Talk:Iliac artery

Set index article
Hi. Should this current disambig be turned into a Set index articles? I am a bit split in the matter and would appreciate your input. Kind regards JakobSteenberg (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi JakobSteenberg - had thought that the three arteries could be merged here but they (two of them) seem to be more involved with separate tables..? Cheers--Iztwoz (talk) 20:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC) But I don't think it needs to be a disambiguation.--Iztwoz (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * IMO a merger is not the best solution mostly since the respective articles have enough information to stand alone. Should we just keep this as a disambig and instead of a set-index article here I could expand a bit at common iliac artery about what externa and interna supplies? JakobSteenberg (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * A similar situation exists with Carotid artery. Would it be better to just redirect to the common arteries in both situations? Those arteries will have subsections or links to their branches. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:34, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Lets just keep both disambig-pages and then I will add a bit of information on branches to common carotid and iliac when I get the time. If we turned the disambig-pages into redirects we would only be saving the readers ONE mouse click and there is most likely a good percentages that searches for carotid artery but means the internal and so on. Deal?