Talk:Near-infrared window in biological tissue
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Euryalus in topic Duplicate article
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Optical window in biological tissue page were merged into Near-infrared window in biological tissue. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Duplicate article
editThis article appears to be a duplicate or near-duplicate of Optical window in biological tissue. I don't have time to sort out what their history is, but they probably ought to be combined! (Did someone intend to make the other title redirect to this one?) --Steuard (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- A merge proposal from 2011 has gone stale without discussion. But the merge seems common-sense - the articles are essentially identical and no reason was given for the 2009 creation of the other page. In the spirit of WP:BRD I have redirected that page to this one.
- One difference between the two is the following, which I will leave to others more expert in the topic. The other page included this in the section on the absorption spectrum for brain tissue:
- "Thus tissue oxygen saturation can be defined as = 0.2 x + 0.8 x ≈ 70%."
- while this page reads:
- "tissue oxygen saturation can be defined as = 0.3 x + 0.7 x ≈ 70%."
- Note the difference in proportions. Other than that the text was essentially the same. But happy to discuss as always. Euryalus (talk) 07:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, further to the above, I have merged across some of the additional text - and one additional reference - from the 2009 fork. Although a wikilink is sufficient as an edit summary I have also included a diff to the most recent un-redirected page, per the conversation here. Noting that the brain absorption content was more recently added on the other page than here, I have also changed the proportion figures to 80/20.
- Again, happy to discuss. Euryalus (talk) 08:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
|}