Talk:Splenorenal ligament

Pciture layout
The picture is laid out incorrectly. The spleen is on the left side and the splenorenal ligament is on the left side however the picture has put both the spleen and ligament on the right side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.251.231 (talk) 23:53, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Phrenicosplenic ligament
Are these the same thing? -- CFCF  🍌 (email) 09:14, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * They seem to be.....The info box for splenorenal ligament says its labelled bottom left which is actually labelled phrenicolienal (an alternate name) ligament. Also dictionary definition for phrenicosplenic or colienal goes straight to splenorenal. Iztwoz (talk) 16:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, to get this straight, there are multiple names, which one should we use?
 * The following names exist for the same organ:
 * Phrenicolienal ligament
 * Phrenicosplenic ligament 80 hits on g-scholar old name used in 1918 Gray's
 * Splenorenal ligament 2200 hits on g-scholar
 * Lienorenal ligament ~650 hits on g-scholar (the name I learned)
 * -- -- CFCF  🍌 (email) 17:33, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * What a confusing state of affairs, I suggest we merge the relevant articles into greater omentum and lesser omentum as subsections. I could be wrong, but Phrenicosplenic ligament appears to be a ligament connecting the diaphragm (eg phrenic nerve) and the spleen, whereas Splenorenal ligament connects the spleen and the kidney. Unfortunately my books aren't detailed enough to explain this. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't have anything detailed enough either, but TA has them as two different structures now that you say so, both sorted under the omentum majus, and forming borders of the omental bursa. Sobotta's 1914 has some additional text we can snipe, and I found this image that might explain the differences . (Haven't found any free image though.)
 * The splenorenal/lienorenal is the one with the splenic artery, so we should probably make that distinction. Apart from that I'm all for merging them to greater omentum. -- CFCF  🍌 (email) 10:21, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There are sources saying they are the same thing as well, so I think a merge is in place, and we can go with that statement "distinctions are often nebulous" that's in the text. :) -- CFCF  🍌 (email) 10:25, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Second the respective mergers different articles for the same topic seem unnecessary. HoneyBadger4 (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There seemed a consensus here, but no action. The concensus was for a merge to Greater omentum, but readers over there haven't been invited to comment. I've therefore listed the new merge proposal, tagging on all 3 pages. Klbrain (talk) 16:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Support items are already mentioned on the target page --Iztwoz (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)