Does Lewis cause transfusion reactions rarely? Snowman 09:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Is this list in any particular order, or could it be reorganised by ISBT number? apers0n 16:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Recent developments have improved this page; however, I thought that what is on this page would be part of the blood type article page where most of it was copied from. Snowman 13:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Copying the table format from the French wiki has added 3 blood group systems not previously accounted for.
Also the Hh antigen system is currently part of ABO_blood_group_system#Bombay_phenotype - either needs a redirect, or to move the article from ABO. apers0n 08:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Could the purpose of the table be made more clear? It's not really explained at all, and in its current form doesn't add much to the article, IMHO. GBMorris ( talk) 11:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The intro states that the ISBT recognises 26 systems. The table lists 29. Something is wrong here. Number 3 and 28 appear to refer to the same system. Moreover, Issit and Anstee (Applied blood group serology 4th edition, Montgomery Scientific publications, 1998) state that "The Ii collection does not satisfy the criteria established by the ISBT working party for designation as a blood group system" (page 277). The ISBT working party insists that there has to be absolute genetic independence, before enumerating a new blood group system. When such evidence is absent, the term antigen collection is used. Thus, Ii is an antigen collection, and not a blood type system. Regarding GIL, I'm not sure about whether independence is established, but since the gene has been cloned and the human genome has been sequenced, this should be knowable. 62.16.189.71 19:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Human blood group systems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
ISBT N° | Common name | Official abbreviation | Epitope or carrier, notes | Locus |
027 | Ii | I | Branched (I) / unbranched (i) polysaccharide. | 6 |
028 | Globoside | P | Glycolipid. | 3 |
029 | GIL | GIL | Aquaporin 3. | 9 |
The link http://www.iccbba.com/wpantigentables.htm to the ISBT antigen tables is broken, and so removed from the reference. The Google cache of the page is [2] -- apers0n 09:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Are all known types reported on a donor's card? Thanks. Xiner ( talk, email) 22:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
There are various errors (in group type descriptions, rare blood groups) and non-precise descriptions in this article. I am thinking that a merge with the much better article Blood type (just transfer the table with the acknowledged blood group systems by ISBT; afterwards deleting this article / change into a redirect to Blood type) would solve the problem. What do others think? -- Firefly's luciferase ( talk) 04:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
There were a few changes introduced by User:Aytrus in the P and GLOB blood group systems. Although it is confusing that currently the P blood group system (ISBT 003) has the P1 antigen and the GLOB system (ISBT 028) has the P antigen, it is a fact (see current ISBT nomenclature). Additionally, there is the collection 209 called GLOB with Pk and LKE antigens. Based on just recently presented research results, there may be modifications in this classification in the future. However, I think wikipedia should reflect the current status of knowledge. Otherwise please add citations to the proper references to reflect the last changes. I think that the last modifications on P and GLOB should be reverted since they are not correct. Thanks -- Firefly's luciferase ( talk) 16:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't know enough on the subject to add this in myself, but this article puts the number of proteins at 32, adding Junior and Langereis to the list. Rich( Contribs)/( Talk to me!) 01:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
As well as A+ I have the above letters on my recent test. What do they refer to? There is no mention of them anywhere here or the main blood group page. "Shocked" that something as fundamental as this is not covered by Wikipedia! A major lacuna??
[[₳File:SSS|framed|none¢₡₢-- 122.163.37.84 ( talk) 14:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Bold text]]
Two complete sections are noted as near to nonsense, and besides tagging them as being without sources—and moving the silliest, most offensive content (a discovery claim, and reference to information "courtesy of")—into footnotes, these two inane sections ("Blood grouping postulates" and "Rare blood types") were left for others to dispose of. Literally, one can hope.
The lede was restructured to remove redundancies (and so it does not begin with a number!), and all sources were checked and completed (with several dead or outdated links fixed).
Regarding sources, a reminder: Wikilinks are not sources. Per WP:VERIFY, complete, verifiable sources for all information that is not common knowledge must appear. And none of this article is common knowledge (as the cross-reference to the simpler article makes clear).
Finally, regarding pasting in material from other articles, and the expert tag: Other's disregard of WP:VERIFY at overseas Wikipedias does not free us from following the verifiability policy when we transfer material. There are messes everywhere in WP.en because of disregard of this: in this article, all the material in the epitopes and notes column of the principal table is essentially unsourced, and therefore also violates WP:VERIFY''.
An expert is called, to delete or revise the two sections described, to restructure the article in accord with a good text source, and to find a source for all the material in the non-compliant table column (and begin to check it top to bottom).
Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 ( talk) 02:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
What if i got married by a person who's not matching me with blood group?! Femitha Kabeer Rk ( talk) 12:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
If you have kids, it will just mean that there is a good chance that they will not have the same blood type as you. For example if you are an A and they are a B, you can have a child with AB blood, or, depending on your (and their) phenotype there may be a chance that they can inherit O blood, A or B blood. If you marry them and don't have kids, nothing will happen, you just won't be able to donate blood to them (possibly, depending on how your blood types match up). 192.199.53.2 ( talk) 03:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I thought this was still useful information, but it certainly doesn't belong in the article under WP:SELF:
This table was borrowed in significant part from a tabular ISBT document available via the web (columns 1, 2, 3 and 5), [1] with column 4, regarding epitopes and entry notes, being largely unsourced (and therefore suspect material not in compliance with Wikipedia policies). [2] That and other unsourced information—i.e., not appearing in the ISBT table cited, or new to the table since publication of the ISBT table—should be considered as currently unverifiable by this encyclopedia's standards.
References
Enterprisey ( talk!) 19:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Former text of the reason parameter in the maintenance box:
the whole of the article lacks the scope of even a basic text, and two sections complete are poorly conceived, structured, and executed, e.g., incl. presenting minor discoveries without source, and referring to courtesy information from an Indian Health organization; in addition, all of the information in the table column on epitopes and notes cannot be traced (i.e., it violates WP:VERIFY)
Moved here because it was making the box too big. Enterprisey ( talk!) 19:24, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Human blood group systems. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Does Lewis cause transfusion reactions rarely? Snowman 09:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Is this list in any particular order, or could it be reorganised by ISBT number? apers0n 16:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Recent developments have improved this page; however, I thought that what is on this page would be part of the blood type article page where most of it was copied from. Snowman 13:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Copying the table format from the French wiki has added 3 blood group systems not previously accounted for.
Also the Hh antigen system is currently part of ABO_blood_group_system#Bombay_phenotype - either needs a redirect, or to move the article from ABO. apers0n 08:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Could the purpose of the table be made more clear? It's not really explained at all, and in its current form doesn't add much to the article, IMHO. GBMorris ( talk) 11:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
The intro states that the ISBT recognises 26 systems. The table lists 29. Something is wrong here. Number 3 and 28 appear to refer to the same system. Moreover, Issit and Anstee (Applied blood group serology 4th edition, Montgomery Scientific publications, 1998) state that "The Ii collection does not satisfy the criteria established by the ISBT working party for designation as a blood group system" (page 277). The ISBT working party insists that there has to be absolute genetic independence, before enumerating a new blood group system. When such evidence is absent, the term antigen collection is used. Thus, Ii is an antigen collection, and not a blood type system. Regarding GIL, I'm not sure about whether independence is established, but since the gene has been cloned and the human genome has been sequenced, this should be knowable. 62.16.189.71 19:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Human blood group systems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
ISBT N° | Common name | Official abbreviation | Epitope or carrier, notes | Locus |
027 | Ii | I | Branched (I) / unbranched (i) polysaccharide. | 6 |
028 | Globoside | P | Glycolipid. | 3 |
029 | GIL | GIL | Aquaporin 3. | 9 |
The link http://www.iccbba.com/wpantigentables.htm to the ISBT antigen tables is broken, and so removed from the reference. The Google cache of the page is [2] -- apers0n 09:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Are all known types reported on a donor's card? Thanks. Xiner ( talk, email) 22:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
There are various errors (in group type descriptions, rare blood groups) and non-precise descriptions in this article. I am thinking that a merge with the much better article Blood type (just transfer the table with the acknowledged blood group systems by ISBT; afterwards deleting this article / change into a redirect to Blood type) would solve the problem. What do others think? -- Firefly's luciferase ( talk) 04:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
There were a few changes introduced by User:Aytrus in the P and GLOB blood group systems. Although it is confusing that currently the P blood group system (ISBT 003) has the P1 antigen and the GLOB system (ISBT 028) has the P antigen, it is a fact (see current ISBT nomenclature). Additionally, there is the collection 209 called GLOB with Pk and LKE antigens. Based on just recently presented research results, there may be modifications in this classification in the future. However, I think wikipedia should reflect the current status of knowledge. Otherwise please add citations to the proper references to reflect the last changes. I think that the last modifications on P and GLOB should be reverted since they are not correct. Thanks -- Firefly's luciferase ( talk) 16:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't know enough on the subject to add this in myself, but this article puts the number of proteins at 32, adding Junior and Langereis to the list. Rich( Contribs)/( Talk to me!) 01:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
As well as A+ I have the above letters on my recent test. What do they refer to? There is no mention of them anywhere here or the main blood group page. "Shocked" that something as fundamental as this is not covered by Wikipedia! A major lacuna??
[[₳File:SSS|framed|none¢₡₢-- 122.163.37.84 ( talk) 14:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)Bold text]]
Two complete sections are noted as near to nonsense, and besides tagging them as being without sources—and moving the silliest, most offensive content (a discovery claim, and reference to information "courtesy of")—into footnotes, these two inane sections ("Blood grouping postulates" and "Rare blood types") were left for others to dispose of. Literally, one can hope.
The lede was restructured to remove redundancies (and so it does not begin with a number!), and all sources were checked and completed (with several dead or outdated links fixed).
Regarding sources, a reminder: Wikilinks are not sources. Per WP:VERIFY, complete, verifiable sources for all information that is not common knowledge must appear. And none of this article is common knowledge (as the cross-reference to the simpler article makes clear).
Finally, regarding pasting in material from other articles, and the expert tag: Other's disregard of WP:VERIFY at overseas Wikipedias does not free us from following the verifiability policy when we transfer material. There are messes everywhere in WP.en because of disregard of this: in this article, all the material in the epitopes and notes column of the principal table is essentially unsourced, and therefore also violates WP:VERIFY''.
An expert is called, to delete or revise the two sections described, to restructure the article in accord with a good text source, and to find a source for all the material in the non-compliant table column (and begin to check it top to bottom).
Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 ( talk) 02:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
What if i got married by a person who's not matching me with blood group?! Femitha Kabeer Rk ( talk) 12:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
If you have kids, it will just mean that there is a good chance that they will not have the same blood type as you. For example if you are an A and they are a B, you can have a child with AB blood, or, depending on your (and their) phenotype there may be a chance that they can inherit O blood, A or B blood. If you marry them and don't have kids, nothing will happen, you just won't be able to donate blood to them (possibly, depending on how your blood types match up). 192.199.53.2 ( talk) 03:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I thought this was still useful information, but it certainly doesn't belong in the article under WP:SELF:
This table was borrowed in significant part from a tabular ISBT document available via the web (columns 1, 2, 3 and 5), [1] with column 4, regarding epitopes and entry notes, being largely unsourced (and therefore suspect material not in compliance with Wikipedia policies). [2] That and other unsourced information—i.e., not appearing in the ISBT table cited, or new to the table since publication of the ISBT table—should be considered as currently unverifiable by this encyclopedia's standards.
References
Enterprisey ( talk!) 19:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Former text of the reason parameter in the maintenance box:
the whole of the article lacks the scope of even a basic text, and two sections complete are poorly conceived, structured, and executed, e.g., incl. presenting minor discoveries without source, and referring to courtesy information from an Indian Health organization; in addition, all of the information in the table column on epitopes and notes cannot be traced (i.e., it violates WP:VERIFY)
Moved here because it was making the box too big. Enterprisey ( talk!) 19:24, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Human blood group systems. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)