Difference between revisions of "Talk:Group 6 Project - Confocal Microscopy"
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
--[[User:Z3255926|David Williamson]] 03:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
--[[User:Z3255926|David Williamson]] 03:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Very good work guys.
Very good work guys.
Revision as of 16:23, 9 May 2010
--z3256682 05:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Hi,
Overall good page. I'll give the following suggestions for your consideration: - an introduction is needed to bring readers up to speed. - possibly separate the CLSM, Nipkow Disk etc.. from the Basic Mechanisms, and have them as a separate more specialised technique section - up to you though. - timeline/development may work better as numbered/dotpoints. Images could relieve the heavy text strain. You also need to have MRC as Microscopy Research Centre as other readers may not understand it is a place and not a separate technique. - possibly images to illustrate the current uses and evaluation, though you have done that in other sections.
--David Williamson 03:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Very good work guys.
- Your page could do with an introduction summarising as simply as possible what confocal microscopes are and what they’re used for. I don’t know about you but often when I look up a Wikipedia page this is often all I’m looking for...
- The layout seems well thought out, but all the glossary points in the contents it makes it really long... You can still make the terms bold without them being section headings, but I don’t know if there’s a way to do this and maintain all the links to the glossary words in the text? Because the links to glossary points are maybe the best idea ever.
- The student diagram is epic. In the description I think you need to put your student number where it says “I, (student number)” though?
- I think the page is well written, making it possible for non-physics experts to understand what’s going on as well as why it matters. One tiny thing I noticed- Under CLSM where you say “Another use of the CLSM is the aperture size which is adjustable”, do you mean aperture size is a use, or like a property or an advantage of CLSM?
- Some bold subheadings would help drive home the main stages in the timeline.
Hi Group 6! First of all, your computer drawn images are seriously impressive- really clear and well designed! I think the "Timeline and Development" section would work better as the first section, so that we're introduced to the general idea and context of the technique before getting into the details of how it works. This section could also benefit from the use of a few subheadings or grouping of the developments into time eras, but that's purely a preference thing on my part. Your referencing is the best I've seen so far and is flawless apart from a couple of references that have been numbered twice (but i'm not sure if that's even avoidable!?). The links to the glossary are a great idea, but the spacing/layout makes it look a really long when compared to the length of the rest of the project and it's a shame that they all apear in the contents table. Overall, a well thought out and easy to understand project- well done! --Louisa Frew 14:13, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
--Begum Sonmez 11:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC) Hello Group 6. Can I just say that when I saw the content list, I didn’t like the LONG list. However, I really loved the link of many of the words to the glossary. That is a five star effort, and as a result, has helped me understand the technique of Confocal Microscopy more.
- I felt like there was no general introduction, and that the project went straight into the facts. An introduction is an important part of the project. It establishes the general status or role of the technique in the world.
- I noticed that there was a lot of information under the first part of the Mechanism section before the CLSMs heading. I would suggest getting rid of some of the text, but make use of dot points or a numbering system.
- I think the Timeline section could use and image or two, possible of Marvin Minsky, and/or the first confocal microscope.
- The structure and amount of text under Applications and Evaluation was good. It made good use of dot points, and summarised the main points (especially the limitations part).
Nice work though, but just a few more changes would really help.
--Katiana Shaw 06:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC) Hey Group 6 - Some thoughts of your project:
- The explanation of the basic mechanism is really good, though I wonder whether your project could be improved slightly by having an introduction to introduce your project to the reader.
- I really like the in text links to the glossary - makes it easy to find out what a word means just by clicking on it. Good Idea!
- I would have liked to see the history put before an explanation of confocal microscopy, rather than half way through.
- I think the pictures you have used are great; the student drawn one is very impressive. I would like to see more pictures throughout the text, just to break it up a little and to supplement what you are saying.
A few slight changes and this is a really good project. Good work!
--z3252340 10:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC) Things I liked about your page: the diagram which explains the process of confocal microscopy - it is simple and conveys the process well, the inclusion of a glossary - it really helped when I didn't know what terms meant. To improve the page you may want to think of ways to reduce some of the large slabs of text - perhaps use some tables and also include an introduction explaining why it is relevant to Cell Biology.
Hey guys, I found some stuff on confocal microscopy --> http://www.physics.emory.edu/~weeks/confocal/ This website has a journal article as well as an easier summary of how it all works! It also has hand-drawings & maybe we can draw some diagrams similar to them? We cant directly use the pictures though. http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0030207 < this one we can use the pictures --Erika Unsworth 21:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
since there is a lab on confocal microscopy, we need to examine which elements aren't on that page that are fairly relevant. since his labs are reused, it will most likely involve newer technologies or methods--Justin Friedman 06:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I've done a bit more research and found three articles at http://jcb.rupress.org/cgi/search?sendit=Search&pubdate_year=&volume=&firstpage=&DOI=&author1=&author2=&title=confocal+microscopy&andorexacttitle=and&titleabstract=&andorexacttitleabs=and&fulltext=&andorexactfulltext=and&src=jcb&fmonth=Jan&fyear=1955&tmonth=Mar&tyear=2010&fdatedef=25+January+1955&tdatedef=22+March+2010&RESULTFORMAT=1&hits=10&hitsbrief=25&sortspec=date&sortspecbrief=date The last one is really good as it is an evaluation of the confocal technique. Also these articles have lots of pictures we can use but the only problem is the articles are a bit old, so I don't think they have much information on newer technologies! Also, we should start looking at dividing up the workload. We can put all our resources here so everybody can use them but everybody can focus on a different aspect? what do you guys think? e.g. INTRODUCTION (& CONCLUSION if we want)- timeline and quick summary of what confocal microscopy is , MECHANICS- how the microscope works, EVALUATION- pro/cons in comparison with other microscopes and examples of where the microscope is used. --Erika Unsworth 20:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
JACKPOT! --> http://www.microscopyu.com/references/confocalmicroscopy.html ~ plenty of suggested journal articles on confocal microscopy!--Erika Unsworth 08:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
The confocal microscope essentially works by excluding much of the light that would enter a conventional light microscope. This makes the image appear sharper. By looking at a point of the cell using lasers it is able to build up a three dimensional model of the cell surface. 
WE NEED: -Referenced research articles, -Referenced review articles, -Images of Cells using method, -Drawn diagram
as you can see on the page, i have added a bit of stuff for my section. it includes a drawn diagram as well as pictures of cells using the confocal microscope as required by this assessment. so you guys don't need to worry about including those elements if you don't need to. i also have a link to a movie which is pretty rad. just have to do the laser scanning microscope and nipkow disk then the rest is up to you guys :)
Hey guys, we still have to include the hand-drawn diagram! --Erika Unsworth 22:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Are you sure it has to be hand drawn Erika? Because I have a picture up that was drawn in paint. Also, we need to fill in the glossary. You need to pit up your references as well. Make sure it's in pubmed format if possible
Paint sounds good! I've put up some more glossary definitions but there are still some missing definitions and/or referencing- if you guys come across any of them in your research please put them up =) I'm gonna try and find more textbooks! (theres 7 definitions to fix up)--Erika Unsworth 01:13, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Stuff to add:
- An Introduction
- Restructuring so that it goes intro/basics, history, mechanism, applications etc.
- Fix PAM
- More pictures for history and applications
- Glossary items:
- Pseudorandom sequence
- Spatial Light Modulator (SLM)
- Digital Micro-mirror Device (DMD)
- Emission Ligth
- Zirconium Arc