Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anatomy

WikiProject Anatomy Talk Page
Main page	Discussion	Things To Do	Tools	Article alerts	Manual of Style	Resources

Requested move at Talk:Muscle tissue#Requested move 19 April 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muscle tissue#Requested move 19 April 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – MaterialWorks 21:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Kidney#Requested move 3 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kidney#Requested move 3 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 21:34, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Bad photos

I and @Claes Lindhardt have been working on the List of skeletal muscles of the human body and it has become clear that several of the muscles have "reused" images or are just scans of Gray's Anatomy 20th edition that do not really explain what the muscle is. For example, just for the head muscles:

• Orbicularis oculi muscle - does not show parts
• Depressor supercilii muscle - just reuses obicularis oculi image
• Temporoparietalis muscle - image but muscle is not even labeled
• Levator labii superioris alaeque nasi muscle - labelled under a different name and the arrow is not even pointing at the right muscle
• Transverse muscle of the chin - identical pictures to Depressor anguli oris muscle
• Thyroarytenoid muscle - doesn't label parts

I'm not really an illustrator, so what is the best way to go about fixing these? Mathnerd314159 (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

• Articularis genus muscle - ist a picture of a bone with the muscle attachment rather then the muscle itself

Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalene_muscles - have all the scalenus muscles except the minimus Claes Lindhardt (talk) 19:07, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interspinales_muscles have no picture yet Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subcostalis_muscle also do not have a picture yet Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coccygeus_muscle , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levator_ani also seems to be using the same primary pictures. There is a lot of articles using the same picture where both muscles are likely visable but not marked. This might not be a major issue, but it would be very neat to also have resolved. Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

puboperinealis, pterygoideus proprius, Muscle of terminal notch, ceratocricoideus and puboprostaticus (males) / pubovaginalis (females) are also still missing pictures Claes Lindhardt (talk) 22:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Same goes for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triceps and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articularis_cubiti_muscle Claes Lindhardt (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Guideline on Multiple muslces in one article

Sometimes there is a lot of muscles covered in one article and sometimes each muscle get thier article, would it make sense to make a kind of guideline on when what makes sense? Claes Lindhardt (talk) 20:50, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@Claes Lindhardt great question. The main guideline is at WP:MEDMOS and the general notability guidelines (WP:NOTABILITY as well as WP:SPLIT and WP:MERGE) tend to influence whether subjects are covered separately or on the same page. If you can identify a group you think need attention I'd be happy to help out by having a look with you or working with you to propose a guideline on this. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 17:50, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Harej, another useful project of yours. Would it be possible to run a once-off report? I am not sure we could sustain regular reports but it would be interesting to have a look at. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)