User talk:Hennessy96/sandbox

The article hold relevancy as many organizations today are yet fighting for social equality among those disabled and abled. Overall it's pretty vague with historical context and definitions, and is in definite need of current information. The links within the citations worked. Viewpoints were lacking, very general, and more less favored the negative side of the topic than the proactive reform of today. References seemed ok, but could be improved. Current information and possible examples could be added. I saw that this page was almost deleted many years ago, and that many changes have already been made. There is not a lot of content, but what is available isn't organized optimally or pleasing for viewing. According to the rating standards, I would rate this page between a 0-1 as it provides a good frame of reference, but political correctness could be at risk. Jacklyn B (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

SOURCES (3)

Doucette, L. (2017, May 17). If You're in a Wheelchair, Segregation Lives. Retrieved March 07, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/opinion/if-youre-in-a-wheelchair-segregation-lives.html

Harnish, A. (2017). Ableism and the Trump phenomenon. Disability & Society, 32(3), 423-428. doi:10.1080/09687599.2017.1288684

Cherney, J. L. (2011). The Rhetoric of Ableism. Disability Studies Quarterly, 31(3). doi:10.18061/dsq.v31i3.1665

Jacklyn B (talk) 03:13, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Peer Edit: Hey guys, I think you have a great start, but I think all sections could use more information especially the discrimination section. It seems a bit messy too but it's just the formatting of having it in your sandbox, I would just make sure someone looks at it before you post the real article. I also think maybe more examples and descriptions would help the reader grasp the concept better. Just a few thoughts! Nicole.lallier (talk) 01:44, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I think the article overall just needs more hard facts, definitions, and explanations to make it. more clear. The history section is heavy but not as relevant as some of the other sections that could maybe use some more information. In my article we even deleted and combines some of the sections so they would have more clear and relevant headers so I would say don't be afraid to omit or add any sections that you find information on in your research. Emmaras (talk) 01:31, 5 April 2018 (UTC)