Talk:Application of Agile - Revision history

Mprokou: /* Answer 2 */

2019-02-25T09:33:24Z

Answer 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:33, 25 February 2019
Line 118:		Line 118:

	No, as there are no sources		No, as there are no sources

	Add more sources ''		Add more sources ''

Mprokou at 09:32, 25 February 2019

2019-02-25T09:32:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 25 February 2019
Line 146:		Line 146:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''No ''		''No, as one of them cannot be seen and the other one is not clear

			No

			Put more relevant figures and clear descriptions ''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===
Line 158:		Line 162:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Not sure

			Yes

			-''

	===Question 6 · TEXT===		===Question 6 · TEXT===
Line 170:		Line 178:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''No

			No

			-''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===
Line 184:		Line 196:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''No

			No

			Not sure

			Add references ''

Mprokou: /* Answer 4 */

2019-02-25T09:27:19Z

Answer 4

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:27, 25 February 2019
Line 146:		Line 146:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''No ''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===

Mprokou: /* Answer 1 */

2019-02-25T09:27:01Z

Answer 1

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:27, 25 February 2019
Line 93:		Line 93:
	''Yes		''Yes

	Correct ~~grammatical~~ mistakes like:		Correct grammar mistakes like:
	instead of 'management style etc. And ' use management style etc., while '		instead of 'management style etc. And ' use management style etc., while '
	instead of 'All of these parts of Agile is described' use 'These parts are described'''		instead of 'All of these parts of Agile is described' use 'These parts are described'''

Mprokou: /* Answer 3 */

2019-02-25T09:25:55Z

Answer 3

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:25, 25 February 2019
Line 130:		Line 130:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''No

			No

			Check grammar mistakes ''

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===

Mprokou: /* Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Maria Christina Prokou */

2019-02-25T09:24:41Z

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Maria Christina Prokou

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:24, 25 February 2019
Line 93:		Line 93:
	''Yes		''Yes

	~~What would you suggest to improve?~~
	Correct grammatical mistakes like:		Correct grammatical mistakes like:
	instead of 'management style etc. And ' use management style etc., while '		instead of 'management style etc. And ' use management style etc., while '
Line 113:		Line 112:
	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	''No		''No

	No the flow is complicated as there the 'Principles' are not in the correct order		No the flow is complicated as there the 'Principles' are not in the correct order

	Yes		Yes
	No. as there are no sources
			No, as there are no sources
	Add more sources ''		Add more sources ''

Mprokou: /* Feedback on Abstract: */

2019-02-25T09:23:43Z

Feedback on Abstract:

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:23, 25 February 2019
Line 80:		Line 80:
	Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?		Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
	* A: I cannot tell, since there is no reference.		* A: I cannot tell, since there is no reference.




			==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Maria Christina Prokou''==
			===Question 1 · TEXT===
			'''Quality of the summary:'''

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

			===Answer 1===
			''Yes

			What would you suggest to improve?
			Correct grammatical mistakes like:
			instead of 'management style etc. And ' use management style etc., while '
			instead of 'All of these parts of Agile is described' use 'These parts are described'''

			===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===
			''No
			No the flow is complicated as there the 'Principles' are not in the correct order
			Yes
			No. as there are no sources
			Add more sources ''

			===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''

Mads Kronholm at 16:33, 24 February 2019

2019-02-24T16:33:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:33, 24 February 2019
Line 13:		Line 13:
	\|}		\|}

	Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: Mads Kronholm Petersen		'''Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: Mads Kronholm Petersen
			'''

	Question 1		Question 1
Line 21:		Line 22:
	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	* A: Not using “is all over”. Use , and . more frequent. Wrong wording like “Agile in its full form is covering various aspects as” in stead of: “Agile is covering various aspects like the following”. Do not start a sentence with but or and. Do not use “All of these parts of” – use “These parts of”		* A: Not using “is all over”. Use , and . more frequent. Wrong wording like “Agile in its full form is covering various aspects as” in stead of: “Agile is covering various aspects like the following”. Do not start a sentence with but or and. Do not use “All of these parts of” – use “These parts of”


	Question 2		Question 2
Line 34:		Line 36:
	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	* A: Add sources, check for pluralis or singularis. Shorten the headlines.		* A: Add sources, check for pluralis or singularis. Shorten the headlines.


	Question 3		Question 3
Line 41:		Line 44:
	Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?		Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
	* A: No. Fill-words are used but not correctly. Example of a bad sentence: “Some frameworks focus more on some parts of Agile some applying all and yet some only applying fewer”. “It is here noted that it is very possible to integrate some parts of Agile without the others”		* A: No. Fill-words are used but not correctly. Example of a bad sentence: “Some frameworks focus more on some parts of Agile some applying all and yet some only applying fewer”. “It is here noted that it is very possible to integrate some parts of Agile without the others”


	Question 4		Question 4
Line 50:		Line 54:
	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	* A: Make the figure visible.		* A: Make the figure visible.


	Question 5		Question 5
Line 57:		Line 62:
	Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?		Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
	* A: Yes, the description explains it quite good.		* A: Yes, the description explains it quite good.


	Question 6		Question 6
Line 64:		Line 70:
	Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?		Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
	* A: No.		* A: No.


	Question 7		Question 7

Mads Kronholm at 16:33, 24 February 2019

2019-02-24T16:33:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:33, 24 February 2019
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Structure and logic of the article:		Structure and logic of the article:
	Is the argument clear?		Is the argument clear?
	A: No.		* A: No.
	Is there a logical flow to the article?		Is there a logical flow to the article?
	A: Following the 12 steps are fine. The logical flow of jumping from 5  11  8 does not make sense without an explanation.		* A: Following the 12 steps are fine. The logical flow of jumping from 5  11  8 does not make sense without an explanation.
	Does one part build upon the other?		Does one part build upon the other?
	A: Yes, fine with the current skeleton.		* A: Yes, fine with the current skeleton.
	Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?		Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?
	A: Arguments are made without a source.		* A: Arguments are made without a source.
	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	A: Add sources, check for pluralis or singularis. Shorten the headlines.		* A: Add sources, check for pluralis or singularis. Shorten the headlines.

	Question 3		Question 3
	Grammar and style:		Grammar and style:
	Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?		Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?
	A: No.		* A: No.
	Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?		Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?
	A: No. Fill-words are used but not correctly. Example of a bad sentence: “Some frameworks focus more on some parts of Agile some applying all and yet some only applying fewer”. “It is here noted that it is very possible to integrate some parts of Agile without the others”		* A: No. Fill-words are used but not correctly. Example of a bad sentence: “Some frameworks focus more on some parts of Agile some applying all and yet some only applying fewer”. “It is here noted that it is very possible to integrate some parts of Agile without the others”

	Question 4		Question 4
	Figures and tables:		Figures and tables:
	Are figures and tables clear?		Are figures and tables clear?
	A: A mix. One figure is to big to read and use, and the other one is not showing.		* A: A mix. One figure is to big to read and use, and the other one is not showing.
	Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?		Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?
	A: No, since there is not description of the large bubbles.		* A: No, since there is not description of the large bubbles.
	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	A: Make the figure visible.		* A: Make the figure visible.

	Question 5		Question 5
	Interest and relevance:		Interest and relevance:
	Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?		Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?
	A: Medium.		* A: Medium.
	Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?		Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?
	A: Yes, the description explains it quite good.		* A: Yes, the description explains it quite good.

	Question 6		Question 6
	Depth of treatment:		Depth of treatment:
	Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?		Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?
	A: Unfortunately not.		* A: Unfortunately not.
	Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?		Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?
	A: No.		* A: No.

	Question 7		Question 7
	Annotated bibliography:		Annotated bibliography:
	Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?		Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?
	A: No.		* A: No.
	Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?		Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?
	A: No.		* A: No.
	Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?		Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?
	A: I cannot tell, since there is no reference.		* A: I cannot tell, since there is no reference.

Mads Kronholm at 16:32, 24 February 2019

2019-02-24T16:32:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 24 February 2019
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Question 1		Question 1
	Quality of the summary:		Quality of the summary:
	* Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?		Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?
	* A: Yes.		* A: Yes.

	What would you suggest to improve?		What would you suggest to improve?
	* A: Not using “is all over”. Use , and . more frequent. Wrong wording like “Agile in its full form is covering various aspects as” in stead of: “Agile is covering various aspects like the following”. Do not start a sentence with but or and. Do not use “All of these parts of” – use “These parts of”		* A: Not using “is all over”. Use , and . more frequent. Wrong wording like “Agile in its full form is covering various aspects as” in stead of: “Agile is covering various aspects like the following”. Do not start a sentence with but or and. Do not use “All of these parts of” – use “These parts of”