Talk:History of sign language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Should this be moved?[edit]

IMHO this article should be Sign Language in Deaf Education or some similiar title. There is an existing sign language (note spelling) article that looks at a variety of sign languages. It may also be possible to merge the information intended for this article into other existing articles. Allen3 19:57, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it should be renamed Eras-mus 21:13, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The title/filename is mis-spelled. www.danon.co.uk

No it should not —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dodsworth falconslayer (talkcontribs) 19:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC).
I think its important ot have a page on the history of sign language - notable aspects missing from this article however are
  • martha's vineyard
  • Nicaraguan Sign Language
  • development of ASL and BSL
  • development of written sign language

Ms medusa 23:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Trivialist[edit]

Trivialist continues to deleted important historical information without discussing it or reaching a consensus. Please refrain from restoring without consensus. How one can not think that having the complete Bible in a sign language is not an historical event blows my mind. This is indeed historical! Besides, you start here not deleting the work of what appears to be at least two editors. Johanneum (talk) 04:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Aside from the promotional nature of the section, it violates WP:UNDUE. Trivialist (talk) 04:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Dear Trivialist, You would have to explain why you think it violates WP:UNDUE. To claim it does, is not to offer proof. Please provide proof or better yet correct it by adding the other balancing viewpoint. That would be great if you can improve the addition rather than just delete it because it doesn't meet your personal standard. Johanneum (talk) 04:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC) 04:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I went ahead and removed what might appear to some as being a "promotional nature", namely the name of the religion that was added by 201.48.252.157. Unless Trivialist expresses what he means by this, it will be hard to tell what he is talking about.Johanneum (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Complete Sign-Language Bible Now Available[edit]

An editor insists on adding this section, which appears to be promotional in nature and is not actually related to the history of sign language. After reverting my deletion they said to discuss it on the talk page. So: why should a paragraph promoting a recently released ASL edition of a work be included in an article about sign language in general? Trivialist (talk) 04:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

First, general etiquette would be to start here not just to delete others hard work. Next, there has been at least one other person who has edited this and added information that I tweaked and could still be. If you think it is promotional in nature then please adjust it so that it is just factual.  That was one reason I did not have the religious group that did it but just that it was done but someone else who doesn't have a name edited what was there.  Any way you toss the dice, this is a very historical event to have the complete Bible in sign language.  Perhaps this could be placed under ASL but it has great historical significance. Johanneum (talk) 04:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)