User talk:Andrew Lancaster/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 7

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	:) Lives forever Taken (talk) 09:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Nope not really. I'm just a new user here who feels obligated to give back to Wikipedia for all the great work rhat has been done to build a great encyclopedia :).

Please help me understand why you put a copyrighted map which is not relevant to Haplotype J1 in general back on the page.

This map is specific to a certain J1 population and it is copyrighted with this at the bottom, "European Journal of Human GeneticsISSN: 1018-4813EISSN: 1476-5438© 2011 European Society of Human Genetics." It is NOT from a comic book. It is not released by the publisher. The one who claims it he has permission also claims to be a "prince." Even if he actually got permission, from Sergio Tofanelli et al, the copyright belongs to the publisher.

I took my time to go into this in detail. I posted why it should not be included on the page and in the Talk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Haplogroup_J1_(Y-DNA)#Map_depicts_J1_M267.2AG_variant_rather_than_being_a_map_of_J1_Haplogroup_in_general.
Please help me understand why you reverted my editing with absolutely no consultation. JohnLloydScharf (talk) 16:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, OK, OK... Dining on crow over here. Also, many thanks for the suggestion regarding drafts as it will allow me to use them as a laboratory of learning the Wiki coding and defend against vandals who love to reduce eight hours of work into garbage, like two or three of them (Qatar?) of them did today from the same IPS. JohnLloydScharf (talk) 08:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Reference Information needed on "Near Eastern Neolithic genetic input in a small oasis of the Egyptian Western Desert"

Near Eastern Neolithic genetic input in a small oasis of the Egyptian Western Desert Martina Kujanová1,2, Luísa Pereira3,4,*, Verónica Fernandes3, Joana B. Pereira3, Viktor Černý1,2 Article first published online: 7 MAY 2009 DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.21078 I need a statement from this reference indicating whether or not J-M267 was used for the populations claimed in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J1_(Y-DNA)#Distribution_2 I highly suspect they did, so it would help if you can find confirmation of that.JohnLloydScharf (talk) 16:43, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
On the Discussion pages, people will have whatever opinion they want to have and the vandals are paying zero attention to them. I do it for organizational purposes, but if you want to change the fonts, feel free. JohnLloydScharf (talk) 18:53, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Genetics Europe

HI Andrew; I noted the updates on G.H. British Isles. Looks good, i think youve set it up well and explanations are very sound Slovenski Volk (talk) 01:29, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

J1

Hi. I was thinking about another haplogroups like I, G or N, but since you want one for J1, I´ll try to make it.--Maulucioni (talk) 20:59, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

evolution

Yes, i appreciated your ending a paragraph with linneaus, for multiple reasons. But I am sincere that it woul be better for someone else to craft what i consider a necessary sentence. Have you perchance read The Metaphysical Club? I am not sure how wide-reaching is your interest in philosophy (the book is largely concerned with philosophical pragmatism) but if you are intereast in evolution AND philosophy, you might enjoy the book.

Either way, I also want to thank you for the good work you are doing. I know you have been focussing on style and well, we really neede dit and you are indeed doing a good job. My peoccupations are complying with NPOV and with NOR. Aside from Menand and a few scatered articles, I am not well-read on the history of evolutionary thought. But I know that there are other books by academic historians on Darwin and Evolutionary Thought, and I wish that we were drawing on them for our account of the history. Well, be that as it may, you are addressing another problem and I want to add to others who have thanked you for doing a good job, Slrubenstein | Talk 16:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Scythian

I don't know if you can add to the discussion, but could you take a look at the discussion on my talk page about a reference being used? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:48, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Prince Bishops of Liège

Why did you create this self redirect? -- とある白い猫 ^chi? 10:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. My mistake. Hopefully fixed now.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Merci/Dankjewel -- とある白い猫 ^chi? 11:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

No-one expects...

Hi Andrew. I noticed your discussion on Kiefer's talkpage. Kiefer knows an RfC/U regarding his own conduct is currently being prepared (by User:Worm That Turned), and he strongly disapproves of it (to the extent that it was suggested at WP:AN that he would likely be blocked if he did not tone down his protests against its preparation.) This may have left Kiefer with some concerns about the RfC/U process in general.

In any case, the Spanish Inquisition image that you noticed Kiefer had added, was an image that he also added alongside discussions of his concerns about his own impending RfC/U. So, in my personal view (I'm somewhat involved here), you may find it difficult to achieve a useful resolution to the discussion on his talk page.

I write this merely to make you aware of what it seems fair for you to know, and (possibly) avoid you wasting your time. Equally, it might have provoked some more thoughtful interaction in some quarters - who knows. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2011 (UTC) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Bias in Infanticide

Would you be so kind as to review User:Jayjg's edits to Infanticide of late? He/she has been policing the section on "ancient Judaism" to craft a very one-sided narrative despite conflicting verses in the Jewish Bible. This is in and of itself evidence of bias IMO (and his/her userpage indicates they are part of a Synagogue Project which, to my mind, further increases the chances of bias being on display, but apparently such observations are not welcome on Wikipedia, which I could agree with if true). If you are uninterested, can you recommend another, unbiased mod/reviewer? Thanks. --X883 (talk) 22:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 08:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Did you mean to write "they are saying R1a overall comes from India to the Steppes but is much older than R1a."? Dougweller (talk) 08:56, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The verifiability and truth spiral

Mr Lancaster, saw your posts on Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability. Noted your interest/expertise in philosophy, and your location. Would have sought your help in formulating Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability/First_sentence#Towards_a_deconstruction_of_truth_in_verifiability et seq had I looked you up earlier, and would certainly welcome your feedback on my observations at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Transcription_monkeys, in which I started to come to the conclusion that the 'difficulty' some editors have with the concept of truth is cultural. My thinking is that accurate and verifiable information or facts are not synonymous with truth, which is always subjective. If that were the case, the entire debate is actually doomed to go nowhere; Americans are not culturally geared to accept that universal, objective truths are matters for philosophical debate, not encyclopaedic exegesis (that whole 'in God we trust, truther' trope, etc).

I would value your opinion on this matter if you can spare the time to consider the cited passages. My interest is both practical and philosophical. Regards from Brisbane, Peter S Strempel | Talk 12:04, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

User Nirjhara

Hi - could you please look at the contributions of Nirjhara (talk · contribs)? I've reverted some, I hope correctly, but maybe not, and there may be problems with those I didn't revert. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 06:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Obviously (I think) Danino's article isn't a reliable source for these articles in the way he's used it. My concern is that he is may be misinterpreting/misusing the Nature article - if you ever have time I'd appreciate your confirmation I reverted correctly and whether I should revert his other edits, but it doesh't look as though you'll have time. Thanks anyway for responding. Dougweller (talk) 08:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page, but just to say thanks and that I'm not sure the editor has learned yet, see Talk:Proto-Indo-Europeans, Dougweller (talk) 20:37, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

R1b

Thanks for your input aboutsources.

Now, I would like to ask, why is this article [1] still going on about the "Atlantic modal haplotype" to proved the Palaeolithic expansion time of west European R1b when Myres & Cruciani have described new SNP sub-haplgroups ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 01:43, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Please use the preview button

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Y, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. This especially applies when you are experimenting with getting a table right; I know from my own experience! —Coroboy (talk) 03:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia

Would you take a look at this please? Is Nirjhara right or??? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Just wanted to let you know that I saw that you created the new article Sunici--It would be great if you could also add references to the related article Germania.

Jipinghe (talk) 17:07, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

hello

If you ask what I mean with "political and nationalistic motivated classification", you might read this here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaza_people#Zaza_Nationalism

Wikisupporting (talk) 16:43, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Your right and I am sorry for my not so kind behave but since I am here on Wikipedia I have only experienced political nationalism on the Zazaki issue and it brought nothing to discuss about it.The Zazaki Group which was never known as something else than Kurdish has become a political game of some circles. There is a huge debate going on the Zaza People discussion page. Wikisupporting (talk) 16:58, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

WT:V

I'm not sure I understand what you meant by your last comment re "worried". --Bob K31416 (talk) 11:19, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Political Science

It appears your reverted my edit regarding the American politics subfield of political science while I was replying to the talk page note you referred to. Reasonable as the justification may sound, the edit I "partly reverted" was even more inaccurate than the misconception it attempted to clear up. Sgelbman (talk) 14:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Community and region map of Belgium

Hi, I reverted your change because the area is officially German-speaking, but with language facilities for French-speakers. (This is in Belgium a *very* sensitive difference, however not so much for that area.) In fact the map is wrong because the German-speaking area should be fully purple because the rest of the map does not include municipalities with facilities either. SPQRobin (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Re Limburgism: One the one hand, it is totally correct that e.g. merci is a much more common word than just "Limburgism" so this is just an article about the viewpoint of ("Northern") Dutch people. On the other hand, there is an article on the Dutch Wikipedia, so I suppose the term is in more or less widespread use in the Netherlands. I edited the Dutch article to reflect a more general viewpoint. The article here could be kept if it is expanded a bit. SPQRobin (talk) 17:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia and Out of India theory

Could you please review the recent edits made by Bodhidharma7? Gaura79 (talk) 17:45, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Richard Robert Madden

Hi Andrew, thanks for taking the time and I've provided what you asked for.--Domer48_'fenian' 20:02, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi again Andrew, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I have posted a reply to your post. Thanks again, --Domer48_'fenian' 09:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Two sentences of proposal

What do you think of my comments in the section The part of the proposal at the end of the first paragraph? --Bob K31416 (talk) 00:47, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

A return beer for you!

Thanks and here's one back for the weekend. When this is over, some bigger ones will be due and I've already got yours named. North8000 (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Author profiles at WP:RSN

Hi, you recently gave an opinion on author profiles. I'm sorry to bother you again, but unfortunately User:Maiorem and I seem to disagree on what you meant. The relevant discussion is here. Could you please clarify whether you consider the source a primary source or a third-party source independent of the subject? Thanks in advance, Huon (talk) 10:01, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia

I think we should work on this section next. I think certain sections of the article need to be heavily revised.

Bodhidharma7 (talk) 18:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that one. I believe it is on my watchlist, so I'll try to participate if I have time. By all means start the discussion.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The discussion has been started. Come join.

Bodhidharma7 (talk) 02:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at Citation bot's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Redrose64 (talk) 16:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

a request

Dear andrew, thanks for your and truthful neutral approach, I would like you to use this recent paper in R1a wiki. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015283 as you can see it again concludes R1a to be pre-neolithic in india while J2 to be a (only) neolithic intrusion, so you can use the sentence" a recent paper by thangaraj et al. Also suggested pre-neolithic presence of this haplogroup in india" I think the paper have a gravity to have a place in R1a wiki as reference, your worthy consideration is hoped.Nirjhara (talk) 04:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I have added the ref, but like with many of the articles being mentioned, it is not really specifically about R1a. It's comments on R1a on not necessarily meant to be arguing much except perhaps "The network analysis of R1a with other Indian populations failed to provide any regional or linguistic clustering".--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention that it's another study using the flawed Zhivotovsky method.

Bodhidharma7 (talk) 21:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC) well whatever you like but bodhis edits are much more attacking from the neutral level, the article mentions R1a1 to be 10-14 kya in india which is paleolithic.Nirjhara (talk) 02:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Ahoy there...science

Debate has started anew to get science to GA or FA status. Join in the fun at Talk:Science#Let.27s_cook_up...... and scroll down...we'll try not to reinvent the wheel Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

a request 2

Dear Andrew, thanks very for bringing commentary chart table on y-dna of South asia by different researchers but you did not include the thangaraj et al. Paper, dont you think it should be added with the stepanov paper as well? Gd tms.Nirjhara (talk) 03:55, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm OK with adding both, if Andrew is.

--Bodhidharma7 (talk) 03:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

It's finished

I managed to get it unprotected and I have gone through with the edits. Come tell me what you think Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia.

--Bodhidharma7 (talk) 16:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Concerning this particular article my biggest feeling is that I am happy if you and Nirjhara, despite your differences on the details, can keep working together concerning what is needed for Wikipedia.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

List of R1a

Hello Andrew Lancaster. Do you remember me. We had a small conversation about Zazaki Speaking Kurds.

Here is another Article were "Kurds" and Zazaki Speakers are listed separately as if they are two different ethnic Groups. I didnt wanted to change it again by myself without telling you. So I ask you can you change it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R1a_frequency_by_population regards Wikisupporting (talk) 16:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

From memory the change you made before was quite reasonable an unlikely to need "support"?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Give Thangarajs comment the justice

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-09-25/india/28107253_1_incidence-of-genetic-diseases-indians-tribes K.Thangaraj was a leading co-author of Reich et al. Study but his valuable comment but unfortunately is not shown On G.A.S.A s Reich study section, so i request the editors to add his quoted comments which was published in The Times of India article i have linked.Nirjhara (talk) 07:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Can you please make your suggestions on the relevant article talkpages? It is unclear what is being suggested, and furthermore you also need to explain to other editors.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I have put it on Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia talk page.Nirjhara (talk) 08:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Dacia

Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in ancient Dacia. Would you like to join the WikiProject Dacia? It is a project aimed to better organize and improve the quality and accuracy of the articles related to these topics. We need help expanding and reviewing many articles, and we also need more images. Your input is welcomed! Thanks and best regards!

--Codrin.B (talk) 18:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

EV13 in Neolithic Spain

Hi, have you read this? BR Aigest (talk) 08:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Interesting isn't it?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hm "According to 14C dating performed on bones and charcoals found in the cavity, this funeral cave was used during the first part of the fifth millennium B.C. (8), which corresponds to the end of the establishment of the Neolithic cultures in Spain (Epicardial Culture)." and "The Ave07 haplotype was also compared with current Eb1b1a2 haplotypes previously published (10–14). It appeared identical at the seven markers tested to five Albanian,two Bosnian, one Greek, one Italian, one Sicilian, two Corsican, and two Provence French samples and are thus placed on the same node of the E1b1b1a1b-V13 network as eastern, central, and western Mediterranean haplotypes" It appears that Bataglia et al 2008 was right in linking EV13 with Cardium Pottery (samples match exactly Cardium Pottery spread area). Another point I was curious about is the place of origin of EV13. According to Battaglia et al "The presence of E-M78* Y chromosomes in the Balkans (two Albanians), previously described virtually only in northeast Africa, upper Nile, gives rise to the question of what the original source of the E-M78 may have been." and if EV13 arrived in Spain in the first part of 5th millenium BC, now we can suppose that according to these data EV-13 should have been present in the Balkans at least in the end of 6th millenium BC. Aigest (talk) 08:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it helps justify the Battaglia time estimation, but it also is not in line with ideas that E-V13 spread after the Bronze Age. A Cardium link is definitely going to be on everyone's mind "between the lines". (But it is not the only interpretation. Just for example maybe E-V13 came to the Balkans via a Tunisia-Italy route, given how much time it now has in which to get there.)--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, this EV13 belongs to Neolithic period in West Mediterranean (Spain) and from an archaeological point of view, there are no significant population movements following the way West Mediterranean(Spain, Tunis)-Italy-Balkans while the contrary Balkans-Italy-West Mediterranean is usually claimed and very well supported with archaeological data. From the existing genetic data, even leaving aside founder effect and population sweeping factors, I think there is a clear and well accepted vector from Balkans to the rest of Europe regarding EV13. As is noted in Cardium Pottery article "The earliest Impressed Ware sites, dating to 6400-6200 BC, are in Epirus and Corfu. Settlements then appear in Albania and Dalmatia on the eastern Adriatic coast dating to between 6100 and 5900 BC. The earliest date in Italy comes from Coppa Nevigata on the Adriatic coast of southern Italy, perhaps as early as 6000 cal B.C" while in the same time it is stated that "Older Neolithic cultures existed already at this time in eastern Greece and Crete, apparently having arrived from the Levant, but they appear distinct from the Cardial or Impressed Ware culture." and also according to Battaglia "The low E-V13 frequency and STR variation observed in Crete indicate that if the first Neolithic colonists came from central Anatolia, they did not bring this Hg". There is also the fact that Impressed ware from Tunisia and surrounding islands (Malta, Sicily, etc) is dated usually later (mid 6th-5th millenium BC) than the Impressed ware in Balkan. Aigest (talk) 14:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes for sure I can see the obvious attraction of this idea, but just considering Y haplotypes, there must also be some way to explain all the other types of E-M35 which are found in Italy and Spain. In Spain, unlike the rest of Europe, there is probably about as much E-M78 which is not E-V13, as E-V13. So with this new piece of evidence, I think we have to be open to fresh explanations.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Surely it should be a big surprise for archaeologists if Spain samples have higher STR variation than in Balkan. Did they published any data on that? If STR is lower (as I suspect) that fits perfectly archaeology data in Cardium ware expansion from the Balkans to the rest of Europe. As for archaeology data, once the people in Iberia arrived there by the sea from the east, they remained isolated in Iberia as was not easy to travel backwards from there in Neolithic times "In the sixth millenium, the Neolithic diaspora continued in Iberia. Joao Zilhao has recently created a new form of the Jump Dispersial model-"enclave colonization"- to explain this movement, attributting it to the arrival of small groups of seaborne settlers from the east, who settled in the enclaves that were not previously occupied by Epipaleolithic people.....Iberia remained relatively isolated from the maritime interaction network that encompassed Italy, Sardinia, Sicily and the smaller islands. The reasons for this are probably to be found in the constraints imposed upon seafaring in Mediterranean by distance, currents, and weather patterns. Seafaring in Mediterranean was safest when land was kept in sight, until the first millenium where knowledge of astronomy allowed navigation...Boats leaving Iberia and heading directly to Sardinia, the apparent direct route, would have faced this problem, losing sight of land, once passing Balearic Islands. The solution was to follow the coast, but this involved substantial risks too: the Mistral blow from Northwest or North Europe through the valley of the Rhone river, to Mediterranean throughout the year, but most often in winter and spring often bringing violent winds and blowing ships far off course, driving them into coastal rocks, or sinking them. It is not suprising, therefore, that there is no evidence for significant Iberian participation in the metals tradewith the wider Mediterraneana until the thirteenth and twelth centuries BC" The Mediterranean Context of Early Greek History Author Nancy H. Demand Publisher John Wiley & Sons, 2011 ISBN 1405155515, 9781405155519 p.55 Aigest (talk) 08:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Guys, I think, archaeologist are understanding that Neolithicization was very complex, with both, 'immigrant' and 'Mesolithic adaptation' scenrios being simplistic. See these for achaeological arguments [2] [3] [4]. Whatever the case, Neolithic europe was still sparsely populated. It is only in the Eneolithic, as far as the Balkans goes, that settlement density grew. If we are to place the "expansion" of V-13, then that's the time (although this doesn;t not suggest from where V13 first arrived, or if it spread earlier to elseqwhere, eg Iberia) Slovenski Volk (talk) 05:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree the early Neolithic will have been complex, this is only one sample, and also whatever happened in the first waves of the Neolithic is highly likely to have be "over written" many times. In summary, it is not easy to say anything simple or uncontroversial.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:42, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the complexity, however I am pointing to the fact that EV13 was present in Spain in early first millenium bc in spain so a) EV13 is min 7kbp old b) since it is not originated in spain, it should have come there from somewhere else c)neolithic spain is linked with east mediterranean in a east- west movement(see above) so it should have come from italy and those to italy from balkan .here is the point I am asking. Balkan is one possibility for EV13 origin and now we can be sure that EV13 was present there in late 6th millenium bc. Also E M78* is present in the Balkan. What are the chances EV 13 did originated in the Balkans? 79.106.109.55 (talk) 16:59, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Anything's possible, but that's something you'd have to ask Cruciani (who suggests western Near East, doesn't he ?). I don;t think where it "originate" is the most important, but from where it spread and why Slovenski Volk (talk) 20:58, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, i think it's a bit difficult to trace pop movements if we don't know its origin, don't you think:) for eg Andrew left open the possibility of Western mediterranean origin for ev13 . Now that would be headaches for archaeologists and what we know of Neolithic in Europe.Aigest (talk) 21:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, but i think scholars sometimes cause their own headache by trying to package language, genes and arcaheology together in a "one-answer-fits-all" scenario. For a critique of such approaches see [5] Slovenski Volk (talk) 04:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Although I tend to support Bellwood regarding demographic processes, I also think that "one-answer-fits-all" scenario is a bit difficult. However I think that we should proceed step by step according to the data we already have. To interpret archaeological data we have main theoretical frameworks of "pots = people" and "pots not people" based on migrations or the acculturation process. We have archaeological data who show the spread of Cardium pottery from East to West Mediterranean. Migration? Acculturation? Now from genetics data we have from the study of skeletons it appears that those Neolithic people actually arrived there from East Mediterranean and in the same time from archaeology we see Cardium pottery culture appear in Spain, than connecting data on both fields (archaeology and genetics) we can say that Cardium pottery culture expanded in West Mediterranean through the migration of small (or big if we find more data) groups of pioneers. That doesn't mean that migrationist theory is always right, but at least in this case it is proved by the data. This is the small step I am interested in, the next step (maybe involving an acculturation process) would clarify another issue and in the end we'll have a clear picture. What is great in this case is that we have genetic data from the people of 7kbp ago that actually were there and had that culture and not from todays populations, which involve many sweepings and replacements. They were the "people using their pots"(I couldn't bring up a better punch line:) Aigest (talk) 08:32, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Now that I have read it fully, the results are interesting, casting doubt on, both, those who argue for Palaeolithic or Neolithic majority continuity, coz as far as western-central Europe goes, the (admittedly) few samples recovered suggest that Neolithic groups there possessed G2a which is absent in extant populations. Ie significant Y HG 'turnover' is possible in the history of Europe. If we also consider the results from Roman colonization, the Migration period, etc; it does not fill one with much confidence that we can use modern samples as proxy markers for past populations movements, does it ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 21:40, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes you're right, that's why I say we should move step by step. We can be also sure that EV13 is 7k old at least. Right now it seems that G2A and EV13 were present in Spain during Neolithic. Were they native there (Mesolithic?) or did they came from East Mediterranean? IMO, EV13 came from East Mediterranean and G2A also. The fact that they are not so much present today is another fact, but so many places around Europe(Spain, France, Germany) with G2A are not a coincidence. Maybe they were the first wave, followed shortly by EV13. Aigest (talk) 09:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Where exactly do you mean by "East Mediterranean" ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 09:47, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I am using the same term of the study "Eastern Mediterranean" which includes (as labeled to the study) "Macedonians, Albanians, Greeks, Cypriots, Cretans" Aigest (talk) 14:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I suggest reading this, and thinking about what it says concerning the "cousins" of E-V13:- --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

• Trombetta, Beniamino; Cruciani, Fulvio; Sellitto, Daniele; Scozzari, Rosaria (2011), MacAulay, Vincent (ed.), "A New Topology of the Human Y Chromosome Haplogroup E1b1 (E-P2) Revealed through the Use of Newly Characterized Binary Polymorphisms", PLoS ONE, 6 (1): e16073, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016073, PMC 3017091, PMID 21253605{{citation}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

Finish it

Dear andrew, Give the decisive opinion on the papers use, you only gave your thoughts on my style of saying. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genetics_and_archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia#neutrality_II Nirjhara (talk) 04:04, 16 November 2011 (UTC) What is going on??? I am just asking your opinion on the talks to have a decisive result but you are just silent, please... Nirjhara (talk) 09:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Talking with Bodhidharma is going no where

Dear andrew, I know you are a busy man and adviced jointly working with bodhi and i tried gladly but... 1. He's attitude towards my proposals is becoming offensive and beyond logical limits. 2. I am just trying to put a simple fact from moorjani et al. that the 3500-1200 ybp mixture was not the first one as mentioned in the paper itself but a major one whichs time is similar of the aryan migration theory, I am not protesting any theory but trying to put the fact on the admixture! and trying to put links to other related wikis with the theory myself! But in latest reply of the talk he has said"Only one admixture event is mentioned here(in the paper), the Aryan conquest of India." So its clear a third party is badly required as a catalyst or clinically to support any 1 of the two to give a result!, your worthy consideration is avidly awaited and very sorry to disturb you.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genetics_and_archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia#A_request_3:_chapter_2 Nirjhara (talk) 07:16, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I do think you could be less repetitive and more constructive. Please note that a discussion has continued, which addresses you concerns. I am personally hopeful that you would be able to have much better discussions if you adapt your style of discourse. Can I suggest you take more time before posting your replies? Try to really see it through the other person's eyes in order to understand what you should say. Do not just keep posting the same rushed remarks in new sections?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

David Hume

Hi... You recently edited the Baconian method topic, asserting that David Hume agreed with Francis Bacon. Since that post, I've tried to find a citation on this, but cannot.

Do you have a citation to prove this claim? It seems somewhat unlikely, given Hume's rejection of inductive reasoning is in absolute opposition to Bacon's defense of inductive reasoning.

Thanks,

Gacggt (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC) David Glass, MD author of: Experimental Design for Biologists, CSH Press

Hi... you wrote on my page that you "answered" my query, but you still did not give a citation. In contrast, I did add in a citation for my claim, and included a quote from Hume... (on the article talk page)

Could you please either prove your point or revert the editing you did? I really don't think the evidence supports the idea that Hume was a Baconian (quite the contrary!!).

Gacggt (talk) 22:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bodhidarma7/Tamilan101 edit war

Hi Andrew,

I've filed a report on the ongoing edit war between these two editors - since you've been involved with the issue, I thought you might be interested (certainly your comments would be welcomed). The report is here. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 14:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		You definitely deserve one of these for your hard work in trying to resolve this dispute. Above and beyond the call... Yunshui 雲‍水 11:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

MThekkumthala and Tamilan101

Andrew, it's clear these two (suspiciously new) individuals aren't interested in discussing anything in a calm and rational manner. They're only here to vandalize the articles in order to suit their personal opinions. Therefore, as a possible course of action, I think the edits should maybe be reverted one last time and the articles in question protected immediately.Bodhidharma7 (talk) 00:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Andrew, I'm not sure what to do here. These two trolls are doing everything they possibly can to provoke me by ramming through unsolicited changes without using a talk page and trying to plot behind my back, as can be clearly seen from Tamilan101's talk page (you should really take a look at it, esp. the last few remarks). In light of what Tamilan101 and MT have written, I'm thinking these two should be reported at once. Bodhidharma7 (talk) 01:30, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, these two are using sock accounts to carry out another edit war with me. I can't believe this. --Bodhidharma7 (talk) 02:13, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I do not see evidence that they are trolls or sock-puppets. If there is evidence then by all means report it. They seem to have a concern about lack of neutrality in some articles, and those articles do seem like ones which can be improved. If they address this concern in a way consistent with Wikipedia norms, then this should be seen as a good thing. You can not say that most of these articles are in a perfect state? On the other hand, if they are trolls then please do yourself a favour and make your own behavior more exemplary?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

If you consider lack of neutrality to be deletion of sourced statements, which is what these two have been doing all along, then you have a pretty warped view of neutrality. I consider these to be sockpuppets because of their blind support for one another and the fact that one appears to be doing the other's dirty work. That smells like sockpuppetry to me. At any rate, they are the ones who started this whole brouhaha to begin with, which is something you seem to have conveniently forgotten. --Bodhidharma7 (talk) 17:43, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Haplogroup E1b1b (Y-DNA), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ragusa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

MThekkumthala

If you haven't already noticed, he's been blocked as a sock. Dougweller (talk) 18:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Newbie in over his head?

Hi Andrew, you had so kindly shown me how to sign my messages not too long ago. Now I think I might need some help with something. I started editing to add a single term to the wikipedia, but it seems to be getting out of hand. Terms often inter-relate and I decided to add or clear up some more. The reason I am knocking on your door is not so much that I need help with the additions, for they seem to be straightforward enough, but I have encountered the strance fact that there is no page for the reference principle. However, wikipedia helpfully offered me the difference principle, but this leads to a page about Justice as Fairness, by John Rawls! This can't be correct. What should I do?

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I left a reply for you at my talk page. Thanks for making time for me Andrew.

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, do you know of an easier way to let people know there is a message for them somewhere (which there is for you at my talk page by the way)?

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 20:50, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

• coughs*

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 08:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

You wouldn't happen to be following my talkpage, would you?

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 19:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

-Coughs-

Question about R1a1

Hi Andrew. Whilst recent studies demonstrate that the STR diversity of R1a1 is greater in India than eastern Europe or central Asia; this doesn't necessarily mean that it originated there, does it ? I know that generally scholars see the place where most diversity exists as the where the oldest lineages lived, however, older lineages could have lived elsewhere, eg central Asia - and this diversity was reduced due to subsequent expansions of certain sub-lineages, erasing somewhat previous diversity. In contrast, India, due to its geographic and cultural factors might have facilitated greater barriers to gene flow, 'storing up' older lineages. Similar story with I2a2 and Bosnia (a hilly, remote region where until pre-modern times had a low population density and was the last to received cultural impulses from central Europe or the Aegean). Slovenski Volk (talk) 22:16, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep, a lot of publications overlook that fact; and in the past, have been overly optimistic in concluding population histories from Y DNA. BTW; do you support the Zhivotosky ("effetive evolutionary") or "germline mutation" rates ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 02:29, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you again, but is "population variance' the same thing as "STR diversity" ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 21:28, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Like in this study [6], it talks of "STR variance". Am I corrrect to assume that its is the same thing as STR diversity ? (ie whether the STR haplotypes found in a population are, on the whole, rather homogeneous or heterogeneous) ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 07:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Secondly, most papers date Y haplogroups based on STRs within them (whether the germaline mutation rate or the "effective" rate). Is there a way of dating y haplogroups purely on the basis of the SNPs themselves ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 07:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Indo-Aryan migration, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kalash (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The obvious

Dear Andrew, I am not getting any response in this talk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Indo-Aryan_migration#.22Genetic_Anthropology.22_section_needs_updating I think my suggestion is quite fit and obvious, please give your thoughts there. Gd tms.Nirjhara (talk) 04:10, 20 February 2012 (UTC) Whats up? Stopped talking?.Nirjhara (talk) 03:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Talk

Talk the talk on Genetics section of Indo-Aryan migration. Gd tms.Nirjhara (talk) 12:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal: Request for participation

Dear Andrew Lancaster: Hello. This is just to let you know that you've been mentioned in the following request at the Mediation Cabal, which is a Wikipedia dispute resolution initiative that resolves disputes by informal mediation.

The request can be found at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 February 2012/Wikipedia:Verifiability.

Just so you know, it is entirely your choice whether or not you participate. If you wish to do so, and we'll see what we can do about getting this sorted out. At MedCab we aim to help all involved parties reach a solution and hope you will join in this effort.

If you have any questions relating to this or any other issue needing mediation, you can ask on the case talk page, the MedCab talk page, or you can ask the mediator, Mr. Stradivarius, at their talk page. MedcabBot (talk) 14:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Andrew - sorry, but I removed your comment over at the mediation page. Not that it was a bad comment, by any means, but if you read the blurb I wrote for step two I did ask people to hold off on commenting on drafts until we have finished our analysis of the RfC in step three. If you would like your draft to be exactly the same as North8000's, then you can either leave a short note saying "I think North8000's draft is the best version we have", or words to that effect; or you could simply copy the text and put it in your own section. Or if you'd rather skip this step, that's fine too - I'll make a note of your preference. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 12:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello again - just to let you know that the deadline has passed for submitting drafts. It was was 10:00 am (UTC) on Sunday, March 11, but as there are still eight drafts left to come in I am extending this by a day, to 10:00 am (UTC) on Monday, March 12. Could you let me know which of the options above you'd like to go with? Best wishes — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 13:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea, for claritea!

Hello Andrew, A cup for clarity! You would perhaps like this a little more if you are a tea to-taller. With respect to your message here “ 3 key policies about what to include in WP are WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV. You should also consider WP:NOTE. But in the context of this discussion it might be neater to just say that what WP aims to do is to summarise what notable and relevant people have properly published about subjects, even if we disagree with them. If a person or publication is controversial, the trick is to make sure we mention who they are, to help readers see it, and also that we put in balancing views. So if this charity is controversial then WP should report the controversy. If it's critics and defenders are controversial, we should help readers to be able to see this, and study it further if they so choose. ” Thanks.इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat2011 13:53, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

R1a1

Hey mate, I replied back here [7] Slovenski Volk (talk) 08:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:V mediation compromise drafts

Hello Andrew, this is just to let you know that to help find compromise drafts at the verifiability mediation, I would like each mediation participant to submit at least one draft at one work group that includes the best of all the previously submitted drafts of that work group. This will probably make more sense if you look at this section on the mediation page, but if anything is still unclear, just let me know. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 17:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:V mediation straw poll

Hello Andrew, this is just to let you know that we are having a straw poll about how many drafts to include in the proposed RfC about Wikipedia:Verifiability. The result of this straw poll will have a large effect on the direction the mediation takes, so if you could let us know your preferred number over at the mediation page, I would be very grateful. I am thinking of leaving the discussion open at least until 10am (UTC) on Thursday, March 22, and possibly longer if we require more time to reach a consensus. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 16:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

e== Gimbutas, Kurgan Hypothesis ==

Would you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology#Marija Gimbutas please? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 10:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Do I understand then that the material should be removed from her article? Dougweller (talk) 11:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I found a later source (being badly used in another article), Marc Haber et al., "Afghanistan's Ethnic Groups Share a Y-Chromosomal Heritage Structured by Historical Events", PLoS ONE 2012, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034288 which I've mentioned at her talk page and added to Kurgan hypothesis. Dougweller (talk) 14:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:V mediation step five

Hello Andrew, this is another update about the verifiability mediation. We have now started step five, in which we will work towards deciding a final draft for each work group. I would like you to submit a statement about this - have a look at the mediation page to see the details of what you should include. The deadline for this step is 10.00 am on Friday 6th April (UTC), and unlike the other steps I am going to be strict about it. If you don't leave a statement by the deadline, then you won't be able to participate in steps six or seven. If you think you are going to be late turning in your statement, please let me know as soon as possible - I can't promise anything, but it will be much easier to work out alternative arrangements now than it would be after the deadline has passed. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 17:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA)

Hello Andrew

I am an young (20) student interested in genetics and in particular the spread of the haplogropus R1a and R1b, since my ancestry is mainly Spanish, Italian, French, German and Slavic (Polish and Russian).

I found this interesting article on a blog that mainly deals with Polish DNA which suggest a common origin of both R1A and R1b in the Middle East (Levant or Mesopotamia) and not the South Asia road as some claim.

What are you thoughts on this article? From the very little information/data we have concerning this particular theory I am inclined to say that it is a great possibility considering the proven common ancestry of R1a and R1b.

Here is the article:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2011/11/on-origins-and-expansions-of-r1a-and.html

Thank you very much.

--Suitcivil133 (talk) 23:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

J1

Hi Andrew, I tried to remove the repetitive clutter. Add whatever you think is helpful, Thanks. Cadenas2008 (talk) 05:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for RSN comments

Hi, Andrew. I didn't feel any need to respond to your most recent post to the Drug Free Australia thread RSN, but I did want you to know that I'd read it, and that I appreciated your remarks. More generally, I appreciate your generosity in participating there, and the quality of your commentary. I know you've been doing so quite regularly, and for some time now, and I'm grateful for your work there. I need to log off momentarily, btw, so if you need me to notice any reply here, feel free to drop a talkback on my own talk page, despite the notice I have in place saying not to. Best regards,  – OhioStandard (talk) 12:49, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

F Origin

Thanks. Cadenas2008 (talk) 09:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Please see this suggestion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genetics_and_archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia#Please_Correct_it gd tms.Nirjhara (talk) 03:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

? RS

Hi Andrew. WOuld this be considered an RS for Hg R1b data / theories [8] ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 13:22, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Could not see quickly whether they actually have editorial oversight or just anyone can post things?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:26, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, on the journal main page it states "peer reviewed" Slovenski Volk (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

That is a good starting point then. I can imagine there might be discussion possible about whether it is a jiurnal recognized forbthis type of subject. A good way to checknis ti seevif it ever gets cited in this subject area. But in any case it sounds like a sourse worth proposing at least.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia

IP edit-warring on this page, has added [9] or similar for the 4th time. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 05:46, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Melungeon

Could you look at the material being added by an IP? Forum and a private DNA testing company. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 08:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not clear what you can't see or why. [10] is the IP's preferred version and if you look at the left-hand corner of [11], the IP removed the paragraph starting "The April 2012". I've given the IP a 3RR warning. Dougweller (talk) 16:48, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You had me confused too. :-). Dougweller (talk) 18:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Ancestry.com

Hi. Having previously been involved in a discussion about Ancestry.com on RSN, could you join a discussion here to offer your opinion on two points? The first point is that a user is saying that some of the material on that site is not from users, but paid employees. The second point concerns WP:BLPPRIMARY, which I think also has something to say on the use of that site. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 09:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

RE: Tadeusz Sulimirski & Rahul Sankrityayan

Requesting your conclusive comments @ Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Tadeusz_Sulimirski_.26_Rahul_Sankrityayan. Thanks! — 117.200.50.151 (talk) 12:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Please be specific about Rahul Sankrityayan, as well! — 117.200.50.151 (talk) 13:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Can it be safely concluded that the consensus has headed in favor of — Tadeusz Sulimirski as a source on Wikipedia! Looking forward to your comments! — 117.207.59.62 (talk) 04:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hobbes and Wiki philosophy

Hello, I responded to your concern about my additions to the Hobbes article on the talk page. I just want to say here that I agree wholeheartedly with your Wikipedia philosophy on civility as stated on your user page, and that I look forward to discussing and resolving the Hobbes issue with you! Archivingcontext (talk) 04:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barony of Westmorland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penrith (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Barony of Kendal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Lakeland, Crook, Rydal and Killington

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Blackburnshire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Marsden, Pendleton, Billington, Altham, Chipping, Witton, Mellor, Hapton, Simonstone, Whalley, Balderston and Eccleshill

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Forest of Pendle, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Whalley and Watershed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you for your work Lgbtoz (talk) 09:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Bernardo di Niccolo Machiavelli

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Bernardo di Niccolo Machiavelli, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Bernardo di Nicolo Machiavelli. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot (talk) 16:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phronesis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phenomenology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.
Message added 20:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WhiteWriter^speaks 20:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

History of Belgium

Hi,

As you've noticed, I've been doing quite a bit of work on the History of Belgium article. Unfortunately, I'm not so good with the references, and I would ideally like to set up the web references I've used so that they do not just disappear when the link rots. However, I'm not sure how to do this - I don't suppose you could work through the ones that are already there? If you could, I'd be really grateful!!! I'm afraid fixing this page has become something of a personal obsession. --Brigade Piron (talk) 17:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Belgium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Waterloo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Medieval Lands by Charles Cawley

Please see Template talk:Medieval Lands by Charles Cawley -- PBS (talk) 13:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Morini, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Celtic and Germanic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Menapii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

The R1b Article

Andrew... I am not sure entirely how to handle the issue with the R1b article having a permanent no-move restriction. My first move would be to take each section that has multiple sources such as R-V88 and move it to its own article with a {{more}} link. I would then summarize all but the R-M343* and R-P25.1 branches. What to do then? Do you have any thoughts?--RebekahThorn (talk) 00:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Please help

Please support keeping that metatheories of religion category. I am certainly open to alternative proposals, but I don't see how any could be more appropriate than calling these what they are: metatheories. Ultimately, every article should be in one of the four Fundamental categories. I do not know how that will otherwise be accomplished. There just aren't enough active editors in the philosophy project to have a substantial discussion about solutions, so I really value your input. Greg Bard (talk) 22:18, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Gallia Belgica (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Celtic

Suessiones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Historia Naturalis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Genetics and archaeogenetics of South Asia

Hi Andrew, thanks for mediating in the discussion. I notice you've been mediated many of polarized discussions previously. I don't envy what you're doing. I'll be off wikipedia for a week or so. So, I will not be able to reply to any new messages at the talk page. From what I've observed, the quality of content in the article tapers off at the bottom. Autosomal DNA section includes an abstract copied from a single study which itself uses a mix of mtDNA, Y-chromosome and Autosomal markers. I don't mind using Basu et al. (2003), but it would be much better if conclusions from this study were combined with other studies based on Autosomal DNA such as Viswanathan et al. (2004), Roychoudhury et al. (2001) and others. The last section of the article includes a long quote from introduction to Watkins et al. (2008). That is an improper use of a study. Studies cannot be used like books. The introduction serves the specific purpose of creating a context for the research. The results/conclusion section of Watkins et al. (2008) should be used instead. The last quote which was added by Āryāvastra is perfectly alright, it is taken from the conclusion of the article and it sums up the section well. So, it's a bit surprising that we are disagreeing at all. I might be wrong, so your independent assessment of the situation will be helpful. Regards. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 12:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Zero^talk 09:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request Evolution

My reply was not answered on the talk page of evolution and I was hoping you would. Do you care to? --173.66.184.34 (talk) 18:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Query

Hello Andrew, Just a brief query on Archaeogenetics of the Near East article, after your note re the parallel article on Asia:

The archaeogenetics of the Near East involves the study of aDNA or ancient DNA, identifying haplogroups and haplotypes of ancient skeletal remains from both YDNA and mtDNA for populations of the Ancient Near East (the modern Middle East, i.e. Egypt, Persia (Iran), Mesopotamia, Arabia, the Levant, Africa and Anatolia).

Unless I'm mistaken, the papers (see notes 14 onwards, several unsourced, apparently the text regarding this was copied and pasted from elsewhere) in dealing with Jewish genetics in the Levant section, appear to refer to modern genetic studies and not to skeletal remains, as the lead indicates it should. Could you have a glance at this and drop me a note? Thanks in anticipation Nishidani (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Andrew. It's rather odd, a curious omission, in any case, given the extensive skeletal DNA testing done for any number of populations from neolithic Berber, European (the Tyrolean Iceman Ötzicomes to mind), Eurasians like the Tarim mummies, and Jomon period Japanese, to cite just a few. Skeletal remains are not that easy to come by in ancient Palestine, of course, but not wholly absent. I recall reading about him thirty years ago, and wonder now why no DNA check has been done on the poor chap! Cheers Nishidani (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Archaeogenetic study would be hard to carry out in Israel, due to well known objections of Ultra-Ortodox Jews. However there is a great place for this study, in Lachish, where a mass Judean grave was found as a result of 701 BCE Assyrian siege and conquest, and as it seems after trans-genome studies to be the last kind of genetic studies still not carried out, it certainly has to happen. I red somewhere that Behar planed such study, but I can not find it now.--Tritomex (talk) 23:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

It would be hard to conduct in Israel, but a large number of the skulls from the Lachish cemetery ended up in England, since the excavation was conducted by Starkey, and are conserved in the London Museum of Natural History, and therefore the material, which would be of decisive value for the issue of the Archaeogenetics of the Near East, is waiting there for whoever wants to do that analysis. I'm always perplexed when a controversy rages for decades, while the obvious experiments that might clarify everything are studiously ignored. See also here. An obvious parallel is the same Museum's attitude to the DNA-analysis potential of the Tasmanian aboriginal skulls it preserves, which Tasmanian aboriginals wish to be repatriated without bore samples to be taken. Nishidani (talk) 12:04, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Edits as 138.88.60.165

I noticed several recent edits as user:138.88.60.165. If these were you, you may want to have someone change them to your account ID. I am sure you do not want to be thought to be deliberately hiding your ID.--RebekahThorn (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Lancaster do you know who is user:138.88.63.185 and/or user:138.88.60.165? I got to ask. -Brout8 (talk) 20:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:DNA history of Ancient Egypt

I think the editor restoring the DNA Tribes stuff has misunderstood you. At Talk:DNA history of Ancient Egypt he just wrote "On the notice board Andrew Lancaster didn't agree with you. He said:In any case every claim on testing company websites is supposedly based on published research, and so it is normally not hard for any responsible editor to confirm if that really exists. Which is what I did by posting to 2 link of those published research (which are also linked in the DNA Tribes documents). I would like to know his feedback. If Andrew Lancaster says we have to remove it, then I won't oppose." Could you possibly respond there? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 20:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Done

But I had to comment about 3RR - easy to lose track of that! Hopefully he won't revert me as he'll get blocked if he does. That was easier to understand than I expected! Dougweller (talk) 20:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 20:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 08:53, 31 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 08:53, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maurits Gysseling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gent (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Invite to Comment

Dear Andrew, as an editor at G.H.E, can you please comment [12] in regard to my suggestions. Regards Slovenski Volk (talk) 00:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haplogroup E-M215 (Y-DNA), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berber (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit conflict at ANI

I think you made a mistake trying to resolve an edit conflict at ANI. [13] This looks as if you tried to copy one section but caught everything to the end of the page instead. I think I have fixed it, but it was a bit tricky. Hans Adler 08:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nervii, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Louvain, Namur and Dyle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Belgae and van Durme

Can you amend the quotation you added to the Belgae page slightly - there seems to be a mistake as the phrase Germanic did not "Celticisation coming from the south" does not makes sense and there is an error in the citation. Thanks in advance. Paul S (talk) 16:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Islek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Celtic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Wysinger.homestead.com

Hi Andrew - this site is rife with copyvio and has been blacklisted. I'm in the process of removing links, see [14]. I realise that you certainly hadn't considered this when adding the links. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions. Dougweller (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately there is no evidence that they have permission to host the articles they are hosting, and copyvio links are forbidden. Dougweller (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

A quick question

Hi Andrew. The Somerled article gives the haplogroup "M17". Is this haplogroup the same as Haplogroup R-M17 (Y-DNA)? Should "M17" in the Somerled article be piped to that article?--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 12:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

OK thanks.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 08:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

RfC regarding inclusion of a subsection of Metaphilosophy in the article on Philosophy

An RfC concerning addition of a subsection to Philosophy can be found at this location. Please comment upon its inclusion and any modifications you think would help make it better. Brews ohare (talk) 20:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hermunduri citations

Glad you appreciated my efforts, and glad I got them right!

The task I have given myself is to correct pages appearing on Category:Pages with missing references list, which this page did. Most of them are stubs about villages in India, or as a result of some vandalism destroying half the page. Occasionally a page catches my eye, and imagination, and I give it the "full treatment". It's all part of wp:WikiProject Citation cleanup.

John of Cromer in Philippines (talk) mytime= Mon 07:01, wikitime= 23:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Germanic peoples (modern) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 09:00, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Gothic (language)

A tag has been placed on Gothic (language), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Camyoung54 talk 15:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Angles, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mother Earth and Ems (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Bavaria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Celtic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Duchy of Limburg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Valkenburg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Potentiality and actuality, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Extension (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sicambri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Celtic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Help needed

Ishmaelites#Genetic geneology of the Ismaelite Arabs - I originally reverted material on this as it was badly sourced AND sources didn't discuss Ishmaelites. Now the sources are better, but still don't so far as I can see discuss Ishmaelites (eg [15] which is the correct link for "Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into the Southern Levant and North Africa", but I'm guessing the editor will argue "Arabs are Ishmaelites so this is about Ishmaelites". I will probably take this to WP:NOR but wanted your attention first, also on the new article YCAIIa22-YCAIIb22. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 14:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Ishmaelites

See WP:RSN#Can these sources be used to genetically trace Arabs (or rather 'Ishmaelite Arabs') to Abraham?. Dougweller (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ripuarian Franks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dutch Limburg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Usipetes may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:00, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Marsacii may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D4%3Achapter%3D29 Plin. Nat. 4.29]</ref> (Possibly related to this same tribe, he also mentions "Oromarsaci" or an "ora" (boundary) of the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:14, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Valentino

Turned them into redirects. He clearly doesn't understand our policy on OR. He doesn't seem to understand genetics either. I've warned him on some copyvio. I think we need to post to his talk page more with warnings and advice, and if he ignores all those, then further action may be necessary (ask for a ban perhaps). Dougweller (talk) 10:12, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

what is redirect has to do with copy violation (J1c3 DIRECTED TO j-P58 for example, WHO DID I COPY RIGHT HERE), and what other copy violations are in Ishmaelites?I am dumbfounded. i HOPE YOU ENLIGHTEN ME AND DONT KEEP THE ALLEGED COPY RIGHT VIOLATIONS SECRET TILL THE 4TH OF JULYValentino2013 (talk) 08:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Valentino you should ask Dougweller for details of the WP:COPYVIO, but perhaps read the policy first. This is not the same problem as the problems I have been trying to explain.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Huh? You don' know who you are copying and pasting from? That's hard to understand. Read the links I gave you on your page about copyvio. You are directly copying from various sources. I put 2 of the sources in my last edit summary, and I will block you if you continue to do this. I have no idea about J1c3 as that's just a redirect, so can't be copyvio, but J-P58 has no sources that meet our criteria for reliability at WP:RS or WP:VERIFY. As for the other copyvio, you know where you are getting the material. Dougweller (talk) 08:56, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 13:06, 1 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Human Genetic History#Guidelines desperately needed. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

History of the Netherlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Dutch Limburg, Frankish and Oude Rijn

Romans in the Netherlands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Frankish and Oude Rijn

Civitas Tungrorum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ala

Saxons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Batavi

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Holland

Hi, I'm wondering what made you believe that "inter Helinium ac Flevum" refers to an area between two river mouths at the North Sea, rather than one at the North Sea and one at what was previously Lake Flevo. Assuming Helinium refers to the North Sea and Flevum to Flevo (the central lake), wouldn't the sentence be correct the way it was before you rewrote it? Although I couldn't find anything in the reference either, I've found this page on the same website that contains the phrase "inter Helinium ac Flevum". I can't read Latin, but from what I can tell from Google translate it talks about "pool from the north".  thayts t  20:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm by no means familiar with these texts, nor with the history, but when I see "Flevo" it means to me the lake that's now IJsselmeer. The reclaimed land from the IJsselmeer is also called Flevoland. But it could have been a fort too (in I think you mean Velsen), although no river discharges into the North Sea there. I'm also not sure if the IJ has ever been connected to the North Sea before the construction of the North Sea Canal (other than by the Zuiderzee). However, the whole North Holland peninsula could have been seen as part of the "island" rather than only the area between Brielle and Velsen. Interesting stuff!  thayts t  09:31, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Policymic

Will you please take a look at the following thread and offer your opinion.[16] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 04:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Rhine–Meuse–Scheldt delta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Old Rhine, Oude Rijn and Waal

Chattuarii (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gau

Marsacii (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Old Rhine

Salian Franks (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dutch

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Duchy of Limburg (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Frank

Gotini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Osi

Suebi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Osi

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Marsacii may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• flevo|title=Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography| year=1854|first=William |last=Smith}}</ref>)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:53, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Common sense may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of the term "common sense" and is the Latin translation of Aristotle's {{lang|gr|κοινὴ αἲσθησις}}).<ref>Aristotle, ''De Anima'', III, 1-2</ref> According to [[Aristotle]], the common sense is an

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:48, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Gotini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Illyricum, Legate and Buri

Common sense (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Seneca and A priori

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Civilisation

On break but wanted to say that I think the 2 most important projects/subjects that deal with the issue of what constitutes a civilisation are archaeology and anthropology. Could you post to those projects please? Dougweller (talk) 20:18, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Andrew, thanks for your message. I'm not quite sure what to do about the topic, civilization is one of the topics that was central to anthropology in an early period and which then turned out not really to be an analytically viable concept so now its mostly conservative political scientists who use it to justify their own cultural hegemony. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:07, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Misesian economists

Andrew, I thank you for your measured and intelligent remarks from earlier, and I hope you continue to join discussion on Wikipedia pages related to Misesian economics/scholars in the future. I think my remarks were not nearly as clear and concise as they should been. Let me try to state my case again.

Wikipedia policy regarding fringe sources asserts that "ideas that depart significantly from the prevailing or mainstream view in its particular field" are fringe. Thus, even if you think the evidence I've presented to this point (which I would agree requires more research) is insufficient, am I right to think that you would agree that Misesian theory should be labeled as fringe and approached with the precautions outlined in WP:Fringe if it can be demonstrated that it "depart[s] significantly from the ... mainstream view" of what constitutes the science of economics? Steeletrap (talk) 23:42, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Common sense, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Induction, Stoic and Timaeus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I just hopped on to the article Common sense and was pleased to see how much you've developed it. Great work! —Tom Morris (talk) 10:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Back to the past?

Hi Andrew!
I am Michael042.
Your contribution to the Morini and Menapii articles is crap. It is very clear to me that you are a biased celticist. Everything is Celtic for you.
Morini:
"Place names and personal names clearly show that the Belgae were heavily influenced by Celtic language" Clearly?? Have you ever seen a medieval map of the region? Or do you mean: by French historians? Why do you reject the presence of 'moer' in many local place names, a clearly Germanic word for wetland AND a PIE word, indeed related to *mor= sea? Gysseling is old science and he was clearly biased by celticism. The reality is that there is no indication at all that the local language was Celtic. Heavily influenced? That is exactly what French historians of the 19th century wanted you to believe. Delamarre? He was a clear French nationalist, even capable to explain why the place-name such as Bremen was probably Celtic. "A transition zone"? Yes, but it was found between the Somme and Seine. I am also sorry for the fact that you dropped further indications of their social organisation as mentioned by Caesar.
Menapii::
Although Caesar clearly wrote that they were of Germanic stock, you insist in portraying them as Celts. You behave there as if you were assisting Caesar at the time, correcting him in his "mistakes". Your given etymology is wholly preposterous: "towering mountain"? Ever went on location? No: it is very clear that the name is Germanic and that the similarity with the Irish Menapii is entirely coincidental. Men = mean = commune / apii = ab (A)a = 'close (to the) river'. Menapii = communes on water's edge. Can it be more simple? It also explains why Caesar put Menapii to the north of the Eburones. They lived in the Schelde-Rhine estuary as well as on the Rhine and Meuse shores up to the modern German border.
If I follow you, then the Celts lived up to the Rhine, possibly even beyond, which is exactly what state paid French historians told king Louis XIV while urging him to 'restore' this alleged old uniform Gaul again. Crap!
But I want change your articles, rest assure. Michael042 (talk) 08:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nous, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Categories (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

ID dispute resolution

As you know, we have frequent disputes on the Talk:Intelligent design page that focus on distinguishing Intelligent design from the teleological argument. I have started a new section on the dispute resolution noticeboard for this and listed you as a participant in these disputes. If you have some time, please stop over and explain what your proposed resolution is and why you believe this to be the case. Thank you! -- MisterDub (talk | contribs) 23:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

please comment

Hi. Can I get your opinion on this talk page before I begin to institute some updates to R1a article ? Regards [17] Slovenski Volk (talk)

Did you mean to change from parethetical refereincing back to in-line citations ? Slovenski Volk (talk) 10:25, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I changed them all to inline citations, which is neater IMO; although ill need to continually tinker and refine the citations over the coming days. And I did a massive re-do of the entire origins sections. Please parouse at your liberty Slovenski Volk (talk) 11:43, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Common sense (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Darwin

Teleological argument (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Stoic

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Reformatting other people's comments

This kind of edits are not acceptable specially if you don't inform the other editor about what you've done and I'd appreciate if you did not do this again. My comment not only commented on your verbiage, it also expressed an opinion on the topic being discussed. Even if it didn't, you'd still have no right to move it around. I've reverted your edit so you should go and re-add the comments you made. Regards. Gaba ^(talk) 19:18, 9 September 2013 (UTC)