User talk:AverageMarquettekid/sandbox

The authors are aware of the following issues regarding this VIP page:
 * All references need to be fixed.
 * Content needs to be added about receptors.
 * Additional content pertaining to GABA can be added.
 * Pathology section can be added to as well.

-WithersM 3/27/17

Feedback
Nice work on your article draft.
 * You have missing references - "ref A1", "ref A2". You need to fix these.
 * References should appear immediately after the statements they support. There should be a minimum of one reference per paragraph, and there shouldn’t be any text after the last reference in a paragraph. By this standard, a lot of your text isn't adequately sourced. See, for example, the VIP in the brain section.
 * Section headers should use sentence case; only proper nouns and the first word of each section header should be capitalized.
 * Your VIP receptors and Pathology sections seem incomplete
 * Some of your references aren't up to standard. You should be using the best available references - WP:MEDRS strongly recommends review articles published in the past five years. Your second and third references are from 1982 and 1986 respectively. It's hard to imagine that nothing has been published about where in the body these peptide is produced in the last 35 years. References 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 11 are similarly old. Reference 10 is a little on the old side as well.
 * You should generally not be using articles that primarily discuss research work as sources. The findings presented in articles like those are preliminary, and need to be considered in light of things like experimental design, statistical power of the analyses, and a whole lot of other things. In as active a field as this, you need rely on more recent articles, specifically those that that try to synthesize the breadth of research findings.
 * The article title shouldn't be repeated in the section headers. So "In the body" rather than "VIP in the body".
 * There's a lot of important information on the existing Vasoactive intestinal peptide article including infobox_gene, several footers and categories. As you update that article, make sure that existing information is preserved. Remember that you aren't replacing the article wholesale. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

References Issues
, do you have any suggestions for the above issues? --WithersM (talk) 22:17, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The chief cell reference does not have an appropriate review article that is up to date.
 * Reference from VIP:functional aspects was hesitantly removed because it seemed relevant, but out of date.
 * Vaginal lubrication reference was updated, but the new reference is not much newer. Reviews in the last 10 years do not exist.
 * The VIP General practice notebook reference does not seem like a viable reference, but for fear of eliminating too much that exists on the page, and because it is out of the scope of this assignment (since it mainly references "in body" and not "in brain"), it was left as is.