Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of DNA sequencing services

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of DNA sequencing services

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was tagged by Jtamad on December 31 with the edit summary Article is out of date, poorly organized, mixes personal DNA testing companies with B2B companies, nothing on talk page for 5 years. Comment from someone from ISOGG: Personally, I would scrap that page and start over. So maybe find what pages reference it (if any) to get a context to include. The writers are very confused. They mix sequencing with microarray testing. They mix personal / consumer (DTC) with medical labs only accessible to other medical facilities (B2B), as well as strictly equip [truncation in original]. They also posted the following on the talk page:

Comment from someone with ISOGG: Personally, I would scrap that page and start over. So maybe find what pages reference it (if any) to get a context to include.
The writers are very confused. They mix sequencing with microarray testing. They mix personal / consumer (DTC) with medical labs only accessible to other medical facilities (B2B), as well as strictly equipment suppliers. Many are not in business. Some are only available to university researchers with grants, etc. You would almost have to get the customer list of every equipment manufacturer to finish the list.
Sometimes the ISOGG Wiki is better (for DTC only). Sometimes my site : start with the glossary to explore (https://h600.org/). Or start your own. That is how my sites start. When I cannot find anything adequate. But likely a new page at Wikipedia is best (if not already existing) and then request that page be deleted. JuanTamad (talk) 04:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

On top of their reasons for deletion, this should be deleted for the same reason as my nominations of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of ADC software/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of PDF presentation software/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of enterprise search software (2nd nomination) /et al, as a list of primarily redlinks which amounts to a WP:NOTDIR violation. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it is not actually clear what the focus of this article is supposed to be. It's very dated. Unless one of the original authors can explain their aim, it should be recreated with a more meaningful title and greater precision. NeverRainsButPours (talk) 11:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we are not a business directory. As it stands, it looks like a customer-guide, analogous to those tables that appear for "best anti-virus software 2022", with features ticked or crossed so you can choose whether you want a VPN or can supply 5mL of blood. It's also incorrectly named; humans aren't the only things with DNA worth sequencing. And it would be impossible to keep this list accurate and up-to-date without enormous quantities of COI editing. Elemimele (talk) 22:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.