Talk:The Global Bell Curve

Original article
This article is a new article. The original (contributed by someone else) was a copyright violation, as it was a review of the book copied verbatim. I removed copyrighted text and made a summary that probably still needs substantial work.

Other text was added, that appeared to be more information from the book, rather than a review. I removed this also, as although it was interesting, much of it is discussed already in the race and intelligence article. If there is new information in Lynn's book, that could be cited in the race and intelligence article.

In my view, the purpose of this article should be regarding the book itself. Other may feel that it is not notable. I won't worry about that.

Atom (talk) 14:26, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

This should probably be merged with other articles about books by Lynn.
There seems to be a huge overemphasis on books by Richard Lynn (as contrasted with books by authors who get better reviews) on IQ here on Wikipedia. Perhaps this article should be merged with one of the other articles, or deleted entirely. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing
You may find it helpful while reading or editing articles to look at a bibliography of Intelligence Citations, posted for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in these issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research. You can help other Wikipedians by suggesting new sources through comments on that page. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

It's high time to merge together all of these articles, presumably under the name of the most noteworthy of the books.
This is altogether too many articles about books with altogether too little praise by independent critics. I don't doubt notability for the overall series, and I have a couple of the books at hand from a library, but so far none of these articles on books by Richard Lynn on this same topic even seem to have the standard format of book articles on Wikipedia, and the articles all need a lot of work for improvement, which could best be achieved, in my opinion, by merging the articles together into one comprehensive article on Lynn's books on international IQ comparisons. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 18:08, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. Walter Siegmund (talk) 01:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

removed "Examples" section
The Examples section was a selective presentation of the book content without basis in secondary sources. Please refer to WP:WikiProject_Books/Non-fiction_article for guidelines on how to structure an article about a book. aprock (talk) 17:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * See nothing there preventing examples from the book. Which is of course a secondary source.Miradre (talk) 18:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I see that you have reverted again. Please explain what policy you are referring to. Thanks.Miradre (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)