User talk:2001:1C00:1E20:D900:D108:E292:4ECE:682B

July 2024

Hello, I'm Donald Albury. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Genetic history of Egypt, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. DNA Tribes does not appear to a reliable source. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 162#DNA Tribes Used As Supporting Source To Two Peer-Reviewed Studies Regarding Ancient Egyptian Race Controversy, DNA History of Egypt, Population History of Egypt Donald Albury 16:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I added DNA Tribes, as the source, as this is their publication.

Whether they are a 'credible' source I wouldn't know, however this is what they published. And as far as I know, it is they only detailed dna from the Valley Of The Kings that doesn't merely rely on haplogroups.

It is also more detailed than the S.O.Y. Keita and Anselin study, which found the same thing. 2001:1C00:1E20:D900:D108:E292:4ECE:682B (talk) 16:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2024

"Persistent long-time pushing of unreliable sources, bludgeoning of talkpages, block evasion and egregious personal attacks"

I have not posted or made any change to an article page, using 'unreliable sources'. I have shown that the best evidence, Autosomal STR DNA tests from the Valley Of The Kings, are being systematically excluded from Wikipedia using technicalities, and have been since they were published in 2012. Similar results were obtained by S.O.Y. Keita and Anselin years later. This latest block is just another attempt to censor information from Wikipedia. I am the one who is positively contributing, because I actually list sources, which is what they don't like. 'Persistent', is gaslighting for consistent. I don't change my opinion unless the data changes. And the data has stayed the same for over a decade. 'Bludgeoning of talk pages' - well that was provoked by one of the banners starting to post comments to data I listed on a talk page. 'Egregious personal attack' - like what? The poster liked to claim 'reliable sources', without ever clarifying why he thought that Wikipedia rule would apply, what wording was relevant, and why he thought the source I supplied (he didn't supply any support for his statements) violated the Reliable Sources rule. Let alone how this rule is consistently (and not selectively) applied on Wikipedia.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Genetic_history_of_Egypt#The_DNA_Of_The_Amarna_Dynasty_Pharaohs_Is_Known_-_And_It_Is_Eastern_Bantu

I therefore want to appeal this 1 year ban for the IP address I'm using. 2001:1C00:1E20:D900:D108:E292:4ECE:682B (talk) 02:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.