User talk:Aano Bhadra

DNA papers on Aryan invasion theory
Hi, thanks for your contribution to the external-links section of Aryan invasion theory. Actually, I have no opinion about those DNA-related research papers, let alone expertise. My edit was just directed at something else Shivraj had been edit-warring about earlier. As for the references, I rather feel they are all off-topic here; there's another page, Indo-Aryan migration I think, where they would fit better. That said, I don't have the impression the Sahoo (2006) study is really intended to supercede the Bamshad (2001) study you deleted - Bamshad et al. seem to have specifically compared higher with lower castes, and Sahoo et al didn't do that, so their results don't really contradict the previous ones, for all I can see. You might want to re-introduce that link; I, for one, am not going to fight about it though. Lukas (T. 08:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Aryan Invasion DNA Link
Hi Lukas, thanks for the comments. Neither I am to fight on the link. But please see page 2 of Sengupta et al paper (AJHG). It discusses the Bamshad paper and points out the limitations of that work due to (1) ethnically ill-defined populations (2) limited geographic  sampling (3)  inadequate molecular resolution, and  (4) inappropriate statistical methods. Note that this AJHG paper is written by Prof. Cavalli-Sforza -- one of the most famous genetic expert of our time (from Stanford univ). Also note that the PNAS paper also points out such limitations of the Bamshad et al work and in fact the PNAS paper is co-authored by Dr. Kivisild -- an author of the Bamshad paper! And the conclusions in both the latest papers are just opposite to what Bamshad et al find. So in my opinion the Bamshad paper is not any more relevant. Thanks

User:Aano Bhadra


 * The question is not whether Bamshad is right or wrong, but whether it is appropriate to include a link to his work so that readers can look at the full debate. If someome writes a bookin 2001 an someone else writes another book in 2006 disgreeing with it, it does not automatically invalidate the first book. It certainly does not mean that exisytence should be effaced from memory. It means we shouls show the debate. As Lucas says.these links should really be in the I-A migration article, but I pretty much despair of maintaining the distinction between the two. Paul B 09:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Nomination of Dharampal for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dharampal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Dharampal until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. &#x222F; WBG converse 10:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)