Talk:Hippocampal prosthesis
Add topicLatest comment: 8 years ago by Klbrain in topic Merger proposal
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | The content of Prosthetic Neuronal Memory Silicon Chips was merged into Hippocampal prosthesis on 27 December 2017. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Older comments
[edit]I am a neuroscientist and expert in the field - Wikipedia has this article tagged as needing the attention of an expert - what is the issue with this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpeakerTR (talk • contribs) 04:35, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Merger proposal
[edit]I proposed Prosthetic Neuronal Memory Silicon Chips be merged into Hippocampal prosthesis, they are essentially the same thing, and also some of the text is overlapping (which also needs considerable attention). Lophostrix (talk) 19:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- I strongly agree that Prosthetic Neuronal Memory Silicon Chips be merged into Hippocampal prosthesis. Prosthetic Neuronal Memory Silicon Chips are not only essentially the same thing as a hippocampal prostheses, they are indeed an example of a hippocampal prosthesis. Moreover, Prosthetic Neuronal Memory Silicon Chips are the same example of a hippocampal prosthesis, designed by Theodore Berger, that is discussed in this article. Philgalinsky (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2016
- I don't have an opinion about that, but your comment confused me because it copied the time and date of the comment above it -- it was hard to recognize as a new comment. I have fixed the date, but note for the future that if you sign a talk page message by typing ~~~~ at the end, the correct time and date will be inserted automatically. Best regards, Looie496 (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
- Agree with merge; now
Done Klbrain (talk) 22:56, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Agree with merge; now
- I don't have an opinion about that, but your comment confused me because it copied the time and date of the comment above it -- it was hard to recognize as a new comment. I have fixed the date, but note for the future that if you sign a talk page message by typing ~~~~ at the end, the correct time and date will be inserted automatically. Best regards, Looie496 (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)