Talk:Incisive bone

merge

should this not be merged with Premaxilla? --- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmungall (talk • contribs) 21:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

It was suggested before, but the problem is that each term is prominently used for humans and animals, respectively. A merger would wind up being inconvenient for someone regardless of direction, and this way we don't have to worry about the human info overwhelming the animal info. Mokele (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Currently the Premaxilla page contains useful information relevant to the human structure, e.g. embryology. I'm not sure the information on other animals would be overwhelming. The current page is a bit underwhelming in its lack of information. My preference would be to merge and if it ends up getting too big, or there are major anatomical or developmental differences between the human structure and other vertebrates then to split. Cmungall (talk) 00:55, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

IMHO, if there is a merge, premaxilla should be the main page. In humans, the incisive bone is usually just considered part of the maxilla, and given little attention (even medical schools gloss over it). However, in many other species, it's a prominent, distinct part of the upper jaw, with significant teeth. I also know it's used to distinguish between species - pythons have teeth on the premaxilla, boas don't. HCA (talk) 14:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree, and have added a merge tag. These are two terms used for the same bone, and premaxilla is used for the human version too. FunkMonk (talk) 13:34, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

I also support a merge for the above reasons, to the target 'premaxilla'. Tom (LT) (talk) 08:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 10:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)