Talk:IQ
IQ[edit source]
This was in "Most Wanted articles," so naturally I obliged. It's a bit short for a rather extensive topic, but my spork broke after sporking most of the first few paragraphs (and the image) from Wikipedia, so what do you, my respected peers, think would make this article funnier?
--Cainad 13:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's not bad. You might want to include a section on Famous People's IQs or even a sample test. I think that would work well. Questions like "If Suzy has 3 hands, how many baseballs can she juggle?" "Answer: None, because she died as a result of the serious birth defects." But I wou cock in the faceldnt' use that one, because it sucks. --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 13:39, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps like, you could make the intro a little shorter? It's too much info for that. Also, add a few other segments like above. Yoda: Quite okay this topic is.--Sixx~Click me! 14:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
It is good. The magic fairy known as 'random page' just landed me here. The main competitor to IQ as a psychometric device that's out there right now seems to be 'emotional intelligence' which you refer to as 'intrapersonal intelligence' here. More people would probably know the former term, I think. "Emotional intelligence - a second bite of the cherry for thick people" --WhatAJoyDivine 06:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello[edit source]
The following discussion was moved from: User talk:Flyingbird Who is Carol Fenjin? Do you really need the name in the picture and do the actual pictures add to humour? Anton (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- Do you think it is funnier without my name? I think that should be the main criterion, if you think it is funnier without a name, or otherwise, that can be discussed. If it is just as funny the way it is, or even funnier, it can stay like this. Cheers, Carol Flyingbird (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- I am not sure. The name definitely does not add anything, but I don't think it makes it less funnier or anything. Well, maybe it can make the reader wonder who you are (my case) and distracts them from jokes in the article. But is there no way to change the name, so it sounds funny, or backs up something the article says: I think that relevance to the text should be the main criterion, when judging an illustration. Anton (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Anton199, ok, I shall leave it like this then, and if someone wants to change it, he or she can feel free to do so! Cheers, Carol. Flyingbird (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- I think the name is fine because it's the sort of thing that has a name in it, and it would look wrongish without that I think. Just my take on it. – Llwy-ar-lawr (talk • contribs • logs) 23:52, 1 Mar 2014
- Thank you for your feedback, Llwy-ar-lawr, I appreciate that! Cheers, Carol. 09:50, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
- I think the name is fine because it's the sort of thing that has a name in it, and it would look wrongish without that I think. Just my take on it. – Llwy-ar-lawr (talk • contribs • logs) 23:52, 1 Mar 2014
- Hi Anton199, ok, I shall leave it like this then, and if someone wants to change it, he or she can feel free to do so! Cheers, Carol. Flyingbird (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- I am not sure. The name definitely does not add anything, but I don't think it makes it less funnier or anything. Well, maybe it can make the reader wonder who you are (my case) and distracts them from jokes in the article. But is there no way to change the name, so it sounds funny, or backs up something the article says: I think that relevance to the text should be the main criterion, when judging an illustration. Anton (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- After more than six years, no one has changed it, so I guess it is ok like this. Carol. Flyingbird (talk)