This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The current version of intro says :The average virion is about one one-hundredth the size of the average bacterium". Could someone please clarify what size means here, length or volume? 22.214.171.124 (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
I have tagged the article with a lead too long tag. My edit conforms to WP:LEADLENGTH and should not be reverted without providing a good reason. Also, at the time the article got promoted to FA‐status, the lead was shorter then it is now. —MartinZ02 (talk) 13:50, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The Lead was not that much shorter. What do you think should be removed? Graham Beards (talk) 20:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 September 2016
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
In the "Origins" somebody put life timeline picture (on the right). Apart from being nice picture, I think its content has very little to do with the viruses by itself and is only very remotely related to the section, thus I think the picture could be deleted without any damage.
The first sentence of the Antiviral drugs section: Antiviral drugs are often nucleoside analogues (fake DNA building-blocks), which viruses mistakenly incorporate into their genomes during replication. It's not correct to call nucleoside analogues, "fake DNA building-blocks". I would rather change it to nucleoside analogues (DNA-like building-blocks)" or just remove the "fake DNA building-blocks".
The second incorrect analogy is "which viruses mistakenly incorporate into their genomes during replication". The virus doesn't make a mistake when incorporating the nucleoside analogues, it just incorporates the nucleotide analogues into its genome. I would remove "mistakenly" altogether.
But if someone has a better suggestions for changing the first sentence please write it down below! Bonnom (talk) 00:21, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
I disagree. The metaphor is an acceptable way of explaining the mode of action of these drugs to the lay reader. Graham Beards (talk) 04:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
"Some antiviral drugs are nucleoside analogues. They are similar enough in shape to actual nucleosides that they will be incorporated as “DNA building blocks” into the virus’s genome during replication, but will, unlike actual nucleosides, interfere with the normal functioning or transcription of that DNA." - Nunh-huh 07:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
But they do not interfere with normal functioning of the DNA; they prevent the DNA molecule from being completed by the polymerase. Graham Beards (talk) 07:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
You could rephrase if you like; one normal function of DNA is, I think, to be reproduced. - Nunh-huh 08:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)