Talk:RNF227

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 22 April 2022 by reviewer DGG (talk · contribs).

Untitled

From draft page comments

I'm unclear about the OR aspect of this: if there is an ITASSER run, that run is the OR performed and reported in RS outside WP, , and reporting it here is not OR. Publishing a full methods section etc. is also done outside WP, not here, and we would not usually include it.

If we said the structure is such and such giving just a reference to the run, that might be undue extrapolation, but if we say clearly as we do in this article that what we are saying is based upon a single run, how is that OR?

If there are multiple runs to determine a consensus structure, and we were to construct such a solution here, that we beOR--to give a consensus structure, it would have to be reported as such. DGG ( talk ) 21:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]

See the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology# Draft:RNF227. Worldbruce (talk) 17:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

imilar to other drafts for human genes: the topic is notable, but there's significant WP:Original research included in this draft. Uncontroversial info sourced directly from a database is fine (e.g. the sequence info). However tertiary structure prediction is difficult and requires more than just a single ITASSER run - a full methods section detailing the steps taken, accuracy assessments etc, which emphasises the significance of the WP:OR involved in it. This has come up in other drafts e.g draft:SMIM19. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 02:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]