User talk:Edburke317

I have removed your post at WP:CHU as that is not the place to comment. You usename was not deleted, but just your userpage contents. For reasons why it was deleted, please see our policy at WP:NOT. =Nichalp  «Talk»=  13:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

NCLB
Ed, it seemed to me that you would probably be able to answer the question at the NCLB talk page better than I could. This question keeps coming up, and I really think that the article needs a paragraph or two at NCLB or perhaps NCLB (or perhaps a new section dedicated to special education?) to specifically address the NCLB-related testing rules for disabled students. If you're interested, I'd be happy to have you answer there.

Also, if you're interested, then I'm sure that the folks at WikiProject Education would be happy to hear from you. You might put the project's talk page on your watchlist. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the answer to whether ALL students must be tested is, "No," and it is found in current footnotes #s 48 and 49. The statutory reference is IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), Sec. 612(a)(16) et ff. Hope this helps! EdBurke317Edburke317 (talk) 21:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Autism
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Eubulides (talk) 22:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Autism
Hi Ed,

We really do get a lot of websites added to the external links section. We're using a slippery slope argument (i.e. add one and you'll eventually get thousands) because we have to, and this interpretation has wide support. You may try adding your website to the DMOZ - I'm not sure how you go about it, but you can get links added to the directory. In order for the website to be considered for autism, you'd need to demonstrate that it provides a resource that dovetails the article (i.e. is specifically about autism) and the resources provided are something beyond the article itself could contain (i.e. passes WP:ELNO point 1). Since I don't believe the website would be considered a medically reliable source, I don't think it's suitable even as an inline citation. These are our rules, and we do have a lot of them, but they're required to make wikipedia work. Rest assured that you're not the only person to get this speech, and we try to be fair by using the same standard for all links, contributors and sources. WLU (t) (c) (rules - simple rules) 20:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)