Talk:Critical reflection on Project Portfolio Management software: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Val review == | == Val review == | ||
I would like to start saying that I learnt something reading your article, which is a good point. | |||
The structure is logical and you manage to turn the complexity of your topic into an easy reading article. | |||
I divided my feedback in 3 categories that are the following: | |||
===Formal aspects=== | ===Formal aspects=== | ||
*use | *You should try to introduce the wiki format for references [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Referencing_for_beginners] You can also have a look to other articles who use it | ||
*figure 1 is missing | *figure 1 is missing | ||
*hard to see the legend/caption in figure 2 | *It is hard to see the legend/caption in figure 2 | ||
*"Executives" or "executives? | *"Executives" or "executives? I think you should choose one of the writing and use the same for the whole article | ||
===Grammar and Spelling=== | ===Grammar and Spelling=== | ||
Few errors here. To find them, use the research tool. | |||
*deferral instead of deferal | *deferral instead of deferal | ||
*" As Lee Merkhofer consulting states. It is not beneficial for software developers to make advanced PPM software targeting niche markets."? | *"As Lee Merkhofer consulting states. It is not beneficial for software developers to make advanced PPM software targeting niche markets."? | ||
*"The bottom line is that even though PPM decision making software is adapted by many companies it fail"s" to gain user acceptance." | *"The bottom line is that even though PPM decision making software is adapted by many companies it fail"s" to gain user acceptance." | ||
===Content aspects=== | |||
*Your article is mostly didactic but sometimes you take strong positions like in this sentence: "Even though Cooper R. argues that poor tools are better than no tools I would argue that a tool that distorts the result is worse." Maybe you should stay pedagogic. | |||
*"From 1990 - 1999 IT investments rose from 9% - 22%" => % of what? | |||
*Your article misses maybe a conclusion? | |||
Revision as of 15:18, 25 November 2014
Val review
I would like to start saying that I learnt something reading your article, which is a good point. The structure is logical and you manage to turn the complexity of your topic into an easy reading article. I divided my feedback in 3 categories that are the following:
Formal aspects
- You should try to introduce the wiki format for references [1] You can also have a look to other articles who use it
- figure 1 is missing
- It is hard to see the legend/caption in figure 2
- "Executives" or "executives? I think you should choose one of the writing and use the same for the whole article
Grammar and Spelling
Few errors here. To find them, use the research tool.
- deferral instead of deferal
- "As Lee Merkhofer consulting states. It is not beneficial for software developers to make advanced PPM software targeting niche markets."?
- "The bottom line is that even though PPM decision making software is adapted by many companies it fail"s" to gain user acceptance."
Content aspects
- Your article is mostly didactic but sometimes you take strong positions like in this sentence: "Even though Cooper R. argues that poor tools are better than no tools I would argue that a tool that distorts the result is worse." Maybe you should stay pedagogic.
- "From 1990 - 1999 IT investments rose from 9% - 22%" => % of what?
- Your article misses maybe a conclusion?