Talk:Human genetics

the human genome project is the newest upcoming discovery and milestone that mankind has imprinted in the sands of time .

This is the worst article on wikipedia. someone fix it.

It's pretty bad, but it doesn't touch the suckiness of Star Wars fan films. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supernerd 10 (talk • contribs) 16:24, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Its amazing how many 'worst' articles there are on wikipedia, or is it possible there are a large number of hyperbolic critics. Wikipedia has guidelines on the code of conduct.

I think the article needs some help.Pdeitiker 00:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

A genetic-stub has been added.

other article?

Is there some other article somewhere about human genetics? This one is pretty thin for such a big topic. Jonathan Tweet 16:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Having six fingers is a genetically dominant trait? That doesn't sound right at all... 71.61.235.84 08:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

RE:Genes and behavior

This is missing critical information. Namely http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-4_Euthanasia_Program Not just sterilization but actual killing took place. Killing would leave a zero chance to reproduce. With the reported 250,000 genetically inferior killed , no one has studied the supposed cleansing effect on the human race ?--Mark v1.0 (talk) 19:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Picture

THe main picture for this article seems that it good be better. Does anyone have any suggestions for a better a picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrpatel08 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Ideas

Does anyone have any feedback or ideas to improve on the article and make it better. Also does anyone have any suggestions on the haplogroup maps at the end of the article. I feel like that they don't add to the article. Before I change it, I was hoping to get some suggestions.Hrpatel08

Don't be afraid to do a total reworking of the article, I'm afraid this article could use it and I'd be happy to help. Think about what main topics this article should cover, make an outline of that, and then try fitting the current information to be within it. Here's my offhand version:

• Description of the standard human genome - chromosomes, sex determination, number of genes, etc.
• Genetic differences and inheritance patterns
  • Dominant
  • Recessive
  • X-linked traits
  • chromosomal abnormalities
  • complex traits
• Human genome sequence
  • relatedness to close species
  • human genome evolution
  • "genomics"

Now here's how I see the current article: cytokinetics can go into the standard genome description but is probably more information than is needed. Molecular genetics doesn't mean anything. Genomics can go within "human genome sequence" section. Population genetics is unrelated to this topic and should be thrown out, although within the recessive trait section one could discuss of frequency of recessive traits vs carriers. Number of genes goes into standard genome ... pedigrees goes into genetic differences somewhere... traits (after fact checking!) could go into their respective inheritance pattern categories... and, as you say, the haplogroup should be thrown out.

This was just a rough draft. Already things occur to me that this doesn't address - eg, how does paternity testing work? Anyway, these were my thoughts, I've felt this article needs work so that's why I was watching and saw your comment. Pretty much anything you do to this article will improve it. Madeleine ✉ ✍ 19:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

PS - Next time remember to sign, even if editing anonymously. :-) Madeleine ✉ ✍ 19:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Heritability

Should heritability and family association studies be included into the article as well or should that just be left out completely. Hrpatel08 —Preceding comment was added at 05:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it could eventually get included under two different areas - complex inheritance patterns (where heritability would be addressed), and a research section could contain family association studies -- human genetics research should be another top level section maybe? Anything that is part of medical genetics is part of human genetics, don't worry about overlap. There's still a lot of cruft in the current article that needs to be cleaned up, though. Madeleine ✉ ✍ 19:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help, the article does need quite a bit of editing. Feel free to edit anything that you feel needs to be changed.

Hrpatel08

Assessment

I notice this has been expanded well beyond what can reasonably be called a stub, so I have upped it to 'start' for now. Some further readings would be good. Richard001 (talk) 09:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Simple inheritance problem

Upturned nose is listed as a recessive trait. Uh, seriously? Mannoro (talk) 23:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Level of hair growth on ears.

My edit concerning the "Level of hair growth on ears" was reverted as "unconstructive". You are free to google scientific articles on this matter yourself... 95.26.49.182 (talk) 02:23, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

it is the responsibility of the creator of content on wikipedia to properly source their information. if you would like to add the bit about ear hair, please find a WP:RS to support your addition. cheers WookieInHeat (talk) 02:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)