Talk:Neuron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Neuron article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Neuroscience (Rated B-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the talk page. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance assessment scale WikiProject Biology Biology Portal Neuron is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. It is requested that a photograph or photographs be added to this article to improve its quality. Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject (Rated B-Class) MCB Portal This article is within the scope of the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject. To participate, visit the WikiProject for more information. The WikiProject's current monthly collaboration is focused on improving Restriction enzyme. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. Top This article is on a subject of Top-importance within molecular and cellular biology. Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · history · refresh · how to use this template) rated top as high school/SAT biology content - tameeria 14:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC) The article seems fairly complete to me, but I'm no expert on neurology. If the B rating seems wrong, please adjust. - tameeria 19:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
This article has an assessment summary page.

Archives

Archive 1

Contents 1 Some room for endocannabinoids? 2 This picture must go in this article 3 Law of Dynamic Polarization Described Backwards? 4 this article is to important to be so brief,, 5 Number of Neurons vs Synapses for humans 6 Reference/Bibliography related to adult neurogenesis 7 confusing numbers 8 a comprehensive one in simple english please?

[edit] Some room for endocannabinoids?

I'm no expert, but is this article appropriate for information regarding the endocannabinoid system? It's a chemical used by neurons, but I don't know enough about it to know if it should be classified as a neurotransmitter, or if it acts in another capacity, or if it isn't really germaine to this article. Well, if someone smarter than me knows, maybe you can let us know. Thanks. Rhetth 20:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This picture must go in this article

I'm no expert on wikianything, and I would go in and add this image directly, but I don't know how to do it and make it look decent. Here's the picture: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Complete_neuron_cell_diagram.svg It's a featured image, and it visualizes a couple dozen essentials about the nerve cell. I don't know why it's not already on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ornen (talk • contribs) 21:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the diagram is very useful. For now, I've added it at the end, but I wouldn't object to seeing it integrated earlier. --Arcadian 01:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Law of Dynamic Polarization Described Backwards?

In the section titled "The neuron doctrine", there is this text, "the Law of Dynamic Polarization, which states that neural transmission goes only in one direction, from dendrites toward axons". Shouldn't that be "from axons toward dendrites"?

Gruhl (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe you are right, it is backwards if it is reffering to communication BETWEEN two cells. If it is reffering to transmition WITH IN a cell, then it is correct; however, it is need of clarification. If no one proves that it is right the way it is writen, i'll change it in a couple of days. --Marvuglia (talk) 20:58, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Like "transmission of signals between neurons goes in one direction" ? X10 (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] this article is to important to be so brief,,

if some one could add sections for different types of neurons, ex.presynaptic. not really a type but still very important, also need the section as a link to other articles im working on thanks Roy Stanley (talk) 20:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Number of Neurons vs Synapses for humans

One part of the article says 100 billion total cells but then it later says 100 billion synapses. Which is right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.31.250.91 (talk) 03:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reference/Bibliography related to adult neurogenesis

maybe a little more serious and scientific than the cited ones: Gerd Kempermann: Adult neurogenesis: stem cells and neuronal development in the adult brain. Oxford University Press, New York 2006.

-- 89.247.127.232 (talk) 10:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] confusing numbers

the numbers of synapses in the human brain are hugely different between this artical and this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapse so witch one is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.4.149.231 (talk) 05:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] a comprehensive one in simple english please?

i'm not a person who study a lot about humans anatomy, but anyway all the explanations in the article and its associated ones are somehow not easily been captured to the common readers. i mean readers without scientific knowledge like me.

so, to enhance the interactions here between the science editors and the common readers, someone should put the simpler words for easy basic understandings, more direct approach & less scientific explanations that only among the specific group of scholars like scientists, medical field would understand. "e=mc^2", although it's a famous but somehow a notorious formula that doesn't mean everyone understand what does each of these variables do. i believe you got the ideas now. i think i gave my tips already for useful approach to wikipedia.

Xmlv (talk) 15:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)