Talk:Nasolacrimal duct

Redundant Article, consider merging

There seem to be 3 nearly identical articles on this topic. They all even use the same illustration photo. Perhaps they should be merged.

• Lacrimal apparatus
• Lacrimal canaliculi

Cheesefromwater (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Lacrimal apparatus, lacrimal canaliculi and nasolacrimal duct could be fused into a single one, that should be called Lacrimal apparatus. They should defenitely not be merged with nasolacrimal canal. Perhaps it should include the lacrimal gland.

The lacrimal apparatus is divided in different parts, as it is specified in the article. But the nasolacrimal canal is neither a part of the lacrimal apparatus nor a synonym or part of the nasolacrimal duct. According to different anatomy reference textbooks (Feneis, Sobotta, Gray), the canal is the osseous space inside the superior maxilla (it is a part of the bone) and the duct is the part of the lacrimal apparatus that goes through the canal. They're radically different things and should not be fused into one article.

- Sumurruchu (talk) 11:15, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Where...??? and pictures

Where is the tear duct located in the body? Also, the pictures aren't as informative, at least to me (i can't understand most of the things on there :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beary605 (talk • contribs) 01:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To merge the articles on the duct and the canal, for context and short text. Klbrain (talk) 22:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

---

• Suppport the March proposal to merge Nasolacrimal canal and this page on the duct, because they're so closely-related topics their best discussed together for context. Distinctions between them can be discussed on the page. Merging here might be best, as this is the better-developed page. Klbrain (talk) 09:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

  • '''Support''' makes sense to cover these two small structures together. Tom (LT) (talk) 11:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

• Support, per the above. –Tobias (talk) 16:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

  Don't support the merge. See my comment in "Redundant Article, consider merging". Sumurruchu (talk) 11:19, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Of course they are not the same thing, but that is not the relevant point. The canal is largely occupied by the duct, so it makes sense to discuss them together. That is, the formal merge reasons are context and short text, not duplication. Disjointed information can be difficult to follow, as we perhaps we can see from this discussion ... Klbrain (talk) 14:50, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Note that none of the participants indicated a direction; however, 'duct' is better developed, and hence probably the better target.   Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 22:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)