User talk:WeberOwl/sandbox

Images[edit]

Hi! Did you get a chance to look at my last post on your talk page? I found some great links in our course resources that help with adding free images from WikiMedia and the web. One of them is the Manual of Style, and another is this-- (clearly I haven't learned how to text wrap yet). These will be very useful in selecting and adding media to our page. I think I'll try it out in the sandbox. Let me know if you find any you'd like to include on the actual page :) MonopterusAlbus (talk) 13:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checking in[edit]

Hey MonopterusAlbus, haven't heard from you in a while. Do you think you'll be able to make some edits to the article this week? I believe the deadline for making our first major edits was yesterday.WeberOwl (talk) 20:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey WeberOwl! I'm not sure if you've seen my correspondence on your talk page and elsewhere. I'll stay in the sandbox talk if you'd prefer. Have you seen the edits to the dephosphorylation proposed by Cecilia? I'm making the suggested revisions now. I noticed many people requested that images are added to the article. Do you think we should create a diagram, or use one already in existence? And if you'd prefer the latter, do you know how to properly find and cite fair use images from WikiMedia Commons and elsewhere? MonopterusAlbus (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dephosphorylation Article Outline[edit]

Hi there. I was thinking that we might benefit from adopting the outline structure from the phosphorylation page.
Contents

1 Protein phosphorylation

1.1 History

1.2 Function

1.3 Signaling networks

1.4 Protein phosphorylation sites

1.5 Types of phosphorylation

1.6 Detection and characterization

2 Other kinds

3 See also

4 References

5 External links

I figured we could tweak this so that rather than "Other kinds", we include the types you listed in the outline (plant, etc.) MonopterusAlbus (talk) 11:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article Selection[edit]

Hi again! Have you looked through the list of articles? Do any of them stick out as exciting, or particularly interesting? We don't need to select an article until Unit 6, but I was curious about which topics interest you. MonopterusAlbus (talk) 01:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proper Formatting[edit]

I forgot to place my last comment under a new section. I'm going to play around in my sandbox a bit more this week, and hopefully learn/remember the tools necessary for proper formatting on Wikipedia. --MonopterusAlbus (talk) 01:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of characteristics of target article[edit]

Wikipedia articles are considered to be of "B" quality when the article is for the most part complete and does not have technical issues, but is still missing components that make a good article. "GA" articles improve on the "B" rating, as GA articles approach the quality of a professional, objective encyclopedia. However, GA status articles can still be improved. Often these articles still require some style and content editing by experts, and efforts are needed to better integrate the article with other articles on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WeberOwl (talk • contribs) 20:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]