Talk:BANZSL

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 page or talk 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

	Language portal 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.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Nick Palfreyman and Adam Schembri (1 February 2022). "Lumping and splitting: Sign language delineation and ideologies of linguistic differentiation". Journal of Sociolinguistics. None of these authors anticipated that the term would take on a life of its own, to the extent that it now has an entry in Wikipedia.

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.64.73 (talk) 20:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Citation, please

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 may be subject to deletion

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]