Talk:Osteoblast

Untitled
The article currently says "Osteoblasts produce a drug called temoxoline barbebutenol of osteoid," this seems to me to be nonsense.The exact phrasing has gotten repeated on many sites that use wikipedia content. I am close to certain that osteoblasts don't produce a barbituate.Even if it was;it wouldn't be called a drug when it is produced in the body the body. I am not knowledgeable about anatomy. Insulin is referred to as a hormone when produced by the pancreas, a drug when abstracted or synthesized elsewhere. Also vasopressin a drug when synthetic, exact same molecule is antidiuretic hormone when produced by the pituitary. Googling "osteoblasts barbituate" produces articles about barbitute effects on osteoblasts but no mention of osteoblasts producing barbituate like substance. I'm 99% sure the temoxeline barbutenol reference is pushing of a meme vandalism or nonsense vandalism. Anyone know differnt?Tjc (talk) 02:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The edit that added the temoxoline barbebutenol stuff was from an IP that added nonsense many places on wikipedia so I felt it warranted to edit things to the state before the barbebutenol stuff was added, especially as no objections came up here.Tjc (talk) 08:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Content added about the role of BMP4. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncirillopenn (talk • contribs) 20:06, 28 January 2013 (UTC) You shouldn't wikilink thee word cartilage to much, it seems Drowe002 (talk) 02:48, 10 October 2015 (UTC)repetitive.

Can someone Help? There is a wrong Link to the Arabic page
User:Andreasmperu: This article is linked (from the English page) to a wrong article correspondant to "Osteocyte" not "Osteoblast". All other languages have correct link to the Arabic page. Can you help me remove the current Arabic link so that I could add the proper link to"ar" page "بانية العظم", Thanks :) ?--Yahia.Mokhtar (talk) 05:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC).

Energy metabolism
10.1210/er.2017-00064 JFW &#124; T@lk  18:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Too General
This article reads more like a general discussion of bone development and degradation than being specifically about osteoblasts. As it is, it looks like it should either be retitled, or overhauled to actual focus on them.