Talk:Autism Speaks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Medicine (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Organizations (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Psychology (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Autism (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Autism Speaks 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

WP:BRD[edit]

The generally accepted flow in disputes is outlined at WP:BRD. If you boldly make a change and it is reverted, it is time to discuss the issue. BRBRBRD is not a generally accepted alternative.

Franklludwig added material sourced to buzzfeed, which is not a reliable source. I reverted for that reason. Franklludwig undid the revert without explanation. Strongjam reverted for the same reason. Franklludwig restored the material, citing a Facebook group, which is not a reliable source. I have re-re-reverted the addition and this is the discussion. Discuss. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

The fact that the media have remained quiet and none of the established websites have written about it doesn't alter the fact that it happened, and the Facebook thread in itself is proof for that. I can't see any plausible reason for removing the paragraph apart from protecting Autism Speaks from criticism. - Frank L. Ludwig— Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklludwig (talkcontribs) 19:39, May 13, 2015‎
Policy requires us to source all claims to reliable sources. If something isn't in mainstream sources then it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. — Strongjam (talk) 19:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
While you may feel that independent reliable sources "should have" reported on this, Wikipedia only covers material that was covered by independent reliable sources. Self-published sources are not sufficient here. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Now that we have a parade of IPs (likely socks) restoring the edit, I guess it's time for page protection. - SummerPhD (talk) 11:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow Wow Wubzy?[edit]

The lead of this article claims that Autism Speaks uses Wow Wow Wubzy as a mascot. However, the link to the article on their website about it just mentions that they worked with them once for something on Nick's website in 2009. At the very least, is this really worth mentioning in the lead? The blue puzzle piece is definetly significantly more important to their image and is the "mascot" that I personally think should be mentioned in the lead. Wubzy at best strikes me as oddly fascinating trivia. Luthien22 (talk) 15:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

eugenics, genocide[edit]

autism speaks advocates genocide against autistic people. the united nations definition of genocide reads:

...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) killing members of the group;
(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

while autistic people don't comprise a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, autism speaks does cause serious bodily and mental harm to autistic people by advocating aba, a form of child abuse which is used against autistic children, and their primary goal is to be able to prevent the birth of future autistic people.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.17.182.15 (talkcontribs) 22:40, April 4, 2016‎

You need to cite an independent reliable source which specifically states Autism Speaks has ties to eugenics. Without that, this is WP:OR and cannot be included. - SummerPhDv2.0 03:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
It says on their site that they want to prevent autism. That, by definition, is genocide! Mage Resu (talk) 01:21, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
That is your fairly far-ranging interpretation, apparently based on the assumption that people with autism constitute a ethnic, national, racial, or religious group and that finding a effective preventative measure would be the systematic elimination of that group. Taking those two leaps and gluing them together is not objectively reporting what independent reliable sources say about Autism Speaks.
The article currently states, "Autism Speaks stated as its goal 'to accelerate and fund biomedical research into the causes, prevention, treatments and cure for autism spectrum disorders; to increase awareness of the disorder; and to improve the quality of life of affected individuals and their families'." If, as you propose, this is clearly a call for genocide, it should be a simple matter to find a reliable source saying that. We do not have such sources. - SummerPhDv2.0 03:07, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
There are plenty of sources claiming that it is a call for genocide. Just look around! Is Autism $peaks paying you to write any of this? How isn't this a call for genocide. Mage Resu (talk) 05:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
There are "plenty of sources" saying lots of things. If you'd like to say Hitler is alive and well and ruling the Fourth Reich from Antarctica, there are plenty of sources for that. Fake Moon landings, Satanic toothpaste companies, various world leaders are human-alien hybrids, etc.: All have "plenty of sources". This, however, is a biomedical issue on Wikipedia. To state emphatically that autism is not a disease, we need sources that meet the criteria outlined at WP:MEDRS which unequivocally say that.
To add "eugenics" as a see also here, you will need independent reliable sources tying the two together.
I have reverted part of your changes as being heavily POV. Per WP:BRD, you will need to discuss the issue and build a consensus for the change. You will need to slow down a bit and partialize here. Rather than trying to tackle such a huge change all at once, I would suggest working on a consensus for one piece at a time. (As my change from "diagnosed autistic" to "diagnosed with autism" was reverted, I will discuss that below.) - SummerPhDv2.0 13:10, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
As the other editor said:

The fact that the media have remained quiet and none of the established websites have written about it doesn't alter the fact that it happened, and the Facebook thread in itself is proof for that. I can't see any plausible reason for removing the paragraph apart from protecting Autism Speaks from criticism.

While a claim made by someone in a Facebook post is definitely unreliable, a citation pointing to a conversation that happened on Facebook to prove that it did indeed happen is valid. How do you not realize that? Mage Resu (talk) 16:18, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Previously, we were (I thought) discussing your wish to say that the organization calls for genocide and desire to publicize various conflicts the organizations have run into with various individuals. Now you are referring to another user's wish to include some minor attack on the organization's Facebook page early last year.[1] Yes, large organizations often have to deal with various issues raised by individuals: Someone is using (the name and logo for Autism Speaks/the Red Cross/images of Mickey Mouse) on their (blog/veterinary clinic sign/t-shirts). The organization threatens legal action. The (blog is taken down/sign is changed/t-shirts are no longer sold). We can document that it happened. We can document that thousands of things happened. They are not necessarily meaningful in the history of Autism Speaks/the American Red Cross/Disney. How do we decide which are relevant and which are clutter? Coverage in independent reliable sources.
If you feel you have material to add that has been discussed in independent reliable sources, please discuss it here, along with the sources.
If you feel there is material in the article that is not appropriately sourced to independent reliable sources, please explain here.
Please note that this article is about Autism Speaks, it is not a WP:COATRACK for discussing whether autism is a disease/disability/condition/flavor/color/nuance/whatever and whether or not it should be prevented/treated/cured/repected/feared/painted over/enhance with a dash of paprika/whatever.
All sources must be reliable. Claims of a biomedical nature will need to meet a higher standard, as will potentially contentious claims about living people.
WP:WEIGHT is certainly an issue. What one popular magazine article says gets less attention than a specific issue addressed in featured articles is the highest quality sources.
So far as I have seen, we do not have independent reliable sources stating that this organization has any involvement in crimes agains humanity. It is a very serious charge, one which Wikipedia will not make on its own. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Updates to Awareness section[edit]

Hello to editors watching this page. To provide some more detail for this article, based on sources about Autism Speaks, I have prepared a few sentences for the Awareness section that I would like to suggest for inclusion. The updates are intended to offer more information about the co-founder of Autism Speaks, Suzanne Wright, who has been heavily involved in awareness activities since the founding of the organization. As disclosure, I should note: I am here on behalf of Bob and Suzanne Wright as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Due to my financial conflict of interest, I will not make any edits to the article myself but hope that uninvolved editors will review and make the edits if they look ok.

You can see my proposed updates here, in green, and the full markup is available below:

I welcome feedback and for others to share their thoughts on my suggested additions here. Happy to respond to any questions here. Many thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 01:56, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Pinging this request, in case anyone watching this page is able to take a look. @SummerPhDv2.0: as you seem to be active on this page (and have been over time), I'm wondering if you'd be interested to review this request? Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:06, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Dropping another note here to let see if editors are able to look at this request. @Quackslikeaduck: I see you added the infobox containing a mention of Suzanne and Bob Wright as co-founders earlier this year. If you have a moment, can you assist here? Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done , I added much of the proposed content. I added content that is relevant to Autism Speaks, rather than only to Wright. I did not add a redundant citation. I reworded the content regarding the United Nations resolution based on the information in the citation given. 16912 Rhiannon, thank you for respecting WP:COI. ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 22:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks much, Quacks Like a Duck. Appreciate your review and making the updates. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 17:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Diagnosed "autistic" or "with autism"[edit]

I made the change and was reverted.[2]

The source cited says he was diagnosed "with autism". Additionally, "autism" is a condition. A diagnosis defines a condition. "Autistic" is either an adjective (not a diagnosis) or a person with autism. A diagnosis, therefore, would be the name of a condition ""cancer", "left-handed", "allergies"" not an adjective ("cancerous") or a description of the patient ("lefty", "allergy sufferer"). - SummerPhDv2.0 13:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree. The diagnosis is called "autism," not "autistic." This is not an issue of using identity-first over person-first language. The change to "diagnosed with autism" should be restored. CatPath (talk) 17:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I reverted your change again because one person saying that they agree isn't enough. Please discuss further before reverting again. Thank you. Mage Resu (talk) 14:16, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
1) The weak consensus (2:1) is for "autism".
2) The source directly states "...Christian received a diagnosis of autism..."
3) The article also states that someone else left "following a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer." They were not "diagnosed cancerous".
4) Linguistically, one is diagnosed with a condition: "autism" is a condition.
5) Your only counter arguments are that you want a larger consensus (rather than the weak one against your wish) and "identity-first language". I am unaware of any policy or guideline that supports this opinion. - SummerPhDv2.0 20:42, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
6)Your new reason is that "'is gay', not 'has homosexuality'" hinges on the source saying he "was autistic". Instead, the independent reliable source (the New York Times) says specifically that he was diagnosed with autism. Your theory would also require that reliable sources say someone was "diagnosed as homosexual". I'm still waiting for your argument that the person who left was "diagnosed cancerous".
The diagnosis was and is "autism". He was not "diagnosed as being a person with autism". - SummerPhDv2.0 02:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

The clear consensus at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles#Diagnosed_.22autistic.22_or_.22with_autism.22 is "with autism". - SummerPhDv2.0 01:28, 26 July 2016 (UTC)