Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

User talk:Tom (LT): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
return: notify of requested GOCE copy-edit to Cardiac output
Cardiac output: copy-edit done
Line 62: Line 62:


==[[Cardiac output]]==
==[[Cardiac output]]==
{{GOCEstartce|article=Cardiac output|sign=Another editor has alraedy done a partial c/e on this one, I'll do my best but it might take a while. Also, I'm not a medical person so I won't be able to correct any facts. Cheers, [[User:Baffle gab1978|Baffle gab1978]] ([[User talk:Baffle gab1978|talk]]) 04:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)}}
{{GOCEtb|article=Cardiac output|sign=Another editor has alraedy done a partial c/e on this one, I'll do my best but it might take a while. Also, I'm not a medical person so I won't be able to correct any facts. Cheers, [[User:Baffle gab1978|Baffle gab1978]] ([[User talk:Baffle gab1978|talk]]) 02:47, 10 June 2015 (UTC)}}

Revision as of 02:47, 10 June 2015

UserUser talkWPANATOMYWPMED

Template:NoBracketBot

Please ping me ({{u}}) if you'd like me to contribute in a discussion on an article talk page.

WikiProject Anatomy Newsletter

WP:Anatomy quarterly update (#3)

Previous -- Next
Released: 1 November, 2014
Editor: Tom (LT)

Hello WP:Anatomy participant! This is the third quarterly update, documenting what's going on in WikiProkect Anatomy, news, current projects and other items of interest. I'd greatly value feedback on this, and if you think I've missed something, or don't wish to receive this again, please leave a note on my talkpage or remove your name from the mailing list

What's new
What's going on
  • We fly past 10,000 articles (now already up to 10,150). Why is this important? Articles under our scope are automatically included in popular pages, the cleanup list, and will be included as the recent changes list is updated.
  • A discussion about the formatting of infoboxes.
  • A lot of editing on the heart article -- can it make it to GA?
  • The medical newsletter, WP:PULSE finds its feet, and Anatomy and Physiology are featured as a subsection!
  • A new WP:WikiProject Animal anatomy (WP:ANAN) is created to focus on animal anatomy.
How can I contribute?
  • Welcome new editors! We have a constant stream of new editors who are often eager to work on certain articles.
  • We are always looking to collaborate! If you're looking for editors to collaborate with, let us know on our talk page!
  • Continue to add high-class reliable sources
  • Browse images on WikiCommons to improve the quality of images we use on many articles.
Quarterly focus - Anatomical terminology

Anatomical terminology is an essential component to all our articles. It is necessary to describe structures accurately and without ambiguity. It can also be extremely confusing and, let's face it, it's likely you too were confused too before you knew what was going on ("It's all Greek to me!" you may have said, fairly accurately).

In the opinion of this editor, it's very important that we try hard to describe anatomy in a way that is both technically accurate and accessible. The majority of our readers are lay readers and will not be fluent in terminology. Anatomy is a thoroughly interesting discipline, but it shouldn't be 'locked away' only to those who are fluent in the lingo – exploring anatomy should not be limited by education, technical-level English fluency, or unfamiliarity with its jargon. Anatomical terminology is one barrier to anatomical literacy.

Here are four ways that we can help improve the readability of our anatomical articles.

  1. Substitute. Use words readers are familiar with -- there is no need to use anatomical terminology unless necessary!
    Innervated by
    The nerve that supplies X is...
  2. Explain. When using terminology, remember readers will likely not understand what you mean, so consider adding an explanation and providing context. Use wikilinks for terms that a reader may not know.
    "The triceps extends the arm" may not be readily understood. A small addition may help the reader:
    "The triceps extends the arm, straightening it". Consider:
  3. Separate. Do not use long, complicated sentences. Don't write discursive, long comparisons unless needed. Start with simple information first, then get progressively more complex. Separate information by paragraph and subsection. Bite-sized information is much more easier to digest for readers who don't have a solid anatomical foundation
  4. Eliminate. Not all information is necessary on every article. Hatnotes are a simple and effective way to direct readers to another article. Don't provide long lists of synonyms of names for structures that an article isn't about. If a sentence has been paraphrased to the hilt, consider that several editors are indicating it may need to be simplified.
    "The other branches of the trigeminal nerve are the opthalmic nerve (nervus opthalmicus) and mandibular nerve (nervus mandibularis)"
    "The other branches of the trigeminal nerve are the opthalmic nerve and mandibular nerve" is much more easily digestible

This essay is provided in full on WP:ANATSIMPLIFY.

This has been transcluded to the talk pages of all active WP:ANATOMY users. To opt-out, leave a message on the talkpage of Tom (LT) or remove your name from the mailing list

Your development idea

Thanks for thinking about what I wrote. There might be a place for a rewritten development section at the end, but I need to see what is now written on the Brainstem page. Let me work on editing the other sections so that the entire page reads well, and is consistent. Then I can embellish with Development and Figures. Really, to understand the Development issue, a figure is essential. And I keep staring at the Extracranial course figures that are there - just not sure what to do with them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anatomyczar (talk • contribs) 14:58, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to worry. If we are going to have a section about embryological development, we normally put that in the anatomy / structure section (WP:MEDMOS#Anatomy), however if we're just going to talk about the columns then we can put that into either the general 'history' section or something like a 'historical concepts' section. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

edit box

Tom:

I didn't know that. I will use the box. Thanks and thanks for the support. Wikipedia anatomy will be my retirement project. I am trying to recruit other anatomists. I have an editorial about Wikipedia and Anatomy that will be published in Clinical Anatomy. If you send me an email address I will email you a pdf version. Anatomyczar (talk) 12:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template query

Hi Tom, wondered what was happening on the Ventricular system template - i added fourth ventricle recently as its absence is marked; it had been agreed to merge fourth ventricle with the ventricular system template but this has not happened. Is it waiting to be merged or been forgotten? Cheers --Iztwoz (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. I had it in my mind that it was already merged, but it obviously hasn't. It's now  Done. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

return

Sorry for the delay to your posts. I have had other projects to work on but now will return to the cranial nerve entries in Wiki. I already see that there is some minor editing to do at and I agree with you about brain and brain stem. Joel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.164.210.185 (talk) 12:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]