Talk:Wide dynamic range neuron/Archive 1

student goals
This page was edited for a college level Neurobiology class. The goal was to elaborate on the anatomy and mechanisms the Wide Dynamic Range Neuron is involved in. You can find more information about the class by clicking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Marquette_University/Neurobiology_(Spring_2017) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OArnold2017 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Secondary Review
Overall, you guys did a good job covering the necessary information that research allowed for your topic. If it allows, a more elaborate description of WDR neurons role in itch responses may bring more depth to your article. The terms you hyperlinked are relevant and help bring a better understanding to the concepts associated with this topic. In all, I think you guys did a really nice job! Ehartmann01 (talk) 03:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Secondary Review
Very well-written and good job with the illustrations. Also, well-organized and to the point. I would consider breaking up the Anatomy and physiology section into two different sections as it may make it easier for future editors of this page to add new information, just a thought. Mknut3 (talk) 17:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

student Secondary Review
Overall, i think you guys did a great job! It was well written and easy to understand. I really like the intro, it was short and precise to the point. One thing i would suggest changing is the first paragraph, 5th sentence, where you say, "this allows for the over-excitation discussed previously..." I suggest that you say what this over-excitation is again because when people look at wikipedia pages, they skip around to the parts that they are looking for and sometimes not read the whole article and because of this, it'll be easier for them if you explain what this over-excitation is again instead of them having to search for what it is in the previous paragraph. Just a suggestion but again, this is a well written page. Achem10 (talk) 23:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

student secondary review
The article is very easy to read and understand for a reader who is not familiar with this topic. The grammar and fluidity of the article is excellent. I would suggest to add a category for disease or dysfunction. What would happen if something were to occur to these neurons? How does it impact the individual? Are there certain disabilities or diseases associated with permanent damage to WDRNs? under expression or over expression? This is a suggestion. Overall, great job. --DKS7623 (talk) 02:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

student secondary review
Really enjoyed reading this article, it was very clearly written. The only suggestion I would have is that due to the lack of information in the "role in itch responses," I would suggest maybe combining it with "role in pain responses" under a larger category and doing subcategories beneath that. If not, possibly talking about what future research will happen that will supply more knowledge on its role. mwelch1990 (talk) 17:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

student secondary review
This was very well done, both the content and structure worked well together. I think your use of images is particularly helpful, they definitely help illustrate what is going on in each section. The itch section is a bit small, though still informative. Perhaps you could add more about the itch pathway or change it to something like additional roles and put in some other uses of WDR neurons. That being said, the overall article is easy to read and useful, you all did a great job. Nathanneuro (talk) 23:59, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Student Secondary Review
Hey guys! This is a great start to a very complete article. I think you did a fabulous job with illustration and citation placement. I think the content of your article is great – however I would love to see a little more under “role in itch response”. The lack of information under this makes me feel like it shouldn’t be a main header. I would suggest finding a way to incorporate this information in a different place within the article or look for a little more information on the subject. Perhaps they have a little information about the mechanism behind it? Not sure how much info is out there, but I think it would be a nice addition. Overall, looks great! Neurosynn (talk) 02:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Secondary Source
Overall, the article did a good job of describing the anatomy of the WDR neurons. In the introductory paragraph i would specify that the dorsal horn is in the spinal cord not the spine. Perhaps in the pain response section, add a subheading describing the pathway from stimulus to response through a WDR neuron as is illustrated by the photo on the right side. I also would include more hyperlinks for the terminology used if you do not want to have to define terms throughout the article. Otherwise, keep up the good work and happy editing.

Sistercerebrum (talk) 07:25, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Primary Review
The word neuron is missing after the introductory of the “Wide Dynamic Range” in the first sentence of the article. It also sounds like the first sentence of the Anatomy and Physiology section should not have the word “in” within the sentence. Additionally, the world “which” does not belong when stating the second type of pain in the second paragraph under the Role in pain responses. It sounds like the information comes from all secondary sources. The only problem is source 5 is saying to check the url value, which sounds like a formatting issue. As for the coverage of information, there is no need to say WDR neurons are located in the spinal cord in the third paragraph of Role in pain responses since you already mentioned that in the Anatomy and Physiology section. This is repetitive. Otherwise you did a really good job on the anatomy of the neuron and discussing the roles it plays in the pain and itch response. Nice job maintaining neutrality throughout the article. The use of the two images also works well for the article and does a nice job enhancing understanding of the descriptions given in the body. The captions of the images work well too. I read through and reviewed reference 3 of the article. You did a good job summarizing WDR neuron’s physiological role in pain and all the information on WDR neurons matches what is talked about in the reference. The reference link lists the authors to the reference article, but why don’t these names appear in the reference citations at the bottom of your article? Overall you did a nice job. Good work! Parker443 (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback! We appreciate your suggestions and have used them all, especially the note on repetition. OArnold2017 (talk) 23:22, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

student Primary Review
Hi guys, a couple things. First off, you did a nice job including illustrations and figures to help give a visual explanation for some of the important concepts and theories underlying WDRN, such as the "gate control theory." Second off, the article written neutrally, simply stating the facts condensed from your reference articles. In terms of coverage, you have addressed the role of WDRN in the pain response well. Perhaps in the "anatomy and physiology" section, perhaps breaking it down so that there is a subsection specifically for the "anatomy" and/or location of these and then subsection for "physiology" of the WDRN's. Otherwise, the coverage of your article is good. Hopefully the section on "itch response" could be elaborated more, if research allows.

There are couple of minor fixes for grammar and sentence structure...In intro of your article, the second sentence, perhaps deleting "the cells" so that it reads "These neurons are responsible for..." As well as inserting "the responses" instead of "to all responses," it will help your first paragraph flow a little bit better. My next suggestion is to create links for "fibromyalgia" and "emphysema" under "Anatomy and physiology" section, people who are not well adverse with medical terms or conditions may be unfamiliar with them. In addition, create a link to "neuropathic pain," it may seem like common sense to us, but again, for the general public may not be so. Finally, the phrase, "this allows" is used too many times consecutively in the "Role in pain responses" section. Just a suggestion to switch up sentence structure as to not make everything seem too repetitive.

In regards to your references, I checked out reference #6, "Spinal cord mecanisms of pain." It is a verifiable, secondary source. After reading through it, I believe that your team did a good job pulling out information specifically related to your focus sections. Maybe something else you can bring into your article from the reference is the role of 5-HT3 receptors in the spinal cord and how it affects pain responses. Other than that, good job guys! Verdagj (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your time and your comments on our page! We created links as you suggested for fibromyalgia and emphysema to make it more understandable for all people reading this page. We also fixed the grammar errors you mentioned, thanks for catching those. There was not enough information to go into depth about 5-HT3 receptors and we also want to explain in terms that everyone will understand without getting that specific. Thanks for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.48.163.166 (talk) 23:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Primary Review
Nice intro it really covers the bases of the direction to where the article will go. I would say only if possible to add an image of the Wide dynamic range neuron since it is the first things readers may look for to get a general idea of what is the WDR neuron. Also since I see a somewhat pattern to your headers it goes in depth to the responses of pain and itch(sort of possibly still working on it though). In the intro you included reaction to heat so maybe find some information about how that functions in the CNS, since it was also mentioned. Then throughout your article maybe highlight/link words like: Nociceptive Specific (NS) neurons, sympathetic pathways, premotor cortex, and anterior insular cortex. Just a suggestion you don't have to I just thought it would be helpful to give a better understand.

I did also notice grammatical errors, but nothing too major that I was unable to understand the article. Maybe reread the article a few more times and correct that problem could help. As stated above from the previous primary reviewer.

I looked over the general usage of all your references and I thought each were all used and evenly distributed throughout the page. One note I noticed though was reference #1 was published 1966, which maybe too old of an article...but maybe there is an article that states that experiment...I specifically verified #3 "Mechanisms and Models of Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain" which is a reliable secondary source. I thought it had a really nice section on animal models and SCS. But I think your group did a nice job summarizing and pulling out the important parts and putting it into the anatomy and physiology section of your wiki page. Good job keep it up. Yoyotime (talk) 21:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Update response:
I'm sorry I didn't notice someone else already verified reference #3 already. Thus, I just checked #12 from the reference list and that is also a verified secondary source(Garrison, Sheldon R.; Stucky, Cheryl L. (2017-04-09). "The Dynamic TRPA1 Channel: A Suitable Pharmacological Pain Target?). I like how you pulled from the article the gene expression of TRPA1. I found the section in the article: Role of TRPA1 in Inflammation, Tissue Injury, Nerve Injury and Disease relatively interesting and most helpful possibly in your page. I thought maybe you could pull more information from the article source into your page in the section about role of pain possibly. Nice job! Yoyotime (talk) 16:27, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback! We took out the part about heat responses as there isn't much information out there about the role of WDR in them. We linked some of those you mentioned, however a few of them don't have wikipedia articles. The reference from 1966 was one used by a previous editor for this article, not one we found. We still wanted to keep some of the information they provided, so we kept the source. OArnold2017 (talk) 23:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Primary Review
Hi all! I really enjoyed this article, it was concise and explained the significance of long dynamic range neurons very well. Various links were included throughout the article which is a great way to keep the article simple while maintaining high quality scientific writing. One suggestion for the flow of the article would be in the anatomy/ physiology section: I think heading up the section with big-picture anatomy or location would make the article more clear rather than beginning with the explanation of the Gate Control Theory. The article was neutral and objectively explained the research and literature available. No discrepancies were noted so the article is verifiable with no original research. The article is broad in that it considers what long dynamic range neurons are, where they are located, and their physiological function. If possible, it could be beneficial to expand on the pertinent research of the topic (research was briefly touched on at the end of the pain response section). The images used were helpful in explaining the topic. I would recommend editing the caption of the last figure so it does not begin with "this is an..." and is more formal. I looked at source #2 which was a secondary source. The source was used to reference the explanation of the gate control theory. However, the source is more focused on SCS and the studies done on that topic so I am curious as to if there is a source which focuses more heavily on the gate control theory that would be better to use. Or maybe, if any of the information from pain responses in the article can be applied to your article, you can reference it again. Great article overall! Not much left to do :) 9923matlous (talk) 04:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the feedback! We ended up moving our section on the Gate Control Theory to our introduction paragraph and then started our anatomy and physiology section with more big-picture anatomy. Source #2 gave the a broad explanation about the gate theory, which is why we chose it. Thanks again!

Cjungers (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)cjungers

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): OArnold2017, Jjazzpur, Cjungers.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)