Human Genetic History Unassessed ( inactive) | |||||||
|
Molecular Biology: Genetics / MCB Template‑class | |||||||||||||
|
A - Khoisan people, including the Bushmen, san man - Hadzabe
BR -
B - pygmy bayaka
CR -
h - Kalash
Is this anything wrong ind making a template with pictures of people rated to each haplogroups?
Y-most recent common ancestor | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| | ||||||||||||||||||||||
BR | ||||||||||||||||||||||
CR | ||||||||||||||||||||||
C | DE | F | ||||||||||||||||||||
D | E | G | H | IJ | K | |||||||||||||||||
I | J | L | M | NO | P | |||||||||||||||||
N | O | Q | R | |||||||||||||||||||
Since we have BR, CR & CF added to the template, I consider how GR & LR would fit at Talk:Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroups. Nagelfar ( talk) 09:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Haplogroup IJ is now be found to share two SNPs in common with K and therefore is under it in the Y-tree. Nagelfar ( talk) 17:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Then all of L through T could be placed in the LT haplogroup (as is given in the Y-Haplogroup Wikipedia page currently) and IJK could have K* & IJ below it. Nagelfar ( talk) 18:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Though I think it is clearer to reference visually now, I don't think it retains the concise template feel of the old version. Maybe the whole template could be downsized (smaller font, etc.). Any opinions? Nagelfar ( talk) 20:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
In the name of science this tree needs to be connected to the evolutionary phylogenic tree Erasmus Darwin Fan ( talk) 05:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC).
I could expand the tree (and take out some of the detailed branches) like the one I put recently in IJK: [1]. Would that not be neater?-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 08:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
What I mean is something like this (I'll play a bit here):-
-I think Andrew that your tree could be in the
Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup article, but I believe that a template should be as small as possible and like this:
Y-chromosomal Adam | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
A | BT | |||||||||||||||||||||||
B | CT | |||||||||||||||||||||||
DE | CF | |||||||||||||||||||||||
D | E | C | F | |||||||||||||||||||||
G | H | IJK | ||||||||||||||||||||||
IJ | K | |||||||||||||||||||||||
I | J | L | MNOPS | T | ||||||||||||||||||||
M | NO | P | S | |||||||||||||||||||||
N | O | Q | R | |||||||||||||||||||||
R1 | R2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
R1a | R1b | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Fine by me. Actually I was thinking it is a handy to have "on file" anyway because it can be adapted for various uses.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 13:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
The latest edit to this template brings up a subject which was inevitably coming. Do we include any sub-clades beyond the ones with single letters? R1 was included at a time when it was one of the few such clades with its own article. It also includes a big part of European descended men who possibly dominate the editing of this Wikipedia. But eventually we have to decide where this template is going.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 13:01, 21 September 2011 (UTC)