Talk:Gastrointestinal tract

Disgusted

As a devout Christian woman with three kids and an ulcer I am utterly disgusted by the picture of the disected rat. It is uncalled for and as an advocate for rat/human relations I see no reason why it should remain on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.149.197.107 (talk • contribs)

Indeed. Then be bold and remove it. Don't just spew hot air. Black-Velvet 10:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff

Should the section on digestion be transplanted to the digestion page? --Alex.tan 04:47, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's out of place here. AxelBoldt 22:25, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

what about naming it Human gastrointestinal tract and using the reference that I placed at digestion? moogle

No. How about all the other mammals with a gastrointestinal tract, not to mention other kingdoms? JFW | T@lk 08:56, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Intestinal mucosa redirects to this article, yet is not discussed in any detail here.

Enteron to Enron

A piece of humor for the article? According to Conspiracy of Fools by Kurt Eichenwald, a consulting company proposed Enteron as the first name for Enron, Ken Lay's natural gas pipeline company, a name rich in irony.

I may be having a slight sense of humour dysfunction, but this doesn't strike me as funny. JFW | T@lk 21:10, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Multicellular Animal

Are there even such things as unicellular animals? That distinction seems unnecessary. That page just redirects to multicellular ORGANISM anyway. Lantoka 05:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move to Digestive System

so that it matches its category name -- Fplay 14:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I think it is useful to keep articles for anatomy distinct from related topics. --Arcadian 18:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed this page's entry from Wikipedia:Requested moves due to a lack of consensus on the move. If this changes, feel free to add another request. --Lox (t,c) 16:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]