The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
<blockquote>'''''Mankind Quarterly''''' is a [[peer-reviewed]] [[Academic journal|journal]] that has been described as a "cornerstone of the [[scientific racism]] establishment", a "[[white supremacist]] journal", and "a pseudo-scholarly outlet for promoting racial inequality". It covers [[physical anthropology|physical]] and [[cultural anthropology]], including [[human evolution]], [[intelligence (trait)|intelligence]], [[ethnography]], [[linguistics]], [[mythology]], [[archaeology]], and [[biology]]. It is published by the Ulster Institute for Social Research, which is presided over by [[Richard Lynn]].</blockquote> | <blockquote>'''''Mankind Quarterly''''' is a [[peer-reviewed]] [[Academic journal|journal]] that has been described as a "cornerstone of the [[scientific racism]] establishment", a "[[white supremacist]] journal", and "a pseudo-scholarly outlet for promoting racial inequality". It covers [[physical anthropology|physical]] and [[cultural anthropology]], including [[human evolution]], [[intelligence (trait)|intelligence]], [[ethnography]], [[linguistics]], [[mythology]], [[archaeology]], and [[biology]]. It is published by the Ulster Institute for Social Research, which is presided over by [[Richard Lynn]].</blockquote> | ||
A Wikipedia user correctly pointed this discrepancy out; that the "peer-review label" might send a false message of scientific credibility, as the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mankind_Quarterly#Revert_explanation wikipedia article on Peer review] does not point out that Peer review can be manipulated to promote a false sense of credibility. However, a Wikipedia admin had dissmised the possiblity out of "not being the average editor": | A Wikipedia user correctly pointed this discrepancy out; that the "peer-review label" might send a false message of scientific credibility, as the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mankind_Quarterly#Revert_explanation wikipedia article on Peer review] does not point out that Peer review can be manipulated to promote a false sense of credibility. However, a Wikipedia admin had dissmised the possiblity out of "not being the average editor": | ||
<blockquote>Well-said. To the average reader, these descriptions are badges indicating that the journal is respectable and reliable. Sure, many of us know that there are too many predatory journals (this one isn't predatory) that also use that description, but we aren't the average reader. Doug Weller talk 14:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC) | <blockquote>Well-said. To the average reader, these descriptions are badges indicating that the journal is respectable and reliable. Sure, many of us know that there are too many predatory journals (this one isn't predatory) that also use that description, but we aren't the average reader. Doug Weller talk 14:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC) | ||