This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
When did that happen?
Based on personal knowledge and consulting his CV, I agree and have removed that. Pengortm ( talk) 04:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I enjoyed reading Geoffrey Miller's book but felt he had not acknowledged other possibilities for human creativity besides his stated belief that it is related to mate selection. -- 18:06, 14 October 2005 User:Marvin Khan
I feel that Miller's book The Mating Mind would deserve an article on its own, as it has become widespread with a large number of readers through the world. -- Philipum 12:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Should add a reference to winning the 2008 ig noble prize for his work showing that exotic dancers earned more money when ovulating. Jonahstein 00:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonah Stein ( talk • contribs)
If there isn't an article on that, maybe someone could add just a paragraph here about it. German page: de:37%-Regel. Regards -- WissensDürster ( talk) 17:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
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 those 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. -- WeijiBaikeBianji ( talk) 16:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
On June 2, 2013, Miller posted the following tweet:
"Dear obese PhD applicants: if you didn't have the willpower to stop eating carbs, you won't have the willpower to do a dissertation #truth"<ref>http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BLykUGQCAAALudM.png</ref>
Removed by CitizenTwo without any explanation why. Not sure if it should be on the page or not (might be too early to post it and that we should wait to see how it works itself out), so leaving it here for discussion. Pengortm ( talk) 04:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/nyu-professor-immediately-regrets-fat-shaming.html - NY Magazine has covered the tweet. Time to add it back?
It's been covered by lots of media, I'm not sure why people keep removing it. I noticed one person who removed it was possibly acting in Millers interests because of being a fan of his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.58.64 ( talk) 16:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Actually, Miller stood by his tweet at first. Somebody challenged him, and he said a gaining a PhD requires more than just smarts. I'm sure somebody has a link if that would add to the weight that this is controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.56.119 ( talk) 16:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I'll delete the twitter obesity section, and let's have a look at the notability of the rest of the article. Firecatalta ( talk) 00:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
The info below has been moved from the article to the talk page until a secondary, reliable source can be found to support its notability and inclusion in the article. See WP:PSTS and policies on primary sources in biographical articles.
Miller believes that our minds evolved not as survival machines, but as courtship machines, and proposes that the human mind's most impressive abilities are courtship tools that evolved to attract and entertain sexual partners. By switching from a survival-centred to a courtship-centred view of evolution, he attempts to show how we can understand the mysteries of mind. The main competing theories of human mental evolution are (1) selection for generalist foraging ability (i.e.,
hunting and gathering), as embodied in the work of researchers such as Hillard Kaplan and Kim Hill at the University of New Mexico, and (2) selection for
social intelligence, as argued by Andrew Whiten,
Robin Dunbar, and
Simon Baron-Cohen.
citation needed
He has published on visual perception, cognition, learning, robotics, neural networks, genetic algorithms, human mate-choice, evolutionary game theory, and the origins of language, music, culture, intelligence, ideology and consciousness. He studies human mental adaptations for judgment, decision-making, strategic behavior and communication in social and sexual domains. Apart from mutual mate-choice and sexual selection theory, this includes work on:
Continued from above:
"At this point, I am certainly not a fan of the man. And I agree with earlier comments that there are insufficient secondary sources for the earlier parts of this article. But I think that Mr. Miller is an important and notable figure in the area of Evolutionary Psychology. Here's my evidence. Using Google, I identified the three journals that appear in the top of Google searches on "Evolutionary Psychology". They are: " Evolutionary Psychology", " Psychology Today", and " Science Daily". Searches for Geoffrey Miller in these journals find him as a writer, reviewed writer, or topic in 23 articles in Evolutionary Psychology, 12 articles or posts in Psychology Today (although 2 of those are about the obesity controversy), and 103 posts on Science Daily (although many of these seem to be duplicates, including the same line about his as a "Young Turk"). Of course some of these articles are speaking poorly of him, but that doesn't prevent him from being notable. And the top journals in his field do, according to this basic search, find him to be quite notable. Chaveyd ( talk) 03:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)" Quoted by Firecatalta ( talk) 04:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Vote for retaining article: Obvious notability in field Tim bates ( talk) 08:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
The Twitter coverage in the article is way out of proportion. If you want to retain it, I suggest doubling or tripling the information on his science. Tony (talk) 08:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
My edit summary got cut off by an accidental hit of the return key, so I'll put it here. I think Miller's claim is offensive and ridiculous too, but unfortunately we would either need a reliable source to include that information in the article in its current form (i.e. a stated fact), or else to have some grounds to cite it as a notable source criticizing Miller for inaccuracy. Firecatalta ( talk) 00:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
It would probably be worthwhile adding to the career section the podcast entitled "The mating grounds" which he authors/hosts with Tucker Max and Nils Parker. Details found at http://www.thematinggrounds.com/about-mating-grounds/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.88.44 ( talk) 09:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I just removed the following "including the website Jezebel, the magazine XOJane, and Disrupting Dinner Parties criticized his public statement about obese individuals," the problem with this is that it was sourced by these 3 websites themselves; these are primary sources, not se3condary sources and so fail to establish their own notability to be here. What is required is some piece (not copied from here) which talks about these 3 sites commenting on Miller's tweet, and because so far we dont have that I have removed all 3 sites. Other information in this section may be similarly vulnerable thought he initial wire ref looks fine to me. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 20:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Let us remove this twitter section altogether. It is not notable. Zezen ( talk) 13:02, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Geoffrey Miller (psychologist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
User:Greyfell is reverting attempts to remove the personally motivated gripe text.
May I have a guarantee that the editor has never had any personal contact with the subject of the article? Tony (talk) 05:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
personally motivated, present it here or take it to a noticeboard. Otherwise focus on content. Grayfell ( talk) 07:35, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
This section is exclusively based on primary sources, which is not compatible with Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Avoid_misuse_of_primary_sources. To make things worse all sources are websites. Not a single reliable secondary source. And such reliable secondary sources are mandatory in biographies of living persons, in particular if contents is concerned that is injurious to a person's reputation. So, according to our rules, the section definitely needs to be removed. I know what steps to take if the removal is undone again. Please refrain from undoing it again. -- Saidmann ( talk) 19:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
@ Saidmann: I have reincluded the controversy in the career section with some adjustments. It is notable and it was covered by NPR which is a reliable source. If you remove that, I will alert other editors because it's simply edit warring at that point. You need to gain consensus on the talk page before you go removing large bodies of text. Sxologist ( talk) 11:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Why do Miller's political views keep being removed? The guy started as a self-proclaimed lifelong Democrat who wrote anti-capitalist books (Spent) but has now become a Tucker Carlson-loving member of the far right. That's an incredibly interesting conversion that people deserve to know about. Is someone trying to protect Miller by hiding these views from the public? 98.148.215.217 ( talk) 16:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
When did that happen?
Based on personal knowledge and consulting his CV, I agree and have removed that. Pengortm ( talk) 04:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I enjoyed reading Geoffrey Miller's book but felt he had not acknowledged other possibilities for human creativity besides his stated belief that it is related to mate selection. -- 18:06, 14 October 2005 User:Marvin Khan
I feel that Miller's book The Mating Mind would deserve an article on its own, as it has become widespread with a large number of readers through the world. -- Philipum 12:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Should add a reference to winning the 2008 ig noble prize for his work showing that exotic dancers earned more money when ovulating. Jonahstein 00:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonah Stein ( talk • contribs)
If there isn't an article on that, maybe someone could add just a paragraph here about it. German page: de:37%-Regel. Regards -- WissensDürster ( talk) 17:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
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 those 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. -- WeijiBaikeBianji ( talk) 16:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
On June 2, 2013, Miller posted the following tweet:
"Dear obese PhD applicants: if you didn't have the willpower to stop eating carbs, you won't have the willpower to do a dissertation #truth"<ref>http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BLykUGQCAAALudM.png</ref>
Removed by CitizenTwo without any explanation why. Not sure if it should be on the page or not (might be too early to post it and that we should wait to see how it works itself out), so leaving it here for discussion. Pengortm ( talk) 04:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/nyu-professor-immediately-regrets-fat-shaming.html - NY Magazine has covered the tweet. Time to add it back?
It's been covered by lots of media, I'm not sure why people keep removing it. I noticed one person who removed it was possibly acting in Millers interests because of being a fan of his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.58.64 ( talk) 16:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Actually, Miller stood by his tweet at first. Somebody challenged him, and he said a gaining a PhD requires more than just smarts. I'm sure somebody has a link if that would add to the weight that this is controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.143.56.119 ( talk) 16:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I'll delete the twitter obesity section, and let's have a look at the notability of the rest of the article. Firecatalta ( talk) 00:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
The info below has been moved from the article to the talk page until a secondary, reliable source can be found to support its notability and inclusion in the article. See WP:PSTS and policies on primary sources in biographical articles.
Miller believes that our minds evolved not as survival machines, but as courtship machines, and proposes that the human mind's most impressive abilities are courtship tools that evolved to attract and entertain sexual partners. By switching from a survival-centred to a courtship-centred view of evolution, he attempts to show how we can understand the mysteries of mind. The main competing theories of human mental evolution are (1) selection for generalist foraging ability (i.e.,
hunting and gathering), as embodied in the work of researchers such as Hillard Kaplan and Kim Hill at the University of New Mexico, and (2) selection for
social intelligence, as argued by Andrew Whiten,
Robin Dunbar, and
Simon Baron-Cohen.
citation needed
He has published on visual perception, cognition, learning, robotics, neural networks, genetic algorithms, human mate-choice, evolutionary game theory, and the origins of language, music, culture, intelligence, ideology and consciousness. He studies human mental adaptations for judgment, decision-making, strategic behavior and communication in social and sexual domains. Apart from mutual mate-choice and sexual selection theory, this includes work on:
Continued from above:
"At this point, I am certainly not a fan of the man. And I agree with earlier comments that there are insufficient secondary sources for the earlier parts of this article. But I think that Mr. Miller is an important and notable figure in the area of Evolutionary Psychology. Here's my evidence. Using Google, I identified the three journals that appear in the top of Google searches on "Evolutionary Psychology". They are: " Evolutionary Psychology", " Psychology Today", and " Science Daily". Searches for Geoffrey Miller in these journals find him as a writer, reviewed writer, or topic in 23 articles in Evolutionary Psychology, 12 articles or posts in Psychology Today (although 2 of those are about the obesity controversy), and 103 posts on Science Daily (although many of these seem to be duplicates, including the same line about his as a "Young Turk"). Of course some of these articles are speaking poorly of him, but that doesn't prevent him from being notable. And the top journals in his field do, according to this basic search, find him to be quite notable. Chaveyd ( talk) 03:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)" Quoted by Firecatalta ( talk) 04:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Vote for retaining article: Obvious notability in field Tim bates ( talk) 08:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
The Twitter coverage in the article is way out of proportion. If you want to retain it, I suggest doubling or tripling the information on his science. Tony (talk) 08:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
My edit summary got cut off by an accidental hit of the return key, so I'll put it here. I think Miller's claim is offensive and ridiculous too, but unfortunately we would either need a reliable source to include that information in the article in its current form (i.e. a stated fact), or else to have some grounds to cite it as a notable source criticizing Miller for inaccuracy. Firecatalta ( talk) 00:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
It would probably be worthwhile adding to the career section the podcast entitled "The mating grounds" which he authors/hosts with Tucker Max and Nils Parker. Details found at http://www.thematinggrounds.com/about-mating-grounds/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.88.44 ( talk) 09:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I just removed the following "including the website Jezebel, the magazine XOJane, and Disrupting Dinner Parties criticized his public statement about obese individuals," the problem with this is that it was sourced by these 3 websites themselves; these are primary sources, not se3condary sources and so fail to establish their own notability to be here. What is required is some piece (not copied from here) which talks about these 3 sites commenting on Miller's tweet, and because so far we dont have that I have removed all 3 sites. Other information in this section may be similarly vulnerable thought he initial wire ref looks fine to me. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 20:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Let us remove this twitter section altogether. It is not notable. Zezen ( talk) 13:02, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Geoffrey Miller (psychologist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
User:Greyfell is reverting attempts to remove the personally motivated gripe text.
May I have a guarantee that the editor has never had any personal contact with the subject of the article? Tony (talk) 05:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
personally motivated, present it here or take it to a noticeboard. Otherwise focus on content. Grayfell ( talk) 07:35, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
This section is exclusively based on primary sources, which is not compatible with Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Avoid_misuse_of_primary_sources. To make things worse all sources are websites. Not a single reliable secondary source. And such reliable secondary sources are mandatory in biographies of living persons, in particular if contents is concerned that is injurious to a person's reputation. So, according to our rules, the section definitely needs to be removed. I know what steps to take if the removal is undone again. Please refrain from undoing it again. -- Saidmann ( talk) 19:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
@ Saidmann: I have reincluded the controversy in the career section with some adjustments. It is notable and it was covered by NPR which is a reliable source. If you remove that, I will alert other editors because it's simply edit warring at that point. You need to gain consensus on the talk page before you go removing large bodies of text. Sxologist ( talk) 11:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Why do Miller's political views keep being removed? The guy started as a self-proclaimed lifelong Democrat who wrote anti-capitalist books (Spent) but has now become a Tucker Carlson-loving member of the far right. That's an incredibly interesting conversion that people deserve to know about. Is someone trying to protect Miller by hiding these views from the public? 98.148.215.217 ( talk) 16:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)