Talk:High IQ society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

How do we verify the individual listed societies?[edit]

As Andy Dingle thoughtfully noted during the AfD discussion on this article, "Vast numbers of societies and their largely self-published sources have come and gone, in an attempt to add particular societies to what is effectively a list article." I think that situation has been dismaying to several editors who are members of various high-IQ societies that can be better sourced. Following up on my reply to him, Andy wrote, "Prune the article down to only what's absolutely referenceable if we must," while definitely supporting keeping this article, which has been the result of the AfD discussion. Here's a set of questions for everyone: what is absolutely referenceable here? What sources can we rely on to make sure that the previously encountered situations (noted in the article edit history and this talk page both, I think) of spurious organizations being mentioned in the article are avoided in the future? And how inclusive is "high IQ"? (I think the question was raised earlier by other editors whether top 10 percent of the population is too broad a level or not. I have no opinion on the issue, but I would like to hear what everyone else has to say.) What do we do about sources when they include factual statements that are readily shown to be false by reliable sources (such as that this or that IQ test has a top score range above the range actually in the test's scoring manual)? How do we verify statements about living persons that the persons are members of this or that society, if the only source for such a statement is a self-edited website by the society? I have a lot of editorial questions here, and I invite comments from all the editors watching this page, because if any Wikipedia article ought to able to reach the featured article level of careful editing, it ought to be the article High IQ society. Thank you for your kind suggestions. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 00:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

What is the reliable source for the statement that any society can select at the Top 0.000005% (99.999995th percentile; 1/20,000,000) level or higher? (Note that there is a reliable published source, already cited in the article, that such a level of selection cannot be obtained by any properly validated test.) What is the evidence that any such society exists in any form other than one person's personal self-published website? -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 12:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
See the comment posted on this article talk page in September 2006 by Ziggurat, who (as I recall) was the article creator: "The question is always one of verifiability - we can only use facts and information that has been presented in reliable sources (reliable sources in this case usually constituting something peer-reviewed, independent, and as unopinionated as possible)." Where can we find sources like that to verify websites that make claims about society selectivity that are plainly contrary to reliable sources by professional psychologists, including psychologists who specialize in the study of high-IQ individuals? -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 12:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Sourcing for latest I.P. additions of organizations? What sources support inclusion of the various societies listed in this article? -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 21:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Simple standard[edit]

As with many list articles, it would be best to list here only organizations that have articles in Wikipedia. No article - no mention here. In that way, we can manage verifiability, notability, etc on a case by case basis within each article rather than try to sort out details for a dozen organizations all on this page. Thoughts? Rklawton (talk) 04:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

The suggested standard is reasonable and would improve the article. I'll be updating the article in light of current sources in a while. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 03:31, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Article clean-up.[edit]

I have begun updates to this article, based on reliable sources on human intelligence and IQ testing I have been collecting in a source list since 2010, and will keep looking for new sources as I research updates for other Wikipedia articles. Feel free to jump in here with more suggestions of sources and other comments on further possible improvements to this article. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 18:28, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I invite editors new to this article to take a look at the many sources for the article IQ classification to see some of the problems with some of the overly specific statements about society membership qualifications that have been made in this article (without reliable sources) over the years. Any currently normed IQ test has standard scoring with a median standard score of 100 and a difference in standard score of 15 for each standard deviation up or down, even if the standard score is not called an "IQ" score. There is very strong evidence, reported in several distinct reliable sources, that there is no such thing as a reliable IQ score above 160. Let's discuss what the sources say here. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 17:14, 19 January 2014 (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) 16:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

High IQ Forum[edit]

Why is this site blacklisted? Because it doesn't have it's own page here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Propianotuner (talkcontribs) 11:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


I've ("Callitwhatyoulike...) amended (on 11/13/17) the "entry requirements" section to include entry requirements. (Previously, the section debated the validity of IQ testing, especially at levels far beyond those required for admission to most IQ societies [irrelevant; removed].) If you believe that you have just cause to remove cited "test scores" pages of the biggest three societies (Mensa, Intertel, Triple Nine), or what I wrote regarding each, advise me before doing so as I do not agree that you have just cause to do so. The page is *not* to be used for the purpose of debating the validity of IQ testing, so linking to "multiple intelligences," e.g., is unacceptable in this context and will be removed. The purpose of the page is to explain what high IQ societies are and how one joins them. Period. Thank you.