Talk:Liver spot

merge
The Liver spot and Lentigo articles seem very similar -- the general links from the footer even say "Lentigo/Liver spot" and almost all of the external links to medical databases contain the same information. As there is more information in Liver spot than Lentigo, I think it would make sense to merge whatever is currently unique to the Lentigo article into the Liver spot one. Ozaru 15:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

"Liver spot" and "Lentigo" are different object classes. Liver spots are types of lentigo. There are other lentigos besides liver spots. The current articles need to be expanded.72.171.0.141 03:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Since liver spots are a type of lentigo, then the obvious answer to this is to merge the liver spots article with the lentigo one. Itsinmyeyes (talk) 05:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that the article name "liver spots" be changed to "solar lentigo" or "solar lentigines". The lentigo article is very general and also has very little information. It does not seem appropriate to merge the two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.223.211.228 (talk) 19:53, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. We should not merge the two. It would make me sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.31.3.182 (talk) 12:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I do not think they should be merged, if merged however I suggest that it be indicated that lentigo be mentioned as it is referred to solely without mention of "liver spots" in many books. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AriaNo11 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

photo
The photo does not immediately demonstrate what a liver spot is. Google Images immediately shows the common liver spots as seen on hands, etc. New or additional photo is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.196.141.50 (talk) 20:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I think liver spot and lentigo articles should be merged. That merged article should, of course, mention both names. We can always split them back apart later if the merged article grows too large. --68.0.124.33 (talk) 05:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)