Talk:Toddler
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Runabout Baby
Is it not true that "Runabout Baby" is another term for Toddler in British English? Ancheta Wis 21:51, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
- If it is, I've never heard of it. Would suit my offspring though! -- Jellyman 08:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- Born in the UK and lived here all my 35 years, never heard the term "runabout baby" in any English or Welsh region. Only reference I can find for it on Google is to describe a pushchair ("Runabout" is a pushchair brand name) and one mention in an article by an American child psychologist [1]. Definitely not English English. I guess it could be Scots English but I think that's unlikely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilandi (talk • contribs) 15:54, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Speaking
I believe the milestones listed in the article for speaking and understanding language are far too low. See, for example [2] or "By eighteen months of age, most children can say eight to ten words." [3] A child who can say eight to ten words probably "knows" at least thirty, and certainly far more than the "2 or 3" cited in the article. -- Dominus 17:17, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- I have adjusted this to conform to the information in The Baby Book, by Sears, Sears, et. al, p. 452-453. I suspect that the table requires additional adjustment. -- Dominus 23:54, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Toilet training
This is a very good and concise article. It is true that "in most Western countries, toilet training starts as early as 18 months for some while others are not ready to begin toilet training until they are three". This is a cultural fact that cannot be omitted when discussing a topic with a strong psychosocial components. However, while in some families, early - even coercitive - toilet training is the rule, this practice has been found to cause a substantial degree of toilet aversion (and retentive constipation) in young toddlers. Therefore, I would suggest that the article acknowledge this fact, given that young parents are often unaware of it.
Eguirald 14:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] {{cleanup}}
Wikipedia is not an image gallery or repository. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 21:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image Deletion?
Someone keeps deleting the image I added, Image:Redheaded child mesmerized 3.jpg, without stating any reason. It has been approved as a Quality Image on the Wikimedia Commons, and I think it deserves a place in this article. It is of much higher quality than most other photos here. Thoughts? --Steevven1 (Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery) 03:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC
- Wikipedia is not the place for you to post cute pictures of your children. You should consider your motives and perhaps seek appropriate professional help concerning your obsessions of forcing your children on others. 216.160.105.233 00:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it is a good quality picture and better quality than the ones used in the article. However the article is about toddlers which is mainly demonstrated by the act of toddling, ie. standing and walking unsteadily. Since the photo you quote is only a neck-up shot, it does not illustrate these key points of the article, as it looks as if it was taken when the child was seated. Lovely photo, though, and it would be nice to see more Native Britons used as photo models. The issue of whether you choose to use your own children for models is irrelevant (and I suspect garnered by prejudice against redheads, which dates back thousands of years to the dark-haired Roman Empire's failure to defeat the blonde and red-headed northern European tribes); personally I thank you for making your works available on WikiMedia. Andrew Oakley 16:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, this is the point. The purpose of images is to enhance the article by, for example, illustrating the subject of the article or to add to the 'story'. The present images all seem to meet this requirement whereas the one complained of does not. TerriersFan 16:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it is a good quality picture and better quality than the ones used in the article. However the article is about toddlers which is mainly demonstrated by the act of toddling, ie. standing and walking unsteadily. Since the photo you quote is only a neck-up shot, it does not illustrate these key points of the article, as it looks as if it was taken when the child was seated. Lovely photo, though, and it would be nice to see more Native Britons used as photo models. The issue of whether you choose to use your own children for models is irrelevant (and I suspect garnered by prejudice against redheads, which dates back thousands of years to the dark-haired Roman Empire's failure to defeat the blonde and red-headed northern European tribes); personally I thank you for making your works available on WikiMedia. Andrew Oakley 16:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Content on Erikson's developmental phase
It would be nice to have content on Erikson's development task (achieving Autonomy) which is the basis for much of the toddler's negativity developmentally. Thoughts?Jreid1944 17:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)jreid1944Jreid1944 17:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Also, noting the previous message, more is needed on toilet training. Neurological development is required and there are known signs for readiness for toilet training that would be good to include in the article. Thoughts? Jreid1944 17:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)jreid1944Jreid1944 17:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Jreid1944 17:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Shouldn't it read something else than "12-24 months" down there?
[edit] Gender neutral
Could we please try to be gender neutral here!!! Instead of "mother or caregiver" can we please say "parent or caregiver" to reflect the fact that increasingly fathers are also primary caregivers as well as mothers. As a stay at home dad and on behalf of other stay at home dads, this would be appreciated. (206.191.33.17 01:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC))
[edit] Age Centric Bias
This article should be DELETED, due to its age centric bias. The term "toddler" is damaging to the self esteem of little people, and should be discouraged. This type of idea only perpetuates limitations on little people with growing minds, and represents true human rights bias. Can we please understand that these type of misguided and invalid arguments limit our future leaders? Please read about Indigo Children. Tommy James 00:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah...until the toddlers themselves complain about it on here, I think that nobody cares and therefore the article is staying.
[edit] Sources
This article has a HUGE amount of information for sources I can't find anywhere on the article. The whole chart, fantasy land, its almost telling you how to raise your kids in the "important things to remember about toddlers activities" 67.162.10.70 22:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Canadian Toddler
Though I can't source it, it seems since a British toddler was beaten to death by older boys in the UK. The phrase toddler has become very common in Canadian media. GoodDay (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
