[[Category:Wikipedia Mediation Cabal closed cases|Black people]][[Category:Wikipedia Mediation Cabal maintenance|Black people]]

Request made by: P0M 04:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the issue taking place?

Black people

Who's involved?

Multiple editors

What's going on?

...The caption to the photo called "Blasians" in Black people says that Luca Cavalli-Sforza made a certain claim: "Europeans are genetically intermediate between Africans and East Asians." This claim is followed by a footnote. The footnote cites an article by Jonathan Marks in which he says: "Time magazine published an article featuring the HGDP and its leading spokesman, geneticist Luca Cavalli-Sforza (Jan 16, 1995:54-55). Time reported in passing that 'All Europeans are thought to be a hybrid population, with 65% Asian and 35% African genes.'" Marks takes it for granted that Time's evident paraphrase of something that Cavalli-Sforza said to their reporter(s) is correct. He procedes to tear into what he asserts that Cavalli-Sforza said. If Cavalli-Sforza really said what these two levels of reporting (Time on Cavalli-Sforza, and Marks on Time) claim, it should be easy to quote Cavalli-Sforza's own words in their original context. I have presented this argument several times on the discussion page for the Black people article. It has never been answered, but any attempt to fix the text to say: "Marks asserts that Time reports that Cavalli-Sforza maintains a certain position" is routinely reverted, and nobody has come up with a valid quotation from Cavalli-Sforza.

What would you like to change about that?

...It seems a bit extreme to put up a notice to the effect that the neutrality of the article is being challenged. It seems bad manners (even if it doesn't rise to the level of libel) to put words in Cavalli-Sforza's mouth. It ought to be a simple problem to fix, but the article has been a hot spot for quite some time now. I see no clear path forward.

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?

...Probably it would be better. You can just access my e-mail address the usual way and we can go from there. (See P0M 04:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]