Talk:Spirit Cave mummy

Untitled

The fair use stuff on the image is moot. The spirit cave area that ws shown in the image is hundreds of miles away from where the mummy was found. I have an image of the cave and will post it when I have the time. It is near Grimes Point, Nevada and nowhere near the lake shown which is in Great Basin National Park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.9.23.175 (talk) 22:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC) i aree this page needs some images — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.148.82 (talk) 14:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 5 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lbaloga. Peer reviewers: Tranquillitatis317, NOakes20.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Spiritcavemummy.gif

Image:Spiritcavemummy.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The title and claim of the Final section is FALSE

One: The linked studies summarize this: Thus, the BLM has determined that the remains from Spirit Cave are unaffiliated with any modern individual, tribe, or other group and are therefore culturally unidentified.

Two: After reading the How is the last section prove anything with "craniological metric measurement"? That is not an accepted scientific method in determining the DNA origins (race is not scientific term) of this "partially" preserved skeleton?

Three: The "update" states a strange percentage attribution to the cave mummy being either Ancient Norse or Ainu. Well, let me ask you this, where is there existing evidence of Ancient Norse culture in Europe that matches and predates the time line of the cave mummy's existence? The same question can be asked of the Ainu, but some Anthropologists are theorizing that Ainu's could go back many millenia, so their origins could indeed be Ancient YET they rank the Ainu lower than the mythological "Ancient Norse Culture"? Again, this is all done through measurement of the Cranium???

Four: Where are the studies and Carbon-dating by scientists outside of the Nevada BLM? --208.179.153.163 (talk) 19:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add my confusion with the inclusion of Polynesians as a possible group associated with this mummy. If you look up Polynesian culture and history there is nothing identifiably Polynesian until about 1,000 B.C.E.. This mummy is reportedly over 9,000 years old. If we know this, then it's common sense to remove Polynesians as a candidate. Agree? --173.60.151.243 (talk) 06:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

10 Years have passed and still no conclusion from BLM?

Seeing that the claim in the article associating Spirit Cave mummy with two different groups of humans from two opposite sides of the world (Ainu & "Norse") without stating that he is NOT related to Indigenous Amerindians, it seems rather odd that this case could take so long to resolve. Or, did the author of this page not have time to update it?

I think the main article is misleading and inconclusive on many levels.--71.189.120.175 (talk) 05:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up the main article by tracking down references and attempting to sum up the results of the legal case. I don't think I have the citation right to the court order, can anyone help? A careful reading of the BLM 2000 document (especially page 39) and the court documents could be illuminating. Getting some of the original material, such as Nevada Historical Society Quarterly 40 (1), and some of the original cranial references (Jantz & Owsley 1997, Steele & Powell 1999), from the BLM 2000 document would be useful. Finding Karen Wright’s article "First Americans," Discover Magazine, February, 1999, could also be of use. My reading of the BLM 2000 document is that the measurements of the skull resulted in data that was outside the currently available data set of cranial measurements. Cxbrx (talk) 08:10, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for Spirit Cave Mummy I don't see any references in the article to indicate it has any relationship to the Eastern Atlantic Ocean. I guess if you were looking for coordinates, where it was found might be good, or where it is now. —Llynglas (talk) 19:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed — Bad bot coords removed. I've added inline coordinates for the approximate location of Spirit Cave. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:50, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification for non-Americans

Er... What's the BLM?QuestingVole (talk) 21:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of Information Present

Upon reading this article, there is an abundance of information missing for each section. Firstly, images throughout are missing which would help readers picture what the descriptions state. Aside from this, there is at least one cited link which does not work. I propose to either remove the text associated with the link, or to find supporting evidence and re-cite within the article. More information on who found the mummy can be presented, as well as information about the site the mummy was found in, description of the mummy from documented journals written at the time of the find, etc. Estherdvorkin (talk) 00:03, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]