Talk:Svante Pääbo

Reliable sources

Hi, I cleaned up this article's external links section in accordance with our guidelines and there were some reliable sources which weren't appropriate there but may be used to build up the article. I'll post them below if anyone wants to use them.

• New Scientist article on domestication by selection
• New light shed on chimp genome
• Why humans are brainier than chimps
• Genome 'treasure trove'
• DNA clues to Neanderthals
• TIME Magazine's 100 most influential people of the year: Svante Pääbo

ThemFromSpace 06:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Reliable source mention in article somewhat IMPOSSIBLE

The article states: In February 2009, at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), it was announced that the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology had completed the first draft version of the Neanderthal genome. Over 3 billion base pairs were sequenced in collaboration with the 454 Life Sciences Corporation. This project, led by Pääbo, will shed new light on the recent evolutionary history of modern humans.[citation needed]

You can't cite a meeting where a talk is given. I was there. It happened. Now, nothing happens because although it is likely archived on video somewhere obscure because it was mentioned during an evening talk, it isn't easily retrieved and copies have to be paid for because it's a royal pain to find and duplicate. So, basically, now you have two people who said it happened The original writer and me. I go every year for fun. I remember this vaguely only because I think someone said "Neandertal" instead of "Neanderthal". But it was sure as hell not printed anywhere. --Bob Calder 01:31, 10 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by B calder (talk • contribs)

Of course you can - date, location, perhaps also the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.15.31 (talk) 22:45, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

More up to date photo?

The photo is from 2016. Are there any more up to date ones? סשס Grimmchild 09:25, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

I did a search and found several photos which may be more recent than the 2016 from the Max Planch Institute. Perhaps they would be more recent and useable. See https://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/staff/paabo/ Jurisdicta (talk) 14:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Nationality in Lead sentence

OK, have at it. Malerooster (talk) 17:32, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, not sure what is going on here, but I came here from the BLP board. Per WP:MOSBIO, ethnicity should not be mentioned in the lead sentnece, full stop. If there is some reason to include ethnicity or the subject has dual nationality or whatever the case, just mention it here and it can be discussed civilly. Thank you, --Malerooster (talk) 20:58, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, got it, no wonder this was at the BLP board. I went back through the edit history here. There is a MAJOR edit war going on over this but NOBODY is using this talkpage? WTF people?!? #1) Stop edit warring over this immediately! #2)The article SHOULD go back to its most stable version which does not include ethnicity in the lead sentence but see #1. #3) DISCUSS it here and come to some consensus. #4) If you cant do #1 - #3, expect blocks and a trip to ANI or the editing and 3rr board. Questions? Ok, please discuss below, thank you. --Malerooster (talk) 21:27, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Per MOS:ETHNICITY Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability(my bolding). Is this the case here? Does the subject hold dual citizenship? Unless these points can be addressed, ethnicity should not be included in the lead sentence. Thoughts? --Malerooster (talk) 21:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to have not noticed this part of the talk. I'm playing catch up at this time. We can talk here, but not to repeat, I'll link everyone to my talk page where I provided a brief summary about my support for its mention. All follow-up can go ahead here. --Transparenter (talk) 22:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock. Politrukki (talk) 09:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

As for citizenship(s), both Estonia and Sweden follow the jus sanguinis principle. So we know for sure that Svante Pääbo became citizen of Estonia at birth (1955), but when exactly did he become citizen of Sweden is actually not that clear. (It may be sensitive private/privileged information.) Difficult to tell without knowing when was the paternity legally established (if ever), i.e, when was the identity of his father - a citizen of Sweden - "officially" documented): around the time of birth, before father's death, or never? In the latter case, SP may not have become citizen of Sweden before his mother had become (naturalised) citizen of Sweden first. 3 Löwi (talk) 12:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I am thoroughly confused, and that is why we discuss this. Didn't he become a citizen of Sweden at birth since he was born there and his dad was Swedish? More importantly, what do reliable sources say about his nationality, because that is what we really should be focused on, not our own orginal research into this matter? If all the sources are calling him "Swedish", that is what we should go with. Can anybody provide a reliable source that is different? Thank you, --Malerooster (talk) 13:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC) ps, Lowi, sorry I don't know how to add the dots over the "o", I don't know the answer to any of your questions about his paternity, but again, what only matters is what reliable sources say.

It's pointless to speculate about his citizenship here. He is likely not an Estonian citizen, there are no sources to back that and we can't use the case of Alexander Van der Bellen or any other person with Estonian ancestry to determine Pääbo's citizenship nor are the present-day laws of Estonia helpful since we need a reliable source dealing with Pääbo for this article. Shellwood (talk) 13:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Of course he is Swedish until otherwise proven. But one thing I can't see in MOSBIO is how to do with names that are alien to any major language in the subject's country of origin, like Pääbo in this instance. For those in the know about said language/s, a remark like "part Estonian ancestry" may relieve some curiosity. 151.177.56.148 (talk) 14:22, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

IP, that discussion or addition is fine for the body of the article(with RS of course), NOT the lead sentence. --Malerooster (talk) 14:25, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Shellwood. I will give this another day or two, but then I will remove ethnicity from the lead sentence biased on 1) MOSBIO and 2) The consensus that seems to be forming here. Transparenter, please provide a reliable source that says Paabo has Estonian CITIZENSHIP, otherwise, please do not readd it once it is removed from the LEAD sentence, thank you, --Malerooster (talk) 14:23, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

I will go along with the IP statement and am happy to see "part Estonian" though from what we know he is half-Estonian and half-Swede. --Transparenter (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock. Politrukki (talk) 09:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Keep the present form as it is perfect, and consistent with other examples of a notable subject being from ONE country, but having ANOTHER ethnic origin past or present. For example, Federico Palacios Martínez is a German footballer professionally but is of Spanish descent and it says so on opener of article. Another instance, and believe me there are too many to list entirely, is the late Nikola Nezlobinski who was North Macedonian but of ethnic Russian descent as it says on his article. So if keep it as it is, then there will be no issues. --Rupert Ratbags (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock. Politrukki (talk) 09:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Rupert Ratbags, thank you for pointing out Federico Palacios Martínez. I have removed his ethnicity per MOSBIO. Nikola Nezlobinski I haven't changed since that seems a bit more involved. So you found the 0.02% of articles that don't match MOSBIO, very good. If you look at 98.98% of well written bios, they do not include ethnicity in the lead sentence per our guidelines. If you find any other bios please bring them to my attention. We do look at these on a case by case basis. Also, consensus is not a vote but is decided by the merits of the arguments. You have less than 20 edits in the project in less than 2 weeks? Not trying to judge, just point out that multiple editors with 10s of thousands of edits have tried to explain this issue. --Malerooster (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes and articles can't be compared like that, they are separate entries. No valid reason has been given of why we should disregard the MOS for the lead regarding his background. There are lots of biographies about people with exotic names and information about their backgrounds should be covered in the early or personal life sections as per guidelines above. Shellwood (talk) 19:25, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles YES THEY CAN be compared like that. Finding matches when comparing is not the be-all-and-end-all of the dispute, but so far no valid reason has been presented for why we cannot say that he is of Estonian heritage and what makes those other articles actually different. Transparenter (talk) 19:34, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Blocked sock. Politrukki (talk) 09:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

We can say he is of Estonian heritage and we should, and we will (again we should have a RS for it). Just NOT in the lead sentence per our MOSBIO. Do you understand and agree with that? Transparenter, you are new, "we" (muliple editors now) have taken alot of effort to explain this and be patient. At some point, pretty close to be honest, you can be blocked for disruption, not hearing, and not liking what you hear. This is a heads up, please take it. --Malerooster (talk) 19:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC) ps, iam out for now, iam going to watch the eagles/cardnals since i like birds ;) --Malerooster (talk) 19:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

The thing I tried to point out is about "anomalous" names, not ethnicity. You can be totally English but have a Russian name and (perhaps remote) ancestry, for example. That's not about ethnicity and is not covered in MOS. Perhaps it should be added there? 151.177.56.148 (talk) 20:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

For Russian paid operatives ("professional trolls") the main purpose of activity on social media channels is to detour people into time-wasting debates that do not address the logical and natural topics of discussion, all the while pounding home Moscow’s incessant core messages. In Pääbo's case, the Orwellian/Pravda'esque message from Moscow would be to repeat ad nauseam that "there was no Estonia", and therefore "there were no Estonian citizens", when he was born in 1955 — because otherwise some "anti-putinist" editors may just mention somewhere that his mother was a refugee from Estonia whose family had escaped in 1944 from the Soviet occupation and the Stalinist terror... 91.200.117.76 (talk) 21:40, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Utter rubbish. First of all, your "Russian paid" fantasy is a conspiracy theory that floats around distinctly anti-Russian, or more precisely pro-Whitehouse/Brussels media and commentators. One only needs to cast the slightest doubt over the corporate media narrative to be labelled a "Kremlin spin doctor". Your claims of the Kremlin funding people to speak for them has no fanfare outside of sources that do not fall into lockstep with the rhetoric spewed forth from the Whitehouse and its allies. Secondly, since when was it a Russian doctrine to deny an Estonian state? From an ethnic Russian perspective, there may be question marks over whether a Ukrainian nation is real or not, and I am writing this as a Ukrainian myself. This has come up a lot throughout 2022 among anti-Russia writers/politicians. But that too is an elaborate topic where those who seek to promote it to be the Kremlin's standpoint betray sublime ignorance and demonstrate piss-poor fact-checking. In the first place, Western media conflate ethnic Russians (regardless of country of origin) with Russian citizens (regardless of ethnicity: e.g. Tatar, Jewish, Chechen, etc). We as Ukrainians know very well that there exists ethnic Russian irredentism that implies all East Slavic people are Russian (and is the reason a great many Ukrainian citizens choose to identify as Russian), but that doesn't mean such people operate from the Kremlin. Don't forget, 1) Putin is an independent who chooses to govern with United Russia, the single biggest party in Russia which in turn is founded on the principles of post-Soviet Russia, and not far-right principles which spell irredentism; 2) Ethnic Russian irredentism is as much a threat to Belarus as it is Ukraine, yet Belarus has strong ties with Russia without threats just as Ukraine did when led by Yanukovich, and 3) Ukraine was not created in a vacuum; before independence, it gained lands (e.g. Crimea, Budjak) and it also lost lands (Tiraspol from Moldavian ASSR within Ukraine to separate new Moldovan SSR). This included Western Ukraine where I come from, and this falls outside of Russian irredentism, BUT, we live with another threat and that comes from Poland, or at least their far-right which wouldn't hesitate to retake lost possessions that include the west of Belarus, Ukraine and even Vilnius (Wilno). But not to go off-topic, Russia doesn't so much deny an independent Estonia so much as Estonia itself was the subject of debate before 1991. Some believed the Baltic states were occupied, while some believe they were legally Soviet. Like this, remnants of Estonian, Lithuanian and Latvian society in the diaspora maintained a rival existence with limited recognition including embassies, but is that relevant here? Was Sweden one such country to recognise Estonian diplomatic documents before 1991? Or is somebody joining the dots of an unwarranted assumption? The subject of this article is old enough to have had a mother with Estonian documentation from before it joined the Soviet Union. But from what I can tell, the argument seems to be about his heritage, and for this, citizenship plays no role. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:26, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

OK, I have removed ethnicity from the lead sentence since there is no clear consensus above to go against MOSBIO and no reliable sources have been provided showing Estonian citizenship. --Malerooster (talk) 14:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Totally support the removal of reference to Estonian background on opening sentence. Nikola Tesla is celebrated both as a Serbian, and an American, and also Croatian for his homeland (and streets there are rightly named after him too). I don't think Pääbo's background is remotely relevant or even that well known among people able to name him. Even Zlatan Ibrahimović whose former Yugoslav background is widely known is not said to be anything other than Swedish on the opening line. It emerges that the WP:TAG TEAM pair were sockpuppets of one another, although I am highly sceptical that the blocking admin has got the sockmaster right. Anyhow, the promotion of his Estonian background which looks like the main push to me of the sock accounts is concluded. Watch out for anyone restoring it. --Coldtrack (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

PS. Come to that, we could just as easily have stated that actor/director Jason Connery is of Italian descent, yet he is that well known as son of James Bond. --Coldtrack (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2022 (UTC)