Talk:Crutch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. | |
| Unassessed | rated as Unassessed-Class on the assessment scale | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Crutches were also used in ECW alot, so they are also a weapon. Whopper 00:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Really? I was unaware of their role in the English Civil War.
The entry for 'Strutters' claims advantages over traditional crutches and that the design has been unchanged since the 19thC, both points which clearly apply to underarm/axillary crutches only, not to forearm crutches. The point relating to upper-leg atrophy for 'knee support crutches' seems heavily dependent on the type of injury/disability and gait pattern of the user, for instance they would be useless to someone with an above knee injury/disability. I'd recommend reordering the list by frequency of use, which would give forearm, underarm, (the rest). DWG 4-Jun-2006
I enjoyed that second comment up there. Also it seems as if strutters has been strategically placed as an advertisement. I mean they should be in there, but not read like some sales pitch. Youknowthatoneguy 10:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Advertising
The External Links for Strutter Use and Types of Crutches are both just advertisements, not factual resources. It seems to me that they don't belong here.
A quick web search turned up a lot more advertising, and then this: Crutches which provides some but not all of the same information as the article.
I would be inclined to just remove those two External Links. Being a newbie I hesitate to do that without first mentioning it here. Any objections?
--Sylvia A 01:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Be bold in removing inappropriate links and replacing them with higher-quality references. If someone disagrees and reverts your change, you can discuss it here. The cycle of bold edit, reversion, discussion is a common pattern here. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 03:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
