Talk:Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales

message: I can't edit the first paragraph for some reason, but I really take issue to the phrase "intellectually deficient children." I think it's appropriate to use person-first terminology and not stigmatize disabilities and differences. "Children with intellectual delays and/or difficulties" would be more correct and appropriate. Can this change be made?
I did make one change in the "Development" section. Again, this was a PC issue: the "problem of retardation"? Calling mental retardation a "problem" is a bit harsh.  I made it a bit more neutral.
Your feelings should not trump technical terminology.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.56.240 (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: PC and Person-first Language

message: Article should indicate how widely used (and for what purposes) this test is at present, and describe the nature of the present exam.  A surprisingly weak article as it now stands.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.225.169.12 (talk) 23:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weak Article 

message: I doubt that Victor Henri was born in 1892 if the tests he assisted in the development of were dated to 1896.  Or is "assistant" a cute way of saying "experimental subject"? —JerryFriedman  (Talk) 04:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there an intelligence test in the lead? 

message: I made this []. It is not in the paper cited, I added the pdf of the paper to the references section. The quote does appear in:
Intelligence: The Ability to Learn, or More? A Review of "Handbook ...
Editorial Review - ed.gov
ED243065 - Intelligence: The Ability to Learn, or More? A Review of "Handbook of Human Intelligence" by Robert S. Sternberg.
[], in reference to "retarded" children.Tstrobaugh (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect material

message: 3 years olds: (1)on being asked, the child points to eyes,nose and mouth.
              (2)After hearing two(spoken) digits,the child repeats them correctly.
              (3)Identifies objects in a picture.
              (4)On listening six sylables,the child repeats them in sequence.
7 years olds: (1)On being asked,shows right hand and left ear.
              (2)Describes a picture.
              (3)Carries out three commands given simultaneously.
              (4)Counts th value of six coins.
15 year olds: (1)After listening,repeats by speaking 7 digits.
              (2)Finds 3 rhymes for a given word within a minute.
              (3)After listening,repeats a sentence of 26 syllables.
              (4)Interprets a set of given facts  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.172.24.10 (talk) 06:11, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Items for various ages in the Bimon & Simon test '' 

message: I see this article can use a lot of editing. 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 these 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. It will be extremely helpful for articles on human intelligence to edit them according to the  Wikipedia standards for reliable sources for medicine-related articles, as it is important to get these issues as well verified as possible. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 20:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing 

message: Even as long ago as 1968, when I underwent Army testing, the Stanford-Binet was not used.  Instead, they used a "GT" test, even on draftees, for purposes of assigning MOSes.  So the historical "facts" in the article seem a tad iffy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.149.170 (talk) 17:17, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's your reading of the facts that's "iffy". The article states that the SB was used in developing the Army Alpha and the Army Beta tests, not that the SB was administered by the military. And the Alpha and Beta tests were developed in 1917. So you are referring to the wrong test and you're off by about half a century. Cresix (talk) 00:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are no citations at all on that paragraph of the article. I have some sources at hand, and have previously read others, on the development of the Stanford-Binet, on the one hand, and on the development of the World War I Army Alpha and Beta tests, on the other hand. Both sets of tests were plainly influenced by ideas that preceded both in the psychological community. Off hand, I don't recall a specific statement from any reliable source that says "the SB was used in developing the Army Alpha and the Army Beta tests" in exactly those terms. If some editor digs into one of the many sources in my  source list on the subject that we can all share in using, or into some other source, and confirms the statement, that would be great. Or if the sources say something a little more nuanced, and article text is revised to match the source, that would be great. The main point is to back up article text with reliable sources, as that is Wikipedia policy. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 02:05, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. There is conflicting information in different Wikipedia articles. Otis-Lennon School Ability Test states that Otis developed Army Alpha and Army Beta. Robert Yerkes states that Yerkes developed those tests. I have some sources at my office that I'll check, but I don't know that they will have info about the army tests. In the mean time, this source states: "The Alpha and Beta tests were the first aptitude tests. They were inspired by the success of the Stanford-Binet and developed by Robert Yerkes for quick large scale assessment of US Army recruits during World War I." In the absence of other sources, I think we should using similar phrasing (i.e., inspired by the SB). Cresix (talk) 02:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting statement. I'll keep an eye on this issue as I scan the historical sections of the sources I have at hand. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 03:40, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Stanford-Binet by Military 

message: I just tagged one section of the article as dubious, with direction to this talk page section, as the article text is quite plainly wrong, based on sources I have at hand. The "source" now cited there is an amateur website, not a Wikipedia  reliable source. Who has sources at hand for editing this article? Many statements in the article text need checking. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 01:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I should have enough sources at hand now to begin slogging into revising the article soon. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 23:43, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are reliable sources for the historical statements here? 

message: The criticism in this section  seems to be about IQ tests in general. There is nothing specific to the S-B. I added a statement to that effect in the section. As it stands now, I am wondering if the section should even be here. It seems the more general article on intelligence testing is a more appropriate place. There is probably documented criticism about this test in particular. If anyone is aware of this and the sources that contain the information please update the section. If not we should discuss moving it. --Probing Mind (talk) 07:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questioning Criticism Section Comment 

message: Article 3.2 Validity of the Modern Scale uses a word 'gloading' which is unknown both to me and to wiktionary.  Is it a real word, or just a typo?
: That's a typo. Thanks for catching that. I have corrected that place to read "g loading," which is the correct professional term. I fixed some other problems along the way. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:21, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo or what? 

message: Substituted at 06:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: This article provides examples of where the Stanford-Binet is used in the present day. However it provides no evidence that this is actually the case. Without any sources this chapter should probably be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runarberg (talk • contribs) 20:58, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs citations in the “Present Use” section 

message: Hi everyone, I am learning to edit wiki-articles on the history of psychology as a part of my Master's Degree Theory and History of Psychology. I noticed that there is not a separate wiki page on the Binet-Simon test in English. I would like to write this! (and perhaps a lot of what was written here in the Binet-Simon test can be transfered to the new page). Would like to hear if you guys think this is a good idea.  Emma VDB Wiki Editor (talk) 13:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the Binet-Simon test has enough scholarly coverage to deserve its own article, and that the present article goes into too much detail on that test. As you're a new contributor, I recommend working on a draft article in your sandbox or in Draft:space and then using this Talk page to request a review. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 14:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the tip! I will get started on a draft in my sandbox and request a review here when I am finished. Looking forward to working together  Emma VDB Wiki Editor (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  new page on the Binet-Simon test