Talk:Dental abrasion

Rating
I marked this article as a stub due to its length and as having mid importance. A picture or diagram is needed, and further explanation will help improve the article. - Dozenist talk  18:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Article Specialty
Under the classification and external resources box on the right, the 'Specialty' is listed as Gastroenterology... Surely this is not correct??

Liam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.48.58 (talk) 08:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Done. Thanks for pointing this out. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 12:18, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Article Editing
I have been going through recent literature and sifting through plenty of images displaying non-carious lesions but am yet to find an appropriate image showing Abrasion. [User:S.hannig96]]S.hannig96 (talk) 08:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

"Abfraction, Abrasion, Biocorrosion, and the Enigma of Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A 20-Year Perspective" is a very good article, perhaps we could use an image from this? Also, I think it would be a good idea to incorporate a brief description of treatment options in the introduction.. agree? [User:Sjpalmer94]]Sjpalmer26 (talk) 08:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes I have had look at this article Sjpalmer26 and it has some good pictures that could be good. Also I have added some information on RDA as well CBrown2657 (talk) 08:24, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I think we need to cut back in the aetiology section, I think theres too much information and people might not read itCBrown2657 (talk) 10:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

The last paragraph in the aetiology section needs revising. I think at the moment it is describing erosion. The link between acidic pH and abrasion needs to be defined clearly. Sjpalmer26 (talk) 10:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Sjpalmer26, it sounds like erosion to me.CBrown2657 (talk) 10:22, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

That is fair enough, and I can see that you have revised this? With all the research about the Aetiology it was hard to conclude in concisely about the abrasive purposes. I tried to stay as far away as possible from the erosion however they usually go hand in hard. Thanks for your input. The page has come along nicely. C.watkins (talk) 10:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I have updated all the references as well so for now we are finished. C.watkins (talk) 11:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey I have been wondering, does the referencing come under the referencing title not the footnotes?? Because footnotes are more of a 'note' that if the reader wanted to know more about, outside of the context of ie. abrasion then this would be hyperlinked to the footnote section and explained more thoroughly C.watkins (talk) 11:01, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I have done some more research into the footnotes and this website gives some reasoning behind what a footnote is... bascially it is a reference with some added notes about this reference that are related to the topic of discussion. If you think that the 'reference title needs to be changed back to foot notes then go ahead but we are only citing the references not expanding on them, if that makes sense? http://penandthepad.com/difference-between-footnote-bibliography-mla-citation-1503.html this is the website for the footnotes explanation. C.watkins (talk) 11:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

The page looks a lot better now guys! I think we did are really good job developing and adding more information to the wiki page. The resources we have used are all current and the pictures will help the public as well. Good job team! [User:S.hannig96]] 122.151.197.239 (talk) 03:14, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that makes sense C.watkins, well done everyone, this page is very informative CBrown2657 (talk) 09:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)