User talk:Jack1104ch/sandbox

My first suggestion would be to change the references section so that it contains the full citation for each reference. (move them from external links into reference section) There is a section that denotes related concepts, but at this point it only contains Glycoform. If there are any other concepts that could fit into this section I would suggest adding those to the page as well. The mechanism section may need additional information even though it is related to a main article. Additional sources may be needed.

The article seems to be going to a pretty good direction. I thought that the Mechanism section could be expanded. At the moment, I thought that the Mechanism section is too summarized as it only gives us 2 statements about alternative splicing. I would suggest describing a little more (in a general sense) about the mechanism and highlighting important processes or steps that are vital to increasing protein diversity. Theres also just a minor error in the Protein isoform section. The sentence: "Many human genes possess confirmedalternative splicing isoforms" needs a spacing between "confirmed" and "alternative."BiochemistrymafiaX (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly the addition of the diagrams helps to improve the article greatly. The description for your article may need to be reworked a bit to be easier to read. I would suggest breaking down the sentences to make them easier to read. The external links portion of the page are mixed up with the references at the moment. I would suggest fixing this so that the references appear in the correct section and then adding additional external links using the page which shows what links to your page... There are a large number of them. It may be worth adding the particular researchers who first worked on protein isoforms. FeebleEagle (talk) 18:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]