Note the Wikipedia article for 'Atomic nucleus' was awkward here because first they depict the old concept with protons and neutrons as a bunch of spheres touching each other and in the sub-text explain how it’s outdated, which is fine for the historical context...but then further below in the "Nuclear makeup" section they depict a modern conceptual visualization of the electron cloud wave function, but still depict the protons and neutrons as separate spherical bodies (albeit each now a cloud gradient body, but still as distinct spheres touching each other). And again, the written sub-text is an explanation of how the visualization is not at all correct...why not just actually visually depict as correct as possible since they are able to do that for electrons?
So, wondering if this is just a weakness of the Wikpedia articles, or if it extends to a deeper matter. Such as, on the one hand, claiming the categorial distinction of protons and neutrons as separate particles as the main defining paradigm for understanding an atomic nucleus to begin with, yet on the other hand having no clear way to visually depict them as distinct wave/probability distributions in a visual spatial depiction of an atomic nucleus.