Talk:Mesonephric duct

message: I suggest this article be moved to "mesonephric duct". I know "Wolffian duct" gives slightly more google results, and therefore is slightly more commonly used. However, mesonephric duct is more descriptive when comparing with other ducts, e.g. the paramesonephric duct, or the final "nephric" duct. In short, it is a better name. Mikael Häggström 17:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to "mesonephric duct"

message: Surely the ducts do not both develop and wither?  Is it not fail to develop and wither?
IceDragon64 (talk) 00:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female Development 

message: According to 6th edition of Moore and Persaud "Before we are born - Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defacts", the prostate is NOT derived from the mesonephric duct (as stated in the article), but rather the urogenital sinus. Anybody know what's correct?
(Grillspyd (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of Prostate 

message: Please add comments on histology too  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.183.151.172 (talk) 04:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Histology  

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests May 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:27, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Gray19 with color.png Nominated for Deletion

message: I propose this (more appropriate) merge because:
* A lot of content is duplicated between the two articles
* 'Wolffian structures' is shorthand for structures derived from the Mesonephric duct (which, as it states, serves as the anlange for these structures)
* It is needlessly fragmented to have two separate articles covering the same topic, per WP:FORK
* Merging the content will benefit readers, by reducing needless fragmentation, centralising content, and providing a greater outline, with context, of the content in the resulting article LT910001 (talk) 23:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: LT910001, did you consider which of these titles is more common -- "Wolffian system" or "Mesonephric duct -- per WP:Common name and Wikipedia:MEDMOS#Article titles? The "Wolffian duct" and "Mesonephric duct" are showing themselves as interchangeable in some sources, but I wonder a bit about the interchangeability of "Wolffian system." Also, it's worth noting that Encyclopædia Britannica has an article on Wolffian duct and on Mesonephric duct. I know that we don't have to copy Encyclopædia Britannica; just pointing out those articles. Flyer22 (talk) 07:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't note that, however there are already several Wolffian articles which point towards the mesonephric duct, and we also have the article titled paramesonephric duct, which is why I proposed a merge in that direction. However per n-gram I appear to be in the wrong on this: . If we make a change, it will have to involve several articles to make sure that we are consistent, and we may need to consult the archives to see if there was a previous debate over their names. If there is consensus, then we will need to conduct a move over redirect. Because of the effort involved and the lack of clarity I'd be happy to maintain the status quo, but I am not too fussed either way. What are your thoughts? --LT910001 (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, LT910001, maybe address this at WP:MED for wider input? These matters concern medical aspects as well, which is why they are tagged above on the talk page as being in Portal:Medicine. And, as you know, WP:MED has a lot more talk page watchers, and is generally more active, than WP:Anatomy. Flyer22 (talk) 23:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, I think this would benefit from a wider audience. I'm a little busy today, so would you mind if I draft a response and post it on the weekend?--LT910001 (talk) 10:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Posted here: :Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anatomy#Mesonephric_duct_.2F_Wolffian_duct --LT910001 (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Wolffian system]] 

message: That's the question I wanted answered and this article didn't help me. --Waqqashanafi (talk) 16:29, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of mesonephric duct