[WikiEN-l] Re: Wikipedia and autism

Wed Oct 12 13:28:46 UTC 2005

Mark wrote:

> I think it's a dangerous and foolhardy endeavor to single out 
> autistic 
> contributors for special treatment - which
> is, after all, what most of this discussion about autism entails.
> 
> Psychologists - trained professionals - are ethically prohibited from 
> making such diagnoses without meeting a
> patient in person. So, rather, now our admins are supposed to do what 
> even trained professionals will not.
> 
> Furthermore, it's inherently bad policy to treat one particular group 
> different than others (different, for better or for
> worse). Not only is it insulting and likely to cause far more 
> problems 
> than it would actually, but it is guaranteed to
> be riddled with errors (statistical type I and type II).

I agree with all the above and suggest that
people have been using the words "autistic" and
"autism" loosely. (To pick a popular example
from politics, a certain school of thought has
taken to labeling George W. Bush "an idiot" -
although they do not _literally_ mean that his
I.Q. is below that of a moron or imbecile: they
merely oppose his policies. They probably mean
that they regard his _policies_ as "stupid". You
might be able to graduate from university with a
90 or 100 I.Q., but an [[idiot]] literally would
be unable to find his way home from class.)

What's tolerable in the political field is not
good to bring to discussions of Wikipedia
contributors. Bush is fair game: we can all say
what we want about him. Our fellow contributors
should not be targets. We should not apply
hurtful labels to them (see [[Wikipedia:Avoid
personal remarks]] and maybe even [[Wikipedia:No
personal attacks]]).

It's easy and common to "diagnose" a schoolchild
or other person with ADD or autism, simply
because they don't "listen" or "behave". Label
them, pigeon-hole them, forget about really
helping them.

We should simply make it possible for those with
poorly developed social skills to contribute to
Wikipedia, but not by relaxing our standards of
civility. If someone _declares_ that they are
somewhat autistic (or senile, or have
Asperger's) that's fine. Cut them a little more
slack, along the lines of "Be nice to the
newbies.") Like we all probably have a friend
who has a short temper, says things they regret,
but always comes back and says sorry and does
substantial things to set it right. (If they're
not a bully, but a genuine friend - we all know
the difference, I assume.)

If they can make it, all well and good. They
don't need special treatment here. If they
simply cannot conform to civility or 3RR or NPOV
(like Gabriel Simon, whom I tried to help), then
we may have to shut the door on them - the same
as any other policy evader.

We can sympathize more, of course, but we need
to maintain one standard for all.

Uncle Ed