601:
164:
120:
110:
36:
130:
424:
neglected topics is to increase the number of contributors. We have made several efforts to do that, but with limited success. Several university neuroscience classes have done
Knowledge (XXG)-editing projects, with valuable results for a number of topics, but our experience has been that they have limited value for the broad topics that are most important.
90:
140:
100:
701:== interdisciplinary science == Just curious about the statement that neuroscience is currently an interdisciplinary science. Doesn’t this statement not apply to most fields these days? Surely all sciences now rely on computer science and statistics to name just a couple? So is it only a matter of degree, or am I missing something? X
402:
Yes, absolutely a benefit. Unlike most academic fields, it's really in neuroscience's blood to be interdisciplinary. I can add that we get a lot of editing help from editors who are psychiatrists. For that matter, some of my most interesting editing experiences have come from working with editors who
564:
That's exactly right. We periodically get an influx of student editors through the
Education Program, and some of my happiest editing experiences have been interactions with student editors who decided that editing was fun. Too few students stick around after a class is over, and I wish that more of
423:
We don't have enough participation to think of dividing responsibility. Our strongest coverage is in (a) core neuroscience topics, and (b) pharmacology, i.e., drugs and the mechanisms that make them work. There are many articles that could benefit from contributions. Really the only way to improve
531:
Finding images is probably the greatest challenge for article-writing and has generally been my greatest frustration. The copyright rules make it difficult to find things that are usable, and
Knowledge (XXG)'s special rules are so baroque that you practically have to be a lawyer to know whether an
330:
Like Looie496, I'm a Ph.D. with a lot of experience as a professional neuroscientist in academia. Looie has always been the biggest contributor to the project, but I'd like to think I've added a lot, as a sort of "second-fiddle". In the real world, the field of neuroscience is, I think, one of the
435:
It is true that we don't have enough active editors, but dividing into reductive task forces also seems against the culture of the field. The nature of neuroscience is such that one needs knowledge across many branches to understand the context of a particular topic. For instance, a molecular
386:
have benefited from keen pharmacology editors. It is a bit presumptuous to declare that other disciplines could benefit from our input. Historically, there have been significant collaborations among computer scientists, neuroscientists, physicists and statisticians at conferences like
280:, the brain area that I worked on. I started editing it very tentatively, and then when nothing bad happened, I ended up doing more and more, until eventually the article was completely rewritten. I've contributed to most of the articles in this project --
552:
That's easy. We need contributors with enough knowledge of neuroscience topics to work on article-writing, and an interest in doing so. New contributors can help by working on whatever interests them. There is no difficulty in finding articles that need
182:
412:. Are all of these subdisciplines covered equally by Knowledge (XXG)? Why has WikiProject Neuroscience refrained from dividing responsibility for these fields with task forces? What can be done to improve neglected neuroscience topics?
681:
588:
579:
246:
630:
655:
650:
645:
640:
571:
76:
265:
What motivated you to join WikiProject
Neuroscience? Do you have an academic or professional background in neuroscience? Have you contributed to any of the project's Good or Featured Articles?
618:
344:
Has the interdisciplinary nature of the neuroscience field benefited or complicated your efforts? What other disciplines could benefit from collaborating with WikiProject
Neuroscience?
319:
for some years. I joined WP Neuroscience due to interest in the field, but am not a core member driving the project. I have only contributed to neuroscience GAs and FAs in minor ways.
520:
Is it difficult to find images suitable for neuroscience articles? What sorts of figures and photographs would be appropriate for articles about neurological concepts and conditions?
515:
It's easy to fall into the trap of writing as though one were writing for other scientists, rather than for the general public. I try, where I can, to make content more accessible.
612:
55:
44:
484:, are actually too detailed and would benefit from trimming. On the whole, the medicine-related articles are in the best shape. Other areas are hit-and-miss -- for example,
233:. The project began in September 2005 and grew to encompass 14 Featured and 16 Good Articles out of a mere 1,655 total articles. WikiProject Neuroscience maintains a list of
242:
625:
339:(a userbox and category). I wish we could get more editors in that way, but most academics either don't have the time to edit, or only want to make edits about themselves.
234:
775:
238:
469:
How detailed are
Knowledge (XXG)'s articles about neuroscience? Has it been challenging to write articles that are substantive yet accessible to the layperson?
532:
image will survive, or will just abruptly vanish at some point. Anyway, we are still lacking some very basic things, such as a good electron micrograph of a
21:
750:
745:
740:
382:, and sometimes discussions need to happen to determine which articles need to be held to a MEDMOS standard and which do not. Many of the articles on
735:
723:
276:
I have a Ph.D. in
Neuroscience, and have been maintaining WPNEURO since 2008. My first motivation was the poor condition of the article on the
217:
229:
444:
might seem the province of molecular neuroscience, but to understand why it is important, one would want to understand behavior of the
363:, etc.) tend to see a lot more activity than the more academic-related articles. We also have some beneficial overlap with Psychology.
730:
600:
49:
35:
17:
570:
Next week, we'll throw a life preserver to some floundering articles. Until then, save the world by reading our old reports in the
375:
335:
started an initiative to get more of its members to become editors here. A couple of us spoke at their convention, and I created
30:
Racking brains with neuroscience: This week, we found three Ph.D.s willing to give us a crash course on WikiProject
Neuroscience.
378:
have benefited this project. A complication with WP Medicine is that they have different standards for articles, in the form of
391:; I suspect that collaborations on articles of common interest among the respective WikiProjects could be of mutual benefit.
710:
336:
316:
191:
756:
449:
332:
706:
453:
383:
355:
I would say a benefit, primarily because of the overlap with medicine. Our medicine-related articles (
461:
356:
208:
195:
is underway, but you can still join and eliminate spelling and grammatical errors on
Knowledge (XXG)
312:
379:
93:
702:
677:
123:
533:
481:
437:
430:
369:
306:
254:
103:
559:
510:
397:
325:
258:
133:
445:
285:
216:
200:
Submit your project's news and announcements for next week's WikiProject Report at the
769:
547:
526:
493:
475:
457:
418:
360:
350:
289:
271:
250:
153:
186:
begins
Saturday. Be sure to sign up, have fun, and earn a barnstar. All are welcome.
480:
Some of our articles are detailed and comprehensive, many are not. A few, such as
409:
113:
143:
501:
485:
293:
277:
541:
What are the project's most urgent needs? How can a new contributor help today?
489:
297:
448:
in which it acts and to understand its impact, one would need to take an
441:
331:
most exciting areas of human investigation. A couple of years ago, the
227:
This week, we found three Ph.D.s willing to give us a crash course on
497:
281:
388:
54:
220:
599:
162:
34:
464:. Little in neuroscience can truly be studied in isolation.
693:
686:
666:
374:
I'll second that collaborations with editors active in
408:
The discipline of neuroscience has a wide variety of
691:If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
456:in the brain, how it affects behaviors such as the
8:
776:Knowledge (XXG) Signpost archives 2014-02
460:, and how it figures in diseases such as
183:Guild of Copy Editors March Backlog Drive
215:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) Signpost
694:
670:
70:
504:needs a lot of work. And so it goes.
29:
7:
56:
28:
676:These comments are automatically
138:
128:
118:
108:
98:
88:
71:Racking brains with neuroscience
687:add the page to your watchlist
1:
792:
337:Template:User Soc Neurosci
317:computational neuroscience
249:. We picked the brains of
223:animation of a human brain
711:23:18, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
450:integrative neuroscience
333:Society for Neuroscience
230:WikiProject Neuroscience
239:stub sorting initiative
684:. To follow comments,
604:
592:"WikiProject report" →
384:molecular neuroscience
300:are primarily my work.
224:
167:
39:
718:What do you think of
603:
496:is not good at all.
492:are pretty good, but
243:popular pages tracker
219:
166:
38:
724:Share your feedback.
680:from this article's
584:"WikiProject report"
500:is pretty good, but
452:approach to look at
376:WikiProject Medicine
462:Parkinson's disease
403:have schizophrenia.
357:Parkinson's disease
315:and have worked in
313:theoretical physics
671:Discuss this story
636:WikiProject report
605:
311:I have a Ph.D. in
225:
168:
68:WikiProject report
45:← Back to Contents
40:
695:purging the cache
50:View Latest Issue
783:
759:
698:
696:
690:
669:
631:Featured content
623:
615:
613:26 February 2014
608:
591:
583:
534:chemical synapse
482:action potential
438:neurotransmitter
209:WikiProject Desk
206:
174:WikiProject News
172:
169:
165:
156:
142:
141:
132:
131:
122:
121:
112:
111:
102:
101:
92:
91:
62:
60:
58:
57:26 February 2014
791:
790:
786:
785:
784:
782:
781:
780:
766:
765:
764:
763:
762:
761:
760:
755:
753:
748:
743:
738:
733:
726:
715:
714:
700:
692:
685:
674:
673:
667:+ Add a comment
665:
661:
660:
659:
656:Recent research
616:
611:
609:
606:
595:
594:
589:
586:
581:
446:neural circuits
214:
213:
212:
204:
198:
176:
175:
171:Your source for
170:
163:
161:
157:
151:
150:
149:
148:
139:
129:
119:
109:
99:
89:
83:
80:
69:
65:
63:
53:
52:
47:
41:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
789:
787:
779:
778:
768:
767:
754:
749:
744:
739:
734:
729:
728:
727:
717:
716:
713:
675:
672:
664:
663:
662:
658:
653:
651:Traffic report
648:
646:News and notes
643:
641:Special report
638:
633:
628:
622:
610:
598:
597:
596:
587:
578:
577:
576:
569:
567:
566:
555:
554:
543:
542:
538:
537:
522:
521:
517:
516:
506:
505:
471:
470:
466:
465:
426:
425:
414:
413:
405:
404:
393:
392:
365:
364:
346:
345:
341:
340:
321:
320:
302:
301:
286:nervous system
267:
266:
199:
197:
196:
187:
177:
173:
160:
159:
158:
147:
146:
136:
126:
116:
106:
96:
85:
84:
81:
75:
74:
73:
72:
67:
66:
64:
61:
48:
43:
42:
33:
32:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
788:
777:
774:
773:
771:
758:
752:
747:
742:
737:
732:
725:
721:
712:
708:
704:
697:
688:
683:
679:
668:
657:
654:
652:
649:
647:
644:
642:
639:
637:
634:
632:
629:
627:
624:
620:
614:
607:In this issue
602:
593:
585:
575:
573:
563:
561:
557:
556:
551:
549:
545:
544:
540:
539:
535:
530:
528:
524:
523:
519:
518:
514:
512:
508:
507:
503:
499:
495:
494:basal ganglia
491:
487:
483:
479:
477:
473:
472:
468:
467:
463:
459:
458:reward system
455:
454:where it acts
451:
447:
443:
439:
434:
432:
428:
427:
422:
420:
416:
415:
411:
407:
406:
401:
399:
395:
394:
390:
385:
381:
377:
373:
371:
367:
366:
362:
361:schizophrenia
358:
354:
352:
348:
347:
343:
342:
338:
334:
329:
327:
323:
322:
318:
314:
310:
308:
304:
303:
299:
295:
291:
290:consciousness
287:
283:
279:
275:
273:
269:
268:
264:
263:
262:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
231:
222:
218:
210:
203:
194:
193:
188:
185:
184:
179:
178:
155:
145:
137:
135:
127:
125:
117:
115:
107:
105:
97:
95:
87:
86:
78:
59:
51:
46:
37:
23:
19:
720:The Signpost
719:
703:Ottawahitech
635:
619:all comments
568:
558:
546:
525:
509:
474:
429:
417:
396:
368:
349:
324:
305:
270:
228:
226:
201:
192:Tyop Contest
190:
181:
757:Suggestions
678:transcluded
565:them would.
502:human brain
486:hippocampus
431:Mark viking
370:Mark viking
307:Mark viking
294:hippocampus
278:hippocampus
255:Mark viking
560:Tryptofish
511:Tryptofish
490:cerebellum
398:Tryptofish
326:Tryptofish
298:cerebellum
259:Tryptofish
235:open tasks
82:Share this
77:Contribute
22:2014-02-26
751:Subscribe
682:talk page
380:WP:MEDMOS
247:watchlist
770:Category
746:Newsroom
741:Archives
582:Previous
548:Looie496
527:Looie496
476:Looie496
442:dopamine
419:Looie496
410:branches
351:Looie496
272:Looie496
251:Looie496
245:, and a
202:Signpost
154:Mabeenot
124:LinkedIn
104:Facebook
20: |
572:archive
114:Twitter
296:, and
257:, and
134:Reddit
94:E-mail
736:About
626:Forum
553:work.
498:Brain
440:like
282:brain
16:<
731:Home
707:talk
590:Next
488:and
389:NIPS
241:, a
237:, a
189:The
180:The
144:Digg
221:MRI
152:By
79:—
772::
722:?
709:)
580:←
574:.
359:,
292:,
288:,
284:,
261:.
253:,
207:s
705:(
699:.
689:.
621:)
617:(
562::
550::
536:.
529::
513::
478::
433::
421::
400::
372::
353::
328::
309::
274::
211:.
205:'
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
