|WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.This article is within the scope of |
||This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.|
||This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.|
||This article has been classified as relating to blood.
Article -> List?Edit
Should this page be made into a List? I feel that Blood type provides sufficient Background (history, content, explanations etc.) to the reader for this article only to be a list that complements the Blood type article. Otherwise, we would just repeat all content written in Blood type article in own subheadings here. That seems unnecessary. Thoughts on this? --Treetear (talk) 23:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
- yes, that seems like a good idea--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
- I agree - Blood type seems the right place for the broader explanation. CharlesSpencer (talk) 10:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
As of today there is a "contradictory" flag after the approximate number of minor blood groups. Why is that there without any further discussion? Which article does this contradict?
188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- I presume it's because the "200+ minor blood groups" number contradicts Blood type "across the 36 blood groups, over 340 different blood-group antigens have been found,", and Rh blood group system "the Rh blood group system is one of thirty-five known human blood group systems," and a number of other locations. It seems like it should clarify that these numbers refer to "major blood groups", and the "200+" number refers to both major and minor blood groups, if that is true. AMWJ (talk) 13:35, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
Right now the wikilink for Augustine group links to Augustine of Hippo. Don’t see how that’s relevant, unless he discovered/had that blood type. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)