Wikipedia:Peer review/Autism/archive1

Autism
OK, its time to resubmit this to peer review. This is a fantastic article that has clearly seen contributions from several professionals in the field and parents of autistic children. Tabushidayu raised a lot of good points in the old peer review. Pretty much all of them have been solved I think except for the size issue - its big. About 10k less than the George W. Bush article. This is due to the fact that even an overview of the subject is huge (there are at least 3 main daughter articles) and you have to be extra careful because of the controversy.

Anyway, other people obviously did quite before I came on the scene, and I did quite a bit too (NPOV everything, translated everything to layman-speak, got rid of dubious unreferenced text, translated all references to wikipedia style, etc. etc.).

--RN 06:34, 3 August 2005 (UTC)


 * "However, 10% of autistic people are naturally bilingual, meaning they've learned a foreign language before learning their local language in their toddler years, the cause of this is completely unknown, but it may be a possible reason why autistic people use language differently than others." - source? - Ta bu shi da yu 07:53, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Dubious, removed - there was a lot of stuff like that in before... --RN 08:20, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Reference to NT... is that Neurotypical? Should this be abbreviated? - Ta bu shi da yu 07:54, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Good catch... there was some nasty stuff in that section that I missed... I changed all occurances of neurotypical to non-autistic to make reading of it easier for people not familiar with the inspeak and wikied all other occurances of neurotypical --RN 08:20, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Can we use ref and note? - Ta bu shi da yu
 * That's what I still see used in all featured articles coming out... I know there's the new footnote syntax, but it puts Note 1: etc. at the bottom. Perhaps its better just to remove it? --RN 08:20, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * P.S. I'd like to congratulate the authors on an interesting, informative and well-written article! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:57, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for your current and future help! --RN 08:20, 3 August 2005 (UTC)