The Big Write

[Joe Quick]

Hi all,
I'd really love to get our workgroup jumpstarted so we can turn out some quality articles and I think The Big Write is a good way to do this, but I need your help.

I don't see any point in starting an article and writing the required 750 words if we just leave it at that.  If you all would be willing to help out, I'll get some of the really important articles started, but I need to know that someone else will be there to pitch in and help see the article through to approval.

Please respond here with which articles you would want to collaborate on, and we'll get started right away.

[Stephen Ewen]

I will help to the extent I can. My issue is that most of my books on anthropology were unable to come with me during a recent move from the other side of the world and are still there. 

[Joe Quick]

Great! Most of my personal books are rather far away at the moment as well, but I have two college libraries within walking distance .

I need to turn in my undergrad thesis in a little over a week, so I won't start working on this quite yet...  I think I'll give it until I get that finished up and then check back to see if anyone else has replied.  In the mean time, anyone and everyone should feel free to get 'er goin'.

I suppose we should start with [[Anthropology]] and go from there?

P.S. I think I've got [[ethnonym]] close to where I want it but I'm tired of looking at it.  If you have a couple of minutes, I would encourage you all to stop in and check it for 1)accuracy 2)completeness 3)clarity 4)style 5)everything else...

[RJ Senghas]

Hey folks,

I'm new to this workgroup but will offer up my contributions as an editor, and perhaps later, as an author.  Still getting the lay of the land, so pardon my delays.  I'm also in the process of doing fieldwork, so at times I get rather busy, and can't also attend to volunteer projects, but I'll do what I can!

I'll try to address the list of topics asap, since that's a key part of The Big Write project that is limited to editors.  In the meantime, it will be interesting to see what topics come in as first suggestions. BTW:  I think the Wikipedia entry for Linguisitc Anthropology is a pretty good one, and would like to see the current general article on Anthropology reworked.  Thoughts on people's sense of priorities?

[Jamie_Szudy]

I can help out with archaeological matters, particularly if they deal with the Near East.

[Joe Quick]

Well, from what I can tell, the Big Write push kind of petered out, but I'm definitely glad to see some new faces here.

Steve and I have started work on [[Anthropology]] and it still needs a lot, so it would be great if you (RJ, Jamie, and anyone else who comes along) could take a look and contribute.  I'd like to see it approved soon, if possible.

From there, I think it would be good to develop the pages for our major sub-fields.  [[Linguistic anthropology]] (RJ) and [[Archaeology]] would definitely fit the bill. I have limited experience with most of these areas, so I'll definitely help where I can.

After that, I imagine it would be best to start branching out according to people's specialties.  You know, click on a red link and fill it in. 

[RJ Senghas]

Getting time for volunteer writing right now is a little hard, as I'm in the field and also taking advantage of a rare opportunity to give presentations and interact with colleagues here in Europe.  However, I certainly can give some time here and there, and especially for editorial tasks.  I have started to work my network of professional colleagues to get some of them aboard, too, so that we can have more company in this effort.

For example, a colleague for whom I have great respect (and who has quite a good reputation within the Society for Linguistic Anthropology) contributed most of the solid structure of the article on [[linguistic anthropology]] over in Wikipedia Land.  I'm trying to get him to bring over that really good page, and then he and we can build it out some more.  Stay tuned.

Somewhere I think we need to include in our main anthro page a discussion about the way anthropology is organized differently outside of the US & North America.  I think we often forget how North American it is to have 4-field (or 5-field) programs.  Here in Europe I see departments in Ethnology/Folklore, Social Anthropology, Archaeology, Ancient Civilizations/Societies not only unaffiliated with each other, but often in entirely different parts of campuses, and even in different "faculties" or divisions (social sciences, humanities, etc.) of the universities.  Furthermore, I don't see linguistic anthropology as such much, and what would be physical anthropology is in different places, such as within the biological sciences (ethology, forensic biology,etc.), or even schools of medicine.

[Joe Quick]

Somewhere I think we need to include in our main anthro page a discussion about the way anthropology is organized differently outside of the US & North America.  I think we often forget how North American it is to have 4-field (or 5-field) programs.  Here in Europe I see departments in Ethnology/Folklore, Social Anthropology, Archaeology, Ancient Civilizations/Societies not only unaffiliated with each other, but often in entirely different parts of campuses, and even in different "faculties" or divisions (social sciences, humanities, etc.) of the universities.  Furthermore, I don't see linguistic anthropology as such much, and what would be physical anthropology is in different places, such as within the biological sciences (ethology, forensic biology,etc.), or even schools of medicine.

I agree.  I've been thinking about how to do that, but haven't made any efforts toward that end yet.

Would it be better to drop the line that mentions the way that anthropology is organized in the U.S. or to add in the ways that it is organized elsewhere?

[RJ Senghas]

I wouldn't drop the four (or five) field description, as it's so central to the epistemology of US anthropology, which produces the majority of anthro degrees (I believe this is still true; probably need to confirm), esp. PhDs.  However, maybe adding a small reference to the other places that some of these fields appear in non-North American universities would help, as would indicating that while 4 (or 5) field training is typical of US anthropological education, that is possibly the exception, rather than the rule, in other places, such as Europe.

[Joe Quick]

See my edit. It could use some refinement (and an example - I left a spot for one).

I wouldn't drop the four (or five) field description, as it's so central to the epistemology of US anthropology, which produces the majority of anthro degrees (I believe this is still true; probably need to confirm), esp. PhDs.  However, maybe adding a small reference to the other places that some of these fields appear in non-North American universities would help, as would indicating that while 4 (or 5) field training is typical of US anthropological education, that is possibly the exception, rather than the rule, in other places, such as Europe.

[RJ Senghas]

See my edit. It could use some refinement (and an example - I left a spot for one).

Yup, I think that'll do for now.  I also dropped in examples in the slot you provided.