Edge Rewrite
Jump to content

Talk:DNA database

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 month ago by MangoStillness in topic Ideas for reworking this article

Possible merge of National DNA database into DNA database?

[edit]

Templates were added to the top of the two articles back in August 2013 saying "It has been suggested that this article (National DNA database) be merged into DNA database." Here is a spot to discuss the possible merger. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:08, 8 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Support. This wasn't my suggestion, but I think the suggested merge is a good idea. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 15:08, 8 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
Support. Looks a good idea to me.SylviaStanley (talk) 13:02, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

 Done

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on DNA database. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

X markN An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on DNA database. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 20:20, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Netherlands may now take DNA

[edit]

I have reverted my own edit and again removed text regarding the Netherlands. Per Openbaar Ministerie's (https://www.om.nl) document on https://www.om.nl/publish/pages/17802/dna_onderzoek_bij_veroordeelden_engels_zw_01.pdf

DNA Testing (Convicted Persons) Act: The DNA Testing (Convicted Persons) Act makes it possible to take tissue samples from certain groups of convicted persons. The Act plays an important role in preventing and detecting crime, and prosecuting persons whose DNA is found at the scene of a crime. The order to take tissue samples is given by the Public Prosecutor.

Jim1138 (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on DNA database. 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:

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) 23:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on DNA database. 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:

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) 01:14, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Incorrect information and wording

[edit]

At least the first paragraph is written incorrectly, with sentences stopping or starting in a way that doesn't make sense or is just plainly incorrect, grammar wise and information wise. Example: "DNA databases may be public or private, the largest ones being. the tea of the day being this DNA storage is a way for humans to revive or bring back people from the dead." 2605:BA00:3118:81D:A8C8:228B:6708:3F8B (talk) 08:19, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ideas for reworking this article

[edit]

I'd like to rework this article in the next weeks/months. I'll share some of my ideas for a rework here.

  • I find the organization of the Types section unclear, because it covers both the purpose of a database (forensic, genealogical, medical) and the owner of a database (national, corporate), which causes the sub-sections to overlap a lot (e.g. the national sub-section states They are generally used for forensic purposes). I think it would make more sense to split this into two sections, perhaps titled "Purpose" (forensic, genealogical, medical) and "Ownership"/"Governance" (national, international, corporate).
  • The Compression section reads DNA databases occupy more storage when compared to other non DNA databases due to the enormous size of each DNA sequence. and while I guess this can be true for genealogical and medical databases, it usually isn't for forensic database which only store small samples (as stated by the article: Typically, a tiny subset of the individual's genome is sampled from 13 or 16 regions that have high individuation.). The Compression section should be reworked to make this clear.
  • Perhaps the short Medicine section should be merged into the section on medical DNA databases?
  • I'm not convinced the section Monozygotic twins deserves inclusion in the article since it currently doesn't mention DNA databases at all. I think this should rather be covered in DNA profiling for example. I would suggest removing the section.
  • The "See also" section currently links Combined DNA Index System (the U.S. database) and UK National DNA Database (the U.K. database) but not other national databases for which Wikipedia articles exist (such as National DNA Data Bank of Canada, the Canadian one). I would suggest either linking all national databases for which Wikipedia articles exist or none of them (I prefer the latter).
  • The article currently does not address transnational exchange of DNA data for forensic purposes (e.g. European countries being able to query the DNA databases of other European countries) which I think is an important topic that should be addressed. It is covered by academic literature, for example in [1].

References

  1. Amankwaa, Aaron Opoku (2020). "Trends in forensic DNA database: transnational exchange of DNA data". Forensic Sciences Research.

MangoStillness (talk) 10:41, 19 June 2026 (UTC)Reply