Autism rights movement was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
Autism rights movement is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
Right now, it is unclear to me what the point of this section is. Is it a list of organizations "approved" by the autism rights movement or created by advocates active within the ARM?
For example, ASAN is mentioned several times in the article but is not listed. AFF and Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network are not on the list either. The Autism National Committee is mentioned in the section text but is not on the list, which I find odd.
That section might be better worded as "There are several organizations that campaign or advocate for autistic rights. ..." That removes the suggestion that they are "in" some specific group (the ARM). Mitch Ames (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it makes more sense to phrase it that way. Thank you!I am struggling to understand the section's value to the article for describing what the ARM is, the movement's principles, and what the movement aspires to achieve. It feels very vague to me (I'm not saying it is pointless! I just don't get it). It would be easier if the organizations explicitly said "we ally ourselves with the ARM" :-PI have some follow-up questions to understand what organizations belong in "Autism rights groups":
Should the organizations operate by neurodiversity principles?
Do the organizations need to be exclusively operated by people with autism?
Do they need to be active, or should inactive organizations also be mentioned?
I don't think it's the job of Wikipedia editors to decide which organization does or doesn't belong to the Autism Rights Movement, and to come up with "rules" to make this decision. I think we should strictly follow what can be backed by reliable sources and consider organizations that claim association with the movement and/or organizations that have been considered autism rights organizations by others. Quite possibly there are cases where these two assessments disagree, then this should be noted.--TempusTacet (talk) 20:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree that Wikipedia editors are not the deciders of which organizations belong. I did not intend to make that impression and I will try to phrase myself more clearly next time! The purpose of the first two questions in the bulleted list were partially to demonstrate that there does not seem to be any clear criteria for organizations to be mentioned on the article page unlike a hypothetical list of "organizations in Finland" where the criteria is a binary "is it an organization in Finland? yes/no". Kindly, Pinecone23 (talk) 16:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As always, ask the sources. If reliable sources seem to have a consensus that a given group is active in advocacy for autism rights, then it is an autism rights organization, since there is no binary definition (unlike the above "organizations in Finland".) To avoid the article becoming a massive laundry list, I think it should also stick to providing examples of the largest and most significant organizations, rather than trying to list all the smaller ones, inactive/defunct ones, and so on. SeraphimbladeTalk to me19:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing dispute in the Wikipedia page on Autism, attentions needed.
I recently went through the current version of the Wikipedia article on Autism , and I found that this article is NOT representing the reality or encyclopedic wholeness. The huge, verbose, highly technical article is biased towards medical model of disability, medical genetics, and nearly zero information regarding the anthropology, evolution, neurodiversity, accommodation, accessibility, Augmentative and alternative communications, and all that actually helps wellbeing of Autistic people. The page boldly focuses on controversial methods such as ABA, such as EIBI (Early intensive behavioral interventions), DTT (discrete trial training) etc. without any mention of the concerns or criticisms against them. I entered the talk page, but it has been turned literally into a warzone, where any dissenting viewpoint is being silenced in name of "global and unanimous scientific consensus" which is simply wrong. It is mostly a view held by biomedical and pharmaceutical majority. But outside of that, opposing viewpoints do exist in actual Autistic populations (who have the lived experience), anthropology, sociology, psychology, etc. I added an "unbalanced" tag for reader information (I did not speak for complete erasure of controversial viewpoints, just needed the reader to know that there are other views), however the "unbalanced" tag was soon reverted.
It is not possible for me to daily attend and post arguments and counter-arguments. I have to acknowledge that, if this kind of silencing continues, this time Wikipedia literally failed as an encyclopedia, as well it failed at public health and education welfare perspective.
