WikiProject Anatomy

Talk Page

Main page


Things To Do


Article alerts

Manual of Style


Bad photos[edit]

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:

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)[reply]

Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply] - have all the scalenus muscles except the minimus Claes Lindhardt (talk) 19:07, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply] have no picture yet Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply] also do not have a picture yet Claes Lindhardt (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply] , 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Same goes for and Claes Lindhardt (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Mathnerd314159 and Claes Lindhardt, images are super important to understanding anatomy so your work is appreciated :). When looking for images I generally start by hunting around in Wikicommons, because we can easily include those images (link here: [1]). Sometimes for less well known structures, they're not placed in the correct category on Wikicommons, so I have to be sneaky and look at anatomical images of things that area close by or of the area in general, with a hope that the structure will be labelled there. Hope that helps, Tom (LT) (talk) 23:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General problem with anatomy pictures

Wikipedia has a widespread general problem with many of its images showing aspects of gross anatomy, images which are featured on article pages on such topics: All too often, those pictures, even if they show some view that includes the structure that is the topic of the article, do not label the structure in question, or label it using a different name.

The problem is, if you do not already know the topic of the article, then you can't necessarily identify the structure in question in the picture even if it's technically (also) depicted in there. Of course, if you already know all about the structure, then you have no problem seeing it in the picture; it's right there. Alas, if you don't already know, then you can't! Ironically, readers who already know all about the structure don't really need to consult Wikipedia articles on it, so they're not even the primary audience.

This is an all-too-common human problem, where bad teachers with poor self-awareness or perhaps a poorly developed theory of mind do not seem to realise that what they know is not what everybody else knows. More empathy is required here – as are better labels. Put yourself in the reader's shoes: What do they know? Can they tell what they're looking at? Making up for such deficiencies in the image caption is better than nothing but also relatively insufficient. Just as an example of this problem (that's not fixed as of this writing): The Gerdy's tubercle article features an image, and while you could technically argue that what's shown in the picture includes Gerdy's tubercle, really your best bet of seeing a picture that actually shows you Gerdy's tubercle and points it out to you is to just search Google Images instead. That's not to knock Gray's Anatomy woodcuts or other old images, but really, if you want to use such a picture to point out a structure, then you need to edit the picture and upload a copy in which what you're actually trying to show is clearly labelled.
ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 11:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Explaining the Human Body" videos[edit]

explainer video about the thyroid

Hello! A public broadcaster from Germany, Deutsche Welle, just donated thirteen short English-language explainer videos about general physiology to Commons. You can find them at commons:Category:Creative Commons videos by Deutsche Welle. Do you think any of them could be used in an article? Thank you, --Gnom (talk) 11:51, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Human tooth[edit]

Human tooth has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Talus bone#Requested move 7 March 2024[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Talus bone#Requested move 7 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talkcontribs) 14:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]