Topic: [REJECTED] Hominin BUR

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

gattonero2001

Janitor

The bulk update request #2829 has been rejected.

create alias australopithecine (0) -> hominin (42)
create implication hominin (42) -> mammal (3446486)
create implication ardipithecus (4) -> hominin (42)
create implication australopithecus (8) -> hominin (42)
create implication homo_(genus) (0) -> hominin (42)
create implication kenyanthropus (3) -> hominin (42)
create implication orrorin (2) -> hominin (42)
create implication paranthropus (2) -> hominin (42)
create implication sahelanthropus (2) -> hominin (42)
create implication australopithecus_afarensis (3) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication australopithecus_africanus (2) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication australopithecus_garhi (3) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication australopithecus_sediba (4) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication kenyanthropus_platyops (3) -> kenyanthropus (3)
create implication paranthropus_aethiopicus (2) -> paranthropus (2)
create implication paranthropus_boisei (2) -> paranthropus (2)
create implication paranthropus_robustus (2) -> paranthropus (2)
create implication ardipithecus_anamensis (2) -> ardipithecus (4)
create implication ardipithecus_kadabba (2) -> ardipithecus (4)
create implication ardipithecus_ramidus (3) -> ardipithecus (4)
create implication sahelanthropus_tchadensis (2) -> sahelanthropus (2)
create implication orrorin_tugenensis (2) -> orrorin (2)

Reason: Species implications for hominins. I decided to exclude the genus Pan (chimpanzees and bonobos) because they would vastly outnumber everyone else here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominini

EDIT: The bulk update request #2829 (forum #339722) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

Updated by auto moderator

gattonero2001

Janitor

The bulk update request #2830 has been rejected.

create implication homo_antecessor (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_denisova (0) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_erectus (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_ergaster (3) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_floresiensis (3) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_georgicus (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_habilis (3) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_heidelbergensis (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_helmei (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_luzonensis (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_naledi (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_neanderthalensis (5) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_rhodesiensis (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_rudolfensis (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication homo_sapiens_idaltu (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create implication red_deer_cave_people (2) -> homo_(genus) (0)
create alias denisovan (2) -> homo_denisova (0)
create alias neanderthal (31) -> homo_neanderthalensis (5)
create alias homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis (0) -> homo_neanderthalensis (5)
create alias homo_sapiens_rhodesiensis (0) -> homo_rhodesiensis (2)
create alias homo_sapiens (5) -> human (378714)
create alias homo_sapiens_sapiens (0) -> human (378714)

Reason: Species implications for the genus Homo. I decided to exclude modern humans because they would vastly outnumber everyone else here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo

EDIT: The bulk update request #2830 (forum #339723) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

Updated by auto moderator

Clawstripe

Janitor

I did originally give it the thumbs up, but times have evolved, and I think I need to give it a neutral now.

As we are now preferring common names over scientific ones whenever reasonable, I think we need to aim the Neanderthal aliases to neanderthal rather than homo_neanderthalensis on account of the former being the common name. Therefore:

imply neanderthal -> homo_(genus)
alias homo_neanderthalensis -> neanderthal
alias homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis -> neanderthal

The same argument could be made for Denisovans, if they had a scientific name. Despite proof that they existed, we actually don't have enough fossils to properly describe them, but both Homo denisova and Homo altaiensis have been proactively coined should enough material be found. But they could be members of already described Homo longi as some Chinese researchers suggest. We might as well sidestep all of that and just tag them as the common name denisovan for simplicity's sake. Thus:

imply denisovan -> homo_(genus)
alias homo_denisova -> denisovan

Lastly, how about replacing homo_(genus) with archaic_human? As used on the site, we don't imply regular old Homo sapiens to homo_(genus) because anatomically modern humans would positively swamp the tag. That's the same thing as archaic human. Thus, the tag would be both accurate taxonomically and site-wise as well as being an easier to understand common name (even though I'm pretty sure most Users would know what Homo (genus) means :p )

alias homo_(genus) -> archaic_human
imply homo_antecessor -> archaic_human
imply homo_denisova -> archaic_human
imply homo_erectus -> archaic_human
imply homo_ergaster -> archaic_human
imply homo_floresiensis -> archaic_human
imply homo_georgicus -> archaic_human
imply homo_habilis -> archaic_human
imply homo_heidelbergensis -> archaic_human
imply homo_helmei -> archaic_human
imply homo_luzonensis -> archaic_human
imply homo_naledi -> archaic_human
imply homo_neanderthalensis -> archaic_human
imply homo_rhodesiensis -> archaic_human
imply homo_rudolfensis -> archaic_human
imply homo_sapiens_idaltu -> human
imply red_deer_cave_people -> human

Homo sapiens idaltu and the Red Deer Cave people are both early members of Homo sapiens, so wouldn't count as archaic humans. In fact, they would be indistinguishable from modern humans in any pictures uploaded here.

In light of this suggestion, alternate versions of my Neanderthal and Denisovan suggested lines:

imply neanderthal -> archaic_human
alias homo_neanderthalensis -> neanderthal
alias homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis -> neanderthal
imply denisovan -> archaic_human
alias homo_denisova -> denisovan

Clawstripe

Janitor

The bulk update request #8775 is active.

create alias australopithecine (0) -> hominin (42)
create implication hominin (42) -> primate (26820)
create implication ardipithecus (4) -> hominin (42)
create implication australopithecus (8) -> hominin (42)
create implication archaic_human (32) -> hominin (42)
create implication kenyanthropus (3) -> hominin (42)
create implication orrorin (2) -> hominin (42)
create implication paranthropus (2) -> hominin (42)
create implication sahelanthropus (2) -> hominin (42)
create implication australopithecus_afarensis (3) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication australopithecus_africanus (2) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication australopithecus_garhi (3) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication australopithecus_sediba (4) -> australopithecus (8)
create implication kenyanthropus_platyops (3) -> kenyanthropus (3)
create implication paranthropus_aethiopicus (2) -> paranthropus (2)
create implication paranthropus_boisei (2) -> paranthropus (2)
create implication paranthropus_robustus (2) -> paranthropus (2)
create implication ardipithecus_anamensis (2) -> ardipithecus (4)
create implication ardipithecus_kadabba (2) -> ardipithecus (4)
create implication ardipithecus_ramidus (3) -> ardipithecus (4)
create implication sahelanthropus_tchadensis (2) -> sahelanthropus (2)
create implication orrorin_tugenensis (2) -> orrorin (2)

Reason: Here's a recreation of the first BUR, albeit swapping homo_(genus) for archaic_human. I didn't really see any problems with it.

Basically, it's setting up the hominin tag – implying it to primate, implying archaic humans and protohumans to hominin, and the species to their genera.

  • These species don't really have any common names.
  • As stated originally, technically, the genus Pan is also included in Hominini, but Pan is all chimps and bonobos, which would swamp the tag.
  • Also, australopithecine is being aliased to hominin to avoid confusion with Australopithecus. (Subtribe Australopithecine is the big word name for all hominins that aren't chimps and bonobos. No matter how you use australopithecine, they'll always be hominins.)

EDIT: The bulk update request #8775 (forum #410311) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

Clawstripe

Janitor

The bulk update request #8776 is active.

create alias homo_(genus) (0) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication denisovan (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication neanderthal (31) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_antecessor (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_erectus (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_ergaster (3) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_floresiensis (3) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_georgicus (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_habilis (3) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_heidelbergensis (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_helmei (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_luzonensis (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_naledi (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_rhodesiensis (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_rudolfensis (2) -> archaic_human (32)
create implication homo_sapiens_idaltu (2) -> human (378714)
create implication red_deer_cave_people (2) -> human (378714)
create alias homo_neanderthalensis (5) -> neanderthal (31)
create alias homo_sapiens_neanderthalensis (0) -> neanderthal (31)
create alias homo_denisova (0) -> denisovan (2)
create alias homo_sapiens_rhodesiensis (0) -> homo_rhodesiensis (2)
create alias homo_sapiens (5) -> human (378714)
create alias homo_sapiens_sapiens (0) -> human (378714)

Reason: Here's a recreation of the second BUR.

  • It uses my suggested swap of Homo_(genus) to archaic_human since that's a common name that's more in line with how we're proposing to use the tag (leaving modern humans out of the tag because they'd swamp it worse than chimps and bonobos would swamp hominin).
  • Denisovan and Neanderthal are now the main tags for the species as they're common names (and technically, Denisovans don't have a recognized scientific name yet, so this sidesteps the issue entirely by aliasing away homo_denisova).

For more details, see above.

EDIT: The bulk update request #8776 (forum #410312) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

  • 1