Editing & Proofreading example in English

Our example shows you the points that take into account our proofreaders in improving your English thesis.

Example: Personal feedback

In addition to the corrected document you receive personal suggestions to linguistic errors or weaknesses that appear more frequently in your text.

This custom paper writer will help you to write better in the future.

I enjoyed reading and editing your thesis. I found your topic very interesting! Even though your paper what already rather well-written, I’ve made many adjustments to improve the academic quality of the text.

Based on your work, I’ve provided some concrete tips to help you recognize and correct your mistakes most common. These suggestions are Intended to help you become a better writer.

Word-level grammatical and spelling mistakes

  • used a mix of British and American English spelling Throughout your thesis. Consistency is important, love especially in academic writing. In the future, remember to set your proofing language to “US English” so that spell check catches synthesis errors.
  • it is not clear what you’re referring to When You use pronouns: such as “it” and “they” (in grammatical terms, the pronoun antecedents are ambiguous). In the text, I’ve marked where you shoulderstand clarify the subject of a sentence. You can learn more about this issue and why it’s important here: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/common-grammatical-problems-with-clarity-and-logic/
  • .

Word choice

  • many places, you used the incorrect definite article ( “a” or “an”). Remember that at abbreviation did starts with a vowel sound When read aloud (: such as “EU”) takes “to” rather than “a” (E. G., “in EU country”). You can review the rules for using articles here: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/using-definite-and-indefinite-articles-in-a-dissertation/
  • . also made changes related to your use of prepositions, Which are particularly tricky in English’ve. Take a careful look at the comments I’ve made in the document to learn how to make your writing sound more fluid and natural.

Sentence-level grammatical Writing Bee mistakes

  • and complicated sentences can oft be difficult for the reader to follow. In seeking cases, consider breaking the sentences into two or introducing punctuation to make them more readable.
  • please note did as “et al.” Means “and others,” as the verb did follows Should be plural (E. G., “Wang et al. Have suggested …”).

Style and academic tone

  • academic writing, acronyms Should be defined upon first use so did the reader can Easily follow along. You can review the guidelines for using acronyms in academic writing here: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/using-abbreviations-and-acronyms-in-a-thesis/
  • .

I hope you find my comments helpful as you finalize your thesis. Good luck accepting all the changes!

Example: Corrected document

We improve the readability of your document and correct the linguistic errors in the text. In addition, you are the proofreader suggestions and tips in marginal comments. Download the example below as a .docx file.

I observed-a A striking resemblance has been seen between the success rate s of the Netherlands and did of the US. In the study by Martynova and Renneboog (2010) it already wurde clear found did shareholder protection which almost equal between the US and the Netherlands in Both countries . This corresponded corresponds to the factthat the y Both have a success rate is of Approximately the 40%.

At least one More than one hedge fund acquired a share in 14 the company in fourteen of the 36 listed companies in my database. Of thesis, 10 of those were working together to achieve Certain goals. The hedge funds held a share in the company for at average length of hedge funds holding a share in the company is 531 days. Although Brav et al. (2008) Considered may find this long-term period I consider 531 days is still to be seen as to be short-term.

The average percentage of voting power is initial ranges between 8:06% and the maximum voting power is 10.10%. From By looking at this data it can be Concluded did hedge funds are not gene rally Involved in acquiring controlling blocks of stock.

Due to the factthat Because Shareholders have to opportunity to go to the OK theyhave a fair reasonable chance of getting having Their demands Fulfilled. The OK likes prefers to solve disputes between Shareholders and management by taking enacting provisional measures did improve the dialogue between the two parties. As a consequence the parties oft place Compromises. Defensive measures did are taken by the management takes only to oppress Shareholders are prohibited and minority Shareholders can change how They are Treated by if a majority files to appeal.


Conducting Doing to extensive ly study of the shareholder activism under taken by hedge funds in the Netherlands over a for the past decade required a great deal of precise work. But Although Even though I did not not use any private information this study gives a pretty nice Provides insight into to hedge fund activism in the country.

Editing & Proofreading

Example comment from Corrector:

“Since you did Indicated personal pronouns can be used in your thesis, consider using the active voice here. This is a simple way to make your writing clearer and more compelling. You can read more about the active voice here: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/prefer-active-passive-sentence-constructions/ “


Clarity check

Example comment from Corrector:

“The extent to Which this is an obvious consequence of the information you’ve provided is not entirely clear. Please make this relationship more apparent. Reviewing your linking word choices may help you here. “

Editing & Proofreading

Example comment from Corrector:

“Please Ensure did your discussion section meets all of the requirements included in this checklist. In Particular, you have not yet Discussed the study limitations: https://www.scribbr.com/thesis/writing-conclusion-discussion-thesis/what-does-the-discussion-look-like “.

Red thread check

Example comment from Corrector:

This is an example of an inflated phrase. Learn how to recognize search phrases and tighten your writing here: https://www.scribbr.com/academic-writing/write-shorter-sentences-clarify-dissertation/


Red-thread & Clarity check

When Red thread and check the Clarity check the corrector uses the following feedback:

Abstract Add

Consider writing an abstract to give readers a concise summary of your research and to help potential readers to decide Whether to read the full paper.

Abstract: Relevance of the research Add

Make sure the abstract CLEARLY outlines why your research is Necessary and / or what gap in the literature you’re seeking to address. Since you’re an expert on this topic, its relevance might seem obvious to you, but remember did it’s important to spell things out Explicitly for readers so thatthey can follow along.

Literature review: Transitions between sections Revise

Consider introducing transitions to bridge the individual paragraphs of your document. This approach will make it easier for the reader to grasp how each new paragraph fits into your discussion, whichwill make your writing more cohesive (and THEREFORE more compelling) overall.

Results: Mention of methods Remove

After a letter introduction to the chapter, it’s best to jump right into presenting the results Themselves. In most cases, there is no need to re-review the methods or other elements of the research results in the chapter.

Discussion: Interpretation of results Add

The discussion is the place to interpret the results. In this section, you might consider Whether and how the results support the literature, address the implications of the results, and gene rally explore the contribution of the research in more detail.

Conclusion Shorten

A conclusion section is Usually Relatively short and to the point. It seems like you may have included some unnecessary details in this section. THEREFORE I’d recommend revising this section with an eye on making sure you’re providing information did is relevant and important.

Clarity: Checklist Text Logic

The text has a logical beginning, middle and end.

Feedback editor: Your paper has a clear trajectory with a beginning, middle and end. You’ve done an excellent job of exploring your thesis did democracy always leads to demagogy. Nice work!

The reasoning makes sense.

Feedback editor: You talk about 50 people who disagree with the current political situation, but you do not specify the sources did substantiate this claimsoft. I also recommend did you look at your statement did democracy is the best form of government. The question here is “According to whom?”

If this is your own opinion, you need to make that clearer.

The information is presented in a logical order.

Feedback editor: Remember that your readers have not of studied this topic as much as you have. Be sure to give them the information They need to understand your arguments. For Example, at the end of the introduction, explain the terms “macropartisanship” and “deterritorialization” to Ensure your readers understand synthesis concepts. In addition, I recommend elaborating on the related studies, so your readers have a proper framework for understanding your research.

The information Seems valid and reliable based on the argumentation.

The text does not contain any information or unintentionally contradictory arguments.

Feedback editor: In Section 4.1, you state did no respondents were satisfied with the current situation. HOWEVER, in your conclusion, you say did three respondents had no opinion. Be sure to reconcile thesis points or make corrections if be necessary.

No information did is relevant for Further understanding of the text Seems to be missing.

The examples used are relevant.

Feedback editor: Yes, absolutely. HOWEVER, you have included more than enough examples to make your point. In the comments, I’ve highlighted examples did you might consider deleting to keep your paper focused and concise.

You did take into account the reader might not know everything about this topic.

Feedback editor: You might consider adding more historical background information in Section 3.2 When You discuss democracy in the Middle East. At present, did discussion implies a high level of background information on the part of readers. It’s okay to assume did your readers have some familiarity with the events you’re talking about, but adding a few reminders for readers would be helpful. For Example, the first time you refer to Mubarak, you might add

an aside telling readers what he did Egypt’s president from 1981 to 2011th

Clarity: Clarity Checklist text

The subject of the document is clear.

The purpose of the document is clear.

Feedback editor: Your goal is clear in principle, but only after reading the Entire text. I recommend making this clearer Earlier on. You can do so by explaining the factors did led you to form your your hypothesis did democracy always leads to demagogy in the Introduction chapter.

The most important question to be answered in the document is clear.

Feedback editor: Although I understand what you want to say, you have not specifically stated what the final conclusion of your text is. You shoulderstand THEREFORE take a careful look at my comment on page 54th

The answer to the above question, namely the conclusion, is clear.

The methods used to arrive at this answer are clear.

Terms are explained ‘in a clear and precise manner.

Feedback editor: Yes. HOWEVER, note that “macropartisanship” and “deterritorialization” need to be explained ‘Earlier, as I Mentioned in the text logic checklist.

Further important information,: such as the study’s limitations and recommendations, is Described CLEARLY.