Talk:Special needs

message: I think there should be an entry on how this is a derogatory term - at least it is were I am from, as people with these problems hate the term. I just don't know where to fit it in. Any help would be apreciated.
And this is true as in my line of work I deal with them very closly. MJN SEIFER 21:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A note about derogatory connotations can be included if reliable sources can be found to demonstrate derogatory usage, but content in articles can't be sourced to anecdotal experiences. So a first step towards including this content would be locating articles, reports, and/or dictionary entries that discuss "special needs" as a derogatory term. --Muchness 22:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Derogatory

message: I’m missing a source/proof of the alleged German term “besondere Kinder”. I’m German and I’ve actually never heard of this term in relation to children with disabilities. This is probably more a personal matter of political correctness of whoever posted that. I pledge for removal. — 88.74.147.28 (talk) 00:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree ! Per incidence I came to this site (seraching for placebo-special needs) and I was wondering about the german term "besondere kinder". I'm german, noone uses such a term here. It is also no official or burocratic term. So it has to be deleted. Sincerely yours ;-)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.189.197.237 (talk) 22:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  German term? 

message: I think where the author stated the "types of special needs vary in severity," but did not include what those types of different special needs would be; there should be some more detailed informations, specifically about  Sever/Profound General Learning Disability.
There also should be some citations for the portion on US Special Needs Adoption Statistics. I have found some information on the Adoption and Safe Family Act.
I think there should also be some summary of the section on United States Special needs adoption statistics above, as the above section is the section for a short summary, and to introduce what the article is going to state. A possible source for information from the Finding Families for Waiting Kids: The Challenge of Special Needs Adoption in the 90’s and Beyond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjohn12 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: Is people first language allowed on a wikipedia article?
“People First Language” (PFL) puts the person before the disability, and describes what a person has, not who a person is. PFL uses phrases such as “person with a disability,” “individuals with disabilities,” and “children with disabilities,” as opposed to phrases that identify people based solely on their disability, such as “the disabled.” Scranton (talk) 14:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but not everyone likes it ... see People-first language#Criticism. Graham87 14:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: will editors revert the change?Scranton (talk) 16:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

text: also, did not see a prompt on the top of this page to add a new topicScranton (talk) 16:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't (unless it made the text extremely clunky) and I'm one of the only ones watching this page (mostly for vandalism-fighting). I'm meh about the whole idea though. There's a new section link after the main edit link for this page. Graham87 09:10, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  Is it a service to the reader to write with the person in mind instead of the disability?Scranton (talk) 16:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Well yes, but not all of us place as much importance on language in that way ... Graham87 08:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using people first language