Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Provinces in Indonesia according to IQ


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. joe deckertalk to me 16:29, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Provinces in Indonesia according to IQ

 * – ( View AfD View log )

IQ by province lacks notability; article is unsourced; article presents a single set of data with no information on how it was obtained or derived; there is no discussion of limitations, biases and controversies related to IQ measurement and comparison across cultures and languages. Bcharles (talk) 10:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Sounds like bs. Even it wasn't, it's mindlessly useless and non-notable. At best, the actual source (if provided) could make an external link but I doubt it. --Merbabu (talk) 11:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions.  —Bcharles (talk) 10:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  —Bcharles (talk) 10:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I would almost !vote speedy delete per WP:IAR. Comparisons between populations on the basis of intelligence (or on the basis of a test purported to measure intelligence) are always controversial, and are very likely to offend people. Without the comparison being covered in reliable sources, and without a reference to the origin of the data used, including the test used, this seems to just be an attempt to say that X is better than Y. As it is, this article has the potential to harm Wikipedia rather than help it. Quasi  human  &#124;  Talk  12:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice or further consideration - all other delete comments simply confirm it should go sooner than later SatuSuro 13:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Tendentious and unencyclopedic. A POV trojan horse at a minimum. Zero scholarly discussion of the data. Yuck. Carrite (talk) 06:10, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete unless you can guarantee that methods of gathering IQ were identical and scientifically robust, this is just POV rubbish. LibStar (talk) 09:56, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - unsourced and likely unsourceable garbage - very much in agreement with Quasi above. Orderinchaos 16:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Controversial and unsourced. A bad combination. Rennell435 (talk) 13:59, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.