Talk:Y-DNA haplogroups in populations of Europe

	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 Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Human Genetic History (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human Genetic History, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Human Genetic HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryHuman Genetic History articles

European history Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Propose reworking table

I would say the list of haplogroups represented here should be edited somewhat... first of all, the differentiation between J1 and J2 should be made, as it is often rather rigid. For example among J Chechens, they are mostly all J2; whereas Dargins are mostly all J1, etc... they are certainly just as worthy of being split as R1a and R1b are. Also, I would split I1 and I2 (which in turn might be best as I2a and I2b). We could possibly find a way to split it within the column for groups that have it specified, at the very least (that way, for groups that only have "I" or "J" in the data, we can still have only one column)... also we might want to add H, a and/or R2a though I would say the I and J splits (into I1, I2a, I2b, J1 and J2) are very important to do... Those 5 are good for differentiating populations in Europe --Yalens (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For H, R2 and others haplogroups, a new column titled "others" might be created.--Maulucioni (talk) 23:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like it is in the Central Asia page? I think that would be a pretty good idea? --Yalens (talk) 23:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Maulucioni (talk) 12:55, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly propose new Caucasian peoples page

This page is pretty big and its only going to get bigger. We might want to take the North Caucasus out of here, or at least leave it only an abbreviated form, and take the South caucasus from the Middle East page similarly and merge them into a new page. The N. and S. Caucasuses are more closely intertwined with each toher than their respective continents... (that being said, Kurds, Laz, Eastern Anatolians and Anatolian Armenians should also be included in the Caucasus page for reference) I wouldn't say take the Caucasus samples out of Europe completely (as they are important for Europe's genetic history), but they definitely deserve their own page. I have an excel file on my computer ready to convert into a wiki chart. If we have to make 10 haplogroup columns like is standard for a Caucasus page, I'd say E1b1b, G, I, J1, J2, L, T, R1 [possibly to split to R1a and R1b?], R2 and Others. --Yalens (talk) 00:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. This article might turn out caotic. It's necessary an Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of Caucasus article. --Maulucioni (talk) 04:19, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

kurds must added too

kurds must added too Please add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmedSoccer (talk • contribs) 07:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can find them here: Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of Near East and North Africa. --Maulucioni (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chronological development of haplogroups found in Europe

"Chronological development of haplogroups found in Europe" section has almost completely wrong data. I tried to remove it, but someone who added it was more persistent than me so... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shetach (talk • contribs) 16:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming proposal

Interested/knowledgeable parties, please see Talk:Y-chromosome haplogroups by populations#Renaming for a renaming proposal that would affect this article and 10 others. Please comment over there to keep the discussion centralized. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 00:20, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Language

The most common Scottish languages are Scottish English (West Germanic) and Scots (West Germanic). Gaelic (Celtic) is only spoken by about 2% of Scottish people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.33.246 (talk) 19:38, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eupedia

The table is really unorganised, a new in-depth study by Eupedia on the halotypes in Europe, including dividing halotypes into subclades such as I1 and I2. I'm going to update and organise the table to this new updated information. 13:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anarchistdy (talk • contribs)

No, you made table much worse, you removed significant informations with relevant sources and institute of researchs, all that was referenced. Single source is not acceptable, especually using no reference at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.149.24.195 (talk) 03:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Y-DNA haplogroups in European populations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate references

Can't kill the duplicates without innate knowledge which reference is meant with the footnotes. MikeTango (talk) 20:57, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maciamo Hay and his Eupedia.com is not science source

See in Talk:Yamnaya culture Maciamo Hay and his Eupedia.com is not science source. See also Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_253#Eupedia.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.119.233.76 (talk) 15:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it is a blog and a forum. In fact, none of the images here were backed by actual academic sources it seems.--Calthinus (talk) 16:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Visualizations

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Europe may be able to help!

A map like [1] that shows the full current distribution in each country would help illustrate just how mixed humans are. The maps that only show the dominant group can give a rather misleading impression, especially where the dominant group is less than half the population. -- Beland (talk) 04:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~This one is much better and thank goodness not based on Eupedia.--Calthinus (talk) 07:39, 24 October 2019 (UTC)~~[reply]

Stricken. The new map is ... also problematic, and outdated. Current one is imperfect but better. Particularly problematic for the new one is its implication that national boundaries are legitimate boundaries to divide the genetic diversity of Europe -- RS say precisely the opposite from Cavalli Svorza onward. Perhaps it can be fixed to make sure its clear most countries except the Atlantic ones and some Slavic areas are in fact pluralities. Whatever. New one is not better. --Calthinus (talk) 19:29, 7 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:

MDS analysis of Europe.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is about nationalities, not ethnicities

The clearly taking nationalities into account, not ethnicities. Bashkortostan is not dominated by Russians. They are Bashkirs. So as many other Russian regions. Common Russians lines are also clrealy about whole Russian population, not only ethnically Russians. Elk Salmon (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]