The gemara discusses why Vashti did not want to attend the banquet of Achashverosh. Two reasons are brought. One from R Yose bar Chanina that she had tzaraas, one from a Beraisa that she had a tail.
1. I saw one girsa quoted in the Tallilei Oros from the Chofetz Chaim that mentions that the tail was in her forehead. Do you know the source? page 52
2. Does it seem from the Loshon of the Gemara these opinions do not have to agree with each other. In other words, R' Yose could hold that she only had tzaraas and did not grow a tail. We see this many times in the Gemara here and in other places too with regards to what happened in the Torah Shebichsav that there is a machlokes and the opinions do not necessarily have to agree with each other. What is the general rule in learning conflicting gemaras and midrashim?
Shmuel , USA
1) It is very possible the source is from the Aruch (quoted here by the Maharsha and others). The Aruch states that the word "Zanav" refers to a piece of flesh that is extra, like a wart. The Maharsha clearly understands that the Aruch holds this was not a tail. The most unsightly place for a wart would be on one's face, which is known as the general way of determining beauty. It is therefore understandable that some commentaries understand that the Aruch means this was on her head, or specifically her forehead (perhaps it stands out the most in this way).
2) The general rule is that unless we have an indication that they argue, we can assume they agree. In this case however it seems that they argue, as the Yerushalmi quotes their sources as being from the same Pasuk in the Megilah, in addition to another Pasuk that uses similar terminology. One says the second Pasuk is a Pasuk discussing leprosy, while the other says the second Pasuk is a Pasuk discussing a tail. This seems to indicate that they argue.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose