Talk:Dental drill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Medicine This article is supported by WikiProject Dentistry. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the project or you can direct questions about the rating system here.
Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

I was trying to link to a page about dental drills, and realized that Wikipedia had none. So I went and created one, despite knowing next to nothing about the subject. If an actual dentist, or anyone who knows anything about the subject, could review and expand the article, I'd be grateful. —Ilmari Karonen 01:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and how hard could it be for someone to take a photo of dental drill? There's plenty of pictures on the web, but so far I haven't found any free ones. —Ilmari Karonen 01:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

You got your pic. Another one could be found here. And we really must move this article to the more appropriate term, "dental handpiece." "Dental drill" has fallen into disfavor, even though it is the most common popular term. -Dozenist talk 16:34, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Sorry for not following up on this sooner. I see you already included the picture in the article. I've now created a redirect from dental handpiece, and will place a request at WP:RM to see if there's a consensus for moving the article. How's that sound? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I respectfully object to the entry representing alternative means of tooth cutting (i.e., air abrasion, laser), as being more precise than the more traditional turbine handpiece; I can assure you that these tools are not. As to their being less painful, well-- the jury is out on this one. Suffice it to say that the preferred source of objective information is not promotional material from either a device manufacturer or an end user. I believe you should omit these unsubstantiated claims.

--
Mark Bornfeld DDS
dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY 23:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs changing, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use out the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. —Ilmari Karonen 09:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Requested move

Dozenist has proposed above that this page be moved to Dental handpiece. I've listed this at Wikipedia:Requested moves to see if the proposal has consensus support. I personally abstain from the voting. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Thank you for bringing this topic up. I just wanted to mention here the professional term "dental handpiece" is more favored now since references to a "drill" is looked down upon in most of the dental community. Nonetheless, since it is commonly known to the public as a drill, I think it only makes sense to have a redirect from dental drill to dental handpiece and to mention the common name in the article as well. -Dozenist talk 04:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Support, I defer to the unflappable dental knowledge of the Dozenist. All this sounds fishy to me though; it seems like the dentists just don't like the word "drill" and the horror stories that have grown up arround it. "Handpiece," though, sounds innocuous enough . . . until it gets in your mouth, anyway. :) - Jersyko talk 04:40, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I support the move to "handpiece", as this is the preferred term. I do agree that there should be a redirect from dental drill. --
    Mark Bornfeld DDS
    dentaltwins.com
    Brooklyn, NY 04:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Wikipedia MoS standard is 'most common name', regardless of technical or professional preferences: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). Waterguy 20:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Provided that dental drill will redirect to the handpiece article and that the latter discuss the nomenclatural issues. --Zantastik 22:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Hands down, overwhelming usage. Gene Nygaard 23:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

The above "oppose" comment by Waterguy is well taken, and would seem to be consistent with the Wikipedia naming conventions. Indeed, the average user might well prefer the term "dental drill", and would certainly think of that word before the term "handpiece". However, if I may presume to know the minds of the framers of the naming conventions, they never intended to advocate for the use of an incorrect name. Perhaps a technical distinction, but a dental handpiece is not a drill, and is not used in a way that is analogous to a carpenter's drill (I will omit the technical reasons for this in the interest of brevity). One might as well call a wood router a drill simply because the average lay person would not know the proper name. This situation might present in any situation where a technique, instrument, or other modality used by a limited number of users is referenced by someone outside the user group. The only difference here is that there are a fair number of individuals who have a passing acquaintance with the handpiece. However, those brief encounters don't necessarily justify the assignment of an inappropriate name.--
Mark Bornfeld DDS
dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY 22:25, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Move request

There does not seem to be consensus for the requested move; if it is reached, please repost on WP:RM (I am removing the entries on that page to clear up the blacklog). I also added a sentence at the beginning of the paragraph; please feel free to revert if it is a misinterpretation. Thanks! --HappyCamper 18:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Speed

The article states old drills spun at "up to" 15 rpm, like hand drills. I don't know who's working the handdrill, but 15 rpm sounds incredibly slow, and it is worded as if that were 'top speed' at the time.

Can anyone confirm / cite?

—DIV (128.250.80.15 (talk) 08:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC))

Most air driven Hi-Speed Handpieces run at 380-450K RPM with no load, and under load the cutting speed drops to around 200,000rpm . I have never heard or read before that the handpiece reaches speeds of up to 800,000 rpm. Handpieces that now run on electric motors top out at 200K rpm, being the motor runs at 40,000 rpm and the handpiece has a 1:5 ratio, used for crown preparations etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.247.66 (talk) 15:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)