User talk:Dodoïste

Edit conflicts
Hi. When there's an edit conflict, you should probably cancel out and start your edit again (use copy and paste to save time); otherwise you risk wiping out the conflicting edit, e.g. Equinox ◑ 14:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This is new to me. But anyway, this RFD page is way too long, which leads to obvious edit conflict risks. Second, if the resolution conflit page shoud not be used, this is a software issue. Talk about it with the MediaWiki developers. Third, at Wikipedia the software is smart enough to resolve such edit conflits by itself. 83.173.207.141 15:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Um. If you edit here then you will be using Wiktionary, not Wikipedia. Equinox ◑ 15:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

multiple disabilities
Creator insists this refers to someone with an intellectual and a motor disability, not just "more than one disability". Citations may be a little trick, any evidence of use in medical literature would be a fine thing. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I see hundreds of thousands of uses, so this should probably be at RFD. < class="latinx" >Ƿidsiþ 13:17, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia article agrees with the entry. Equinox ◑ 13:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. Here is a detailed and trustworthy source about multiple disabilities. At the end of the page, there is a quick list of books about multiple disabilities. See Severe and Education of individuals With Multiple Disabilities - Definition and Types of Severe and Multiple Disabilities, MARTHA E. SNELL, StateUniversity.com
 * Oh my. I needed to create this entry thrice before any discussion started. I'm not familiar with en.wikibooks, but hopefully I know Wikipedia so I was able to insist and make sure the entry is not deleted without a discussion. But it must be really - really - hard for newbies, I bet a few years ago I would not have understood a thing, and I would have given up. Yours, Dodoïste 13:23, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Your source, ironically enough, seems to say it just means "more than one disability". Mglovesfun (talk) 13:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not exactly. I admit it is a little complicated. The source says that "more than one disability" of the same kind is not considered as multiple disabilities. For example, a deaf-blind person does not have multiple disabilities. A person with two motor handicaps does not have multiple disabilities. There are indeed some cases where a multiple disabilities person does not have a mental handicap. But the severity of the handicaps affects significantly the education of the person, so a severe mental retardation appears as the person grows up and usually be detected at a joung age (since 18 months or so).
 * The official U.S. definition is quite vague, and causes significant misunderstandings. The UK definition, PIMD (Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities) is more accurate and states clearly that it concerns at least of a mental handicap and another kind of handicap. See the book "Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities: Nursing Complex Needs", Jillian Pawlyn, Steven Carnaby. Yours, Dodoïste 14:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think the specificness of the definition can really be supported by citations, since, despite the fact that some authorities may seek to delineate what "multiple disabilities" means, many people clearly use it in a wider sense. Including many professional works (eg here: ‘This classification includes children with a combination of two or more disabilities. These might include deafness, hearing impairment, blindness or visual impairment, mental retardation...’ (etc.), which seems to suggest that someone who's deaf-blind would be considered as having multiple disabilities). Maybe the issue is just whether this is felt to be a set term or not. It seems like a borderline one to me. < class="latinx" >Ƿidsiþ 14:59, 10 December 2010 (UTC)