User talk:Jnims

Welcome

Nice work uploading a picture already! Welcome. Biosthmors (talk) 20:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And if you want to "officially" display the template that says "This user is a member of WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology" then you should put it on your user page, User:Jnims. Best! Biosthmors (talk) 20:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article topic for Biol 512

Taking a quick look at the links you posted on my talk page, it looks like you've found some good resources and I agree with your assessment about editing the Glutathione_transferase article over the other two. Biolprof (talk) 02:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 3

The information looks good from a good search and search through your articles in the posted references. I would like to have the references added to your current ref section and them inserted next to the relevant sentences. Hakkinen2013 (talk) 04:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 3

I agree with Ian. I have learned that keeping track of the citations right off the bat has always helped organize things much better. It saves much wasted time trying to go back and figure out where each source came from and then just giving up trying to figure it out. This may seem like common sense, but I still have yet to get this idea fully incorporated into my own research as of yet. Flemingrjf (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 3 feedback

Thanks for the suggestions, Ian and Bobby. Actually, all the information I got came from that one citation, but I plan to expand it in the future, of course.

Jnims (talk) 19:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 3

Your formatting looks to be in good shape. Keep up the good work. Gpruett2 (talk) 04:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hello, Jnims. You have new messages at Biosthmors's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Biosthmors (talk) 05:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 5

Ian's Review of Glutathione S-transferase

Julia's responses below each of Ian's points, below. Jnims (talk) 21:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your work:

(structure)

Add a Citation end note in the first paragraph. I think it would be reference 7 again there. From the 2011 Glutathione transferases: a structural perspective paper
- Right you are. Done.

the UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot database can be linked as uniprot
- Done.

I am a little bit confused by the maxed all species column. Does it mean that that is highest number that has been found out of all species? (the chart is good otherwise)
- That's a great question! I have absolutely no idea, and am wholly unfamiliar with protein databases. I will try to contact the user who made the chart originally, in the hope of gaining insight.

Good information. The second paragraph may be a good place to add more for your next revision, possibly expanding and adding more details about the information that you already have.
- Thanks; I will focus on this area for Assignment 6.

(role in cell signaling)

Paragraph 1 is a good intro and set up for what comes.
- Thank you kindly.

paragraph 2 needs a citation where you say "in fact"
- Done.

I think each example you give about the different classes of GST provides good details and that is the best way to do it.
- Excellent, thanks.

(implications in cancer)

Nice picture for the possible ways that GST can play a role in cancer.
- Thanks; I thought so, too.

The Previous Material:

I find the introduction to be a bit wordy and confusing. It took me several reads to get a gist of what is trying to be said. A possible place for revisions in the future.
- I agree, and will work on improving it for Assignment 6.

The Gst and Biotransformation heading could be just biotransformation.
- Good point. Done.

There is a logical flow to the article and it definitely is a good start for this addition.
- Thanks!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hakkinen2013 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help us improve the Wikipedia Education Program

Hi Jnims! As a student editor on Wikipedia, you have a lot of valuable experience about what it's like to edit as a part of a classroom assignment. In order to help other students like you enjoy editing while contributing positively to Wikipedia, it's extremely helpful to hear from real student editors about their challenges, successes, and support needs. Please take a few minutes to answer these questions by clicking below. (Note that the responses are posted to a public wiki page.) Thanks!

Delivered on behalf of User:Sage Ross (WMF), 17:14, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment 5 feedback from Gpruett2

Grace was kind enough to provide suggestions for me, as well, so I've included them below, followed by my responses. Jnims (talk) 00:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The first big thing that I note is that several paragraphs that you did not edit (the ones under “GSTs and biotransformation” and “GST-tags and the GST pull-down assay”) and one that you did (first paragraph under “Structure”) have no citations. These paragraphs list specific information; thus, it is vital that they be cited.
- I will try to find citations for the content I did not add. I've added a citation to the Structure section.

Another issue that I noted is that while one section is titled “Structure”, I feel like it is mostly discussing how GSTs are divided into different classifications. I would suggest either separating the information about structure and classification into two different sections or re-labeling this section.
- Good point. From your suggestion, I have decided to separate the information into two sections: Structure and Classification.

Furthermore, you should consider rewording the first paragraph under “Structure”. Specifically, make sure that it is obvious that GST proteins are classified as belong to one of the three different families (cytosolic, mitochondrial, or MAPEG). I say this because when I first read this paragraph, I wasn’t sure of how the sentences starting with “Cytosolic GSTs”, “Mitochondrial GSTs”, and “The MAPEG superfamily” related to one another.
- I have attempted to clarify the wording.

Also, while the writing is very sound and the information in the different sections are relevant to one another, I feel like a lot of the paragraphs under your sections seem rather disjointed. They do not transition well between each other. For example, under “Role in Cell Signaling”, you go from talking about the effects of GST on MAPK signaling to talking about the location of GSTπ. For me as a reader, I find this distracting and confusing. To remedy this, perhaps start the GSTπ paragraph with an introduction sentence that mentions it is related to cell signaling. Overall, with all of the paragraphs that are together under a section, try to make them flow together.
- I will work on knitting the sections together more effectively, although I believe the GSTP paragraph is fine as it stands, as the second sentence relates it to cell signaling. I tried in the past to make it more obvious, but could not find a good way to include all the necessary information about the meaning of the name "GSTP1-1" without putting off the cell signaling tie-in until the second sentence.

Generally, I also suggest that you might want to reconsider the overall structure and organization of your article. The WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology Style Guide has a good suggestion for the different sections that should be included in a protein article.
- I am currently working on a Function section, and would also like to add a section about the history/discovery of the protein superfamilies, if possible. Additionally, I would like to include a Clinical significance section, as you suggest below. While a Gene section is in theory appealing, the huge array of isozymes and superfamilies and classes of GSTs may make such a section of dubious value.

Specifically, you should probably move the “Role in cell signaling” and “Implications in cancer development” sections out from under “Structure”. They do not seem to be specifically related to structure and/or they do not really discuss structure; thus, they should not be listed under structure.
- I hadn't even noticed that. Thanks! It is fixed.

I also moved one of your citations. I place citation [8] next to citation [9] at the end of the sentence because that is where I believe Wikipedia likes to have citations.
- Much obliged.

I also have some suggestions for sections that you might want to include in your article. One such section would be “Clinical significance” or “Implications in disease”. This would be a good section to not only discuss GST involvement in cancer, but also other conditions. For instance, citation [4] lists several other conditions (such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and cardiovascular disease) that are associated with malfunctioning GST. Another useful section would be a “History” or “Discovery” section. While Wikipedia asks that you not specifically list who conducted each study in GST, it does say that you can mention those who made key discoveries. Also, this section could discuss what experiment was used to first discover GST.
- I would like to create both of these sections (see above). Thank you for the suggestions!