Talk:Exoskeleton

message: There is also Robot exoskeleton article. I think that should be redirected here for the time being. Below is the text from that page.
:es: exoesqueleto robótico
:The powered robot exoskeleton,  is a suit to aids the aged or physically disabled people to walk, climb stairs, or sit down. It consists of a computer, batteries, and four actuators at the knees and hip joints. 
:An example, it´s  HAL-3 (Hybrid Assistive Leg),
:See also : robotics, robot.
Any comments? Paranoid 07:03, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Robot exoskeleton]] (June 2004) 

message: User:Toytoy has just demerged this article, pretty much into the same divide as was merged in June. As I've written on their Talk: page, I'm not sure either article is big enough to warrant splitting yet and, imho, the term "robot exoskeleton" isn't entirely appropriate for all the content on that page, so I've reverted the changes.  Can we discuss it here, as I kinda agree with the point Toytoy's trying to make, but I don't think the current divide is right, nor do I think that Robot exoskeleton is the right term for the 'other' page. Let's try to reach consensus and then do the demerge? — OwenBlacker 15:57, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
: I think the biological exoskeleton deserves a much better article. However, I am not that good to write on this complex issue. I think the mechanical part of this article will be better inserted into various robot- or armour-related articles. A good encyclopedia has to have excellent articles on basic scientific topics. I will propose a possible outline of the exoskeleton article later. -- Toytoy 16:15, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
I agree, the biological part needs a lot more expansion or explanation  --John-Nash 17:15, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Robot exoskeleton]] (October 2004) 

message: Removed the word "unsurprisingly" for obvious reasons. --jonasaurus 01:02, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Removal 

message: Does orthotics deserve a mention in this article?  Does the medical community currently consider orthoses to be a form of exoskeleton, or is this science fiction?  ‣ᓛᖁ[ ᑐ] 07:40, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthoses 

message: Why does this article focus almost exclusively on science fiction and specious links to medical devices that vaguely resemble exoskeletons?  There should be much more information about how exoskeletons developed in biology, probably starting with the armored fish and moving up through evolution to trilobites, diatoms and so on.  Human applications are a very minor footnote to evolutionary history.  ‣ᓛᖁ[ ᑐ] 07:50, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Exoskeleton (technology) (or whatever) probably ought to be a separate article. This article is showing our systemic bias in unfortunate ways. -- nae'blis 16:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Focus 

message: Under the in medicine section I think it should be added that it is used often in sutures.  I dont really have a link that would help but I thought as long as someone was rewriting the article I might mention it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.193.242.112 (talk) 02:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uses in medicine 

message: I've rerated the quality of this article to Start.  It definitely needs a lot of work, as there's practically no discussion at all on the evolution or different types of exoskeletons.  Akriasas 06:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rating 

message: Couldnt the human chest be considered an exoeskeleton? Dentren | Talk 11:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's internal - so no. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 16:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Human chest

message: I've added "verification needed" to this section as I know of exceptions, e.g. Cloudina apparently grew new segments of its tube. While I'm no expert on bivalves, AFAIK giant clams start small and don't moult, and I think the same is true of large gastropods. OTOH arthropods have to moult in order to grow, despite having segmented exoskeletons. I suspect this is a fairly complex sub-topic. 
It might also be good to re-title the section "Limitations of exoskeletons". For example this would open the door for discussion of how fossil cephalopods and modern Nautiloids have exoskeletons but octopi, squid and cuttlefish have traded them in for mobility and tentacles, and rely on other methods of protection including ink and sharp senses. -- Philcha (talk) 21:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Growth in an exoskeleton

message: Have these bodyparts been intentionally hidden in the text, or barely mentioned? They are certainly external parts of the skeleton,  protuberances  beyond the skin.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LouisBB (talk • contribs) 09:24, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Antlers, horns and tusks

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Exoskeleton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170211103042/http://www.cosmonova.org/download/18.4e32c81078a8d9249800021554/Bengtson2004ESF.pdf to http://www.cosmonova.org/download/18.4e32c81078a8d9249800021554/Bengtson2004ESF.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: me gustan las tortugas GXGamingPr0 (talk) 13:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turtles 

message: Do sea urchins have an exoskeleton? If yes, I suggest we include it in the article. --kupirijo (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sea urchins? 

message: Under the Growth section- "Animals of the order arthropoda, like lizards, amphibians, and many other animals that shed their skin, are indeterminate growers."
I don't know enough about exoskeletons to correct this to the article's intent, but those creatures are definitely not arthropods. I took a glance through the article, and the article doesn't claim this either.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.17.220.255 (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lizards are not arthropods 

message: It’s time we show these things who the boss is . 2604:CB00:2D0F:8E00:6093:B3EC:935:C23 (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting bite 

message: Supporting tissue in animal 105.112.182.92 (talk) 17:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biology