Talk:Autism

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Can I say this?[change source]

"Parents with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder (Asperger Syndrome) often have children with Asperger Syndrome or with more severe Autism. Sometimes people who have autism are extraordinarily gifted or talented. These people are said to have savant syndrome. They are often very good at just one thing in particular, like mathematics, playing the piano or remembering football scores. "

I want to include savant syndrome. Why can't I add this? Flayof (talk) 02:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Some quick research reveals that Savant syndrome is not exclusive to people with Autism. That's why. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
People with savant syndrome can have autism. Flayof (talk) 02:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, why don't you create an article on Savant syndrome? Griffinofwales (talk) 02:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
So why can't I say that the people with autism that are extraordinarily gifted or talented also have savant syndrome? Flayof (talk) 02:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Where are your sources that say that? Either way (talk) 02:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Here is one: [1] Flayof (talk) 02:47, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Savant syndrome and autism are comorbid, but each can exist without the other. Jim Michael (talk) 20:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Autism/Asperger's[change source]

I'd like to point out that Autism and Asperger's are different. Asperger's is not "High Functioning Autism."

They are different types of autism. Jim Michael (talk) 20:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Complex tag...[change source]

Looking at the page history, this is probably one of the first pages of SEWP. I currently has a complex tag. If anyone feels like it, please help sipmlify it. As an article on a medical condition it should be reasonably simple to understand. --Eptalon (talk) 11:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, id be happy to simplify the article, especially as I do have a good knowledge of autism. Exactly what bit do you feel needs simplification? ThatNinetiesGirl talk 13:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Much academic material was added since I edited it two years ago. Virtually all of the extra stuff was heavy academic material from En wiki, poorly simplified and IMO not needed by our readership. We do not exist to train professionals. We exist to provide a simple language version which is readable by a much wider audience. Annoyingly, some material which our readership does need is not included.
Isn't this graph interesting?! You'll find a whole article on En wiki titled Epidemiology of autism. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Bar chart versus time. The graph rises steadily from 1996 to 2007, from about 0.7 to about 5.3. The trend curves slightly upward.
Reports of autism cases per 1,000 children grew dramatically in the US from 1996 to 2007. It is unknown how much, if any, growth came from changes in rates of autism.
I see what you mean, a lot of information (e.g. the theory of mind stuff) does seem a little unnecessary - it reminds me more of a psychopathology textbook than a general purpose simple wiki. Im considering rewriting the entire article, but that seems a hefty task - I may do it in stages, especially so individual simplifications can be critiqued if necessary. ThatNinetiesGirl talk 19:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Ongoing simplification[change source]

So far ive got up to the symptoms. Ill get onto the next bits when I have time. Im thinking of removing the diagnostic criteria, for eg, because honestly it depends on the diagnostic system used, and theyre basically just a formalised version of a symptom list anyway, which already exists. I do feel the causes section could have its own article, with a brief paragraph in the autism article explaining some causes but containing a link to this possibele "causes of autism" article? Especially as the MMR topic is quite hefty in nature to warrant a separate page? ThatNinetiesGirl talk 09:42, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Simplification enough?[change source]

Would anybody reason that this article has been simplified enough to remove the tag, or are there still some sections to improve? (and if so, which ones?) PrimordialTaco 11:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I found a lot of errors and inconsistencies in the introductory paragraph alone. It's not just a question of getting the English simple, it's getting everything correctly expressed. A simple example: apart from initial words, only proper nouns are capitalised in English. Of the words used only Asperger is a proper nounn (being a person's name). This is elementary grammar. Personally, I don't like tagging, and think it is more or less useless, just a substitute for doing the job properly. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)