| Revision as of 00:43, 21 April 2013 editCailil (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,119 edits -1: Patriarchy is mentioned in the first section (after the lede) teh subsection on Patriarchy can be moved up if needs be← Previous edit |
Revision as of 01:11, 21 April 2013 edit undoCailil (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,119 edits -1 and reorder furtherNext edit → |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
#Improve article to ] |
|
#Improve article to ] |
|
#Harmonize citation style (using <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki>) and making sure all relevant page numbers are included. |
|
#The articles citations need attention. All references need to use the <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki> template. And 33 citations needs page numbers. |
|
#33 citation needs page numbers |
|
|
#Section on "Mid-twentieth century" needs work: a) the first paragraph needs to bring together the de Beauvoir material and the second-wave material better; b) it should mention "difference feminism" somehow - it needs to convey that the assumptions underlying second-wave feminism were different than those underlying first-wave feminism. |
|
#Section on "Mid-twentieth century" needs work: a) the first paragraph needs to bring together the de Beauvoir material and the second-wave material better; b) it should mention "difference feminism" somehow - it needs to convey that the assumptions underlying second-wave feminism were different than those underlying first-wave feminism. |
|
#The "Pornography" section is a bit unclear. Could you spell out in a few sentences what exactly the debate was/is? The "Prostitution" section does that very well. |
|
|
#The "Socialism" subsection does not explain the general impact as well the other two sub-sections. It is too fact-based. |
|
#The "Socialism" subsection does not explain the general impact as well the other two sub-sections. It is too fact-based. |