Help to express, please. SOS!

[Volnushka]

Я получила задание и результаты , мягко говоря,выглядят странно. Возможно я неверно поняла бизнес реквест. Дедлаин неотвратимо приближается и надо сдаваться. Чем раньше-тем лучше, т.к. идеи больше нет.
Я описала последовательность деиствии и приложила оутпуты в имеиле менеджеру от к-го получила ету бяку.
А вот выводы. Поправьте, плиииз , чтоб как-то посолиднее и покрасивше звучали

Не звучит ли ето нахально (учитывая, что я долго вожусь и что он два раза обьяснял задачу)? Помогите, в общем...

Therefore the assumption that HDW admissions were broken was not met as none of the admissions were found in 2003.
Some EDW admissions were found , however, and it looked they were broken

Attached please find my description and outputs.
Please let me know what you think might be incorrect.

I double checked my HDW extract through Access (as well as Cognos)

Thanks,

[kron]

Instead of "were broken" I would put "had been broken".

"Therefore the assumption that HDW admissions were broken was not met as none of the admissions were found in 2003. " - too complicated.
Just put:
I doesn't seem that any admissions has been broken since none of them were found in 2003.

[starkiller]

any admissions has been broken

have been

[thinker]

Attached please find my description and outputs.

Don't use "please" here. You already have it below. One is enough.

Please let me know what you think might be incorrect.

If you find something incorrect, please let me know.

[kron]

any admissions has been broken

have been

I agrees.

[Иоп]

Therefore, the assumption that HDW admissions were broken is not met (в данный же момент, а не в 2003?) as none were found broken in 2003. Some EDW admissions were found, though -- and it seemed they were broken

Attached are my description and outputs. If you find something incorrect, please let me know.

I (have ?) double checked my HDW extract through Access (as well as Cognos).

Thanks,[/quote]
Я сделал несколько unnecessary corrections. То что написали другие участники дискуссии - тоже хорошо.