lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Submucosal plexus

message: Is this correct? I found in some sources that submucous plexus is actually divided in two parts: inner submucous - which is called Meissner's plexus, which lays directly below muscularis mucosa, and Henle/Schabadasch plexus. In article it is written as synonym.
Sources: https://books.google.lv/books?id=qfsjKl-sct4C&pg=PA96&lpg=PA96&dq=henle+plexus+intestinal+nerve&source=bl&ots=UvD0wNp6dj&sig=5-p-T9B-FgtON02bi5EzsvZqlOA&hl=lv&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRnJjtxvLSAhVHjiwKHRbIDKAQ6AEIMDAD#v=onepage&q=henle%20plexus%20intestinal%20nerve&f=false
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1256735/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/38087267_Two_submucosal_nerve_plexus_in_human_intestines
--Kokomokoz (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Submucous plexus is not same as Meissner's plexus?
Talk:Corpuscles of Herbst

message: Who was Herbst, that the corpuscles are named for him? (I assume 'him') DS (talk) 13:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No English article yet on de:Gustav Herbst Shyamal (talk) 16:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Namesake?
Talk:Amygdalofugal pathway

message: Probably the template  should be applied to this article. But the template requires modification to include this articles. Can somebody intervene and evaluate the requirement and justification? DiptanshuTalk 03:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:Neural tracts 

message: This article is incomplete.
1. Quality of Information: 2.
What is here is well-referenced, but the page is clearly incomplete and has many blank sections.
2. Article size: 0.
Article is approximately half the minimum recommended size, and was posted after the deadline.
3. Readability: 0
Again, the contents are well-written and -referenced, but the page is only half-done.
4. Refs: 2
5. Links: 2
6. Responsive to comments: N/A, no comments posted on talk page.
7. Formatting: 1
Formatting is fine, but there is far too little of it.
8. Writing: 1
The writing is fine, but there is far too little of it.
9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2
10. Outstanding?: 0
Incomplete.
_______________
Total:      10 out of 20.
Anishpotnis (talk) 20:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia Article Peer Review - Anish Potnis 
Talk:Islands of Calleja

message: The article says that the Islands of Calleja are within the ventral striatum (which are part of the basal ganglia). But the text goes on to say this is part of the limbic system. Is there a contradiction here?
93.97.32.155 (talk) 15:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the ventral striatum and ventral pallidum form the limbic part of the basal ganglia. Looie496 (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction
Talk:Dorsal column nuclei

message: It is just one of two nuclei - already covered on target page which would benefit from this addition and from additional merge of  Cuneate nucleus Iztwoz (talk) 21:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Gracile nucleus]] 

message: One of just two nuclei already covered on target page which would benefit from the addition of this page and also with the addition there of Gracile nucleus Iztwoz (talk) 21:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Cuneate nucleus]]
Talk:Allostatic load

message: I was looking at Allostasis and Allostatic load. Should these articles be combined? Emwhitaker (talk) 20:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combine Allostasis and Allostatic Load 

message: tons of OR and commentary.  use of "you" and "we" etc.  Needs very careful review to remove all the gunk. Jytdog (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full of problems 

message: Some please edit the opening few paragraphs to remove obviousl redundant sentences.
I really like this article but the editing makes Wikipedia look bad. RRTripp10 (talk) 08:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The intro (or lede) is a summary of the article. It should contain info that is redundant in the later part of the article. – The Grid (talk)  16:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundantcy 

message: — Assignment last updated by BrownBoy1999 (talk) 04:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Neuroscience
Talk:Anterior perforated substance

message: Lead sentence says it's, "... behind the olfactory trigone, from which it is separated by the fissure prima.", but what IS the 'fissure prima'? Only references I could find were relating it to the cerebellum, with it being a transverse fissure separating the anterior and posterior cerebellar lobes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnderEducatedGeezer (talk • contribs) 02:18, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is 'fissure prima'?
Talk:Office of the Accountant of Court

message: While I am investigating the nature of the copyright of this section, I have removed it from the article to the Talk page:
The principal purpose of the Accountant of Court, also known as the Accountant of the Court of Session (see Court of Session), and his staff is to ensure that people appointed by the courts manage the estates under their charge in a proper manner. They also provide practical assistance, advice and guidance to appointees in carrying out their duties.
The Office supervises the actings of legal guardians appointed by the Courts to manage:
*the financial affairs of persons deemed incapable of looking after their own financial welfare 
*estates where there is a disagreement between interested parties 
*estates which become the property of children under the age of 16 years
-- Mais oui! 06:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note to Admin working on Speedy deletions: please note that after cutting out the above section, nothing currently remaining in the article is a copyvio. Please remove the speedy delete notice. Ta. -- Mais oui! 06:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immediate nomination for speedy deletion upon creation due to copyright query 
Talk:Inferior anal nerves

message: Hello. 
I am a member of WikiProject Anatomy, a Wikipedia wide project that maintains and improves articles that fall under the scope of anatomy. Since your article has fallen under our scope, I have placed the correct templates on this talk page for verification. Upon review of this article, I'd like to make a few points, as shown:
*Assess articles with class and importance factors
*Removed WP:MED tag, they do not cover anatomy
I'm glad this article could fall within our scope, and I hope to see it grow large! Many thanks! Renaissancee (talk) 21:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Assessment for [[WP:ANATOMY|WikiProject Anatomy]]
Talk:Fruitless (gene)

message: In case anybody is unclear about this gene, when mutated it makes male flies chase, court and vigorously attempt to mate with other males, and that is a scientific fact. Homosexual behavior is common in animals. Humans are not flies, and homosexual behavior in humans may or may not be influenced by genetics. Speciate 07:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Scientific fact is a dangerous combination of words. In fact, only some alleles of fru do as you say; others simply prevent courtship behavior. --aciel (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mutation
Talk:Diplegia

message: I am not sure what the difference between spastic diplegia and diplegia is. There are two wikipedia articles and on the diplegia page it says not to be confused with spastic diplegia. If they are the same then I suggest merging the articles. If they are not the same then maybe someone with more knowledge could add a note explaining the difference, as although written different, overall they appear to be much the same when reading.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infobleep (talk • contribs) 20:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge articles
Talk:Listener fatigue

message: The section on Asius's developments into possible mediation approaches seems like promotional material, and needs revision or removal. Ta
27.253.56.104 (talk) 13:36, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commercial content - membrane (Asius)

message: Hi - please read over WP:MEDRS.  This article has a lot of sourcing problems.  I'm sorry if your instructor didn't go over our medical sourcing standards, but Wikipedia doesn't allow the use of primary sources etc in articles about medicine, and greatly prefers the use of review articles published in the last decade unless no such sources are available.  I'm going to drop some cleanup tags on the page until the sourcing problems are addressed. Thanks, Kevin Gorman (talk) 00:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:MEDRS]] 

message: Hi students! The talk page of an article is for discussing the article, not for grading editor's contributions. You can use the editor's talk page for this. Lova Falk talk 19:24, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk page

message: This section is completely unverified and lacks credibility. I think this section needs to be entirely removed. W. M. Martínez (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Would prefer sources to be found. If none exist then it needs to disappear due to probable WP:OR  PriceDL (talk) 10:31, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Just removed the most outlandish subsection, however almost the entirety of the remainder is speculation. There's also the wider point of whether this article should address all listener fatigue, or only that in a musical context. --pmj (talk) 07:43, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section 'Causes' Should be Deleted 

message: I know exactly what causes this phenomenon and no, I have no sources to give you, so you'll just have to look it up and put two and two together, if so inclined. The hair cells in the ear actually have tiny muscles attached to them that oscillate 180 degrees out of phase at frequencies the brain wants to cancel out. This is how you are able to pick out the voice of one person in a crowded room in which many people are talking. It also is how the ear tries to mitigate sounds loud enough to cause damage. The length of time sounds are heard, the amplitudes, and the frequencies all contribute towards the micro-muscles literally becoming fatigued. 2600:1700:5DD0:3E40:54E2:CFD1:B5F1:4879 (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Simple Explanation for Ear Fatigue
Talk:Formula (mathematical logic)

message: Maybe this should be merged with Well formed formula? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.86.183.4  (talk • contribs)  06:20, 12 March 2007   (UTC)
:Possibly. In that case I would say well-formed formula should be merged here; this is the better title. --Trovatore 07:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, after looking at the WFF page, I'd say don't merge. That page seems to be about any string accepted by a formal grammar; this page is about a specific kind of WFF with a particular semantics. --Trovatore 07:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also opt for keeping the two articles distinct, for the same reason. --Dessources (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge q 

message: This claim:
:Two different strings of symbols may be tokens of the same formula. It is not necessary for the existence of a formula that there be any tokens of it.
Is simply incorrect. In mathematical logic, a formula is a specific kind of string of symbols. As a syntactical object, it is completely determined by the symbols that of which it is composed, so different strings are always different formulas. Moreover, it is impossible to have a syntactic object, such as a formula, which cannot be syntactically represented.  — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different strings are different formulas 

message: Is this article about formulas in arbitrary formal systems (like well-formed formula), or is it specifically about formulas in propositional and sentential logic? I plan to start working on expanding and improving this article as soon as I find an answer to that question. — Carl (CBM · talk) 21:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the subject of this article?
Talk:Hypogastric nerve

message: I need some help with contradictory source! One source says that the hypogastric nerve is made from T10 to L2. Another says that it is made from T12 to L3. Does anyone have any expert knowledge of this? Thanks! Bibeyjj (talk) 17:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spinal Nerve Roots
Talk:Endoneurium

message: Is the endoneurium a 'sheath', like a straw around a pencil for example, or a matrix, more like a glass of pudding with a bunch of pencils stuck into the pudding? (pencils representing axons in a nerve.) I ask because at a useful website about nerves, the New York School Of Regional Anesthesia (| NYSORA ) I read this: "The endoneurium (Figures 7 and 8) intimately surrounds Schwann cells and fills the space bounded externally by the perineurium." I'm referring to the phrase, 'fills the space bounded externally by the perineurium'.  And the pictures indicated do seem to show that it's a matrix of material. Pics are: https://www.nysora.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/05x07.jpg and https://www.nysora.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/05x08.jpg UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endoneurium: sheath or matrix?
Talk:General somatic afferent fibers

message: An anonymous editor just deleted
 	
Examples of nerves containing GSA fibers include the trigeminal nerve, the facial nerve, the glossopharyngeal nerve, and the vagus nerve. Mehta, Samir et al. Step-Up: A High-Yield, Systems-Based Review for the USMLE Step 1. Baltimore, MD: LWW, 2003. with no explanation. If you have some knowledge in this field and think it is valid, please reinsert it. Anthony (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Unexplained deletion
Talk:General somatic efferent fibers

message: Hello. 
I am a member of WikiProject Anatomy, a Wikipedia wide project that maintains and improves articles that fall under the scope of anatomy. Since your article has fallen under our scope, I have placed the correct templates on this talk page for verification. Upon review of this article, I'd like to make a few points, as shown:
*Assess articles with class and importance factors
*WP:MED template removed. They do not cover anatomy
I'm glad this article could fall within our scope, and I hope to see it grow large! Many thanks! Renaissancee (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Assessment for [[WP:ANATOMY|WikiProject Anatomy]]

message: An anonymous editor just deleted
 	
Examples of nerves that contain GSE fibers include the oculomotor nerve, the trochlear nerve, the abducens nerve, and the hypoglossal nerve. Mehta, Samir et al. Step-Up: A High-Yield, Systems-Based Review for the USMLE Step 1. Baltimore, MD: LWW, 2003. with no explanation. If you have some knowledge in this field and think it is valid, please reinsert it. Anthony (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Unexplained deletion
Talk:Inferior cervical cardiac nerve

message: Can anybody confirm that the Latin name for this nerve is nervus cardiacus inferior and not nervus cardiacus cervicalis inferior? I ask because the superior cardiac nerve and middle cardiac nerve are named nervus cardiacus cervicalis superior and nervus cardiacus cervicalis medius.
If anybody can confirm that a misstake have been made please changde the name in the infobox, add cervicalis under cardiac nerve, and press on this link: nervus cardiacus cervicalis inferior and copy/paste this redirect: #redirectInferior cardiac nerve .--JakobSteenberg (talk) 02:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Talk:Microneurography

message: Thanks everyone for all the input! Hyperlinks to other wikipedia articles that might give a reader without a scientific background some basic information, like the sympathetic nervous system, were added. Also, a picture was added from the Wikipedia Commons of the sympathetic nervous system; not the most specific picture relating to microneurography but there was not a picture of microneurographic imaging in the Commons. Links to the papers of some clinical trials that implemented microneurography were added to the page. The Introduction section was also moved to the very top of the page as suggested. KOskar (talk) 18:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: note

message: Looks good, your article is very detailed. A few suggestions: hyperlink to other Wikipedia pages throughout your article. Also, I think you should include right away in your introduction (first sentence above the outline) the purpose of this technique instead of saying what the technique involves. I think you can also do away with some of the background information about the types of fibers studied using this method; if you link to the page describing these methods there will be plenty of information. I'm also curious, what kind of clinical trials are using this technique? You mention this at the beginning of the "Implementing Microneurography" section. As for organization, I'd consider reorganizing the "Advantages" and "Disadvantages" so that you don't have as subsections "Advantages of Ultrasound Guidance" and "Disadvantages of Ultrasound Guidance." Overall, good work! Reedich (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Review

message: I thought that this article was very informative regarding the topic of microneurography. I particularly was interested in the methods used to research this particular field of neuroscience. For improvement, I think there should be more of an introduction into the article; you should summarize some of the information that you cover later in the article. Also, some of the terms on your page should be linked to other Wikipedia pages, as it gives some background knowledge of the subject to those who may be unfamiliar. I'd like to see inclusion of information from more resources in your final piece, maybe to add more information to the subsections in "Implementing Microneurography." Jsavarino (talk) 19:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Reviews
Talk:Complex cell

message: It is probably not the case that Complex Cells are simply above the hierarchy of Simple Cells, receiving their convergent receptive fields. Hamdev (talk) 17:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please feel free to fix the problems in the article if you can.  Regards, Looie496 (talk) 22:51, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Convergence
Talk:Gaviotas

message: — Assignment last updated by Raby Manon (talk) 14:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: HENV 680 Advanced Seminar in Environmental Science WINTER2023
Talk:Fixation (visual)

message: Article merged: See old talk-page here  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hphan1719 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: "In the absence of retinal jitter (a laboratory condition called retinal stabilization), the visual percept rapidly fades out and may even completely disappear under certain conditions (low contrast, absence of sharp edges, etc.)."
I have read a lot about this topic, and I am pretty confident that this sentence is very misleading. Even high contrast stimuli with sharp edges will (not just "may") fade and completely disappear quite quickly if the stabilization is good enough (perfect stabilization is almost impossible to achieve even today). Using an exceptionally good stabilization technique (but one that, for technical reasons, can only be used with certain special, and, I think, rather low contrast stimuli) Coppola & Purves (1996) found that percepts would disappear completely in less than a tenth of a second (much more quickly than in other experiments using poorer stabilization), but even Pritchard, Heron & Hebb (1960), using a much more primitive stabilization technique, but with high contrast, sharp edged stimuli (black and white drawings) found that the percepts would often quite rapidly disappear. In this case the percepts (or parts of them) tended to reappear after a little more time, but this is now thought to be due to slight shifts of teh image on the retina due to the imperfect stabilization. 
*Coppola, D. & Purves, D. (1996). The Extraordinarily Rapid Disappearance of Entoptic Images. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 93, 8001-8004.
*Pritchard R.M., Heron W., & Hebb D.O. (1960). Visual Perception Approached by the Method of Stabilized Images.  Canadian J. Psych., 14, 67-77.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Treharne (talk • contribs) 11:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Retinal Stabilization

message: I fixed some grammar issues throughout the article and clarified that the application of Brainstem Biometrics technology is monitoring anesthesia.
AleksNemo (talk) 01:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: General
Talk:Frontostriatal circuit

message: I, Trupesh Patel, will be working on expanding this stub until the end of December 2013 as part of my undergraduate class project for Neuroscience at Georgia Tech. Tpatel45 (talk) 21:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

message: 1. Quality of Information: 1
2. Article size: 0
3. Readability: 2
4. Refs: 1
5. Links: 2
6. Responsive to comments: 2
7. Formatting: 1 
8. Writing: 1
9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2
10. Outstanding?: 1
Total: 13 out of 20
Comments: The article size is too small and a lot more information needs to be added. The references sections needs to be updated as well. With a lot more detail, the article will be a informative read.
SindhujaPadmanabhan (talk) 15:23, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Article Critique (Applies to Last Version before November 19) 

message: Dershika Patel (talk) 17:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Article Critique (Applies to Last Version before November 19) 

message: 1. Quality of Information: 1
*The article could definitely be more informative...There isn't much here, yet.
2. Article size: 0 
*Article is <1/3 the size it should have been. 
*Please expand, some of the information was there already, authored by others.
3. Readability: 1
*It would be good to break up the longer sentences into multiple shorter sentences.
4. Refs: 1 
*Only 5 Citations out of 10.
5. Links: 2
*You have links but you could link to frontal eye fields (FEF) too. Some may not know what FEF are. I know it exists because my topic is supplementary eye fields.
6. Responsive to comments: 2
*Sure.
7. Formatting: 1
*Could do with adding some pictures, maybe a brain image with frontostriatal circuit areas highlighted. (With some reference areas also labeled.)
8. Writing: 1 
*Same comment as what Dershika said. 
9. Used real name or has real name on User TALK page: 2
*I am not sure, but maybe you have edited this page without being logged in, before?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaswatPanda (talk • contribs) 22:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Article Critique (Applies to Last Version before November 19) 

message: Sorry for writing an extra chapter about a simple typing error - I think that the word "lability" is meant, but it could also be "liability", so I didn't correct it because I don't want to correct it by the wrong word... --79.243.228.202 (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  emotional labiality (typo in chapter "orbital frontal circuits") 

message: Excoriation disorder cites laterality in the neurological causes of the disorder. This aspect is not cited within this page. Anacforcelli (talk) 02:04, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is a difference between the sides of the brain
Talk:Sample mean and covariance

message: Often I have disagreed with the "too technical" tag, but here it's appropriate. This article should get reorganized. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely agree. Rather than too technical, it is unnecessarily involved. The page should begin by discussing the sample mean of a scalar random variable. Txebixev (talk) 17:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too technical