User talk:Notgrouchy

I'm not affiliated with them at all. I am a Mom who (yes, believe it or not) randomly passed by. I never claimed to have inside information about this organization. Yes, your page needs a face lift-it is written in a biased manner. As far as my credentials, I am simply a Mom of an autistic child and married to an Asperger's spouse. I have read way too many books and articles on Autism than I would have chosen to had it not been for autism touching my life. I happen to be an RN, but I am not working in order to help my child. I don't have the time to go back and forth with this. If you can't see that the page is biased it is beyond the scope of my abilities to educate you. You use terms like "biologically plausible." That is a vague and virtually undefinable term. You have completely missed the point I've tried to convey to you, you have misrepresented on the page what the proponents of biomedical intervention for Autism advocate. More specifically, you have a mistaken notion about this particular group based on what their webpage claims they are about vs. what you claim they are about.

Generation Rescue
I Please review the edit history of Generation Rescue. There have been edit conflicts on this page before. If you object to what you see on the page today, please explain each individual change that you want to make instead of simply deleting the criticism without explanation. Soap Talk/Contributions 21:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Soap, I did review the edit history and explained my change. Your introductory paragraph does not indicate what the group claims their agenda is.  You have it worded what their agenda is in your own words rather than allowing their self definition to be presented (before attacking it)
 * I replied again on the talk page of Generation Rescue. A note, the reason I insist on putting new comments at the bottom is because that's what every other talk page does.  The rule doesn't apply to user talk pages, so you can reverse them if you want. Likewise, just because you claim to have inside information about Generation Rescue doesn't mean we can just take your word for it and accept the deletion of referenced material.  Indeed, if you are affiliated with them then I and others are going to be more careful than if you were a random passer-by who simply thought the article was written in a biased manner.  However a random passerby would probably not know much about whether particular information was true or false, so in either case I ask you to back up your claims line by line.  ***Please explain why you want to remove the information that is critical of Generation Rescue and why you want to add the information that you added.*** Otherwise, I or somebody else will simply reverse the edit, as we have done to all the other people who have tried to do the same thing.  Soap Talk/Contributions 13:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)