Contents

Talk:Paragroup

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

Molecular Biology: Genetics / MCB This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology 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.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance). Human Genetic History (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 Evolutionary biology Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

technical[edit]

This page was tagged as needing "a better explanation of technical details". I have tried to provide them. If any parts are still unclear, please specifically list them here. — Reinyday, 11:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the title of the article breaches the conventions. See: Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Special characters.

I can't understand why this title anyhow. --Sugaar 14:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the correct title should be "paragroup". This is what Karafet et al 2008 use. Wapondaponda (talk) 03:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have read somewhere that paraphyletic haplogroups can indicate ancestral haplogroups. And that it's useful in determining ancestral lands (places of origin) of a certain haplogroup. Due to my lack of deep knowledge in the subject, I'm not sure whether this is implied within the technical info in the article, or needs mentioning (if this piece of info is true). --Xevorim (talk) 01:42, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Standard scientific notation for paragroups is to use an asterisk after the name for the haplotype. The very conciseness which makes this a very useful standard, reduces its usefulness as a link

Therefore, currently, there is no standard for both noting a paragroup, and usefully linking to the paragroup article which explains this distinction, without saying, Haplotype paragroup, which in my limited understanding seems to be either a tautology or an oxymoron (I told you it was limited)

I fear my option may be marginally acceptable, and I was hoping someone with a better knowledge of the subject might either endorse them or have a better idea

Current status: * The current status. If you missed that, I can't say I am surprised, it is a link shown as * after the colon and before the word, "The" on this line. Paragroups are marked with an asterisk, which is pipe-linked to the redirect page * (haplogroup), creating about 30 or so double redirects

Option: * ^paragroup My favorite. Might be better to use the abbreviation, 'para', instead, to save space.

Option: your idea here. Including haplotype paragroup, if that works

Anarchangel (talk) 20:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IsParahaplogroup the same as a Paragroup? If so, should that article be merged into this? - Kautilya3 (talk) 22:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]