Wikipedia:Peer review/Protein Allergy/archive1

Protein allergy
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I am completing this article for a class project with another user. We would appreciate any feedback and comments anyone has to offer!

Thanks, Clarker1 (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: This is a good start and an important topic, here are some suggestions for improvement. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:LEAD - the lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article, and can be up to four paragraphs long. I do not think the current lead is a true summary of the article. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but I also do not work on the lead too much until I am reasonably happy with the rest of the article (although it is read first, a good lead is written last).
 * The red link in the lead should be to GTP-binding protein
 * One of the major problems with the article is a lack of references in places. Many parts are nicely cited, but others have no references at all - for example the first paragraph of Symptoms, as well as the Skin symptoms and Gastrointestinal symptoms sections. The table in Avoidance is also not clearly cited.
 * Per WP:HEAD, subsections should avoid repeating the name of a higher section, so "Skin symptoms" could just be "Skin" (since it is already in the symptoms section, this should be clear).
 * Refereces used need to be reliable sources - I am not sure what came from Wikimedia.org (listed as a source) but it is not considered reliable. I am also doubtful that foodallergy.org and highproteinfoods.net are reliable sources.
 * There are a lot of External links - several of them look like they might be better used as references
 * The article as written has many short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections - these break up the flow of the prose. In most cases these should be combined with other sections or paragraphs, or perhaps expanded.
 * My main concern with the article is the focus. Much of the article seems to be more about how proteins work in general, with little apparent relevance to allergies. WHile it is good to have some information on proteins in the article as background and to help understand the topic, I think the current version gives too much weight to the basics of proteins - see WP:WEIGHT
 * Continuing with the focus problem, it seems to me that there is not really a basic explanation of how allergies occur / what triggers them. The phrase "immune system" only appears once in the article - if there is a bit too much on the basics of proteins, there is much too little on the immune system and how allergies work in general.
 * The toolbox in the upper right hand corner here has some useful things to look at too. The automated tips lists several things that could be improved. There is one disambiguation (dab) link that needs to be corrected.
 * The external link checker finds one dead link and others that may have problems.
 * The alt text tool shows no alt text (for people who cannot see the images - see WP:ALT)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are several featured articles in the Biology and Health and Medicine sections at Featured articles that may be good models

Note article is at Protein allergy Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 11:23, 29 April 2010 (UTC)