Talk:Biobank

Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Computational Biology task force (assessed as High-importance).

Biobanks from PKU stored samples (residual dried blood spot samples) are still controversial both in Europe and USA. It's better to change the picture from the PKU registry and put something else in order to maintain public trust on this subject. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjoana1 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image has been removed. Qn3xsmchf (talk) 23:07, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some weeks ago, I edited this article heavily to remove the

, but I was reverted, so here I am to try again. An shrill edit summary in the article history complained I 'emasculated' the article, which is interesting. I've been here for a while and I didn't know until today that Wikipedia articles had gender issues.

I've formatted the lead to conform with the

.

This article is about a biobank, not about DNA extraction, RNA extraction, genotyping, or the numerous techniques and media and storage used in molecular biology. Category:Molecular biology, Category:DNA profiling techniques, and Category:Biochemistry each contain several articles to use a table called 'approaches to sample collection' and much of the other good information that does not belong here.

I hope I'm being clear enough. I'm not saying that the information is not encyclopedic, because it very well may be if handled in the right way. I'm simply saying that this article is the wrong place for it. People who want to know about

are going to go to those articles, not here.

A layperson who wants to know about a biobank doesn't particularly care about which sample medium provides what result. It's like an article about a car that has a big section in the middle about how the tires are manufactured. The tires are important, but that information is out of place in an article about the car. It's a distraction from the main topic, which is the car.

Biobanks come with some controversy, as I'm learning during research for this article. There are several books on the subject, and that's the content about which visitors will want to read. I have added references and will continue to add relevant information to the article over the next several weeks. Please

]

While I agree with what Katie says, it is not obvious to me that she took the best action in revising the article. Here is what the article was like in 2008 before she edited it; here is the draft that she proposed. There was a lot of editing since then, with some of the information being removed and readded, but I think there was never expert oversight on this.

The big issue was deciding what goes into the article. An example of what Katie removed were descriptions of the kinds of samples which a biobank may have and characteristics of each. While such information may be overly detailed for this article, I think that information is a necessary part of explaining biobanking and it merits its own article and that this article should have a section summarizing that and linking to the main article. I could say the same for other sections removed. I am going to be working on this article starting now and if at any point in the future someone wants to talk to me about this, post here, post on my talk page, or even email me your phone number and we can talk on the phone. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:14, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I created an article called

Biobank specimens which incorporates a lot of what was lost. I rewrote it into my own words. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply

]