| Revision as of 14:31, 4 November 2017 editUrselius (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers24,694 edits →Ancient DNA← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:49, 6 November 2017 edit undoAiden guy (talk | contribs)3 edits ←Replaced content with 'lit fam goals butt poop emoije hit my insta up at yaboi123'Tag: talk page blankingNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| lit | |||
| {{Talk header}} | |||
| fam | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|1= | |||
| goals | |||
| {{WikiProject Anatomy |class=C |importance=Mid |field=gross}} | |||
| butt | |||
| {{WikiProject Animal anatomy|class=C|importance=low}} | |||
| poop | |||
| {{WikiProject Anthropology |class=C}} | |||
| emoije | |||
| }} | |||
| hit my insta up at yaboi123 | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 75K | |||
| |counter = 5 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 5 | |||
| |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| |algo = old(60d) | |||
| |archive = Talk:Eye color/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| == In Iceland 89% of women and 87% of men have either blue or green eye color <- INCORRECT == | |||
| This is incorrect. This was the statistic of a small sample size not a nationwide survey. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| == Ancient DNA == | |||
| Recent papers on ancient European DNA has cast some light on the history of eye colour in Europe. Surprisingly, light coloured eyes are a primitive feature of the European gene pool, with 100% of all Middle Stone Age hunter-gatherer remains showing alleles for light coloured eyes. Later additions to the European gene-pool, the earliest farmers and the Bronze Age Yamnaya people (possible Proto-Indo-Europeans) having much higher frequencies of dark eye alleles. I have added a section, supported by references to papers in 'Nature', on this recent development. ] (]) 11:25, 8 May 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ----------------------------------------------- | |||
| I find the claims in this paragraph to be odd, given the widespread publication of work claiming that blue eyes arose from a mutation 6,000-10,000 years ago, of the OCA2 gene, such that the mutated version of the OCA2 could not produce melanin. (see https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080130170343.htm ) Could someone please explain the discrepancy between these two claims. | |||
| I am also aware that genetic patterns for light skin, hair, and the presence of freckles were established in Europe because they were inherited from Neanderthal ancestors of Europeans. But I have not seen any definite claims about the eye colour of Neanderthals. More information would be welcome. ] (]) 23:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :Genetic clocks are unreliable and vary hugely, being dependant on the assumptions made by each group of researchers in creating the models used to generate the rate of genetic change. This is true of research done into the genomes of living people and then projecting these findings backwards in time. The research on ancient DNA I described above is much more absolute, as the DNA is extracted from the remains of people who lived and died in the Mesolithic or Bronze Age etc. As far as I'm aware some Neanderthal genetic alleles for variation in pigmentation seem to have been specific to Neanderthals and others seem to have been inherited by modern non-African humans from Neanderthals due to genetic introgression in the distant past. ] (]) 14:30, 4 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == nomenclature == | |||
| i know this isn't the place for discussion, but i think that we need to discuss the nomenclature of eye colors, since the way it is explained in this article it makes absolutely no sense, though i see the same problem in other sources. | |||
| in particular green and hazel. some people have eyes that actually appear green, but most examples given of green eyes (especially if you google it) are just copper-brown in the center adjacent the pupil, and blue(ish) around that, sometimes with some yellowish lines or a yellow band in between the brown and blue. the problem is that those look very different from actually green eyes, and look to me exactly the same as most of the examples of hazel eyes (why is that even called "hazel"?). | |||
| and then there's people with straw-colored eyes, which also gets called hazel. so this distribution doesn't seem to make any sense at all. first of all adding straw and green eyes with mixed colors, and secondly randomly dividing mixed colors into the hazel or green categories. | |||
| i think this is done because actually green, and straw colored eyes are so rare, people fill up those categories with mixed colored eyes. but this is done in such a senseless way, it ruins any meaning that statistics regarding eye-colors could have. also i don't think actual green or straw is any rarer than amber. | |||
| i would suggest using green for actually green-looking eyes despite rarity, adding straw as a rare category for eye colors (some people genuinely have straw-colored eyes), and allowing a separate categorisation for the predominance of brown areas, in particular centrally located, as any eye-color quite often has a less or more predominant central brown area. | |||
| while changing the article to that would be original research, i really think it would help accuracy, because y'all know i have a point.· ] ] ] 13:09, 7 September 2017 (UTC) | |||
| also, the color called "amber" looks nothing like ]. it's clearly ]· ] ] ] 15:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == External links modified == | |||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| I have just modified 5 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060909190624/http://www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/~pfuerst/courses/eeobmg640/reading1eyecolor.pdf to http://www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/~pfuerst/courses/eeobmg640/reading1eyecolor.pdf | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110912065611/http://j-sallabouteyes.wetpaint.com/ to http://j-sallabouteyes.wetpaint.com/ | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101023191830/http://www.eyecarecontacts.com/eyecolor.html to http://www.eyecarecontacts.com/eyecolor.html | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927085904/http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=232 to http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=232 | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100224065704/http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf/digi/D193D7DD8DD78628CC257540000F4A4F to http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf/digi/D193D7DD8DD78628CC257540000F4A4F | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 15:19, 26 September 2017 (UTC) | |||
| == Why is editing blocked on an article with such poor sourcing? == | |||
| "DNA studies on ancient human remains confirm that light skin, hair and eyes were present at least tens of thousands of years ago on Neanderthals, who lived in Eurasia for 500,000 years." | |||
| No, those sources don't say that -- especially the bit about "500,000 years," but more important (given the subject of the article) nothing "confirms" "light eyes" in Neanderthals, only light skin and red hair. Genes expressing blue eyes in modern homo sapiens were present but less dominant in a couple DNA samples mentioned in one of the articles, but that's it, and the article warns that the study is not widely accepted and that we ahve no way of knowing what the actual effect of thse genes would have been. | |||
| Yet there it is: DNA studies on ancient human remains confirm that light skin, hair and eyes were present at least tens of thousands of years ago on Neanderthals, who lived in Eurasia for 500,000 years. | |||
| Who besides me will actually READ all five of those sources? It's not unlikely that the original editor who contributed the sentences had racist motives. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small> | |||
Revision as of 18:49, 6 November 2017
lit fam goals butt poop emoije hit my insta up at yaboi123