Talk:Autism rights movement/Archive 2

For the history of this page see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Autistic_rights_movement&action=history

merge to autistic rights movement

This is already discussed there at some length. I think it would be best if the good facts from here are merged there.... as is this is an overly speculative article. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 20:15, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

If the article stays separate it will be seen by a wider number or readers. "Autistic rights movement" will tend to be read mainly by committed supporters. I did not see it as speculative. If you check my references and external links you will see they include strong authorities, the New Scientist, the BBC.

Barbara Shack 20:43, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not claiming your references are bad, I'm just saying that its sheer speculation and should be merged someplace else which can provide better context on the subject... maybe just merge the relevant facts in Asperger's syndrome instead? Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 21:01, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Ryan Norton for leaving things as they are for the moment. The contributions over autism are a bit disorganized and you are doing useful work sorting them out. Over Sunday I could not easily get to the Internet and had time to think things over. There is a case for moving my article to “Asperger's syndrome”. It would help organize the articles on autism.

The reason I wrote the separate, Einstein, Newton, and Autism article is as follows. I could link it to both the Isaac Newton article and the Albert Einstein article. People will access the above two articles because they are interested in the two geniuses. They can access my article out of interest in either scientist and can learn about autism. Readers can move on from my article to other articles on autism and I hope this will increase general awareness of the condition.Barbara Shack 15:54, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Urg... first off you need to realize you're coming to the wrong place unfortunately if you're seeking to raise awareness about something - this is an encyclopedia, as you know (WP:NOT):). Also, I doubt it would raise awareness anyway because autism et al. is already linked from that article. In addition, this info is already in 3 other places... so I think it would be best to merge this (and the other stuff from autistic rights movement into Asperger's syndrome and try to keep it all in one place :). Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 15:36, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, I merged it. If you have a problem let me know (you can always put the article back if you want) Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 16:13, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, unmerged.... I'm going to wait until tomarro as I'm waiting for second opinion from people about what would be best here Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 16:57, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

At least my current thought is to move this to a new article called "Speculation of famous people who might have autism" and then making these two as individual cases... what do you think? Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 18:54, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I think that is a good idea. I do not think that the Einstein, Newton and Autism article should be a separate article; it's odd to have an article about two otherwise unrelated historical figures and their potential diagnoses. Instead, they should be covered in an article about Autism, or maybe an article specifically about famous people with Autism. Otherwise it's sort of the equivalent of an article called "Queen Victoria, George Washington, and Migraines"! (OK, maybe the analogy is weird...) At any rate, I think it should be merged somewhere. ManekiNeko | Talk 20:14, 6 September 2005 (UTC)