Talk:Bender-Gestalt Test

Edit request: External Links section addition (1938 monograph)

Disclosure: I am the owner of whats-your-iq.com, a free educational website that hosts an open archive of public-domain historical IQ tests. Per WP:COI I am not editing this article directly and am posting this {{edit request}} for an independent editor's review. COI disclosure is on my user page.

Proposed addition: Create a new "External links" section (this article currently has none).

==External links==

* [https://whats-your-iq.com/en/historical-iq-tests/bender-visual-motor-gestalt-1938 Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test archive page] - whats-your-iq.com archive page documenting Lauretta Bender's 1938 monograph and the nine Wertheimer gestalt-psychology figures she adapted. Free educational resource for the history of the test instrument. Modern Bender-II forms remain under copyright and are not provided.

{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Cognitive tests]]
[[Category:Projective tests]]

Rationale: The Bender-Gestalt article lacks an External Links section entirely. The 1938 Bender monograph (A Visual Motor Gestalt Test and Its Clinical Use, American Orthopsychiatric Association Research Monograph No. 3) is in the public domain in the United States. The WYI archive page documents the historical context and the nine Wertheimer figures Bender adapted. Modern Bender-II forms are explicitly out of scope; only the 1938 public-domain version is documented.

Per WP:ELNO I confirm:

• The link is to a free, public-domain resource (not paywalled).
• The link is a substantive supplement to the article.
• The link is not primarily promotional.
• If an independent editor judges this fails ELNO, please decline this request and I will not re-post.

Baycanemir (talk) 11:33, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Baycanemir, and thank you for your suggestion. In my opinion, the web page you linked is excessively promotional and fails WP:ELNO. For instance, there is a large box at the bottom of the page that says "Take the Modern IQ Test." For that reason, I am declining this edit request. Altamel (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Altamel, thank you for the prompt review and for engaging with the substance. I would like to respectfully push back on the ELNO assessment and offer a revised proposal.

On the "promotional" finding: whats-your-iq.com sells no product or service. The "Take the Modern IQ Test" link points to a free test that requires no account, no payment, and collects no email. WP:ELNO #5 ("Sites that primarily exist to sell products or services") presupposes a commercial offering, which is not present here. By the same standard, Wikipedia articles routinely link to free educational sites with prominent CTAs (Khan Academy lessons, Internet Archive itself has a "Donate" button on every page, Duolingo's free course pages, OpenLearn, etc.). The presence of a free-access CTA does not, by itself, make a site fail ELNO.

On the substantive content: the WYI Bender-Gestalt page documents Lauretta Bender's 1938 A Visual Motor Gestalt Test and Its Clinical Use (American Orthopsychiatric Association Research Monograph No. 3) and the nine Wertheimer gestalt-psychology figures she adapted. This is encyclopedic primary-source content not currently linked from the article and not duplicated by the article body.

Acknowledging the legitimate concern: I understand the UI prominence of the "Modern IQ Test" CTA on the same page creates a perception of promotion that you reasonably flagged. I can adjust the WYI page itself to make the historical-archive section visually independent of the general-site navigation (suppress the CTA on archive subpages, or anchor-link to a sub-section without the CTA), if that would address your concern. I would like to know whether that adjustment would satisfy the ELNO concern before re-engaging.

Separately on the Internet Archive primary-source links: on the Talk:Army Beta and Talk:Kohs block design test decisions you noted that other editors are free to add the Internet Archive links if they wish. I will not push for those independently (I would have a COI concern about doing so), but I want to flag for the record that I think those primary-source links (Yoakum and Yerkes 1920; Kohs 1923) are clearly within ELNO and would improve those articles regardless of any WYI link. I leave that decision to uninvolved editors.

Thank you again for the review. Baycanemir (talk) 15:38, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Altamel, following up on my earlier reply. I have now made the source-page adjustment I offered, and I would appreciate your reassessment.

Changes made to the archive pages (all live as of 2026-06-06):

• The prominent "Take the Modern IQ Test" call-to-action has been replaced on all 91 historical-test archive pages with a small inline note that the modern test is available separately. The visual hierarchy now leads with citation, license, and historiographic content; the modern-test reference is a soft inline link.
• A "Cite this page" section has been added to the Historical IQ Tests Archive hub and each archive subpage, including BibTeX, RIS, and CSL JSON exports at , , and .
• Editorial content, transcription notes, and curation are now explicitly released under [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International]. Public-domain primary sources retain their public-domain status.
• The Bender-Gestalt subpage you specifically reviewed has been adjusted at the historical-archive URL; the only call-to-action above the fold or in the body now points back to the archive index, not to the modern test.

I am not renewing the edit requests at this time; I want to give you the opportunity to review the adjusted state and tell me whether you consider the WP:ELNO concern addressed before any further submission. If you maintain that the WYI archive page does not belong in External Links regardless of the page-level adjustment, that is a fair editorial judgement and I will accept it.

Thank you again for the substantive review. Baycanemir (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Baycanemir. I appreciate your willingness to update your website as you did. However, I am still not convinced that the web pages you wish to have included would qualify under WP:ELNO, as there are more fundamental concerns that would be unlikely to be addressed by page-level adjustments. The overall design of each of the pages is still aimed at getting readers to take an IQ test. In my opinion, that shows the link is "mainly intended to promote a website" contrary to the external links policy. "Promoting" a website isn't limited to collecting payment or an account registration; as you described it, the IQ test links on the web pages were a "call-to-action." As I view it, that demonstrates that those links were intended to promote the IQ tests by calling upon the reader to go to another page on the website and take the tests. WP:ELNO also discourages adding links to web pages with "objectionable amounts of advertising" and there are a lot of banner and pop-up ads on those pages. Other Wikipedia articles may have their own issues with promotional links, and depending on the content of the links, they may warrant removal. That's my judgment call, but if you strongly disagree, you are free to ask for a second opinion or start an RfC.

In addition, did you use an AI to draft these comments? If so, please be aware that we have a policy discouraging LLM-drafted talk page posts and would prefer that editors present comments in their own words.

While I am not able to support adding the links at this time, your website was an interesting read and I have given careful consideration to your requests. I hope that this addresses your reply, and thank your for your patience in awaiting my response. Altamel (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Altamel, two more quick notes.

You may have seen a cached version of the pages, caching can sometimes lag a few hours and the live state may look different now.

I also went further after your reply: Any Ad is now removed from the six pages we discussed, the header "Take IQ Test" button is removed, and the bottom CTA block is removed. What's left is the article body and a small citation/license section. Whether or not that changes your view, the pages are now what I think they should be.

If you do take another look with a hard refresh, you'll see what's actually there now.

Thanks again. Baycanemir (talk) 19:59, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Altamel, thank you for the careful and substantive response, and for explaining the deeper concern. I take your judgment on the COI question and on the broader promotional pattern, and I accept the decline on these six articles as final.

On the question of LLM use: yes, I used an AI assistant to help structure and word the earlier reply. I now understand from the policy you noted that talk-page contributions should be in editors' own words. I am writing this comment myself and will do so going forward.

I have made one further adjustment in good faith for any future use of these archive pages: the six pages we discussed (Army Alpha, Army Beta, Stanford�Binet 1916, Kohs Block Design 1923, Trail Making Test 1944, and the Bender 1938 Visual-Motor Gestalt) now serve with no AdSense script, no "Take IQ Test" header button, and no promotional CTA blocks. They retain only a small citation/license section and the article body. This is independent of the Wikipedia decision; it is what I think the editorially clean state should look like.

Thank you again for the time you spent. Baycanemir (talk) 19:45, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Baycanemir - understood, and thank you for your responses to my concerns and your updates to the website. I appreciate your prompt replies and willingness to engage with my review of your edit request. On the positive side, I predict that visitors to your website will like the content refresh and decreased number of ads. Best of luck with your endeavors. Altamel (talk) 20:50, 6 June 2026 (UTC)