Talk:Goblet cell

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of cells.

Anatomy: Microanatomy Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to microanatomy.

Molecular Biology: MCB Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

Individual glandular cells such as goblet cells are present among epithelial cells.

Non-humans?

I know that these kinds of cells are present in molluscs, but this article (as currently written) treats them as though they only exist in humans. I do not know how many other groups have them— surely someone must! KDS4444 (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KDS4444 this article is written in generic form and makes reference to humans twice in text, both instances using the human intestine as an example of the function of goblet cells. I think it is up to you to prove this assertion and, if you feel the article is indeed human centric, WP:LIGHTBULB, I invite you to help fix the problem that you are seeing. For now, I am removing the tag. --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:00, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This article only refers to goblet cells of vertebrates. I know that goblet cells in the guts of silkworms have been a favourite object of experimental investigation, as they are infected by economically important viruses and are a convenient model system. Like User:KDS4444, I can identify an omission, but that doesn't put me in a position to write a survey of the subject. William Avery (talk) 13:31, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But what all of this DOES tell us is that this article DOES still read from an anthropocentric perspectivce, and that the tag should probably remain here until this has indeed been fixed someone, not until someone decides that other people should fix it but not me. The tag was created so that it could remain there until that time (i.e., until someone who DOES know more about these cells in their general experience) can write the article from a non-human-centric position. The tag was not created in order to invite those with no experience in this type of cell to attempt to fix it, because most of us right-out do not HAVE the correct experience to do so— until someone comes along to can, this tag needs to stay in place, no? As it reads now (and as it read before I first placed the tag), a person reading this will be led to believe that only humans have them... Unless this is fixed by an expert, or found to be untrue. The burden of incorporating that info into this article is placed on the person wanting to remove this tag, and if you have removed the tag without addressing the problem, then the tag needs to go back for now, yes? And I will now do this, and will ask anyone in the future to consider this before removing the tag a second time. Thank you! KDS4444 ^(talk) 02:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]