Talk:NK1 receptor antagonist

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified (February 2018)
Former good article nomineeNK1 receptor antagonist was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 11, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 22, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the first registered clinical use of an NK1 receptor blocker was the treatment of nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy?

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:NK1 receptor antagonist/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
  • There a few problems with flow of the prose, but more annoying is the quality of the pictures. Xasodfuih (talk) 12:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • Also there's quite a bit of overlinking, e.g. vasodilatory and tachykinin are linked twice in the same paragraph in the history section. Xasodfuih (talk) 13:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • The attribution style that's normally used in science papers doesn't quite work on the wiki, e.g. "In 1971 Chang managed ..." doesn't work for a general audience (who is this Chang?). The references at the end of the sentence aren't papers by Chang. Xasodfuih (talk) 13:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • The neurokinin-1 receptor section is a bit long; this is okay for term paper, but on the wiki this section should be moved/merged to Tachykinin receptor 1, which has less detail, and just a summary should be kept here. Xasodfuih (talk) 13:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • There are some problems with the organization of the historical material. The section intro and the 1st subsection of "Drug discovery and development" section should be moved to the history section. The "Other compounds" should be top level section that discusses all the compounds; this should probably include the binding section. I realize that the current organization is due to the focus of the original article, which was titled Discovery_and_development_of_neurokinin_1_receptor_antagonists, but this should be fixed for GA. Xasodfuih (talk) 13:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I'm failing this GAN due to lack of any edits/improvements in the week since I wrote my review above. Please renominated after addressing the issues detailed above. Xasodfuih (talk) 23:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (February 2018) edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on NK1 receptor antagonist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:49, 10 February 2018 (UTC)Reply