Talk:Peștera cu Oase
 | A fact from Peștera cu Oase appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 December 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}
Lectie de istorie...
editHaha, asta e curat lectie de istorie pt Unguri. Sa le intre in cap ca NOI AM FO PRIMII, nu ei. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fillosaurus (talk • contribs) 14:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Biased article
editI think this article is biased in favor of the multi-regional evolution model. It leans too heavily on Trinkaus et al. Nrkpan (talk) 09:54, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Neither Trinkaus nor his work ever supported multiregionalism; he simply pointed out that Oase1 and Oase2 show evidence of interbreeding between Neanderthals and modern humans. 10 years after your comment was posted we now have genetic evidence that modern humans and Neanderthals did indeed hybridize, contrary to the replacement theory of archaic human extinction. And it is glorious. Hunan201p (talk) 05:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Replace the Turkish ş (s-cedilla U+015f/hex) with the correct Romanian ș (s-comma U+0219/hex)
editThe s-cedilla is incorrect in Romanian, it would need to be replaced with the proper letter. Most occurences in ro.wikipedia.org have already been fixed AFAIK. 70.54.202.152 (talk) 18:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
His population did not make a significant contribution to modern European ancestry
editCurrently, in the "Oase 1" section, it is stated that: "He was not more closely related to ancient European hunter-gatherers than to East Asians, suggesting that his population did not make a significant contribution to modern European ancestry."
I know this is more or less literally taken from the research paper - but it has a deep logical flaw. From uniparental DNA, we know that Europe was populated from Africa via eastern West Asia, the subcontinent, and/ or SE Asia, ~43,000 years ago. Since then, both East Asia and Europe have drifted away from that range of founder populations for over 40k years. Thus, one would not expect a closer affinity of a very early European to either side. Instead, Oase 1 and his companions could very well be 50 - 80 % the ancestors of modern Europeans (taking into account Gravettian and West Asian and Eastern European admixture that originally might have been close but since then drifted in isolation, or received Southwest Asian and "basal Eurasian" admixture).
Wikipedia itself states South Asia as the origin of y-DNA haplogroup F (although it may have been the NW portion of the subcontinent and adjacent regions).
At the minimum, this page should be edited to say that the above statement is the authors' conclusion, but can be criticised on the grounds I mention.
John of Anina
editThere's a separate article at John of Anina that is probably referring to Oase 1. That article should probably either be renamed to 'Oase 1' or merged into this article. Fraenir (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Earlier???
edit"Earlier research by Fu et al." = 2016! cannot be named "earlier" than 2016, if not a few months.2A02:8108:9640:1A68:590B:2AFD:1FF1:E401 (talk) 13:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)