Talk:Glutamate receptor: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Suggestions for BI481 course: copyedit to previous post |
Justindchien (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{GA nominee|17:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)|nominator=[[User:Justindchien|Justindchien]] ([[User talk:Justindchien|talk]])|page=1|subtopic=Biology and medicine|status=|note=}} |
|||
== Suggestions for BI481 course == |
== Suggestions for BI481 course == |
||
Revision as of 17:45, 8 November 2009
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||
 | Glutamate receptor is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by Justindchien (talk) at 17:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.
|
Suggestions for BI481 course
Hi,
You guys have made a great start on updating this article. I have a couple of suggestions:
- Citations. If you haven't seen this yet, please check out User:Diberri's Wikipedia template filling tool. Given a PubMed ID, one can quickly produced a full citation that can be copy and pasted into a Wikipedia article. This will save you an enormous amount of work and insures that the citations are displayed in a consistent manor.
- Introduction and conclusion sections are not normally included in Wikipedia articles. I have taken the liberty of merging the introduction into the lead section. The conclusion section should be integrated with the rest of the article.
- Organization. It appears that the sections of this article were written independently and then merged together. This is understable given the requirements of your course but the end result is that the article is not as cohesive as it should be. The section entitled "Types" contains a list of the mGluR subtypes while "Genetics" contains a list of the iGluR subtypes. These two sections should be merged. The "Pathology" and "Current research" sections contain the same type of information and probably should be merged together. The focus should be kept on the receptor and not research about the receptor.
Again, good work. Cheers. Boghog (talk) 10:54, 31 October 2009 (UTC)