Aspies: Does the Wikipedia article accurately describe you?

Post Reply New Topic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

I'm self-diagnosed, but when I read this article it makes me unsure.
Quotes like "Unlike those with autism, people with AS are not usually withdrawn around others; they approach others, even if awkwardly [...] This social awkwardness has been called 'active, but odd' ".
(Yet I am withdrawn around others)
"They usually understand the cognitive basis of humor but may not enjoy it due to lack of understanding of its intent"
(I have no problems understanding and enjoying humor)
"Stereotyped and repetitive motor behaviors are a core part of the diagnosis of AS and other ASDs."
(Not really for me)
"Individuals with AS may fail to monitor whether the listener is interested or engaged in the conversation."
(Nope, on the contrary, I tend to suspect I'm boring people even when I'm not.)
Also, the article implies that Aspies fail to pick up on nonverbal communication. However, I recognize nonverbal communication all the time (perhaps more of it than there really is); I just don't express myself nonverbally.

I'm still pretty sure I have A.S., but I'm just wondering if it's normal not to have all the symptoms.

First of all, you don't need to have ALL the symptoms to be aspie.

Second, I wouldn't take the Wiki entry too seriously. It is the locus of a tiny war, and changes every 10 minutes.

I'm diagnosed, and I'm totally withdrawn (because I want to be; I don't wish to approach people); there are "severely" autistic individuals--adults who appear aloof and uninterested in interaction, but they still do wish to interact. Just like how some "normal" people can desire a lot of social contact, or others who don't want any; the former will be seen as odd and eccentric when you add the social impairment of Asperger's/autism to the individuals; the latter will appear aloof with the same autistic template added over.

These "active", "odd", "passive" and/or "aloof" descriptions are based on observations of us rather than explanations by us.

Nonverbal communication deficits are a staple of ASDs (as well as verbal).

I'm ALSO self diagnosed, but have a lot of reasons to believe this is ME!

I HAVE tried to approach others. I don't now, and usually didn't, merely because it doesn't seem worth it. It seems some view aspies as people that walk up to anyone, and bore them to death. I HAVE been known to bore people to death, but THEY walked up to me!

My humor is sometimes considered odd. I would say 80% of what I like OTHERS like! About 70% of what THEY like I like.

The repetitive motor behaviours are open to interpretation. Even DIAGNOSED people here ask "Does THIS count?"!

Sometimes my care for the other persons interest seems to wane and, even if I become aware, I don't react. Again, I think it is THEIR impression.

There is a lot of "non verbal" stuff. Frankly, I don't believe 60% of it exists! AGAIN, interpretation.

NOBODY can have ALL the symptoms as many specify.

Wow... the last 50 edits occurred in the last week. 250 only takes you back to mid december.

As a general note, if you're looking at a non-technical subject on Wikipedia, it may be very informative to look at the history page. If the last 50 edits occurred in under a month, you can pretty much figure the page is "disputed".

I never have taken wiki seriously but much of the info on that article appeared to be correct and tho I have a DX of HFA (prior to AS being in the DSM) I am certainly aspie and not HFA. The article discribed me ALMOST to a T.

Well I read it and that is so not my boy. He is more on the autism side altho I am waiting for Pyschologist to tell me.

Wikipedia is a horrible source of information on controversial subjects. The characteristics and critera for diagnosis of Aspergers is somewhat disputed, therefore don't look it up on Wiki.

yeah i wouldn't take wikipedia that seriously. they add every type of research that comes out. they have not said why autism/asperger is here and this crap has been going on for over 10 years....

The article looks ok to me.

It explains the three main areas affected: social interaction, restricted/repetitive interests, and speech/language difficulties.

Here are two sites that are quite "official":

Pervasive Developmental Disorder: Asperger Syndrome
Asperger Syndrome Fact Sheet

Parts of it does and parts of it doesn't.

While reading the wiki on aspergers I had an epiphany. It revealed to me almost everything I thought was wrong with me and gave me a reason why. It was then I became a Self Diagnosed Aspie. I also dont fit in with those quotes you have listed although I am not sure all of them existed in the wiki when I first read it. I did have my doubts about those parts that dont match but it all seemed to be 90% accurate which was enough for me.

I was allready arranged to see a psychiatrist by that time to diagnose my problems and find out why I hadnt been out of the house for 5 years but he couldnt really diagnose me with anything at all. He wasnt there to look forAutism/Aspergers so I told him that I thought I had Aspergers. Then he realised it could possibly be true because nothing else fit but he wasnt able/allowed to diagnose Aspergers. He helped arrange a proffesor to come see me who has expertise in diagnosis for Aspergers and after a few hours of interviewing me and my mum seperately he told me he has diagnosed me with Aspergers.

Its was nice to satisfy those doubts that I wasnt aspergers and It made me happy to be diagnosed but I am yet to see any changes because of it.

Taken from the second link I posted; it's short, but accurate (it's better than the whole Wikipedia article IMO):