User talk:Dozenist

Hello. I welcome comments here. Please add a new section when starting a new topic, and please use ~~~~ to sign your comments. When responding to comments, I usually will return a message on your talk page. Thanks.

Archives:
Archive 1 (3/1/2005–7/30/2005)
Archive 2 (8/1/2005–1/31/2006)
Archive 3 (2/1/2006–6/30/2006)
Archive 4 (7/1/2006–12/31/2006)

Contact Response

Hi Dozenist. I just noticed your note on my Talk page. Sorry it has taken so long to respond. I am willing to help, but would like to talk to you prior. Please email me when you return from your honeymoon. Best wishes – Drschmitt 12:15, 5 June 2007

Dental caries

Hi Dozenist. It's none of my business, but I think your article is ready for FAC now, rather than doing the Good Article thing first—that is, if you intend to try for featured status. I'd support it. –Outriggr § 01:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Reviewed! –Outriggr § 05:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Portal

Nice work. You should get one of those barnstar things. When are your exams? You must be final year at this stage. If you need any help (I seriously doubt it), let me know. I didn't do American boards, but I know something about some things. I think. I've forgotten most of it, and I'm only out 6 months. Anyway. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dr-G (talk • contribs).

Portal:Dentistry

Oh your quite welcome, thats what were all here for. The portal is looking great by the way. — WilsBadKarma ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 08:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I wanted to commend you on the new layout of the topics section I never really like the old format but the new one looks incredible. — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 02:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Dental caries FA

Why don't you nominate Dental caries for FA status? And thank you for your kind comment on my talk page regarding Tooth_enamel. --Parker007 00:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Dentistry WikiProject

Hi, thanks for your message. I realize the time and effort that you have been putting into this project - it is commendable. I will try to help out as time allows. Best regards, Nazli 02:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

A peer review

I wanted to personally thank you for reviewing the article, maxillary central incisor, and your subsequent feedback. Hopefully, I can address your concerns to improve the article. Thanks again. - Dozenist talk 15:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. That was appreciated. — RJH (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Article Rating

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dentistry/Article_rating could be changed to for example:

MCB articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	9	4	3	5			21
FL		1					1
GA	16	16	16	13			61
B	54	210	272	315		2	853
C	65	252	612	1,163		51	2,143
Start	20	292	907	5,780		65	7,064
Stub		4	223	17,816		34	18,077
List	4	7	35	62	242	20	370
Category					875		875
Disambig					34		34
File					29		29
Project					7		7
Redirect	2	16	58	870	770		1,716
Template					254		254
NA		3	24	106	218		351
Draft					3		3
Assessed	170	805	2,150	26,130	2,432	172	31,859
Unassessed			7	22	3	191	223
Total	170	805	2,157	26,152	2,435	363	32,082
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 155,022			Ω = 5.49

from: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Molecular_and_Cellular_Biology

used in almost all wikiprojects nowadays. --Parker007 05:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Editing Templates

Ok here is a brief explaination on how you can edit you dentistry project to make it look fancy and neater, to recruit more users:

{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/MCB articles by quality statistics}}

The above template is where they have placed all their rated articles.

Therefore if you go to:Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/MCB_articles_by_quality_statistics

you will be able to edit their template, (or copy the source in our case).

--Parker007 04:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

You see I have copied and paste their script here: (click edit to view script); and I have made some changes to reflect our project.

Dentistry articles		Importance
		Top	High	Mid	Low	None	Total
Class
	FA	5	2	6	1		14
	A			1			1
	GA	11	4	4	3		22
	B	14	34	51	13		112
	Start	17	48	128	61		254
	Stub		6	63	159		228
	Unassessed					35	35
	Total	47	94	253	237	35	666

Category:MCB articles by quality

Bot to update articles?

Would there be an easy way to fill in the chart information accurately, or should I just do it by hand? I placed the chart within this page for now until it is finalized. Clearly, the numbers on the chart are currently inaccurate.- Dozenist talk 16:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

@ WP:INCOTW it states the bot updates their article rating box, though I am not sure which one. --Parker007 00:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Dozenist you may not remember but I helped out out on your portal when it went up for peer review. Anyway yes you can automate it but it entails several different things. I'm going to reference a few things but it may take a second I'm going to remove the helpme request so it will stop beeping me and I'll start posting some more information.— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 00:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok I hope you don't mind but it will take me two hours to explain it and 20 minutes to do it so I'm going to create it and hand it over to you.— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 00:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok after further research I have found that this template is already set up you can add the template by adding {{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Dentistry articles by quality statistics}} to any page. The Mathbot is updating this daily when there is a change and the numbers are correct, I counted them but looking at each of your class categories. You can edit the layout by going here Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Dentistry articles by quality statistics here is the template :

Dentistry articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	Other	???	Total
FA		1						1
GA	2	2		2			1	7
B	17	17	17	21			8	80
C	9	28	45	113			17	212
Start	9	50	102	350	2		64	577
Stub		5	33	313	1		29	381
List	2	2	5	6			1	16
NA	2	2	3	25	35	1		68
Assessed	41	107	205	830	38	1	120	1,342
Unassessed				2			34	36
Total	41	107	205	832	38	1	154	1,378
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 6,277			Ω = 4.99

— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 01:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not a problem I'm glad I could help. I have years experence with advanced HTML, CSS and about a year of wiki markup. so if you have any questions please don't hessitate to ask. Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 03:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

History of nitroglycerin use for angina

Hi- thank you so much for your quick response. Irene Wolf 17:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Dental Amalgam Controversy

Man am I getting sick of listening to the accusations of uneducated conspiracy peddlers on the discussion page here. Thankfully the admins have kept a close eye on this in order to keep it fairly neutral, because I am about ready to pack it in. I should probably just stay away from all 'controversy' pages. They just irritate me - no-one on these pages is willing to reach consensus.Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 18:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Portal peer review

Hello, Dozenist! Since it has almost been a month since you nominated the Dentistry portal for peer review, I hope you received good feedback on how the portal could be improved. If you would like, you could keep the portal listed at the portal peer review for more suggestions for improvement and ask the Wikipedians here for feedback. Also, if you think the portal is ready, you could nominate the portal for featured status. Either way, I hope you've received helpful reviews! Cheers, S.D. ¿п? § 03:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Alesnormales’ contributions

Hi, I see you just tagged tooth abscess for the Dentistry wikiproject. I was just editing that article to remove some strange edits by Alesnormales. I think that you might want to review this editor's contributions: many are good, but some are a little odd, to say the least. Keep up the good work... +Fenevad 17:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Your response on Crown talk

I was a bit surprised by your reponse to Plugwash on the Talk:Crown (dentistry) page, in that it didn't occur to you that this person could have been and was probably talking about a post, being that he/she said a "pin inserted into the root canal." From the way the question was asked, it sure seemed like he/she is a lay person, and this could easily have been a misunderstanding on their part. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 22:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, perhaps so? No telling. Maybe a post is what they meant, but then again "even down into the jaw to support a crown"? The only thing I could think of is an implant. No post would be used for that sort of thing. - Dozenist talk 00:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but I figured that if someone doesn't know what they are talking about, they often say things that may or may not be even nearly accurate. However, a post is within a root, and the root is within bone, and prosthodontically speaking, we really are only interested in length of post within root within bone, so this guy actually did make an excellent statement, albeit he probably didn't even realize it. :)

I see that you are 25, unless your page is not updated. I'm also 25. Where are you in dental school, unless you have already graduated? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 00:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Senior at NJDS. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I'm at XXX@XX DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Listen boys, mistake easily made. Patients don't know half the time what they are on about. Get used to it. Dr-G - Illigetimi non carborundum est. 00:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

As a dental patient, I'm insulted. Now get all these amalgam fillings out of my mouth before the aliens eat my brain. · j e r s y k o talk · 00:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Gday dozenist ;) can you please comment on the Talk:Bridge (dentistry) regarding the most recent changes. Bouncingmolar 21:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Human teeth vs. animal teeth

I dunno how to answer your question... but I have wondered the same. So, I did posted a message at the doctors' mess --> Human vs. animal. Check there in a few days... and there will probably be some advice. Nephron  T|C 05:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Maxillary central incisor GA review

Hi there. I've reviewed maxillary central incisor and placed it on hold momentarily: my comments are on the article's Talk page. If you have any questions or if you disagree with any of my remarks, please feel free to drop me a line. Best wishes, Fvasconcellos 16:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. It's a good article :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Our Dental Project

Only nine participants? What do you say we find some more members...there has to be more dentists out there. Any suggestions? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 05:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Occlusal trauma

Hmm...perhaps I didn't follow protocol properly. I put the article up for peer review, and no one made any comments. I figured that, with its extremely narrow focus in terms of subject content, and there being only 7 or so dentists on Wikipedia, that this article will never get loooked at that that rate. How do you think it can ever be promoted if no one ever checks it? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up...I'll see what I can do with those. What do I do after I fix these things up? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 23:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Tooth

I promise I haven't forgotten about my copyedit. It's just that work has been, well, very work-like this week, and I haven't had much time to edit away from work because of someone's week-long birthday celebration. That plus Wii = not much copyediting. Then again, I am editing right now from work . . . · jersyko talk 14:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

12

This is my 12,000th (!) edit to Wikipedia. I assumed you would like to be the beneficiary. I thought about letting this be your wedding present but decided against it in favor of tupperware and/or spoons. Regardless, here it is :) Please enjoy. · jersyko talk 13:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. I feel very honored!!!!! - Dozenist talk 01:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It's hilarious that you're editing from your honeymoon.  :) · jersyko talk 13:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

School calls me at 4:30 a.m. in this time zone, and since that is 9:00 a.m. in memphis I end up staying awake! Of course, now, I am trying to email people at the school so hopefully everything will be all set for me next week when I get back. A little bit of wikipedia will not hurt. Oh yeah, and I am sure I am probably the only person that has some dental articles on my watchlist. If I do not keep up with them, they will fall apart to vandals. All of them. I am sure of it. - Dozenist talk 15:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

What is your definition of vandalism? Why would dental articles be the target of vandals?--Fahrenheit451 21:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

POV of anatomy/physiology articles

Hi...long time no speaky. I was working on some articles lately, and in my quest to establish more coverage for the new Template:Periodontology, came across the gingival hyperplasia article, which for some reason, is written by some dog owner and not by a dentist. I made a comment on the talk page as well as asked a friendly admin about it. I was wondering if you'd perhaps weigh in on it. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 23:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Template breaks

Haha...I was wondering where they went!! I just thought its convention to not allow article links to cross the end of the margin. No problemo...let's leave them out. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Crown, Bridge and Crown and bridge

As the leader of Wikipedia:WikiProject Dentistry I, in the kindest manner, insist that you look into the current situation of the aforementioned articles and their related content. Whatever has been said or done in the past doesn't matter, because it's over and we are where we are. But the articles were put together after much debate, and then split once again after more debate. Now the bridge article is in disrepair, as indicated by its cleanup tag. As leader, I feel that you should and could persuade others, with a much less aggresive tone than I, to do what you feel is right for this project. I worked hard to complete the crown article as much as I could, adding a lot of info as well as multiple photographs. While others sit back and complain about what is and what should be, and I complained about this before to no avail, articles are merged and split at their request, but they don't then get to work to make these articles work. They just sit gleefully over their split/merge debate skills, ignoring the currently half-baked articles. I recommend re-merging bridge and crown, because that was the most comprehensive explanation provided, until such time as someone or ones take upon themselves to properly author a bridge article. This is so frustrating, after so much work was done to bring the joint article to proper form, to have it split and one of the constituents to sit in disrepair. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 13:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Slashdot? Whachoo talkin' about, Willis? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 13:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Permission to use a figure

hi Dozenist

My name is Hagen Kluge. I was wondering whether I might be able to use the image Image:Crosssectiontooth11-24-05.jpg in my Master's thesis (being completed at McMaster University in Hamilton, Onatrio, Canada) in order to illustrate the difference between mantle and circumpulpal dentine. My thesis concerns the use of root dentine transparency as a means of adult age estimation.

I can be reached at klugehf@mcmaster.ca

Cheers,

≈Hagen

Recaldent/Novamin

Hi Dozenist,

I created my first wikipedia article about Recaldent, a compound that helps rebuild the enamel and as you did an excellent job on the tooth enamel and dental caries, I was wondering if you would agree in linking the Recaldent article to tooth decay/enamel/caries ones?

Recaldent is not the only technology to help rebuild decay spots. I have read about Novamin, but haven't had the time to gather enough information yet/create a new article.

If you have any more informations about those two technologies, I would be grateful if you could share them, or if you know anybody who could improve the article. I started this article because of a decay spot I've had for 3 years now, and all the dentists I have seen alwayss told me it wasn't a carie, but it kept growing. I realised by myself that it was demineralisation by reading your article ! And then I learnt that by changing my habits (consumption of sugar, use of gum during the day to help salivation) I could try to slow down the process, until I discovered Recaldent, which invert the process and remineralises the enamel on small decay spots ! And I think that it is an important piece of information that should be featured in wikipedia (not as an advert of course), when people like me search information about demineralisation/caries.

I also think that giving availability of the marketed products by countries could help people around the world in quickly finding the right product.

Thx for reading me and for your helpful articles !

Disc303

Wikiproject jurisdiction

Who decides who can include which articles in their projects? If gingival enlargement is within all of those many projects, why aren't teeth? Dogs have teeth. Dogs have eyes also...how come its not in the dog project? And what about the cat project? Who has jurisdiction over articles that arbitrarily "fall," and I use that term loosely, into many projects? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Periodontitis changes

I am new to Wikipedia so please bear with me. When I edited the section on treatment in Periodontitis, it was removed with an explanation that “there is nothing that replaces tooth brushing and flossing.” There is a new device that does replace tooth brushing and flossing. It’s called Dental Air Force®. It has been approved by the FDA. Here are the device listings for tooth brush (http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRL/listing.cfm?&ID=71406) and oral irrigator (http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRL/listing.cfm?&ID=71405). These device listings are referenced in the FDA Notification for Approval for Marketing. (http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/pdf/k001493.pdf) I believe that these three items give the validation necessary to be included in Wikipedia. However, I do not know how to place the validation in the text. I would like to include a statement in the Periodontitis page, treatment section that reads: There is also a new technology available for the home that takes the place of tooth brushing and flossing. It is brushless, uses air, water and dental cleaner and is similar to a power washer. I have not included the name of the product or its web site so as not to be an advertisement. However, since there is only one product of this kind on the market, there is really no generic name like “tooth brush” or “oral irrigator”. Let me know what to do. Thanks. Piabrown 19:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your response.

Unfortunately, the ADA is not the do all and end all in dentistry. It is a political institution that uses a great deal of money to fuel its existence. If you have ever used the professional Prophy-Jet by Densply in your practice you can appreciate the Dental Air Force efficacy to remove plaque off the facial, lingual and interproximal areas. The Dental Air Force was designed to safely be used in the home. It uses the same technology as the Prophy-Jet. It would costs millions of dollars and require significant political power to get endorsement from the American Dental Association (ADA). One reason you only see products from very large corporations with ADA approval. Listerine does not replace flossing and justifiably so, because it only affects planktonic organisms. It was not FDA approved to replace flossing.

Flossing is actually an inadequate plaque removal. According to the Journal Of Clinical Periodontology flossing only removes 18 – 35% of plaque. Oral irrigators have FDA approval and ADA approval to replace flossing. Electrical tooth brushes have FDA approval and ADA approval to replace manual tooth brushes. The FDA approved the Dental Air Force using university clinical studies showing that the Dental Air Force removed 60% more plaque between teeth than the electric tooth brush. (Since that study the Dental Air Force actually has increased its interproximal efficacy.) The approval (http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/pdf/k001493.pdf) was “the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure)” - the enclosure being the INDICATION FOR USE. The statement on this INDICATION FOR USE page, "Device is used by the general population in their daily home dental cleaning as part of a regimen for plaque removal for prevention of gingivitis.", is from the submission written by Dental Air Force and refers to a “regimen” as both home care and professional care, so as not to imply that it replaces the need for professional cleanings.

The “Device” is found in the “Device Listings” http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRL/listing.cfm?&ID=71405 and http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRL/listing.cfm?&ID=71406 which were for both a dental cleaner and an oral irrigator. Thus the FDA letter of approval that the Dental Air Force is “substantially equivalent” is indeed referring to tooth brushing and flossing.

The FDA is well aware of the Dental Air Force claims and would have us cease and desist our marketing if we did not comply. They actually guided us with a list of approved wording and marketing verbiage that we could use.

In addition, according to an ADA survey only 5% of the population flosses daily. Because the Dental Air Force simultaneously cleans all surfaces of the teeth it does not have the compliance issues that flossing obviously has.

This is a new device that requires a shift in the old way of thinking about how we clean our teeth. Like the personal computer 20 years ago, it requires a paradigm shift. Your reaction is very common and understandable. Piabrown 19:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania in Atlanta!

Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!

P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 07:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Shame about the dentistry page

I think it's a shame one of the first links in the dentistry page is to the dentistry article - which is poor. The page also seems subject to external link spamming. I'll cut out some of those links and keep an eye out. Would suggest a transfer of that big list of dental organizations out of the dentistry page - For a start I'll remove subheading ratings as they make the TOC useless. It would be nice as well to make the information more general - North America and Canada even with the addition of Australia are not the whole world... Revatim 16:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Scaling and root planing

Please see footnote #4 and the information that it is sourcing. How can this be in the article -- it's contrary to the very basis of cenventional periodontal therapy! This looks to be a case of a bad source being worse than no source. The source cannot be viewed except by paying customers, and its not even a dental journal. What can we do about removing this alleged piece of "information." DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 22:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

OK...I'll get right on it. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 14:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

First off, I personally know two of the authors of this review, one of whom is the former president of the IADR and also former dean of my dental school. The other is an American trained periodontist. Apart from all that, Cochrane reviews are amongst the most respected of all sources. Second, I didn't insert the reference or the wording in the article. Thirdly, the wording states that there is insufficient evidence that pre-emptive scaling prevents periodontal disease. I'm sure this is to do with the theory that there is no direct link between gingivitis and periodontitis. Therefore scaling in the absence of periodontal disease may not prevent its development (it may not develop anyway). Mildly pedantic? Possibly. Is there a lot of unnecessary scaling going on? Possibly.Dr-G - Illegitimi non carborundum est. (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

hey

shalom. check out my latest photo addition...what do you think? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Mucous retention cyst

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Mucous retention cyst, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Mucous retention cyst is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Mucous retention cyst, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 02:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

New recruit!

Just took the liberty of adding myself as a new recruit to the Wikiproject: Dentistry list.

Drop me a line if you need a hand! Ashley Payne (talk) 19:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Great photo

Microscope? Both the tooth and the abscess are macroscopic! I took this with a well-steadied 5.0 megapixel digital elph from Canon -- as I do with all of my other photographs. Well, I'll see you around. Thanks! DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Yo

You qualify for this if you want to use it {{SA-yeoman}}. Self-application of it is encouraged. See Wikipedia:Service awards. · jersyko talk 22:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Trench mouth

This should really be renamed as ANUG. (unabbreviated, of course). DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 04:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Dental Implant Blog

I respectfully ask that you reconsider adding this blog to the Implant section. I post regularly on the dental implant industry and its focus is indeed on implants. Please scroll through the blog to see the variety of implant related postings. Here's a few:

http://implantblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/becoming-an-implant-dentist-part-1/

http://implantblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/18/implant-dentistry-trend-insurance-coverage/

http://implantblog.wordpress.com/2007/12/10/tooth-replacement-with-an-implant-supported-crown-by-emil-hawary-dds-fagd/

http://implantblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/implant-dentistry-trend-more-patient-friendly-procedures/

I'm not trying to spam your site but I have to protest the reason for deletion as not being related to implant dentistry. Thank you.

Teresaduncan (talk) 00:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)Teresa Duncan

Cashews

Removed some of the crazy talk about cashews here: tooth abcess. Would appreciate your help if the crazy cashew user comes back to start any edit wars, as this page is part of our wikiproject!

Regards

Ashley Payne (talk) 22:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Amalgam

Please see here and offer your thoughts; thanx! DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Amalgam

Please see here and offer your thoughts; thanx! DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Good morning. Whilst I totally understand why wikipedia needs to remain free of blatant advertising the Veneers (dentistry) page states that drilling and filing is nescessary for veneering to take place and this is not always the case. I did make sure my contribution was neutral and free of branding. I have reverted the page to include it again and would value your comments with a view to reaching a consensus of how to best alter it. SamG1978 (talk) 08:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Fluoride Therapy

Hello Dozenist, You removed my references to the New York Times, the Journal of the American Dental Association et al. without stating cause. Please note that I will be reverting your revert. If you have what you consider to be superior references for those facts, please provide them. Thank you. Petergkeyes (talk) 20:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Survey request

Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, BCeagle0312 (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hydrodynamic theory

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hydrodynamic theory, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. RayAYang (talk) 22:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

Replied at my talk. Washburnmav (talk) 18:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

And now, for Fvasconcellos' traditional nonsectarian holiday greeting!

Wherever you are, and whether you're celebrating something or not, there is always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! So, may you have a great day, and may all your wishes be fulfilled in 2009! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:29, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Is this a combination of my Christmas greeting from 2006 and my New Year's greeting from last year? Why, it most certainly is! Hey, if it ain't broke...

Keratocystic odontogenic tumour

I have given keratocystic odontogenic tumour an overhaul. You created it as odontogenic keratocyst. Take a look at how it has developed. :-) Nephron  T|C 16:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Map of fluoridation in the U.S.

Your old map

New map from the National Center for Health Statistics

While working on Water fluoridation I uploaded a map of water fluoridation in the US in 1992 and 2006. However, I later discovered that you had created a map back in 2006 yourself, based on data no longer available (the link died, but its name I guess it's 2001 data?). Anyway, just thought I'd drop you a line to say thanks for generating the old map, as it's better than what the CDC did, but since it's outdated now I thought that Water fluoridation for now should use the newer (but otherwise lower-quality) map.

If you're good at maps and would like to generate one based on newer data, the latest data I know are at Water fluoridation statistics for 2006 at the CDC. The folks at Commons recommend SVG maps over JPEG, as SVG scales better, and they provide Image:Blank US Map.svg and other blank maps to play with.

Eubulides (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Meth mouth

I am preparing an anesthesia review article on the implications of methamphetamine use; would it be possible to use your photograph of suspected meth decay (with appropriate credit given, of course)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southseasnurse (talk • contribs) 00:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Meth Mouth Photo

The American Association of Nurse Anesthetists Journal. I've written a Journal Course Update reviewing the relevant literature and condensing the clinical pearls of managing methamphetamine-dependent patients. Southseasnurse (talk) 00:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Dental fluorosis pic

Is there any chance you could find a better one, preferably of a milder case than this? We could use it in the Water flouridation FAC. Xasodfuih (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I will see what I can do. If I see an example this week, I will take a picture. - Dozenist talk 15:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, that was very nice and prompt work! Crossing fingers that other editors on that FAC will like the new pic. (I wonder how ancient the on the right here is and what camera it was taken with.) Xasodfuih (talk) 05:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Conditions of the mucous membranes

I am working on dermatology content on wikipedia, and through my work have developed a list of roughly 25 conditions of the mucous membranes that need stubs created. I noticed your work with regard to oral pathology, and wanted to know if you would help me create these articles? kilbad (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Currently I am working on List of skin-related conditions, and in it there is a section of mucous membrane conditions (see: List_of_skin-related_conditions#Conditions_of_the_mucous_membranes). The conditions in that section were generated from the secondary sources cited in the bibliography. Perhaps you could help me make stubs of those diseases? kilbad (talk) 21:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Dental plaque

I am going to upgrade the above article and really try to build up the dental microbiology stuff there! Hope you can drop by and take a look in a few weeks time to see what you think. Ashley Payne (talk) 23:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Nankali Post-system

An article that you may concern you, Nankali Post-system, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nankali Post-system. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 15:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Dental caries GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Dental caries for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Tooth enamel at FAR

I have nominated Tooth enamel for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-- Cirt (talk) 01:45, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Would you be interested in being an advisor about a documentary on the Panama Canal?

Hello, I noticed that you have more than ten edits on the Panama Canal article. First of all I would like to say thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Secondly, I am writing to ask you if you would consider participating as an advisor to a group producing a documentary about the canal and its history. If this is of interest to you please drop me a note on my talk page. Thank you for your time. Psingleton (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Dentistry -- Inactive??

The project had been listed as inactive as of November 2010, and I just reverted it now -- have you dropped out? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:40, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:DentPortalTalk

Template:DentPortalTalk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magioladitis (talk) 09:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CCWDcur

Template:CCWDcur has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magioladitis (talk) 03:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:21, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Oral pathology

Category:Oral pathology, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 22:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CCWD

Template:CCWD has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Collab-dentistry

Template:Collab-dentistry has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Dentistry

Portal:Dentistry, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Dentistry and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Dentistry during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CCWDprev

Template:CCWDprev has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 06:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Dentistry trophy box

Template:Dentistry trophy box has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 16:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Dentistry Article Initiative 2023

Hi there! I am messaging you because you are listed as a member of the WikiProject Dentistry here. The project is starting an initiative to increase the number of Wikipedia articles relating to dentistry. If you'd like to help, please let me know (either on my page or here). We'd like each participant who'd like to contribute to start an article that is well-written and well-referenced, and I'm here to help.

Looking forward to hearing back from you soon! DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 18:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Human tooth

Human tooth has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)