Talk:Zygomatic process

message: I don't think the initial presentation is correct, that there is a collective zygomatic process that includes the zygomatic bone and the 'zygomatic processes' of adjacent bones (temporal,  maxilla, frontal) and structures (orbital) projecting and joining to the zygomatic bone.  There is only the situation of a number of different zygomatic processes all qualified by the bone of which they are processes (just as listed in the article), and their attachment to the zygomatic bone.
142.68.161.187 (talk) 22:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, and given that there have been no objections over more than 6 years, I've edited the text to reflect this meaning Klbrain (talk) 21:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zygomatic process(es) does not include zygomatic bone 

message: Pointlessly fragmented approach to a tiny structure that makes it very difficult for readers to understand. Readability would be enhanced by merging. Tom (LT) (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and  Klbrain (talk) 21:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Zygomatic process of frontal bone]] 

message: Given that the case has been made to merge in the frontal process, the same argument holds for the processes of both the temporal and maxilla. Klbrain (talk) 21:50, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge processes

message: In non-human terms, the temporal arch consists of processes from the jugal ("zygomatic") bone and the squamosal bone; in various mammals, the squamosal has fused with several other bones (prootic, opisthotic...) and forms (in the adult anyway) the squamous part and the zygomatic process of the temporal bone.
Separate question: why do all these articles for skull bones pretend that only humans have them?
David Marjanović (talk) 16:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that lots of the articles on bones of the skull could/should have content from other species, indicating which species is being referred to. I suppose the current balance exists because of the specialisms of active editors and the early availability of text from Gray's Anatomy. Klbrain (talk) 12:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  If at all, merge with "squamous part" 

message: There is a 2017 merge template on the article and other related stubs. I came to this through a twelve year old that liked the rotating skull on the Zygomatic process of maxilla. I transferred some of that material to this article and looking at the others since there was consensus to merge that has a career tag on them. Otr500 (talk) 13:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article merging 

message: : The lead states Each Zygomatic process is the part of a bone which articulates with the zygomatic bone. The three processes are: 1)- Zygomatic process of frontal bone from the frontal bone, 2)- Zygomatic process of maxilla from the maxilla, 3)-Zygomatic process of temporal bone from the temporal bone.
: The "Processes of the zygomatic bone" section state there are four process: frontosphenoidal, orbital, maxillary and temporal processes.
: While this is likely common knowledge to a specialist I see it has been postulated the "Zygoma has not three but four processes" Google books: Oral and Maxillofacial Trauma (Chapter 16, part 3, pp. 356). The set index article Zygoma lists: "The zygomatic process, a bony protrusion of the human skull, mostly composed of the zygomatic bone but also contributed to by the frontal bone, temporal bone, and maxilla". 
:I understand there are many different "processes" but there can be less confusion. The temporal processes has the mastoid process but possibly the "Processes of the zygomatic bone" should be left out,  otherwise referred to in another way, or worded differently to avoid confusion.
:A "specialist" would likely have far better resources than Wikipedia, and I assume we are still interested in a "layman's" approach, so if someone can delve into this a little I would like to feel at least on the same level as the twelve year old that brought it up. Thanks,  Otr500 (talk) 15:04, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed