User talk:JillRyeTheScienceGal/sandbox

Article structure
You have refined the titles of the sections for the article. I think this is a good improvement to the article and adds to its readability and flow.

I would suggest adding an introductory paragraph (2-3 sentences) that explain that HA is a protein (incl. size). Also mention its significance (i.e. key protein of flu virus) and key structural features (e.g. glycoprotein, trimer etc)

Do you think it would improve flow if you changed the headings around to: 1. Structure, 2. Function (Roles etc), 3. Structural rearrangements (possibly as a subheading under Function or Structure?) 4. HA subtypes 5. Antiviral treatments targeting HA

HA subtypes
Clarify how the different antigens relate to the subtypes? How do the subtypes differ structurally?

Structure
Great idea to add pictures here to explain and illustrate structure. This is sorely missing from the original article. Your addition of pics here would significantly improve the article and this section.

Some of the (original) material here could possibly be too specific/specialised, while other content is suitable but could benefit from rewriting into shorter sentences and with simpler language

Roles of HA in Viral entry
As structural rearrangements and membrane fusion (next section) are key processes governing viral entry, I suggest considering merging these two sections - perhaps (i) structural rearrangements (ii) membrane fusion as subheadings under Roles of HA in viral entry.

Similar to above, this section would benefit from pictures too.

HA2 Structural rearrangements
The material here is new content not found in the original article - a number of suggestions: 1. diagrams and pictures would likely be needed to visualise the various regions and movements here 2. Might require a quick introduction explaining that there is currently two hypothesised mechanisms of membrane fusion earlier in the section. 3. Trim back sentence lengths

The structural determination methods (CD, X-ray etc) could also fit under Structure. An idea for your consideration

Development of HA Targeting Flu etc
I think your title here is better than the original. Would you consider "Antiviral treatments targeting HA" as a more concise heading here?

The last paragraph (other inhibitors) - perhaps more specific examples from that review could be added here. Arbidol is a specific small molecule inhibitor, but the other dot points (small molecules, natural compounds etc) are quite broad. Also, do you mean natural products (vs natural compounds?)

Review checklist
'''Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?''' I think everything is relevant, well done. Minor points - define how antigens relate to the subtypes, and clarify concept of the 2 hypotheses of membrane fusion '''Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?''' Everything good here Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I think the content is well-balanced '''Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?''' Refs 9 and 10 and 21, 8 and 15, 20 and 11 are duplicates. Some refs simply require date checks. Checked links - they are all ok '''Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?''' Majority of facts supported by very reputable references. Other places requiring references are marked with reminder for refs; excellent. All content neutral. '''Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?''' Seems ok here Mglutamate (talk) 13:49, 21 August 2018 (UTC)