DTU ProjectLab - User contributions [en-gb]

Talk:Conflict Resolution in Project Management

2019-02-19T23:09:01Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| Good, however there's a few grammatical mistakes.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. An explanation of the article purpose and eventually the target group should be highlighted.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references (DTU Inside) in your abstract, if needed.
|}

Talk:Conflict Resolution in Project Management

2019-02-19T23:08:34Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. |- |'''Article purpose explanatio..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. An explanation of the article purpose and eventually the target group should be highlighted.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references (DTU Inside) in your abstract, if needed.
|}

Talk:Four types of dependency

2019-02-19T23:04:04Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. However the four types of dependency could be quickly listed in the abstract.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. An explanation of the article purpose and eventually the target group should be highlighted.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references (DTU Inside) in your abstract, if needed.
|}

Talk:Four types of dependency

2019-02-19T23:03:27Z

Talk:Due Diligence on Wind Farm Assets

2019-02-19T23:01:35Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. An explanation of the article purpose and eventually the target group should be highlighted.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Irrelevant at this point. A clear link to project/program/portfolio management still needs to be made (e.g. project business case etc). This article shouldn't focus on investment management.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references (DTU Inside) in your abstract, if needed.
|}

Talk:Gantt chart and Scheduling techniques

2019-02-19T22:55:57Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== There's some progress. However, I cannot give much feedback at this point as the abstract is incomplete (19-Feb-2019)."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

There's some progress. However, I cannot give much feedback at this point as the abstract is incomplete (19-Feb-2019).

Talk:Process Planning and Cost Estimation

2019-02-19T22:53:52Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== Cannot give feedback as the abstract is incomplete (19-Feb-2019)."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

Cannot give feedback as the abstract is incomplete (19-Feb-2019).

Talk:Risk Log

2019-02-19T22:51:51Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, but can be much more coherent. There's a few grammatical errors. The abstract still needs to b..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, but can be much more coherent. There's a few grammatical errors. The abstract still needs to be finalized.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| This can be improved. The abstract needs to be further elaborated. Risk log is not even mentioned. It needs to be mentioned and explained.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. In addition to the point above, the purpose of the article and eventual target group needs to be highlighted. The purpose should be easily understood from reading the abstract.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references (on DTU Inside) in your abstract, if it makes sense to do so. Make sure to reference throughout the entire article.
|}

Talk:Project Management in pharmaceutical industry

2019-02-19T22:45:43Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Okay. You can use pharma to add context to your article. However, it seems very generic. There are many types of projects in pharma including IT projects, CapEx, R&D and so on. This should be narrowed down with a specific topic/knowledge area in project management. You need to be able to focus on one or two topics and go in a lot of detail.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good. However, see point above.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant. However, the article needs to be further scoped and focused on a specific topic.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references (on DTU Inside) in your abstract, if it makes sense to do so.
|}

Talk:Product family master plan

2019-02-19T22:40:15Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. Ensure this is emphasized and eventually highlighting the target audience.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant. However, always ensure this is kept within the realms of project/program/portfolio management.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references in your abstract, if it makes sense to do so.
|}

Talk:Benefits of systems engineering

2019-02-19T22:34:33Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text can be coherent. It seems that the abstract isn't finalized yet. This is fine, but make sure to not min..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text can be coherent. It seems that the abstract isn't finalized yet. This is fine, but make sure to not minimize the use of bullets etc. There's also some grammatical errors, so please read it over again.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good. However consider further scoping your article. Try to cover less areas, but in more depth? Disclaimer: A complete judgement cannot be made until the abstract is finalized.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant. However, always ensure this is kept within the realms of project/program/portfolio management.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some of the listed references in your abstract, if it makes sense to do so.
|}

Talk:Design Thinking

2019-02-19T22:26:41Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is somewhat coherent, but can be improved. Missing punctuation. Also, I would recommend adding titles (..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is somewhat coherent, but can be improved. Missing punctuation. Also, I would recommend adding titles (e.g. for the abstract) instead of just bold text.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. However, the second part of the abstract isn't easy to follow.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well explained. Keep up the good work and make sure to include an explanation of the article purpose.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant. The first part started well, however the second part of the abstract focuses on generic applications rather than project/program/portfolio management. Make sure to keep within the realms of project/program/portfolio management.
|-
|'''References'''|| Try to use the list of references (if it makes sense).
|}

Talk:Human behaviors in scheduling

2019-02-19T22:07:52Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical mistakes (e.g. look at "The majority of schedules is created..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical mistakes (e.g. look at "The majority of schedules is created with the '''ambition of enhance the time-management''' during a project and reducing unnecessary risks"). There are other mistakes, so please read the abstract again.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Add references in your abstract, if needed, to give more credibility.
|}

Talk:Project Management Success Factors

2019-02-19T20:22:47Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== Great to see your'e ahead of the game! Please find my feedback below: {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few g..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

Great to see your'e ahead of the game! Please find my feedback below:

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical mistakes (e.g. read "Project management success may be defined as if an intersection of..." again). It could also be more concise.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references.
|}

Talk:Resource breakdown structure

2019-02-19T10:49:23Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however it can be more coherent. Try reading the abstract again and add more punctuation whene..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however it can be more coherent. Try reading the abstract again and add more punctuation whenever necessary.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. Could the standards/theories in "Project Human Resource Management" (PMBOK) be touched here?
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well explained, however coherent text will make it even clearer.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references.
|}

Talk:Project Management Reporting

2019-02-19T10:38:48Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Very good. It's also good to describe the benefits of reporting. Perhaps consider good/bad examples of reporting (if it makes sense to add)?
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated. However, could you specify the target audience (e.g. project managers/team members)?
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Very relevant - keep it up.
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references - keep referencing.
|}

Talk:The Periodic Table of Project Management

2019-02-19T10:28:31Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent, however there's a few grammatical errors.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. There's a large emphasis on the periodic table used in chemistry. I understand this is used in combination with the periodic table of project management, however keep it to a minimum as possible. It's also difficult to understand what "field" is menat in "...three different ways that are used to divide the '''field''' up..." - this could be better explained.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references. Reach out if you have any technical issues with the referencing.
|}

Talk:The Periodic Table of Project Management

2019-02-19T10:28:03Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent, however there's a few grammatical errors. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent, however there's a few grammatical errors.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. There's a large emphasis on the periodic table used in chemistry. I understand this is used in combination with the periodic table of project management, however keep it to a minimum as possible. It's also difficult to understand what "field" is menat in "...three different ways that are used to divide the '''field''' up..."
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references. Reach out if you have any technical issues with the referencing.
|}

Talk:Application of Agile

2019-02-19T09:23:13Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent, however there's a few grammatical errors (missing space). |- |'''Description of the tool/t..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent, however there's a few grammatical errors (missing space).
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Very relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Make sure to use the list of references whenever necessary.
|}

Talk:Improve communication with active listening

2019-02-19T09:16:12Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical errors (e.g. writing "spent" instead of "spend.") |- |'''Des..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical errors (e.g. writing "spent" instead of "spend.")
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant. Check for Project Communication Management in PMBOK for further inspiration (if it make sense).
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references.
|}

Talk:Dan Pink on Motivation

2019-02-19T08:59:05Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| This can be further elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Make sure to link this within the context of project/program/portfolio management and not organizational management. Look into Project Human Resource as a source of inspiration (if it makes sense).
|-
|'''References'''|| Make sure to use the list of references wherever appropriate.
|}

Talk:Requirements management using SysML

2019-02-19T08:53:55Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== The abstract seems incomplete. However, please find my immediate feedback below (19-Feb-2019) {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay,..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

The abstract seems incomplete. However, please find my immediate feedback below (19-Feb-2019)

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a lack of flow/consistency (too many dotted lines).
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good. Ensure to emphasize how the tool is relevant and its project/program/portfolio management without getting into too much technical detail about the modelling language itself.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references.
|}

Talk:Effective Brainstorming

2019-02-19T08:29:01Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a few grammatical errors. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| G..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a few grammatical errors.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good. However, how a link to engineering project, program or portfolio management needs to be made.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| A link to engineering project, program or portfolio management needs to be made. This is not organizational management or a description of interactive works (e.g. strategy and planning methods).
|-
|'''References'''|| Good reference. Make sure to use the list of references when appropriate.
|}

Talk:Cognitive Bias

2019-02-19T08:22:42Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== Cannot give feedback at this point as the abstract is not complete, however feel free to reach out if you have any questions (19-Feb-2019)."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

Cannot give feedback at this point as the abstract is not complete, however feel free to reach out if you have any questions (19-Feb-2019).

Talk:Value to whom?

2019-02-19T08:18:26Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. However, could you even scope the article even more? There's quite a few concepts introduced here.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references.
|}

Talk:Project Sponsorship

2019-02-18T22:59:44Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good. However, it can be more concise and coherent. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good. However, it can be more concise and coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| This needs to be elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Remember to make correct references (websites). Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references
|}

Talk:Investment portfolio management

2019-02-18T22:52:39Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical errors. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| G..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, however there's a few grammatical errors.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. However, a clear link to engineering project, program or portfolio management needs to be made.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated. However, see comment below.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| No clear relevance. This is linked to finance and not engineering project, program or portfolio management. A clear link to the curriculum needs to be made.
|-
|'''References'''|| Missing references.
|}

Talk:Unidentified Risks

2019-02-18T22:45:11Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however the beginning needs to be more coherent. Consider using brackets less often. I would n..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however the beginning needs to be more coherent. Consider using brackets less often. I would not include the agenda in the abstract as it's automatically generated.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Complete adding your references.
|}

Talk:Basic estimation techniques

2019-02-18T22:40:01Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a few grammatical errors (e.g. "a manager has to achieve specific object within...").
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. Perhaps include a definition of what estimation is?
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Very good.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Ensure to include references wherever needed.
|}

Talk:Basic estimation techniques

2019-02-18T22:39:41Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a few grammatical errors (e.g. "a manager has to achieve specific object withi..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a few grammatical errors (e.g. "a manager has to achieve specific object within...").
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good, perhaps a definition of what estimation is?
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Very good.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Ensure to include references wherever needed.
|}

Talk:Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership

2019-02-18T22:32:56Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent, however there's a few grammatical errors.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good, but it can be slightly elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Good. Continue to ensure the article is relevant to project, program or portfolio management and NOT organizational management.
|-
|'''References'''|| Make sure to use references wherever needed.
|}

Talk:DMAIC

2019-02-18T22:26:47Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

I'm unsure whether or not your abstract at this point is complete, however find my feedback below.

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| Good, however there's a few mistakes (e.g. "it is almost impossible to measure and improve, if you do now know where to start." - you probably meant "if you do not know where to start.")
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Make sure to add references wherever needed.
|}

Talk:DMAIC

2019-02-18T22:26:31Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== I'm unsure whether or not your abstract at this point is complete, however find my feedback below. {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| Good, howeve..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

I'm unsure whether or not your abstract at this point is complete, however find my feedback below.

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| Good, however there's a few mistakes (e.g. "it is almost impossible to measure and improve, if you do now know where to start." - you probably meant "if you do not know where to start."
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Make sure to add references wherever needed.
|}

Talk:Determining Measurement Methods in Earned Value Management

2019-02-18T22:12:38Z

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Great, however try to make it more concise. Keep up the good work!
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Very relevant.
|-
|'''References'''|| Ensure to add references whenever necessary.
|}

Talk:Agile One Page Project Management

2019-02-18T22:02:21Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is okay, however there's a few grammatical errors.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good. However, a short description of "Agile One Page Project Management" would be beneficial.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Well elaborated. However, do you have permission to mention "LEO Pharma A/S" in your article? Best practice is just to mention "based on a pharmaceutical company/pharmaceutical industry."
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references.
|}

Talk:Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)

2019-02-18T21:55:10Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is very coherent. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Very good. |- |'''Article purpose ..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is very coherent.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Very good.
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Missing. Keep up the good work and make sure to include an explanation of the article purpose.
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Add some references in your abstract, if needed.
|}

Talk:Agile One Page Project Management

2019-02-18T21:53:42Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

Talk:Agile One Page Project Management

2019-02-18T21:48:12Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, but there's quite a few grammatical mistakes.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good, but a short description of Agile One Page Project Management can be added. Also, do you have permission to include LEO Pharma A/S? It's best practice to just mention "a healthcare company."
|-
|'''Article purpose explanation'''|| Good
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references
|}

Talk:Agile One Page Project Management

2019-02-18T21:36:37Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

Talk:Agile One Page Project Management

2019-02-18T21:36:14Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Feedback on Abstract:== {| |'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, but there's quite a few grammatical mistakes. |- |'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''..."

==Feedback on Abstract:==

{|
|'''Text clarity & language'''|| The text is good, but there's quite a few grammatical mistakes.
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Good, but a short description of Agile One Page Project Management can be added. Also, do you have permission to include LEO Pharma A/S? It's best practice to just mention "a healthcare company."
|-
|'''Explanation of the purpose of the article'''|| Good
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum '''|| Relevant
|-
|'''Meaningful contribution'''|| Good
|-
|'''References'''|| Good references
|}

Talk:Negotiation techniques

2018-02-18T09:31:40Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Good

'''Language''' Good with minor spelling mistakes: e.g. write "her" instead of "hers" and write "role" instead of "rolle"

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Well explained

'''Purpose explanation''' Well addressed, but consider to briefly outline the structure of the article to set the reader's expectations (see "Article in general" for info on article structure)

'''References''' Missing references to list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Relevant

'''Article in general''' Good topic, but consider the structure of your article. The following structure is recommended

<ol>
<li> Summary/abstract
<li> Big idea/theory
<li> Application
<li> Limitations
<li> Annotated bibliography
</ol>

Talk:Negotiation techniques

2018-02-18T09:31:10Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Good

'''Language''' Good with minor spelling mistakes: e.g. write "her" instead of "hers" and write "role" instead of "rolle"

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Well explained

'''Purpose explanation''' Well addressed, but consider to briefly outline the structure of the article to set the reader's expectations (see "Article in general" for info on article structure

'''References''' Missing references to list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Relevant

'''Article in general''' Good topic, but consider the structure of your article. The following structure is recommended

<ol>
<li> Summary/abstract
<li> Big idea/theory
<li> Application
<li> Limitations
<li> Annotated bibliography
</ol>

Talk:Negotiation techniques

2018-02-18T09:30:44Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Good

'''Language''' Good with minor spelling mistakes: e.g. write "her" instead of "hers" and write "role" instead of "rolle"

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Well explained

'''Purpose explanation''' Well addressed, but consider to briefly outline the structure of the article to set the reader's expectations (see "Article in General" for info on article structure.

'''References''' Missing references to list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Relevant

'''Article in general''' Good topic, but consider the structure of your article. The following structure is recommended

<ol>
<li> Summary/abstract
<li> Big idea/theory
<li> Application
<li> Limitations
<li> Annotated bibliography
</ol>

Talk:Negotiation techniques

2018-02-18T09:30:21Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Good '''Language''' Good with minor spelling mistakes: e.g. write "her" instead of "hers" and write "role" instead of "rolle..."

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Good

'''Language''' Good with minor spelling mistakes: e.g. write "her" instead of "hers" and write "role" instead of "rolle"

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Well explained

'''Purpose explanation''' Well addressed, but consider to briefly outline the structure of article to set the reader's expectations (see "Article in General" for info on article structure.

'''References''' Missing references to list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Relevant

'''Article in general''' Good topic, but consider the structure of your article. The following structure is recommended

<ol>
<li> Summary/abstract
<li> Big idea/theory
<li> Application
<li> Limitations
<li> Annotated bibliography
</ol>

42433 APPPM 2018-Feedback template for Wiki article

2018-02-16T13:37:21Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim:

==Feedback 1==
===Question 1 · TEXT===
'''Quality of the summary:'''

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 1===
''Answer here''

===Question 2 · TEXT===
'''Structure and logic of the article:'''

Is the argument clear?

Is there a logical flow to the article?

Does one part build upon the other?

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 2===
''Answer here''

===Question 3 · TEXT===
'''Grammar and style:'''

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 3===
''Answer here''

===Question 4 · TEXT===
'''Figures and tables:'''

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 4===
''Answer here''

===Question 5 · TEXT===
'''Interest and relevance:'''

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 5===
''Answer here''

===Question 6 · TEXT===
'''Depth of treatment:'''

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 6===
''Answer here''

===Question 7 · TEXT===
'''Annotated bibliography:'''

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 7===
''Answer here''

==Feedback 2==
===Question 1 · TEXT===
'''Quality of the summary:'''

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 1===
''Answer here''

===Question 2 · TEXT===
'''Structure and logic of the article:'''

Is the argument clear?

Is there a logical flow to the article?

Does one part build upon the other?

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 2===
''Answer here''

===Question 3 · TEXT===
'''Grammar and style:'''

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 3===
''Answer here''

===Question 4 · TEXT===
'''Figures and tables:'''

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 4===
''Answer here''

===Question 5 · TEXT===
'''Interest and relevance:'''

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 5===
''Answer here''

===Question 6 · TEXT===
'''Depth of treatment:'''

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 6===
''Answer here''

===Question 7 · TEXT===
'''Annotated bibliography:'''

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 7===
''Answer here''

42433 APPPM 2018-Feedback template for Wiki article

2018-02-16T13:36:37Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim:

==Feedback 1==
===Question 1 · TEXT===
'''Quality of the summary:'''

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

What would you suggest to improve??

===Answer 1===
''Answer here''

===Question 2 · TEXT===
'''Structure and logic of the article:'''

Is the argument clear?

Is there a logical flow to the article?

Does one part build upon the other?

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 2===
''Answer here''

===Question 3 · TEXT===
'''Grammar and style:'''

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 3===
''Answer here''

===Question 4 · TEXT===
'''Figures and tables:'''

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 4===
''Answer here''

===Question 5 · TEXT===
'''Interest and relevance:'''

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 5===
''Answer here''

===Question 6 · TEXT===
'''Depth of treatment:'''

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 6===
''Answer here''

===Question 7 · TEXT===
'''Annotated bibliography:'''

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 7===
''Answer here''

==Feedback 2==
===Question 1 · TEXT===
'''Quality of the summary:'''

Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 1===
''Answer here''

===Question 2 · TEXT===
'''Structure and logic of the article:'''

Is the argument clear?

Is there a logical flow to the article?

Does one part build upon the other?

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 2===
''Answer here''

===Question 3 · TEXT===
'''Grammar and style:'''

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 3===
''Answer here''

===Question 4 · TEXT===
'''Figures and tables:'''

Are figures and tables clear?

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 4===
''Answer here''

===Question 5 · TEXT===
'''Interest and relevance:'''

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 5===
''Answer here''

===Question 6 · TEXT===
'''Depth of treatment:'''

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 6===
''Answer here''

===Question 7 · TEXT===
'''Annotated bibliography:'''

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

What would you suggest to improve?

===Answer 7===
''Answer here''

Talk:Work Breakdown Structure in Construction Management

2018-02-16T12:54:12Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract - the text should flow

'''Language''' Good

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Well addressed, but try to use the word "scope" in the abstract - as in a work breakdown structure is a tool used breakdown the scope of a project

'''Purpose explanation''' Well explained, but consider:

<ol>
<li> Who is the reader? Project Manager or team etc?
</ol>

'''References''' Missing references to the list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Consider the following:

<ol>
<li> It is okay to use examples from the Metro Cityring project, but remember it is '''not''' allowed to write the article as a case study. The course requirements have changed
<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
</ol>

Talk:Work Breakdown Structure in Construction Management

2018-02-16T12:53:47Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract - the text should flow

'''Language''' Good

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Well addressed, but try to use the word "scope" in the abstract - as in a work breakdown structure is a tool used breakdown the scope of a project

'''Purpose explanation''' Good, but needs development. Consider:

<ol>
<li> Who is the reader? Project Manager or team etc?
</ol>

'''References''' Missing references to the list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Consider the following:

<ol>
<li> It is okay to use examples from the Metro Cityring project, but remember it is '''not''' allowed to write the article as a case study. The course requirements have changed
<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
</ol>

Talk:Work Breakdown Structure in Construction Management

2018-02-16T12:53:25Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: Created page with "==Abstract Feedback== '''Text clarity''' Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract. The text should flow '''Language''' Good '''Description of t..."

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Text is good, but avoid writing bullet points in the abstract. The text should flow

'''Language''' Good

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' well addressed, but try to use the word "scope" in the abstract - as in a work breakdown structure is a tool used breakdown the scope of a project

'''Purpose explanation''' Good, but needs development. Consider:

<ol>
<li> Who is the reader? Project Manager or team etc?
</ol>

'''References''' Missing references to the list of mandatory references/standards

'''Relevance of article''' Consider the following:

<ol>
<li> It is okay to use examples from the Metro Cityring project, but remember it is '''not''' allowed to write the article as a case study. The course requirements have changed
<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the project management community more than a normal web search
</ol>

Talk:Managing Successful Programmes (MSP)

2018-02-14T17:46:12Z

Hani Mike Rae Selim: /* Abstract Feedback */

==Abstract Feedback==

'''Text clarity''' Good

'''Language''' Minor errors e.g. " To achieve this, the '''''he''''' main idea is to sub-divide..." - remove "he"?

'''Description of the tool/theory/concept''' Good, but consider going back to basics. Define what program management is and reference standards/mandatory list of references to add credibility. Also, is it true that ''all'' organizations need good program management? Also, what defines a successful program?

'''Purpose explanation''' Good and sets up the reader's expectations well

'''References''' Missing appropriate references to mandatory list of references

'''Relevance of article''' Consider the following:

<ol>
<li> Who is the reader? Program Manager etc?
<li> What will the reader get out of this?
<li> Ensure depth of the article so it contributes to the program management community more than a normal web search
</ol>