Talk:Zygomatic bone

“Society and culture” is clearly biased

I don’t consider high cheekbones a beauty trait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.72.1.156 (talk) 18:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

RFE

This page really needs some help. It still resembles a Grey's Anatomy lift to an embarrassing degree, doesn't talk about the cheekbone as it affects visible facial structure (high/low cheekbones, etc), is overly technical, and unaccessable to the layman. It probably ought to either be renamed to cheekbone as well. I would also recommend that we find ourselves some pictures or facial models showing cheekbone structure. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 08:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it should be expanded, but disagree that it should be renamed to "cheekbone". --Arcadian 19:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

More expansion needed and should be renamed "Zygomatic Arch".

The article can always be expanded but the title should remain. Cheekbone and zygomatic arch should redirect to this article. Alex.tan 04:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI: I translated this article to Swedish. I also translated zygomatic arch (Okbensbåge) and changed the redirect here on enwp, so it now leeds to Zygomatic process of temporal bone.

/ Mats Halldin 10:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

This is an article on the bone, and thats what its called; zygomatic bone, or malar bone.

Proposed Merge

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.

After over three years, there is no consensus to merge these two articles. WTF? (talk) 18:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

---

Honestly, I'm conflicted. On one hand, they're the same bone. On the other, I worry that stuffing jugal at the bottom of this page will only further the anthropocentric bias that overwhelms most of the anatomy articles, as well as subtly discouraging efforts to expand upon the coverage of the jugal as a whole. Mokele (talk) 01:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we should induce a paradigm shift and include 'zygomatic', 'cheekbone', and 'malar' all under 'jugal'? This, as far as I'm concerned, would remove any anthropocentrism... it would also incite a barrage of attacks from concerned anthropologists who will wonder where their bones went. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.213.176.227 (talk) 18:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

While I'm sorely tempted to show those mammal-centric folks what's what, I'm afriad that the use of Zygomatic is so common and widespread that it would actually make WP less useful and more confusing to merge into jugal. Mokele (talk) 19:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

This merge should definitely not happen. While they *are* the same bone, fusing them into the term used for the minority of taxa serves only to further accentuate the anthropocentric/mammalocentric bias in anatomical articles on WP. Think of it like merging articular with malleus - the bones are homologous, but it would be a disservice to readers to simply lump them together, obscuring the non-mammalian bone due to the vast preponderance of mammal-oriented anatomical information. Plus, what is lost by allowing them to remain separate? It simply ensures those searching for "jugal" will come to a page with information oriented towards the bone in non-mammals, rather than having to dig through the zygomatic bone page to find the information. HCA (talk) 15:52, 24 January 2013 (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.

Proposed merge with Temporal surface of the zygomatic bone

There is no need to be constrained by the arrangement of 1918 Gray's Anatomy in our coverage of the Zygomatic bone. Splitting it into four pages based on processes is confusing and needlessly fragmented. Displaying this in a single article allows the zygomatic bone to be covered in greater depth, with extra context given by the additional information. Tom (LT) (talk) 22:58, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I support all of the merges HCA (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done

Proposed merge with Orbital process of the zygomatic bone

As above Tom (LT) (talk) 22:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done Klbrain (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Lateral process of the zygomatic bone

As above Tom (LT) (talk) 22:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done Klbrain (talk) 17:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

"Zygomatic arches, also known as high cheek bones, are considered physically attractive in some cultures, in both males and females." and in other cultures low cheek bones are considered physically attractive in both males and females? why in other cultures low bone cheeks are considered physically attractive in both males and females?

"Zygomatic arches, also known as high cheek bones, are considered physically attractive in some cultures, in both males and females." and in other cultures low cheek bones are considered physically attractive in both males and females? why in other cultures low bone cheeks are considered physically attractive in both males and females? 77.137.71.27 (talk) 08:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Human Anatomy Lab

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 February 2024 and 13 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Howardhailey (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Howardhailey (talk) 03:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)