Talk:Melanesians
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Melanesians article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
Melanesians are melanated Asians. The Connor descent from europeans. That’s impossible
Austronesians
editWay too much info about them. They have their own article (Austronesians). This is about Melanesians. Kortoso (talk) 17:03, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Kortoso: This information is relevant because it describes the interaction of Melanesians and Proto-Polynesians in New Guinea. Jarble (talk) 17:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- The problem is that the entire section called Origin and Genetics is not about either with regards to the Melanesians. There is a large section about Austronesians, and about Hominins. Not the genetics of the Melanesians. 83.84.100.133 (talk) 12:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Sensitive subject
editI'll probably get flamed for asking this question but ...
It is curious that there is almost nothing said about the predominant physical characteristics of the Melanesian people given that there are obviously substantial differences compared to the Austronesian and Polynesian peoples (this is briefly touched on in the history but not in a significant way). Granted, such a discussion has the potential to descend into a very racist vein (as it appears happened in previous versions of the article). But deliberately avoiding such information seems less than intellectually honest. Just wondering if there is not some appropriate way to touch on this as it obviously says some significant things about the migration patterns of humans in ancient times.
-- MC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.131.2.3 (talk) 18:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Well, if reliable sources exist for information about physical characteristics, I don't see why it can't be added. The material about blonde hair seems to fall into that category. Looie496 (talk) 19:16, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- The general consensus is that "Australoid" Melanesians came first, likely migrating along the coast of southern India. Then "Mongoloid" Polynesians came more recently, after having dwelt in mainland East Asia for millennia. Trilobright (talk) 11:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Map from Meyers Lexikon
edit@John beta: I think the problem of the map is that it follows an outdated theory about human races according to which the Melanesians were a sub-race of the "Negroid race" (while, funny enough, the Maori were seen as "Mongoloid"). If we keep the map, we should at least not hide its origins, that's why I changed the caption. --Rsk6400 (talk) 19:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Map inaccuracy
editThe French map of ‘Melanesian areas of Oceania’ should be deleted as it contains a highly inaccurate depiction of Aboriginal Australian territory. What seems to be shown on this map is areas in central and northern Australia where Aboriginal people live semi-traditionally and have formal political control of their communities. The fact that these things are only present in the areas depicted is the result of European settlement, and it is a damaging piece of misinformation with a long history in Australia that these are the only places that ‘real’ Aboriginal people live. Of course Aboriginal people live all over the continent, in both urban and rural settings, and to actually match the type of territorial information shown on the map for Melanesians and Papuans the entire continent should be colored yellow. I suggest this map be replaced with a more accurate one. 203.166.254.167 (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)