User talk:570kkl/sandbox

I think you're off to a great start, interesting subject choice! I only have a few very minor suggestions. 1)It seems that you have some headings and subheadings within your sandbox (and I'm sure you plan to do this) but I would suggest highlighting them in some way, as it would improve the clarity for readers and contribute to the overall "flow" of the article. 2) I would eliminate the wording about "live" or "dead" virus. As you noted, PCR methods do not determine if infectious virus is present; PCR simply determines the presence of viral RNA/DNA. And 3) I am no expert on PCR methods, but I am curious if the method of collection could possibly interfere with PCR testing. Using a Swiffer and collecting the sample from this would introduce a ton of extra "junk", in the form of dirt, fibers and other debris, bacteria (which may or may not be relevant to the monitoring of the facility), and potentially any viruses you seek.  There are filtering/washing methods done prior to and during the PCR process, but I honestly don't know if they would be sufficient to remove all this extra "stuff" or not.  And all of that may be way too in-depth for what you're writing about here, but just a thought.  Can't wait to read the final version! 570hjm (talk) 17:10, 11 November 2017 (UTC)570hjm

greetings- environmental monitoring certainly relates very to certain aspects that we touch on in class. I did some brief searching online and found an article that focuses specifically on Environmental Monitoring and Assessment and believe that it would help you to expand on existing parameters based on category. The link may be helpful if you are interested in expanding the different parameters slightly. Overall, I believe that you will have a great addition to the thread if you continue to add information and make some of the suggested changes. https://www.envirotech-online.com/news/air-monitoring/6/breaking_news/what_is_environmental_monitoring/31597 Rebur (talk) 03:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I would have to agree that you are off to a great start! It appears that you have a few sections left to write and heading to edit. At first your title threw me off about what your article was about specifically. I agree with the above suggestions. I will check back into read about your air collector sections. I am aware of articles out of the University of Minnesota about using such air collectors for PRRS monitoring on Swine farming that might be nice articles for that specific section. 570bcs (talk) 17:35, 13 November 2017 (UTC)570bcs

It would be helpful to add headers and sections to make it a little easier to read. Are you adding this to an existing page or creating a new one? It looks like there is already a wiki page for environmental monitoring - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_monitoring. Would you want to use this for the definition instead of creating your own? I would maybe remove the part “For the purposes of this article” since this is a wiki page, it doesn’t seem to work to have it worded like that. I would maybe just go into your explanation on environmental monitoring a research facility. Make sure to define acronyms the first time you use them. I am not sure what PCR or RODAC is. Add sources for fact based information, this would be in cases like “The most common testing performed in the research facility….”. It doesn’t look like you have any sources yet so I am guessing they just need to be added. When you mention “The research facility” is this a specific location or are there multiple research facilities? You discuss the various places that the samples can be taken throughout the process. It would be interesting if you could add the pros and cons to sampling at these various points. Are there certain scenarios where you would favor sampling at one point versus another? Why? You discuss the types of testing available but it seems critical you would add information about the results that you get as a result of this testing. What are potential results? What is done with the results? And how are those results used in risk assessment or analysis? When you discuss that the PCR test identifies genetic material but cannot differentiate between live or dead material, is this important? What benefits or drawbacks are a results of this limitation? Also, how can there be differences between labs? Are there not established test procedures that need to be followed so that there is consistency from one lab to another? Looking at the part on RODAC, you say “swabs run the same risk”. The same risk as what? I am not sure I am following that part. Does the RODAC have similar limitations to the PCR? Do you the results show if the material is alive or dead? In the risk assessment section, you do answer some of my questions above but I would still go more in depth on them. Also, what is the norm for research facilities? Is a zero tolerance policy normal or is there a threshold allowed? That would be helpful information to add to the Risk Assessment portion. It looks like you begin to explore this but I would just elaborate a little more and possibly provide examples with citations for allowable limits. Make sure to update the formatting and add the necessary citations as you work through this.

It would be helpful to add headers and sections to make it a little easier to read. Are you adding this to an existing page or creating a new one? It looks like there is already a wiki page for environmental monitoring - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_monitoring. Would you want to use this for the definition instead of creating your own? I would maybe remove the part “For the purposes of this article” since this is a wiki page, it doesn’t seem to work to have it worded like that. I would maybe just go into your explanation on environmental monitoring a research facility. Make sure to define acronyms the first time you use them. I am not sure what PCR or RODAC is. Add sources for fact based information, this would be in cases like “The most common testing performed in the research facility….”. It doesn’t look like you have any sources yet so I am guessing they just need to be added. When you mention “The research facility” is this a specific location or are there multiple research facilities? You discuss the various places that the samples can be taken throughout the process. It would be interesting if you could add the pros and cons to sampling at these various points. Are there certain scenarios where you would favor sampling at one point versus another? Why? You discuss the types of testing available but it seems critical you would add information about the results that you get as a result of this testing. What are potential results? What is done with the results? And how are those results used in risk assessment or analysis? When you discuss that the PCR test identifies genetic material but cannot differentiate between live or dead material, is this important? What benefits or drawbacks are a results of this limitation? Also, how can there be differences between labs? Are there not established test procedures that need to be followed so that there is consistency from one lab to another? Looking at the part on RODAC, you say “swabs run the same risk”. The same risk as what? I am not sure I am following that part. Does the RODAC have similar limitations to the PCR? Do you the results show if the material is alive or dead? In the risk assessment section, you do answer some of my questions above but I would still go more in depth on them. Also, what is the norm for research facilities? Is a zero tolerance policy normal or is there a threshold allowed? That would be helpful information to add to the Risk Assessment portion. It looks like you begin to explore this but I would just elaborate a little more and possibly provide examples with citations for allowable limits. Make sure to update the formatting and add the necessary citations as you work through this. 570mna (talk) 21:43, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. You have taken a complicated subject to discuss. I agree with the others insights. I presume you will be adding the citations after you are done writing the content. I had some of the same questions as above, so look forward to your completed page. 570rlg (talk) 20:54, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Your content is about the definition and discussion of environmental monitoring and its applicability in risk assessment. I think that research facilities may find the content here quite relevant since they conduct assessments of the environment. The content is well-developed with clear structure characterized sub-headings. It is easy for a reader to understand the simple language applied to this content. Thus It is credible and of high quality. Your draft is about environmental monitoring, which is a significant activity aimed at ensuring the surrounding is safe and supportive for both animal and human life. It is revealed in your draft that this monitoring has to be done through constant risk assessments. It is quite true that one may be interested in monitoring a water supply source to ensure it is always safe for human and animal consumption. I think the definitions presented in your paper are of high quality. Moreover, the risk assessment applications presented in your draft will make it a significant peace for researchers. 570iya (talk) 05:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)570iya

I would agree with most of the above commentary. I was able to find a link to the PCR wikipedia page that could be used https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerase_chain_reaction within the article. I am not all that familiar with the testing techniques or acronyms used, so any further definitions there would be helpful. User:570smb —Preceding undated comment added 00:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I think you have some strong content this far! Like everyone has said above you work on some headings and it will make your article more aesthetically appealing. Aside from layout of your article, I think if you added a heading for the definition of a broad statement of what environment monitoring entails that would be beneficial for readers. After you've defined your topic you could jump in with a subheading titled applications of environment monitoring which you can form your information from your first paragraph into. Once you've clarified applications you can talk about the two most common types of testing; which you've already got content for. 570cjd (talk) 17:30, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, as others have stated, you seem to have a great page started here. I will echo some of the other comments on looking at using existing Wiki pages to help with some definitions, this may help with the validity of your article. You also may want to check on citations, as I don't see them in your article yet. Your content overall is very pertinent and I think you've done a good job compiling information that can very easily be used as a way to implement a risk assessment in the real world. -570alp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 570alp (talk • contribs) 21:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)