Talk:Trigeminal nerve
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neurology. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the talk page. |
| B | This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance assessment scale |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. |
| B | This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance assessment scale |
Contents |
[edit] Hey
Hey all of you that are in the same mess that I'm in. HELL, right here on earth. Ane I'm a strong christian Grandma. My name is Brenda A. Fox, age 50, and on Jan. 17, 2006 my life was taken from me by a dentist. He pulled a tooth,and either in applying the numbing shot or pulling my tooth, I'm sure it is the first, he took my life as I knew it. My right eye stayed open for 8 hours after he pulled it, and the pain after the numbing wore of was horrible. I thought I was gonna lose it. And of course, my tooth was pulled on a sat. and Monday was a holiday, so I finally got into to see the dentist and he said there was no was I could have a dry socket, well, then buddy, you screwed up something in my face. Long story short, I was in isolation in my bedroom for 8 months, for noise of any sort took me to my knees. They had to even pad the toilet paper rolls. Thank God my kids didn't life at home and were grown-up. And my mate worked out of town and was only home on weekends. He got a cold, I had to go live at my mom's home for 1 month until he quit coughing, for she stays the winter in Florida. Finally, on July 6, 2006, we got the call of my surgery fo Dr. McGregor, Columbus Ohio State University Hospital. He was doing a Rhizotomy(PGR). It helped get the noise problem under control, praise the Lord, but my jaw-cheek area still until this day plus my jaw area, lower lip and inside that area feel like a baseball bat had it's was with me. I've had 2 Rhizotomy since October of 2005, and Brain Surgery on Feb. 27,2006, wher they did fing a cluster of blood vessels wrapped around the Trigeminal nerve. But, truthfully, I'm in more pain than I was before all of the last 3 surgeries. The only thing I can say that is great is that the sound is better. But inless I stay in bed and don't talk, This Demon inside of me just won't let go. But, god has left me here for a reason, hopefully, it's to get the word out about this horrible demen noone can see or feel but the patient. If any Dr. reads this and thinks he can help me: my number is: [REMOVED]. I live in Ohio.
- Do not appeal to complete strangers with such questions. You will be misled by unscrupulous snake oil salesmen. Dr McGregor will hopefully be able to explain what options there are left now. I reckon you are already on gabapentin or a similar drug for pain control. JFW | T@lk 20:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
This article is more about nerves in general than the trigeminal nerve. Most of the information can be merged with Nerve. I don't have the authority or time to do it, though. Maybe someone else does.
- I disagree. It's not about the trigeminal nerve, it's about the whole neuroanatomy of the affferent pathways of the face. I notice that there are discrepancies between the article about the trigeminal nerve nuclei and this one. But I don't know wether the topic is controversial, or if there is a mistake in one of them. -- 15:17(gmt+1) 27 September 2006
[edit] Background information and Central pathways
It is not particularly useful to delete large sections from a Wikipedia article because they contain "some very generic stuff that's already covered in other articles." One of the strengths of Wikipedia is that the same topic is often covered in many different articles, written from different points of view and at different levels of complexity, with different target audiences in mind.
The present article includes background information on sensation, which is entirely appropriate in an article about a sensory nerve. Readers who find this information “too basic” are free to skip over it.
The article also contains a summary of central pathways for sensation. Two of these pathways (the trigeminal lemniscus and the trigeminothalamic tract) are specific to the trigeminal nerve. At the present time they are not covered elsewhere in Wikipedia; that is one reason for including them here. Btarski 20:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The sensory stuff must go. I agree that some basics is okay, but when I look up article on a dog, I'm not really interested in how mammals evolved to walk on land or the components of leather in a collar. If what's in this article isn't covered in sensation, then it should be moved there. If it's already there, delete it. Look at cranial nerve V, for instance. There is no sensation summary. At least be consistent.
Details about pathways to the thalamus and cortex have no business on this page. Similarly, the section on sensation and sensory pathways are by no means specific to the trigeminal nerve. Because of this nonspecificity, these discussions all belong elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sqroot3 (talk • contribs) 07:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Separating notes and references
The style guideline Wikipedia: Citing sources notes that
-
- It can be helpful when footnotes are used that a separate “references” section also be maintained, in which the sources that were used are listed in alphabetical order.
-
- A References section, which lists citations in alphabetical order, helps readers to see at a glance the quality of the references used.
The style guideline Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines discusses articles on technical subjects that are widely known within certain disciplines. Such articles, the guideline says, should be sourced so that in principle anyone can verify them.
-
- Most readers would assume that the bulk of the statements in the comparatively short Wikipedia article could be verified by checking any of these references.
There are no rigid guidelines with respect to notes and references. In addition to Notes (in-line references), articles may have sections labeled “References,” “Bibliography,” “Further reading,” “Textbooks,” “Poplar reading” and so on, depending on the subject.
The present article deals almost exclusively with “core” knowledge in physiology and clinical medicine. Therefore, it is referenced primarily by a list of standard textbooks in the field. The listed books are authoritative, but (with the possible exception of Wilson-Pauwels et. al.) they are also highly technical. The article might benefit from an additional list of introductory books and articles intended for the general reader.
In-line references in this article are sparse and could probably be expanded and improved. For example, the first reference bears no obvious relation to the subject it footnotes (the etymology of ‘’trigeminal’‘). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Btarski (talk • contribs) 23:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (medicine-related articles), "Medical articles should be relatively dense with inline citations. It is not acceptable to write substantial amounts of prose and then add your medical textbook to the References section. It is too easy for a later editor to change the body text and then nobody is sure which statements are backed up by which sources. Unlike many established scientific disciplines, medicine attracts controversy and opponents on even the most basic and commonly held facts.". If you want to include that list of books, you need to tie them to specific assertions made in the article. --Arcadian 03:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] More on references
Removing the entire References section from an article is not an improvement. On the contrary, it makes the article less useful for Wikipedia readers.
If an article needs more footnotes, then they should be supplied. But deciding exactly what to footnote in this article raises the very point I was trying to make. Does every anatomical fact in the article need a footnote? Does every CNS tract need a reference? Does every disease of the 5th nerve need its own footnote? Of course not.
The point is that articles that summarize a large body of information – information that is not in any way controversial or disputed – do not need to document each and every sentence. The material in this article is common knowledge in medicine.
Summary articles like this cannot simply be presented. The reader needs to have some idea of where the information comes from. References should be provided, so that the reader can refer to the sources. The sources, in this case, are standard textbooks.
The guideline you cite refers to articles where there is “controversy and opponents on even the most basic and commonly held facts.” Do you really think that there is controversy or opposition on any of the facts in this article? I would be most interested to learn of it.
Many topics in medicine are, indeed, controversial. Examples would be specific therapies, or specific diagnostic criteria, or even entire conceptual frameworks such as psychiatry. I agree with you that these topics require careful documentation, with specific in-line references. Simply citing a textbook isn't good enough. However, I don’t think that articles about basic anatomy and physiology need the same kind of line-by-line detail. Attempts to add such details would be futile, and they would detract from the readability of the article. It would be a disservice to readers.
In looking through Wikipedia’s coverage of medicine, I find many articles that have References. For example, look at the beta blocker article. Should the References section in this article be deleted? They are not tied to the text. Would removing them improve the article?
References are a useful addition to almost any Wikipedia article. They should not be removed simply because they “cannot be tied to the text.” That is why they are called references. The present article is a good example of an article that needs references, specifically, references to generally accepted textbooks on neuroanatomy and neurophysiology.Btarski 00:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
