The Historical Earthworks of the Warsaw Citadel
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- I think the title should be changed, especially in terms of the geoheritage component.
- The paper does not make a clear connection with geoheritage. Insist on the presentation of the cultural site.
- The Figures must be renumbered from 1 to n in the article.
The first figure is not clear enough.
The figure 7 (new numbering) has not scale, and the legend is not legible on the vignette
The paper is not typewritten in accordance with the rules of the journal
Author Response
Thank you for your kind comments. In the revised version, the manuscript has been re-organised and clarified. Some language errors have been corrected. All changes in the text of manuscript have been indicated by red colour. We have simplified the title by removing some obviousness: "the exploring", and "the geoheritage".
The first figure has been changed and expanded for a more precise reception, also Figure 7 has been improved.
We've reworked the article according to the journal's editing requirements.
The elements marked in the text have been corrected.
Reviewer 2 Report
The approach to the research question and the analytical content of the paper are interesting and offer valuable information on military architectural heritage of the nineteenth century. I think that the introduction could be improved and offer a bit more on the historical (political), social, and architectural background of the citadel's construction. The analysis is well done and contains relevant results concerning earthwork technology and military engineering. The presentation is, however, sometimes unclear, partly because of problems of the authors with English language and style. Thus, extensive editing by an English native speaker is indispensable which will, at the end, improve the quality of presentation and also influence the interest of the reader positively.
Author Response
Thank you for your kind comments. In the revised version, the manuscript has been re-organised and clarified.
We have simplified the title by removing some obviousness: "the exploring", and "the geoheritage".
We extended the historical introduction with additional graphics Fig. 1a) and a broader political context. This is not a significant extension of the content, but we expect it to better position the object over time.
The elements marked in the text have been corrected.
Reviewer 3 Report
The proposed paper is interesting; it presents original contents, the themes are well developed and the discussion is appropriate.
I just would suggest to slightly simplify the technical part and to deepen the dissemination potential of the case study, in order to harmonize the first and second part of the work, otherwise too distinct.
Moreover, the manuscript needs proofreading. Some suggestions are on the revised text. Particularly, there are some errors in the numbering of the figures, in the captions of the tables, and, more generally, in the formatting of the text.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for your kind comments. In the revised version, the manuscript has been re-organised and clarified.
We have simplified the title by removing some obviousness: "the exploring", and "the geoheritage".
We have separated the mathematical part related to the pre-projects of the calculation method from the mainstream text.
The elements marked in the text have been corrected.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The text has considerably improved. But, there are sometimes still problems with regard to the quality of presentation. Thus, the article still needs a copy editor. I just would like to give some examples; there will be more. E.g.,
Page 4, line 582, subheading: "Historical Evidence of Warsaw Citadel Origin" > "Historical Evidence of Warsaw Citadel: Origin"
Page 6, line 160.: "was the only the huge prison"
Lines 1796-98: "Despite the progress of the above-mentioned machines, until the 20th century, only one set was used the basic machine for earthworks: "
Lines 1800-1801: "Historical sources mention employment of thousands of diggers during the construction Warsaw Citadel. "
Lines 1806-08: "The compaction of earth embankments was made with the help of the “bab”, which was a heavy oak block with a few wooden handles attached and were operated by four diggers. "
Line 2704: eastern most > easternmost
Line 3751: "iswas"
Line 3870: is crucial > are crucial
Lines 4582-83: "These past irregularities were hard direct to determine."
The bibliography is also unsystematic. While at the beginning the use of italics and " is rather systematic, one finds them in the end of the bibliography completely different and not following any rules.
Thus, let us say, minor but indispensably necessary modifications have to be done.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your careful reading and insightful comments. We have tried to improve all shortcomings. All changes in the manuscript have been marked using the "Track Changes" function in Microsoft Word as was suggested by Managing Editor.
Point 1:
The text has considerably improved. But, there are sometimes still problems with regard to the quality of presentation. Thus, the article still needs a copy editor. I just would like to give some examples; there will be more. E.g.,
Page 4, line 582, subheading: "Historical Evidence of Warsaw Citadel Origin" > "Historical Evidence of Warsaw Citadel: Origin"
Page 6, line 160.: "was the only the huge prison"
Lines 1796-98: "Despite the progress of the above-mentioned machines, until the 20th century, only one set was used the basic machine for earthworks: "
Lines 1800-1801: "Historical sources mention employment of thousands of diggers during the construction Warsaw Citadel. "
Lines 1806-08: "The compaction of earth embankments was made with the help of the “bab”, which was a heavy oak block with a few wooden handles attached and were operated by four diggers. "
Line 2704: eastern most > easternmost
Line 3751: "iswas"
Line 3870: is crucial > are crucial
Lines 4582-83: "These past irregularities were hard direct to determine."
Response 1:
We don't feel qualified to judge about the English language and style, therefore an English Editing MPDI Services was performed, certificate in attachment.
The above visible mistakes have been also corrected.
Point 2:
The bibliography is also unsystematic. While at the beginning the use of italics and " is rather systematic, one finds them in the end of the bibliography completely different and not following any rules.
Thus, let us say, minor but indispensably necessary modifications have to be done.
Response 2:
The References chapter was formatted according to The Reference List and Citations Style Guide for MDPI HSS Journals.
Thank you again for all your comments
