User:Z5113034 - Revision history

Z5113034: /* Group 5 */

2017-10-12T02:34:04Z

Group 5

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:34, 12 October 2017
Line 27:		Line 27:

	==Group 5==		==Group 5==
			The anatomy, histology and cardiovasculature sections are written and structured very well. The figures are direct, clear and enhance the text. The bolded words highlight anatomy specific for the lung and would be wonderful for the future glossary. Timeline is formatted extremely well and the level of detail coupled with the figures used is excellent. The structure of the respiratory network and the development signalling pathways are again done very well but would benefit from deeper referencing. The inclusion of short movies is entertaining and a helpful learning tool. Abnormal development was covered extensively and referenced well. Overall there was a cohesive writing style and approach to the topics, which flowed very well and created an engaging page.

	=Subheading=		=Subheading=

Z5113034: /* Peer Reviews */

2017-10-12T02:09:41Z

Peer Reviews

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:09, 12 October 2017
Line 26:		Line 26:
	The "Anatomy of the eye" was addressed very well, and the figures were very useful. However, significant aspects discussed in the Anatomy section were not present in the figures and could leave readers confused, for example, when all the muscles responsible for ocular movement were listed but not illustrated; there would be no need to list the proper names of all the muscles. Other than that the section was written well, merging description of form with explanation of function. The tables used in "Eye Development" were also gratifyingly direct, although some elaboration could improve the notes. From what is completed in the development of the "Components" the writing is engaging and the content is appropriately thorough. A diagram or figure would add to the good content. Congenital anomalies are a little brief but the images and table worked well in terms of formatting and visual appeal. Overall good job, would have appreciated a little more completion.		The "Anatomy of the eye" was addressed very well, and the figures were very useful. However, significant aspects discussed in the Anatomy section were not present in the figures and could leave readers confused, for example, when all the muscles responsible for ocular movement were listed but not illustrated; there would be no need to list the proper names of all the muscles. Other than that the section was written well, merging description of form with explanation of function. The tables used in "Eye Development" were also gratifyingly direct, although some elaboration could improve the notes. From what is completed in the development of the "Components" the writing is engaging and the content is appropriately thorough. A diagram or figure would add to the good content. Congenital anomalies are a little brief but the images and table worked well in terms of formatting and visual appeal. Overall good job, would have appreciated a little more completion.

	===~~Subheading~~===		==Group 5==


			=Subheading=
	[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]		[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]

Z5113034: /* Peer Reviews */

2017-10-12T02:09:07Z

Peer Reviews

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:09, 12 October 2017
Line 24:		Line 24:

	==Group 4==		==Group 4==
			The "Anatomy of the eye" was addressed very well, and the figures were very useful. However, significant aspects discussed in the Anatomy section were not present in the figures and could leave readers confused, for example, when all the muscles responsible for ocular movement were listed but not illustrated; there would be no need to list the proper names of all the muscles. Other than that the section was written well, merging description of form with explanation of function. The tables used in "Eye Development" were also gratifyingly direct, although some elaboration could improve the notes. From what is completed in the development of the "Components" the writing is engaging and the content is appropriately thorough. A diagram or figure would add to the good content. Congenital anomalies are a little brief but the images and table worked well in terms of formatting and visual appeal. Overall good job, would have appreciated a little more completion.

	===Subheading===		===Subheading===

Z5113034 at 01:18, 12 October 2017

2017-10-12T01:18:21Z

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 <br>
 {{2017ANAT2341 footer}}
 ===Subheading===
@@ Line 24: / Line 38: @@
 <pubmed>28786202</pubmed>

Z5113034: /* Peer Reviews */

2017-10-12T01:15:33Z

Peer Reviews

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:15, 12 October 2017
Line 33:		Line 33:

	==Group 3==		==Group 3==
			Overall a very in-depth page with most of the required subjects covered. Some general notes; the figures would have benefited from appropriate captions but were helpful nonetheless. Referencing and overall visual formatting could be improved. The page is written well and enjoyable to read.
			"Primary heart field and heart tube formation" could benefit from a diagram or figure since it is a lot of text that could be hard to conceptualise. The signalling processes are explained very well and in deep detail. Just a note though; the addressing of so many different variables in the signalling is a little confusing and hard to follow. Perhaps a more condensed response might be a little more straightforward. The diagram of the signalling pathways under "Wnt Signalling" was likewise hard to follow, and no key was given. Current Research and Animal Models were covered well and the explanation for their research and the key results highlighted were fascinating. Abnormal development was likewise addressed very well and the glossary of terms was very much appreciated.

Z5113034: /* Peer Reviews */

2017-10-11T23:30:46Z

Peer Reviews

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:30, 12 October 2017
Line 30:		Line 30:

	==Group 2==		==Group 2==
	The introduction is clear and well-thought-out; simple enough that the layman can understand but comprehensive enough to lead logically into the more extensive information on the page. Perhaps a discussion of the kidney's function ought to be included with the description of kidney structure. Kidney development; the choice of that particular style of formatting runs a risk of not tying the development with the timeline but the small table at the top serves well to stop that, even if it is a little of a hassle moving back and forth to keep up. The content was well-written and appropriate in voice and depth of knowledge. Visually well-presented with figures appropriately explained. Developmental abnormalities were covered well, and although bullet points may not be the best way to present the information, it allowed for the key points to be understood very quickly and effectively. Some aspects of the page must of course be filled out but overall a well-rounded and informative page. Well done.		The introduction is clear and well-thought-out; simple enough that the layman can understand but comprehensive enough to lead logically into the more extensive information on the page. Perhaps a discussion of the kidney's function ought to be included with the description of kidney structure. Kidney development; the choice of that particular style of formatting runs a risk of not tying the development with the timeline but the small table at the top serves well to stop that, even if it is a little of a hassle moving back and forth to keep up. The content was well-written and appropriate in voice and depth of knowledge. Visually well-presented with figures appropriately explained. Developmental abnormalities were covered well, and although bullet points may not be the best way to present the information, it allowed for the key points to be understood very quickly and effectively. The transition from topic to topic was logical and flowed appropriately. Some aspects of the page must of course be filled out but overall a well-rounded, well-structured and informative page. Well done.

	==Group 3==		==Group 3==

Z5113034 at 23:24, 11 October 2017

2017-10-11T23:24:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:24, 12 October 2017
Line 24:		Line 24:

	<pubmed>28786202</pubmed>		<pubmed>28786202</pubmed>

			=Peer Reviews=
			==Group 1==
			The most obvious flaw was the lack of polish in formatting of some of the page. Bullet points are only so useful when it comes to writing a wiki page, instead of taking notes. The page is unfinished, but, the content included especially in the "Development of Cerebral Cortex" and "Abnormalities associated with Cerebral Cortex Development" was extensive and well done. The large table that linked the development with the time period was very useful and the choice of bolding key words allowed the main idea in the paragraph to be quickly understood from a glance. The use of images very much enhanced the descriptions and checker-like the layout of the different abnormalities was refreshing. Some subheadings, such as the Anatomy and Function of the cerebral cortex, could be elaborated on but the overall structure of the page is logical and fluid, and the writing is clear and concise without being superficial.

			==Group 2==
			The introduction is clear and well-thought-out; simple enough that the layman can understand but comprehensive enough to lead logically into the more extensive information on the page. Perhaps a discussion of the kidney's function ought to be included with the description of kidney structure. Kidney development; the choice of that particular style of formatting runs a risk of not tying the development with the timeline but the small table at the top serves well to stop that, even if it is a little of a hassle moving back and forth to keep up. The content was well-written and appropriate in voice and depth of knowledge. Visually well-presented with figures appropriately explained. Developmental abnormalities were covered well, and although bullet points may not be the best way to present the information, it allowed for the key points to be understood very quickly and effectively. Some aspects of the page must of course be filled out but overall a well-rounded and informative page. Well done.

			==Group 3==

Z5113034: /* Subheading */

2017-08-10T06:56:01Z

Subheading

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:56, 10 August 2017
Line 15:		Line 15:
	[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]		[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]

			embryo
			[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/gquery?term=embryo ''embryo'']

	[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/~~sites/gquery~~?term=~~embryo~~ ''~~embryo~~'']		notochord
			[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=notochord ''notochord'']

			References

	~~[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov~~/pubmed~~?term=notochord ''notochord'']~~		<pubmed>28786202</pubmed>

Z5113034 at 06:52, 10 August 2017

2017-08-10T06:52:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 10 August 2017
Line 15:		Line 15:
	[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]		[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]

	~~<ref_name~~=~~”PMIDXXXX”><pubmed>XXXX<~~/pubmed>
	~~</ref>~~		[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/gquery?term=embryo ''embryo'']


			[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=notochord ''notochord'']

Z5113034: /* Subheading */

2017-08-10T06:50:40Z

Subheading

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:50, 10 August 2017
Line 14:		Line 14:
	===Subheading===		===Subheading===
	[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]		[[File:Chicken embryo E-cad and P-cad gastrulation.png\|500px]]

			<ref_name=”PMIDXXXX”><pubmed>XXXX</pubmed>
			</ref>