Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/JHU MolBio Ogg 2012/Section 83/Group 83F

Group 83F
This is the Wikipedia page for 410.602 Molecular Biology, 2012, group 83F. This group will be working on the DSCAM article.

Use the talk page here to collaborate as a group, when learning to use and navigate Wikipedia, assessing articles, or for any other topic.

Use this page (not the talk page) for article assessments (optional, see Unit 5); rationale for selecting an article (Unit 6); progress reports (Units 9 and 12); and the final report (Unit 14). Please create a new section here for each of those assignments.

Unit 6 - Article Selection Rationale
Our group (83F) has selected the article DSCAM for review and improvement. An abbreviation for Down Syndrome Cell Adhesion Molecule, this Wikipedia article seems to be an excellent example of a topic that is very relevant to Molecular Biological research. In looking at the main page for the article, there is very little information provided; mainly just a brief definition and introduction to the subject. While the article is only in the beginning developmental stage, it is also not just a “blank canvas”. It does seem to have a good start on the use of some notes and references that we believe our group could build on and possibly analyze further for more information relating to the subject. This will also give us a good learning tool for citation and referencing, as it can often be a bit confusing.

On the Talk page of the article, it is noted that it is considered to be "Stub-class" on the quality scale. This simply means that is just barely started and has vast room for expansion and improvement. This will allow our group to develop the article in a manner that best suits the topic and in accordance with a sort of “best practices” approach as we learn to edit in Wikipedia. The last time the page was edited was in 2007. Upon doing some very basic initial research on the internet, our group believes that there are many good resources available for us to use in order to create a more informative article.

On the topic of DSCAM in general, our group agrees that any information and/or research dealing with Down syndrome can always be quite interesting and will help keep us intrigued as we learn throughout the semester long project. Specifically, we have briefly discussed in our assessments (Unit 5) some areas of interest (i.e. genetics, abnormalities in the cell and homology across species, just to name a few) that we would like to learn more about and use to expand the article.

In short, our group agrees that the DSCAM article is a good choice for improvement and it is a topic that the three of us have a marked interest in learning more about as we work through the project over the course of the semester.

Unit 9 Progress Report
Upon selection of our article topic, our group has worked to develop an efficient strategy to compile and present relevant information from our research. Multiple web sources and scientific journal articles provide reputable resources for our research of the DSCAM gene and proteins.

We discussed as a team whether to address only the gene (DSCAM) or both the gene and the protein (DSCAM/Dscam) in our article. After looking at different articles on Wikipedia, along with reviewing multiple journal articles on the topic, we decided that we should follow the prototypical gene-protein article structure, as the protein will shed further light on the functional analysis of the molecule in the biological system and the consequences of their mutation.

Since we have started with a “stub-class” article, the article itself has very few sections to structure and/or outline the topic. Therefore, our group decided that the best way to improve it would be to start with the layout that focuses on the basic properties of DSCAM /Dscam and modify the sections to produce a well structured and informative article that is relevant to our research findings. This layout includes sections with information on the functional and structural properties of DSCAM gene and proteins, their clinical and scientific significance, as well as their role and distribution in the biological system, just to name a few.

We started the investigation of our topic by finding articles that could be used as an initial guide for our progress. This included a few articles about the immunoglobulin family, which have some very similar functions as DSCAM. By collaborating with our fellow classmates, we recently found a Wikipedia page that provides a structural guide for articles that contain a general “gene and protein” type of article outline; we then decided that this outline/structure suits the approach that we want to take for our article topic almost perfectly.

As first-time Wikipedia editors, our group has been a little cautious about making edits on the main article page; so far. Therefore, we decided to use our group Talk page for the initial editing of the article. This enables us to further build our Wikipedia editing skills and easily collaborate as a group with ease of any side discussions and comments. We feel that once we have mastered the Wikipedia article editing concepts, transition to the main article page will be easier and more effective as a group.

As for citations on Wikipedia, we were facing some difficulty in correctly and timely creating references with footnotes in-line. Upon research of the topic, we have found a few web resources that have enabled us to more easily create such references and ensure Vancouver style accuracy. In order to avoid research and editing overlap, the group has agreed to distribute the subsections of the article among the three of us for research. We will be working on summarizing and adding to each designated section on our respective individual sandboxes and then later compile them together so that they can be further edited and posted to the main article page. So far, we have worked on the functions of the DSCAM gene using about 10 articles as sources along with review of many relevant journal article abstracts.

We now feel that because we have some structural and content issues figured out, we are well on our way to continue improving the DSCAM article.

Unit 12 Progress Report
As our group has been working on the DSCAM article the last few weeks, we have made some great improvements and additions to the page. Thus far, we have been able to add multiple new sections with relevant content for each. We were initially a bit hesitant to begin editing the actual article, but once we became “bold”, as Klortho suggested to do, it enabled us to become much more comfortable with the wiki editing process. Prior to making any major edits to the article, we posted a note on the DSCAM Talk page to inform any other wiki editors, that may be watching the article, that we would be trying to make improvements to it in the weeks to come. Unfortunately, we did not receive any responses or advice from other editors that were watching the article but this is probably due to the fact that the article was considered to be “Stub-class” and of “Low importance” for the project. Additionally, prior to our editing the article, the last time that it was modified was in May 2012. There was one editor (BG19bot), not from our class, that made a few changes to the in-line citations, stating that they needed to be after the period of each sentence. This was beneficial to ensure our article is structured correctly for the Wikipedia style. For the couple of weeks remaining in the class, our to-do list is as follows:


 * •	We have a bit more content to add to the article, and possibly a few more sections depending on how we feel would be the best way to incorporate it.


 * •	We will take a really good look at the content we have incorporated into the article and ensure that section headings describe it well. We will also make sure the sections are in a sort of order to make the article “flow” from one to the next.


 * •	Once we have added all content to the article, we can go through each respective section and add some “wiki links” to other articles that may be helpful. We have done this for some sections currently in the article, but we will also be sure to take another look.


 * •	If we feel that it would be relevant, we may try to add an image or two; depending on if we feel that an image can be beneficial to add value to a given section.


 * •	Lastly, once we have all structured sections and content added to the article, we will review it for overall grammar correctness and ease of reading. Reviewers from our class have made some great suggestions on some things to look for and areas that may need to be clarified a bit.  The peer reviewers from our class did an excellent job in giving us some really great advice on improving the article.  We will be sure to take advantage of it!

The list above may seem like a lot to accomplish, however now that we have been working more on the article, and at wiki editing in general, it is very doable to complete in the next two weeks of the course.

Our group was assigned the Homeotic selector gene article, that is being edited/improved by group 83E, for our peer review input. Below is a summary from each of us for the reviews we have done for their article.


 * •	Rex – In my first review, the group had not yet added their content to the Homeotic selector gene article. However, they had a very good draft compiled on their respective group talk page.  I suggested they go ahead and add their draft to the actual article and begin making edits on it.  Additionally, I shared a couple of very useful citing tools to enable them to easily make some in-line citations while editing.


 * In my second peer review, I tried to specifically note some areas in the article that could use some improvement editing. I selected some sentences that needed to be clarified grammatically that would enable them to flow and be better understood by a reader.  I also suggested that they could maybe create a section for some definitions and switch the order of sections a bit to allow a reader to understand some of the more complex terms before reading further into the article.  Lastly, I suggested that they try to add some “wiki links” where appropriate to tie to other Wikipedia articles and to possibly add some more in-line citations for their reference sources.  To view the full reviews, please see the group 83E talk page.


 * •	Susana – The original article of the homeotic selector gene had substantial content to begin with, which I pointed out in my first review. There were figure descriptions but no figures added at the time. I suggested that they concentrate on adding the figures. I also gave them a personal tip on how to cite the sources using the wikipedia citation tab.


 * After reading the group's follow-up on Rex's review, I learned that the group was planning to add more information to the topic. The article however, still needed a better layout. In my second review, I concentrated on pointing out some of the major things that I saw lacking in their article. These included (1) correction on some minor grammar mistakes (2) better article layout and headings (3) more citations with recommendation on what they may use to 'track' the sources of some of the existing information written by previous editors of their article.


 * •	Rubayath – The group 83E already have a lot of content compiled ready for editing which is a great thing. On reading their article it seemed like they need a thorough 'read' of the article in order to correct the grammatical and punctuation errors. I also picked out a sentence to put to the group's attention to the areas that need the most improvements. Their description section, according to me was too "broad" and therefore it would be a good idea if they could incorporate more on the gene itself. Like Rex and Susan, I also advised them on a better layout of the whole article since right now it is a little hard to follow for a reader. Making a new section for definitions and placing the figure number and descriptions under the images rather than in a new section would make the article much better. And they also need to define the abbreviations for the terms they use before they actually use it. I am hoping that the list I provided on the article talk page serves as a good editing tool for the group.

In conclusion, we feel that we have made some very good improvements to our DSCAM article as well as some useful review tips for group 83E's Homeotic selector gene article. Finally, we feel that we have a strong plan to complete article editing/improvement for DSCAM in the remaining two weeks of class!

Unit 14 - Final Progress Report
Throughout this semester we have been steadily working on improving the DSCAM article. We have gone from being completely unaware of how to contribute/edit in Wikipedia, to being very fluent and comfortable with the process. Unfortunately we have not had any input from Wikipedia editors outside of our class; however, we would definitely like to acknowledge the efforts of Group 83C (Diane, Jamie & Tony) on their extremely helpful reviews. They were an invaluable asset when it came to specific sections of the article that needed to be improved along with sharing beneficial resources to add/use during the editing process. Our sincere thanks to them! :-)

Below is a very simplified summary list of the tasks we have completed for improving our article: Probably the easiest way to view the improvements/additions/edits we have made over the course of the semester to the DSCAM article can be seen when comparing the current version with that of the last updated version prior to this class (18 May 2012). For convenience, we have inserted a link here to compare: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=DSCAM&diff=cur&oldid=493235271 While we understand there is obviously still room for improvements and additions, we also know that is the beauty of Wikipedia…..the editing never has to end, even if the class does! :-) Thank you for the opportunity to learn in this exciting new way and to be contributors to the wiki-community!
 * Added multiple new sections and sub-sections including the following: History/Discovery, DSCAM Gene, Functions (Immunity and Regulation of Synaptognesis), Interatctions and Clinical Significance.
 * Added a large amount of relevant content to the article in the appropriate aforementioned sections and sub-sections.
 * Added a diagram to help explain alternative splicing and a table of homologs, along with descriptive sections explaining each.
 * Used in-line citations throughout the article with the addition of many new references. This adds credibility to the overall article as well as provides easy access to expert sources for anyone that needs to find more information on a specific part of the topic.
 * Used wiki-links throughout the article to ensure that a reader can understand the subject matter and easily reference questionable topics within the wiki community.
 * Lastly, tried to improve the grammar and overall readabilty (flow) of the article by making some corrections to what was previously inserted along with trying to carefully plan how to most suitably add subject matter content.