Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Graham Beards (talk | contribs) at 20:07, 30 March 2009 (→Prose issues: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• Please place new messages at the bottom of this page where I can quickly find them. I usually reply within 24 hours. Thanks, Graham.

Archives

September 2007-February 2008 March-April 2008 May-June 2008 July- 2008

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Peer review for SR Leader Class steam locomotive.

Greetings! I recall that you did a thorough proof-read of the LSWR N15 class article during its FA nomination some time back, and am wondering whether you would like to have a look at this article, which is currently under Peer Review? Thanks, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Enjoy the bubble tea!

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Question about a sentence in the Rotavirus article

To start, thanks for a brilliant article on Rotavirus. We've been busying translating it for the Finnish wikipedia for about a month now. We're in the final stages (i.e. Replication) and I starting pondering the following sentence:

1) This causes the breakdown of VP7 trimers into single protein subunits, 2) leaving the VP2 and VP6 protein coats around the viral dsRNA, 3) forming a double-layered particle (DLP).

Does the bracketed sentence cause 1-3, or does 1 cause 2, which causes 3? Thanks for your help! -Yupik (talk) 20:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Yupik, Sorry for the confusion. 1 and 2 cause 3:

Proteins in the third layer (VP7 and the VP4 spike) disrupt the membrane of the endosome this causes a difference in the calcium concentration. This difference in calcium concentration then causes the breakdown of VP7 trimers (three units) into single protein (one unit) subunits. The VP2 and VP6 protein coats remain around the viral dsRNA to form the double-layered particle.

I hope this helps. Graham. Graham Colm 20:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Beautiful, thanks! -Yupik (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Being Human

Thanks for the help on being human. cant wait for the new season talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC).

Nor can I! It gives me a break from thinking about viruses. BBC drama at its best IMHO - it's all down to the plot and the acting- brilliant :-) Graham. Graham Colm 21:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte

No need to apologise for correcting my mistakes or when I've worsened the prose! Revert and correct at will. Colin° 22:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

• Colin, I'm so grateful for your help with this difficult article. :-) Graham. Graham Colm 23:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Blech

I steel myself to begin reading over 50 FACs, and the first words I encounter on the page are about green pus ??? Trust you to start me off laughing ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Green pus is good. It is a sign of a life. I'm sorry to have added to the (too) long a list— but duty calls. Content, and especially FA level content, is why we spend so long working here. All I have to offer in my defence is that my contributions may be pus and pooh to you, but they are intellectual bread and butter to me. Affection, Graham. Graham Colm 20:18, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte FAC

Thank you for submitting Phagocyte for FA. I apologize for not doing this sooner. My excuse is, well, I did not have access to internet over the weekend, but I probably would have waited until the very last second to submit (regardless of if I had connection or not because of my constant worrying). Thanks for pushing me forward. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Eulemur, it had be nominated this week because I have taken leave from the lab to look after you and the article. Don't be too quick to respond to any advice at the FAC; it might not be good advice and (though I am sure you will not) don't take any negative comments personally. Be polite to the reviewers for without their comments we will not succeed. Most important of all - don't worry, all the hardest work has been done. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm 12:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Prose issues

I respect not trying to list all of the problems with prose, but it's generally unhelpful to get vague notions of poor prose without at least a couple of examples. If I have no idea what you are looking at then I cannot possibly fix it. Most of the prose hasn't been touched in awhile, so I'm sure it could use some assistance. Nevertheless, some people say there are prose issues when there is actually just confusion over events (i.e. someone close to the project doesn't realize that a particular point was not explained well for those who know nothing about it), while other times there are real issues with grammer, sentence structure, or just basic flow of text. Without some form of example I cannot fix the problem, and "find a third-party editor" doesn't always fix the issue either (especially if it takes half a year to get a copy editor to the article). So, I respectfully request that you come back to the FAC and provide me with some form of assistance so that I can better understand your qualms with the prose.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

• I understand your frustration. The FAC is on my Watchlist, let's see what other reviewers have to say. I am not going to be drawn into listing all the faults, it would take too much of my time, and it is unfair of you to ask. Graham Colm 20:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)