| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've just created this and there don't seem to be any other pages dedicated to describing a whole enzyme superfamily. I hope that, with input of other users, that this could reach good article status and act as a template for further superfamily pages.
Thanks, Evolution and evolvability (talk) 18:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Comments from LT910001
editFisrtly, thanks for improving this article! I'm not sure if it would be ready for GA just yet. Unfortunately I can't give very specific advise, as I only know about enzymes in general terms, but things that could be improved for GA include:
- Fixing the large image size that runs over the size of the screen (you use this below already, for the other large image), and moving this to the end of the article (this may be personal preference, however the majority of panoramas are provided lower, so that text can be seen at the start)
- I don't know enough to comment about what should be added, but this article feels very short and you could perhaps expand it by adding some sentences explaining or elaborating about the structure or evolution of the virus.
- The 'evolution' section doesn't make reference to the evolution of the enzymes
- The evolution section has been expanded and improvedT. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 05:43, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- A 'history' section could be provided to enhance broadness.
- Added, with etymology subsection T. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 10:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- The lead could be lengthened to help reflect the article's content a bit more.
- Expanded, contains info from more of the sections T. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 10:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- All "e.g." should be removed, and the parentheses integrated into the text. If these are retained, specific examples of which bacteria/viruses could be mentioned.
- Making sure that all paragraphs have citations.
- Sorted out reference-less paragraphs T. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 10:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
I hope that helps. Having written these comments, it feels like quite a lot. These are just some suggestions, so feel free to take them with a grain of salt. It's great that you've been working on this article and I wish you all the best in your wiki-travels. Kind regards, LT910001 (talk) 03:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for the input, it's exactly the sort of help I needed. Even though I've seen so many wikipedia articles, starting to edit is still a learning curve. T. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 10:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program
editSuggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
- If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
- You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. [?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
- Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
Allpigs are pink, so we thought ofa number ofways to turn them green.”
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]