|WikiProject Education||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Genius article.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Please vote here if you knew there'd be a picture of Einstein
Two convenient sources for this article
There are two inexpensive, popular but thoroughly referenced books about genius that would be very good reliable sources for improvements to this article. You should be able to find them at a library near you. They are
- Simonton, Dean Keith (2009). Genius 101. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-0-8261-0627-8. Lay summary (28 July 2010).
- Robinson, Andrew (2011). Genius: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-959440-5. Lay summary (22 May 2013).
Both books are readable and interesting, and cite their sources so that you can check details. The authors of both books are authors of previous, thicker and more scholarly books on genius that have received many favorable reviews. I'll add the Robinson Very Short Introduction book to the Further reading section of this article first, and then move both books into the bibliography of the article as they used to reference article text. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 13:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
- Now that there has been time for editors to check the sources and read through those that are readily available, this will be a productive time of year for updating the article from top to bottom for coherency, due weight on various subtopics, and referencing according to Wikipedia content policy. I look forward to seeing the next edits to article text along those lines and expect to edit some article sections from my own keyboard in the next few months. Let's all discuss here how to make the article better. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Why is there a redirect from "Genious?" This has the unfortunate effect of Google providing the information on this page as a "web definition" of "genious." Suggest the "genious" page be removed. (Google "define:genious") Danchall (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Listed examples should be cited specifically to a source
This article accumulates names of persons who are claimed to be geniuses, but usually without citing any source. I have the Cox source (an old source) cited in the article in my office. I also have the newer (and better) books Genius 101 by Dean Keith Simonton and Genius: A Very Short Introduction by Andrew Robinson in my office. We should be checking sources together before adding names of examples to this article, to make sure we are talking about examples who are generally regarded in reliable sources to be geniuses. I'll try to clean up this article with this long-standing issue in mind, and I invite everyone to join in on checking reliable sources. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 20:15, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
False statement: Gauss did not discover the normal distribution
The section titled Galton contains this sentence:
"Gauss discovered the normal distribution (bell-shaped curve): given a large number of measurements of the same variable under the same conditions, they vary at random from a most frequent value, the "average," to two least frequent values at maximum differences greater and less than the most frequent value."
No, Gauss (1777-1855) did not discover the normal distribution. It was known at least by the time of Abraham de Moivre (1667-1754), who discovered that it is an approximation to the binomial distribution that becomes exact in the limit, as the number of trials approaches ∞. (See de Moivre–Laplace theorem.)
It is possible that Gauss discovered the (more general form of) the Central Limit theorem. Perhaps that is why his name is attached to the normal distribution (also known as the Gaussian distribution). But he most definitely did not discover it.Daqu (talk) 22:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)