Talk:Autism

message: Proposal: Add a section to "ASD in the media" that shows all historic and defunct organizations that cover autism and the many metrics that they can be 'graded' by.
Why? : Newsgroups that focus on covering ASD (or that spend a fraction of their time, money, and coverage on the topic of ASD) are a part of the media that we consume. Therefore, a page that is focused on "ASD in the media" is obliged to include a list documenting some of these organizations in some level of detail.
Definitions
'Austism Centricity': how focused a news organization is on the topic of ASD (for simplicity's sake, we could just include organizations that claim to focus on ASD or organizations that have a massive amount of content on ASD (comparative to the content they have on other topics) and have (or have had) a name that intentionally references some part of ASD (See spectrumnews.org as an example).
Newsgroup: any group that assumes/claims a role in the distribution of (factual) information (although it might be interesting to include and the amount of attention paid to ASD by satirical news networks)
Other Potential Solutions
- A wikipedia page/list of all groups that claim to 'dispense news', sorted by their primary foci and every other metric that we care to sort by.
- Another page that would categorize newsgroups by their coverage of and focus on ASD.
Thanks for reading this. This is my first time joining a talk channel on Wikipedia besides 2 minor edits I made on two other articles that I wanted to appends reasons for those edits to. I hope that this suggestion is decent and actionable, and that this did not read terribly. My reason for suggesting this was that I found this group called spectrumnews.org and their about page seemed pretty terrible. Naturally, I looked to Wikipedia for answers and was met with nothing but a linkless mention to this group in a disambiguation page for spectrum news.
If anything I wrote here was downright terrible, please feel free to let me know. If this falls into the category of original research, please let me know. Sorry if this was a bad 'idea commit'. In the case that this is a bad 'idea commit', please know that I did not intent for it to be so. Robitium (talk) 17:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I skimmed this a little bit but it seems (great) (wonderful), I would most likely wouldn't add much since there is this already here, as well is this here and some other articles that are similar. So I would add that "main article here" thing. But I'll leave it to more experienced editors than me about this. Tonkarooson (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Newsgroups Grouped By 'Autism Centricity' 

message: Many sources, including the CDC and the National Autistic Society (UK), state it as such. It is also a disability from a medical and legal standpoint. PicoMath (talk) 00:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should “neurodevelopmental disorder and disability” be added? 

message: It's been started by a new editor. Notifying in case you'd be interested in providing feedback or helping out. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:Special interest (autism)]] 

message: Autism is not a diagnosis explicit to children; children grow up into adults and many children are also unidentified until well into adulthood. All the pictures except one are pictures of young boys below the age of 3 years old; all but one picture is of a white person. Furthermore, none of the pictures show groups of autistics together or provide examples of autism activism in practice. While Temple Grandin is a known public speaker on autism, and it's great that she at least counters the overall image the article implies to be a diagnosis for young white boys, she's also a very stereotypical example that not everyone can or will relate to. There are better examples of famous autistic people than Temple Grandin that also convey the broader range of autism as a spectrum among people. 
I would also advocate to change or remove the box of how to identify autism, because it seems to be explicitly written on how to identify it in children i.e. lining up toys, not engaging in pretend play, despite other portions of the article trying to remain age neutral. 
Also, this article is too damn long in general and should be broken up or reorganized. Finally, remove the Autism Speaks logotype as an example of an autistic representation logo, since the organization is highly controversial and it's better to dedicate a separate article to explain what they are. Entr0pic08 (talk) 18:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to change it.  We encourage you to be bold in updating pages, because wikis like ours develop faster when everybody edits. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. You can always preview your edits before you publish them or test them out in the sandbox. If you need additional help, check out our getting started page or ask the friendly folks at the Teahouse.   -- NotCharizard 🗨 23:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  There has to be greater diversity of gender, ethnicity and age ranges in the pictures 

message: I'm trying to publish an edit but it's not working with an error message saying, "Unable to determine wikitext upload result." What is this and what does it mean? Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 00:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the edit but not the reference Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 05:30, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failed edit 

message: The lengthy discussion about changing the infobox image turning into a big disagreement has sparked me to say that the image just should be of something not someone; discussions about having the image of something has less disagreements than an image of someone. But there, of course, needs to be a consensus on this. Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 01:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The disagreement about infobox image 

message: Making a new section so it's organized better.
I have somewhat changed my opinion on the . Since I'm seeing quite a few people (including anonymous users) wanting the image back, the picture somehow grew on me. But I still don't prefer the image; I'll be fine with whatever picture is used. Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 22:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Tonkarooson can we just put like 5 images of the most common autistic traits so everyones happy that one of the photos is one they they did? Anthony2106 (talk) 21:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: cats have more then one image Anthony2106 (talk) 21:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

text: Sounds like an excellent idea, but the images would have to be found. Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 00:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I can make drawings, but they may not be that good as I almost never draw. Anthony2106 (talk) 01:58, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Autism#The image|disagreement on the image]] 

message: Request to merge these articles that have "Autism" and "Autism spectrum (disorder)" as separate articles. It is also a request to make this a team effort, and share this to other Wikipedia articles that still have this I have shown.
So far, I found 6 pages that still have two separate ASD articles.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autisme, and https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trouble_du_spectre_de_l%27autisme. I can't say anything about this on French Wikipedia because I can't speak French.
https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/자폐, and https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/자폐_스펙트럼. I can't say anything about this on Korean Wikipedia because I can't speak Korean.
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/自閉症, and https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/自閉症スペクトラム障害. I can't say anything about this on Japanese Wikipedia because I can't speak Japanese. Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 21:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Autism" and "Autism spectrum (disorder)" on articles. 

message: @BilledMammal, is the page supposed to have moved by now? I'm not familiar with this process, so I don't really know how long it's meant to take. Signed from the grave (seance me!) 14:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's move protected; I have put in a request at WP:RMTR. BilledMammal (talk) 14:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  does not appear to have moved... 

message: Well, it's done; it's now called "Autism". I really didn't think this needed to be changed again. It used to be called "Autism", look on the Wayback Machine. I wonder the article being called "Autism" played a role with the controversies?
I think this name change was bad and I'm unhappy with it. :( Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 20:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the way wikipedia works - I expect that if the article being called "Autism" causes problems, another discussion will be started and it might be moved again. This is kind of an ongoing issue, how we ought to think about and classify autism, so it'd be unreasonable to expect it to be stable. Also, keep in mind that the article does begin with "also called autism spectrum disorder (ASD) or autism spectrum condition (ASC)," so it's unfair, in my opinion, to say that it's that fundamental or influential of a change. Signed from the grave. (séance me!) 14:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article changing from "Autism spectrum" to "Autism" 

message: Creating a new topic as this is not specifically about Greta Thunberg, though I do think Greta Thunberg does not meet the criteria of being "representative" as in "It is common for an article's lead or infobox to carry a representative image" from MOS:LEADIMAGE.
There don't seem to be any visible characteristics of autism, unlike for example down syndome where an image is justifiable because it can be recognised by looking at a person.
Why then include an image of a person at all?
I don't think this meets MOS:LEADIMAGE, specifically "Lead images [...] should [...] illustrate the topic specifically" and "Lead images are not required". Ybllaw (talk) 21:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted to the old image which has been in the page for however long without as many people complaining. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Please respect the discussion page and separate the Greta-or-not discussion from the old image. There have been lengthy discussions in here. Don't just come and revert things back after just dropping a one-liner. Rkieferbaum (talk) 00:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: i don't see lengthy discussions? 49.183.1.141 (talk) 08:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is there a picture of a person with autism at the top of the page at all? 

message: he is our icon 2600:1006:B0C2:5CFF:D171:CF51:9477:3DB5 (talk) 12:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: My icon is of St. Demetrios of Thessalonica. Urselius (talk) 15:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  PUT THE CAN CHILD BACK 

message: Regardless of if the article necessitated a replacement image, I think it is problematic to use this one.
First, I don't see how it is appropriate to simply use an image of an important person diagnosed with the disorder. This is inconsistent with other articles. For example, in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, the image showcases a relevant context of ADHD symptoms (academic performance) and is not focused on any individual diagnosis. Second, Greta Thunberg expresses idiosyncratic views of ASD such that it is a "superpower" in her activism as indicated in that article; this surely is not the consensus view of ASD and can serve to mislead readers, especially by referring to this activism in the footnote. This is compounded by the previous point in that the image conveys nothing substantive but a reference to the individual.
It may be prudent to find an alternative image but I certainly feel it's important to reach a consensus on this matter by evaluating all of these factors so as to have a relevant, consistent picture. If one cannot be determined at this time, it may be necessary to exclude a main image altogether as is the case elsewhere (e.g. cognitive disengagement syndrome).
Димитрий Улянов Иванов (talk) 14:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Better no image than one that reinforces the widespread and entirely incorrect stereotyping of autism as a purely, or largely, childhood condition. Urselius (talk) 15:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

text: As Urselius stated, I think that no image would be better, if no agreement can be reached. This infobox is already very busy and an image makes it even lengthier. Regarding the picture of Greta, I'm not sure if it contributes much to this article either for the reasons mentioned in the above sections, incluging MOS:LEADIMAGE. Piccco (talk) 23:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree Димитрий Улянов Иванов (talk) 00:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

text: This will only really get solved via RfC Traumnovelle (talk) Traumnovelle (talk) 00:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

text: I support "no image". Mitch Ames (talk) 02:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I support whatever makes the consensus - Talk:Autism#Disagreement on the image. Tonkarooson (talk) *new editor* 22:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus for the image