Talk:Haplogroup A (Y-DNA)

message: A appeared "roughly 270,000 ybp[1]". Now hte last time I looked, the appearance of the first humans was 200,000 years ago. So how can Haplogroup A be 270,000 years old? Let's just start there. And, I am not a fan of using alleged Neanderthal or Wachovian dna, when they are the oldest and most damaged DNA available. If it's available. What a coincidence that redheaded researcher Svante Paabo would isolate a redheaded gene among Neanderthals. MrSativa (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating Haplogroup A Beyond Modern Human Appearance?

message: Haplogroup A is NOT contained in Hadza from Tanzania! It is a misleading statement based on the traditional grouping of the Hadza with the Khoisan due to the presence of "clicks" in their languages. Yet the Hadza are a distinct people that genetically have nothing in common with the Khoisans. In fact, they are rather related to Pygmies. See A. Knight et al.: African Y Chromosome and mtDNA Divergence Provides Insight into the History of Click Languages. Current Biology, 6/2003, p. 464-473
----
Haplogroup A1, highly West-African specific, found in Yorkshire: BBC News, "Yorkshire clan linked to Africa" 27 January 2007. Might be worth looking into. --Wetman 05:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled Section

message: Which one is it!?
The BT article claims BT split from A, then recent edits on the A article split A from Adam.  
For now I just added BT as a descendant of A, I have my reservations on where A starts, but aslong as BT article says BT came directly from the new "I guess" Y-Chromosmal Adam, then the article should state that A shares a common origin with BT, since some edits that don't want to recognize A as Adam anymore (by stating it originated from Y-Adam!) Cadenas2008 (talk) 09:55, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter what the BT article claims because the BT article is not a reliable source. ISOGG, however, is. And it's phylogenetic tree indicates that haplogroups BT and A are sister clades. It does not indicate that "BT split from A" (that would be big news, by the way). Causteau (talk) 02:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: A Adam or Not!

message: Can we show a map of its distribution based on what we see in the article Labled "Africans in Yorkshire?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyoku (talk • contribs) 16:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A very good one. If copyright allows, it should be added. СЛУЖБА (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Distribution Map

message: I appreciate PB666's efforts to improve the article. But there are some underlying problems that should be resolved before we can proceed effectively. I have posted a thread that involves this article here. Wapondaponda (talk) 08:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Block has served its purpose. User must start collaborating productively as indicated." Apparently the block did not serve its purposes. MW trying to use Noticeboards in an effort to 'game' content disputes is not going to fly. I did not delete your edits, even though I showed that others have contradicted what you claim. I am avoiding an edit war with you, all you have to do is avoid the edit war with me and we can work together. What this has already gotten you is a reminder of the ANI people of your past block log which they can research. Lets choose another path quickly.PB666 yap 10:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since you started editing R1a, the article has picked up five 150kb talk archive pages. Much better to get to the root of the problem and avoid going down that path. Wapondaponda (talk) 12:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The root of the problem is numbers of edits to Y-DNA pages that are based in non-scientific conjecture and a general lack of concern for readability. The root of the problem is not on the talk pages it is on main pages like genetic history of Europe, and you appear to be getting no traction on the board. The root of the problem here may be here so lets work on the problem that is obvious first.PB666 yap 16:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research noticeboard

message: is the kind of verbiage that misleads people about MRCA's. The phylogeny suggests there were two sons whose yDNA has survived. Not that there were only two sons. For all anyone knows, he may have had 10 sons, 8 of whose yDNA died out 50,000 years later. 67.171.217.252 (talk) 07:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Adam's two sons" 

message: This article is not A-V148, in any way. It is just A.--Maulucioni (talk) 03:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So, when the new peer reviewed paper comes out, create an article for A-something. Try to make it NPOV. ;-) --RebekahThorn (talk) 19:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error 

message: I am thinking that we should start to divide this article based on the current subclade sections:
*A-P305
*A-M31
*A-M6
*A-M32
*A-M28
*A-M51
*A-M13
Are there any of these that are not worthy of their own article? Does anyone have suggestions for other foundation articles?--RebekahThorn (talk) 22:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think so. Only if there is a lot of information about one of them, it would deserve any new article.--Maulucioni (talk) 14:20, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Articles 

message: EXTREMELY confused.  If I didn't understand the phylogeny already this page would leave me at a loss.
Even the first sentence is confused: "Haplogroup A is the lineage of most human males"
If "A" means "A0 plus A1-T" then "most" should be "all."  If "A" instead means any version of A as normally used then "most" should be "few."
You need better nomenclature.  Perhaps "A0-T" for everything, "A1-T" for A0-T(xA0), "A" for A-T(xBT), or such.
yes the designation Macr should be removed. actually people with haplogroup a (non BT haplogroup) are exteremely rare just the khoisan, they could be total 2 million . while haplogroup BT is the macro one totaling the rest ofd the males of humanity at 3500 million males.
haplogroup BT stayed in africa for a very long time before any of its members made it out side of africa (by sea route) like C, D, E, F {G, H , I , J, K(L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T)}
by definition a haplogroup starts with one man, and by difinition Y chromose adam the MRCA of all men, the most recent common ancestor has to have two sons to be considered a Most recent. If he had one son then his son will be the most recent common ansestor.
04:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extremely confusing 

message: In human genetics, Haplogroup A is the lineage of all human males. 
What is this supposed to mean? Something we all have? Is it the Y chromosome, or something you learn in a sweathouse in the New Mexico desert under the sign of the bear? 
The rest of the lede is equally trash -- it only talks about misunderstandings and common misperceptions but still can't proceed to a definition. 84.227.246.65 (talk) 19:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Makes no sense

message: The article is called "Macro-haplogroup A(X-BT)", and the article body mentions "haplogroup A(xBT)" at one point. 
But neither does the article explain what a "macro-haplogroup" is supposed to be, nor does it use the spelling "(X-BT)" of the title, nor is the name "A(xBT)", which I assume is intended as gesturing at the definition "anything ancestral to BT but excluding BT", attributed to anything. Worse, google books comes up with zero hits for "haplogroup A(xBT)". 
We cannot just make up our own terminology, even if our made-up terminology is sensible. This is already a terminological nightmare without people trying to "fix" it by inventing yet more terminology: the problem isn't that any system of terminology is somehow bad, the problem is that people keep changing it. --dab (𒁳) 11:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: article title

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Haplogroup A (Y-DNA). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090304100010/http://dirkschweitzer.net/E3b-papers/Hassan-Sudan-2008-AJPA.pdf to http://dirkschweitzer.net/E3b-papers/Hassan-Sudan-2008-AJPA.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726031920/http://ytree.ftdna.com/ to http://ytree.ftdna.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060320201311/https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html?card=my026 to https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html?card=my026
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Haplogoups' tree is no more at the end of the article? It was so practical! Now, there is no overview - it looks so complicated; someone here doesn't want us to understand who we are?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8A0:6067:3400:C518:5BF6:9067:753E (talk) 14:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Bingo !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 184.97.94.152 (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  NO OVERVIEW ANY MORE? 

message: This isn't true if it doesn't include BT. Grassynoel (talk) 22:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Haplogroup A is a human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup, which includes all living human Y chromosomes." 

message: Hi, I have the A00, and A00 appears to be one family, one bloodline.  It's shows that people like Thomas Edison, Charles Darwin, and Nikolai Tesla are all related.  My DNA timeline shows you these people, and the Haplogroups and segments ( or ancestors), that connected them, it's all there.  This data has been crossed referenced with raw data, and other sites, it all matches me.  You have to click on the little arrow to expand the tree completely.  Companies have been contacted, but they have been rude and very tight lipped, including Dr. Michael Hammer who contributed as well. Here's my DNA timeline
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/Q-M242/tree Alphamoses (talk) 15:05, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Living A00 Human