User talk:NewRuins012: Difference between revisions

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

NewRuins012, good luck, and have fun. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:02, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Intelligence quotient. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. The concerns you've raised in your edit summaries have been raised here before. Indeed, they've been subjected to intense scrutiny and debate for several years. Please familiarize yourself with the talk page discussion, including the archives for this article alone, instead of attempting to assert your view unilaterally. In particular, you should be aware that there is a consensus among Wikipedia editors which follows the scientific consensus that genetics do not explain group-level differences in IQ: [1]. It might also be helpful to familiarize yourself with the arguments and sources discussed at Heritability of IQ. Generalrelative (talk) 06:41, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no scientific consensus that genetics do not explain group-level differences in IQ. In fact, quite the opposite, as most scientists, biologists, and researchers agree that genetics are, to one extent or another, responsible for IQ difference between social demographics. Do they entirely land the focus on genetic factors? No, as that's stigmatised. Rather, they place blame on both environmental and biological factors, which they claim are the cause of racial disparities within this particular category. So, no, you're not following the general consensus. However, even if you were, you'd still be incorrect to leave up a portion of that Wikipedia article which states that race is a social construct. This is an opinion, not a fact, and is phrased intentionally to downplay racial realism. When hovering over the citation, it is stated that most anthropologists agree race doesn't exist (not stating which percentage, suspiciously), which isn't really evidence of anything. Even if all scientists agreed race wasn't real, it still wouldn't prove this. But, the beliefs of anthropologists, people who don't even study race, are irrelevant here.

There are individual examples where a certain degree of bias is acceptable, in order to maintain social harmony, and also pay respects to specific individuals. For instance, referring to trans people by their preferred pronouns is, through linguistic implications, pointing to their gender identification as valid, as a fact. This is an opinion. However, it makes sense, regardless, seeing that some pronouns have to be used, so it might as well be the correct ones.

Do not edit Wikipedia articles in a biased manner. I did not edit it to remark that race was real, or that the majority of anthropologists agreed with this sentiment. No, I removed an incorrect portion of the text. (talk) 06:41, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents|Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]].
 Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies and guidelines]], and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|loss of editing privileges]].  The concerns you've raised in your edit summaries have been raised here before. Indeed, they've been subjected to intense scrutiny and debate for several years. Please familiarize yourself with the talk page discussion, including the archives for this article alone, instead of attempting to assert your view unilaterally. In particular, you should be aware that there is a consensus among Wikipedia editors which follows the scientific consensus that genetics do not explain group-level differences in IQ: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard/Archive_70#RfC_on_race_and_intelligence]. It might also be helpful to familiarize yourself with the arguments and sources discussed at [[Heritability of IQ]].<!-- Template:uw-disruptive2 --> [[User:Generalrelative|Generalrelative]] ([[User talk:Generalrelative|talk]]) 06:41, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
+[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is no scientific consensus that genetics do not explain group-level differences in IQ. In fact, quite the opposite, as most scientists, biologists, and researchers agree that genetics are, to one extent or another, responsible for IQ difference between social demographics. Do they entirely land the focus on genetic factors? No, as that's stigmatised. Rather, they place blame on both environmental and biological factors, which they claim are the cause of racial disparities within this particular category. So, no, you're not following the general consensus. However, even if you were, you'd still be incorrect to leave up a portion of that Wikipedia article which states that race is a social construct. This is an opinion, not a fact, and is phrased intentionally to downplay racial realism. When hovering over the citation, it is stated that most anthropologists agree race doesn't exist (not stating which percentage, suspiciously), which isn't really evidence of anything. Even if all scientists agreed race wasn't real, it still wouldn't prove this. But, the beliefs of anthropologists, people who don't even study race, are irrelevant here.
+There are individual examples where a certain degree of bias is acceptable, in order to maintain social harmony, and also pay respects to specific individuals. For instance, referring to trans people by their preferred pronouns is, through linguistic implications, pointing to their gender identification as valid, as a fact. This is an opinion. However, it makes sense, regardless, seeing that some pronouns have to be used, so it might as well be the correct ones.
+Do not edit Wikipedia articles in a biased manner. I did not edit it to remark that race was real, or that the majority of anthropologists agreed with this sentiment. No, I removed an incorrect portion of the text. ([[User talk:NewRuins012|talk]]) 06:41, 16 December 2020 (UTC)