Talk:Homo naledi

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Africa Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Anthropology Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Primates Start‑class High‑importance

	Primates portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates 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.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Extinction Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Full list of authors of "Berger et al"

Here's the full list if anybody wants to take a crack at adding them to the citation ;-):

Lee R Berger, John Hawks, Darryl J de Ruiter, Steven E Churchill, Peter Schmid, Lucas K Delezene, Tracy L Kivell, Heather M Garvin, Scott A Williams, Jeremy M DeSilva, Matthew M Skinner, Charles M Musiba, Noel Cameron, Trenton W Holliday, William Harcourt-Smith, Rebecca R Ackermann, Markus Bastir, Barry Bogin, Debra Bolter, Juliet Brophy, Zachary D Cofran, Kimberly A Congdon, Andrew S Deane, Mana Dembo, Michelle Drapeau, Marina C Elliott, Elen M Feuerriegel, Daniel Garcia-Martinez, David J Green, Alia Gurtov, Joel D Irish, Ashley Kruger, Myra F Laird, Damiano Marchi, Marc R Meyer, Shahed Nalla, Enquye W Negash, Caley M Orr, Davorka Radovcic, Lauren Schroeder, Jill E Scott, Zachary Throckmorton, Matthew W Tocheri, Caroline VanSickle, Christopher S Walker, Pianpian Wei, Bernhard Zipfel

HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 10:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the full list (indented) after the citation. I hope it's not too overbearing. —Bruce1ee^talk 13:59, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia frontpage candidate

Here's an ongoing discussion about mentioning the discovery on the Wikipedia frontpage, as well as how to word the news item. --93.223.61.100 (talk) 13:22, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Approximate measurements

Given the approximate nature of the measurements, converting 150 cm to 4 ft 11 in and 45 kg to 99 lbs is a little silly. If we must have American units, surely "approximately 5 ft" and "approximately 100 lb" is close enough. Use of the conversion template here is not really justified. Just type in the different values. --Khajidha (talk) 14:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image

I removed an image of a "reconstruction". There is no reconstruction in the published articles, and the image looks like a photo of a photo. So all in all it is likely to be a hoax or a copyright violation, or both.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 15:01, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen that exact image in reports about this announcement. --Khajidha (talk) 16:15, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then the question is about the copyrights and authorship.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And reliability/accuracy. Unlikely that the reconstruction has had any peer review.216.96.78.28 (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hominini/Hopminid/Homo

I am not quite sure how the find is best described in the opening sentence. Describing it as a species of the tribe Hominini seems somewhat too vague. The interesting thing is that it is clearly in the Hominina subtribe, AND that it proposed to belong to the genus Homo.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference between ...

... "Hominini" and "Early species of Homo"?

T 88.89.219.147 (talk) 16:42, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hominini includes chimpanzees and australopithecines. Homo is the family that includes only bipedals with nimble thumbs and large brains.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dating

I don't understand why such a large collection hasn't been dated. 2 years is plenty of time for radioisotope dating. Could someone add an explanation?216.96.78.28 (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]