Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:10, 21 June 2016

Userboxes This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 13 years, 3 months and 16 days. This user has made over 47,000 edits on Misplaced Pages worldwide. This editor is a Senior Editor II and is entitled to display this Rhodium Editor Star. This user has been blocked at Misplaced Pages 1 time. This talkpage is decorated by Hafspajen

Alien Mentor collection Thanks Hafs! Now what kind of grammar was that? Be POLITE!! Darth Vader Misplaced Pages:Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them I don't like the way you do your citations... That sentence, you need to reword it. It's too near original'. File:Kalachakra el paso 2012.jpg

RfC-closure

See Four Noble Truths

Joshua, an Rfc can be formally closed by any uninvolved editor . I do agree with your result, but I think it should be closed by someone else. JimRenge (talk) 01:03, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I'll self-revert, and leave it as it is. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Origins of the PIE

Hi Joshua,

You reinserted the statement the DNA evidence "confirmed a migratory pattern out of the Pontic Steppe at the relevant time" in Kurgan Hypothesis.

The DNA evidence is relatively new and therefore not surprisingly misunderstood by most, even by "scientists" writing in "RS" journals. Consider:

1) The entire idea that there is any genetic evidence that PIE originated with R1a1a is absurd. The article says that "Geneticists have noted the correlation of a specific haplogroup, R1a1a, defined by the M17 (SNP marker) of the Y chromosome, and speakers of Indo-European languages in Europe and Asia. The connection between Y-DNA R-M17 and the spread of Indo-European languages was first proposed by Zerjal and colleagues in 1999" but a little thought will make it clear why this is wrong. Modern populations that speak the Italic and Celtic languages are dominated not by R1a, but by R1b.

FACTUALLY "correlation of a specific haplogroup, R1a1a, defined by the M17 (SNP marker) of the Y chromosome, and speakers of Indo-European languages" is WRONG.

FACTUALLY "correlation of a specific haplogroup, R1 and speakers of Indo-European languages" MAYBE correct.

As haplogroup R2 is also concentrated in modern populations that speak the Indo European languages, this statement MAYBE correct "correlation of a specific haplogroup R and speakers of Indo-European languages".

That is, factually the correlation is between IE languages and parent R (or maybe R1), not only the descendant R1a1a.

The genetic evidence for the origins of R is likely South Asia, given that its descendant R2 occurs almost entirely in South Asia. The genetic evidence for the origins of R1 is likely South Asia or its western neighboring areas for example Soares et al., "The Archaeogenetics of Europe", Current Biology 2010. The place of origin as the "Pontic steppe" is not supported by any scientific research that I know of.

Best,

JS (talk) 08:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Jayanta Sen: Haak et al. (2015) is noy about R1a1. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Haak et al. concludes "These results provide support for the theory of a steppe origin of at least some of the Indo-European languages of Europe."

What does the above statement mean? It could mean: 1) The place of origin (place of birth) of some of the IE languages of Europe was the steppe. This is the Kurgan Hypothesis

2) Some of the IE languages of Europe originated from (came from) the steppes.

There is a difference between 1) and 2).

The evidence that Haak et al provide does support 2). Indeed, R1 was not present in older European populations but common in modern European populations. This supports the idea of massive migrations into Europe by R1, who carried with them the IE languages.

However, the evidence produced by Haak does not support 1). It is quite possible that the R1 population that spoke PIE originated east of the steppes, then migrated to the steppes and next to Europe. As the steppes lie between Iran/South Asia and Europe, it is to be expected that this population spent time in the steppes before invading/migrating into Europe.

The scientific way of determining the place of origin of a haplogroup is to look for geographical areas with great diversity in the older descendant haplogroups.

Let me try to explain it in another way. As Haak et al. do not compare the diversity in descendant mutations in different candidate geographical regions, they cannot determine the place of origin, they can only deduce that there was movement into Europe.

Others such as Soares et al. (2010) (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20178764) consider the DNA evidence from different regions. Soares has this to say "More surprising is the status of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1, which, unlike mtDNA haplogroup I, is not indigenous to West Eurasia but appears to have originated in South Asia, possibly in the early settlements associated with the southern route dispersal. This appears better substantiated than the alternative suggestion of a Central Asian origin."

One needs to exercise caution in understanding the methodologies and conclusions of the research in this area.

Best,

JS (talk) 23:49, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

If you are going to re-insert without discussion ideas that are obviously understood to be wrong with a bit of reading such as R1a1a is the population in which IE originated, which then magically replaced the languages of R1b populations, I don't have the time to continue this. Somebody in the future will come along and clean this up. Best, JS (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Did you actually read my response? "Haak et al. (2015) is not about R1a1." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I did read your all your responses. My comment was directed to this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kurgan_hypothesis&type=revision&diff=725568960&oldid=725553411 Best, JS (talk) 06:58, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

And that's exactly the kind of information you can't remove; it's relevant for an overview. What is questionable, though, is how much attention must be given to this R1a discussion in the context of the Kurgan-hypothesis; too many possibilities, too much partisanship. It may be somewhat undue there. Haak et al. (2015) and Allentoft et al. (2015) is more relevant. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Review request

Would you please verify these edits (IE-related articles)?

• , ,

Thanks. --Wario-Man (talk) 13:31, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Wario-Man: I'd noticed these edits too, but they seem to be correct. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Admiring your patience

Allegations of racism on Buddhism talk page can be bothersome, but inappropriate in your case. It reflects nothing off you, but just how upset the OP is. Your patience, calmness and "no ill-will" is not unnoticed. Just admired. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciated. I shouldn't have used that one specific word; it heats the emotions, which is not usefull. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Sex-androgyny in mythology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sex-androgyny in mythology is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Sex-androgyny in mythology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MSJapan (talk) 16:58, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

IVC editor

I've reverted several other edits by this person, but not yet South Asia. Doug Weller talk 06:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

SpacemanSpiff already did. We'll see what more Diannaa has to say about this editor. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Oh, SpacemanSpiff took care of that too. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I've given an ARBIPA warning. If it was just copyvios then I'd have done the banning when needed, but I've had to revert some POV nonsense that can be confused for being involved in content, so I don't think I'll take any admin action. Maybe Bishonen can keep a watch and do what's necessary, if/when (Gullupat‎). —SpacemanSpiff 10:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

20th century BC

I didn't really want to revert you, but that's had a fact tag for 2 years, we normally don't replace unsourced text which has a fact tag. You watching the Krishna stuff? Doug Weller talk 13:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

SuttaCentral

Hello, Joshua ! Can you please expand and find some sources for the above website? I shall be very grateful to you. With regards and love, Terabar (talk) 14:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

• Wikipedians whose talkpages are decorated by Hafspajen