AFP has an interesting natural history and is also an important tumor marker. I think it is one of the oldest tumor markers. Its natural history makes its use as a tumor marker somewhat complex, particularly for surveilance of
teratoma and other kinds of
germ cell tumor in infants. Most pages about tumor markers are inadequate; I'd like to improve this page in part as a model for the others.
Una Smith 04:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)reply
I think this domain is one of the most exciting discoveries to come out of MCB in recent decades. Its discovery and study has drastically altered the scientific concept of what life is and where it can survive, thereby renewing interest in the search for life elsewhere in the solar system. --
EncycloPetey 16:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)reply
This stubbiest of stubs is rated at high importance...as it should be. Cellular biomarkers are important in any study of individual cell types. I see a great potential for elaboration upon the biomarkers used in staining techniques, cell sorting, and identification of stem cells or cancer cells. —
Scientizzle 21:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)reply
This is an important topic (generation of biomass from CO2) covered by merely an uncategorized stub. It needs expansion and inclusion of carbon fixation mechanisms other than the Calvin cycle (e.g. in autotrophic microorganisms). A general discussion of carbon fixation capacity of the biosphere and technological methods would be informative in relation to the
Greenhouse effect and strategies to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere.
tameeria 18:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Considering how widely used this application is, I'm surprised that it is in such a disorganised state (although the initial history part is fairly well referenced). I think it is an important one to improve.
This subject, one of the fundamental topics in cell biology, is in sorry shape. This could easily be brought to featured status with just a little attention from our combined knowledge. –
ClockworkSoul 23:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)reply
For such a central subject this article is so bad that I would think it's a satire if I didn't know better. The main image actually has little pictures of chicken and cheese pointing into a cell to represent catabolism. This must be fixed! –
ClockworkSoul 19:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)reply
You have a knack for finding the really abominable ones :)
Opabinia regalis 02:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Oh, it's no so hard... I just go through our
worklist and pick out some of the red or orange ones. –
ClockworkSoul 16:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I just merged
Cell metabolism into
Metabolism, but I see little reason why the support here should not be transferred to that article if none object. I would also Supportmetabolism becoming the collaboration of the month.
Robotsintrouble 16:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
This is currently an especially stubby stub, despite being ranked as "top" importance on the
organization page. Needs lots of love. –
ClockworkSoul 22:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)reply
Keesiewonder 19:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC) A vote of pure faith and confidence until I'm more versed.reply
Comments
The connexin family of proteins are extremely important in biological processes, and especially in early development of embryos and cell differentiation. They are increasingly becoming a "hot topic" in molecular biology and it would be to the benifit of wikipedians everywhere to improve this page. JE.at.UWOU|T 19:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)reply
These two closely related articles might merit a merge, but are of critical importance to understand basic molecular evidence for evolution and the molecular biology tools for determing the functional attributes of a gene product. They currently have minimal text and references. —
Scientizzle 20:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Almost any protein article that talks about the protein's evolution or homologs will mention conserved sequences.
Forluvoft 22:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)reply
ww 17:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC) an article which has been awaiting informed cleanup for some time. The time has come!!reply
Comments
This article is perhaps more clinical than nominations here should be, but the underlying biological process is confused here. Most humans (and all who fast, deliberately or not) go ketotic. Normally so. Only diabetics (and only some of those) progress to keotacidosis. The usual mechanisms proposed for this are unconvincing. Some biochemical system rigor deserves to be injected here, if only to avoid wikiembarrassement.
ww 17:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)reply
— ReoON |
+++ 12:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC) (unlike in other events-improvements, I may contribute here (easilly))reply
Comments
Endosomes are very important cellular structures. The current stub suffers from a lack of images, sources & organziation. The prose is probably a little too dense for your average reader as well. —
Scientizzle 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)reply
ClockworkSoul 14:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC) – A borderline start/stub! We can't allow this state to continue! –
ClockworkSoul 14:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Comments
Topic of the 2007 Nobel Prize in Medicine and only a few paragraphs on Wikipedia...
tameeria (
talk) 05:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC) - P.S. In connection to this,
knockout mouse could also use some help... -
tameeria (
talk) 04:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
A very high-profile topic, and a subject of close study for nearly all undergraduate students in biology and biochemistry. It's already in pretty good shape, and with a bit of polishing, I think that we can get it up to a full FA status. –
ClockworkSoul 18:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Excellent suggestion! I was just reading/writing about this material yesterday.
Keesiewonder 13:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Interferons are major proteins of the immune system that are discussed in basic undergraduate immunology classes. Their use as medicines in recent years (e.g. beta-interferon) has also brought them into the spotlight of the general public. However, the
interferon article is in need of a huge overhaul, and has been tagged for clean up since June 2006. Maybe it's time to put a wee bit of
elbow grease to finally get this page to at least GA standard!!
~ Ciar ~(Talk to me!) 05:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Such an important class of molecules deserves more than a couple paragraphs. Much expansion could be used in the roles kinases play in signaling and regulation of proteins and other molecules. The mechanism of phosphorylation is unclear. Non-protein kinases get minimal attention and that should be rectified. —
Scientizzle 18:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)reply
This article, a staple biological education from the high school level and up, is a bit of a mess and really could use a bit of love. –
ClockworkSoul 14:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Additionally,
photosynthesis is a selection for the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools. With the number of eyeballs that see this article, we really need to clean it up. –
ClockworkSoul 15:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Nominated for the same reason as above, that the elucidation of the mechanisms of this complex the subject of the 2006
Nobel Prize in Chemistry. The current state of this article is also okay (rated as B class at the time of this post), but certainly can use more attention, especially with all of the current media focus on it. –
ClockworkSoul 14:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)reply
This article lacks any real information on the role & importance of saturated fats outside of dietary issues. It's a likely search term based on the current obesity epidemic, so it would be valuable to clean up this page. —
Scientizzle 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)reply
This article desperately needs development so could benefit enormously from a month's attention.
Nunquam Dormio 05:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)reply
There's no doubt that this article needs more work and I'm willing to do my part to get it up to snuff. -
Sloth Loves Chunk 05:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)reply
This article presently contains too many controversial statements and should not be article of the month.—The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
66.67.208.246 (
talk •
contribs).
I'm not sure our anonymous editor understands that this is a nomination for Collaboration of the Month--that is, an article to be improved from its current state by a group effort. Containing too many [uncited] "controversial statements" is one reason why this article might benefit from further attention. —
Scientizzle 06:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)reply
The topic is absolutely missing, there is nothing except the redirect to
Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Even there is virtually no condensed information about the T-DNA.
T cells are essential for immunity against pathogens and cancer, and drive autoimmunity. Yet absolutely nothing was written about the development of T cells in the thymocyte article. I spent quite a while writing the article, but it would be great to get others to help on it to make this essential immunology topic a featured article.
Sad mouse 23:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Also, most of the collaborations so far have been molecular, so it would be nice to have a cellular topic.
Sad mouse 01:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Topoisomerases are vital for cell replication. Every organism has at least 2 and they are currently being looked at for bacterial and cancer treatments.
SenorKristobbal 16:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)reply
(high importance article marked as needing attention since December 2006; fairly lengthy discussion page showing high interest but little recent editing of the article itself)
Boghog2 21:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This article is so lacking in any sort of information. I use tris every day, I bet it's the most used buffering system in Molecular biology. It also belongs to a family of buffers (I think they're called Best buffers?) We could link to all of them!
Adenosine | Talk 16:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)reply
A topical subject with top priority on MCB project that is clearly of interest to the general public, and yet it is still only at B quality. Has a lot of info in the article, with one or two editors trying to improve it, but needs a little love and understanding! Should really be an FA.
~ Ciar ~(Talk to me!) 06:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)reply
...especially given the anti-vaccine controversies out there. —
Scientizzle 20:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Vaccine is a medicine article which get more edits, I think getting attention in medicine portal to fix it and concentrate on other conceptual topics which are specific for MCB portal: like regulation, or cell signaling.—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Squidonius (
talk •
contribs)
That's quite a proposal, but looking over the articles they do clearly need quite a bit of love. Perhaps we can drop a message over at the newly formed
WP:WikiProject Genetics? –
ClockworkSoul 18:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)reply
(Fixed that link for ya) Thats really snazzy! Is it ready for prime time? –
ClockworkSoul 08:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I hate to say this... but one of my pet peeves is the misunderstanding of the
central dogma to mean DNA -> RNA -> protein, because inevitably someone follows this with "and reverse transcriptase violates the central dogma!" (It does not. The central dogma is about the directionality of information: it can go from nucleic acid to nucleic acid or protein, but cannot be transferred from protein to protein or protein to nucleic acid.) I worry this template would only promote this misinterpretation. Would it be possible to use another name for this template, eg. "gene expression"?
Madeleine✉✍ 13:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Sure, Dogma is as the template name as it is the most catchy word in Mol Bio (that is why F Crick incorrectly chose it). gene expression actually works better (less awesome though). Consider it changed. The template picture remains as it is (simple), if that is ok. --
Squidonius (
talk) 14:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I added the template to the various pages but I did little or no editing. I do not think major edits may be needed, so this may be dropped. --
Squidonius (
talk) 17:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Note: This article was COTM from April 2009 to February 2010. Review submitted. --
Firefly's luciferase (
talk) 07:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)reply
AFP has an interesting natural history and is also an important tumor marker. I think it is one of the oldest tumor markers. Its natural history makes its use as a tumor marker somewhat complex, particularly for surveilance of
teratoma and other kinds of
germ cell tumor in infants. Most pages about tumor markers are inadequate; I'd like to improve this page in part as a model for the others.
Una Smith 04:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)reply
I think this domain is one of the most exciting discoveries to come out of MCB in recent decades. Its discovery and study has drastically altered the scientific concept of what life is and where it can survive, thereby renewing interest in the search for life elsewhere in the solar system. --
EncycloPetey 16:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)reply
This stubbiest of stubs is rated at high importance...as it should be. Cellular biomarkers are important in any study of individual cell types. I see a great potential for elaboration upon the biomarkers used in staining techniques, cell sorting, and identification of stem cells or cancer cells. —
Scientizzle 21:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)reply
This is an important topic (generation of biomass from CO2) covered by merely an uncategorized stub. It needs expansion and inclusion of carbon fixation mechanisms other than the Calvin cycle (e.g. in autotrophic microorganisms). A general discussion of carbon fixation capacity of the biosphere and technological methods would be informative in relation to the
Greenhouse effect and strategies to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere.
tameeria 18:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Considering how widely used this application is, I'm surprised that it is in such a disorganised state (although the initial history part is fairly well referenced). I think it is an important one to improve.
This subject, one of the fundamental topics in cell biology, is in sorry shape. This could easily be brought to featured status with just a little attention from our combined knowledge. –
ClockworkSoul 23:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)reply
For such a central subject this article is so bad that I would think it's a satire if I didn't know better. The main image actually has little pictures of chicken and cheese pointing into a cell to represent catabolism. This must be fixed! –
ClockworkSoul 19:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)reply
You have a knack for finding the really abominable ones :)
Opabinia regalis 02:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)reply
Oh, it's no so hard... I just go through our
worklist and pick out some of the red or orange ones. –
ClockworkSoul 16:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)reply
I just merged
Cell metabolism into
Metabolism, but I see little reason why the support here should not be transferred to that article if none object. I would also Supportmetabolism becoming the collaboration of the month.
Robotsintrouble 16:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
This is currently an especially stubby stub, despite being ranked as "top" importance on the
organization page. Needs lots of love. –
ClockworkSoul 22:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)reply
Keesiewonder 19:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC) A vote of pure faith and confidence until I'm more versed.reply
Comments
The connexin family of proteins are extremely important in biological processes, and especially in early development of embryos and cell differentiation. They are increasingly becoming a "hot topic" in molecular biology and it would be to the benifit of wikipedians everywhere to improve this page. JE.at.UWOU|T 19:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)reply
These two closely related articles might merit a merge, but are of critical importance to understand basic molecular evidence for evolution and the molecular biology tools for determing the functional attributes of a gene product. They currently have minimal text and references. —
Scientizzle 20:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Almost any protein article that talks about the protein's evolution or homologs will mention conserved sequences.
Forluvoft 22:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)reply
ww 17:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC) an article which has been awaiting informed cleanup for some time. The time has come!!reply
Comments
This article is perhaps more clinical than nominations here should be, but the underlying biological process is confused here. Most humans (and all who fast, deliberately or not) go ketotic. Normally so. Only diabetics (and only some of those) progress to keotacidosis. The usual mechanisms proposed for this are unconvincing. Some biochemical system rigor deserves to be injected here, if only to avoid wikiembarrassement.
ww 17:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)reply
— ReoON |
+++ 12:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC) (unlike in other events-improvements, I may contribute here (easilly))reply
Comments
Endosomes are very important cellular structures. The current stub suffers from a lack of images, sources & organziation. The prose is probably a little too dense for your average reader as well. —
Scientizzle 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)reply
ClockworkSoul 14:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC) – A borderline start/stub! We can't allow this state to continue! –
ClockworkSoul 14:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Comments
Topic of the 2007 Nobel Prize in Medicine and only a few paragraphs on Wikipedia...
tameeria (
talk) 05:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC) - P.S. In connection to this,
knockout mouse could also use some help... -
tameeria (
talk) 04:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)reply
A very high-profile topic, and a subject of close study for nearly all undergraduate students in biology and biochemistry. It's already in pretty good shape, and with a bit of polishing, I think that we can get it up to a full FA status. –
ClockworkSoul 18:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Excellent suggestion! I was just reading/writing about this material yesterday.
Keesiewonder 13:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Interferons are major proteins of the immune system that are discussed in basic undergraduate immunology classes. Their use as medicines in recent years (e.g. beta-interferon) has also brought them into the spotlight of the general public. However, the
interferon article is in need of a huge overhaul, and has been tagged for clean up since June 2006. Maybe it's time to put a wee bit of
elbow grease to finally get this page to at least GA standard!!
~ Ciar ~(Talk to me!) 05:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Such an important class of molecules deserves more than a couple paragraphs. Much expansion could be used in the roles kinases play in signaling and regulation of proteins and other molecules. The mechanism of phosphorylation is unclear. Non-protein kinases get minimal attention and that should be rectified. —
Scientizzle 18:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)reply
This article, a staple biological education from the high school level and up, is a bit of a mess and really could use a bit of love. –
ClockworkSoul 14:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Additionally,
photosynthesis is a selection for the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools. With the number of eyeballs that see this article, we really need to clean it up. –
ClockworkSoul 15:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Nominated for the same reason as above, that the elucidation of the mechanisms of this complex the subject of the 2006
Nobel Prize in Chemistry. The current state of this article is also okay (rated as B class at the time of this post), but certainly can use more attention, especially with all of the current media focus on it. –
ClockworkSoul 14:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)reply
This article lacks any real information on the role & importance of saturated fats outside of dietary issues. It's a likely search term based on the current obesity epidemic, so it would be valuable to clean up this page. —
Scientizzle 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)reply
This article desperately needs development so could benefit enormously from a month's attention.
Nunquam Dormio 05:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)reply
There's no doubt that this article needs more work and I'm willing to do my part to get it up to snuff. -
Sloth Loves Chunk 05:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)reply
This article presently contains too many controversial statements and should not be article of the month.—The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
66.67.208.246 (
talk •
contribs).
I'm not sure our anonymous editor understands that this is a nomination for Collaboration of the Month--that is, an article to be improved from its current state by a group effort. Containing too many [uncited] "controversial statements" is one reason why this article might benefit from further attention. —
Scientizzle 06:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)reply
The topic is absolutely missing, there is nothing except the redirect to
Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Even there is virtually no condensed information about the T-DNA.
T cells are essential for immunity against pathogens and cancer, and drive autoimmunity. Yet absolutely nothing was written about the development of T cells in the thymocyte article. I spent quite a while writing the article, but it would be great to get others to help on it to make this essential immunology topic a featured article.
Sad mouse 23:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Also, most of the collaborations so far have been molecular, so it would be nice to have a cellular topic.
Sad mouse 01:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Topoisomerases are vital for cell replication. Every organism has at least 2 and they are currently being looked at for bacterial and cancer treatments.
SenorKristobbal 16:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)reply
(high importance article marked as needing attention since December 2006; fairly lengthy discussion page showing high interest but little recent editing of the article itself)
Boghog2 21:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This article is so lacking in any sort of information. I use tris every day, I bet it's the most used buffering system in Molecular biology. It also belongs to a family of buffers (I think they're called Best buffers?) We could link to all of them!
Adenosine | Talk 16:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)reply
A topical subject with top priority on MCB project that is clearly of interest to the general public, and yet it is still only at B quality. Has a lot of info in the article, with one or two editors trying to improve it, but needs a little love and understanding! Should really be an FA.
~ Ciar ~(Talk to me!) 06:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)reply
...especially given the anti-vaccine controversies out there. —
Scientizzle 20:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Vaccine is a medicine article which get more edits, I think getting attention in medicine portal to fix it and concentrate on other conceptual topics which are specific for MCB portal: like regulation, or cell signaling.—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Squidonius (
talk •
contribs)
That's quite a proposal, but looking over the articles they do clearly need quite a bit of love. Perhaps we can drop a message over at the newly formed
WP:WikiProject Genetics? –
ClockworkSoul 18:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)reply
(Fixed that link for ya) Thats really snazzy! Is it ready for prime time? –
ClockworkSoul 08:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I hate to say this... but one of my pet peeves is the misunderstanding of the
central dogma to mean DNA -> RNA -> protein, because inevitably someone follows this with "and reverse transcriptase violates the central dogma!" (It does not. The central dogma is about the directionality of information: it can go from nucleic acid to nucleic acid or protein, but cannot be transferred from protein to protein or protein to nucleic acid.) I worry this template would only promote this misinterpretation. Would it be possible to use another name for this template, eg. "gene expression"?
Madeleine✉✍ 13:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Sure, Dogma is as the template name as it is the most catchy word in Mol Bio (that is why F Crick incorrectly chose it). gene expression actually works better (less awesome though). Consider it changed. The template picture remains as it is (simple), if that is ok. --
Squidonius (
talk) 14:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I added the template to the various pages but I did little or no editing. I do not think major edits may be needed, so this may be dropped. --
Squidonius (
talk) 17:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Note: This article was COTM from April 2009 to February 2010. Review submitted. --
Firefly's luciferase (
talk) 07:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)reply