Wikipedia:Peer review/Ice-minus bacteria/archive1

I am looking for advice on how to make the article better.Amkered 23:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At a glance:

Lose the list (convert to prose)
Add inline citations for anything likely to be challenged or otherwise in need of citation, assertions of fact, conclusions etc.
I really don't think the intro provides enough context, (I remember thinking that when I saw it on DYK too).
Expansion: So how does this all work? How does it "win out"?
- Further, how does a farmer introduce it to their crop?
Wouldn't historical perspective be better as just "History"?
Talk about its use more. When? Where? How often? Why or why not?
When all is said and done lead should conform to WP:LEAD.
An actual image of the bacteria would be wonderful for the upper right hand corner of the page.
Watch for tense agreement as here: found that when this particular bacterium was introduced to plants where it is originally absent
Talk more about the differences between the minus and plus.
Are there any applicable WikiProjects? They might have guidelines regarding what to include and what not to.

Hope that helps. Happy editing and good luck with a most interesting entry. IvoShandor 09:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inline citations = good thing. Wikipedia:Footnotes can help.
The opening is too jargon-y and doesn't indicate the underlying importance of the strain (that it provides some frost resistance). In fact, the clear link to frost resistance doesn't occur until the "Economic importance" section--far too late.
Wikipedia isn't a how-to guide, so there's no need to explain the production of the strain.
Has it been used beyond any government field tests?
The gypsy moth stuff is too tangental. A link to introduced species or something would prove more effective. — Scientizzle 23:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]