Talk:Optic radiation

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Optic radiation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Anatomy: Neuroanatomy 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 neuroanatomy.

Neuroscience Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience 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.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge

It seems probable that someone created this article without realizing that there was another article on the same topic but with the plural rendering of the term in the title. Suggest merging contents to the most commonly accepted usage (whichever that may be). --Lacatosias 07:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with merge. As for the titling issue...I think the plural is used most commonly (which is probably why that article is more substantial), but it seems like the Wikipedia style preference is for singular even in that case, so I could be convinced either way. -- JVinocur 23:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with merge, preferrably to to Optic radiation (i.e. singular). Optic radiation refers to a single tract or a single collection of axons. Optic radiations refers to multiple tracts or multiple collections of axons. (Although many refer to each axon as a radiation and refer to a grouping of them as radiations, I think this is technically incorrect.) -AED 23:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per the above, I merged Optic radiations to Optic radiation. -AED 06:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Baum's loop"

I can't find any evidence that the term "Baum's loop" has ever been used in scholarly literature (0 results on Google Scholar, versus 317 for "Meyer's loop"). Can someone please clarify this? 131.215.220.185 (talk) 18:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to find any use of the term in Pubmed prior to 2000, which is odd if this was a classical anatomical name for the structure. Without a reference, I suggest the term is removed. --Frank Gaillard (talk) 08:31, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have received the following email from a source I cannot name "All I can tell you is that a student at Brown University, between the years 2003-2008, changed the Wikipedia information on the posterior bundle and added their name (Baum's Loop) as a joke. I have this information directly from the source.". We’ve been doing some looking around and it seems that this fits with the timeline of therm "Baum’s loop” entering the literature. Looking at Wikipedia’s Optic Radiation article, “Baum’s loop" was present on a 2004 article version but that is the oldest available so exact date of insertion is unclear. The first Google Scholar mention is from a 2011 article. A direct search of PubMed does not reveal any hits but via Google there is an indexed article from 2014. Looks like an amazing propagation of a joke! I have therefore removed the entry from the article. --Frank Gaillard (talk) 21:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is 2023, and I am here to pay respects to Dr. Baum, the absolute gigachad madman. 2603:8081:6D05:3341:D8D8:4576:6E3B:BB34 (talk) 02:29, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hemianopia/Quadrantanopia

This article is incorrect. A lesion to the left or right optic radiation causes hemianopia (loss of vision in the contralateral visual field), not quandrantanopia as is currently stated.

This should be fixed immediately.

Wandell (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]