Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthropology

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Anthropology and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 12 months

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Speech sounds

The following is based on Internet data and my own pronunciation exercises

ORIGIN OF SPEECH SOUNDS..

An accent arises when a foreign language is spoken with the sounds of the first language.

At some point on the path from monkey to human, the addition of a new gene made it possible to create an activation surface on the pharyngeal wall that is suitable for making voiced sounds. Every sound has its own place there, together they form the pronunciation nest of a certain language. It was now possible to bring an idea into the sound combination that the entire herd of people understood in the same way. The voiceless consonants clarified the words and made it possible to increase their number.

Genetics should look for a sound gene rather than a language gene to determine the approximate time to the onset of human speech.

When monkeys get a suitable surface on the pharyngeal wall to form voiced sounds they begin to speak to an extent commensurate with their mental abilities.

Leonhard Klaar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.176.22.157 (talk) 02:22, 2021 July 10 (UTC)

Peer Review for Cultural diversity

A peer review is being requested for this article after a substantial rewrite. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Origin(s) of man

The page Origin of man redirects to Anthropogeny, whereas Origins of man redirects to Human evolution. I have no opinion which redirect target is the better one, but it appears to me that either the Origin page should be a disambiguation page to which the Origins page redirects, or both should redirect to the same target. --Lambiam 11:46, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Set them both to target Human evolution and nominate (or PROD) Anthropogeny for deletion. That article is an absolute mess that appears, at best, to be attempting a WP:DICDEF. — HTGS (talk) 23:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anthropogeny turned out to be the target of 23 redirect pages. I've made all, including Anthropogeny, redirect to Human evolution. --Lambiam 12:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional tattooing

Hi all, I'm considering splitting History of tattooing into a separate article on indigenous and traditional tattooing practices. Given the size of the article, it doesn't feel very readable and I think having a separate page would allow people to expand on the contemporary practices of these traditions. I'm alerting some of the WikiProjects attached to the article; please let me know if you have any concerns or objections to this idea :) ForsythiaJo (talk) 03:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tips on how to archive documents of interest to Anthropology (among other areas)

Hi, I am an inexperienced editor and have dabbled around in the talk pages of various articles rather than editing them directly for the past few years (without an account until now). I have a very unique question which I haven't received a good answer to until now. (I have actually asked a postgrad anthropologist, and while I didn't really get the answer I wanted from her I didn't get the sense that she was completely the wrong person to seek advice from either.)

I have thousands of pages of memos and emails, as well as leaflets, sermon audio, and "recruitment videos" from a "new religious movement" (article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Assemblies_International), and I think it would above all be in the public interest to bring these into the public domain. As a side-effect, I would hope that this might remove hurdles for respected specialists such as anthropologists to have access to this information. Ideally, Wikipedia might be able to cite any resulting commentary, just as it has cited an important journalistic investigation on the group.

So that is where anthropology enthusiasts of Wikipedia come in. What is the best way for me to archive this material such that it is brought into the public domain and searchable through google or academic databases? Is there any pathway for me to take the material to a reputable organisation which can verify its authenticity and remove barriers for specialists to access it? Is there any way for me to archive it in such a way that it will be possible to cite it or any resulting commentary on Wikipedia?

Also, am I think it is simply beyond me to judge the importance of the documents, whether I am overestimating myself etc, so it would be nice to get some feedback in this regard. Are my concerns legitimate and worthwhile, or am on a fool's errand, like Don Quixote charging at windmills. Therefore please see the following Google Drive link to get a feel for some of the more interesting documents etc. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1On5nu70ix6S0loLODmmQjusYsyESlP7x?usp=drive_link

NB, I am hoping to shorten this question and ask on WP:Teahouse as well in order to get different input from outwith Anthropology, since I think en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Assemblies_International is at least as much of interest to the public and whichever genres the Roys Report/Ministrywatch come under as to Anthropology. OverthinkingNovice (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to warn you, I suppose that the way I frame the memos etc in the "Letters Memos Statements Communications" document might be overly emotional. I wrote it a few years ago but would probably write it different now, and it wouldn't be an issue for me to change the presentation to make it less emotional. OverthinkingNovice (talk) 00:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You posted a very similar question in "How to archive and bring into the public domain materials which might be of public interest" within the "teahouse", and I responded to it there. -- Hoary (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hierarchy

Would like editors' thoughts on this claim:

"Humans have lived in societies without formal hierarchies long before the establishment of states, realms, or empires."

Discussion here:

Talk:Anarchism#Claim:_"Humans_have_lived_in_societies_without_formal_hierarchies_long_before_the_establishment_of_states,_realms,_or_empires."

--David Tornheim (talk) 07:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistic anthropology vs Anthropological linguistics

I have started a discussion at Talk:Linguistic anthropology § Linguistic anthropology vs Anthropological linguistics that might be of interest to members of this WikiProject. The discussion concerns whether these two articles should be merged (although it is not—yet—a formal merger discussion as such), or if not, how to clean up the articles, which are problematic in a number of ways. Brusquedandelion (talk) 12:10, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Elisabeth Burgos-Debray#Requested move 5 March 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Elisabeth Burgos-Debray#Requested move 5 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 12:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Julian Jaynes and his "bicameral mind" hypothesis that consciousness arose only about 4,000 years ago – 3-way POVFORK

FYI

– Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see: Talk:Julian Jaynes#It needs to be made clearer that his overall hypothesis is WP:FRINGE.

Summary: Aspects of his hypothesis having "inspired" some later research doesn't equate to his work being proven correct, and cognitive science, evolutionary psychology, and related displines decreasingly support it, most especially his central notion that consciousness only arose a few millennia ago. Furthermore, it was proposed at that article to move it and reshape it into an article on the book, since the person is not notable for anything other than one book. Instead, the subject has been WP:CFORKed (arguably WP:POVFORKed) into two further articles (The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, and bicameral mentality). The bio mostly just repeats claims from the book article (but with barely any hint of controversy or challenge, and strong suggestions of influence), while the book article is mostly just repetition of what is said at the hypothesis article (but without much of the critical material from the latter).

It is thus proposed to merge these into a single article on the hypothesis, the book it came from, and who wrote it, with all the critical material present, and expanded by more recent work on consciousness and cognitition. Even if they were not merged, they have to stop viewpoint-forking (and coatracking of the hypothesis across all three articles).

Anyway, please follow up at the Talk:Julian_Jaynes discussion thread, so this stays centralized. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 14:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge WikiProject Cultural Evolution here

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cultural Evolution is an inactive WikiProject within the broader scope of this one, are there any objections to me merging it here? – Joe (talk) 09:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Human history and Wikipedia history writing has major problems

I believe that human history has become a nadir of problems that English Wikipedia has with writing about history. The article itself (at least the recorded history part) is mostly just a collection of historical events that are considered notable and relevant for inclusion by individual editors. The view of professional historians is being toned down, ignored or selectively presented to fit individual opinions. Several users also appear to be engaging in some sort of campaign against the validity of the entire sub-discipline of world history. The impression I'm getting is of openly disparaging and hostile view of academic historians to an extent that in other fields of research would be considered fringe. Peter ^Isotalo 12:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please name these users or withdraw this claim. Doug Weller talk 13:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WikiProject Oral tradition

Would people be interested in joining a wikiproject on improving and creating articles about oral tradition? Wikipedia's coverage on this appears to be very poor Kowal2701 (talk) 18:46, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is everyone okay with a sub page being created at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce? Kowal2701 (talk) 17:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion at List of Indigenous people that may be of interest to this project

There is a discussion on this talk page: Talk:List of Indigenous peoples#Controversial move that may be of interest to this WikiProject. Please consider joining the discussion. - Donald Albury 13:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Archaeoastronomy

Archaeoastronomy has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bloating Category:WikiProject Anthropology articles

Before we start tagging for the oral tradition taskforce, there's a concern that we would be bloating the articles for this WP with lots of articles outside of its scope. Out of the 100 or so articles already tagged, only one had the {{WikiProject Anthropology}} banner, and we're going to be tagging about 5000 articles. We could move the taskforce to a new WP to solve this, but there's a concern that the taskforce may not be lively enough to be a WP. Please lmk your thoughts Kowal2701 (talk) 18:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Human geography, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
_{Delivered by — MusikBot ^talk 00:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team}[reply]

Requesting help on GAN

Hi, I'm looking for help from anyone in this wikiproject to handle the GAN for Fish in culture. Thanks! – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Housing and Tenant Rights is live!

Hello! I've set up a new WikiProject, Housing and Tenant Rights :)

I'm adding a message here since it could be of interest to your group.

If you are please feel free to add your name to the page, we already have a couple who have joined. The main focus will be covering tenant strikes, tenants unions, tenants rights, and more. Documenting the history of land ownership and tenant advocacy. Thanks! - LoomCreek (talk) 02:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Slow living, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
_{Delivered by — MusikBot ^talk 00:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team}[reply]

Talk:Invented_tradition#Merge_from_pseudo-mythology

Please say a word at Talk:Invented_tradition#Merge_from_pseudo-mythology