Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Erachima (talk · contribs) 00:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm putting the article On Hold as there are a few issues that need addressed. Anything I don't mention you can assume I'm fine with. --erachima talk 00:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The lead of the article is too short, not in readable prose, and not very informative. Please expand it.Y

Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• As a more minor point, nowhere in the article does it mention how long the Enquiry is. This seems like a pretty basic oversight.Y

Added. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:05, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Has anyone given an educated guess as to the contents of the tenth book?Y

It may not even have existed, if the current 9 books represent the material of all 10 books, redivided. Have said so, with ref. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:05, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• There is a wild inconsistency in the style used to describe each book of the Enquiry. Please revise the descriptions for the 2nd through 7th books to be closer in style to how you presented the 8th, 9th, and to a lesser extent 1st book.Y

Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:38, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, all my concerns appear to have been addressed now, so I'm passing it. Good work. --erachima talk 13:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]