Talk:Anthropologist

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Atjaffery. Peer reviewers: Jackson Francis.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 4 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Maryliz19.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jaiyce, Wiki12346, Albertkx.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Earlier criticisms
I find it difficult to see that, as you say, the "the profession of anthropology is an enclyclopedic topic". I can't imagine anything else than a list of anthropologists here, there rest should be contained in the anthropology article. Can you clarify? jheijmans, Thursday, July 18, 2002

What is there to clarify? An article on the profession itself would be interesting -- that would be where one would discuss the people behind the science who helped shape it into what it is. This leaves the main article free to discuss the science itslef. I'm not a big fan of the profession articles, but others are and I respect that (although I do often break off lists into "List of X" when those lists get too long). There are already a couple dozen (at least) of these articles and there is no reason to start removing them as separate articles. --maveric149

Well, I imagined this article to become a useless stub, though you have some point that it COULD be an article at some point. However, then weightlifter, atheist and Utahn could be articles as well, which I would not really support. But I'll leave it in the hope somebody will make a great article out of it. jheijmans

I just redirected this article to anthropology (instead of list of anthropologists). People who follow a link to "anthropologist" are much more likely to want to know what anthropology is than to be interested in wading through a list of names. GrahamN 02:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

very confused —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.15.254.26 (talk) 19:52, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Current look
It has been over 5 years since the last look. I confirm that the situation still seems to me to be as originally depicted. Nothing has been done here despite the years-old call for a rewrite.

I'm not sure there should be a distinct article on this topic. The article spends a lot of its space defining anthropology, not anthropologist. I would say with the original critic it still is not encyclopedic. However I do see that some information about the profession of anthropologist is possible. I think I may throw my hat in the ring briefly. If I can't do anything then I will just abandon it like everyone else.Botteville (talk) 05:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with this comment> i think the article should also be using reliable sources which appear to be far and few between also im wondering if there should be some sources for the educational component?Happydaise (talk) 06:35, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Wiki-ed assignment
This article has been assigned to me as part of a Wiki-ed project.

I would like to include a little more about the history of the profession. I know there is an extensive history of anthropology page, but this would strictly be the profession. I would also like to include information about how technology has impacted and changed the profession as well as what the future holds in relation for technology.

Here are some sources:

Axel, Brian Keith. "Anthropology and the New Technologies of Communication — Cultural Anthropology." Cultural Anthropology. American Anthropological Association, 10 Dec. 2012. Web. Libin, A., and E. Libin. "Cyber-anthropology: A New Study on Human and Technological Co-evolution." Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. U.S. National Library of Medicine, n.d. Web. Pfaffenberger, Bryan. "Social Anthropology of Technology." Social Anthropology of Technology | Annual Review of Anthropology. N.p., Oct. 1992. Web. University of Toronto. :: Intro to Anthro ::. N.p., n.d. Web. Weise, Elizabeth. Anthropologists Adapt Technology to World's Cultures. N.p., 26 May 1999. Web.

Wiki Assignment
For an assignment I need to add information to this article. I was thinking of adding some information on cultural anthropology, and what a cultural anthropologist does. I think this will add to defining more of anthropologist, rather than just anthropology. Here are a few sources I would use:

Maryliz19 (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Culture
— Assignment last updated by Brenalexis11 (talk) 17:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Anthropology Peer Review
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? In this article, there is a brief description of anthropologists, but doesn't dive deeper into each branch of anthropology. I see a section for cultural, but not biological, linguistics, archaeology, medical, and applied.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article seems to remain in a neutral position. The article describes the career path of anthropologists. I see an anthropologist as someone who studies all things to do with humanity.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The underrepresented would be the description of career paths for anthropologists and the specific fields. The links do work and go to the correct page.

Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The citations do work and go to the correct pages.

Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? There are many sources ranging from books, scholarly articles, statistics, etc.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? I think this is a great start and I would add more descriptions about the field of anthropology. Andrewanthony15 (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2023 (UTC)