Talk:Methodology/Archives/2024/March

Original research
This article is riddled with original research. In particular, the entire "Examples" section ought be deleted. 24.126.199.129 04:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool 209.105.137.204 (talk) 18:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

I disagree - the examples given are not original. They are uncited and vague, which is different. Links need to be given to either the sources or if there are none, to other articles/websites which explain positivism and constructionism in more detail. But it is relevant stuff and shouldn't be deleted. Perhaps it should instead be complemented with an example of a justification of research design, or something like that?
 * (please sign your comments). I agree with whoever wrote the paragraph directly above.  The examples help the reader understand what a methodology is.  It sure helped me.     Th e Tr ans hu man ist    07:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * @ 2806:106E:1C:C00B:4A2:FD01:B768:B83F (talk) 03:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)