Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sexual revolution"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(should be 60s and 70s) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
There was a sexual revolution in the 50s? Where? --[[User:Emmeline|Emmeline]] 14:01, 8 May 2007 (EDT) | There was a sexual revolution in the 50s? Where? --[[User:Emmeline|Emmeline]] 14:01, 8 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
:I think the writer means it had its roots in ideas developed in the 50s? It would be much more appropriate to say 60s and 70s, though. [[User:Human|Human]] 15:15, 8 May 2007 (EDT) | :I think the writer means it had its roots in ideas developed in the 50s? It would be much more appropriate to say 60s and 70s, though. [[User:Human|Human]] 15:15, 8 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==References that do not support the statement== | ||
| + | The statement | ||
| + | :He used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated | ||
| + | is followed by two references. Although both of the references make many unflattering statements about Kinsey, ''neither of them says anything about his statistical sampling methods.'' | ||
| + | The statement should be supported by a reference that analyzes his statistical methodology. To say that his statistical sampling methods must be faulty because he was an unpleasant person is a very pure example of argument ''ad hominem.'' [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 15:20, 8 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 19:20, May 8, 2007
There was a sexual revolution in the 50s? Where? --Emmeline 14:01, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
- I think the writer means it had its roots in ideas developed in the 50s? It would be much more appropriate to say 60s and 70s, though. Human 15:15, 8 May 2007 (EDT)
References that do not support the statement
The statement
- He used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated
is followed by two references. Although both of the references make many unflattering statements about Kinsey, neither of them says anything about his statistical sampling methods. The statement should be supported by a reference that analyzes his statistical methodology. To say that his statistical sampling methods must be faulty because he was an unpleasant person is a very pure example of argument ad hominem. Dpbsmith 15:20, 8 May 2007 (EDT)