diff --git a/guides/wikimedia_en.csv b/guides/wikimedia_en.csv
index 1bdde83..c496de7 100644
--- a/guides/wikimedia_en.csv
+++ b/guides/wikimedia_en.csv
@@ -1,40 +1,40 @@
 Question,Priority,Option,Answer,Explanation,Note
 1,low,1,,see 2.,see 2.
-2,low,1,,"Yes, our projects  experience daily restrictions using content across all language versions. To give an expample, the European Directives covering copyright delegate most limitations to the Member States -  one such limitation being ""Feedom of Panorama"" in the Copyright in the Information Society Directive (2001/29/EC). It effectively results in pictures of buildings from half of the Member States not being allowed on Wikipedia. Furthermore, pictures of some buildings are not available in all language versions of Wikipedia, also due to the legal reality the delegation to the Member State level has caused. A notable example of such an image is the Atomium in Brussels - which can be seen in the English version of the encyclopedia but not on French Wikipedia. ",
-3,medium,,,"The most fundametnal principle of the World Wide Web and most online projects is that everything is available worldwide. This is the basic factor that made the internet an innovation driver. However, in order to legally do this in the EU we need to go over lenghts to ensure that our content is not only freely licensable but also that free, international license is available. Both us and our partners at Creative Commons invest huge amounts of time to ensure this, worldwide but also in Europe. Conflicts and unclarities are inevitable, which causes high volunteer and legal cost with remaining legal uncertainties in many cases. This ultimately results in less content being available.",
+2,low,1,,"Yes, our projects  experience daily restrictions using content across all language versions. To give an example, the European Directives covering copyright delegate most limitations to the Member States -  one such limitation being ""Freedom of Panorama"" in the Copyright in the Information Society Directive (2001/29/EC). It effectively results in pictures of buildings from half of the Member States not being allowed on Wikipedia. Furthermore, pictures of some buildings are not available in all language versions of Wikipedia, also due to the legal reality the delegation to the Member State level has caused. A notable example of such an image is the Atomium in Brussels - which can be seen in the English version of the encyclopedia but not on French Wikipedia. ",
+3,medium,,,"The most fundamental principle of the World Wide Web and most online projects is that everything is available worldwide. This is the basic factor that made the internet an innovation driver. However, in order to legally do this in the EU we need to go over lengths to ensure that our content is not only freely licensable but also that free, international license is available. Both us and our partners at Creative Commons invest huge amounts of time to ensure this, worldwide but also in Europe. Conflicts and unclarities are inevitable, which causes high volunteer and legal cost with remaining legal uncertainties in many cases. This ultimately results in less content being available.",
 4,low-medium,,,"As the Satellite and Cable Directive (93/83/EEC) already lays out, there should be no digital borders in the single market. There is no coherent argument as to why this principle shouldn't apply to the internet. Furthermore, the logic behind the digital single market has since been reaffirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2011 in the case Murphy vs. Media Protection Services Limited. ",
 5,medium,2,,,question might be biased
 6,medium,2,,,see 6
-7,medium,1,,"We believe that legislative solutions are needed, as the market was so far clearly not able to remedy Europe's lagging behind North America in this field. The fact that new services such as Netflix continute to come form the USA is directly connected to the fact that there is no Single Market when it comes to the internet in Europe. Two possible approaches to the issue might be: 1. Introduction of a ""use it or lose it-principle"" in copyright. This will urge content owners and service providers to offer their products across the EU. Currenlty especially users in smaller EU markets are being left without (legal) possibilities to access content. 2. The introduction of compulsory free licenses for works in countries where the original rights holder does not exercise his/her rights and does not offer these works. There is precendent for this principle in the Berne Convention.","Wouldn't ""use-it-or-lose-it"" lead to many cases where rightsholders sue pre-emptively?"
+7,medium,1,,"We believe that legislative solutions are needed, as the market was so far clearly not able to remedy Europe's lagging behind North America in this field. The fact that new services such as Netflix continue to come from the USA is directly connected to the fact that there is no Single Market when it comes to the internet in Europe. Two possible approaches to the issue might be: 1. Introduction of a ""use it or lose it-principle"" in copyright. This will urge content owners and service providers to offer their products across the EU. Currently especially users in smaller EU markets are being left without (legal) possibilities to access content. 2. The introduction of compulsory free licenses for works in countries where the original rights holder does not exercise his/her rights and does not offer these works. There is precendent for this principle in the Berne Convention.","Wouldn't ""use-it-or-lose-it"" lead to many cases where rightsholders sue pre-emptively?"
 8,low-medium,2,,see 9,
 9,low-medium,1,,"The rather large number of cases brought to the courts asking what exactly constitutes ""making available"" is a sign that this important term is not sufficiently clear. Technologies like embedding and framing, cultural practices like compiling and remixing are likely to grow their social and economic importance. A principled and technology neutral definition of ""making available"" is needed. ",
 10,low-medium,3,,,
-11,high,2,,"Such a move would directly violate the right of reference, freedom of expression and destroy the fundamental structure of the internet. On top of this, it is practically impossibile without having to implement total, automated and pre-emptive surveillance and take down tecnologies (a practice that has been ruled disproportional by the courts, e.g. CJEU in Scarlet vs. SABAM). Our proposal is therefore to clarify that (hyper)linking has no copyright implications whatsoever.",
+11,high,2,,"Such a move would directly violate the right of reference, freedom of expression and destroy the fundamental structure of the internet. On top of this, it is practically impossibile without having to implement total, automated and pre-emptive surveillance and take down technologies (a practice that has been ruled disproportional by the courts, e.g. CJEU in Scarlet vs. SABAM). Our proposal is therefore to clarify that (hyper)linking has no copyright implications whatsoever.",
 12,high,2,,"This is unrealistic and would ""break"" the internet. In digital technologies every use of content inevitably produces a copy. We therefore propose to limit the definition of reproduction in copyright to exclude technologically sensible (temporary) copies, including but not limited to caching and buffering.",
 13,medium-high,3,,,see 14
-14,medium-high,,,"The consequences would be that well confirmed citizen and user rights from the ""physical world"" would finally be restored in ""digital world'. This is one of the few exaples where ""digital"" is far behind the ""physical"" in our society.",
+14,medium-high,,,"The consequences would be that well confirmed citizen and user rights from the ""physical world"" would finally be restored in ""digital world'. This is one of the few examples where ""digital"" is far behind the ""physical"" in our society.",
 15,high,1,,YES,
 16,high,,,"It would greatly benefit the digitalisation, saving of orphan works, the safe re-use of works and the possibility to attribute content correctly. It would also foster legal use of content and limit legal uncertainty, which currently plays a prohibitive role in the fields of creation and innovation.",
-17,high,,,We couldn't think of any disadvantages that survive scrutiny. The risks would stem mainly fom contradictory implementations in overly bureaucratic systems.,
-18,high,,,There should be no copyright protection unless registration. In many jurisdictions it was previously required to register a work in a central registrly if one wanted to exploit it. A (re)introduction of this system would give everyone greater legal certainty and eradicate issues related to oprhan works (which the Orphan Works Directive (2012/28/EU) failed to resolve in practice). ,
+17,high,,,We couldn't think of any disadvantages that survive scrutiny. The risks would stem mainly from contradictory implementations in overly bureaucratic systems.,
+18,high,,,There should be no copyright protection unless registration. In many jurisdictions it was previously required to register a work in a central registry if one wanted to exploit it. A (re)introduction of this system would give everyone greater legal certainty and eradicate issues related to orphan works (which the Orphan Works Directive (2012/28/EU) failed to resolve in practice). ,
 19,medium,,,"The EU should refrain from creating new standards, as this usually leads to poliferation.",
-20,high-OMFG,2,,"The current terms of copyright are definitely too long. This position is confirmed by the overwhelming majority of academic and economic studies of the past 20 years. The first, and legally the only possible current step, is to go back to the term legnths of the Revised Berne Convention . A second step would be to renegotiate both the Berne Covention and the WIPO Copyright Treaty. In the meantime it is crucial to not sign and ratify trade agreements that require longer term protection.",
+20,high-OMFG,2,,"The current terms of copyright are definitely too long. This position is confirmed by the overwhelming majority of academic and economic studies of the past 20 years. The first, and legally the only possible current step, is to go back to the term lengths of the Revised Berne Convention . A second step would be to renegotiate both the Berne Convention and the WIPO Copyright Treaty. In the meantime it is crucial to not sign and ratify trade agreements that require longer term protection.",
 21,high,1,,"Yes, the Copyright in the Information Society Directive leaves the protections of depictions of architectural works entirely up to the member states. This causes a maze of legal regulations which results the fact that many of Europeans' holiday photos posted on Facebook or their own blog are outright copyright infringements. A similar maze of legal exceptions and limitations can be found when looking at government produced works - making their use and distribution difficult.",
-22,high-OMFG,1,,"Yes, first and foremost in the Information Society Directive Article 5, Point 3(H), which we refer to as ""Freedom of Panorama"". Furthermore we would recommend the Commission to exempt all government produced works from copyright. Thridly, it would be advisable to revise the Oprhan Works Directive and allow unrestricted re-use of the content it covers.  ",
+22,high-OMFG,1,,"Yes, first and foremost in the Information Society Directive Article 5, Point 3(H), which we refer to as ""Freedom of Panorama"". Furthermore we would recommend the Commission to exempt all government produced works from copyright. Thridly, it would be advisable to revise the Orphan Works Directive and allow unrestricted re-use of the content it covers.  ",
 23,high,,,"We need an exception excluding government produced works from copyright protection. This would make them part of the public domain and boost innovation, information and creativity. Countries/institutions that have a such an exception (most notably the USA) clearly outperform the EU in these crucial areas. Also, their agencies dominate the ""global image"" as the pictures of their press offices, for instance, can simply be used without having to clear permissions first.",official texts?
 24,high,2,,We need more harmonisation across Europe and all further steps should be made with this in mind. Therefore any proposed new flexibility must be scrutinised under this aspect. ,fair use clause
 25,high,,,,
-26,high,1,,"Yes. This is a major problem for every single European website. It covers virtually all the content used online. It makes it oftentimes impossible to have the same version of a website in more than one language (see French and English Wikipedia articles of the Atomium). It also makes running pan-European projects more time-consuming and drives up costs, resulting in smaller markets and target groups, wich is of disadvantage to European projects on the global scale. ",
+26,high,1,,"Yes. This is a major problem for every single European website. It covers virtually all the content used online. It makes it oftentimes impossible to have the same version of a website in more than one language (see French and English Wikipedia articles of the Atomium). It also makes running pan-European projects more time-consuming and drives up costs, resulting in smaller markets and target groups, which is of disadvantage to European projects on the global scale. ",
 27,medium,,,,
 28,medium,,,,
 29,medium,,,,
-30,medium,,,"Exceptions and limitations need to cover the ""digital world"". Preservation and archiving are crucial, but only public accessiblity will bring about the public attention necessary to raise public support and funds for such projects.",
+30,medium,,,"Exceptions and limitations need to cover the ""digital world"". Preservation and archiving are crucial, but only public accessibility will bring about the public attention necessary to raise public support and funds for such projects.",
 31,medium,,,,
 32,low-medium,,,,
 33,low-medium,,,,
 34,low-medium,,,see 30.,
 35,low-medium,,,,
-36,low-medium,1,,"Even in legal cases - i.e. where an exception or limitation applies - it is oftentimes impossible to make use of one's rights due to Digital Rights Management technologies. Such is the case with copies for eductational purposes and private copies, which are unambigiously legal (this has been further confirmed in numerous court cases). A circumvention of DRM is also prohibited, which puts many institutions and users in a legal paradox. ",DRM
+36,low-medium,1,,"Even in legal cases - i.e. where an exception or limitation applies - it is oftentimes impossible to make use of one's rights due to Digital Rights Management technologies. Such is the case with copies for educational purposes and private copies, which are unambiguously legal (this has been further confirmed in numerous court cases). A circumvention of DRM is also prohibited, which puts many institutions and users in a legal paradox. ",DRM
 37,low-medium,,,A general ban on DRM would be the most effective solution. ,
 38,low-medium,,,,
 39,low-medium,,,"In the digital world, it could be so much easier to give out copies to multiple users at the same time. Problems such as books not being available, books not being returned and book abrasion could disappear. Copyright needs to acknowledge the fact that these are positive developments and not something that has to be prevented by DRM or other technological and legal measures. Otherwise our legislative framework will remain at odds with the needs and expectations of users and continue to loose public support.",
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ Question,Priority,Option,Answer,Explanation,Note
 45,low-medium,,,,
 46,low-medium,,,,
 47,low-medium,,,,
-48,low-medium,,,"All reseach financed by public funding should be freely available (Open Acess and refraining from ""non-commercial"" clauses). All research produced directly by governments and their agencies should be exempted from copyright (public domain). ",
+48,low-medium,,,"All research financed by public funding should be freely available (Open Acess and refraining from ""non-commercial"" clauses). All research produced directly by governments and their agencies should be exempted from copyright (public domain). ",
 49,low-medium,,,,
 50,low-medium,,,,
 51,low-medium,,,,
@@ -56,13 +56,13 @@ Question,Priority,Option,Answer,Explanation,Note
 55,medium,,,"It would be advisable to make changes to existing Deposit Laws to fully enable text and data mining by national libraries on-site.  This would make sure public deposit libraries have an additional task and make use of the huge archives they have accumulated, which in turn would greatly benefit researchers. ",
 56,medium,,,"We need to make sure that the principle of ""right to read is right to mine"" is enshrined. Public libraries who can offer mining services should be allowed (and possibly funded) to do so.",
 57,medium,,,General access to content and data formats and the coherent enforcement of deposit laws.,Deposit Law
-58,medium,1,,The legal situation of re-mixes is unlcear and uncoherent across jurisdictions. No one can currently tell what exactyly is legally acceptable. ,
+58,medium,1,,The legal situation of re-mixes is unclear and incoherent across jurisdictions. No one can currently tell what exactly is legally acceptable. ,
 59,medium,,,,
 60,medium,,,,
 61,medium,,,,
 62,medium,,,,
 63,medium,,,"Here is a paradox: Wikipedia is among the largest genuine UGC projects (by most definitions) and yet all the questions in the UGC section of this consultation do not relate to us. It feels like the umbrella term UGC is misleadingly used to deal with problems in the application of copyright to end users, where copyright should have little or no interference with people's daily life.",
-64,low-medium,1,,"Yes, all exsiting exceptions and limitations must remain valid also in the digital environment to ensure user and citizen rights don't decline over time.",
+64,low-medium,1,,"Yes, all existing exceptions and limitations must remain valid also in the digital environment to ensure user and citizen rights don't decline over time.",
 65,low-medium,2,,NO. This is a trick question. It needs to be asked in parts and not in a large combined assumption that ends with levies.,
 66,low-medium,,,,
 67,low-medium,,,,
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ Question,Priority,Option,Answer,Explanation,Note
 69,low,,,,
 70,low,,,,
 71,low,,,,
-72,medium,,,"We reject the premise of this question. It somehow proposes the idea that there is a way for (monetary) compensation. If the creators' financial benefit is the main objective here, an expanded ""droit de suite"" as known in France would be a mcuh more suitable chain of thought.",
+72,medium,,,"We reject the premise of this question. It somehow proposes the idea that there is a way for (monetary) compensation. If the creators' financial benefit is the main objective here, an expanded ""droit de suite"" as known in France would be a much more suitable chain of thought.",
 73,low-medium,,,,Total Buy-out?
 74,low-medium,,,"Whatever need is articulated by other parties in this section, it remains crucial that it should not interfere with the self-determination of people and their right to grant free licenses or to not participate in the further exploitation of their works.",
 75,medium,2,,We note that this question only asks about civil enforcement. Please keep in mind that copyright has criminal law sections and the unlawful commercial usage of works is considered to be a crime. We are curious to hear the Commission's reasoning why this question only relates to civil enforcement.,
@@ -78,4 +78,4 @@ Question,Priority,Option,Answer,Explanation,Note
 77,medium-high,2,,This would be a great opportunity to talk about the side effects of the copyright wars on the survival of law-abiding projects.,
 78,high,1,,YES,Wittem-Code
 79,high,,,"On the contrary. The level of difference among Member States means that this is a high priority issue that should be dealt with in the near future. The results of projects - such as the Wittem Code - prove that it is possible to come up with a unified, harmonised EU copyright law.",
-80,high,,,"There is a need for clarification that the faithful reproduction of a 2D public domain work does NOT create any new form of copyright protection whatsoever. Furthermore, there a several issues which could greatly benefit the IPR environment in Europe if implemented: allowing the free use of Ophan Works (which could be achieved by an opt-in copyright system), having government works exempt of copyright, repealing database rights and raising the treshhold for required originality. Another point worth mentioning is that international agreements oftentimes cause considerable damage to our culture and numerous knowledge institutions and projects. To give an example, the Marakech Agreement, which was part of the Uruguay Round (WTA/GATT) resulted in taking content out of the public domain and putting it back under copyright protection in some countries. Such implications need to be kept in mind when negotiating international accords. ",
\ No newline at end of file
+80,high,,,"There is a need for clarification that the faithful reproduction of a 2D public domain work does NOT create any new form of copyright protection whatsoever. Furthermore, there a several issues which could greatly benefit the IPR environment in Europe if implemented: allowing the free use of Orphan Works (which could be achieved by an opt-in copyright system), having government works exempt of copyright, repealing database rights and raising the threshold for required originality. Another point worth mentioning is that international agreements oftentimes cause considerable damage to our culture and numerous knowledge institutions and projects. To give an example, the Marakech Agreement, which was part of the Uruguay Round (WTA/GATT) resulted in taking content out of the public domain and putting it back under copyright protection in some countries. Such implications need to be kept in mind when negotiating international accords. ",