need update to 1st source, in lede: that src now says Multiregional took away RAO's formerly "mainstream" status, in the book's 2012 edition.  Also: reasons to support a long ignored proposal to unlock the article. 

A new edition of The Essence of Anthropology (by McBride B, Haviland WE, Prins HEL, Walrath D) is available, dated 2012.  This article is still citing the 2009 edition of the same book.

Note that the new, 2012 edition says  on pg. 94:
"Until 2010, the recent African origins hypothesis was the mainstream position. But when researchers from the Max Planck Institute released a study comparing the Neanderthal genome...the genetic evidence shifted to supporting the multiregional hypothesis.[19]"

This article's statement of RAO being "the most widely accepted model..." was relying on the outdated 2009 edition of this book having said, on pg. 90 of the 2009 edition, that RAO "is" the "mainstream" position; the sentence involving what is "mainstream" was revised in the 2012 edition, to say that the evidence now "supports" the multiregional hypothesis.

This article's first sentence should therefore read (edits are in italics): "...dubbed the "Out of Africa" theory, was the most widely accepted model describing the geographic origin and early migration of anatomically modern humans, until the Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans gained favour."

-
-
-

Also, who has kept the article locked for years and what is their reason for why it is still locked? Are the sources for each of these competing hypotheses so dubious and disputed?

And did the pro-RAO vandal himself lock this article, and then quit WP, or has had his account suspended, or what?
Why else is there no response to complaints about this article being locked for such a long-term, but that the one who locked it has long ignored this article and cannot be trusted to lock articles (if he is even still a WP member)? Per the fact-based accusations that were raised in the above topics in this Talk page, it should be unlocked in order to add the discoveries (I'd say "recent discoveries," except that 2010 isn't recent, which again exhibits that nobody holding a WP account is responsible enough to be trusted with the locking of this article, especially not an anthropologist or even anthro student, because if this article had even one expert editor, he should recognise immediately that the above edit requests are from veracious sources and are the reasons for the requests are explained explicitly enough that anyone worth their salt should comprehend what's being requested).

Others posing this question about why this article is locked have been unanswered for roughly a year, so who locked this article, then ignored this badly neglected, scientifically outdated article, for so long? And ironically, the people who want it unlocked are desiring to update this article with recent facts, i.e. discoveries, that refute RAO, so obviously none of us are the pro-RAO vandal, but this article was locked for years (literally) even before that complaint of a list of edits by a pro-RAO vandal was raised on the Talk page, again raising my question: Did the pro-RAO vandal make his edits to corrupt the veracity of this article, and then skip town, so to speak? 209.97.203.60