Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sociology/Archive 5
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Quality of article within project is challenged
Culture has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.
--AlotToLearn (talk) 07:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Milestone Announcements
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 (t, c) 22:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Major edits to article on Culture
Since Culture was delisted as a Good Article and downgraded to a C-Class article in a reassessment two or three weeks ago, the article has undergone many edits, for example adding a great deal of information dealing with the history of the concept of culture in American anthropology. The current article seems to me to be too long and too lopsided. I intend to make substantial edits to the article within the next twelve hours and I hope any one who is interested will comment as they see fit on the outcomes, see Talk:Culture#Substantial edit of article to reduce length and add breadth--AlotToLearn (talk) 23:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have made many additions to this article. One reason why there is much material from US sources is that American anthropology is distinct in having made "culture" the explicit object of its study. This is not quite so American-centric as it seems, since the Americans largely got the idea from German thinkers (which I added to the article too). By way of contrast, British anthropology explicitly makes "sociality" and "society" its object of study, and French anthropology has mostly (but not entirely) been concerned with universal structures of thought as an object of study. That said, I also added information about British and French research. Frankly, I am puzzled by AlotToLearn's comment about it being lopsided. The article on Quantum Mechanics draws mostly on the work of European (and some American) physicists - not African or Latin American scientists. There are of course reasons for this, be they good or bad, but no one faults the article for being lopsided. Be that as it may, I do not feel I am biased (I teach at a UK institution), and I have simply strived to follow Wikipedia policy by adding significant views from notable sources - all verifiable and reliable. I have put a lot of work into it and AlotToLearn seems to be saying I have wasted my time. But rather than deleted significant views from notable sources, I counter that if the article is lopsided, the solution is to add other significant views from notable sources. FYI I have tried to contact Wikipedians who have expertise in cultural studies, cultural geography, and cultural history ... which all seem to be fields related to "culture." Slrubenstein | Talk 16:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- By the way, I have consulted with other editors and we all agree that the article is long and at some point should be divided into different articles. No one contests this. The question is, when? I feel that it makes sense to wait and let other editors work on refining the article and giving full coverage to all the significant views from notable sources per WP:NPOV, and then deciding how best to spin off linked articles. AlotTolearn seems unwilling to learn how to compromise with anyone else. Slrubenstein | Talk 16:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
I wondered if anyone would like to look at that article. It's in need of wikification and that's how I noticed it, but I've made a suggestion on the talk page that some of the material might fit better in Armed forces. Would be grateful for some more eyes on it. Thanks. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Gift economy
There has been a recent major edit (mostly removals) in gift economy. My personal view is that the article was much stronger before this edit than after, but since I was a major contributor to the previous content, I'm hardly in the position to be an even-handed judge. I'm posting here and in WikiProject Economics, hoping to bring in some people not previously engaged in the article to perhaps help reach a consensus on whether these changes are good or bad. - Jmabel | Talk 00:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated List of premature obituaries for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks, where editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Scorpion0422 00:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Lesbian peer review sought
Lesbian has been completely rewritten and is now looking for peer review. All help appreciated. -- Banjeboi 10:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:41, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Social Circle article
I am new at posting on the talk page and also new to the WikiProject Sociology, however, when I read the article on Social circle I couldn't help notice the idea to merge it with Social club." The term "social circle" predates the birth of American Sociology, but was taken up by the early American sociologists during the late 19th century -- and is closer to the current idea of a "dense" social network than a "social club" which has an orientation of affiliation based on mutual avocation or interest. I would keep it separate for its historical significance but cross link it with early definitions of social networks. Drmissio (talk) 05:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Content dispute over racial identity, or something to that effect
If anyone feels brave enough to wade through some inspired original research, please take a look at Talk:Person_of_color#List_of_peoples_of_color. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 11:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- heck, why not merge person of color into racism --> discuss at Talk:Racism#Merger_proposal. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Pro-ana is being peer reviewed. Interesting article to establish NPOV on. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
This page is currently listed as WP:SEX and WP:MED. Because there are social and identity aspects to intersex as well, I am looking to propose that this be included as WP:SOCIOLOGY and WP:LGBT as well, so that the relevant aspects can be addressed from those projects, and should RfC's be necessary, they can be broadened beyond the medical perspective. I would appreciate feedback on how this should be managed, as I am relatively new to wikipedia. I have asked whether there are any strong objections, and the two responses so far have been positive. Mish (talk) 23:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I have added the sociology & LGBT project tags to the page, and would appreciate if somebody gets the chance some time to review it and grade it by class and importance. It has been under medicine and sexology/sexuality, but it is evolving towards two sections, one for sociology/LGBT aspects, and one for medical/sexology aspects. Mish (talk) 10:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Submission at AfC
Hi, we have had a submission at Articles for creation entitled "Investment Model". I wonder if anyone could take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Investment Model and see if this article has any potential? I have put my comments at the top. Thanks, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Missing topics related to social customs
I have updated my page about missing topics related to social customs and I wonder if anyone could have a good look at it. Thank you - Skysmith (talk) 13:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps invitation
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Proposed merger of When Wish Replaces Thought into Steven Goldberg
Proposed merger of When Wish Replaces Thought into Steven Goldberg - discuss at Talk:Steven_Goldberg#Merger_proposal. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Africana womanism
Helo everyone! You may be interested in checking out Africana womanism. Thank you! The Ogre (talk) 12:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
IEEE Society on Social Implications of Technology
IEEE Society on Social Implications of Technology has been nominated for deletion. 70.29.210.130 (talk) 04:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Latino Muslims article
The article on Latino Muslims needs your attention. Please review the discussion page.--LatinoMuslim 21:30, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Suggestion for new article
I think that education (undereducation and high school dropout rates) should be included somewhere in this topic area.
What I do know is that, in developed countries, someone who is illiterate (someone who does not read at a proficient level) is a huge risk for many social problems --- poverty, teen pregnancy, drug abuse, unemployment, health problems and mortality, juvenile delinquency, incarceration rates, etc --- and that the social and economic costs of this risk factor is so high that it is difficult to calculate. In developing/third-world countries, higher education levels improves social problems across the board -- birth rates, hunger, etc.
Sociology is not my area of expertise, so I'm not sure where this topic would fit, and I don't feel qualified to create it.
Thoughts?
Rosmoran (talk) 11:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
how do you know this??? what sources are you retreiving this information from?? i dont see that illiteracy causes poverty, teen pregnancy, drug abuse, unemployment, health problems and mortality, juvenile delinquency, incarceration rates, etc but i do see that they are related problems maybe caused by a greater issue???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.195.71.46 (talk) 01:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Mechanism
Is anyone familiar with the sociology use of the term "mechanism"? There's a stub article Mechanism (sociology), which refers to mechanism design. Do sociologists tend to use "mechanism" in the same way as in mechanism design? If so, should probably delete the article and/or redirect. If not, is anyone up to adding a bit of clarification or references to the stub? CRETOG8(t/c) 04:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Age at first marriage
The article Age at first marriage is in need of much improvement. Right now, the article is merely a list of poorly cited statistics. I've added a list of suggestions to the article's talk page on ways to improve the article, but what I think the article could really use is a good introduction with discussions of how marriage age effects or is affected by things such as culture, cohabitation, family planning and the like.
I'm sure articles such as Marriage might have some good resources to work with, but beyond that, I'm not a sociologist (i'm more of a technical person who would rather work with stats and formatting), so I'm looking to recruit some help. --Kpstewart (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
gender
reading this page was very informative and a huge help but am a bit concerned that nothing has been included on merton and cohens views on strain theory and gender. please dont take this as a swipe as i still consider myself (after 2 years of hard study) a beginner in the study of criminology!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.195.71.46 (talk) 01:23, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Merger discussion
I've proposed merging patriarchy (anthropology) with patriarchy. If you have any interest in the topic, please feel free to weigh in. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 15:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Need feedback on a merger proposal
I've proposed merging patriarchy (anthropology) with patriarchy. If you have any interest in the topic, please weigh in. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 18:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Effort to improve the Cult entry
There is an ongoing effort to improve the entry for Cult, which is in horrible shape. Please see the talk page for some discussion. Please also see the ongoing rewrite at Talk:Cult/Cult Sandbox. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. In general the sociological POV on new religious movements/"cults" across the encyclopedia is not particularly well represented. Something to keep in mind for those here interested in religion topics. Thanks.PelleSmith (talk) 15:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
There is a naming dispute considering the correct name for the category for the main article Markov chain and related articles, see WP:CFD. 76.66.192.144 (talk) 03:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Homosexuality rewrite
Is it about time to rewrite this article to conform to MOS and concentrate on accuracy, neutrality, comprehensiveness, and the best quality sources? Is it possible in an article of such controversy? I tend to hope a rewrite can be accomplished without the fuss of ArbCom, possibly as a model for Wikipedians working together from vastly different approaches.
I have been approached to rewrite the article by myself, but I do not wish to do that. I already wrote the Lesbian article and several other high-profile LGBT articles. I do not wish to write the core article on LGBT issues using my perceptions of what should be in this one. Wikipedia is a community effort, and there is no reason why this article cannot be constructed by many of us with the same goals in mind.
Please see Talk:Homosexuality#Rewrite_agenda. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
'I' and 'me' by George Mead
Is it not supposed to be the other way around, that the Me is the social and thinking part.
In "Franzoi, S. L. (2006). Social psychology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill" page 58 it is the other way around and it is a very popular book.
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/'I'_and_the_'me' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jurijalive.dk (talk • contribs) 15:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Sociology mainpage: Improvements, Quality review
I've spent hours and hours on the main sociology page over the past two months. I think it's much better now - the scope and topics sections needs work, but is at least fairly large and comprehensive now. Should we get the article re-evaluated for quality? Any other comments? --Tomsega (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
My attention was recently drawn to this page. Could some experts here weigh in on its talk page? I have the sense that a great deal of synthesis (and perhaps original research as well) is has taken place in its composition. Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
- And could those wishing to join the discussion please review the literature in the bibliography before forming an opinion on this issue? Thanks, —Aryaman (talk) 11:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Death
Please join discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Death regarding forming a joint task force with WikiProject Biology. --Geniac (talk) 02:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Both of these articles seem to have issues...I seem to remember the platonic love article being well rounded a while back, but now it and romantic friendship both seem to be very homosexually focused (and the platonic love article a somewhat incoherent mess). They were both unhelpful when I was researching heterosexual forms of the same the other day. I would love to help improve the articles, but I admit my knowledge on them is somewhat lacking. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 01:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Userbox
I've created {{User WPSOC}}, for public display of our allegiance and such. Enjoy! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Science Fiction?
When adding the Wikiproject Sociology userbox, the Category of "Wikiproject Science Fiction members" is also automatically added to one's user page. I suspect the latter userbox was used as a template for the former, but it is not working correctly; needs repair! DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 18:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- Corrected. :-) DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 18:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Sociological educational assignment needs reviewers
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Request_for_reviewers_for_educational_assignments_GANs. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
The current article at Affirmative Action is fully about social equality with various phrases such as "positive action" redirecting there. I have suggested moving to and merging with Social equality and both are part of this project. It shouldn't require much change to either articles basis so I could do it but please go ahead and chime in at it on Talk:Affirmative_action#Social_equality or Talk:Social_equality#Affirmative_Action ~ R.T.G 08:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
RfC: UFO religion
Please see Talk:UFO_religion#RfC_Church_of_the_SubGenius. Cirt (talk) 12:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Relevant AFD
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Core Knowledge Perspective. Thank you for your time, Cirt (talk) 08:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
This article could use some new eyes with expert knowledge/mediation/constructive input; I'm posting to several WikiProjects that seem relevant and to RfC. I have already done so on WP:Cleanup (other ideas just about where to seek help are also welcome). Article was created 06:51, 20 April 2004 by an IP. There's thirteen talk page archives and five Articles for Deletion discussions; there are 122 watchers and about 400 daily page views on average. Has never reached much of a consensus regarding the subject, content or sources AFAIK. Thanks! Шизомби (talk) 03:44, 16 December 2009 (UTC)