|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anthrozoology article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Excised content useful for finding references
|While inappropriate in this form, this content contains many useful references.|
- I've moved this content from the article page, which was formed from Anthrozoology and the merged Human–animal studies. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 04:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I changed the links section around a bit, hoping to make the link organization a little more relevant to people looking for more information. After a little bit of internal debate, I chose the following separations:
Professional Bodies, Research Centers and Journals - This is meant to link people to organizations and journals as opposed to information on the topic. I limited this to academic research oriented bodies; if there are non-academic organizations that need links they should be in a new, discrete category.
Websites - Links to websites that contain information on the topic of anthrozoology. This is a harder place to distinguish academic from non-academic affiliation, so I chose to use the loose rubric of "websites." In the future as (and if) more websites are added, it may be necessary to distinguish academic from non so readers are clear where information is coming from.
Links to Web-Accessible Academic Research by Author - I thought this would be a nice feature for people looking for research information. This section should link to pages that contain full-text academic research accessible without special credentials or authentication (i.e. university affiliation). I chose by author as a reasonable grouping since what I was aware of being available were lists on the websites of individual authors. If someone else is aware of pages with accessible research grouped in other ways (by subject, by journal, etc.) please feel free to make another link category. If you wish to link to research that requires some form of authentication, please make another category as well.
illovich 20:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Considering that they are half-animal and half-human, and that research on them has been published in what appears to be an anthrozoology journal, shouldn't they fit?--220.127.116.11 (talk) 00:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
The article says, "A major focus of anthrozoologic research is the quantifying of the positive effects of human-animal relationships on either party and the study of the reality of their interactions." Uh... the reality of their interactions? As opposed to what? The fantasy of their interactions? I don't understand the significance of the word "reality" in this context. Is it necessary to use that word? - dcljr (talk) 22:49, 30 September 2012 (UTC)