Talk:Massachusetts General Hospital

Boston Associates and connection to slavery
The Boston Associates were a group of cotton merchants and textile factory owners who helped to found Massachusetts General Hospital. It is a fact that they profited from slavery. Afterall, the American South was the major cotton producing region in the world in the late 18th and early 19th century. The Boston Associates are a part of the history of this hospital. To delete any reference to them and the nature of their business is an affront to History. Noxscientia 00:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not denying that this connection may have existed. However, it's given a bit too much weight in an article of this size.  Andrew73


 * It's part of the hospital's history, as painful as it is for apologists. It deserves to be in the entry, more so, than trivial references to it in fictional tv shows. Furthermore, it fulfills the wikipedia criteria of adding material to entries: it is from a legitimate historical reference. As Cicero wrote "The first law for the historian is that he shall never dare utter an untruth. The second is that he shall suppress nothing that is true. "   Noxscientia

Could you please point out a suitable reference for this, particularly the names of those in the Boston Associates? Riverview1 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)Riverview


 * The connection between Boston Associates and MGH isn't obvious. If you do a Google search, this link doesn't necessarily turn up.  Furthermore, The Boston Associates article doesn't make specific mention of slavery.  Again, while I'm not disputing that there may be possible a connection between slavery and the founding of MGH, it shouldn't be given WP:UNDUE weight.  At the same time, I can't imagine institutions that date back to the 1800s being free of any slavery connection, so I'm not sure how this would make MGH unique in this regard.  Andrew73 23:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Charles/MGH Red Line T stop
The Charles/MGH Red Line T stop, which has been under renovation for almost five years, is now fully handicapped-accessible. Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, along with MBTA General Manager Dan Grabauskas and other local and government officials celebrated the renovation in March of 2007. 132.183.229.88 13:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

how many beds?
there's two different cites & numbers - one to 950 beds, one to 1057 beds. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 19:28, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Massachusetts General Hospital. 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://archive.is/20130415110724/http://www2.massgeneral.org/history/museum_onlineExhibits_EtherMural.htm to http://www2.massgeneral.org/history/museum_onlineExhibits_EtherMural.htm

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) 01:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

When did the hospital open?
You say it was "founded" in 1811. Then you say it admitted its "first patient" in 1821. That is&mdash;take your pick&mdash;contradictory, a non sequitur, and completely unclear. When the hospital opened for practice, or whatever activity it first engaged in, is what we want to know.

If it opened in 1811 but didn't have patients for 10 years, then what did it do for a decade? In what medical activity other than seeing patients [sic] did it engage? How is a hospital called a hospital without having patients?

Or are you saying 1811 was just an event on paper, a charter or something, and the hospital didn't open until 1821? If so, then say so. And use a single, defining English verb, e.g. 'open'. Of course, if you wish to say that admission of its first patient constituted its opening, if that is true, fine. Or, if those are two different events and you also want to state the 1821 first-patient-admission event, that's fine too. But give us the 'opening' flavor.

Given the present phrasing, for the record we must also ask: Did it open in a third year, neither 1811 or 1821?

Jimlue (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 30 October 2021 (UTC)