Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sequence alignment

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Sequence alignment

I've been working slowly but steadily on this article and its daughters for about a month now, and it's been significantly improved in technical detail, comprehensiveness, and referencing. The subject is a central topic in bioinformatics that is nevertheless commonly misunderstood by students and casual users of common sequence alignment tools. It's had a very helpful peer review and I'm interested to see how it fares here. Opabinia regalis 03:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support—My, this is well written indeed. Why can't all FACs be like this? Just a few points.
- Programmers use ", then" in their code, but when writing for a broader audience, avoid it as a marker of sequence unless absolutely necessary.
- Do use "the" consistently—not the telegram language that so many scientists use.
- Just a few more commas might be considered, although it's partly a matter of personal style. After sentence-initial adverbial/prepositional phrases, and before "such as", "because", "but" and "including" are possibilities.
- Consider using em dashes for some nested clauses that already contain commas.
- I've removed a few idle "alsos".
- In a few places, you over-favour "or" over "and" in lists.
- Avoid "Note that ..." in this register. Tony 04:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I've made a few minor changes given your comments. I'm both a scientist and a programmer, so I get both sets of idiosyncrasies. Also, thanks for taking care of my extraneous "alsos". Opabinia regalis 04:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Image:RPLP0 90 ClustalW aln.gif should be in PNG. WP 09:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I actually replaced that image with another one in PNG format that illustrates two different coloring/characterization schemes and is a less raggedy alignment. Opabinia regalis 01:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the following passage, "A variety of computational algorithms have been applied to the sequence alignment problem, the most intuitive of which is dynamic programming." (emphasis mine) sounds biased. I haven't found where in the article it is explained why dynamic programming maps onto the problem in a more intuitive way than other methods. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 09:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm, I think you're right. Reworded. (edit conflict: that was fast, thanks!) Opabinia regalis 01:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Samsara (talk • contribs) 01:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Opabinia, you've really done some great work on these topics in a short time. --Aranae 01:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't know much abuot the subject, but it looks like a good article. Viva La V i e Boheme 16:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice article ont he subject matter. -- Shane ^{(talk/contrib)} 01:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - one minor nitpick, the reference tags appear both before and after the punctuation, they should just be after.--Peta 02:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I think I got them all. Opabinia regalis 03:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's good to see a technical topic elucidated so well in W'pedia. Reimelt 21:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]