curprev19:0219:02, 12 December 2022 173.177.138.219talk 117,354 bytes−286 remove uncited hyperbole. Nearly half of women sexually assualted in a year? Fringe at best but not cited anyway. Editors need to step up their game here.undo
curprev20:0620:06, 25 October 2022 Rrdurham5talkcontribs 117,170 bytes+2,789 I noticed there was no media angle in this article, and media is a crucial point to include when discussing sexual assault on a college campus. I made sure to include how activism is seen when using social media, as I think it is important to this topic.undoTags: Visual editDisambiguation links added
curprev03:3003:30, 4 September 2021 Jasper0333talkcontribs 109,344 bytes−198 →Criticism: This section cherrypicks one of Taylor's arguments (the one about using the word "sexual assault" in the survey, and acts like it's his only argument. Added all the other arguments he uses. Also there's no mention of Sommers in the source cited so I removed it. Also removed the section criticizing the criticism??? That's not what this section is for. A response to the criticism should be it's own section and not violate WP:SYNTHundoTag: Visual edit
curprev03:2603:26, 25 October 2020 Citation bottalkcontribs 107,461 bytes+276 Alter: url. URLs might have been internationalized/anonymized. Add: pmid, s2cid. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here. | Suggested by AManWithNoPlan | All pages linked from cached copy of User:AManWithNoPlan/sandbox2 | via #UCB_webform_linked 1467/5071undo
curprev11:2311:23, 24 November 2019 Citation bottalkcontribs m100,971 bytes+371 Alter: title, quote, url, issue. Add: work, issue, id, url, pmid. Removed URL that duplicated unique identifier. Removed accessdate with no specified URL. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were actually parameter name changes.| You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here.| Activated by User:Headbomb | via #UCB_webformundo
curprev20:4520:45, 5 October 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 99,311 bytes−944 →Criticism: removing second paragraph of critique from outsiders, but leaving first. I think this is a reasonable read of the RFC result (minority view should get some coverage, but less than mainstream view)undo
curprev19:4219:42, 19 September 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 100,767 bytes+789 →Measures: add. It might make sense to elaborate further here, but its not clear whether or not women attending college are more likely to be sexually assaulted compared to women of a similar age and demographic profile who do not attend collegeundo
curprev03:4203:42, 27 August 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 101,158 bytes−249 rv good faith edit: the definitions used actually aren't considered the main source of the difference in estimates. It's a difference in survey design. This should probably just be left as is as long as the rfc is ongoingundoTag: Undo
curprev15:4015:40, 16 August 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 101,186 bytes+28 Undid revision 911110334 by Mattnad (talk) It is. As evidenced by the sources already being discussed. Cleanup tags need to remain while the discussion is ongoing, and should be removed when the problem has been addressed through consensus.undoTag: Undo
curprev15:3615:36, 16 August 2019 Mattnadtalkcontribs 101,158 bytes−28 remove POV tag. This is no more dubious than methodologies that deliver very high estimates of assault. Unless we say all estimates are dubious then this is a NPOV violationundo
curprev13:5713:57, 16 August 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 123,458 bytes−585 →Criticism: removing claim about response bias and overly broad definitions. Taylor is not an expert on survey methodology, and he's giving a misleading characterization.undo
curprev20:5720:57, 15 August 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 123,539 bytes−1,847 →Criticism: rewording - ultimately I'm not sure how to address this without being overly pedantic, but this is essentially the core of what Sommers and Taylor argueundo
curprev23:0423:04, 14 August 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 125,235 bytes+47 →top: reword: the percentage estimate is not what is reported in the study, and it isn't a valid interpretation of this result - it's an incident rate, not a prevalence. Also added "dubious" tagundo
curprev21:5321:53, 14 August 2019 Nblundtalkcontribs 125,188 bytes−424 removing statement that college SA hasn't declined - again, I doubt this was part of the controversy, and the fact that something hasn't changed doesn't seem particularly lead-worthyundo
curprev18:3418:34, 13 August 2019 Flyer22 Frozentalkcontribs 125,346 bytes+64 The lead sentence, and its subsequent sentence, was clearer before. The new wording could imply to readers that all cases of campus sexual assault includes rape.undo