Wikipedia:Peer review/Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology/archive1

Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've made some additions to this page over the past few weeks, mainly the History and Format sections (as part of the ISCB wikipedia competition) - I've listed this article for peer review to get some unbiased advice on areas for improvement, particularly on the sections mentioned above. Hopefully one of the outcomes could be raising the rating on the quality scale (it's currently at Start-Class).

Many thanks, Amkilpatrick (talk) 15:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Comment by Praemonitus – Here are a few suggestions:

• "In recent years" is WP:DATED
• "Since 2007, ISMB has rotated locations between North America and Europe": to clarify this, the lead should mention where was it held before then.
• The "Format" section doesn't appear to be summarized in the lead.
• "National Library of Medicine": please be specific about which nation.
• "National Library of Medicine" is WP:OVERLINKed.
• "artificial intelligence" and "computer science" should be linked;
• Names such as "Lawrence Hunter" and "Russ Altman" are presented without context. Please list at least a nationality and profession for each name.
• "David Searls", "Jude Shavlik", "Christopher Rawlings", and "Alfonso Valencia" should be WP:REDLINKed, unless you don't think they can satisfy WP:GNG.
• In the "List of conferences" table, consider listing the title and presenter for each Keynote speech. Presenting the conference themes, if any, would also be beneficial.
• For comprehensiveness, some information about budgeting and attendance requirements would be of interest. How much does it cost to finance a conference like this? What's the standard rate for attending the full conference? Presumably speakers get their attendance costs picked up? Is it limited to professional academia or can students and other interested participants attend?

I hope these comments are useful for you. Praemonitus (talk) 14:47, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your comments, really appreciated. I'll have a good look through them shortly and get back to you once I've made some changes. --Amkilpatrick (talk) 06:38, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I've made a couple edits now, mostly expanding the lead and rewriting some of the early history section - completely agree with your comments. These should cover all but the last two bullets. Re the list of keynote speeches, I had thought about this and had started to create a table (see User:Amkilpatrick/draft1), but it was going to be a lot of information and I couldn't find an elegant way of collapsing this bit while keeping the rest of the List of Conferences visible. Maybe this could be put in a new article, perhaps List of Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology Keynote Speakers and linked to from the ISMB article? Agreed about the info for budgeting and attendance - I will have a look for some sources, probably ISCB reports, but it might take a little while. Where do you think would be best for this to go in the article? I'm thinking with the recent meetings but perhaps it calls for a new section. Again, thanks for your comments, it's been really helpful! --Amkilpatrick (talk) 18:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Well if the keynote speech information is going to take up that much room, perhaps it's not such a good idea after all. As for the budget and other details, I don't know why those couldn't just go in another section under 'Format'. Perhaps consider revising the section name to something like 'Operations'. Anyway, glad I could help. Praemonitus (talk) 04:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)