Talk:KE family

Introduction
Here is the place to discuss KE family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crowstar (talk • contribs)

Merge?
Is this family really notable other than as covered in FOXP2? Right now, our article doesn't say much of anything about them (not even what part of the world they live in). Unless there is more content we want here, we can just merge this article into FOXP2 (or just make this article redirect there, as I'm not sure we need to actually move any text over). Kingdon (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * They're frequently mentioned, but only in context with FOXP2. That, coupled with the anonymous name, appears to fail notability on their own. I think a merge and redirect might be suitable. FOXP2 is cited, and it should be trivial to add sources to the History section of FOXP2  . Unless someone else beats me to punch in the meanwhile, I'll wait a short bit for any other input before doing a merge. Yngvarr (c) 15:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

The only field of study they're involved in seems to be FOXP2 research. A merge therefore seems more than suitable. (They're British of Pakistani origin, by the way).--LemonParty1 (talk) 22:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The KE family are not of Pakistani origin, this is a myth. Drsef (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't wish to edit this page but I want to explain that I searched for information on the KE family because a member of my family may very well have the same genetic problems. I would like to know more about how they cope, etc. I expected to be redirected to FOXP2 but I did have a little hope that there would be a more personal view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.216.40.191 (talk) 11:04, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The family is notable for its role in speech gene research; they are also implicated in CS research. They are quite famous now, and there appear to be 400 + scholarly papers that refer to "KE family" (google scholar) as well as 26,000 websites. Like the person above, I came to this page searching "KE family" directly; I am sure many others do.  I see no reason for merging with FOXP2, or any other genetics page.  I also tried to completely re-write the page to make the context etc more accessible.  mukerjee (talk) 15:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

"Their condition is also the first human disease known to exhibit strict Mendelian inheritance."
Is this true? I don't believe it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.117.102.235 (talk) 04:03, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Reappearing error on KE family page
As has been noted by multiple Wiki editors (most recently by KateEWatkins a researcher who has directly worked with them for many years) the KE family is not Pakistani. The references that are cited to support that claim are secondary sources (a review article and a book, both written by people who have not worked with the KE family) and they are incorrect on this particular point. It is not clear where the origin of this inaccuracy comes from, but while this Wikipedia entry continues to be incorrect, it will be perpetuated continually, since many scientists, journalists and writers use Wikipedia as a reference too. The longer that this is not accurate on Wikipedia, the more of these secondary sources will appear and the harder it will be to have an accurate entry describing these scientific studies. For an example of a peer-reviewed scientific paper that made the mistake and then formally corrected it, please see http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v20/n6/full/ejhg201231a.html. If you wish to revert this Wiki entry, please first consider contacting the researchers who have studied this family and written the primary research articles on them, such as Prof Kate Watkins, Experimental Psychology Department of Oxford University (https://www.psy.ox.ac.uk/team/kate-watkins) or Prof Simon Fisher, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics (http://www.mpi.nl/people/fisher-simon). Our email addresses can be found on the websites of our organisations, so that you can verify that it is us who are making this request. Thank you for helping to ensure that Wikipedia accurately reports our science. ProfSimonFisher (talk) 20:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the information. This will stand as the correct conclusion that KE is not of Pakistani origin. By the way, I am not particularly keen on reverting, which you are implying. The reason I defended their "Pakistani origin" notion was that it was explicitly mentioned in earlier research papers such as Grigorenko (2009) and Wilcke et al. (2012), and in some books as well. These are perfectly the kind of Wikipedia reliable sources. But I was not aware of the (corrigendum). I have indeed commented to Kate Watkins mentioning the possible error but also that a verifiable source is required to make the correct claim. I am merely (trying to be) a medium of trustworthy information through Wikipedia, and definitely not a revert enthusiast. Chhandama (talk) 03:39, 21 October 2016 (UTC)