Talk:Sahelanthropus

message: This article mention the people involved with this project. It also have a photo. "The near-complete skull, pieces of jawbone and several teeth unveiled in july 2001 - march 2002 were discovered in the desert of northern Chad by a team led by Alain Beauvilain, of the Centre National d'Appui à la Recherche, N'Djamena, Chad." [http://site.voila.fr/toumai
http://site.voila.fr/toumai/humanadventure.html
:See also Guardian Unlimited | Life | More human than ape.  
:(I have also taken the liberty of adding the title of your Web reference, plus your IP address and datestamp for future reference).
:--Tiffer 09:47, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent news 

message: The first sentence seems to be incomplete. I can't fix it because I don't know what the author was trying to say. It currently reads:
:"Sahelanthropus tchadensis is classified as the oldest possible member of the human family tree early (fossil hominin), approximately 7 million years old from the Miocene."
There's something missing between "tree" and "early". thx1138 11:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  intro

message: What does "thought to have lived" mean? Is this synonymous with "claimed to have lived"?
All I've seen is that the discoverers put out a date of 6-7 million based on associated fauna and have also put up a firm date (on their websites, not their publications) of 7 million years. 
I don't see an indication of any serious work on dating. This is a topic which is of wide interest, and it would be nice to have more links, preferably with a recent review. Abu Amaal 03:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Age?

message: If Sahelanthropus was demonstrated not to be the earliest human, Sahelanthropus is probably the ancestor of chimpanzees and humans. Orrorin might also be a chimp/human ancestor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.194.116.63 (talk • contribs) .
:Those are possibilities. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't the line "a Miocene ape related to humans and other living African apes" seem just a little contentious? --Wetman 08:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Humans are apes. African is redundant. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sahelanthropus as a human/chimp ancestor 

message: Is it possible that bipedalism evolved in the common ancestor of humans & chimps, only to be lost secondarily in chimps?. Such evolution & secondary loss of features is not unheard of in animals (example: the flightless ostrich evolved from flying birds, which in turn evolved from flightless dinosaurs). Also, it would account for the fact that Sahelanthropus is older than the suggested last common ancestor between chimps & humans. - User:64.237.249.121 16:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a valid theory, but not very likely. In other cases of degenerated functionality, there's also degenerated physicality to show the derivation. In your example of the ostrich, the wings are retained (and in fact have new use) but are degenerated from the shape of a functional flighted wing. Likewise penguins are evolved from flighted bird, but their wings have changed. If chimps and humans were both evolved from a bipedal hominin, then chimps would have certain features in their feet, knees, legs and hips which would point us to that conclusion. They don't have these features, so it is highly unlikely that a chimp ancestor was bipedal. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: @UtherSRG: Ignoring the advantage of bipedalism, what would you expect the degradation to be? Shorter legs? Evan Carroll (talk) 16:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no zoologist or anthropologist, so from my layman's understanding, there are key features in the shape of the footbones, legbones, pelvis, and neck that all make long-term bipedalism possible. (Long-term because there are many animals that can do short-term bipedalism, such as bears.) those changes would be present but degraded in chimps, and I believe they are not present. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bipedalism in Apes 

message: The article cannot go on like that, with one part of the article contradicting the next, or even one sentence contradicting the next.
The status as an hominina or as a paninais not settled, the article must reflect that and not try to impose one view or the other. --Dwarfpower (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: This article was attacked as nonnotable and proposed for deletion. You can comment at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_D._Hawks#John_D._Hawks. --JWB (talk) 22:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: AfD of [[John D. Hawks]]

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Sahelanthropus tchadensis - TM 266-01-060-1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 15, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-03-15. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng  {chat} 05:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Sahelanthropus tchadensis - TM 266-01-060-1.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: I'm reading a bit on Wikipedia on Human origins.  I note that Tim White, who I have zero knowledge of, is cited time and time again as being "THE" source of various claims stated on Wikipedia.  To me, this raises a red flag. If it is true that Dr. White is the only source for so much on human origins, then his entire "model" is likely a "pet theory" rather than accepted broadly across the scientific community.  I don't know the quality of his work, nor the robustness of his analysis, and I have no reason to believe it is not of the highest quality; I simply wish to raise the possibility that there is too much attributed to only one investigator to be be taken as solid, established science. (Too much reliance on "authority"). FWIW.Abitslow (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tim White 

message: There is an RFC that may affect this page at WikiProject Tree of Life. The topic is Confusion over taxonomy of subtribe Panina and taxon homininae (are chimps hominins)?
Please feel free to comment there. SPACKlick (talk) 16:38, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is an RFC that may affect this page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Sahelanthropus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160102083328/http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/ap_050406_chad_bones.html to http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/ap_050406_chad_bones.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I noticed that the photo of the Daynès reconstruction of Sahelanthropus is misplaced in the flow of page. I attempted to place it under the Relationship to humans and chimpanzees heading, as that's where I feel it would be most appropriate, and found that it defaulted to its present position at the left of the See Also bullet list regardless of where I tried to place it. What is the nature of this formatting bug? Also, is Relationship... a better place for the picture than where it's intended to be now? Shmuser (talk) 04:17, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placement of reconstruction picture 

message: The reviewed version in Nature is behind a paywall. Here is the open source version of the preprint.
*
 Peaceray (talk) 18:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Coverage of this paper does not take account of criticisms at . Dudley Miles (talk) 15:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open source preprint of "Postcranial evidence of late Miocene hominin bipedalism in Chad"