User talk:Arbottoms/Language deprivation in deaf and hard of hearing children

Moved to userspace
Hi, , I'm helping with Adam's classes this semester.

I've moved this article to the userspace since it looks like there are some issues that need to be resolved. brought up several concerns:
 * The article lacks enough sourcing to back up all of the claims in the article.
 * The article seems to contain original research, which does not belong in a Wikipedia article, and strongly resembles an essay.
 * The article doesn't seem to really discuss its topic, which is language deprivation in deaf and hard of hearing children and instead mostly contains content that belongs in other articles.

I wanted to avoid this getting nominated for deletion, so I've moved it to Arbottoms's userspace so you can work on the issues. I also wanted to explain what is considered original research on Wikipedia. Original research, or OR as it's frequently called on here, is essentially content where you've drawn your own conclusions on a topic and where the claims made are not explicitly backed up with a reliable source. This is one of the more major differences between [[User:Tokyogirl79/Academic papers vs Wikipedia articles
 * academic papers and encyclopedia articles]], as we can only include content and research that has already been explicitly written about by a reliable and authoritative source.

Here's some of what you may be able to do to address these issues:


 * The first thing to do is to find sourcing that backs up the claims in the article. This can help with the claims of original research, which can in turn help with the concerns about it being more of an essay. Make sure that the sources specifically say what you are sourcing.


 * Be very careful about how content is written. I found one sentence that was written in a fairly casual tone:
 * Throughout a normal day, hearing children continually receive input from TV, radio, surrounding conversations, narration of events throughout their day, and so on.
 * You should avoid using phrasing like "and so on" since this is very casual and can contribute to an article seeming more like a personal essay. You could instead say something like "such as" with things like this.


 * The article needs a lead paragraph that gives a general overview of the topic.


 * You may want to check to see if this particular topic warrants an independent article. By this I mean that the topic may only require a subsection in the main article for language deprivation that gives a general overview. I see where there was such a section in the article, but has since been removed.


 * You should also try to summarize content that belongs in other articles. For example, you do not need to go into detail about the details about the educational offerings and could instead just write "There are four educational placements for Deaf and Hard of Hearing students, deaf education schools, mainstreaming, self-contained classrooms in public schools, and co-enrollment classes that contain hearing and deaf children, all of whom are taught sign language." This gets the same point across in a more succinct manner.
 * The issue here, however, is that this is somewhat redundant to the pre-existing article on deaf education, especially as this is already covered in the article.

This tends to be a frequent issue when you have topics that are very specific, so I would also recommend that you look into how the article can be expanded in ways that would only belong in this specific article. Perhaps a section on research on language deprivation where the research focuses solely on deaf and hard of hearing children? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2017 (UTC)