Talk:Cranial nerves

Cranial nerves has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 26, 2014. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cranial nerves article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q: Why are cranial nerves referred to with a roman numeral after their name?

A: It is convention in much of medical and anatomical literature that cranial nerves are followed by their number. We follow that convention here.

Q: Why was my mnemonic removed?

A: A list of medical mnemonics exists where these can be recorded. Wikipedia is not a textbook (WP:NOTTEXTBOOK) and not a repository for such material (WP:NOTREPOSITORY).

Anatomy: Neuroanatomy Top‑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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to neuroanatomy.

Neuroscience Top‑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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Cranial nerves appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 May 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that twelve pairs of cranial nerves control facial expression, and transmit facial sensation and the special senses of taste, hearing, balance, vision, and smell?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/May.

Wikipedia

central and peripheral course

Cranial nerves do not have a central and peripheral course. Once in the brain, they are no longer cranial nerves. The nerves have intracranial and extrancranial courses. I am changing the text accordingly.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anatomyczar (talk • contribs) 13:34, 14 April 2015‎ (UTC)[reply]

raising shoulder and head turning (accessory nerve)

Damage to the accessory nerve causes ipsilateral, not contralateral, weakness to the trapezius. Similarly, damage to the ipsilateral nerve, if high, will definitely cause paralysis of the sternocleidomastoid as well. What is currently written is incorrect.

Why is "Function" discussed largely as pathology?

In the sections under 2 Function, the function of each nerve is discussed largely in terms of known pathologies. Is this how anatomical function is normally or primarily described? Is the emphasis on pathology a feature of medical literature as opposed to literature for a general audience?

I suspect that the knowledge of cranial nerve function might proceed largely from the knowledge of adverse physical conditions observed consistently in conjunction with specific cranial nerve damage. (In other words, as regards "function," it may be more truthful to say, "we know what functions are impaired when this particular nerve is damaged," rather than describe the same nerve as positively "having" such functions.) Even so, as a general reader, I myself did expect to find information about normative "function" as such and was surprised to find mostly information characterizing "malfunction."

Please keep in mind that I am not a medical expert, and please do pardon my ignorance if the reason for the focus on pathology is obvious or generally understood. --Zmvictor (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmvictor (talk • contribs) 02:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zmvictor you make an excellent point and I very much agree this distinction between normal and abnormal is important. For this reason in most articles "Clinical significance" and "Function" are split quite clearly. In this article we use a slightly different structure. The main reason for that was otherwise we have two lists of the tweleve nerves - one in function and one in clinical significance, which ended up being messy. We decided it might be more useful to have the effect of damage to each of the twelve nerves next to its function, and an overall coverage of sources of damage in the 'clincial significance' section. I see that the text has deteriorated a little bit so this distinction has been lost over time. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:59, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ergh. I think this article will need more work than I thought. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zmvictor

Done I have made quite a lot of edits to the article. It's not perfect but I hope this is an improvement. Let me know what you think.--Tom (LT) (talk) 06:02, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tom (LT) Just a note to say I reread the article and very much appreciated your emendations as well as the expanded text and additional figures. I found the subsections under Function clear and easy to follow. As a reader, I quickly caught on to the pattern (description of normative function followed by description of abnormal function due to damage), which helped me organize the information mentally as I was reading.-- Zmvictor (talk) 08:23, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I appreciate your positive reply :). Let me know (probably via my talk page is easiest) if you find any other articles that are particularly hard to understand, happy to have a look and try and improve them too. Cheers --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 April 2024

It has been proposed in this section that Cranial nerves be renamed and moved to Cranial nerve.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Cranial nerves → Cranial nerve – WP:SINGULAR, not a plurale tantum, a single cranial nerve isn't referred to in plural, in line with spinal nerve where the nerves are more commonly referred to in plural. Background is a declined past move request per Template:Db-move. –Tobias (talk) 08:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for proposing this. You can see I've been involved in editing this article previously. I would not be in favour of moving the article per Wikipedia:PLURAL, "Articles on groups of distinct entities that are nevertheless often considered together". Unlike spinal nerves, which are often simply reported by their number and are conceptually fairly similar, the cranial nerves are very commonly considered as a group. That's why there is a difference between the two article titles. Tom (LT) (talk) 06:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]