 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The map is wrong for that title. Because "Recent excavations at Arzhan in Tuva, Russia have uncovered the earliest Scythian-style kurgan yet found.[5]" . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paganikgaos (talk • contribs) 21:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
This is a blatent fork of Scythians, as part of Krakkos's mistaken efforts to narrow the scope of that article. When the dust settles, it should be redirected back there. Johnbod (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
The genetics section of this article, which is a mess of Biblical proportions, contained numerous citations of Simpson (2017), which was used to support, for example, this statement:
who then were themselves replaced by paternal lines of other Eurasian cultures.[1]
But Simpson doesn't support any such statement, and contains no genetic information about human beings at all:
https://www.academia.edu/33750890
The only reference it makes to genetics is about Scythian horses. The reference itself is a pop archaeology article.
The content was added by 107.115.33.55 (talk · contribs) in a blitz edit that overturned content that had been added by more trustworthy and established Wikipedians like Krakkos.
Diff:
Seems highly dubious. - Hunan201p (talk) 20:28, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Both of these terms are pseudoscientific and obsolete, as noted on their respective pages. I feel like this passage should be removed in favor of a more more modern descriptor, or accompanied by a disclaimer that these categories are outdated and unscientific. 47.55.95.232 (talk) 22:37, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply
The haplogroup of the remaining 1 sample was uncertain (probably group R).
Not seeing this anywhere the paper cited. Did I miss something?
The sample in question appears to be ARZ-T8.
A raw link to Supplementary materials 2 is found here. It's a .xlsk file and the Y-DNA data is found in Table 6.
I can't find anything saying that ARZ-T8 was "likely R". Is this original research or something?
Since it was actually 16 of the 17 samples yielded a Y-haplotype, I don't see why we should enumerate this sample as 17, in this context.
We also should describe the mtDNA lineages from Arzhan since that was a significant part of this study's contents. - Hunan201p (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:38, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
