Talk:Basic estimation techniques - Revision history

S153408: /* Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Place your name here */

2019-02-25T22:09:41Z

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Place your name here

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:09, 25 February 2019
Line 104:		Line 104:
	''There is no annotated bibliography included in the article --> don’t forget to include it. <br/> The references in general looks okay. There is no clear citiation style (I think they want the Vancouver style); one cite error and an internet link without access date, author etc''		''There is no annotated bibliography included in the article --> don’t forget to include it. <br/> The references in general looks okay. There is no clear citiation style (I think they want the Vancouver style); one cite error and an internet link without access date, author etc''

	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''~~Place your name here~~''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Andreas Tuxen''==
	===Question 1 · TEXT===		===Question 1 · TEXT===
	'''Quality of the summary:'''		'''Quality of the summary:'''
Line 113:		Line 113:

	===Answer 1===		===Answer 1===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''The abstract gives a good introduction, easy to grasp. I like to questions you have put in.''

	===Question 2 · TEXT===		===Question 2 · TEXT===
Line 129:		Line 129:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''There is logical flow, a good introduction to subject followed by practical methods and an example.''

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===
Line 141:		Line 141:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''The language precise.''

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===
Line 153:		Line 153:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Maybe some more models, could be the example as well.''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===
Line 165:		Line 165:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Very relevant, looking forward to read the finished article!''

	===Question 6 · TEXT===		===Question 6 · TEXT===
Line 177:		Line 177:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''The article is not finished yet. I hope to see more methods.''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===
Line 191:		Line 191:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Article not finished yet.''

S182655: /* Answer 4 */

2019-02-24T20:02:51Z

Answer 4

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:02, 24 February 2019
Line 64:		Line 64:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	'' Both figures implemented in the article helps to better understand the key points of the article. However, there is a typo in figure 1 and ~~fIgure~~ 2 has an invalid cite tag. Try to use more figures as you are describing several tools  makes it easier to not get confused''		'' Both figures implemented in the article helps to better understand the key points of the article. However, there is a typo in figure 1 and figure 2 has an invalid cite tag. Try to use more figures as you are describing several tools --> makes it easier to not get confused''

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

S182655 at 20:02, 24 February 2019

2019-02-24T20:02:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:02, 24 February 2019
Line 88:		Line 88:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	'' As stated above, the topic is relevant and therefore interesting to read. It includes all relevant techniques at a glance and mentions critique. < br /> But as the author describes six different techniques, there is a risk of a superficial writing. In order to avoid this, you could mention all techniques (framing in a big picture) but focus on one or two based on logical criteria ''		'' As stated above, the topic is relevant and therefore interesting to read. It includes all relevant techniques at a glance and mentions critique. <br /> But as the author describes six different techniques, there is a risk of a superficial writing. In order to avoid this, you could mention all techniques (framing in a big picture) but focus on one or two based on logical criteria ''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===

S182655 at 20:01, 24 February 2019

2019-02-24T20:01:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:01, 24 February 2019
Line 88:		Line 88:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	'' As stated above, the topic is relevant and therefore interesting to read. It includes all relevant techniques at a glance and mentions critique. < br/> But as the author describes six different techniques, there is a risk of a superficial writing. In order to avoid this, you could mention all techniques (framing in a big picture) but focus on one or two based on logical criteria ''		'' As stated above, the topic is relevant and therefore interesting to read. It includes all relevant techniques at a glance and mentions critique. < br /> But as the author describes six different techniques, there is a risk of a superficial writing. In order to avoid this, you could mention all techniques (framing in a big picture) but focus on one or two based on logical criteria ''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===

S182655: /* Answer 2 */

2019-02-23T14:50:28Z

Answer 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:50, 23 February 2019
Line 39:		Line 39:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	'' ~~the~~ logical flow of the article is very good as each technique (for now: three out of six) is described shortly, including advantages and application examples. The techniques are framed with an abstract, a general guideline (but without further text) and critique (only keypoints, but sounds promising) which is really good.		'' The logical flow of the article is very good as each technique (for now: three out of six) is described shortly, including advantages and application examples. The techniques are framed with an abstract, a general guideline (but without further text) and critique (only keypoints, but sounds promising) which is really good.''
	The structure of each technique text could be improved by using subchapters (Advantages, Application), bolt words (as titles) or italic text''		''The structure of each technique text could be improved by using subchapters (Advantages, Application), bolt words (as titles) or italic text.''

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===

S182655: /* Answer 1 */

2019-02-23T14:49:55Z

Answer 1

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:49, 23 February 2019
Line 22:		Line 22:
	Add summary before table of contents or add abstract/introduction chapter after table of content		Add summary before table of contents or add abstract/introduction chapter after table of content
	===Answer 1===		===Answer 1===
	'' The Abstract (Summary) gives a really good overview about the topic itself, the structure of the article and the connection to PPPM. Probably the text can be read easier when you write the questions (in italic) blow each other (use < b r / > )		'' The Abstract (Summary) gives a really good overview about the topic itself, the structure of the article and the connection to PPPM. Probably the text can be read easier when you write the questions (in italic) blow each other (use < b r / > )''
	NB: I think resources covers time and money as well, so you could write “a manager has to achieve specific objects within the project resources such as time and budget” or similar. ''		''NB: I think resources covers time and money as well, so you could write “a manager has to achieve specific objects within the project resources such as time and budget” or similar. ''

	===Question 2 · TEXT===		===Question 2 · TEXT===

S182655: /* Answer 7 */

2019-02-23T14:49:15Z

Answer 7

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:49, 23 February 2019
Line 102:		Line 102:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''There is no annotated bibliography included in the article  don’t forget to include it.		''There is no annotated bibliography included in the article --> don’t forget to include it. <br/> The references in general looks okay. There is no clear citiation style (I think they want the Vancouver style); one cite error and an internet link without access date, author etc''
	The references in general looks okay. There is no clear citiation style (I think they want the Vancouver style); one cite error and an internet link without access date, author etc''

	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Place your name here''==

S182655: /* Answer 6 */

2019-02-23T14:48:32Z

Answer 6

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:48, 23 February 2019
Line 88:		Line 88:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	'' As stated above, the topic is relevant and therefore interesting to read. It includes all relevant techniques at a glance and mentions critique.		'' As stated above, the topic is relevant and therefore interesting to read. It includes all relevant techniques at a glance and mentions critique. < br/> But as the author describes six different techniques, there is a risk of a superficial writing. In order to avoid this, you could mention all techniques (framing in a big picture) but focus on one or two based on logical criteria ''
	But as the author describes six different techniques, there is a risk of a superficial writing. In order to avoid this, you could mention all techniques (framing in a big picture) but focus on one or two based on logical criteria ''

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===

S182655: /* Answer 3 */

2019-02-23T14:48:07Z

Answer 3

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:48, 23 February 2019
Line 52:		Line 52:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	'' Overall, the grammar and spelling is good. But sometimes sentences are hard to read as they are long and ~~consists~~ of many subordinate clause; sometimes it’s better to put a full stop than a comma. There is a spelling mistake in figure 1. ''		'' Overall, the grammar and spelling is good. But sometimes sentences are hard to read as they are long and consist of many subordinate clause; sometimes it’s better to put a full stop than a comma. There is a spelling mistake in figure 1. ''

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

S182655 at 14:47, 23 February 2019

2019-02-23T14:47:18Z

Show changes