Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dentistry/Article rating
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is for any comments concerning the article rating process used in WikiProject Dentistry.
[edit] Importance Rating
I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out which rating to use...I think this system might be great for an overall encyclopedia, but there are too many categories for the dental section. Enamel pearl, for instance...initially I gave it a TOP. That was prior to reading the dental method for classification...I figured people on every continent know about enamel pearls. But with your method, I knocked it down to a MID, because, well, what's an enamel pearl? We learn about it in school like we're going to see it on every patient...same with Wegener's granulomatosis. Then it's on every exam. Then we never see or hear about it. What could possibly be less important than an enamel pearl. Maybe an enamel knot or cord. So those two get a LOW? I mean, this starts off too subjective to begin with, and now it's like intraoperator subjectivity from day to day makes this system way too volatile. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 18:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Good day and thank you for your work on dental crowns, their need, structure and effectiveness.
Along with this article Wikipedia should present the newly invented manner of effectively protecting badly decayed or broken teeth with a "direct" crowning procedure now identified as the "'Carlson Restorative Crown (CRC). The process and concept can be viewed at <www.carlsonbiologicaldentistry.com> and has been published in Dentistry Today Feb. 1999, Popular Mechanics 1998, Journal Academy of General Dentistry October 2003, and Dentistry Today October 2006.
Demonstrated in those articles and on web site noted prviously is how a tooth can be reconstructed, in situ, with current space age composites. In this methodology there is no need for radical tooth reduction (often leading irreversible gangrenous pulpitis), impressions, bite registrations, temporization, laboratory procedures, or second visits!
I believe Wikipedia should present a full section on this approach.
Sincerely, with respect, I AM Truth, Dr. Ronald S. Carlson agent Syntro-Research, Inc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.253.117.236 (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
