UTC The initial criticism was that Stringer should be added as a source It appears nobody follows this Talk page who has the expertise in anthropology nor even the common sense to comprehend that Stringer is an expert source who should be added to this article and it is now a badlyoutdated article as no valid challenges have been brought forth that would exclude Stringers opinion from Wikipedia articles and despite the very long period given to Wikipedians to challenge it and thus  I concur that this article should be unlocked because for example see also my request for another yearold source to be updated which is crucial as it is in the lede and claiming that the RAO hypothesis is still the mainstream hypothesis in human evolution when even those anthropologists who are cited as calling it the mainstream hypothesis have retracted that claim and you are therefore basically misinforming a new generation of K students yearbyyear as youve kept this page outdated since  It is obvious that no Wikipedians with expertise in anthropology have editingrights to this locked article and are being responsible enough to maintain this article since approximately  not even responsible enough to add simple update and POV dispute types of tags  So who locked this article And why is it still locked for years when the person who locked it doesnt have either the due diligence and care or else the expertise in anthropology to maintain the page as being uptodate within even three years yet they took the responsibility for locking it and no elder Wikipedians have addressed the issue Where can elder Wikipedians be found or contacted to ask them to review the need to unlock this article andor the abilities of the fool who locked it to not be allowed to lock articles then wander off and ignore for years perfectly valid requests  valid scientifically speaking as well as regarding Wikipedias standards for veracity of expert sources  to update this horribly outofdate article     January