Talk:Population of Helsinki metropolitan area: Difference between revisions

From Opasnet
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Parameters corrected)
Line 27: Line 27:


:{{defend|3|You might want to contact Statistics Finland to have them explain how they derive these numbers and formulate your uncertainty interval |--[[User:Eva Kunseler|Eva Kunseler]]{{attack|4|Enter your attacking argumentation between these two bars|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 12:56, 4 June 2009 (EEST)}}
:{{defend|3|You might want to contact Statistics Finland to have them explain how they derive these numbers and formulate your uncertainty interval |--[[User:Eva Kunseler|Eva Kunseler]]{{attack|4|Enter your attacking argumentation between these two bars|--[[User:Jouni|Jouni]] 12:56, 4 June 2009 (EEST)}}
}}
}}
}}

Revision as of 13:28, 16 November 2009

Geographic Extent

How to read discussions

Fact discussion: .
Opening statement: Administrative boundaries should define study area

Closing statement: Resolution not yet found.

(A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:

←--1: . Assessment includes only the Helsinki Met Area, and these boundaries should be used to 'clip' higher resolution population data (e.g. EEA grid) if used --Dvienneau 14:57, 17 February 2009 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

←--2: . The adminstrative boundaries define the study area indeed. The population data could be organised in different grids, because this provides more detailed information --Eva Kunseler 15:08, 18 February 2009 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

Source of data

How to read discussions

Fact discussion: .
Opening statement: The source of data should not be defined as a boundary

Closing statement: Accepted!

(A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:
←--#:: . There could be other sources of data that can be used to define this variable --Eva Kunseler 15:31, 18 February 2009 (EET)--Dvienneau 15:42, 18 February 2009 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

Validity of Projections

How to read discussions

Fact discussion: .
Opening statement: Validity of Statistics FI population projections

Closing statement: Resolution not yet found.

(A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:

←--1: . How can we assess the validity of these projections? Can we assign errors/confidence intervals to these projections? --Dvienneau 14:06, 18 February 2009 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

←--2: . How sensitive are Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL) assessment results to uncertainty in the population projections --Dvienneau 14:06, 18 February 2009 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

←--3: . You might want to contact Statistics Finland to have them explain how they derive these numbers and formulate your uncertainty interval --Eva Kunseler⇤--4: . Enter your attacking argumentation between these two bars --Jouni 12:56, 4 June 2009 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)