el nino the limited and perhaps maladroit changes i've made in the first bit of the article ignoring please my snide comment you may give a sense of where jargon might impede readability of the article however could be a case in which if you have to ask then maybe you can't help or maybe you can i've added article to watch list for the moment and may try to marginally contribute i don't pretend to understand subject with slightest depth and would be cautious the larger problem is in its organization a general reader wants to know immediately what are the potential consequences of el nino instead the article's lead grafs launch into a long winded and seemingly vague description of its history and theory that are more appropriate for deep into its body