This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm moving the following material here from the article. It's about ASD, not about Asperger syndrome, and so isn't that relevant in the article. The topic is an important one, but the citations here are not the best and the claims are not well supported. Eubulides ( talk) 23:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The majority of ASD referrals and diagnoses are for males. However, epidemiological research suggests that females with ASD are largely under-diagnosed. Researchers including Tony Atwood, a regarded expert on Asperger's and author of several books on the subject [1] have attributed this phenomenon to several factors. Although every person on the spectrum is different, the tendency of ASD girls is to withdraw and try to blend in. Conversely, boys on the spectrum "act out," sometimes violently, calling more attention to themselves. [2] The public misconception of savant males obsessed with train schedules and computers doesn't help matters. Females on the spectrum often become entranced with animals, words, and writing. [3] Arguably, the most famous person ever confirmed of being on the Autism Spectrum is the female author Temple Grandin. [4] [5]
You can check the links to see that these are all actually about Aspergers but it applies to ASD as well so I made it ASD to cover both bases but you're right, it shouldn't say ASD here. I am reposting with AS.
Drewhamilton ( talk) 13:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you reverted my edit to Asperger syndrome. As per the MoS, my understanding is that abbreviations should be pluralised by adding an S, which would seem to apply there because the abbreviation is of autism spectrum disorders. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I have Asperger syndrome and consider the term "Aspie" derogatory. There are others with and without Asperger syndrome that share my views and think this should be noted in the article if it does not already have such a notation. I have seen discussion on some message boards to confirm this but think some established scources would appear more relaible for a citation -- Ted-m ( talk) 15:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
The page should include the support groups for asperger-adults and their websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tucko1 ( talk • contribs) 10:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
i know someone with this, and he likes to run around like a dinosaur and make dinosaur lke noises, is this related to the syndrome or is he just very eccentric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.175.243 ( talk) 12:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I hate how people vandalize groups of people on Wikipedia for no reason. People can just be immature sometimes. As an AS-diagnosed teenager, I feel these vandals to this page is discriminating. Who agrees? 71.121.72.7 ( talk) 04:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I recall the Wikipedia Asperger syndrome article having at one time had a section labeled "controversy," or something similar. At the moment I'm trying to find arguments skeptical of the legitimacy of the diagnosis, and I wanted to reread that section. It's gone.
I was moved to comment on this partly because a similar section was at one time part of another Wikipedia article that I occasionally looked at--one on the author Dennis Cooper. Cooper is a writer known primarily because of the controversies that have attended his work; but someone pruning Cooper's Wikipedia entry commented that he had removed the section as it constituted a distraction. Hence the article became more promotional in nature.
Is this not deeply objectionable? And what are we to make when the discussion of a psychiatric condition seems itself to become promotional in nature?
Asperger syndrome involves as nebulous and subjective a diagnosis as I can personally imagine. We know when someone has a syndrome with definitely biological roots, such as Down's syndrome, because of the scientifically quantifiable debilities associated with it. The debility associated with Asperger syndrome, however, is lack of social adeptness, by a particular society's standards, at a particular cultural moment. This reminds me of now disgraced, once widespread diagnoses such as borderline personality disorder. Those who believe in the legitimacy of the Asperger syndrome diagnosis increasingly do little more, in their online and print polemics, than point out that licensed, educated authorities frequently make the diagnosis. Was the case much different with borderline personality disorder?
At any rate, this article has become more like an act of advocacy than it was when I last read it.
JFC1978 ( talk) 17:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
If you don't believe in Asperger's syndrome I think you need to talk to some of the other people affected by it. Read this article: Families Affected by Adults with Aspergers Syndrome
Soarhead77 ( talk) 12:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps this article should mention the Higher-than Average IQ some researchers have corallated with AS 98.169.244.28 ( talk) 22:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)14 May, 2008
Just a thought. There are a lot of important people who have or are theorized to have had AS 98.169.244.28 ( talk) 22:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)14 May, 2008
This change was labeled " Typo fixing + general fixes using AWB" but I didn't see any typos or general fixes there; all I saw was removal of wikilinks, I guess under the general principle that article A should never contain more than one wikilink to article B. That general principle is too strong: it's too much to ask a reader of Asperger syndrome to remember the lead's wikilink to Hans Asperger by the time they've waded all the way through the article to the History section. It could well be that some of the wikilinks are unnecessary, but I'd rather see them judiciously removed by hand, by someone who's reading the article, rather than removed automatically by a deterministic algorithm. As I was writing this I saw that the change was reverted; if the article does have too many wikilinks I suggest starting the stable version, with more links, rather than the AWBed version with fewer. Eubulides ( talk) 21:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
If anyone wants to join an online support group for Asperger syndrome then here is link to one on Blurtit it is called Group For Teens With Asperger Syndrome I an also adding it as an external link on the Asperger syndrome page. Miagirljmw14 ( talk) 22:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Is there evidence that the pronunciation /ˈæspɚgɚ/ is either the original or common, or is it just how the person who added it pronounces it? To me, it's always been /æspˈɜ:gɚ/. -- Smjg ( talk) 14:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, and I had to go to all these humiliating classes. My friends didn't seem to think I was weird, and they eventually decided I didn't have it after all...
Anyway, I wish there were explanations on this page for some of the words used in this article, especially around Section "Speech and language". If anyone can help with this, or at least tell me to "go to school, kid", I would appreciate your time. Thanks
Tezkag72 ( talk) 22:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm wondering if something should be put into the "cultural" section about the pitfalls of self-diagnosis. It seems that these days anyone who is vaguely socially awkward and uses the internet is talking about how they have it, or they think they have it, despite not getting an actual doctor's professional diagnosis. Are there any sources for criticism of this behavior, or personality disorder self-diagnosis in general? The false diagnoses take away attention and care from those who actually have it and need it, yet among the internet crowd it seems like the "in" thing to have nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.142.137 ( talk) 18:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a discussion forum; talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
This article only describes the disadvantages of Asperger's, except for noting that individuals with it often have excellent auditory and visual perception. It notes that Aspergers have obsessive interests but doesn't describe how they are often very knowledgeable about them (That's why Hans Asperger described his young patients as "little professors". It also doesn't emphasize that Asperger's people only have some of the symptoms described (that's why it's a syndrome). I don't consider myself experienced enough to make big changes but I hope someone who is sees this.-- Supertask ( talk) 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
This article is no longer unbiased, as either Wikipedia or members have deliberately removed many positive comments about people with AS. This article has also had remaining portions re-worded to be misleading and give the impression that those with AS are mentally slow, humorless, or that dealing with Aspies is much more difficult than it really is. This article would be much more accurate if many of those deleted adpects were restored. Tattoo-Mage-13 ( talk) 00:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
This article used to be much more complete but has been chopped down severely by somone(s). The part I take particular offense at (being someone with AS myself) is the implication that people with AS are not able to understand humor, irony, or teasing on anything more than an "cognitive" level. Whoever edited out the comments from some time back about the fact than many Aspies have a very developed sense of humor that is often based on wordplay, doggerel, and other such things needs to look at whether they were doing so for a "cleaner" article, or simply because they personally can't conceive of someone who's autistic in any way being able to have a sense of humor. I have looked at this article compared to earlier versions and find it rather disappointing that many of the good aspects of Asperger's were chopped out, including the list of famous Aspies and those strongly suspected of having it. To remove all the positive parts of this article is, in my view, reprehensible. (In fact, I added in something this evening about many Aspies actually having a sense of humor, and someone came along and chopped it right back out.) If it was someone who does not work for Wikipedia, I would request they be reported for manipulating articles. If it's someone who works for Wikipedia, they be talked to and made to restore the article to help show Aspies in a more realistic and unbiased light. Tattoo-Mage-13 ( talk) 03:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Pubmed reports the following recently-published review of AS:
The full text is not yet available from the publisher's website, but judging from the abstract it looks like an excellent review and I suspect we should use it as a source for this article, when the review comes out and we have time to digest it. Eubulides ( talk) 18:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated the photo of the boy in the article for deletion, out of concern for this individual's privacy. Regardless of whether you agree with my concern, or find that my concerns are misplaced, please go to commons:deletion requests/2008/06/23 to discuss. 69.140.152.55 ( talk) 19:06, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
What does "a failure to [...] enjoy spontaneous interests or achievements with others" mean? Шизомби ( talk) 01:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
This line seems counter-intuitive: "and the speech of those with AS typically lacks significant abnormalities". It implies that those who are not A.S. HAVE significant abnormalities in their speech, and that does not seem to me to be a common view of average humans. Antilog ( talk) 17:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Children and adults with Asperger Syndrome may possibly exhibit dyssemia, as the diagnosis of AS coexists with other conditions, or their AS condition may be confused with dyssemia. Dyssemia consists of a series of difficulties with expressive and/or receptive nonverbal communication, the language of relationships. These difficulties may refer to facial expressions, gestures, body posture, pitch and tone of voice, appropriate touch and interpersonal space, mood, adaptive manners, punctuality, functioning and performing in rhythm with the environment, clothing, make-up, and hairdo style.
Dyssemia is considered a difference rather than a disability; therefore it is not classified as a standard medical condition. In extreme cases, the symptoms of dyssemia could be considered ‘ Social Anxiety’ or ‘ Communication Disorder Not Otherwise Specified.’ Many times Dyssemia springs from cultural factors; the same has been predicated of AS, HFA, and NLD. MinerVI ( talk) 08:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I created this section to fill a gap in the article. Regardless of the negative connotation of the word "nerd", it remains the usual, street English word to describe AS and must appear at least once in the article.
Technical note: the content of this section is not written in the page, but consists of a partial transclusion of the Nerd article. For details, see WP:Transclusion. Emmanuelm ( talk) 17:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
These two topics could well do with being covered. I am pretty sure that the phenomina of Asperger managers is quite a common one and is very little researched. If anyone knows of any research on Asperger managers please let me know. I do know of a book sold by Amazon called "Managing With Asperger Syndrome: A Practical Guide For White Collar Professionals" by Malcolm Johnson who is an Asperger manager giving advice for other Asperger managers. Asperger managers often have bad unintended consequences as they dont understand office politics, are oblivious to any office bullying that is going on around them and have serious problems judging someone's character resulting in errors such as promoting the wrong person. On the plus side Aspies are generally more honest than non-Aspies but they can easily get manipulated by a bully. -- Penbat ( talk) 19:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Another reminder of WP:NOTAFORUM; this page is for dicussing improvements to the article based on reliable sources. Perhaps this discussion can be moved to Talk:Sociological and cultural aspects of autism, if there are reliable sources upon which to base the discussion. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Solely behavioral and/or neurological things that can stem from Asperger's are mentioned - things like depression, anxiety, etc.. But, shoudln't some physical one be there, too?
I will grant that hypertension, high blood pressure, and even stroke could fall under a wide anxiety umbrella - so if that is your reason for not mentioning them I can understand. However, it seems that the stress associated with an Aspie's attempts to survive in the daily routine of most would lead to this, and perhaps to easier work burnout if not monitored closely. Or, have they actually found that that is not the case, and I am trying to think too logically on this?
Again, though, perhaps you mean to cover all of these in anxiety. (Or, perhaps "anxiety and other stress-related conditions could be place in place of just plain "anxiety.") 209.244.187.155 ( talk) 15:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I can't seem to decode the 'əː' glyphs using the IPA help? Is the former correct? the latter? Am I missing something? 87.254.73.119 ( talk) 00:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The following text was added as part of a new top-level section Personal relationships that cut the existing Asperger syndrome #Characteristics in half, in a confusing way:
Having Aspeger syndrome can make staying in a personal relationship extremely difficult. The constant battle with miscommunications alone can be both exhausting and heartbreaking for both parties involved. Maxine Aston [8] suggests several ways to better communication when there is a situation where one partner has Asperger syndrome, and one does not. Some of these include utilizing the telephone and e-mail rather than talking face-to-face, or talking with the lights turned down. Tony Attwood [9] suggests using written communication, which allows each partner to actually take some time to think over what they want to say.
A better location for this sort of material is Sociological and cultural aspects of autism #Asperger syndrome and interpersonal relationships; I suspect many of these ideas are there already. Anyway, I made this edit to move the text in question to the above location, and to add a {{ further}} template to make it clearer where the subarticle is.
If this material is added to Sociological and cultural aspects of autism I suggest first reviewing WP:MEDMOS #Audience, in particular the section "Signs of writing for (other) patients", as it does appear that this text suffers from some of the problems listed there.
Eubulides ( talk) 14:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I find this page mostly focuses on asperger syndrome as a disease and does not give weight to other views. It can also be seen by the wording in which it is not stated that these are just one groups views. The complaints on the talk page are yet another clue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 17:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
I had problems with the wording such as the words impairment and that it seems to be considered a disease. The sources cited from the beggining seem to be made up of mostly medical journals which can many time be ghostwritten. The sociological part thrown in at the end seems like an attempt to give a minimum opposing view. I would see this article in need of improvement I guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 18:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC) Stating whos views these are would be enough to suffice although I owuld appreciate more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 18:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
"Asperger syndrome is one of the autism spectrum disorders (ASD) or pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), which are a spectrum of psychological conditions that are characterized by abnormalities of social interaction and communication that pervade the individual's functioning, and by restricted and repetitive interests and behavior. Like other psychological development disorders, ASD begins in infancy or childhood, has a steady course without remission or relapse, and has impairments that result from maturation-related changes in various systems of the brain." here is a quote from the wikipedia article. just read through and you will find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 19:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
My main problem is the wording in this article. It is suggestive. As far as neutrality there are conflicting views which should be specified, but the wording makes it seem like credibility is being given to the medical view and reading through it seems like I am reading a medical manual. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Explanation_of_the_neutral_point_of_view —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 20:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC) |
Can I suggest (which Sandy also hints at) that we continue this discussion at Talk:Autism rather than two places. I don't see anything being discussed here that isn't a concern shared with autism. Colin° Talk 20:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Someone recently posted a talk section called AS and Crime, which was quickly deleted on the suspicion of it being a sock for a banned member User:Jquandar. I have no way of knowing if the person who posted that section about AS and Crime is User:Jquandar or not (maybe an admin could check the IP's), but the information seems legitimate to me. I know it's not politically correct, and it might be possible to show that the data isn't true, but it seems to me that rejecting the idea of even putting it into the article on the basis of superficial similarity to something that an Encyclopedia Dramatica member posted a few weeks back is a bad idea. Even if by some chance it is the same person, shouldn't we take a look at the information and add it into the article if it seems legitimate?
(Note: It would seem that I chose to use my anonymous IP (65.175.254.105) to edit during the "Autism and Rape" thing because I didnt want it showing up in my recent edit history. I don't know who Jquandar is but I am familiar with Encyclopedia Dramatica and with the help of a friend who isn't on Wikipedia I was able to discover the other things that he/she had likely written. I recently switched from general vandalism watch to watching mostly autism-related articles. I have AS myself, but I'm a novice when it comes to knowledge about AS and autism so I mostly content myself to reverting vandalism and even then I will wait and let someone else do it if I'm not sure what to do. I'm just saying all of this in case anyone here is wondering who I am, since most editors of this page probably aren't familiar with me.) Soap Talk/ Contributions 19:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
What is going on here. You remove not only text but the source URL's as well? Based on an unchecked and utterly false conjecture that I'm a sock puppet? or troll?(whatever that is). You are reminding me of Vietnam vets with PTSD. I understand it is not the most palatable of issues but that is no reason to wipe it off the page without discussion. At minimum Id like the links restored and something of my question, and maybe an explanation for why there was no check of my IP before wrongly concluding sock puppetry? I'm only suggesting the smallest of mentions in the article, perhaps a sentence or even half sentence if it is found legitimate. 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 21:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC) PS. to put your mind to ease please note that I have not been involved in editing any of the previous discussions above, nor have I read them until now. So you can rest that I'm not one who frequents this entry, nor am I involved in AS groups outside of Wikipedia (can't believe I'm having to offer a reassuring resume!) 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 21:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Alright, you want to quibble. You did not ask a question of whether my effort was independent, but you made a clear statement that it remains unclear whether my efforts were indeed independent. Note that I had already made a statement that your focus on "coincidence" did not follow through to the suggested reality of me being a sockpuppet, and yet you still feel a need to state that coincidence again. Would you like to take this paranoia further? 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 00:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
This article just isn't clear.
The Attwood book gives 3 different diagnosis criteria types. ie not just DSM-IV. This article is hard to read through and actually see what the list of traits (positive & negative) involved are. If I didn't already know, I would have a hard time figuring out form the article as it stands now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.222.149 ( talk) 02:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
For now I reverted those changes, pending further discussion here. Eubulides ( talk) 19:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
This set of edits introduced some problems:
I see now that the edit has been reverted, but it did point out some problems in the previous text:
I installed this edit in an attempt to fix these problems. Eubulides ( talk) 07:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I hope nobody minds if I add Eubulides's version, as it is very good, concise, and eye-catching - and more importantly, a consensus exists to modify the text. Master&Expert ( talk) 01:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
This edit changed the lead sentences, on the argument that the text was misleading. But the result is a bit repetitive. How about this replacement instead?
Eubulides ( talk) 18:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I know naive can also be spelled as "naïve" too (which I learnt from wiktionary, and a person who added it, and I reverted it), although I more easily recognise it without the extra symbols above the 'i'. I remember English as a simple language without extra stuff. Have your say please Logictheo ( talk) 18:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
There have been recent attempts ( [3], [4], [5]) by 79.71.215.203 to add a claim to the effect that people with AS have above-average or average intelligence. These claims have been supported by questionable sources. The most recent attempt is particularly questionable: it inserted a claim "however those with AS are often of average, or above average, intelligence" into the lead, but the claim is not supported by the cited source (which merely says "Some people who have Asperger's syndrome may have normal or high intelligence but struggle with social skills"; there's a big difference between "Some ... may ... but" and "are often"). Also, the source itself is a fact sheet put out by an insurance company, which is not that reliable by the standards of Asperger syndrome and of WP:MEDRS.
For now I reverted the change. If we can find sources that are reliable by the standards of WP:MEDRS we can of course revisit this. However, the lead already says that AS is characterized by "no general delay in language or cognitive development" (this part is well-sourced). Now, consider a hypothetical syndrome that I'll call the "brown-eyed syndrome", which is characterized by having brown eyes and no significant cognitive delay. On average, people with brown-eyed syndrome have a higher IQ than typical. But this is by definition; once you give the definition, there's little need to spell out the rest in the lead. The case with AS is similar. For more on this topic, please see our previous long discussion about it at Talk:Asperger syndrome/Archive16 #The lead.
Eubulides ( talk) 17:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
What are the key differences between these two diagnosis ? Lot's of people get misdiagnosed between them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pwjb ( talk • contribs) 12:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I have just finished writing an article about Denise Phua, a Singaporean politician dedicated to helping the special needs (especially autistic) community in Singapore. The article is currently on peer review in preparation for a GA nomination. Is there an active WikiProject about autism, which I can approach to request peer reviewers? I looked around but could not find any. If no such WikiProject exists, consider creating one. -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 12:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I've heard indications that the draft of DSM-V may not contain Asperger syndrome as a seperate diagnosis - it may all be rolled into the concept of Autism. Anyone any information or views on this? Soarhead77 ( talk) 14:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The DSM research committee has advocated that Asperger's Disorder be dismissed from the DSM-V and that HFA now cover the territory of the old diagnosis.
Thanks for the pointer; that's much better than the "reading between the lines" I was talking about above. I made
this edit to try to incorporate that source into
Asperger syndrome #Classification, noting that two of three breakout groups recommended eliminating AS as a separate diagnosis. Further improvements are welcome. I suppose we might want to update
Diagnosis of Asperger syndrome as well....
Eubulides (
talk) 18:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Eubulides (
talk) 18:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Holy possum pants ... after all these years, there's no Asperger syndrome. The term has such wide recognition that I can't imagine it simply being replaced by "high-functioning autism, type N" or even just "HFA". I hope the DSM people decide to keep the name as a synonym, if that's allowed. e.g. "High functioning autism, also known as Asperger syndrome". Even if they don't keep it officially, I'm sure that colloquially people will still refer to Asperger's syndrome and "aspies" and so on. Incidentally, I have a pet theory that at least some reports of early-talking Asperger's kids are actually just
echolalia being mistaken for proper speech. I have seen many a mommy who thinks their kid is talking to them, when I know for one reason or another that they're just repeating something they've heard. But, I can't imagine that phenomenon could explain all of the early-talking Asperger's kids.
Soap
Talk/
Contributions 21:15, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
There was an articlerecently on the Australian TV show Catalyst about the different walking characteristics of children with high-functioning autism and Asperger Syndrome; this is probably worth including in the page. Carl.antuar ( talk) 03:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
If anyone would like to do research into skepticism about AS and the people who are diagnosed with it, go for it. I know it exists. 150.176.82.2 ( talk) 17:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
There appears to be an editor who is adamant on changing "like the more severe ASD's" to "like Autism". While he/she has a point (AS ranges in severity and Autism itself would be the only ASD which we could say is definitely more severe than AS), it's probably best not altered in such a way. I propose something along the lines of "While AS varies in severity, it is similar to Autism in that it..." It would appear that this line is best altered, but that editors can agree on the word choice. Hooliganos ( talk) 03:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
no growin out of it the (%20)percent, taking it under control,living with two ego's alter and the other,a test subject(person)and the tester in the same body
I've talked to a child psychiatrist and she told me that Asperger syndrome and SPD are essentially one and the same. If adult, the diagnosis will be SPD, if it's a child or teenager: Asperger. Is this accurate? 205.151.119.166 ( talk) 20:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Please forgive this long personal anecdote; I'm not just talking to hear myself talk, but rather trying to give an idea as to how this SPD/AS misconception may have come about.
Based on the list above, I bet I would be diagnosed with SPD instead of AS if I just was going into a clinic now and they only looked at the symptoms listed on the SPD page. Yet, I am absolutely sure that in my case the AS diagnosis would be more appropriate, because of the obvious behavioral signs that I showed as a child but which I carefully hide as an adult. To be more specific: when I was younger, I was very friendly towards other children ... too much, in fact. (I believe this is known in the community as the "Odd" personality, as opposed to "Passive" and "Aloof".) But today? I've given up trying to have friends because nobody wants to befriend a touchy-feely misfit like me. So on Point 1, SPD describes me better today than AS does. And Point 2 seems to be more or less the same thing, such that I don't see why it's even listed separately. So that makes 2-0 for SPD.
On to "Secretiveness". I don't know if that really describes me ... it's probably the sort of thing that no one would use to describe themselves but other people would.
So now "emotional coldness" is up. For me, that could go either way. I would say that I have socially inappropriate emotions, meaning that for example on 9-11-2001 I was angry, but unlike most of my classmates I really had no great emotional reaction. Some people think that I must be a horrible person who doesn't care about other people, but that isn't true. I couldn't react to 9-11 because I couldn't emotionally comprehend the idea of thousands of people dying since I've never even seen one death in person. But if I see a person getting beat up, or even just a person with a visible medical disorder, right in front of me where I can see them, I'll obsess over them for weeks and still feel uncomfortable when something reminds me of the incident years later. People who see this tell me I'm over-reacting to things that are just part of life and can't be bothered with. But I've learned to hide both types of these irregular emotional reactions from other people. However, despite my efforts, I probably look "emotionally cold" to most other people, and therefore SPD rather than AS.
Lastly, while I have always had typical AS "perseverations", the older I get the more they start to look like the personal hobbies that normal NT adults have. So in summation, it seems to me that I have grown up from an AS child into an SPD adult. I think the same would be true of a lot of other Aspies. SPD seems like a state of maturity in which a large number of young AS people eventually end up as they learn to suppress their obvious AS tendencies.
But if we can accept the definition of "once an Aspie, always an Aspie", there's no way I could ever not be considered to have Asperger's Syndrome. I was one of the most clear-cut cases of AS when I was younger, and in fact, I might be mentioned in medical literature somewhere since my parents signed a form that allowed the laboratory that diagnosed me to use information about me and artwork I created as a child for just that purpose. And of course, the SPD symptoms I've listed above are all just part of a shell I've built around myself to make myself more acceptable to other people; they don't reflect my true inner personality at all. Soap Talk/ Contributions 15:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I tried to change this, but got reverted. To me, it is the same thing as saying "A dodo is the bird which blah", it should be "A dodo is a bird which blahblah". Anyone got any thoughts on this? — neuro (talk) 21:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) But AS is the only ASD that has the property of having no general delay in language or cognitive development. That's the definition of AS, right or wrong (lots of people think that's wrong, but the lead sentence is not the place to take this up). I take your point about the wording being too terse, though. How about this instead? "Asperger syndrome (also called Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's or AS) is the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) distinguished by having no general delay in language or cognitive development." Eubulides ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Addressing some of the above points:
Eubulides ( talk) 20:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
This edit replaced this:
with this:
However, the latter text does not summarize anything in the body. As per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the body and not raise new arguments about the legal framework. In the literature the legal-framework argument is secondary and is not notable enough to be worth summarizing in the lead.
Reading through the above remarks, and looking at the lead and the body, I have some thoughts.
... we question whether AS constitutes an actual impairment as opposed to a neurological difference and we examine how AS has been socially constructed.
The debate about whether AS is a difference or a disorder, one type of neurodiversity or a neurological disability can be seen as a part of the ongoing debate about the power of medicalization in contemporary society.Another quote: "There are striking contrasts between the views expressed on the organizational websites and the personal blogs written by people who have been diagnosed with AS. The organizations clearly medicalized and pathologized AS and the people with AS, were directed most often at parents and described those who had been diagnosed in terms of their 'deficits'. The blogs, on the other hand, expressed resistance to the AS organizations, to medicalization and to what they felt was the public stigma associated with AS. Bloggers spoke of celebrating their differences and of anger at neurotypicals for stigmatizing them."
Self-identified Aspies made it very clear that they did not want to be cured and that they were proud of their Aspie identity and of their different ways of seeing the world. They considered themselves to be on a spectrum of neurodiversity rather than neurologically disabled. They opposed the medicalization and pathologization of their lives. Those diagnosed with AS were more concerned about changing the stereotypes and stigma that they confront than changing themselves.
While ASCs are disabling in the social world, hyper-systemizing can lead to talent in areas that are systemizable. In this sense, it is likely that the genes for increased systematizing have made remarkable contributions to human history.
{{
cite book}}
: |editor=
has generic name (
help); Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)Eubulides ( talk) 20:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
After a quick skim of the article, I failed to come across a mention of formal vocabulary. I myself have Aspergers Syndrome, and everyone I've come across who had Aspergers either speak or can easily speak in an overly formally vocabulary.
In short, excessively formal words (i.e. big wods, fancy talk, ect.) seems to be rather common among autistic people, at least under the Aspergers category.
Adding the fact that Hans Asperger called his paitients "little professors" my serve as enough for inclusion in the article.
Alas, I can't cite any references.
74.184.188.59 (
talk) 23:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
The section about social interaction doesn't include any information about what happens when a child with Asperger Syndrome is successful in establishing social ties. The fact is, despite challenges, children with Asperger can still learn, just as any other child, it's just harder and takes longer.
(Link to supporting information was blacklisted so unable to provide proof to the above at this time.)
Also, the suggestion for lacking empathy is a bit misleading. It suggests that a total lack of emotional understanding is typical, which is far from the truth. The problem has more to do with a difficulty in putting thoughts into spoken words than in actually understanding others.
Management needs to include the practice of Mindfulness Meditation as a form of treatment. There are a number of books on that topic, with supporting studies in Neuroplasticity. These studies suggest that the practice of Meditation can actually help someone grow out of it into adulthood.
Meditation Alters Structure of Brain:
This website on ADHD talks about how Neurplasticity can be applied to treatment, includes mention of Asperger Syndrome:
I am not able to update the article myself with these views because my view is biased. I have Asperger Syndrome and I speak from experience on every point. So I am writing these thoughts here in discussion hoping that someone who would not be biased checks in on them.
-- 24.182.230.186 ( talk) 21:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Google books search shows that "Asperger's syndrome" is used in three times as many books as Asperger syndrome. Should the article be moved to that title? DCDuring ( talk) 21:28, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I left the cited text in place because of the comment warning, I only removed the link to the topic after reading what I thought was also a joke. However this is an unnecessary use of hyperlink. The topic doesn't need linking to deep fat fryers. 68.89.47.220 ( talk) 17:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Admittedly, perhaps ordering a CT scan - or an MRI is a big thing compared to some psychological tests, but I was surprised to find that neither here nor in the main article on diagnoses is it mentioned that this can be detected via either.
Is this one of these things where I think technology is more advanced than it is, so that we can't really distinguish between AS and other things via brain scan? Can we even detect anything with AS via brain scan? I'd think so - there's a picture of an MRI in the article, and it is neurological. Right? Or am I way off base? 209.244.187.155 ( talk) 20:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps a section should be added to this article to make it more comprehensive that includes pop culture references. The character Jerry in Boston Legal is a good example to start with who had Asperger's. Joshuadelung ( talk) 22:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.198.236 ( talk)
Whaaaaaaat? so now anybody who's interested in dinosaurs has asperger syndrome? so does that mean that Robert Bakker and Jack Horner and Richard Owen all had asperger's? i don't think so.... 76.102.94.69 ( talk) 23:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
However, there is more of a likelyhood that there will be an interest in dinosauria if a person is autistic. I mean to say that this fascination will continue later into life than it does with most other people. I am fourteen years old and only stopped being avidly interested in dinosaurs two years ago. My friend, who has worse AS than me, is fifteen and is still interested in them. So you see, there is a connection but that is not the same as saying that everybody who has ever been interested in prehistory had or has AS. Themanfromthenorth
What's with this line at the end of the article? "If you have AS, you could die in 7 days." Seems highly suspicious to me, so I'm deleting it. Feel free to revert if the sentence has a valid place in the article. Already taken of by another user.--
Whip it!
Now whip it good! 23:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
See my notes under 'AS and Crime'. Themanfromthenorth
There's a new review on AS diagnosis and treatment here:
Eubulides ( talk) 03:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I would love to see a new section added on current genetic theories of the regions involved for each given trait. 96.233.42.222 ( talk) 04:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
The page on Heritability of autism is terrific, and just what I was hoping to see. I think the Aspergers page should have a link to it. 96.233.42.222 ( talk) 04:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Has anyone done a study of geographical incidence of the distribution of Aspergers across continents?
96.233.42.222 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC).
I note the increase in studies finding an overrepresentation of AS individuals in acts of crime in relation to their numbers. For instance the following By Haskins and Silva:
'Asperger's Disorder remains an under-diagnosed condition because of clinical unfamiliarity with its adult presentation. As forensic clinicians become familiar with the presentation of Asperger's disorder, it appears that affected individuals are over-represented in forensic criminal settings. Unique features of such persons may heighten their risks for engaging in criminal behavior.' Asperger's Disorder and Criminal Behavior: Forensic-Psychiatric Considerations
The authors of that study, and other studies, eg. [8] [9] mention the significant representation of AS individuals in sexual crimes, violent crimes, arson, cyber crime, stalking, and others. Whilst these might not be the best sources for these crime-AS correlations, a cursory read still suggests that the issue is at least significant enough to warrant a brief mention in the article. 58.170.49.139 (talk) 13:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC) 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 21:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Once again you raise the sockpuppet coincidence. For goodness sake provide any real evidence for that conjecture, or please desist! You are on the right track by discussing this issue, and thats all we need do. Simple!
I'm surprised at your claim that the sources are selected purely to present AS as badly as possible. Are you saying that about me? or about the authors of those studies? Either way I think its time you stopped with the hyperbole, and allow for a polite and friendly discussion of this sensitive subject. This issue of crime in the context of psych disorders of a common one (eg for personality disorders) and is not an attack on people with AS. It is more a question of the vulnerability of individuals toward these behaviors. I would like to see a breif mention in the article based on the surest of details these studies provide.
Dismissing controversial details in the entry could also invite the claim of creating the entry as a front-page for AS lobby groups. 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 00:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Based on Eubulides paranoia about me being (apriori) a sockpuppet I dont think an environment was created for a trusting, open-minded discussion. So I'll just drop it. 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 00:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Although there are some reports of an association with violence or criminal behavior in AS [3], [26], [27], a systematic review of the literature did not find support for increased behaviors of this nature in AS [28]. Taken along with the current results, there is more evidence to suggest that children with AS occupy the role of victim rather than victimizer [1], [29].
An entire section, "Challenge 8: people with AS as aggressors and not just victims", includes discussion of sexual deviation.
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The final version of Newman & Ghaziuddin 2008 ( PMID 18449633) has been published. It's a review, albeit not a systematic one. After reading it and rereading this thread, I appended the following text to the last paragraph of Asperger syndrome #Social interaction: "A 2008 review found that an overwhelming number of reported violent criminals with AS had coexisting psychiatric disorders such as schizoaffective disorder. Eubulides ( talk) 10:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm researching the connection between those with Aspergers (emotional distancing) and interaction with group sexual dynamics. In other words, if AS allows some people to not be jealous if their partner has other sexual outlets... Is there any possibilty of adding this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.30.129 ( talk) 04:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't think this is true. As I have already said in above and below sections, I have AS. I would feel extremely jealous if any partner of mine were ever to start seeing someone else. I would be angry, upset and feel like a failure. There would be no lack of jealousy. Themanfromthenorth
AS and sexual behavior is a tricky subject. I have a number of good friends with AS and we commonly share views on sexuality and sexual preference. From discussion, I'd say that the majority of the group hold non-traditional views on sexuality, with most comfortable in group sexual dynamics but still very possessive of their main partner. If there is material that supports this, I think it would be pertinent to the article. Nebnosam ( talk) 15:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Would Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome be classed with the anxiety-related disorders that it's said are more common with those in the autism spectrum, or should it be listed separately?
I ask becuase it seems the problem of PTSS is that some traumatic event is so...burned into the conscience, let's say (you know, like you burn a CD), that the person remembers every sight, sound, etc., surrounding it. And, the memories keep coming back. Well, this seems to be the case with how Aspies record many instances in their lives, even non-traumatic ones.
Or, is PTSS so problematic for neurotypicals because it's so opposite from how the brain records things? 172.131.176.22 ( talk) 12:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Why does YCS redirect here? What does it mean? Egg-Emperor ( talk) 17:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
There is evidence that Not all ASPIES show VIQ>PIQ. Ghaziuddin 2004, has shown about 10% of Aspies/HFA's show inverse trends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.228.249 ( talk) 23:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Why does the following sentence omit that the planning conference was carried out specifically for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual regarding it's planned revision in 2011? I would have thought this was a link with massive implications for world diagnosis:
"A panel discussion..." is needlessly vague. 123.211.74.2 ( talk) 21:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit replaced "which challenge theories of humor in AS" with "which highlight the complexities of humor in AS", commenting " Anecdotes never disprove in a syndrome as complex as autism. At most they only highlight the complexities. Fixed to show this.". First, it's not correct that "anecdotes never disprove"; certainly an anecdote can disprove a broad claim, since it's a counterexample. Second, the cited source (Lyons & Fitzgerald 2004, PMID 15628606) has as its main conclusion that the anecdotal evidence challenges theories, not that it "highlights the complexity". For example, the source's summary section describes the theories behind well-documented deficits in autism/AS that lead to impaired humor appreciation, but then goes on to say:
Our summary should not lose sight of the main point of the source, which is that theories of humor in autism/AS are being challenged. I attempted to fix the problem by replacing "there are anecdotal reports of humor in individuals with AS, which highlight the complexities of humor in AS" with "anecdotal reports of humor in individuals with AS seem to challenge some psychological theories of AS and autism". Eubulides ( talk) 16:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I believe that the NLD article should be merged with this one as 80% of people with Aspergers also meet the criteria for NLD and the fact that the way the two were defined in the last ten years has changed. I believe the two diseases are very similar. because of this I believe that the NLD article should be added to this article. Tydoni ( talk) 16:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I cannot understand this article. I have read it, and I still cannot understand anything about Asplerger's. The article says such things as impaired social skills, and does not explain any further. I need to see a list of many social skills that are impaired and specifically how they are impaired. I need to see these concrete, specific examples for nearly every topic covered by the article. 67.150.122.218 ( talk) 05:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)hagexk 040209
A recent edit removed Image:Hans Aspergersmall.jpg from Asperger syndrome #Classification with the comment "What Asperger looking at an unnamed child looks like is irrelevent". I tend to agree that the image is not that relevant to the Classification section, but the image is quite relevant to Asperger syndrome #History, so I moved it there. The image illustrates the co-discoverer of autism and the psychologist that Asperger syndrome is named for, and in particular illustrates the following longstanding comment in the text:
No free photo is available to illustrate this, and a photo cannot be created now because Asperger is no longer with us and stopped seeing young patients many years ago.
This particular image has been used to illustrate Asperger syndrome since 2006, and passed featured article review in 2006 and 2007 without any problems that I know of. Have the standards for non-free images changed significantly since 2007? If not, then let's keep the image, as it significantly increases readers' understanding of the syndrome's history. Eubulides ( talk) 07:41, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't agree with leaving the image (the burden of proof lies with those wishing to include it, and, with matters like NFC and BLP, it's best to err on the side of caution...) but I have no desire to edit war. At no point in the text is the appearance of Asperger discussed, nor the appearance of his patients, nor (the most likely of the three) the appearance of his experimental technique. I admit my argument was hardly a conventional one, but I thought it may help others to understand the issue. As we do not seem to think in the same way, I will have to return to the conventional line. Unless the appearance of the image (in this case, as the image itself is not famous, the appearance of Asperger, his patients, or their interaction as shown in this image) is necessary for a full understanding of the article subject ("full understanding" meaning the level of understanding that should be conveyed by this single article) then it should not be included. If such a visual understanding was necessary, it should be mentioned in the text. What element is this illustrating that really needs to be illustrated at this level? (Note that I am requesting a third opinion on this issue.) J Milburn ( talk) 21:06, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
The image neither "significantly increase [my] understanding of the topic" nor would its absence "be detrimental to that understanding". I can imagine what "little professors" might be like and it is a behavioural concept, not a visual one. There is nothing in the picture of the cute little boy that is characteristic of asperger syndrome. Colin° Talk 19:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
To me, the image illustrates that a person with Asperger's looks like any other person. It also shows the person that discovered the disorder interacting with the kid, he is not oh say, restrained in any way, things like that. In the 1940s (especially in Nazi Germany I might add) the idea of treating people with some mental disorder like this is fascinating. The image brings that out, to me. Dbrodbeck ( talk) 02:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Certainly the artistic appeal of works can be adequately described in words. To take J Milburn's first example, the article Study after Velázquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X has a description of Bacon's painting that is reasonably adequate to describe its artistic appeal; it could be improved, of course, but seeing the image of Bacon's painting is not required for that purpose. Furthermore, that image's use in other articles clearly falls outside the Wikipedia policy. For example, the text of the article Detournement does not even mention the image (!), and even if it did, it would be trivial for any Wikipedia editor with some Gimp or Photoshop experience to modify the free Image:Innocent-x-velazquez.jpg and produce a perfectly adequate and free example of détournement without any need for a non-free image. Similarly, Bacon's painting could be removed from Western painting, History of painting, and Francis Bacon (painter) without significantly harming any of those articles; none of them are required to have that image.
( The Scream is public-domain in the U.S., so it's not a good example here.)
While we're on the subject of non-free use, Image:Study after Velazquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X.jpg lists neither the copyright holder nor the source of the image. The copyright holder cannot be Francis Bacon, as dead people are not allowed to hold copyrights. The source is given only as "desmoinesregister.com", which is not a specific citation of a source. This is a clear violation of Wikipedia policy WP:NFCC#10 (a policy which I am trying to get fixed, but nevertheless that's the way the policy is written now).
If Bacon's painting is intended to be an example of the best use of non-free works in Wikipedia, then all I can say is that the policies for non-free use do not seem to be applied at all fairly and uniformly. Articles on art seem to be able to use non-free works with almost blithe disdain for policy, whereas articles on medicine seem to get the short end of the stick, with skeptics who seem to reject any and all justifications. Eubulides ( talk) 22:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Colin's analysis and had already followed up with him re SandyGeorgia's suggestion to ask Elcobolla about it (see User talk:Elcobbola #Asperger); no response to my query yet. I worry, though, that the situation will be escalated, in that File:Hans Aspergersmall.jpg will be deleted due to a technicality (at least, it's a technicality in the context of this thread: it's lack of copyright info) and as a result Wikipedia won't contain any image of the (co-)discoverer of autism, which would be a significant deficiency. If the above kerfuffle hadn't occurred, I would simply respond to the deletion by substituting a different (and necessarily, alas, non-free) photo that would satisfy the technicality. I worry, though, that in the current environment such an action will be interpreted as disruptive editing. Any comments or suggestions? Eubulides ( talk) 19:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
The article should cover this in detail. The backlash to AS and a huge fraction of the public's opinion of the condition (basically a huge joke), along with the fact that everyone and their dog now has the condition (why was the world "asperger" free until the early 90's?), should be covered here.
1) Don't try to simply brand this comment as inflammatory as the easy way out, and completely swerve the matter at hand, and 2) don't go telling me that it's only myself who holds the opinion of AS as a fraud. I'm not even saying I do consider AS to be that, although there are myriad cites and webpages out there which basically shoot the notion of AS down in flames (as anyone knows, let's not play dumb), basically telling these "self-indulgent nerds" to get on with their lives like they had to before the popular sanctuary of AS. The criticism of the condition should be covered here, that's obvious.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.201.40 ( talk • contribs) 16:44, April 23, 2009
"The condition's legitimacy is disputed by multiple reliable sources, including Szatmary 2000 ( PMID 11086556) and First 2008, and this dispute is covered (and both these sources cited) in Asperger syndrome #Classification. Eubulides ( talk) 01:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)"
Perhaps some mention of discrimination of individuals with disabilities would balance a section such as this one? Regardless, it does seem to me that there is a real need for clairification on the above mentioned issues based on the comments I have seen and the information that has been presented in this section. For this reason, I feel that there should be a section which addresses "debate surrounding the diagnosis of Asperger's" as opposed to a section which addresses the "illegitimacy of a diagnosis of Asperger's". The information that I have read in this discussion suggests to me that there is significant confusion between debate in the medical community over the true "clinical picture" for Asperger's with respect to assigning a correct "label" and the notion of the non-medical community that this debate somehow gives credance to those who question the legitemacy of such a label in the first place. 09:06, 5 May 2009 (whipstitches). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whipstitches ( talk • contribs)
The correct title is Asperger's Syndrome, not "Asperger syndrome" and as a person with it myself I believe the title should reflect its official name, not simply public opinion. Glenn L ( talk) 12:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I just now checked Google Scholar for articles since 2004 and found the following number of hits:
The article's lead didn't mention "Asperger disorder" but did mention "Asperger's disorder", which seemed a bit out of whack, so I reworded it a bit to talk about this label as well. Since there are so many names that the naming business is highly distracting in the lead sentence, this rewording moved the terminology stuff into the lead for the 2nd paragraph. Eubulides ( talk) 01:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit inserted a new lead sentence, as follows:
This sentence misstates the issue in question. There is no dispute among reliable sources that Asperger syndrome is an ASD. The only dispute is whether there is a valid distinction between Asperger syndrome and some other forms of ASD. For more on this subject, please see #Overdiagnosis and legitimacy of the condition and #Illegitimacy above.
The dispute about validity is already summarized in the lead, which says "... questions about many aspects remain. For example, there is lingering doubt about the distinction between AS and high-functioning autism (HFA) ...". The validity issue should not be in the very first sentence; as per WP:LEAD #First sentence, that sentence should be a simple, straightforward definition of the topic. Perhaps the validity issue could be summarized better in the lead, but this change was for the worse; so for now, I have reverted it. Eubulides ( talk) 22:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
A lot of people don't know what this word means and aren't going to bother going to the page to find out. To casual readers (which most users are), this will give out a completely wrong perception of the condition. Clearly another word can be used here which promotes plain English, first of all, and avoids the obviously incorrect perception that the word "stereotype" will give 99% of readers. Sure, we can still link to the Stereotypy article, but this word should be altered. 88.109.58.184 ( talk) 22:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ted Dryburgh ( talk • contribs) 23:16, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I have asperger and my father, and I have noticed a few things missing from the article that could be added for the "symptons". First, I have noticed that ridalin (or however you spell it) is not a good thing for treatment. It caused me to have major mood swings, become extremly hyper (to the point of undesireble), sexually active to an extreme at 8yrs, depressed, and suicidle. Another is (and I talked to a others with it) my dad and I are extremely angered at something that would be considered too much (ie someone takes the last pop and I curse and hit someone) -- Flynn M Taggart ( talk) 12:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Oh, the sister didorder should be mentioned that.-- Flynn M Taggart ( talk) 12:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I have a friend wh has aspergers and he is giving alot of prescriptions that aren't normally recommended for people with that sort of thing.I think it is used to treat small portions of the symptoms. He is given Clondine, albilify, and some type of bi-polar medicine, even though he is not bi-polar and they seem to work. ( 205.134.216.18 ( talk) 22:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC))
I'd like to remind us all that talk pages are for discussing ways to improve an article, not for discussing the topic itself. Any followups should be framed in terms of possible changes to the article. Looie496 ( talk) 14:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't see temper mentioned anywhere in the article but I've noticed that many people with AS have short tempers and often have temper tantrums, is this a symtpom of AS or is it caused by something else? Dionyseus ( talk) 00:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Some people with Asperger do not respond well with SSRI's and the article suggests instead they are on older tricyclic antidepresents such as Imipramine. Should that be mentioned in the article Natche24 20:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Natche24 ( talk • contribs)
I propose a "criticism" section, where the arguments that Asperger Syndrome is not a legitimate disorder shall be discussed. 81.170.75.166 ( talk) 04:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The current article gives a very one-sided view that many (most?) "aspies" would be in very strong disagreement with. In particular, it paints the syndrome as a strong deficiency, and uses a lot of suggestive language. Only at the very end, the typical "aspie" view is presented in a few paragraphs. I very strongly urge that this article be completely re-written by someone actually diagnosed with the syndrome. Until this has been done, I further urge that its status as "featured article" is revoked.
Compare e.g. http://isnt.autistics.org for a satirical take on with the tables turned.
I have added the tags misleading and POV. Beware that there are strong interest groups (notably "autism speaks") that are very highly critizied by autists for acting against the best interest of the autists, and that this article plays strongly into the propaganda of these groups. (Think of a PETA for autists.)
A similar critique may apply to the article on autism, which I have not reviewed.
88.77.188.152 ( talk) 00:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
The general point is that the presentation of the article has a one-sided focus on "Asperger's is a decease", "Aspies need to be cured", etc. This is an attitude that the corresponding communities consider offensive, unfair, and/or just plain stupid. This should be likened to the hypothetical claim "Negroids need to be cured": I doubt that my protest against that attitude would meet resistance.
Notably, this is not a question about medical facts (or other easily referenced issues), e.g. whether Aspies and NTs are neurologically different, but whether the attitude taken towards Asperger's is the analogy of racism or a similar phenomenon.
In addition to the link already provided (the contents, btw, are not by me), I would encourage you to read corresponding forums, e.g. http://www.wrongplanet.net/forums.html. (I note that http://www.wrongplanet.net is already linked from the article page.) 94.220.242.34 ( talk) 05:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I am not going to go into an edit war over this. However, I maintain my position, and point out that
88.77.128.233 ( talk) 12:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. Us autists and many others see it as a 'unique difference' rather than a Disorder. Keep in mind that everyone, especially people with AS, also have their say on how Autism is shaped. In addition to this, I believe this article requires a serious clean-up, as it is currently a mess, slightly one-sided and is written like it reflects the interests of members of the general community rather than facts and science. -- Billsta1 ( talk) 22:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
In response to Andrewlp1991's relatively immediate revert of text added (06:17, 18 July 2009) for an other-side view of the AS empathy debate (claiming "unsourced essay-like ranting"): 1) Why was it deemed "ranting" — that seems to be a rather harsh adjective for this case; 2) If you wanted a source (I'm including it below) I would have expected the more usual response of tagging it requesting a source rather than an immediate revert, and/or modifying it to be more "acceptable" (do moderators of this page follow slightly different rules from the rest of Wiki?). A couple sources for the previous text would be [12] (an old one), and [13] (although not a link to the actual study or its abstract, I'll try to find a one soon).
Also, I am in agreement with the section pointing at one-sidedness to the article — this is one of the reasons why I added the text that I did (to give a different view than the typical clinician "aspies don't have empathy" view, which just about any Aspie would disagree with). It often seems that people have a view that everyone with AS is like Rainman (Perhaps the movie coming out this year on Temple Grandin might help change people's perspectives) not realizing most Aspies live normalish lives, sometimes undiagnosed, and that there are many aspies — by no means "all" — falling at the genius level. That was a rant, BTW, even aspies get annoyed when people seem to be acting rudely. :( Would you prefer a different way of expressing the thought? Feedback appreciated. — al-Shimoni ( talk) 03:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Could someone assist me in adding section to the Cause section of Asperger syndrome. In 2009 James D. Watson (Nobel prize winner for discovery DNA was a double helix) announced his discovered patients with Asperger syndrome had significant loss of DNA as compared with the parents DNA.
R.R. Roberts ( talk) 00:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit made this change to the lead:
and tagged the sentence "[citation needed]", with the edit summary "These terms appear outdated." I looked into this and found that the terms are definitely not outdated. Also, while doing this I was reminded that a reliable source said that there's no consensus over whether the name should end in "syndrome" or "disorder".
I looked over the article and found some glitches in this area:
I installed a patch that attempts to address the issues mentioned above. Eubulides ( talk) 06:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
Eubulides (
talk) 15:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC){{editsemiprotected}}
the proposed edits do not involve changes to existing text, rather additions that enhance the discussion about cultural aspects.
Please change the paragraph that currently reads: Some researchers have argued that AS can be viewed as a different cognitive style, not a disorder or a disability.[10][95] In a 2002 paper, Simon Baron-Cohen wrote of those with AS, "In the social world there is no great benefit to a precise eye for detail, but in the worlds of math, computing, cataloguing, music, linguistics, engineering, and science, such an eye for detail can lead to success rather than failure." Baron-Cohen cited two reasons why it might still be useful to consider AS to be a disability: to ensure provision for legally required special support, and to recognize emotional difficulties from reduced empathy.[96] It has been argued that the genes for Asperger's combination of abilities have operated throughout recent human evolution and have made remarkable contributions to human history.[97]
to:
Some researchers have argued that AS can be viewed as a different cognitive style, not a disorder or a disability.[10][95] [13] For example, in a 2009 article Sarah Allred argues that an appropriate reframing may involve the demedicalization of Asperger Syndrome, in part, because published assessments of the diagnostic criteria reveal a problematic pattern of unreliability. In addition, Allred supports demedicalization because the published accounts of Asperger Syndrome—those by people who study, live with or have Asperger Syndrome—indicate that the Asperger cognitive and social differences as a whole do not meet the general criteria of a mental disorder as specified in the preface of the DSM-IV. These criteria include evidence of an internal dysfunction, unexpected responses to particular events, and behaviors that are distinguishable from deviant behavior. In a 2002 paper, Simon Baron-Cohen wrote of those with AS, "In the social world there is no great benefit to a precise eye for detail, but in the worlds of math, computing, cataloguing, music, linguistics, engineering, and science, such an eye for detail can lead to success rather than failure." Baron-Cohen cited two reasons why it might still be useful to consider AS to be a disability: to ensure provision for legally required special support, and to recognize emotional difficulties from reduced empathy.[96] It has been argued that the genes for Asperger's combination of abilities have operated throughout recent human evolution and have made remarkable contributions to human history.[97]
JRS8688 ( talk) 19:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Done Welcome and thanks for contributing. Celestra ( talk) 13:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Now then.. there is much conjecture about notable people from the past that are thought to have had the same psychological profiles now recognized as Asperger's Sydnrome [Jane Austen, Mark Twain, Thomas Jefferson, for example.] Does anyone else feel this should be added to the article, as well as a possible "In Popular Culture" section that would make reference to the new Hugh Dancy film "Adam", amongst other things? Let me know and I can get on it. Hrhadam ( talk) 20:16, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
This intelligent blog is vehemently opposed to the whole prevailing epistemology of Asperger's syndrome: http://racketaspergers.blogspot.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.171.148 ( talk) 15:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit added a huge batch of citations in a new Further reading section, which I've listed below:
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)These citations, where they do not repeat sources that are already cited, are not useful as recommended publications (see WP:FURTHER), and anyway the list is way too long and obsolescent, so I moved these citations here for further discussion. Further reading sections should not be a dumping ground for random books published on Asperger disorder. Eubulides ( talk) 01:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
NOne of these need to be added. The article is comprehensive, and there is an entire page of AS reading linked in the template already. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I monitor T:TDYK, and the new article cortisol awakening response (CAR) includes an interesting tidbit from a recent paper: apparently AS "sufferers" (for lack of a better term) lack the CAR. The paper is Mark Brosnan et al. (2009) "Absence of a normal cortisol awakening response (CAR) in adolescent males with Asperger syndrome (AS)." Psychoneuroendocrinology. 34(7):1095–1100 PMID 19304400 doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2009.02.011. The epub was back in March, Circeus ( talk) 18:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
The lead paragraph is lanky: sterotypies is a stumbler; the leading sentence structure is haphazard. Aspergers is too important.
Currently: Asperger syndrome is an autism spectrum disorder, and people with it therefore show significant difficulties in social interaction, along with stereotypies and other restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests. It differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development. Although not required for diagnosis, physical clumsiness and atypical use of language are frequently reported.
Proposed: Asperger syndrome is a mental disorder of the autistic spectrum whose psychological profile demonstrates normal linguistic linguistic and cognitive abilities, but appears void of the skills for empathy and the non-verbal communication. Behaviors and interests are restricted severely and highly repetitive. The reality complex manifests stereotypy, a bodily movement disorder. Persons diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome have also been frequently reported to have physical clumsiness and an atypical use of language. [14] [15]
Rationales:
It is only a copy-edit.
Be There Do That ( talk)cpiral
Although the article is not grotesque, it IS not beautifully written. The lead paragraph is confusing. I could not figure out exactly what was being said about stereotypes. Is it being said that those with Asperger's have trouble comprehending stereotypes? Are they, in many cases, alleged to speak in stereotypes? Are they supposed to engage in repetitive behavior? I must say that I am a bit surprised. This is a rather important article and expected a better job. Gingermint ( talk) 07:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The article Dion Betts is being discussed for possible deletion.
I was unable to find sources indicating his notability (or that of his books), but I am by no means an expert in this area! If he is indeed notable, if his books are thought of as being significant in the field of Aperger syndrome, I would be grateful if people could take part in the discussion.
I am not seeking to get this article deleted if he/his books are actually notable and significant in the field. However, if they are not significant, then the article is right to be deleted.
If you want to make your thoughts known, the AfD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dion Betts
Thanks -- PhantomSteve ( Contact Me, My Contribs) 17:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The article Dion Betts is being discussed for possible deletion.
I was unable to find sources indicating his notability (or that of his books), but I am by no means an expert in this area! If he is indeed notable, if his books are thought of as being significant in the field of Aperger syndrome, I would be grateful if people could take part in the discussion.
I am not seeking to get this article deleted if he/his books are actually notable and significant in the field. However, if they are not significant, then the article is right to be deleted.
If you want to make your thoughts known, the AfD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dion Betts
Thanks -- PhantomSteve ( Contact Me, My Contribs) 17:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The quote from Baron-Cohen is in quotation marks, as it should be, but has been altered to suit the preferences of USA English.
Baron-Cohen writes in UK English. Why do you want to translate him yet leave it as a quote? Bias, that's why.
He wrote 'maths' not 'math'.
And yes, it matters. This USA bias can be found throughout Wikipedia and when it interferes with quotations from those who do not speak USA English, you diminish yourselves and Wikipedia in one fell swoop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.140.105 ( talk) 18:49, 22 September 2009
This intelligent blog is vehemently opposed to the whole epistemology of Asperger's syndrome: http://racketaspergers.blogspot.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.171.148 ( talk)
"Now College Internship Program -- with campuses in Massachusetts, Indiana, California and Melbourne -- is among a handful of places where young people with Asperger's can attend college while getting the support they need to help them succeed. Another, called the College Living Experience, has five locations around the country, including a program in Fort Lauderdale." This may be worth mentioning somewhere, although I'm not sure where exactly. Management?
Also, "People with AS/Asperger snydrome/Asperger's" appears way too often in the article. Is there something else we could replace it with? I was thinking "those affected by" (rather than suffering from), but this may imply friends and family members. Any ideas? MichaelExe ( talk) 21:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Kasari
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Baron-Cohen2000
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).McPartland
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Baskin
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm moving the following material here from the article. It's about ASD, not about Asperger syndrome, and so isn't that relevant in the article. The topic is an important one, but the citations here are not the best and the claims are not well supported. Eubulides ( talk) 23:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The majority of ASD referrals and diagnoses are for males. However, epidemiological research suggests that females with ASD are largely under-diagnosed. Researchers including Tony Atwood, a regarded expert on Asperger's and author of several books on the subject [1] have attributed this phenomenon to several factors. Although every person on the spectrum is different, the tendency of ASD girls is to withdraw and try to blend in. Conversely, boys on the spectrum "act out," sometimes violently, calling more attention to themselves. [2] The public misconception of savant males obsessed with train schedules and computers doesn't help matters. Females on the spectrum often become entranced with animals, words, and writing. [3] Arguably, the most famous person ever confirmed of being on the Autism Spectrum is the female author Temple Grandin. [4] [5]
You can check the links to see that these are all actually about Aspergers but it applies to ASD as well so I made it ASD to cover both bases but you're right, it shouldn't say ASD here. I am reposting with AS.
Drewhamilton ( talk) 13:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you reverted my edit to Asperger syndrome. As per the MoS, my understanding is that abbreviations should be pluralised by adding an S, which would seem to apply there because the abbreviation is of autism spectrum disorders. Cordless Larry ( talk) 18:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I have Asperger syndrome and consider the term "Aspie" derogatory. There are others with and without Asperger syndrome that share my views and think this should be noted in the article if it does not already have such a notation. I have seen discussion on some message boards to confirm this but think some established scources would appear more relaible for a citation -- Ted-m ( talk) 15:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
The page should include the support groups for asperger-adults and their websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tucko1 ( talk • contribs) 10:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
i know someone with this, and he likes to run around like a dinosaur and make dinosaur lke noises, is this related to the syndrome or is he just very eccentric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.175.243 ( talk) 12:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I hate how people vandalize groups of people on Wikipedia for no reason. People can just be immature sometimes. As an AS-diagnosed teenager, I feel these vandals to this page is discriminating. Who agrees? 71.121.72.7 ( talk) 04:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I recall the Wikipedia Asperger syndrome article having at one time had a section labeled "controversy," or something similar. At the moment I'm trying to find arguments skeptical of the legitimacy of the diagnosis, and I wanted to reread that section. It's gone.
I was moved to comment on this partly because a similar section was at one time part of another Wikipedia article that I occasionally looked at--one on the author Dennis Cooper. Cooper is a writer known primarily because of the controversies that have attended his work; but someone pruning Cooper's Wikipedia entry commented that he had removed the section as it constituted a distraction. Hence the article became more promotional in nature.
Is this not deeply objectionable? And what are we to make when the discussion of a psychiatric condition seems itself to become promotional in nature?
Asperger syndrome involves as nebulous and subjective a diagnosis as I can personally imagine. We know when someone has a syndrome with definitely biological roots, such as Down's syndrome, because of the scientifically quantifiable debilities associated with it. The debility associated with Asperger syndrome, however, is lack of social adeptness, by a particular society's standards, at a particular cultural moment. This reminds me of now disgraced, once widespread diagnoses such as borderline personality disorder. Those who believe in the legitimacy of the Asperger syndrome diagnosis increasingly do little more, in their online and print polemics, than point out that licensed, educated authorities frequently make the diagnosis. Was the case much different with borderline personality disorder?
At any rate, this article has become more like an act of advocacy than it was when I last read it.
JFC1978 ( talk) 17:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
If you don't believe in Asperger's syndrome I think you need to talk to some of the other people affected by it. Read this article: Families Affected by Adults with Aspergers Syndrome
Soarhead77 ( talk) 12:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps this article should mention the Higher-than Average IQ some researchers have corallated with AS 98.169.244.28 ( talk) 22:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)14 May, 2008
Just a thought. There are a lot of important people who have or are theorized to have had AS 98.169.244.28 ( talk) 22:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)14 May, 2008
This change was labeled " Typo fixing + general fixes using AWB" but I didn't see any typos or general fixes there; all I saw was removal of wikilinks, I guess under the general principle that article A should never contain more than one wikilink to article B. That general principle is too strong: it's too much to ask a reader of Asperger syndrome to remember the lead's wikilink to Hans Asperger by the time they've waded all the way through the article to the History section. It could well be that some of the wikilinks are unnecessary, but I'd rather see them judiciously removed by hand, by someone who's reading the article, rather than removed automatically by a deterministic algorithm. As I was writing this I saw that the change was reverted; if the article does have too many wikilinks I suggest starting the stable version, with more links, rather than the AWBed version with fewer. Eubulides ( talk) 21:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
If anyone wants to join an online support group for Asperger syndrome then here is link to one on Blurtit it is called Group For Teens With Asperger Syndrome I an also adding it as an external link on the Asperger syndrome page. Miagirljmw14 ( talk) 22:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Is there evidence that the pronunciation /ˈæspɚgɚ/ is either the original or common, or is it just how the person who added it pronounces it? To me, it's always been /æspˈɜ:gɚ/. -- Smjg ( talk) 14:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, and I had to go to all these humiliating classes. My friends didn't seem to think I was weird, and they eventually decided I didn't have it after all...
Anyway, I wish there were explanations on this page for some of the words used in this article, especially around Section "Speech and language". If anyone can help with this, or at least tell me to "go to school, kid", I would appreciate your time. Thanks
Tezkag72 ( talk) 22:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm wondering if something should be put into the "cultural" section about the pitfalls of self-diagnosis. It seems that these days anyone who is vaguely socially awkward and uses the internet is talking about how they have it, or they think they have it, despite not getting an actual doctor's professional diagnosis. Are there any sources for criticism of this behavior, or personality disorder self-diagnosis in general? The false diagnoses take away attention and care from those who actually have it and need it, yet among the internet crowd it seems like the "in" thing to have nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.142.137 ( talk) 18:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a discussion forum; talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
This article only describes the disadvantages of Asperger's, except for noting that individuals with it often have excellent auditory and visual perception. It notes that Aspergers have obsessive interests but doesn't describe how they are often very knowledgeable about them (That's why Hans Asperger described his young patients as "little professors". It also doesn't emphasize that Asperger's people only have some of the symptoms described (that's why it's a syndrome). I don't consider myself experienced enough to make big changes but I hope someone who is sees this.-- Supertask ( talk) 16:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
This article is no longer unbiased, as either Wikipedia or members have deliberately removed many positive comments about people with AS. This article has also had remaining portions re-worded to be misleading and give the impression that those with AS are mentally slow, humorless, or that dealing with Aspies is much more difficult than it really is. This article would be much more accurate if many of those deleted adpects were restored. Tattoo-Mage-13 ( talk) 00:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
This article used to be much more complete but has been chopped down severely by somone(s). The part I take particular offense at (being someone with AS myself) is the implication that people with AS are not able to understand humor, irony, or teasing on anything more than an "cognitive" level. Whoever edited out the comments from some time back about the fact than many Aspies have a very developed sense of humor that is often based on wordplay, doggerel, and other such things needs to look at whether they were doing so for a "cleaner" article, or simply because they personally can't conceive of someone who's autistic in any way being able to have a sense of humor. I have looked at this article compared to earlier versions and find it rather disappointing that many of the good aspects of Asperger's were chopped out, including the list of famous Aspies and those strongly suspected of having it. To remove all the positive parts of this article is, in my view, reprehensible. (In fact, I added in something this evening about many Aspies actually having a sense of humor, and someone came along and chopped it right back out.) If it was someone who does not work for Wikipedia, I would request they be reported for manipulating articles. If it's someone who works for Wikipedia, they be talked to and made to restore the article to help show Aspies in a more realistic and unbiased light. Tattoo-Mage-13 ( talk) 03:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Pubmed reports the following recently-published review of AS:
The full text is not yet available from the publisher's website, but judging from the abstract it looks like an excellent review and I suspect we should use it as a source for this article, when the review comes out and we have time to digest it. Eubulides ( talk) 18:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated the photo of the boy in the article for deletion, out of concern for this individual's privacy. Regardless of whether you agree with my concern, or find that my concerns are misplaced, please go to commons:deletion requests/2008/06/23 to discuss. 69.140.152.55 ( talk) 19:06, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
What does "a failure to [...] enjoy spontaneous interests or achievements with others" mean? Шизомби ( talk) 01:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
This line seems counter-intuitive: "and the speech of those with AS typically lacks significant abnormalities". It implies that those who are not A.S. HAVE significant abnormalities in their speech, and that does not seem to me to be a common view of average humans. Antilog ( talk) 17:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Children and adults with Asperger Syndrome may possibly exhibit dyssemia, as the diagnosis of AS coexists with other conditions, or their AS condition may be confused with dyssemia. Dyssemia consists of a series of difficulties with expressive and/or receptive nonverbal communication, the language of relationships. These difficulties may refer to facial expressions, gestures, body posture, pitch and tone of voice, appropriate touch and interpersonal space, mood, adaptive manners, punctuality, functioning and performing in rhythm with the environment, clothing, make-up, and hairdo style.
Dyssemia is considered a difference rather than a disability; therefore it is not classified as a standard medical condition. In extreme cases, the symptoms of dyssemia could be considered ‘ Social Anxiety’ or ‘ Communication Disorder Not Otherwise Specified.’ Many times Dyssemia springs from cultural factors; the same has been predicated of AS, HFA, and NLD. MinerVI ( talk) 08:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I created this section to fill a gap in the article. Regardless of the negative connotation of the word "nerd", it remains the usual, street English word to describe AS and must appear at least once in the article.
Technical note: the content of this section is not written in the page, but consists of a partial transclusion of the Nerd article. For details, see WP:Transclusion. Emmanuelm ( talk) 17:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
These two topics could well do with being covered. I am pretty sure that the phenomina of Asperger managers is quite a common one and is very little researched. If anyone knows of any research on Asperger managers please let me know. I do know of a book sold by Amazon called "Managing With Asperger Syndrome: A Practical Guide For White Collar Professionals" by Malcolm Johnson who is an Asperger manager giving advice for other Asperger managers. Asperger managers often have bad unintended consequences as they dont understand office politics, are oblivious to any office bullying that is going on around them and have serious problems judging someone's character resulting in errors such as promoting the wrong person. On the plus side Aspies are generally more honest than non-Aspies but they can easily get manipulated by a bully. -- Penbat ( talk) 19:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Another reminder of WP:NOTAFORUM; this page is for dicussing improvements to the article based on reliable sources. Perhaps this discussion can be moved to Talk:Sociological and cultural aspects of autism, if there are reliable sources upon which to base the discussion. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Solely behavioral and/or neurological things that can stem from Asperger's are mentioned - things like depression, anxiety, etc.. But, shoudln't some physical one be there, too?
I will grant that hypertension, high blood pressure, and even stroke could fall under a wide anxiety umbrella - so if that is your reason for not mentioning them I can understand. However, it seems that the stress associated with an Aspie's attempts to survive in the daily routine of most would lead to this, and perhaps to easier work burnout if not monitored closely. Or, have they actually found that that is not the case, and I am trying to think too logically on this?
Again, though, perhaps you mean to cover all of these in anxiety. (Or, perhaps "anxiety and other stress-related conditions could be place in place of just plain "anxiety.") 209.244.187.155 ( talk) 15:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I can't seem to decode the 'əː' glyphs using the IPA help? Is the former correct? the latter? Am I missing something? 87.254.73.119 ( talk) 00:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The following text was added as part of a new top-level section Personal relationships that cut the existing Asperger syndrome #Characteristics in half, in a confusing way:
Having Aspeger syndrome can make staying in a personal relationship extremely difficult. The constant battle with miscommunications alone can be both exhausting and heartbreaking for both parties involved. Maxine Aston [8] suggests several ways to better communication when there is a situation where one partner has Asperger syndrome, and one does not. Some of these include utilizing the telephone and e-mail rather than talking face-to-face, or talking with the lights turned down. Tony Attwood [9] suggests using written communication, which allows each partner to actually take some time to think over what they want to say.
A better location for this sort of material is Sociological and cultural aspects of autism #Asperger syndrome and interpersonal relationships; I suspect many of these ideas are there already. Anyway, I made this edit to move the text in question to the above location, and to add a {{ further}} template to make it clearer where the subarticle is.
If this material is added to Sociological and cultural aspects of autism I suggest first reviewing WP:MEDMOS #Audience, in particular the section "Signs of writing for (other) patients", as it does appear that this text suffers from some of the problems listed there.
Eubulides ( talk) 14:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I find this page mostly focuses on asperger syndrome as a disease and does not give weight to other views. It can also be seen by the wording in which it is not stated that these are just one groups views. The complaints on the talk page are yet another clue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 17:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
I had problems with the wording such as the words impairment and that it seems to be considered a disease. The sources cited from the beggining seem to be made up of mostly medical journals which can many time be ghostwritten. The sociological part thrown in at the end seems like an attempt to give a minimum opposing view. I would see this article in need of improvement I guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 18:47, 23 August 2008 (UTC) Stating whos views these are would be enough to suffice although I owuld appreciate more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 18:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
"Asperger syndrome is one of the autism spectrum disorders (ASD) or pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), which are a spectrum of psychological conditions that are characterized by abnormalities of social interaction and communication that pervade the individual's functioning, and by restricted and repetitive interests and behavior. Like other psychological development disorders, ASD begins in infancy or childhood, has a steady course without remission or relapse, and has impairments that result from maturation-related changes in various systems of the brain." here is a quote from the wikipedia article. just read through and you will find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 19:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
My main problem is the wording in this article. It is suggestive. As far as neutrality there are conflicting views which should be specified, but the wording makes it seem like credibility is being given to the medical view and reading through it seems like I am reading a medical manual. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Explanation_of_the_neutral_point_of_view —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.93.212 ( talk) 20:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC) |
Can I suggest (which Sandy also hints at) that we continue this discussion at Talk:Autism rather than two places. I don't see anything being discussed here that isn't a concern shared with autism. Colin° Talk 20:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Someone recently posted a talk section called AS and Crime, which was quickly deleted on the suspicion of it being a sock for a banned member User:Jquandar. I have no way of knowing if the person who posted that section about AS and Crime is User:Jquandar or not (maybe an admin could check the IP's), but the information seems legitimate to me. I know it's not politically correct, and it might be possible to show that the data isn't true, but it seems to me that rejecting the idea of even putting it into the article on the basis of superficial similarity to something that an Encyclopedia Dramatica member posted a few weeks back is a bad idea. Even if by some chance it is the same person, shouldn't we take a look at the information and add it into the article if it seems legitimate?
(Note: It would seem that I chose to use my anonymous IP (65.175.254.105) to edit during the "Autism and Rape" thing because I didnt want it showing up in my recent edit history. I don't know who Jquandar is but I am familiar with Encyclopedia Dramatica and with the help of a friend who isn't on Wikipedia I was able to discover the other things that he/she had likely written. I recently switched from general vandalism watch to watching mostly autism-related articles. I have AS myself, but I'm a novice when it comes to knowledge about AS and autism so I mostly content myself to reverting vandalism and even then I will wait and let someone else do it if I'm not sure what to do. I'm just saying all of this in case anyone here is wondering who I am, since most editors of this page probably aren't familiar with me.) Soap Talk/ Contributions 19:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
What is going on here. You remove not only text but the source URL's as well? Based on an unchecked and utterly false conjecture that I'm a sock puppet? or troll?(whatever that is). You are reminding me of Vietnam vets with PTSD. I understand it is not the most palatable of issues but that is no reason to wipe it off the page without discussion. At minimum Id like the links restored and something of my question, and maybe an explanation for why there was no check of my IP before wrongly concluding sock puppetry? I'm only suggesting the smallest of mentions in the article, perhaps a sentence or even half sentence if it is found legitimate. 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 21:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC) PS. to put your mind to ease please note that I have not been involved in editing any of the previous discussions above, nor have I read them until now. So you can rest that I'm not one who frequents this entry, nor am I involved in AS groups outside of Wikipedia (can't believe I'm having to offer a reassuring resume!) 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 21:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Alright, you want to quibble. You did not ask a question of whether my effort was independent, but you made a clear statement that it remains unclear whether my efforts were indeed independent. Note that I had already made a statement that your focus on "coincidence" did not follow through to the suggested reality of me being a sockpuppet, and yet you still feel a need to state that coincidence again. Would you like to take this paranoia further? 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 00:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
This article just isn't clear.
The Attwood book gives 3 different diagnosis criteria types. ie not just DSM-IV. This article is hard to read through and actually see what the list of traits (positive & negative) involved are. If I didn't already know, I would have a hard time figuring out form the article as it stands now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.222.149 ( talk) 02:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
For now I reverted those changes, pending further discussion here. Eubulides ( talk) 19:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
This set of edits introduced some problems:
I see now that the edit has been reverted, but it did point out some problems in the previous text:
I installed this edit in an attempt to fix these problems. Eubulides ( talk) 07:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I hope nobody minds if I add Eubulides's version, as it is very good, concise, and eye-catching - and more importantly, a consensus exists to modify the text. Master&Expert ( talk) 01:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
This edit changed the lead sentences, on the argument that the text was misleading. But the result is a bit repetitive. How about this replacement instead?
Eubulides ( talk) 18:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I know naive can also be spelled as "naïve" too (which I learnt from wiktionary, and a person who added it, and I reverted it), although I more easily recognise it without the extra symbols above the 'i'. I remember English as a simple language without extra stuff. Have your say please Logictheo ( talk) 18:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
There have been recent attempts ( [3], [4], [5]) by 79.71.215.203 to add a claim to the effect that people with AS have above-average or average intelligence. These claims have been supported by questionable sources. The most recent attempt is particularly questionable: it inserted a claim "however those with AS are often of average, or above average, intelligence" into the lead, but the claim is not supported by the cited source (which merely says "Some people who have Asperger's syndrome may have normal or high intelligence but struggle with social skills"; there's a big difference between "Some ... may ... but" and "are often"). Also, the source itself is a fact sheet put out by an insurance company, which is not that reliable by the standards of Asperger syndrome and of WP:MEDRS.
For now I reverted the change. If we can find sources that are reliable by the standards of WP:MEDRS we can of course revisit this. However, the lead already says that AS is characterized by "no general delay in language or cognitive development" (this part is well-sourced). Now, consider a hypothetical syndrome that I'll call the "brown-eyed syndrome", which is characterized by having brown eyes and no significant cognitive delay. On average, people with brown-eyed syndrome have a higher IQ than typical. But this is by definition; once you give the definition, there's little need to spell out the rest in the lead. The case with AS is similar. For more on this topic, please see our previous long discussion about it at Talk:Asperger syndrome/Archive16 #The lead.
Eubulides ( talk) 17:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
What are the key differences between these two diagnosis ? Lot's of people get misdiagnosed between them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pwjb ( talk • contribs) 12:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I have just finished writing an article about Denise Phua, a Singaporean politician dedicated to helping the special needs (especially autistic) community in Singapore. The article is currently on peer review in preparation for a GA nomination. Is there an active WikiProject about autism, which I can approach to request peer reviewers? I looked around but could not find any. If no such WikiProject exists, consider creating one. -- J.L.W.S. The Special One ( talk) 12:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I've heard indications that the draft of DSM-V may not contain Asperger syndrome as a seperate diagnosis - it may all be rolled into the concept of Autism. Anyone any information or views on this? Soarhead77 ( talk) 14:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The DSM research committee has advocated that Asperger's Disorder be dismissed from the DSM-V and that HFA now cover the territory of the old diagnosis.
Thanks for the pointer; that's much better than the "reading between the lines" I was talking about above. I made
this edit to try to incorporate that source into
Asperger syndrome #Classification, noting that two of three breakout groups recommended eliminating AS as a separate diagnosis. Further improvements are welcome. I suppose we might want to update
Diagnosis of Asperger syndrome as well....
Eubulides (
talk) 18:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Eubulides (
talk) 18:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Holy possum pants ... after all these years, there's no Asperger syndrome. The term has such wide recognition that I can't imagine it simply being replaced by "high-functioning autism, type N" or even just "HFA". I hope the DSM people decide to keep the name as a synonym, if that's allowed. e.g. "High functioning autism, also known as Asperger syndrome". Even if they don't keep it officially, I'm sure that colloquially people will still refer to Asperger's syndrome and "aspies" and so on. Incidentally, I have a pet theory that at least some reports of early-talking Asperger's kids are actually just
echolalia being mistaken for proper speech. I have seen many a mommy who thinks their kid is talking to them, when I know for one reason or another that they're just repeating something they've heard. But, I can't imagine that phenomenon could explain all of the early-talking Asperger's kids.
Soap
Talk/
Contributions 21:15, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
There was an articlerecently on the Australian TV show Catalyst about the different walking characteristics of children with high-functioning autism and Asperger Syndrome; this is probably worth including in the page. Carl.antuar ( talk) 03:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
If anyone would like to do research into skepticism about AS and the people who are diagnosed with it, go for it. I know it exists. 150.176.82.2 ( talk) 17:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
There appears to be an editor who is adamant on changing "like the more severe ASD's" to "like Autism". While he/she has a point (AS ranges in severity and Autism itself would be the only ASD which we could say is definitely more severe than AS), it's probably best not altered in such a way. I propose something along the lines of "While AS varies in severity, it is similar to Autism in that it..." It would appear that this line is best altered, but that editors can agree on the word choice. Hooliganos ( talk) 03:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
no growin out of it the (%20)percent, taking it under control,living with two ego's alter and the other,a test subject(person)and the tester in the same body
I've talked to a child psychiatrist and she told me that Asperger syndrome and SPD are essentially one and the same. If adult, the diagnosis will be SPD, if it's a child or teenager: Asperger. Is this accurate? 205.151.119.166 ( talk) 20:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Please forgive this long personal anecdote; I'm not just talking to hear myself talk, but rather trying to give an idea as to how this SPD/AS misconception may have come about.
Based on the list above, I bet I would be diagnosed with SPD instead of AS if I just was going into a clinic now and they only looked at the symptoms listed on the SPD page. Yet, I am absolutely sure that in my case the AS diagnosis would be more appropriate, because of the obvious behavioral signs that I showed as a child but which I carefully hide as an adult. To be more specific: when I was younger, I was very friendly towards other children ... too much, in fact. (I believe this is known in the community as the "Odd" personality, as opposed to "Passive" and "Aloof".) But today? I've given up trying to have friends because nobody wants to befriend a touchy-feely misfit like me. So on Point 1, SPD describes me better today than AS does. And Point 2 seems to be more or less the same thing, such that I don't see why it's even listed separately. So that makes 2-0 for SPD.
On to "Secretiveness". I don't know if that really describes me ... it's probably the sort of thing that no one would use to describe themselves but other people would.
So now "emotional coldness" is up. For me, that could go either way. I would say that I have socially inappropriate emotions, meaning that for example on 9-11-2001 I was angry, but unlike most of my classmates I really had no great emotional reaction. Some people think that I must be a horrible person who doesn't care about other people, but that isn't true. I couldn't react to 9-11 because I couldn't emotionally comprehend the idea of thousands of people dying since I've never even seen one death in person. But if I see a person getting beat up, or even just a person with a visible medical disorder, right in front of me where I can see them, I'll obsess over them for weeks and still feel uncomfortable when something reminds me of the incident years later. People who see this tell me I'm over-reacting to things that are just part of life and can't be bothered with. But I've learned to hide both types of these irregular emotional reactions from other people. However, despite my efforts, I probably look "emotionally cold" to most other people, and therefore SPD rather than AS.
Lastly, while I have always had typical AS "perseverations", the older I get the more they start to look like the personal hobbies that normal NT adults have. So in summation, it seems to me that I have grown up from an AS child into an SPD adult. I think the same would be true of a lot of other Aspies. SPD seems like a state of maturity in which a large number of young AS people eventually end up as they learn to suppress their obvious AS tendencies.
But if we can accept the definition of "once an Aspie, always an Aspie", there's no way I could ever not be considered to have Asperger's Syndrome. I was one of the most clear-cut cases of AS when I was younger, and in fact, I might be mentioned in medical literature somewhere since my parents signed a form that allowed the laboratory that diagnosed me to use information about me and artwork I created as a child for just that purpose. And of course, the SPD symptoms I've listed above are all just part of a shell I've built around myself to make myself more acceptable to other people; they don't reflect my true inner personality at all. Soap Talk/ Contributions 15:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I tried to change this, but got reverted. To me, it is the same thing as saying "A dodo is the bird which blah", it should be "A dodo is a bird which blahblah". Anyone got any thoughts on this? — neuro (talk) 21:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) But AS is the only ASD that has the property of having no general delay in language or cognitive development. That's the definition of AS, right or wrong (lots of people think that's wrong, but the lead sentence is not the place to take this up). I take your point about the wording being too terse, though. How about this instead? "Asperger syndrome (also called Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's or AS) is the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) distinguished by having no general delay in language or cognitive development." Eubulides ( talk) 18:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Addressing some of the above points:
Eubulides ( talk) 20:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
This edit replaced this:
with this:
However, the latter text does not summarize anything in the body. As per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the body and not raise new arguments about the legal framework. In the literature the legal-framework argument is secondary and is not notable enough to be worth summarizing in the lead.
Reading through the above remarks, and looking at the lead and the body, I have some thoughts.
... we question whether AS constitutes an actual impairment as opposed to a neurological difference and we examine how AS has been socially constructed.
The debate about whether AS is a difference or a disorder, one type of neurodiversity or a neurological disability can be seen as a part of the ongoing debate about the power of medicalization in contemporary society.Another quote: "There are striking contrasts between the views expressed on the organizational websites and the personal blogs written by people who have been diagnosed with AS. The organizations clearly medicalized and pathologized AS and the people with AS, were directed most often at parents and described those who had been diagnosed in terms of their 'deficits'. The blogs, on the other hand, expressed resistance to the AS organizations, to medicalization and to what they felt was the public stigma associated with AS. Bloggers spoke of celebrating their differences and of anger at neurotypicals for stigmatizing them."
Self-identified Aspies made it very clear that they did not want to be cured and that they were proud of their Aspie identity and of their different ways of seeing the world. They considered themselves to be on a spectrum of neurodiversity rather than neurologically disabled. They opposed the medicalization and pathologization of their lives. Those diagnosed with AS were more concerned about changing the stereotypes and stigma that they confront than changing themselves.
While ASCs are disabling in the social world, hyper-systemizing can lead to talent in areas that are systemizable. In this sense, it is likely that the genes for increased systematizing have made remarkable contributions to human history.
{{
cite book}}
: |editor=
has generic name (
help); Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)Eubulides ( talk) 20:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
After a quick skim of the article, I failed to come across a mention of formal vocabulary. I myself have Aspergers Syndrome, and everyone I've come across who had Aspergers either speak or can easily speak in an overly formally vocabulary.
In short, excessively formal words (i.e. big wods, fancy talk, ect.) seems to be rather common among autistic people, at least under the Aspergers category.
Adding the fact that Hans Asperger called his paitients "little professors" my serve as enough for inclusion in the article.
Alas, I can't cite any references.
74.184.188.59 (
talk) 23:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
The section about social interaction doesn't include any information about what happens when a child with Asperger Syndrome is successful in establishing social ties. The fact is, despite challenges, children with Asperger can still learn, just as any other child, it's just harder and takes longer.
(Link to supporting information was blacklisted so unable to provide proof to the above at this time.)
Also, the suggestion for lacking empathy is a bit misleading. It suggests that a total lack of emotional understanding is typical, which is far from the truth. The problem has more to do with a difficulty in putting thoughts into spoken words than in actually understanding others.
Management needs to include the practice of Mindfulness Meditation as a form of treatment. There are a number of books on that topic, with supporting studies in Neuroplasticity. These studies suggest that the practice of Meditation can actually help someone grow out of it into adulthood.
Meditation Alters Structure of Brain:
This website on ADHD talks about how Neurplasticity can be applied to treatment, includes mention of Asperger Syndrome:
I am not able to update the article myself with these views because my view is biased. I have Asperger Syndrome and I speak from experience on every point. So I am writing these thoughts here in discussion hoping that someone who would not be biased checks in on them.
-- 24.182.230.186 ( talk) 21:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Google books search shows that "Asperger's syndrome" is used in three times as many books as Asperger syndrome. Should the article be moved to that title? DCDuring ( talk) 21:28, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I left the cited text in place because of the comment warning, I only removed the link to the topic after reading what I thought was also a joke. However this is an unnecessary use of hyperlink. The topic doesn't need linking to deep fat fryers. 68.89.47.220 ( talk) 17:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Admittedly, perhaps ordering a CT scan - or an MRI is a big thing compared to some psychological tests, but I was surprised to find that neither here nor in the main article on diagnoses is it mentioned that this can be detected via either.
Is this one of these things where I think technology is more advanced than it is, so that we can't really distinguish between AS and other things via brain scan? Can we even detect anything with AS via brain scan? I'd think so - there's a picture of an MRI in the article, and it is neurological. Right? Or am I way off base? 209.244.187.155 ( talk) 20:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps a section should be added to this article to make it more comprehensive that includes pop culture references. The character Jerry in Boston Legal is a good example to start with who had Asperger's. Joshuadelung ( talk) 22:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.198.236 ( talk)
Whaaaaaaat? so now anybody who's interested in dinosaurs has asperger syndrome? so does that mean that Robert Bakker and Jack Horner and Richard Owen all had asperger's? i don't think so.... 76.102.94.69 ( talk) 23:26, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
However, there is more of a likelyhood that there will be an interest in dinosauria if a person is autistic. I mean to say that this fascination will continue later into life than it does with most other people. I am fourteen years old and only stopped being avidly interested in dinosaurs two years ago. My friend, who has worse AS than me, is fifteen and is still interested in them. So you see, there is a connection but that is not the same as saying that everybody who has ever been interested in prehistory had or has AS. Themanfromthenorth
What's with this line at the end of the article? "If you have AS, you could die in 7 days." Seems highly suspicious to me, so I'm deleting it. Feel free to revert if the sentence has a valid place in the article. Already taken of by another user.--
Whip it!
Now whip it good! 23:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
See my notes under 'AS and Crime'. Themanfromthenorth
There's a new review on AS diagnosis and treatment here:
Eubulides ( talk) 03:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I would love to see a new section added on current genetic theories of the regions involved for each given trait. 96.233.42.222 ( talk) 04:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
The page on Heritability of autism is terrific, and just what I was hoping to see. I think the Aspergers page should have a link to it. 96.233.42.222 ( talk) 04:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Has anyone done a study of geographical incidence of the distribution of Aspergers across continents?
96.233.42.222 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC).
I note the increase in studies finding an overrepresentation of AS individuals in acts of crime in relation to their numbers. For instance the following By Haskins and Silva:
'Asperger's Disorder remains an under-diagnosed condition because of clinical unfamiliarity with its adult presentation. As forensic clinicians become familiar with the presentation of Asperger's disorder, it appears that affected individuals are over-represented in forensic criminal settings. Unique features of such persons may heighten their risks for engaging in criminal behavior.' Asperger's Disorder and Criminal Behavior: Forensic-Psychiatric Considerations
The authors of that study, and other studies, eg. [8] [9] mention the significant representation of AS individuals in sexual crimes, violent crimes, arson, cyber crime, stalking, and others. Whilst these might not be the best sources for these crime-AS correlations, a cursory read still suggests that the issue is at least significant enough to warrant a brief mention in the article. 58.170.49.139 (talk) 13:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC) 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 21:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Once again you raise the sockpuppet coincidence. For goodness sake provide any real evidence for that conjecture, or please desist! You are on the right track by discussing this issue, and thats all we need do. Simple!
I'm surprised at your claim that the sources are selected purely to present AS as badly as possible. Are you saying that about me? or about the authors of those studies? Either way I think its time you stopped with the hyperbole, and allow for a polite and friendly discussion of this sensitive subject. This issue of crime in the context of psych disorders of a common one (eg for personality disorders) and is not an attack on people with AS. It is more a question of the vulnerability of individuals toward these behaviors. I would like to see a breif mention in the article based on the surest of details these studies provide.
Dismissing controversial details in the entry could also invite the claim of creating the entry as a front-page for AS lobby groups. 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 00:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Based on Eubulides paranoia about me being (apriori) a sockpuppet I dont think an environment was created for a trusting, open-minded discussion. So I'll just drop it. 58.170.49.139 ( talk) 00:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Although there are some reports of an association with violence or criminal behavior in AS [3], [26], [27], a systematic review of the literature did not find support for increased behaviors of this nature in AS [28]. Taken along with the current results, there is more evidence to suggest that children with AS occupy the role of victim rather than victimizer [1], [29].
An entire section, "Challenge 8: people with AS as aggressors and not just victims", includes discussion of sexual deviation.
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The final version of Newman & Ghaziuddin 2008 ( PMID 18449633) has been published. It's a review, albeit not a systematic one. After reading it and rereading this thread, I appended the following text to the last paragraph of Asperger syndrome #Social interaction: "A 2008 review found that an overwhelming number of reported violent criminals with AS had coexisting psychiatric disorders such as schizoaffective disorder. Eubulides ( talk) 10:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm researching the connection between those with Aspergers (emotional distancing) and interaction with group sexual dynamics. In other words, if AS allows some people to not be jealous if their partner has other sexual outlets... Is there any possibilty of adding this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.30.129 ( talk) 04:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't think this is true. As I have already said in above and below sections, I have AS. I would feel extremely jealous if any partner of mine were ever to start seeing someone else. I would be angry, upset and feel like a failure. There would be no lack of jealousy. Themanfromthenorth
AS and sexual behavior is a tricky subject. I have a number of good friends with AS and we commonly share views on sexuality and sexual preference. From discussion, I'd say that the majority of the group hold non-traditional views on sexuality, with most comfortable in group sexual dynamics but still very possessive of their main partner. If there is material that supports this, I think it would be pertinent to the article. Nebnosam ( talk) 15:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Would Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome be classed with the anxiety-related disorders that it's said are more common with those in the autism spectrum, or should it be listed separately?
I ask becuase it seems the problem of PTSS is that some traumatic event is so...burned into the conscience, let's say (you know, like you burn a CD), that the person remembers every sight, sound, etc., surrounding it. And, the memories keep coming back. Well, this seems to be the case with how Aspies record many instances in their lives, even non-traumatic ones.
Or, is PTSS so problematic for neurotypicals because it's so opposite from how the brain records things? 172.131.176.22 ( talk) 12:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Why does YCS redirect here? What does it mean? Egg-Emperor ( talk) 17:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
There is evidence that Not all ASPIES show VIQ>PIQ. Ghaziuddin 2004, has shown about 10% of Aspies/HFA's show inverse trends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.228.249 ( talk) 23:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Why does the following sentence omit that the planning conference was carried out specifically for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual regarding it's planned revision in 2011? I would have thought this was a link with massive implications for world diagnosis:
"A panel discussion..." is needlessly vague. 123.211.74.2 ( talk) 21:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit replaced "which challenge theories of humor in AS" with "which highlight the complexities of humor in AS", commenting " Anecdotes never disprove in a syndrome as complex as autism. At most they only highlight the complexities. Fixed to show this.". First, it's not correct that "anecdotes never disprove"; certainly an anecdote can disprove a broad claim, since it's a counterexample. Second, the cited source (Lyons & Fitzgerald 2004, PMID 15628606) has as its main conclusion that the anecdotal evidence challenges theories, not that it "highlights the complexity". For example, the source's summary section describes the theories behind well-documented deficits in autism/AS that lead to impaired humor appreciation, but then goes on to say:
Our summary should not lose sight of the main point of the source, which is that theories of humor in autism/AS are being challenged. I attempted to fix the problem by replacing "there are anecdotal reports of humor in individuals with AS, which highlight the complexities of humor in AS" with "anecdotal reports of humor in individuals with AS seem to challenge some psychological theories of AS and autism". Eubulides ( talk) 16:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I believe that the NLD article should be merged with this one as 80% of people with Aspergers also meet the criteria for NLD and the fact that the way the two were defined in the last ten years has changed. I believe the two diseases are very similar. because of this I believe that the NLD article should be added to this article. Tydoni ( talk) 16:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I cannot understand this article. I have read it, and I still cannot understand anything about Asplerger's. The article says such things as impaired social skills, and does not explain any further. I need to see a list of many social skills that are impaired and specifically how they are impaired. I need to see these concrete, specific examples for nearly every topic covered by the article. 67.150.122.218 ( talk) 05:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)hagexk 040209
A recent edit removed Image:Hans Aspergersmall.jpg from Asperger syndrome #Classification with the comment "What Asperger looking at an unnamed child looks like is irrelevent". I tend to agree that the image is not that relevant to the Classification section, but the image is quite relevant to Asperger syndrome #History, so I moved it there. The image illustrates the co-discoverer of autism and the psychologist that Asperger syndrome is named for, and in particular illustrates the following longstanding comment in the text:
No free photo is available to illustrate this, and a photo cannot be created now because Asperger is no longer with us and stopped seeing young patients many years ago.
This particular image has been used to illustrate Asperger syndrome since 2006, and passed featured article review in 2006 and 2007 without any problems that I know of. Have the standards for non-free images changed significantly since 2007? If not, then let's keep the image, as it significantly increases readers' understanding of the syndrome's history. Eubulides ( talk) 07:41, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't agree with leaving the image (the burden of proof lies with those wishing to include it, and, with matters like NFC and BLP, it's best to err on the side of caution...) but I have no desire to edit war. At no point in the text is the appearance of Asperger discussed, nor the appearance of his patients, nor (the most likely of the three) the appearance of his experimental technique. I admit my argument was hardly a conventional one, but I thought it may help others to understand the issue. As we do not seem to think in the same way, I will have to return to the conventional line. Unless the appearance of the image (in this case, as the image itself is not famous, the appearance of Asperger, his patients, or their interaction as shown in this image) is necessary for a full understanding of the article subject ("full understanding" meaning the level of understanding that should be conveyed by this single article) then it should not be included. If such a visual understanding was necessary, it should be mentioned in the text. What element is this illustrating that really needs to be illustrated at this level? (Note that I am requesting a third opinion on this issue.) J Milburn ( talk) 21:06, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
The image neither "significantly increase [my] understanding of the topic" nor would its absence "be detrimental to that understanding". I can imagine what "little professors" might be like and it is a behavioural concept, not a visual one. There is nothing in the picture of the cute little boy that is characteristic of asperger syndrome. Colin° Talk 19:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
To me, the image illustrates that a person with Asperger's looks like any other person. It also shows the person that discovered the disorder interacting with the kid, he is not oh say, restrained in any way, things like that. In the 1940s (especially in Nazi Germany I might add) the idea of treating people with some mental disorder like this is fascinating. The image brings that out, to me. Dbrodbeck ( talk) 02:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Certainly the artistic appeal of works can be adequately described in words. To take J Milburn's first example, the article Study after Velázquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X has a description of Bacon's painting that is reasonably adequate to describe its artistic appeal; it could be improved, of course, but seeing the image of Bacon's painting is not required for that purpose. Furthermore, that image's use in other articles clearly falls outside the Wikipedia policy. For example, the text of the article Detournement does not even mention the image (!), and even if it did, it would be trivial for any Wikipedia editor with some Gimp or Photoshop experience to modify the free Image:Innocent-x-velazquez.jpg and produce a perfectly adequate and free example of détournement without any need for a non-free image. Similarly, Bacon's painting could be removed from Western painting, History of painting, and Francis Bacon (painter) without significantly harming any of those articles; none of them are required to have that image.
( The Scream is public-domain in the U.S., so it's not a good example here.)
While we're on the subject of non-free use, Image:Study after Velazquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X.jpg lists neither the copyright holder nor the source of the image. The copyright holder cannot be Francis Bacon, as dead people are not allowed to hold copyrights. The source is given only as "desmoinesregister.com", which is not a specific citation of a source. This is a clear violation of Wikipedia policy WP:NFCC#10 (a policy which I am trying to get fixed, but nevertheless that's the way the policy is written now).
If Bacon's painting is intended to be an example of the best use of non-free works in Wikipedia, then all I can say is that the policies for non-free use do not seem to be applied at all fairly and uniformly. Articles on art seem to be able to use non-free works with almost blithe disdain for policy, whereas articles on medicine seem to get the short end of the stick, with skeptics who seem to reject any and all justifications. Eubulides ( talk) 22:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Colin's analysis and had already followed up with him re SandyGeorgia's suggestion to ask Elcobolla about it (see User talk:Elcobbola #Asperger); no response to my query yet. I worry, though, that the situation will be escalated, in that File:Hans Aspergersmall.jpg will be deleted due to a technicality (at least, it's a technicality in the context of this thread: it's lack of copyright info) and as a result Wikipedia won't contain any image of the (co-)discoverer of autism, which would be a significant deficiency. If the above kerfuffle hadn't occurred, I would simply respond to the deletion by substituting a different (and necessarily, alas, non-free) photo that would satisfy the technicality. I worry, though, that in the current environment such an action will be interpreted as disruptive editing. Any comments or suggestions? Eubulides ( talk) 19:45, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
The article should cover this in detail. The backlash to AS and a huge fraction of the public's opinion of the condition (basically a huge joke), along with the fact that everyone and their dog now has the condition (why was the world "asperger" free until the early 90's?), should be covered here.
1) Don't try to simply brand this comment as inflammatory as the easy way out, and completely swerve the matter at hand, and 2) don't go telling me that it's only myself who holds the opinion of AS as a fraud. I'm not even saying I do consider AS to be that, although there are myriad cites and webpages out there which basically shoot the notion of AS down in flames (as anyone knows, let's not play dumb), basically telling these "self-indulgent nerds" to get on with their lives like they had to before the popular sanctuary of AS. The criticism of the condition should be covered here, that's obvious.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.201.40 ( talk • contribs) 16:44, April 23, 2009
"The condition's legitimacy is disputed by multiple reliable sources, including Szatmary 2000 ( PMID 11086556) and First 2008, and this dispute is covered (and both these sources cited) in Asperger syndrome #Classification. Eubulides ( talk) 01:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)"
Perhaps some mention of discrimination of individuals with disabilities would balance a section such as this one? Regardless, it does seem to me that there is a real need for clairification on the above mentioned issues based on the comments I have seen and the information that has been presented in this section. For this reason, I feel that there should be a section which addresses "debate surrounding the diagnosis of Asperger's" as opposed to a section which addresses the "illegitimacy of a diagnosis of Asperger's". The information that I have read in this discussion suggests to me that there is significant confusion between debate in the medical community over the true "clinical picture" for Asperger's with respect to assigning a correct "label" and the notion of the non-medical community that this debate somehow gives credance to those who question the legitemacy of such a label in the first place. 09:06, 5 May 2009 (whipstitches). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whipstitches ( talk • contribs)
The correct title is Asperger's Syndrome, not "Asperger syndrome" and as a person with it myself I believe the title should reflect its official name, not simply public opinion. Glenn L ( talk) 12:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I just now checked Google Scholar for articles since 2004 and found the following number of hits:
The article's lead didn't mention "Asperger disorder" but did mention "Asperger's disorder", which seemed a bit out of whack, so I reworded it a bit to talk about this label as well. Since there are so many names that the naming business is highly distracting in the lead sentence, this rewording moved the terminology stuff into the lead for the 2nd paragraph. Eubulides ( talk) 01:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit inserted a new lead sentence, as follows:
This sentence misstates the issue in question. There is no dispute among reliable sources that Asperger syndrome is an ASD. The only dispute is whether there is a valid distinction between Asperger syndrome and some other forms of ASD. For more on this subject, please see #Overdiagnosis and legitimacy of the condition and #Illegitimacy above.
The dispute about validity is already summarized in the lead, which says "... questions about many aspects remain. For example, there is lingering doubt about the distinction between AS and high-functioning autism (HFA) ...". The validity issue should not be in the very first sentence; as per WP:LEAD #First sentence, that sentence should be a simple, straightforward definition of the topic. Perhaps the validity issue could be summarized better in the lead, but this change was for the worse; so for now, I have reverted it. Eubulides ( talk) 22:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
A lot of people don't know what this word means and aren't going to bother going to the page to find out. To casual readers (which most users are), this will give out a completely wrong perception of the condition. Clearly another word can be used here which promotes plain English, first of all, and avoids the obviously incorrect perception that the word "stereotype" will give 99% of readers. Sure, we can still link to the Stereotypy article, but this word should be altered. 88.109.58.184 ( talk) 22:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ted Dryburgh ( talk • contribs) 23:16, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I have asperger and my father, and I have noticed a few things missing from the article that could be added for the "symptons". First, I have noticed that ridalin (or however you spell it) is not a good thing for treatment. It caused me to have major mood swings, become extremly hyper (to the point of undesireble), sexually active to an extreme at 8yrs, depressed, and suicidle. Another is (and I talked to a others with it) my dad and I are extremely angered at something that would be considered too much (ie someone takes the last pop and I curse and hit someone) -- Flynn M Taggart ( talk) 12:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Oh, the sister didorder should be mentioned that.-- Flynn M Taggart ( talk) 12:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I have a friend wh has aspergers and he is giving alot of prescriptions that aren't normally recommended for people with that sort of thing.I think it is used to treat small portions of the symptoms. He is given Clondine, albilify, and some type of bi-polar medicine, even though he is not bi-polar and they seem to work. ( 205.134.216.18 ( talk) 22:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC))
I'd like to remind us all that talk pages are for discussing ways to improve an article, not for discussing the topic itself. Any followups should be framed in terms of possible changes to the article. Looie496 ( talk) 14:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't see temper mentioned anywhere in the article but I've noticed that many people with AS have short tempers and often have temper tantrums, is this a symtpom of AS or is it caused by something else? Dionyseus ( talk) 00:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Some people with Asperger do not respond well with SSRI's and the article suggests instead they are on older tricyclic antidepresents such as Imipramine. Should that be mentioned in the article Natche24 20:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Natche24 ( talk • contribs)
I propose a "criticism" section, where the arguments that Asperger Syndrome is not a legitimate disorder shall be discussed. 81.170.75.166 ( talk) 04:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
The current article gives a very one-sided view that many (most?) "aspies" would be in very strong disagreement with. In particular, it paints the syndrome as a strong deficiency, and uses a lot of suggestive language. Only at the very end, the typical "aspie" view is presented in a few paragraphs. I very strongly urge that this article be completely re-written by someone actually diagnosed with the syndrome. Until this has been done, I further urge that its status as "featured article" is revoked.
Compare e.g. http://isnt.autistics.org for a satirical take on with the tables turned.
I have added the tags misleading and POV. Beware that there are strong interest groups (notably "autism speaks") that are very highly critizied by autists for acting against the best interest of the autists, and that this article plays strongly into the propaganda of these groups. (Think of a PETA for autists.)
A similar critique may apply to the article on autism, which I have not reviewed.
88.77.188.152 ( talk) 00:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
The general point is that the presentation of the article has a one-sided focus on "Asperger's is a decease", "Aspies need to be cured", etc. This is an attitude that the corresponding communities consider offensive, unfair, and/or just plain stupid. This should be likened to the hypothetical claim "Negroids need to be cured": I doubt that my protest against that attitude would meet resistance.
Notably, this is not a question about medical facts (or other easily referenced issues), e.g. whether Aspies and NTs are neurologically different, but whether the attitude taken towards Asperger's is the analogy of racism or a similar phenomenon.
In addition to the link already provided (the contents, btw, are not by me), I would encourage you to read corresponding forums, e.g. http://www.wrongplanet.net/forums.html. (I note that http://www.wrongplanet.net is already linked from the article page.) 94.220.242.34 ( talk) 05:26, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I am not going to go into an edit war over this. However, I maintain my position, and point out that
88.77.128.233 ( talk) 12:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. Us autists and many others see it as a 'unique difference' rather than a Disorder. Keep in mind that everyone, especially people with AS, also have their say on how Autism is shaped. In addition to this, I believe this article requires a serious clean-up, as it is currently a mess, slightly one-sided and is written like it reflects the interests of members of the general community rather than facts and science. -- Billsta1 ( talk) 22:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
In response to Andrewlp1991's relatively immediate revert of text added (06:17, 18 July 2009) for an other-side view of the AS empathy debate (claiming "unsourced essay-like ranting"): 1) Why was it deemed "ranting" — that seems to be a rather harsh adjective for this case; 2) If you wanted a source (I'm including it below) I would have expected the more usual response of tagging it requesting a source rather than an immediate revert, and/or modifying it to be more "acceptable" (do moderators of this page follow slightly different rules from the rest of Wiki?). A couple sources for the previous text would be [12] (an old one), and [13] (although not a link to the actual study or its abstract, I'll try to find a one soon).
Also, I am in agreement with the section pointing at one-sidedness to the article — this is one of the reasons why I added the text that I did (to give a different view than the typical clinician "aspies don't have empathy" view, which just about any Aspie would disagree with). It often seems that people have a view that everyone with AS is like Rainman (Perhaps the movie coming out this year on Temple Grandin might help change people's perspectives) not realizing most Aspies live normalish lives, sometimes undiagnosed, and that there are many aspies — by no means "all" — falling at the genius level. That was a rant, BTW, even aspies get annoyed when people seem to be acting rudely. :( Would you prefer a different way of expressing the thought? Feedback appreciated. — al-Shimoni ( talk) 03:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Could someone assist me in adding section to the Cause section of Asperger syndrome. In 2009 James D. Watson (Nobel prize winner for discovery DNA was a double helix) announced his discovered patients with Asperger syndrome had significant loss of DNA as compared with the parents DNA.
R.R. Roberts ( talk) 00:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit made this change to the lead:
and tagged the sentence "[citation needed]", with the edit summary "These terms appear outdated." I looked into this and found that the terms are definitely not outdated. Also, while doing this I was reminded that a reliable source said that there's no consensus over whether the name should end in "syndrome" or "disorder".
I looked over the article and found some glitches in this area:
I installed a patch that attempts to address the issues mentioned above. Eubulides ( talk) 06:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
Eubulides (
talk) 15:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC){{editsemiprotected}}
the proposed edits do not involve changes to existing text, rather additions that enhance the discussion about cultural aspects.
Please change the paragraph that currently reads: Some researchers have argued that AS can be viewed as a different cognitive style, not a disorder or a disability.[10][95] In a 2002 paper, Simon Baron-Cohen wrote of those with AS, "In the social world there is no great benefit to a precise eye for detail, but in the worlds of math, computing, cataloguing, music, linguistics, engineering, and science, such an eye for detail can lead to success rather than failure." Baron-Cohen cited two reasons why it might still be useful to consider AS to be a disability: to ensure provision for legally required special support, and to recognize emotional difficulties from reduced empathy.[96] It has been argued that the genes for Asperger's combination of abilities have operated throughout recent human evolution and have made remarkable contributions to human history.[97]
to:
Some researchers have argued that AS can be viewed as a different cognitive style, not a disorder or a disability.[10][95] [13] For example, in a 2009 article Sarah Allred argues that an appropriate reframing may involve the demedicalization of Asperger Syndrome, in part, because published assessments of the diagnostic criteria reveal a problematic pattern of unreliability. In addition, Allred supports demedicalization because the published accounts of Asperger Syndrome—those by people who study, live with or have Asperger Syndrome—indicate that the Asperger cognitive and social differences as a whole do not meet the general criteria of a mental disorder as specified in the preface of the DSM-IV. These criteria include evidence of an internal dysfunction, unexpected responses to particular events, and behaviors that are distinguishable from deviant behavior. In a 2002 paper, Simon Baron-Cohen wrote of those with AS, "In the social world there is no great benefit to a precise eye for detail, but in the worlds of math, computing, cataloguing, music, linguistics, engineering, and science, such an eye for detail can lead to success rather than failure." Baron-Cohen cited two reasons why it might still be useful to consider AS to be a disability: to ensure provision for legally required special support, and to recognize emotional difficulties from reduced empathy.[96] It has been argued that the genes for Asperger's combination of abilities have operated throughout recent human evolution and have made remarkable contributions to human history.[97]
JRS8688 ( talk) 19:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Done Welcome and thanks for contributing. Celestra ( talk) 13:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Now then.. there is much conjecture about notable people from the past that are thought to have had the same psychological profiles now recognized as Asperger's Sydnrome [Jane Austen, Mark Twain, Thomas Jefferson, for example.] Does anyone else feel this should be added to the article, as well as a possible "In Popular Culture" section that would make reference to the new Hugh Dancy film "Adam", amongst other things? Let me know and I can get on it. Hrhadam ( talk) 20:16, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
This intelligent blog is vehemently opposed to the whole prevailing epistemology of Asperger's syndrome: http://racketaspergers.blogspot.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.171.148 ( talk) 15:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
A recent edit added a huge batch of citations in a new Further reading section, which I've listed below:
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite book}}
: |author=
has generic name (
help){{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)These citations, where they do not repeat sources that are already cited, are not useful as recommended publications (see WP:FURTHER), and anyway the list is way too long and obsolescent, so I moved these citations here for further discussion. Further reading sections should not be a dumping ground for random books published on Asperger disorder. Eubulides ( talk) 01:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
NOne of these need to be added. The article is comprehensive, and there is an entire page of AS reading linked in the template already. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I monitor T:TDYK, and the new article cortisol awakening response (CAR) includes an interesting tidbit from a recent paper: apparently AS "sufferers" (for lack of a better term) lack the CAR. The paper is Mark Brosnan et al. (2009) "Absence of a normal cortisol awakening response (CAR) in adolescent males with Asperger syndrome (AS)." Psychoneuroendocrinology. 34(7):1095–1100 PMID 19304400 doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2009.02.011. The epub was back in March, Circeus ( talk) 18:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
The lead paragraph is lanky: sterotypies is a stumbler; the leading sentence structure is haphazard. Aspergers is too important.
Currently: Asperger syndrome is an autism spectrum disorder, and people with it therefore show significant difficulties in social interaction, along with stereotypies and other restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests. It differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development. Although not required for diagnosis, physical clumsiness and atypical use of language are frequently reported.
Proposed: Asperger syndrome is a mental disorder of the autistic spectrum whose psychological profile demonstrates normal linguistic linguistic and cognitive abilities, but appears void of the skills for empathy and the non-verbal communication. Behaviors and interests are restricted severely and highly repetitive. The reality complex manifests stereotypy, a bodily movement disorder. Persons diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome have also been frequently reported to have physical clumsiness and an atypical use of language. [14] [15]
Rationales:
It is only a copy-edit.
Be There Do That ( talk)cpiral
Although the article is not grotesque, it IS not beautifully written. The lead paragraph is confusing. I could not figure out exactly what was being said about stereotypes. Is it being said that those with Asperger's have trouble comprehending stereotypes? Are they, in many cases, alleged to speak in stereotypes? Are they supposed to engage in repetitive behavior? I must say that I am a bit surprised. This is a rather important article and expected a better job. Gingermint ( talk) 07:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The article Dion Betts is being discussed for possible deletion.
I was unable to find sources indicating his notability (or that of his books), but I am by no means an expert in this area! If he is indeed notable, if his books are thought of as being significant in the field of Aperger syndrome, I would be grateful if people could take part in the discussion.
I am not seeking to get this article deleted if he/his books are actually notable and significant in the field. However, if they are not significant, then the article is right to be deleted.
If you want to make your thoughts known, the AfD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dion Betts
Thanks -- PhantomSteve ( Contact Me, My Contribs) 17:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The article Dion Betts is being discussed for possible deletion.
I was unable to find sources indicating his notability (or that of his books), but I am by no means an expert in this area! If he is indeed notable, if his books are thought of as being significant in the field of Aperger syndrome, I would be grateful if people could take part in the discussion.
I am not seeking to get this article deleted if he/his books are actually notable and significant in the field. However, if they are not significant, then the article is right to be deleted.
If you want to make your thoughts known, the AfD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dion Betts
Thanks -- PhantomSteve ( Contact Me, My Contribs) 17:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The quote from Baron-Cohen is in quotation marks, as it should be, but has been altered to suit the preferences of USA English.
Baron-Cohen writes in UK English. Why do you want to translate him yet leave it as a quote? Bias, that's why.
He wrote 'maths' not 'math'.
And yes, it matters. This USA bias can be found throughout Wikipedia and when it interferes with quotations from those who do not speak USA English, you diminish yourselves and Wikipedia in one fell swoop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.140.105 ( talk) 18:49, 22 September 2009
This intelligent blog is vehemently opposed to the whole epistemology of Asperger's syndrome: http://racketaspergers.blogspot.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.171.148 ( talk)
"Now College Internship Program -- with campuses in Massachusetts, Indiana, California and Melbourne -- is among a handful of places where young people with Asperger's can attend college while getting the support they need to help them succeed. Another, called the College Living Experience, has five locations around the country, including a program in Fort Lauderdale." This may be worth mentioning somewhere, although I'm not sure where exactly. Management?
Also, "People with AS/Asperger snydrome/Asperger's" appears way too often in the article. Is there something else we could replace it with? I was thinking "those affected by" (rather than suffering from), but this may imply friends and family members. Any ideas? MichaelExe ( talk) 21:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Kasari
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Baron-Cohen2000
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).McPartland
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Baskin
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).