Difference between revisions of "User talk:Simonwro120"

Revision as of 05:56, 24 September 2017

Comments

Hello everyone, please feel free to leave any comments here! Simonwro120 (talk) 14:17, 4 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 2 Feedback

• Thank you for turning in your assignment on time.
• You wrote something in the summary field for 9 of 11 saves (82%) in the period of review. This is very good, but remember, we are aiming for 100%
• The number of total saves on your individual wiki page was 10, which is just within the range of what would be expected for this assignment.
• The only link to your User page from your journal entry was in your wiki signature, and the template/category was added late. The link from your User page to the shared class journal page was also late. In the future, be sure that all the requested links are in your template and invoke them on your pages on time.
• Your complementary DNA sequence was correct.
• Your translations were correct, except that you mixed up the labels for frames +2 and +3 and again for frames -2 and -3. Also, it would have been good to keep translating beyond the stop codon in this case, since it was purely a translation exercise.
• Your determination of which frames contained ORFs was correct.
• One other note: we do not label the ends of proteins 5' and 3', instead we label them N-ter and C-ter.
• I did not see any electronic lab notebook in your journal entry. For this assignment, the lab notebok would have explained how you arrived at your answers to the questions posed in the exercise. Please be sure to keep your electronic lab notebook for future assignments. Also, as discussed in class, please keep your notes on the same page as your individual journal entry.
• One small note about your References section: you need to provide a label for the link to the Week 2 assignment.
• Also, for your Acknowledgments section, this exact statement is required each week" "While I worked with the people noted above, this individual journal entry was completed by me and not copied from another source" followed by your wiki signature.
• The technical language in articles from the primary literature is definitely a hurdle for students (and even for faculty from a different field), but keep with it. Like with other fields of endeavor, it is good to take a look at the primary source.

— Kdahlquist (talk) 22:56, 23 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 1 Feedback

Thank you for submitting most of your work on time, though one edit was noticed at 3:42pm on September 5. Your Week 1 work has been reviewed, and the following points of improvement have been identified. Other than these items, your wiki skills and deliverables checked out OK:

• 32 edits were made to your user page—a good, gradual pace—but around 7 of those were missing a summary message. Please make it a habit to provide a summary, no matter how small the change might be.
• There is a difference between internal wiki links (double bracket) and external links (single bracket). The link on the main page to your user page is written out as if it were an external link, but it is more compact if written as an internal one.
• A template was successfully created, but it does not appear to be used anywhere in your submission.

For your shared journal response, no link was seen from your user page to the shared journal page. Thank you for answering the questions!

—Dondi (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2017 (PDT)