Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zad68 (talk | contribs) at 20:00, 7 July 2014 (→Merge tag: make link). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wording

We typically say person with autism rather than autistic person. This is because they are people first and autistic second. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 06:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		To Muffinator, for a well-reasoned argument advocating the phrase "autistic person". Axl ¤ 10:22, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages: check out the Teahouse!

Person-first language

Hi Muffinator. Thanks for the barnstar, which I've move to my talk page and replied there, saying that of course you may quote me outside WP. Your contributions on Talk:Autism were very helpful to my understanding of this whole area. Regards, --Stfg (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Autistic person v person with autism

I saw your comments on the disability talk page and read them to my autistic son. He agrees with you, and (without reading your comment about the term used as a noun) brought up the fact that he considers it's use like that offensive and compared it to looking at someone on the street and referring to the as black to define them. Ian Furst (talk) 02:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Issues

We are not to rewrite Misplaced Pages from the perspective of a subgroup of autistic people. We do not use terminology like "neurotypical" and ASD does not equal autism. You edits need more discussion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:03, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not trying to make Misplaced Pages pro-autism. I'm just removing things that are overtly anti-autism to move Misplaced Pages towards neutrality. If I see anything overtly pro-autism I will correct that too. Muffinator (talk) 07:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The concern is not that it is pro autism. It is that the change in wording is not supported by the sources and the wording you are using belongs to a specific community rather than being common English. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Language usage

Please stop switching better terms to "neurotypical" and "allistic". This is disruptive. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The edit was this one Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

A short rant to myself to preserve my mental health

My edits are getting reverted in the middle of a huge project. Now I have to go back and fix those pages again, carefully avoiding the arbitrarily disallowed parts, before I can even continue on to more pages. Fuck My Life. I want power. Don't know how to get it.

Changing all of the section titles to 'trolling' on your talk page

I have some advice for you. I would change those titles back to the ones originally inserted by the other editors. None of those are 'trolling'. Please read WP:AGF. Dbrodbeck (talk) 14:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

They are, but I can foresee a future present where changing someone else's words causes me trouble, even if it is on my own talk page. Muffinator (talk) 18:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Asperger syndrome. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Misplaced Pages this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Misplaced Pages is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

Everything including tags are content and are covered under edit-warring rules. Zad68 19:47, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Merge tag

You're repeatedly undoing the removal of the merge-from tag at Asperger syndrome. If you feel strongly a merge is warranted, you need to start a Talk page discussion about it. The onus is on you to start the conversation, especially after multiple editors have expressed that the merge-from is not warranted. Aspergers is a featured article which means that the edit community has reviewed the article, including its scope, carefully. If you have an argument for the merge, it would really need to be very strong. I will leave the tag up for a little while, but if no merge discussion is started, I will remove it again. Please note reverting tags is edit-warring like everything else. Zad68 19:52, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I started a discussion thread on the high-functioning autism talk page. Do both pages need a discussion thread? Muffinator (talk) 19:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Consider at least putting a note on the AS Talk page making mention of that discussion and linking to it. It's a bit of a flaw in Misplaced Pages design that merge discussions like this don't have just one logical "home". Zad68 20:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)