Talk:Father of surgery

Who is real father of surgery?

I think the real answer is Sushruta because he was the 1st to do operations and start dissection classes Akshkantgagneja (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Maharishi Sushruta

I have been seeing from the Last Few Days named @MrOllie who is always reverting my Edit of Maharishi Sushruta. Even though, I am giving Proper citations from Formal Sources, still he thinks it is junk. Please Any Administrator Intervene in this Case and make a Conclusion DevastatorOfficial (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

You've got two citations that don't support your content ('Father of plastic surgery' is not the same thing), and your third source is a predatory medical journal that decided to publish a history article for some reason. - MrOllie (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok, But why did you removed the Images which I added ?? DevastatorOfficial (talk) 08:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

the sources here are completely different 103.81.215.143 (talk) 17:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

But importantly, they either do not meet our sourcing requirements or do not support the text they are being attached to. MrOllie (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

i just provided the one which supports the statement here 103.81.215.143 (talk) 17:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

The relevant historians don't even believe that 'Sushruta' was a singular person, but rather a collection of authors who added to the book over time. MrOllie (talk) 17:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Who do you consider relevant historians 103.81.215.143 (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

The ones cited at Sushruta Samhita#Authorship MrOllie (talk) 17:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Maybe the work was continued after his death. But the base work , the foundation was done by him only which included the most important part 103.81.215.143 (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

IP, you are seriously edit warring. Problems with your text have been pointed out. What you should do, unless you want to be blocked, is propose text here on the talk page for editorial consensus. Drmies (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

but my sources completely seems to agree with my statement. And looks like the others user has also agreed on the edit now 103.81.215.143 (talk) 17:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect. If you're referring to Mr Ollie not reverting you, they probably refrained given WP:3R, which you are in danger of violating--I could already block you for simple edit warring and disruption. You need to propose better text, here on the talk page, that also takes into account the content and sourcing on the Sushruta article. I am not going to discuss "edit warring" or "disruption" with you: just stop reverting and edit warring. Drmies (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Can you Please give the Name which according to you is relevant Historians along with proper data ? DevastatorOfficial (talk) 04:35, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Same goes for Other Person mentioned in the Post, they are also being mentioned as Father of Surgery by some Random Websites. By the Way, Many websites alternatively use the Term 'Father of Surgery' and 'Father of Plastic Surgery' DevastatorOfficial (talk) 09:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

'Many websites' do not meet Wikipedia's sourcing requirements. MrOllie (talk) 13:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Sushruta

The new sources completely Focus on the whole surgery not just plastic one as you claimed. At this point you are just acting like a boss here 103.81.215.143 (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@MrOllie: What exactly are your concerns with this content? The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland is a reputed journal published by the Cambridge University Press, and Elsevier's Injury is a scholary source as well. utcursch | talk 15:12, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

First of all, look at the section preceding this one which covers the same issue. The Royal Asiatic Society is from 1981. It's obsolete. Injury might be a reliable source for medicine, but we're taking about history here - they are outside their lane. Current consensus of historians is that Sushruta's book wasn't authored by a single person. We shouldn't be listing a mythologized figure here. MrOllie (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Your arguments would hold more weight if you applied them uniformly. Many of the entries in this article are supported by medical journals, and several of the sources predate 1981 (a couple of them from the 19th century). Indeed the compendium attributed to Sushruta is believed to have been revised by several others, but I don't know of any modern scholar who doubts the existence of an original compiler named Sushruta as a historical person. utcursch | talk 15:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

My point is not that the cite is from 1981, but that it has been contradicted and superseded by better and more recent sources, which you can find at Sushruta Samhita. MrOllie (talk) 16:05, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

father of surgery- Sushruta

maharishi Sushruta was renowned surgeon from 6th century. he has been also recognised as father of surgery by the Australian University Melbourne. There is an utter need to add his name to this list. he is the rsl father of surgery. Sumesaramitali (talk) 03:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

See all the comments above. MrOllie (talk) 10:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Sushruta

I have made a quick search through google scholar and have found modern (post 2000) sources that state Sushruta as the Father of Surgery

medical Journals (used to cite other sections in this article)

Sushruta: The father of surgery - PMC (nih.gov) Published 2017

Contributions of Sushruta to anatomy Published 2020 "Sushruta, popularly known as Father of Surgery"

From antiquity to the present day: a brief history of balding Published 2022

SUSHRUTA SAMHITA:“AN ANCIENT FUNDAMENTAL SURGICAL TEXT IN AYURVEDA”–A LITERARY REVIEW published 2023 "Sushruta is the father of surgery"

Anatomy in ancient India: a focus on the Susruta Samhita Published 2010 "Known as the father of Indian surgery,"

Sushruta:'The Father of Indian Surgery' Published 2005

Note: several of these sources are Medical Journals, however other medical journals have been cited in this article.

Also Encyclopedia Britanica (which is used as a citation for Guy de Chauliac) also states:

Sushruta | Father of Surgery, Ancient India & Ayurveda

This would fall into Wikipedia:TERTIARY

pinging @MrOllie and @Utcursch who were involved in similar discussions.

SKAG123 (talk) 02:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

I checked a couple of thoese - your britannica link does not actually contain the phrase in question, and the other I looked at is from the World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, which appears on various lists of predatory journals. Indiscriminately listing unreliable or irrelevant sources does not help here. And, once again, it bears repeating that the current thinking of historians is that 'Sushruta' was not a single person, but is a pseudonym collectively applied to a number of authors. MrOllie (talk) 02:58, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Medical Journals (even pre 2000) have been used to cite other parts of this article. It looks like there is also a significant number of sources (based on Sushruta's article and google scholar that state he was a single person. This looks like it is disputed among historians. If Sushruta were to be included in this article, I would also support stating that he is also by many historians considered to be multiple people. (provided that sources support it)

So based of this, either 1. Medical Journals are considered reliable sources in order to consider a person "the father of Surgery" or 2. they are not and other figures cited by journals should be removed. SKAG123 (talk) 19:29, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Again, search results and indiscriminate lists of unreliable sources aren't helpful here, and do not in any way establish that there is some kind of dispute among historians. MrOllie (talk) 19:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

The question is if medical journals are considered reliable sources here. If yes than many (as cited above) consider Sushruta the father of surgery. if not then the other figures in this article should be removed as they are also cited with medical journals or pre 2000 sources. SKAG123 (talk) 03:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

One possible solution to this repeated adding of Sushruta is to include a Sushruta here, with the 'father of' cited to the The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland. This would be followed by the more recent refs that establish a consensus view that the works were authored by multiple people. This would be more informative to readers looking for Sushruta than removing all mention. Something like "While Sushruta has been called the father of surgery, recent scholarship has established that the works attributed to Sushruta are in fact the work of multiple authors." Dialectric (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I could support something like that. MrOllie (talk) 16:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I would also support this SKAG123 (talk) 15:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)