Talk:Xq28

Expanding: more on 1993 study + summary of 1999 refutation study.
Err, this rather large edit was done by me while my session was mysteriously expired. Does the article still qualify as a stub? I'm not sure what the criteria is for individual gene articles. LeaHazel : talk : contribs 12:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

this is it
wiki only care about the lenght of the article, so don't worry. Just come back when you have more to put in (hopefully they won't delete it before that) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.121.40.89 (talk) 11:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Bloated content on 409 pair study
This content violates WP:NOTNEWS and WP:UNDUE so I had removed it. This is about the conference presentation of research that was formally published online in November 2014. The stuff relevant to the topic of this article, Xq28, is covered in the simple paragraph that remains, which uses the actual scientific paper as the source. This stuff is all bloat about the initial conference presentation of that research. Happy to discuss

In 2012, results from the first large, comprehensive multi-center genetic linkage study of male sexual orientation were reported by an independent group of researchers at the American Society of Human Genetics. The study population included 409 independent pairs of gay brothers, who were analyzed with over 300,000 single-nucleotide polymorphism markers. The data strongly replicated Hamerʻs Xq28 findings as determined by both two-point and multipoint (MERLIN) LOD score mapping. Significant linkage was also detected in the pericentromeric region of chromosome 8, overlapping with one of the regions detected in a previous genomewide linkage study by the Hamer lab. The authors concluded that "our findings, taken in context with previous work, suggest that genetic variation in each of these regions contributes to development of the important psychological trait of male sexual orientation." The authors described their findings in greater detail in an article published in November 2014.

- Jytdog (talk) 16:57, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Revert editing

 * I want to seek attention about this edit of User:Crossroads. I can also add some new including    . I think removing these words with citations are WP:vandalism. Pinging .116.58.201.145 (talk) 11:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I removed it because aside from being nonsensical, it added nothing of substance, just a vague and redundant statement that it was "doubtful and highly controversial". Also, I highly doubt any respectable commentator would accuse Hamer of "doing partiality in research for being himself a gay". Your WP:REFBOMB is doing you no favors. Lastly, how do you know these editors that you've pinged? Crossroads -talk- 05:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I edit wikipedia for a long time, that's why I know them. And the writers who have written those books which I have mentioned are public academics on their own scientific fields such as R. Scott Hawley, James T. Sears and David P. Barash. And latest 2019 Nature magazine findings has dismissed the possibility of linkage of Xq28, which more strongly support the doubtfulness of hamer's research. 116.58.205.7 (talk) 07:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * IP, I didn't get your ping, but the article is on my watchlist. I agree with Crossroads. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

___