Talk:Haplogroup E-M215: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:18, 7 November 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Haplogroup E-M215 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11: 60 days

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by .

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Haplogroup E-M215 (Y-DNA). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 20:52, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Haplogroup E-M215 (Y-DNA). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 11:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

E-M35 should have its own page

It's significantly younger than E-M215 by tens of thousands of years and is more numerous as well. E-M215 obfuscates clarity on E-M35.Wadaad (talk) 05:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wadaad: It would copy almost everything from this page. What we really need to do is mention M35 everywherewhere we know it's M35. --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 12:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sidoroff-B:I can do it later on, it's not that hard to do, just time-consuming. The problem with a wiki page on the E-M215 mutation is that it is uninformative about the precise origins of E-M35, which is more common and tells us more about anthropology (especially the Afro-Asiatic language family). I split up the uninformative page on E-V38 for the same reason between West-Central African E-M2 and Omotic/Southwest Ethiopian E-M329 (more clear info on origins).Wadaad (talk) 13:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wadaad: Well, I guess we can just create a chapter on M35 and move everything about M35 there. --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 13:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sub-Saharan Africa

It is written in the Origin section that: "No affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in the genome-wide analysis." Now, my assertion is: Sub-Saharan Africa it's a geographical term. Not an ethniticy term. Hence, Somalis, Ethiopians, Eritreans and the like are all "Sub-Saharan". So, it's better to specify with which africans they have no affinity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kleistinos (talk • contribs) 16:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC) Edit: I deleted the part which I contested. Someone need to fix the terminology. It's misleading. Kleistinos (talk) 20:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the term Sub-Saharan is misleading. Nowadays in genetics, the Yoruba of West Africa are usually the proxy for 'Sub-Saharan', the way the Basks are usually a proxy for European/Arabic/Modern Egyptian. West African would be much more accurate than Sub-Saharan. Another problem is that the Sahara is not always dry - from 7500-3500 BC it had a savannah-like climate. It is possible people who are in West Africa now came from the Sahara after it started to dry up. Nilotic dna is distinguishable from Yoruba dna although they both share eachother's dna too. 83.84.100.133 (talk) 00:18, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced and unexplained changes to data

A person using a range of IP numbers that geolocate to Florence, Italy (62.19.*, 79.*, 80.116.211.147, 87.21.125.98, 87.17.131.74, etc.) and another (likely the same person, since they've made the same edits) to Milan (213.61.205.102), has repeatedly made seemingly-random changes to various numbers in the table in the "Distribution" section, without citing any source. The information in the table is sourced to this paper: [1], and the data can be found in the "Supplementary Material": click the link on the page, and download the file "evv118_Supplementary_Data.zip", inside is a spreadsheet file "Supplementary_Tables_1-7_Revised.xlsx", and within the spreadsheet, the data is found in "Supplementary table 7".

The unsourced changes have been happening since at least June, 2019, in this article, as well as in other articles about genetics. I've left warnings and requests to communicate in edit summaries and on the talk pages of several of the IPs, to no avail. The edits appear to me to be vandalism, that is, intentionally putting in false information. This article has now been protected from IP edits. If the person has any legitimate reason to make these changes, they'll need to explain it here... --IamNotU (talk) 16:33, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Source say origin in North or Northeast Africa

"the node separating E-V38 and E-M215 branches (47.5 ka; 95% CI: 41.3–56.8 ka)...Considering the spatial–temporal congruencies with other pieces of evidence coming from archaeology as well as genetics, we propose that the observed phylogeographic trajectories of haplogroup E-V1515 could be the consequence of multistep southward movements of early pastoralists from a northeastern African motherland across the equatorial belt." (Trombetta, et al [2])

"This and all other scenarios require migration out of E-M35 after 47,000 years ago (its origin) and before 28,500 years ago (its divergence) to explain its presence outside Africa (Figure 2, B–D)." (Haber, et al [3] [4] 142.116.178.22 (talk) 21:56, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But the first quote is about E-V1515, not E-M215??

Concerning the age, why are we only using the oldest of the two numbers these papers give?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 22:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is our source for Northern Horn of Africa?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 22:52, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 84: / Line 84: @@
 So, it's better to specify with which africans they have no affinity.  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kleistinos|Kleistinos]] ([[User talk:Kleistinos#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kleistinos|contribs]]) 16:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 Edit: I deleted the part which I contested. Someone need to fix the terminology. It's misleading. [[User:Kleistinos|Kleistinos]] ([[User talk:Kleistinos|talk]]) 20:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
+:I agree the term Sub-Saharan is misleading. Nowadays in genetics, the Yoruba of West Africa are usually the proxy for 'Sub-Saharan', the way the Basks are usually a proxy for European/Arabic/Modern Egyptian. West African would be much more accurate than Sub-Saharan. Another problem is that the Sahara is not always dry - from 7500-3500 BC it had a savannah-like climate. It is possible people who are in West Africa now came from the Sahara after it started to dry up. Nilotic dna is distinguishable from Yoruba dna although [https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1006976#pgen-1006976-t001 they both share eachother's dna] too. [[Special:Contributions/83.84.100.133|83.84.100.133]] ([[User talk:83.84.100.133|talk]]) 00:18, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 == Unsourced and unexplained changes to data ==