Talk:International HapMap Project

Comment

This is seemingly a Work of the United States Government and so not copyrighted. --Rikurzhen 23:16, Jul 12, 2004 (UTC)

Copyrights are not the only issue here. Per WP:WWIN, Wikipedia is not a mirror. -AED 07:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

variation between two random individuals is 99.9% not 99.5% example of source: see discussion of the paper "The International HapMap Project." Nature 426, 789-796. 2003. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.193.9.228 (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

The link "What is the HapMap Project? - An Introduction to HapMap" no longer works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.81.102.142 (talk) 19:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Stylistic problems

Does anyone else feel this reads more like a FAQ or a press release rather than an encyclopedia? 203.34.41.43 05:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I totally agree. The information is alright, but the headings are inappropriate, and a simple rewording would suffice.

It reads like a brochure; I smell a copyvio... -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 19:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The first version of the page was directly copied from a work of the U.S. gov't which is thus public domain. --Rikurzhen 19:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Lots of the stuff now needs rewording to be less in the future tense, given the progress since the first version was written. Pseudomonas 11:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Criticism section?

One of the links, "An utter refutation of the 'Fundamental Theorem of the HapMap", heavily criticize the projects foundations. Perhaps a section regarding this criticism should be created, rather by someone who is qualified enough to completely understand the criticism (Rikurzhen?). Elamere 11:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

If this is a government funded organization the reasoning for it to have a medical benefit (e.g. associations with diseases in haplogroups) is simply to keep it government funded and recognized. The refutation stands but the fundamental theorem is probably just a ruse to keep it a publicly recognized & therefore a public domain entity; ultimately what it would be good for is use in genetic genealogy; something the government wouldn't stand behind as useful or recognizible. This is much like the government working toward maping the genome alongside private companies; there was fear that the human genome could be copywrited if the private companies got to it first. This, being variations on the human genome, has the same rationale. The refutation doesn't seem to see this point; that the theorem behind it is simply political wording and the actual purpose to it is unrelated. Nagelfar 01:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The criticism is not about the funding of the project but about the use of the HapMap to capture ungenotyped SNPs which is "the fundamental theorem of the HapMap project".Andersduck 21:06, 24 June 2007

Expansion request

It looks like this group continues the work of the "SNP Consortium", which is also a funding member. That previous consortium should probably also be explained. It would also be interesting to have a list of notable scientific discoveries made as a result of this project. -- Beland (talk) 15:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Difference from Human Variome Project?

To a reader who is not familiar with the details, the characteristics of the HapMap Project sound very similar to those of the Human Variome Project. What are the differences? Please mention those in the intro. -Pgan002 (talk) 06:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on International HapMap Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110820025139/http://linkage.cpmc.columbia.edu/2006/EJHG_Terwilliger_2006.pdf to http://linkage.cpmc.columbia.edu/2006/EJHG_Terwilliger_2006.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100918023309/http://diversity.inmegen.gob.mx/gbrowse/cgi-bin/gbrowse/inmegen_diversity/ to http://diversity.inmegen.gob.mx/gbrowse/cgi-bin/gbrowse/inmegen_diversity/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)