User:Immcarle80/sandbox

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Yes, everything written in the article is relevant to the topic.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article seems impartial and focuses on the scientific aspect of the topic only.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? All the links in the article work and they seem to buttress the claims in the article very substantially.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Journals.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? Maybe we haven't gotten to this topic yet. What do you need to read to be able to understand this article? Some articles come from the 20th century but I think they make a case for the historical discovery of the protein as well as the basic understanding people had at the time regarding the protein.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Not much is being discussed.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

It is part of a few WikiProjects.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Maybe we haven't gotten to this topic yet. What do you need to read to be able to understand this article?

I need to read lots of journals and reviews and do research on this topic.

In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article now that you've had a chance to do some reading.