Talk:Lip reading

message: I'm quite sure that the appropriate term for this is now speechreading, not lipreading. Although certainly the vast majority of people who read this will search for lipreading, the term speechreading is now preferred by Deaf people.
*Yes, I agree.  Can we move this to Speech Reading and add a redirect from Lip Reading?  NightMaj (talk) 19:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: There is an article in the Daily Telegraph on 22nd December 2006 on Automatic Lip Reading software which has been used on old home movies of Adolf Hitler.  --jmb 23:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Automatic Lip Reading software

message: A picture that shows someone (preferably not anyone notable) talking, such that you can clearly see that they are talking, would probably be good. Perhaps better still, a video (with caption showing what they are saying, perhaps), though videos are in short supply still. Richard001 (talk) 23:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: The article, as it currently stands, spends a lot of time emphasizing the difficulties inherent in speechreading, and not just in the section titled "difficulties".  Although personally, I am very sympathetic to that view (a strong manualist myself), I can imagine, trying to look at the article through the eyes of an oralist, that it would come across as biased.  Therefore, I'd suggest that some attention be given to providing a more neutral perspective WP:NPOV.  Some of this will hopefully happen naturally as the article is expanded (as suggested by other editors) and other aspects of the subject are considered. AlbertBickford (talk) 09:32, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some rearranging and rewording of the material to make some progress along this line.  In the process of rearranging, I was able to concentrate the perspective emphasizing difficulties in just a couple places, rather than have it pervade the article. AlbertBickford (talk) 09:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point of view  

message: I don't see any evidence of a conflict of interest in this article. Can you explain why you added this COI tag to the article? Jarble (talk) 03:42, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to remove it was two years ago now and involved User:RuthBCCampbell. Theroadislong (talk) 06:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I stumbled by, as I sometimes do, so I will remove the tag. I have something to add also. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI tag 

message: Why does "professional lip-speaker" link to lipspeaking.co.uk specifically? Did someone add a link to them to this article as an ad? SheepTester (talk) 17:56, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  external link to lip speaker 

message: Latest comment: 200 years ago 92.32.63.133 (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Youtube videos 

message: In the section "Phonemes and visemes", there is the following sentence: "Because there are about three times as many phonemes as visemes in English, it is often claimed that only 30% of speech can be lip read."
Do we have a source for people making that claim? BranAndSceolan (talk) 09:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  percentage of English speech that can be lip-read: source?