File talk:R1A map.jpg

来自Wikimedia Commons
跳转到导航 跳转到搜索

Distribution and sources

[编辑]
Forwarded from en Wikipedia

Appeal to Correct. This map is meet to show the correct distribution of R1A If you find that this map shows incorrect information you may appeal to correct and if possible I will either say the reason why the original information is correct (and give a source)or change the map to how you say. Sincerely The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 20:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[回复]

Can you please explain the sourcing for this map. It shows a detailed breakdown by region but no such data exists? --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
Yes it does If possible I will give all sources within a week. The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 14:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
Here are a few sources:
  • Data from Russia from: Two Sources of the Russian Patrilineal Heritage in Their Eurasian Context
  • Data from Poland and Germany from: Significant genetic differentiation between Poland and Germany follows present-day political borders, as revealed by Y-chromosome analysis
More are coming later if possible. The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 15:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
--The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 23:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 22:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
None of these source have this level of detail? --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
Yes they do (disprove me by telling me where my map is wrong) The Count of Monte Cristo (talk) 22:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]
No they do not and anyway please see WP:PROVEIT and WP:CIRCULAR. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[回复]

[Discussion above forwarded from en:File talk:R1A map.jpg by Athaenara (talk) 04:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)][回复]

Besides using a Wikipedia article as a source, the JOGG article is from a journal that says "The main emphasis of this journal will be to present a forum for articles that may not be appropriate for other established genetics journals since they may be based on datasets in which a statistically random sample cannot be guaranteed (i.e. surname studies)." The article is by the linguist Kalevi Wiik [1], and gets very negative comments [2] here. Dougweller (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[回复]

the claim of the level of detail implicit in this map, with the sub-national entities indicated, is far beyond anything I have seen in any genetics paper. If you have really compiled this information, you must have worked on it for weeks, full time. You should then also have a complete table in which you have compiled the data. Why don't you upload that full table so people can see the raw data. As a random example, we have the claim that R1A level is 3-5% in en:Tangier-Tétouan, but less than 1% in en:Gharb-Chrarda-Béni Hssen. What is our source for this information? I would also like to see an excellent source for the claim that there is <1% R1A in en:Kalmykia. Plus, who the hell does a genetic survey in Svalbard? An archipelago with no native population? Did they sample ice bears or something? All in all this map is very fishy. --Dbachmann (talk) 07:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]

great, I could have saved 10 minutes scrutinizing this if it had been evident that this image was uploaded by a banned troll. Perhaps some sort of warning should go in the image desciption? Or perhaps commons can even see its way to deleting this thing? --Dbachmann (talk) 07:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]
检索自“https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:R1A_map.jpg&oldid=774445614”