Talk:Iliopsoas

Anatomy: Gross Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Skeletal muscle#Skeletal muscle fiber types|slow-twitch red type 1 fibers]] The anchor (#Skeletal muscle fiber types) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Attachment of the Psoas Minor

Wikipedia says that the psoas minor is attachad to the transverse processe of the vertebrae, but both the Gray's anatomy (40th edition, expert consult, page 1368) and the Netter's Atlas (5th edition, student version, plate 484) say that the psoas minor is attached of the sides of the bodies, not the transverse process.

Should I fix that or there is an explanation?

--93.40.75.9 (talk) 12:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC) Iliopsoas[reply]

The term iliopsoas refers to the combination of the psoas major and the iliacus at their inferior end. These two muscles are distinct in the abdomen, but usually are not clearly defined as two distinctly different muscles in the thigh. The psoas muscle attaches at the lateral surfaces of the T12 and L1-L5 vertebral bodies of the spinal column. The lumbar vertebrae and all their intervertebral discs are included . The iliacus originates in the iliac fossa (hip bone) of the pelvis. Starting at the side of the spinal column, this is where the psoas major begins its’ attachment with the attachment ending at the inferior (distal) end where it merges with the iliacus at the level of the inguinal ligament and then the iliopsoas (a united iliacus and psoas) attaches to the femur (inner thigh bone). The iliopsoas is involved with flexion (bending) and lateral rotation of the thigh. When a person is standing firmly on their feet in an upright position, the iliopsoas allows flexion (bending) of the trunk by supporting the movement of the body from the reinforced stability provided by the iliopsoas. The psoas minor does not contribute to the iliopsoas muscle. (76.2.74.99 (talk) 13:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Revise sentence

Following sentence should be rewritten = "Strongest of the hip flexors (rectus femoris, sartorius, and tensor fasciae latae), iliopsoas is important for standing, walking, and running." The hip flexors according to this sentence are the muscles within round brackets "(rectus femoris, sartorius, and tensor fasciae latae)". This does not include the iliopsoas but the same sentence states that iliopsoas is a hip flexor. /Björn Ahlman

It would be useful if someone who knows how to write "prononciation symbols" (I forgot what the symbols are called) could help pronounce "iliopsoas" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hackbook (talk • contribs) 02:41, 4 July 2010 (UTC) Pronunciation audio for Iliopsoas http://media.merriam-webster.com/soundc11/i/iliop03m.wav (76.2.74.99 (talk) 13:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Requested move 22 October 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved.

2 editors oppose the move per WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISE and none support. Accordingly I find a consensus not to move. This can be revisited should discussions elsewhere result in a general consensus as to how muscle articles should be named. (non-admin closure) Havelock Jones (talk) 19:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iliopsoas → Iliopsoas muscle
Vastus medialis → Vastus medialis muscle
Peroneus tertius → Peroneus tertius muscle
Peroneus longus → Peroneus longus muscle
Peroneus brevis → Peroneus brevis muscle

– These are the final five skeletal muscle articles that do not have the word muscle in them. They should have them per WP:CONSISTENT and a consensus I read about skeletal muscle article titles some time ago in a talk page faraway. Invinciblewalnut (talk) 05:53, 22 October 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 03:22, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISE. There is no ambiguiuty here, and the correct name of the muscles is simply as they are currently formulated, without any need to add "muscle" on the end unless the term is ambiguous with something else. — Amakuru (talk) 10:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. The Terminologia Anatomica preferred names are the current article names (agreeing with WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME). However, this reveals an issue. "Iliopsoas" could refer to the muscle or the fascia, going against WP:PRECISE. A similar situation occurs with the other muscles.

There has never been a clear decision about when or when not to include the word "muscle" in page titles. If this particular move request is majority opposed, that would suggest that hundreds of anatomy articles will need to be renamed (per WP:CONSISTENT). I have looked at every muscle of the body, and an see that only the pterygoid muscles and could possibly be confused with neurovascular or other structures, so if WP:PRECISE were followed perfectly then all of these should not include the word "muscle" in the title.

In the proposal here, I suggested that muscle names on the page List of skeletal muscles of the human body are generally not needed - this conforms with WP:COMMONNAME (especially when comparing to Terminologia Anatomica) and WP:CONCISE (removing visual clutter). Further discussing this is going to be important, and I will start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles. Bibeyjj (talk) 11:38, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above – Many resources online (including Terminologia Anatomica mentioned above) don't specify "muscle" as part of muscle names; for example; "Deltoid" by itself is often used to refer to the muscle, and would not refer to the "deltoid tuberosity" or "deltoid ligament"; nor would just "quadriceps" refer to the quadriceps tendon. So I don't think ambiguity would be a concern in most cases, especially since the muscles often receive much more attention (due to fitness/bodybuilding) compared to ligaments or other individual anatomical features, unless they tend to get injured or cause problems. –Sonicwave ^talk 23:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.