Talk:Anatomical plane

Recreation
I've re-created this article as a fork: --LT910001 (talk) 02:48, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The section in anatomical terms of location is becoming very large and warrants its own section.

Proposed merge

 * Plans to merge the individual planes article here.

Hi, LT. I support the merges, since the topics (e.g coronal plane and sagittal plane and transverse plane) cannot be understood individually but inevitably always necessitate comparison together (hence duplication..), and besides, individually they aren't likely to ever become much more than stubs anyway. Cesiumfrog (talk) 00:05, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. I don't mind the fork, but the planes are too closely logically associated for efficient separation. We can have redirs to this article from all the other all the other planes' names which in any case are multiple for each plane (or class of plane). JonRichfield (talk) 18:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

hi, leke. i also agree ,the topics are interdependent of each other

❌ No consensus for a merge. --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:15, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * oppose merge Duplication is not a problem. We can have three independent articles on each plane and also an overall article. This gives straightforward answers to each topic, with as much depth as is needed in each. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:14, 21 December 2014 (UTC)