This template is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human Genetic History, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Human Genetic HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryHuman Genetic History articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate articles
A new template version has been installed - mostly to improve accessibility by increasing the font-size of text [and better colors(a/o 20240310)] - hope this new template is *entirely* ok - please comment if otherwise of course - related timelines include: ((Life timeline)) and ((Nature timeline)) - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 01:13, 5 June 2021 (UTC) [edit added - Drbogdan (talk) 21:31, 10 March 2024 (UTC)][reply]
Passing through and was interested in the figure in this template. I thought it was [a] great display of information, very well-done. The one thing that I couldn't find was a legend explaining the differences in the shades of orange around the names of the species. It seems to be a detail that was overlooked when the figure was being designed. Can someone who worked on this figure add something that explains why the orange shading gets lighter toward the top? CoffeeHawk (talk) 01:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@CoffeeHawk: - Thank you for your comments about the template - there is no particular meaning intended for the template orange coloring/gradations - added mostly to help distinguish the various hominin groupings presented - and for being a bit artistic ("artistic license"?) - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 01:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done@CoffeeHawk: (and others) - Decided to adjust some colors - to help avoid any possible misunderstandings - seems better after all - more distinct (and clearer) between groups imo - hope this helps in some way - Comments Welcome - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 20:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see an explanation of the 2 'columns' at the left, where the background colour changes are at different times from those where the "H. erectus" etc. text appears. I've tried to make sense of it with "in Africa", or "in Asia", but nothing really seems to work. Can brief text be added to explain them? Peace Makes Plenty (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Peace Makes Pretty: (and others) - Thank You for your comments - and suggestions - not clear re your concern - possibly, the 1st left column may indicate that Australopithecus survived until about 1.20 mya; whereas the 2nd left column may indicate that H. habilis survived until about 1.65 mya - nonetheless - should note that space and related are very limiting with such templates - adding more template text may compromise the template - also - items are hyperlinked to associated WikiArticles for more details - perhaps more clarification may be helpful - Comments Welcome from other Editors also of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Belbury: (and others) - Thank You for your comments - and suggestion - they're appreciated - seems a WP:CONSENSUS may be helpful in considering this - Comments Welcome from other editors - in any case - Thanks again for your comments and all - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments - yes - intentional - but otoh - maybe better with a distinct color after all (see image above) - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 17:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done@Belbury: (and others) - template has now been updated with better accessibility colors - and installed in main wiki space - should now be ok - please comment if otherwise of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:36, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected edit request on 30 September 2022[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In fact Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis invented clothing before Homo Sapiens Sapiens, the timeline should be updated to reflect when clothing was first invented and by whom...
"According to the study, our extinct relatives, the Neanderthals, likely made clothing before us using similar bone tools about 15,000 to 70,000 years ago."
https://hyperallergic.com/681497/scientists-have-found-the-earliest-evidence-of-leather-clothes/
Thank You for your comments - and request re the date the first clothing may have occurred in human history - the date and related seem to be somewhat unclear in the reponsible scientific literature afaik (see "Clothing#Early use" and related) - at the moment, the template notes 120,000 years ago as a reasonable, and supported, estimate - at least until a better estimated date (with well-established supporting evidence) is presented - the noted date in the current template is based, at least in part, on the 2021 studies described at => https://www.cell.com/iscience/fulltext/S2589-0042(21)00956-1[1] - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 03:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Controlled use of fire and cooking may be separate and at least for cooking or widespread cooking, current data doesn't seem to support 1.7 Mya. See the updated lead of Control of fire by early humans. Is the reference for that date the study at the third point or which one(s) is/are claiming that date?
Cooking#History begins with Phylogenetic analysis suggests that early hominids may have adopted cooking 1.8 million to 2.3 million years ago but a) that is just one study without direct evidence (but genetic data) b) skimming the study I couldn't find where it got the "1.8 million to 2.3 million years" from, or at least the "to 2.3 million years".
@Prototyperspective: - Thank You for your comments - and suggested improvements - not clear - are there specific changes in the dates on the current template that may be better than those noted at present?
These aren't necessarily suggested improvements yet, these are mostly questions about these issues because it seems these may need get changed or would need refs to get specified.
What about adding refs to each of the items? Currently it's not clear what was used to determine that likely rough estimated date.
Cooking currently also isn't mentioned in Timeline of human evolution and should probably get added there if a date has good evidence and is not in contradiction to what is widely thought by the field's community without good-quality somewhat-direct evidence.
Moreover, maybe changes to the brain could be integrated into the graphic, maybe as a separate item for "Increase in brain size" (e.g. 2.3 Mya) and/or otherwise.
@Prototyperspective: (and others) - Thanks again for your comments - seems you're requesting suggestions (with supporting WP:RS refs) from others - I *entirely* agree - Comments Welcome from others - esp those more knowledgeable about this than I - yes - I made the original ((Human timeline)) template - and have maintained this template over the years - but depended on the best available information on the related Wikipedia articles (ie, I'm not an expert in the field, only interested) - re "brain size" - reluctant to add this at first glance since the supporting evidence may be more interpretable than substantial at the moment I would think - re "((Tooltip))" - new to me - may have to do some homework with this at some opportunity - iac - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:02, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Scale of the Hominin Timeline on various pages[edit]
Why is this timeline not scaled/presented differently depending on the article. For example, Middle Paleolithic ranges from 300kya to 30kya, yet the timeline goes on to 10mya. It's can definitely be confusing for readers, as I just had to explain to my son that it's not a timeline that is proportionate to the main range of the article. 104.128.253.245 (talk) 04:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Item displays vertical not horizontal as earlier[edit]
@Hike395 and PrimeHunter: TEMPLATE PROBLEM: For some reason, seems the Neanderthal and Denisovan template items (remmed out at present) are currently displaying vertically instead of horizontally as earlier and as originally intended - is there some way of correcting this? - Thanking you in advance for your reply - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 20:27, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: - Yes - all now seems good - and displaying horizontally as earlier - and as intended - Thank You *very much* for your help with this - it's *greatly, greatly* appreciated - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 22:06, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Drbogdan: I have investigated why ((nowrap)) is suddenly needed. The display changed Thursday when we got a new MediaWiki version with code from phab:T327334 to allow links to break by default. By the way, your second post [2] pinged me in both the wikitext and edit summary, causing two separate notifications. I have done the same in this edit to show the effect which can be a little confusing. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter: - Thank You for your comments - and *excellent* explanation - interesting - at least it helps explain the reason the template changed to the vertical display from the horizontal one it was earlier - Yes - also interesting about the two separate notifications - Thanks again for your comments - they're *greatly* appreciated - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 00:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done - @Sangrala: (and others) - Thank You for your suggestion - added the following => | note8-at=-2.800 | note8=Earliest sign of Homo | note8-nudge-down=0.25 - to the ((Human timeline)) template - should now be ok - please comment if otherwise of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done - @Sangrala: (and others) - Brief followup - even more adds/adjs/updates have been performed on the ((Human timeline)) thanks to your original suggestion noted above - seems ok - but please comment if otherwise of course - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hike395 and PrimeHunter: - PROBLEM: Seems the vertical text on the left side of the template is no longer spread apart as earlier - but seemingly sqeezed together for some reason instead - is there some fix for this? - (currently using Dellxps8930/Win10tel/Chrome) (add => same problem on FireFox and Opera as well)- Thanks in advance for your reply - Drbogdan (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is caused by ((Vertical text)) being inside the link, not outside of it. A known bug for years: phab:T200704. I fixed the template (basically, by doing [[Link|((Vertical text|Text))]] → ((Vertical text|[[Link|Text]])). stjn22:37, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done@PrimeHunter and Stjn: - Yes - Problem seems to be *completely* solved - Thank You *very, very* much for your help with this - it's *greatly* appreciated - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 00:37, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimeHunter and Stjn: Brief Followup - although the "vertical text" issue seems to be fixed on the main page of ((Human timeline)), the issue seems to persist on this talk-page (see instance of ((Human timeline)) - in the coding context of a "table" - above on this talk-page) - even after this talk-page - and the main page - had been "purged" of any browser cache remains - this may (or may not) be important - and may not require any attention - but perhaps worth mentioning - Thanks again for your recent help with this - Drbogdan (talk) 10:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both "Asia" fail to become vertical, also the second which is supposed to work. If the order of the two lines is swapped then both become vertical. It can be tested in preview by swapping the order without keeping a copy with the original order. I wasn't able to demonstrate the broken and working order at the same time because they interfere with eachother. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To both: would be good if I didn’t get so many pings from this discussion. I am following it. To your question: I did link to the Phabricator task that describes this bug, yes, this is how it ends up bugging out, I don't know what I am supposed to say. I am not responsible for writing TemplateStyles extension. stjn12:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After my edit to ((Human timeline/sandbox2)) which is transcluded in #Original vs New Templates, my above "Asia" example displays vertically in a full page view where the correct order with ((Vertical text)) outside links is encountered first on the whole page, but horizontally in a section preview where the incorrect order is encountered first. This can be pretty confusing. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]