: First of all, I don't think that a public lecture is ever the correct comparison.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a public lecture.  We have wikilinks, which allow a reader to go and access new information and terms, to find out more about the material and so on.  Readers can return to the material again and again, as they like. As an encyclopedia, we also have a policy of no original research, while a public lecture by a scientist would be expected to include the results of his or her latest original research, and also have policies on verifiability and sourcing that cannot be met during a lecture. So, I think the public lecture comparison is completely off here.  But, second of all, even if we were to use that standard, your argument that the imaging work should not be included would not go through.  As you mentioned, I've just seen a public lecture by Ramachandran, less than one week ago, and in that lecture, he *did* talk about the imaging work, as part of his overall presentation that included discussion of our behavioral studies, of other cutting edge research coming out of his lab, and the work on metaphor and so on.