Latest revision as of 19:45, 29 September 2015

Anna: I like the topic a lot, it gives great opportunity for discussing the advantages and limitations of this tool and also give pointers on how this should be used in the most efficient way!

[edit] Reviewer 1: S141543

• It is noted at the top of the wiki page that the article is a work in progress at the moment
• What has been written at this moment is really good
• The abstract sums it up nicely
• The definition in “big idea” explains the idea behind the method well
• The article needs references
• It might be a good idea to add some figures for easy understanding
• It would be nice to add conclusions as well
• Definitely going in the right direction, keep up the good work!

• • • Thank you for the constructive comments!

Reviewer 2: Lea

• Your article is well written. You have a good and fluent writing style. Sentences are coherent and the reader can easily follow through the paragraphs.
• From the structure you are following the method-article. I would suggest to add more sub-heading on order for the reader to be able to follow the theme or your article more.
• Grammar and sentence-structure are fine.
• You have not used any figures but some visualization would make the topic more readable.
• The topic is interesting and applies to the course. As mentioned above, I would recommend to add more subheadings to facilitate reading.
• As you mentioned, you are not done with the article yet. Right now the word count is far below 3000. More structure and headings might help you to identify spots where more information is needed.
• There are no sources in the text. In my opinion you should concentrate on adding more information to your article by revising relevant articles and books which will also give you the opportunity to add information to the annotated bibliography.
• You haven’t added any links but mentioned for example Work Breakdown Structure. An article was formulated this year which you could link to your text. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
• Concerning Plagiarism you have to be sure to add sources to the text.

• • • Thank you very much for your very nice and constructive comments! Hope you like the final version!

Reviewer 3: s141569

The topic of the article seems to be really interesting for reading.

I would suggest to the author to add some figures for a better explanation and to like their article with the Gantt chart articles because the Gantt chart nowadays uses the milestones. It is quite hard to review the article because it is under construction, however I will try to give my best review until now.

• The article is free of errors except some spelling which are obvious that are not so significant
• Until now it is written in a very well way and it is very understandable
• There are no figures yes, but I hope some will be added
• The article is properly formatted according to the wiki-article type
• I think that the final version is going to be really interesting for practitioners
• The article is not so related to a project, program or portfolio management topic but it can be as a sub-category of it
• The length is almost half of what we are asked to write, but it is still in modification mode
• There is a logical flow throughout the article
• The starting summary seems to be appropriate for the article
• There are no sources or references yet but probably there are going to be some to support the arguments
• There no straight link with other apppm wiki articles yet

• • • Thank you for the help, I have corrected many of the points you made and looked through it all again!