This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Human cloning article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
A news item involving Human cloning was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 19 April 2014. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a global map or maps, showing countries colored by current legal status of cloning, be included in this article to improve its quality. |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
I've removed the long section of trivia. It contained only one ref tag and that seemed non WP:RS. If anyone wishes to add some back, reliable sources are imperative and an indication of relevance to the subject -- as in how does the fictional thing improve the article content or reader understanding of the content. Vsmith ( talk) 15:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I think with the Ditto controversy, the Pokémon series here has severe issues as gamers are left unpunished when using imposter Ditto's or normal Dittos using transform in battle. Also, gamers are left almost unpunished when it comes to other science controversies or prohibited thinking orientations such as Eugenics, inbreeding and other nonsense coming from rather not racists like the n**i regime only, but also nobility elitists such as kings and queens and their kingdom and empire families. -- 2001:16B8:570E:1D00:C14F:B181:1C48:2C0E ( talk) 19:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
This article was part of an assignment from Saint Louis University in Spring 2014 (see the course page for more details).. Estephe9 ( talk) 17:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Jfriend2 Jfriend2 ( talk) 17:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
User:Jfriend2 and I are discussing how this article could be improved, and we think it would be beneficial to change the format of the article. Some of these changes include:
Jfriend2 ( talk) 18:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfriend2 ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 18 February 2014 (UTC) - Estephe9 ( talk) 17:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estephe9 ( talk • contribs) 17:51, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Some quick feedback on the edits you just made:
Chase
why Not splice DNA in two humans in halve and take one halve from each and put it in the other. 71.161.109.86 ( talk) 14:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Some recent edits have been made to this section to include a very long detailed description on a tv show and it's plot that includes cloning. This whole section needs to be re-worked to focus only briefly on HUMAN cloning in popular culture, not just cloning in general. Cloning in popular culture has it's own section in the Cloning article. Only sources referencing to human cloning should be included in this section and I will be working on cleaning it up over the next day or so. Jfriend2 ( talk) 20:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
It's relevant to bring up examples under the popular culture section because science fiction is often the source of misconceptions, also discussions on legality and ethics are often paralleled or thematically referenced in speculative fiction. A TV show truly has no place in a scientific discussion, but wiki is not a scientific journal and the factors influencing public opinion of topics is relevant to the article. It is important to the discussion being addressed to draw out the distinctions what is demonstrated by the scientific literature and what is shaping opinions from philosophical and pop culture sources. Czarnibog ( talk) 10:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
I was WP:bold and removed the following sentence from the history section:
It seems to me that it is more relevant to ethical issues than history and it has no citation. Anyone who disagrees should feel free to revert. Biolprof ( talk) 21:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
I was reviewing the text on United states state laws and the source for the entry under Florida is not present in the current citation from the National Conference of State Legislatures Jan 2008
What is the reason for this? Has the state law been changed or was the source originally incorrect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.106.239.16 ( talk) 03:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Human cloning article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
A news item involving Human cloning was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 19 April 2014. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a global map or maps, showing countries colored by current legal status of cloning, be included in this article to improve its quality. |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
I've removed the long section of trivia. It contained only one ref tag and that seemed non WP:RS. If anyone wishes to add some back, reliable sources are imperative and an indication of relevance to the subject -- as in how does the fictional thing improve the article content or reader understanding of the content. Vsmith ( talk) 15:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I think with the Ditto controversy, the Pokémon series here has severe issues as gamers are left unpunished when using imposter Ditto's or normal Dittos using transform in battle. Also, gamers are left almost unpunished when it comes to other science controversies or prohibited thinking orientations such as Eugenics, inbreeding and other nonsense coming from rather not racists like the n**i regime only, but also nobility elitists such as kings and queens and their kingdom and empire families. -- 2001:16B8:570E:1D00:C14F:B181:1C48:2C0E ( talk) 19:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
This article was part of an assignment from Saint Louis University in Spring 2014 (see the course page for more details).. Estephe9 ( talk) 17:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Jfriend2 Jfriend2 ( talk) 17:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
User:Jfriend2 and I are discussing how this article could be improved, and we think it would be beneficial to change the format of the article. Some of these changes include:
Jfriend2 ( talk) 18:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfriend2 ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 18 February 2014 (UTC) - Estephe9 ( talk) 17:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estephe9 ( talk • contribs) 17:51, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Some quick feedback on the edits you just made:
Chase
why Not splice DNA in two humans in halve and take one halve from each and put it in the other. 71.161.109.86 ( talk) 14:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Some recent edits have been made to this section to include a very long detailed description on a tv show and it's plot that includes cloning. This whole section needs to be re-worked to focus only briefly on HUMAN cloning in popular culture, not just cloning in general. Cloning in popular culture has it's own section in the Cloning article. Only sources referencing to human cloning should be included in this section and I will be working on cleaning it up over the next day or so. Jfriend2 ( talk) 20:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
It's relevant to bring up examples under the popular culture section because science fiction is often the source of misconceptions, also discussions on legality and ethics are often paralleled or thematically referenced in speculative fiction. A TV show truly has no place in a scientific discussion, but wiki is not a scientific journal and the factors influencing public opinion of topics is relevant to the article. It is important to the discussion being addressed to draw out the distinctions what is demonstrated by the scientific literature and what is shaping opinions from philosophical and pop culture sources. Czarnibog ( talk) 10:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
I was WP:bold and removed the following sentence from the history section:
It seems to me that it is more relevant to ethical issues than history and it has no citation. Anyone who disagrees should feel free to revert. Biolprof ( talk) 21:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
I was reviewing the text on United states state laws and the source for the entry under Florida is not present in the current citation from the National Conference of State Legislatures Jan 2008
What is the reason for this? Has the state law been changed or was the source originally incorrect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.106.239.16 ( talk) 03:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)