User talk:DBM393/sandbox

 Transient Receptor Potential Channel Review  What I liked: • I think you are off to a good start • I like your idea to make a family tree of all the TRP channels • There’s not a whole lot to work with but I’ll read through the original page very closely and try to give you some ideas of things that you could add

Future ideas: • It would be easier to keep track of all your citations if you were to put them in the standard format, which would also save you a lot of trouble later on • I noticed that the history section only talks about drosophila TRP channels. I would change this to a broader “History” section and then make the current paragraph on Drosophila a subsection and also add a subsection for human TRP channels. • The structure section is very empty in comparison to other pages on similar channels. • Are there any new papers that elucidated more about the structural nature of the channel? • Are there any key residues in the channel? • Are there any known drugs that can modulate or interact with TRP channels? • If there are any known blockers, you could include a section called “Pharmacologic Modulation” under the Clinical significance section.

DK2975 (talk) 23:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

I really like the use of tables you have going. I agree that it will make it easier to navigate the differences of these channels. Maybe include a section that clearly defines what differentiates the sub-families in the first place. Do they have different kinetic activity? ApexofAdharma (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your input!DBM393 (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi DBM393! I really like your diagram and the use of color. But for the tables, I don't think you should indicate what the subtypes are BELOW the table, instead maybe include a little key beside the tables with all of the indications. Might help it look nicer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ApexofAdharma (talk • contribs) 03:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)