Talk:Accessory nerve

Accessory nerve has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 4, 2017. (Reviewed version).

Anatomy: Neuroanatomy High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-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.

The[edit]

The spinal part (ramus) of the accessory nerve actually enters the skull via the foramen magnum (rather than leaving the skull through that foramen), where it loosely joins with the cranial part (ramus) of that nerve to form the intracranial segment of the accessory nerve. Then, the fibers in the cranial ramus join with those of the vagus, while the fibers of the spinal ramus continue as a separate bundle. Finally, both the vagus nerve (with the cranial ramus fibers of the accessory) and the accessory nerve proper leave the skull through the jugular foramen.

Rewrite[edit]

I rewrote the article from the stance that accessory nerve has only a spinal component, but didn't want to eliminate the mention of the cranial component altogether. The result is a bit of a mish-mash as I didn't separate out the various classification schemes as clearly as I perhaps could have. I'll be doing another reorganization so that the article speaks only of the spinal accessory nerve, with a section devoted to the traditional description and a note on how that description has been shown to be erroneous. --David Iberri (talk) 22:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]