Contents

Talk:BANZSL

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Deaf Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Deaf, the WikiProject which seeks to improve articles relating to all aspects of deaf-related and Deaf culture. For the Project guidelines, see the project pageortalk page.DeafWikipedia:WikiProject DeafTemplate:WikiProject Deafdeaf articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Disability BANZSL is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles Languages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

BANZSL is not the name of the 'parent language' from which British, Australian and New Zealand Sign Language have developed. Instead, it is an alternative way of referring to these languages, by highlighting the fact that they might all be considered dialects of the one signed language (i.e., BANZSL). Trevor Johnston and I coined the term some years ago, and it has appeared in print (e.g., Johston 2003), but only in the latter sense, not the former. Adam Schembri, UCL.

Thanks for your input. I've fixed the definition, however please feel free to edit the article further. —Pengo ^{talk · contribs} 02:03, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When providing the percentages of similar and cognate signs between various signlangs, could someone please cite the reference with <ref>...</ref> markup? I suspect that the correct cite for this entire paragraph would be McKee and Kennedy (2000), but don't have access to that reference to check it out. yoyo (talk) 17:00, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article doesn't seem to indicate how widespread this "proposal" is, or who proposed it. If an editor researched or synthesized it, that is against WP policy. There seems to be only one reference, which is not sufficient to establish notability, another required WP policy. Unless I am mistaken, this article is subject to deletion unless it is improved. David Spector (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]