Talk:Neanderthal interaction with Cro-Magnons
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Delete this article?
This article WP:FORKs information already dealt with in the Neanderthal article and basically represents just one point of view. While the Neandertal article is up to date with recent articles and summarizes the actual state of the debate, this article needs a complete overhaul to cope with recent developments. Here, the extinction of Neanderthal is taken for granted, while it is still hotly debated. This is not conform WP:NPOV policy. If the intention is to describe Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal interaction, than please do so - and find out even the advent of Cro Magnon in Europe before 30000 kya is contested. For all of this the article should be reorganised and rewritten completely, or nominated for deletion. What will it be? Rokus01 (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- If it's completely dealt with in the Neanderthal article, why not just redirect there? WLU (talk) 01:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
It would be a valid sub-article, if:
- it would establish proven Neanderthal-Cro Magnon interaction on the first place
- it would not be a WP:FORK from Neanderthal that basically tend to forward the single point of view against interbreeding
- it would be confirm WP:NPOV policy to represent multiple points of view
- it would give valuable information on the subject other than basically stating there was no interaction, only extinction.
Now to come forward with some WP:POINT policy in order to dodge the issue I raise, is a bit like a silly WP:GAME isn't it? To keep in line with WP:TALK you should explain why this is a valid sub-article the way it is. Rokus01 (talk) 22:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I never said it should remain "the way it is". It obviously should be improved. If you have any valid points to raise, do it. I know you are here because of Neanderthal H. sapiens interbreeding (you want there to have been interbreeding. Presumably to account for your superior Nordwestblock/Dutch race that gave rise to civilization etc.). This is indeed the right place for the interbreeding debate. That is, following actual research, not racialist speculation. As it happens, there is no evidence indicating that there was any interbreeding. If there was any evidence, this would be the place to report it. dab (𒁳) 19:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Apart from your denigrating way of communicating and extrapolating against WP:NPA and WP:AGF that obviously does not fit an administrator; why do you think again it is of any interest what you think about the interbreeding question or evidence? The valid point I raised and keep raising is the article should reflect the current debate on this issue, and not just what happens to be the POV of an administrator on the loose. You being such a great self-proclaimed merger; what keeps you from merging this very article that severely lags behind and does not give any additional information to what we already know from Neanderthal? I am very interested to such "actual research" on evidence of interaction, still all I can see here is mere speculation and obsolete concepts. You still did not comply to WP:TALK to answer my inquiry how this article could be saved, or otherwise why it should be saved. I would save it myself if I knew of any sourced evidence of interaction. So far there is not any evidence or indication whatsoever to who or what belongs the Aurignacian, and all we know is anatomically modern humans were present since Gravette, on locations very separate from late Neanderthal. Hardly a sound base for an article, or rather some opinions on interaction. Rokus01 (talk) 21:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I propose a combination of:
- a redirect to Neanderthal of Neandertal interaction with Cro-Magnons, since this article does not seem to intend adding any valuable information on the interaction-subject about if, when, where and how the two human branches interacted
- a full move of the content to a new subject called Neanderthal extinction hypotheses, since this is where the article is really all about
- an overhaul of the content in order to reduce the redundancy with the main article.
Rokus01 (talk) 21:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)\
-
- I like Neanderthal extinction hypotheses as well. Such an article should address most of the concerns above. GwenW (talk) 09:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- I don't have a problem with that. This article is in fact about Neanderthal extinction, so we can and should move it to an appropriate title. dab (𒁳) 07:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- I like Neanderthal extinction hypotheses as well. Such an article should address most of the concerns above. GwenW (talk) 09:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
