My nickel on the content as written:
* At risk of being a hypocrite for some of my own edits - This is a wall of text. Outside of the online citation (See next point), and a brief description of skin being taken from one person to help her, everything else is fluff at best and editorializing at worst.
* These are living people - I strongly feel the inline citation is warranted for the exceptional claim.
* Who said it? On each edit it sounds like the person in question spoke for the other. That’s technically possible, but unusual.
* No link to an archived version of the article is provided.
* Outlets retract stuff all the time. I’m not saying it’s false, but there may be a good reason it was retracted, including potentially that it isn’t true.
Now to try and figure out if this even had any merits on its face, I did a google search about it. Given the topic this may be not safe for work, but People magazine has an article about it Here. Without the original article, my best reading of the situation based on what is publicly available now is that they did indeed get the procedure done, but it’s not directly taking a body part and injecting it or grafting it, but rather a procedure relying on cloned human cells.
I think that means the trope still applies, but given the squick factor and the involvement of living people I think a more reasonable edit would look like:
* Human Resources: People Magazine reported here that so and so underwent a cosmetic procedure involving cloned human cells.
* At risk of being a hypocrite for some of my own edits - This is a wall of text. Outside of the online citation (See next point), and a brief description of skin being taken from one person to help her, everything else is fluff at best and editorializing at worst.
* These are living people - I strongly feel the inline citation is warranted for the exceptional claim.
* Who said it? On each edit it sounds like the person in question spoke for the other. That’s technically possible, but unusual.
* No link to an archived version of the article is provided.
* Outlets retract stuff all the time. I’m not saying it’s false, but there may be a good reason it was retracted, including potentially that it isn’t true.
Now to try and figure out if this even had any merits on its face, I did a google search about it. Given the topic this may be not safe for work, but People magazine has an article about it Here. Without the original article, my best reading of the situation based on what is publicly available now is that they did indeed get the procedure done, but it’s not directly taking a body part and injecting it or grafting it, but rather a procedure relying on cloned human cells.
I think that means the trope still applies, but given the squick factor and the involvement of living people I think a more reasonable edit would look like:
* Human Resources: People Magazine reported here that so and so underwent a cosmetic procedure involving cloned human cells.