User talk:LacMJ

Hello, LacMJ, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. We're so glad you're here!

I work with the Wiki Education Foundation, and help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment. If there's anything I can do to help with your assignment (or, for that matter, any other aspect of Wikipedia) please feel free to drop me a note. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work!

		The WikiCookie
		You've learned how to use basic wikicode in your sandbox. You can always return there to experiment more.

Posted automatically via sandbox guided tour. LacMJ (talk) 01:16, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Test

Testing 123. Can Anybody Hear Me? LacMJ (talk) 01:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LacMJ!

I am also in CHM437S, the University of Toronto's bioinorganic chemistry class! I look forward to reading your article on ATOX1.

All the best,

☺ Czeer (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am also enrolled in CHM437S, and I would like to thank you for the inspiring userpage! Your userpage helped me with my own, thanks!

D.jae.lee (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear LacMJ,

I don't remember the M and J genes in the lac operon.

--Rfwh (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you done with your article?

Hi LacMJ, have you finished editing your article? I'm interested in your protein. Daamoy (talk) 17:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Daamoy, it would be nice for you to take a look at my article and let me know what you think. Thanks! LacMJ (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Hi, thank you for reviewing my article. I read your article and I have a few comments for you:

I think your article is good to understand. You mentioned intersting details but didn't make it too complex for someone who didn't go through all the literature.
In your introduction I wouldn't mention the names of the copper transporters (ATP7A and ATP7B), this is probably too much information. And in the last sentence of your summary, I'd just leave the part "where its function has been extensively studied" out.
I would put the section about homology and nomenclature either before or after the section about the function, in my opinion it fits better in the context there.
I saw that in the original article the author mentioned the 5q-syndrome and suggested that the protein might play a role in cancer carcinogenesis. I think it would be interesting to include this in your article as well if these topics are still up to date (probably you didn't mention it because current research has proofed the suggestions wrong)

I hope you find my comments helpful, have a nice weekend! Vogel ant789 (talk) 00:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer comments from Daamoy

Hello, your article is overall clear and easy to read. I have some suggestions:

The lead section does not provide enough information to summarize the main points of the various sections of your article. You may want to use half to one sentence to summarize each section.

Under the Function section, the hyperlink "cyclin D1" does not actually link to "cyclin D1". It only gets to "cyclin".

Also under this section, it would be nice if you could briefly explain how ATOX1 works as a transcription factor.

Under the Structure & metal coordination section, you mentioned "The metal binding motif also binds Hg(II), Cd(II), Ag(I).." . So how would ATOX1 bind specifically to Cu(I) but not other metals when it needs to? You may want to briefly explain this.

Under the Clinical significance section, there is a typo "fo".

The "Homology and Nomeclature" section better come before the Function section.

Thank you. Daamoy (talk) 21:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review CHM437

This protein is interact to ATP7B which is my project. I assume you will expanding the article since the the bibliography part is quite long. Overall, it is very clear to mention the features of ATOX1.

Postive part

Good linking to Wikipedia
Nice referencing and formatting
Thanks to mention ATP7B and ATP7A
Good table to show the nomeclature
Nice to know ATOX1 may cause Wilson's disease

Things to improve

I think its better to mention tran-Golgi network instead of Golgi network in function part.
You mentioned a ligand exchange mechanism. If it is possible, I would like to know some examples of ligands.
May need an interaction section that mentioned in your bibliography.

Other comments

I am trying to find more information about interactions between ATOX1 and ATP7B, we can share some references if possible.

Good luck with the assignment!Cliff310 (talk) 00:02, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I read over your ATOX1 article.

I think that the article is really excellent, and I don't have too much to recommend right now. My few suggestions:

There may be an error in this sentence: "ATOX1 is responsible for shuttling copper to ATPase transporters ATP7A or ATP7B into the golgi network or secretory vesicles."
If you want to use a different illustration, maybe include one of the ligand exchange mechanism? This could be helpful, and it would be an easy diagram to produce. If you wanted to you could get fancy and make it a .gif!
Your citation style isn't consistent. Sometimes you use {{vcite2 journal | ... and sometimes you use {{cite journal | ... . The vcite2 style isn't the default, but it uses something closer to the Vancouver style, which gives more compact references. If you decide to go Vancouver, use vcite (not vcite2) for books and websites, otherwise you lose them! I have no idea what the difference is between vcite and vcite2 is for journal references.

Best wishes, Czeer (talk) 01:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi LacMJ. Sorry I took so long to get back to you. I looked at your article (now that you've moved it into mainspace) and it looks good. The main feedback I'd give would be that your 'further reading' section is a bit long. Might you trim it back to just the most useful things someone might want to read? The more choices you give someone, the less they're able to focus on finding the best ones. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kerry Vandenberg

Please note that under Wikipedia's inclusion rules for politicians, a person does not get a Wikipedia article just for being a candidate in an election — if you cannot make and properly source a credible assertion that they were already notable enough for a Wikipedia article before they got named as a candidate, then they have to win the election, not just run in it, before they become notable enough for a Wikipedia article. If Vandenberg wins his seat on October 19, then he'll be eligible for an article as a newly elected MP — but he does not get to keep an article on here just for having his name on a ballot, if he wasn't already notable for anything else. Bearcat (talk) 18:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]