Debate test?
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This part is too long.
This part is to be developed.
This part is unclear.
This part is not neutral.
This part lacks references.
The style of this part needs to be reviewed.
dfdsfdsx
PROS
|
CONS
|
Keywords: test
To understand the debate
fsdfds
It can be written in a more concise way or be divided into different subsections.
It is incomplete or too telegraphic. How about taking it back?
It is too obscure or jargon. What if you made it more understandable?
It favors one of the two sides (“pro” or “con”) to the detriment of the other. The introduction should not take sides, but simply provide useful information for understanding the debate.
Some little-known facts or quotes are not sourced. References should be added in notes.
This part is written in a personal way (“I think that…”) or too familiar. It needs to be rewritten.
Pros
What are the pros of abortion?
Cons
What are the cons of abortion?
To go further
Bibliography
- Achille Dupas, Le Monde.
Webliography
- Auteur 1, Auteur 2, Auteur 3, Wiki.
Broken link
The page no longer exists at this address. How about updating the link?Insufficient quality reference
More rigorous or better argued content can be found for this argument.Incomplete reference
Some important fields have not been filled in. What if you complete them?
Videography
- dsfdsxdsx, Auvidéo.
Broken link
The page no longer exists at this address. How about updating the link?Insufficient quality reference
More rigorous or better argued content can be found for this argument.Incomplete reference
Some important fields have not been filled in. What if you complete them?
Related debates
Latest changes
Categories:
- Non-standard debate titles
- Debate titles to simplify
- Debate titles to be explained
- Debate drafts
- Sensitive debates
- Fanciful debates
- Redundant debates
- Unbalanced debates
- Debate plans to improve
- Too long debate introductions
- Debate introductions to develop
- Unclear debate introductions
- Partisan debate introductions
- Debate introductions lacking references
- Debate introductions whose style needs to be reviewed
- Dead links
- Insufficient quality references
- Incomplete references
- Debates
- Culture
- Ecology
- Economy
- Education
- Ethics
- Geopolitics
- Health
- History
- Law
- Philosophy
- Planning
- Politics
- Psychology
- Religion and spirituality
- Science
- Society
- Sport and leisure
- Technology