Talk:Playa de Oro virus

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Playa de Oro virus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Playa de Oro virus has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 30, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Viruses Mid‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Playa de Oro virus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sasata (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Haven't seen a virus article at GAN for a while. Comments soonish. Sasata (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing. Ucucha 20:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If this article is a start-class, the concern that the reviewer may ask is does it addresses the main aspects of the topic? AJona1992 (talk) 20:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is start-class only because I put the template there when I started the talk page, and it is generally accepted that one should not assess one's own articles higher than Start-class. The article covers all aspects of the virus that we know about. Ucucha 20:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

links: host, sequence, sequenced, nucleotide
- Done. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, the disease caused by hantaviruses such as Sin Nombre virus, has never been reported in Mexico, antibodies against hantaviruses have been found in human blood samples in Yucatán and various wild rodents are known to be reservoirs of hantavirus species." Is this sentence missing "Although" at the beginning?
- Yes, or a "but" in the middle. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Because OROV occurs frequently in Oryzomys couesi" can this frequency be expressed in numbers?
- Added the total numbers to the first paragraph.
mention the higher prevalence of antibody and viral RNA in males than females
- Added. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"The S segment consists of 1953 bases, of which 1287 (starting at position 43) make up the nucleocapsid protein." More accurately, the segment codes for the nucleocapsid protein
- Yes, rather embarrassing mistake. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"OROV is most closely related to the clade" is it possible to be related to a clade?
- Why not? Perhaps more precise would be "OROV is sister to the clade", but that is cladistic jargon that I wanted to avoid. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
a few words about the Muleshoe virus?
- Added. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps mention that the only other hantavirus previously found in Mexico is the ELMC
- Added. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
mention the two subspecies of O. couesi?
- Seems unnecessary; the name of the taxon (mexicanus) is already mentioned in the next sentence, and previously recognized subspecies are obscure enough that we can do without them. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be good to mention the guidelines for declaring a virus a new species, and the authors' justification against this set of criteria (already briefly mentioned at the end of the History and occurrence section, but some bit more discussion would be good)
- I've added a little. I feel like adding more would be undue weight for a matter that is only discussed briefly in Chu et al. (2009). Ideally, there would be an article on virus species or so to link to, but of course there isn't one. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"According to phylogenetic analyses" in this case, a link to molecular phylogenetics might be more germaine
- Done. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sasata (talk) 16:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. Ucucha 22:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome; article meets GA criteria, passing now. Sasata (talk) 02:35, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]