From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects.
Click [show] for further details |
 |
An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles about the idea of systems. If you would like to help, you can edit this article or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B |
This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid |
This article is on a subject of mid importance within Systems. |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
|
 |
This article is within the scope of the Columbia University WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Columbia University, her schools, environs, and people. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
|
|
[edit] Deletion
It looks like someone simply deleted the entire section on this. This was immediately followed by another act of vandalism which was reverted, but the samoan deletion seems to have survived for about a month. I'm going to re-add it, but thought I'd leave a note here in case it was decided that the section shouldn't remain in the article. --Starwed 04:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Linkage to References Needed
As stated in other places on this talk page, the article is apparently well-researched but the supposed factual information is unreferenced save for a list at the end. So I added the unreferenced tag. I think it should be kept there for a while. --Merryjman
[edit] Coming of Age in Samoa: summary style
I would suggest that most of the text from the Coming of Age in Samoa section should be moved to the article for the book itself, with just a summary of the book and its controversies in the Margaret Mead article. This seems to be the convention for other author pages, where the book has its own page. (See for example Judith Rich Harris and The Nurture Assumption. Fionah 10:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see that this article has any text from Coming of Age in Samoa unless you mean the short quote by Boas. Slrubenstein | Talk 10:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality dispute, revisited
In general I found this to be an informative and very well written article but I question its neutrality mainly due to one phrase. I believe that the phrase that violates neutrality is, "...most published accounts of the debate have asserted that Freeman's critique is highly questionable.[16]". I do not believe that the sources cited can substantiate this assertion. I believe that this is a dismissive opinion in the guise of a factual statement. Claiming neutrality for this opinion based on the American Anthropological Association's assertion that Freeman's work is "poorly-written, unscientific, irresponsible, and misleading" is a circular argument, as the AAA is hardly a neutral party in this debate. This a bit akin to referencing the Pope to substantiate the factuality of the virgin birth. I agree that a link here to a more detailed account of Freeman's views in an article on him or on Samoa is necessary. Replacing this statement with such a link would be more appropriate to a neutral stance on the Meade/Freeman debate.--Johosophene (talk) 01:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I go as far as you do, but I could go along with some revised language. Can you suggest some specific language? (PS - I moved your cmt here, and then archived most of the old stuff, because I had a hell of a hard time finding it in the old 2006 stuff. The prior discussions are all still available in the archives for reference.) --Lquilter (talk) 02:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- I do not buy Johosophene's comment. The AAA is the largest body of anthropologists in the world and therefore the best authority on what anthropologists think. I see no reason t assume any bias in Mead's favor: Freeman was an anthropologist too, and probably was a member of the AAA. Even if he was not, there is no reason to think most members of the AAA are in any sense "meadists," in fact, if you look through American Anthropologist. you will see that the bulk of articles published diverge very much from Mead's approach. The analogy to the poe is misleading - this is a debate between two anthropologists, not between an anthropologist and a non-anthropologist. In what way is the claim "published accounts of the debate have asserted that Freeman's critique is highly questionable" unsubstantiated? The article provides an extensive list of articles publsihed. It is a simple fact: most published articles support Mead or question Freeman. Sorry if you do not like it. We can include minority POVs but let's be accurate as to what is the manority POV and the minority POV. All that we need here is a link to the Freeman article, and a good Freeman article that fully accounts for his work. Slrubenstein | Talk 02:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] was the first person to have a spock baby
she had a daughter that was token care of by benjimann spock she was told that she could not have children but after many time she had catherine mead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.159.154.109 (talk) 13:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Any source verifying this? Slrubenstein | Talk 13:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[out] Yes, this is more or less correct: she was not his first baby, but it was early in his career, before he wrote his book. I added this to article with appropriate citation. Tvoz |talk 09:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
