Talk:Human evolution

Presentation on human evolution 2409:40C2:103D:E2C6:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 17:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

It's not clear what that contribution is intended to be. Is it a request of some kind? Please clarify. HiLo48 (talk) 00:15, 20 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

It is not a contribution, it is someone misusing a talk page as a search engine or ChatGPT. These comments, of which there are hundreds every day, should be deleted per talk page guidelines and not responded to, otherwise they will clog the page. Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

There is a lot of hidden racism that is indirectly implied by stating that “anatomically modern human behavior” (full human intelligence)originating originates from the people from “The Great Leap Forward” 50-60,000 years ago. Which, the descendants from “The Great Leap Forward” are only non Africans. Implying that Africans and African descendant people don’t have full human intelligence. The idea that different races of people have different levels of intelligence has been debunked and is now rightfully seen as pseudoscience and all suggestions that “The Great Leap Forward” was the onset of full human intelligence should be removed. 2601:247:4482:9BA0:A1D8:538:1B98:946D (talk) 00:52, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

I think you are reading a lot into Human evolution#Transition to behavioral modernity which is not actually present. Please quote what wording you think is a problem. Who says only non Africans are descendants? I don't see it in the article. Is the reference in doubt? Johnuniq (talk) 03:49, 12 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation–supported course assignment, between 15 January 2026 and 6 May 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JadedAZ (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Oren Byrne.

— Assignment last updated by Oren Byrne (talk) 20:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

5/8/26 - I added some more info to the H. cepranensis and H. antecessor sections, the H. heidelbergensis section, the H. rhodesiensis section, and the H. rudolfensis section. I also included a fact I found about bipedalism. I got an edit check about copy-pasting, but that's because I wrote all of my sections in my sandbox page before just pasting the info I wrote down into the article. I didn't know Wikipedia would consider my published sandbox as info from another space, but now I do. All of my sources are from the University of Arizona library. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JadedAZ (talk • contribs) 04:09, 9 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Across Wikipedia, It would be extremely nice if the number of years / and terms specifying numbers - are mentioned in thousands / ten thousands / lakhs and crores. We can understand this better.

I do not know whether you are aware of the fact that, many people in Asia / South East Asia (and even other parts of the old world) just do NOT understand this "Million, Billion and Trillion" at all. Also, I just do not understand that why 'Million-Billion-Trillion' is so very extensively used everywhere.!!! It only helps people in the Americas. Not elsewhere.

Secondly, please do NOT use shortforms at all - even though some of them are very common and widely used. Best Regards, U Harish Kumar. Bangalore, India. ~2026-41101-93 (talk) 07:13, 23 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

This is en.wikipedia.org, and the units common in English, or defined by international standards, are what are appropriate. In the Indian wikipedia, lakh and crore would be appropriate, but not here and not even in other parts of Asia. The two Indian terms only help people in India and Pakistan, while millions and billions are understood throughout the English speaking world, which is by no means limited to the Americas. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 13:06, 23 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Will the following link be accepted: Imaging genomics reveals genetic architecture of the globular human braincase? דב מרקו1969 (talk) 02:44, 7 November 2026 (UTC)Reply