Physiology Mid‑importance

	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.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

Neuroscience Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience 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.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anatomy: Neuroanatomy Mid‑importance

	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.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to neuroanatomy.

Untitled

Re: criticism impartiality... I removed the "it was probably inevitable" and just stated the facts, is that OK now? 72.165.84.59 (talk) 18:39, 26 March 2011 (UTC) Porejide[reply]

Criticism

There's something very strange about a major criticism of this field being that it's named -omics. The first reference cited is some blog, where the writer says that the use of this suffix annoys him. There's no scientific content at all, as he himself acknowledges. Does such flimsy material belong in the criticism section? --Gargletheape (talk) 23:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translations

Greek: η δικτυωμική (from connectome = δικτύωμα) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:8282:F200:958A:17F3:1F81:DF60 (talk) 19:45, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Connectomics. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110819054616/http://kaboodle.nescent.org/?q=node%2F1943 to http://kaboodle.nescent.org/?q=node%2F1943

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 06:10, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]