User:Organism438/Deafness in Italy/Nayanalize Peer Review

Language emergence
I would seperate the part about the origins of LIS and the part talking about convergence/community sign.

There are some opportunities to improve the grammar to make some statements/facts seem clearer; "LIS came to be partly through convergence. They lacked a form of communication..."- Who is they? maybe add a bit more history/context

is there a source for characterizing it as community sign? a statistic or more background information might help.

I could not access source 3 (improve citation) and finding the information about the information before citation 4. Also citation 4 took me to a link about divination on the subject of Biblical Studies; not sure if that was the correct link.

The information about the Milan conference might fall under the Human/Civil Rights section as well and might be better placed there.

I would also see if any of the longer quotes can be summarized efficiently instead of quoting multiple sentences (wiki flagged this as well).

Significant Organizations
I could not access citation 7 & citation 8 is "not found"/error.

FIADDA: I had trouble finding where in citation 10 the statement "They believe that sign language is not an official language and because of its variety in nature should be a second choice as compared to oralism." was found. This section needs cited a bit more accurately.

CODA: I would list the activities/resources they provide a bit clearer and with more detail as well as mentioning their conference.

GPODHH: I would include more information from their page- maybe from their Position statement page (https://www.gpodhh.org/position-statement-2010) as summarized information about what they provide families, for example.

Human/Civil Rights
Just for formatting so it is easier on the eyes- the last part "points that are relative to DHH individuals" can be put:

"points that are relative to DHH individuals:

1.

2.

3.

etc." which would also take away some current formatting/grammar issues

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Organism438


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Deafness in Italy
 * Deafness in Italy

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)