User talk:Right honorable dr. zombie

"Citation needed" tags

Please note that "citation needed" tags are not intended for the original contributor of an uncited statement to use. If you add a statement to an article, it is your responsibility to include a citation. It is not appropriate to add the "citation needed" tag and expect others to find the citation and insert it. Adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with Wikipedia's policy of verifiability. If you don't have a citation, don't add the uncited statement. "Citation needed" tags are only for an editor to insert after an uncited statement that is already in an article. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Ward3001 (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The following statement was left intact even though the author did not include a citation"

Previous inadequate sourcing is not a justification for adding more unsourced information.

"Most measures of g positively correlate with conventional measures of success (income, academic achievement, job performance, career prestige) and negatively correlate with what are generally seen as undesirable life outcomes (school dropout, unplanned childbearing, poverty)^{[citation needed]}."

I restored this statement because it reflects the previously uncited information, just stated differently.

"IQ tests that measure a wide range of abilities do not predict these outcomes much better than g ^{[citation needed]}."

Quite correct that it needs a citation. You added the statement; you should add the citation.

"The explanation for the correlation between measures of g and individual or collective life outcomes is highly controversial and has been the subject of intense debate. While biological determinists claim that g is a mainly hereditable quality that determines life chances, most scholars recognize that social origins and associated factors (e.g. quality of education) have a large or predominant impact on measures of g, reducing or, for many scholars, eliminating, the significance of g as an explanatory variable in social processes. While the dispute has mainly concerned issues of class and social mobility, highly controversial claims made by a small minority of scholars concerning differences in g between ethnic groups (see race and intelligence) have dominated the more visible public debates on the issue."

This information desperately needs citations, and it is your responsibility to provide them since you made the edits. This has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with what you added. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. This is fundamental Wikipedia policy.

"I demand a more adequate explanation or restitution"

Please read the following core policies of Wikipedia before making demands: WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NPOV. Ward3001 (talk) 23:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General intelligence factor

"still doesn't explain why only my uncited statements were deleted, does it?"

I was not rewriting the entire article. I was reverting your unsourced statements. One does not necessitate the other. You still have an obligation to provide citations regardless of the content of the remainder of the article, and regardless of whether my focus was on the entire article or just your edits.

I did not (and would not) add this phrase: "IQ tests that measure a wide range of abilities do not predict these outcomes much better than g [citation needed]."

You're right. My mistake, and my apologies.

The remainder of your edit requires citations if you restore it. Ward3001 (talk) 03:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]