This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Morocco 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.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cemeteries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cemeteries 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.CemeteriesWikipedia:WikiProject CemeteriesTemplate:WikiProject CemeteriesCemeteries articles
Hello all, I'm currently editing this article for a graduate course. I would argue against the removal of the "(Grotte des Pigeons)" portion of the title as the vast majority of the research that has taken place at this site over the last 60 years has routinely referred to the location using the entire name. Also, "Taforalt Caves" would be misleading as there is only one archaeologically significant cave by Taforalt with Taforalt actually being the name of the village nearest to the cave which would, I imagine, create further issues if the title of the article is shortened to "Taforalt" and someone creates an article on the village at a later point in time. Just my opinion based on the research I've been doing, I of course will respect your expertise in the Wiki-world if you disagree. I'll be updating the page itself throughout the rest of the day, removing the extensive block quotes and expanding on the information regarding the pre-Iberomaurusian occupation on the site (Aterian-Mousterian) and providing a summary on the most recent excavations. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. I've never really used the talk page before so I'm not sure what code I need to be filling in besides the final four tildes so I apologize ahead of time for the formatting here. Archaeologyhunter (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 10 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The earlier text stated that according to the paper by Lazaridis Taforalt could be better seen as a mix between a Dzudzuana component and a sub saharan component. This is not in the paper.
In fact the paper mentions that the unknown sub saharan component previously found, related to the Yoruba was actually Taforalt DNA in Yoruba, so the exact other way round.
The entire paper does not mention a Sub-saharan component. LouisBStevenson (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2023 (UTC)Reply