Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/JHU MolBio Ogg 2013/Group 81E

Group 81E
This is the Wikipedia page for 410.602 Molecular Biology, Spring, 2013, group 81E. This group will be working on the article Pluripotency.

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; rationale for selecting an article; etc.

Please create a new section here for each of those assignments.

Initial article assessments from Vdiaz3
Immunolabeling What has been written under this article so far is easy to follow—however lacking in heavily content. This would be in part one of the reasons why it is still classified as a stub. As of now it serves as a good starting point to develop and add to so that it is even more usable and beneficial. This article could also use some additional images and illustrations to help make the points on immunolabeling clear. Sections introducing and detailing several of the labeling techniques would add good flow and go from being very general to providing specifics. Most of the external links are relevant but there is no original research and also lacks in-line citations.

Pluripotency The pluripotency article is a subtopic within a broader article that covers related aspects of the topic. The pluripotency section is very brief and can be built upon. There are in-line citations and in text links. There is also a relevant image and the material is presented in a neutral way. Lacking material and important details.

Initial article assessments from aaron.aude
Lysogenic Cycle Although the Lysogenic Cycle article is written in a manner one can understand, the contents largely lack references. As such, WikiPedia has classified the article in the stub status. For a topic as complex as this, only three references are given. The article is not as broad as it could be, and in fact lacks the context a reader would expect to grasp this subject in the context of DNA replication, recombination and bacteriophage history. The article does include a diagram, which helps contextualize the lysogenic and lytic cycles. The article does not include summary or contents section, which could help readers better understand the material. Finally, this article does not appear to have much dialogue on talk, only a few editors have made suggestions.

Reading frame The Reading frame article has better structure and content over the Lysogenic cycle article, but is also considered stub status by WikiPedia. This article is lacking in references, and based on the talk page for the article, definitions are largely lacking within the article. References provided are valid, but still vague. It is good to see there is a 'see also' section, as this provides context for the user to better understand what a reading frame is.

Article selection rationale
Our group chose the article Pluripotency for several reasons. First, both of the two team members found the topic interesting and intriguing; it sparked both members’ curiosity and compelled both to look into and investigate the topic further. For example, there is interest in iPS (induced pluripotency) and its relationship to an adult somatic cell to stem cell-like conversion.

The group is also interested in pluripotency because the topic is also quite relevant, current and has far reaching applications in fields of basic research and applied medicine. To this end, there is interest in the medical application of regeneration therapy and potential benefits it brings to patients.

Lastly, the group is interested in pluripotency because the article has room for improvement. For such an interesting article it is very low on rich content and detailed information. For example, the article doesn’t provide detail about the molecular biology of cells, genetics and relevant content about differentiation. Our group believes we have a good opportunity to build content in this article, learn about content contribution and bring the article’s score up in the process.

Unit 9 progress report
Most of our contributions were prose but also included the following: 1. Summary section: Simplified it, corrected it 2.  Multipotency section: Started to reformat 3. Additional references added

Unit 14 progress report
Prose contributions to the various sections as well as edits to the introductory section and correction of previously noted citation issues. Significant help was received from all reviewers; WikiPedia editor Keilana in particular offered a very thorough and useful review. Aaron.aude (talk) 04:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)