Talk:Helmuth Nyborg: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:00, 17 July 2013

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.

Arbitration Ruling on Race and Intelligence

The article Helmuth Nyborg, along with other articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed), is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, described in a 2010 Arbitration Committee case where the articulated principles included:

Pillars: Wikipedia articles must be neutral, verifiable and must not contain original research. Those founding principles (the Pillars) are not negotiable and cannot be overruled, even when apparent consensus to do so exists.
Original research: Wikipedia defines "original research" as "facts, allegations, ideas, and stories not already published by reliable sources". In particular, analyses or conclusions not already published in reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy are not appropriate for inclusion in articles.
Correct use of sources: Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Primary sources are permitted if used carefully. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than to original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.
Advocacy: Wikipedia strives towards a neutral point of view. Accordingly, it is not the appropriate venue for advocacy or for advancing a specific point of view. While coverage of all significant points of view is a necessary part of balancing an article, striving to give exposure to minority viewpoints that are not significantly expressed in reliable secondary sources is not.
Single purpose accounts: Single purpose accounts are expected to contribute neutrally instead of following their own agenda and, in particular, should take care to avoid creating the impression that their focus on one topic is non-neutral, which could strongly suggest that their editing is not compatible with the goals of this project.
Decorum: Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, harassment, or disruptive point-making, is prohibited.
Tag-team editing: Tag teams work in unison to push a particular point of view. Tag-team editing – to thwart core policies (neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research); or to evade procedural restrictions such as the three revert rule or to violate behavioural norms by edit warring; or to attempt to exert ownership over articles; or otherwise to prevent consensus prevailing – is prohibited.

If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the above guidelines. You may also wish to review the full arbitration case page. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Outdated Refrence

The link to the Article "G for Galskab" is outdated since the article has been moved, but I do not how know to change it. The link to its new location is http://politiken.dk/debat/ledere/article81143.ece —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.74.217.62 (talk) 08:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A martyr to political correctness

It looks like the first draft of this article was POV, taking a stand opposed to Professor Nyborg--stating for example that the heritability of intelligence is a "theory" (it's an empirical fact, emerging from every study that tested for it), and branding his "defenders" as "controversial intelligence researchers" (all people who research intelligence are controversial, since the empirical facts they have uncovered fly in the face of what most of us want to believe). Some of the later material, on how Nyborg's methodology compares favorably to his peers, strikes me as much more NPOV. Nyborg is truly a martyr to political correctness, and IMHO a NPOV article would emphasize that. I intend to make a few changes. Any thoughts? --Anthon.Eff 22:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Distance between nipples

2/3 of the children Helmuth Nyborg followed through the years left. Especially around puberty. The research did not only consist of testing IQ regularly but also photographing the children nude from 3 different views, taking blodsamples for hormones, and measuring the distance between the girls nipples and measuring the size of the boys testicles. So far I haven't seen any data public about the IQ of the girls choosing to leave the research project, neither the boys. Should this information be included in the profile? --Toften (talk) 13:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it would be original research to introduce your own criticisms of Nyborg's work. Try to find and cite a published paper that mentions these possible sources of sample selection bias.--Anthon.Eff (talk) 16:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You, "Anton.Eff", have stated that "Nyborg is truly a martyr to political correctness", so in your mind there obviously is no doubt. However the argument for his suspension was that he was deemed guilty of scientific misconduct in relation to the academic documentation. Nyborg himself tells about the photographing [1]: Others, amongst those his boss, have told about the nipple-measurement, and adding new children to compensate for the loss in newspaper articles I'm sure you must be aware of.--Toften (talk) 17:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong about the martyr stuff. In general, though, I don't think it's a good idea for politicians to tell scientists how to do science. I'm not wrong about original research--you'll need to find a reputable source for any criticisms of his work, avoiding your own synthesis. This is especially sensitive because Nyborg is a living person. Please let me know if I can be of any help. mvh--Anthon.Eff (talk) 17:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not one politician has had a role in this case, as far as I now. In Denmark it is just bad taste to talk about gender differences as well as about discrimination. I am presently trying to get a link to a report published in 2006 on the quality of the Nyborg-research, but I am not sure it is public. Behind the report are three appointed experts from academia within the research field.--Toften (talk) 19:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have found said report but I can't find where it gives the alternative numbers for IQ difference. The old reference is dead so I am compelled to remove the sentence. If anyone can find the numbers in The official report then we can add it again. I browsed through the report but I haven't got the necessary statistical prowess to extract the numbers. eruantalon (talk) 16:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

which paper?

The section "Aarhus University reaction" starts with the sentence "Even though the paper had passed peer review.." could someone please clarify which paper this is referring to? It's not clear to the casual reader. Thanks. WotherspoonSmith (talk) 10:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing

Maybe these references will help clean up some of the questions about the article. You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 21:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now is a good time to dig into the sources and see if the article can be improved by referring to more and better sources. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 15:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is writer on IQ the same person as the Olympic medalist?

Let's check sources. There has been a recent insertion into the article of information about an Olympic medalist. Is he really the same person as the subject of this article? -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a little digging in danish sources - he did apparently win A bronze medal in the Olympic games in Rome in 1960 IN 4 X 500 metres kayak.[2]·Maunus·ƛ· 00:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Race and intelligence talk page notice}}
-{{WikiProjectBannerShell||blp=yes|1=
+{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
+{{WikiProject Water sports|class=}}
+{{WikiProject Kayaking|class=Stub|auto=yes}}
 {{WikiProject Psychology}}
 {{WikiProject Denmark|class=Start|importance=}}
-{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=Start|listas=Nyborg, Helmuth|s&a-work-group=yes}}
+{{WikiProject Biography
+|living=yes
+|class=Start
+|listas=Nyborg, Helmuth
+|s&a-work-group=yes
+|sports-work-group=yes
+|sports-priority=
 }}
+||blp=yes}}
 ==Outdated Refrence==