Talk:Genetic studies on Croats

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Croatia Low‑importance

	Croatia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Croat = Serbian

According to Klosev : "approximately 58% of Serbian Y-chromosomes (I1-M253, I2a-P37.2 and R1a1a-M198) belong to lineages believed to be pre-Neolithic. On the other hand, the signature of putative Near Eastern Neolithic lineages, including E1b1b1a1-M78, G2a-P15, J1-M267, J2-M172 and R1b1a2-M269 accounts for 39% of the Y-chromosome. " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.39.91.209 (talk) 14:52, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Croats from the coast and Herzegovina have 90-100% I2a, while Serbs don’t. Therefore, how can they be the same? 31.217.34.130 (talk) 06:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Utevska

In the article was edited ([1]) sourced information from pg. 224 by O.M. Utevska (2017), however, @Nicoljaus: made first revert substantiating it with a lie, stating that the information is "not in the source" ([2]) although obviously read the source because fixed previous error ([3]), to then make a second revert substantiating it that the citation was a "distortion" because "Utevska refutes this hypothesis and does not even mention any "Slavs" in the conclusions (page 302)", again lying as there was no distortion of information because it was simply cited what Utevska said and wasn't presented in a different way at all, while lack of mention of Slavs in short conclusion on page 302 is a straw man argument. I had enough of Nicoljaus trolling. The information will be reverted because the substantiation is intentionally false, disruptive and personally provocative due to the state of RfC at White Croats.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 17:43, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Use the one of the ways from WP:CONTENTDISPUTE--Nicoljaus (talk) 18:39, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, what is the point of resolving a content dispute with outside help when it was not thoroughly discussed on the article talk page (WP:3O)? Immediately calling for outside help and mediation, but not doing it by yourself, obviously shows you don't want to have a discussion because you don't want to accept you made a mistake. Secondly, how is even possible to have a discussion with someone whose consciously ignoring and neglecting what's written in the source? Do you want to have a normal discussion about the content or fooling around as you did for weeks at the article of White Croats?

Source, pg. 224, rough translation: Now areas with high frequencies I-P37.2 are geographically quite opaque. Moreover, the Balkans, the Carpathians and the Northern Black Sea region have for a long time been united by various kinds of connections and mutual migrations of the population. It is considered as the area of expansion of a number of archaeological cultures and migration flows, which had different directions, from both the Balkans to the northeast and from the Northern Black Sea coast to the southwest. Among the first, in particular, the early agricultural culture of the Cucuteni–Trypillia culture 5-3 thousand BC. The regions with high-frequency of I-P37.2 very well coincide with the southern direction of Slavic expansion in the 5-6 centuries AD, which creates a tempting opportunity to link the secondary expansion of this haplogroup in Europe with the migration of the Slavs. However, dating on microsatellite diversity relates the process of the recent spread of I-P37.2 in Europe to the pre-Slavic period, but much later than the extinction of the Tripoli culture.

Paragraph: The most recent research by O.M. Utevska (2017), concluded that the haplogroup STR haplotypes have the highest diversity in Ukraine, with ancestral STR marker result "DYS448=20" comprising "Dnieper-Carpathian" cluster, while younger derived result "DYS448=19" comprising the "Balkan cluster" which is predominant among the South Slavs.[15] This "Balkan cluster" also has the highest variance in Ukraine, which indicates that the very high frequency in the Western Balkan is because of a founder effect.[15] Utevska noted that the frequency distribution coincides very well with the migration of the Slavs from the middle reaches of the Dnieper river or from Eastern Carpathians towards the Balkan peninsula, but the calculated STR cluster divergence happened approximately 2,860 ± 730 years ago, thus relating it to the times before Slavs, but much after the decline of the Tripolye culture.[15].

The information about geographical location and the Slavs is significant because is a continuation and supplements previous sentence "...as already Battaglia et al. (2009) observed highest variance of the haplogroup in Ukraine, Zupan et al. (2013) noted that it suggests it arrived with Slavic migration from the homeland which was in present-day Ukraine.[14]".--Miki Filigranski (talk) 15:40, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To get started, re-post this message according to the requirements of WP:Civility, in polite and calm manner.--Nicoljaus (talk) 17:40, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, things like this don't work in real life. You made a mistake, you're going to fix it, not I. I will make the change only if you first apologize for consciously lying and accusing me of distortion because you still have nothing learned about civility after being blocked 14 times on Russian Wikipedia for unethical behavior and trolling.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

I Distribution.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:37, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sardinia

Why is there no mention of Sardinia’s population having 40% of I2a haplogroup? Doesn’t fit someone’s narrative of I2a exclusively arriving with Slavic migrations?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5500864/ 31.217.34.130 (talk) 06:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated subclade.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 10:35, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]