Talk:Salve

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Drawing Salve is 100 percent Ammonium bituminosulfonate, so I suggest to merge Salve article with Ammonium bituminosulfonate article.Gsarwa (talk) 01:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

   Well, no: since we already have also a non-intersecting formulation in the article, the article should rather somehow (TBD: do the research) link to Ammonium bituminosulfonate.
--Jerzy•t 19:20, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly, in the UK the commonest drawing salve is based on magnesium sulphate. Also it 'draws' splinters, not 'evil humours'. Stub Mandrel (talk) 09:53, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

   Contrary to the previous section, i argue that the accompanying article is the seed of a Dab page, and that the impulse to merge reflects confusion between dictionaries and 'pedias: what the sections have in common is the letter sequence salve (and the pronunciation that rhymes with "have"), connoting soothing (relieving irritation) and presumably a cognate of salvation and of the verb to salve (as in "that helped salve his feelings"). Sheep dip and drawing salve belong in separate articles; it may be that neither of their titles will include a form of the verb or noun.
   The Dab page may also deserve at least a "See also" entry for the Latin greeting with the same spelling.
--Jerzy•t 18:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"salve" is a perfectly good dictionary word, but as an encyclopedia entry for a medical term, it is problematic. Maybe the best course would be to delete it; let Wiktionary take care of it? Reason I say this, I tried to improve the first citation. WebMD's article on sunburn still exists, but has changed to not even mention the word "salve". Looking in the Wayback Machine, at its best the article barely mentioned salve. After a reasonable amount of effort, could not find a replacement citation. It appears, "salve" is too imprecise for reputable medical web sites to address. Although I think this article does not stand as a medical article, perhaps someone could salvage it by shifting its focus to literary or cultural uses of the term. Condensinguponitself (talk) 19:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]