Talk:Outline of autism

message: Are all the people listed under "autistic savants" really savants, or are some of them just autistic people who happen to have a marketable art or skill? That's why I put Jessy Park under just "autistic people". --Bluejay Young 00:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Savants?

message: Please provide reliable sources ASAP for every person alleged to be autistic on this list, or the list should be deleted per WP:BLP.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In some cases, that information can be found in their respective biographical articles, is it necessary to duplicate that information here? Seems like by that logic, WP:RS would require that any potentially controversial item on this list have its own references. So most of the "possibly-associated conditions" would have to be tagged as unreferenced.Species8471 19:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: oops, I guess I should have re-checked the article, since there's no longer a list of autistic people here, just a link to List of people on the autistic spectrum. However, my question still applies to the list on that page (and user Q0 already asked it that talk page; no response yet.) Species8471 23:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: BLP

message: There are multiple lists of autistic or thought-to-be autistic people.  For BLP reasons, it's important that they be scrupulously referenced.  Repeating those lists of people here, in a list that already links to lists, is redundant and raises the need for further BLP citation. I believe linking to the lists is sufficient, so that citations can be maintained in one place only.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundancy in people lists

message: IMO, it's probably best to file medical conditions other than Autistic Spectrum Disorders under "possibly-associated conditions." For example, I moved autistic enterocoelitis because the article says its existence is controversial. (It's not a question of whether some autistic people have GI disturbances, the issue is whether this should be considered a distinct disorder and also whether the co-occurrence of autism and enterocoelitis is significant.)
 
There are also three genetic conditions whose main articles don't seem to support their inclusion on this list: Phelan-McDermin 22q13 deletion syndrome, Fragile X syndrome and Isodicentric 15. They may need to be moved if they only have "some features in common with autism" but aren't considered ASDs, and it can't be demonstrated that they cause autism. 
All three articles suggest some link to autism and say some individuals with those conditions meet the criteria for autism, but only one of the articles (Phelan-McDermin) provides a reference that MIGHT support a link to some subset of autism cases. Until someone finds new data to substantiate a link, I think these three should probably be relegated to "possibly-associated conditions" as well.  Species8471 19:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Conditions vs. "possibly-associated" conditions

message: "Outline" is short for "hierarchical outline". There are two types of outlines: sentence outlines (like those you made in school to plan a paper), and topic outlines (like the topical synopses that professors hand out at the beginning of a college course). Outlines on Wikipedia are primarily topic outlines that serve 2 main purposes: they provide taxonomical classification of subjects showing what topics belong to a subject and how they are related to each other (via their placement in the tree structure), and as subject-based tables of contents linked to topics in the encyclopedia. The hierarchy is maintained through the use of heading levels and indented bullets. See Wikipedia:Outlines for a more in-depth explanation.  The Transhumanist 00:03, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines