Talk:Duffy antigen system

Plagarism

Found this exact same info (didn't check the whole page, as usual, but at least the intro is plagarized) from Answers.com (perhaps it was Answers who stole from the Wiki, but once again, ask the author)

Just asking someone to check, since plagarism simply isn't allowed on the Wiki.

-DEMONIIIK 15:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Answers.com mirrors content from Wikipedia, as far as I understand. - tameeria 23:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

having written most of this article I can assure any readers that it is Answers that is plagerising from Wiki - which is permitted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.66.207 (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

To be consistent with other "antigen system" articles - see Human_blood_group_systems#Table Ohwell32 18:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

This page has been moved from Duffy antigen to Duffy antigen system as the result of a move request. Dekimasuよ! 02:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

inapropriate language?

i just felt uncomfortable when reading this page about the Duffy antigen system, by the way it referred to dark skinned people as 'blacks' and to caucasian people as 'whites'. I am what you would call white, but i feel that when you mention the two words as being opposed to each other in that way, it just has a real racially discriminate tone to it...

This is a problem. 'Blacks' as the term is commonly understood are genetically a very heterogenous group - far more so than 'caucasians'. The term here is used in a clincal sense - a common feature that requires no special equipment to identify. To be more politcally correct one would have to introduce a collective noun for those of African decent who live in North and South America, Africa, Europe and elsewhere who are not of European or Arabic decent. There are a number of Chinese decent also in Africa but these are currently small in number. To create such a term de novo or to use some convoluted expression to avoid the term 'blacks' would increase the difficulty of reading the article considerably. The term is not being used in any negative sense here mere as a useful recognition term. No offense is intended or should be taken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.66.207 (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the use "Blacks" is innapropriate here, however I find the use of "negroid" very, very questionable. 71.220.155.61 (talk) 02:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Duffy as a genetic marker

As mentioned in the article gene flow, there is a (semi-famous) study which uses the Duffy genes as genetic marker to study gene flow. The finding is that gene flow between Whites and Blacks is greater in northern United States than in the Southern United States, logically due to cultural differences. I can't remember what it is. Does anyone know? I am not a dog (talk) 22:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Redundant?

This page is kind of a mess. I started editing but while doing so found there was already a very good entry for this topic on the NCBI bookshelf.

The Duffy blood group —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krabapple (talk • contribs) 21:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Population genetics

The line "In the Chinese ethnic populations—the Han and the She people—the frequencies of Fya and Fyb alleles were 0.94 and 0.06 and 0.98 and 0.02 respectively" is extremely confusing, and I'm sure that I'm not the first person to be bewildered by this. Could someone clear this up? ☠ QuackOfaThousandSuns (Talk) ☠ 00:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I confess that I dont see the potential for confusion here. Two ethnic groups were samples for this gene. Different frequencies for the the alleles were found in these populations.DrMicro (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

My concern with this section now is the rewrite, which uses "Asians" as a descriptor in the writing, "Chinese" in the bulleted list, and doesn't have a citation to clarify the issue. Anyone have any shortcuts for sorting through 100 sources, or remember this detail on their own? Diimmortales (talk) 03:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)