Chapter 5 Comments

[anniecollins]

• Line 78-94: Too many quotes!! Pick one! (Jk I’m just being picky/dramatic, I think the King one suffices on its own though)
• Rewriting section: Great. Love it.
• Line 161: Is this quote complete? The end doesn’t make sense to me.
• Line 193: The code here does not correspond to the paragraph above (i.e. drawing 100 times instead of 10 as written). Also what’s up with all the commented code? Is this supposed to be a LLN illustration? Code needs to be fixed and probably another paragraph added before line 235 since that explanation comes out of nowhere right now.
• Line 259: Based on the example you provide I would say the second title format is more like ‘A question? And a method’ than ‘A question? And an answer’
• Line 290 and 311: On line 290 you say “For a five-to-fifteen-page paper, an introduction may be two or three paragraphs of main content,” and then on line 311 you say, “For instance (and this is just a rough guide) an introduction for a 10-page paper, should probably be about 3 or 4 paragraphs, or 10 per cent, but it depends on specifics.” Which is it? Either way I think it works better to keep this thought in line 290.
• Model section: I think it would be good to include a paragraph in here (maybe at the end?) about what might replace a model section for papers that don’t involve modelling. For example, this section could be replaced by a description of a simulation that was conducted or by a broader “Methodology” section for papers that are more EDA-based.
• Line 417: Citation for the Jeff Bezos quote?
• Line 421: Does R Studio not have spell check? Why would people need to copy and paste into a word doc? This feels unnecessary.

[RohanAlexander]

• Line 78-94: Too many quotes!! Pick one! (Jk I’m just being picky/dramatic, I think the King one suffices on its own though)

Have removed every quote apart from the King one.

• Rewriting section: Great. Love it.

Thank you for the positive comment.

• Line 161: Is this quote complete? The end doesn’t make sense to me.

Alice interrupts him, which is why it seems incomplete. I've added Alice's interruption.

• Line 193: The code here does not correspond to the paragraph above (i.e. drawing 100 times instead of 10 as written). Also what’s up with all the commented code? Is this supposed to be a LLN illustration? Code needs to be fixed and probably another paragraph added before line 235 since that explanation comes out of nowhere right now.
• Line 259: Based on the example you provide I would say the second title format is more like ‘A question? And a method’ than ‘A question? And an answer’

Have changed.

• Line 290 and 311: On line 290 you say “For a five-to-fifteen-page paper, an introduction may be two or three paragraphs of main content,” and then on line 311 you say, “For instance (and this is just a rough guide) an introduction for a 10-page paper, should probably be about 3 or 4 paragraphs, or 10 per cent, but it depends on specifics.” Which is it? Either way I think it works better to keep this thought in line 290.

Looks like you removed it from 311. I agree with that.

• Model section: I think it would be good to include a paragraph in here (maybe at the end?) about what might replace a model section for papers that don’t involve modelling. For example, this section could be replaced by a description of a simulation that was conducted or by a broader “Methodology” section for papers that are more EDA-based.

Great idea. Have added.

• Line 417: Citation for the Jeff Bezos quote?

Have added

• Line 421: Does R Studio not have spell check? Why would people need to copy and paste into a word doc? This feels unnecessary.

Have clarified that the R Studio spell checker is not great.