Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neurotypical Disorder

:{{la|Neurotypical Disorder}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neurotypical_Disorder Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Neurotypical Disorder}})

Originally tagged as G3 and A11. This still appears to have been invented by the author, and is at best original research and at worst a hoax. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:55, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I didn't invent it, someone else did.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661309001703

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/wflr34&div=28&id=&page=

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763414003327

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aur.1508/full

The list goes on and on. We just have a better understanding of how the brain works now and the links to genetics. I'm sure it will be published in the next DSM in 20 years or whenever they get around to rolling out the old printing press, but this is the 21st century and we have computers which obsoletes that technology. I won't accept deletion without a suitable redirect to another article with the same basic information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whytehorse1413 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm no psychologist, but based on at least the abstracts of the papers linked (only one of which even uses the word "neurotypical", unless I missed something, and none of which use this term, arguing against the claim that "someone else [invented it]"), I'm thinking this is a hoax. It does also sound a little bit along the lines of the rather silly political trope of "[insert name of the side of politics you don't subscribe to] don't understand common sense, so they must be psychologically affected". Criteria 4, 6 and 8 in the article point in this direction, although that may just be me having read too much political science today. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:43, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

::This is a bit like someone creating an article Hearing disorder that states the condition is characterised by a lack of deafness and an inability to understand sign language.--Pontificalibus (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete G3, tag was removed by article creator. --Pontificalibus (talk) 06:48, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
• Redirect to Neurotypical. While I think the contents of the current article need to be significantly improved, it's not a hoax. I could see the usage of the exact term "Neurotypical disorder" in Sussex.ac.uk accepted research (Yuill, N., et al, 2015).^{[http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/58041/1/Yuill2015JATauthorversion.pdf Journal of Assistive Technologies]} The exact term can also be seen in various books and research papers: [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jason_Potts/publication/37627525_An_Alternative_Framework_for_Economics/links/54e592870cf29865c3374e9c/An-Alternative-Framework-for-Economics.pdf#page=223][http://www.academia.edu/1539557/The_Tyranny_of_Neuronormativity_Questioning_Neurotypical_Privilege_in_Communication][https://books.google.ch/books?id=ikPFDPCk7hcC&pg=PA88&lpg=PA88&dq=%22Neurotypical+Disorder%22+-wikipedia&source=bl&ots=GskY4Hn_2R&sig=jOkJY0Ua4ithgNsMAwnb64Y8c34&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjwks3urPnVAhUEq48KHVRvAvIQ6AEITjAI#v=onepage&q=%22Neurotypical%20Disorder%22%20-wikipedia&f=false][https://books.google.ch/books?id=6tjuVqUN8aYC&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10&dq=%22Neurotypical+Disorder%22+-wikipedia&source=bl&ots=9GF3LdC20B&sig=YxGHAsk7f2CBoijl5VnKW1aENnA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjwks3urPnVAhUEq48KHVRvAvIQ6AEISzAH#v=onepage&q=%22Neurotypical%20Disorder%22%20-wikipedia&f=false]. [https://dr.library.brocku.ca/bitstream/handle/10464/2731/Brock_Grubb_Sarah_2007.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y dr.library.brocku.ca's digital library] describes the exact term "Neurotypical disorder" as "a neurobiological disorder characterized by preoccupation with social concerns, delusions of superiority, and obsession with conformity." Having said that, while the term is not a hoax, it can easily be accommodated in the Neurotypical article, which already has a skeletal paragraph on this issue. Lourdes 07:17, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

::My computer's up to no good, so I can't read/search everything you've cited. That said, Yuill's article, while it does use the term, it's used in what seems to be the context of a thought-experiment where someone on the autism spectrum is describing how a neurotypical person would be described if autism-spectrum conditions were the "standard" by which others were measured. The last source says precisely what you've stated, but the rest of the context there reads "The above statement is taken from a website developed by people on the autism spectrum. It attempts to provide a humorous account of the belief that autism is a disease by seeking to establish the argument as irrational." The "skeletal paragraph" in the artcle you're suggesting as a redirect target is simply a rehash of the symptoms of the "disorder" as quoted in this article. If it's not a hoax, it's certainly something being taken significantly more seriously than it is intended to be. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:29, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

• Delete it is a parody or joke. I have also remove similar text from Neurotypical. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 15:30, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.