Talk:Burial at sea

A fact from Burial at sea appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 April 2004. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the United States Navy practiced burial at sea as recently as World War II?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2004/April.

Wikipedia

Comments

I've found two advertisements on this page for burial at sea companies, and removed them. One was in the footnotes, so if you notice an advert, go through and doublecheck the footnotes too, please. And if you're the one doing this, it's pretty disrespectful to waylay a encyclopedic entry on a respectful method of disposing of the dead to advertise your own services. L.cash.m (talk) 08:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured on the Main Page together with the photo Image:BurialAtSea USS Intrepid1944.jpg on 26 April 2004 in the section "Did you know..." "...that the United States Navy practiced burial at sea as recently as World War II?"

It is stated that Janis Joplin was burried at sea, but on the pagina on Joplin one can find the following contradictional statement: "Joplin died of a heroin overdose on October 4, 1970 in Los Angeles, California, at the age of 27. She was interred in the Westwood Village Memorial Park Cemetery in Westwood, California."

My source is [1], and i did not verify the information. It is quite possible that I am wrong. I will add a note to the page until I or someone else finds more info. Thanks for pointing that out. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 11:16, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Got it. Cremated at Westwood Village Memorial Park Cemetery, but then the ashes were scattered in the pacific ocean, as stated on Westwood Village Memorial Park Cemetery, also for example [2] -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 11:19, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Removed section on suicide because it really doesn't fit, topicwise, very well into this article. Improv

It is nice to learn that illegal burial is illegal. Do you have any logic left? This article needs serious improvement, but looking into the version history you are not willing to accept any changes for the better.

Wasn't there a Polynesian culture that consigned their dead to the ocean, with the intent that the bodies be eaten by the god-like sharks? If so, that would be a suitable addition to this article. -Willmcw 06:17, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the 1990s a woman standing on a favorite rock on the California coast was swept out to sea and drowned by a large wave. Her son and daughter chose the same spot to scatter her ashes and were also struck by a wave, killing the son.

Any good reason for not removing this?

Why does a subject titled "Burial at sea" have the first chapter as "United States Navy"??!!

Good point, moved this to a subsection -- Chris 73 | Talk 11:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should Spock be placed under fictional figures buried at sea, it was a traditional ceremony, even though it happened in space.

There is a burial in space page where Spock is listed. Butnotthehippo 23:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed "Jacob Marley" from the section on Fictional Characters Buried at Sea, as nowhere in Charles Dickens's "A Christmas Carol" does it say he was so buried. Indeed, the first paragraph of the first chapter says "The register of his burial was signed by the clergyman, the clerk, the undertaker, and the chief mourner." sugesting an ordinary London church burial. If one of the many adaptations of this book has Marley buried at sea, someone can restore this name with a reference to the adaptation. MacPhilbin 03:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was told in my years at sea by a bosun that had buried souls at sea, that British naval tradition is that the sailmakers last stitch in the shroud must pass through the nose of the deceased. Allegedly to prove he was dead. Jim Lad.203.44.141.220 (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph beginning with the text "California is the only state that doesn’t permit full body burials. " seems to completely overlook the fact that states exist outside of the usa. 81.102.245.90 (talk) 10:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funeral at sea

"Burial" seems so wrong - there's no burying going on at all. Funeral at sea seems better. Okay to move? Ingolfson (talk) 14:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Burial" is the term used by various seafarers. "Bury" and "burial" do not require earth -- you can bury under water.

The Admiralty Manual of Seamanship does not speak directly on the subject, but says, "[Ensigns] ... are usually half masted ... to the time when [the body] is buried."
The US Federal Register section title is "Burial Of Human Remains At Sea". (see main article ref 1)
It's the US Navy term of art United States Navy Burial at Sea Program
And the term the RN uses
The OED defines "burial": "the depositing of anything under earth or water...."

. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 00:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, however I think that the article has it right. In the case of burial of ashes (more accurately 'burial of cremated remains' there is not a funeral, though there may well be prayers and ceremony. Stick with 'Burial' please. Springnuts (talk) 19:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Memorial Service

I removed this today,

"Where the deceased's remains have been previously scattered into the sea, memorial services are often performed by returning to the location of the scattering using GPS coordinates logged at the time of the original service."

It's hard to imagine why a family (or friends, etc.) would scatter ashes at sea, presumably with a ceremony appropriate to their customs and wishes, and then return later to hold a memorial service there. A memorial service is a service held in lieu of a burial or a second service in a different place to allow those who could not attend the primary burial service.

Also, one does not log "GPS coordinates", one logs locations, which may have been determined with a GPS, or otherwise. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 14:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Photos - bias needs removing/correcting

This article needs some photos of non-US burials at sea. As it stands the four photos are all of US naval burials at sea, and they make the article very biased, towards one country and towards the non-civilian aspect of burial at sea. It should be corrected. 86.152.240.193 (talk) 16:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Step

You mentioned the addition of weight to keep the body down, but you missed a step. You need to create a vent to release the decomposition gasses. A cut acress the stomach and one on the neck. If you don't, the gasses will pull the body (with weights) back to the surface. My Dad helped bury men during WW2 and prepared bodies during 15 years in the merchant marine. Herogamer (talk) 14:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Should Cremation be added to Categories? Tiyang (talk) 14:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of hardware used at your automotive workplace?

Danny5805 (talk) 06:37, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If customer complains you about your production how do you save that issues? For- motormachanic Danny5805 (talk) 06:39, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cremation?

I don't think Cremation related scattering should be included in "Burial at sea". Cremation is an alternative to burial. Where you scatter the ash, IF you scatter the ash, is not a burial at sea or on land.

Having a long list of examples of people "buried at sea" that is dominated by scattered ashes is silly. Buried at sea is having a body sunk in the ocean, not a body in a funeral home being cremated and then the ashes being carried to the water and scattered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/ ([[User talk:|talk]]) 18:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Islamic burial timing?

"Islamic law requires a body to be buried within 24 hours after death." Is this accurate? There is no mention of this in the main Islamic Burial article. I was trying to see if this was just an internet meme or if there is some validity to it. 70.125.204.222 (talk) 02:33, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Judaism

Article had said: "Orthodox Judaism prohibits burial at sea; Reform Judaism may allow it." The Reform statement was unsourced; the Orthodox statement pointed to Yoreh Deah 375:7. Yoreh Deah 375:7 is irrelevant; it's talking about if a living person is swept out to sea, at what point can the family assume s/he has died. Burial at sea (as I understand it) means we have a corpse here that we've verified as dead, and now we want to put it in the sea.

So we had one unsourced statement and one statement not supported by the citation; I'm taking this all out and replacing it with something more direct. TLMD13 (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I could fairly certainly say from an Orthodox perspective that where prompt burial in the earth is an option, it would be required. In a situation such as someone who died at sea, presumably the ship's crew would have to decide between prompt burial at sea, or postponing burial until they reached dry land. This situation is not addressed in the Talmud or Shulchan Aruch to the best of my knowledge; my suspicion is that prompt burial at sea is preferable. See Deuteronomy 21:23 ("don't leave the corpse sitting around; rather, bury it") as interpreted by Talmud Sanhedrin 46b. But I kept to the the minimum facts in the article. TLMD13 (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

tribal peoples

Are or were there any tribal peoples (presumably living on a coast) that practice burial at sea? -- 77.189.63.128 (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight

Is this much detail on the specific legal requirements of the State of California in particular, really appropriate? 2607:FEA8:13E0:7AD:4687:FCFF:FE5C:A019 (talk) 03:37, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - there is far too much detail on this topic in the article. Please edit ruthlessly! Springnuts (talk) 19:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Burial at sea. 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/20110502113045/http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/05/osama-bin-laden-body-headed-for-burial-at-sea-officials-say.html to http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/05/osama-bin-laden-body-headed-for-burial-at-sea-officials-say.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 02:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]