Deletion of List of people with autism spectrum disorders

Comment: Could easily be open to abuse on a  front - some of the existing references are rather weak. Unless one is going to insist on  references only
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:MEDRS)

Comment: I'm not sure if this list should be deleted or not but I'm nervous about editors adding individuals where the sources used are highly speculative.  outlines community responsibilities to not to include, even well sourced material, if an individual's notability stems from being victimized by another's actions. While not enforceable, I would want to see the list adhere to only individuals who they themselves have acknowledged and publicly released this information about themselves -- or if it's been the heavy subject medical documentation
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: There is, quite literally, no redeeming value to maintaining such a list on the project. It has ''huge'' potential to cause ''major''  issues, which combined with the inherent |verifiability concerns raised multiple times above, make this a fairly straightforward call, in my view
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:V)

Comment: Is a diagnosis obtained for the purposes of a court case a  issue? See also {{section link|WP:Biographies of living persons|Avoid misuse of primary sources}} "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person." I don't understand the importance of the primary/secondary/tertiary source issue. Can someone point me to a good discussion of the reasoning
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY)

Comment: inherently -dangerous and people are being added with limited checks, balances, and accountability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: as a violation of . It focuses too much on people with ASD who have committed crimes, and hence creates the impression that ASD is causal in those crimes, when it is not. To quote from , the "article ''fails to give a truthful impression'' of the subject. In the extreme case, the nominal subject gets hidden behind the sheer volume of the bias subject(s). Thus the article, although superficially true, leaves the reader with a thoroughly incorrect understanding of the nominal subject." The context of  is that ''subject'' is the subject of the article, not necessarily an individual person
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK||WP:COATRACK||WP:COATRACK)

Comment: If the list is biased towards violent criminals, the solution is to add other notable individuals, not delete everything. Even if the list in its present form violates , it should be changed, not deleted. It's clearly ''possible'' to create such a list in compliance with NPOV, as evidenced by List of HIV-positive individuals and plenty of others. I don't see how the article in its present form could possibly violate  since that only applies to individuals, not whole large groups of people, and none of the information about any individuals mentioned is incorrect - their crimes and diagnosis are both well-sourced. Whether it fairly portrays ASD as a whole is more debatable, but that's a NPOV issue, not a BLP issue
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:BLP)

Comment: The most common reasons for deletion look to be  grounds. If deletion isn't supposed to be based on the current composition of a list, if ''all'' Wikipedia articles requires strong sources for BLPs, if reliable sources could be required for every addition, and if everybody on the list is a notable person, I don't understand what the argument is. We don't delete things because people ''could'' be added inappropriately or because it ''could'' be abused. And if that's all it takes to be deleted, what's going on with every page at :Category:People with personality disorders, :Category:Lists of people with disabilities, and even some of :Category:Lists of people by medical condition? If the BLP issue is utterly unavoidable, should those other pages be deleted? Could someone summarize the BLP issue that looks to be spread over too many pages for those of us who are thus far uninvolved? &mdash
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: I believe the editing community has the ''moral obligation'' to identify situations where increased risks to  violations are prevalent and to impose community solutions to the problem. At the top of BLP it states, "the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment". Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, yet with very high profile controversial individuals, we permanently semi protect the page because there is a threshold where  must be applied. I believe in this case the potential harm to individuals outweighs the value and need for this list to exist as part of this encyclopedia. Lists also require the establishment of these individuals as a group whereas they're being thrown together at the discretion of editorial judgement, not third party publications
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:IAR)

Comment: A  of sheer speculation, not backed up by any RS medical diagnosis evidence. Violates all kinds of WP policies/guidelines
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)