SAGE Encyclopedia of Antrhopology

[Peter J. King]

Any opinions on this five-volume work?  I contributed a few articles to it, so got a free copy.  I'm not really in a positions to judge its quality overall (though a lot of it looks as though it wasn't edited or even proofread; there are some very odd English-as-a-second-language articles), and I'd be interested to know whether it's thought of as a reliable/respectable source.

Peter

[Joe Quick]

Well, it certainly takes up a respectable amount of shelf space in the reference section of our library at Carleton, though I had never opened it before tonight.

A random selection of articles on topics that I know pretty well makes me think the following:
1) The articles tend to romanticize indigenous cultures rather more than I would do myself.
2) Though there are some glaring omissions, the content seems in general to be accurate.

On a side note, I was surprised to see Wikipedia credited for one of the photos and iStockphoto for many of them.  I've never seen that in a printed volume before.

[Peter J. King]

On a side note, I was surprised to see Wikipedia credited for one of the photos and iStockphoto for many of them.  I've never seen that in a printed volume before.

I hadn't noticed that.

I should say, by the way, that my comments weren't meant to be a critciism of the editor; I imagine that lateness of copy was mainly to blame.