Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a231b20cad11f162

Jump to content

Talk:Accessory auricle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Me and in topic Overly technical

Article categorization

[edit]

This article was initially categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Definition

[edit]

The current definition states that the condition is a congenital abnormality. However, there are very many such abnormalities what actually is this one? What does it look like? Is it fatal? Is it operable? Does it give the person ultrasonic hearing...? Richard New Forest (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Overly technical

[edit]

I've just tagged this article as being too technical. Specific points that I think need addressing for this to be useful to a layperson:

  • "the persistence of a structure which variably recapitulates the normal external ear": it is unclear what this means, particularly the phrase "variably recapitulates".
  • The Classification section launches into technical terminology with no explanation of what the terms mean.
  • "anterior to the auricle" and "within the periauricular tissues" is unnecessary technical wording.
  • The terms "sessile" and "pedunculated" are not explained, nor is "histologic examination" nor "recapitulation of normal external auricle".
  • The meaning of the term "hillock" is not clear in context.
  • The sentence "The second ear appears as a mirror image folded forward and lying on the posterior cheek" makes no sense in context, at least without more technical knowledge.
  • The Management section is needlessly technical.

I consider myself reasonably medically literate, but I couldn't understand much of this article, even after going away and hunting definitions for some of the technical terms.

me_and 13:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)Reply