Category talk:People with developmental coordination disorder

Double standards regarding reasoning for deletion, suggest reinstatement

This was previously deleted because the people listed in it did not have dyspraxia as a definining feature, but I would argue that some of these cases are defining and others have been added to categories for different disabilities that are given the same amount of attention. Here is a list of every one of these double standards:

Gage Golightly's experiences with dyspraxia takes up most of her early life section, which is seemingly defining enough for her to be added to the category for American actors with disabilities but not this category, despite her not having any other disabilities mentioned.

Olive Gray's article spends just as much attention to her dyspraxia as it does her ADHD and dyslexia, and those are apparently defining enough for her to be added to the category for actors with dyslexia and people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, but not to this category.

Tom Hunt's article focuses more on his dyspraxia than his dyslexia, but his dyslexia is defining enough for a category, while his dyspraxia is not.

Mel B's article also focuses equally on her dyspraxia as it does on her ADHD and dyslexia, and she is placed in ADHD and dyslexia categories.

Will Poulter's article focuses just as much on his dyspraxia as his dyslexia, and he is in a category for people with dyslexia.

Daniel Radcliffe's listed in the category for English actors with disabilities, despite dyspraxia being the only disability mentioned.

Florence Welch's article focuses just as much on her dyspraxia as her dyslexia, and she is in a category for dyslexics.

I do not understand why this is the case and it appears to me to be a clear double standard. I suggest that we apply these standards equally, either these people should be added to this category, or we should be stricter on who gets listed in categories relating to ADHD, dyslexia, and general disability. UsernamesArePublic.Unfortunately. (talk) 20:12, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There were several indivduals who participated in the original Category for Discussion that led to the deletion who many have input regarding the category recreation. Pinging @RevelationDirect, Marcocapelle, Justus Nussbaum, Johnpacklambert, and Animalparty:.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:24, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural Comment Thanks for the ping. Since this is a talk page of a page that may be speedy deleted, another location might be more stable for this conversation, maybe WP:DRV if this is a formal review or Wikipedia talk:Overcategorization if it is preliminary discussion. - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question (as original nominator): The concern I raised originally is that, according to the Developmental coordination disorder article, around 5% of people have dyspraxia. Now I don't doubt that there are extreme cases that are WP:DEFINING. Do you think this trait is generally defining for 1/20th of people? - RevelationDirect (talk) 23:33, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Response: I do think that it's generally defining for 1/20 of people, I am dyspraxic and I have a fairly typical form of it, it's not "extreme". I would still consider it defining and from knowing multiple other dyspraxic people, it seems to be a defining aspect of their lives too. But also, dyslexia also affects about 5% of people according to the dyslexia article, so if dyspraxia is too common to be defining except in "extreme" cases, you would also need to get rid of most of the people in the dyslexia categories, because most of them don't seem to have extreme cases of dyslexia either. As I've said, this is an obvious double standard. A disability does not need to be rare to be a defining aspect of one's life. UsernamesArePublic.Unfortunately. (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]