Line 19: Should a reference to work of the HERMES collaboration not been made here as well? http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.7028.pdf Phys. Rev. D 89, 097101 Figure 5: This large figure can be reduced by adding 7 and 8 TeV results and by adding mu+ and mu- results together from 8 to 2 panels. The information is available in Table 1 and the mu+ and mu- difference is also visualizedin Fig. 1 Figure 6: Left and right seem more different than they are, due to the different yields and the logarithmic scales. One attempt for better comparison has been made by chosing different maxima of the vertical scale. It would be better to change also the minima of this scale, i.e. (left) from 0.5 to 500 and (right) from 2 to 2000 Line 269: Remove "All measurements ... 8 TeV. The results are" by "The results of our measurements at sqrt(s)= 7 and 8 TeV are". Probably a wrong try to split the longer sentence in two parts and thus allow for a separate paragraph. Line 276: The contribution of order of 10\% b-content in the proton should specified. It reads as if the b-quark content is possibly 10% of that of the proton. Line 278: Replace " Additionally ... and anti-quark PDFs" by "The measured charge asymmetry for Wc cross secctions is consistent with zero and in agreement with the SM predictions ... and anti s-quark PDFs". Line 288: I am puzzled by "fixed-order SM predictions". Line 289-293: Replace "The fiducial ... does not require PT > 20 GeV" by a description of the large cross section ratios of Wb/Wj, the large asymmetry for Wb and the small one for Wc, and the larger cross section for Wj than for Zj for the typical LHCb forward acceptance for jets and muons of 2