80.243.173.100
Haplogroupe D modifier
J'ai commencé un sujet sur la page de discussion pf de l'article Haplogroupe D concernant votre édition et ce que dit l'étude concernant les origine de l'haplogroupe. Veuillez en discuter ici (ou ici) avant de revenir en arrière / modifier à nouveau. Merci. (I have started a topic on the discusion page of the Haplogroupe D article regarding your edit and what the study says regarding the origins of the haplogroupe. Please discuss there (or here) before reverting/editing again. Thank you.) Skllagyook (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 20:56 (CET)
- As I already said, both maps must be presented as this is completely accurate way. The study talks about two options. The team favours one, but the reader should be informed about both possibilities. The text already talks about the theory which is more likely according to one research team. Stop removing important things without any reason. The study makes it clear that this is scenario II. And every option should be discussed and presented in the right way. This is how Wikipedia works. All views are discussed in an NEUTRAL manner. Thank you.80.243.173.100 (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:12 (CET)
- The text does not explicitly not the view of the team. The inclusion of both maps is still somewhat misleading. This is because though the study proposed more than one theory but it decided in favor of one. The job of Wikipedia is to represent expert opinion on a topic, and the opinion of the authors of that source is that the lineage more likely originated in Africa. It would be editorializing to represent the two scenarios as though the source considers them both equally likely (which is not the case). Skllagyook (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:18 (CET)
- That is not true, more a bold lie. The text mentions that the Haber team favours the first theory of an African origin, but the study clearly says that there is a possible second scenarion (which is presented by the map). Wikipedia does show both major and minor possibilities, not one alone. This is common in several other topics too. There is no consense about the origin of D or even DE among mainstream geneticists. The research are still ongoing. Fact is that the study talks about two possibilities and thus both maps must be presented. You can additionaly add that the first scenario is favoured by the Haber team, but to delete the other map is on the border of vandalism. Please understand this now.80.243.173.100 (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:40 (CET)
- I have just added the view of the team, but it was not very explicit before. Skllagyook (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:43 (CET)
- Ok, great. Now it is accurate.80.243.173.100 (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:44 (CET)
- I have just added the view of the team, but it was not very explicit before. Skllagyook (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:43 (CET)
- That is not true, more a bold lie. The text mentions that the Haber team favours the first theory of an African origin, but the study clearly says that there is a possible second scenarion (which is presented by the map). Wikipedia does show both major and minor possibilities, not one alone. This is common in several other topics too. There is no consense about the origin of D or even DE among mainstream geneticists. The research are still ongoing. Fact is that the study talks about two possibilities and thus both maps must be presented. You can additionaly add that the first scenario is favoured by the Haber team, but to delete the other map is on the border of vandalism. Please understand this now.80.243.173.100 (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:40 (CET)
- The text does not explicitly not the view of the team. The inclusion of both maps is still somewhat misleading. This is because though the study proposed more than one theory but it decided in favor of one. The job of Wikipedia is to represent expert opinion on a topic, and the opinion of the authors of that source is that the lineage more likely originated in Africa. It would be editorializing to represent the two scenarios as though the source considers them both equally likely (which is not the case). Skllagyook (discuter) 17 décembre 2019 à 21:18 (CET)
Ceci est la page de discussion d’un utilisateur n’ayant pas créé de compte ; de tels utilisateurs sont identifiés par leur adresse IP.
Cette adresse IP est peut-être partagée par plusieurs utilisateurs. Si vous trouvez sur cette page des commentaires qui ne vous concernent pas, n'hésitez pas à créer un compte ou vous connecter afin d’éviter toute future confusion.
[ À quel domaine appartient cette IP ? | Recherche sur Dshield ]