Talk:Computational anatomy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Articles for creation (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
Note icon
This article was accepted from this draft on 5 February 2016 by reviewer SwisterTwister (talk · contribs).
WikiProject Science (Rated B-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Anatomy (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article has been classified as relating to The field of anatomy.
 

some general editing tips[edit]

hi,

first i want to thank the people who spent the time to create this page. clearly you put a lot of time into it, and it shows with the 'meat' of the article having substantial references.

that being said, i think it is crucial we improve readability. one thing that comes to mind is the excessive usage of the term 'computational anatomy'. now, the usage is not wrong per-se, but effort needs to be made to substantially reduce the number of mentions.

i am going to try and do this myself, but i doubt i'll finish much. i feel this tip could really improve the readability of the article.

also, i found the mention of that Ulf guy's work (whoever the dude at Brown is) informative, but not enough for the lead. is it possible that we move it down to the history section?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.155.181 (talk) 01:31, 1 April 2016‎ (UTC)

someone make a paragraph for dr chomsky's work on computational linguistics[edit]

would like to slot it in as a third paragraph for the genesis section, please someone who is a fan of the field do it? i'm not familiar with it (i'm just getting familiar with this one!!)

thank you 174.3.155.181 (talk) 04:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Computational anatomy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:21, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

COI review[edit]

I have read through the article with an eye to assessing if there are major COI problems. While the prose is that of an expert or experts clearly excited about their field and some WP:PEACOCK words and prose could be toned down--pioneering, key, etc.--I don't see any major areas of non-neutrality or undue weight in the content or referencing. Spot checking some citations turned up no issues and there is a good breadth of authors and research groups cited in the article. Hence I will remove the COI tag.

If I have missed something, please feel free to revert and discuss on the talk page. --Mark viking (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2018 (UTC)