Talk:Acne scarring

Proposed merger

I think that acne scar treatment should logically belong in acne scarring. It would make the latter page more comprehensive, and I think it's useless to have a separate treatment page when the content could easily be copied into the scarring page. Aristotle1990 (talk) 19:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --SilyOlPooh (talk) 02:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second the motion. Dictouray (talk) 05:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree. --Pbroks13 07:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is right --08:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[Raman Chalotra]

Both should be merged into acne vulgaris, the parent article. B.Wind (talk) 04:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to merge the two —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpwood (talk • contribs) 20:56, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

agreed. Mahanmd (talk) 03:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Really one of the most biased entries on Wikipedia to serve the cosmetic enhancement industry. The page reads unabashedly like an advertisement by the practitioners. Silas10961 (talk) 11:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done acne scar treatment was essentially word for word copy of this article, so merged together. Now to consider issue of merging into Acne#Treatment... David Ruben ^Talk

Picture

How about one? I want to know what it looks like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.237.81 (talk) 18:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC) hello —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.147.96 (talk) 02:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]