Talk:Head

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The organisation of this article is under review by the Preclinical Medicine Project. This project aims to provide guidelines for consistent organisation of the preclinical medical science articles including anatomy, physiology and other fields. Please visit our page for further information!

Head was the collaboration of the week for the week starting on July 24, 2005. For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.

Previous discussion of the renamed page Head (now Head (anatomy)), can be found at Talk:Head (disambiguation), as its discussion is more relevant to Head (disambiguation).

At this time, the only relevant topic for this talk page is redirection of Head.

--Jerzy (t) 00:09, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)

I don't know where to place this as all talk pages don't seem to have any information. Does it make sense that the human head is anterior only? It is also posterior. The face is anterior, but the head is both the face and the skull. It is indeed, the most superior part of the body, but I really can't see it being labelled as anterior. --yosiea 2005 Jul 25

Is there a reason why this redirects to Head (anatomy) instead of head (disambiguation)? unsigned

Yes, thank you for asking. The vast majority of all internal links were in the anatomical sense, and it's the most logical thing to expect when typing the word--nearly all other meanings derive from the anatomical one. head (anatomy) has a link to head (disambiguation). Since I produced this primary topic disambiguation, a number of articles have had head added to them, and nearly every single one has been a reference to head in the anatomical sense, which seems to confirm that the choice to perform this kind of disabiguation was the correct one. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:21, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Another response, whose composition overlapped with the above one:

  This is Talk:Head, which redir-ed to Talk:Head (disambiguation) until you mucked with it; by "this", you must mean Head.

  I'll tell you how to find out why it should, which is much more interesting: go to the list of articles that link to this talk's corresponding article page. (Eventually we can expect those lks to get retargetted appropriately, so there's an unlinked ugly version of the list, for the longterm record, below, between the next two horizontal rules.) Ask yourself how likely future legitimate lks to Head are likely to resemble these. Then go to Head (disambiguation), and ask yourself how useful it would be, to people reading such articles, to follow a link from one of those pages to Head (disambiguation) instead of one named Head (anatomy) that begins

  For other uses of the word head, see head (disambiguation).

  --Jerzy (t) 00:14, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)

Has this COTW died out or something? Check out the tag above. If this page is empty after a while, I will finish the page. PhatRita 19:55, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

See the contrib above that is time-stamped "00:14, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)", if you don't understand why this is here:

• Richard Nixon
• Minoan civilization
• Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links
• Human nature
• Wikipedia:Deletion log archive/October 2003
• Clean and jerk
• Wikipedia:Offline reports/This is one of the most linked to disambiguation pages
• Wikipedia:Links to disambiguating pages (H)
• Template:Pic of the day/Archive1
• Wikipedia:Revenge of bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
• Body proportions
• Wikipedia:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense/Encyclopædia BJAODNonica
• Hypotonia
• Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/September 2004 II
• User:Tony Sidaway
• User:Jimbo Wales/Pushing To 1.0/archive
• Metallo
• Jump & bump
• Arteritis
• User talk:Tony Sidaway/Archive 2005 01 07
• Kefalovryso
• Kefalovryso (Ioannina), Greece
• List of biomedical terms
• List of biomedical topics, F to J
• Face (disambiguation)
• Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Jan Feb 2005
• Appendix (horse)
• User talk:199.43.32.68
• Wikipedia:Picture of the day/June 2004
• Head hair
• User:Noisecontrol
• User talk:Tony Sidaway/RFA
• Água de Pena

[edit] Head picture

Can someone put a pretty head picture there. I didn't like the previous one and changed it but I'm not sure if I did right. Thanks.

A picture of just one human head would be preferable.

Someone reverted to previous picture which contains another person in the background, so I think we can do better than that. I've just wasted an hour searching the common gallery. What I had in mind was a female head picture not obstructed by much hair, like a Sinéad O'Connor head picture, that would be best, but I couldn't find one. I give up, for now.

Why is this guy the definitive human head? What does this image even add? I would be shocked if someone could use their web-browser to navigate to the "Head" article of Wikipedia and not know what one looked like. Perhaps an anatomical diagram would be of actual interest to someone? Appropriate Username 04:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, the current image is a very poor choice. I think a plate from Gray's Anatomy could be nice, or maybe a bust of someone. Besides that, I think the rest of the article is in need of attention. jerd 09:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

How many people need a picture to show them what a human head looks like? Shouldn't the image just be removed? I can't see that it serves any purpose.

[edit] Missing sections

This article is missing the history of the evolution of the head, and is missing discussion of the head of the most notable animals and creatures which have heads. It is also missing a section about the features of the human head. This article could also have a section explaining known head diseases. What does everyone else think? — Wackymacs 18:27, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree, the article as it stands is too focused on the human head. It needs some pictures of non-human heads, and a discussion of how the head came to be, why heads exist, etc. Head diseases might also be nice, but it could just turn into a long list of brain diseases, dental problems, sinus problems, eye problems, hair loss, etc. ONUnicorn 20:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

agree, ATM it has nothing more than the use of the word "animal" in intro paragraph. They need thier own section, but that won't make any sense until all the human stuff is broken down better

jerd 09:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Needs Work

I think Head should be the disambig page. Head (anatomy) should be about the anatomical head in all animals. Finally, this article should be moved to Human Head. Furthermore, references to oral sex have no place in this article, they should be on the disambig page as well. Even then, this article could use some serious organization- it goes immediately into baldness, then to a detailed list of the bones in the human skull (which belong in Human skull), then to non-humans, then cultural references, then phrenology. This makes very little sense. --Karuna8 03:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, I don't understand what the long list of random articles is doing on this page, even after viewing the referenced post. --Karuna8 03:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)