Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swiss Sign Language

:{{la|Swiss Sign Language}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Swiss_Sign_Language Stats])

:({{Find sources|Swiss Sign Language}})

There is no "Swiss Sign Language".

In Switzerland there are three sign lanugages, all unrelated to other. LSF (:fr:Langue des signes française) is used in french parts of Switzerland and LIS (:it:Lingua dei Segni Italiana) is used in italian parts (Canton of Ticino) of Switzerland. In german spoken areas of Switzerland, the DSGS (:de:Deutschschweizer Gebärdensprache) is used and it has influences from the German Sign Language.

The article describes that "Swiss Sign Language" is influenced by LSF, but this is only true for LSF and can be considered as a dialect of LSF. As source of this article Wittmann is mentioned, but for Switzerland, this source can be considered as outdated, because research for DSGS began in the 1990s and the source was from 1991. Today, there exists whole dictionaries for all three swiss languages like [http://signsuisse.sgb-fss.ch/ signsuisse.sgb-fss.ch] etc.

This article shall be deleted. Swiss German Sign Language shall have it's own article. A new article Sign Languages used in Switzerland may be created, but not a article like this. --Filzstift (talk) 13:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 October 30. Snotbot  t • c »  13:34, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. Assuming your conclusions are correct, then as this is the older article, Swiss German Sign Language should be merged into this one, which should then be moved to the ISO name (Swiss-German Sign Language).
• :Wittmann lists three SL's for Switzerland: Natürliche Gebärdensprache / Langage gestuel suisse from 1828 (your Deutschschweizer Gebärdensprache), Langues des signes austro-hongroise, and Deutsche Gebärdensprache.
• :He does not say that the first is influenced by LSF, but that it *may* be connected historically. (As opposed to Austro-Hungarian SL, which is clearly part of the LSF family.) — kwami (talk) 19:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

:::Of course, the other idea, this article could be moved to Swiss-German Sign Language, this is no problem.

:::But your revert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Swiss_Sign_Language&diff=520672522&oldid=520660911] was not helpful regarding the current situation (if this AfD would be declined).

:::# the term reported in the Ethnology report ("Natürliche Gebärden", meaning "Natural gestures") is known by me (one of the rarely sources where this term is used), but this maybe was in the 1970s and 1980s and is no longer in use today, today only the term "Deutschschweizer Gebärdensprache" DSGS (means "Swiss German sign language") is used ([http://www.fzgresearch.org/bibliography.html Biblography])

:::# a reader could unterstand, there is a "Swiss Sign Language", which is not true, there are three different sign languages, DSGS, LSF, LIS (and several dialects of those sign languages) used in switzerland. Historically, deafs were taught by lip reading and sign language were forbidden until the 1980s, the time, where the Ethnology report and Wittmann list were made. These sources does not reflect the current situation. Linguistic research started about 1983 by the "Forschungs­zentrum für Gebärden­sprache FZG" [http://www.vugs.ch/?action=wir_ueber_uns&path=/wir_ueber_uns/geschichte], today basic research is done (see the biblography link above). Fact is, there is no "Swiss Sign Language", and if Wittmann reported a such language, it shall be mentioned but there it must be a remark which says that this does not reflect the current research.

:::# The artice is also inaccurate, as example HamNoSys is also used, not only SignWriting, as example at the University of Zurich [http://www.cl.uzh.ch/research/maschinelleuebersetzung/signlang.html] (ah yes, also here of course the term "Natürliche Gebärden" or a "Swiss Sign Language" is not used, but DSGS)

:::Thats why the status quo is not acceptable. --Filzstift (talk) 07:55, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

::::It doesn't matter if a term hasn't been used for a few years. We're an encyclopedia. A reference work.

::::No language uses HamNoSys as its script. Or prove me wrong by citing a DSGS book written in it.

::::You say the article is inaccurate for not mentioning HamNoSys. So why did you create a 2nd article which does not mention HamNoSys?

::::— kwami (talk) 08:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

::::: You don't have to taught me what an encyclopedia is. You know, an encyclopedia has to reflect the current research in this topic and as such it should not rely on some (old american) sources while ignoring other (newer swiss) sources. My english is too bad to do it myself (the most sources in this topic are all in German). Correct, I didn't mention HamNoSys, but I also didn't mention SignWriting but if SignWriting is mentioned, other writing systems have also to be mentioned. There is as far as I know, no book, neither in SignWriting and in HamNoSys in DSGS (or in any other Sign language in Switzerland), but HamNoSys is used for a project in machine translation into sign language for visual representation for the Swiss Federal Ralways ([http://www.cl.uzh.ch/research/maschinelleuebersetzung/signlang.html the Uni ZH]). SignWriting is also used by some people, mostly those who have learned this in US and brought this to Switzerland, but books, no. --Filzstift (talk) 10:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

::::: Correction, I found a source, there are two Books in SignWriting. --Filzstift (talk) 10:38, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

::::::You're welcome to update the article. But you should know not to delete older names etc, because not everyone will have the latest research. If they did, they wouldn't be looking it up on Wikipedia. — kwami (talk) 11:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.