Raffelate

Welcome!

Hi Raffelate, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Without question. Raffelate (talk) 13:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

R&I

Hi Raffelate, welcome to Wikipedia! You're certainly not the first editor to identify problems with Wikipedia misrepresenting sources on the issues of race and intelligence. See the discussion from 2021 on my talk page here[[1]] for one example. As noted in that discussion, consensus is opposed to even the relatively mundane idea that there's any resistance or taboo against research into race and intelligence, despite that fact being extremely well-documented.[2][3][4][5]

Given these issues are longstanding and highly contentious, coming in guns blazing so to speak isn't advisable. I'd recommend you start by contributing to non-contentious articles, in order to gain more experience and understanding of the nuances of editing and consensus-building on Wikipedia before wading into more contentious areas. Walk softly upon the earth and she will bless you with her grace. Happy editing :) Stonkaments (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

While there is some good advice in that second paragraph, and I'd certainly encourage you to try editing constructively in other areas, I'd like to cut off any ideas that anybody might have that one can build clout here and then cash in that clout by editing subtly but tendentiously on one's hobby horse topics. Attempts to falsely legitimise Scientific Racism as contemporary science will never be accepted no matter how artfully disguised.

Raffelate, If you have any other interests which are compatible with an encyclopaedia then by all means try working on articles about those but if you are only here to promote a specific fringe viewpoint then it would save everybody a lot of trouble if you just stopped. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I resent the implication; nowhere did I hint at anything to the effect of building "clout" to later cash it in on subversive editing in favor of a specific viewpoint. Please WP:Assume good faith. Contentious articles are simply hard to navigate for a newcomer, so it's better to come back after gaining experience on more mellow articles first. Contrarian viewpoints and contributions are always welcome on Wikipedia, if they follow the sources, especially on topics where the consensus has a well-documented history of misrepresenting said sources. Stonkaments (talk) 01:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Ah yes I see from reading your kindly provided leads that Wikipedia is now edited according to the consensus among Wikipedia editors rather than academics.[6] How very odd. Raffelate (talk) 16:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Heritability of IQ. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. It's rather depressing that such brazen liars are allowed free rein around here is a clear personal attack. Do not do that again. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

You know what else deters editors? Brazen corruption supported by admins. Raffelate (talk) 16:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Jesus Christ could you keep this pathetic display off my talk page. Raffelate (talk) 17:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

As long as you stop attacking people, sure. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 17:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)