Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hershey–Chase experiment/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 22:21, 2 April 2011 [1].
Hershey–Chase experiment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Jmn49114 (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured article because Hershey-Chase represents a significant turning point in the understanding of human biology. The results changed the world by showing the scientific community which biomolecule contained the genetic code and the basis for familial similarities. The former article was a stub and it has been significantly expanded over the last few weeks to expand on the existing article referencing their experimentation with bacterial amino acids and DNA. We added to the existing information about how Phosphorus and Sulfur molecules were used in conjunction with viruses to show the hereditary nature of DNA. We discussed the intentions and expectations of the scientists in order to clarify the benefits of discovering which biomolecule carries the genetic code. We also discussed experiments done by other scientists that support the results of the Hershey-Chase experiments. Connections were made to genetic testing and paternal tests. We will discuss applications to DNA testing in reference to crime investigation. Lastly, we explored the recent discovery of arsenic-based life forms and the repercussions of this discovery on the results of Hershey-Chase. All evidence has been cited clearly and we have edited for clarity. Jmn49114 (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note to reviewers/delegates: this article is tagged as being the subject of an educational assignment. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
GA? PR?: might I suggest you consider submitting this article to the good article or peer review processes before trying to have it promoted as a Featured Article? I am concerned that it might not meet the FA requirements at this time. Here are some specific problems:
- This article is tagged as being under construction, which is an indicator that it is not yet stable
- Some material is uncited. It's generally a good idea to have a citation at the end of every paragraph. Also, things like direct quotes should always be cited
- The article is structured like a university essay. Check out WP:LAYOUT and look at some similar articles to get a better idea of Wikipedia's organization conventions
- I think the article could benefit from some copy-editing - some sections of prose are unclear and awkward in phrasing
- I'm guessing you've got more than one person working on this? Make sure you all use a consistent formatting for references and keep track of what's being said and how in all of the article's sections.
I wish you luck with your project, but would strongly suggest that you withdraw the article at this time to give yourselves a chance to improve it before resubmitting. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a quick view of the article shows that a number of your references to PNAS are not full citations. I don't think this article is ready to be a FAC yet. Rjwilmsi 10:14, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.