User talk:Laureny13/sandbox

The "Microbial Loops" article, although somewhat informative, lacks a significant number of reliable sources, demonstrating the article’s lack of notability. It also does not follow proper citation conventions - much of its content contains unreferenced material and assumptions not backed by evidence. Although the article’s one referenced source does originate from a reputable Marine Ecology publication, it is outdated, published in January 1983. In order to support current research and perspectives, more recent publications and reviewed journals should be utilized - for example, “The Microbial Loop - 25 years later” (Fenchel, T., 2008). Under every subheading, numerous missing references to brief quotations are obvious - although some are included in the bibliography, those quotations remain unattributed, or are closely paraphased. One latter sentence also makes an assumption that “early work…concluded their [the bacteria] role to be minimal”, which is an example of an unverifiable claim. Furthermore, a balanced coverage of various sections is absent - it is evident that the length of the ‘History’ subtopic overpowers the ‘Factors controlling the microbial loop’ section, thus downplaying the importance of the factors involved. In addition, the reference from 1983 expanded upon an equal balance of topics relating to microbial loops; similarly, the article should also delve into the same depth to include subtopics, such as bacterial biomass and production, and conditions where bacterial growth is favoured. Overall, the lack of in-depth content contributes to the failure of the article’s quality of writing and lack of references, which remains unaddressed - existing conversations have only spoken to trivial details such as definitions. --Laureny13 (talk) 05:09, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Currently, the article “Bacterial Gliding” clearly conceptualizes the key ideas, however, it barely scratches the surface. Although this topic is highly notable - reflecting quality and independent sources with five references available - the article itself does not any show semblance whatsoever of having a defined, clear structure containing a brief lead section, several headings, and subheadings. More importantly, there is an absence of detailed examples of bacteria that utilize gliding as a means of motility, despite multiple reliable sources this article was based on. The article gives a good start to the topic - it does provide a core definition of bacterial gliding, how it differs from other manners of motility, as well as a couple of trivial examples of bacteria who utilize gliding. The existing information is verifiable by somewhat recent and correctly cited references, however, some references are 10-15 years old and may not accurately mirror the work of current research. Though the article is noticeably incomplete, with examples that are missing clarification, this article merits significant improvement. Gliding is a crucial aspect of locomotion - albeit the less understood form of motility compared to other types involving flagella, pili or filaments, it still is an important subject that allows microbiologists to discern the differences in motility mechanisms and how it is distinguished from non-motility factors, such as Brownian motion.


 * The article appears to have only one short, untitled section that houses both the definition and examples. As such, this one section needs to be expanded to create independent subsections that are individually of encyclopedic quality, and have balanced coverage. This includes (but is not limited to), as shown in more recent research papers, elaborating on the known mechanisms of gliding, in what environments it takes place in, current models of effective gliding in various bacteria, and illustrating how gliding is a recognizably distinct method of locomotion. For example, possible subsections could allude to various phyla that display gliding, different appendages that have been observed, or speed and efficiency of gliding in comparison to other forms of motility. Ultimately, although this article falls short of being of encyclopedic quality, it needs more work so that the audience - as well as those in the field of microbial ecophysiology - can have a clearer understanding of every type of known motility and what makes gliding unique. --Laureny13 (talk) 22:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Lauren Yi's Peer Review
-The edit involves the addition of paragraphs and the expansion of the information present in the article. The definition of the gliding motility is provided and the environment types where bacteria glide is mentioned that are not in the original article. Addition of examples to the common apparatuses that facilitate bacterial motility help with differentiating gliding motility from other types of motility.

- Addition of new primary sources was made, however, from the middle of paragraph one until the middle of paragraph three only had one reference source. Attributions to different reference sources that are all primary would strengthen the validity of the statements made. Moreover, there could be the addition of hyperlinks to twitching motility and quorum sensing for readers with less background information.

- The writing has a formal tone, is concise and uses simple words. However, correction of grammatical errors and changes to the choice of wording should be made for optimum clarity. An example would be the sentence “Although gliding...its surroundings.” The emphasis on the fact that even though there are different mechanisms of gliding bacteria employ, this type of motility is employed in environments with common features, could be made in a more clear way.

- Errors in the information provided regarding the motility of the species M. xanthus should be addressed. A-motility is said to a type of motility M. xanthus employs that is not considered gliding, but a source used states the opposite. That article also regards the second type of motility of M. Xanthus as gliding, which is both supported and contradicted by different articles. This seems to be due to the slightly different definitions of gliding motility made in different sources, and can also be addressed in the article. This would also help with the overall neutrality of the article.

Ayserdo (talk) 02:30, 9 November 2017 (UTC)