User talk:Godofincompetence

Welcome!

Hello, Queenofconfusion! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 05:25, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

"people with autism" / "autistic people"

Changed "people with autism" to "autistic people" because the majority of autistic people prefer this terminology

What is your source for this claim? --Calton | Talk 08:16, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Calton: Actual study: https://altogetherautism.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/2015-Kenny-terms-to-describe-autism.pdf (I'm looking specifically at how autistic people, in general, prefer autistic to people with autism-- I don't think it's important what non-autistic people think about that.) Article by an autistic person explaining why: https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/ Queenofconfusion (talk) 06:35, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing anything in that paper making such a specific claim. Please point me to the specific page and passage that says that a majority prefers "autistic people" over "people with autism". --Calton | Talk 10:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I'm not seeing anything in that paper making such a specific claim. Please point me to the specific page and passage that says that a majority prefers "autistic people" over "people with autism". --Calton | Talk 01:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using solely the cited paper, I believe the "page and passage" that best demonstrates what you're asking would be Page 4, specifically Figure 3.

(While Queenofconfusion did middle it a bit, it's worth noting an error: the argument wasn't "autistic people" over "people with autism," it was preference for "autistic" over "people with autism.")

Obviously this calls for a little bit of latitude, but going by what is provided in Figure 3 about a singular choice and using solely responses from autistic people (n=502), this resulted in a roughly 54% preference for either "has autism," "on the autism spectrum," or (most of all) "autistic."

If estimates are to be trusted, roughly 1% of the global population is autistic; when the story was published in 2015, that would mean around 74 million people globally. Using the autistic sample of 502 autistics with a 95% confidence interval, their responses represent a margin of error just under 5%. (The latitude I asked for is over trickling matters like how some countries don't believe autism is real, regions where any display of mental illness is demonized or derided, etc. . . y'know, things of that nature.)

Given the statistics and how "autistic" is the predominant choice while "person with autism" ranks fifth out of eight choices, I'd say that qualifies as the majority choosing identity-first over person-first language. Actibus.consequatur (talk) 02:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Calton: See Actibus.consequatur's comment above (you weren't tagged so I'm just making sure you see it, haha). Also, there is a general consensus among the autistic community about this on social media from what I've seen-- I follow a lot of autistic creators and they all pretty much agree. Not the most credible source though, haha. There are a lot of articles online, though-- here's another helpful article I found and it has someone a lot more qualified than I am who also says that, generally speaking, autistic people prefer "autistic people" to "people with autism": https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/07/12/unpacking-the-debate-over-person-first-vs-identity-first-language-in-the-autism-community/ Queenofconfusion (talk) 20:45, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:FMSky, you may be blocked from editing. FMSky (talk) 01:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FMSky First of all, all I did was use the pronouns template on your talk page, which is not vandalizing or disruptive editing. Second of all, Wikipedia's policies clearly state that one should use the pronouns and gendered language that one prefers when talking about them. Additionally, even if you do believe that Tony Hawk's child is his son, using the word "children" would still be correct. It is in Wikimedia's code of conduct that one will use a person's preferred pronouns, and this extends to gendered language such as the word "son". By referring to Tony Hawks' child as his son, you are directly going against Wikimedia's code of conduct. I will revert your change once more and further action against Wikimedia's code of contact may result in you being blocked from editing. Queenofconfusion (talk) 02:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

someone wanting to be referred by as "they/them" doesnt equal this person not being male anymore. --FMSky (talk) 02:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FMSky I'm not going to get into the nuances of gender and pronouns and I think that, in this case, it is much more plausible and much more respectful to change the term used to "children". After all, a male can still be a child. By changing the word to "children", we are implying nothing about their gender. I'm not going to argue with you about the validity of someone's gender identity because it will get absolutely nowhere. However, I do know that, even from your point of view, the word "children" should be okay since, again, it says nothing about the gender of either of Tony Hawk's children. Queenofconfusion (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You could've simply said that in your revert instead of slapping a warning tag on my talk page btw --FMSky (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FMSky I put what I deem necessary for all who may encounter a revision in my reverts and I put things aimed at one person on their talk page. Also, warnings only look bad if you continue to violate them. Queenofconfusion (talk) 02:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]