Talk:Tinman (gene)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Molecular Biology: Genetics

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology 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.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Diptera Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Diptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of flies 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.DipteraWikipedia:WikiProject DipteraTemplate:WikiProject DipteraDiptera articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Objection to wholsale replacement of content[edit]

In this edit Avery.brister replaced the entire previous content of the article with new content. This meant that useful content was simply discared without consideration. I have reverted this action, I think a proper WP:Merge should be done that combines the best of the old and new content, instead of simply overwriting previous contributions. I have requested assistance from WikiProject Genetics. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I support your reversion. The original version of the article seemed fine with reasonable sources. The new draft version may have some content that could be merged in, but I would be dubious of material sourced to the Wall Street Journal and musclehealth.org for technical topic. Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. --Mark viking (talk) 11:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have merged some content in from the draft. I have left out everything I couldn't find journal references for; Wall Street Journal, musclehealth.org, a lecture, and obviously Wikipedia are not suitable as references for this type of article. I noticed that we also have articles on the human homologue Nkx2-5 gene and its protein Homeobox protein Nkx-2.5, which were proposed for merging a year ago. All three of these articles should probably be merged to Homeobox protein Nkx-2.5. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:12, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]