Talk:Deaf President Now

message: I feel that my additions were positive, but I think now the length of the article requires a bit more structure/breaking up. Not sure what the best way would be, though. Any ideas? --Jacquelyn Marie 20:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I broke the page up into three sections (lead up, protest, resolution). That may help to organize the page. Of course, lots more can and should be added. Qaz (talk) 23:15, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The timeline contains definite biased statements; I will try and work on this later... 76.117.247.55 (talk) 02:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: If this is all that's available, it should be removed until someone can do a better job. It reads like an unsupervised college newspaper article. 
MarkinBoston (talk) 19:59, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Much of the article seems to have been cut-and-pasted from the Gaulodet history web page. Pawsplay (talk) 00:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

text: I came here with the same concern, but just before changing the article I searched for capitalization rules.  As stated at Deaf culture in the United States#"deaf" and "Deaf", the term is capitalized when referring to members of the Deaf Community, and the practice appears to be adopted in scholar literature.  Still, I think some kind of note would help those confused.  Perhaps a ? Hoof Hearted (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

text: The purpose of the capitalization of the 'D' is not political. It would cause the Wikipedia articles to become biased if they chose to side with the medical definition of hearing disability and reject the culturally defined definition of deaf ability. The capitalization serves to distinguish the differences between medically deaf and unable to hear with those who identify themselves as culturally Deaf. Being culturally Deaf goes beyond the inability to hear. Those who identify themselves as Deaf with a capital 'D' view themselves as part of a minority group of people with their own language, stories, art, and experiences. Some Deaf people are proud of their deafness as part of their identity, considered. They do not consider it as a crippling disability as they are able to have full lives without being able to hear. An elderly person with declining hearing loss or a person who recently had an accident that deafened them would be considered deaf but not Deaf as they have no ties to the Deaf community. It can take a long time for a deaf person to become culturally Deaf, learning a new language, meeting with other Deaf people, and accepting their deafness as part of their identity. However, it can be hereditary with the culture passing on from Deaf parents to Deaf children. By changing the capitalization to a lower-case letter you would be ignoring the minority group of people whose shared experiences, unique language, and culture have been developing for more than hundreds of years. Thus limiting their identity and history to a disability defined only by the medical field.RCovell (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  no argument over the capitalization in the article.  I just thought it was a good idea to add a note explaining why it is correct when many will see it as a grammatical mistake.  However, that edit was undone without explanation.  I guess we're counting on those who are confused to come to this talk page. Hoof Hearted (talk) 13:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: This is a real stinker.

message: I came to this talk page to see if anyone had explained why an ordinary adjective like "deaf" is capitalized throughout the article. From the comment above, I gather that the purpose of the capital is to distinguish those who cannot hear from those who refuse to hear. If I have understood the distinction correctly, I would say then that the capital should be changed back to a lower-case letter because using a capital in this manner politicizes this article, and Wikipedia articles should be unbiased. For a lay person, the capitalization is also unnecessarily distracting. Hattrick (talk) 15:25, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here with the same concern, but just before changing the article I searched for capitalization rules.  As stated at Deaf culture in the United States#"deaf" and "Deaf", the term is capitalized when referring to members of the Deaf Community, and the practice appears to be adopted in scholar literature.  Still, I think some kind of note would help those confused.  Perhaps a ? Hoof Hearted (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

text: The purpose of the capitalization of the 'D' is not political. It would cause the Wikipedia articles to become biased if they chose to side with the medical definition of hearing disability and reject the culturally defined definition of deaf ability. The capitalization serves to distinguish the differences between medically deaf and unable to hear with those who identify themselves as culturally Deaf. Being culturally Deaf goes beyond the inability to hear. Those who identify themselves as Deaf with a capital 'D' view themselves as part of a minority group of people with their own language, stories, art, and experiences. Some Deaf people are proud of their deafness as part of their identity, considered. They do not consider it as a crippling disability as they are able to have full lives without being able to hear. An elderly person with declining hearing loss or a person who recently had an accident that deafened them would be considered deaf but not Deaf as they have no ties to the Deaf community. It can take a long time for a deaf person to become culturally Deaf, learning a new language, meeting with other Deaf people, and accepting their deafness as part of their identity. However, it can be hereditary with the culture passing on from Deaf parents to Deaf children. By changing the capitalization to a lower-case letter you would be ignoring the minority group of people whose shared experiences, unique language, and culture have been developing for more than hundreds of years. Thus limiting their identity and history to a disability defined only by the medical field.RCovell (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  no argument over the capitalization in the article.  I just thought it was a good idea to add a note explaining why it is correct when many will see it as a grammatical mistake.  However, that edit was undone without explanation.  I guess we're counting on those who are confused to come to this talk page. Hoof Hearted (talk) 13:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: "Deaf" or "deaf"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Deaf President Now. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100609045058/http://pr.gallaudet.edu/dpn/issues/HISTORY/newhistory2.html to http://pr.gallaudet.edu/dpn/ISSUES/HISTORY/newhistory2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi everyone, 
I just wanted to post here because I've recently been making a lot of edits to the page.
I just wanted to give a summary of all the edits I made so far and the reasons why I've made them.
So I've removed the different dated sections and put the protest as one big section. I did this because there wasn't enough content under each day to section it off.
I moved one of the references Deaf President Now! by Sharon Barnett and John Christiansen to the sources section. I did this rather than have the book cited throughout the entire article because a lot of the information in this article is attributed to that book. Every line would have to be cited to that book throughout the article if I did in-line citations for it.
I changed a lot of the actual content in the article as well. After heavily reading and reviewing the source Deaf President Now! by Sharon Barnett and John Christiansen I changed a lot of the article to be accurate with the information depicted within that book. I included information that the book heavily covers, such as the group the "Ducks."
I also removed some information that I feel was extraneous and not notable enough/relevant enough to the protest to be included such as the March 5th candlelight vigil.
Alittlebird1 (talk) 23:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: you also removed a note explaining the capitalization of Deaf used throughout the article.  Was that your intent?  See Talk:Deaf President Now#"Deaf" or "deaf" above. Hoof Hearted (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Edits 

message: — Assignment last updated by Public-historian-90 (talk) 13:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: HIST 121 - U.S. History since 1877