952:
dyslexia included in the Rice and Brooks review paper to support his case. As I have tried to explain to many
Knowledge (XXG) editors over the last few months. I can do the research, I understand the research, but due to the nature of my auditory processing disorder which is the cause of my dyslexia, I lack the ability to paraphrase the work of others or research papers, and to copy edit. There are others like you good self who have these skills which I lack. I can provide the research but i can not write the articles. So although much of the original content is my poor attempts to explain these issues, I do rely on other editors to rephrase or add to what i had originally put. I have long since stopped even attempting to add new content to Knowledge (XXG) articles as few other editors seem willing to understand how i have to work. For me it is all too stressful, understanding my own limitations, while others seem unwilling to understand the nature my communication limitations, which is strange as this article is about my disability.
972:
too simple and layman. As well, it provides no clear form for where the article will be taking you. It provides no background into dyslexia research, for example, as to why this article is even being written. It should provide a bit of detail into the reason this article is of importance, perhaps by highlighting the potential controversies surrounding it and the origins of the research of the topic itself. Although it does not have to be laden with data, the introduction would be better off if it provided more detail to clarify the subject of the article, and provide an outline as to where the article will be taking them in their reading. After reading the initial section, I felt, as perhaps other readers did, that I had no idea where the author was going with the subject, and that I didn't even fully understand the topic of the article.
877:
for Adult
Literacy and Numeracy report on Developmental dyslexia in adults: a research review by Michael Rice with Greg Brooks May 2004. " This is worded in such a way that nothing can be gleaned from it. It should be reworded so as to explain WHY Elliot was referencing the definitions, or removed since it in itself means nothing. Is there some suggestion that referencing 28 definitions of dyslexia somehow imparts an implicit understanding of why it was done? Whoever wrote these words should explain what Elliot was wanting to do by referencing the 28 definitions. That is the point of referencing, not just to say that something was mentioned, but explaining the point of the reference. Do you now understand why this section needs rewording? It is a failure to explicitly state Elliot's point, and should be corrected.
892:
directly addresses the topic of the page, which is research in dyslexia. The section referencing Elliot is more appropriate to the main page of dyslexia, since it more addresses perceptions of dyslexia, rather than the research of the area. In fact it would seem that Elliot was suggesting that research should not be done on dyslexia, since blanket early interventions would have the same benefit without the costs of diagnosis. Elliot's work is contentious, and as such should be approached in a way that clearly states the topics that are being discussed. I have all the copies of the articles stated in this page so far, and would be happy to more thoroughly represent them on this page if no-one else has the energy.
977:
why dyslexics can comprehend regular spoken language, but not the written orthography. This concern carried over into subsequent sections, where it appeared that the author was regurgitating random facts and quotes rather than actually providing a cohesive and informative article. As well, what little information was provided appeared to be heavily weighted towards the controversy side. Almost no information was actually provided on the actual topic of the article, Dyslexia
Research, and almost all of the information was about how dyslexia is considered by some to be a mere reading disability. To improve this section, I'd recommend that the author provide more information regarding:
82:
64:
507:
483:
316:
160:
135:
519:
250:
566:
336:
226:
240:
206:
33:
401:
370:
828:
788:
748:
937:
is why I am going to remove this reference, and more explicitly explain how the word "dyslexia" is understood in differing spheres, as well as how it is defined by various researchers. This retains the Rice and Brooks review paper, and builds upon it in such a way that a reader of this page will not be left with more questions than they started with.
411:
922:
contributing in a the WIKI way of doing things, and to avoid all of the stress that working on wiki involved for me I have stopped being an active WIKI editor. I still research
Dyslexia and the related issues and I have posted links to most of my research paper collection on my user page, which could be useful for future editors of these articles.
998:
With regard to structure, the article needed a bit more flow it it. There was no rhyme or reason for placing the sections in said particular order, and it seemed as if I was having random data and information thrown at me, rather than being show a smooth, transitional article. It should be structured
994:
As well, the information and sources being cited for these apparent subsections should primarily use empirical data from studies and research, rather than the articles and television citations provided. The reasoning for this is that, whereas these articles can provide good information and arguments,
936:
If you say that you are good at researching the information but not at presenting the information, why do you react so personally to an attempt to clarify the information presented on this page? If you state that a researcher referenced something then you must state the purpose of the reference. This
976:
Aside from the introduction, I found that the following subsections were lacking in information. For example, under "Language and
Orthography," it would have been useful to provide more information about the importance of understanding orthography and its effects on language, and perhaps delve into
971:
Whereas the actual subject for the article is quite compelling and interesting, the manner in which the information (or lack thereof) is laid out is confusing and uninformative. The first issue that I noticed would be in the lead section. The description provided of dyslexia, first and foremost, is
891:
The Rice & Brooks study should not be included as a citation made by Elliot, since his reference to it means nothing. Instead it should form part of a new subsection towards the beginning of the page discussing definitions, as used by researchers, clinicians, the media and the public. This more
876:
The recent edits and reverts of those edits aren't adding anything to this page, so perhaps it is best to discuss it here. "More recently Julian Elliot has also made reference to the 28 Definitions of
Dyslexia which were documented in the Appendices of the National Research and Development Centre
906:
May be you should have a go at rewording this yourself instead of just deleting everything. I am dyslexic, Auditory
Processing Disorder is the cause of my dyslexia, and this disability causes me to have word recall problems, which makes it difficult for me to paraphrase the work of others and coy
921:
I Spent 2 months this year editing the main dyslexia article and then creating the most of the new sub articles. Which turned into a WIKI war, concerning the implications of the last decade of scientific dyslexia research. personally I have a skill cognitive skill deficit, which prevents me from
951:
There are two interventions by Julian Elliot. The first was in 2005 regarding the Myth of dyslexia, and his subsequent research paper "Does
Dyslexia Exist" 2009. The second intervention was as part of a second media discussion 2009 in which Julian Elliot made reference to the 28 definitions of
995:
they can also be weighted with bias, whereas empirical articles provide more neutral, fact-based information. Yes, these other sources can be used, but there should also be a solid presence of research, especially considering the scientific nature of the topic.
649:
704:
654:
225:
999:
in a manner something like what is mentioned in the bullet points above, where we are provided with background information that helps us realize the importance of the subject, and then presented with arguments.
907:
edit, so i have to rely on others like you to do that for me. I am very good at doing the research and understanding what it means, but I need others to do the copy editing etc. Are you volunteering to do that
674:
634:
730:
659:
639:
630:
532:
384:
492:
429:
380:
644:
1168:
669:
433:
699:
664:
1076:
1072:
1058:
723:
1163:
306:
1158:
1153:
296:
716:
473:
325:
216:
1208:
537:
1193:
497:
1183:
1173:
463:
272:
1143:
774:
101:
1218:
1213:
1198:
583:
438:
1148:
1002:
All in all, this article has the potential to be a very interesting read, but lack of relevant information and structure make it fall flat.
1203:
1138:
868:
What do you not understand please elaborate and stop deleting parts of the article and use the discussion page here to discuss your issues
854:
263:
211:
1188:
814:
97:
92:
69:
1178:
1044:
1054:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
604:
599:
594:
589:
579:
557:
424:
375:
166:
140:
609:
44:
351:
or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the
614:
1119:
344:
1075:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1010:
50:
1110:
1036:
171:
145:
694:
1094:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1082:
271:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1035:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
844:
804:
764:
840:
800:
760:
32:
1045:
https://web.archive.org/web/20071020051112/http://www.nrdc.org.uk/projects_details.asp?ProjectID=75
1006:
942:
897:
882:
255:
1079:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1095:
984:
The importance of researching dyslexia, including controversy surrounding learning disabilities
1028:
957:
927:
912:
690:
524:
506:
81:
63:
348:
1102:
1048:
416:
1061:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
938:
893:
878:
1101:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1068:
482:
315:
17:
1132:
953:
923:
908:
847:. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see
807:. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see
767:. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see
268:
1124:
1014:
961:
946:
931:
916:
901:
886:
565:
518:
249:
159:
134:
1067:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
514:
406:
335:
245:
239:
205:
400:
369:
436:. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at
981:
The definition of dyslexia, including the psychology behind it
822:
782:
742:
26:
428:, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the
505:
481:
334:
314:
1039:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
100:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
1049:
http://www.nrdc.org.uk/projects_details.asp?ProjectID=75
1032:
849:
835:
809:
795:
769:
755:
987:
Previous and modern methods for researching dyslexia
267:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1071:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
169:, a project which is currently considered to be
432:and that biomedical information in any article
1057:This message was posted before February 2018.
724:
430:Manual of Style for medicine-related articles
8:
1169:Automatically assessed Linguistics articles
853:; for the discussion at that location, see
813:; for the discussion at that location, see
773:; for the discussion at that location, see
1027:I have just modified one external link on
731:
717:
553:
364:
200:
129:
58:
439:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Medicine
1164:Applied Linguistics Task Force articles
682:
622:
572:
556:
366:
281:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Linguistics
202:
131:
60:
30:
352:
110:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Disability
655:Developmental dyslexia reorganisation
7:
1159:C-Class applied linguistics articles
448:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Medicine
422:This article is within the scope of
261:This article is within the scope of
181:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Dyslexia
165:This article is within the scope of
1154:Low-importance Linguistics articles
756:Neurological research into dyslexia
49:It is of interest to the following
1209:Low-importance psychiatry articles
96:. For more information, visit the
25:
1194:Low-importance neurology articles
1031:. Please take a moment to review
1184:Low-importance medicine articles
1174:WikiProject Linguistics articles
826:
786:
746:
564:
517:
434:use high-quality medical sources
409:
399:
368:
284:Template:WikiProject Linguistics
248:
238:
224:
204:
158:
133:
80:
62:
31:
1144:WikiProject Disability articles
836:Biological theories of dyslexia
468:This article has been rated as
301:This article has been rated as
113:Template:WikiProject Disability
1219:All WikiProject Medicine pages
1214:Psychiatry task force articles
1125:08:20, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
1015:17:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
796:Genetic research into dyslexia
326:Applied Linguistics Task Force
1:
1199:Neurology task force articles
962:01:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
947:04:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
675:Alternative Remedial Programs
530:This article is supported by
490:This article is supported by
451:Template:WikiProject Medicine
323:This article is supported by
275:and see a list of open tasks.
184:Template:WikiProject Dyslexia
1149:C-Class Linguistics articles
932:21:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
917:21:02, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
902:05:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
887:03:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
665:Alexia outline and resources
660:Alexia series reorganization
650:Proposed reorganisation 2009
1204:C-Class psychiatry articles
1139:C-Class Disability articles
670:Country Support Information
1235:
1189:C-Class neurology articles
1088:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1024:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
474:project's importance scale
307:project's importance scale
1179:C-Class medicine articles
533:the Psychiatry task force
513:
489:
467:
394:
342:
322:
300:
233:
153:
75:
57:
493:the Neurology task force
1020:External links modified
705:Globalization guideline
631:Proposed reorganization
264:WikiProject Linguistics
90:is within the scope of
510:
486:
343:This article has been
339:
319:
93:WikiProject Disability
39:This article is rated
18:Talk:Dyslexia research
833:The contents of the
793:The contents of the
753:The contents of the
509:
485:
338:
318:
43:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1069:regular verification
990:Significant findings
845:Research in dyslexia
805:Research in dyslexia
765:Research in dyslexia
558:WikiProject Dyslexia
425:WikiProject Medicine
287:Linguistics articles
167:WikiProject Dyslexia
88:Research in dyslexia
1059:After February 2018
872:Controversy section
691:Dyslexia navigation
645:Reorganization 2010
573:General information
345:automatically rated
217:Applied Linguistics
116:Disability articles
1113:InternetArchiveBot
1064:InternetArchiveBot
700:Top navigation bar
511:
487:
340:
320:
256:Linguistics portal
45:content assessment
1089:
1029:Dyslexia research
861:
860:
821:
820:
781:
780:
741:
740:
580:Main project page
552:
551:
548:
547:
544:
543:
525:Psychiatry portal
454:medicine articles
363:
362:
359:
358:
199:
198:
195:
194:
187:Dyslexia articles
128:
127:
124:
123:
16:(Redirected from
1226:
1123:
1114:
1087:
1086:
1065:
852:
830:
829:
823:
812:
790:
789:
783:
772:
750:
749:
743:
733:
726:
719:
615:Project Template
568:
554:
527:
522:
521:
456:
455:
452:
449:
446:
419:
414:
413:
412:
403:
396:
395:
390:
387:
372:
365:
354:
289:
288:
285:
282:
279:
258:
253:
252:
242:
235:
234:
229:
228:
227:
222:
219:
208:
201:
189:
188:
185:
182:
179:
162:
155:
154:
149:
137:
130:
118:
117:
114:
111:
108:
84:
77:
76:
66:
59:
42:
36:
35:
27:
21:
1234:
1233:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1129:
1128:
1117:
1112:
1080:
1073:have permission
1063:
1037:this simple FaQ
1022:
969:
874:
866:
848:
827:
808:
787:
768:
747:
737:
523:
516:
453:
450:
447:
444:
443:
417:Medicine portal
415:
410:
408:
388:
378:
286:
283:
280:
277:
276:
254:
247:
223:
220:
214:
186:
183:
180:
177:
176:
143:
115:
112:
109:
106:
105:
40:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1232:
1230:
1222:
1221:
1216:
1211:
1206:
1201:
1196:
1191:
1186:
1181:
1176:
1171:
1166:
1161:
1156:
1151:
1146:
1141:
1131:
1130:
1107:
1106:
1099:
1052:
1051:
1043:Added archive
1021:
1018:
1007:JuliannaIvanyi
992:
991:
988:
985:
982:
975:
968:
965:
873:
870:
865:
862:
859:
858:
831:
819:
818:
791:
779:
778:
751:
739:
738:
736:
735:
728:
721:
713:
710:
709:
708:
707:
702:
697:
685:
684:
680:
679:
678:
677:
672:
667:
662:
657:
652:
647:
642:
637:
625:
624:
620:
619:
618:
617:
612:
607:
602:
597:
592:
575:
574:
570:
569:
561:
560:
550:
549:
546:
545:
542:
541:
538:Low-importance
529:
528:
512:
502:
501:
498:Low-importance
488:
478:
477:
470:Low-importance
466:
460:
459:
457:
421:
420:
404:
392:
391:
389:Low‑importance
373:
361:
360:
357:
356:
341:
331:
330:
321:
311:
310:
303:Low-importance
299:
293:
292:
290:
273:the discussion
260:
259:
243:
231:
230:
221:Low‑importance
209:
197:
196:
193:
192:
190:
163:
151:
150:
138:
126:
125:
122:
121:
119:
85:
73:
72:
67:
55:
54:
48:
37:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1231:
1220:
1217:
1215:
1212:
1210:
1207:
1205:
1202:
1200:
1197:
1195:
1192:
1190:
1187:
1185:
1182:
1180:
1177:
1175:
1172:
1170:
1167:
1165:
1162:
1160:
1157:
1155:
1152:
1150:
1147:
1145:
1142:
1140:
1137:
1136:
1134:
1127:
1126:
1121:
1116:
1115:
1104:
1100:
1097:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1084:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1060:
1055:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1025:
1019:
1017:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1003:
1000:
996:
989:
986:
983:
980:
979:
978:
973:
966:
964:
963:
959:
955:
949:
948:
944:
940:
934:
933:
929:
925:
919:
918:
914:
910:
904:
903:
899:
895:
889:
888:
884:
880:
871:
869:
863:
856:
855:its talk page
851:
846:
842:
838:
837:
832:
825:
824:
816:
815:its talk page
811:
806:
802:
798:
797:
792:
785:
784:
776:
775:its talk page
771:
766:
762:
758:
757:
752:
745:
744:
734:
729:
727:
722:
720:
715:
714:
712:
711:
706:
703:
701:
698:
696:
692:
689:
688:
687:
686:
681:
676:
673:
671:
668:
666:
663:
661:
658:
656:
653:
651:
648:
646:
643:
641:
640:Live articles
638:
636:
632:
629:
628:
627:
626:
623:Project pages
621:
616:
613:
611:
608:
606:
603:
601:
598:
596:
593:
591:
588:
587:
586:
585:
581:
577:
576:
571:
567:
563:
562:
559:
555:
539:
536:(assessed as
535:
534:
526:
520:
515:
508:
504:
503:
499:
496:(assessed as
495:
494:
484:
480:
479:
475:
471:
465:
462:
461:
458:
441:
440:
435:
431:
427:
426:
418:
407:
405:
402:
398:
397:
393:
386:
382:
377:
374:
371:
367:
350:
346:
337:
333:
332:
328:
327:
317:
313:
312:
308:
304:
298:
295:
294:
291:
274:
270:
266:
265:
257:
251:
246:
244:
241:
237:
236:
232:
218:
213:
210:
207:
203:
191:
174:
173:
168:
164:
161:
157:
156:
152:
147:
142:
139:
136:
132:
120:
103:
99:
95:
94:
89:
86:
83:
79:
78:
74:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
34:
29:
28:
19:
1111:
1108:
1083:source check
1062:
1056:
1053:
1026:
1023:
1004:
1001:
997:
993:
974:
970:
950:
935:
920:
905:
890:
875:
867:
834:
794:
754:
590:Participants
578:
531:
491:
469:
437:
423:
324:
302:
262:
170:
98:project page
91:
87:
51:WikiProjects
850:its history
810:its history
770:its history
278:Linguistics
269:linguistics
212:Linguistics
1133:Categories
1120:Report bug
967:Evaluation
839:page were
799:page were
759:page were
600:To-do list
385:Psychiatry
355:parameter.
107:Disability
102:discussion
70:Disability
1103:this tool
1096:this tool
939:Ninahexan
894:Ninahexan
879:Ninahexan
864:Ninahexan
683:Resources
610:Templates
381:Neurology
1109:Cheers.—
605:Articles
445:Medicine
376:Medicine
178:Dyslexia
172:inactive
146:inactive
141:Dyslexia
1033:my edit
954:dolfrog
924:dolfrog
909:dolfrog
472:on the
305:on the
41:C-class
841:merged
801:merged
761:merged
595:Issues
353:|auto=
47:scale.
843:into
803:into
763:into
347:by a
1011:talk
958:talk
943:talk
928:talk
913:talk
898:talk
883:talk
695:talk
635:talk
584:talk
1077:RfC
1047:to
464:Low
349:bot
297:Low
1135::
1090:.
1085:}}
1081:{{
1013:)
1005:--
960:)
945:)
930:)
915:)
900:)
885:)
693:•
633:•
582:•
540:).
500:).
383:/
379::
215::
1122:)
1118:(
1105:.
1098:.
1009:(
956:(
941:(
926:(
911:(
896:(
881:(
857:.
817:.
777:.
732:e
725:t
718:v
476:.
442:.
329:.
309:.
175:.
148:)
144:(
104:.
53::
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
