User talk:Taylor O'Neil/sandbox

Got to get moving--RJBazell (talk) 16:26, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Kapp Singer Peer Review
- In terms of formatting, make sure to use Wikipedia's built in formatting options from the drop-down menu for topic headings, etc. - "which prevent the HIV from infecting CD4" replace with "which prevented the HIV virus from infecting CD4." - in the above phrase, maybe explain what CD4 is - Might be a stretch, but it could be very helpful to try to find an image you're able to post on Wikipedia that could explain the technical processes of HIV resistance like CCR5 deletion of the delta 32 mutation - I think it would be very helpful to add a bit more context to the CCR5 deletion section about the significance of CCR5 deletion. The section feels a bit technical and jargon-y (at times a little hard to understand) and clarifying the reason the section is there at the beginning could help with a lot of these problems. - Obvously add on to the section headings you've outlined but haven't yet wrote (unless you're writing in a Google Doc or something and just need to transfer the text in) - Is there any current research about innate resistance to HIV? Are people who are innately resistant being studied to help develop treatments for HIV/AIDS? This could be good to think about for an additional section. - I think you have a super good start, the sections just need to be tied together a bit more so the article feels more cohesive. Kseses14 (talk) 00:13, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Pinecone1500 Peer Review
Maybe provide some background on what HIV is. I feel like you just dropped me in right away. It might be helpful to provide a few sentences that quickly review what HIV is and how it operates.

You should link key scientific words, for instance "receptor" "virus" should be linked to their corresponding Wikipedia pages. Basic stuff, I know, but its good practice.

You may want to add a citation on the sentence where you talk about the Oxford Researchers theory.

Nice job with the linking of terms in the CCR5 deletion section. Overall this section is very technical. It may be nice to have a sentence or two in the beginning that gives a very broad/generalized overview for lay-readers that have no idea what these concepts are.

The creation of genetic resistance section is quite well done. You may want to follow up the initial sentence on ART with a quick mention of what this is / how it works (i.e combination of three drugs the suppresses the ability of HIV to bind with cells etc.)

The first sentence in the Environmental factor section is a little confucing "While the delta mutation has been observed to prevent HIV in specific populations, it has shown little to no effect between healthy individuals and those who are infected with HIV among Iranian populations." You might want to break up the sentence into two, this could make it more clear.

It looks like the Nairobi Kenya Case is something your planning on adding to the environmental factors section. I think this is a good idea.

Overall, this is a very good article. You go into a lot of detail which is good. I do think that you should read through and try to summarize the concepts without the technical terminology. You could put these overview sentences in the beginning or at the end. That would really help to clarify and make the sections more cohesive. Nice job though!