Talk:Cerebrum

This page should properly receive the redirect from cerebrum.

There's an accuracy dispute tag that's been here since early March, but absolutely no indication of what the dispute is over or that there's any work being done to resolve it. I'm removing it. Bryan 04:18, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"...cerebrum to thalamic nuclei and to other regions of the brainstem." This is gramatically incorrect unless the author means to include the Thalamus in the Brainstem. Some would, but the separateness of the Thalamic nuclei and their cortical complements is an illusion of anatomy. Inclusion of the Thalamus in reference to that thing called the brain 'Stem' is an antiquity, at best, ought to be abandoned, and usually is. tombronson@yahoo.com 7:32 6/17/05

Thanks for the cleanup

Hey! Thanks for cleaning up my artciel, i was going to add references, but i just wanted to make sure that all the relevant information was added. So, thanks for beating me to it!

I'll be trying to get some book references shortly, and there will be more information added for expansion, but until then, thanks to ye who beat me to it! *giggles* (JessicaX 08:13, 27 September 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Absolutely jumpstarted the article

Hey guys, i've got 18 books, free time, and my science cap is on. I'm going to do MAJOR edits on this article, the majority of information i'm adding does not come close :D.

Thanks! (Jessica(Succeeded) 20:55, 7 October 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Does this really need to be a stub?

It looks reasonably comprehensive to me. Weebs 09:30, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it does not need to be. It's been fixed. semiconscious (talk · home) 21:38, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted text

I deleted this from the end of the first sentence of the intro, "..., which some groups would class as unique features that make humans different from other species." Reason: weasel words, "some groups." Which groups? Groups of scientists, clergymen, Hollywood actors? --TheLimbicOne(talk) 13:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

image consistency

There are at least three different images that are used to show the relationships various lobes of the cerebrum. There's which is used on the Temporal and Occipital lobe pages, , which is used on the Parietal and Frontal lobe pages, and on this page.

Wouldn't it a better if one of these images was selected and used across all five pages? It would make for more visual consistency across them. Yvain 13:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would support that. Of the three, I like the middle one the best. --Arcadian 14:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Gray's image is nice. I've updated the lobe pages to use it. --David Iberri (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apoptosis details - do they belong here?

Isn't that information on the morphological effects of apoptosis general to most tissues and cell types? You know - the membrane blebbage, pyknosis, etc. Does it really belong on a telencephalon page? 130.91.11.117 13:30, 9 August 2006

This struck me as odd too, wanted to ask the same question. --CopperKettle 07:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dorsal and ventral telencephalon

Stumbled upon this sentence: "The telencephalon is subdivided into dorsal (pallial) and ventral (subpallial) territories, which give rise to the cerebral cortex and the underlying basal ganglia, respectively. " Should this information be included in the article? --CopperKettle 07:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, in the "avian pallium" article, there is also a mention of dorsal and ventral telencephalon subdivisions:

In the anatomy of animals, an avian pallium is the dorsal telencephalon of a bird's brain. The subpallium is the ventral telencephalon.

--CopperKettle 11:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]