User talk:IamtheStudent/sandbox

There's a lot of "to-do" written under the sections. Some of it seems useful for the article, like under "Formation" you wrote that you wanted to present and explain aetiological agents. Though, with adding figures, that might be tough to find some that you can use.

Adding information to the sections seems to be a top priority of yours. It may be best to spend the most time adding to sections like "Disease" but possibly not make any major edits to "Discovery" as that section is well written. You could potentially move it, but I don't see a better place for a historical section to be than before the main part of the article.

Most time should go into your work under "highlights". There's a lot of sections there, you'll need to elaborate and cite.

I don't have much else to comment on. You have quite a few good ideas, I'm interested to see where you go from here. Just be careful not to take on more than you can as the article already has a lot of information included. Rhoffing (talk) 01:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The new "highlights...annotated proteins" section of this article looks like a unique, and useful addition to the Lysosome page. I'm assuming the list of proteins are all associated with the lysosome in some way, but a short summary of why these proteins are listed and not others would be helpful. As far as describing how each protein is related to the lysosome - if giving a 1-2 sentence summary involves too much research, an alternative might be to hyperlink to wiki articles about these proteins (if any exist), or to some external source.

I think even though there are a lot of "to do" notes throughout this draft, if the only addition to this article was to link/summarize the protein-lysosome relationships under this section, it would still be really impressive and useful contribution. It looks like focusing most of your efforts to this section, along with finding diagrams or pictures to supplement written explanations will help to improve this article the most.

Some small points:

Changing the "Disease" title to "Lysosomal Storage Diseases" might better summarize this section. Right now it sounds like this is about a singular disease.

Even though the "Controversy in botany" section from the current article seems irrelevant, there are 8 sources listed for this section alone, so it looks like maybe it should stay for now? --Posner.c (talk) 01:31, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]