[WikiEN-l] A cry to save the Asperger's Syndrome page

[Zachary Harden]

Ok, so I voted to have the FA status removed from the article.Also, if you 
payed attention, I said "Coming as a neutral party, I looked at the website 
in question. IMHO, I do not think we should have a link to there. Also, in 
fairness, we could start trimming other links to various forums and other 
websites. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 21:28, 22 August 2005 (UTC)"  Tren himself 
responded to my statement as "more 2 -sided. Despite ZScout370 not giving 
reasons for his view above, I credit the balance in what he is trying to do 
by removing (qhile I was writing this!) the entire block of community sites 
and forcing a rethink on them and their balance." I did remove the links to 
all of the froums since we do not have to have every single stinking forum 
about Asperger's (which, I have anyways), and how every person who has it is 
coping with it. I, also, have removed a link to a school that is 
"developing," since I saw it as a promo. I also said "Note, my suggestion 
for removal of the links is due to the page, to me, sounding like a forum. 
And, there are countless of those dealing with this community. While if 
there are sites who oppose the community in a way that is scientific, we 
should have a link. But, overall, there could be a bunch of links that could 
be removed. I suggest, as a community, figure out what should stay and 
should go. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 21:44, 22 August 2005 (UTC)"

As for the vote I performed, I stand by it and I will not change it. If the 
article is still going to be full of edit wars and have that POV tag at the 
top of the page, it does not deserve FA status and should be removed until 
the problems are solved.

Regards,

Zachary Harden (Zscout370)




>From: Ryan Norton <wxprojects at comcast.net>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] A cry to save the Asperger's Syndrome page
>Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 18:02:04 -0700
>
>Hi,
>
>This was an otherwise great article that as of late (the past 3 days)  has 
>seen excessive edit warring and POV entries injected into it. Now  it has 
>been (predictably) set up for removal as a featured article.
>
>All of this is due to a single user, Tern, who continually injects this  
>passage
>
>"These things illustrate how AS appears to correlate with child  
>authorship, hence a number of aspie communities have a concerned  awareness 
>of the terrible injustice an aspie child can suffer when the  
>[http://www.phad-fife.org.uk/recognition.html chance to achieve child  
>authorship] is unfairly wrecked by high-handed [[school]] pressures."
>
>and links to a very controversial site which nearly everyone else  
>describes as a "hate site", which other editors are editing anonymously  to 
>avoid being listed on.
>
>The link above in question is merely the rantings of a 14-year-old  person 
>with Asperger's Syndrome who could not get a scifi book  published (and 
>some other editors also claim that Tern is the person  referenced there)- 
>so initially users (before I came in the debate)  just reverted the passage 
>and noted on the talk page that it needed to  be reworded to be less POV 
>and needed a better reference.  However, as  evidenced by the history page
>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/ 
>index.php?title=Asperger%27s_syndrome&curid=37556&action=history
>Tern continued to revert back to his version many, many times against  MANY 
>other editors who reached their 3 revert limit VERY quickly  (reverts often 
>happen within 10 minutes!). So, out of desperation the  other users 
>attempted to reword the passage in order to be less pov and  accurate, 
>including myself - however, this was not enough and Tern  continued to 
>revert back to his version.
>
>Some of his edit summaries have been very hurtful and involve personal  
>attacks, such as
>"sysops look how this rv of haters' vandalism gives new consensual  edits 
>to both items"
>"the last attack made here, the public can see is blatant personally  
>malicious bullying against wikpedia's rules and illegal in intending to  
>suppress prevention of child cruelty"
>"creatively revert the llast absurdity, cos it's obviously just an  
>irresponsible personal insult and not verified"
>
>Tern has also accused other editors of "hurting children" on the talk  
>page.
>
>Tern has violated 3RR at least 3 times, and depending on how you want  to 
>do the math many more times
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/ 
>3RR#User:Tern
>
>I'm just a participant in the war and have reached my 3RR limit twice  
>already, and I've filed the 3RR against Tern.  I WANT to work with the  
>user, but the user needs to calm down and discuss with more sense about  
>what he wants to do with the page, not just revert other good faith  
>editors. I've tried notifying two admins without response on the issue  
>also - and one admin - Zscout370 - simply voted to remove the article  from 
>FA status and not get in the debate with the user.
>
>I'm the one who brought the Autism article to its Featured Article  status 
>and used this article as a reference more or less on how to do  it, so its 
>really a pity to see this happen - I'd hate to see it lose  its status 
>because of a war with one user.
>
>Thanks,
>RN
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l