User:WeepingBritney/Influenza prof review

Quality as Teaching Aid

 * Is the level of this article appropriate for junior- and senior-level undergraduates? If not, what level of reader (or range of levels) would it be appropriate for?
 * Is the topic of the article presented in a logical sequence?
 * Would you recommend this article for your undergraduate students? If not, why not?

Overall, I think that this would be a useful article for senior level undergraduate students. However, there are some terms that would be unfamiliar to students who had not taken virology. The links that are provided would help with this, but they miss a few things and it would be also be disruptive to be going back and forth all the time. I think that students with strong backgrounds in biochemistry and molecular biology would do ok, but others might struggle with this article.

Quality as Summary of the Topic

 * Does the article cover its topic completely?
 * Are the basic concepts and terminology of the topic introduced?
 * Is the amount of detail appropriate for the length of the article?
 * Are there any glaring errors, omissions or misleading statements?
 * How precise and/or quantitative is the article?
 * Is the article up-to-date? If not, when would this article have been a current review of its topic?
 * Is the historical development of the topic covered?

I thought that overall it was a good article, and pretty accurate. It was also quite up to date. As mentioned above, some of the basic concepts and terminology are not dealt with directly, but there are links provided in many cases. One example that I can think of where no link was provided is that the article describes influenza viruses as having negative sense RNA genomes. This is true, but I wonder how many undergraduates would know what it means. Even if you don’t however, you can still understand most of the article. It would also help to know some immunology to understand this article.

Readability

 * Is the writing clear and well-organized?
 * Does the article have good flow?
 * Is the article redundant anywhere?

I thought it was well written.

Figures

 * Are the figures clear, and do they help explain the topic?
 * Are the figures consistent with each other and with the text?
 * Do the figures have any exceptional features, such as being three-dimensional?

I liked the figures.