This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Should this page be made into a List? I feel that Blood type provides sufficient Background (history, content, explanations etc.) to the reader for this article only to be a list that complements the Blood type article. Otherwise, we would just repeat all content written in Blood type article in own subheadings here. That seems unnecessary. Thoughts on this? -- Treetear ( talk) 23:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
As of today there is a "contradictory" flag after the approximate number of minor blood groups. Why is that there without any further discussion? Which article does this contradict?
77.138.224.125 (
talk)
22:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Right now the wikilink for Augustine group links to Augustine of Hippo. Don’t see how that’s relevant, unless he discovered/had that blood type. 97.116.94.89 ( talk) 21:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
"38 major human systems are identified as of August 2019"
"As of 2019, a total of 41 human blood group systems are recognized by the International Society of Blood Transfusion (ISBT)" at line 15 of the latter article.
Thank you ;) — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 03:10, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
In case people haven't seen this:
- PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 07:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop changing Rh to Rhesus. Rh is the official and correct term as per the ISBT. The term 'Rhesus' is incorrect and antiquated. If Rhesus has to be mentioned at all it should be a reference to the historical and incorrect use. Eg 'previously known as Rhesus'. 2A01:4B00:D206:8000:45AC:B66E:D597:87BB ( talk) 09:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Should this page be made into a List? I feel that Blood type provides sufficient Background (history, content, explanations etc.) to the reader for this article only to be a list that complements the Blood type article. Otherwise, we would just repeat all content written in Blood type article in own subheadings here. That seems unnecessary. Thoughts on this? -- Treetear ( talk) 23:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
As of today there is a "contradictory" flag after the approximate number of minor blood groups. Why is that there without any further discussion? Which article does this contradict?
77.138.224.125 (
talk)
22:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Right now the wikilink for Augustine group links to Augustine of Hippo. Don’t see how that’s relevant, unless he discovered/had that blood type. 97.116.94.89 ( talk) 21:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
"38 major human systems are identified as of August 2019"
"As of 2019, a total of 41 human blood group systems are recognized by the International Society of Blood Transfusion (ISBT)" at line 15 of the latter article.
Thank you ;) — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 03:10, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
In case people haven't seen this:
- PhantomSteve/ talk¦ contribs\ 07:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Please stop changing Rh to Rhesus. Rh is the official and correct term as per the ISBT. The term 'Rhesus' is incorrect and antiquated. If Rhesus has to be mentioned at all it should be a reference to the historical and incorrect use. Eg 'previously known as Rhesus'. 2A01:4B00:D206:8000:45AC:B66E:D597:87BB ( talk) 09:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC)