User talk:Teeconway11/sandbox
The changes to this article provide a lot of good information about specific biological therapies, and the history section provides good background information on biological therapy in general. However, the updates might be a bit too technical and dense for a wikipedia article right now, which is mostly a problem for the history section. Also, some of the additions for specific therapies don't have linked sources (maybe they're from the main article on each, I don't know what the policy is on sourcing that)
Based on the current intro, I'm not entirely sure what "biological therapy" is specifically, and whether it is simply the use of biopharmaceuticals. Given that there isn't a "biological therapy" article referring to biopharmaceuticals directly might be a good idea (perhaps also in title). The history section also contains mostly background on biological therapy and only a little about IBS.
FricativeMelon (talk) 16:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
I think you've got a handful of issues with commas, specifically in that you're creating run-on sentences. Don't be afraid to split them up and play with the structure. For example,
The definition for biologics and biological therapy has changed a lot since, and the development of recombinant DNA technology in the 1970s shaped the modern understanding of what constitutes as biological therapy, which often does not include traditional biological substances like vaccines.
Could be changed to,
The definition for biologics and biological therapy has changed a lot since with the advent of new technologies. Recombinant DNA technology developed in the 1970s shapes the modern understanding of what constitutes biological therapy, which often does not include traditional biological substances like vaccines.
Don't forget to add spaces after your citations.
or their work. [10]Soon after -> or their work.[10] Soon after
Aside from grammar, I think you could definitely flesh out the pre-1975 history a bit and maybe split the entire history header into a few sections if you can add enough information to warrant it. You can probably hyperlink more often, specifically w.r.t. complex terminology in the "Rationale" and "inhibitors" sections.
Overall, I think it's a good start!