1. Really good content. i think it might need a little more colour. perhaps you could add an image of the crystal structure if there is one avaliable.(Beatrix 3158969)
- thanks! I was thinking I might colour in the diagrams when i can find the time because it takes AGES on photoshop but looks really nice.--Peter Kehoe 12:30, 21 May 2009 (EST)
also the function of your protein is very complex, i found it a little difficult to follow your diagrams. Overall really good though (Beatrix 3158969)
- yes it is a little daunting :S... what i'll do is clean up the function diagram a little, add some proper photoshop text and use a bit of colour to try to make it more obvious... would this satisfy your request? thanks for all the input by the way.--Peter Kehoe 23:44, 23 May 2009 (EST)
2.Carmen Lam 12:44, 21 May 2009 (EST) A very detailed page, and good use of images. Clearly a lot of research was done in preparation, however, maybe you should includde information about what occurs when it fails to function properly? eg Clinical manefestations if any, and include current research? But definately a good wiki page. By the way, not really a critique, but as a reminder, you're supposed to link back to the group page!
- The links back are text-embedded (TRK receptors) is this not sufficient to the outcomes of the assesment?--Peter Kehoe 23:44, 23 May 2009 (EST)
3. Shows extensive research. Just was a little confused about what 'NGF' was in the introduction. It was good to see that you were able to find differences in structure between the Trks & TNFRs and your own receptor. "s-p75NTR: an variant of p75NTR..." I think it should say 'a variant'. The pictures are great, perhaps you could use computer text to type in the names, eg. 6CD, to make the text clearer. Good stuff!
- i'll clean up the pictures and fix that typo, thanks for the help!--Peter Kehoe 23:44, 23 May 2009 (EST)
4. Good research and content. I too suggest information about when it fails to occur properly. It is always interesting to know what happens when things go wrong. Great job! The digrams are a bit hard to follow but they certainly do help in understanding what you are saying.--Gurkiran Flora 16:47, 21 May 2009 (EST)
- thanks for the feedback, there's not much info on pathological implications as it's a novel protein... i'll see what i can dig up, mainly it has implications for oncogenisis in NGF-dependant prostate cancers.--Peter Kehoe 22:48, 21 May 2009 (EST)
5. I am sorry, a bit confused, maybe too much information and too long in explanation. The page can be improved to look more organized, maybe put some lines under any headings. References a bit confused as well. diagram should be explained to help you to deliver information. Anyway, overall is quite good.
- i'll try to address those general issues... could be perhaps be a bit more specific about what you mean by making look more organised? also, what aspect of the referencing is insufficient? i was unable to get the numbering code working when i set the page up, i might try that again... is that what you mean? thanks for the input--Peter Kehoe 23:44, 23 May 2009 (EST)