![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
This article is the same as in the www.stellman-greene.com website, which is also an external link.
Vishwamithra 15:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
part of 'Overview' so I've moved it to 'Methods' and given cite for the source. Markbassett ( talk) 19:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
The Professional Resources and Project Management firms section apparently has spam. I will take a further look into it to see whether the whole section should stay or not. Pm master 19:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
There is no longer such a section, so I guess he fixed it long ago and forgot to remove talk Markbassett ( talk) 12:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
What does this article have that the Project management page doesn't? DCDuring 20:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
This edit here was copy/paste from within Wikipedia from here -- Marcel Douwe Dekker ( talk) 21:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
So what ? If both pages mentioned how they might be rrelated is that good or bad or just a note? Outdated anyway as both pages have since changed. Markbassett ( talk) 12:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Pm master essentially deleted the University of Wisconsin reference as spam but in doing so, the two references initially provided were likewise deleted.
As Vishwamithra noted earlier, much of the article's content came from the Stellman & Greene Consulting LLC website which is promoting its consulting services and does not have any in-text citations.
On the other hand, one reference that Pm master deleted came from a peer reviewed journal. It was an examination of a survey of 55 IT project managers and 19 experts with 21 references and citations where appropriate.
The following statements are hereby disputed:
1. "In some large corporations, scheduling, as well as cost, estimating, and risk management are organized under the department of project controls."
2. "Many project scheduling software products exist which can do much of the tedious work of calculating the schedule automatically, and plenty of books and tutorials dedicated to teaching people how to use them. However, before a project manager can use these tools, he or she should understand the concepts behind the WBS, dependencies, resource allocation, critical paths, Gantt charts and earned value. These are the real keys to planning a successful project."
Pmresource ( talk) 21:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Item No. 1 appears to be a copyright violation after a simple Google search of the said sentence in quotation marks.
Item No. 2 is a copyright violation of the Stellman & Greene Consulting LLC website. The editor who wrote item #2 can discuss this issue here.
Thank you.
Pmresource ( talk) 17:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
2-3-2012
As a professional, certified full time scheduler working in project controls full time, I can tell you that all of the disputed facts are true, even if you complain about the source. I can guarantee you that the professionals in PMI, AACE and the Project Controls Guild are too busy refining and expanding their own published bodies of knowledge to take the time to learn Wikipedia standards of content. Personally I've contributed to dozens of articles in a few minutes of my spare time, referenced multiple professional and academic publications, and you guys always erase it because I don't have the enough time to properly format it. Yet you guys never complain about any graduate level math article I've used over the years.
Simply put - If my peers and I are already working 50 hours a week at this professionally, and promote it within professional societies in our spare time, and maybe see our families after that, if we are to contribute to Wikipedia, we would appreciate your help and guidance into accomplishing something, not arrogant rules lawyers saying if we contribute in ignorance of your rules, you just erase it. Not a good way to get the contribution of subject matter experts from outside or your online community.
You want references? Google the Project Managment Inistitue, the Association for Cost Engineering International, The project controls guild, and the Construction management institue. Referemce ANY text book on project management or construction management published in the past 70 years. This article should be cross referenced with the articles on Gantt schedules, PERT, and critical path methode, not to mention earned value. Last I checked both DOE and DOD have public available manuals on the subject as well.
This has been industry standard practice for decades, no reason not to include it just because the practitioners are not wiki savvy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.233.139.131 ( talk) 21:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Time to remove Accuracy dispute -- It is now 2 years after dispute raised, the two paras cited are long gone, and I'll also note they were described as copyright issues and seem mislabelled factual accuracy issues becaue the statement is both reputably sourced and appears a valid view. So I believe it is time to remove the Factual Accuracy tab. Markbassett ( talk) 12:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Could use more details about what relationship of schedule is to usage, or with other items such as the WBS. This article had defined schedule as listing terminal elements from a WBS. However, I note that (a) WBS refs say activities are the level below the WBS terminal elements, (b) many PMs schedule major milestones or events that affect the program, such as governance reviews or expectations of an interfacing project that the program has dependency links to nut are not part of the WBS, (c) there is fundamental divergence over whether WBS is to be breakdown of deliverable or it is breakdown of Work, and (d) practices are not as good as theory and tools allow .... many schedules just hardcode dates without dependencies, even fewer go into identifying resources or risks. Markbassett ( talk) 18:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I moved the following ELs from the article External links section. Some might make good sources to support article content but they are not appropriate as ELs.
Joja lozzo 23:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Documenting here -- I'm removing the tags about insufficient inline cites. There was one at top of lead and an earlier one at the bottom of References section, and nothing in TALK that seemed a way out, so I'll start with the closure. The article didn't seem in error but there was a mechanistic call to have some cites that has been here for years. There hardly seems a point to having a tag that is never addressed or discussed. So... I saw that a few of Further Reading would be suitable support for bits of the Overview section and moved them up. The tags were
Feels a bit bogus to put them as cites because the article text did not come from them or the article topic/content inherently need a cite, but the content is supported by them even if it doesn't really need the extra support, and cite is the only way I see to remove a tag. Markbassett ( talk) 14:48, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Is there enough notability for schedule structure concepts ? There is some, such as Hammock activity, but there are more structure concepts of how to build a schedule out there and not many are in the Category Schedule (Project management)
e.g. Types of schedule primarily categories Gantt chart, Milestone chart, Network schedule, or Production schedules
e.g. Work Breakdown Structure as a data key across the effort, a table of contents for the Statement of work, and schedule subsections. This provides for a desire to multiple levels of data and making it clear 'what cost center does this task bill to' and enabling financial analysis.
e.g. I've seen a high level approach to schedules into four areas
e.g. "Master" schedules and sub-schedules, "Consolidated" schedules, ...
e.g. Further clarification of Critical path and warning of it vs Microsoft variance
e.g. List of 'Required milestones' - certain Milestone (project management) that must be shown/done, either parts of mandated approach or linked to the kind of project
e.g. Naming conventions to use - configuration items lists and definition (official terms); standard reports...
e.g. Best Practices or GAAP - 'good' milestone is 0 day, measurable, and important; a 'good' schedule guidelines ...
Cheers Markbassett ( talk) 17:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
This article is the same as in the www.stellman-greene.com website, which is also an external link.
Vishwamithra 15:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
part of 'Overview' so I've moved it to 'Methods' and given cite for the source. Markbassett ( talk) 19:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
The Professional Resources and Project Management firms section apparently has spam. I will take a further look into it to see whether the whole section should stay or not. Pm master 19:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
There is no longer such a section, so I guess he fixed it long ago and forgot to remove talk Markbassett ( talk) 12:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
What does this article have that the Project management page doesn't? DCDuring 20:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
This edit here was copy/paste from within Wikipedia from here -- Marcel Douwe Dekker ( talk) 21:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
So what ? If both pages mentioned how they might be rrelated is that good or bad or just a note? Outdated anyway as both pages have since changed. Markbassett ( talk) 12:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Pm master essentially deleted the University of Wisconsin reference as spam but in doing so, the two references initially provided were likewise deleted.
As Vishwamithra noted earlier, much of the article's content came from the Stellman & Greene Consulting LLC website which is promoting its consulting services and does not have any in-text citations.
On the other hand, one reference that Pm master deleted came from a peer reviewed journal. It was an examination of a survey of 55 IT project managers and 19 experts with 21 references and citations where appropriate.
The following statements are hereby disputed:
1. "In some large corporations, scheduling, as well as cost, estimating, and risk management are organized under the department of project controls."
2. "Many project scheduling software products exist which can do much of the tedious work of calculating the schedule automatically, and plenty of books and tutorials dedicated to teaching people how to use them. However, before a project manager can use these tools, he or she should understand the concepts behind the WBS, dependencies, resource allocation, critical paths, Gantt charts and earned value. These are the real keys to planning a successful project."
Pmresource ( talk) 21:16, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Item No. 1 appears to be a copyright violation after a simple Google search of the said sentence in quotation marks.
Item No. 2 is a copyright violation of the Stellman & Greene Consulting LLC website. The editor who wrote item #2 can discuss this issue here.
Thank you.
Pmresource ( talk) 17:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
2-3-2012
As a professional, certified full time scheduler working in project controls full time, I can tell you that all of the disputed facts are true, even if you complain about the source. I can guarantee you that the professionals in PMI, AACE and the Project Controls Guild are too busy refining and expanding their own published bodies of knowledge to take the time to learn Wikipedia standards of content. Personally I've contributed to dozens of articles in a few minutes of my spare time, referenced multiple professional and academic publications, and you guys always erase it because I don't have the enough time to properly format it. Yet you guys never complain about any graduate level math article I've used over the years.
Simply put - If my peers and I are already working 50 hours a week at this professionally, and promote it within professional societies in our spare time, and maybe see our families after that, if we are to contribute to Wikipedia, we would appreciate your help and guidance into accomplishing something, not arrogant rules lawyers saying if we contribute in ignorance of your rules, you just erase it. Not a good way to get the contribution of subject matter experts from outside or your online community.
You want references? Google the Project Managment Inistitue, the Association for Cost Engineering International, The project controls guild, and the Construction management institue. Referemce ANY text book on project management or construction management published in the past 70 years. This article should be cross referenced with the articles on Gantt schedules, PERT, and critical path methode, not to mention earned value. Last I checked both DOE and DOD have public available manuals on the subject as well.
This has been industry standard practice for decades, no reason not to include it just because the practitioners are not wiki savvy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.233.139.131 ( talk) 21:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Time to remove Accuracy dispute -- It is now 2 years after dispute raised, the two paras cited are long gone, and I'll also note they were described as copyright issues and seem mislabelled factual accuracy issues becaue the statement is both reputably sourced and appears a valid view. So I believe it is time to remove the Factual Accuracy tab. Markbassett ( talk) 12:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Could use more details about what relationship of schedule is to usage, or with other items such as the WBS. This article had defined schedule as listing terminal elements from a WBS. However, I note that (a) WBS refs say activities are the level below the WBS terminal elements, (b) many PMs schedule major milestones or events that affect the program, such as governance reviews or expectations of an interfacing project that the program has dependency links to nut are not part of the WBS, (c) there is fundamental divergence over whether WBS is to be breakdown of deliverable or it is breakdown of Work, and (d) practices are not as good as theory and tools allow .... many schedules just hardcode dates without dependencies, even fewer go into identifying resources or risks. Markbassett ( talk) 18:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I moved the following ELs from the article External links section. Some might make good sources to support article content but they are not appropriate as ELs.
Joja lozzo 23:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Documenting here -- I'm removing the tags about insufficient inline cites. There was one at top of lead and an earlier one at the bottom of References section, and nothing in TALK that seemed a way out, so I'll start with the closure. The article didn't seem in error but there was a mechanistic call to have some cites that has been here for years. There hardly seems a point to having a tag that is never addressed or discussed. So... I saw that a few of Further Reading would be suitable support for bits of the Overview section and moved them up. The tags were
Feels a bit bogus to put them as cites because the article text did not come from them or the article topic/content inherently need a cite, but the content is supported by them even if it doesn't really need the extra support, and cite is the only way I see to remove a tag. Markbassett ( talk) 14:48, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Is there enough notability for schedule structure concepts ? There is some, such as Hammock activity, but there are more structure concepts of how to build a schedule out there and not many are in the Category Schedule (Project management)
e.g. Types of schedule primarily categories Gantt chart, Milestone chart, Network schedule, or Production schedules
e.g. Work Breakdown Structure as a data key across the effort, a table of contents for the Statement of work, and schedule subsections. This provides for a desire to multiple levels of data and making it clear 'what cost center does this task bill to' and enabling financial analysis.
e.g. I've seen a high level approach to schedules into four areas
e.g. "Master" schedules and sub-schedules, "Consolidated" schedules, ...
e.g. Further clarification of Critical path and warning of it vs Microsoft variance
e.g. List of 'Required milestones' - certain Milestone (project management) that must be shown/done, either parts of mandated approach or linked to the kind of project
e.g. Naming conventions to use - configuration items lists and definition (official terms); standard reports...
e.g. Best Practices or GAAP - 'good' milestone is 0 day, measurable, and important; a 'good' schedule guidelines ...
Cheers Markbassett ( talk) 17:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)