Talk:Inferior temporal gyrus
|WikiProject Anatomy||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Neuroscience||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
We are a group of three Middlebury College students in an Introduction to Neuroscience course who are going to be creating/editing the page for the Inferior Temporal Cortex. We are going to be making a lot of changes from now through December. We will be looking into its structure, functions, and also disorders amongst other things. Please message us with any questions or relevant information.
Hi, My name is Adam. I am a student at Middlebury College. I am working along two other classmates for our Introduction to Neuroscience Class. We have been assigned to work on a topic of our choosing relating to Neuroscience. We have done some research into the Inferior Temporal Gyrus and we will post these changes into the sandbox of the Inferior Temporal Gyrus wikipedia page. We will not delete anything that is already on the page. Please let myself and my two other classmates who will also add information to the page if there are any problems or issues that need to be addressed, as well as any questions regarding our work.
We have uploaded what we have written so far. We are having some difficulty with the formatting of the page as well as with citations and finding more information for content, but will work on refining and cleaning it up this week. Please comment with any questions about the topic or information that you would like to know.
Peer Review from NSCI 0100
Hi Guys! Nice article! I think one easy way to improve your article is to fix all of the red links. In the first paragraph alone there are two, which seem like they can be easily fixed. "Inferior sulcus" could refer to several articles according to a quick search, but I don't think it would be that difficult to specify which inferior sulcus you refer to. With the "inferior occipital gyrus," it seems there is no Wikipedia article to link to, so it's a bit weird to link to nothing. You also have a couple of  brackets, and I'm wondering if those are fixable or not (as in, is there an article you can cite for the information?). The first section ("Inferior Temporal Gyrus") is a bit a redundant at times with the introduction. The information on where it is located, for example, is already present earlier in the article. The article could be made more concise by editing this section for redundancies. The information is also somewhat repeated in the next section ("Anatomy"). In fact, the first two major sections, "Inferior Temporal Gyrus" and "Anatomy of the Inferior Temporal Gyrus" are quite repetitive. I think the article could be improved by consolidating the information into one section. In the next section, "Receiving Information" you have written "see two-streams hypothesis" in parentheses. From my understanding, links for greater understanding of a related topic go at the bottom of the article in the "See Also" section. Your information on disorders stemming from damage to the IT Cortex is great, particularly the section on prosopagnosia. I also really like your section on "Further Research and Unknowns." Since so much of neuroscience is still being researched, it is nice that you noted that for readers who might think your topic covered everything that will ever be known on the subject. I appreciate when people recognize the current limits of understanding, yet still manage to foreshadow future research. Overall, great page. It's extremely informative. Good luck!
This is an incredibly fascinating and in-depth article. At the beginning of the article, you'll want to make the corrections where it says citation needed. In Addition, perhaps just making the word “sulcus” a wiki link would repair the red marking, as it appears under the first section . In the last sentence of the Inferior Temporal Gyrus section, it seems that you meant to say "possibly", rather than, “possible explain the IT cortex’s relation to memory.” In the section titled “Object Recognition”, it would help to specify the kind of understanding you are referring to when stating that the regions within the ITC must work together and in conjuction with the hippocampus in order to, “create an array of understanding of the physical world”. What kind of understanding is this—perceptual or sensation-related? Perhaps you could be more clear with the wording. Also, you might want to create a wikilink for necropsy, in the last paragraph of the Prosopagnosia section.
I think the breadth of the information covered is really impressive, but some examples seem extraneous such as specific references to personal cases as they appear in the later disorder sections, such as the Prosopagnosia section. Lastly, It would be great to see works cited in the last section on "Further Research and Unknowns," so that the reader may follow up on these studies you briefly mention. Great job, overall.Vrodriguez360 (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Response to JoshBerlowitz
Hey Josh, Thank you for your comment! Your points on looking into further citations and "red links" include sections that were here previous to our additions to the article but we will look into them nonetheless. On the redundancy issue, we did not feel comfortable deleting previously existing sections... We will look into the issue in our own sections though! AdamKohutnicki
Response to JoshBerlowitz and Vrodriguez360
Thank you both for the insightful comments. Josh, the part relevant to my contribution is the two streams hypothesis and I will move it down as per your recommendation. V, I will work on specifying understanding of the physical world that comes from the cooperation between the inferior temporal gyrus and other gyri and the hippocampus. Thank you both very much! Jyangmidd (talk) 06:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi! This article was extremely informative and really hit all of the key points. In the section "Anatomy of Inferior Temporal Gyrus" I think it would be helpful to simplify some of the sentences because I found myself at one point focusing on all of scientific terms and didn't truly grasp the sentence. For example, in the sentence "When looking at the brain laterally - that is from the side and looking at the surface of the temporal lobe -"...I think you could eliminate the explanation of what it means to have a lateral view of the brain. In the section "Receiving Information", I think you did a great job summarizing the very complex concept of vision; it was easy to read and provided me with more information to help me better understand the job of the Inferior Temporal Gyrus. I really enjoyed the section "Disorders Associated with Damage to IT cortex" because after reading all of the complicated anatomy and functions of the Inferior Temporal Gyrus, it is nice to see what happens when it does not function properly and presents the reader with its importance. My last suggestion is that in the section "Single-cell function in the Inferior Temporal Gyrus" is to maybe but some footnotes in because it seems that you refer to recent research but do not have a source for the reader to use to get to that research article. Overall I learned a lot personally and underestimated how significant one gyrus is to visual recognition. Great job! Jwardwell6 (talk) 02:09, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Response to Jwardwell6
Hey Jwardwell6, Thanks for the feedback! We will look into simplifying some of the sections you identified as vague/difficult to understand. Also, for the issues of footnoting the "Single-cell function in the Inferior Temporal Gyrus" section, I will look into hyperlinking the actual research article. Thanks again! AdamKohutnicki
From August H (talk) 2:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey fellas! Good work on this article; you did a snazzy job of revealing what the inferior temporal gyrus is, what its roles are, and how it relates to other parts of the brain. The Object Recognition and the Disorders sections are especially well done. Below are my suggestions.
Anatomy: The opening sentence is dense, and full of information about the placement of ITG relative to other parts of the brain. I recommend removing it, and providing that information in the Anatomy subsection. Furthermore, I would make the anatomy subsection the first subsection, and in it, include a bullet-point list defining all of the other anatomical structures and their relationship with the ITG. This should provide a great deal of clarification; as it stands now, a number of similar-sounding anatomical terms are used very frequently, and without a clear bullet-point list to reference, it is hard for the reader to reference all of them and to understand what they all mean.
Visual Processing Subsection: I don't see a reason to have a subsection called "The Inferior Temporal Gyrus" in an article titled "Inferior Temporal Gyrus." Since most of the subsection deals with visual processing, I recommend giving it a new title related to visual processing, and then taking the information from the first sentence, which is unrelated to visual processing, and moving it into your introduction. There are also a number of anatomical points made in this subsection that are very similar to points made in the Anatomy subsection. I would put all of the information related to visual processing (esp. info from the second paragraph of the Anatomy subsection) in a visual processing subsection. I would also fuse the text from the "receiving information" subsection and the "how it works" subsection into this subsection. By putting it all in one place, you will provide a single clear description of its role in visual processing, instead of having what you have know, which is essentially information about visual processing scattered in large chunks across three seconds. Doing this will also enable to you eliminate the repetition of visual-system-related information that your article currently has. If you're afraid that putting all of this information under one subsection will result in a large block of text, I suggest breaking it down into sub-subsections.
Naming the Inferior Temporal Gyrus: The article repeatedly cycles between multiple terms for the structure of which you speak, including "the IT cortex," "the inferior temporal gyrus," "the inferior temporal cortex," and "the ITC." While I think you should inform the reader at some point, as you do, that the structure is referred to by all these names, I think you should pick one of them for use throughout the rest of your article, or perhaps use the acronym ITG. This way, your article will be more consistent, and it will be clear to the reader that you're referring to the Inferior Temporal Gyrus each time you do so - it's much easier to keep track of one name than three. There are also currently instances in which you have mis-named the structure; for example, in the subsection titled "The Inferior Temporal Gyrus," you refer to it as the "IT" at one point, instead of the "IT cortex."
Word Choice: In the first sentence, I recommend replacing "placed" with "located." In the beginning of the second paragraph, I recommend replacing "an array" with "a comprehensive understanding"
Capitalization/Punctuation/Tense: In the second sentence and the last sentence of the Cerebral Achromatopsia subsection, the term "Cerebral Achromatopsia" should be lower-case. In the fourth sentence of the subsection, there should be a period after "al". And in the last sentence of the subsection, "includes" should be "include."
Wording: In the first paragraph, I suggest replacing "…is connected behind with the inferior occipital gyrus" with "…is connected to the inferior occipital gyrus." The first part of the last sentence in the Inferior Temporal Gyrus subsection needs to be altered. The subject is "The IT cortex's neurological significance," but the second verb-object combination following it is, "has been found to be a vital area…" The neurological significance is not a vital area; the cortex itself is. Furthermore, in the second sentence of the Anatomy of Inferior Temporal Gyrus subsection, you should rephrase it to say "The IT cortex of humans is more complex than that of their primate relatives," because it appears to be currently saying that the human IT cortex is more complex than primates, which doesn't make sense. And in the fourth sentence, I'd replace "the brain" with "the surface of the temporal lobe laterally" and then remove "and looking at the surface of the temporal lobe." And in the sixth sentence, I'd reword the first part of the sentence to say, "Viewing the brain ventrally - looking down at the brain from above - reveals that the…"
Hey August, Thanks for the feedback! You really went above and beyond giving us some pointers and issues you've identified! I will definitely try to condense and simplify the anatomy section that you've identified. Also, you are absolutely correct about the naming/consistency of the structure (inferior temporal gyrus) in question: we will definitely look into your suggestions. Thanks! AdamKohutnicki
August, Thank you so much for all of the great advice, it is really very helpful. Much of our organization and formatting is based off of our combining of individually contributed parts, but you make excellent points and we will work to meld them together into cohesive sections that are most beneficial to the reading of the page. We will also clean up the grammar and other comments you addressed. Appreciate it! Jyangmidd (talk) 06:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
The page looks great guys! I only have a few suggestions because I think you guys have done a really nice job outlining such a large amount of information on the inferior temporal gyrus. I would introduce your topic with more general ideas, to give a broader understanding of what the inferior temporal gyrus does and where it is located in the brain. I think if you were to start the introduction with the information you put towards the bottom of the paragraph about the function of the inferior temporal gyrus it would be very helpful. The first sentence under the subsection "The Inferior Temporal Gyrus" may be a good sentence to move to the introduction paragraph because it gives a more general concept as to where the inferior temporal gyrus is located without making things complicated from the start. If you feel you want to have your introduction with the same information it currently has, I might suggest you to break up the anatomy a bit because the wording can be difficult to understand. It also appears that there are some links not working in the introduction paragraph, but I'm not sure why. My last suggestion is that I feel the subsection "The Inferior Temporal Gyrus" could potentially be renamed to something else, such as "Overview" or "Background" seeing as your actual is titled "Inferior Temporal Gyrus." Overall, I think you guys did an awesome job with the page and I think anyone who reads it will get a lot of good, important information from it! Mjthibault (talk) 12:49, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
You all did a nice job of discussing the inferior temporal gyrus, its location in the brain, and its interaction with other structures and systems. I also thought that your language was highly appropriate for a Wikipedia page, free of informal/colloquial language. The numerous images used on the page itself I thought were especially useful tools to reinforce concepts introduced in the text, and also the section about further research and unknowns to acknowledge science's current limitations when it comes to the IT cortex. One suggestion is to change the subsection "Inferior Temporal Gyrus" because this is the title of the Wikipedia page. Also, while the images are very helpful, their placement can be improved. Perhaps move one of the brain diagrams to the "Anatomy of Inferior Temporal Gyrus" section the page, since it's helpful to visualize anatomy with a picture, in addition to clarity that comes with spacing out the four pictures squeezed together. Also, you should remove the internal link to the inferior occipital gyrus and the inferior sulcus in the first paragraph of the page since those pages don't exist (they're red). Other than these minor edits, I think you all did a wonderful job tackling the inferior temporal gyrus! Neuroeditor (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Response to Neuroeditor
Hello there, Thank you very much for the constructive advice, I am glad that you enjoyed the article and find it interesting overall. I am a big fan of the visuals also but will definitely work on their placement so as to allow the reader to get the most out of them. The first paragraph was information already on this page before we began adding to it and we didn't feel completely comfortable removing it, but we will definitely look into fixing up the citations/links. Thanks again! Jyangmidd (talk) 06:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)