Jump to content

Talk:Genographic Project

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

HGDP failure = POV

[edit]

The project has drawn comparison with the failed Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP) from the 1990s, which ended after a range of controversies emerged about how the DNA information would be managed. This statement contradicts the HGDP article which does not indicate the the project has been terminated or has not produced any results. This wording smacks of POV. --Eddylyons 19:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Exactly. СЛУЖБА (talk) 00:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Y-DNA 12 Marker Test

[edit]

As noted on Family Tree DNA, the Y-DNA is a 12 marker test. MinstrelOfC 14:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Yes, but you can add more markers if you pay for it yourself. СЛУЖБА (talk) 00:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Accusations of Biopiracy by Native Groups not mentioned-why?

[edit]

Why are there no references to the well-publicized accusations of possible biopiracy by concerned groups? Has Wikipedia's integrity fallen so low that Nat Geo has secretly bribed the editors, or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.166.200 (talk) 04:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-- It's actually there. Moreover, some complete nonsense concerning the "exploitative and unethical", "use Indigenous peoples as subjects of scientific curiosity in research that provides no benefit to Indigenous peoples, yet subjects them to significant risks", "take blood or other bodily tissue samples for their own use in order to further their own speculative theories of human history", not "giving openly" that the indigenous peoples "are the same as the Pilgrims except coming over several thousand years before" and so on... СЛУЖБА (talk) 00:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "Criticism" section.

[edit]

Is it really that necessary to reflect the unreasonable blubbing of some idiots? СЛУЖБА (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. These people obviously have no understanding of how the project works, or the aims of it. Nor do they have even a rudimentary knowledge of anthropological theory if they believe that someone is trying to prove "that we’re the same as the Pilgrims except we came over several thousand years before." Facepalm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.151.215.197 (talk) 19:35, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Criticism section is too damn long. The point need not be laboured. Those political advocates are idiots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.118.209.122 (talk) 19:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly gives the impression of a vast wall of criticism, all based on what... that Native Americans evolved separately from microbes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:B930:7B90:D41A:9C8D:3E6:E585 (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I trimmed it down. You are correct.--FeralOink (talk) 08:26, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, we are a group of students working on this article. We're interested in the topic of "biocolonialism", a term that arose largely in response to this project. We think it would fit under the criticism section, as well as the larger topic of genetic testing. It is a notable political movement that we think is missing from this article. Lindsmach (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC) and @adrianngzz and @evc32[reply]

Which test is better: male or female lineage?

[edit]

Or does it matter? I want to do the test, but I'm wondering if there are any reasons for choosing one path over the other. Accuracy maybe? Or are they simply two different lineages and neither is preferable over the other? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnJSal (talk • contribs) 21:51, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Y-DNA test of the paternal lineage has an advantage for genealogy in that one's surname is used to filter out false positive matches, which are numerous. --Traal (talk) 19:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Are these "questions" real? First: James, you are a Man so you HAVE an Y chromosome, period. If you are a transgender girl believing that you are a man, well for Genetics you are still a girl, sorry. The test is not a scam. Wich is better? male or female lineage? There is not "female" lineage. Only mithocondrial comes totally from mothers but the "7 mithocondrial eves" are not a racial, lineage, geographic or cultural afiliation. At the other side: the "Y chr lineage" from men, give you exactly your father ascendence (race, nation, geographic origin) from at least 200 years to more than a millenium. Geno 2.0 chip gives both mithocondrial and Y chromosome tests -and also autosomal tests (the other chromosomes that are also tested). All together give a really deep idea of wich genotype of human is the tested subject (by aproximation of course, and when more cases and studies are made, the better the analysis of the data given -that is updated regularly by National Geographic)

"Other media"

[edit]

I removed a section which did not contribute to the article and appeared only to be a promotion for a self-published book. Non-notable. --74.111.214.16 (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genographic Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:17, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genographic Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:32, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is something unhealthy about your article

[edit]

--Adbouz (talk) 17:25, 5 July 2021 (UTC)There is something unhealthy about your article. In the original National Geografic article, the presence of the Berbers in the four corners of the world was the greatest "surprise". But since then the article has been deleted from National Geografic for probably the same reason as that the North Africa is not mentioned in this Wikipedia article. In the original article of National Geografic there is the presence of the Berbers in Peru, Mexico, Argentina etc. in large proportion for a people who have not been a people of colonizers for thousands of years. Extract: " This is how 5% of North African Amazigh DNA is found among Argentines, and 6% among Colombians. There is also DNA from berbers (Amazighs) in Bermuda, Peruvians 3%, Mexican Americans 4%, Puerto Rico 3%, Greece 3%, Iran 4%, In Tuscany (Italy) and France (2%), Kenya and Ethiopia with 4%."[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: The Rhetoric of Health and Wellness

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2022 and 17 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Adrianngzz, Evc32, Lindsmach (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Tenarg, Ninaflinn, Ekf22, Ciarrai32, Writ015-tseng, RhetoricH&W2022.

— Assignment last updated by Liliput000 (talk) 16:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Genographic_Project&oldid=1199647045"