User talk:Peter Znamenskiy/Adult stem cell

ACMe, thank you for your contribution. There's only one thing I disagree with regarding your changes. I think a good Wikipedia article introductions should go beyond a one sentence definition, an provide a brief overview of the subject. That way readers who only want to briefly familiarize themselves with it don't have to look through the entire page. Furthermore, things like "adult stem cells are not as controversial as ESCs" definitely don't belong in Properties. Concerning language - I tried to stick to US English, while writing. However, some British English may have crept in. Peter Znamenskiy 22:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the controversial part not belonging to Properties. Sorry, I moved the whole section. ACMe 23:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I assume you are still considering content for Quiescence and Isolation? ACMe 23:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peter, by the way, I did not get to say this earlier...you are doing a fantastic job with this. Thank you! ACMe 23:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Yes, quiescence and isolation do need content. I'd also like to expand the pathways section but at the moment I don't have access to e-journals to do this properly. Finally, I'd like to write some more on stem cell types. Peter Znamenskiy 17:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wrote up a bit of info on neural stem cells. Could someone go through it and point me to any bits that are unclear/confusing/too technical, so I could simplify and clarify them? Peter Znamenskiy 22:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]