Talk:Qubit fluorometer

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Molecular Biology: Genetics Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Talk

as a scientist who actually uses the qubit, I dispute the advert flag; it is actually a pretty good article The qubit has gained wide acceptance in the DNA community; many people (personal communications) have abandonded other methods (eg, nano drop UV) for the qubit and i am not a life fanboy; they just got this product right

Reply: While there's nothing in the article that seems plainly untrue, I still has significant problems with the tone of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.91.19.123 (talk) 16:30, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Advert tags looks valid to me, in fact the sourcing is weak at a glance - none of them about the topic, presumably only mentions. Notability tag added. Widefox; talk 15:39, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notability II and subsections

As a scientist who actually uses the Qubit fluorometer, I agree on the advert flag despite (or even more) the relevance of this device in the scientific community. As a first starting point for further revisions, I cut the article into preliminary subsections, removed the numerous redundant statements about the device, linked it within wikipedia and hope to gain an objective article soon. Bathyscapher (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Qubit fluorometer. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110713071611/http://wetlab.izzid.com/2008/Feb/Review_of_Qubit/ to http://wetlab.izzid.com/2008/Feb/Review_of_Qubit/

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) 18:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]