Talk:Dinophysis acuminata

Untitled

Critique of Article

NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The facts in the article is not well referenced. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The description section could use a bit more of a referencing to other articles used in the research. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)However, the 11 sources used seem to come from very reliable sources. NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)There is nothing distracting in this article. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The article stays on topic and continues to give good information about Dinophysis acuminata. NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The article in neutral. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)It just presents the facts of the protist. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)There is no bias or claims about this algae. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)All facts used are written from a very objective standpoint. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)This allows readers to get a neutral understanding of the subject. NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The information comes from older and newer research materials.NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)It has information that is cited and written be multiple people who came together to produce that source. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The sources themselves uses primary information from other places and cite those as well.NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC) Like this article, these sources are neutral as well. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)They provide objective standpoints about Dinophysis acuminata and present the research and facts in a well organized manner. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The sources used here, have also included sources in their research.NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC) Perhaps, if there is any bias, it would be best to evaluate the sources that the people (those in the citations used.) NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Feeding and endosymbiosis was underrepresented. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)This could be due to that note that there isn't too much really known about this particular protist. NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)I checked some of the links provided in the citations, and they worked perfectly. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)I was led to great articles. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The main this that this writer did was summarize and paraphrase the sources he cited. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)However, the other information that weren't cited had to come from somewhere, so this article can have some bits and pieces of plagiarism included in it. NaNa210 (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Actually, this article was edited quite recently, so it is up to date with most of its information. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)The article can broaden its information by providing some of the benefits and dangers that this protist causes. NaNa210 (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)What is being done currently, and its importance in its location just to name a few. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaNa210 (talk • contribs)

Bibliography to check out.'

• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3917280/

• http://botany.si.edu/references/dinoflag/Taxa/Dacuminata.htm

• http://botany.si.edu/references/dinoflag/Taxa/Dnorvegica.htm

• Stern, R.F., A.L. Amorim, and E. Bresnan. "Diversity And Plastid Types In Dinophysis Acuminata Complex (Dinophyceae) In Scottish Waters." Harmful Algae 39.(2014): 223-231. ScienceDirect. Web. 8 Oct. 2016

• García-Altares, M., et al. "Bloom Of Dinophysis Spp. Dominated By D. Sacculus And Its Related Diarrhetic Shellfish Poisoning (DSP) Outbreak In Alfacs Bay (Catalonia, NW Mediterranean Sea): Identification Of DSP Toxins In Phytoplankton, Shellfish And Passive Samplers." Regional Studies In Marine Science 6.(2016): 19-28. ScienceDirect. Web. 8 Oct. 2016

• Giménez Papiol, Gemma, et al. "The Use Of A Mucus Trap By Dinophysis Acuta For The Capture Of Mesodinium Rubrum Prey Under Culture Conditions." Harmful Algae 58.(2016): 1-7. ScienceDirect. Web. 8 Oct. 2016

• Mafra Jr., Luiz L., et al. "Harmful Effects Of Dinophysis To The Ciliate Mesodinium Rubrum: Implications For Prey Capture." Harmful Algae 59.(2016): 82-90. ScienceDirect. Web. 8 Oct. 2016.

• Díaz, Patricio A., et al. "Climate Variability And Dinophysis Acuta Blooms In An Upwelling System." Harmful Algae 53.Applied Simulations and Integrated Modelling for the Understanding of Toxic and Harmful Algal Blooms (ASIMUTH) (2016): 145-159. ScienceDirect. Web. 8 Oct. 2016.

• Villalobos, Leilen Gracia, et al. "Dinophysis Species Associated With Diarrhetic Shellfish Poisoning Episodes In North Patagonian Gulfs (Chubut, Argentina)." Journal Of Shellfish Research 3 (2015): 1141. Academic OneFile. Web. 8 Oct. 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaNa210 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NaNa210. Peer reviewers: Mauramk.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Dead references

https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Dinophysis_acuminata&diff=prev&oldid=754697516 produced a bunch of dead references. It seems to be copied out of a wiki inappropriately, but I cannot identify a source of the copying -- so the issue here is mainly about citation, not copyright. --Artoria2e5 🌉 03:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)