Talk:Ear pick

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright note

This article was created from content previously added to Ear wax; please also consult that article's history for those who contributed those edits, and therefore hold the copyright, subject to the GFDL.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Earwax#Production, composition, and different types|dry ear wax]] The anchor (#Production, composition, and different types) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Merge?[edit]

should this be merged with 'earwax'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.5.13 (talk • contribs)

Haha. It was spun off less than 24 hours before you posted this. ;) — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 13:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I did the deed :) I apologize to those who wrote the bulk of the article when it was still a section in earwax, their work and effort does not show up in the history of this article. However, I think the item deserves it's own article since it really a unique thing on its own with its unique history and cultural connections. Sjschen 22:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added notice above. — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 21:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Performance[edit]

Feels like heaven getting your ears cleaned, I swear. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.132.31.72 (talk) 06:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Its like, staying in bed in a warm house while looking out into the night while its snowing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AllStarZ (talk • contribs) 07:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'm wary of doing it so often that it's not as soothing anymore. Pomte 07:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boy oh boy do I agree, it feels amazing. But as Pomte said, doing it too many times lose it's charms, kind of like sex.{{Subst:unsigned|24.224.154.12}

No, no, no! Removing earwax hurts like hell, especially when you have a mother eager to test your new earpicker, and shot to shoves it so far in your ear canal, you're thinking "Well, my eardum's gonna be shot to hell." Fortunately, that hasn't happened...yet. -- John R. Sellers 01:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Danger warning needed[edit]

However nice it may feel, it is a dangerous practice. See the external links in the ear wax article, and some of the discussion. 80.2.194.3 12:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yea this looks totally like a good idea. Next up---using knitting needles to clean your ears. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.15.38 (talk) 20:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No more dangerous than cotton swabs, and more effective for the admittedly dubious purpose, silly ethnocentrists.122.102.238.156 (talk) 01:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

The last reference:

   ^ a b Fumiko Keehn, Laura, "The Art of Ear Picking", SWINDLE Magazine (10)

does not link to anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.226.176.247 (talk) 00:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first referenced link does not mention anything about ear picks. Perhaps the link was meant to be to another page on the same site, such as this one which is more pertinent to the topic of this page: http://www.deafnessresearch.org.uk/content/your-hearing/other-ear-problems/earwax/ So I am changing it. 71.163.222.167 (talk) 05:55, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed one of the first lines about the hazards so it actually reflects information from the sources. The first source did not mention ear picks at all, it was only a general article about earwax that was used later on in the article and seemed to have just been copy+pasted, so I removed it. The third reference is also not about ear picks so I removed it as well. I also added the words "inexperienced" to reflect the later portion of the article and because the previous edit made ear picks sound much more hazardous than the sources say. 140.180.190.188 (talk) 16:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay wow. I looked a little further into the sources. The Ruedi source actually doesn't mention ear picks at all, only mentions a deaf patient who used an ear pick which punctured his ear drum and IMPROVED his hearing. The Cassels reference is not even remotely related to ear picks. Given the fact that the references had nothing to do with the statements, I updated the article to removed the poor references about the supposed strong hazards of ear picks. I left in the actual statements with a reference needed in the interest of being neutral, but changed the wording to reflect the lack of sources. 140.180.190.188 (talk) 17:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the reference needed tag since saying the ear pick can puncture the ear drum seems clear. I kept the other references removed however since they were poor. 140.180.190.188 (talk) 17:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bohemian Earspoon[edit]

The search box was sending people to the ear pick article when searching for "earspoon". I added a disambiguation hat for the intended article about the European pole-arm known as the "Bohemian Earspoon". Bosef1 (talk) 22:30, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]