Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Neuroscience: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Add topic

Revision as of 02:21, 9 October 2019 edit Lowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs) Bots, Template editors 2,235,014 edits m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Neuroscience/Archive 6) (bot ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 22:45, 26 September 2024 edit undo WhatamIdoing (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 119,264 edits →‎Please check your priority ratings: Reply Tag: Reply
(87 intermediate revisions by 42 users not shown)
Line 8: }} {{talkheader}} {{WikiProject banner shell\| {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used\|link=Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-02-26/WikiProject report\|writer=[[ User: Mabeenot\|Mabeenot]]\|\|day=26\|month=February\|year=2014}}▼ {{WikiProject Neuroscience}} }} ▲{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/~~WikiProject~~Templates/Signpost ~~used~~article link for WikiProjects\|link=Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-02-26/WikiProject report\|writer=[[ User: Mabeenot\|Mabeenot]]\|\|day=26\|month=February\|year=2014}} {{archivebox\|auto=yes\|search=yes}} == A tool to monitor and improve images in this Wikiproject == ~~== A possible Science/STEM User Group ==~~ Hi there! I am not part of this Wikiproject, but I am a Wikigraphist. I am interested in improving Wikipedia’s visual content and I built a tool that could help detect visual gaps in Wikiprojects. I called it [[User:MingoBerlingo/Visual content assessment tool\|Visual Content Assessment Tool]], or simply VCAT. There's a discussion about a possible User Group for STEM over at [[Meta:Talk:STEM_Wiki_User_Group]]. The idea would be to help coordinate, collaborate and network cross-subject, cross-wiki and cross-language to share experience and resources that may be valuable to the relevant wikiprojects. Current discussion includes preferred scope and structure. [[User:Evolution and evolvability\|T.Shafee(Evo<small>&</small>Evo)]]<sup>[[User talk:Evolution and evolvability\|talk]]</sup> 03:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC) A working version of VCAT with data for Wikiproject Neuroscience already extracted by me on 26/07/2023 can be found at [https://aquets.github.io/VCAT-dashboard/#/dashboard?data=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Aquets/VCAT-data-extractor/main/Examples/wp_Neuroscience.json VCAT-dashboard]. You can always extract fresh data for any Wikiproject using the [https://aquets.github.io/VCAT-dashboard/#/extraction extraction tool], a command line tool I created for this purpose. ~~== need feedback ==~~ Some of the actions you can do with this tool are: Please chime in at [[Talk:Hearing#Add new section]]. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman\|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman\|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 02:02, 15 June 2019 (UTC) * Monitoring the visual content coverage in a Wikiproject ~~== Are [[Spinal neuron]] and [[Spinal interneuron]] distinct? ==~~ * Detecting articles needing images (eg. articles without images) * Detecting low resolution images to improve (eg. raster diagrams to be vectorized) Then you can ask for image creation or vectorization on the Graphics Lab. I would do a proposed merge, but it looks like neither article has gotten much editing traffic in the past year. Is there some subtle difference between these two classes of neuron, or are they two names for the same thing? ―Thanks, [[User:Vahurzpu\|Vahurzpu]] ([[User talk:Vahurzpu\|talk]]) 02:00, 28 June 2019 (UTC) :[[Interneuron]]s are a subset of neurons, so all interneurons are also neurons, but not all neurons are interneurons. So they ''are'' distinct. But that doesn't mean that these pages couldn't be merged. Looking just now at [[spinal neuron]], it's kind of embarrassing. --[[User:Tryptofish\|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish\|talk]]) 20:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC) What do you think? Could it be a useful tool? ~~== Portal MfD ==~~ [[User:MingoBerlingo\|MingoBerlingo]] ([[User talk:MingoBerlingo\|talk]]) == Nicolelis Lab Series == ~~FYI: [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Neuroscience]]. --[[User:Tryptofish\|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish\|talk]]) 20:27, 12 July 2019 (UTC)~~ The [[Miguel Nicolelis]] Lab published, for free, two volumes of their neuroscience work. I saw that some of them are under a Wikisource friendly CC license, but I'm not sure if it applies to all of them: ~~== [[Digital media use and mental health]] FA nom ==~~ Hello! I was wondering if any members of the WikiProject could kindly [[wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Digital media use and mental health/archive1\|take a look at the review for this article that I nominated]]. It has a neuroscience section out of interest. With many kind thanks --'''<span style="font-size:90%;font-family:courier">[[User:E.3\|<span style="color:#DB2E16">[E.3]</span>]][[User talk:E.3\|<span style="color:#FF9933">[chat2]</span>]][[Special:Contributions/E.3\|<span style="color:#FF7133">[me]</span>]]</span>''' 13:51, 12 September 2019 (UTC) * {{Cite book \|url=https://issuu.com/mnicolelis/docs/nicolelis_labs_series_vol_1 \|title=20 Years of Brain-Machine Interface \|volume=1 \|page=452}} ~~== [[Selfish brain theory]] ==~~ * {{Cite book \|url=https://issuu.com/mnicolelis/docs/nicolelis_labs_series_vol_2 \|title=20 Years of Brain-Machine Interface Research \|volume=2 \|page=436}} Thanks, [[User:Erick Soares3\|Erick Soares3]] ([[User talk:Erick Soares3\|talk]]) 23:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC) Perhaps I'm mistaken, but this looks rather wacky to me. Perhaps somebody here can have a look? It has been at AFD in 2011, but criteria have become more stringent, I feel, so another AfD may be called for. --[[User:Randykitty\|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty\|talk]]) 16:49, 13 September 2019 (UTC) : Don't anthropomorphize neural homeostasis mechanisms; they hate that. More seriously, the article looks essay-like with a lot of synthesis and few sources outside Peters' group using this concept. [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4419-7210-1_25 This chapter] might be secondary, but I haven't dug deep. I am dubious about notability. One alternative might be to redirect/smerge to [[Achim Peters]], which has a summary of the theory. --<code>{{u\|[[User:Mark viking\|Mark viking]]}} {[[User talk:Mark viking\|Talk]]}</code> 21:10, 13 September 2019 (UTC) :New article: [[Walk Again Project]]. [[User:Erick Soares3\|Erick Soares3]] ([[User talk:Erick Soares3\|talk]]) 17:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC) ::Yikes, what a lousy article! It's also badly written and formatted, in addition to being promotional and POV. I'd support just making it a redirect to the Peters page (which can be done without going through an AfD). --[[User:Tryptofish\|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish\|talk]]) 22:32, 13 September 2019 (UTC) :::Redirecting is indeed a good idea, I think. I'll be BOLD and go ahed, let's see whether it stands. Meanwhile, the [[Achim Peters]] artyicle can use some attention, too... --[[User:Randykitty\|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty\|talk]]) 15:27, 14 September 2019 (UTC) == Interest in weighing in on Polyvagal theory? == I’m posting here because I think this topic could be interesting to members of this WikiProject. Currently there’s a discussion at [[Talk:Polyvagal theory #Discussion: representation of one author’s viewpoint]] regarding the undue weight given to a critical minority opinion. [[User:Ian Oelsner\|Ian Oelsner]] ([[User talk:Ian Oelsner\|talk]]) 22:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC) == Good article reassessment for [[Long-term potentiation]] == [[Long-term potentiation]] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the [[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Long-term potentiation/1\|reassessment page]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. [[User:Z1720\|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720\|talk]]) 04:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC) == Request to merge [[Frisson]] into [[Goose bumps]] == I have noticed that these two articles talk about the same thing. I have created a proposal on [[Goose bumps]]'s talk page to discuss a merger. [[Special:Contributions/80.0.166.171\|80.0.166.171]] ([[User talk:80.0.166.171\|talk]]) 01:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC) == Requested move at [[Talk:Neuromorphic engineering#Requested move 24 August 2024]] == [[File:Information.svg\|30px\|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Neuromorphic engineering#Requested move 24 August 2024]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:RodRabelo7\|RodRabelo7]] ([[User talk:RodRabelo7\|talk]]) 01:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC) == Please check your priority ratings == An editor first labeled [[Legality of cannabis]] as top-importance for this group, and after I removed the rating, has [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Legality_of_cannabis&diff=prev&oldid=1247813728 changed it] to high-importance. Please decide for yourselves how you'd like to have it assessed. I've seen a couple of editors "upgrade" their favorite subjects, perhaps in the mistaken belief that this will result in more editors working on the articles. I specifically suggest taking a look at what's in [[:Category:Top-importance neuroscience articles]] ([[CLARITY]]? [[Hebbian theory]]? [[Tractography]]?) and [[:Category:High-importance neuroscience articles]] to see whether it reflects your group's goals and preferences. [[User:WhatamIdoing\|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing\|talk]]) 04:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC) :Thanks for the note. I changed it down to low for neuro. I don't mind leaving it at high for pharmacology. As for checking the other ratings, I'll leave that to other editors. --[[User:Tryptofish\|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish\|talk]]) 21:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC) ::WPMED set a standard years ago of 100 top-priority and 1,000 high-priority articles. The high-priority group has crept up a bit over the years. I glanced through about half the list, fixed some obvious errors, and posted a list of some others for discussion. I'll probably to the same for the rest of the list later. I thought it might be easier if one person organized it. If everyone has a look at "some", there's a risk that we'll all carefully review the articles at the start of the alphabet and nobody will look at the ones towards the end. [[User:WhatamIdoing\|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing\|talk]]) 22:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)