Talk:Edward Dutton/Archive1

Anyone want to expand article on this guy's crazy views?
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMRs0Ml8RF0cWVAOeQeBxTw/videos 6857 (talk) 01:14, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Photo
Article has been locked because of Mike's trolling on the article & Reddit, but here's a photo of Dutton that can be added:

SimonandSimon (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ye EK (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

New video
Why are all left wing people raging liars Jolly Roger (talk) 13:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Because we're shills for Obama and ISIS. Duh. Twodots (talk) 16:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * You admit you're left wing, with an a priori bias towards egalitarian conclusions? But I thought this was supposed to be rationalwiki. Jolly Roger (talk) 17:38, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:49, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Not an anthropologist
Wikipedia removed anthropologist from his article; I think RW should do the same. He's not an anthropologist but academic fraud - he describes himself as Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Asbiro University - it doesn't even have an evolutionary psychology department and is a private business school.88.202.180.230 (talk) 22:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The Asbiro University website is essentially useless for information. Dutton provides some evidence that he was indeed appointed to the claimed position. What is your source that Asbiro doesn't even have this position? He also claims to have been docent of Anthropology of Religion and Finnish Culture at Oulu University, a claim which is supported by his Wikipedia page and this entry at The Guardian. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  22:49, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * He holds the title but it's garbage - Asbiro doesn't have a psychology department - it only offers business courses.88.202.180.230 (talk) 22:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * How do you know? I find it prima facie plausible that evolutionary psychology could be taught to business students, even in the absence of a separate department. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  22:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Here's one of his lectures: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuFjOIo9AXE Hilarious how you're supporting a total fraud akin to Kent Hovind's credentials., , will one of you sort this mess out and put my edits in the article back? Serene is a clueless idiot or a troll. Edward Dutton is not an anthropologist, even Wikipeda removed this incorrect (and quite franky laughable) description.88.202.180.230 (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is a living person so Serene just wants to make sure it isn't bullshit, give him some space and sources. FYI the Polish site for Asbiro is much better. He is listed in the list of lecturers as a "guest lecturer". That video is from this conference. Professor definitely doesn't fit here, this seems like primarily a series of entrepreneurial type conferences to me. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (I half take that back, I was relying on Google's translation of the Polish "wykładowcy" and "professor" actually is an acceptable translation of that word from other sources. However, this still seems like it is more a bunch of entrepreneurial pep videos than any sort of scholarly study.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Professor seems to be his official title (translated, at least, based on the link further above), so calling him that and contextualizing it based on the apparently unusual nature of the institution I think would be fine. Nothing he has done seems to have constituted fraud, which, being a legal term, should be treated carefully. He holds the docent title for his claim to be an anthropologist, but his degrees seem to be in theology, so that might be a more apt descriptor.  He self-describes as an anthropologist.  As for the claim, made above, that his credentials mirror Kent Hovind's, unless I am missing something, both his undergraduate and graduate institutions seem to be pretty ordinary. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  23:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * To be honest, especially with the small changes, I think the page is currently fine. The article includes a link to the tweet the University of Oulu made distancing himself from Dutton (which I think is a helpful addition), and Asbiro's unusual "university" is described as such. His plagiarism incident is also already noted in the article. "Academic fraud" is too harsh of a word and could easily be challenged, there's not enough in my opinion to merit that at this point. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 00:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * What are his degrees in? If it's just a doctorate in theology (I assume European theological schools are at least slightly higher quality than their American counterparts), I very much would not call him an anthropologist. He would need a doctorate (I think there's a few other ways he can legitimately claim to be an anthropologist, but I'd have to double check to be sure) in anthropology to make that claim with any level of legitimacy. I would however agree that we should not throw around legal claims lightly. 00:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * His doctorate appears to be in theology. His claim to be an anthropologist seems to be based on his docent title (from what I gather, something like an associate professorship).  I agree that theologian may be a more apt description (see above), but I did not want to go demanding discussion on the talkpage, and then unilaterally change to theologian (granted, I did unilaterally add a note to the anthropology title).
 * I also think the page is pretty much fine as is; I just wanted to highlight that we are not limited to just changing these few words. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒  talk  01:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If he has something equivalent to an associate professorship, depending on what exactly he was doing with it, he might be able to legitimately call himself an anthropologist. 01:43, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Although he has a doctorate from a religious department, his thesis actually takes an anthropological approach to the study of religion. It is not incorrect to call him an anthropologist based on this. I will try to consolidate his academic positions into a separate section, since there seems to be some controversy as well as some outdated statements. Bongolian (talk) 04:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

user:Saxton celt
user:Saxton celt, mentioned in this article, has been indeffed on Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Saxon_celt Cheers JimW (talk) 08:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Article is biased written by left-wingers
Hi,

I am an experienced Wikipedia editor (I have been on Wikipedia 17 years) so I know how wikis work. I declare I have no connection to Dutton but this article is deeply biased from left-wing and anti-racist sources. The article reads as a smear job. There are positive reviews for some of Dutton's books which are not mentioned. I would like to have some of the criticisms remove from the article. It needs to be more neutral. Cagliost (talk) 19:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If you want purported neutrality, go to Wikipedia. We're SPOV here. Bongolian (talk) 20:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * So many people make the mistake of thinking that "wiki" means "neutral", It doesn't. Just because Wikipedia aspires to being neutral doesn't mean every wiki has to be written from a neutral point of view. Spud (talk) 00:51, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If I had a dime every time someone said "it's biased" as a sole criticism.... 00:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If you want to improve the article, and have solid sources for your claims, go ahead and improve it. 20:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Edward Dutton has been complaining about the "left-wing" sources on his Wikipedia and RationalWiki articles on Twitter and other social media platforms. He claimed he has an experienced wiki editor working for him. The account is likely to be Cagliost who is also editing the Wikipedia article for Dutton trying to remove various criticisms. I do not believe the "no connection" claim. 37.120.209.38 (talk) 20:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no connection to Dutton. Emil Kirkegaard told me to come here and try and improve the article. This appears to be an anti-racist left-wing website so there is bias here against pro-white academics like Kirkegaard or Dutton. Cagliost (talk) 22:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * True 😎 Aren't we naughty? Scream!! (talk) 22:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You say "anti-racist" as if it's a bad thing. Are you perchance a white supremacist? 23:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Saying something like "biased against pro-white" is basically being a white supremacist. Like that particular fly that keeps coming back here to spread her little pasty maggots. 00:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is 'biased' in favour of the truth, good references, and a form of neutrality that allows for inclusivity; RW makes use of somewhat similar principles (along with snark, and indicating what is A Good Thing and what is A Bad Thing). You are allowed to have strong viewpoints on a subject RW - but statements of 'anti-X bias (or similar)' are considered to flag up problematic views - 'X-views are under-represented (and I am here to rectify the situation, and will engage in energetic discussions with anyone getting involved)' would be acceptable.
 * Can I bring this into the discussion. Anna Livia (talk) 11:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Nice. I remember Blake's seven with affection. Scream!! (talk) 12:37, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The quote can be used in many RW contexts (the 'bottle of oil' inserted into poetry scene in The Frogs manoeuvre).
 * How enthusiastic a RW contributor would Orac be? Anna Livia (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Dutton partially defending a pedophilia book
I added a section on this, see also his disturbing comment:

http://www.quarterly-review.org/a-dark-night-rises/84.247.48.134 (talk) 23:45, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I added a section on this, cheers. Pavel Altarovski (talk) 00:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Question
It appears anyone who tries to edit these articles or talk pages is accused of being "Michael Coombs" or "Smith". Who are these people, and how do you know it's them? Pavel Altarovski (talk) 22:49, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Mikemikev is a long-term Neo-nazi troll here and creates socks on the daily to try to whitewash people he likes and primarily targets Racialism-related articles. He had a feud with another editor here named Oliver D. Smith (who was banned for doxxing other editors in Kiwi Farms) and has a preoccupation with him. It's very easy to spot Mike as the first thing that he posts with his new socks is him impersonating said people and filing false DMCAs under the pretext of "photos being stolen by Smith". 00:13, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Found a new article from the pedo: . Can someone please debunk this?