Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular Biology/Molecular and Cell Biology/Announcements

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This MCB project subpage is no longer in use and is kept as a historical archive.
Please go to the Molecular Biology project homepage or talk page for currently active sections.
This is an appropriate place for general discussion about the project and its direction. This is an appropriate place to make announcements to other project members. This is an appropriate place to ask help of other project members. This is an appropriate place to make and discuss proposals with other project members.
This is an appropriate place to make announcements to other Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject members.
Click here to make a new announcement.
Users are encouraged to trim the announcements page themselves, deleting irrelevant sections (e.g. votes that closed some time ago) or moving sections to the archive pages.


Open tasks list[edit]

Please help to keep the Biology portal's Open tasks list up to date. This is one of our main communication methods to help get newcomers more involved in editing articles. It contains a list of articles that need improving, articles that need creating, articles that need cleanup, etc. And of course, if you have the time, please help and work on some of the tasks on that list! --Cyde Weys 05:20, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{Wikiproject MCB}}[edit]

I found an article with this header in the article namespace: please make sure to put it on talk pages only.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Talk) 14:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Molecules of the Month[edit]

Hi! I'm a contributor of Italian Wikipedia's Progetto Bio, the ortholog of your WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology... I have just finished uploading to Commons a great number of images from the Molecule of the Month section of www.PDB.org, since they are released in PD... This message is just to inform you that they can be used for a lot of en.wiki articles that still don't have an image... Hope this will help! Bye! --Gia.cossa 16:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!! -- Boris 17:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worklist[edit]

I just reorganized our article worklist. Feel free to move some things around if you think I've made any errors, which I probably did. Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 18:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PyMol tutorial draft done[edit]

After over a month of procrastinating, I finally got around to fleshing out the PyMol tutorial we talked about oh-so-long-ago. Any comments, suggestions, or additions would be appreciated; I tried to keep it to the stuff you'd need in routine image production, but I'm sure there's something I've left out. Opabinia regalis 06:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

excellent !!! -- Boris 12:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great work! I've added links to the main page and our advice page (which I and everyone else seem to have forgotten existed!). I don't have spare time right now to test your tutorial out (I'm still a protein-image-creation-virgin) so can't offer much (constructive) criticism at this moment. Do we have a list of protein image requests anywhere? It might be an idea, assuming that we do have such a list, to link the tutorial to the list so people can learn and do some productive work at the same time. Do you think that screenshots might add something to the tutorial? --Seans Potato Business 20:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Requested pictures page? Added a link, though maybe someone wants to do something similar for pathway diagrams?
I thought about screenshots and a complete example or something, but I wasn't sure how useful it would really be to make it even longer. What do you think? Opabinia regalis 06:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would be very useful at all to add pictures; I just thought it would look nice and break up the text. I tried out your tutorial and created my first, very basic image, now at KRAB. I'm suprised at just how easy it was with that tutorial.
Useful additions might include: a) making the 'Display > Background' etc instructions stand out against the rest of the text (usally it's okay if they contain one word but things like 'Select all' need a re-read to understand that 'all' belongs to 'Select'. I think bold would be too severe for this purpose; maybe underlined or bold-but-grey-coloured text would be suitable. b) A cheatsheet of the most common things, or even a basic and an advanced (that's two) cheatsheet would be handy. I will go and check what resources are even available on the Pymol website.
Thanks again for all the effort, Opabinia! --Seans Potato Business 04:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you found it useful! (Also fixed your link to the page I bet you meant, very nice! :) How's italics for the menu options? Now that I think about it, that's what I see and use in software docs. For a cheatsheet, how much more abbreviation do you think would still be useful? It's hard to know at what point you've provided so little context that the document is no longer useful to anybody who doesn't already know how to use it. Opabinia regalis 01:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Italics works great. As for the cheatsheet, I thought that it would be used by people that had already gone though the tutorial and just needed to be reminded how to execute a feature or function, so very little context would be necessary. I've gone through the tutorial and used it to produce a single protein structure but havn't used it now in three weeks. I'd probably need reminding re: what to do if I needed to do use Pymol again. --Seans Potato Business 20:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, added to my mental to-do list ;) Opabinia regalis 06:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RNA interference peer review[edit]

FYI, our December collaboration, RNA interference, is up for peer review here if you have any thoughts. Thanks! Opabinia regalis 02:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proteins wiki opened; suggestions welcome![edit]

Hello,

Your colleague Opabinia regalis suggested that I post a message here introducing myself and a new wiki. Through my students, I've recently become aware of your efforts to produce well-referenced summaries of various topics in biochemistry and cellular biology. Based on the Featured Articles that I've seen so far, your work is impressive and your efforts to be commended. I'm intrigued by the possibilities of using wiki's for scientific collaboration and for teaching materials, although I wonder whether the vandalism might not undermine your long-term efforts. The enduring quality of your Wikipedia articles would seem to depend on the ongoing personal attention of its principal authors, is that correct? Perhaps if a large enough community of attentive editors were nucleated, the burden of upkeep might not fall on a few people's shoulders.

I now have a pressing reason for learning more about wiki's. We've recently been awarded a grant from the NSF to functionally annotate the chloroplast-targeted genes of Arabidopsis thaliana, roughly 4500 proteins in all, using a combination of experimental and computational means. We're growing up thousands of individual knockout plants and assaying them using various methods, while at the same time, trying to predict their domain structure, carry out multiple sequence alignments and structure predictions. Naturally, it's a lot of work to interpret the data and formulate functional hypotheses. So, as an experiment, I've begun setting up a Proteins wiki at this page to facilitate the distribution of our results and to foster collaboration in developing functional hypotheses. Contributors would of course be credited on any publications to result from their work. However, the aim of the Proteins wiki is to foster education and discussion on any sort of protein, not only those of A. thaliana. The initial development will be slow, however, since I and my students need to familiarize ourselves with the software and wiki's in general. I'm also teaching senior-level biochemistry this semester and working on a major grant, so my students may shoulder most of that burden; if you could help them as needed, I would very much appreciate it.

The nascent Proteins wiki is not meant to supplant Wikipedia's own coverage, but to be complementary to it, since it may accept as-yet-unpublished data. I hope that the new wiki and the MCB WikiProject will benefit from one another; for our part, we will work to earn your respect and trust. We are presently learning how to upload thousands of pages in an automated way, and will put our 200 Gflop supercomputer to work producing data that may be useful for Wikipedia as well as our own wiki. Suggestions are welcome! In earnest of a friendly working relationship, I've put your DNA clamp image as the logo for the Proteins wiki.

For my teaching, I've also developed several hundred public-domain LON-CAPA problems quizzing various features of biochemistry. I've placed a few on my user page, but I discover now that they are not easily accessed from without. Once they are made more available, you are welcome to use them, and I would appreciate any suggestions for their improvement. Thank you for your efforts in producing such excellent articles and for future help and suggestions, Proteins 22:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting this announcement. To give an initial response to your question about article maintenance - while vandalism is an inevitable result of open editing, and is inevitably annoying, Wikipedia does a very good job dealing with 'article graffiti'. Sneaky content changes generally persist a little longer, but one of the benefits of an organized wikiproject is that articles under our purview get on the watchlists of more knowledgeable people who can tell the difference between legitimate corrections and the insertion of misinformation. It is generally true that featured articles must be maintained, if not by the original author(s), then by a similarly knowledgeable editor or group, to stave off degradation and keep the content up to date. FAs do tend to receive additional scrutiny by those who specialize in anti-vandalism activities, which helps keep their half-life above that of the average article even if unmaintained by a specific individual.
You mentioned your students' becoming familiar with wiki software and editing - are you intending to ask them to contribute to the proteins wiki (good idea) or to Wikipedia (also a good idea)? In either case, you might be interested in Wikipedia:School and university projects, which is a somewhat out-of-the-way page cataloging and organizing educational projects on Wikipedia, and might also give some useful advice for other wiki-based projects. Opabinia regalis 03:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I intend for them to contribute to both, although I'm not sure what would be most useful for you all here; some guidance from you would be appreciated. For example, a bot might be able to create a page here for every presumed protein in A. thaliana (or any other genome), but my impression was that you're collectively more interested in classes of proteins, rather than instances of proteins from any one organism. Wikipedia's requirement that every article have reliable published sources would also make it more difficult to generate useful pages in a fully automated way, unless we write some literature-mining software or exploit other such compilations, such as those at TAIR. Suggestions are welcome, however! Proteins 23:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else might have more experience with organized student projects, but what I've usually seen people do is get their students to each choose an article on a relevant subject and substantively improve it - I assume the resulting articles are then assessed for the class. We do usually do articles on protein classes or homologs, though that doesn't mean they couldn't be seeded with Arabidopsis content and later expanded with information from other organisms. Personally, I usually stick to classes because it's not often that there's enough encyclopedia-level information on the protein from a single organism to write a real article about it. I don't currently have any good ideas on automated text import, which can be a challenge due to licensing as well as policy issues. Opabinia regalis 06:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are online biochemistry questions appropriate as "External links"?[edit]

Hello, I uploaded some biochemistry problems written for my undergraduate students here. Conceivably, such questions might be a good "External link" feature for some MCB encyclopedia articles. Some readers of Wikipedia are undoubtedly students wishing to learn a topic, and such students might appreciate having a handy test of their comprehension on the same page. The problems are graded by computer and generated on the fly; new problems on the same topic can be produced by clicking on the "New Problem Variation" button at the top. Such questions might be more suitable for the Wikiversity, but there doesn't seem to be a significant biochemistry program there as yet.

Congratulations on getting DNA on the Main Page; that seems like quite a coup and reflects well on the WikiProject. Proteins 23:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't think they're quite suitable for Wikipedia (c.f. Wikiversity) but other MCB users may have another opinion. Wikiversity is probably a long way off being of much use for our purposes. Wikipedia still needs so much attention. Incidentally, it would be useful if you could have several problems on one page, and after getting all the answers right or whatever, if you could go to the next page without having to click the back button on your web-browser and choose another question. --Seans Potato Business 01:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Proteins, and welcome to Wikipedia! :D Thank you for the DNA congratulations, but they're somewhat misdirected; we're a friendly, sharing Wikiproject but la gloire eternelle belongs properly to its main authors and defenders. ;)
Your biochemistry problems seem neatly posed, and I'm sure that they'd be excellent for students learning biochemistry. The "New Problem Variation" button is a nifty feature, too! :) However, I agree with Seans Potato Business that they don't seem right for Wikipedia; they're more textbook than encyclopedia, don't you think so? Perhaps you'd be willing to tackle making a Wikiversity course on basic biochemistry to give them a proper home? It's a lot to ask, but maybe it might be easier for you?
The other proposal — automatically creating thousands of relevant MCB pages — is likewise sorely tempting but, forgive me, makes me even more uneasy than the analogous Pfam proposal. I'm worried that our Wikiproject would be spread too thin. We have so much left to finish on our most basic articles, such as amino acid, protein, lipid and RNA, that it seems premature to start an article on At5g43210, even if you could automatically describe it with decent prose and literature references and links to relevant databases. Your offer is very kind, and I realize that the initial pages will require no extra work from us; but perhaps we should talk it over among ourselves? Please be patient with us; thanks! :) Willow 08:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RNA interference[edit]

Our December collaboration, recently GA'd and recently expanded, is up for FAC here. Comments appreciated! Opabinia regalis 06:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antioxidant[edit]

Up for FA here. Comments, edits and suggestions are welcome. TimVickers 05:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Titin[edit]

Template:Titin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Followup to this earlier thread, after the ongoing low-level edit war broke out again. Opabinia regalis 03:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stem cell controversy[edit]

Hi there has been some animated discussion over the name of this page, particularly as the main focus of the page is embryonic stem cell controversy, rather than a general controversy over both embryonic and adult stem cells.

It has been proposed to be changed to something like stem cell ethical controversy or embryonic stem cell controversy.

I'm pretty ambivalent about a change, but I certainly think that a few more people should comment before such a bold move. I invite MCB members with stem cell interests to check out Talk:Stem cell controversy. Cheers Dr Aaron 13:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Metabolism[edit]

One of our core topics, the article has been completely re-written, peer-reviewed and now nominated as a FAC here. Comments and suggestion would be very welcome. TimVickers 19:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles marked for deletion[edit]

Someone marked articles Outdoor Cannabis cultivation and Indoor Cannabis cultivation for deletion. Could you take a look and tell your opinion?Biophys 21:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles up for peer review[edit]

I have just put two articles up for review if you have any thoughts:

Thanks so much, cheers.--DO11.10 03:22, 20 April 2007

FYI a third article, Anabolic steroids was also just listed for review here.--DO11.10 03:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution up for peer-review[edit]

At Wikipedia:Peer review/Evolution/archive1. All comments welcome. TimVickers 16:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MCB in the news[edit]

FEBS, the Federation of European Biochemical Societies has agreed to publish an article on our Wikiproject and it's possible future directions. The news items is here and the article goes out in their next newsletter. News article, link on right. Hopefully, this will help us recruit more editors! TimVickers 14:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the direct link. Nice plug for the project Tim. It will be interesting to see if more people arrive. I believe science had an article a while back about the potential for creating pages for all proteins and genes (along the lines of Andrew's GNF project). And the Encylclopedia of Life wiki got a huge plug by Wisconsin NPR yesterday with a call in show devoted to the topic (you can hear the show at this link). There is clearly a lot of interest in this type of collaborative effort but people don't know where to look. When this is published it might be a good idea to advertise the article further on various scientific newsgroups and list servers. David D. (Talk) 18:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution FAC[edit]

Hi all, comments and suggestions at the nomination page are, as ever, most welcome. TimVickers 20:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles proposed for deletion (WP:PROD)[edit]

Dealt with and expanded. Tim Vickers

2007 MCB coordinator nominations[edit]

Hi everybody. I've opened up nominations for the 2007 coordinator position. Feel free to either nominate yourself or nominate somebody else. Tim Vickers 20:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left this open for a while longer, but nobody else seems to want to be nominated. I thought it would be a good idea to assess if we still want this as part of our organisation. Feedback and opinions please on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology/Votes/2007 director vote. All the best Tim Vickers 23:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"in situ" insulin crystal formation.[edit]

The first in "situ" published report and electron microscopic pictures of insulin crystal formation in the beta cell of the pancreas was the paper by Lawrence Herman and Tamiko Sato: "Correlative Light and Electron Studies of the Islets of Langerhans of an Amphibian Amphiyuma tridactylum (Congo Eel), Journal de Microscopie, 9:907-922, 1970. This work was later confirmed by an associate of Nobel Laureate Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin in her laboeatory.

I don't understand why you are telling us this. Is there an error of attribution somewhere? Tim Vickers 23:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flu wiki collaboration[edit]

Hi everybody, the publisher of the Flu Wiki, Melanie Mattson has expressed interest in collaborating with MCB. I've offered her our "general help" and any experience we may have in group projects and Wiki affairs. This could be an area where our expertise will be very useful. Tim Vickers 21:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxidative phosphorylation FAC[edit]

Hi everybody, comments and suggestions would be welcome. Tim Vickers 23:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion: Cbl Oncogene[edit]

Cbl Oncogene (via WP:PROD on 28 September 2007) Deleted

Proposed deletion: Serial clone[edit]

Serial clone (via WP:PROD on 28 September 2007) Deleted

Human chemistry[edit]

This article is up for deletion, discussion page is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human chemistry. Comments would be most welcome. Tim Vickers 21:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MCB in the news[edit]

Hi everybody, we have been profiled in the November issue of EMBO Encounters, the newsletter for the European Molecular Biology Organisation. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide FAC[edit]

Hi there, NAD is up as a candidate for featured article. Reviews, comments and suggestions are welcome on the nomination page. Thank you. Tim Vickers (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very welcome. :) Tim Vickers (talk) 17:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion: Chemome[edit]

Chemome (via WP:PROD on 14 December 2007)

oxygen at FAC[edit]

Please either support or suggest improvements at the FAC page. --mav (talk) 02:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When to capitalise[edit]

Many people seem to think that because an acronym (e.g. DISC) is written in capitals, then its expanded form must also maintain capitals at the beginning of each word (e.g. Death-Inducing Signalling Complex. This is wrong. Capitals belong at the beginning of sentences, in acronyms and as the first letter of proper-nouns. The correct form is 'death-inducing signalling complex'. I feel like I'm the only one correcting this type of error and it seems as though it's spreading. I think proper capitalisation is a pretty basic aspect of the English language and should be adhered to on an encyclopaedia. If in doubt, don't capitalise. --Seans Potato Business 18:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, when you're typing on your Keyboard, don't imagine that all Nouns need Capitals. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks to CmdrBot owner, these problems should be a lot easier to fix now. Just go to the page linked to from my talkpage, and follow the format shown, signing your entry. A bot will automatically decapitalise those phrases. Make sure not add ones that are likely to also occur frequently in legitimately-capitalised forms; these will have to be corrected the old-fashioned way :/ ----Seans Potato Business 23:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genetics FAC[edit]

I nominated Genetics for FAC: Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Genetics I hope people here might help review it/comment/make suggestions. It's not at the moment listed as an MCB topic, although I suspect it should be, but I want someone other than me to make that decision. Madeleine ✉ ✍ 21:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New template[edit]

Hello every one! I've created a new template on molecular and cell biology. Since, I do not have much experience and confidence in editing such sophisticated material, and also don't possess the requisite expertise in the field, I request others to go through the template and edit it in accordance. Moreover, I felt this was a very fundamental topic, which didn't have any template, so created that.

I don't know if there is a provision to notify users accessing articles related to the template that such a template has been created, and that it could be included on the pertinent pages.

Regards.

—KetanPanchaltaLK 07:29, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pages and template for single nucleotide polymorphism[edit]

I have started to construct pages for individual single nucleotide polymorphisms, see, e.g., rs6313 [1], as well as an infobox template. I am wondering if anyone has comments, e.g., on the naming, on the fields of the infobox and the infobox itself. I would like to add more quantitative information, e.g., about personality traits. — fnielsen (talk) 16:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Related to the SNP template I have now made a small Python program that will assemble the information on HTML page with an example shown at http://hendrix.imm.dtu.dk/services/wikipedia/snipper.html — fnielsen (talk) 14:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cell Biology Wikipedia Workshop at ASCB Annual Meeting[edit]

Dear Molecular & Cell Biology Wikiproject Community,

I'm with the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB), an 11,000 member professional organization headquartered in Bethesda, MD. At our recent Council meeting, it was decided that we should investigate holding a workshop at our annual meeting (December 13-17, 2008 in San Francisco, CA) that would focus on improving cell biology entries in Wikipedia, the idea being that members would come armed with their laptops and be instructed on how to go to the cell biology entries and work on them.

I've been tasked with finding scientist(s) to organize and run this potential session. The selected people would need to be current members of the ASCB, experienced users and annotators of the cell biology Wikipedia entries, and, preferably, be faculty members who teach biology to undergraduate students.

Please nominate yourself and/or colleagues who may be interested in running and organizing this workshop. You can contact me at dennist@ascb.org

Regards, Dave (aka, Cellbase)

David L. Ennist, PhD Director, Digital Resources The American Society for Cell Biology 8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 750 Bethesda, MD 20814-2762 website: http://cellimages.ascb.org/

This could be a very useful event. I've replied to say we're interested, but I don't fit the criteria myself. Any volunteers? Tim Vickers (talk) 19:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, this is Prof. Bill Wedemeyer from the Biochemistry Dept. of Michigan State University. I'd be happy to assist in preparing/organizing/running the ASCB workshop, if you'll accept my help. I agree that it's an excellent opportunity. I have some understanding of Wikipedia's strengths and weaknesses in molecular and cell biology, since some students and I have been studying Wikipedia's science coverage for a little over a year now; I'll be giving a talk on that subject in a few weeks at the 2008 Wikimania in Alexandria. I'm also a faculty member who cares about teaching undergraduate (and graduate) biology, and I'd like to help your work in that direction. Congratulations on your recent FAC for Archaea, by the way! Proteins (talk) 04:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds great, have you e-mailed David Ennist? I'm not sure if he's watching this page. Tim Vickers (talk) 04:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I didn't want to put myself forward, but on your encouragement, I've written to Dave. I'll keep you all posted on our progress. I should also say that I would welcome help from anyone else from the MCB who would like to participate! Proteins (talk) 05:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good news! The ASCB have invited me to help present this workshop. It will happen on December 16th. I think that in the spirit of Wikipedia, and to give the participants a flavor of on-line collaboration, I'll try to organize this so that Wikipedians (and particularly members of MCB) can volunteer to welcome participants as they sign up at MCB. This will help involve people in the community from the start and pair expert contributors with expert editors. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is very good news for us all, Tim! That's also an excellent idea for pairing experienced Wikipedians and the cell biologists. I was thinking of inviting the FA-Team to participate and perhaps also local San Francisco Wikipedians; the personal touch of working face-to-face with Wikipedians might help in building bridges between the two communities.
According to the invitation, we'll have only two hours for the workshop, so we should organize as much as possible in advance. I started this subpage to have one central place for planning and organizing, and to invite suggestions from other interested Wikipedians. My first thoughts were that we should consider making handouts (e.g., Wiki-markup cheat-sheets), an online course (scientists are eager students and will do some advance reading) and, time permitting, an illustrative video. Since a signal success with the ASCB might lead to interest from other scientific communities, for everyone's mutual benefit, we should spare no effort, as I'm sure you agree. Proteins (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

“Gene Wiki” in press[edit]

It seems that the gene pages in Wikipedia has been noticed in the press due to a recent article in PLoS Biology:

  • AFP (2008-07). "Wikipedia opens online library on human genes". AFP. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  • "Archiving Information About The Human Genome Using Wikipedia". Medical News Today. 2008-07-08.

The research article is here:

I guess the last author Andrew I. Su is User:AndrewGNF? — fnielsen (talk) 09:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well there you go, my real name is out of the bag... ;) Thanks to everyone here who participated and provided input... Cheers, AndrewGNF (talk) 16:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulation with the bot, the pages and the nice PLoS article. — fnielsen (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2008[edit]

This is an interesting project, with high-school students trying to improve biology articles as part of coursework. I've adopted one student and am going to give him peer-review/advice as he works on Introduction to microbiology. Any other members of the MCB project who are interested would be most welcome to drop a note on this project's talkpage. Tim Vickers (talk) 20:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The RNA WikiProject: Community annotation of RNA families[edit]

Nice... Congrats to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_RNA folks. Efforts to do "real science" at WP are gaining steam! AndrewGNF (talk) 05:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, on a closer second look, I think special acknowledgment should go out to Willow. It looks like pretty much every page here has Willow's fingerprints on it, either in the page's creation or some very early edit. (I'm therefore a bit surprised at the paper's author list...) In any case, hearty kudos to Willow. Again, just one more example of her incredible contributions to WP... AndrewGNF (talk) 17:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Only noticed this now. We asked WillowW if she wanted to be included, but she very politely and nicely declined for her own special and private reasons. We really did try - honestly. --Paul (talk) 09:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, perhaps that's not surprising. In my few interactions with her, she does tend to be quite humble, especially given her many contributions... Anyway, glad to hear the effort was made! Cheers, AndrewGNF (talk) 00:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
She is in the Acknowledgments if that counts for anything. :) --Paul (talk) 07:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gene Wiki growth stats[edit]

In case anyone else is interested, we did a quick snapshot of the growth of Gene Wiki pages. At right is an image that shows the top 10 gene articles (by size). The full interactive version showing the top 2500 gene pages is at this link. (Pretty cool visualization tool written by folks at IBM...) AndrewGNF (talk) 01:40, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seen the "WikiProject NIH"?[edit]

I'm on a recruitment drive to boost the numbers in the NIH WikiProject, "a collaboration area and group of editors dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of National Institutes of Health". The project needs some administrative TLC, as well as more people willing to consider improving articles within its scope. The 'official' NIH documentation (say for their Entrez services) isn't great. Thanks for your help! --Dan|(talk) 09:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical warfare[edit]

I have nominated Chemical warfare for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.

Articles nominated for deletion[edit]

These articles have been nominated for deletion. Uncle G (talk) 03:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For reasons that will become apparent once you read it, you may like to contribute to this discussion. Uncle G (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neuroscience Wikipedia Initiative[edit]

The Society for Neuroscience just posted this call for participation in a "Neuroscience Wikipedia Initiative". Should be interesting... (Also posted at Neuroscience WikiProject). AndrewGNF (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article nominated for deletion[edit]

This article has been nominated for deletion. Uncle G (talk) 10:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should be redirected or merged to Alpha defensin instead, as it's a synonym as far as I can understand. Narayanese (talk) 13:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pipette[edit]

By pure coincidence I stumbled across the article pipette, which was quite bad (long, full of repetition and incomplete), so I gave it some tlc and now it is looking a bit better, to do so I made a new article called Air displacement pipette. I am not a pipette super expert, but I used them everyday, so if someone wants to give the articles some attention, feel free too!--Squidonius (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bioprotocols[edit]

To quell the problem of the illegality of protocols in wikipedia I have created Template:Bioprotocols, which add link to external pages with protocols so users will not need to add protocols in the first place. I had a bit of a hickup start, but it seems to be fine now. Please feel free to use it go to Template:Bioprotocols for details or just simply add {{bioprotocols|''website1''|''name_displayed1''|''website2''|''name_displayed2''|''website3''|''name_displayed3''|''website4''|''name_displayed4''} there can be zero to 4 links. --Squidonius (talk) 16:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, but per WP:LAYOUT, the external links should go at the bottom of the page. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:48, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox biodatabase[edit]

Hi all,

Boghog and I wrote an infobox to describe the Biological databases Template:Infobox_biodatabase.

I hope we can later use this structured box to extract a complete list of the available databases with their functionalities (API, tools, license, etc... ). I'll start using this template soon after creating a XSLT stylesheet transforming a pubmed article to a WP article. Any comments and suggestion on this infobox are welcomed on the talk page: Template_talk:Infobox_biodatabase--Plindenbaum (talk) 12:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(later)I wrote a Xslt stylesheet to transform a Pubmed article to wikipedia. See Template:Infobox_biodatabase/doc for a demo. And here are a two pages I created with this stylesheet : PlasmoDB and Rebase. I also created the template Template:Biodatabase-stub --Plindenbaum --Plindenbaum (talk) 21:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI the data from Template:Infobox_biodatabase have now been integrated into DBPedia 3.7. For example, see:

--Plindenbaum (talk) 09:46, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did You Know? articles list[edit]

I have created a list at Portal:Molecular and Cellular Biology/DYK Archive of all MCB-related articles that appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page, in the Did you know? column. In order to qualify for the DYK column, articles need to have at least 1500 characters of prose (i.e., not lists, not tables, not refs) and be well referenced. Keeping track of such articles and displaying their "hook" sentences at Portal:Molecular and Cellular Biology may motivate users to improve the thousands of gene- and biochemical-related Wikipedia articles that are currently at the stub level. It would also be good to have a place in one of the MCB subpages where new DYK nominations can be announced, so that interested editors can review them. --İnfoCan (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to rename catalyst categories[edit]

There is a discussion at WP:CFD about the categorisation of enzyme-catalyzed reactions. DexDor (talk) 20:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion had not reached a consensus, so I have relisted it at WP:CFD 2013 February 9.
More input from project members would be very welcome. I think that some expertise is needed to resolve this one. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update[edit]

The same topic is now back at CFD again, at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 February 18#Category:Linear_amides. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page merger discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place that may be of interest to some members of this project at Talk:XY sex-determination system#Proposed merge with Maternal influence on sex determination. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Molecular_Biology/Molecular_and_Cell_Biology/Announcements&oldid=1187777712"