Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/F2 and F1 screening

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] F2 and F1 screening

Fails WP:NN, WP:OR, and WP:V. Possibly a hoax, or at best a lot of original research. The images are hand drawn scribbles, and the starting editor only has edits related to this article. Google search turns up 19 results, almost all related to this article. Originally PRODded, but User:Catchpole removed the tag, stating; "Not a hoax" without providing a rationale. Green451 16:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:OR and WP:V. Scorpiondollprincess 16:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Looks pretty definitvely "original some sort of research" (though it's so short of context it's impossible to know what it's actually on about, save that it's "something to do with genetics"). Delete. Tonywalton  | Talk 17:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Original research. --Xrblsnggt 18:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. It's too bad there aren't sources for this information, as it's good stuff. It appears to deal with zebrafish genetics. In this sense, the F-number denotes the generation: F0 for the original parents, F1 for the first offspring, F2 for the offspring's offspring, etc. If someone could clean this up and remove the unsourced bits I would change my vote to keep. Isopropyl 19:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Wait, why are people under the impression that this is a hoax? Even vanity and original research are stretches, as this stuff is pretty basic biology. No one does cutting-edge research in zebrafish; they're a teaching tool. Isopropyl 19:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
    • "No one does cutting-edge research in zebrafish" I have a number of colleagues that would take offense at that... -- Scientizzle 20:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I moved the page; it is now at Generational screening for induced mutations. Isopropyl 19:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep & cleanup This does not appear to be a hoax at all...WP:OR, maybe, and perhaps not a how-to guide. Mostly, it just needs a cleanup and better diagrams. -- Scientizzle 20:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, the more I think about this, the more I think it should be Deleted. While this is basic Mendelian genetics in practice with a common model organism, it's unsourced has some original research and, most of all, fail the "not a how-to guide" portion of WP:NOT. It appears that there is little to merge, either. -- Scientizzle 16:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, no sources cited. I'm trouble by the lack of context and by the use of photographs of what look like a whiteboard as illustrations. I wonder whether these are lecture notes of some kind? Dpbsmith (talk) 00:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.