Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Race and intelligence: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:15, 3 March 2007

Latest revision as of 17:31, 26 March 2007

(13 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)

Line 1:

==Note==

I have requested (several days ago) for assistance with this mediation, as my health is still uneven and I am unable to give this the time I would strongly prefer. Unfortunately, the other Mediation Committee members are busy, and no one has yet been able to assist. I appreciate your continued patience and assure you that although this is proceeding slowly,I have not abandoned you. Thanks much to all of you for understanding. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]]^{[[User talk:KillerChihuahua|?!?]]} 17:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

==Some ground "rules"==

I have removed the previous non-mediation discussion which was here[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Race_and_intelligence&oldid=109261909], which I see as indicative of a problem we might face in this mediation: This is a complex mediation, with a number of distinct issues and a fairly large pool of editors involved. You'll have to let me drive, or this will turn into the same kind of chaotic unorganized dispute as has been seen so far. In order for mediation to succeed, it is important for the participants to be able to focus on ''one issue at a time'', and work within the framework not disrupt it. I have every confidence that the editors involved all want to resolve this, or you would not have all agreed to mediation. I plan to work through the list of [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Race_and_intelligence#Issues_to_be_mediated|Issues to be mediated]] one at a time, and hope to post a corresponding list of Agreed items as each item is resolved. That said, the first item is '''What should the organization of the main article be? ''' and I invite each of you to post a preferred structure. If you support an already posted structure, simply say Support EditorFoo's version. Ok?

Line 5 ⟶ 8:

Per request, '''What should the organization structure/relationships of the many articles be?''' has also been opened for views to be posted. Add to both or either, but be aware that all of you need to voice a position on both. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]]^{[[User talk:KillerChihuahua|?!?]]} 23:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

'''15:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)''': I am semi-back, thanks for your patience while I was "out sick". I note we have heard from the following parties:

:On the MAIN article structure:

*JereKrischel

*Kevin Murray

:On the family of articles structure/relationship:

*WRN

*Futurebird

*Kevin Murray

*JJJamal

:Editors we have not heard from at all:

*Ultramarine

*Ramdrake

I will request input from the two editors not heard from, and those of you who have entered a position in only MAIN or ARTICLE please add your position to the other section. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]]^{[[User talk:KillerChihuahua|?!?]]} 15:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

:And now Ramdrake is the only editor not participating. The last edit by Ramdrake was 10 March 2007. Hopefully it is just a time concern and we will hear from that editor shortly. [[User:KillerChihuahua|KillerChihuahua]]^{[[User talk:KillerChihuahua|?!?]]} 22:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

==What should the organization of the main article be? ==

Line 81 ⟶ 99:

- 4-10 paragraphs

7. end material (switch to footnote ref system, with separate bibliography common to the project)

=== WRN ===

Research should not be a single section in the main article. There should be three individual section for the three sections currently described as research: (not necessarily these titles)

# Average racial differences on intelligence related measures)

# Explanations for average racial differences on intelligence related measures)

# Practical validity (or whatever you call it)

== What should the organization structure/relationships of the many articles be? ==

Line 114 ⟶ 139:

* Kevin's comment re: ''Populations and Intelligence'' -- there are advantages and disadvantages of that, which are probably better answered at a later time. if going down that route, ''Population Differences in Intelligence'' would be more specific.

* FB's comment re: ''But, Race and intelligence research still needs it's own subarticle.'' -- there are now a number of permutations on that idea. Can you give a specific suggestion?

* I don't know anyone who claims that "Race and intelligence" is a topic limited to only recent research results, but research results are clearly the largest single aspect of this topic, receiving the largest fraction of the attention in scholarly sources.

* I believe Ultramarine may be agreeing with my assessment. Or perhaps I am agreeing with Ultramarine's assessment. The exception being the "interpretations" article doesn't appear in Ultramarine's outline. The issue of a "research" subarticle appears to still be an issue of contention. The only use I can see for it is as a nontechnical summary of the entire research topic, but this isn't necessarily a good idea.

===Futurebird's thoughts===

Line 119 ⟶ 146:

#[[Race and intelligence (utility of research)]] and [[Race and intelligence (potential for bias)]] are confused topics at this point. (I ''do'' agree with WRN on this, in some ways) I'm open to suggestions about what we should do with these topics, so long as the material in them remains in the controversies section, or in a sub-section of the controversies section. Naming these articles will be a sensitive matter.

#[[Race and intelligence (interpretations)]] belongs in the [[Race and intelligence (Controversies)]] section, not in the section for research. This section explains the interpretations that various scholars have of the gap. All of the explanations (both liberal and conservative) are slightly political and controversial in nature. There is no agreement about how gaps ought to be understood among academics. The work in this section isn't about experiments, but rather it about comparing data from experiments that others have done and then drawing conclusions about what should or should not be done.[[User:Futurebird|futurebird]] 03:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

====Compromise and comments====

* I'm willing to compromise given the points raised by JK and have [[Race and intelligence (interpretations)]] be a sub-section of research. But, [[Race and intelligence research]] still needs it's own subarticle.[[User:Futurebird|futurebird]] 13:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Line 126 ⟶ 153:

* The research sub-article should not contian it's own history section. It should focus on modern work. [[User:Futurebird|futurebird]] 15:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

* I think Ultramarine's idea also makes a lot of sense. I'm willing to give up on the "race and intelligence research sub-article.[[User:Futurebird|futurebird]] 22:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

====Stalled?====

Line 150 ⟶ 178:

===Comments - JJJamal===

* The main page should not give the impression that the topic "Race and intelligence" is only a topic for scientific research. I don't care about the names of the subpages, however it is organised this should be the final result.

Line 158 ⟶ 186:

[[User:JJJamal|JJJamal]] 11:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

'''Bold text'''

===Comments - Ultramarine===

*The most important point is that "Race and intelligence" is not a topic limited to only recent research results, as sometimes have been argued. It also inlcludes, for example, racial stereotypes throughout history, use in media and by racists, and motivations and funding of research.

*My proposed structure would be:

**Race and Intelligence

***Race and Intelligence (Historical views and their influence)

***Race and Intelligence (Current media portrayal)

***Race and Intelligence (Average racial differences on intelligence related measures)

***Race and Intelligence (Explanations for average racial differences on intelligence related measures)

***Race and Intelligence (Controversies surrounding research)

I do not think there is a need for a "Race and Intelligence (Research)" article since it will only repeat material already in other articles and "Race and Intelligence" is already a summary article.[[User:Ultramarine|Ultramarine]] 21:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)