Chakazul

Black hole electron

Hi Chakazul: I would like to know if you have interest in the "Black hole electron" article. If you are interested in this, would you mind looking at "Talk:Black hole electron", item 8, Balanced pattern? I believe the multiple dimensionless ratios shown will lead to a better understanding of electrons. Let me know if the logic sequence shown is appropriate from your perspective.--DonJStevens (talk) 15:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Chakazul, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Verbal chat 21:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

The NPOV reference is probably in reference to the aquatic ape hypothesis but I could be wrong. You can't receive e-mail alerts, the only way to check your watchlist is to check your watchlist. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 22:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Pre-Siberian American Aborignes

You asked me why the above article was deleted and whether it is original research. The article was about recent theories that humans were present in america before the migrations from Siberia at the end of the Ice Age, which until recently were assumed to be the first time humans came to America. It is a controversial but squarely scientific topic, with solid archaeological evidence, journal publications and all that.

The article was posted on the AfD on december 27, 2009 and deleted on Janyary 2, 2010 --- before I had a chance to read the arguments or reply to them. Apparently someone googled the title and since it did not turn up a match he concluded that it was garbage. Actually there are a number of alternative theories, and each uses different names for those hypothetical "Zeroth Americans". The article's title was an attempt to encompass all those theories under a neutral and descriptive name. So it is no surprise that Google did not turn up anything.

When I found out about the deletion I complained to the administrators and got the article restored as a subpage of my user page. Then I took a few months of vacation from Wikipedia; partly for work reasons, partly because I was really fed up with the rampant wikibulying (of which that deletion was just a small sample). I hoped that in time the joy of editing would return. Ha! Yesterday I checked my user pages only to find that the article had been deleted again, from my user space --- without any warning or explanation. So much for the joy...

All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 03:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 16:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

March 2012

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. IRWolfie- (talk) 20:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Algis_Kuliukas for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Question

Where does this source support the aquatic ape hypothesis? It's about Neanderthals, not humans, eating fish, shellfish and dolphins. Can you point me to a specific page and quote? WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 11:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Aquatic Ape reference

Hi. Are you aware of Darwin's Dangerous Idea by Daniel C. Dennett? It's available on line, for example here. Search for "aquatic ape". There's a couple of pages on AAH, quite good sense. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 14:45, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Ghost! Chakazul (talk) (list of RS for/against AAH) 04:38, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit-warring warning.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

AAH

I had no intention ąt all of being rude or attacking you, but of being absolutely frank and contructive. I could see that you were getting frustrated and were starting to lose it (even you were starting to realize that you went too far based on your post on Kwami's page). You needed a splash of cold water, and I was glad to oblige. I wouldn't have offered the advice if I did not follow it myself. As I said, I have never even looked at a single WP article related to my own research or to my own field, microbiology, as a whole. I don't need the aggravation. Good luck! ~~

Understand that you don't mean to attack anyone. What I really want to verify, as one who studies AAH's history and reception, is whether it's still considered a fringe or has entered the stage of proto-science. Apparently WP is not the right place for this, or the question itself is meaningless except in a retrospective sense. Anyway thanks for your comments :) Chakazul (talk) (list of RS for/against AAH) 16:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

My participation in the article was primarily concerned with sourcing and promotion. I don't have an opinion one way or another about the validity of the theory. I read Morris's book in high school and found it intriguing and plausible at the time. But then, my background in anthropology is limited to dental disease in Neanderthals, spinal and infectious diseases in medieval European populations, cystic fibrosis in rural vs. urban children, and growth stature changes in populations of African hunter-gatherers after they undergo modernization. I have no background in human evolution, so I'm in no position to judge for myself. Besides, I could never understand why anyone would waste time studying humans. Bacteria and fungi are so much more interesting! And much more numerous, too! (That's my personal bias showing). Again, good luck with your research! Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

World Map of Y-DNA

Thanks for writing. Excellent your hard work.

It is interesting to use some old haplogroup names for clarity. But there may be controversy. I would recommend Q-M3 instead of Q3, etc.

I have not updated some of my works: The main Eskimo haplogroup is not Q-M3 but Q-NWT01. It is not clear what kind of Q yeniseians have.

Some doubts or corrections:

• T is not a native Australian haplogroup.
• Philippine negritoes are not relatives to Micronesian. West Micronesians came from East Indonesia and East Micronesian came from Fidji (according linguistic evidence).
• R1 situation in North America is uncertain and controversial. Looks like R1b-P25 and probably it came with European colonization during the last centuries.

Good luck!--Maulucioni (talk) 05:28, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments!

• I will try using the new haplogroup names as of 2013, but the names keep changing... some have become too long (E3a7 -> "E1b1a1a1f1a"!). In this case I can only remove it or use SNP name (E-M191) which is not ideal.
• Someone in Dienekes blog commented that "Q-L330 is now called Q1a2a1c and is basically a Ket/Selkup haplogroup", but I cannot find source to back up this claim. Also, not sure if Siberian Eskimo (Yupik) has Q-NWT01, it is expected if American Eskimo-Aleut is Q-NWT01.
• T in Australian aborigines -- Wikipedia says so, but again, no published source. Better assume K
• Both Negritos and Micronesians are K + C + O3, and they're just near by, so I guess they are related...
• Some people think that R1b across Atlantic (also mtDNA X) is evidence for the Solutrean hypothesis, which is controversial, but an interesting link between genetics and archaeology

Also:

• Do you know any result on Tasmanians / Caribbean Amerindians?
• I always think of coastal routes for A/B/CT around Africa (see earlier version of my map), but it may be too speculative

Chakazul (talk) 03:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Dieneke just wrote a post about your map. You should keep working on it, it is worth improving it! Best regards Robertius (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:19, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, excuse me the delay in replying. I give you my opinions:

• Regarding E3a7, I prefer E-M191 (or E1b1a-M191).
• I knew that Q-L330 is European, but I'm surprised that it can also be yenisean. In any case Q-L330 is closer to Q-M3 than Q-NWT01. We are not sure about Eskimo-Aleuts, but we now that Inuits are Q-NWT01.
• About Negritos and Micronesians, K and C are macro-haplogroups, very old. It's impossible to establish relationships without subcladistics. The idea about navigation tradition in Negritos will be extraordinary, but there are not evidence.
• About Tasmanians / Caribbean Amerindians, the native population was virtually exterminated or mixed. Caribbean mixed reveals South-American ancestors according mtDNA.
• I also think that coastal routes for A/B/CT around Africa was too speculative. Quite the same, the draw of other coastal routes, specially C3 in Americas are speculative.--Maulucioni (talk) 06:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Maulucioni and Robertius! It seems the map needs much refinement before it can be used in main articles.

• I think better mark "Q" for Yeniseian/Selkup (also Yupik, Aleut) before research could give higher resolution.
• I will remove the link between Negritos and Micronesians as no evidence that they are related.
• So Native Caribbeans is probably Q, but can't be sure until we get ancient DNA study.
• The research on C3* in S America gave 2 possibilities: (1) coastal dispersal along American coastline (2) link with Japan through Pacific ocean currents. I think (1) as depicted here is already more conservative, but still speculative -- I should add a question mark there.

Chakazul (talk) 07:09, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Please continue discussion at File_talk:World_Map_of_Y-DNA_Haplogroups.png Chakazul (talk) 07:57, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Haplogroup map

Please see discussion at Talk:Haplogroup#Haplogroup_map. HelenOnline 06:39, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Haplogroup map -turmenistan Q1a1-m25 mistaken as R1b. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041252

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041252 Turkmens have Q-M25 not R1b, they are the only country not in Continental Latin America with much of haplgroup, Q and the main source of Q-M25. old studies confused r1b with q-m25 the same way they did p1-r2 and f3/h2.

209.236.86.201 (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Why Q1a1b was mislabeled as R1b1 (both are defined by m25)

Turkmens have the worlds highest frequency of Q1a1-F1215 (Q1a2 a different clade is found in Americans and Siberians) [1] [2]. Turkmenistan may be the only nation outside of the continental Americas with more then 10% Q, and one of only a few remaining in the world. Q1a1 is at least 17 kya as it is found in an upper Paleolithic Afontova remain in siberia [3]. Old studies mislabeled Q1a1-m25 with R1b1. This is due to the fact that both Q1a1b, the only clade of Q in Turkmens is defined by P25 which also is a defining mutation of R1b1 [4] [5] . It is likely that most of what was labeled R1b in central asia- and Siberia is really Q1a1b, including Uyghurs, and the Bashkirs, R1b has been verified as being common in some of the Bashkirs but it likely that they are the eastern-most population with a high frequency of the haplogroup . So you should entirely remove the R1b from TUrkmenistan, and also possible from other areas in central asia and siberia. 209.236.86.201 (talk) 00:11, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Only if this is specifically stated in sources. Noting also that this IP seems to be pushing stuff from yfull.com] which is not a source we should be using, we should stick with peer-reviewed academic material. Dougweller (talk) 19:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.phylotree.org/Y/tree/ grungi et al and many other articles prove what I am tring to say, I have no affliation with yfull and will remove from wiki if I see it. 209.236.86.201 (talk) 01:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 Hong Kong protests, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Queensway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

File:Flag of Ainu People.gif listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Flag of Ainu People.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Marchjuly (talk) 18:22, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Flag of Ainu People.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Flag of Ainu People.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: File:Flag of Ainu People.gif

Hello, Chakazul. You have new messages at Marchjuly's talk page.
Message added 05:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikiversity Journal of Medicine

I've a suggestion for you. The Wikiversity Journal of Medicine accepts submissions of medically-related images for publication. The format is to give some scientific background, describe the history of any previous versions of the image, references and sources, and the decisions made for how to present the information. It's an interesting way of having a searchable (on google scholar) cite-able record. It was featured in the signpost last week too (link).

• E.g.: Häggström, Mikael (27 March 2014). "Diagram of the pathways of human steroidogenesis" (PDF). Wikiversity Journal of Medicine. 1 (1). doi:10.15347/wjm/2014.005.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

I think your diagram File:Metabolic_Metro_Map.svg and the interactive version (Template:Metabolic_metro) are perfect candidates for submission. I'm thinking of submitting my Template:Eukaryote_gene_structure to it too. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 03:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: Thanks for letting me know! Seems to be an interesting project, let me learn more about it. Chakazul (talk) 01:47, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chakazul, I realise it's been a while. However if you'd be interested, the journal (now called WikiJournal of Medicine, and with web-address www.WikiJMed.org) would still be interested in getting the diagram peer reviewed. See a relevant example of an interactive diagram here. Also, of relevance, there is a $200 prize for best article submitted in 2017. Let me know if you'd like to submit and I can help with the process. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 06:21, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to thank you for cleaning up some of the mess left by the orthodox brigade. In particular the Erlandson 2001 paper which I hadn't seen despite having read his contribution to the HBE conference. It has so much good stuff in it. (I even mistakenly credited Pants with it in a futile exchange I had with him on his page!) I'm rather discouraged with the people who rule the roost here. But maybe things will quieten down. Chris55 (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

@Chris55:Thank you for the tremendious work in redrafting the whole article. I'm just defending it from erosion and hopefully can add more useful stuffs in it. I've been maintaining an exhaustive list of for/against sources which become handy when finding citations, you can see parts of it at the bottom of my user page. Archaeologist like Jon Erlandson, Geoff Bailey, Curtis Marean pushed coastal models into the archaeology mainstream, their works are always good reads. I tend to welcome the edits from those more skeptical editors for making the text more accurate, just no removing a whole paragraph or insisting AAH = pseudoscience would be fine. Chakazul (talk) 04:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aquatic ape hypothesis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sea Gypsies. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Dominant Haplogroup shown for Eastern Indian(West Bengal, Orissa) is Incorrect in the Map

@Chakazul:, Haplogroup T and C5 are shown dominant in West Bengal and Orissa which is wrong. According to Kivisild et al 2003, the most common Haplogroup for West Bengalis(the whole regional group studied) is Haplogroup R1a1 at 39% followed by Haplogroup R2 at 23% then H at 9%. Haplogroup T is only common among an obscure tribal group called 'Bauri' which constitute a fractional %age of the total population. I think that the Map needs to be changed accordingly.--Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Chakazul. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Metabolic metro map

Template:Metabolic metro map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:30, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Chakazul. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Could you provide SVG sources of your Human Aquatic/Running Adaptations PNG for translations ?

Hello Chak,

and thank you a lot for your infographics about possible human aquatic and running adaptations, and also your page about reliable sources for/against AAH, they're nice summaries !

I'd like to translate into French both of your infographics on aquatic/running adaptations, and I suppose others could want to translate them into others languages as well.

For that, could you provide your SVG sources of these two infographics ? Either publicly, or if you prefer to avoid that (for any reason), directly to me - in this case I'll publish only a translated PNG.

Thanks in advance. Yours, --Philibre (talk) 13:55, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

@Philibre: I used MS PowerPoint to create the images because it's the most convenient for me. I'm thinking to port them (also my other infographics) into SVG, but it may be in the future. Is it OK if I send you the PowerPoint files? ChakAzul (talk) 02:01, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Chakazul: Yes please ! I have LibreOffice : I believe that it will be able to import the PP files. Do you need anything (like an e-mail address) to send them to me ? Thanks again! --Philibre (talk) 21:53, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

@Philibre: Email sent to you. ChakAzul (talk) 00:50, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Translation of your maps

Hello, I'm comming from the french wikipedia community and I had profundly impressed by your work. I would like to make french traductions for your inforgraphics ? Either by editing the file by myself if you consent to share it with me or by handing you atraduction. What do you think of this idea ? D Cat laz (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)