Talk:Simple eye

This really doesn't warrant its own page, and would be much better off as a subsection of eye. -DrSandstone 15:21, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

I agree. If you add it as a subsection to the eye article, I will delete these pages. --DeanS^talk 15:37, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

Deal. -DrSandstone 15:48, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

Nominate for deletion

This "article" is just rubbish. Never mind merging it; it should be deleted, because it's simply wrong. A simple eye is NOT an eye which has just one lens; vertebrate eyes have one lens, and are far from simple. --SamRSC 19:40, 25 November 2011 (EST)

Simple dosn't refer to the complexity of the eye, it refers to the number of lenses. FCapra 19:53, 25 November 2011 (EST)

SamRSC, you sure do like to bash articles and users. It would be nice if you just stick to the point. Follow Thumper's mother's advice: "If you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say it at all." ~ JonG ~ 20:17, 25 November 2011 (EST)