Talk:Virophage

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): Karate bb. Peer reviewers: E.L.Gamillo.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Introduction

The introduction is now clear and less technical. Please provide a comparison of the genome size of virophages to other viruses and their giant virus counterparts. Remainder of article needs a section on 1- physical and genomic characteristics and 2- a history of discovery. Language in the section on metagenomics needs to be less technical and better written, but it is good to include this information. S L Seston (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I really like how the information is very easy to understand and is not too technical so anyone who hasn’t read on this topic could get a clear understanding on Virophages. The setup of your page is organized and well constructed. Your table is a great visual! Abinkley95 (talk) 17:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC) Thank you for the peer review Karate bb (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Name

Shouldn't this be Sputnik virophage? Since it's been mentioned in very many places that it's the first example of a "virophage", and that's not its name. 76.66.195.63 (talk) 07:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the true name is "sputnik virophage". Virophage is not concept established in Virology, there are many other examples of satellite viruses, like hepatitis delta using the HBV capsid. The new finding for sputnik is that his virion can be seen into Mimivirus virion. Anyway we have to wait for an official approval By ICTV to have a definitive name.--Philippe Le Mercier (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Now that there are other examples of virophages see http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110328/full/news.2011.188.html , shouldnt this page be reinstated as a description of the type. Lumos3 (talk) 07:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Remove the redirect already, a valid stub is better than an invalid redir. --79.223.13.231 (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Doh, forgot that even an IP can do that. Done. --79.223.13.231 (talk) 21:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Wording

auxiliary vs. "other virus" I believe it is easier to be consistent. Rather than "other virus", we could and perhaps should use the term auxiliary throughout the article. When I first read the original wording in this article, I wondered "what do they mean with the other virus?". I assume the original author referred to the virus in the same cell, but I was not 100% sure from reading the article alone. This should perhaps be clarified. 84.112.136.52 (talk) 11:30, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review

It would be really interesting to add any applications that can be done with the virophage. As well as any research and discoveries that have been made because of the virophage. You could also add a separate section that only talks about the Sputnik virophages to provide more information about them. I like how you have a table showing the genomes of the virophages. That helps visualize information that might be difficult to picture. My only other suggestion would be to add more to the distinguishable characteristics. The section is very short. Overall the edits on the page look great! It is very informational and organized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E.L.Gamillo (talk • contribs) 08:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Viral replication Factory

Right now the article states this:

"Virophages rely on the viral replication factory of the co-infecting giant virus for their own replication. "

Now, I understand that giant viruses are a bit different to the other virus types; and I understand that virophages are different since they depend on giant viruses.

However had, the article claims that there is a "viral replication factory" and this is logically not very ... convincing. Why? Because by definition any virus requires the host cell machinery for translation; even if giant viruses code for some tRNA, they are not free living entities, right? They depend on the amoeba.... now the article claims that there is a "viral replication factory" but does not explain this AT ALL. I think this can not be maintained in the long run and should be reworded, while focusing exactly and accurately on WHAT exactly the virophage needs. Because I am 100% sure that even the giant viruses do require a host cell - otherwise they could be free living/existing entities and would not need any cell, ever. 2A02:8388:1604:CA80:30D1:92B6:15A6:A5F0 (talk) 12:18, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

replication factory is a term of art https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro.2016.197

you can google and read to see what precisely it means, but in the virological literature it is an accepted term — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:192:4700:1F70:F0C2:8DF0:1A19:D9D (talk) 14:58, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

contradiction with another article

Can we create or find a virus that will target and attack carona and overwhelm the virus? then neutralize that virus with a vaccine? 38.142.169.94 (talk) 06:13, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

co ordinate your articles

to people writing https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Virophage and https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Satellite_(biology)

you seem to have contradictory ideas about the difference between a virophage and a satellite virus can you two please edit your articles so they are not in conflict ? thanks !!