Talk:Aniseikonia

Refractive surgery
The following appears in the article as of the date and time of this post: However, partial correction often improves the patient's vision comfort already significantly. Little is known yet about the possibilities of using surgical intervention to correct aniseikonia. It is followed by a hidden note. Is this information up to date? Garvin (talk) 23:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Jan 18, 2008
I have taken another step to reconstruct this article. I researched the Optical Diagnostics Website. It is an information section from a site trying to sell a piece of diagnostic software. While this is not consistent with Wikipedia Verifiability Standards, much of the information is still accurate. I am making attempts to use other references to confirm facts used in that outside article.

I will do more as I find time. Post any concerns or comments here or on my talk page. Garvin (talk) 21:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This content appears to have been added to the article but 'hidden'. In other words, it can only be seen by viewing/editing the underlying source code.  —DIV (1.129.106.159 (talk) 05:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC))

What causes aniseikonia?
[ Blank contribution by Special:Contributions/2601:2C3:4201:D70:CC1A:C3C1:6DB3:367B on 28 Feb 2020. ]
 * As a guideline: "Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject".  Wikipedia is not a forum.
 * The article does already address causes of aniseikonia under the heading "Causes". If you feel that the article is incomplete or unclear, then please provide specific & constructive feedback on the Talk page.  Alternatively, if you are confident about what should be added or amended, then you can be bold and make the edits yourself!
 * —DIV (1.129.106.159 (talk) 04:48, 27 February 2021 (UTC))

Symptoms in relation to distance of object viewed
Under "Diagnosis", the article emphasises the viewing of nearby objects. This seems to imply that the effects are more obvious/problematic for near vision than for distance vision. Could this please be clarified in the article, under either "Diagnosis" or "Symptoms". —DIV (1.129.106.159 (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC))

Shaw lens
In recent years the "Shaw lens" has received publicity. If it is just one of many alternatives available for specialised (iseikonic) spectacle lenses, then it should not be singled out in the article. But if it is the market leader, or if it happens to use a technology widely acknowledged to be superior, then it probably could be mentioned, with appropriate citations of reliable third-party references. (The same goes for any other company/brand.) —DIV (1.129.106.159 (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2021 (UTC))