User talk:A hashimi/sandbox

Assignment 1: Critique of Bacterial circadian rhythms article

I have found a few issues with this Wikipedia article, the first of which being un-cited material. The sources that are used are reliable academic sources in which I could identify no biases, but there are many instances throughout the article where no citations are given (for example, the second paragraph of the introduction – almost every line needs a citation).

There are some sentences that that do not seem to be rooted in referenceable facts. For example, in the first paragraph of the “History” section the author explains a perspective on why prokaryotic circadian rhythms are reasonable, without citations. Although the reasoning is compelling, it shouldn’t be such a large paragraph, especially when it has no citations to support it. Although the information may be true, it seems as though it is the author’s opinion (perhaps this is because of the tone and syntax).

In the molecular mechanism section, the article states that there have been no similarities identified between past genome sequences and the sequences discovered in a 1998 study. A 2005 study is mentioned as being the first “so far” to reconstitute the clock in vitro. These parts may be potentially be out of date, since according to the history and talk page, no edits have been made on these since 2009.

Additionally, the title “Visualizing the clockwork’s “gears”: structural biology of clock proteins” is wordy; the section could easily be summarized by “Structural biology of clock proteins,” without a clock analogy.

-A hashimi (talk) 05:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I learned how to be critical of information that I would previously just accept as fact. I also learned how to check sources for their credibility and check writing for plagiarism.

-A hashimi (talk) 05:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Assignment 2: Choosing a Wikipedia Article

I am choosing the Dehalococcoides article to edit. It is classified as a stub article and thus has many areas where information can be added. I would like to focus on the "Applications" and "Activities" sections, as the MICB 301 course and lecture material relates to the activities of these bacteria with bioremediation applications. The applications of these bacteria are important in relation to environmental pollution, which is a pressing issue. Research in this area has received acclaim - from the gene sequencing of the bacteria in 2005 to studies done by multiple institutions, including the Georgia Institute of Technology, it is clear that the applications of these bacteria can yield fruitful results. From looking at this research, and also looking at the citations that are already on this Wikipedia article, it is evident that this topic has received significant coverage in literature and other independent sources, and since bioremediation is such an important issue, I find it important to improve this article to include more information in this area.

In these sections I have found spelling and grammatical errors, and areas in which the syntax could be improved, such as the sentence "For treatment of contaminated sites apart from an active culture also electron acceptors have to be added," which is confusing, wordy, and is written without a citation. Additionally, the entire "Activities" section is written without a single citation given.

I noticed that there are not many details on bioremediation - I would like to add more information on the ways Dehalococcoides are used for bioremediation for PCE and other contaminants. Adding this information will improve the article since this is an important application of Dehalococcoides, and should be mentioned. Also, I would like to fix grammatical and spelling errors, which will improve the overall quality of the article.

- A hashimi (talk) 01:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Ameena's Peer Review
The author edited two previously existing sections (activities and applications), transitioning from one topic to another in a way that is easy to follow along by first explaining what Dehalococcoides can do and then how these abilities can be harnessed. Sections are organized logically in a way that facilitates thorough understanding of Dehalococcoides. However, the explanation of its ability to transform toxic compounds like PCEs and TCEs would be better suited in the applications section rather than the activities section, seeing as it is a strong example of how Dehalococcoides can be used for bioremediation.

In terms of content, all edits are relevant to Dehalococcoides and provide a depth that the article did not have before. The author does an excellent job in expanding upon Dehalococcoides with relevant examples. For example, she adds two examples of reductases capable of transforming toxic compounds, an example of a substrate used by Dehalococcoides and another example of how companies can use Dehalococcoides. These additions help tie in Dehalococcoides' abilities to its bioremediation potential. One area of improvement would be to further explain why acetate is needed and how Dehalococcoides is inhibited by acetylene.

The edits are based on relevant, trusted sources from various scientific journals. None are closely paraphrased and all are supported in multiple sources, which demonstrates their importance to understanding Dehalococcoides. However, one of her sources by Löffler et al. details Dehalococcoides' involvement with halogen cycling and bioremediation. While the author addresses bioremediation in detail, halogen cycling could be added to fully examine Dehalococcoides' importance and relevance.

The author provides an easy to understand introduction to Dehalococcoides in a neutral, straightforward tone. She reworded sentences from the original article to help with flow of ideas and understanding. The author summarizes her findings without using too much jargon. None of the edits try to persuade the reader to take on a particular stance or to try to force an opinion on the reader. Instead, the author lists all of the facts for readers to make their own judgments. One final suggestion would be to shorten her sentence structure, as this topic can be confusing to someone without a background in microbiology, so shorter sentences will make the edits even more concise and will allow even more readers the ability to understand more about Dehalococcoides.

Veenalin (talk) 05:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)