Template:Did you know nominations/Early 35 kDa protein
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 12:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Early 35 kDa protein
edit- ... that the viral Early 35 kDa protein is a universal inhibitor of programmed cell death or apoptosis?
Created by Shinryuu (talk). Self nominated at 21:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC).
New and long enough. Clinical significance section needs a ref, otherwise within policy. QPQ not needed. Spot checks reveal no close paraphrasing. Hook is boring; I think one about its potential use in gene therapy would be more interesting. Just needs the extra ref and a new hook to pass. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 20:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)- Comment: I've added an in-line citation to the section about apoptosis. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm currently on vacation but will address these issues as soon as I'm back. Thanks for reviewing! Shinryuu (talk) 15:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Shinryuu: This nomination is still outstanding (and has been outstanding for over a month). Recommend that it should be closed soon if the author doesn't respond with the recommended changes. Prioryman (talk) 06:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I added the references myself. The article itself is good to go, and I suggest the following hook. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 16:04, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that the viral Early 35 kDa protein may be useful in gene therapy as a universal inhibitor of programmed cell death?
- @Antony-22: Thank you for adding the references, and sorry for not responding sooner, I was on vacation for a few weeks. I agree that the new hook is much better and hope that the updated article will now meet approval. Shinryuu (talk) 16:20, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
This article is new enough and long enough. The hook fact has an inline citation, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:56, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
