Talk:Resolvin

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

synthesis

I am wondering why there have been so little synthesis publications on resolvins so far. GregKeyes 01:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unreadable

i just tagged this for technical. Not an encyclopedia article. Jytdog (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:David notMD is this something you could help fix? Jytdog (talk) 16:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I plead ignorance. I looked at the article, also searched PubMed on 'resolvin.' Came away with feeling that this is too soon. The unaddressed question is whether part of the anti-inflammatory action attributed to long-chain omega-3 fatty acids is due to these metabolites? Or are they without measurable function? David notMD (talk) 17:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article decimated

Recently this article has been decimated by people invoking various Wikipedia policies. See the changes.

In my opinion, people ought to think about why they are enforcing these policies. Do they really think the article is better after removing most of the information? Might readers not want to know the information that was removed? When you sign up to Wikipedia, you are not obliged to go around looking for articles to eviscerate on the grounds of violating policies. People are doing this because they choose to do it. The result is articles that are much less useful. Or useful articles get deleted completely.

Eric Kvaalen (talk) 19:49, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is meant to summarize accepted knowledge, not provide a confusing splurge of WP:USEFUL information. I fully support attempts to try and make this article more encyclopedic in nature. Alexbrn (talk) 20:03, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I also support the concept of an encyclopedia as a trailing indicator, a depository of useful fact, not every fact. As I noted in the other section, I personally am ignorant of resolvin research. My takeaway of what one editor had created was content worthy of a peer-reviewed journal review article, readable/understandable by other scientists actively researching resolvins. And that was too much for Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 20:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It needs a lot more trimming. It is still unreadable alphabet soup. Jytdog (talk) 20:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned that five of the seven citations come from the same research group at Harvard Medical School. Serhan has been an author/co-author on resolvins since 2004, contributed to 20% of all the journal articles on this topic (!), and I am guessing is the person who originated the term. I do not suspect the author of this Wikipedia article of being associated with the HMS group - which would raise question of COI - but I am concerned that this is a narrowly researched topic. What is needed are attempts to make this article more germane to a general audience AND citations from outside the Serhan group for reasons of NPOV. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a narrowly researched topic susceptible to speculation about mediators and receptors involved in the complex mechanisms of inflammation, defining it as a laboratory research field years/decades away from understanding in humans. WP:MEDANIMAL prevails upon sources for this topic. The two reviews I added today provide dietary evidence of using PUFA or fish oil supplements to improve inflammation biomarkers, but further understanding about resolvins remains in the vague territory between dietary intake and blood output. --Zefr (talk) 17:12, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]