Talk:Capoid race

message: The first paragraph of this article seems to indicate that physical anthropologists, as a group, recognize racial classification (particularly the of the -oid variety). According to this statement by the AAPA (statement on race), no such recognition is evident (two extracts follow: "Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past." "The geographic pattern of genetic variation within this array is complex, and presents no major discontinuity. Humanity cannot be classified into discrete geographic categories with absolute boundaries.") Unless contradictory evidence can be cited for this claim that physical anthropologists recognize this racial classification, I will change the wording.--Ove 23:12, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical anthropology 

message: I do not think this article reflects the controversial nature of this racial classification, nor does it compare with the complexity of the other -oid articles (as difficult as they are in themselves). If there are no comments in the next few days, I will delete most of this text and replace it with something more in line with the other articles. --Ove 17:49, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  language change 

message: Negroid does not mean Africoid. Negroid, is an outdated derogatory term to classify human beings. Negroid, or Negro, means black race or black. Caucasoid means those originating from the Caucasus. "Mongoloid" are those originating from Mongolia. Negroid makes no sense in present day. Is there any such continent or place called Negrous, or Negro that would continue to justify this term? The Negroid classification was to make the "negros" a sub-race (sub-species) of human beings, which is FAR from the truth and SCIENCE. Therefore the beginning sentence is misinforming the public, and continuing the stereotype that Negroid is something like the "missing link" between apes and humans. ~Jeeny (talk) 04:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: One of two within the Negroid race?

message: It doesn't explain what the color that occupied Oceania after the Pleistocene expansion is. Is it a "Polynesian" race? Lycurgus (talk) 23:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, I believe I started the previous thread (One of Two...) but someone apparently deleted my comments there, not sure of this though. Lycurgus (talk) 20:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apparently not, think it's a false memory now. In any case the issue in this thread is the only one I have a position on. 72.228.150.44 (talk) 02:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem with the Map

message: This article asserts that Coon's out-of-date racial classifications have validity, and equates Khoisan with Capoid on the basis of what seems to be original research. Wikipedia should not be reported discredited decades old ideas as though they are current and mainstream. Fences&Windows 16:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the original research, and made clear that this racial category is historical and not in current use. Fences&Windows 17:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I redirected "Khoisanoid" to Khoisan languages instead of Khoisan, since the term is sometimes used to refer to them (Khoisanid languages). FunkMonk (talk) 17:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, that's better than Khoisan, and miles better than a redirect here. Fences&Windows 17:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Factually incorrect

message: Khoi-San people have the same 'wooly'/tightly curled hair that their Bantu neighbours do, they just wear it in the 'peppercorn' style. You can see Westernized Khoi-San who do not live the hunter-gatherer lifestyle with mini-afros in parts of South Africa.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.88.24.191 (talk) 19:22, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Capoid hair