This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments4 people in discussion
The term is self explanatory. Is there really a good reason for this to be on wikipedia? The topic is only practically of relevance in the context of other more dominant subjects (eg weapons, military conflicts and forensic science) in which it can be mentioned as part of a separate subject and the only reason why I can think as to why it is here as a stand alone topic is that a childish desire to promulgate a prurient concept. 209.93.146.110 (talk) 13:28, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Total body disruption is a valid medical term describing an important phenomena, yet the term is still uncommon in lay knowledge, and the term collates and clarifies from the numerous unscientific slang terms that have countlessly been used throughout the years for this cause of death and are synonymous with other events:
I think the article should be renamed to use the redirect title which was just requested and activated, i.e., "Gross dismemberment". As stated, this latter terminology is very important in legal practice for Emergency Medical workers, because according to many local laws according to jurisdiction in the U.S. "gross dismemberment" is the only assessment non-M.D. EMS personnel can--and then must--explicitly invoke in order to discontinue rescue interventions at a scene. As such, it is a term-of-art for EMS personnel that subsumes more than the words of its literal meaning, making it equivalent to--and more decorus, in my opinion, than--the current article title. I agree with @209.93.146.110 that the "spray mist" or whatever that is currently in the lede salacious, although I'm not expert enough to raise a dispute on the point. I do wish there were more citations for the suspicious phrases, which sound like urban lingo to me. 67.185.21.25 (talk) 22:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Article creator here. Thanks for your contribution 67.185.21.25, it is quite important. I put your "gross dismemberment" term in bold on the article due to its importance. "Grossly dismembered" definitely rolls off the tongue easier than "total body disruption", and is easier to use in sentences instead of "totally body disrupted" or "underwent total body disruption"... Ideally, "grossly dismembered" should replace the term of "blew up" and all those other slang terms in common modern English. Thanks, and stay safe! BuddyOrgan (talk) 00:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
