Open main menu
Genetic history of Europe was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
August 9, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed

Name changesEdit

The term "genetic history" strikes me as somewhat unusual. What about "Population genetics of Europe".


  • The reference included in the section "Bibliography", by Adams et al, on religious intolerance and gentics in the iberian peninsula,from Am J Hum Gen is just terrible. Its title clearly indicates an aim outside the scope of a Journal on Human Genetics, and it contains many imprecissions and unproven judgements. No description of the sampling technique is included in the article, and even the ballot surveys describe how they choosed the sample in their data. From the description of "spaniards rueld by 300'000 visigoths" a negative judgement can be inferred, but the goths never ruled the spaniards, they just started acting as state powers when the Roman authority that hired them to be part of the roman army in exchange of being allowed to have shelter inside the roman empire borders,as some other peoples attacked them, when the roman authority faded goths found themselves as the only organized power,and started acting in acordance with their authorities, the romans allowed the goth's authorities to be preserved inside the roman army, and with their own rules. No imposition at all existed in this. The paper speaks about religious intolerance: goths changed their orginal religion, arrianism, to catholicism, in order not to enter in conflict with the rest of spaniards, but many times the facts linked to other religious groups arriving into Spain, some times forced,as some people of jewish orgin may have arrived to Spain forced by the romans,others as invaders, there were several cases when moslim authorities tryed to force christians to endorse moslim faith, or accept Mohammed as a prophet;some catholics become saints when they were killed because of this, and that probably is against the moslim rules, that stablish for the Islam a respect for "The people of the book", jewish and christians,the book named in this being the Bible. Some cases of jewish being blamed for religious violence existed,for example the case of "Santo Dominguito del Val", the history telling that young was crucified, and the expulsion of jewish in 1492 was founded in a supposed declaration of some of them of trying to "Put down the law of Jesus and stablisihing the rule of Moshes law"; even when the descendants of the kings that made the expulsion were ruling, many jews returned years after the expulsion to Spain, and there's no record of them being bothered again. The article uses the word "pogrom", a word of polish origin, but no records exits of violence in Spain specially focusing on jews, and if it was some, it was never worse than violence from some spaniards against other spaniards. The article in Am J Hum Gen speaks about some 20% of today's spanish males having jewish Y chromosome markers, and if it's taken into account that the same article says that at the time of expulsion, jewish were just 4% of the total population in Spain, the growth of this people from 4% in 1492 to 20% of today clearly speaks about no discrimination, at least. The authors have doubts about why the 20% is maintained all over Spain but in the island of Menorca. This island was for some time an english island, and either people of jewish ancestry moved to the british islands looking for a richer environment, or they were chased by the britons. This article in Am J Hum Gen seems containing a lot of propaganda, but from who,and with which goal ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 14:47, 5 November 2011‎

Good Article Review #1Edit

GA ReviewEdit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Genetic history of Europe/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 19:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Pre-review commentsEdit

This article has a {{update}} flag dated November 2009 in the Genetic studies after Cavalli-Sforza which is sufficient to Quick fail this article without needing a review.
The WP:Lead is also non-compliant with WP:Lead.
I will continue to review this article, but regardless of any other findings, this article will not gain GA-status unless these two items are addressed and the article brought up to standard. Pyrotec (talk) 20:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the article's history page, this nomination was made by an editor who has not edited this article. It appears to be a drive-by nomination, so I'm closing this review. The article is listed as B-class by most WikiProjects and that appears to be an accurate assessment of the article at this time. Pyrotec (talk) 09:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Pyrotec - 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Path to updateEdit

In my understanding, "current" literature on the topic should date from 2015 onwards. This is necessary because major advances were made in 2014/5, and literature published since then has adopted the principal components proposed by Lazaridis et al. (2014).

  • Lazaridis, I. et al. "Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans." Nature 513, 409-413, doi:10.1038/nature13673 (2014).

It has now become possible to distinguish Paleolithic, Neolithic and post-Neolithic (steppe migrations) components quite reliably, and the entire article should reflect this structure. This is not very difficult to do, because any paper on the topic chosen at random will start by making a brief reference to recent developments and cite the relevant papers, e.g. [1], references 1-6: Lazaridis, I. et al. (2014), Haak, W. et al. (2015), Allentoft, M. E. et al. (2015), Mathieson, I. et al. (2015), Fu, Q. et al. (2016). Lazaridis, I. et al. (2016). There has been a paradigm shift, and a huge increase in both knowledge and confidence, over the past five years or so, and the state of the literature easily allows an encyclopedic treatment here, but it will be a lot of work. --dab (𒁳) 11:28, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I tried to at least write a coherent lead section based on the current state of research. I would propose we pretty much throw out all the pre-2010s data tables and pileup of unconnected studies from the article body and try to write a shorter but more coherent and up-to-date account. All the patrinlineal/matrilineal haplogroup stuff should probably go to dedicated sub-articles. mtDNA and Y-DNA analyses were important first insights in the 1990s and early 2000s, before large-scale autosomal analysis became possible, but they are little more than a red herring distracting from the overall picture now. --dab (𒁳) 09:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

A good job, thanks. As you say it needs much more work. In particular the confident interpretations of modern patrilines/matrilines are pretty much out of date. To me it would seem reasonable to remove pretty much all of this stuff. How would you feel about moving, approximately, all of it to a new article, possibly called "History of the population history of Europe"? Richard Keatinge (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Genetic history of Europe. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 19:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

"Spain (Aryan Magi/Druids and Slavs/Sarmatians of Cantabria)"Edit

What does "Aryan Magi/Druids" even mean? Which group is this? And when were there "Slavs/Sarmatians" in Cantabria? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:48, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Return to "Genetic history of Europe" page.