This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I recently tried to add a link to the plastic surgery site under Wikipedia. It was removed as it was interpreted as a spam link - which it is not, why I am writing this post. The site I wanted to add is a plastic surgery discussion forum. The site does not receive any form of funds from anyone and is completely impartial. It is basically a meeting place for people who are considering to have plastic surgery and people who want to share their experiences with plastic surgery. I think it could be relevant for people reading about plastic surgery to know that you have the possibility to talk about issues that might concern you prior to an operation and share your experiences.

I would be grateful if you could consider adding the site as link to the plastic surgery section under Wikipedia. Should you have any questions or require any further information please do not hesitate to say so.

The site is located at: http://lookyourbestuk.com/forum

Kind Regards,

Thomas Sylvest Thosylve 15:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Forums are not appropriate links for an encyclopedia. If patients want to know about plastic surgery forums, Google is their friend. JFW |  T@lk 15:46, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I know that in the past couple of years there's been much controversy about plastic surgery performed in the DR, but I mean, there's horror stories to be told about other third world countries. If we're gonna talk about the horrors of third world PS, why should we single out one country? Not to mention the fact that sometimes even worse things have ocurred in the US in regard to PS...

If this is notorious, yes. JFW |  T@lk 23:58, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

I thought it was kind of weird that it singles out the DR. If it is particularly notorious for blundered PS, then it should be mentioned. But other third world country's PS blunders should be mentioned too (or semi-3rd world countries, such as Mexico). — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:16, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Can we strike it out? From my point of view surgery in the Plillipines and Thailand is associated with just as many problems. The other issue is that many nations regulate the training of cosmetic practitioners poorly and and untrained surgeon in LA or Melbourne, Australia -my home- is more dangerous than a well trained surgeon in DR. Will Blake 06:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Is this topic still relevant? -- Doctorkc ( talk) 07:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not aware that circumcision is a plastic surgery. I thought it's done for religious and health (however dubious the claims are) reasons?

It's not. I removed it. Thanks for the catch. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:04, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Isn't it plastic surgery in cases where it's done for aesthetic values, though? While many people might do it out of social pressure/custom/purported medical value, I'd think that there are some who do it it for that reason alone.

I put comments of a repeated topic in one area I hope no body minds. If so I do apologize in advance as I am still learning. Doctorkc ( talk) 07:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Please discuss the proposed merger here. Calicore 07:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

--- For Merging ---

Plastic surgery does not only refer to cosmetic surgery, but also to reconstructive surgery. The name plastic after all, came from the Greek plastos. Plastic surgeons commonly treat patients with burns, cancer, congenital deformitites and trauma victims.

---Against Merging---

I agree. Plastic surgery should not be merged with cosmesis as cosmetic surgery is just one part of the scope of plastics. It is a common misconception and many people overlook the value of other aspects of plastics.

Concur with the arguments for NOT merging this article. Why should something so obvious merit any disscussion at all?

The terms are not synonymous. Cosmesis is a concern of any surgery, not only Cosmetic Surgery. Cosmetic Surgery is the portion of Plastic Surgery that concerns itself with the elective improvement of Cosmesis. DLaub 06:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

No - just another voice suggesting that a merge is a dumb idea

I think that my version of the cosmetic surgery section (4/26/06) was more succinct and came a little closer to NPOV language than the version by 71.232.27.89 . Might I suggest it be reverted? DLaub 18:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The cosmetic surgery section has a terrible US bias. The issues related to the training of plastic surgeons versus untrained cosmetic practitioners are universal but the discussion here is solely US focussed. All this needs to be stripped out and replaced with the general principles like 1. educate the public 2. regulate credentialling 3. enforce disclosure of training etc. Will Blake 05:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Please help with this: "Within the US, critics of plastic surgery note that it is legal for any doctor, regardless of speciality, to perform "cosmetic surgery", but not "plastic surgery"." What exactly does this mean? That it is not legal for anyone in the US but a plastic surgeon to perform plastic surgery (eg reconstruction, or augmentation etc)? And how is a plastic surgeon defined? One board certified in plastic surgery? If that is the case as is implied here, then the statement is untrue. General surgeons can perform plastic surgery, wtihout board certification in plastic surgery. This needs clarification. MollyBloom 01:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I have seen a growing number of references on cosmetic limb lengthening (also called distraction osteogenesis). In my opinion it should be mentioned in this artice. User:Napoleon 09:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.8.87.241 ( talk)

Can anyone put the side effects or the risks after plastic sergery? thnakyous

Beyond what is mentioned in the article, no. It depends greatly on the extent and type of the surgery performed. Ask your doctor. — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

;_;

And then, again, your doctor may not tell you unless you ask. Each plastic surgery procedure has separate side effects and risks which should be mentioned along with the description of the procedure. For instance, not every breast augmentation patient knows that one breast enhancement operation will require another, or perhaps two, during the course of her life. Charles.Downey 17:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I've just taken a cleaver to some really bizarre voiced writing about this topic. There is still a good bit rubbish & editorial type of material that needs to be redone. I'll start contributing something more polished as time permits. Droliver 18:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, there sould be a separate section added concerning the all too common negative side effects of the surgery. Often, severe psychological trauma is suffered by recipients of CS, where the outcome is unsatisfactory, or ruinous. - 86.42.185.60 13:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

That's not really Plastic Surgery itself per se. I think that is better addressed in articles on cosmetic surgery or some of the individual procedures. Also "severe psychological trauma" is kind of overstating things. It's usually the other way around when those things arise (psych. issues leading to surgery) Droliver 04:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Can I axe the sentence "The first President of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery was Irving B. Goldman, 1964."? I can't see that Goldman or the AAFPRS cut it with the rest of the names in the History section. Will  TALK 13:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah, go for it. It's not totally relevant here - Alison ^☺ 17:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I think an excellent addition would be the inclusion of a section about Body Dysmorphic disorder as this ties in very closely with plastic surgery and is one of the possible risk factors associated with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.26.239 ( talk • contribs)

• We already have a body dysmorphic disorder article but yes, maybe a short (neutral!) para with a "see also" link to the main article might be nice - Alison ☺ 23:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

There needs to be some discussion about how common and popular plastic surgery is becoming for purely superficial reasons and how this is impacting our society.

When the common idea is that you need to have a tummy tuck, an invasive surgical procedure, after a simple pregnancy instead of doing some good old fashioned sit-ups, then there is a problem.

When it's common for young girls to think that two pieces of silicone in their breasts is going to solve their self-confidence problems, we're being duped by advertising.

Why is cosmetic surgery more often sought by women than men? that needs to be discussed.

Of course it's fine to have plastic surgery in case of severe disfigurement, but there are perfectly normal people having plastic surgery and they think somehow it's a panacea for their problems and more often than not they are wrong. Often times after surgery people look worse, or they look fake. This article reads too much like an ADVERTISEMENT for plastic surgery. The negative side of this INDUSTRY needs to be discussed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.171.150 ( talk) 12:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

If you can find some published secondary works that discuss these issues, by all means, add the information to the article or list them here for others to add. Without sources though, it's original research and verbotten. Natalie 12:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh shit! People are getting COSMETIC surgery purely for SUPERFICIAL REASONS?!

Get real.

If America's media-controlled image problem were up for debate in this article, we would crash Wikipedia's servers. Obviously the unwillingness of your populace to do sit-ups is what created demand for tummy-tucks in the first place. In a country like America, ruled by the free market, the plastic surgery industry only exists because there are people willing to pay for it. I get what you're saying, people's motives for getting plastic surgery disgust you. Well, me too, vanity is an epidemic in your country. However, I firmly hold the opinion that there is no place for this kind of exposition in this encyclopedia, where analysis, background, and especially tangents, are unwelcome. I too have a chip on my shoulder about this phenomenon but I hope you can agree that discourse based on one person's moral judgments does not belong. QatBurglar ( talk) 05:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you saying America is the only place where cosmetic surgery is "epidemic"? If so, you're dead wrong. 71.175.251.136 ( talk) 22:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi all. This edit was made today to the "Related disciplines" paragraph, largely changing one somewhat POV piece to another. Can anyone comment as to the veracity of either statement there? As it's largely US-o-centric, it's outside my realm of experience - Alison ^❤ 18:57, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"Cosmetic surgery" and the surgical specialty of "Plastic and Reconstructive surgery" are not the same thing. They should be separate articles. Please explain why the article on cosmetics is consistently being redirected to a different article about a related but separate topic (PRS). Jwri7474 ( talk) 21:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

"Cosmetic surgery" and the surgical specialty of "Plastic and reconstructive surgery" are not exactly the same thing. They should be separate articles. The "cosmetic surgery" article on cosmetics is consistently being redirected to a different article about a related but separate topic (ie. the specialty of plastics).

Here are some examples of the current representative bodies for "cosmetic surgery":

• Australasian College of Cosmetic Surgery
• American Academy of Cosmetic Surgery
• American Board of Cosmetic Surgery
• Canadian Academy of Cosmetic Surgery
• European Academy of Cosmetic Surgery
• Is facial cosmetic surgery for you?

http://www.americanboardcosmeticsurgery.org/fellowship_route.php training requirements for US board certification in cosmetic surgery]

Even without fellowship training in cosmetics, many specialties are actually required to teach and provide examinations in cosmetics as part of their standard residency training program (example Otolaryngology and Maxillofacial surgery Board certification exams have a substantial component devoted to cosmetics 15-30%)

There are many medical/surgical specialties that utilise cosmetic surgical techniques and procedures and are equally licensed to provide such procedures, not only the surgical specialty of "Plastic and reconstructive surgery". Redirecting the entire article to the Plastic surgery article suggests a certain POV that only Plastic surgeons can provide cosmetic procedures to the public and this is not true. Cosmetic surgery procedures are performed by many specialties (one of which being plastic surgery).. others being OMFS, ENT, Opth, General surg, Urology, etc. Thank you. Jwri7474 ( talk) 09:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC) }}

They do appear to be the same in the standard mainstream view. [1] Vassyana ( talk) 05:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

If you will scroll down and read the same reference you provided, you will noticed that there are sources from other specialties other than Plastic and Reconstructive surgery (ie. Derm, ENT, etc). I could just as easily provide websites referring to "Otolaryngology and Cosmetic surgery" or "Dermatology and Cosmetic surgery" or "Opthalmology and Cosmetic surgery". Also, considering the references I provided demonstrating the provision of many "cosmetic surgical procedures" by other medical and surgical specialties I would think this would be evidence enough that although Plastic surgeons do provide cosmetic surgery, they are not the only ones who provide this service and that the terms "plastic and cosmetic" although sometimes related are not synonomous. Jwri7474 ( talk) 05:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Plastic surgeons specialize in plastic surgery. However, other doctors perform cosmetic surgery as well. There's no real contradiction or lack of clarity in that, and such "overlap" is not at all uncommon in modern medicine. An internal medicine specialist may still perform colon surgery (if a surgeon), even though they are not a proctologist. If the article fails to properly represent the breadth of plastic surgery's practice, by all means fix it. Vassyana ( talk) 06:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The contention is not over the adequacy of the wiki article on Plastic surgery. This is fine. The problem is the repetitive deletion/redirection of the wiki article on "cosmetic surgery" to the plastic surgery article. If we agree that cosmetic surgery is performed by many medical/surgical specialists. The redirecting of the term "cosmetic surgery" to the wiki article "plastic surgery" infers that all cosmetic surgery is performed by only by plastic surgeons alone and this is not true and against wiki TOS relating to a plastic surgery weighted POV. I think it is worthwhile having a separate article on cosmetic surgery. Jwri7474 ( talk) 07:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Jwri7474 seems to have demonstrated by the provision of names of prof. bodies that the lead statement, "plastic surgery is also sometimes incorrectly referred to as "cosmetic surgery", is factually wrong, POV, OR, unbalanced and unverifiable. In addition this claim exists only in the lead which is meant as an overview of the article not a place for unique information. I agree that Plastic surgery and Cosmetic surgery would be better off in separate articles. Hopefully the cosmetic surgery article will contain information on the economic size of this industry and also info on the complication rates and patient outcomes. In mean time, cosmetic surgery, wikilinked to its section. SmithBlue ( talk) 11:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Jwri7474, are you saying there should be subarticles of plastic surgery for reconstructive surgery and cosmetic procedures? Or are you saying that they are distinct fields? Vassyana ( talk) 20:35, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not promoting altering the current article plastic surgery in any way. There is already a separate article on Reconstructive surgery explaining that other specialties also provide these services in some capacity. I simply believe there should be a separate but similar article for cosmetic surgery. I don't believe the term "cosmetic surgery" should be automatically redirected to an article on plastic surgery. This is because 1. other specialties also provide these services other than "only" plastic surgeons, and 2. because although the terms are related.. they are not synonymous. Does that make sense? Thanks. Jwri7474 ( talk) 22:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

reference to other specialties.

I reverted the removal of reference to other specialties also doing what is commonly thought of as plastic surgery. Judging from the above, I do no think there is consensus to remove them. DGG ( talk) 18:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the above user Jwri7474. The distinction between plastic surgery and cosmetic surgery must be made. They are different and an automatic redirect from 'cosmetic surgery' to 'plastic surgery is inappropriate. Cosmetic Surgery is performed by many types of surgeons. Separating the articles would allow the cosmetic surgery article to flourish. ArizonaFace ( talk) 06:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't really wish to call this article's POV into question, but I feel it is at risk of presenting only the glamorous side. Keep in mind that plastic surgery is not all cake and ice cream. I would welcome a section on the more common (usually risks are specific to the procedure, but some are not such as infections, rejection, or surgeon error) adverse health affects caused by cosmetic surgery. QatBurglar ( talk) 04:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. I would initiate something but I'm awfully busy these days. What do you suggest? A section about plastic (cosmetic in fact) surgery disasters (usually performed by quacks) and/or a section on the side effects of plastic surgical procedures (such as infection, nerve damage etc)? ktr ( talk) 07:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking mostly along the lines of the second part -- say that amateur/unskilled/quack cosmetic surgeons aren't all too common; however even "safe" procedures have potential to, say, leave someone without any feeling in half of their face. I am not an expert on cosmetic surgery but I do know a heck of a lot about Wikipedia and based on this I would say that a section on health risks of plastic/cosmetic surgery definitely belongs in this article. Will someone team up with me on this? QatBurglar ( talk) 19:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

is there a plasty that can make me tall? I am 5 feet 7 and I want to be at least 5 feet 10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.242.160 ( talk) 19:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Is this a relevant comment? -- Doctorkc ( talk) 07:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Can we at least change Cosmetic surgery to redirect to Cosmetic surgery so that it at least sends you to the right subsection of the PRS article? Thanks Jwri7474 ( talk) 09:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Anyone? Can someone unlock the redirect so we can change it? Thanks Jwri7474 ( talk) 17:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It says that the left one was before receiving a skin graft and right one is after, but when reading the skin grafting page, it says otherwise, the right is just after surgery and left is a lot time after. I googled about Walter Yeo and the results say differently. How can we judge which is right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petorial ( talk • contribs) 15:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I removed the first sentence in techniques, because it indicated that liposuction, fillers etc were techniques of plastic surgery - they are cosmetic procedures. It's important to always distinguish between cosmetic and plastic surgery. BTW the caption on Walter Yeo is correct now - I'm also looking for statistics that are more recent than what we've got. Dj321 ( talk) 00:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dj321 ( talk • contribs) 23:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I've added some statistics, which the page seemed to need, with attribution - something I think is important for stats. One site I wanted to quote, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, was apparently not OK to use, but I was able to find other sources. Dj321 ( talk) 18:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Breast reduction is listed in both the cosmetic and reconstructive sections of the article, but in the cosmetic section the description describes its effects to improve functioning. Couple this with the trend to sexualise unnaturally huge breasts (cf Lolo Ferrari and Maxi Mounds) and it seems like breast reduction is a purely reconstructive procedure. is there any resource defining it as cosmetic? 68.62.24.98 ( talk) 19:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I've updated and changed the wording on the etymology section; the confusion needs to be addressed between plastic the material and plastic the description and as such I've hopefully written a few sentences which describe why with proper linkages. It was removed previously since I had called it a verb, which was wrong, but has now been corrected with adjectives. It _is_ important I find to mention that there is no connection between the plastic material, i.e. polymers, and the procedure, which is why I wrote it the way I did. Hope it's better!-- Cpt ricard ( talk) 02:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The distinction between the 'plastic' in 'plastic surgery' and the polymers called 'plastics' has been made in the lead for years, and I certainly didn't 'remove' it, just changed the wording to make it clearer and more concise. -- Macrakis ( talk) 23:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Why put a citation there with the education. It is common knowledge that an MD, MBBS, or DO (US, i.e. Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, not Osteopathy) can be fully board certified in Plastic Surgery by the American Board of Plastic Surgery. These other degrees are also accepted as a US-MD in America: MBBS, BMBS, BM BCh, BM, MB BCh BAO, or MBChB. Those should be added to the list. As of now I don't know any non-US-DO programs that would qualify for Plastic Surgery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.104.249 ( talk) 23:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

I wonder if Jacques Joseph should be mentioned in the history section. According to my knowledge he is widely considered the main pioneer in plastic surgery in the 20th century. However, I am not a specialist on this topic, but I was missing this name from the otherwise very detailed article.

best regards, Joerg 109.228.137.232 ( talk) 21:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A copyright concern tag was placed in January, but I concur with Ragesoss, almost certainly a backwardscopy. Given that it is only a single sentence, not going to bother adding the template.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 16:19, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa ( talk) 21:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

More social or sociological information would be nice. Especially, if that's possible, a map about the frequency of plastic surgery by country. (To my knowledge, there are great differences between countries, with numbers relatively high in the US and southern Europe, and less so in northern and central Europe; although I might be mistaken.) Anyway, more sociological information, and especially more information on regional differences, would be what I personally would like to see in this article :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.206.143.173 ( talk) 10:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

That is completely untrue. If anything, Northern and Central European women have more plastic surgery than any other person in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.22.212.211 ( talk) 17:56, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Little mention is given to the psychological implications that ought to be considered when discussing cosmetic surgery. In addition, there is no mention of the potential evolutionary implications for cosmetic surgery. The features enhanced via cosmetic surgery that may lead to more sexual partners have little or no correlation with the actual fitness or quality of genes of the individual. Thus mate choices may be influenced by the resources (e.g., money and time) available to an individual to allow for cosmetic surgery rather than by having the best genes. Furthermore, those who decide on cosmetic enhancement in situations where psychological intervention may be of help, the offspring produced as a result may also carry such faulty genes. This page need more information and critical research in to the psychological and evolutionary implications of cosmetic surgery. Charleywoltynski ( talk) 10:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Got any references for these things? peterl ( talk) 05:34, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

In the coming weeks, my colleagues and I will be editing with page to add the information above (including references) as part of our University project.

Great! Well sourced, referenced material is always welcome. peterl ( talk) 00:34, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Potential sources: Bibliography

1. Sarwer, D. B., Wadden, T. A., Pertschuk, M. J., & Whitaker, L. A. (1998). The psychology of cosmetic surgery: A review and reconceptualization. Clinical psychology review, 18(1), 1-22.

2. Scott, K. (2009). Cheating Darwin: The genetic and ethical implications of vanity and cosmetic plastic surgery. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 20(2), 1-8.

3. Rowanchilde, R. (1996). Male genital modification. Human Nature, 7(2), 189-215.

4. SCHATZKI, T.R., 2001. On sociocultural evolution by social selection. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31(4), pp. 341-364.

5. Donath, J. (2007). Signals, cues and meaning. Unpublished Manuscript. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. http://smg. media. mit. edu/classes/IdentitySignals06/SignalingDraft. pdf.

6. Arnocky, S., & Piché, T. (2014). Cosmetic surgery as intrasexual competition: the mediating role of social comparison. Psychology, 2014.

7.) Furnham A, & Levitas J. (2012). Factors that motivate people to undergo cosmetic surgery. Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery, 20, 47–50

8.) https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201004/why-do-breasts-mesmerize — Preceding

unsigned comment added by Navinadgandhi ( talk • contribs) 14:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Charleywoltynski ( talk) 11:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Navinadgandhi ( talk) 15:16, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

EllaMcCann ( talk) 12:33, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

— Preceding 
unsigned comment added by 
Charleywoltynski (
talk • 
contribs) 16:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC) 

I just have some suggestions on expanding the ‘Male cosmetic surgery’ section. Maybe expand on the reasons why males undergo cosmetic surgery (besides increasing masculinity) and contrast these with reasons for women having cosmetic surgery. Some of these reasons are mentioned in Davis’ “A Dubious Equality”, which has already been referenced.

Could also discuss why numbers of males undergoing cosmetic surgery is so much lower than females. For example, if males want to increase masculinity, there are other ways besides cosmetic surgery of achieving this (e.g. steroids, physical training). It also might be worth mentioning how there is a lot more negativity surrounding the idea of men having cosmetic surgery compared to women.

Overall the section is well written and informative, so well done! -- AH2960 ( talk) 16:08, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I have some suggestions for improvements, particularly related to the evolutionary advantages section.

• You could add some images showing how plastic surgery improves the WHR (before/after), to make this clearer
• You could add an few sentences explaining that this is a new phenomenon, in that our ancestors had no way of changing their appearance as dramatically as we can today - it is allowing people to bypass their genetics to become more desirable mates
• How this could potentially lead to problems - cases where people only realise that their partners have had plastic surgery after their children are not as attractive as they would have guessed - misleads beliefs about 'good genes'
• You could explain in greater depth why people get plastic surgery - e.g. the appearance of youth in women is favoured by men, and assigns them high mate value, so women attempt to look as youthful as possible to gain higher quality males

Nd2242 ( talk) 17:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

You've made a good start on the topic of evolution and cosmetic surgery; the research on women's motivations and WHR is well explained. I have made a few copy-edits, just to restructure some sentences to make them more concise. I also have a couple of suggestions for how you can improve and build on what you have written.

Firstly, you might consider altering your title for this section to something more along the lines of "Evolutionary Theory and(/of) Cosmetic Surgery". "Evolutionary Advantages" could sound like you're endorsing cosmetic surgery, but that's just my personal opinion!

You have mentioned gender roles in reproductive strategies - it might be an idea to add in an extra sentence or two after this to summarise each gender's role in this and how it links to cosmetic surgery before you go into female-specific examples. Maybe this could tie into your point about mate value? This could just make the points flow into each other a bit smoother!

Honest signals could be explained in a little more detail and you could even link your article to Signalling theory so you link the physical aspects of cosmetic surgery straight back to evolutionary theory.

You mention that WHR informs us about women's "reproductive health and status"; maybe you could expand on what you mean by "status" and how this links to WHR and cosmetic surgery in general?

Also, there might be some research on men's motivations for cosmetic surgery and how this links into evolutionary theory, in the same way you have addressed females.

You may find this chapter interesting if you're thinking of covering literature about beauty ideals over the years and how physical appearance may affect treatment of individuals: ^[1]

Tinaballerina02 ( talk) 22:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I like that you have included this subheading as it makes the article more well rounded. However, there are a few things that you could do to expand on the topic of male cosmetic surgery for example:

• A definition of intra-male mate competition may be useful to readers. Also, you could explain specifically what it is about intra-male mate competition that would lead to men wanting to get plastic surgery.
• Some examples of what telltale signs of femininity are (such as breast tissue) could be helpful for readers understanding.
• It could be interesting if you found some research showing that men actually get plastic surgery to improve facial symmetry to support your point.
• You could give a possible explanation for the differences in the number of males and females getting plastic surgery. For example, physical attractiveness is not as important for females as it is for males, and so they may not feel as much of a need to increase it. Hhammam ( talk) 13:32, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

The psychological angle on this page really adds something. I feel like the female aspect is very well explained, maybe the male section could be further expanded?

The psychological sections could perhaps use some reformatting. The psychological motivation for plastic surgery should have its own heading, something along the lines of ‘Evolutionary explanations’ with subheadings of ‘Males’ and ‘Females’? This will help to improve the general flow of this part of the page, as it seems strange for these to follow on as it does at the moment.

Perhaps you could explore more the advantages of being attractive. You already look at the increased likelihood of getting a job, maybe you coud link this to the ‘Halo effect’ and the view of attractiveness as good.

More focus on male influences could be explored. You mention the link with resourcefulness, you could also link this with social status and the benefits of high social status. There is plenty of evidence suggesting that dominance in social situations is attractive to females, maybe you could explore confidence and its relation to cosmetic surgery and attractiveness more generally.

As symmetry = attractiveness, you could link your research to the page ‘Facial symmetry’, which also gives information on the benefits of being attractive. Perhaps exploring Fluctuating Asymmetry briefly could add something too.

I have made a few copyedits to the page. Just be careful when using phrases such as ‘it is likely that…’: if you have research to support these claims then use them! Really good start to exploring this topic though! MattConnell94 ( talk) 17:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

It might be helpful to include some statistics from other countries, as the rate of cosmetic surgery varies from different countries and cultures. Only one statistical figure from a country may not be representative enough to support it as an increasing overall trend. To further explain the motivation apart from the evolutionary perspective, some social and psychological aspects may also be considered, such as attention and self-identity seeking among peers, or a boost of self-confidence. Overall, this section provided a precise general overview on male cosmetic surgery.

( W62043 ( talk) 21:04, 15 March 2016 (UTC))

In the first paragraph it is mentioned that male mate preference is a strong motivational factor for females to get plastic surgery although the direction of such male mate preference isn't stated. For example, you could talk briefly about how males look for certain signals of reproductive fitness, which could be changed via plastic surgery to manipulate male mate choice.

In the fourth paragraph, while it is mentioned that females with the optimal WHR tend to produce the most healthy offspring, further depth could be added by talking about the factors associated with this optimal WHR that lead to healthier offsrping. E.g. Is there a link associated with low WHR and genes that enhance offspring survival/reproductive fitness?

( LiamW1265 ( talk) 17:19, 16 March 2016 (UTC))

Subarticle best as a section of plastic surgery per article size & scope WP:SPINOUT - see reasons Talk:Ethnic plastic surgery#Expert Widefox; talk 09:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I think this is much broader issue that plastic surgery and would prefer not to see it merged there. If anything, a merge with Racial transformation (individual) might be more appropriate.-- Nowa ( talk) 13:06, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Racial transformation (individual) is unstable currently, and although I agree the scope straddles medicine and sociology, the ethical considerations are best handled in the parent (in a similar way to the BDD mention - which is a medically recognised separate topic). Maybe we should avoid WP:POV fork, and follow WP:SPINOUT from the parent per article size. Currently the biggest issue is the Ethical Considerations section WP:COATRACK. That would be solved by merging into the parent. Widefox; talk 14:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I would consider the same goes for other markets of plastic surgery: Caucasian plastic surgery, Female plastic surgery, Male plastic surgery. WP:SPINOUT. Widefox; talk 14:31, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I moved this section down to the bottom because while ethnic plastic surgery has been tagged with {{ mergeto}} since last June, the {{ mergefrom}} tag was removed inappropriately back in December. Granted, it was up for several months without any additional discussion, so someone else can feel free to remove/close this, but please also remove the tag from the other page. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:51, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

• oppose Plastic surgery is big, big topic. There is room, and sourcing, for this. Andy Dingley ( talk) 11:42, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi! Overall, the structure of the article is great and it follows a logical path, the images you have included are also very interesting to look into further! Just a few things I would suggest;

• Include citations from a reliable source whenever you are making statements for example in the 'Reconstructive surgery' section.
• You have a good amount of subsections for each topic however sections such as 'complications and risk' are fairly small compared to the other sections so perhaps adding some more useful information to this section or even merging it with another section may help.
• In the techniques and procedures section, it may be worth simplifying or further defining complicated terms such as 'glycosaminoglycans' as many people may not be familiar with such terms.

Hopefully this feedback was helpful but overall a really great read! Rhearattan ( talk) 11:08, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Wiki editors, I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions for edits into this article. I am currently taking a class about the History of Modern Medicine and for an assignment we are supposed to edit wiki pages and contribute new information and improve articles. I hope to focus on the development of plastic surgery from the 18th to the 20th century, but I am open to suggestions. Thanks Nikkilopezsuarez ( talk) 02:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you to everyone for your detailed responses, I am going to make the changes to correspond with what the wiki community is saying. One of my main concerns however is that I do not have the time nor the resources to provide the demographic information for every country in which plastic surgery is popular. I would recommend someone else who is also curious about the topic to try and add more information so there can be a more balanced view of this phenomena. However, if this would be something that nobody is interested in doing it might be best to take out this section since it might provide an unbalanced view of how this phenomena. Nikkilopezsuarez ( talk) 17:22, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Plastic surgery/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: LT910001 ( talk · contribs) 05:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your (2) edits to this article, Nikkilopezsuarez. Good articles are reviewed against six criteria. They are here: WP:GA?. On first glance this article is not close to meeting these criteria. In particular:

• The lead section is too small. It should reflect and summarise the article contents. See WP:LEAD
• Numerous sections lack citations. Active tags are present that request citations
• Many sections are small and consist of a single sentence or two
• The article is US-centric
• There is a large list that should be converted to text
• There is barely any discussion of complications or risks

In addition, I note you are a student and wish you well with your studies, but based on past experiences will not hold my breath for any response. I'll hold this review open for some days and then if there is no response mark it as failed. All the best, -- Tom (LT) ( talk) 05:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Failed per above.-- Tom (LT) ( talk) 07:58, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review Hey Nikki! This is a really good article and had a lot of interesting additions. Also information that I did not know and was intrigued to learn about the topic. I think that this sub specialties could be expanded just a little bit in order to have a larger introduction on each sub surgery. Other than that good job! LauraBou ( talk) 02:44, 6 May 2017 (UTC)LauraBou LauraBou ( talk) 02:44, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Plastic surgery. 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/20101127161922/http://www.nyam.org/news/2493.html to http://www.nyam.org/news/2493.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080922005722/http://www.encarta.es/encyclopedia_761577922/Plastic_Surgery.html to http://www.encarta.es/encyclopedia_761577922/Plastic_Surgery.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140202180933/https://www.abplsurg.org/ModDefault.aspx?section=AboutIntro to https://www.abplsurg.org/ModDefault.aspx?section=AboutIntro
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101015000138/https://abplsurg.org/ModDefault.aspx?section=AboutDPS to https://www.abplsurg.org/ModDefault.aspx?section=AboutDPS
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160402095506/http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2014-statistics/plastic-surgery-statsitics-full-report.pdf to http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2014-statistics/plastic-surgery-statsitics-full-report.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150910172447/http://www.webmd.com/beauty/treatments/most-popular-cosmetic-procedures to http://www.webmd.com/beauty/treatments/most-popular-cosmetic-procedures

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)