486:
person liked so much, he gave me a branstar. My proposal was not meant to be the last word but a starting point for substantive and productive discussion about how to move forward. I beg you to reread the discussion and look at how effectively Jagz and
Confederate till death have utterly derailed my or any attempt to move forward. Look carefully at their comments and you will see disruptive editing that does not address the problems raised by the RfC nore adds to any proposed solution - just disruptive editing. The sad thing is, people keep replying to them, and more and more empty, meaningless talk accumulates - yes, I am including your comments which, though well-informed and reasonable, in this context (replying to a troll) just contribute to their aim to disrupt any productive work. And at this rate in a week or two enough of the talk page will have to be archived, that the RfC and my proposal will disappear, and we will just be left with a debate the terms of which are dictated by Jagz and Confederate till death. They will never stop - the question is, will the people of good faith, like you, who respond to them, who feed them, stop? I do not mean to offend you, I know you act in good faith.
314:) 23:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC) I haven't read it in great detail but my impression is twofold:firstly the basic principle is sound and far reaching. Classic IQ tests are (IMHO and probably that of Rasch and general IRT modelers) sources only of ordinal data - that is they are rankings. As the hot topics, such as the achievement gap for ethnic minorities and the Flynn effect, are primarily about arithmetic differences the kind of data that IQ tests generate just isn't up to the job. To measure differences you need measurement data and that requires a measurement model such as the Rasch model (or only the Rasch model in some opinions). Simply put IQs are like 1st, 2nd,3rd and arithmetically 27th -17th =10th doesn't make any actual sense. Secondly, I was taught that you have to use IRT from the ground up. I'm less familiar with using such tools retrospectively on tests that weren't designed within the framework of a given model. Consequently I'm not entirely sure that their approach was right. I've used Rasch model based measurement scales on tests of mathematical ability but not retrospectively. Either way its an interesting development.
395:
get air so long as notability is established - i.e. those views have been discussed in peer-reviewed academic journals. Gievn that the journal
Intelligence does publish such stuff that is not a high bar. The task would not be to keep such views out but to keep such views in context. If a random racist comes along and just plonks in some sopabox diatribe we can delete it with ease. If criticism of Jensen et al is deleted then we have a uniform standard to apply and to which we can reasonably demand others follow: A standard that is politically independent.
183:
559:
485:
With all due respect (and I mean that) I think your comment to
Confederate till death was unconstructive. Any response to him is feeding a troll. There was an RfC on the neutrality of the article and the overwhelming response was that the article violates NPOV. I made a four-part proposal that one
408:
3. assume good faith (even from people with dodgy views). We don't delete willy-nilly if an edit doesn't appear to meet point 2 we look it up and look up papers critical of it. This may result in writing-for-the-enemy, but that serves the broader aim of the article: what is it that the Race-IQ people
394:
Yes, but I'm not interested in an edit war :) - clearly people will make contributions to this article that articlulate some unpleasant views. So that other articles (eg proposals 2 & 3 of
Slrubenstiens) remain unembroiled - the race-IQ/Intelligence article needs to be the place where those views
245:
deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with
Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note
530:
OK I stand corrected; I didn't think Jagz had actually overtly objected, and I'm fairly sure he hasn't actually put up a counter argument of any substance to your proposal. Alun and
Legalleft seem to be broadly in tune with my proposal - which is progress. I think the remaining problem is the
349:
I appreciate your constructive role in the discussion. Do you think there is enough agreement to move forward on my first proposal? I ask because it seems to me that you and
Ramdrake, working together, would be able to work out an appropriate article, one that covers the controversy that is
693:
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the
689:
or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
415:
5. be wary of attempts to solve meta-arguments. This issue in particular has a higher level discussion on what is the mainstream position and to what extent the view of Jensen et al are fringe of pseudoscience. I'm still not sure how to handle this within the
247:
159:
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you!
512:. As long as he does we need mediation as I entirely reject his vision of the article. I do however hope you and I can work together, which is why it is important that you accept mediation and I hope you will consider accepting
329:"I was taught that you have to use IRT from the ground up. I'm less familiar with using such tools retrospectively on tests that weren't designed within the framework of a given model." Sort of what I was thinking too. Thanks. --
480:
Nick, I just left this message on
Brusegadi and Wobbl's talk pages. I share it with you because I think if there is any serious progress with this article you will be part of it, so I wanted to shar emy concern with you:
736:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
350:
notable, rather than try to make claims about the controversial science ... this would be a content rathe3r than a POV fork and I think you and
Ramdrake are both well-suited to develop such an article ...
569:
405:
2. notability and relevance have to be established: a given book or research paper has to be the subject of peer review and has to have been explicitly linked to both race and IQ or intelligence.
279:
490:
I know you have not been feeding trolls but I am concerned that a constructive discussion you were prominent in has been or seems to be in the process of being derailed, and hope you can help.
531:
questionable-science/fringe-science/pseudoscience meta-argument. Please bring in anybody you may think could help. Some sort of Deus-Ex-Machina may be needed to move forward now.
710:
282:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
380:
Nick, would such an endeavor interest you? I'm open to suggestions regarding the name of the article, or this could be arrived through larger consensus later.--
575:
666:) 06:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC) Yes -ish, I've been on a semiWiki-break due to general work demands (and my aging home machine behaving erratically).
624:
761:
26:
565:
402:
1. the article covers the debate rather than attempts to say what the actual relation is (readers will have to draw that conclusion)
156:
618:
614:
48:
757:
705:
695:
43:
412:
4. stoicism that would make the Dalai-Lama look quick tempered in the face of trolling. The talk pages will be troll magnets.
237:
206:
748:
describes the
Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
275:
53:
753:
153:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button
106:
Sorry you don't get to play with yours anymore ;) Nice pics always make an article, thanks for the quick upload. --
655:
210:
271:
231:
190:
176:
278:. I do not feel that this article satisfies Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at
33:
22:
60:
701:
90:
508:
You are wrong that no one objects to my proposal. Jagz has made consistent and strenuous objections, e.g.
202:
146:
64:
686:
521:
495:
355:
749:
142:
76:
68:
38:
658:. The only person who refused mediation previously was Jagz and he's left the article. Any interest?
431:
Nick, do you think that we could expand that into a set of guidelines to propose on the talk page? --
725:
716:
201:
for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on
593:
450:
436:
334:
311:
283:
251:
745:
729:
667:
636:
610:
532:
465:
417:
385:
365:
315:
125:
85:
29:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
216:
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding
75:(~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
517:
491:
351:
197:, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see
165:
110:
741:
733:
198:
663:
513:
744:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
737:
194:
221:
588:
446:
432:
330:
307:
193:
requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done under
182:
461:
381:
235:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
161:
107:
303:
659:
558:
364:
I think the main point of remaining contention would be the name of the article.
445:
That's great. Do you want to propose it on the talk page? I'll support it. --
765:
675:
644:
597:
540:
524:
498:
469:
454:
440:
425:
389:
373:
358:
338:
323:
292:
260:
169:
128:
113:
96:
635:
I seem to be having problems editing anything. Seems to be working here...
79:, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place
732:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)
155:
409:
think, why do they think it and why do people claim they are wrong.
150:
72:
145:
and Knowledge (XXG) pages that have open discussion, you should
460:
Thanks for pointing me to your set of guidelines. Great work!--
280:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Elementary cognitive task
576:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for mediation/Race and intelligence 2
302:
I'm curious, have you seen the Beaujean and Osterlind paper (
241:
explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for
181:
141:
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
509:
246:
that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
681:
Notification of automated file description generation
574:You can find more information on the case subpage,
724:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
304:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2007.10.004
195:section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion
623:If you have questions about this bot, please
8:
266:AfD nomination of Elementary cognitive task
553:
250:to request that a copy be emailed to you.
205:subjects and should provide references to
59:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
306:), and do you have any thoughts on it? --
625:contact the Mediation Committee directly
516:, I think he would be very effective.
83:before the question. Again, welcome!
656:mediation for "Race and intelligence"
7:
654:Hi Nick, there is a new attempt at
34:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)
568:to which you were are a party was
550:Request for mediation not accepted
25:to Knowledge (XXG)! Thank you for
14:
750:review the candidates' statements
557:
476:trolls at Race and Intelligence?
154:
756:. For the Election committee,
726:Arbitration Committee election
717:ArbCom elections are now open!
274:, an article you created, for
1:
766:17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
170:23:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
711:13:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
585:For the Mediation Committee,
298:Beaujean and Osterlind paper
129:04:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
114:04:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
49:How to write a great article
752:and submit your choices on
621:to perform case management.
613:, an automated bot account
781:
758:MediaWiki message delivery
645:05:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
609:This message delivered by
541:19:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
525:16:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
499:12:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
470:20:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
455:17:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
441:23:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
426:19:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
390:12:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
374:22:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
359:20:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
324:02:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
293:03:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
261:03:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
21:Hello, Nick Connolly, and
676:01:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
598:14:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
339:22:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
272:Elementary cognitive task
191:Elementary cognitive task
189:A tag has been placed on
177:Elementary cognitive task
97:01:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
77:Knowledge (XXG):Questions
671:
640:
536:
421:
369:
319:
687:File:BindeezInTray.jpg
572:and has been delisted.
186:
123:Revenge of the Bindeez
730:Arbitration Committee
700:Message delivered by
566:Request for Mediation
504:race and intelligence
345:Race and intelligence
185:
199:Knowledge (XXG):Stub
734:arbitration process
619:Mediation Committee
248:one of these admins
175:Speedy deletion of
746:arbitration policy
187:
44:How to edit a page
27:your contributions
702:Theo's Little Bot
607:
606:
514:User: Tim Vickers
290:
270:I have nominated
258:
137:Your recent edits
67:your messages on
772:
596:
561:
554:
288:
286:
285:Ten Pound Hammer
256:
254:
253:Ten Pound Hammer
227:
226:
220:
213:their content.
207:reliable sources
158:
121:I'm waiting for
95:
93:
88:
82:
69:discussion pages
780:
779:
775:
774:
773:
771:
770:
769:
754:the voting page
720:
685:Your upload of
683:
652:
633:
628:
587:
552:
506:
478:
347:
300:
284:
268:
252:
224:
218:
217:
180:
149:by typing four
147:sign your posts
139:
104:
91:
86:
84:
80:
54:Manual of Style
12:
11:
5:
778:
776:
723:
719:
714:
682:
679:
651:
648:
632:
631:Ignore this...
629:
622:
608:
605:
604:
603:
602:
601:
600:
579:
573:
562:
551:
548:
546:
544:
543:
505:
502:
488:
487:
477:
474:
473:
472:
429:
428:
413:
410:
406:
403:
399:
398:
397:
396:
377:
376:
346:
343:
342:
341:
299:
296:
289:and his otters
267:
264:
257:and his otters
179:
173:
138:
135:
134:
133:
132:
131:
103:
100:
87:DangerousNerd
57:
56:
51:
46:
41:
36:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
777:
768:
767:
763:
759:
755:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
727:
718:
715:
713:
712:
709:
707:
703:
697:
694:instructions
691:
688:
680:
678:
677:
673:
669:
668:Nick Connolly
665:
661:
657:
649:
647:
646:
642:
638:
637:Nick Connolly
630:
626:
620:
616:
612:
599:
595:
592:
591:
586:
583:
582:
581:
580:
577:
571:
567:
563:
560:
556:
555:
549:
547:
542:
538:
534:
533:Nick Connolly
529:
528:
527:
526:
523:
519:
515:
511:
503:
501:
500:
497:
493:
484:
483:
482:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
458:
457:
456:
452:
448:
443:
442:
438:
434:
427:
423:
419:
418:Nick Connolly
414:
411:
407:
404:
401:
400:
393:
392:
391:
387:
383:
379:
378:
375:
371:
367:
366:Nick Connolly
363:
362:
361:
360:
357:
353:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
327:
326:
325:
321:
317:
316:Nick Connolly
313:
309:
305:
297:
295:
294:
287:
281:
277:
273:
265:
263:
262:
255:
249:
244:
240:
239:
238:the talk page
234:
233:
223:
214:
212:
208:
204:
200:
196:
192:
184:
178:
174:
172:
171:
167:
163:
157:
152:
148:
144:
136:
130:
127:
126:Nick Connolly
124:
120:
119:
118:
117:
116:
115:
112:
109:
101:
99:
98:
94:
89:
78:
74:
70:
66:
62:
55:
52:
50:
47:
45:
42:
40:
37:
35:
32:
31:
30:
28:
24:
19:
18:
721:
699:
692:
684:
653:
634:
611:MediationBot
589:
584:
570:not accepted
545:
518:Slrubenstein
507:
492:Slrubenstein
489:
479:
444:
430:
352:Slrubenstein
348:
301:
269:
242:
236:
229:
215:
188:
140:
122:
105:
58:
20:
16:
15:
230:the top of
71:using four
742:topic bans
698:. Thanks!
143:talk pages
81:{{helpme}}
61:Wikipedian
738:site bans
447:Legalleft
433:Legalleft
331:Legalleft
308:Legalleft
63:! Please
615:operated
462:Ramdrake
416:article.
382:Ramdrake
276:deletion
232:the page
39:Tutorial
17:Welcome!
706:opt-out
650:R&I
617:by the
203:notable
162:SineBot
102:Bindeez
23:welcome
728:. The
594:scribe
243:speedy
222:hangon
211:verify
151:tildes
73:tildes
209:that
762:talk
696:here
672:talk
664:talk
660:Alun
641:talk
537:talk
522:Talk
510:here
496:Talk
466:talk
451:talk
437:talk
422:talk
386:talk
370:talk
356:Talk
335:talk
320:talk
312:talk
166:talk
108:Step
92:talk
65:sign
722:Hi,
590:WjB
520:|
494:|
354:|
291:•
259:•
228:to
111:hen
764:)
740:,
674:)
643:)
564:A
539:)
468:)
453:)
439:)
424:)
388:)
372:)
337:)
322:)
225:}}
219:{{
168:)
160:--
760:(
708:)
704:(
670:(
662:(
639:(
627:.
578:.
535:(
464:(
449:(
435:(
420:(
384:(
368:(
333:(
318:(
310:(
164:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
