Talk:Management of risk - Revision history

S141543 at 22:03, 28 September 2015

2015-09-28T22:03:06Z

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 *I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.
 *Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.
 Reviewer 1: Lea
@@ Line 17: / Line 24: @@
 *Annotated bibliography has not yet been added.
 *Some words are highlighted in the text but they are just linked to a blank page. Maybe you wanted to link the text to other wiki articles?
 Reviewer 3: s141569
@@ Line 33: / Line 49: @@
 *There are three references, but I consider that there are going to be some more until the finish.
 *There are no links to other relevant pages in appp wiki yet.

S141569 at 17:30, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T17:30:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:30, 22 September 2015
Line 17:		Line 17:
	*Annotated bibliography has not yet been added.		*Annotated bibliography has not yet been added.
	*Some words are highlighted in the text but they are just linked to a blank page. Maybe you wanted to link the text to other wiki articles?		*Some words are highlighted in the text but they are just linked to a blank page. Maybe you wanted to link the text to other wiki articles?

			Reviewer 3: s141569

			The topic of the article is really interesting. It is obvious that there are lots of modifications that they need to be done because the article is under construction.

			I would suggest (maybe the author has the same thoughts, I do not know) that it would be very engaging the usage of figures and a video for this kind of topic.
			*Some spelling errors found and some other syntax. Probably they are due to momentum because they do not seem to be so significant.
			*Figures are not illustrated but I hope that there is going to be few of them
			* The article is properly formatted under the typical wiki-article structure. It would be awesome to add some hyper-links leading to other wiki-pages related to the topic.
			*I think that the final version is going to be very interesting for a practitioner
			*The article is highly related to a project, program or portfolio management topic
			*The length at this time is at the 1/3 of what it should be, however I suppose that at the finishing it is going to be at the appropriate standards.
			*The structure seems to follow a logical flow among the chapters of the article.
			*The starting summary is appropriate for the article until now
			*There are three references, but I consider that there are going to be some more until the finish.
			*There are no links to other relevant pages in appp wiki yet.

S113440 at 16:32, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T16:32:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 22 September 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	*Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)		*Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)
	*Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).		*Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).
	*Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)). I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.		*Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).
			*I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.
	*Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.		*Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.

S113440 at 16:32, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T16:32:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 22 September 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	*Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)		*Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)
	*Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).		*Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).
	*Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).		*Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)). I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.
	I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.
	*Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.		*Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.

S113440 at 16:32, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T16:32:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:32, 22 September 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Reviewer 2: Jacob		Reviewer 2: Jacob

	Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)		*Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)
			*Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).
	Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).		*Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).

	Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).
	I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.		I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.
			*Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.
	Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.

	Reviewer 1: Lea		Reviewer 1: Lea

S113440 at 16:31, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T16:31:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:31, 22 September 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Reviewer 2: Jacob		Reviewer 2: Jacob

	Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)		Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)

	Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).		Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).

	Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).		Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).
	I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.		I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.

	Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.		Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.

S113440 at 16:31, 22 September 2015

2015-09-22T16:31:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:31, 22 September 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
			Reviewer 2: Jacob
			Before the final deliverance, I would suggest a thorough spell- and gramma check, as well as revamping where you set full stops, since there are many unnecessarry and wrongfully placed full stops, which severely limits the readability (Example: ""chance or probability of loss". Meaning that only negative results could" - the full stop should in this case have been a comma, if anything)
			Secondly, parts of a website is called sections, not chapters, for the unwritten reference you have. You also have a few other references that haven't been created yet - I would suggest removing the references and possibly just giving a short description of what you're referring to instead (For instance, COntingency in the "For Projects" section).
			Next, you're not following the structure of the article as supposed - I'm not sure how much of a problem that is, though, since the alternative structure you have used make sense to me, and also includes many of the requirements from the description (i.e. Introduction, limitations, Big idea (although renamed)).
			I would also suggest a few more figures, for instance of Fault Trees, or some of the other methods, just to give a different visual effect.
			Finally, I would elaborate on the subjects of the General methodology, the Important principles and the benefits, making them more than just a set of bullet points.

	Reviewer 1: Lea		Reviewer 1: Lea
	*You are following the Method-article type. The general outline of your article gives good guidance to the topic. I am missing a bit of the application or implementation part.		*You are following the Method-article type. The general outline of your article gives good guidance to the topic. I am missing a bit of the application or implementation part.

Lea: Created page with "Reviewer 1: Lea *You are following the Method-article type. The general outline of your article gives good guidance to the topic. I am missing a bit of the application or impl..."

2015-09-22T12:46:47Z

Created page with "Reviewer 1: Lea *You are following the Method-article type. The general outline of your article gives good guidance to the topic. I am missing a bit of the application or impl..."

New page

Reviewer 1: Lea
*You are following the Method-article type. The general outline of your article gives good guidance to the topic. I am missing a bit of the application or implementation part.
*Structure: There is a good structure but the “abstract” in the beginning and the first heading introduction are not very clear. A short summary of the article would be good. Also an abstract should not exceed 200 words.
*Introduction. It is said that one ISO guide complements the other. Is this information relevant? Maybe an explanation of why you start out with the ISO guide.
* There are a few spelling mistakes, but your sentences are short and can be easily read.
*The figure in the beginning cannot be read. Maybe change the pixel size. If you do not have more complimentary figures, I think it is fine. Otherwise one or two more pictures would give a better overview.
*The subject is interesting and definitely corresponds to the course subject. Since there are still some Headings without text, I guess you are not done writing yet. For the further progress I would suggest to try and get more “grip” on the topic. Narrow it down in the end to maybe one tool.
*Sources are unfortunately a little sparse. I would suggest to get more information from relevant articles or books.
*Annotated bibliography has not yet been added.
*Some words are highlighted in the text but they are just linked to a blank page. Maybe you wanted to link the text to other wiki articles?