User:Js3377/Calcium channel/Bio phys 568 Peer Review

General info
Js3377/Calcium channel
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Js3377/Calcium channel
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Calcium channel

Evaluate the drafted changes
General comments


 * I liked how you cleaned up the gene name part of the table, I think that was a good call
 * Your writing voice is great -- it's clear and professional, but not bogged down by excessive jargon or oversimplification. I'm not seeing any glaring spelling or grammatical errors. Some of your section titles have an extra [edit] in them and when published will show up as "Title [edit] [ edit ]", just so you're aware.
 * Don't forget to add citations!
 * I can see that you're thinking about the best way to present the information regarding voltage- vs ligand-gated calcium channels, and I like your approach so far. For what it's worth, I think anything that's not first and foremost a "calcium channel" should be put in bullet points or paragraph form -- anything that's not a table. (If I saw them in a table I'd probably assume I'm looking at additional calcium channel types, and would have to read more to understand that they're really other cation channels that also happen to permit calcium flow.)
 * In a similar vein to what I mentioned above, when I first started reading your section "Cation channels with calcium permittivity" I was confused about what... it was about? since the whole article is about channels permeable to calcium. Of course, after reading on for a couple more sentences I realized what you were talking about, but for the sake of clarity I think changing the section title slightly could go a long way. Some examples:
 * "Other channels with calcium permittivity"
 * "Other channels with calcium permeability"
 * "Other channels permeable to calcium"
 * "Other cation channels also permeable to calcium"
 * etc

Nitpicky suggestions


 * "pH regulated" → "pH-regulated"
 * "these channels participate in action potentials" → (To what extent? I think adding a "...by ____" or even just an adverb after "participate" could make this clearer, without going into too much detail.)
 * If you want a cleaner look than bullet points (depending how in depth you're planning on going with the other cation channels) you might consider subheadings or even just bolding them.