Paper Revisions

Group 1: I really enjoyed the figures that were included in this paper, though some of them appear to have a different font than others, some also need scales. I thought the abstract and the introduction were both very well done. The paper can be repetitive in places, and could have some spots cut a bit shorter. There were also some places with seemingly irrelevant information, like the first paragraph on glacial history. Overall I liked this paper a lot, and found that it had a lot of good information.

Group 2: This paper does not meet the assignment parameters (too many words). I think the figures would be very informative, but many of them are too small to read any of their text. Overall, I liked their paper a lot. Some things do need to be cut out to get them to the correct length. I recommended removing the equations, and the paragraph that discusses them. I think it is informative but not exactly necessary for this paper. Some of the figures could also be cut out for lack of relevance. This paper is full of good information. I think once the less important pieces are cut out, and the figures are fixed this will be a much better paper.

Group 3: This paper is far over length, needs to be cut down quite a bit. I think the figures should be moved into the body of the paper so it can be more easily read and understood. There were many repetitive parts of this paper, which should be removed. Many of the paragraphs need to have all irrelevant information removed. There are many sentences that do not fit in the paragraph that they are in. That would help get the length down, and give the paper a better structure. Each paragraph needs to be a bit more focused on their own topic. I think when this happens the paper will be really good.

Group 4: I was a bit confused when reading through the discussion section of this paper, I think would be good to break it up into some different sections to give it a bit more direction. I think all of the figures in this paper are very useful and informative. Some sentences in this paper need to be changed a bit, a lot of them are talking about things we have discussed as though they may or may not be true. Example : "the glacial history may have created the unstable underlying soils for landslides." This is a fact so it should be stated as a fact. I think this paper is really good, and could be made better with a change in some of the language that is used.

Group 6: This paper is way too long, and needs to be cut down. I think the beginning of the backgrounds on landslides could be removed. I do not think it is necessarily important to go over these things to people that already understand landslides. I would like to see some more sub headings in this paper, to separate ideas into concise paragraphs. This is not that much of an issue but it may make it easier to follow, or know where you are in the paper. The most important update for this paper will be to remove unnecessary information, and maybe add some sentences together to make the paper shorter.