This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Agreed - In the form the articles are in now, they would greatly benefit from this, and if they were to be split again it is much easier to see what content is available on Wikipedia so as not to duplicate everything like it is now. CFCF (talk) 11:40, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
I have completed the merge between the article human anatomy and here. The content was already substantially duplicated here, but I have preserved the majority of text and images. The remainder of the article duplicates, but in a truncated form, the list provided at Outline of human anatomy, so I have provided a link in the see also section to that page. --LT910001 (talk) 23:40, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Can we get you to ask for help as the merger was not done properly - as per WP:MERGETEXT -- Moxy (talk) 16:05, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
. . . it is unnecessary nudity. Tito☸Dutta 10:48, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't see how a picture of two human bodies (one male and one female) is "unnecessary" on an article about the human body. And it makes more sense if the bodies are naked: clothes don't have anything to do with the article topic or any content in it. WP:CENSOR - not liking pictures of naked bodies or potentially objectionable material is not a reason to remove the picture.Bilorv (talk) 13:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
That may be true, but those are some un-representative people. Weird lookin' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 05:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes. To begin with, they are so extremely clean-shaven in different parts, that you would almost suspect them of being US WASPs:-). If the idea is to illustrate humans as biological beings, more naturally looking people might be better; while if you take dominating culture features into account, they actually ought to be clad. JoergenB (talk) 18:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
These would support between 5 and 5 1/2 litres. Also note there is a difference between blood and interstitial fluid (which is between cells). Please feel free to improve the article by adding these sources (and more while you're at it!). Lastly, the final source is probably not as reliable as the other sources, which are textbooks. --Tom (LT) (talk) 02:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Many thanks for the sources! --Spyder212 (talk) 02:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)