Talk:Scar

Archives

/Archive 1 as up 25 March 2011, moving everything older than 1 year here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rknight (talk • contribs) 08:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Keloid vs other hypertrophic scars

The article asserts that keloid scars are distinct from other types of hypertrophic scars, mentioning that there are phenotypic differences. However, it does not attempt to explain, summarize or list any of them, even in general terms. Aboctok (talk) 12:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Botanical scarring

Scar and scarring are old, common, important, useful and accepted terms in botany. Yet in this article on "biological" scars there is no mention of this, zoology is not the only biology, human/medical science is not the only zoology. I argue that this article is suffering a major POV issue, ignoring other animals, zoological science, and other life-forms, plants/botanical science. Brunswicknic (talk) 08:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Salicylic Acid/ Hydrogel Treatment

I want to be upfront about my conflict of interest right away, I work for a company that makes products to treat scars. It wouldn't be right for me to edit this the treatment section but there are a lot of scientific articles about using Salicylic Acid/and or Hydrogel(http://avocetcorp.com/scientific_publications.html) to treat scars that would be worth someone looking in to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lclarke14 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Cicatrix

The term Cicatrix redirects here; when you get here, there's nothing to help establish whether it is a directly equivalent term, or refers to something specific within the article. This is not my area at all at all but I wondered if experienced editors in the field would please at least consider whether something needs to be added to help? If not then fine – perhaps! Cheers DBaK-photo (talk) 12:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done - Resolved by the redirect being replaced by a stub article. DBaK (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered not any more 84.67.26.50 (talk) 12:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry @84.67.26.50 thank you but I don't understand your comment. I can't see what has substantively changed between my remark of 20/05/19 and yours of yesterday. Do explain if you feel like it but it's not causing me any great unhappiness. Cheers, DBaK (talk) 11:35, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Unnecessary slave mutilation picture (Keloid scars)

The inclusion of the picture of a black man who had been whipped gruesomely during slavery is an inappropriate image to include as the example of keloid scarring. The is no context regarding the unacceptable harm that was done to him as punishment or as a form of control by those who enslaved him. Surely there is a less traumatic and insensitive picture of a keloid scar available somewhere with public use rights. A color picture would be an improvement even without the problem of racial insensitivity. Carinamc (talk) 15:03, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Continuing, I noticed that none of the other scar types have images on this page and each scar type has many examples on each type's main page, each of which is linked in this article. For consistency in addition to the inappropriateness of this image's inclusion, I am removing the traumatic photo from this page Carinamc (talk) 15:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC)