Talk:Body Worlds

message: This article quotes an "ethical analysis" by a professor at Baylor, a Baptist university; the article states that this analysis compared the exhibit to pornography.  In my opinion, if the article is to reference this analysis at all, it should appear along with the other religious opinions and the university's religious affiliation should be clearly stated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.153.9 (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, after all the firm control universities exercise over the statements of tenured faculty is well-known. Yappy2bhere (talk) 17:23, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality? 

message: Does anyone have any information on the California Science Center's investigation?  There should be a link or a source for that. --RedViking 22:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The titles in parentheses were ones where I had no idea what the real name was, and just wrote a descriptive term. If anyone knows the actual names of the works, they're more than welcome to insert them. --NeuronExMachina 04:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Just saw the exhibit today (in St. Paul).  They had a sign that said the woman had a terminal illness, and that the baby could not be saved.  No further details were given (and that was the most detail given about ANY of the exhibits).  --Rehcsif 02:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: Proponents for the increased respect and courtesey for the human body point out that the inventors went ahead with the institute without due consideration to alternative non intrusive methods of anatomy illustration such as digital computer rendered simulation. Computer simulation of the human body would allow much closer and detailed analysis of the human body. Zoom in, see through and body position maneuverability could allow a digitally simulated model much greater detail and content than a physical model ever could. Redistributing the simulations in the form of software over the internet, could further accomplish a broader viewer base and through a much more flexible means without ever requiring the use of bodies. Because of the versatility of software and the development of computer technology today, a virtual model is not only vastly supperior and more available to viewers world wide, but also an opportunity for further scientific development. The lack of a free, open source, world wide available simulation while continuation of plastination, is not only unscientific, but also disrespectfull to the human body.
Wow, what a stupid kneejerk response.  Bodies are complex and variable, and the differences are informative and interesting.  No computer program could demonstrate the differences without requiring massive numbers of dissections, which are usually only useful for months at a time, rather than the years that the plastination exhibits are good for.  If you wish to see the variability in the SMA (superior mesenteric artery) from a scientific interest, the plastinized bodies are invaluable; likewise if your knowledge of the body is not sophisticated enough to know that such differences exist, you may find yourself impressed and overawed by seeing them in situ.  Either way, your appreciation will be much higher in viewing the exhibit than it would be in seeing a computer program.  That's why medical schools still include cadaver labs, despite the many excellent atlases that are currently available.216.98.236.14 18:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The titles in parentheses were ones where I had no idea what the real name was, and just wrote a descriptive term. If anyone knows the actual names of the works, they're more than welcome to insert them. --NeuronExMachina 04:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Just saw the exhibit today (in St. Paul).  They had a sign that said the woman had a terminal illness, and that the baby could not be saved.  No further details were given (and that was the most detail given about ANY of the exhibits).  --Rehcsif 02:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative computer simulation 

message: Hey, just saw this exhibition yesterday... pretty incredible stuff.  So anyway, where can we index this in Wikipedia?
(text copied from my talk page)
Hi, thanks for writing up the Body Worlds exhibits. I was wondering why you put some of the titles in parentheses? Maybe that should be explained. Cheers, AxelBoldt 19:45, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The titles in parentheses were ones where I had no idea what the real name was, and just wrote a descriptive term. If anyone knows the actual names of the works, they're more than welcome to insert them. --NeuronExMachina 04:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Just saw the exhibit today (in St. Paul).  They had a sign that said the woman had a terminal illness, and that the baby could not be saved.  No further details were given (and that was the most detail given about ANY of the exhibits).  --Rehcsif 02:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ===================================

message: "However, Von Hagens does not make the same claim for all bodies prepared by his plastination institute, only the ones exhibited in Body Worlds."
Unless there is any facts or truth that this claim is based on then it is pointless and implies strongly that the Von Hagens may be involved in such activities.
As such, such loaded speculation has no place in a factual article.
:I disagree. Controversy remains on the legitimacy of the cadavers sourced from China and Kyrgyzstan. The fact that Von Hagens only states that those used in the Body Worlds exhibits were sourced legitimately says nothing about whether the bodies used by his Institute for Plastination are similarly legitimate. Without that line in the article the implication is that there is no longer a controversy, which is not the case. -- Hux 09:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This line should probably be removed. 

message: Does anyone know if this is a for-profit exhibit?  I know that the competing exhibits are for-profit (Premier Exhibitions Inc).
:: It is. (I worked for one of the venues...) LordAmeth 22:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Profit 

message: I just saw this exhibit in Phoenix. It was absolutely amazing.  I must respectfully disagree with the idea that a computer program is superior to real plastinated bodies for anatomical education.  The way that whole specimens are posed is artful and breathtaking.  I was nearly moved to tears by the praying man.  Being able to examine the inner parts of the body so closely (most bodies are not enclosed in glass) was invaluable you just can't get that sort of a spatial understanding for function and position in a two dimentional medium.  I also found it superior to embalmmed cadavers, at least to the lay person as there is no odor or decay.  I would encourage anyone with actual interest in the exhibit, the process, and anatomical education in general to check out their web site. I can see why the donor list has grown so much.  What a wonderful way to give back.  
72.201.244.17 02:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BEAUTIFUL AND MOVING 

message: I have removed the following from the External links:
* "The Universe Within" caused a disgusted public to see the result of sophomoric understanding of the plastination process, when bodies started oozing fluid during a San Francisco show": San Francisco Chronicle
I have two concerns. First, this link is not directly related to Body Worlds, but rather another unrelated (if inspired) display. Second, the wording used to describe the link violates WP:NPOV in that it casts judgement on Universe Within and those who created it, which could be seen to violate WP:BLP. 23skidoo 23:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed link

message: I'm curious as to the legality of the photos contained in this article.
New photos included - these are official pics given with permsission and copyright. The exhibitor prevents photos and film being taken inside the exhibit to discourage inappropriate or disrespectful images being taken & distributed. Body Worlds also limits copyright carefully, to restrain copycats from using BW images to advertise their own work, and to avoid copycat images being used to illustrate articles about BW. Tigriscuniculus (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If the ticket says "no photography" etc., then the image was taken in violation of a civil contract.  However, that has nothing to do with copyrights.  If, on the other hand, the show's creator claims his works are art, then these photographs constitute a derivative of his art work, and publication would constitute a copyright violation.  Indeed, the show's creator has filed suits against a competitor on these grounds (copying the poses).  I don't know how the suits have turned out, though.  If the courts ruled these were works of art, then we should remove these images and find some fair use publicity photos to use in their place.  Rklawton 12:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo legality? 

message: The exhibition is currrently on display in this spanish city. 
http://www.diariodesevilla.es/article/galeria/343235/exposicion/body/worlds/viaje/por/corazon/gunther/von/hagens.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.208.191.221 (talk) 20:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bodyworlds 3: Seville  

message: This article is a mess, particularly the overview. Is this a consensus? Rabend (talk) 07:40, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup  

message: I agree with Rabend above, needs a makeover! 
The Ontario Science Center is currently hosting "Body Worlds and the Story of the Heart"
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/June2009/22/c8620.html
http://www.ontariosciencecentre.ca/bodyworlds/default.asp
Tim Riches, Brampton, Ontario (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ontario Science Center October 9, 2009 

message: In at least five citations, the link points to bodyworlds.com, which is obviously not a reliable source.  I suggest all these citations be replaced or removed, and any claims relying on them be omitted.  In particular the claim "All whole body plastinates exhibited in Body Worlds come from donors who gave informed consent via a unique body donation program." relies on bodyworlds.com.
The article (and the bodyworlds.com website that it relies on) seems to contradict itself, when it says:
"The pre-natal and infant specimens in the exhibitions are obtained from morphological collections previously held by universities and medical institutions."
If there are any pre-natal or infant specimens, regardless of their source, they obviously weren't a result of informed consent from adults.  Also, Body Worlds (and this article) is careful to use the term "whole body".  Does not mean some parts of the human body are on display, despite a lack of informed consent?  
Even when we properly source this article, we need to clearly attribute any contentious statement, in the body of the article.  We should not give claims by BodyWorlds as facts.  --Rob (talk) 23:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The sourcing is inadequate when key statements are backed by references to an interested party's website. And the wording is convoluted in places and ways in which Wikipedians strive to be clear. Drakkenfyre (talk) 06:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "And the wording is convoluted..." Hilarious! Yappy2bhere (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral sourcing. 

message: It looks as though someone deleted this section and I think that it would be important to reinstate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.15.92.101 (talk) 05:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scientific content 

message: :Bodies from deceased persons who did not give consent ... have never been used in a Body Worlds exhibition.
:von Hagens countered that he did not know the origin of the bodies, and returned seven disputed cadavers to China.
If even he doesn't know the source of all his corpses how can Wikipedia state as fact that no non-consenting people's remains were used?
Also, the first sentence I quote has a citation but that citation is a decade-old PDF written by von Hagens himself. That's probably not a very neutral source. --holizz (talk) 15:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consent: Contradictory statements 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Body Worlds. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090610060739/http://bodyworlds.red-dog.com:80/ to http://bodyworlds.red-dog.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121221150453/http://www.hta.gov.uk:80/licensing.cfm to http://www.hta.gov.uk/licensing.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140413125000/http://rcav.org/2010-09-30-concerns-about-body-worlds/ to http://rcav.org/2010-09-30-concerns-about-body-worlds/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150318133332/http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2006-02-28/winter-bodyexhibits/ to http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2006-02-28/winter-bodyexhibits/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140525233652/http://dignityinboston.googlepages.com/bodyworldsobjectifieshumanity to http://dignityinboston.googlepages.com/bodyworldsobjectifieshumanity
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090327110112/http://www.bodiesrevealed.com/korean-times.pdf to http://www.bodiesrevealed.com/korean-times.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:16, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Body Worlds. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905170629/http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/15/soa/bodyworlds.htm to http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/15/soa/bodyworlds.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090208231942/http://www2.canada.com:80/theprovince/news/story.html?id=f89ece3d-f0e0-4d55-aa2e-746a9fcd9079&k=63910 to http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=f89ece3d-f0e0-4d55-aa2e-746a9fcd9079&k=63910
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Body Worlds. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080623080125/http://www.myfoxstl.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4201800&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1 to http://www.myfoxstl.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4201800&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Body Worlds. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090727080255/http://www.visitlondon.com/bodyworlds/ to http://www.visitlondon.com/bodyworlds
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327110113/http://www.anatomy.org/Files/private/newsletters/aaa_sept_nl.pdf to http://www.anatomy.org/Files/private/newsletters/aaa_sept_nl.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-corpse25jan25%2C0%2C2070702.story
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110911144748/http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/71686 to http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/71686
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090613044212/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/200806412221471 to http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/200806412221471
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327110115/http://www.bodyworlds.com/Downloads/E_Kirgisien%20AW%20GVH%202.pdf to http://www.bodyworlds.com/Downloads/E_Kirgisien%20AW%20GVH%202.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100628063801/http://blog.lib.umn.edu/sphpod/sphpod/2006/07/plastination_how_america_was_w_1.html to http://blog.lib.umn.edu/sphpod/sphpod/2006/07/plastination_how_america_was_w_1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100205020019/http://www.catholicsun.org/2007/feb15/local/bodyworlds.html to http://www.catholicsun.org/2007/feb15/local/bodyworlds.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140525232216/http://www.bodymobil.de/Downloads/Deutsch/Downloads/Brosch/BD_Brochure_EN_EU08_240613.pdf to http://www.bodymobil.de/Downloads/Deutsch/Downloads/Brosch/BD_Brochure_EN_EU08_240613.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081209074304/http://www.bioethics.net/journal/j_articles.php?aid=1205 to http://bioethics.net/journal/j_articles.php?aid=1205
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327110115/http://www.bodyworlds.com/Downloads/E_Kirgisien%20AW%20GVH%202.pdf to http://www.bodyworlds.com/Downloads/E_Kirgisien%20AW%20GVH%202.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:23, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't see a "See also" section attached to this article(?) Clearly plastination relates to other topics (such as embalming and mummification) that aren't touched upon in the article. Unless there are objections, I will be adding a "See also" section shortly – Down time (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 13:45, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposing a "See also" section