User talk:Hunan201p/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lucas Ngonda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Angolan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cletus Mendis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sinhala.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Overlink

Hi; saw your edit on Griff's page and wanted to inform you that nationalities, countries, etc should not be linked per MOS:OL; read that link for more info. – Meena • 21:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Red hair, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Greek and Illyrian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Ashina tribe

Hunan201p, I want to know which part from the Ashina tribe that you disagrees with me. I suggest you reply here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ashina_tribe I need to know so I can make a proper third opinion request.Ghizz Archus (talk) 22:15, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Kolyma1

Hi! I (with heavy heart and sad face ☹️) reverted your addition to Yana RHS article as I thought it was a bit undue for that article, since Kolyma1 is not from there and is Mesolithic. Perhaps we should start a Ancient North Siberians/Ancient Palaeo-Siberians article?  Tewdar  09:42, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Tewdar that your edit was a bit off-topic. Kolyma1 is mentioned in the article because of the ancestral link to Yana, but then it's not an article for all about Kolyma1. What about extending the scope of Ancient North Eurasians for that purpose (well, it already has been extended somehow to include Yana etc.)? There was a craze especially among IE identitarians about Mal'ta especially before EHG came into the scene, but actually MA-1 is just a part of a bigger complex of early Siberian populations, so a standalone about MA-1 is a bit undue IMHO. Austronesier (talk) 10:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm actually starting to think articles along the lines of "Palaeogenetics of North-East wherever" might be a better strategy for our archaeogenetics articles. So we could bunch ANE, ANS, APS together on the same article, explaining how they differ, and so on. Might require a page move, though, rather than just extending the scope of Ancient North Eurasians... since that might get confusing... what do we all think about that?  Tewdar  10:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Apologies, folks. Most of the reports I have read about this study described Kolyma1 as a woman,[1][2] which I guess I took at face value since I don't recall learning that Kolyma1 had been assigned male (I gleamed the haplogroup info I added from Dryomov, et al (2020) rather than Sikora, et al (2019)). But this happens from time to time when taking pop-sci at face value... - Hunan201p (talk) 10:25, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

The Sikora paper itself describes Kolyma1 as female! You have to look in the supplementary tables to learn otherwise... You actually reminded me to fix my (and their) mistake, so thanks! 😁  Tewdar  10:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Tewdar: Yes, I don't mean to keep "Ancient North Eurasians" as the page title for an article of wider scope. We can of course build a new article from scratch and keep Ancient North Eurasians as is (but less coatrackish). It will certainly be fun to cover the whole topic range of the Genetic history of East Siberia (or watchamacallit...), from the makeup of the earliest populations to their traces in modern populations from Europe to the Americas, but also how their genetic heritage increasingly became diluted in its "home area" with repeated ingressions of East Asian ancestry. –Austronesier (talk) 10:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

How about one of us starts a sandbox 'Genetic history of East Watchamacallit', we add the worthwhile information from the ANE article to it, then add some other stuff from Yana, Kolyma1, etc., then delete the ANE article and move the new article to mainspace (pending consensus, time, etc.)? It does sound fun, doesn't it? 😊👍  Tewdar  10:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

In any case, we could just start working on the new article, no matter what the fate of Ancient North Eurasians turns out to be...  Tewdar  10:56, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Human evolutionary genetics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European people.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

SPI mess-up

Hi Hunan201p! This SPI was clearly misplaced: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Vamlos/Archive#17_November_2022. The editor behind these IPs obviously is the Austrian IP, not DH/Vamlos etc.

The story goes like this: the original "WCF" was the same person as DH/Vamlos etc. At a later stage, a sock farm surrounding User:Kumasojin 熊襲 (original sockmaster: User:Satoshi Kondo = "Austrian IP") was erroneously conflated with WCF. Subsequently, the original WCF and the "Austrian IP" were handled in one SPI, resulting in a weird assemblage of blocked editors with completely different editing profiles.

Finally, these two actors have been disentangled, but paradoxically, it was Vamlos that was split out, even though he is the original WCF, while the "Austrian IP" remains as the sockmaster in the WCF-SPI page.

If you detect the smell of a sock spirit and are unsure which one of these two actors it is, you can ping me first. I think I have developed quite a sense for keeping these two troublesome individuals apart. Austronesier (talk) 16:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much for stopping by to deliver the good news. It is regrettable that I filed for the wrong character, but this has always been a crapshoot. As for how the false negative mess got started... I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Anyway, it goes without saying that I appreciate your constant assistance and vigilance against the sock activity. I'll filter my suspicions to you in the future, but we're still halfway in perdition without you and Spicy on the CheckUser team. - Hunan201p (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

It's all here, and it spite of their drama and foul play, this statement looks absolutely credible. Actually, this guy would be a good editor (by diligence, curiosity etc.) if he weren't such a bad editor (by standards of collaborativeness, credibility, competence, self-reflection etc.). And he will hardly be able to restore community trust with such a record of deception and disruption. It takes more than lip service[3], especially when at the same time actively editing with sock accounts (I have twothree potential candidates on my radar, but not fully ripe yet for an SPI).

The original WCF is deeply stuck and unshaken in racialism, thus a net-negative by all parameters IMO. –Austronesier (talk) 22:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

The fuck😂...[4]. –Austronesier (talk) 22:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

This is honestly sad. It's like a kamikaze mission at this point. I wholeheartedly agree about their continued misconduct. I was actually willing to give them the benefit of a doubt until I saw that they were continuing to slash content under different webhosts. There's just no potential for trust here.

I'm really surprised that no one has floated the idea of just EC locking all the targeted articles, given the perpetual cycle of abuse.

Austria is a very interesting country and I have often wondered why Austrian IPs are commonly shared between these socks. - Hunan201p (talk) 22:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

It's actually simple and unspectacular: most likely that's where he lives. Apparently he is a native German speaker, see their global edit counts[5][6]. He is notorious in de.WP, too. Unlike the original WCF and socks[7][8][9] –Austronesier (talk) 23:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

You may have noticed that I have "thanked" you for an edit earlier. Don't take it literally, but as a hint related to this discussion. I'm watching closely and can't wait to get more linguistic cues. –Austronesier (talk) 17:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

I remember the activity from a while back.... From Austrian and Kazakhstan IPs.

Austria

Kazakhstan

Examples: [10], [11]

The Ipv4 also has a history of interacting with WCF socks like SapmiSamo. - Hunan201p (talk) 23:32, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/WorldCreaterFighter/Archive#18_April_2020: those were the days. But now it's clear why it was a fuck-up: both @Shinoshijak and @Queenplz geolocated to the UK (based on overt non-CU diffs), so they were related to @DerekHistorian/Vamlos (thus ultimately to the "orginal" WCF), and not to the Austria-based socks which have been more prolific and thus dominated the CU material in the SPI archives then. –Austronesier (talk) 12:38, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Haha, they must have really gotten a kick out of passing that particular SPI case. It makes perfect sense now. I trust that some people behind the scenes will eventually get the CU data organized in this case in a way that will make it easier for future CUs to understand it.

It's hard to believe that nearly 3 years have gone by since then. Time really flies when the world is enveloped in drama. But at least there are people like you who actually care about all of this, breathing life in to the investigation. Thanks for that. - Hunan201p (talk) 11:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Khakas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samoyedic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Golden Horde, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hazara.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Göktürks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Altai.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Sockpuppet's edits

Hi. How are you? BaiulyQz is just another WorldCreaterFighter's sock. I think his edits on Iranian peoples and Tajiks could be disruptive because I remember he tried to disrupt Indo-Iranian topics in the past (using his AsadalEditor account or whatever). Both Iranian peoples#Genetics and Tajiks#Genetics require review or rewriting. --Mann Mann (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hey, Mann! Thanks for stopping by and for keeping me updated on the various edits to different articles. I am usually more active on Wikipedia, but holiday season visitations have sapped a lot of my time up. Now that I've got my free time back to myself I will be able to spend more time editing. Thanks for your assistance and I hope you'll enjoy time off and a Happy New Year. - Hunan201p (talk) 05:09, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

You too, have a good time. Cheers! --Mann Mann (talk) 05:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

"an" before "h"

Hello! I see you're editing 'an's before 'H' words. Just a reminder that if the H is not silent, it is just 'a' not 'an'. Your edits at Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge for the word "hostage" are in error, because "hostage" has a non-silent consonant. Leitmotiv (talk) 21:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Leitmotiv: The form of indefinite article is governed by the displayed text, not by the invisible wikilinked text. It's "an FBI...", not "a FBI...". –Austronesier (talk) 21:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Missed that! thanks Leitmotiv (talk) 22:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

3rd opinion

With this I notify you that I mentioned our dispute at the "3O". See here for more. Mark. PaloAlto (talk) 21:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Explain to me on talk page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Golden_Horde

The 2016 is only a hypothesis and it says " Considering the historical, archaeological, physical anthropological, and molecular archaeological evidence obtained, it seems most likely that the Tavan Tolgoi bodies are members of Genghis Khan’s Golden family, including the lineage of bekis, Genghis Khan’s female lineage, and their female successors who controlled Eastern Mongolia in the early Mongolian era instead of guregens of the Ongud clan, or the lineage of khans, Genghis Khan’s male lineage, who married females of the Hongirad clan, including Genghis Khan’s grandmother, mother, chief wife, and some daughters-in-law. "

The author even suggest that it is the female lineage of Genghis Khan that is related to Tavan Tolgoi. Gemmaso (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Your not making any sense to me. You said " Unnecessary edit, study specifically states: "it seems most likely that the Tavan Tolgoi bodies are members of Genghis Khan’s Golden family, including the lineage of bekis, Genghis Khan’s female lineage, and their female successors who controlled Eastern Mongolia in the early Mongolian era ***instead of guregens of the Ongud clan***, or the lineage of khans, Genghis Khan’s male lineage, who married females of the Hongirad clan"

How is this unnecessary when the way you edited makes not mention of the Tavan Tolgoi bodies were possibly only maternally related to the female lineage of Genghis Khan family.Gemmaso (talk) 21:36, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I had replied

Reply back. The way you edited make no mention that the study also claims that it is only maternally related to Genghis Khan, not paternal. You claiming Golden Horde and Golden family R1b being Genghis Khan related? Your basically making a bold claim that the Khans were R1b. Also let me remind you Batu Khan founder of Golden Horde, was suspected by Genghis Khan not to be his child, but of other men when Borte was help captive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Golden_Horde Gemmaso (talk) 22:35, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you reply red hair talk page. You reverted the fake source. It says light colered, not red. Since when is it officially confirmed that Odegei Khan have red hair when there isn't a physical description of him with red hair. You used secondary language blog as a source and from Rashid al Din to claim he has red hair but those are unreliable as everyone knows.Gemmaso (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Warning: 3rr rule

Your recent editing history at Red hair shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemmaso (talk • contribs) 02:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Native Americans obvious west eurasian admixture Y-DNA R and mtDNA X

Who ever edited the page wants to remove all west eurasian admixture of Native American. The Native Americans have the highest percentage of ANE, Ancient North Eurasian

R1b in Native Americans are no doubt related with West Eurasian or Mal'ta boy ANE a component that isn't even west eurasian (or is it mixed?)

Haplogroup X (mtDNA) Haplogroup X is a human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup. It is found in America, Europe, Western Asia, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa.

It is found in Kennewick Man , his mtDNA is X

WHY IS THIS REMOVED?

A 2013 study in Nature reported that DNA found in the 24,000-year-old remains of a young boy from the archaeological Mal'ta-Buret' culture suggest that up to one-third of Indigenous Americans' ancestry can be traced back to western Eurasians, who may have "had a more north-easterly distribution 24,000 years ago than commonly thought" "We estimate that 14 to 38 percent of Indigenous American ancestry may originate through gene flow from this ancient population," the authors wrote. Professor Kelly Graf said,

"Our findings are significant at two levels. First, it shows that Upper Paleolithic Siberians came from a cosmopolitan population of early modern humans that spread out of Africa to Europe and Central and South Asia. Second, [Paleo-Indigenous American] skeletons like Buhl Woman with phenotypic traits atypical of modern-day Indigenous Americans can be explained as having a direct historical connection to Upper Paleolithic Siberia."

Gemmaso (talk) 13:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Gemmaso: it was removed because it is original research. It was placed in the "Haplogroup R1" sub-section, implying that R1 in Native Americans is from ANE. Every source in the article that contemplates the origin of R1 in Native Americans says that it is most likely of post-1492 origin.

Haplogroup X2a in Native Americans is not of European origin and hasn't been found anywhere in Eurasia, but is most closely related to South Siberian X lineages. The fact that Europeans have other mutations of X doesn't make Native Americans related to them. - Hunan201p (talk) 13:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/131120-science-native-american-people-migration-siberia-genetics

" Nearly one-third of Native American genes come from west Eurasian peoples with ties to the Middle East and Europe"

Every source in the article that contemplates the origin of R1 in Native Americans says that it is most likely of post-1492 origin

According to what source and how is that possible. If R1b in Native American came post -1492 origin, how is it that nearly 92-98% of Native Americans west eurasian lineage are R1b, with nearly no other west eurasian y-dna haplogroups. How can R1b be so high? Gemmaso (talk) 14:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)