Sec 2.2 Galaxy Nuclei

1. I think other readers would prefer it if you directed them to Kennicutt et al. (2003) for a description of the sources.

--Done

Sec 5.1 Optical Classification of Nuclei

1. The criticism of NED in the first paragraph does not make sense to me as written.  It also does not address the problem with NED.  The problem with NED is that its classifications of nuclear activity are taken from multiple publications with different classification criteria.  (NED also does not properly list 'transition objects' as such but instead lists them as HII/LINER, which isn't quite the same thing.)  Please rewrite the current statement to make it clearer.
 
--I say that the literature/NED is incomplete and heterogeneous.  I believe these two adjectives address both of your points above.

2. The first paragraph says that the filled/open circles in Figure 2 correspond to Seyfert/LINER identification from the literature, but the caption for Figure 2 says that the identifications are from NED.  These do not seem to be the same to me.  Please change one or the other to make them consistent with each other.

--Thanks for catching this.  Previous iterations on this manuscript involved me removing replacing references to "NED" with the "literature."  I have fixed the caption.
 
3. Gonzalez-Delgado et al. 2004 ApJ 605, 127 is a more recent paper on transition objects and LINERs that is relevant to Section 5.1.  This may be a better reference than Ho Filippenko & Sargent 1993 in the discussion of transition objects.

--Thanks.  The reference has been added.

 
4. NGC 4826 has some funky special notes in NED on its nuclear classification.  See 
http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/nph-datasearch?search_type=Note_id&objid=58704&objname=MESSIER%20064
You might be interested in citing some of the notes in the second paragraph of Sec 5.2.  (These notes also reveal how the NED classifications are sometimes arrived at.)

--Thanks.  I especially was interested in the reference to Ho, Filippenko, \& Sargent (1997), which also lists N4826 as a transition object.

5. Someone may ask whether these sources contain compact hard X-ray or synchrotron radio sources, since such emission almost certainly indicate the presence of AGN.  We have X-ray data for some of the SINGS sample in the SINGS archive.  It may be worth looking to see which ones contain hard X-ray sources and which ones do not.  (On the other hand, this may be a lot of work.  However, I know that I've been asked about it in the past.)

--I agree that this would be a lot of work, and perhaps "beyond the scope of the paper."  I'd rather wait and first see what the ref has to say.

Figure 1

1. I would find it useful if you identified some of the features in the data, particularly the PAH features and some of the broad absorption features.  I would rather see 'typical' spectra from either the low-resolution or high-resolution modules with the identification of major spectral lines (much like JD's spectra in his 2004 ApJS paper).  This would be a much more useful reference on what the typical spectral lines may be expected for each type of object, and it gives the reader a much better qualitative understanding of how Seyferts, LINERs, and star formation regions differ from each other.

--Good idea.  Done.