Talk:Glossary of dentistry

Last tooth - Rear Most tooth??? towards the throat? etc. last tooth assumes we laymen know wtf the first tooth is.
 * No need to get angry -- last would indeed refer to rear-most.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 20:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Is dental arch defined? Is quadrant defined? Mesial - which term are we explaining here? the first sentence, filled with jargon, seems more about this term than distal. This is called a antonym, It is a separate thought. Separate thoughts belong in separate sentences. Do NOT EVER define one obscure technical tern by using, lets see, 5 equally obscure technical terms. All that in the first sentence. The following are used in this paragraph and not defined in the article: quadrant;dental arch;anterior; midline; distal surface; posterior teeth; distobuccal; distolingual; cusp; corner. IF this isn't incompetence on a grand scale, I don't know what is. And this is just one paragraph of the entire article. BTW it appears that "midline" is not a term that belongs (defined) here since the link is to a separate article. Perhaps that should be reconsidered. Think about this: distal refers to the direction towards doesn't it INDICATE that direction? it IS a direction, rather than referential of one, isn't it? Or do all word "refer"? And if all words refer, isn't pointing out that fact redundant, in general?
 * Distal refers to the direction towards the last tooth in each quadrant of a dental arch, as opposed to mesial, which refers to the direction towards the anterior midline. Each tooth can be described as having a distal surface and, for posterior teeth, a distobuccal (DB) and a distolingual (DL) corner or cusp. What GARBAGE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.241.207 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 29 March 2009
 * You're so upset! As this article is viewed over 2000 times a month, and you're the only one to complain, it looks as though your comments are representing a mere sliver of even the minority.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 20:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Mesial
My hygienist pronounces mesial as musial. Is this kind of variation common? 216.99.198.66 (talk) 02:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No -- that would not be a variation of normal. The two accepted pronunciations are "MEE-zee-ul" and "MEE-zhee-ul" (in the second one, the "zh" is pronounced like Zsa Zsa Gabor.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 20:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Dental terminology
We have an article on Anatomical terminology and one on Medical terminology, would there be any support for a move to Dental terminology? Also, as this list is complete and easy to understand/read, editors (?) may wish to consider a featured list nomination. I will at some point link this article from the Anatomical terminology series in a 'see also' area. --LT910001 (talk) 10:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree with move... "Commonly used terms of relationship and comparison in dentistry" is too long when "dental terminology" says the same thing. Lesion  10:44, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Support move, with a minor complication. Sorry late to comment; I was not aware of this discussion till I saw the move to Dental terminology on my watchlist just now. The title "Dental terminology" is too vague/general for this list in its current form; this is a list of terms for location and direction within the oral cavity. It is thus a subset of dental terminology. This list is the oral cavity homolog to anatomical terms of location, not to anatomical terminology; the former is a subset of the latter. The title Dental terms of location and direction would really be the most accurate. However, I'm OK with leaving the article at its current title (Dental terminology), because this list could be expanded over time to become a full dental glossary ("living up" to the current title). The natural organization scheme would be alphabetical, of course. But I think it would be neat, pedagogically, to keep the "location and direction" list as a separate section; each location/direction term would appear in the main body's A-Z sequence, of course, but their entries there would just be linked cross-refs to their "home base" entry in the location/direction section. This would be just like when you look up "[whatever] syndrome" in Dorland's and it says, "see entry under syndrome". Dorland's follows that pattern for syndrome, disease, sign, nerve, disorder, muscle, test, and other terms. It is useful because you get to see all the subentries for syndrome (or disease, or test) filtered into one list. Regards, Quercus solaris (talk) 14:24, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Addendum to my comment: BTW, I well realize that the project I just sketched out (a complete dental glossary) is a large volume of work that won't get done anytime soon. But hey, eventually we'll get there. Quercus solaris (talk) 14:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I understand your concerns. I think this title is easier to understand, matches these other 'terminology' headings, and perhaps will encourage editing... eventually. We have a similar situation re. anatomy: Glossary of anatomy matching the alphabetical organisation that you state, and Anatomical terminology which is conceptually organised. There is a role for both, in my opinion. --LT910001 (talk) 23:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)