Talk:Rayna Rapp

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): Dsmith18. Peer reviewers: Londralondris, Mpraml.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is about a very important contemporary anthropologist. She is an expert of health issues interlinked with gender issues. She was the editor of this very important book ( https://www.amazon.com/Toward-Anthropology-Women-Rayna-Reiter/dp/0853453721/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1477153298&sr=1-2&keywords=rayna+reiter) reviwed in a lot of well known social studies magazines (https://www.jstor.org/stable/29789897?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents)--AlexSrbs (talk) 16:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Planned Edits

To agree with the above comment, this article should NOT be deleted. Rayna Rapp is a highly respected and well-known anthropologist in her field, giving multiple talks yearly and universities around the country. In addition to the works listed above, Rapp has edited multiple journals and anthologies. She is frequently cited by anthropologists in the field of Anthropology of Birth, including Carolyn Sargent and Robbie Davis-Floyd. Her frequent collaboration with Faye Ginsburg is mentioned briefly in the article, but I'd like to elaborate on this relationship and the numerous studies/works the pair have produced. Sections for works Rapp has authored independently, coauthored with Ginsburg and others, and works she has edited should be added to this page, along with biographical information. Some of her fields of study are mentioned already in the article, but a more in-depth exploration of her interests and disciplines are most certainly necessary, such as her research on ableism and genetic knowledge. Her work in the Anthropology of Birth is not even mentioned, so an exploration of her book, Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America would also be an addition I'd like to add. I wasn't sure if citing the books themselves might be helpful, or whether I should stick to reviews of books and Rapp's research, so any tips on ideas for sources would be greatly appreciated.

Some sources I've explored (and will continue to add to): http://wooster.summon.serialssolutions.com/search?s.q=%22Reyna+Rapp%22&spellcheck=true#!/search?ho=t&l=en&q=%22Rayna%20Rapp%22 https://conferences.la.utexas.edu/healthdisparities/rayna-rapp-phd/ ""Banking on DNA: Globalizing Selective Reproductive Technology" - Rayna Rapp - Reproductive Ethics Lecture Series". Eventbrite. Retrieved 2017-02-16. Sargent, Carolyn (1996). "Conceiving the New World Order: The Global Politics of Reproduction . Faye D. Ginsburg, Rayna Rapp". American Anthropologist. 98: 444–446. "Rayna Rapp , Faculty, Anthropology | New York University". anthropology.as.nyu.edu. Retrieved 2017-02-16. Clark, Adele E. (2001). "Reviewed Work(s): Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America by Rayna Rapp" (PDF). American Journal of Sociology. 106: 1201–1202 – via JSTOR. ceas.iscte.pt/ethnografeast/Rayna%20Rapp/bio.narrative1.doc --Dsmith18 (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2017 (UTC)dsmith18

Peer Review

One of the main problems that I am seeing with the current state of this article (other than how short it is) is that all of the sources are to some extent written by Rapp. Book reviews will probably be extremely helpful in remedying this as they usually have a lot to say, not only about the book, but about the author, as well. This might be able to help those working on this article to get some credible outside information. Linking to Rapp's work might be helpful for the sake of anyone interested in reading what she has written, but the information in the article should avoid coming from those sources (other than when talking about Rapp's argument within a certain book or article. I think it is probably not a problem in that case.). I agree that there is a lot that this article is missing in terms of content. There are sections that can be added on Rapp's education, research, published works, and career. Sections could even be added to show the organizations and activism that Rapp has been involved with. The published works section, especially, can help to add some bulk to the article, as it can be divided into subcategories (books, articles, symposium articles, etc.). I also suggest adding a sentence or two at the top about rewards or mentions that Rapp has received, as this ensures that the article will not be taken down due to a lack of notability. The infobox is a good idea, and once more information is retrieved on Rapp's education and career, it can be added. An explanation should be given for the name "Rayna Reiter"? Is this her maiden name, a pen name, or what? It is unclear. The article does, however, do a good job of remaining neutral. Mpraml (talk) 22:11, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Primary sources (such as a curriculum vitae or faculty web page) are ok for verifying the basic factual details of her education and career moves (both of which should be added); we don't need to find secondary sources for those (although I agree that proper secondary sourcing would be better). The cv would also be useful for getting a list of awards to possibly include in the article, although my usual practice is to list only the most significant awards while a cv will typically list every little thing. Secondary sources are necessary for any evaluation of what she has accomplished e.g. in her writings. I removed the A7 speedy deletion tag because of the high citation counts for some of her books on Google scholar, and I think those already make a clear case for notability through WP:PROF#C1. But presumably these have reviews that (as you say) could be used to fill out the article, and would make notability more clear within the article itself rather than through external searches. Her Guggenheim fellowship should also be mentioned. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:43, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review 2

I agree with the statement above. Before reading the above critiques, I read the article for myself and wrote down some notes along the way. I believe that the article is a little too short. However, I am sure that comes with struggling to find primary resources. I do believe that it would be a good idea to do a biography section and a section where you place what she has published or accomplished. However, it would also be good to separate the information into smaller sections. For example, education, occupation, books published, talks that she has done, and add more information on her specialities. It would be great to see work that she has completed that is related and shows explicit connection to her interests. It would also be good to add the year she was born and overall add a personal history or life experience section. Majority of the time, readers will be interested in what influenced her to accomplish what she has accomplished. One more thing to add would be a picture of her or the work that she has published. A visual is always useful and attention grabbing. Other than that, you are off to a great start. It is short but straightforward, which is useful for readers for now, but I am sure they will be pleased once you add more information. If I find any information or websites that are useful, I will place them under this paragraph for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Londralondris (talk • contribs) 15:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)