Commons:Deletion requests/File:Europe20000ya.png

The underpinning map claimed as File:BlankMap-Europe-v3.png is not the source for this map, it has a different projection. This matches the pattern of copyvios and obscuration of sources in other pseudo-science and likely scientific racism raised elsewhere. Fæ (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see. You are trying to delete an image for political reasons (somehow this innocent map is used in articles in contexts that you happen to disagree with) based on a flimsy copyright claim on what is clearly public domain geodata. I did not make this map, but please, please do not conflate questions regarding the origin of map data with allegations of "scientific racism". --Dbachmann (talk) 07:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:BlankMap-Europe-v3.png is clearly the source map, modified with green and white highlights. There is no licensing problem Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are different maps, they are even different projections. Please actually compare the two. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong in so many ways. Let's start with the projection. A cursory glance at File:BlankMap-Europe-v3.png shows that it was first created at 02:02, 5 May 2006, and then modified to use a different projection at 09:18, 2 May 2007. This file was created at 18:59, 25 February 2007 so clearly used the first version of the underlying map. Now go and have a look at the correct base map. Next copyvio. The original is CC-BY-SA-3.0, so copying is permitted. Next: obscuration of sources – rubbish, it is clearly documented. Next: pseudo-science, Mithen received a BA in prehistory and archaeology from Sheffield University, a MSc degree in biological computation from York University and a PhD in archaeology from Cambridge University so I'm inclined to doubt this also. Finally "scientific racism", possibly true, since no-one has the faintest idea what it means. 4½ out of 5 wrong is quite a spectacular fail. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:10, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comparing BlankMap 20070502 with Europe20000ya latest does give a match. This link in the description would useful for future verification.

This map is original research, being asserted to be a synthesis of various books by the uploader, which is of course unverifiable. This means that it should fail the original research policies of the multiple language Wikipedias it's being used in, but that's a matter for those communities to understand the images they apply to articles. --Fæ (talk) 08:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He clearly cites his sources "Information about human refugia from "Origins of the British" by Stephen Oppenheimer and "Out of Eden by Stephen Oppenheimer" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 15:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, these are books that this map might be based on. This is what 'synthesis' means. It is still original research and a user creation, not a map by Oppenheimer and not suitable for a Wikipedia article as it is not a peer reviewed or even verifiable diagram. But as said, it's up to those Wikipedias to realize this is original research by the (Commons) back door. --Fæ (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would just chime in to say that the cited books are now generally regarded as completely out-of-date in their theories, since Oppenheimer based all of his genetic history ideas on what are now known to be flawed assumptions. He was working in an era when the DNA of modern populations had been sequenced and he assumed that this would essentially map onto prehistoric populations, but since 2015-16 we now have actual Ancient DNA from ancient skeletons (archaeogenetics), that tells a very different story. And that new data made all the previous studies done on modern populations obsolete overnight (at least when it came to understanding prehistory). So those are not great sources for much at all. Now that's not to say that the map is necessarily wrong, but I believe the refugia idea has been questioned at least somewhat by the latest archaeogenetics. I suspect the map is probably pretty out-of-date therefore. There are probably a lot more recent studies done on the refugia phenomena (if it was ever significant for human populations). I wouldn't say delete it now, but if someone can create a new map encompassing the latest research on the subject then that should replace it. --Hibernian (talk) 04:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: simple base map is clearly {{PD-map}}, and scientific accuracy is irrelevant, in use. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]