Jump to content

Talk:Kathleen Stock: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Kathleen Stock/Archive 4) (bot
Line 26: Line 26:
didn’t she join the staff at an extremely controversial university after leaving Sussex? This is crucial information. [[Special:Contributions/2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D|2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D]] ([[User talk:2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D|talk]]) 06:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
didn’t she join the staff at an extremely controversial university after leaving Sussex? This is crucial information. [[Special:Contributions/2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D|2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D]] ([[User talk:2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D|talk]]) 06:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
:I think it’s probably the [[University of Austin]] which you’re thinking of. This is mentioned at the end of the '''Academic career''' section. [[User:Sweet6970|Sweet6970]] ([[User talk:Sweet6970|talk]]) 11:40, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
:I think it’s probably the [[University of Austin]] which you’re thinking of. This is mentioned at the end of the '''Academic career''' section. [[User:Sweet6970|Sweet6970]] ([[User talk:Sweet6970|talk]]) 11:40, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
:: 'extremely controversial' - and hysterical UK 'academics' launching a witch hunt against her is, of course, not controversial at all ...


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2023 ==
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2023 ==

Revision as of 09:07, 1 January 2024

subsequent career

didn’t she join the staff at an extremely controversial university after leaving Sussex? This is crucial information. 2A01:CB05:54:C200:6944:BD1:F947:D65D (talk) 06:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it’s probably the University of Austin which you’re thinking of. This is mentioned at the end of the Academic career section. Sweet6970 (talk) 11:40, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
'extremely controversial' - and hysterical UK 'academics' launching a witch hunt against her is, of course, not controversial at all ...

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2023

Edit should be re-applied:

04:44, 10 June 2023‎ Snokalok talk contribs‎  58,022 bytes −7‎  →‎Views on gender self-identification: Removed word “theory”, seemed pov 

Undo was insufficient: "The expression ‘gender identity theory’ is used 4 times in the text of the ES source, as well as in the headline." It does not matter what the link states as it doesn't address the reason for the change, further the link is a book BY Stock, to say it's biased on the topic is an understatement. 24.206.115.25 (talk) 09:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Lightoil (talk) 02:26, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]