Talk:Treatment of human head lice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve and expand Wikipedia's coverage of arthropods. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
B	This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance assessment scale

Um, can't one just shave one's head? It's sort of fashionable anyway, especially among middle-age men. -Rolypolyman 07:52, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I've had a go at cleaning this up, mainly by cutting out some data and rearranging the rest but it really needs a good workout by someone with more time. 85.210.113.18 11:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Caught a few refereces to lice as insects. Lice are not insects! 85.2.197.196 15:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 How to 2 Louse Buster 3 Contradiction? 4 Overlap with Head Lice article

[edit] How to

This article reads more like a how-to rather than a discussion about the removal of lice from humans. 202.89.152.42 09:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. One of the drawbacks of collaborative editing is that articles can get worse over time as well as better. Two months ago the article was vastly better than it was when you saw it. I've reverted to that version and merged in more or less everything useful done since that date – Gurch 11:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Louse Buster

I've removed this for the same reasons I gvae on the main Head Lice page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Head_louseNBeddoe 12:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction?

Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_louse#Shaving_the_Head : "A completely shaven head is not necessary, the hair only needs to be cut to 1 inch or less." Yet still this article specifically states that "A completely shaven head is necessary, a mere buzz cut is not sufficient." This should probably be checked up... - 88.91.191.62 19:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The cited article agrees with this page. However, this page has some info directly copy-pasted from the source. "Shaving the head gives the lice little to grasp to stay attached to the head. In addition to head hair, lice may infest facial hair or eyebrows, and these may also need to be removed for effective treatment. While effective, some patients may find the hair removal aesthetically unappealing." [1] Fixedd 05:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Overlap with Head Lice article

The overlap is huge and verbatim. I suggest everything before the Treatment section be removed, considering that that is the purpose of the entry. 81.23.48.101 (talk) 11:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The overlapping piece is transcluded using a template. This is why the information is identical in both articles. This is a somewhat common practice on Wikipedia. I would say that Epidemiology (including Vectorial capacity), Diagnosis, Clinical symptoms, Nit removal, and Prevention are definitely more applicable to this article than they are to the Head louse article. I think The "no-nit" policy could go either way, however I have no problem with this information being in both articles. Ursasapien (talk) 11:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I see a couple of issues here.

• What "lice" content should each of the three main articles related to lice, contain? (i.e., head louse, pediculosis, and Treatment of human head lice). This has been discussed at Talk:Head_louse#mergefrom_treatment_of_human_headlice, where consensus seemed to be that pathology, treatment, and epidemiology information be removed from head louse. This hasn't yet happened, in part because most of that article WAS pathology, treatment, and epidemiology. I've been slowly adding more insect biology information. Once the article is more filled out, I don't think transclusion of Template:Head louse pediculosis into Head louse will be necessary. Once that happens, I think your objection to the overlap between Treatment of human head lice and Head louse will be largely resolved. In truth, if Template:Head louse pediculosis is removed from headlouse, the template's content should probably be moved, because transclusion will no longer be useful.
• Should this article be merged into Pediculosis? I'm not sure I favor such a merge, but I think it's worth discussing. At the very least, I think a {{main}} tag should be placed at Pediculosis#Treatment directing readers to Treatment of human head lice.

-Noca2plus (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I've "untranscluded" {{Head louse pediculosis}}, moving it over to Head louse and Pediculosis where I thought appropriate. There's now a {{main}} tag on Pediculosis to bring readers here. -Noca2plus (talk) 18:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)