How to Cite:
Nurmi, Hannu. 2000. “Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation”. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 4 (1): 42–49. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi, H., 2000. Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory, 4(1), pp.42–49. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi H. Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory. 2000;4(1):42–9. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi, H. (2000). Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory, 4(1), 42–49. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi H, ‘Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation’ (2000) 4 Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 42 DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi, Hannu. 2000. “Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation”. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 4 (1): 42–49. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi, Hannu. “Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation”. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 4, no. 1 (2000): 42–49. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
Nurmi, H.. “Comments to Jones: The Ambiguity of Proportional Representation”. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory, vol. 4, no. 1, 2000, pp. 42–49. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.4
