text:
Angel Mounds

Angel Mounds State Historic Site (12 VG 1), an expression of the Mississippian culture, is an archaeological site managed by the Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites that includes more than 600 acre of land about 8 mi southeast of present-day Evansville, in Vanderburgh and Warrick counties in Indiana. The large residential and agricultural community was constructed and inhabited from AD 1100 to AD 1450, and served as the political, cultural, and economic center of the Angel chiefdom. It extended within 120 mi of the Ohio River valley to the Green River in present-day Kentucky. The town had as many as 1,000 inhabitants inside the walls at its peak, and included a complex of thirteen earthen mounds, hundreds of home sites, a palisade (stockade), and other structures.

Designated a National Historic Landmark in 1964, the property also includes an interpretive center, recreations of Mississippian structures, a replica of a 1939 Works Projects Administration archaeology laboratory, and a 500 acre area away from the archaeological site that is a nature preserve. The historic site continues to preserve and relate the story of pre-contact Middle Mississippian indigenous culture on the Ohio River.

The site is named after the Angel family, who in 1852 began purchasing the farmland on which the archaeological site is located. In 1938, the Indiana Historical Society, with funding from Eli Lilly, purchased 480 acre of property to preserve it and to use it for long-term archaeological research. From 1939 to 1942, the Works Progress Administration employed more than 250 workers to excavate 120000 ft2 of the site, which resulted in the recording and processing of 2.3 million archaeological items. After excavation was temporarily halted during World War II, work resumed in 1945 as part of the Indiana University Archaeology Field School during the summer months. In 1946, the Indiana Historical Society transferred ownership of the site to the State of Indiana. It manages the site through the Indiana State Museum. Archaeological research on Angel Mounds, once conducted through the Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology, is now overseen by the IU Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology at Indiana University Bloomington.

Origins
For thousands of years, the area that was later organized as the eastern United States was home to a succession of native groups who settled near the rivers and used them for travel and trade. The widespread Mississippian culture, which is named in reference to its geographical origins along the Mississippi River valley and its tributaries, developed around AD 900. This culture eventually extended as far west as Oklahoma, as far north as the present-day suburbs of Saint Louis, Missouri, in southwestern Illinois, and ranging east into the Southeastern Woodlands, to present-day North Carolina and as far south as present-day Mississippi.

Site development and decline

The people of the Middle Mississippian culture built and lived in a community (in what became southwestern Indiana around AD 1100 and remained there until AD 1450, a period that Marjory Honerkamp defined in the 1970s as the Angel phase. The Angel phase and the Mississippian culture town are named after the Angel family, who in 1852 began purchasing farmland that included the archaeological site.

Archeologist Sherri Hilgeman and others have used the distinctive pottery produced at the Angel site and in other satellite communities in this section of the Ohio River valley to define the Angel phase as the middle period between the Emergent Mississippian Yankeetown phase (AD 750 to AD 1000) and the Terminal Mississippian Caborn-Wellborn phase (AD 1400 to AD 1700).

The Angel chiefdom (a simple hierarchy led by a chief) was the regional trading center in a group of communities within 12 mi of the Ohio River valley; it extended as far as the Green River in present-day Kentucky. The large residential and agricultural community was also the political, cultural, and economic center of the chiefdom, whose residents traded with other chiefdoms and peoples along the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. The Angel community primarily inhabited an area bounded by the Ohio River to the south, the White River and its East Fork to the north, the Wabash River to the west, and the Anderson River to the east. Archaeologists have inferred that the smaller communities (villages, hamlets, farmsteads and camp sites) were politically subordinate to the main Angel site. Continuing excavations at the site have revealed new elements of the complex society.

Laborers built the main Angel site sometime after AD 1000. They also established the surrounding villages and farming areas along the Ohio River and engaged in hunting and farming on the rich bottom lands. In addition, the Mississippian culture is known for its earthen mounds, designed in shapes including platform, conical, and ridgetop (as also seen at the largest center, Cahokia in present-day southern Illinois). Working with a variety of soils to create a stable mass, the Mississippian people built major earthworks at the Angel site. The community eventually covered about 100 acre and included thirteen mounds near the Ohio River. Some of these mounds were built for ceremonial and cosmological purposes. In addition to the mounds, the Mississippians constructed structures and a defensive palisade (stockade) made of wattle and daub with 12 ft walls and punctuated with bastions. This settlement was the largest-known town of its time in what became present-day Indiana. Scholars believe the town may have had as many as 1,000 inhabitants at its peak, which Indiana archeologist Glenn Albert Black estimated to be about 200 households.

Archaeologists believe that the Angel community existed from around AD 1100 to around AD 1450, although estimates for the site vary from AD 1000 to AD 1600. Carbon dating of the community indicate it was developed as early as AD 1200 and as late as AD 1500.

The Mississippian people abandoned the Angel site long before European contact; however, it is not known for certain why the Angel civilization declined. Scholars have speculated that it was potentially due to environmental factors, such as an extended regional drought that reduced the maize (corn) surpluses, and resulted in increasingly scarce natural resources that had once enabled the concentration of population. In addition, the people may have been overhunting, and reducing forests through the consumption of wood for constructing buildings and making fires. Archaeologists also theorize that with the collapse of the Angel chiefdom by AD 1450, many of the site's inhabitants relocated downriver to the confluence of the Ohio and Wabash rivers. A separate Late Mississippian cultural group subsequently emerged that archeologists named the Terminal Mississippian Caborn-Welborn phase (AD 1400 to AD 1700).

Subsequent settlement
Angel Mounds scholars believe that the Mississippians abandoned the site by AD 1400, and the Ohio River valley by AD 1650. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, groups of other native peoples, such as the Shawnee, the Miami, and other historical tribes moved into the Ohio River valley from the east over the next 150 years. European explorers and traders subsequently arrived in the area. Anglo-American settlers who migrated to the area from the east and south remained to farm the land. Both the Native Americans and other settlers were attracted by the rich soil and temperate growing season.

Mathias Angel (1819–1899) was among these settlers. In 1852 he began purchasing farmland that also included the archaeological site. The Angel Mounds Historic Site is named after the Angel family and their descendants.

Site acquisition
In May 1931, Warren K. Moorehead, a nationally known archaeologist from Ohio State University and the Peabody Foundation; Eli Lilly, who became president of Eli Lilly and Company in 1932 and served as the president of the Indiana Historical Society from 1932 to 1947; and Glenn A. Black and E. Y. Guernsey, Society employees and archaeologists, visited the Angel site as part of a tour to assess Indiana's archaeological sites. Black, who served as the Society's director of archaeology and from 1939 to 1964 supervised excavation and field schools at the Angel site, thought that the mounds would provide an opportunity to conduct a long-term study of a single archaeological site. Although individuals had been surveying the area and digging at the Angel site prior to the beginning of its official excavation in 1939, the archaeological findings were not properly documented. Some individuals also came to the site simply to collect relics.

In 1938, the Indiana Historical Society purchased 480 acre of property from the Angel family descendants and others to protect the archaeological site from destruction. The mounds were in danger of being destroyed due to construction of a planned levee and real estate development. Eli Lilly in his role as a philanthropist interested in Indiana's prehistory, provided the funds for the purchase.

Early excavation
Initial efforts in 1938–39 focused on surveying and clearing the main archaeological site and an outlying camp. From 1939 to 1942, as a project financed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, the Works Projects Administration employed more than 250 workers under the direction of Indiana archeologist Glenn A. Black to excavate 120000 ft2 of the site. These efforts resulted in the recording and processing of 2.3 million archaeological items. Excavation was temporarily halted during World War II, but resumed in 1945 as part of the Indiana University Archaeology Field School during the summer months.

In 1946, the Indiana Historical Society transferred ownership of the property to the State of Indiana, but retained the rights to excavate the site. Black remained on the property as its caretaker. Between 1958 and 1962, two National Science Foundation grants provided financial support to assess geophysical applications at the site, including use of a proton magnetometer to trace segments of the site's palisade (stockade) walls that were not visible from the surface. This project, which extended the work begun by the University of Oxford's Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, was one of the "first comprehensive tests in the Americas" to assess the instrument's potential on a New World site.

State historic site
Angel Mounds was declared a National Historic Landmark in 1964, the same year that the Indiana Historical Society transferred its archeological excavation rights to Indiana University. The site's original purchase was later augmented by Elda Clayton Herts's donation of 20 acre containing an early Woodland period mound.

The Indiana State Museum and Historic Sites is the present-day manager of the site. Research on Angel Mounds is conducted through the Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology, founded in 1965 at Indiana University Bloomington and named in honor of Glenn Albert Black, the archaeologist who conducted excavations at Angel Mounds from 1939 to 1964, and brought the site to national attention. Since 1945, Indiana University has continued to conduct an archaeology field school at the site during the summer months.

The Angel Mounds State Historic Site, a National Historic Landmark, is recognized as one of the best-preserved prehistoric sites in the United States for understanding Middle Mississippian culture along the Ohio River, and Native American culture before contact with Europeans. The site occupies more than 600 acre of land and includes an interpretive center (opened to the public in 1972), recreations of Mississippian structures, and a replica of a 1939 WPA archaeology laboratory. A 500 acre area of the property, which does not include the archaeological site, has a nature preserve and recreational trails. Archaeological excavations at Angel Mounds State Historic Site continue through Indiana University's field school.

Setting

The Angel site was the regional trading center in a group of associated settlements and hamlets within a 70 mi radius. The town overlooks the Ohio River, which borders the town's south side, and includes terraced land and earthen mounds built above the river's flood plain. The main site is close to agricultural fields and is shielded from the river by what is known in the present-day as Three Mile Island. The community faces south across a narrow channel toward the island and what is present-day Kentucky. The channel and slough, which existed during the time that the archaeological site was inhabited, created a quiet backwater that surrounded the town on the north, east, and west sides. The slough and channel to the Ohio River provided easy transit for canoes, as well as a source for freshwater fishing, potable water, and bathing.

(Until nearly the end of the nineteenth century, the Ohio River was clear and potable. In the mid-twentieth century, the channel was known as an excellent fishing area.) When the site was first settled, the slough was deeper and the Mississippian people kept it cleared of brush and trees; however, by 1939, when official excavation of the Angel site began, the stream had dried-up and the channel had eroded, providing a land surface that was often stable enough to walk across.

The Mississippians found the site along the Ohio River ideal for agricultural purposes. Annual spring floods regularly replenished the nutrients in the soil and allowed cultivation of crops that included maize (corn), beans, and squash. The fertile soil enabled production of surplus crops, which the Mississippian people used for trade and to support a higher density population that developed artisan and craft specialties such as pottery.

Mounds
The site includes six large platform mounds (Mounds A through F), five smaller mounds (Mounds H through L), and at least one large plaza. Mound G, which is older than the others, may not have been part of the Angel phase group. A defensive palisade with bastions nearly surrounded the approximately 100 acre town. Mounds A (Central Mound), E, and F (Temple Mound), the largest mounds at the site, are truncate pyramidal earthen structures with either a square or rectangular base. Mound A and Mound F, constructed about AD 1050 to 1100, were used until the Mississippians abandoned the site about AD 1400, and then burned. Mounds I and K may have been constructed over older mound structures.

Mound A (Central Mound)
Mound A, also called the Central Mound, is the largest and highest (44 ft) in the complex. It also among the largest prehistoric structures in the eastern United States. Central Mound contains three levels with a smaller conical mound in the southeast corner of the upper level. The base mound is 644 ft long and 335 ft wide.

Laborers carried 67785 yd3 of dirt in baskets from the chute (a waterway along the south side of the town) to create the mound. The lower terrace, measuring 100 ft by 100 ft, is on the south side of the mound. The upper terrace is 28 ft above the surrounding area. Based on reports from early European explorers in the southeastern United States who encountered active Mississippian culture villages, this mound was likely the residence of the hereditary chief of the town and the surrounding communities. (It is generally believed that upper-class members of society would live on the highest mounds, while lower-class members inhabited smaller living spaces.) The State of Indiana constructed a modern stairway ascending the mound to protect it from erosion of pedestrian traffic. Archeological evidence suggests there may have been a log stairway in prehistoric times.

Mound F (Temple Mound)
Mound F, the only mound that is completed excavated, was a platform mound measuring 235 ft by 239 ft and 4.26 m in height. Excavations showed that the mound was built in several construction phases with different occupation episodes on the different levels. The episodes of occupation include a structure at the original ground layer, followed by another structure on what is known as "occupational layer 2". This was then covered by the "inner mound surface", a layer of mound fill and more structures. The structures on this level seemed to have been domestic in nature. The next layer of mound fill is known as the "primary mound surface" and was surmounted by a large rectangular structure with at least two rooms and anterooms, or porticoes, appended to it. The final layer of mound fill is the "secondary mound surface". Due to the amount of historic period soil disturbance on the summit it is unclear if any structures sat atop this phase. Mound F was destroyed during the process of its excavation and subsequently re-constructed to show its original appearance. The reconstruction features a temple structure surrounded by a palisade and stairs leading to the summit.

Mound E
Mound E, the third largest mound, measures 160 ft by 140 ft. Its upper platform is 45 ft by 40 ft. Because this earthen mound was never cultivated, it is considered to be the site's best example of a truncate mound.

Palisade

Archaeological excavation revealed a set of two palisade (stockade) walls. The outer palisade surrounded the perimeter of the town with the Ohio River acting as a barrier on the south side. An inner palisade bisected the interior of the site. An entrance to the town was believed to have been on southwest corner of the palisade, based on archaeological findings at that location. Parallel to the stockade walls, another barrier (similar to a picket fence) was set 14 ft outside the stockade. It was designed to slow attackers as they came into range.

A reconstruction of part of the stockade, based on archeological evidence, was made in 1972. The reconstructed walls are 12 ft high and have wooden posts set 4 ft deep into a narrow trench. The walls and posts are covered with wattle and daub (a loose weaving of sticks covered with a mud-and-grass plaster). Defensive bastions along the stockade walls were also reconstructed. The original inhabitants set the bastions about 120 ft apart and projecting 10 ft to 11 ft from the wall. The distance between each bastion allowed defenders using arrows or lances to protect the walls from direct attack.

Other structural features
When residences were no longer "serviceable," the Mississippians burned the structures and constructed a new one over the ashes. Indiana archaeologist Glenn A. Black posited that walls were covered in cane and plastered with mud and straw. Roof composition is uncertain, but Black thought they were grass thatch. Two construction methods were used, one for summer and another for winter. Two circular structures uncovered at the site are likely to have been sweat lodges (similar in use to present-day saunas). Or, they may have been used for meetings. The Mississippians also constructed what is believed to have been a public plaza between Mound A and Mound F.

Artifacts
About 2.4 million artifacts were collected during excavations conducted by WPA workers from 1939 to 1942. One of the most significant artifacts uncovered at the Angel site was a carved Mississippian culture stone statue of a seated man, which was found at Mound F in November 1940. The fluorite artifact is 8.5 in tall and weighs 11.5 lb. Similar rare fluorite statues have been found at the Obion Mounds site in Henry County, Tennessee and the Ware Mounds site in Union County, Illinois.

Mississippian tools and weapons found at the site were made of igneous rock, sedimentary rock (sandstone), slate, shale, diorite, or cannel coal. Metalwork objects were very rare. Based on research and artifacts discovered at the Angel site, it is believed that the Mississippians used bone fishhooks and nets made of cord to catch mollusks and freshwater fish (catfish and drumfish). Spears with projectile points were used to hunt small game. Antler, animal and bird bone, shells, and animal teeth were also found.

Of the nearly 2 million sherds of pottery found at the site, 4,569 of them were of the negative-painted type. Textile patterns made inside of the pottery are a trait unique to the Angel site. In May 2006, researchers discovered a probable pottery-making workshop at the site. This discovery further revealed the artistic skills of the Mississippian culture people. Pottery tools and masses of prepared, slightly-fired clay pieces were also found during the season's excavation. It appeared to be a type of production-line process, with the works awaiting finishing and firing as bowls, jars or figures.

The archaeological objects and associated records from Angel Mounds are curated and cared for at the IU Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology in Bloomington, Indiana. The most recent preservation effort came through a three-year Save America's Treasures grant administered by the National Park Service and the Institute of Museum and Library Services to rehouse the Angel Mounds collections.

Kincaid Focus

In the lower Ohio River valley in Illinois, Kentucky, and Indiana, the Mississippian-culture towns of Kincaid, Wickliffe, Tolu, and Angel Mounds have been grouped together into a "Kincaid Focus" set, due to similarities in pottery assemblages and site plans. Most striking are the comparisons between the Kincaid and Angel sites, which include analogous site plans, stylistic similarities in artifacts, and geographic proximity. These connections have led some scholars to hypothesize that the builders and residents were of the same society.

The 300- to 400-year span in which these types of artifacts and sites are found is called the "Angel phase". It is divided into three subphases:

Rare painted and incised sherds of Mississippian culture pottery have been found at all four sites, ranging from less than one percent near Kincaid to about three or four percent of the assemblage at Wickliffe. Some common pottery styles found in these sites include: Angel Negative Painted, Kincaid Negative Painted, and Matthews Incised. This pottery is shell-tempered and ranges from the smoothed surface and coarser temper of Mississippi Ware to the more polished surface and finer temper of Bell Ware.

Burials
During the WPA excavation of the site (1939 to 1942), more than 300 burials were uncovered, most of them in the site's east village. Other burials were found on the sides of Mound F, at Mound I, or near the palisade walls. Although there are grave sites found throughout the Angel site, the remains of infant children were "occasionally found beneath the floors of homes."

title: Angel Mounds


license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: File:Coldplaylive2003albumcover.jpg


text: User talk:207.69.137.20

title: User talk:207.69.137.20


text: Category:Leaders of the Liberal Party of Canada


text:
Live 2003 (Coldplay album)

Live 2003 is the first live album by the British rock band Coldplay. It was released on 10 November 2003 by Parlophone in the United Kingdom. However, Capitol Records made it available on 4 November 2003 in the United States, with screenings at select theaters being held a day before as well. Featuring the shows filmed at Sydney's Hordern Pavilion on 21 and 22 July 2003, the album marks the group's second live project after Trouble – Norwegian Live EP (2001).

It was nominated for Best Long Form Music Video at the 47th Annual Grammy Awards, and named one of the greatest releases of the year by Blender. The song "Moses", exclusive to the album, was written about Chris Martin's then-wife Gwyneth Paltrow and inspired the name of their second child, born in 2006. It was sent to alternative radio stations in the United States as a promotional single on 6 October, while the recording of "Clocks" had a promotional push in countries such as Mexico and Spain.

Track listing
All tracks are written by Guy Berryman, Jonny Buckland, Will Champion and Chris Martin.

Disc one (DVD)

 * 1) "Politik" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head, 2002)
 * 2) "God Put a Smile upon Your Face" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 3) "A Rush of Blood to the Head" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 4) "Daylight" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 5) "Trouble" (from Parachutes, 2000)
 * 6) "One I Love" (from "In My Place" single, 2002)
 * 7) "Don't Panic" (from Parachutes)
 * 8) "Shiver" (from Parachutes)
 * 9) "See You Soon" (from The Blue Room EP, 1999)
 * 10) "Everything's Not Lost" (from Parachutes)
 * 11) "Moses" (previously unreleased)
 * 12) "Yellow" (from Parachutes) (additional guitar by Matt McGinn)
 * 13) "The Scientist" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 14) "Clocks" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 15) "In My Place" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 16) "Amsterdam" (from A Rush of Blood to the Head)
 * 17) "Life Is for Living" (from Parachutes)
 * 18) "Tour Diary Documentary" (Extra) 40:00

Disc two (CD)

 * 1) "Politik" – 6:36
 * 2) "God Put a Smile upon Your Face" – 4:57
 * 3) "A Rush of Blood to the Head" – 6:51
 * 4) "One I Love" – 5:08
 * 5) "See You Soon" – 3:29
 * 6) "Shiver" – 5:26
 * 7) "Everything's Not Lost" – 8:48
 * 8) "Moses" – 5:29
 * 9) "Yellow" – 5:36
 * 10) "Clocks" – 5:33
 * 11) "In My Place" – 4:13
 * 12) "Amsterdam" – 5:22
 * Interactive Photo Gallery

Personnel

 * Chris Martin – lead vocals, piano, acoustic guitar, rhythm guitar
 * Jonny Buckland – lead guitar, backing vocals, harmonica
 * Guy Berryman – bass, harmonica, synthesizer
 * Will Champion – drums, percussion, piano, backing vocals

title: Live 2003 (Coldplay album)


text:
User talk:CoyneT

Archive October 2012

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

"Websafe" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Websafe and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 21:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:CoyneT


text:
Talk:Controversies in autism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rlstatton. Peer reviewers: Mymurphy2, Eisherfinski.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Leepatlo.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Evaluation
This article did cover controversies in autism which may influence neutrality of an article. I think especially in the vaccine overload section the author's language did sound more argumentative and attempting to persuade rather than inform that vaccine overload was "flawed." They did use sources athough I couldn't access the 14th citation backing up how multiple vaccines don't weaken the immune system. Instead of the author stating that this theory is "flawed", they could state something more like "the majority of the scientific community believe this not to be a cause of autism for these reasons..." I feel that the Thiomersal section was not given the same amount of attention as the other sections. For one, it jumps in talking about how the Centers for Disease control asked vaccine makers to remove it from Thiomersal, and doesn't give their reason for doing so and then talks about a study from 2 years before it was "banned". I also think they should choose their wording from "autistic individuals" or "autistic children" to "individuals with autism" and "children with autism" to allow more inclusive language. Calgalhil (talk) 23:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Removed for cleanup
There is likely a good deal of salvageable content here, but it needs cleanup before its ready for primetime. PMIDs are needed on the citations to ascertain sourcing (there are good sources available for this content, but it's unclear if these are them). The section starts with mentioning the DSM, which is never defined or linked anywhere in the article. There is some unnecessary overquoting (that content can be rephrased). And, written like an essay, there is not a single wikilink in this content. Who says "immense amount of changes implemented"? Smells like anecdote or original research. And some copyediting is needed. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Changes to the DSM
With the immense amount of changes implemented, there are clinical complications, concern, and debate. The consistency of the diagnoses as well as the reliability has been in constant question since the DSM-IV-TR, which is why the DSM-5 does not feature various subtypes. The removal of the subtypes allows the DSM-5 to become more simplified as clinicians do not need to spend resources and time decided what subtype children have. Because of the simplified nature of the DSM-5, ASD diagnoses can be made in a more timely fashion with less room for error. Also, having a, “single category of autism spectrum disorder results from data suggesting that the entire spectrum share a pathophysiological substrate and this classification is not expected to modify the prevalence rate but to make more clear the diagnosis”  In retrospect, without the subtypes, the diversity and heterogeneity that exist among ASD and particular individuals with ASD is not necessarily accounted for. For instance, a child with Asperger’s disorder who has an above-average IQ and a circumscribed interest in the French Revolution would receive the same diagnosis as a non-verbal child who spends his days spinning objects and flapping his hands” Typically, there are negative perceptions that are associated with autism; therefore, those who have mild cases of autism, such as Asperger’s, will be more reluctant and to seek a diagnosis due to the fact that they do not want to be categorized under ASD. Moreover, using the DSM-IV-TR criteria, it was found that a person who is diagnosed with Asperger’s disorder does not fully meet the criteria for autistic disorder. Although individuals with Asperger’s does not meet the criteria and are considered to have vastly different characteristics than autistic individuals, the diagnosis of Asperger’s has gradually become synonymous with autism. Each individual diagnosed with autism may portray both similar and different symptoms that range in severity, by grouping symptoms, mild and severe, into one diagnosis category could be potential issues, especially with stigmatization and stereotyping. Receiving the label “autism” generates stigmas, stereotypes, and overall negative evaluations in the home, community, and school. It was found that the diagnosis of autism had a significant effect not only on the child, but also the family than the diagnosis of Asperger’s. This signifies the concerns about the label of autism having more of a negative repercussion and meaning attached to it versus the label of Asperger’s.

This sounds like entirely USA-centric thinking. In the UK, amongst the general public and amongst Doctors, Aspergers is widely accepted as a sub-type of autism. Sorry, no sources, just a comment. This is a talk page... I'm married to a Doctor, parent of 2 kids with ASD who the Doctors said "previously, we would have said aspergers... But they don't use that now..." source: also talking to dozens of parents of ASD & aspergers kids across the UK 109.155.225.70 (talk) 23:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Is the section on Joint Attention actually relevant to this article?
So. I was reading this article, and frankly, I feel that the section on joint attention is irrelevant to the focus of this article on controversies in autism. I'm not going to do anything to it myself, because I frankly have no clue what it is (like it says, it needs cleanup) and thus have no clue where it could go (other than the page on autism), but I am of the opinion that it should definitely not stay here. Anyone? 108.50.51.25 (talk) 01:15, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Controversies in autism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071014175207/http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00018E9D-879D-1D06-8E49809EC588EEDF to http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00018E9D-879D-1D06-8E49809EC588EEDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:42, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Controversies in autism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080913173824/http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/basics/truths.php to http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/basics/truths.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:16, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Controversies in autism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130903024137/http://idea.library.drexel.edu/bitstream/1860/2632/1/2006175339.pdf to http://idea.library.drexel.edu/bitstream/1860/2632/1/2006175339.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070615000359/http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk:80/ to http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120215181832/http://archive.autistics.org:80/library/dawson.html to http://archive.autistics.org/library/dawson.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Facilitated communication
Should there be a mention of so-called Facilitated communication? Wikipedia already has a pretty good article on it, but even though it's a discredited technique it definitely remains controversial and quite popular. But I don't know how to add it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.250.3.250 (talk) 11:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me, since debunking faciitated communication was a significant step in the understanding of how autism is perceived in society. What about the exploitative nature of facilitated communication? Sdsures (talk) 04:25, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

 * I'm curious, what's particularly contentious about supporting non-speaking autistics and other neuro-divergent people in communication? Is letting people communicate particularly controversial?
 * Random Acts of Language (talk) 13:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Less Rhetoric/More Medical Support
This article provides information that could be used better in a different format. There are signs of persuasive writing, especially in the section "Vaccine Overload". This section uses the words such as firstly, secondly, etc. which should be changed to make the article seem like less of a persuasive matter. There are also lots of questionable sources such as The Huffington Post, BBC News, and other news websites/papers that are not guaranteed to be true or factually correct. More medical & scientific sources are required for this article to be valid. Newer articles and sources should be incorporated as well, since lots of articles or references shown are not recent. DGHUCEK (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Should be less biased and add more to genetics..
I feel like the article should present the "Vaccine Overload" section in a less biased manner. For example, the last sentence of this section is stating more of an opinion rather than the facts. Relating to this, more information should be added to the "Genetics" section with more scientific summaries of how autism relates or not to genetics so it does not make the genetics perspective appear trivial. Also, the phrase "autistic children" should be changed to children with autism. Leepatlo (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Should Be Less Biased and Update Sources
Parts of this article show very clear bias, particularly the section titled Vaccine Overload. Instead of explaining the issue and why people believe it, the article almost immediately jumps into discrediting this belief. The second sentence of this section calls this theory flawed, which shows clear bias towards one side of this issue. The next sentence begins with "Firstly", which isn't a very professional way to write an article, particularly one that isn't persuasive. Many of the sources for this article are from 2008 or before, and should be updated to accurately express current findings.Ndenoble173 (talk) 02:43, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia Article Critique
After reading this article, there is definitely some bias towards the idea that vaccines do not case autism. At the start of the article, several potential causes of autism are mentioned but the only idea that is thoroughly discussed is regarding vaccines. There is also bias terminology used such as "vaccine overload is flawed", "lack of evidence" and "conclusion that currently recommended vaccine programs do not 'overload' or weaken the immune system". The bias makes it difficult for the reader to understand all controversies surround autism.

Also, when looking over the references at the bottom of the page, many of the citations are from sources from the late 1990s or early 2000s. In the past couple of years, there has been a lot of research regarding genetics and genes tied to specific diseases or disorders. Science is so fast paced that there is constantly research being done and journals, etc. being published about the findings. The references for this topic should include more recent sources. In addition to some of the sources being outdated, there were citations to many sources that are necessarily relevant. There were references to many articles about how celebrities feel about autism and vaccines. Hearing these opinions doesn't contribute learning more about the different controversies surrounds autism.

Mholty10 (talk) 03:55, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Added facilitated communication and fixed "Vaccine Overload"
Since facilitated communication is still a controversial topic on autism, I added a small section about it from different viewpoints. In addition, I tried fixing up a bit of the Vaccines section, specifically the Vaccine Overload paragraph, to sound less biased. Leepatlo (talk) 06:51, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Controversies in autism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130421054344/http://www.taaproject.com/about-us/mission-statement/ to http://www.taaproject.com/about-us/mission-statement/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://archive.autistics.org/library/dawson.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:33, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Cure perspectives
I've been conservative with editing recently, but I had some thoughts about the cure perspectives section that I wanted to add (without changing anything). I think they were moved over from the old medical model of autism page. Both perspectives should rely on reliable sourcing for their descriptions. There are some at Autism rights movement. I'm not sure the section is accurate, otherwise. It implies a black-and-white perspective on treatment and research, which isn't the case. I think most people who have an "anti-cure" perspective are for some medical research -- ASAN, for example, talks about research priorities. They don't talk about anti-cure, though. Also the "pro-cure" section doesn't mention genetic research at all, which I would think would be significant. I do still think this is trying to portray a divide that is already implied by there being an "anti-cure" perspective to begin with (the "mainstream" perspective on autism, for example, is the "cure/medical perspective"; and the counter-perspective is the autism rights movement and its general "anti-cure/social model" perspective). But it's certainly a controversy of some kind and does belong on this page. --Anomalapropos (talk) 22:02, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

 * So the above seems to have been overlooked. However, I found an academic source for the two perspectives which referred to them as the "pathology paradigm" and the "neurodiversity paradigm." I think this covers the medical model vs. social model that the Advocacy section was trying to differentiate between. I've removed excessive information about the autism rights movement itself, removed excessive quotations and opinions of specific individuals, and rewritten much of it to concentrate mainly on these two points of view within advocacy efforts. --anomalapropos (talk) 15:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

 * User:Ylevental -- the source I'm using for pathology paradigm is here: https://books.google.ca/books?id=PV95DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA373. It's not a single POV; it's literally the opposite of what neurodiversity means. Many neurological configurations which are equally valuable versus only one neurological configuration (and all others are unhealthy or incorrect and should therefore be cured, treated, etc.) I don't think the sentence needs to be changed, but feel free to challenge that. (As a note, you should refrain from changing the meaning of sentences without including a source to back it up. The way you had changed it was not supported by the source I had cited for the original sentence.) --anomalapropos (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
 * User:Anomalapropos It says on p. 372 that they are looking at "the most nuanced account" for this claim and referencing it with "According to Walker". As mentioned in the edit, the phrase "harmful dysfunction" appears on p. 373 and is described as the "general consensus" for psychiatry. Ylevental (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I mean, the two paradigms are, in fact, Nick Walker's theory and are what I was describing. Anyway, I'm not going to be super fussed about it, but the sentence after the one in question doesn't make sense now. --anomalapropos (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
 * (I edited it.) --anomalapropos (talk) 16:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

In
Why is this article called "Controversies in autism"? Why not "about"? Is that the right grammar for the word "controversy"? --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Needs More Depth/Context
I feel as though there needs to be more meat on certain sections of the article, especially within the summary of the vaccine controversy and discussions on intelligence, as both have been influential to the conversations surrounding autistic individuals. The average reader may not quite understand the very scientific rhetoric–pervasive development disorder and Raven’s Progressive Matrices to name a few–that is defined but leaves little other context. This leaves the article feeling vague and not allowing for a good core understanding of autism controversies. I am also surprised that the article does not contain any subject matter on psychological theories such as that of the refrigerator mother. While the theory has been widely denounced, it adds a great deal to the history of autism controversies. I highly doubt that the neutrality of the article would be compromised if this additional material were incorporated and worded correctly. Fishfarmer3 (talk) 23:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Find good sources and give it a try. Then don't get upset if other editors delete or change it. Follow WP:BRD. It's a back-and-forth process. Discuss on this page if necessary. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 00:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I am very new to Wikipedia editing-wise, so I appreciate your advice! Fishfarmer3 (talk) 00:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As long as you avoid irritating people, you'll find that we are very helpful here. Feel free to ask questions here or on our talk pages. It's not easy here. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 01:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access
— Assignment last updated by Annamariefdaly (talk) 02:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone
— Assignment last updated by Rahneli (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Messy Wording
I have no clue how to actually edit, but there is a sentence in the "Neurodiversity paradigm" that I had to read several times to finally understand it.

Original: "Neurodiversity advocates are opposed to medical research for a cure, believing that it will lead to eugenics, and instead support research that helps autistic people thrive as they are."

May I propose: "Neurodiversity advocates are opposed to medical research for a cure, believing that it will lead to eugenics. Instead, they support research that helps autistic people thrive as they are."

Two sentences instead of one confusing run-on. RaptorGirl97 (talk) 12:42, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Controversies in autism


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stiff Chainey

Stiff Chainey
Thanks for transwiki, but I thing this Dude is of no relevance at all. -guety is talking english bad 01:05, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)PS. I have no idea why the title does not show up as a link on VFD, could someone please fix this.
 * Almost certainly a hoax or some "mythical messageboard figure". Delete. --Slowking Man 01:24, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity. Non-notable. Just plain stupid article. jni 06:24, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: the article is a goof. Geogre 00:43, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. He (it?) has a website  but then so do lots of people. This article doesn't establish notablility but I'm open to changing my mind. Gamaliel 21:18, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Everyone~enwiki

Hi! Thanks for uploading Image:Sdwap4503 40.JPG. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GFDL, or  if you claim fair use, etc.) Thanks so much,    – Quadell (talk) (help)   01:05, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

Complaint about the word given to describe F.Y.R.O.M.
Hi! I admire everyone here doing this perfect job for all the Internet Community. But there is a major deal here. I didn't expect from wikipedia to become a source of propaganda! I talk about the name you use to describe F.Y.R.O.M. . Instead of it, you use the term "Republic of Macedonia"! Well, are we serious now? You all know who the real Macedons are and you know where Fyromians come from? Right? Why do you use "Republic Of Macedonia" then? Moreover, this is really annoying because at the same time Greece has not accepted such a name! Also, you know that there is not a "Macedonian Language". You know that Macedonians throughout history use the Greek language to communicate. Then why you describe the language of FYROM as "Macedonian"? Please stop this propaganda! Also, i dont want to hear that you use that because FYROM geografically belongs to Macedonia because this is not true as well! About 10% of Macedonia belongs to FYROM and about 7% belongs to Bulgaria. The rest is Greek. It would be stupid to name all the balkans as "Thessalia" because Thessalia is in the Balkans. Thanks for reading. I hope you "repair the damage".79.103.185.70 (talk) 23:32, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Everyone. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Everyone~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:44, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Everyone~enwiki


text:
National income policy agreement (Finland)

Finnish national income policy agreements or comprehensive income policy agreements (tulopoliittinen kokonaisratkaisu, often called tupo; inkomstpolitiskt helhetsavtal) are tripartite agreements between Finnish trade unions, employers' organizations, and the Finnish government. They are policy documents covering a wide range of economic and political issues, such as salaries, taxation, pensions, unemployment benefits, and housing costs. They represent collective bargaining taken to its logical maximum, reaching virtually all wage-earners. Their enforcement is made easier by the universal validity of collective labour agreements. However, they are voluntary agreements and are not considered government legislation, i.e. they do not represent central planning of the economy.

In national income policy agreements, the government and the employees' and employers' organizations attempt to reach a common understanding of the best choices for the national economy in terms of economic growth and real wages. The basic conundrum is simple: employees want higher salaries, employers want no wage hikes. The government wants to maintain international competitiveness and a high employment rate, while simultaneously ensuring sufficient tax revenues and keeping inflation in check.

National income policy agreements are usually valid for a two-year period. These agreements are not compulsory. If the employers' and employees' national organisations cannot agree on terms, no agreement is signed. In that case, negotiations on salaries are carried out by individual trade federations with no government participation. Sometimes talks are not even initiated due to differences of opinion between employers' and employees' organizations.

History
The first national income policy agreement was negotiated by National Labour Dispute Conciliator Keijo Liinamaa. In 1967, Liinamaa was given a special task by Prime Minister Rafael Paasio: Liinamaa was to negotiate a comprehensive economic deal with employers' organisations and labour unions in order to prevent inflation due to rising wages. These negotiations resulted in the first national income policy agreement, the so-called "Liinamaa I" and brought fame to Liinamaa, a later caretaker prime minister. The tradition of comprehensive agreements has been particularly persistent since then, even if there are always doomsayers predicting their end. Currently, there is no such agreement. This follows from the political pressures to increase public sector competitivity that led to comparatively higher increases in public sector wages, particularly nurses' wages.

In 2008, the main employer's union Confederation of Finnish Industries, representing 70% of Finland's GDP, announced that new national income policy agreements will not be made, and that they will radically reduce the influence of the central union, and close down the special office that has prepared previous agreements. The reasons cited were the inflexibility of comprehensive agreements, their incompatibility with global markets and the differences between different industries. This was met by accusations of irresponsibility from some trade union leaders.

The agreements have ultimately been an effective way to curb inflation, particularly in recent times where globalization has placed pressure on both the employers and employees. The consensus policy unravelled several "perpetual inflation machine" problems: wages tied to price indices, constant competition over nominal wages between different employee unions resulting in constant nominal wage hikes, the government effectively subsidising these wage hikes by subsidising exports based on costs (including wages), and perpetual strikes to increase minor benefits (particularly Niilo Wälläri's seamen's union). On the other hand, a comprehensive agreement maintains distortions that have arisen between different industries, i.e. when wages are too low in one industry relative to other industries.