![]() | 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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I have committed some of the text to related subsections and revised the introduction for synoptic brevity thereby, I hope, reducing the rather scattered approach in the introduction and making it an actual introduction for the remainder of the article. Text has not been deleted as such but relocated. There were some non-Wiki phrases (e.g. "most notably") that was rewritten to simply focus on the content rather than a POV that seemed apparent. Malangthon 02:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The section in Introduction changed:
to
I infer an attempt to address what is considered to be POV by some people with a vested interest—people who represent another POV in fact. However, the edit now renders the text incoherent and has compromised the facts stated in the original text which can not be considered a candidate for deletion simply because someone disagrees with the facts.
How about: In the scientific and medical literature, Autism refers to a group of diseases or disorders of the development of the human central nervous system that specifically impair social interaction, communication, interests, imagination and activities.
Conversely, Autism may be considered conditions that theoretically involve the development of the human central nervous system. The development may be perceived as a variant of what is statistically typical. Malangthon 02:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
The Autism Society of America defines autism as "...a complex developmental disability that typically appears during the first three years of life and is the result of a neurological disorder that affects the normal functioning of the brain, impacting development in the areas of social interaction and communication skills." I've edited the intro section for readability, and modifed the first sentence to reflect this very mainstream and hopefully neutral definition. Please note that the first paragraph is shorter because redundancies were combined; no content was excised. wintersmith 05:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing this issue to discussion. The reason I changed diseases and disorders to conditions is because the assertion that autism is a disorder or disease is disputed and therefore I did not consider it neutral. I have seen condition used in place of disorder as a way of resolving this issue in the past, so I didn't think it would be a problem here. I thought that the word condition simply means state of being and does not say anything about it being a good state of being or a bad state of being so would cover either perspective of autism. Actually, terms like heart condition are often used to refer to heart disorders, so the word condition has some baggage, but I couldn't think of a better word. Please note that there are two places where autism is introduced: both at the very top of the article, and the top of the section titled Introduction. I used the word condition at the very top but not in the Introduction section. I am less concerned about the Introduction section because it also mentions that some autistic people don't want to be cured, and because it asserts that autism is a developmental disability "... according to the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases." Even though the classification of autism is disputed, it is not disputed that the WHO classifies autism in that way. However, the way the article is organized, it seems that some people (such as those only skimming articles) might only read the very top sentence without being informed that multiple points of view exist. I would like to suggest the following sentences to be used as an introductory sentence at the top of the article, if people still have a problem with the word condition:
Could either of these suggestions resolve the above dispute? Q0 12:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
If we need to delete the WHO ICD classification in the introduction we can make note of the two sides of the issue, possibly using the two paragraphs I have proposed, if that is agreeable. Malangthon 08:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
neurodevelopmental disorders will not link to the article (stub actually) within Wikipedia. The article is there if you use the search function. I have checked the formatting and it seems to be OK. Any idea what is wrong?
Malangthon
08:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Just so you know I am not being pedantic, but the line in the introduction: "There are numerous theories as to the specific causes of autism but they are as yet unproven (see section on "Causes" below)." is a bit sophomoric. Might be OK for us here but very few diseases are "proven" in relation to cause. It is trivial to point this out. The statement does point out that there are numerous theories so the 'as yet unproven' phrase is redundant.
Your thoughts. Malangthon 22:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the intro is bugging me. It explicitly uses one definition of autism (from WHO and APA), which isn't exactly NPOV, as there are different ways to define it. There are plenty of sites that give introductory definitions of autism and I think it's best if we try and find a middle ground between them. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. Those are a few definitions that I found that might help in rewriting the intro. Also, maybe looking at the intro for Asperger Syndrome might help, as it is related to autism and a featured article. -- James Duggan 04:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
This was getting a little diffuse. I went ahead and added a definitive source. However, the list format, while certainly preferred in the real world (it was a list on the NICHD publicaton for example) is often decried on Planet Wikipedia. I have no idea why. Anyway, the publication is from a US government office and can be quoted at length in full. The source for the citation is also mentioned. I have altered the text somewhat just in case anyone has an issue with copyright. Malangthon 04:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I deleted the following: " Some believe that sensory issues can be helped nutritionally through sensory diets or sensory snacks citation needed which are typically put together by trained occupational therapists. The diet consists of items that are thought to help keep the senses in control, with the intention of helping the individual cope better with sensory-related problems. citation needed"
It is
I have also been looking for any occupational therapy orgnisation (e.g. AOTA) that is saying that they can control senses in autistic children with diet(providing they are not suffering from long-term dietary imbalances). No luck. Malangthon 02:23, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Sensory diet is NOT about special foods, if you look at the page on Sensory Integration Disorder, sensory diet is about taking sensory breaks. This means taking the time to use a therapy ball, a swing, take a walk, other activities. "Snacks" are less intrusive ones such as chewing gum or using a chewy tube.
You deleted something you do not understand. Please look up the definitions of phrases before you delete them because you decided they mean something THEY DO NOT.
I deleted 'sensory integration dysfunction' lines- (a) it does not appear in PubMed archives, (b) many of the article links are commercial, (c) legitimate sources do not call it a disorder and use different terminology.
Malangthon
10:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The text refers to a source with the statement: "The method that has been best documented to show positive results is Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA),[29] which systematically breaks down and teaches tasks.
The citation says " "This study corroborates earlier studies showing the power of early intensive behavior analytic intervention," said Howard, the study's principal investigator. "It is important because it is one of only a few studies in which the ABA intervention was delivered through a community- based, rather than a university-affiliated program. These results signal the potential for delivering effective intervention without the resources of a university-based clinic."
It does not say it is the best documented. In fact it says there are few studies like it. It goes on to say: " "The study is also noteworthy because it is only the second one to compare the common practice of combining multiple treatment approaches ("eclectic" treatment) with a cohesive approach based on the science of applied behavior analysis,""
This needs to be deleted or rewritten since it is not accurate. Malangthon 12:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
perhaps someone more qualified / knowledgeable than i could add something about the neanderthal theory of autism. as i understand, the theory supposes that autistics are *not* dysfunctional, aberrant, etc. there *is* a wikipedia page about this at User:Zenosaga/Neanderthal_theory. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.19.178.44 ( talk • contribs).
It is a fascinating idea. Would make a great movie. That is not a slam by the way.
There is also the idea that autistic people (specifically those with Asperger Syndrome) are and have been what would be called wizards, priests and bards in the old days. This makes me think of the theory--referenced in the Autism article-- that Henry Cavendish had Asperger's. Fascinating but in the end what we do know is limited to this--Asperger Syndrom people may be intellectually very advanced but they are not likely to want to communicate with others about their work and that means they remain hidden from observation which in turn means a dearth of information from which to derive descriptions. Given that alchemists and those labelled wizards were notorious for being socially isolated, this may be a fascinating idea but there is very little we can do with it until someone steps forward in a reputable forum to deal with it.
I have been trying to find a reputable source positing a link between autism and Neanderthals but so far no luck. Malangthon 01:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I think it will take some more time before anything is published by a reputable source, but it will be sooner or later. The Neanderthal nuclear-DNA project and large autism genomes will eventually provide the data to definitely prove (or disprove) it. -- Rdos 19:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that in the article there is a sporadic and dispersed treatment of much of the research into actual organic components of autism. I have attempted to divide the information into coherent sections treating definitive aspects and to update the current research perspectives that herald a paradigm shift in scientific perspectives of the malady. Malangthon 02:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
A couple of edits have slipped through that are unsourced and ungrammatical and I deleted them
24.131.5.175 29 January, 2007
216.251.169.134 26 January, 2007 Malangthon 02:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I removed: By age 3, typical children have passed predictable language learning milestones; one of the earliest is babbling. By the first birthday, a typical toddler says words or turns when he or she hears his or her name, points when he or she wants a toy, and when offered something distasteful, makes it clear that the answer is "no." It should be noted, however, that late language development does occur in a minority of neurotypical children.
Speech development in people with autism takes different paths than the majority of neurotypical children. Some remain mute throughout their lives with varying degrees of literacy; communication in other ways—images, visual clues, sign language, and typing may be far more natural to them. Contrary to the prevailing traditional stereotype of mute people with Kanner-type autism, around one third of people diagnosed with this type of autism will develop what is often viewed as dysfunctional verbal language, relying on rote learned stored phrases, songs, jingles and advertisements. The earliest published autobiographical account of this is Donna Williams first book, "Nobody Nowhere", (1991). Those with the autism spectrum condition of Semantic Pragmatic Disorder fall into this group.
Those who do speak sometimes use language in unusual ways, retaining features of earlier stages of language development for long periods or throughout their lives. Some speak only single words, while others repeat a mimicked phrase over and over. Some repeat what they hear, a condition called echolalia. Sing-song repetitions in particular are a calming, joyous activity that many autistic adults engage in. Many people with autism have a strong tonal sense, and can often understand at least some spoken language whilst others can understand language fluently.
Some children may exhibit only slight delays in language, or even seem to have precocious language and unusually large vocabularies, but have great difficulty in sustaining typical conversations. The "give and take" of non-autistic conversation is hard for them, although they often carry on a monologue on a favorite subject, giving no one else an opportunity to comment. When given the chance to converse with other autistics, they comfortably do so in "parallel monologue"—taking turns expressing views and information.[citation needed] Just as "neurotypicals" (people without autism) have trouble understanding autistic body languages, vocal tones, or phraseology, people with autism similarly have trouble with such things in people without autism. In particular, autistic language abilities tend to be highly literal; people without autism often inappropriately attribute hidden meaning to what people with autism say or expect the person with autism to sense such unstated meaning in their own words.
because it appears to blatant copyvio material from this site. If anyone would care to rewrite it that would be great because this is good info and its coming from a reliable source.~ Joe Jklin ( T C) 12:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jklin,
I went to the site. At the top it states, "Autism Spectrum Disorders (from NIMH) - Part 1," and "This brief overview of autism from the NIMH covers the symptoms, treatments, and research findings." So, it is not copyright violation, just not attributed correctly--i.e. it should site NIMH and the date retrieved from secondary website. I would say
Malangthon 03:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
A section for literature is lacking. Have you left it out on purpose? I would like to recommend the book There's a Boy in Here. A mother and her son tell the story of his emergence from autism, by Judy & Sean Barron, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1992, but I don't know where to place it on the mainpage, it is so full.
At the age of 25 the young man decided to write a book about the meaning of autism, reconfronting his painful but past experience, his mother helping him with the diaries she had written during all those years of desperation. It is a convincing story about healing.
Thanks, by the way. Austerlitz 88.72.3.207 09:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Austerlitz, I think the article you are looking for is Autistic culture. They have books on the subject listed with a synopsis. Malangthon 04:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
For the moment two links, refering to the book and to Sean Barron:
The list in the infobox is a little garbled
The DSM-IV-TR is supposed to be the second which is listed as ICD-9. I rewrote the script but it simply voids that entry and the one below it. There is something I do not know to do or it has a glitch. Malangthon 02:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*There are a few occurrences of
weasel words in this article- please observe
WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
**are considered
**might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper
citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).
[?]
{{fact}}
s.
[?]You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, ~ Joe Jklin ( T C) 13:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
RE: Spelling. Some one is going through this and changing the English to American. Now I have a great respect for Daniel Webster and his towering intellect but he was grossly misguided in this. This version of Wikipedia is the English version not American dialect version and, as a Yank of the old school, this is an issue upon which I suggest POMS and Commonwealthers not even waste their time. Anyone wants to spend their time and go through and change the spelling to follow this rather small detail is welcome--but I am not going to alter it to what is a regional variation with a very short history in comparison with the proper spelling. The article Kanner wrote, by the way, that kicked this off--it was published in Britain. I say leave it be with proper English spelling. And too, 'Z' is just damned ugly, the less we use it the better.
Malangthon 00:16, 27 January
2007 (UTC)
Regarding point made for, “ See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[?]”
Regarding, what is to me anyway, obscure directive: “Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]”
RE: Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
Regarding the observation: “Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]”
Regarding the admonition to “Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1’s redundancy exercises.)”
With reference to the assertion, “Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.””
And last of all, “Please provide citations for all of the citation neededs.[?] Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]”
Hello fellow editors and those of us who would like to see this article back up on the Feature Article list,
I am going over those articles that have Feature Status to get a picture of what this genre (Wikipedia standards that is) requires, e.g. phrasing, organisation etc. If you have the intention of getting this up to status, take a look at the related article (those in the health care genre that is) and let us know what you think we can do to improve this article. I have already made some observations in my analysis and will put them in here from time to time. Malangthon 00:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that we are still rated fourth from the top in quality, to wit:
Any idea if we can get this looked at and re-evaluated? Malangthon 13:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Was wondering how far we've come and what exactly must be done to raise the rating of this article. How do we request a peer review update? Malangthon 00:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
We seem to be getting a lot of this in the last 24 hours. What gives? Malangthon 00:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
205.155.228.5
OrgName: California State University Network OrgID: CSU Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue City: Los Alamitos StateProv: CA PostalCode: 90720 Country: US
Could be anyone. Is there some way we can block this or is it even acceptable? I imagine it is a site from which just about anyone can edit Wikipedia. Malangthon 04:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
216.113.128.161
OrgName: Worldspan, L.P. OrgID: WLSP Address: 300 Galleria Parkway NW City: Atlanta StateProv: GA PostalCode: 30339 Country: US
Is this blockable? Malangthon 04:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
207.237.8.231
OrgName: RCN Corporation OrgID: RCN Address: 196 Van Buren St. City: Herndon StateProv: VA PostalCode: 20170 Country: US
Anyway we can determine if some one is dealing with this person, if it is just one? Malangthon 04:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
202.152.78.194
Registered to OrgName: Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Address: PO Box 213, Milton, QLD, 4064 Australia
inetnum: 202.152.64.0 - 202.152.95.255 netname: SIMPUR-AP descr: SIMPUR ISP, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei country: BN
person: Hj Saifuddin Hj Ibrahim address: DST Headquaters, Jalan Tungku Link, Bandar Seri Begawan BE 3619 country: BN
person: Pg.Mohd.Azamuddin Pg.Hj Mohiddin address: DST Headquarters, Jalan Tungku Link BE3619, Bandar Seri Begawan country: BN
24.0.113.12
Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. EASTERNSHORE-1 Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. PA-34 (NET-24-0-0-0-2) 24.0.0.0 - 24.0.255.255
91.0.103.190
ARIN Whois Lead me to the RIPE database [11] which says inetnum: 91.0.0.0 - 91.23.255.255 netname: DTAG-DIAL22 descr: Deutsche Telekom AG country: DE person: DTAG Global IP-Addressing address: Deutsche Telekom AG address: D-90492 Nuernberg address: Germany person: Security Team Malangthon 02:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
70.185.239.70
Malangthon 02:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Want to thank those who are keeping on top of the gremlins, they have been busy, eh? Malangthon 04:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Regarding vandalism on 2 Feb., 2007 ARIN WHOIS Search results for: 24.81.164.238 Shaw Communications Inc., Suite 800, 630 - 3rd Ave. SW, Calgary, Alberta, T2P-4L4 Canada Malangthon 09:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
216.207.50.106
Malangthon 02:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
74.112.127.139
Want to thank those who are keeping on top of the gremlins, they have been busy, eh? Malangthon 04:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
V-Man737 deleted the comment "Her presence here on this article is essential," from my footnote link to Temple Grandin and I concede the point. However, let me make that observation here. Malangthon 03:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I have been working on doing a minor copyedit of the article. However, I don't want to step on any toes, so feel free to change any of my edits you feel are out of place. I haven't read all of the comments here on the talk page, so I'm trying not to make any changes in content right now.
I did add that public awareness might be one cause among many for the increase in diagnosis, however this is from my personal thinking and is not a sourced addition. It just seems obvious that as people are more aware, they bring possible cases to the attention of doctors more often. -- DanielCD 02:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Why do we have a photo of Hans Asperger and not Leo Kanner? Asperger syndrome already has it's own page and his picture should be on that page. This page, to my understanding, is about Kanner's autism, so his picture should be used, not Asperger's. -- James Duggan 20:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Can't agree. It should be both of them. Dubhagan deleted Asperger in favour of Kanner. I think Dubhagan was half right. This is not at all uncommon, two or more people coming up with the same idea at nearly the same time. Asperger's work was hidden by a rather significant period of political turmoil and while that was going on, his work at home did progess although the audience was rather limited. I say put both in. Malangthon 03:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
And I'd like a little discussion of this sort of change before it happens. Please replace it while leaving Kanner's photo. We'll chat.
Malangthon
03:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion, a picture of both Kanner and Asperger should be included. Q0 09:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Does the fact that the article continuously refers to people as "autistic" bother anyone but me? I am a special education major and the first thing we are taught is to refer to people first, and their disability second. It shouldn't be "autistic people". It should be "people with autism". This is true in all disability categories excluding deafness and sometimes blindness. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.56.99.40 ( talk • contribs).
Well, if it means anything, I have severe ASD, and I am high functioning in communication. If you want it from the horse's mouth, then here it is... We don't really care what you call us, we're just the same as anyone else. You can call a brick a diamond if you feel so inclined, it doesn't really do anything but make the intent more difficult to decypher. The best words to use are the simplest, and most to the point. "Autistics" is fine for all I care. As long as you understand that we're people on the inside, then you can say whatever you want. ReignMan 22:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
This page [12] says there are some facial features peculiar to autistic persons. I don't know if this information is true or not, but was wondering if anyone could comment on this. The features are regarding the corners of the mouth and the shape/position of the ears. -- DanielCD 22:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I hope we can use this space to look back at the article and note the areas that need to be supported by sources.If we keep the comments in the relevant section we will not have to hunt for them and commenting will be a little more straightforward.
All in all, this section looks well supported. Your thoughts? Malangthon 12:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This section looks as if everything is supported by sources. Have I missed anything? Malangthon 12:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I reorganised this top section by making the paragraphs more distinctive for coherence.
"Individuals diagnosed with autism can vary greatly in skills and behaviors, and their response to sensory input shows . . ."
The comments on behavior is well delineated in the next paragraph, then there is nothing else said about skills and last it goes into sensory input. It just looks to me like it needs a rewrite.
Fully resourced
Malangthon 12:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Malangthon 12:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
First the title is not really working. We are looking at food obsessions in the middle of the subsection for one thing. We also see a comment on coordination. This subsection could do with a rewrite for coherence as well as cohesion
Conclusion: This subsection need a good rewrite, it rambles and it is not well supported. Malangthon 12:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Note: Who thought up the idea of using the phrase "Developmental trajectories"? That is journal-speak to be sure. Not something most folks would understand.
This could be merged with the subsection on the sensory system by the way. Malangthon 12:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Ironically, this is the most crucial issue of the entire article--the very crux of autism--and it is completely unsourced. There are sources used in other parts of this article that would serve. The Key Behaviours lists a number of these phenomena. Malangthon 12:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely no sources Malangthon 12:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Six paragraphs and one source.
Note: I think that this subject would be of great value to parents and educators. This section, from the perspective of it being an encyclopedia article, is of very high value. Malangthon 13:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Is there any correlation between autism and atheism? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Phase Theory ( talk • contribs) 18:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
There's this article from CNN you can click this link that discusses much about this "Autism" controversy. I'm not sure if it warrants to be mentioned on this article but I thought that you want a heads up on it. — Vesther ( U * T/R * CTD) 14:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Sure, it is relevant but have we not included this information? Malangthon 00:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Frequency of autism. aLii 01:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I believe I read somewhere that in some "primitive" societies, autistic children are worshipped as gods or consulted as oracles. I don't know exactly where I read it, and I can't find any information with a Google search. I was wondering if anybody else had heard this and could possibly find some sources. Of course, I may not remember right (I do have a bit of a bias) or the source I'm thinking of was full of it. I'd really like to see more in the history section, to tell the truth, and this seemed like a decent place to start. Aljo 00:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
![]() | 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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I have committed some of the text to related subsections and revised the introduction for synoptic brevity thereby, I hope, reducing the rather scattered approach in the introduction and making it an actual introduction for the remainder of the article. Text has not been deleted as such but relocated. There were some non-Wiki phrases (e.g. "most notably") that was rewritten to simply focus on the content rather than a POV that seemed apparent. Malangthon 02:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The section in Introduction changed:
to
I infer an attempt to address what is considered to be POV by some people with a vested interest—people who represent another POV in fact. However, the edit now renders the text incoherent and has compromised the facts stated in the original text which can not be considered a candidate for deletion simply because someone disagrees with the facts.
How about: In the scientific and medical literature, Autism refers to a group of diseases or disorders of the development of the human central nervous system that specifically impair social interaction, communication, interests, imagination and activities.
Conversely, Autism may be considered conditions that theoretically involve the development of the human central nervous system. The development may be perceived as a variant of what is statistically typical. Malangthon 02:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
The Autism Society of America defines autism as "...a complex developmental disability that typically appears during the first three years of life and is the result of a neurological disorder that affects the normal functioning of the brain, impacting development in the areas of social interaction and communication skills." I've edited the intro section for readability, and modifed the first sentence to reflect this very mainstream and hopefully neutral definition. Please note that the first paragraph is shorter because redundancies were combined; no content was excised. wintersmith 05:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing this issue to discussion. The reason I changed diseases and disorders to conditions is because the assertion that autism is a disorder or disease is disputed and therefore I did not consider it neutral. I have seen condition used in place of disorder as a way of resolving this issue in the past, so I didn't think it would be a problem here. I thought that the word condition simply means state of being and does not say anything about it being a good state of being or a bad state of being so would cover either perspective of autism. Actually, terms like heart condition are often used to refer to heart disorders, so the word condition has some baggage, but I couldn't think of a better word. Please note that there are two places where autism is introduced: both at the very top of the article, and the top of the section titled Introduction. I used the word condition at the very top but not in the Introduction section. I am less concerned about the Introduction section because it also mentions that some autistic people don't want to be cured, and because it asserts that autism is a developmental disability "... according to the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases." Even though the classification of autism is disputed, it is not disputed that the WHO classifies autism in that way. However, the way the article is organized, it seems that some people (such as those only skimming articles) might only read the very top sentence without being informed that multiple points of view exist. I would like to suggest the following sentences to be used as an introductory sentence at the top of the article, if people still have a problem with the word condition:
Could either of these suggestions resolve the above dispute? Q0 12:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
If we need to delete the WHO ICD classification in the introduction we can make note of the two sides of the issue, possibly using the two paragraphs I have proposed, if that is agreeable. Malangthon 08:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
neurodevelopmental disorders will not link to the article (stub actually) within Wikipedia. The article is there if you use the search function. I have checked the formatting and it seems to be OK. Any idea what is wrong?
Malangthon
08:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Just so you know I am not being pedantic, but the line in the introduction: "There are numerous theories as to the specific causes of autism but they are as yet unproven (see section on "Causes" below)." is a bit sophomoric. Might be OK for us here but very few diseases are "proven" in relation to cause. It is trivial to point this out. The statement does point out that there are numerous theories so the 'as yet unproven' phrase is redundant.
Your thoughts. Malangthon 22:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the intro is bugging me. It explicitly uses one definition of autism (from WHO and APA), which isn't exactly NPOV, as there are different ways to define it. There are plenty of sites that give introductory definitions of autism and I think it's best if we try and find a middle ground between them. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. Those are a few definitions that I found that might help in rewriting the intro. Also, maybe looking at the intro for Asperger Syndrome might help, as it is related to autism and a featured article. -- James Duggan 04:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
This was getting a little diffuse. I went ahead and added a definitive source. However, the list format, while certainly preferred in the real world (it was a list on the NICHD publicaton for example) is often decried on Planet Wikipedia. I have no idea why. Anyway, the publication is from a US government office and can be quoted at length in full. The source for the citation is also mentioned. I have altered the text somewhat just in case anyone has an issue with copyright. Malangthon 04:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I deleted the following: " Some believe that sensory issues can be helped nutritionally through sensory diets or sensory snacks citation needed which are typically put together by trained occupational therapists. The diet consists of items that are thought to help keep the senses in control, with the intention of helping the individual cope better with sensory-related problems. citation needed"
It is
I have also been looking for any occupational therapy orgnisation (e.g. AOTA) that is saying that they can control senses in autistic children with diet(providing they are not suffering from long-term dietary imbalances). No luck. Malangthon 02:23, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Sensory diet is NOT about special foods, if you look at the page on Sensory Integration Disorder, sensory diet is about taking sensory breaks. This means taking the time to use a therapy ball, a swing, take a walk, other activities. "Snacks" are less intrusive ones such as chewing gum or using a chewy tube.
You deleted something you do not understand. Please look up the definitions of phrases before you delete them because you decided they mean something THEY DO NOT.
I deleted 'sensory integration dysfunction' lines- (a) it does not appear in PubMed archives, (b) many of the article links are commercial, (c) legitimate sources do not call it a disorder and use different terminology.
Malangthon
10:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The text refers to a source with the statement: "The method that has been best documented to show positive results is Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA),[29] which systematically breaks down and teaches tasks.
The citation says " "This study corroborates earlier studies showing the power of early intensive behavior analytic intervention," said Howard, the study's principal investigator. "It is important because it is one of only a few studies in which the ABA intervention was delivered through a community- based, rather than a university-affiliated program. These results signal the potential for delivering effective intervention without the resources of a university-based clinic."
It does not say it is the best documented. In fact it says there are few studies like it. It goes on to say: " "The study is also noteworthy because it is only the second one to compare the common practice of combining multiple treatment approaches ("eclectic" treatment) with a cohesive approach based on the science of applied behavior analysis,""
This needs to be deleted or rewritten since it is not accurate. Malangthon 12:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
perhaps someone more qualified / knowledgeable than i could add something about the neanderthal theory of autism. as i understand, the theory supposes that autistics are *not* dysfunctional, aberrant, etc. there *is* a wikipedia page about this at User:Zenosaga/Neanderthal_theory. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.19.178.44 ( talk • contribs).
It is a fascinating idea. Would make a great movie. That is not a slam by the way.
There is also the idea that autistic people (specifically those with Asperger Syndrome) are and have been what would be called wizards, priests and bards in the old days. This makes me think of the theory--referenced in the Autism article-- that Henry Cavendish had Asperger's. Fascinating but in the end what we do know is limited to this--Asperger Syndrom people may be intellectually very advanced but they are not likely to want to communicate with others about their work and that means they remain hidden from observation which in turn means a dearth of information from which to derive descriptions. Given that alchemists and those labelled wizards were notorious for being socially isolated, this may be a fascinating idea but there is very little we can do with it until someone steps forward in a reputable forum to deal with it.
I have been trying to find a reputable source positing a link between autism and Neanderthals but so far no luck. Malangthon 01:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I think it will take some more time before anything is published by a reputable source, but it will be sooner or later. The Neanderthal nuclear-DNA project and large autism genomes will eventually provide the data to definitely prove (or disprove) it. -- Rdos 19:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that in the article there is a sporadic and dispersed treatment of much of the research into actual organic components of autism. I have attempted to divide the information into coherent sections treating definitive aspects and to update the current research perspectives that herald a paradigm shift in scientific perspectives of the malady. Malangthon 02:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
A couple of edits have slipped through that are unsourced and ungrammatical and I deleted them
24.131.5.175 29 January, 2007
216.251.169.134 26 January, 2007 Malangthon 02:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I removed: By age 3, typical children have passed predictable language learning milestones; one of the earliest is babbling. By the first birthday, a typical toddler says words or turns when he or she hears his or her name, points when he or she wants a toy, and when offered something distasteful, makes it clear that the answer is "no." It should be noted, however, that late language development does occur in a minority of neurotypical children.
Speech development in people with autism takes different paths than the majority of neurotypical children. Some remain mute throughout their lives with varying degrees of literacy; communication in other ways—images, visual clues, sign language, and typing may be far more natural to them. Contrary to the prevailing traditional stereotype of mute people with Kanner-type autism, around one third of people diagnosed with this type of autism will develop what is often viewed as dysfunctional verbal language, relying on rote learned stored phrases, songs, jingles and advertisements. The earliest published autobiographical account of this is Donna Williams first book, "Nobody Nowhere", (1991). Those with the autism spectrum condition of Semantic Pragmatic Disorder fall into this group.
Those who do speak sometimes use language in unusual ways, retaining features of earlier stages of language development for long periods or throughout their lives. Some speak only single words, while others repeat a mimicked phrase over and over. Some repeat what they hear, a condition called echolalia. Sing-song repetitions in particular are a calming, joyous activity that many autistic adults engage in. Many people with autism have a strong tonal sense, and can often understand at least some spoken language whilst others can understand language fluently.
Some children may exhibit only slight delays in language, or even seem to have precocious language and unusually large vocabularies, but have great difficulty in sustaining typical conversations. The "give and take" of non-autistic conversation is hard for them, although they often carry on a monologue on a favorite subject, giving no one else an opportunity to comment. When given the chance to converse with other autistics, they comfortably do so in "parallel monologue"—taking turns expressing views and information.[citation needed] Just as "neurotypicals" (people without autism) have trouble understanding autistic body languages, vocal tones, or phraseology, people with autism similarly have trouble with such things in people without autism. In particular, autistic language abilities tend to be highly literal; people without autism often inappropriately attribute hidden meaning to what people with autism say or expect the person with autism to sense such unstated meaning in their own words.
because it appears to blatant copyvio material from this site. If anyone would care to rewrite it that would be great because this is good info and its coming from a reliable source.~ Joe Jklin ( T C) 12:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jklin,
I went to the site. At the top it states, "Autism Spectrum Disorders (from NIMH) - Part 1," and "This brief overview of autism from the NIMH covers the symptoms, treatments, and research findings." So, it is not copyright violation, just not attributed correctly--i.e. it should site NIMH and the date retrieved from secondary website. I would say
Malangthon 03:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
A section for literature is lacking. Have you left it out on purpose? I would like to recommend the book There's a Boy in Here. A mother and her son tell the story of his emergence from autism, by Judy & Sean Barron, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1992, but I don't know where to place it on the mainpage, it is so full.
At the age of 25 the young man decided to write a book about the meaning of autism, reconfronting his painful but past experience, his mother helping him with the diaries she had written during all those years of desperation. It is a convincing story about healing.
Thanks, by the way. Austerlitz 88.72.3.207 09:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Austerlitz, I think the article you are looking for is Autistic culture. They have books on the subject listed with a synopsis. Malangthon 04:13, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
For the moment two links, refering to the book and to Sean Barron:
The list in the infobox is a little garbled
The DSM-IV-TR is supposed to be the second which is listed as ICD-9. I rewrote the script but it simply voids that entry and the one below it. There is something I do not know to do or it has a glitch. Malangthon 02:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*There are a few occurrences of
weasel words in this article- please observe
WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
**are considered
**might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper
citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).
[?]
{{fact}}
s.
[?]You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, ~ Joe Jklin ( T C) 13:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
RE: Spelling. Some one is going through this and changing the English to American. Now I have a great respect for Daniel Webster and his towering intellect but he was grossly misguided in this. This version of Wikipedia is the English version not American dialect version and, as a Yank of the old school, this is an issue upon which I suggest POMS and Commonwealthers not even waste their time. Anyone wants to spend their time and go through and change the spelling to follow this rather small detail is welcome--but I am not going to alter it to what is a regional variation with a very short history in comparison with the proper spelling. The article Kanner wrote, by the way, that kicked this off--it was published in Britain. I say leave it be with proper English spelling. And too, 'Z' is just damned ugly, the less we use it the better.
Malangthon 00:16, 27 January
2007 (UTC)
Regarding point made for, “ See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[?]”
Regarding, what is to me anyway, obscure directive: “Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]”
RE: Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
Regarding the observation: “Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]”
Regarding the admonition to “Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1’s redundancy exercises.)”
With reference to the assertion, “Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.””
And last of all, “Please provide citations for all of the citation neededs.[?] Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]”
Hello fellow editors and those of us who would like to see this article back up on the Feature Article list,
I am going over those articles that have Feature Status to get a picture of what this genre (Wikipedia standards that is) requires, e.g. phrasing, organisation etc. If you have the intention of getting this up to status, take a look at the related article (those in the health care genre that is) and let us know what you think we can do to improve this article. I have already made some observations in my analysis and will put them in here from time to time. Malangthon 00:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that we are still rated fourth from the top in quality, to wit:
Any idea if we can get this looked at and re-evaluated? Malangthon 13:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Was wondering how far we've come and what exactly must be done to raise the rating of this article. How do we request a peer review update? Malangthon 00:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
We seem to be getting a lot of this in the last 24 hours. What gives? Malangthon 00:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
205.155.228.5
OrgName: California State University Network OrgID: CSU Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue City: Los Alamitos StateProv: CA PostalCode: 90720 Country: US
Could be anyone. Is there some way we can block this or is it even acceptable? I imagine it is a site from which just about anyone can edit Wikipedia. Malangthon 04:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
216.113.128.161
OrgName: Worldspan, L.P. OrgID: WLSP Address: 300 Galleria Parkway NW City: Atlanta StateProv: GA PostalCode: 30339 Country: US
Is this blockable? Malangthon 04:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
207.237.8.231
OrgName: RCN Corporation OrgID: RCN Address: 196 Van Buren St. City: Herndon StateProv: VA PostalCode: 20170 Country: US
Anyway we can determine if some one is dealing with this person, if it is just one? Malangthon 04:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
202.152.78.194
Registered to OrgName: Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Address: PO Box 213, Milton, QLD, 4064 Australia
inetnum: 202.152.64.0 - 202.152.95.255 netname: SIMPUR-AP descr: SIMPUR ISP, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei country: BN
person: Hj Saifuddin Hj Ibrahim address: DST Headquaters, Jalan Tungku Link, Bandar Seri Begawan BE 3619 country: BN
person: Pg.Mohd.Azamuddin Pg.Hj Mohiddin address: DST Headquarters, Jalan Tungku Link BE3619, Bandar Seri Begawan country: BN
24.0.113.12
Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. EASTERNSHORE-1 Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. PA-34 (NET-24-0-0-0-2) 24.0.0.0 - 24.0.255.255
91.0.103.190
ARIN Whois Lead me to the RIPE database [11] which says inetnum: 91.0.0.0 - 91.23.255.255 netname: DTAG-DIAL22 descr: Deutsche Telekom AG country: DE person: DTAG Global IP-Addressing address: Deutsche Telekom AG address: D-90492 Nuernberg address: Germany person: Security Team Malangthon 02:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
70.185.239.70
Malangthon 02:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Want to thank those who are keeping on top of the gremlins, they have been busy, eh? Malangthon 04:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Regarding vandalism on 2 Feb., 2007 ARIN WHOIS Search results for: 24.81.164.238 Shaw Communications Inc., Suite 800, 630 - 3rd Ave. SW, Calgary, Alberta, T2P-4L4 Canada Malangthon 09:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
216.207.50.106
Malangthon 02:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
74.112.127.139
Want to thank those who are keeping on top of the gremlins, they have been busy, eh? Malangthon 04:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
V-Man737 deleted the comment "Her presence here on this article is essential," from my footnote link to Temple Grandin and I concede the point. However, let me make that observation here. Malangthon 03:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I have been working on doing a minor copyedit of the article. However, I don't want to step on any toes, so feel free to change any of my edits you feel are out of place. I haven't read all of the comments here on the talk page, so I'm trying not to make any changes in content right now.
I did add that public awareness might be one cause among many for the increase in diagnosis, however this is from my personal thinking and is not a sourced addition. It just seems obvious that as people are more aware, they bring possible cases to the attention of doctors more often. -- DanielCD 02:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Why do we have a photo of Hans Asperger and not Leo Kanner? Asperger syndrome already has it's own page and his picture should be on that page. This page, to my understanding, is about Kanner's autism, so his picture should be used, not Asperger's. -- James Duggan 20:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Can't agree. It should be both of them. Dubhagan deleted Asperger in favour of Kanner. I think Dubhagan was half right. This is not at all uncommon, two or more people coming up with the same idea at nearly the same time. Asperger's work was hidden by a rather significant period of political turmoil and while that was going on, his work at home did progess although the audience was rather limited. I say put both in. Malangthon 03:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
And I'd like a little discussion of this sort of change before it happens. Please replace it while leaving Kanner's photo. We'll chat.
Malangthon
03:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion, a picture of both Kanner and Asperger should be included. Q0 09:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Does the fact that the article continuously refers to people as "autistic" bother anyone but me? I am a special education major and the first thing we are taught is to refer to people first, and their disability second. It shouldn't be "autistic people". It should be "people with autism". This is true in all disability categories excluding deafness and sometimes blindness. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.56.99.40 ( talk • contribs).
Well, if it means anything, I have severe ASD, and I am high functioning in communication. If you want it from the horse's mouth, then here it is... We don't really care what you call us, we're just the same as anyone else. You can call a brick a diamond if you feel so inclined, it doesn't really do anything but make the intent more difficult to decypher. The best words to use are the simplest, and most to the point. "Autistics" is fine for all I care. As long as you understand that we're people on the inside, then you can say whatever you want. ReignMan 22:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
This page [12] says there are some facial features peculiar to autistic persons. I don't know if this information is true or not, but was wondering if anyone could comment on this. The features are regarding the corners of the mouth and the shape/position of the ears. -- DanielCD 22:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I hope we can use this space to look back at the article and note the areas that need to be supported by sources.If we keep the comments in the relevant section we will not have to hunt for them and commenting will be a little more straightforward.
All in all, this section looks well supported. Your thoughts? Malangthon 12:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This section looks as if everything is supported by sources. Have I missed anything? Malangthon 12:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I reorganised this top section by making the paragraphs more distinctive for coherence.
"Individuals diagnosed with autism can vary greatly in skills and behaviors, and their response to sensory input shows . . ."
The comments on behavior is well delineated in the next paragraph, then there is nothing else said about skills and last it goes into sensory input. It just looks to me like it needs a rewrite.
Fully resourced
Malangthon 12:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Malangthon 12:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
First the title is not really working. We are looking at food obsessions in the middle of the subsection for one thing. We also see a comment on coordination. This subsection could do with a rewrite for coherence as well as cohesion
Conclusion: This subsection need a good rewrite, it rambles and it is not well supported. Malangthon 12:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Note: Who thought up the idea of using the phrase "Developmental trajectories"? That is journal-speak to be sure. Not something most folks would understand.
This could be merged with the subsection on the sensory system by the way. Malangthon 12:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Ironically, this is the most crucial issue of the entire article--the very crux of autism--and it is completely unsourced. There are sources used in other parts of this article that would serve. The Key Behaviours lists a number of these phenomena. Malangthon 12:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely no sources Malangthon 12:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Six paragraphs and one source.
Note: I think that this subject would be of great value to parents and educators. This section, from the perspective of it being an encyclopedia article, is of very high value. Malangthon 13:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Is there any correlation between autism and atheism? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Phase Theory ( talk • contribs) 18:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
There's this article from CNN you can click this link that discusses much about this "Autism" controversy. I'm not sure if it warrants to be mentioned on this article but I thought that you want a heads up on it. — Vesther ( U * T/R * CTD) 14:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Sure, it is relevant but have we not included this information? Malangthon 00:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Frequency of autism. aLii 01:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I believe I read somewhere that in some "primitive" societies, autistic children are worshipped as gods or consulted as oracles. I don't know exactly where I read it, and I can't find any information with a Google search. I was wondering if anybody else had heard this and could possibly find some sources. Of course, I may not remember right (I do have a bit of a bias) or the source I'm thinking of was full of it. I'd really like to see more in the history section, to tell the truth, and this seemed like a decent place to start. Aljo 00:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)