Talk:Aminoallyl nucleotide

message: The article talks only about aminoallyl-modified nucleotides and not about the aminoallyl group in general. --Kupirijo 02:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've completed the page move, as requested. -GTBacchus(talk) 05:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reasons to move

message: Myself and Mishasubz plan on adding additional information into this article and would like some input as to what would be important/not mentioned on the article itself and not talked about in our points. We are both new to the Wiki community and have been slowly learning through the educational program. 
=== Our talking points are as follows: ===
:expand how they are used in 
::cDNA (describe each in detail)
::PCR nick-translation
::random-primed labeling
::primer extension.
::DNA microarray, which measures the level of gene expression
:Pros/cons of aminoallyl nucleotides use in DNA labeling
:Expanding information on the four known aminoallyl nucleotides, AA-dUTP/UTP and AA-dCTP/CTP with images
:Would Biotin-16-Aminoallylcytidine-5'-Triphosphate fall in the article? 
We embrace any input, please check my sandbox as we are editing there. Crandel5425 (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional information  

message: :expand how they are used in 
::cDNA (describe each in detail)
::PCR nick-translation
::random-primed labeling
::primer extension.
::DNA microarray, which measures the level of gene expression
:Pros/cons of aminoallyl nucleotides use in DNA labeling
:Expanding information on the four known aminoallyl nucleotides, AA-dUTP/UTP and AA-dCTP/CTP with images
:Would Biotin-16-Aminoallylcytidine-5'-Triphosphate fall in the article? 
We embrace any input, please check my sandbox as we are editing there. Crandel5425 (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Our talking points are as follows: 

message: HI Randel
: should we add a protocol on how to label with aaNTPs? if so, what do you think about this one
http://www.pangloss.com/seidel/Protocols/amino-allylRT.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mishasubz (talk • contribs) 07:03, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi Misha, I've edited and revamped it a bit. I'm going to read over some of our links and include them into this article. I'll need your links to what you were trying to cite. I'll include them when I can. Looking better every time! Crandel5425 (talk) 19:17, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  unit 8 notes/comments/ideas 

message: This is a nice page and is addressed in a way such that a user is pleasantly surprised by the fashion in which a normally chemistry related topic is made to seem biological.
The comments I have are mostly stylistic in nature and don't really affect the content of the article as much as the way it is organized.
* Header: I would take out the particulars of the molecule (maybe after cytosine in line 3) in the header and move this to the synthesis section.
* History: I would move the uses and first paragraph of post synthesis into the history section as it continues to explain the rationale for this type of research. Otherwise, this is a very nice section.
* Synthesis: Anything about the reactivity of the molecule should also be moved into the synthesis section including the different types of aminoallyl nucleotides. I think that a diagram with the carbons labeled would be nice. There are lots of free chemical drawing software programs or you could just copy your drawing, paste it into paint, label it and then put it back into your article; it would make it easier for the layperson to understand it.
* Post synthesis: I guess you are still building out this part and will either put descriptions or links into the article. Just a piece of information: the online ambassador told me there should be no "bolding" in the article, except that which occurs naturally at subject heading, etc.. I had to remove a lot of it in our article.
* Vendors: A list of some vendors for these type of probes would be helpful.
* Pictures: If you could add some pictures of the glowing molecules, people would go crazy for it.
:♠ Deacon C (talk) 19:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks so much for the input, specially about adding vendor information. Will definitely do soMishasubz (talk) 08:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Unit 11 Deacon C comments

message: hi Randel,
:We good some really helpful feedback from last week. I am going to work on this today and see what I can improve. 
Please review my additions and advice of improvements. I am having a hard time finding diverse information of this topic, most of the information i find is repeated in our already listed references
thanks
Mishasubz (talk) 09:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I haven't had a chance to fully look at the work added on your end. I'll be able too hopefully today - latest tomorrow. I also replied to your email. Check out some articles allotted by companies or email them for specific journals and articles. I've contacted sigma aldrich and was able to find the synthesis articles from them.  Crandel5425 (talk) 13:55, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

text: wow that is great! where did you post those articles? are they under the reference list?Mishasubz (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This link looks very promising! I will comb though it as well. Crandel5425 (talk) 00:57, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unit 11 discussion 

message: This article is coming along very well. Here are some recommendations for further improvement:
#Nothing in the lead should need to be cited because the lead serves as a summary of the rest of the article; anything in the lead should already exist in the body and be cited there.
#Be straightforward and direct. For example, there is no need for the words "can be referred to as" in the first sentence of the lead; the article should simply start with "Aminoallyl nucleotide is a primary amino group linked..."
#Pay attention to punctuation and grammar. The last sentence of the lead is missing a period, "a useful labeling techniques" mixes singular and plural, etc.
#Sections should consist of more than one paragraph each.
#There should be no unsourced information; all information should be followed by a citation.
#Only the title of the article in the lead should be bolded; other bolding should be removed.
#The format issues in the "Post-synthesis" section should be addressed, such as the "[cite]" and the indented phrases that are sometimes followed by periods and sometimes not.
You are making some great progress with this article. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about the recommendations above. Neelix (talk) 02:49, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for some great recommendations, please advice further. I have made changes to your suggestions Mishasubz (talk) 19:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Will alter the lead topic and clean up the rest. Very difficult to find information on this topic. Crandel5425 (talk) 00:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review by Neelix 

message: "Aminoallyl nucleotide can be referred to as…" sounds a bit awkward. Simply stating "aminoallyl nucleotide is etc etc" flows better and makes the definition sound more concrete. It might be useful to wikilink to amino and ester group as well. The description of the naming convention might be too technical for the lead. It might fit better at the end of the synthesis section or as it's own section.
:Hopefully this will be cleared up after Tuesday Crandel5425 (talk) 01:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, very hard to find information on this topic, trying our best. The synthesis was based off only the abstracts of articles behind pay-walls, as well as the other parts of this topic. Crandel5425 (talk) 01:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Will consider your idea or just delete the list all together. Still undecided. Crandel5425 (talk) 01:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking better! There are still grammatical, spacing, and punctuation errors, particularly in the uses section. The uses section is also pretty technical, I'm not sure someone without a good science background would understand it. I don't think you should include the vendors, it doesn't really add any information. It could almost be considered promoting them (which would be against Wikipedia's policies), especially because you're just linking to their catalog. Lisawisa (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks Lisawisa, I'll remove the vendors. Did not your reply to Misha Crandel5425 (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments from Lisawisa 

message: Hey Misha I noticed some of the links you added aren't  being referenced correctly. I didn't want to step on any toes to fix the issue, I figure I'd bring it to your attention first. Before trying to fix it myself and likely messing it up. Let me know what I can do to help with this small issue. Crandel5425 (talk) 13:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link issue 

message: Hey Misha I noticed some of the links you added aren't  being referenced correctly. I didn't want to step on any toes to fix the issue, I figure I'd bring it to your attention first. Before trying to fix it myself and likely messing it up. Let me know what I can do to help with this small issue. Crandel5425 (talk) 13:58, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link issue 

message: Hello,
Here is my review for the article:
===Introduction===
* I like the information in the introduction. It is pretty straightforward and to the point.
* One thing I would suggest different is to switch the second and third sentence. I think the sentence about what it is used for is more relevant to the initial reader who may not be as familiar within the topic. Also, the second sentence goes more into the structure, which is what the rest of the introduction focuses on, so it would transition better.
:Will consider the change Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the tip, i agree that the transition is smoother.
Randel, i have made the change, let me know otherwiseMishasubz (talk) 02:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I think what happened was that I had made the change, and then you flipped it back. I have corrected this again. Per Martinhyou's input. Crandel5425 (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Will edit grammar, however adding a picture might clutter the article, or make it easier to understand. Will consider Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

text: a lot of your comments and questions cannot be answered as the pay wall prevents this information from being uncovered. Phosphorylation may not be needed, will consider editing for correctness. Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. That's fine then. Just some suggestions :) Martinhyou (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review by martinhyou 4.28.2014 

message: * I like the information in the introduction. It is pretty straightforward and to the point.
* One thing I would suggest different is to switch the second and third sentence. I think the sentence about what it is used for is more relevant to the initial reader who may not be as familiar within the topic. Also, the second sentence goes more into the structure, which is what the rest of the introduction focuses on, so it would transition better.
:Will consider the change Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the tip, i agree that the transition is smoother.
Randel, i have made the change, let me know otherwiseMishasubz (talk) 02:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

text: I think what happened was that I had made the change, and then you flipped it back. I have corrected this again. Per Martinhyou's input. Crandel5425 (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: * Changed some grammar by adding , and ;
* Great history section! I would add a picture though. Possibly of the heatmap with DNA microarray that you can take straight from that Wikipedia page.
:Will edit grammar, however adding a picture might clutter the article, or make it easier to understand. Will consider Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: * I would add onto this section a little bit with more information. For example, is Heck coupling the only means of producing aminoallyl nucleosides? Why is it necessary for the nucleoside to form into a nucleotide by phosphorylation? More elaboration into the single pot synthesis with other halogens? How do you obtain the substrate in the first place and where?  Just some ideas. Not necessarily needed to go into all of them!
:a lot of your comments and questions cannot be answered as the pay wall prevents this information from being uncovered. Phosphorylation may not be needed, will consider editing for correctness. Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. That's fine then. Just some suggestions :) Martinhyou (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Synthesis

message: * There should be a citation for the last sentence of this paragraph. 
Will add citation Crandel5425 (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Reaction

message: * There are quite a few grammatical errors with sentences, spacing, periods, and citation locations. Please fix these.
* The information should be in paragraph format, but they seem like notes. It would be good to transition from one another within the section.
* I like the information that is here though. Going over the uses, advantages, disadvantages, and other areas is great!
I have worked on the general formatting as you suggested, please let me know if there is still work needed, thanks!Mishasubz (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Uses

message: * Looks like there are a lot of citations used throughout. From looking at the references section, some of the citations (such as 6 through 11) may not be formatted properly? Not quite sure.
* I think the overall jargon could be a bit improved upon especially in sections such as “Uses.” 
* Good job though! Hope my review helps
Martinhyou (talk) 21:59, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: In General

message: Hi guys, great job so far. Here are my comments as you finish things up. Let me know if you have any questions!
* I saw a few spelling/grammar errors throughout, so a thorough copyedit would be really helpful. 
:Anything specific? I noticed 3 spelling errors.Crandel5425 (talk) 16:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The point of the heat map image is to show what it is and that aminoally nucleotides are used in it. Why would we need a more thorough caption; I feel it takes away the point of the article. Crandel5425 (talk) 16:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

text: Will use the initial citation in the section. Crandel5425 (talk) 16:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

text: Will correct.Crandel5425 (talk) 16:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

text: Thank you for the review. I'll correct what I've commented on. Crandel5425 (talk) 16:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review by Keilana 

message: 1/15/17 DennisPietras (talk) 02:01, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  moved out of unassessed