5 ms·

Am I being pedantic or is something off about the writing in this article. > The very biggest blue whales could reach near 200 tonnes, but that was before comm

Am I being pedantic or is something off about the writing in this article. > The very biggest blue whales could reach near 200 tonnes, but that was before commercial whaling "very biggest"? Doesn't "biggest" already cover very? "near"? Wouldn't "nearly" be more grammatically correct. "but that was before commercial whaling"? Wouldn't a more professional way of writing this be "until the advent of commercial whaling" This all sounds like a speech of a tour guide being made towards children not a scientific article in the BBC. Speaking of tour guide, the section bringing in the Natural History Museum was wild to me. Yes, the museum's whale skeleton is a beautiful sight for visitors to see, but "The London whale skeleton is a key resource for scientists worldwide" -> huh?? Blue Whales are far from extinct, why would scientists need to go to this one museum for skeletons, surely they can be found from other sources? But really, I was on guard from the very beginning of the article that started with FIVE consecutive paragraphs made up of single sentences. What strange paragraph breaks, why not combine them into 2 or 3 max?

throwawaylinux 3y ago
> "very biggest"? Doesn't "biggest" already cover very? "very biggest" is a common phrase. Maybe it's more British. > "near"? Wouldn't "nearly" be more grammatically correct. I don't know but that's also pretty common. > "but that was before commercial whaling"? Wouldn't a more professional way of writing this be "until the advent of commercial whaling" I think it's fine. > This all sounds like a speech of a tour guide being made towards children not a scientific article in the BBC. The BBC is a government media / propaganda organization, "scientific BBC article" doesn't have much gravitas.
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  The BBC used to insist on very high standards of English. This is no longer the case as this is now seen as being 'elitist'.
colechristensen 3y ago
You’re being pedantic, and not even the kind where you’re correct.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  I think all the comments are valid, and would improve the writing. I'd probably replace "near" (an Americanism) with "close to".
hardlianotion 3y ago
The articles is a news article - think science popularisation. It's not a scientific article, but from my (British-English-speaking) perspective, the tone is reasonable and professional. You didn't include in your quote that the skeleton was digitised to help prepare for it's move to the main hall of the museum. I think that the article emphasises that the analysis and digital artefacts created while moving the skeleton are an important scientific resource. That sounds credible to me.

throwawaylinux 3y ago

> "very biggest"? Doesn't "biggest" already cover very? "very biggest" is a common phrase. Maybe it's more British. > "near"? Wouldn't "nearly" be more grammatically correct. I don't know but that's also pretty common. > "but that was before commercial whaling"? Wouldn't a more professional way of writing this be "until the advent of commercial whaling" I think it's fine. > This all sounds like a speech of a tour guide being made towards children not a scientific article in the BBC. The BBC is a government media / propaganda organization, "scientific BBC article" doesn't have much gravitas.

mytailorisrich 3y ago
The BBC used to insist on very high standards of English. This is no longer the case as this is now seen as being 'elitist'.

colechristensen 3y ago

You’re being pedantic, and not even the kind where you’re correct.

robertlagrant 3y ago
I think all the comments are valid, and would improve the writing. I'd probably replace "near" (an Americanism) with "close to".

hardlianotion 3y ago

The articles is a news article - think science popularisation. It's not a scientific article, but from my (British-English-speaking) perspective, the tone is reasonable and professional. You didn't include in your quote that the skeleton was digitised to help prepare for it's move to the main hall of the museum. I think that the article emphasises that the analysis and digital artefacts created while moving the skeleton are an important scientific resource. That sounds credible to me.