About your bit on the intelligence quotient article

edit

Hello Petruspennanen, The reason I added the (citation needed) template is so your edit wouldn't be reverted as vandalism. I know what you mean, and I know you're right. However, this is an encyclopedia for the layman, and most people will not understand what you pointed out (the last time you added it, someone -who considers himself an "ad hoc" expert on intelligence- removed the passage as "nonsense"). I just don't want to see this happen once more, so this is why I strongly suggest you find some textbook reference to anchor the statement before someone else who doesn't understand the point but thinks he does reverts your edit again. The decision is yours; I just thought I'd point out the circumstances and the consequences.--Ramdrake 18:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)Reply


Speedy deletion of Leiki

edit
 

A tag has been placed on Leiki requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- pb30<talk> 06:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply