Talk:Sacrum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Can someone comment on the origin of the name sacrum? --Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 01:27, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Several related possibilities from a Google search for sacrum etymology:

You want to incorporate this? -- Phyzome is Tim McCormack 01:42, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)


This post really needs to be cleaned up so a general audience (e.g., me, not medically trained) can read it. Any volunteers? --67.170.23.71 22:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Anatomy on Wikipedia is in a poor state. I've been away from gross anatomy for too many years to care enough for it. You can try Wikipedia:WikiProject Preclinical Medicine JFW | T@lk 12:47, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Simply cutting and pasting Grays (especially the free 1917 edition) seems stupid to me, and not really in the ilk of Wikipedia - this shold not be an encyclopedic entry as it contains anatomical description from the outset instead of starting "base-up"

Main problem is that it is Gray's - medical-based students use Gray's as a reference manual and not as a learning tool, mainly it's hard to read and digest : Moore and Daley's Clinically orientated anatomy is a popular choice.

Simply cutting and pasting Grays because it was free and in the public domain (especially the free 1917 edition) seems stupid to me, and not really in the ilk of Wikipedia.

Surely there must be enough anatomists around to tart it up to make it more Encyclopedic rather than shrouded in medical terminology to alienate a non-plussed up reader?

Why "The sacrum (or sacrum) is..."? Is that a typo or is there something being indicated by the formatting?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/a/c/Talk%7ESacrum_249a.html"