Talk:Special education

Copyright Violation...

Sock master Jessica Liao has admitted via IRC to have willingly copied and pasted the content in the Description of Services section from [this website] I have tagged the section as copy/paste, but I'm leaving it to someone who is a part of WP:EDU to edit, as I'm not sure of the information. The user is attempting to correct their wrongs with this, in order to possibly be allowed a return next year under the WP:Standard Offer, and I'm willing to AGF for now. The user is concerned about getting in trouble, and appears to want to return to Wikipedia on good terms. We'll see. This looks like a positive step though. --ANowlin: talk 05:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

It would appear that Eliane Schlessel and Jessica Liao are one and the same. So I have reverted the article to its state prior to all of Eliane Schlessel edits, which eliminates the problem you have identified dolfrog (talk) 11:41, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

That works for me. I just figured I'd let someone more familiar with this subject do it, in case the information was viable, and needed to be simply re-written. --ANowlin: talk 12:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Those images and other information removed are not vandalism when it has already been explained why. Read above. Sgoldbergwiki (talk) 13:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Well well well... So much for not socking anymore, and so much for returning to Wikipedia, Jessica. Who said anything about vandalism anyway? --ANowlin: talk 22:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Reverted

I was reverted by WhatamIdoing. How is this source a copyvio? I have quoted the text exactly. [1] The Nysut is a union of professionals. If you can't trust them, who else can you trust? The Nysut has its own copyright. This is their website. [2] Summerblush (talk) 20:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

This may be useful

Hi all For the immediate future I will be busy with a number of projects both in real life and on Wikipedia. I came across this research paper the other day a 2008 review of Special Education Law, which the editors on this and related articles may find useful (I have only read the abstract, and have not yet obtained a copy of the full research paper.) A Review of Special Education Law dolfrog (talk) 20:01, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

umm...

I really like to revert to this revision: [3] as the source is from a gov/ link. It's not a copyvio. I have quoted the exact words from the source. Hteb (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

unfortunately your source only applies to the USA, this is a global Wikipedia article, and you deleted the introduction which indicates that the following content is from the USa and may not apply to countries ourside of the USA. We have been trying to balance the USA bias in this article, and you have just reintroduced that USa bias. There is a Special education in the USA article so may be you may prefer to add USA only content. dolfrog (talk) 21:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

"Education researchers, particularly in United States, have described different kinds of services in special education." It says in particular in the US. Hteb (talk) 21:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I will leave the "methods of provision" intro the same. Hteb (talk) 21:53, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Note sur la scolarisation des enfants handicapés

Le gouvernement français se trouve, concernant le handicap, devant une situation particulière qui n'est pas du tout désespérée, mais qui nécessite « du punch ». Nous allons montrer quelques points développant cette remarque d'actualité en décrivant le contexte international puis national de la scolarisation des enfants handicapés. Voir l'article de COURTAULT Michel : Note sur la scolarisation des enfants handicapés Revue / Journal Title Pour ISSN 0245-9442 Source / Source 2007, no195, pp. 30-36 [7 page(s) (article)] Langue / Language Français Editeur / Publisher Revue POUR - Groupe de recherche pour l'éducation et la prospective, Paris, FRANCE --Michel Courtault (d) 15 décembre 2009 à 17:34 (CET)--90.53.167.82 (talk) 17:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)