From apppm
Revision as of 22:20, 28 September 2015 by Gaetangarnotel (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Anna: Very nice topic and method you have chosen. I don't have a lot of comments as it seems that you are well within the requirements for the article and that you have already created a great structure including the application and limitations.

Review 1: s150905

Hi, the illustration of the method is really engaging and interesting for the subject

Formal aspects

  • The article follow the right method’s structure.
  • The few images used are very focused and understandable.
  • There is a lack in blank spaces and paragraphs’ division in the section, which might help the reader.


  • The introduction is very clear and illustrative.
  • The topic clearly developed, underling the essential aspects in a precise way.
  • The method description maybe seems sometimes a little much specific and the reader could find difficulties in following the parts depicted; but here the example you have made could act as a helper.
  • Not all the references appear to be of high quality

Ch.filis, Review 2: Hello, and straight to the point. Really analytical explanation and description of the method. I had the opportunity while reading it, to understand how the methods works.

Formal Aspects:

  • The article has a logical flow and every part is “built” on another
  • I could not notice any obvious grammar mistakes
  • The images illustrate your writings in a clear and understandable way

Content Aspects:

  • The introduction describes the model in a clear way
  • Analysis in depth for all the phases required in order to formulate the model
  • Not so clear how the model was used in the industry
  • Understandable description of the model’s limitations and advantages as well
  • Quite few references for so extensive analysis but probably the author’s experience can cover parts of the subject

Thanks & answers

Dear all,

Thank you for your comments, they have been important to improve the article. And to answer the second comment, I actually based much of the article on my own experience, which explains why you don't have 10 references but only 5 :)

Personal tools