- 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 Cielquiparle (talk) 15:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Fionula Brennan
- ... that Fionula Brennan's experiments revealed an unexpected "TNF-dependent cytokine cascade" that led to new therapies to treat rheumatoid arthritis? Source: "Brennan obtained the paradoxical result that blocking a single cytokine, TNF, totally abrogated IL-1 production within 2 to 3 days in seven consecutive RA operative samples ... This led to a new concept of the “TNF-dependent cytokine cascade.”[1]
- ALT1: ... that Fionula Brennan's experiments with cytokines led to new therapies to treat rheumatoid arthritis? Source: "Fionula’s most significant scientific contributions came from 1988, on understanding cytokine expression and regulation in rheumatoid joints." [2]
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kurnianingrat
Created by Zeromonk (talk). Self-nominated at 16:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fionula Brennan, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.
This is new enough, long enough, and carefully and neutrally written with extensive inline sourcing to appropriate scholarly sources. The text is sufficiently original, except that the second paragraph of the lead ("Brennan described the inhibitory effect...") is almost exactly the same as in the source: could this paragraph be rewritten, maybe spelling out some of the technical terms (although the existing wikilinks are very useful)? There's a which? tag on the vague phrase "many groups"; can we be more specific about what opposition cytokine therapy received? Better still, reword that sentence to say that cytokines didn't become mainstream for therapy at that point, without having to state who opposed them? I find the first suggested hook a bit overwhelming for a general audience; I much prefer ALT1. The hook is short enough, correctly phrased and supported in the article by the BMJ source. QPQ done. Just a couple of minor changes to make and this will be ready: thanks for explaining a difficult scientific topic and improving the coverage of women scientists on Wikipedia. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I've adjusted "which" text but not 2nd para of lead. Am full of Covid and unable to think how to rephrase such technical text. Please do make amendments. Zeromonk (talk) 09:21, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Zeromonk:. The second sentence was the last remaining issue, so I've rewritten that and the article now passes review. Nice work!
MartinPoulter (talk) 19:44, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Zeromonk:. The second sentence was the last remaining issue, so I've rewritten that and the article now passes review. Nice work!
- I've adjusted "which" text but not 2nd para of lead. Am full of Covid and unable to think how to rephrase such technical text. Please do make amendments. Zeromonk (talk) 09:21, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
