Revision as of 21:26, 11 October 2024 view sourceDanielRigal (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users48,111 edits Undid revision 1250576456 by Raffelate (talk) This is pure trolling. It has to stop. Removing per per WP:DENYTags: Undo Reverted← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:59, 12 October 2024 view source Raffelate (talk | contribs)58 edits Undid revision 1250681787 by DanielRigal (talk)Tag: UndoNext edit → | ||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
::So apparently we're at an impasse where editors here think their personal opinion trumps what is found in the range of academic sources. Of course this is the diametric opposite of Misplaced Pages policy. I will raise this issue at a noticeboard. ] (]) 06:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC) | ::So apparently we're at an impasse where editors here think their personal opinion trumps what is found in the range of academic sources. Of course this is the diametric opposite of Misplaced Pages policy. I will raise this issue at a noticeboard. ] (]) 06:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
:::Please read ] before you do. --] (]) 14:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC) | :::Please read ] before you do. --] (]) 14:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
::::You are implying the admins are also corrupt? Quite possibly. How very sad. I used edit Misplaced Pages twenty years ago and it wasn't like this at all. But still, it's worth a try. ] (]) 15:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:59, 12 October 2024
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Race (human categorization) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Race (human categorization). Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Race (human categorization) at the Reference desk. |
Race (human categorization) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 26, 2004. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former featured article |
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
Arbitration Ruling on Race and Intelligence
The article Race (human categorization), along with other articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed), is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, described in a 2010 Arbitration Committee case where the articulated principles included:
If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the above guidelines. You may also wish to review the full arbitration case page. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. |
Do not feed the trolls! This article or its talk page has experienced trolling. The subject may be controversial or otherwise objectionable, but it is important to keep discussion on a high level. Do not get bogged down in endless debates that don't lead anywhere. Know when to deny recognition and refer to WP:PSCI, WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:WIKIVOICE, or relevant notice-boards. Legal threats and trolling are never allowed! |
Wiki Education assignment: Evolution of the Genus Homo
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 March 2022 and 3 June 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): WordlyWaleed (article contribs).
Pseudoscientific (?) categorization
In the newest revision of this page (5 July 2024) someone changed "categorization..." to "pseudoscientific categorization..." in the beginning of the article, without changing the rest of the definition or adding references. In my opinion, that is a big claim and should at least be cited, if not removed completely, especially because it's the first thing users see after opening the article. Without proper expansion of that claim, I think it does not belong to this article Wojtek703 (talk) 10:19, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- In my opinion, Pseudoscience should be in the very part of Misplaced Pages where this article is best ordered in. And the historical part can, of course, stay pretty much unaltered.
- In Germany, we - by law - have no concept of race. IMHO people mean ethnicity or phenotype when they say race. Racism does exist, but german law dictates that it stems from pseudoscience, mixing a correlation (not causation) of genotype/phenotype with stereotypes. Back on topic: every single "source" and claim in here should be even stronger scrutinized. FeltFurHeartAndSoulfelt (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Quality of writing
While I am quite far from being racist and I do want to learn how/why a race is a social construct and I am open to believe it, the first two, being the second one pretty too extensive, sections of this article are about, in essence, 20 times repeating that it is a social construct but 0 times explaining why. Why are physical commonalities in those socially constructed races notoriously common? I fail to possess the motivation to read another 100 notions of the race really but really being a social construct to finish this article in a mere hope there is somewhere deep down at the end some actual explanation. Especially when the social and behavioral commonalities were already repeatedly explained. 2A00:11B7:393D:2B01:3921:D38E:78F8:B105 (talk) 17:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Defining Race
I think it would be good to include some historical scholarly definitions, such as Blumenbach, Darwin. Private Bean (talk) 06:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Modern science regards...
"Modern science regards race as a social construct", in the opening section. This is weasel wording. You have three American sources for this statement. Later in the article international surveys show such an idea is common *only* in America. It's my understanding that American bias should be avoided, especially when claiming to speak for modern science. This sentence should be changed to reflect the lack of international consensus. Something like "The status of race as a biological or social construct continues to be debated." Raffelate (talk) 09:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. British guy here. And no. Just no. Race is socially constructed. Just ask anybody from any group who's perceived race depends on the context of who's asking and why. "Scientific" racism is pure pseudoscience. That's not just an American idea. That is the global consensus. By all means add another source that is not American if you like but we will not be bothsidesing racism with a statement like "The status of race as a biological or social construct continues to be debated". Those really would be weasel words which open the door to a spurious legitimisation of "scientific" racism. DanielRigal (talk) 12:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Excuse me but as I understand it Misplaced Pages is edited according to a range of published material, not your personal opinion. Raffelate (talk) 13:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's not a personal opinion, it is the plain language of the cited sources. Misplaced Pages uses a range of published material, but that doesn't mean that it seeks a WP:FALSEBALANCE between the mainstream and the fringe. MrOllie (talk) 14:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Surveys in even America do not support the claim that it is remotely close to "fringe". The fact that the idea is entertained in academia, let alone held by significant numbers as shown in Ann Morning's survey, preclude such a claim. Please explain how you arrived at such an assessment. Raffelate (talk) 14:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nearly a quarter of the population believes in Astrology. Science isn't settled by opinion polling. MrOllie (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am not claiming anything is settled, merely that both sides of the issue are held in academia. How else can we establish whether an idea is fringe other than by polling experts in the relevant discipline? How have you established this? I have asked you this question, please answer it. Raffelate (talk) 14:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- By following the best quality sources, which is what the article presently does. MrOllie (talk) 14:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- And what are the criteria for best quality? Perhaps merely cherry picking those that match the personal opinion of editors rather than surveying the field? This is a gross violation of policy. Raffelate (talk) 14:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- If you can't discuss without throwing around aspersions I'm done here. MrOllie (talk) 14:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I simply asked a question. Is the answer no? If it is yes you should certainly be done here. Raffelate (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I reject the premise of the question. MrOllie (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- That you use "best sources" to write the article and it is unclear what this means? Raffelate (talk) 14:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- An aspersion thinly disguised as a question is still an aspersion. I will not respond to this thread any further. Feel free to take the last word if you require it. MrOllie (talk) 14:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- It would behoove you to address the policy issue rather than stonewalling based on the fact you "don't like my tone". Raffelate (talk) 06:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- An aspersion thinly disguised as a question is still an aspersion. I will not respond to this thread any further. Feel free to take the last word if you require it. MrOllie (talk) 14:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- That you use "best sources" to write the article and it is unclear what this means? Raffelate (talk) 14:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I reject the premise of the question. MrOllie (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I simply asked a question. Is the answer no? If it is yes you should certainly be done here. Raffelate (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- If you can't discuss without throwing around aspersions I'm done here. MrOllie (talk) 14:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- And what are the criteria for best quality? Perhaps merely cherry picking those that match the personal opinion of editors rather than surveying the field? This is a gross violation of policy. Raffelate (talk) 14:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- By following the best quality sources, which is what the article presently does. MrOllie (talk) 14:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am not claiming anything is settled, merely that both sides of the issue are held in academia. How else can we establish whether an idea is fringe other than by polling experts in the relevant discipline? How have you established this? I have asked you this question, please answer it. Raffelate (talk) 14:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nearly a quarter of the population believes in Astrology. Science isn't settled by opinion polling. MrOllie (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Surveys in even America do not support the claim that it is remotely close to "fringe". The fact that the idea is entertained in academia, let alone held by significant numbers as shown in Ann Morning's survey, preclude such a claim. Please explain how you arrived at such an assessment. Raffelate (talk) 14:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's not a personal opinion, it is the plain language of the cited sources. Misplaced Pages uses a range of published material, but that doesn't mean that it seeks a WP:FALSEBALANCE between the mainstream and the fringe. MrOllie (talk) 14:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Excuse me but as I understand it Misplaced Pages is edited according to a range of published material, not your personal opinion. Raffelate (talk) 13:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Rather than attribute to "modern science", we should just say "Race is a social construct ...". Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- So apparently we're at an impasse where editors here think their personal opinion trumps what is found in the range of academic sources. Of course this is the diametric opposite of Misplaced Pages policy. I will raise this issue at a noticeboard. Raffelate (talk) 06:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please read WP:BOOMERANG before you do. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- You are implying the admins are also corrupt? Quite possibly. How very sad. I used edit Misplaced Pages twenty years ago and it wasn't like this at all. But still, it's worth a try. Raffelate (talk) 15:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please read WP:BOOMERANG before you do. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- So apparently we're at an impasse where editors here think their personal opinion trumps what is found in the range of academic sources. Of course this is the diametric opposite of Misplaced Pages policy. I will raise this issue at a noticeboard. Raffelate (talk) 06:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages former featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- B-Class level-4 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class sociology articles
- Top-importance sociology articles
- B-Class Anthropology articles
- High-importance Anthropology articles
- B-Class Ethnic groups articles
- Top-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Top-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class Philosophy articles
- Low-importance Philosophy articles
- B-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Low-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- B-Class culture articles
- Low-importance culture articles
- WikiProject Culture articles