File talk:Human Skin Colour Distribution 26,000 BC - 1500 AD.gif

Original research and false precision embodied in this file

This file is described as being "based on the scientific consensus at the time of creation". It appears to be based on rather a lot of original research, in particular discounting the evidence - which we agree is imperfect - for darker skin color among Western Hunter Gatherers. By way of support for this comment, I note that the map is derived from https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0000027 A traditional skin color map based on the data of Biasutti. Reproduced from http://anthro.palomar.edu/vary/ with permission from Dennis O'Neil." - which isn't available, and seems to be referenced to Relethford 1998, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199712)104:4%3C449::AID-AJPA2%3E3.0.CO;2-N, which in turn doesn't seem to support any historical change element and was published too long ago to use any of the more recent genetic data. The reference to Biasutti as the source of the original data appears to refer to Renato Biasutti, who died in 1965 and as far as I can see made no attempt to do much beyond documenting characteristics of then-living populations.

I commend your industry in generating this file, and some of it may be arguable, but overall it is original research and it also offers spurious accuracy. I feel that this file should not be used in its current form anywhere on Wikipedia, and I hope that you will withdraw it until it is suitably amended. Richard Keatinge (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest Richard.

I do not agree that this map is a product of original research - it is based on a combination of the most solid data we have available in addition to the blanks filled in with the least controversial stances on the subject. For example, we know we a high degree of confidence that by ~7,700 BC at the latest (contemporary with Cheddar Man) Scandinavians had much the same features as the present, include the pale skin genes mentioned above. Current theories (including those accepted by Dr Thomas Booth who was the main advisor for the latest Cheddar Man wax model) find it likely that those genes originated from Scandinavia and spread throughout Europe, North Africa and India to various degrees of combination with other pigmentation alleles. As a result it is depicted on the map. We also know that the first settlers of the Americas (during the Epipalaeolithic) had the same light skin genes as their ancestors in East Asia (which are , which then became darker in Mesoamerica. Western Europe is not a subject of that matter, but it is interesting that the same latitude produced light skin (12-14 pigmentation in Walsh's research(apologies - I meant Barsh 2003)) deep into the glacial period in East Asia, so could easily be theorised to have had a similar effect in the Mediterranean during its settlement during the same period of prehistory.

The depiction of Palaeolithic Europeans, North Africans and many Near Easterners being of 12-14 pigmentation - as the present - is therefore a "filling in of the gap" based on the least extraordinary interpretation of events, since we cannot yet tell what their skin colour was. I am confident this rendition would be quite mundane in circles beyond those of Brace 2018's supporters. If there is anything specific you wish to point out as being potentially original research, please do and I shall see if I can explain what it was based on. Naturally this map summarises a great deal of less controversial research in addition, such as the existence of Doggerland and the timing of the settlement of Madagascar and New Zealand.

If you wish to create your own maps of alternative stances to this one, I am sure they would be welcome on the article alongside the map I created, to show visually the various theories. I have a fascination for prehistory and I would be very interested to see what Brace 2018's theory looks like on such a map, and how it interacts with the advent of pale skin in Scandinavia and with the settement of the Americas. I would be happy to send you the PNG templates I used to make my map, which used Barsh 2003's modern map as a starting point and format guide. I used Paint.NET to create them and EZgif to make the gif. Vaurnheart (talk) 13:06, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again for your hard work. Unfortunately it is the gap-filling that makes it original research, and the existing format requires quite a lot of that. In a fast-moving field, guesses also mean that it's likely to be outdated very quickly. (I should say that I'm no sort of expert on the subject matter, I have merely looked at the references you give and I see the odd headline.) My attention was particularly drawn by the confident depiction of evolution in and around the Andes, and the limited changes depicted in southern and eastern Africa despite the known Bantu expansion. I've tried to think of a way of overcoming the limits to the data so as to present a solidly-based picture that allows for easy updating as science progresses in the area. I've come across a couple of maps that similarly try to depict a changing situation with uncertain details. They are End of Roman Rule in Britain and Britain c. 540 They are careful to avoid firm boundaries and they use question marks as appropriate. I wonder if they give you any inspiration for a more defensible and future-proof version? I'll take the liberty of copying this comment and your preceding remark to this talk page, where any further discussion should probably take place and which I'll keep on my watch list. Richard Keatinge (talk) 09:46, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Vaurnheart, you might find inspiration in Skin colour and vitamin D: An update. Andrea Hanel. Carsten Carlberg. First published: 03 July 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/exd.14142, especially figure 2. I hope this is helpful. Richard Keatinge (talk) 20:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)