Talk:Uvula

message: The uvula is lymphoid tissue, this should be placed within this article at some point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.78.45 (talk) 19:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsorted talk

message: One thing not covered is the actual function of the uvula. I mean, I have a good guess, but someone probably knows more.
The page calls the uvula "cone-shaped", which it can be, but not always, and not in the visuals that accompany the article. This phrase, "cone-shaped" seems to have been copied from another source.
The page later says the uvula got its name from its "grape-like shape". This also is not always true, and is not seen very much in the visuals. Other sources say that the word uvula in latin meant a swollen uvula, which do look like grapes.
The page also says the uvula "plays an important role in the creation of the sound of the human voice."  Outside of helping with a uvular trill, this doesn't ring true to me...Someone probably got a little ambitious, and confused about the word "uvular". The fact that Wikipedia's "Uvular" page also is a bit confused probably didn't help.
I got reverted when I just tried to edit this willy-nilly, so I thought I'd bring it up here....meditate on it....
-Misha
--216.254.12.114 05:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work To Be Done 

message: I've changed that material because the explanation was incorrect: there is no molecular iodine (which would have antiseptic properties in low concentrations) present in iodised salt. The iodine is added as sodium iodide, which is not an antiseptic.
Kay Dekker 22:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salt water gargling 

message: Ironically, some of them could make you gag. Wahkeenah 18:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we have enough photos of the uvula? 

message: Honestly  , who is intrested in the uvula in popular culture? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blackfield (talk • contribs) 19:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular culture 

message: :Image:Scoblehd.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 11:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Scoblehd.jpg

message: Bad POV protection to preserve a disruptive edit made by the protecting admin.  Indefinite full protect to avoid trivia sections - immediately after the admin changes the article to his liking - is way over the top and inappropriate.  See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Admin incivility and Wikipedia talk:Trivia sections#massive removal of content Wikidemo 15:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The protection is inappropriate and I have removed it.  I will say, though, that these trivia sections are wholly unencylopedic and should be removed from articles.  This is not an encyclopedia of pop culture phenomena.  The protection of the article may have been unfortunate, but Alkivar is 110% correct that this stuff should not be in our articles. --B 16:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In this particular case I don't think any of the trivia items are notable or relevant, even if worked into the text, so I won't add them.  They could be the subject of an independent list / article.  A single sentence to the effect that the P.U. is often featured as a sight gag in American cartoons (or something similar, once researched and sourced) would be reasonably relevant.  As to the broader question of trivia and pop culture, that's a big debate on Wikipedia, and protecting admins should not be taking sides or protecting simply to shut down the debate.Wikidemo 16:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am fairly certain that if someone tried to make the list of uvula-related trivia into a separate article, the article would be nominated for deletion very quickly due to its insignificance.  However, I do feel the list has a place in the uvula article - I find the facts very interesting and clearly others do.  Furthermore, the article contains a significant amount of scientific information about the uvula; some pop culture can't really hurt the quality of the article.  Caution: Wet Floor (talk) 04:13, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please remove edit protection 

message: the article has this line: " This affected her voice by eliminating vibrato, she said [...] although the uvula is not responsible for vibrato (the vocal cords make this happen)."
...so DID the removal of the uvula remove her vibrato, if so how and if not what did? Otherwise this sentence is kind of useless.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.22.2.92 (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the vocal chords have anything to do with amplitude, just pitch. The uvula can, however, be used to vary the character of the sound over time. 66.118.149.200 (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this section: Anita O'Day, a popular big band singer, had her uvula accidentally removed during a childhood surgery when only her tonsils were intended to be removed.  This affected her voice by eliminating vibrato, she said, in an interview with Terry Gross of NPR's "Fresh Air" radio show, although the uvula is not responsible for vibrato (the vocal cords make this happen). It was tagged with a  tag anyway and I agree that it's pointless to have a sentence discussing one person's mistaken belief. howcheng  {chat} 03:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vibrato 

message: There's an own article for Bifurcated_uvula, but it doesn't offer much more than is already written here, except for some unverified claims. It doesn't have a picture and the statistics are different ("1% of Caucasians" vs. 2%, both numbers without any source). Then there's the issue of the name.
I have looked looked at Help:Merging and I don't think this merge is controversial, but the task is a bit too complicated for me. Is someone feeling bold and knowledgeable enough to do it? 92.203.13.157 (talk) 02:06, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: . howcheng  {chat} 03:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Bifurcated_uvula]]? 

message: And what, pray tell, are the myositides? rowley (talk) 17:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The myositides? 

message: Deleted this false information, was clearly vandalism.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.10.144 (talk) 21:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hypouvulitis 

message: Musculus uvular is inherent to the palantine uvula, and should be covered on the same page. This would be of benefit to readers, having information in one place, and by virtue of having the context of incresed information would enhance readability. LT910001 (talk) 00:30, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Musculus uvulae]] 

message: The Function section talks only about its use in speech, other languages. Yet it has other functions such as to close off the nasopharynx, preventing food from entering the nasal cavity, or to pronounce "b," drinking, etc.  That section should be expanded.  --71.133.254.31 (talk) 17:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Function?  

message: It's as if the authors had never had a writing class, nor bothered to take a gander at Wiki guidelines.   
Hint1: poor communication is poor writing.    Hint2: by definition, it takes more than one to communicate.   Hint3: high expertise suggests little about the ability to communicate.    Hint4: The entire Lead section is written in argot or jargon.  Hint5 hyperlinks do not much improve nor excuse lazy writing. ("lazy-links")  Hint6: see Hint2   Last clue: see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section). Thanks!     --71.133.254.31 (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Doug. Wikipedia's a collaborative effort where anyone can contribute, so if there's any way you feel an article could improve, feel free to make the changes yourself.--LT910001 (talk) 02:53, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section does not meet Wiki specs. 

message: Information seems to be lacking on cases where there is an absence of the uvula  - notably, what causes this defect, and what is the incidence in the population of people lacking a uvula.
Denys Wheatley April 1, 2015 Editorbiomedes (talk) 13:20, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  uvula 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc.talk 06:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Palatine uvula →  – "Uvula" is clearly the common name for this organ; most people are unaware of the uvula of cerebellum and of the structure in the prostate noted in Bladder#Nearby structures. I would treat this as an uncontroversial move, except 1) it was previously moved from "Uvula" (way back in 2009), which may suggest that at least one editor may disagree; and 2) given the large number of incoming links, a bold move would be a hassle to undo, so I'm erring on the side of caution and treating this as a potentially controversial move. TJRC (talk) 18:15, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

text: *Strong support per WP:COMMONNAME. Tom (LT) (talk) 06:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 22 May 2023