Talk:Red Deer Cave people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I'm concerned some of the phrasing used by this article may be too close to that of this source. For example, compare "To make a convincing case for their new human, the study team will need genetic evidence" with "Genetic evidence is required to make a convincing case for a new species of human", or "Attempts to obtain DNA from the Red Deer Cave remains haven't been successful" with "Attempts to extract DNA from the Red Deer Cave remains have been unsuccessful". Nikkimaria (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Well spotted - it's far too easy to miss this sort of thing. Is my version better? (This has been on my watchlist almost since it was written but I haven't been following it closely). Dougweller (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess my paraphrasing was a bit too close to the original. Thanks for following up and making corrections. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)


As in "youngest known prehistoric population who do not resemble modern humans". The intent of that phrase is difficult to understand. Are they most recent? Did they die at a young age? It's just not clear as the lede should be. I see in the video that Curnoe is saying "young". I vote for "most recent" instead, if at all in the lede. Kortoso (talk) 00:02, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

I went ahead and fixed it. Hope it's better that way. Kortoso (talk) 23:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


Richard D. Fuerle is not an acceptable source for this article. "The author is a retired patent attorney who lives on a small wildlife refuge on an island in upstate of New York. A perpetual student, he has degrees in math (BS), law (JD), economics (MA), physics (BA), and chemistry (BA)." Kortoso (talk) 23:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Well spotted. I missed this when it was added by an IP last month. I've removed it. Dougweller (talk) 10:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)