WikiProject Genetics has been featured in the Signpost. If you wish to get involved with the Signpost, please visit the Newsroom. 30 April 2014

Possible project consolidation

There's a discussion going on over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biology about whether it is worth consolidating some of the disparate biology wikiprojects. One possibility could be a merger or semi-merger of WP:GEN + WP:MCB + WP:COMBIO + WP:BIOP, since their scopes are well-aligned. Ideas and opinions welcome! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 01:14, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

WP:Gene Wiki may also be included in this. We are still in the early stages of this discussion. Comments are welcome (read:needed)!!

I should also add that we are considering bringing some aspects of WP:Wikiproject X to WP:Biology and turning it into a proper meta-project. Whether GEN remains independent or is merged into a larger project, there will be an opportunity to participate in that change as well. Prometheus720 (talk) 03:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Confirmation pre-merger

Hello, based on the consensus at the WP:Biol discussion, this is confirmation of my suggestion to merge:
WP:GEN + WP:MCB + WP:BIOP + WP:CELLSIG (possibly + WP:COMBIO) -> into popflock.com Resource: WikiProject Molecular Biology (name to be confirmed)
The new main page should be able combine all of the information of each project (much of which overlaps) and the talkpage should also also centralise discussion to make it more lively and easier for newcomers! Separate tracking tables of article qualities can still be kept by making them 'taskfores' if people think that'll be useful. If people don't object I'll go about redirecting the WP and WT pages to that centralised location next week per this process. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 13:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jkrn111, Gonnym, Fangmz, Iamnotabunny, NessieVL, Poeticfeelings, and UnitedStatesian: Pinging you as you are all listed as active members under Wikiproject Directory tools. We really would like to have some conversation about this merge. Prometheus720 (talk) 16:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Not a member of this project. Probably raised a template issue, which is why I showed up. Good luck with the merger. Gonnym (talk) 16:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for summoning me. Where shall we discuss this matter? Also, I think centralized discussion is a great idea. Poeticfeelings (talk) 17:15, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I think the WP:Biol discussion speaks for itself. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm pulling a Davos Seaworth and saying I'm not sure I get a vote, but aye. --Nessie (talk) 01:41, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Merger complete! See the new unified talkpage. All talkpage archives should be clearly visible and searchable and the new unified WikiProject page is almost complete. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

A possible Science/STEM User Group

There's a discussion about a possible User Group for STEM over at Meta:Talk:STEM_Wiki_User_Group. The idea would be to help coordinate, collaborate and network cross-subject, cross-wiki and cross-language to share experience and resources that may be valuable to the relevant wikiprojects. Current discussion includes preferred scope and structure. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 03:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Draft talk:Horizontal transfer of mitochondria#Opinions of subject matter experts sought

 You are invited to join the discussion at Draft talk:Horizontal transfer of mitochondria#Opinions of subject matter experts sought. Worldbruce (talk) 14:46, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Genealogy

If anyone here is interested, we are looking for volunteers at WikiProject Genealogy. Thanks! Tea and crumpets (talk) 01:07, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Christopher Kaelin up for deletion

• Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL
• Christopher Kaelin (|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

IMO, well sourced article about a geneticist. But you can help improve it. 7&6=thirteen (?) 15:53, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Your input appreciated

Hi all,

I would appreciate your input in this strange case: Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Wikipedia_page_"later"_published_in_scientific_paper:_copyvio?.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 20:02, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion of interest at Reliable Sources Noticeboard

The following discussion is of interest to members at popflock.com Resource: Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Using of primary genetics sources at Uyghur (and many other Eurasian pages)--Ermenrich (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Mendelian inheritance

Hallo dear colleagues, I have studied biology at the University of Frankfurt Germany, I am a biology college teacher, I have been working in the German popflock.com resource for many years correcting biology articles and writing some new ones. Some time ago I started completing and correcting some english articles too, for example Genetic carrier. I created many own graphics where they were missing. Recently I found the english article Mendelian inheritance needing improvement and reliable sources. I saw a number of technical inaccuacies too and took the time to make a completed and corrected version in a sandbox User:Sciencia58/sandbox Can you please read through this carefully, compare with the current version and tell Redrose64 and me on the talk page, if you agree to use the reworked version. If you have any further suggestions for improvement, please let me know. Sciencia58 (talk) 16:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hallo I haven't received any answer yet. Has anyone read this post? Sciencia58 (talk) 06:15, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Maximum genetic diversity

Can someone familiar with genetics/molecular genetics take a look at this new article. There are some bold claims about what appears to be a fairly new explanation for molecular evolution, including "is a scientific theory" and "resolves all the paradoxes in molecular evolution" (the latter is a cited quotation, but I can't access the source). It also makes claims about other approaches being "erroneous". This needs a subject-matter expert. I've left a comment on the article's talk page. Mindmatrix 20:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

The article's neutrality is disputed. Editors are invited to join the discussion on the article's talk page. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:59, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Dubious inclusion within the scope of this WikiProject?

Just putting this here as I've been doing some maintenance of some articles I've created. I noticed that Strømme syndrome had been designated as within the scope of WikiProject Genetics, however CDK13-related disorder hadn't. I then checked around and saw that examples such as Down syndrome, fragile X syndrome, Angelman syndrome (but not Prader-Willi syndrome, oddly) and Klinefelter syndrome had not been designated as within the scope of WikiProject Genetics, only WikiProject Medicine and their Medical genetics task force.

This led me to wonder, how I do specifically determine whether an article is within the scope of this WikiProject, and can I remove the WikiProject Genetics tag from Strømme syndrome? SUM1 (talk) 21:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Inclusion of a Wikiproject tag at an article talk page is entirely up to the project members themselves, so it's not like any standard has yet been applied to all those pages. Strømme syndrome is pretty clearly a genetic disorder, as are all the other ones you mentioned in terms of WP:PROJSCOPE, so I'd see no reason why that one should be removed. If no one adds the tags to the others though, then that's also not a big deal. Kingofaces43 (talk) 21:49, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

@SUM1: In general, I think it's better to include the wikiproject tags when in doubt. There's a general guideline here for genetics articles. I would imagine that most (all?) articles in the WP:MED's medical genetics taskforce would be relevant to WP:MOLBIO's genetics taskforce. It makes the Metrics more useful (e.g. for looking for high/mid-importance, stub/start-class articles to prioritise improving). T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 00:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Non-helical models of DNA structure

I saw a Science Reference Desk question about this article. I've edited some of the references but have concerns about the content in this article. I've started a discussion at Talk:Non-helical models of DNA structure#Work from X, Y. C. about my concerns. Any and all comments, edits, etc welcome. Thanks, EdChem (talk) 04:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

WP:NORN#Is it original research to take a table from an article on genetics and interpret it?

Editors here might be interested in the above discussion. Doug Weller talk 15:56, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Gene names policy

What is Wikipedia's policy on enforcing the official gene symbols as endorsed by HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee? --130.60.206.75 (talk) 09:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

An article should either use the current HGNC-approved gene symbol or the UniProt protein name. Old gene symbols might be ok to list as an alias if they're notable, but nothing more than that. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 19:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Genetic Saturation

FYI: Draft:Genetic Saturation has been submitted to AfC some time ago - could do with someone with a interest in the subject reviewing it. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Overall it's ready for mainspace (start class). Still could so with improvements for clarity in some areas, but nothing that would exclude it from mainspace. I've tidied up the simple heading and figure formatting issues. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 00:56, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

The bottom half on GSSM should be merged into Saturation_mutagenesis (both have useful info on the technique) and a {{see also}} tag added to the top. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 01:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks Evolution and evolvability - accepted. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:50, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Biological determinism's neutrality

An IP editor has placed an NPOV (neutrality) tag on this article. Editors are invited to comment in the discussion on the article's talk page. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:04, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Featured article review for Attachment theory

I have nominated Attachment theory for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Edits to Translation (biology)

There have been a lot of small edits from brand new users to this article. Just about every red name in the edit history has made exactly that one edit. I thought they were all one person, but it looks like I was wrong. A lot of them are unsourced with no edit summary and change around the meaning of the article. I don't have the subject knowledge to say if these are vandalism or plausible though, perhaps someone on this WikiProject can take a look through edits such as these? 1 2 3 4 5 For example, I can vaguely say that the first edit I linked is probably incorrect...? But I'm far from certain. (Those 5 are just an example, there are many more in the history, some reverted, some accepted) Leijurv (talk) 20:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Will respond at WT:MCB. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talkocontribs)} 01:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for advice on article

Hi everyone, I'm looking for some help with an article I've been working on and would like to submit for review. I want to make sure it is notable enough and well sourced, and would really appreciate any advice anyone can give. It's about a genetic research company, so I thought it would be of interest in this page. The page is Draft:Sano Genetics - thanks for any help!

Clarealev (talk) 14:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I've commented over at Draft talk:Sano Genetics. It's tricky because I actually rather like the company, but from the sources, it currently looks like one of a hundred personalised dna sequencing companies. It's main points of difference from the references are its future plans rather than past achievements. I'm no expert on company wp pages though, so may still be sufficient if buzz is large enough. Best to check with others. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 11:34, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Description regarding differences in skin among individuals

Thoughts are needed on the following: Talk:Human skin color#Description regarding differences in skin among individuals. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 04:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

ctRNA edits

I would like to add edit the article on ctRNA as a my project for a course I am taking. I am new ish to this and I would really appreciate some help and feedback. Garhingh (talk) 21:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Should we redirect this page to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology

A similar redirect was recently done for MCB to further consolidation and reduce the need to cross-post between talkpages. Would there be any objections to doing something similar for this page (following on from the earlier post #Possible_project_consolidation)? T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 22:45, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

I suspect it's just a few of us watching all the taskforce pages, so I'm happy to see them all redirected to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology. Ajpolino (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Genetic disorders

Worldwide, most nations screen newborn infants for a range of genetic disorders. However, there are not many efforts to consolidate this information across nations. The Global Newborn Society described in Draft:Akhil Maheshwari seeks to correct this deficiency. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhuma1971 (talk o contribs) 03:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)