User:Sammy Tavassoli/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Frontal nerve


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article is neutral and relevant but includes very limited information in the sections it has on the structure and functions of the frontal nerve, and it does not even begin to explain the pathology and treatments associated with frontal nerve damage. It also does not include information on the role of the nerve in sensation processes or how it may be involved in comorbidities with another nerve or eye conditions. Overall, the article is brief and not at all comprehensive compared to information that can be found on scientific databases, like Science Direct. All of its claims are based on one source regarding general anatomy, which is neutral, published in 2016, and widely accepted as a reliable, but again it's very limited in specifically frontal nerve content.


 * Sources
 * Frontal Nerve Innervation & Facial Reconstruction: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000712269190148D
 * Frontal Nerve Schwannoma: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002939417304907
 * Nerve Connections in Non-Humans: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0361923094002843
 * Neuroimaging: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S016164209730219X

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Midline nuclear group


 * Article Evaluation
 * While I'll excuse the article's brevity in not extensively discussing the nuclei within the midline group that already had their own individual articles, it does little else but refer to these other articles and hardly discusses the group as a system/whole or includes any original content. Even a summary of the other articles would've been nice. Not to mention, it does mention the nuclei that do not have their own articles, but it does not describe them beyond their names or even include subsections about their structures/functions. It appears neutral and manages to say relevant because it hardly includes more than two original sentences not directing the reader to other links. I will say this article was well cited in including a reliable journal article or literature review for both of its claims, but it only had two claims and two sources, so I don't consider that much of an achievement.


 * Sources
 * Review on Development & Imaging of Thalamic Nuclei in Possums: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S089106180800063X
 * Effects of Opioids on Midline Group in Rodents: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0006899391911865
 * Pathology in Epilepsy: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1472928802000298
 * Nucleus Reuniens + Executive Behaviors: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306452216001147
 * Role in the Limbic System: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306452298000621
 * Role in Classical and Fear Conditioning: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432898000229, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0028390811003704, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0031938472902909

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Orienting system


 * Article Evaluation
 * I will say this article has a great start in its lead and subsequent introduction, but it too has very little content. It could've expanded upon many of the concepts it lists, such as covert and overt attention, better discussed the pathway for visual orientation information gathering, how orienting systems potentially may relate to attention deficit disorders, AI orienting systems and visual stimulus detection, and the specific nerves and larger structures within the system, among other things. It started off as neutral and relevant, only needing to build on its breadth of content and sources. Because it only consisted of an introductory section, this article included only three sources, but all were reliable literature reviews and psychology handbooks. Each claim did include one or more citations.


 * Sources
 * Summary Articles on Visual Orienting Systems: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B978012801529200009X, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079612308633178
 * Functionality in Musicians versus Non-Musicians: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844018369858
 * Role in Affect-based Attention: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878929316300329
 * AI Orienting Systems: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050915036698, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169023X96000134

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Anterior nuclei of thalamus


 * Article Evaluation
 * As the pattern holds, while this article included relevant information from reliable sources (e.g. journal articles, medical handbooks, and literature reviews), it only utilized four sources, making it quite limited and somewhat biased. It presented the claims and hypotheses of a single article from one research team in the same way it presented the information listed in the handbooks and reviews, leading readers to assume both were as reliable and well-agreed upon. Each claim did provide a citation, but there were few claims in general, and the last paragraph of the "Function" section should've specified that its conclusions were all from one team's research, along with further details about how the anterior nuclei play a role in conditions such as epilepsy and emotional regulation. Finally, given the wealth of journal articles on anterior thalamic nuclei in rodents, the article should've included a subsection on that in the "Function" section and compared how the nuclei function differently in rodents and humans. Overall, the content was decent but there was too little of it, especially in the lead, which did not summarize the little content the article did include.


 * Sources
 * Role in Human Spatial Memory: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393215301792, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019745801830410X, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S107474270800004X
 * Role in DBS Epilepsy Treatment: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878875016312451, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006899317303190,
 * Research on Rodent Behavior: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432818311392, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306452217301094, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S030645221730619X

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Optical illusion


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article provides a great deal of relevant and well-cited information on the different kinds of illusions, as well as subcategories of cognitive illusions. Through its inclusion of many representative optical illusions to better explain how illusory contours, depth and contrasts illusions, and certain artistically purposed optical illusions work. It even included gifs of motion perception illusions, and multiple hypothesis as to why our brains perceive these illusions the way they do. Additionally, it was well organized and pulled from a variety of academic research articles, the only issue being that its most current source was from 2014. Some of the reference links were also broken, and some of the technical wording (such as motion parallax) required additional article links/references and explanations. Still, it was overall in better shape than all of the other articles listed above. To improve it, I'd like to supply more current research on the mechanisms behind the processing of optical illusions in humans, as well as how preexisting conditions (such as psychological/neurological conditions, age, and fatigue) affect how optical illusions are perceived.


 * Sources
 * Perceptual Illusions and Pain Relief: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468781219301195,
 * Preexisting Conditions on the Perception of Optical Illusions: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050920303513, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053810018304999, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698918302244, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0028393205003623, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215001319300277, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945220301751
 * Processing of Illusory Images: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811918302830, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304394020300902 https://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/publications/AIAA.2011.DepthPerceptionCueCntrl.pdf https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(97)01060-7