Wikipedia talk:USEP/Courses/JHU MolBio Ogg SP14/Group 82G

Initial article assessment from tmckenne

Equine arteritis virus leader TRS hairpin (LTH)

This article is missing most of the characteristics of a good Wikipedia article. According to Wikipedia:Good article criteria consists of the following:

1. Well-written

The article has only a few sentences and is not comprehensive in it's coverage of the topic

2. Verifiable with no original research

The article consists of no original research and the sources it does have are citied correctly. However it needs more sources and more information to make this article better

3. Broad in its coverage

The coverage of this article does address the main topic, but needs more information to better cover the topic.

4. Neutral

This article is neutral without any opinions present.

5. Stable

The last edit on this article was on 25 June 2013, which makes it a stable article without many editions taking place. The article was started in May 2007 and has only had a handful of edits since then. The talk page also has no activity.

6. Illustrated

There is one illustration showing the topic, but more could be found and put in the article to better show and describe the topic.

Some references I found that could be used to improve this article are:

Arterivirus discontinuous mRNA transcription is guided by base pairing between sense and antisense transcription-regulating sequences

Antiviral activity of morpholino oligomers designed to block various aspects of Equine arteritis virus amplification in cell culture

Tmckenne (talk) 22:29, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Initial article assessment from tmckenne

Northwestern Blot

This article has not been created yet, so it does not meet any of the Wikipedia criteria of a good article. I think this could be a good article to write because it currently isn't covered by Wikipedia and could be a reference tool for many scientists.

Some sources that could be used to build this article:

Northwestern Blot of Protein-RNA Interaction from Young Rice Panicles

A Northwestern blotting approach for studying iron regulatory element-binding proteins.

Tmckenne (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

3rd initial article assessment from tmckenne

Bacteriolytic

This page also does not exist, but I think that this could be an interesting article to help write. Bacteriolytic's have a big potential to change how modern medicine is used to combat bacterial infections.

Some sources that could be used to write this article:

Type VI secretion delivers bacteriolytic effectors to target cells

A bacteriolytic agent that detects and kills Bacillus anthracis

Bacteriolytic activity in staphylococci.

Tmckenne (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Initial article assessment from msmrugby

Acetyltransferase

My overall assessment of this article is that it is bare bones and needs much expansion to satisfy the typical characteristics of a good Wikipedia article as summarized on my Sandbox. There is not much information on the talk page to reference. Specific comments include:

Completeness - There is an overall lack of information on the topic. There is only a brief definition and some examples. This article is incomplete.
Quality - The information seems to be accurate, but the lack of information impacts the overall quality.
Citations - Although there are links to other Wikipedia pages with examples of Acetyltransferases and a link to the US National Library of Medicine, there is no reference list. There is a lack of external sources.
Organization - There is not much information to adequately assess organization, however, the little information that is there can be better formatted. For example, the spacing in the left column of the information box could be left justified to make the box look cleaner. In addition the columns could both be top justified to be consistent.
Images/Captions - There is one image, but it is not sufficient and could include more detail for the reader to understand it's value.
Plagiarism - There does not seem to be any plagiarism, but there is also an overall lack of information.

Additional references could include the following:

Msmrugby (talk) 20:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2nd article assessment from msmrugby

Paraptosis

This article does not exist at this time. Below are a list of references that could be used to write this article.

Msmrugby (talk) 20:27, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

3rd article assessment from msmrugby

Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme

The article is considered bigger than a stub, but still needs a significant amount of additional information to raise the overall quality of the article. There is not much information on the talk page to reference. Below are the specifics of my assessment.

Content - Although bigger than a stub, there is a clear opportunity to add in additional, relevant information. For example, the article fails to highlight the big picture importance of the enzyme. The mechanism is discussed, and some relationships are also pointed out, but there is a clear opportunity for more comprehensive information to be included.
Quality - The overall quality of the information seems to be acceptable, although as stated, additional information is required.
References - There are some references listed, but there should be additional ones included. There is an overall lack of citations.
Organization - The page is organized into multiple sections, but there could be additional sections added and expansion of current sections that would provide much needed additional relevant information.
Images - There is an image provided. The caption could be enhanced and there could be additional images included to enhance the quality.
Plagiarism - There is an overall lack of citations, so it is difficult to assess plagiarism.

Additional references could include:

Selected Article Rationale - Northwestern Blot

Team 82G (Tyler McKenney and Mike McGinnis) decided to select Northwestern Blot for our article topic. In our down-select process, we first looked at selecting a stub article instead of a more developed article. This particular article does not exist, and we understand that truly starting from scratch may actually entail more work than working on an article that is further developed. Our rationale for this approach is that this provides more of a blank slate and allows for more freedom with regard to organization and format. From there, we then selected from a few different stub articles. The other articles that were considered were, Branch Migration, Acetyltransferase, Paraptosis, Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, Bacteriolytic and Equine arteritis virus leader TRS hairpin (LTH). We settled in on Northwestern Blot, as the topic is of interest to both of us and is somewhat relevant from a professional perspective. Tyler has relevant experience with gel electrophoresis and Western Blotting, and we felt that this personal knowledge will add considerable value to our project and ultimately to the article. In addition, Mike has access to several respected purification scientists, and can leverage these relationships if needed. From a technical perspective, given this article does not exist currently; we feel it will be a useful contribution to our industry and potentially of value to many scientists as a reference. Msmrugby (talk) 00:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unit 7

Msmrugby,

I'm going to get started on the Unit 7 assignments. I'll put it in my sandbox and we can start working from there.

Tmckenne (talk) 20:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a plan Tyler. I'll add my comments to the page. Msmrugby (talk) 03:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also added a couple of references. The last reference seems pretty good and also has some images we can use. I took your key points and created a rough outline. I posted it under your key points section on your sandbox. Msmrugby (talk) 03:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also just posted our rationale from last week onto the actual project page (instead of the talk page). Maybe we can recover one of those points that were deducted because we did the rationale correctly but posted it on the wrong page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msmrugby (talk • contribs) 03:38, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tyler, I think we've covered all of the required tasks for this week. The only one that we are not able to do is to post our ideas on the articles talk page. Since the article does not exist yet, there is no talk page. Msmrugby (talk) 01:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Msmrugby, I was just checking over the requirements for this week also and I agree we should have them all covered! Tmckenne (talk) 02:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Btw, I just realized you may not know my name since only my username shows. It's Mike McGinnis. Msmrugby (talk) 02:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unit 10

Msmrugby, I'm having quite a bit of difficulty finding any good pictures of Northwestern blots or the technique it uses. There are a lot of Western blot photos and examples, which is a very similar process instead it involves proteins instead of RNA binding proteins. If you are able and can find any good pictures of Northwestern blots feel free to upload them. Otherwise what are your thoughts on using some Western blot photos and explaining the difference? Tmckenne (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is difficult. As an alternative, take a look at what I did in the Origin section. I found an article that had an image with a Western and Northwestern, and linked to the article to avoid any copyright issues. Let me know what you think. Also, I've been commenting on your Sandbox page as well, so take a look at that thread. Nice additions in the Advantages/Disadvantages section.Msmrugby (talk) 01:21, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]