Euchromatin Peer Review 1

I think these are all great edits! It is great that you've added a variety of sources that are missing from the current version of the page, and it is evident that you have expanded upon many of the ideas left by the original writer(s). I find organization to be a very helpful tool when trying to learn new information, so I really like how you added additional headers to compartmentalize this information under the "Function" section and wrote an entirely new section on regulation. Specifically, I think this new "Regulation' header is a very nice addition to the page, as the differentiation between euchromatin and heterochromatin plays a huge role in this process, and so it only makes sense to be included on this page.

For ways to improve the page even more, I would suggest adding references to the "Transcription" header, as this seems to be the only block of text that is not currently backed up by any sources. Additionally, you could briefly describe H3, H4, H2A, and H2B if you are looking to expand the page in a meaningful way. Other than those few things, however, I am at a loss for ways to expand this page more without adding in a slew of redundant sentences or unnecessary paragraphs. I cannot wait to see the polished version and anything else you may decide to add!

Ed10005 (talk) 06:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Euchromatin Peer Review 1

You all have made great improvements to the article so far. I really enjoy how you added a different figure than the old one giving the distinction between euchromatin and heterochromatin. The old figure really did not give insight into euchromatin at all. The addition of more information to the introduction paragraph before the content list was a welcome change because it more accurately gives a brief description of what euchromatin is. The new subheaders under "function" in the content list is great for readers to quickly jump to what they need to find. In the structure header, I like how you mentioned the four histone protein pairs. The addition of the "key difference" between euchromatin and heterochromatin is crucial for readers trying to distinguish between the two. The appearance section was reviewed and improved with a better introduction of cytogenic banding. Your function header was completely revamped, which was a necessary fix. There was not enough information to truly explain the function of euchromatin in the prior version. The addition of your new "Regulation" header is a very welcome addition and shows that you have done your research to improve the topic, along with the evidence of adding a lot of new resources that can be used.

If there was one thing I would keep, it would be the header called "See Also." You could add other relevant wikipedia pages that relate to euchromatin such as heterochromatin, Histones, Histone-Modifying Enzymes (our page!), or anything else you think has a relevant connection. As my partner said above, a reference or two in the "Transcription" header would be perfect to validate your credibility. Other than that, you all made great additions to your page and I can tell that you put time into thinking about how to improve the page. It seems very clear and concise under each header, which is exactly what is needed. You have a great lead section, clear structure, balanced coverage between all headers, neutral content without inherent bias, and amazing sources. Great job!

Sctoves (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine's feedback

This is nicely done!

It does appear that some statements are missing citations, so please work on that.

In the statement "euchromatin tends to appear lighter than heterochromatin," specify if this is referring to cryo-EM imaging, another type of imaging, or molecular weight. As it is written, it could be misconstrued.

If you think it would fit, you could add more information about current research on euchromatin that is ongoing or ways that current and past research is used to address disease/disorders related to euchromatin if there are any.

Cawilhel (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nils comments

Nice start, expanding on the original article! The reference Singh, Dipty et al seems duplicated. Consider adding more on the modern insights into epigenetics and gene regulation and how they are linked to each other and to the euchromatin/heterochromatin conversion. Make sure to link to as many other Wikipedia entries as possible.

Ngwalter (talk)

MLibrarian feedback

Good job! A few suggestions:

1) Possibly, it would be worth keeping the old figures, which may help visualizing the concept.

2) Reference 1 need to be fixed - some duplication occurred.

3) In the Appearance section, I would suggest removing "As noted earlier". It is not necessary. Sometimes, people jump into a specific section without reading the previous one. MLibrarian (talk) 19:01, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

4) There is a typo in ref 1 "Nature. 431 (7011): 931–945." - please correct to year 2011MLibrarian (talk) 19:09, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]