==Lab Attendance==

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:28, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:08, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 23:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 00:20, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 22:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

==Lab works==
===lab 1===
This is an internal link :[[2010_Lecture_2|Cell division lecture L2]]

This is an external link:[http://www.smh.com.au/ SMH]

Internal link to fertilization:[[Fertilization|TADA]]

==== Answers for all lab questions====

Lab 2

1.Synctiotrophoblast cells secrete Human Chorionic Gonadotropin to support the ongoing pregancy.

2.Corpus luteum secrete progesterone to prevent continuation of the menstrual cycle.

Lab 3

1.Carnegie stage 7,8 and 9 occurs in week 3 whereas, Carnegie stage 10,11,12,and 13 occur in week 4.

2.The embryo grows from the size of 0.4mm at the beginning of week 3 to 3.5mm at the end of week 4.

3.The cranial neuropore closes on day 24 , whereas ,the caudal neuropore close on day 26.

Lab 4

1.The vessels that drain into sinus venosus are the umbilical(placental),the vitelline and the common cardiac vein.

2.The vitelline venous system will eventually give rise to liver sinusoids and portal system.

3.The four layers that contribute to the placenta barrier are syncitiotrophoblast, cytotrophoblast, villi connective tissue and fetal capillary endothelium.

4.Haematopoetic stem cells are found in abundance, and may be harvested from the placenta for therapeutic uses.

Lab 5

1.The origin of gastrointestinal smooth muscle is splanchnic mesoderm, considering gastrointestinal smooth muscle is derived from splanchnic mesoderm.

2.The buccopharyngeal membrane begin to break down at Carnegie stage 11.

3.Lung development which is the budding of lungs from the trachea begins at Carnegie stage 22.

4.Premature babies may not have fully developed type 2 alveolar cells which secrete surfactant.

Lab 7

1.A myotube is a nucleated muscle fibre that has yet matured and still undergoes developing processes.It is formed by the fusion of myoblasts.

2.a)If i suffered a spinal cord injury,i would expect to see an atrophy in the legs.

b)If i took up a marathon running , i would expect to see some of the fast fibers being changed to slow fibres in the legs.
Lab 10

1.Development of endocrine organ,the tyroid gland is affected by low dietary iodine.

2.Iodine deficiency causes preventable mental retardation and brain damage.

3.
The endocrine function of pancreas starts from 10 to 15 weeks onwards with the release of hormones,whereas the exocrine function of it starts postnatal onwards.
The thyroid starts functioning from week 10 onwards.
The presence of high levels of hCG in week 8 to 12 in the body stimulates Leydig cells of testes to start producing testosterone from week 8 onwards with the secrete of testosterone and androstenedione.

--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 06:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

==Picture==
[[File:Early_zygote.jpg|right]]

==Peer Accessment==

===Group One===

This web page is very well organised. The information is easy to understand and the subheadings are indicative of the historical development and the use of the ultrasound.Most of the points made is supported with pictures ,definitely provid me a better understanding of CVS.Also,I like the pictures and tables for the different types of ultrasounds.Anyway, this is an informative website,in other words, it's educational value is high as it is very informative.It makes use of external pages.Well done.
===Group Two===

A lot of research has gone into this assignment and it’s evident in the information presented as its precise which also helps capture the attention of readers.The reference list is indicative of your extensive research.Very good effort.The table of deformities was a stand out for me as it was very well organised and was a effective break from the text. You also used excellent external links that were very well placed within the web page. A slight improvement would be to include a link or a reference to the brief time line where you state the names of the authors, and as previously mentioned, reference the statistics that you have included.Well done.

===Group Three===

I personally think the introduction part is too lenghty.I don't think an outline of what the webpage consists of is completely necessary seeing as there is a table of contents. A Glossary and proof reading are also needed to help make the reader understands more easily. Other than that,in general,the web page is well done. The table of disorders that you have included is encompassing and simple enough to easily follow. It s a very well-rounded overview of Amniocentesis.Good work.

===Group Four===

I feel that this is a good project guiding through readers who don't know much about this area.I think you should keep the history first then the procedure and so on. There are too few references which do not adequately support the claims that you make.The glossary is sorta short as there are some words that I had to google them. Other than that,good work.Put up some more pictures and possibly , a larger referencing list would make the page better , i think.Good effort.

===Group Six===

The page is too much of informative and too lengthy .I personally think you need to break it up a bit.Maybe put it in point form.You have a lot of great pictures.This is certainly a good work.Also, you might wanna include a table or flow chart for the procedure because it is quite hard to follow. Your glossary is adequate although your referencing may fall short in the screening test section.The layout is great in general and i like how you put in a link to a video.

User:Z3318446

2010-10-06T22:14:26Z

Z3318446: /* Lab Attendance */

Talk:2010 Group Project 5

2010-10-06T12:47:09Z

Z3318446: /* Improvements */

Hey, i know im not supposed to be helping rival groups (hehe) but i was just having a general look through all the pages, and i noticed your new picture (which is awesome by the way). i thought i would let you know that the cervical canal is labeled in the wrong spot :/ hope you have time to fix it. kind regards - --[[User:Z3265772|z3265772]] 04:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC) also, if you decide to fix it, at the same time you might want to change the label speculum to cotton swab (or something similar), and if you dont want to change it, you might want to delete this post so mark doesnt read it :P hehe

THanks! --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 10:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Guys! I was just wondering if i could please get your permission to use your student drawn diagram, if you see our [[2010_Group_Project_2|page]] im making a table with all our diagrams in it, and, of course, i need your permission to use it :) Thanks! Jill - group 2 --[[User:Z3265772|z3265772]] 02:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

==Peer review==

Group 5: I found your page to be very concise and to the point and your information seems to cover all concepts without rambling on. This is a good thing because it makes reading the text straightforward and simpler to understand but at the same time i think you could still have used with some background information, perhaps in a history section, and maybe even a discussion about limitations. More pictures would also greatly improve not only the look of your page but also compliment the information and engage your reader. In terms of structure, i think that improvements could be made here to allow the information to flow better. Perhaps the 'preventions' section could be merged with "what next?' because the content is related so it would be natural progression and even put into a table to aid understanding? But overall its looking good and the research is evident. good job
--[[User:Z3293029|z3293029]] 21:59, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 5 - in terms of content, it is informative. Well done. In terms of the page aesthetics, images of fetal fibronectin itself would be useful at the start, and images especially in the Procedure section. The information is there however the use of images throughout the page and tabulating some of your information would make it more engaging and easier to understand. Remember to add a Historical background on the procedure even if it's short seeing as it is still a relatively 'new' procedure. The current research section could be rephrased more to fit into the flow of your page as a whole. Judging by the last sentence, it seems as though it has been put together by simply copy and pasting snippets from different journals. It would be more beneficial if the information given in the journals was analysed, interpreted and then presented while still referencing. This goes for the procedure also. Try to find information, understand it yourself and then 'explain' it to your audience. You will find that the page will be more cohesive as a result. Another point would be to expand the subheadings so that they clearly identify the subject matter being covered under that section as at the moment they are quite vague. Some points which could also be addressed: future of the procedure? The glossary could also be expanded. Good effort. --z3241780 14:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

'''GROUP 5: Fetal Fibronectin'''

Group 5 the first thing I have to say about your project page that I think will really help you guy out is that you need put more pictures. If I’m not mistaken the hand drawn picture at the very top is the only picture on the whole page. Pictures help captivate the audience and makes your intended audience want to read on to find out or relate the picture to the information present. They also help break up the page and allow the reader some processing time while reading the information of Fetal fibronectin. The Information you have presented is pretty much flawless being the perfect amount of scientific language, by this I mean that your assignment is assessable for pretty much anyone but more importantly the information was informative. The Dot points you have used many of the section also help us understand the project better. Last but not least you have missed out on history of the pre-natal diagnostic technique which Mark Hill said was part of his marking scheme, and after reading what other people have posted on your discussion page I notice that I’m not the only one to make this comment. Apart from that nice work!!!!

--[[User:Z3252635|z3252635]] 13:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

You have a nice and simple page, concise and to the point. Nice drawn image at the beginning of the page to draw attention I thought it was very well done. I found that the current research was good, showed some good effort with good references to backup your info about the case studies and statistics. Ways that could be improved is the use of images, so people could understand the topic better, and some tables may help to make the information more interesting. I guess more detail and elaborate more on the history. Also i wasn't sure if there were any risks involved and how common this test is done. References were good, with a nice glossary. nice effort!
--[[User:Z3224500|z3224500]] 13:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Good content, needs a bit of colour and dynamics,,pictures, to engage the viewer,
The explanation of the results that can be obtained is succinct and to the point, it is a good section. There a few typos about, I was interseted in how accurate the test was for predicting pre term births and this was dealt with well in clinical research section. This had good scientific content. A table summarising your projects views on the validity of conducting this procedure, may reinforce the topic as, as you have explained in sentences, that it is a pretty crucial diagnostic tool. With a few little things like that this is a good web page.
--[[User:Z3129413]] 17:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Simple, good organisation and what I like about it is that they referenced a lot of their text to backup their information which i thought was very scientific. The drawn picture was nice, but overall the page needed more images and pictures to understand the topic better. A table may have been a good choice to convey some information to make it more interesting, but it is still simple so not a very big deal there. So overall, more images, and I think more longer information under some headings would provide more extensive knowledge on the topic. References are very good, with an alright glossary.
Hi guys!

I’m guessing that the fetal fibronectin diagram at the top of the page is your student drawn diagram. Nice job on it. You might want to more clearly indicate that it is student drawn, though, and you should probably include the copyright statement. Also, you might want to think about adding some more pictures to your page to break up the text a little bit and make the page more eye-catching and easy to look at. I have to say that I really liked the way that you’ve set out the section on the test results. It was very easy to read. If I had another suggestion, it would be to move your glossary up to before the references – I almost didn’t notice you had a glossary hidden there. If someone wasn’t really looking, they might not spot it. Other than that, nice job!--[[User:Z3252833|z3252833]] 12:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

--Group 4 Fetal Fibronectin

Although this page had not as much detail put into it compared to previous pages, I found it much easier to read and absorb information. We must take into account that they have used a variety of sources so I am speculating that this is the more important information after researching this topic. So taking this into account I believe that this page is informative on the topic using a variety of sources, but hasn’t gone too in depth. The only advice I can give is to add some pictures or diagrams, even reproduce the information in a table to make it more interesting. Thanks guys you have done a great job.

--[[User:Z3290040|3290040]] 10:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 5

Group 5, the set out of your page is really good, its broken up into sections and there's lots of point form throughout which makes it really clear and easy to understand, except for current research.

What could be improved: More pictures would help break it up and make it more interesting, maybe a picture of the actual procedure would be good. Some more detail could be added to give it a more scientific aspect like for example in the procedure section, and maybe a section on the historic background, I think thats part of the marking criteria. Overall i think you've done a great job but just maybe add some more detail to give it a more scientific feel.

--[[User:Z3292208|z3292208]] 08:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Fetal Fibronectin

Hey guys good work with this assignment. The first thing I notice was there are not as many pictures as there are in other pages. However, what was there was relevant and easily readable.I think some more detail could be given in a few sections would help convey a more technical side of this subject matter.

--[[User:Z3254753|z3254753]] 17:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 5 = I really like how all the parts are broken down into points which made it easy to follow except for the "current research" . It is very structured and the picture looks great.

What could be improved is adding more pictures and break down the current research into bullet points but other than that its great --[[User:Z3305561|Navneet Ahuja]] 12:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 5: Foetal fibronectin
What I found good about this assignment was that all the information was presented in a clear and organized manner, and did appear to have a teaching element to the project. There was a great amount of research and referencing done although it did lack a bit of a “scientific feel”.

What could be improved?
Some extra pictures or tables could be added and also the glossary could probably be placed above the references so that it is easier to refer to it instead of having to scroll all the way down.

--[[User:Z3254433|z3254433]] 07:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Group 5, I liked the fact that everything is referenced, it made me feel like you have really researched what you are putting on here. Your page is very informative and i learnt alot about fetal fibronectin. i liked your student drawn diagram!

improvements: definitely extra pictures. If you cant find any that you can use, start emailing the companies, this is how i got most of our permissions, as i couldnt find any with permissions. as a last resort try wiki, all of their pictures arent copyright protected. Also, probably best to go through the criteria for the page, youve missed the history altogether. Here it is for you:
project outline:

1. Intro

2. historic background

3. current associated research

4. simplified description of technique

5. student drawn figure or animation

6. reference list

7. glossary

8. external links

--[[User:Z3265772|z3265772]] 03:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Reading through the information is quite easy, the headings and sub-headings makes it very clear to follow. Having questions as sub-headings makes it very user friendly to read and understand the fetal fibronectin test. However the history and development of the test is lacking. Also is the test specific for pre-mature birth detection only? please specify. The introduction also is a bit confusing where it say "Fetal fibronectin is a protein based plasma that acts as a form of glue attaching the amniotic sac to the uterine wall. Fetal fibronectin is commonly present between 22 to 35 weeks of pregnancy. It is released into the upper vagina towards the onset of labour. If the test finds fFN between this period, the woman will have a chance of going into labour" - what period are u talking about? when I read it, it seems to be prefering to 22-35 weeks of pregnancy as it state before, but it was mention that it was commonly to find fFN during that time, does that mean that it is common for women to have pre-mature births?

What could be improve would be providing a brief history of this test and fix up the introduction so it won't be confusing to the reader.

--[[User:Z3216889|3216889]] 13:53, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

----

{{Template:Projects10MHtalk}}

--[[User:S8600021|Mark Hill]] 00:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC) There is no content on your project page and you are not making appropriate progress. I expect you all at this weeks lab and an explanation as to why no one is adding content to your project page.

===You need to have this updated before this weeks lab when I will be reviewing all projects.===

--[[User:S8600021|Mark Hill]] 04:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC) This is no where not good enough, I will need to talk to you in this weeks lab. Your group has not searched the scientific literature, found information about fibronectin or related images. Unless everyone here gets going on this project you will not be completed in time.

Dez--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 09:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi,members,i have split the work up to 3 different constituent parts and each of us will get to pick 1

and do it.In addition,i have also roughly split the work up to 3 stages, which is:

a)collecting the information from different sources,

b)grouping the information,and

c)put what we get on group page.

Note:

-you just need to put your name next to the capitalised heading,(e.g PART C-Dez)to indicate you are up to that part.

-PART C is picked by me, so,options left are PART A and B only.

-You can always add in additional info, but i think it`s better we discuss it first when we figure or find it out(the ones you cant decide if they`re your part),so that we can discussion whose part it belongs to and who should do it, to kinda maintain the flow of the content.

-i`m aware that PART B is relatively short,i was outta ideas.Well, the point of PART B i make it mainly emphasizes on info related to how this test is carried out and 3rd party`s voices on this test.

The 3 different parts that i have split up are as following:

PART A - Jade

Introduction:

-what does this technique rely on?(fibronectin)

-Stuff about fn ,fibronectin,like the time or stage it forms during pregnancy.

-what does fn do in mom`s tummy during pregnancy.

-what kind of other abnormalities can this test predict? (mainly used for the prediction of preterm birth as far as i know)

-signs and events of preterm birth in mom`s tummy if there`s a high possibility the mom`s having a

preterm birth,like,cervix dilation , fn leaks outta vagina,etc.

-the relationship of fn and prediction of preterm birth.

(like comparison of fn between pregnant woman who are not at risk of preterm birth and those who are,etc)

PART B-Mary

-how does the test work? like,steps and procedures involve.

3rd party`s voices:

-what do the public doctors , pregnant woman say about this technique?-interview thing, vids( how this

test is carried out)

-related images.

PART C-Dez

-who should take the test?

-What will the results tell about risk of delivering early?

-diagnostic accuracy.

-side effects.

-advantages of knowing the prediction.

-treatments for those who tested with positive result.

One last thing,

i think our primary source would be pubmed,of course there`re others too, but then the info isnt as

extensive and specific as pubmed,so go to it,look for the related journals and extract only details that

you need.

It`d be great if we could find more images and videos related to the info we get,by doing so,we could

make the page less lengthy and readers understand it better.

Looking forward to your comments,because i could be wrong.

--[[User:Z3291079|z3291079]] 12:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
We should probably add something about the history of fetal f. Fit it in with part B?

heey , sorry for the late reply.Yea, it fits in with part B , sounds reasonable.
Do you have any idea what it could be? and post some links on here , if you have some with you.
--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 06:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys I found a really good article about that defines what fetal fibronectin is and how it is used to determine preterm labour. I Don't know if I can copy paste because of the copyright and I forgot how to make a link so the website is http://www.ranzcog.edu.au/publications/statements/C-obs26.pdf , It's got bits and pieces of everyones parts if You guys want to look through it and pick out what would be of help to you. Also I found a video. It's that doctor that goes onto the Dr Phil show but it's pretty good. It was one of few that I could find soo look at it and tell me what you think. Its website is http://www.5min.com/Video/Learn-about-Fetal-Fibronectin-Test-114223707. If you can find any videos just post them up because I don't think there are many around. Also I've found articles that question the tests ability to undermine the occurrence of the pre-term birth. I don't know if this is significant enough to add in as we are essentially talking about it's role in identifying whether or not the mother is going to have a pre-term birth or not instead of whether the doctor can stop it. Tell me what you think. should I add it in or not? You can find the article at http://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/Abstract/1996/05000/The_Preterm_Prediction_Study__Fetal_Fibronectin.1.aspx. --[[User:Z3252083|Mary Nicolas]] 10:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it is significant enough as it is an issue around this technique.I`d say add it in.
--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 07:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah add this in cos you can say how it is a good technique but is not the best etc., etc. This could cover the topic of the reliability of this technique which we can look through. Some additional info i guess. --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 03:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Mary, you have one more part to do , which is the history of fetal fibronectin.( Like what inspired the Doc came up with this technique and is this technique a modified version of some technique, and of course it`d be great if you could find stuff like when the first time this technique was put to use, how was it and talk a little bit about the following tests,and important people involved.)
--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 06:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys, I've found an article that is a good reference describing the test...it's a good outline of what we need to know. I've found a site about fFN that may help, nothing major though. it also has a few references of articles on there that we could research. I'm going to post the subheadings up on the main page of what i think, let me know what you think but you guys can go ahead and change it :) - Jade

http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1149.asp

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582650/?tool=pubmed --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 03:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh and if we can find anything about further research about fFN, about improving it or something then we should add that in --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 03:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I will do a drawing of fetal fibronectin in the womb, there's a great picture on the video that mary posted, so i will use that as a guide --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 11:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

http://www.southernhealth.org.au/icms_docs/1197_Fetal_fibronectin_Quikcheck_in_threatened_peterm_labour.pdf Just some more info to help --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 13:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys, kinda getting worried, we should really get a move on with this assignment lol. I'm going to draw a picture today and put it up. And hopefully finish my part of this assignment. Any feedback? --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 00:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Another helpful site guys - http://www.ffntest.com/index.html --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 02:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

hey guys don't worry about me I'm doing my work I just want to do it all before I put it up. The test results and procedure have been really easy to put together but the history is quite difficult as there is not demarcating date or person that used it first up... if that makes sense. I'll do it but I dont think I'm going to come up with a timeline like some of the other groups. --[[User:Z3252083|Mary Nicolas]] 04:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

@Mary:it`s alright ,Mary.Put up what you think is makes sense,we can then discuss on it and edit in the remaining days.
@Jade:i realise you didn`t reference your work.So, i reckon you reference your work as soon as you can.--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 10:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

We also need more images. It's hard to find non-copyrighted pictures for fFN. i'll draw another picture if really needed. --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 12:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

===Improvements===

Include a table on the deformities that result from pre-term births

History; refer back to the outline - I'm finding it extremely hard to find stuff about the history ay--[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Pictures

Images for the Procedure - I added another drawing for the procedure --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Glossary above the references - DONE --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Make Introduction clearer - DONE --[[User:Z3291079|Jade Seenandan]] 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Break up Current research into dot points

--[[User:Z3252083|Mary Nicolas]] 00:25, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

"preventions" section could be merged with "what next" -DONE --[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 12:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

How common the test is done- look it up under the heading "targeted individuals--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 12:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The risks of this test-look it up under the heading "disadvantages"--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 12:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The "current research section" is broken down into several subheadings to make readers more easier to understand--[[User:Z3318446|Seow Liew]] 12:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

''So we don't forget; '''the project guidelines'''''.

1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.

2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.

3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.

4. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.

5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.

6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.

7. Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki.

8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.

9. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.

10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines. --[[User:Z3252083|Mary Nicolas]] 00:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Guys! I was just wondering if i could please get your permission to use your student drawn diagram, if you see our [[2010_Group_Project_2|page]] im making a table with all our diagrams in it, and, of course, i need your permission to use it :) Thanks! Jill - group 2 --[[User:Z3265772|z3265772]] 02:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)