Talk:Population of Helsinki metropolitan area: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Parameters corrected) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{discussion | {{discussion | ||
| | |Statements= Administrative boundaries should define study area | ||
| | |Resolution= | ||
|Argumentation = {{defend|1 | |Argumentation = | ||
{{defend|1|[[Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL) | 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|--[[User:Dvienneau|Dvienneau]] 14:57, 17 February 2009 (EET)}} | |||
{{defend| | {{defend|2|The adminstrative boundaries define the study area indeed. The population data could be organised in different grids, because this provides more detailed information|--[[User:Eva Kunseler|Eva Kunseler]] 15:08, 18 February 2009 (EET)}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 12: | Line 13: | ||
{{discussion | {{discussion | ||
| | |Statements= The source of data should not be defined as a boundary | ||
| | |Resolution= Accepted! | ||
|Argumentation = {{defend|#: |There could be other sources of data that can be used to define this variable|--[[User:Eva Kunseler|Eva Kunseler]] 15:31, 18 February 2009 (EET)--[[User:Dvienneau|Dvienneau]] 15:42, 18 February 2009 (EET)}}}} | |Argumentation = {{defend|#: |There could be other sources of data that can be used to define this variable|--[[User:Eva Kunseler|Eva Kunseler]] 15:31, 18 February 2009 (EET)--[[User:Dvienneau|Dvienneau]] 15:42, 18 February 2009 (EET)}}}} | ||
== Validity of Projections == | == Validity of Projections == | ||
{{discussion | {{discussion | ||
| | |Statements= Validity of Statistics FI population projections | ||
| | |Resolution= | ||
|Argumentation ={{defend|1 | |Argumentation = | ||
{{defend|1|How can we assess the validity of these projections? Can we assign errors/confidence intervals to these projections? |--[[User:Dvienneau|Dvienneau]] 14:06, 18 February 2009 (EET)}} | |||
{{defend|2 | {{defend|2|How sensitive are [[ Assessment on impacts of emission trading on city-level (ET-CL) ]] assessment results to uncertainty in the population projections |--[[User:Dvienneau|Dvienneau]] 14:06, 18 February 2009 (EET)}} | ||
:{{defend|3 | :{{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 13:27, 16 November 2009
Geographic Extent
| 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
| 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
{{discussion |Statements= Validity of Statistics FI population projections |Resolution= |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)