User talk:Rcalleja/sandbox

Anti mRNA oligonucleotides Peer Review 1
First paragraph should be the “introduction” instead of the summary. AMOs are design to interfere with miRNA and so a direct link to “miRNA” on wiki is needed. AMOs can hybridize to miRNA and sterically block interactions. Both of these mechanisms should be mentioned in the introduction. The current introduction only mentions that AMOs steric block miRNA. This paper talks about AMOs in more detail AMOs-http://www.nature.com/mtna/journal/v2/n8/full/mtna201346a.html. The authors should also mention in the introduction that AMOs are used as therapeutics. Over expression, under expression or aberrations in miRNA can be lead to diseases. However, whether AMOs can be used to treat diseases due to any of theses conditions is not clearly mentioned. If AMOs can be used to any of these, it should be clearly explained. Another unaddressed question is whether AMOs can hybridize to other noncoding RNAs.

Its good to mention about both first generation and second generation AMOs in general. The paragraph under “disease” should be added to the introduction directly. Whether AMO is a novel treatment is not clear. Are there any drawbacks of using AMOs as therapeutics?

"By minimizing overexpression with AMOs and fixing underexpression with reinsertions of missing genes, some of these genetic diseases can be fixed or at least minimize their symptom” is a different application of AMOs. It seems to integrate with genes rather than hybridize to miRNA. Therefore, this should be mentioned as another application of AMOs.

"Many human diseases have been found to have some expression involving miRNA”. Here, it should be corrected as aberrations or alterations in expression levels of miRNA leads to many diseases such as….etc. "By targeting cells affected with improper miRNA expression, the normal balance of the expression can be restored by using AMOs”. This sentence seems pretty confusing and could be omitted. Disease section is good to be changed as therapeutics. Also under therapeutics, the author needs to talk more about miRNA and then mention how AMOs are used to…”. For an example in Neurogeneration, its good to start with something like "AMOs have been applied to study miRNA level and activity in neurogenesis" and then proceed to further explain their application.

How AMOs are delivered into cells needs to be mentioned. Also how successful treatments are, should be addressed.

Scristie (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions from ChemLibrarian
Good work! A few more suggestions here.

1. I fixed your link on the course page to the original article page. Just want to let you know that the link you posted didn't work because of different capitalization of the word. It should be  if you'd like to keep the H capitalized in your text.

2. When you are ready to move your article to the real article page, you don't need the "Summary" section heading. That paragraph is just the lead section.

3. As you see that the figure you used doesn't show up any more. Looks like your syntax looks right. But just could not find the images you refer to on the Wikimedia Commons site. Please make sure you have the right to post the image. An image directly form a publication is protected by copyright of the publisher and it's unlikely you can upload it here. I followed the link appeared there now and it seems like to be the case for your image. It muse have been deleted due to copyright issue. Please let me know if you need additional help. Besides the picture tutorial page mentioned by the other reviewer, you can also watch the video tutorial below.

4. If you don't have anything under the Detection section, please just delete the section.

5. You did not have many internal links to other Wikipedia articles for terms and jargon in your addition. e.g. cancers, muscular diseases ... Please add some internal links as you can.

Hope it helps. Please let me know if you have any questions. ChemLibrarian (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Anti mRNA oligonucleotides Peer Review 1
WIKIPEDIA PROJECT – PEER REVIEW

Content Is the introductory section accessible for non-experts?

For the most part the introductory section is accessible for non-experts. However, in the last sentence of the first paragraph “Understanding the miRNA sequences involved in these diseases can allow us to use anti microRNA Oligonucleotides to disrupt pathways that lead to the expression of symptoms for these diseases” ,I am not sure how you express a symptom. This last sentence should be phrased differently. I would also like to add that usually the first paragraph is the introduction and having a summary as a first paragraph might confuse some readers.

Do the contents of each section justify its length?

The contents of the section do justify their lengths. However, the last paragraph on Neurogeneration could be expanded on a bit more. It seems like the author has stopped midway to an idea. The could maybe add a concluding sentence to sort of rap up the paragraph.

Are all the important terms/concepts linked to their respective Wikipedia pages for further reference?

The term “exonuclease attack”, “downregulated” and “neurogenesis" could be linked to its respective pages. Are the highlighted examples appropriate?

Yes the highlighted examples of the diseases are very appropriate to their topic. Is the content duplicative of any other content already on Wikipedia?

The content is present on wikipedia but the authors have done a good job at not duplicating any of the information.

Figures

Are the figures original and of high quality?

The link of the figure does not work and it not viewable.

Are the figures informative and add to the text?

There is no figure but the comment underneath where the figure should be states “An illustration of the different chemical modifications given to AMOs in order to detect their effectiveness and concentration inside of cells”. This is very informative and adds to the text.

Are the Chemdraw structures chemically accurate, aligned, and easy to read?

There are no chemdraw structures.

References

Are the references complete (≥ 10)?

Yes there are more then 10 and the reference are complete.

Are the references inclusive of non-journal sources?

Yes there are non-journal as well as journal sources.

Overall Presentation

Provide a short summary of the entire content/figures/references, highlighting both what the group did well and well as what still needs to be improved.

The overall presentation of the wikipedia topic was well written. I think the group just needs to fix a few minor flaws that I mentioned. They needs to add a few more links to some of the vocabulary that the general audience might not understand such as “exonuclease attack”, “downregulated” and “neurogenesis”. Also they needs to add figure or fix the link that they have posted on their page since it does not work when you click on it. The references look well written and seem to be in the right format.

Olaneli (talk)olaneli

RESPONSE:

In response to the review, we have decided that we will rewrite our introduction to be more of an overview instead of it being a summary, as we can see how this is confusing. Our wording in the paragraph will be reworked to be more easily understood as well as give a larger overview of why these are important as well as their uses. We are also planning on lengthening our Neurogenesis paragraph as well as adding a detection paragraph further explaining how anti-miRNA Oligonucleotides are detected and their expression analyzed within the body. We will also reread our page to make sure that we have linked all the Wikipages that we need to. As for our figures in the project, we believe that they are copyright protected images from Journals, which is why we did not insert them initially. Therefore, we will are planning on adding in original images instead of the ones that we were going to add at this time.

Rcalleja — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olaneli (talk • contribs) 20:14, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

GSI Comments
Hi Rcalleja,

Thank you for your work on this page. Please consider the points made by you reviewers when finishing your edits. Great job!

Elizabeth — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChemStudent24601 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 28 October 2014 (UTC)