90
edits
Talk:Integration and tolerance: Difference between revisions
Talk:Integration and tolerance (view source)
Revision as of 19:35, 12 December 2010
, 19:35, 12 December 2010no edit summary
Jana Dlouha (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Paper title: | Dear Ilknur, you have made a very good and polite analysis of the article (which itself could be understood as an attempt to countervail author’s own relatively negative but not too rational perception of the problem). You have made a very good job as you have raised interesting point how to make some of the statements (which generalize to a great extent) concrete and thus rational, then suitable for mutual dialogue. | ||
--[[User:Jana Dlouha|Jana Dlouha]] 14:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
==== Paper title: ==== | |||
Integration and tolerance | Integration and tolerance | ||
=== Reviewer´s assessment: === | === Reviewer´s assessment (Ilknur Yilmaz): === | ||
== 1. Basic criteria == | == 1. Basic criteria == | ||
| Line 76: | Line 80: | ||
4.4.3. Quality of presentation is poor | 4.4.3. Quality of presentation is poor | ||
--[[User:Ilknur Yilmaz|Ilknur Yilmaz]] 10:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | --[[User:Ilknur Yilmaz|Ilknur Yilmaz]] 10:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Assessment from January 4th == | == Assessment from January 4th - Jana Dlouhá== | ||
The text has not very good formally (structure and logic, citations etc.). And also your arguments are not well justified, you have written your oppinions and not discussed with opposing views. | The text has not very good formally (structure and logic, citations etc.). And also your arguments are not well justified, you have written your oppinions and not discussed with opposing views. | ||
| Line 104: | Line 107: | ||
Just go to the roots, not only accept what somebody says! | Just go to the roots, not only accept what somebody says! | ||
'''Caroline Reibe: "vote on quality"''' | |||
Hi Jana, hi Josef! | |||
Here comes my second "vote on quality". I liked reading the essay but I found a few minor criticisms. I think there should have been more references that support his argumentation or highlight some special aspects. | |||
When he writes about the Islamic population and the fear about it, I missed an explanation that is different from fear of "the unbeknown". I would probably had mentioned the attack on the US in 2001 that caused a big anxiety towards all arabic cultures. This goes along with general suspicion and prejustice against this cultural group. | |||
It would have been nice to hear arguments of both sides in a more structured way and then come later to a conclusion. | |||
But I really liked the paragraph on European History ("What is the European identity?") because it gives a good short overview about the European values and the historical steps that were taken to todays stage. | |||
To sum up, I'd like to say, that I found the theme really interesting and the essay good and easily to read. | |||
Best regards, | |||
Caro | |||
--[[User:Reibe|Reibe]] 18:35, 12 December 2010 (CET) | |||