The Wikipedia is largely garbage. Unfortunately when you let the mass mind rule on something, it tends to be divisible by the lowest common denominator-- or whatever the popular theory is at the time. Veracity or scholarliness are non-points.
I remember REALLY not liking the wikipedia AS article back when I was still "in denial." It made me really not want to have it. Something about it makes aspies seem like overgrown, spoiled children, rather than real, intelligent people who are usually aware of their awkwardness.
Yeah, I also hate it. The wikipedian mods should be able to recognize bullshit when they see it.
When I first learned I was Aspergian, I went immediately to the wiki article, and I was angry at the way to explained me. There were two possible ideas: I was Aspergian but the Wiki article was bullshit, or I wasn't Aspergian and the Wiki article was correct.
But within each lie there is truth. I did meet some of the traits described in the article, even if it was mangled to death by parents who can't accept their kid is Aspergian. So I settled with the former.
It took me a while, almost a few months before I finally found a place where Aspergians united. Like this place. And I'm glad I joined. ^^
I don't think I would like the wiki then as I have no patience with bullshite. It was my impression it was only supposed to consist of scientifically verifiable facts or if an article was a contributor's own opinion, there would be a clear disclaimer to that effect.
Am I the only person concerned about the Wikipedia entry for "Asperger syndrome"?
Do other successful aspie parents object to being depicted by the loons at ASpar and FAAS as being unable to parent children without irreperably damaging them psychologically, and in urgent need of the services of a shrink?
Am I the only aspie who is fed up to the eye teeth with adult children of aspies who are most likely somewhat AS themselves, whinging and complaining that it was bad parenting from an aspie parent that is the cause of their own marriage failure, social ineptitude or depression? The crowd who are currently dominating the Wikipedia entry are doing this, and I've seen a most spectacularly bad case of this "my weirdo mummy made me a misfit" syndrome in real life. I think it's time to GROW UP!
Am I the only person who objects the absence of a positive view or an autistic view of AS in some sections of the Wikipedia?
Another point - I have no idea where I'm supposed to post posts about the depiction of AS in the media. It used to the the biggest and the most interesting section of the forum. What the f@#$?
Forget it. In today's society nothing is your fault. You're not responsible for your own actions because someone else screwed you up or God told you to do it or because you listened to Marylin Manson and played Grand Theft Auto. But Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and so why don't you go in there and fix it. Wait, did they list any sources showing a coralation between Apserger's and bad parenting or is this complete speculation by the author?
Never seen the Wiki entry on AS.
Tim
I'll have to check and see if this is being looked after. I have an account with Wikipedia. The first post in this thread was from earlier this year. If opinions are being put in there that's a violation on Wikipedia's rules on neutrality. I'll do that when I have a chance, and I'll ask a friend who also has an account to check it as well.
The form of the article I took a copy of some time ago was terrific. It sounds like it may have changed though.
Just perused it and it looks OK to me.
Oh for goodness sake! That needs to be looked into ASAP!
And in the process appear to put it over as inherent and unavoidable!
Excuse me but;
BS!!
Homelessness and poverty - no matter what the reason - should NEVER EVER be inherent or unavoidable! A society that thinks like that is a society that needs to take a good long hard look at itself!
Curebies and the mercury militia would put it over as the same! All part of their fear campaign!
A smilie is getting in the way of the link. Could someone fix that up?
dont listen to wikipedia, wikipedias a load of s...!
Incorrect.
Wikipedia is a very useful source of information, however; like all information, you must check the sources.
And, unlike most of the crap you find online, Wikipedia actually makes a point of showing you exactly where it gets its information, so it's pretty easy to check their sources and see if they're good or bad.
People always get upset and are like, "OMG, people can make stuff up and put it on Wikipedia and no one can tell the difference!!!!!" But that's bullshit. Most edits- even good ones sometimes- get reverted within minutes. And if you happen to stumble on an entry that has bad info that hasn't been reverted, all you need to do is check the sources and references. Don't trust anything that lacks a citation, either.
Which is good advice for ANY source of info, not just Wikipedia.
I don't think I would like the wiki then as I have no patience with bullshite. It was my impression it was only supposed to consist of scientifically verifiable facts or if an article was a contributor's own opinion, there would be a clear disclaimer to that effect.
No, it's full of crap, crap, and crappier crap. The best way to ensure that crap gets to be retained is for it to be leftist and/or come from a sycophant of one of the moderators. For a great example of the "value" of wikipedia, look up "wikigroan" on google.
Yeah, I remember I was doing some research for a school report, and checked the sources and found out that the wikipedia article misquoted some of the numbers from a reliable source. Too bad I didn't know how to edit it then.
Towards the end of the school year, we were at the computer lab, and the guy sitting next to me changed an article about pyramid schemes to make it seem like instead of 88% of people losing money, that 90% of people make a lot of money off it. He refreshed the page a minute later and it was back to normal.
So yeah, blatant stuff like that usually gets corrected immediately, and usually I use wikipedia as a summary, or quick reference. It's not the be-all end-all truth, but for quick access and citations available, it's a good site.