Jump to content

Talk:Disability studies

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Xttina.Garnet (talk | contribs) at 20:35, 26 March 2015 (→unsubstantiated claims). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconDisability Start‑class
WikiProject iconDisability studies 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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

unsubstantiated claims

I agree with the below Kikidawgzzz. This article is heavily slanted and biased in terms of its political viewpoint. Just about every point made is couched in Crypto-Marxist Language.

i have added the link to Marxism. Since so much of the writing & ideological driven phrases aka 'The Personal is Political' arise from Marxism.

I am of the opinion that there is a strong need to return a more balanced sociopolitical point of view to the writing.

Moreover, not everything to do with Disability Studies can or should be described in terms of the political.

. . .

As I also say over at the WikiProject page, this article's number of unsubstantiated claims is so high that it actually makes for a major problem given its inherent status as a more "top-priority" article in the Disability series on Wikipedia. I hope that those of us working on these things, and other editors too, can add appropriate citations. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 15:18, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - were you thinking specifically of the "Criticisms" section there? There are at least two "Citation needed" tags there. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only "citation" listed in the "Criticisms" section is a link to a PDF of political diatribe peppered throughout with specious, non-evidential claims. The cited "article" is not a peer-reviewed article published in a reputable journal. The "Criticisms" section as it is now written should be regarded with high suspicion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.214.68.72 (talk) 21:44, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just rewrote the introduction, so that it was better sourced and included some of the history (in the US). I included the resent shift toward interdisciplinary connections and criticism of the Social Model"[1]. I don't have time to access it now (my university system is in French and I don't speak French -long story). If someone else can get the full article that would be great. I'm going to go ahead and delete the stuff in the criticism section that doesn't relate to a specific tenant of the field (e.g. the shifting toward identity politics). If you can find a relevant source, please feel free to add it back in. Xttina.Garnet (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Potential references

I am rescuing the following references from article How disability should be researched by Sonafaraz (talk · contribs), tagged for speedy deletion as a duplicate of this article (CSD A10), as these references may be useful for this article, even if the content is not.

  • Barnes, C. (2003). "What a Difference a Decade Makes: Reflections on doing 'emancipitory' disability research". Disability & Society, 3-17.
  • Bernard, R. (2013). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousands Oak: SAGE Publication, Inc.
  • Bricher, G. (2000). "Disabled People, Health Professionals and the Social Model of Disability: can there be a research relationship?" Disability and Society, 781-793.
  • Clear, M. (1999). "The 'Normal' and the Monstrous in Disability Research". Disability and Society, 435-448.
  • Morrison, L. J. (2006). "A Matter of Definition: Acknowledging Consumer/Survivor Experiences through Narrative". Radical Psychology, 60-79.
  • Oliver, M. (1992). "Changing the Social Relations of Research Production". Disability and Society, 101-113.
  • Oliver, M. (1983). The Individual and Social Model of Disability. London: UPSIA.
  • Oliver, M., & Colin, B. (1997). "All We Are Saying is Give Disabled Researchers a Chance". Disability and Society, 811-813.

הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 04:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The "External links" list is far too long - it should contain only a handful of the most impostant and universally relevant links. It should not contain a bunch of links to an arbitrary selection of university DS programme websites. See WP:EL, WP:ELNO and WP:ELNEVER for guidance on what should be included and excluded. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Particularly individual courses or institutions are not appropriate.--SabreBD (talk) 13:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Bibliography is a similarly arbitrary collection of "stuff" which doesn't actually serve any purpose in the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This problem is getting worse - the WP:LISTCRUFT needs to be pruned back. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference anti-social was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Disability_studies&oldid=653653964"