Talk:Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence

	This Pseudoscience related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Lynn

Isn't Nazi Dick dead? Carthage (talk) 17:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Don't ask questions you already know the answer too and yes, yes he is. A somebody. (talk) 17:25, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

I asked that because the draft uses present tense. Carthage (talk) 17:28, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Still Under Construction

The draft is under construction and in a state of constant flux. Please refrain from editing until the "under construction" indicator is removed and is in standard draft mode. Thanks.Pinkerite (talk) 19:37, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

OK - it's in regular Draft mode now. Pinkerite (talk) 01:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Drive by commentary

While the end product may be (or become) awesome, right now this draft is heavily weighted in favor of anything EXCEPT a thorough discussion/debunking of the article. The heavy emphasis on all the crappy things people vaguely associated with the article makes seems like poisoning-the-well when, in fact, the water (I.e. the actual published article) is already sufficiently poisonous. I recommend a focus on the article itself with much of the rest of this material reduced to some kind of “other context” or “reception” sections. ^{— Unsigned, by: 75.71.166.95 / talk / contribs}

Please see section above Pinkerite (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Reference issues

@Pinkerite, the reference that begins "<ref name=10K>[https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.012612799 The 10,000 Year Explosion]…" links to a PNAS page titled, "In our genes" (2002). Something seems amiss. Can you fix it?

Fixed Pinkerite (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, I added a "citation needed" ({{cn}}) following one short quote. And, I added ^{[better source needed]} where you said that Cochran retweeted Sailer, but as far as I can see it only shows the Sailer tweet, not the retweet by Cochran. Bongolian (talk) 03:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

The problem is that it shows up on Cochran's timeline as "Cochran reposted" but it doesn't show up on the individual post. So AFAIK the only way to link to the evidence that Cochran reposted is to link Cochran's entire timeline.

Or use this screen cap. Is a screen cap considered valid without the link to the original post?Pinkerite (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bongolian- about the citation needed for this (emphasis added):

What this snapshot leaves out is that Cochran already believed, per the hereditarian assumption, that Jews are genetically more intelligent than other "groups" and so the thought process was likely a simplistic: "Jews are genetically intelligent. Jews have genetic diseases. Therefore, the genetic diseases caused the genetic intelligence."[citation needed]

This is a speculation - "so the thought process was likely" - if speculation is not permissible it can be taken out, but it was my impression there was room for opinions in RW articles, for example in the gold-rated article about Kent Hovind (emphasis added):

Hovind neglects to mention which institutions awarded the theological doctorate and honorary divinity doctorate, probably because — like the Patriot doctorates — they are also the educational equivalent of an online ordination by the Universal Life Church.[23]

Pinkerite (talk) 06:34, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Then perhaps you could write it differently that it's clearly speculation rather than looking like an unattributed quote? Bongolian (talk) 07:02, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

re-written Pinkerite (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2023 (UTC)