Talk:Scarification

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scarification article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Fraternities & culture

Removed from the article:

"In more modern times, black men in fraternities would sometimes have the symbol or letter of their fraternity branded onto themselves, often as a rite of passage into the fraternity."

I've never heard of this. Cite please? -- The Anome 07:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the article:

"In some cultures, the willingness of a woman to receive scarifications shows her maturity and willingness to bear children."

Which cultures? Cite? -- The Anome 07:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to the removed quotation above, I have found similar information about the various cultural reasons one might undergo scarification (specifically those in West African Tribes) and I have the citations for it. TelejaG (talk) 06:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Under the "Reasons" section, I tried to clean up by changing to: "Scarification can be used for healing increasing their cultural desirability. It may help a patient change their status from victim to survivor. These individuals pass through various kinds of ritual death and rebirth, and redefine the relationship between self and society through the skin[1]". Still needs a lot more work to sound professional, this is really unclear. 73.8.61.140 (talk) 21:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hardcore or "Death Match" Wrestling

Hardcore or "Death Match" Wrestling should be removed entirely because its not a type of scarification, its a type of show, and has little or nothing to do with scarification as a body modification. Plus, its also not even sourced in any way.

-Concur-

I totally agree. Not only that, but it makes patently ludicrous claims which are totally unsupported as well as previously unknown cultural tidbits which are inserted—ie. "hardway" scarification is "greatly appreciated" on /every/ continent on Earth, including Canada, sans USA. As a Canadian, I've never even heard of this type of scarification, which prompts me to move along with this deletion. PublicSecrecy (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dangers/Cautions

The intro to this section is taken almost word for word from the "Scarification FAQ" listed as a source - a very biased source, and one that has an admission of not being written by medical professionals. The comment on "acceptable risk" is extremely POV - on the Scarification FAQ, they claim it is an acceptable risk based on the fact that we do many things every day that are not safe. Barring objection or medical info, I would suggest removing the "acceptable risks" comment and reverting to the more commonly accepted medical opinion, which is that most forms of body modification (including tatoos) is never considered to be safe. This is not a criticism of the peoples that practice scarification through religious belief or tradition, but rather a reflection of the most prevalent thought in the medical community. There are also complications for certain conditions, such as those with leukemia [[1]] DonaNobisPacem 07:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

How about some pictures of modern/western scarification? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fre k (talk • contribs) 18:14, November 20, 2006 (UTC)

I tried to add a high quality picture of my personal modern western scarification piece to replace the low-quality picture of the man on his back getting scarred in Paupa, New Guinea where you can't see anything, but it was taken down and replaced back with the New Guinea picture. I agree that there should be a picture of a modern western scar, and if you need one, you can use mine. It is on wikimedia commons as Image:My Tree Scar Good.jpg.

Unbalanced

The article as it stands is woefully unbalanced. It has a lengthy unsourced "how to" diatribe regarding human anatomy, but very little for the other uses (eg botany , gardening, materials science). I am working to balance this problem and i hope others can assist. Maybe a split is warranted. Plumpurple (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Body Modification

I'm trying to start a Wikiproject on Body Modification, if anyone wants to join go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Body_Modification ScarTissueBloodBlister (talk) 01:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Separating the article

I think the gardening and human body modification should have different articles.. they are two completely different things..ScarTissueBloodBlister (talk) 05:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence clarity

Under the section on Dangers/Cautions, the sentence repeated in quotation marks below seems unclear. In the final clause -- "that can lead to death from the tool they use," to whom or what does the word "that" refers to?

No idea how to fix as I am unsure of the original meaning. I'm also unclear as to the source for the claim that diseases are passed by air during burning of the skin, but I probably just missed that.

THE SENTENCE: "Precautions are made for brandings, such as wearing masks, because it is possible for diseases to be passed from the skin into the air when the skin is burning, that can lead to death from the tool they use." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oriental2012 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]