User talk:Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Archive 25

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 04:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Intelligence quotient (IQ) of dismall profession: Mean

 * "With all of its problems, economics still has the highest mean I.Q. of any social study". Really? Sounds highly improbable to me, even if I did grant that subject areas can have IQs, which of course I don't. Malleus Fatuorum 05:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Was going to say the same thing, but found this, which discusses these tables. It appears that economics has the highest mean IQ of the social sciences at 128.0, although it is 4th overall behind physics, mathematics and computer science. Of course, I still maintain that IQ is not a helpful quotient, it just indicates that people are good at IQ tests.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * @Malleus,
 * In answering the survey, I was the first respondent after a week, and I wrote mainly to provoke the more productive members of the economics project to participate, in particular, by bringing up contentious issues among economists.
 * In After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre discussed the reasons for social studies lagging behind physical sciences, and noted that physical scientists had a higher (mean) I.Q. than social scientists, "although economists bring up the social sciences and chemists bring down the physical sciences" (quoting from memory). MacIntyre's comment is consistent with what I've seen in reports of Verbal/Mathematical/Analytical GREs by subject. (The GREs are nearly IQ tests.)
 * @Worm/David,
 * It is tautological that I.Q. is the best measurement of I.Q., which implies that I.Q. is good for measuring proficiency on I.Q. tests. Seriously, I.Q. is the first principal component (perhaps factor) of other indices of developed intellectual ability, most of which are positively associated with one another. In general, it is a better predictor of intellectual accomplishment than is any other single index (e.g., vocabulary). As always, there are discussions of whether I.Q. as a latent variable measures anything or is just a summary of substantial indices. Stephen Jay Gould has (as usual) an informative, entertaining, and humane discussion of I.Q. and related issues (heritability, race, racism, etc.), in his The Mismeasure of Man; Gould concludes that I.Q. is merely a summary. It is worth considering similar indices from principal-components or factor analyses, such as the principal-component of socioeconomic status or partial least squares in chemometrics, and considering their use in practical applications (and in discovering real chemical phenomena), before dismissing I.Q. as being a mere summary prematurely.
 * Best regards, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 09:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you're claiming that economists (not economics) have the highest mean IQ of any social sciences grouping? But without wishing to blow my own trumpet, as an ex-member of MENSA I don't consider 128 to be a particularly notable score anyway, so if the others are lower that doesn't really say much for them. In my own experience I'd say that most sociologists ought not to be allowed out unless under strict supervision, which I guess kind of backs up your thesis. Malleus Fatuorum 17:53, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You cut me to the quick Malleus. --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  19:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

ROFL! I can think of many professions whose members shouldn;' be allowed out unless under strict supervision! IQ tests are a good indicator among a large group of people either all of whom, or none of whom, have been exposed to them in the past or had any "training" on them. But as the vast majority of readily-available IQ tests are very far from accurate once people have diverged more than 20% from the average, individual scores in the high and low ends aren't terribly meaningful. Example: my younger daughter, at the age of 10, did an online test aimed at American children (which meant she was juggling unfamiliar currency-names whilst doing test). She scored out at 183, which, frankly, although I know she's bloody intelligent, I find a little hard to believe. Pesky ( talk  …stalk!) 20:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's in the nature of IQ tests that it's not hard for kids to do exceptionally well or exceptionally badly, as all the tests do is compare chronological age with so-called mental age; if she'd taken a similar test the following year she might well have ended up at 83 rather than 183. It's somewhat trickier with adults though. Malleus Fatuorum 21:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * She does consistently score high (always has), though that's very possibly because now (as an adult) she "knows the ropes" with tests. The sheer blazing "enquiringness" of her mind, from a very early age, has been noticeable. At the age of about three and a bit (having taught herself to read, and made friends with the vet, who was a fairly regular visitor), she would wander around the farmyard with said vet, asking the "why, how" questions about everything he did.  To which, bless him, he gave answers to the best of his ability for someone of that age.  When she got to "But how does the antibiotic kill the bugs?" he wasn't quite sure what to do!  The best compromise he could come up with was "It stops them having babies and the old ones die", which she accepted.  Not, by any means, an easy child to live with.  Challenging, interesting, fascinating - yes.  But not easy. heh!  Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 22:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Hi Kiefer, please review WP:NPA at your leisure. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I shall rephrase the statement to comply with NPA policy. I should have hoped that Chris Cunninham should have done the same soon after writing his personal attack on MF, especially after many fellow administrators noted that his abuse of MF was conduct unbecoming an administrator.
 * The word "cunt" is elastic, particularly in British English, and I trust Elen's judgment of MF's use. (Compare: When I had a French class, the instructor once played a popular song about con (French for "cunt"), which was used as a slang for "fool".)
 * As you know from my private email, I agreed that you were once within policy to block Malleus although I viewed the block as imprudent given the political environment. In this case, the block and the RfC/ArbComm case seem idiotic and a waste of many hours we should be spending with our families and friends.
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz 22:29, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Peer Review request
Hello, I see that you are "on strike" right now and I definitely respect that decision. I was wondering if, when you return to regular editing, you (or anyone who happens to be seeing this, actually) would be interesting in Peer reviewing an article I have been working on with a few other contributors. The article is Prosperity theology. It just reached Good Article status last week and is now at Peer review. I know that you are an expert on economics and theology, so I thought you'd be the best person to ask. Thanks and have a pleasant holiday. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Marc!
 * Honestly I have never understood liberal protestant theology (Tillich, etc.), and I prefer to read Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic theologians (usually writing about ethics, rather than theology). I have more experience with and sympathy for evangelicals than is common in my mileau, but I listen carefully when properity theology has been denounced as heretical. It does seem to combine the most intellectually dishonest aspects of liberal Protestantism, conservative evangelism, and mass culture.
 * Well, maybe such prejudices make me interested enough that I could do a good job as a peer editor. ;)
 * It would have to be in a month. I shall be out of WP access for a few weeks.
 * Thank you for you kind words, which flatter me, because I don't deserve them.
 * Have a good winter break.
 * Sincerely,
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz 21:28, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your willingness to help, I look forward to your comments when you have time. Interesting to hear your perspective, I am pretty familiar with the North American religious landscape, that's what I've been focusing most of my Wiki-time on lately. After Prosperity theology, my next target will be a Snake handling article. I sometimes wish I had studied Anthropology of religion back in my university days. Oh well, I hope you have a good time on your Wikibreak. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't trust anybodyunder 35
Kiefer .Wolfowitz 21:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC) ("Memory is the second thing to go.")

Comments and clarifications
Hi KW - regarding this comment, it seems to me that you read more into what I wrote than what was there, then went on some sort of counter offensive against an attack I never made. If you react like this to disagreements, I'm not surprised you get into scrapes. Let me apologize for any poor wording on my part and try to clarify.
 * 1) "Please stick to the issue, rather than calling me a "lawyer"."
 * I did not call you a lawyer, nor did I imply there is anything wrong with being a lawyer, or behaving like a lawyer. If you want to defend Malleus, you are free to do so. (Perhaps you thought I meant "wikilawyer"? That is something quite different.)
 * 1) "Is my account plausible or not?"
 * Well, it conflicts with Malleus' own account: perhaps it is what his own account should have been (and that is why I found it lawyer-like). It is plausible to the extent that Malleus did not know what he was doing and/or was not in his right mind. I believe more plausible accounts can be constructed based on the edit histories.
 * 1) "It is not nonsense for some to object to the use of "cunt""
 * I never said it was. Admittedly, my statement was vague: what I meant is that it is precisely because "cunt" is such an emotive word for many that it clouds clear thinking on the issues of civility, point making, disruption and personal attacks involved here. I was proposing a simple way to bypass the emotive aspect: substitute another swear word.
 * 1) "NPA is satisfied when I rewrite "hypocrite and fool" as "behaved (willfully for more than a day and despite superiors' advice) as a hypocrite and fool", but honesty and English suffer."
 * I agree with you there, but I have a different response: if we don't explain what it is about someone's behaviour that we find foolish and hypocritical, then we are making no more helpful a contribution than a direct personal attack would. Otherwise, the distinction amounts to wikilawyering: following the letter of policies and guidelines, but not the spirit. (Despite disapproving of wikilawyering, I do not regard it as an insult: following policies and guidelines to the letter is a tenable position, and editors may disagree on the spirit.)
 * 1) "Previously you and Malleus have been wrong and I have been right in my objecting to a description of SandyGeorgia as appearing to be sexist..."
 * Unfortunately, I have no idea what you are talking about here. It could be my memory, but I don't know what the description was, when it was made, or by whom. I don't remember ever siding with Malleus against an objection you made. If I did, then I imagine it would have been along the lines "Sandy can look after herself", as I took a similar line when someone tried to warn me off Malleus' talk page. Since you are basing your opinion that I have a "half-assed record" on sexism on this one incident, I think I deserve to know what it was, or whether you might have confused me with someone else.

Finally, you are right that I have absolutely no cause to doubt your bona fides; consequently I do not doubt your bona fides. However, it is perfectly possible that we may disagree again in the future. May I therefore assure you now, in advance, that when I disagree, it is a matter of substance, not tone.

In this case Malleus chose a reckless path of disruptive behaviour for two nights running. Blocking him for at least 48 hours was justified on preventative grounds in order to avoid a third. Geometry guy 22:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

PS. Let me also add that I respect the right to disagree, and continue to respect editors I disagree with. I don't like even to start grudges, let alone bear them! This is leisure time, after all. Even though I disagree with Malleus' actions here, I greatly respect him as an editor, and when he returns, I will be happy to support him whenever I agree with his position.


 * Hi Geometry guy,
 * I appreciate your writing, and I don't have time to reply with the thought your note deserves.
 * As usual, you are right on the essential issues here, although I agree that some of your wording was ambiguous and less helpful than usual on MF's page.
 * MF's first use of cnt was a probable provocation, given at a late hour before he went to bed. His second and compound use was a direct insult; we all should respond better or ignore comments like those that provoked him to call (a man I believe) an idiot (in dialect).
 * I still believe that my interpretation of MF's statement that he had called nobody a cnt (as vagina) is correct. He is one of the editors least likely to deny his own behavior; consider his "witless" acknowledgment, with its bad adjective.


 * Finally, you may be right that he and WP are better off with a short block, although I believe both blocks were badly performed, and served to escalate conflict, rather than resolve it.
 * It seems likely that one or both administrators will lose their bits, unless a sincere recognition of error occurs; in this case, because of the NPAs on MF accompanying the blocks, it is hard to imagine that even with an apology the administrators will remain with their bits.
 * It is unseemly but expected that many editors are using this pretext to try to settle scores, ignoring all of the PAs on MF; some ArbCom members seemed one-sided in their initial statements. I believe that you and John provide MF with enough criticism when he deserves it, and he is intelligent enough to learn from his own mistakes and an occasional friendly word. It is unfortunate that this happened in a week where MF was behaving like a model editor, helping many many editors, as his talk page demonstrates.
 * Sincerely, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 22:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks: your first sentence already provides the reply that my note deserved. Further discussion is regular talk (although I would still like to know whether I behaved in a sexist way or not, as it would be contrary to my nature to do so, and would like the opportunity to defend whatever statement I made that was perceived as sexist).
 * My own view is that there is a Jekyll and Hyde aspect to Malleus' contributions: he values the ideals of Wikipedia to create a free encyclopedia, but resents the way it is managed here ("policed by children" might paraphrase his view). He has said as much himself on several occasions, but I'm only making suppositions here, not presumptions. Continuing with the same disclaimers, since Wikipedia is freely licensed, he contributes knowing that his work could be incorporated in something better than this. However, from time to time, especially under stress, or late at night, the other side comes into the play, representing the injustices that there are on Wikipedia which obstruct good content creation. Sometimes he tells home truths that all editors might learn from, but sometimes he can be downright disruptive. His claim that he forgot what he wrote on a previous night is consistent with such an analysis.
 * Of course, no one can presume to understand the motivations of another. But if more wide-ranging sanctions are contemplated, they should be based on the best information. Geometry guy 23:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * PS. I do not spend my time looking for reasons to criticize MF. I simply support where I agree, and don't where I don't.
 * All the best for Xmas! Geometry guy 09:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Have a great Christmas

 * Dear Pesky,
 * When my hosting friend asked me to find suitable music on Spotify this afternoon, I thought first of Greg Lake's beautiful song, and I was happy that our other friends enjoyed it too.
 * King Crimson had a concert from 1990-2010 (on YouTube, one wishes legally) in which Adrian Belew sang Twentieth Century Schizoid Man with his usual style and power, but I did miss Lake's range, volume, and clarity. (A British accent is more credible than a Covington accent for singing "Father Christmas", also.)
 * I wish you a very merry Christmas also. My mother used to make a date pudding, which became an acquired taste in our family.
 * Cheers,
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz 22:50, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have to admit I adored Greg Lake ..., and ELP, and King Crimson! Remember that amazing chord progression in Court of the Crimson King?  And recipes; I have my great-grandmothers Christmas cake and Christmas pudding recipes.  But not enough free time this year to make either of them! Next year, maybe ;P  Pesky  ( talk  …stalk!) 23:11, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Guerillero &#124; My Talk  22:46, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Have a nice Christmas Kiefer -- Merry Christmas from Guerillero  07:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I wish you a belated (Western) Christmas!
 * Best regards, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 14:55, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * How did F get to be an administrator with 98 Supports and 33 substantive opposes? Did Woolworth's have a going-out-of-business RfA that day? Or have standards increased at RfAs, the way they have at GA/FA articles? Kiefer .Wolfowitz 10:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Userbox
Not sure why yours isn't working, but I've modified mine as you suggested, esp. considering that MF doesn't want to be unblocked. Yworo (talk) 18:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed! Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Not all Americans are cunts: End the Americanist cock up
The invocation  produces
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User.Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Support Malleus
A tag has been placed on User.Kiefer.Wolfowitz/Support Malleus, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 23:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hans Rådström
Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Could I ask you something
Since you're the only person I can think of who would be familiar with the niceties of the Swedish University system. User:Haraldwallin is a young man who seems to have fairly recently (2008) gained a qualification in materials science at the university of Karlstad. His thesis is published in two places Diva and LIBRIS. It seems to contain some research about Galling - a phenomenon I believe to do with tools gradually picking up crud and going blunt - and he wants to use it in the article. He says that those two links prove that the thesis is both published and peer reviewed. Are you familiar with those two sources, and it be fair to say this is the case. As I know you'll understand, using undergrad theses as sources can be somewhat variable, and if he has discovered something new (rather than just summarising the current state of understanding) one would in an English University have expected a research paper in a peer-reviewed journal.

Appreciate any insight you could give. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear Elen,
 * I tried to reply the 29th, taking too many of the 15 "free" minutes at the airport.
 * I looked at the DIVA description, which listed no submissions of manuscripts to refereed journals. By 2011, one would have hoped that at least one article would have appeared at least on-line at the publisher. I and the National Academy of Sciences of the USA ("Responsibilities of Scientists: Responsible Conduct in Science", I think) would consider it generally inappropriate to publicize (or otherwise publish in non-refereed fora) results that have not appeared in refereed journals---such publication distracts the public from published refereed research. (I am in a hurry and it may be that my poor eyes missed the submission information).
 * Also, unfortunately, Karlstadt University is a relatively new university, and as such is regarded as lesser quality than KTH or Chalmers or Linkoping or Umea or Lund or Lulea---universities with established institutes of technology. (Sweden suffered from a populist/regionalist expansion of "universities".) The best departments at Karlstadt and similar universities are trying to establish their reputation by passing only very high quality dissertations; alas, I cannot tell whether this thesis would be one of those happy few, because my host doesn't have adobe acrobat reader(although there is a host of violent games! the youth!).
 * I also did not read any acknowledgment that the research had been supported by grants, e.g. VR, which would have been a sign of internationally recognized quality (or national power, in some cases ...).
 * In short, I would encourage the results to be published in an international refereed journal, after which it could possibly be mentioned in an encyclopedia article, like ours.
 * Typically, the thesis is published (spiked on a wall) and electronically published before the defense. Therefore, listing in DIVA does not constitute publication or passing the oral defence. (Even an oral defence can be rigged, because the opponent is appointed by the dean who usually follows the advice of the senior professor/supervisor/chairman/prefekt.)
 * I shall be able to respond after the 11th.
 * Have a happy 2012!
 * Sincerely, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 11:55, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time out to respond. Enjoy your holiday. Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

payback is a bitch
Could you please review my DYK?

[]

Make sure to support.TCO (Reviews needed) 00:19, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Happy New Year, TCO!
 * I would be happy to review your DYK nomination, but I am abroad and have limited internet access, only at the cost of my better half's irritation....
 * Please wait for the 11th.
 * Best regards, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 11:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)