Talk:Anatomical position

For the current list of potentially controversial requested moves, see § Current discussions.

"Wikipedia:RM" redirects here. For other uses, see Wikipedia:RM (disambiguation).

For detailed guidance on how and when to move a page, see Wikipedia:Moving a page.

Commenting on a requested move

All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. There are a number of standards that Wikipedians should practice in such discussions:

• When editors recommend a course of action, they write Support or Oppose in bold text, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g. '''Support'''.
• Comments or recommendations are added on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *) and signed by adding ~~~~ to the end. Responses to another editor are threaded and indented using multiple bullets.
• The article itself should be reviewed before any recommendation is made; do not base recommendations solely on the information supplied by other editors. It may also help to look at the article's edit history. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior move requests. They may contain relevant arguments and useful information.
• Vested interests in the article should be disclosed per Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI.

When participating, please consider the following:

• Editors should make themselves familiar with the article titling policy at Wikipedia:Article titles.
• Other important guidelines that set forth community norms for article titles include Wikipedia:Disambiguation, specific naming conventions, and the manual of style.
• The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations that are not sustained by arguments.
• Explain how the proposed article title meets or contravenes policy and guidelines rather than merely stating that it does so.
• Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.
• Do not make conflicting recommendations. If you change your mind, use strike-through to retract your previous statement by enclosing it between <s> and </s> after the bullets, and de-bold the struck words, as in "• Support Oppose".

Please remember that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but that arguments based in policy, guidelines, and evidence have more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers an argument that does not explain how the move request is consistent with policies and guidelines, a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion may be useful. On the other hand, a pattern of responding to requests with groundless opinion, proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive. If a pattern of disruptive behavior persists after efforts are made to correct the situation through dialogue, please consider using a dispute resolution process.

Closing a requested move

Any uninvolved editor in good standing may close a move request. Please read the closing instructions for information on how to close a move request. The Simple guide to closing RM discussions details how to actually close a requested move discussion.

Relisting a requested move

Relisting a discussion moves the request out of the backlog up to the current day in order to encourage further input. The decision to relist a discussion is best left to uninvolved experienced editors upon considering, but declining, to close the discussion. In general, discussions should not be relisted more than once before properly closing. Users relisting a debate which has already been relisted, or relisting a debate with a substantial discussion, should write a short explanation on why they did not consider the debate sufficient to close. While there is no consensus forbidding participation in a requested move discussion after relisting it, many editors consider it an inadvisable form of supervote. If you want to relist a discussion and then participate in it, be prepared to explain why you think it was appropriate.

Relisting should be done using {{subst:RM relist}}, which automatically includes the relister's signature, and which must be placed at the very end of the initial request after the move requester's signature (and subsequent relisters' signatures).

When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions; there is no required length of time to wait before closing a relisted discussion.

If discussion has become stale, or it seems that discussion would benefit from more input of editors versed in the subject area, consider more widely publicizing the discussion, such as by notifying WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.

See also

• Wikipedia:Requested moves/Article alerts, which includes a list of recently closed, as well as open discussions

There is already an article Terms for anatomical location which covers much the same subject and could be merged with this one. Any objections? (BTW, I like this one better because of its excellent style but the other one has dozens of links to it so it might be easier to move content from here to there) Cheers, Kosebamse 19:57 24 May 2003 (UTC)

No problem here...Thanks for the kind word. Note: I like cranial/rostral in the other article as opposed to my cephalic. KJ Sam 21:55 24 May 2003 (UTC)

I´ve spent an hour trying to integrate the content, but somehow it didn´t work. As the other article does not specifically refer to human anatomy, it might be best to leave it the way it is, and let this article deal specifically with human anatomy. It could perhaps be renamed "terms in human anatomy" or something like that. Kosebamse

Thank you for your efforts, and I concur that much of the material overlaps. Since the anatomical position is a widely used phrase and a distinct device applicable to a whole corpus, I believe it should be separated from other relative or positional terms such superficial/deep, external/internal, supine/prone... I hesitated to include the last paragraph because it wandered into that area; however I was unaware of the other page at the time. KJ Sam 05:35 25 May 2003 (UTC)

Since those other terms are of a more general nature, they should probably go into the other article, I´ll give it a try later. Thanks for your work! Kosebamse 07:06 25 May 2003 (UTC)

I gave it a go on the other page, last section (Motion), and tried to preserve the existing style; see what you think and edit freely. Thank you! KJ Sam 06:31 26 May 2003 (UTC)

I have a question about the information contained in this article:

"

• Adduction - where there is a reduction in the angle between bones or parts of the body. This only applies to movement along the coronal plane. An example of this is where extending arms outwards as if to fly.
• Abduction - the exact opposite, with an increase in the angle. Also only applies to movement along the coronal plane.

"

What reduction in the angle between bones or parts of the body occurs during "Extending the arms out as if to fly"? This sounds like Abduction to me - an increase in the angle between the trunk and the arm. What am I overlooking here? [Timbo]

Nothing; the article is wrong. Fixing now. --Dcfleck 00:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Moved movement section

I've moved the material under 'Movement terms' to its own article, and added a link here. This was to eliminate the duplication of much of the same material in the Anatomical terms of location article. --Dcfleck 03:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Specificity

I think in many instances this article is too specific. For example, there are infinitely many transverse, coronal and sagittal planes. Also, terms of comparison like superior and inferior don't refer to objects above and below the transverse plane, they just refer to things relatively closer to or further from the top of the head. Leon... 01:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Redirected

No offense intended, but this article isn't 1/8th as useful as the location article... and as far as I can tell all the important details are already there. So rather than carry out a merge (with the connected history complications), I've simply redirected the article. --Gmaxwell 02:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)