:''For computer memory, see computer storage.'' Memory is a function of the brain: the ability to retain information. Memory is much studied by cognitive psychology and neuroscience. There are multiple types of classifications for memory based on duration, nature and retrieval of perceived items. The main stages in the formation and retrieval of memory, from an information processing perspective, are: * ''Encoding'' (processing and combining of received information) * ''Storage'' (creation of a permanent record of the encoded information) * ''Recollection'' (calling back the stored information in response to some cue for use in some process or activity) ==Classification by duration== A basic and generally accepted classification of memory is based on the duration of memory retention, and identifies three distinct types of memory: ''sensory memory'', ''short-term memory'', and ''long-term memory''. The ''sensory memory'' corresponds approximately to the initial moment that an item is perceived. Some of this information in the sensory area proceeds to the sensory store, which is referred to as ''short-term memory''. Sensory memory is characterized by the duration of memory retention from milliseconds to seconds and short-term memory from seconds to minutes. These stores are generally characterised as of strictly limited capacity and duration, whereas in general stored information can be retrieved in a period of time which ranges from days to years; this type of memory is called ''long-term memory''. It may be that short-term memory is supported by transient changes in neuronal communication, whereas long-term memories are maintained by more stable and permanent changes in neural structure that are dependent on protein synthesis. Some psychologists, however, argue that the distinction between long- and short-term memories is arbitrary, and is merely a reflection of differing levels of activation within a single store. If we are given a random seven-digit number, we may remember it only for a few seconds and then forget (short-term memory). On the other hand, we can remember telephone numbers for many years (assuming we use them spaced repetition). Those long-lasting memories are said to be stored in long-term memory. Additionally, the term ''working memory'' is used to refer to the short-term store needed for certain mental tasks - it is not a synonym for ''short-term memory'', since it is defined not in terms of duration, but rather in terms of purpose. Some theories consider working memory to be the combination of short-term memory and some attentional control. For instance, when we are asked to mentally multiply 45 by 4, we have to perform a series of simple calculations (additions and multiplications) to arrive at the final answer. The ability to store the information regarding the instructions and intermediate results is what is referred to as working memory. ==Classification by information type== Long-term memory, the largest part of any model, can be divided into ''declarative memory'' and ''procedural memory'' memories. Declarative memory requires conscious recall, in that some conscious process must call back the information. It is sometimes called ''explicit memory'', since it consists of information that is explicitly stored and retrieved. Declarative memory can be further sub-divided into semantic memory, which concerns facts taken independent of context; and episodic memory, which concerns information specific to a particular context, such as a time and place. Semantic memory allows the encoding of abstract knowledge about the world, such as "Paris is the capital of France". Episodic memory, on the other hand, is used for more personal memories, such as the sensations, emotions, and personal associations of a particular place or time. Autobiographical memory - memory for particular events within one's own life - is generally viewed as either equivalent to, or a subset of, episodic memory. Visual memory is part of memory preserving some characteristics of our senses pertaining to visual experience. We are able to place in memory information that resembles objects, places, animals or people in sort of a mental image.[http://moodle.ed.uiuc.edu/wiked/index.php/Memory%2C_visual] In contrast, procedural memory (or ''implicit memory'') is not based on the conscious recall of information, but on an implicit learning. Procedural memory is primarily employed in learning motor skills and should be considered a subset of implicit memory. It is revealed when we do better in a given task due only to repetition - no new explicit memories have been formed, but we are Unconscious mind accessing aspects of those previous experiences. Procedural memory involved in motor learning depends on the cerebellum and basal ganglia. == Classification by temporal direction == A further major way to distinguish different memory functions is whether the content to be remembered is in the past, retrospective memory, or whether the content is to be remembered in the future, prospective memory. Thus, retrospective memory as a category includes semantic memory and episodic memory /autobiographical memory memory. In contrast, prospective memory is memory for future intentions, or ''remembering to remember'' (Winograd, 1988). Prospective memory can be further broken down into event- and time-based prospective remembering. Time-based prospective memories are triggered by a time-cue, such as going to the doctor (action) at 4pm (cue). Event-based prospective memories are intentions triggered by cues, such as remembering to post a letter (action) after seeing a mailbox (cue). Cues do not need to be related to the action (as the mailbox example is), and lists, sticky-notes, knotted hankerchiefs, or string around the finger (see box) are all examples of cues that are produced by people as a strategy to enhance prospective memory. == Memory disorders == Much of the current knowledge of memory has come from studying memory disorders. Loss of memory is known as amnesia. There are many sorts of amnesia, and by studying their different forms, it has become possible to observe apparent defects in individual sub-systems of the brain's memory systems, and thus hypothesize their function in the normally working brain. == The physiology of memory == Overall, the mechanisms of memory are not well understood. Brain areas such as the hippocampus, the amygdala, or the mammillary bodies are thought to be involved in certain kinds of memory. For example, the hippocampus is believed to be involved in spatial learning and declarative learning. Damage to certain areas in patients and animal models and subsequent memory deficits is a primary source of information. However, rather than implicating a specific area, it could be that damage to adjacent areas, or to a pathway travelling through the area is actually responsible for the observed deficit. Further, it is not sufficient to describe memory, and its counterpart, learning, as soley dependent on specific brain regions. Learning and memory are attributed to changes in neuronal synapses, thought to be mediated by long-term potentiation and long-term depression. == Related topics == * Amnesia * Long-term potentiation * Hebbian learning * Memory-prediction_framework * Mnemonic * Muscle memory or proprioception: the sense and memory of where parts of our body are in space ==External links== * [http://www.sense-think-act.org Memory Exercises], a memory wiki * [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/memory/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry] Cognition Memory simple:Memory
==photographic memory== Can someone add text regarding what's called a "photographic memory" ? User:Bevo 23:22, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC) :I think that the term "Eidetic_memory" is what passes for a technical term related to "photographic memory". Some psychologists have done tests on children and found that some children seem to have very good memories for things like visual patterns. This sort of eidetic memory is rare after age 7. Before age 7, when the human brain is still growing and forming many new synaptic connections, there is a need to learn rapidly from one's social group. Studies on experimental animals have shown that mutations in certain genes like the CREB gene (CREB is mentioned Eric_R_Kandel.) can result in "istant memory" formation, with out the need for repetition. I would not be surprised if some older humans still have this sort of rapid learning. For example, see Asperger's_syndrome. With modern rules for experimenting with children, there is little current research on this topic. User:JWSchmidt 00:54, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC) New Article: I have aspergers and have nothing of the sort. Aspbergers is a symptom that is almost like ADD or ADHD but slightly differential symptoms. Aspbergers is a disorder that borders obsessive compulsive disorder. A person with aspbergers becomes focused on a hobby and can't stop until another interest comes along. User: Anonymous. Oct. 1, 2004. About the physiology of memory: I think article doesn't make clear enough how little the physical mechanisms of memory are understood. Maybe should mention that information could also be stored in surface area of glial cells, numbers and types of ion channels, amount of myelination? -cypherx :I just read that section, and, at least to a scientist (ie, me), it seems plenty clear enough that it's poorly understood. There's a lot of the use of "believed" and "attributed", both of which make it reasonably clear that the answer's not well known.--User:Limegreen 04:49, 28 May 2005 (UTC) == A property of the human mind ? == Other animals (all of them, would I say) obviously have a memory. I've replaced it with "a function of the brain" (since mind may not apply to all animals, while memory does -- in my opinion). Some parts of the article seem to be specific to humans though, feel free to revert, change, etc. if you aren't pleased with my edit. → User:SeeSchloss 16:05, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Good call. There's probably a need for a section on memory in non-human animals. Some experts (e.g., Tulving) are very clear that some types of memory, such as episodic (autobiographical) memory, are only found in humans. There's some quite nice work by Nicola Clayton [http://www.psychol.cam.ac.uk/pages/staffweb/clayton/] that suggests that animals may in fact be capable of, at the very least, episodic-like memory. It's not really my area, but I do some research in memory, and this article could contain much much more information in all sorts of ways. However, memory is such a work-in-progress on many levels, that it would be quite easy to digress beyond what wikipedia probably needs... User:Limegreen 05:52, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Cognition
--User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 00:45, 11 May 2005 (UTC) ==Needs WP articles about very specific fictional contents?== ====You said...==== that ''"most Trek-articles that use it belong only to the MA because Wikipedia is not a Wiki for fiktive terms"''. That, however, is incorrect - Wikipedia ''is'' a Wiki for 'phantastic' terms. Presumably, so is MA. But we do cover pop culture, scifi, fantasy etc in exquisite detail - feel free to contribute! User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!meta:mergist 21:30, May 27, 2005 (UTC) :Yes, for important terms, sure. Darth Vader is definitely important (also for a real-world-encyclopedia), Frodo too, James T. Kirk too, but somewhere is a finish line. Drayan must not be here, Trilithium and other things like that too. In the end, should every Uruk-hai in the Battle of Minas Tirith get an own article? That's too much... --User:Memory 21:45, 27 May 2005 (UTC) ====New banner==== ::What do you mean when you say Keep the old version, I'm going to create a new template"? Are you going to ignore the voting process and create a new template as you would like this one to be? You should know that it will be speedily deleted. ::Also, I find it odd that you believe it necessary to link so bombastically to Memory Alpha. It is, after all, a reference, like any other source. Surely, in any article that exists in both wikis, the Memory Aplha article will contain much of the same information as Wikipedia. What then is the added value that theMemory Alpha template adds to the specific article. -- User:Ec5618 14:04, May 30, 2005 (UTC) :::I don't want to link "bombastically" (what do you say about the Wikispecies template?), the contributors of the smaller articles shall be redirected to MA because things like Trilithium just don't belong here, they are not important enough outside of Trek to have an own article here (I say this as a Trekkie). If WP goes this way, we'll have some day articles about every spell from Morrowind or Warcraft, or about every charakter from ST fan fiction (which is banned even on the MA), because there's no argument to stop it if you keep other "small details" from Trek, LotR or whatever. We can't prevent WP not even from getting articles about every living (deceased) human with (descendants with) the ability to add an article about him, because how can we ban this (as "not important enough") if we have an article about Trilithium? - Got it now? :::Originally, I would make a new template for this, then I thought I can use the existing, but now I think it's better to make no template and add a suggestion pattern manually to all smaller articles. --User:Memory 16:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::::Are you suggesting we delete articles on StarTrek topics? ::::: *argh* No! But there were other (nontrek) articles deleted in the past that were not more or less "nonrelevant" than e.g. Trilithium... --User:Memory 23:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::::The wikispecies article links to a page that contains very different information. Memory Alpha will link to articles that might as well be carbon copies. Trilithium looks like a blue link to me, so it exists in Wikipedia. :::::Yes, but other Wikis (e.g. German WP) banned detailed trek/fiction articles like this because of - what I explained above... --User:Memory 23:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::::Adding a suggestion pattern manually is a bit silly, and a somewhat sneaky way of cicumventing the Tfd process. If you want to imput specific text into many articles, use a template. That's what they're for. But if most people want to see a template deleted, they don't want ''that'' information to be added to those articles. -- User:Ec5618 16:56, May 30, 2005 (UTC) ::::: *lol* The deletion voting for the MA template sprung up only as an "answer" to the deletion vote for the HRWiki template, so I don't treat this process any longer as serious... --User:Memory 23:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC) :I don't like the placing of the template. It should be at the bottom of the article. Banners at the top of the article are usually those notifying readers of calls for deletion, clean-up, etc. and is very distracting. If you feel the article shouldn't be in Wikipedia, I suggest starting a poll in the talk page for each article and seek consensus. I have started a discussion on this template at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek and I invite you to participate. (Any direct follow-up to my talk page, please). User:23skidoo 04:26, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ::As I wrote Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek#New Star Trek .22template.22, I adapted the German version which is far bigger than this one and also placed at the top. Ok, the bottom is good too. I don't want to delete the existing articles, I just want to limit the expansion of smaller Trek articles because of the reasons that are explained here. So this banner is only a combination of a general information on the nature of the article and a suggestion. (I keep it here because the discussion is of general interest) --User:Memory 20:49, 31 May 2005 (UTC) Hello User:Memory -- From frustrations with redundancy, I created Template:Hrwiki as a graphical ad. So I totally know where you're coming from. Your arguments against M:Inclusionism above are quite valid, especially in light of the fact that Wikipedia cannot match a fan wiki's willingness to cross the line in use of copyrighted material. Perhaps it is best to take an M:Eventualism standpoint, and help enable an army of editors who'll merely refactor the information so it fits. It may seem like a lot of work to keep deleting fan pages that pop up like mushrooms, but a well-placed ad wouldn't stop them anyway. Maybe we should push for each of the wikis in the Interwiki map to have a page for outlining the balance between the Wikipedia/Wikibooks and itself, enumerating the "encyclopedia-worthy" topics that are worth droning on in an NPOV about...? User:Metaeducation 10:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC) :Generally I'm not an M:Exclusionism, but in this case (detailed fictional content) I think it's not necessary to integrate the whole Trek vocabulary here if there is a Wiki like Memory Alpha. But I don't want to delete anything. --User:Memory 21:14, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ==Template:Memoryalpha (old)== I just noticed that the way you edited Template:Memoryalpha and later Template:Memoryalpha_article, you apparently intended for it to be used in a different context than my original version. The original version was intended to be used exactly like Template:imdb_name, Template:imdb_title, Template:ibdb_name, etc; that is, in the ''External links'' section, on a line with a * at the beginning. (Have you seen these other tempaltes in use? Look at Patrick Stewart#External_links, for instance.) It seemed logical to make the MA templates behave the same way. Now you have edited many articles to include "* " that is used elsewhere. I have now reverted to the versions of the templates without your CSS box, because from the current deletion poll I think the consensus is that it should be plain text. Non-wikimedia projects don't need a big CSS box. Unfortunately, now all of the articles you edited to use Template:Memoryalpha without a * before it (and many without even an ''External links'' section) aren't displaying the original template correctly. I fixed a few, but I really don't feel like fixing ''all'' the stuff you broke right now, so I hope you or someone else will... Do you understand why it's not good to change the context a template is expected to be used in, when many articles are already using it? ~User:Leif ☺ (User_talk:Leif) 08:15, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
:The point is: it ''shall be'' a big eye-catching box because of the reasons I explained in the deletion discussion. If it is not, it is easy to overlook the presence of MA where the work on such articles is far more appropriate and noticed as here. So there is a difference in the intention between the imdb temp. and this one. Maybe I create a new template for this indication, similar to the one used at the German Wikipedia which i don't want to adapt because it's so huge. But I can try to make it smaller. --User:Memory 13:06, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
== I don't like the disclaimer ==
Memory, I really don't like the disclaimer you've been putting at the top of several Star Trek-related articles: ''This article contains fictional facts and terms from the Star Trek universe. Note: content of this specific level might be better contributed to the specialized Wiki Memory Alpha.''
The problem is that ''all'' content is welcomed in Wikipedia. If it's factual and encyclopedic, it belongs here. If a fact is too trivial to deserve its own article, then it can be made part of another article. I'm looking for any official statement in the Wikipedia FAQs to back me up here - I can't find any yet, but similarly I can't find anything defining what level of detail is too trivial to include in Wikipedia, and I've never seen information rejected for being too trivial. If a pointer to your web site becomes accepted for Star Trek articles, then what's to prevent a pointer to IMDB at the top of actor/actress articles, or a pointer to car fan web sites at the top of automotive articles?
Your disclaimer, especially placed as it is at the top of an article, looks like it would serve to discourage someone from contributing to Wikipedia and instead would divert them to your project instead. While I think you've got a really terrific project and I want to see it grow, I don't think this is the way - I think your disclaimer is contradicting the goals of Wikipedia. I think it ought to be removed from the articles it's been added to, and there's probably a much better way to make sure that information is shared between Wikipedia and Memory Alpha. - User:Brian Kendig 23:33, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I am going to remove the disclaimer from the pages which use it. (Whups, someone else beat me to it.) At the very least, something like this needs to be a template, not boilerplate text. And IMHO it's little more than an ad for Memory Alpha. - User:Brian Kendig 19:08, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
==Patterns== {| align="center" width="75%" class="toccolours" style="text-align: center" | '''This article contains ''fictional'' facts and terms from the Star Trek universe.
Note:''' content of this specific level might be better contributed to the specialized Wiki ''[http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Main_Page Memory Alpha]'' |} ====More about this subject on:==== *
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Memory:
Memory
Memory
Memory
Memory
Memory
Memory,_Sorrow,_and_Thorn
Memory-mapped_I/O
Memory-mapped_IO
Memory-prediction_framework
Memory-prediction_framework
Memory-prediction_model
Memory-prediction_theory
MemoryAlpha
Memoryalpha
Memoryalpha
Memoryalpha_article
Memoryalpha_article
MemoryHole.com
Memoryless
Memorylessness
MemoryStick
Memorystick_pro
Memorystick_pro_duo
Memory_(Computer)
Memory_(song)
Memory_(song)
Memory_address
Memory_addressing
Memory_address_register
Memory_allocation
Memory_allocation
Memory_Alpha
Memory_Alpha
Memory_Alpha_(Star_Trek)
Memory_augmentation
Memory_barrier
Memory_bias
Memory_buffer_register
Memory_B_cell
Memory_Card
Memory_card
Memory_card
Memory_Cards
Memory_cards
Memory_card_slot
Memory_cell
Memory_Charm
Memory_Charm
Memory_coherence
Memory_Consolidation
Memory_consolidation
Memory_corruption
Memory_data_register
Memory_debugger
Memory_disorders
Memory_distrust_syndrome
Memory_distrust_syndrome
Memory_dump
Memory_effect
Memory_effect
Memory_foam
Memory_Foundations
Memory_Foundations
Memory_fragmentation
Memory_hierarchy
Memory_hole
Memory_Leak
Memory_leak
Memory_leaks
Memory_loss
Memory_management
Memory_management
Memory_management_software
Memory_management_unit
Memory_management_unit
Memory_manager
Memory_mapped_I/O
Memory_mapped_IO
Memory_metal
Memory_metal
Memory_Model
Memory_of_earth
Memory_of_water
Memory_page
Memory_palace
Memory_pool
Memory_Pool_System
Memory_prosthesis
Memory_protection
Memory_puzzle
Memory_retention
Memory_RNA
Memory_scrubbing
Memory_segment
Memory_segmentation
Memory_space
Memory_Stick
Memory_Stick
Memory_stick
Memory_stick
Memory_Stick_Duo
Memory_stick_pro
Memory_stick_pro_duo
Memory_Stick_Select
Memory_swapping
Memory_wall
Memory_World
Memory_wrap-around
Memory
:''For computer memory, see computer storage.'' Memory is a function of the brain: the ability to retain information. Memory is much studied by cognitive psychology and neuroscience. There are multiple types of classifications for memory based on duration, nature and retrieval of perceived items. The main stages in the formation and retrieval of memory, from an information processing perspective, are: * ''Encoding'' (processing and combining of received information) * ''Storage'' (creation of a permanent record of the encoded information) * ''Recollection'' (calling back the stored information in response to some cue for use in some process or activity) ==Classification by duration== A basic and generally accepted classification of memory is based on the duration of memory retention, and identifies three distinct types of memory: ''sensory memory'', ''short-term memory'', and ''long-term memory''. The ''sensory memory'' corresponds approximately to the initial moment that an item is perceived. Some of this information in the sensory area proceeds to the sensory store, which is referred to as ''short-term memory''. Sensory memory is characterized by the duration of memory retention from milliseconds to seconds and short-term memory from seconds to minutes. These stores are generally characterised as of strictly limited capacity and duration, whereas in general stored information can be retrieved in a period of time which ranges from days to years; this type of memory is called ''long-term memory''. It may be that short-term memory is supported by transient changes in neuronal communication, whereas long-term memories are maintained by more stable and permanent changes in neural structure that are dependent on protein synthesis. Some psychologists, however, argue that the distinction between long- and short-term memories is arbitrary, and is merely a reflection of differing levels of activation within a single store. If we are given a random seven-digit number, we may remember it only for a few seconds and then forget (short-term memory). On the other hand, we can remember telephone numbers for many years (assuming we use them spaced repetition). Those long-lasting memories are said to be stored in long-term memory. Additionally, the term ''working memory'' is used to refer to the short-term store needed for certain mental tasks - it is not a synonym for ''short-term memory'', since it is defined not in terms of duration, but rather in terms of purpose. Some theories consider working memory to be the combination of short-term memory and some attentional control. For instance, when we are asked to mentally multiply 45 by 4, we have to perform a series of simple calculations (additions and multiplications) to arrive at the final answer. The ability to store the information regarding the instructions and intermediate results is what is referred to as working memory. ==Classification by information type== Long-term memory, the largest part of any model, can be divided into ''declarative memory'' and ''procedural memory'' memories. Declarative memory requires conscious recall, in that some conscious process must call back the information. It is sometimes called ''explicit memory'', since it consists of information that is explicitly stored and retrieved. Declarative memory can be further sub-divided into semantic memory, which concerns facts taken independent of context; and episodic memory, which concerns information specific to a particular context, such as a time and place. Semantic memory allows the encoding of abstract knowledge about the world, such as "Paris is the capital of France". Episodic memory, on the other hand, is used for more personal memories, such as the sensations, emotions, and personal associations of a particular place or time. Autobiographical memory - memory for particular events within one's own life - is generally viewed as either equivalent to, or a subset of, episodic memory. Visual memory is part of memory preserving some characteristics of our senses pertaining to visual experience. We are able to place in memory information that resembles objects, places, animals or people in sort of a mental image.[http://moodle.ed.uiuc.edu/wiked/index.php/Memory%2C_visual] In contrast, procedural memory (or ''implicit memory'') is not based on the conscious recall of information, but on an implicit learning. Procedural memory is primarily employed in learning motor skills and should be considered a subset of implicit memory. It is revealed when we do better in a given task due only to repetition - no new explicit memories have been formed, but we are Unconscious mind accessing aspects of those previous experiences. Procedural memory involved in motor learning depends on the cerebellum and basal ganglia. == Classification by temporal direction == A further major way to distinguish different memory functions is whether the content to be remembered is in the past, retrospective memory, or whether the content is to be remembered in the future, prospective memory. Thus, retrospective memory as a category includes semantic memory and episodic memory /autobiographical memory memory. In contrast, prospective memory is memory for future intentions, or ''remembering to remember'' (Winograd, 1988). Prospective memory can be further broken down into event- and time-based prospective remembering. Time-based prospective memories are triggered by a time-cue, such as going to the doctor (action) at 4pm (cue). Event-based prospective memories are intentions triggered by cues, such as remembering to post a letter (action) after seeing a mailbox (cue). Cues do not need to be related to the action (as the mailbox example is), and lists, sticky-notes, knotted hankerchiefs, or string around the finger (see box) are all examples of cues that are produced by people as a strategy to enhance prospective memory. == Memory disorders == Much of the current knowledge of memory has come from studying memory disorders. Loss of memory is known as amnesia. There are many sorts of amnesia, and by studying their different forms, it has become possible to observe apparent defects in individual sub-systems of the brain's memory systems, and thus hypothesize their function in the normally working brain. == The physiology of memory == Overall, the mechanisms of memory are not well understood. Brain areas such as the hippocampus, the amygdala, or the mammillary bodies are thought to be involved in certain kinds of memory. For example, the hippocampus is believed to be involved in spatial learning and declarative learning. Damage to certain areas in patients and animal models and subsequent memory deficits is a primary source of information. However, rather than implicating a specific area, it could be that damage to adjacent areas, or to a pathway travelling through the area is actually responsible for the observed deficit. Further, it is not sufficient to describe memory, and its counterpart, learning, as soley dependent on specific brain regions. Learning and memory are attributed to changes in neuronal synapses, thought to be mediated by long-term potentiation and long-term depression. == Related topics == * Amnesia * Long-term potentiation * Hebbian learning * Memory-prediction_framework * Mnemonic * Muscle memory or proprioception: the sense and memory of where parts of our body are in space ==External links== * [http://www.sense-think-act.org Memory Exercises], a memory wiki * [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/memory/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry] Cognition Memory simple:Memory
Memory
==photographic memory== Can someone add text regarding what's called a "photographic memory" ? User:Bevo 23:22, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC) :I think that the term "Eidetic_memory" is what passes for a technical term related to "photographic memory". Some psychologists have done tests on children and found that some children seem to have very good memories for things like visual patterns. This sort of eidetic memory is rare after age 7. Before age 7, when the human brain is still growing and forming many new synaptic connections, there is a need to learn rapidly from one's social group. Studies on experimental animals have shown that mutations in certain genes like the CREB gene (CREB is mentioned Eric_R_Kandel.) can result in "istant memory" formation, with out the need for repetition. I would not be surprised if some older humans still have this sort of rapid learning. For example, see Asperger's_syndrome. With modern rules for experimenting with children, there is little current research on this topic. User:JWSchmidt 00:54, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC) New Article: I have aspergers and have nothing of the sort. Aspbergers is a symptom that is almost like ADD or ADHD but slightly differential symptoms. Aspbergers is a disorder that borders obsessive compulsive disorder. A person with aspbergers becomes focused on a hobby and can't stop until another interest comes along. User: Anonymous. Oct. 1, 2004. About the physiology of memory: I think article doesn't make clear enough how little the physical mechanisms of memory are understood. Maybe should mention that information could also be stored in surface area of glial cells, numbers and types of ion channels, amount of myelination? -cypherx :I just read that section, and, at least to a scientist (ie, me), it seems plenty clear enough that it's poorly understood. There's a lot of the use of "believed" and "attributed", both of which make it reasonably clear that the answer's not well known.--User:Limegreen 04:49, 28 May 2005 (UTC) == A property of the human mind ? == Other animals (all of them, would I say) obviously have a memory. I've replaced it with "a function of the brain" (since mind may not apply to all animals, while memory does -- in my opinion). Some parts of the article seem to be specific to humans though, feel free to revert, change, etc. if you aren't pleased with my edit. → User:SeeSchloss 16:05, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Good call. There's probably a need for a section on memory in non-human animals. Some experts (e.g., Tulving) are very clear that some types of memory, such as episodic (autobiographical) memory, are only found in humans. There's some quite nice work by Nicola Clayton [http://www.psychol.cam.ac.uk/pages/staffweb/clayton/] that suggests that animals may in fact be capable of, at the very least, episodic-like memory. It's not really my area, but I do some research in memory, and this article could contain much much more information in all sorts of ways. However, memory is such a work-in-progress on many levels, that it would be quite easy to digress beyond what wikipedia probably needs... User:Limegreen 05:52, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Memory
Cognition
Memory
--User:Viriditas | User_talk:Viriditas 00:45, 11 May 2005 (UTC) ==Needs WP articles about very specific fictional contents?== ====You said...==== that ''"most Trek-articles that use it belong only to the MA because Wikipedia is not a Wiki for fiktive terms"''. That, however, is incorrect - Wikipedia ''is'' a Wiki for 'phantastic' terms. Presumably, so is MA. But we do cover pop culture, scifi, fantasy etc in exquisite detail - feel free to contribute! User:Radiant!User_talk:Radiant!meta:mergist 21:30, May 27, 2005 (UTC) :Yes, for important terms, sure. Darth Vader is definitely important (also for a real-world-encyclopedia), Frodo too, James T. Kirk too, but somewhere is a finish line. Drayan must not be here, Trilithium and other things like that too. In the end, should every Uruk-hai in the Battle of Minas Tirith get an own article? That's too much... --User:Memory 21:45, 27 May 2005 (UTC) ====New banner==== ::What do you mean when you say Keep the old version, I'm going to create a new template"? Are you going to ignore the voting process and create a new template as you would like this one to be? You should know that it will be speedily deleted. ::Also, I find it odd that you believe it necessary to link so bombastically to Memory Alpha. It is, after all, a reference, like any other source. Surely, in any article that exists in both wikis, the Memory Aplha article will contain much of the same information as Wikipedia. What then is the added value that theMemory Alpha template adds to the specific article. -- User:Ec5618 14:04, May 30, 2005 (UTC) :::I don't want to link "bombastically" (what do you say about the Wikispecies template?), the contributors of the smaller articles shall be redirected to MA because things like Trilithium just don't belong here, they are not important enough outside of Trek to have an own article here (I say this as a Trekkie). If WP goes this way, we'll have some day articles about every spell from Morrowind or Warcraft, or about every charakter from ST fan fiction (which is banned even on the MA), because there's no argument to stop it if you keep other "small details" from Trek, LotR or whatever. We can't prevent WP not even from getting articles about every living (deceased) human with (descendants with) the ability to add an article about him, because how can we ban this (as "not important enough") if we have an article about Trilithium? - Got it now? :::Originally, I would make a new template for this, then I thought I can use the existing, but now I think it's better to make no template and add a suggestion pattern manually to all smaller articles. --User:Memory 16:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::::Are you suggesting we delete articles on StarTrek topics? ::::: *argh* No! But there were other (nontrek) articles deleted in the past that were not more or less "nonrelevant" than e.g. Trilithium... --User:Memory 23:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::::The wikispecies article links to a page that contains very different information. Memory Alpha will link to articles that might as well be carbon copies. Trilithium looks like a blue link to me, so it exists in Wikipedia. :::::Yes, but other Wikis (e.g. German WP) banned detailed trek/fiction articles like this because of - what I explained above... --User:Memory 23:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC) ::::Adding a suggestion pattern manually is a bit silly, and a somewhat sneaky way of cicumventing the Tfd process. If you want to imput specific text into many articles, use a template. That's what they're for. But if most people want to see a template deleted, they don't want ''that'' information to be added to those articles. -- User:Ec5618 16:56, May 30, 2005 (UTC) ::::: *lol* The deletion voting for the MA template sprung up only as an "answer" to the deletion vote for the HRWiki template, so I don't treat this process any longer as serious... --User:Memory 23:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC) :I don't like the placing of the template. It should be at the bottom of the article. Banners at the top of the article are usually those notifying readers of calls for deletion, clean-up, etc. and is very distracting. If you feel the article shouldn't be in Wikipedia, I suggest starting a poll in the talk page for each article and seek consensus. I have started a discussion on this template at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek and I invite you to participate. (Any direct follow-up to my talk page, please). User:23skidoo 04:26, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ::As I wrote Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek#New Star Trek .22template.22, I adapted the German version which is far bigger than this one and also placed at the top. Ok, the bottom is good too. I don't want to delete the existing articles, I just want to limit the expansion of smaller Trek articles because of the reasons that are explained here. So this banner is only a combination of a general information on the nature of the article and a suggestion. (I keep it here because the discussion is of general interest) --User:Memory 20:49, 31 May 2005 (UTC) Hello User:Memory -- From frustrations with redundancy, I created Template:Hrwiki as a graphical ad. So I totally know where you're coming from. Your arguments against M:Inclusionism above are quite valid, especially in light of the fact that Wikipedia cannot match a fan wiki's willingness to cross the line in use of copyrighted material. Perhaps it is best to take an M:Eventualism standpoint, and help enable an army of editors who'll merely refactor the information so it fits. It may seem like a lot of work to keep deleting fan pages that pop up like mushrooms, but a well-placed ad wouldn't stop them anyway. Maybe we should push for each of the wikis in the Interwiki map to have a page for outlining the balance between the Wikipedia/Wikibooks and itself, enumerating the "encyclopedia-worthy" topics that are worth droning on in an NPOV about...? User:Metaeducation 10:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC) :Generally I'm not an M:Exclusionism, but in this case (detailed fictional content) I think it's not necessary to integrate the whole Trek vocabulary here if there is a Wiki like Memory Alpha. But I don't want to delete anything. --User:Memory 21:14, 31 May 2005 (UTC) ==Template:Memoryalpha (old)== I just noticed that the way you edited Template:Memoryalpha and later Template:Memoryalpha_article, you apparently intended for it to be used in a different context than my original version. The original version was intended to be used exactly like Template:imdb_name, Template:imdb_title, Template:ibdb_name, etc; that is, in the ''External links'' section, on a line with a * at the beginning. (Have you seen these other tempaltes in use? Look at Patrick Stewart#External_links, for instance.) It seemed logical to make the MA templates behave the same way. Now you have edited many articles to include "
Memory
==Patterns== {| align="center" width="75%" class="toccolours" style="text-align: center" | '''This article contains ''fictional'' facts and terms from the Star Trek universe.
Note:''' content of this specific level might be better contributed to the specialized Wiki ''[http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Main_Page Memory Alpha]'' |} ====More about this subject on:==== *
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
M
MA | MB | MC | MD | ME | MF | MG | MH | MI | MJ | MK | ML | MN | MO | MP | MR | MS | MT | MU | MW | MX | MY | MZ |Words begining with Memory:
Memory
Memory
Memory
Memory
Memory
Memory,_Sorrow,_and_Thorn
Memory-mapped_I/O
Memory-mapped_IO
Memory-prediction_framework
Memory-prediction_framework
Memory-prediction_model
Memory-prediction_theory
MemoryAlpha
Memoryalpha
Memoryalpha
Memoryalpha_article
Memoryalpha_article
MemoryHole.com
Memoryless
Memorylessness
MemoryStick
Memorystick_pro
Memorystick_pro_duo
Memory_(Computer)
Memory_(song)
Memory_(song)
Memory_address
Memory_addressing
Memory_address_register
Memory_allocation
Memory_allocation
Memory_Alpha
Memory_Alpha
Memory_Alpha_(Star_Trek)
Memory_augmentation
Memory_barrier
Memory_bias
Memory_buffer_register
Memory_B_cell
Memory_Card
Memory_card
Memory_card
Memory_Cards
Memory_cards
Memory_card_slot
Memory_cell
Memory_Charm
Memory_Charm
Memory_coherence
Memory_Consolidation
Memory_consolidation
Memory_corruption
Memory_data_register
Memory_debugger
Memory_disorders
Memory_distrust_syndrome
Memory_distrust_syndrome
Memory_dump
Memory_effect
Memory_effect
Memory_foam
Memory_Foundations
Memory_Foundations
Memory_fragmentation
Memory_hierarchy
Memory_hole
Memory_Leak
Memory_leak
Memory_leaks
Memory_loss
Memory_management
Memory_management
Memory_management_software
Memory_management_unit
Memory_management_unit
Memory_manager
Memory_mapped_I/O
Memory_mapped_IO
Memory_metal
Memory_metal
Memory_Model
Memory_of_earth
Memory_of_water
Memory_page
Memory_palace
Memory_pool
Memory_Pool_System
Memory_prosthesis
Memory_protection
Memory_puzzle
Memory_retention
Memory_RNA
Memory_scrubbing
Memory_segment
Memory_segmentation
Memory_space
Memory_Stick
Memory_Stick
Memory_stick
Memory_stick
Memory_Stick_Duo
Memory_stick_pro
Memory_stick_pro_duo
Memory_Stick_Select
Memory_swapping
Memory_wall
Memory_World
Memory_wrap-around
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
