PoutineNation

December 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Motor coordination, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Motor coordination was changed by PoutineNation (u) (t) deleting 19836 characters on 2008-12-11T22:02:11+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Motor coordination

Hi, I'm trying to understand what's going on with that article -- which paper is the review paper you were referring to in your edit summary?

It may or may not be useful to you to know that the expansion of the article was done by a student in an introductory neuroscience class, as part of a class assignment. (I'm not involved, I just know this as a result of my own investigation.) If there is something here that is worth keeping, perhaps with a more specific article name, it might be worth thinking about. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 02:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

PoutineNation, please correct instead of deleting.

As far as I can tell, there was nothing erroneous or misleading in the Motor Coordination page edits by Steven Hand. If you disagree, please correct the errors, and comment in the TALK section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Professorpotter (talk • contribs) 18:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The entry is largely based on the review article by S.Scott "Optimal feedback control and the neural basis of volitional motor control". Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5: 534–546. Note that I have a fair amount of expertise on this topic as I have been a researcher in that very lab. In brief, the entry effectively (though unintentionally) pigeon-holes motor coordination as upper limb control per se, gives inordinate/inappropriate attention to a commerical product (KINARM), and overly emphasizes optimum feedback control. I thought the best course was to revert to an earlier version that did not suffer these glaring problems. It should also be noted that Box 1 is a direct copy from Fig 1 of the review paper and was likely used without permission from the journal. PoutineNation (talk) 19:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)