Talk:Preference theory

Catherine Hakim
There is no separate page for Catherine Hakim? That's a shame.--Vulc (talk) 18:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Third party sourcing
The vast majority of this article is sourced to Hakim herself. Half a sentence, sourced to a dictionary definition, does not change that fact. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

So what? The article cites a dictionary entry in the Dictionary of Sociology (which is a third party source) for preference theory, thereby clearly establishing its notability. Claiming it's not notable is just ridiculous. It's one of the most widely debated sociological theories for the last ten years or so, you find articles like "Hakim's preference theory in the Czech context". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soc628 (talk • contribs) 06:14, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No. A single dictionary definition does not "address the subject directly in detail", so is not "significant coverage" per WP:Notability. Additionally, sourcing the article almost entirely to Hakim results in an inherently unbalanced treatment. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Jesus Christ. The article contains several sources that are not written by Hakim. "preference theory" returns 8 280 Google Scholar results and has received significant coverage by any standards. Soc628 (talk) 06:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The article, striking what is cited to Hakim or uncited:

Doesn't leave much left, does it? HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The article needs more work. Much of this could easily be replaced by citing works by others on preference theory, such as the article mentioned above. Soc628 (talk) 06:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No. What it needs is what third party sources say about preference theory, not merely using them to parrot what Hakim had already said (which is pretty much all Marshall is being used for). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

In explaining what the theory is all about about, I see no reason why we can't cite the scholarly books and articles by Hakim. says: "primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia". Discussing preference theory without citing its author is meaningless. Soc628 (talk) 07:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * You obviously haven't read that section of policy with any care. It clearly states: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources." and "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them." This article (i) has very little secondary-based content & (ii) has made rather careless use of primary sources. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 07:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

And I see absolutely no "misuse" of the articles and books by Hakim in this article. The fact that the article needs improvement and could do well with more secondary based content is a different matter. Soc628 (talk) 07:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Misuse: HrafnTalkStalk(P) 08:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) "The theory was developed by Catherine Hakim, based on an extensive review of the research evidence on women's choices in the last two decades, and first published in 2000 in a book. However she has also published numerous articles and chapters in books describing the theory's application to particular topics." = blatant WP:Synthesis (since removed)
 * 2) "Other studies have also found that all three groups of women can be identified in all modern countries, even when quite different questions on societal norms are used (instead of questions on personal preferences), or using career choices as an indicator of 'revealed preferences'" -- not found in the cited sources.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Preference theory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.czso.cz/eng/redakce.nsf/i/czech_demography_2008_vol_2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)