Talk:Child prodigy/Archive 1

message: IMHO this page gives little light and too much personal opinion.
:I agree. Working on it. --Alex S 17:55, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Too Little Light?

message: Should there be one? Candidates:Jesus Christ(teaching at 12), Dai Lama(Spiritual head while still a child), --Jondel 07:31, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Both strongly agree and strongly disagree for the reason listed below. --Master Psychologist 12:07, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Spirituality Category

message: I've added the template because:
*This list hasn't been verified and any kid can add their name freely (Ivan Cherevko, for example)
*Its becoming a dumpsite for marginally-deleted vanity VfDs
*Half the people on this list probably aren't child prodigies
The list needs checking for accuracy, so I hope the template stays until it is. Hedley 21:16, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verification 

message: This is a very good article, one of the best in Internet, but I would suggest that edit wars being fought here are doing no good.
So or we shall remove every living person on the list, leaving only dead and famous, or retuen all those that been deleted because of "lack of notability", but actually quite notable and fascinating. Priyanshu Kumar, Willem Klein, Chris Hirata, Dmitri Sguoros, Sean Bennett, Stephanie Overton, Merrill Kenneth Wolfe, Ivan Cherevko, Meghan Kearney, Steven Spielberg etc. AFAIK, they are all verifiable by some means. Teenage filmmakers, youngest writers, musicians and artists are all notable.
Or, again, delete all the rest living of pre-60, as Jondel said.
I would also lobby adding of Brandenn Bremmer. Master Psychologist
*Brandenn Bremmer commited suicide. If you were the parent, would you appreciate the publicity? Wouldn't this be harsh on them?--Jondel 01:19, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two ways 

message: From the article: It is rumored that Fanning learned to read at age two. She rose to stardom as a young girl, being chosen for a Tide commercial at age five.
Seems like a good candidate for C.P.--Jondel 00:32, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dakota Fanning 

message: What's about Jondel's idea of Spirituality section? Any ideas yet? --Master Psychologist 30 June 2005 17:34 (UTC)
*Candidates:
-Dai Lama was a spiritual leader at less than 10 years old.--Jondel 1 July 2005 00:05 (UTC)
:Jesus Christ; Buddha; others? In fact, every Dalai Lama was spiritual leader since birth. --Master Psychologist 3 July 2005 07:15 (UTC)
::Amazing. I agree with you on that one. Most spiritual leaders were. Hedley 3 July 2005 11:44 (UTC)
:::Not most, but many. Few enough to be fitted in Spirituality category. Hedley, Wikipedia's mission is to expand, not to stay on one place. --Master Psychologist 6 July 2005 11:43 (UTC)
::::Well, expanding doesn't mean including the unnecessary. Hedley 6 July 2005 15:32 (UTC)
:::::Unnecessary? In your opinion unnecessary? --Master Psychologist 8 July 2005 18:20 (UTC)
Well, there is no explicit request, (nor notable ? outside their following  or group/church,etc ?) maybe not necessary.--Jondel 00:27, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: --T. Anthony 06:32, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reconsidering spirituality 

message: I think that including David Farragut is inaccurate. At the time that he did recieve his naval command, which was during the Napoleonic period and the War of 1812, it wasn't uncommon to give midshipmen command of prize ships. The article defines a child prodigy as "someone who is a master of one or more skills or arts at an early age." The article on David Farragut simply states that he brought the prize ship safely to port; it doesn't appear that he fired every gun himself or, frankly, did anything very unusual or special in his fairly common first command. I wonder if he is included simply because he's the most famous midshipman who commanded a prize ship? --Aerodotus 01:11, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a book with an article on him and he was exceptional. He was bilingual(Spanish) and won many difficult battles. I guess I should update more of his exploits. He was the first Admiral of the US. It wasn't also easy for him because at his young age, he was experiencing a lot of insubordination from the older men. It is fine with me to remove. But then we should also remove the ones for politics and maybe some others by your definition and include many others.--Jondel 01:59, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm. Interesting. Although being bilingual almost doesn't seem unusual  for the time, what with most educated people of the upper classes having some French, and possibly Greek and/or Latin. Food for thought, that. --Aerodotus 00:07, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Including David Farragut 

message: I am concerned with the deterioration of the article. There is currently no progress, at all, in the main body of the article, only an evolution of the list. Wikigurus, what should be done? The list is rapidly replacing the article, and neither are any good. Perhaps we should seperate the list into a separate article? Danielfong 06:09, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think separating the list from the article is a good idea. I know some feel there are already too many lists, and there may indeed be I don't know, but as is I think the list is taking up most of the space so maybe drowning the article out. On authenticity of the list I'm not sure what we'd do there. It's in like a thousand different directions and I'm not sure anyone is informed enough in everything from painting to law to judge it all.--T. Anthony 07:40, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deterioration of the Article 

message: List of child prodigies is now its own article. This was a rather radical thing to do, but I feel the list was garnering a disproportionate amount of the interest. Possibly now the article itself can be more detailed.--T. Anthony 04:43, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: NNNNOOOOOOoooooohh. (just kidding, just kidding :) )--Jondel 05:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was prepared for some real objections, but the list isn't gone so it's not like I destroyed anything. Having the list be called a list kind of makes sense anyway.--T. Anthony 12:57, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: I separated it

message: This article, and its sister article LIST OF... are among the worst wikipedia entries I have ever seen. MASSIVE confusion over what constitutes a child prodigy... I've made a rather lengthy discussion contribution over at LIST OF CHILD PRODIGIES, and would ask that all those involved in this article take a look. One point - there really isnt any other type of prodigy - so why the redundant "child"??? That elementary mistake exemplifies the problems with wiki.
:Could you help by giving some idea how to fix it? As for the redundancy "child prodigy" is the term often used. Common speech is redundant sometimes, but I'm not sure why that means dumping it.--T. Anthony 23:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I read somewhere that a child prodigy is a child performing at an adult level or high skill at an adult level. I will look for web references. I think i can trim out the redundant 'child'.  --Jondel 04:16, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awful, simply awful 

message: Admittedly I don't quite get this. How is saying Wesley Crusher, The Royal Tennenbaums, or Little Man Tate about child prodigies spoil anything? That's how the characters are advertised. In the case of the Tennenbaums it's not even really about that as the child prodigy portions end like in the first half hour.--T. Anthony 08:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler warning? 

message: What happened to the list of prodigies?
:There 's a link at the top.--Jondel 01:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WHat happened

message: It's also misleading. There are numerous accounts of people being unusually skilled in multiple areas from an early age, quite a few of them on the same page. Zhu Da is even listed for being both painter and poet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.64.129.200 (talk) 23:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This would seem to refer to the list as well, seeing as Akiane Kramarik is not even mentioned in this article. Her article is basically accurate to what is claimed of her and represents that these are claims.--T. Anthony 20:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Akiane Kramark link reads like marketing copy. 

message: Were there children who were prodigies because they just matured mentally much more quickly than others their age but as adults were not really exceptionally intelligent? (They were considered very smart as children but others their age caught up to them years later.) --Jagz 09:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean that there are some child prodigies because they are just extremely intelligent. Other "prodigies" may be the result of their brain freakishly developing mentally/intellectually much earlier than it is supposed to, however, the development levels out and the end result is that they are not brilliant as adults. They can perform as adults when they are children. I'm not saying they slow down, just that they level out as intelligent but are not geniuses. They were whiz kids but not whiz adults. I am just speculating here. Maybe I'm wrong. --Jagz 18:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know of prodigies who did not succeed in later life or ended up leading "normal lives." Adragon De Mello was hailed as a prodigy on TV, but works at Home Depot the last I heard. However in that he case he has largely disavowed the idea he ever was a child prodigy as it was largely his Dad's doing. The other cases I know of the prodigy stayed unusually smart, they just didn't succeed for other reasons. Maybe they lacked ambition or they even had personal problems that kept them back. The closest I can think of to what I believe you mean is a few cases where a child had one prodigious skill, which faded in adulthood.  There are several Mental calculators that would fit that.--T. Anthony 10:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe they exist. My feeling is that it doesn't typically work like that, but if there are cases I don't know of them. Danielfong 21:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mental maturation 

message: I know there is an article that lists child prodigies but should there be a child prodigy Category? --Jagz 23:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a category, but it was deleted over a year ago, see Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 January 19#Category:Child prodigies. Recreating it would likely get a "speedy delete."--T. Anthony 10:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Child prodigy Category? 

message: I would like to propose a cleanup of this page. I reached this page through Random Article and must say that the content is fascinating. However the poor formatting detracts from the ideas discussed. The section Cognitive studies on child prodigies is daunting to wade through. In fiction could also do with a cleanup. I'd be glad to know all editors' comments on this, and if there are no objections, I'll go ahead with the proposed cleanup. Thanks xC | ☎  15:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content? 

message: this edit removed a couple of paragraphs from the content. just wondering, how does any of that give an anti-nature impression?Regards, xC | ☎  08:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal?