Talk:Septum

Other uses of the term

"Septum" isn't only used in biology; it's also used for a piece of laboratory equipment in chemistry. There isn't all that much to say about it, but it's still common enough to be deserving of a Wikipedia article. I can't really figure out a good place in the current article to add it to, though. It seems slightly excessive to create a separate article for it to link to that, as the article would start out very short. - Alltat (talk) 20:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Text describing non-existent image

This text was previously under both the chemistry and the histology sections, but there is presently no accompanying image:

The yellow portion is made of flexible cartilage, the quadrangular cartilage. The blue portion is thin bone, the perpendicular plate of the ethmoid bone. The purple portion is thicker bone, the vomer bone.

Adrian J. Hunter 05:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This has been haunting me for a while because it's such an utterly complex situation. I don't think this is within the scope of WP:RM. —harej (talk) 03:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

---

Septum → Septum (biology) — more specific; Only Particle accelerators should be removed - Wickey-nl (talk) 08:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

To me this looks far too complex to sort by a simple uncontested move not to mention the fact that we are only more specific when we have to be. Personally I think Spetum needs to be split into two new articles and the disambiguation page moved to be the main page. Dpmuk (talk) 09:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Right--Wickey-nl (talk) 09:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Moved from "contested requests". Please discuss below. Jafeluv (talk) 09:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Move to septum. Septum already redirects to septum (anatomy) and there is no ambiguity in the term. Also, move septum (disambiguation) to septa (disambiguation) since the only other listing there is SEPTA. — AjaxSmack 22:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• • I think it is OK now.--Wickey-nl (talk) 11:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Tidied up the old article and moved it. Septum (disambiguation) can be moved to Septum.--Wickey-nl (talk) 10:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd clearly contested such a move and also am worried about the 'tidying up' as per my comments on the users talk page. I await this editor's explanation for his actions before deciding how to move forward. Dpmuk (talk) 16:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• First, the old division was confusing, also for others. Several items were placed twice.
• Second, Brain physiology did not really deal with septum.
• Third, Particle accelerators was a really poor attribution, without any context.
• Finally my view about the article chanced while editing, which had to be discussed. After 'tidying up' it looks much different.

Sorry, I did not follow the right procedure.--Wickey-nl (talk) 13:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.