Contents

Template talk:Y-DNA: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:15, 10 September 2010

	Human Genetic History Unassessed (inactive)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human Genetic History, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Human Genetic HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryHuman Genetic History articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Template:Wikiproject MCB Template:WikiProject Genetics

A - Khoisan people, including the Bushmen, san man - Hadzabe

BR -

B - pygmy bayaka

CR -

C - Indigenous Australians

h - Kalash

Is this anything wrong ind making a template with pictures of people rated to each haplogroups?

Human Y-chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups

Y-most recent common ancestor

|

A

BR

B

CR

C

DE

F

D

E

G

H

IJ

K

I

J

L

M

NO

P

N

O

Q

R

• I think that will make the template more difficult to understand. — Reinyday, 16:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, also too biased/stereotyped. Those people pictured may not even be of the haplogroup, so technically they aren't really related subject matter. It would be near impossible to get the type of ethnicity with the most common haplogroup and individual person confirmed of that haplogroup to be pictured; and regardless, phenotypal appearance has no relation to haplogroup. Templates by their very nature shouldn't be picture intensive anyway. Nagelfar (talk) 09:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since we have BR, CR & CF added to the template, I consider how GR & LR would fit at Talk:Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups. Nagelfar (talk) 09:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haplogroup IJ is now be found to share two SNPs in common with K and therefore is under it in the Y-tree. Nagelfar (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IJK is apparently under and separate from K. This will make it interesting. Nagelfar (talk) 17:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My eyes deceived me for whatever reason; IJK is of course above K & IJ, logically. Nagelfar (talk) 19:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then all of L through T could be placed in the LT haplogroup (as is given in the Y-Haplogroup Wikipedia page currently) and IJK could have K* & IJ below it. Nagelfar (talk) 18:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though I think it is clearer to reference visually now, I don't think it retains the concise template feel of the old version. Maybe the whole template could be downsized (smaller font, etc.). Any opinions? Nagelfar (talk) 20:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the name of science this tree needs to be connected to the evolutionary phylogenic tree Erasmus Darwin Fan (talk) 05:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Not immediately clear what you mean by this? Please explain.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could expand the tree (and take out some of the detailed branches) like the one I put recently in IJK: [1]. Would that not be neater?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is something like this (I'll play a bit here):-