User talk:Ptgalfas/sandbox

Caitlin's Peer Review
This article covers a wide array of topics on the P2Y receptor, not just explaining what the receptor is, but also why it is important in normal human biochemistry as well as why certain receptors are potential drug targets. This quality is very appropriate for Wikipedia and has been done in a way that is not overwhelming.

The lead section is brief and gives enough information that someone browsing the article would know if they have found what they are looking for. I think it could be improved by switching the last sentence (about where P2Y receptors are found and what they do) and the next to last sentence (about which P2Y receptors have been cloned). When I originally read the article I was confused by the statement "have been cloned in humans" before I understood that these were human/mammalian proteins.

The section on structure is very well laid out, follows a logical order, and gives enough detail for the reader to understand comparisons. At the same time, it gives the readers brevity by choosing not to explain terms such as "class A" and "G protein-coupled receptors" and instead links to the corresponding Wikipedia articles. I think this is great as if keeps the reader focused on the P2Y receptor without derailing into other topics, but still gives the reader easy access to explanations of terms they may not understand. I would be interested in seeing an example of how the protein dimers act differently than the monomers in order to get a reference for how drastic that change might be. I would also be interested in an example of the structural irregularities mentioned in the next to last paragraph of this section, but it end up being too distracting and an interested reader can easily find the source of the study.

The coupling section was the most confusing section for me in this article. I appreciate the explanation for the gaps in numbering, but I think it needs a source at the end. I'm interested to know what the receptors were if they were not in fact P2Y receptors which could presumably be found in the corresponding source(s).

The clinical significance section is a great way to end this article. After the sections on structure and coupling which focus on the individual receptor, this section gives the reader a look at bigger picture applications of the protein as a whole. As in previous sections, I would like an example of why P2Y2 is a potential drug target for cystic fibrosis. What about it would help to treat the disease and are GPCRs also being considered? This may suggest which regions of the protein, if any particular one, makes the receptor a good drug target when compared to the similar or dissimilar structural domains of GPCRs. Again the citation is there to allow the reader access to the study, but I felt like the other two examples give the reader some idea as to why they make good targets (regulator of immune response, anti-platelet drug).

All sources are functional and come from a variety of reliable journals. The only source that caused any trouble was the book at source 3, but by typing ISBN into google before the number, it was easy to find. I find the length of the article to be generally appropriate with the structure section being the largest, although I would be interested in reading a little more in the coupling section. I very much like the idea of a concepts section at the top underneath the illustration, but I do wish the article gave more information on P2Y's function in those concepts (such as metabolism). While I don't think this needs to be its own section, a few sentences of a specific metabolic function could give the article an extra boost. Overall this is a good article, and please let me know if there's any questions about what I said in this review.

Chanson36 (talk) 19:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)