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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
Just noticed that some years ago, the autistic culture article was removed and merged into societal and cultural aspects of autism, an article on neurotypical society and how it deals with the problem of autism. This was done by one editor, not obviously identifying as autistic, and without any visible attempt at discussing the merge.
I also note that this article also perpetuates the belief that both Autistic people, and parents of Autistic people, are different segments of the Autistic Community. But, as I think you and I have already discussed, to me this is like arguing that fathers of daughters are part of the community of women. Which is presumably not something that anyone seriously argues.
I trust that you already know my objections to placing the voices of non-Autistic parents on a par with self-determination of Autistic people.
I do agree that we need to engage with the conversation of who people like me are speaking for, but I believe (and I have a number of medium- to high-support Autistics in my circle) that my perspective is representing them better than the medical view, and have concrete examples of things the medical community gets harmfully wrong. Zenmasterbear (talk) 09:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have a feeling Andy might have brought it up because they might think the topic of autistic culture is relevant to this article in some way. I can't say for certain, though. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I interpreted it as a continuation of a discussion between Andy Dingley and Zenmasterbear (in the NPOV-dispute thread) on people without autism making decisions on matters about people with autism instead of autistic people being the primary decision-makers on issues regarding autism. However, I am open to the idea that I may have misinterpreted Andy's comment! Which part makes you think the comment was about "autistic culture" being relevant to this article? Sincerely, Pinecone23 (talk) 12:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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]
