The result was delete. Notability has not been established during this discussion. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 20:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm nominating this for deletion on grounds of, well, non-notability.
Although the content and referencing appears pretty solid, of the four existing sources:
I reached out to User:Sarahj2107 for sourcing help, and they report that "There are zero results for this term on both Pubmed and Google Scholar". Given that, I conclude this is most likely fringe research authored by Klyosov or someone associated with him, and not notable. Ironholds ( talk) 10:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
this topic of semitic haplogroup mcra is been researched by top scientists of the field such as behar nebel et al mentioning aaron and abraham and are found in pub med as top notch research.the burden of proof in wiki is two references of published material in english Viibird ( talk) 20:39, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- :No, it's two pieces of reliable material published and authored by people independent of the subject. If you can direct us to other researchers explicitly discussing the "Abraham modal haplotype" I am only too happy to evaluate those sources. Ironholds ( talk) 01:43, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- Many of the references of Klyosov study include Pub Med studies like Nebel et al which mentions Aaron modal haplotype is that of abraham and the Arabs (both arabs and abraham are mentioned by name). - Many of List of Haplogroups of notable people are actually modal haplotypes! of notable people. Aaron a desendent of Abraham being separated by small time period they would have same haplogroup/haplotype of ( Y chromosomal Aaron also known as Aaron modal haplotype., this is the argument of Klyosov ( a major contributor to the ancestral mutation studies since 2010 in the field of genetic genealogy (the field of the article) he is a superior scientist who made millions in the us because of his scientific discoveries. I will even add more ref that klyosov referenced that are Pub Med and speak of the same thing. others and the fact that Aaron haplotype is the same of the Arabs J1e. Viibird ( talk) 11:46, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- Looking at the wiki Fringe theory the article/studies does not fit under fringe theory: fringe theory is by definition:
he would have called it Steve modal haplotype. if the historical record /claims his name was steve, same thing with Y-chromsomal Adam, Y-chromsomal Aaron. Klyosov refers to J1-CMH j1- Cohen modal haplotype ( Y-chromosomal Aaron ) "it should be called more appropriately the “Abraham Modal Haplotype” when it is exhibited in Jews and Arabs".
since most arabs are J1 who have Cohen modal haplotype ( and most j1-cmh (J1-L147.1 sub-haplogroup) is in arabs and all j1-CMH jews are in this subclade), they arabs can't be desendents from Aaron but rather his recent ancestor Abraham. The reason why j1- Cohen modal haplotype was called Y-chromosomal Aaron in the first place is that current jews with cohanim (priestly cast in current judaism/jews claim descent from Aaron!?. The fact the existance of high J1-Cohen modal haplotype in all cohens in all jewish communities even in Tailand (a country devoid of J1 altogether since tailand never experienced arab/islamic invasion) in large percentage can not be a conspiracy theory/ pseudohistory!.
significant coverage reliable verifiable published long term interest,not temporary the studies for Abraham modal haplotype have citations from other notable studies (the same studies of cohen modal haplotype researchers (hammer, nebel)the notability of Abraham modal haplotype is derived from Cohen modal haplotype since unlikely all arabs having CMH are descendents of Aaron. klyosov says in the article cmh in j1 should be called Abraham modal haplotype when it is found in arabs and jews. the sources are secondary sources, two researchers with multiple studies. same thing with Galilee modal haplotype three researchers nebel and hammer 2002, Semino 2004, tofaneli 2009 all confirm galilee mh represent arab ancestry. same researchers who discovered cmh discovered gmh Viibird ( talk) 23:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
I did not say notable and fringe are mutually exclusive!?. what I said is that somebody sent me on a wild goose chase when claimed the article does not fit notability, and studying Notability wiki guidelines the article did not fit non-notability in any section of the non-notability, then again claiming the article is fringe theory/research, yet again i had to read the fringe research wiki guidelines in detail and again the article did not fit the fringe wiki. I don't know where am i going to be sent chasing again. I said the article is ligitimate as Cohen modal haplotype wiki article, since Abraham modal haplotype the ancestor haplotype of Aaron haplotype and amh cover arabs and j1-jews who are not cohanim or have cohanim names based on the many arab haplotypes klyosov claim 5000 persons resu;lts he analysed in the study. The article refrence/source studies of klyosov and others are actually master references for ISOGG and are used extensively in Yahoo groups of genealogy, and FTDNA projects [4] [5] [6], so the researchers and their studies and the journals are reliable since they are referenced by ISOGG and also every where in wikipedia pages, isogg reference only few journals in genetic genealogy being the JOGG is one of them the other is the russian journal Obviously the sources (studies and studies makers, and the journals) are much reliable than most of sources used in wiki Viibird ( talk) 00:35, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Comment note two related creations Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galilee modal haplotype, and J1 Y-DNA Project, which has been nominated for SPEEDY deletion. Agricolae ( talk) 14:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
The result was delete. Notability has not been established during this discussion. — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 20:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm nominating this for deletion on grounds of, well, non-notability.
Although the content and referencing appears pretty solid, of the four existing sources:
I reached out to User:Sarahj2107 for sourcing help, and they report that "There are zero results for this term on both Pubmed and Google Scholar". Given that, I conclude this is most likely fringe research authored by Klyosov or someone associated with him, and not notable. Ironholds ( talk) 10:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
this topic of semitic haplogroup mcra is been researched by top scientists of the field such as behar nebel et al mentioning aaron and abraham and are found in pub med as top notch research.the burden of proof in wiki is two references of published material in english Viibird ( talk) 20:39, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- :No, it's two pieces of reliable material published and authored by people independent of the subject. If you can direct us to other researchers explicitly discussing the "Abraham modal haplotype" I am only too happy to evaluate those sources. Ironholds ( talk) 01:43, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- Many of the references of Klyosov study include Pub Med studies like Nebel et al which mentions Aaron modal haplotype is that of abraham and the Arabs (both arabs and abraham are mentioned by name). - Many of List of Haplogroups of notable people are actually modal haplotypes! of notable people. Aaron a desendent of Abraham being separated by small time period they would have same haplogroup/haplotype of ( Y chromosomal Aaron also known as Aaron modal haplotype., this is the argument of Klyosov ( a major contributor to the ancestral mutation studies since 2010 in the field of genetic genealogy (the field of the article) he is a superior scientist who made millions in the us because of his scientific discoveries. I will even add more ref that klyosov referenced that are Pub Med and speak of the same thing. others and the fact that Aaron haplotype is the same of the Arabs J1e. Viibird ( talk) 11:46, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- Looking at the wiki Fringe theory the article/studies does not fit under fringe theory: fringe theory is by definition:
he would have called it Steve modal haplotype. if the historical record /claims his name was steve, same thing with Y-chromsomal Adam, Y-chromsomal Aaron. Klyosov refers to J1-CMH j1- Cohen modal haplotype ( Y-chromosomal Aaron ) "it should be called more appropriately the “Abraham Modal Haplotype” when it is exhibited in Jews and Arabs".
since most arabs are J1 who have Cohen modal haplotype ( and most j1-cmh (J1-L147.1 sub-haplogroup) is in arabs and all j1-CMH jews are in this subclade), they arabs can't be desendents from Aaron but rather his recent ancestor Abraham. The reason why j1- Cohen modal haplotype was called Y-chromosomal Aaron in the first place is that current jews with cohanim (priestly cast in current judaism/jews claim descent from Aaron!?. The fact the existance of high J1-Cohen modal haplotype in all cohens in all jewish communities even in Tailand (a country devoid of J1 altogether since tailand never experienced arab/islamic invasion) in large percentage can not be a conspiracy theory/ pseudohistory!.
significant coverage reliable verifiable published long term interest,not temporary the studies for Abraham modal haplotype have citations from other notable studies (the same studies of cohen modal haplotype researchers (hammer, nebel)the notability of Abraham modal haplotype is derived from Cohen modal haplotype since unlikely all arabs having CMH are descendents of Aaron. klyosov says in the article cmh in j1 should be called Abraham modal haplotype when it is found in arabs and jews. the sources are secondary sources, two researchers with multiple studies. same thing with Galilee modal haplotype three researchers nebel and hammer 2002, Semino 2004, tofaneli 2009 all confirm galilee mh represent arab ancestry. same researchers who discovered cmh discovered gmh Viibird ( talk) 23:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
I did not say notable and fringe are mutually exclusive!?. what I said is that somebody sent me on a wild goose chase when claimed the article does not fit notability, and studying Notability wiki guidelines the article did not fit non-notability in any section of the non-notability, then again claiming the article is fringe theory/research, yet again i had to read the fringe research wiki guidelines in detail and again the article did not fit the fringe wiki. I don't know where am i going to be sent chasing again. I said the article is ligitimate as Cohen modal haplotype wiki article, since Abraham modal haplotype the ancestor haplotype of Aaron haplotype and amh cover arabs and j1-jews who are not cohanim or have cohanim names based on the many arab haplotypes klyosov claim 5000 persons resu;lts he analysed in the study. The article refrence/source studies of klyosov and others are actually master references for ISOGG and are used extensively in Yahoo groups of genealogy, and FTDNA projects [4] [5] [6], so the researchers and their studies and the journals are reliable since they are referenced by ISOGG and also every where in wikipedia pages, isogg reference only few journals in genetic genealogy being the JOGG is one of them the other is the russian journal Obviously the sources (studies and studies makers, and the journals) are much reliable than most of sources used in wiki Viibird ( talk) 00:35, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Comment note two related creations Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galilee modal haplotype, and J1 Y-DNA Project, which has been nominated for SPEEDY deletion. Agricolae ( talk) 14:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC)