Contents

Talk:Jebel Sahaba

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Africa: Sudan Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Sudan. This article was created or improved during the "African 10,000 Challenge", which started in 1 September 2016 and is still continuing. You can help! Archaeology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: "Has there ever been a period of time without war?". Yahoo. April 4, 2007.

Whole paragraphs taken from source:

http://www.anthroarcho.com/prehistory/warfare.html Kikuichimonji 03:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly is it? I cannot find reliable sources for accurate coordinates. ♆ CUSH ♆ 00:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd advocate for renaming this article "Jebel Sahaba" - that is how the site is generally referred to in both the popular media and in the archaeological literature these days, and I think anyone searching for this information on Wikipedia would be much more likely to search for Jebel Sahaba than they would Cemetery 117. We could always add a separate section for Tushka, or create a new page for that site. Thoughts? Ninafundisha (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This may be journalistic clickbait. What we have so far is:

" Work carried out at Liverpool John Moores University, the University of Alaska and New Orleans’ Tulane University indicates that they were part of the general sub-Saharan originating population – the ancestors of modern Black Africans. The identity of their killers is however less easy to determine. But it is conceivable that they were people from a totally different racial and ethnic group – part of a North African/ Levantine/European people who lived around much of the Mediterranean Basin."

(emphasis mine). In other words, there is no positive evidence either way, and the journalists just thought this might make the story more sexy. Looking for the actual study now. Never cite journalism on academic studies, always use the journalists to find the studies, and then cite those. --dab (𒁳) 07:03, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found the actual study (Holliday 2015). As expected, the "race baiting" component was entirely the journalist's. --dab (𒁳) 07:23, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]