User:WeepingBritney/Sequence alignment student review

Breadth (4) Does the article cover its field completely? It covered both biological and non-biological uses for sequence alignments. It also went into detail about each method used. It didnt really give a good background about DNA and RNA and why sequence alignment is used. It only talked about exactly what it was. Are all the common terms of the field defined? I think so. There was a lot of subtopics. It seemed to describe all important uses. Are all the basic concepts of the field described? I think so. Were important topics missed? Not that I know. Depth (4) Amount of detail appropriate for topic- Not enough information was given for the first time student. This article was really confusing and I could not have learned about sequence alignment for the first time using it. History given? None really. It would have been nice to know what actions lead up to sequence alignments. Readability/Writing (4) Is the writing clear? The writing is really scientific and a little confusing. Is the writing interesting? Not really Is the writing organized, good flow? Yes, it follows a good outline. Architecture to the article (beginning, middle, end)? Yes Is the writing redundant? No. It covers a variety of information about the topic. Learnability (4) Is the level of explanation good for undergraduate students? Not too simple or complex? Is the teaching well-organized, clear progression of topics? Figures (4) Are there Figures at all? Yes there are several pictures. Are the Figures clear? All of the pictures have a brief description beneath them. Are the Figures three-dimensional? Some Are the Figures consistent with each other? They show a variety of different sequence alignments. They definitely go with the text and are appropriately located. References (4) Are there references? Yes there are several. Are the references recent? Are the references from "good" journals? Several are from Gene, Bioinformatics, Nucleic Acids Res, Quality (4) How up-to-date is the article? When would this article have last been an up-to-date review of the field? The resources cited range in date from 1990 until 1999, 2000. It seems like this information could probably be updated. Glaring errors, minor errors, and misleading statements? I really couldn't say. How precise and quantitative is the article?

Britannica does not mention sequence alignments

Breadth (0) Depth (0) Readability (0) Learnability (0) Figures (0) References (0) Quality (0)