 | IQ classification has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 29, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about IQ classification.
|
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
 | A fact from IQ classification appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 2 October 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
The idea that Feynman actually scored a 125 on an IQ test of some kind is ridiculous on the face of it. Yes, I know that the man himself liked to tell the story, but I can only assume that he was having his usual iconoclastic fun in doing so. The man who taught himself calculus by age 15 was in the high gifted range, to be sure, and those who accept the story on face value are flunking one of life's little IQ tests themselves. The fact that his biographer accepted it says more about the leftist antipathy to intelligence testing than it does about Feynman. Of course, I can't prove that he didn't actually get such a score on a test, but if he did, it would have been as a prankk - the kid knew what he could do. MarkinBoston ( talk) 20:34, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Well back then (when was it?) the tests where not made to exclude certain biases, so it could be true and if he did poorly on the general knowledge, word meaning, spelling, perception, puzzle etc parts, he could get a lower score! Thats why these days they are all on logic puzzles, pure intelligence without he effect or memory, general knowledge etc!-- Femanistfantasical ( talk) 09:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
In popular media, you see lots of articles talking about how so and so has an IQ of 200-250 or something ridiculous. Since this is not feasible with most reliable tests, should there be a section discussing this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.27.204.252 ( talk) 14:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not unless there’s a reliable source, otherwise it’s WP:OR Dronebogus ( talk) 16:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
"I.Q. test results" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
I.Q. test results and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 6#I.Q. test results until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
An anonymous username, not my real name 02:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
its missing the lower half of the average range. Looking at the source, “normal or average” should be 90-110. Not 110
Terman's Stanford–Binet original (1916) classification IQ Range ("ratio IQ") IQ Classification Above 140 "Near" genius or genius
120–140 Very superior intelligence
110–120 Superior intelligence
110 Normal, or average, intelligence
80–90 Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness
70–80 Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as dullness, often as feeble-mindedness
Below 70 Definite feeble-mindedness 68.55.76.245 ( talk) 01:24, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- done, Thanks. Moons of Io ( talk) 01:27, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
|
| IQ classification has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 29, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
|
| Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about IQ classification.
|
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
|
| A fact from IQ classification appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 2 October 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| |
The idea that Feynman actually scored a 125 on an IQ test of some kind is ridiculous on the face of it. Yes, I know that the man himself liked to tell the story, but I can only assume that he was having his usual iconoclastic fun in doing so. The man who taught himself calculus by age 15 was in the high gifted range, to be sure, and those who accept the story on face value are flunking one of life's little IQ tests themselves. The fact that his biographer accepted it says more about the leftist antipathy to intelligence testing than it does about Feynman. Of course, I can't prove that he didn't actually get such a score on a test, but if he did, it would have been as a prankk - the kid knew what he could do. MarkinBoston ( talk) 20:34, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Well back then (when was it?) the tests where not made to exclude certain biases, so it could be true and if he did poorly on the general knowledge, word meaning, spelling, perception, puzzle etc parts, he could get a lower score! Thats why these days they are all on logic puzzles, pure intelligence without he effect or memory, general knowledge etc!-- Femanistfantasical ( talk) 09:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
In popular media, you see lots of articles talking about how so and so has an IQ of 200-250 or something ridiculous. Since this is not feasible with most reliable tests, should there be a section discussing this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.27.204.252 ( talk) 14:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not unless there’s a reliable source, otherwise it’s WP:OR Dronebogus ( talk) 16:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
"I.Q. test results" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
I.Q. test results and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 6#I.Q. test results until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
An anonymous username, not my real name 02:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
its missing the lower half of the average range. Looking at the source, “normal or average” should be 90-110. Not 110
Terman's Stanford–Binet original (1916) classification IQ Range ("ratio IQ") IQ Classification Above 140 "Near" genius or genius
120–140 Very superior intelligence
110–120 Superior intelligence
110 Normal, or average, intelligence
80–90 Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness
70–80 Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as dullness, often as feeble-mindedness
Below 70 Definite feeble-mindedness 68.55.76.245 ( talk) 01:24, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- done, Thanks. Moons of Io ( talk) 01:27, 27 May 2023 (UTC)