Talk:Fundus photography

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine: Ophthalmology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Ophthalmology task force (assessed as High-importance).

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Fundus photography. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

The contents of the Fundus camera page were merged into Fundus photography on 2012-08-26. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

I think the topics are too similar, and the article sizes too small, to justify being two separate ones. In a very distant future, we might make them separate again (like camera and photography) if they become long enough. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Support it looks like at the significant information in Fundus camera would fit into a new section here. --Kvng (talk) 15:10, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's been done. Rytyho usa (talk) 14:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

user:Rytyho usa did it on 2012-08-26. -—Kvng 19:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone,

we are a group of Orthoptic students from La Trobe University, and we are interested in improving and editing Orthoptic/Ophthalmic related articles/pages for the benefit of everyone.

A few of us are currently working together as a group to improve on the present article. We intend to add more subheadings and information regarding fundus photography. Some subheadings we propose to include are the history of fundus photography, pros and cons and future advancements. Group2cla (talk) 00:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear everyone, just like to clarify/advise that we will be editing the article in various stages throughout the next few weeks. Sorry for any inconvenience caused and we seek your kind understanding. Group2cla (talk) 23:40, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fundus photography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061209143555/http://www.opsweb.org:80/Op-Photo/Fundus/CFundus/funphot2.htm to http://www.opsweb.org/Op-Photo/Fundus/CFundus/funphot2.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061210074309/http://www.opsweb.org:80/Op-Photo/Fundus/CFundus/funphot3.htm to http://www.opsweb.org/Op-Photo/Fundus/CFundus/funphot3.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:11, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]