Talk:Hand/Archive 1

Untitled sections

I removed this sentence because opossums aren't anywhere near Daubentoniidae taxonomically: Other than opossums (Daubentoniidae), lemurs (Daubentoniidae) and the now extinct dinosaurs, this is a unique feature. -phma 13:39, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Where/when/how does second hand mean anything close to "I know it like the back of my hand"? The only usage I know is like the reference to second-hand goods; meaning indirect: IE second-hand knowledge; "Someone told me you did it." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niteowlneils (talk • contribs) at 19:08, April 4, 2004 (UTC)

---

Here is image pof hand in SVG format. It is vector graphics format, optimized for internet (it is subset of XML). Many programs can edit svg images (like SodiPodi or Inkscape). Its much more easy to improve SVG image than JPEG, PNG raster images. Kenny sh at 15:40, May 18, 2004 (UTC)

Hand

Yeah, this section on common uses in the english language needs to go. What about "hand" the verb? What about the adjective "handy"? How about just adding a link to the wiktionary article.

And why does the hand in the picture in the upper right of the page have a ring on one of its fingers? People don't naturally have rings. I don't wear a ring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.137.57 (talk) at 23:33, June 2, 2005 (UTC)

I agree, it has little to do with the subject of hands, is more suited to Wiktionary, is completely unreferenced, is very incomplete, and is somewhat inaccurate. I have removed it, but am copying it to the talk page. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)} 15:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Common uses in the English language

I know it like the back of my hand - English phrase used to say that the subject knows the matter perfectly, as if it were part of their body, or that they were born with the knowledge. Related: Second hand.

Second hand - Similar to "I know it like the back of my hand," in that it is definitely known by the subject. Similar to something being described as second nature. Not to be confused with second-hand goods, which have already been used before, and are being resold. In the U.S., at least, second hand means indirect--almost the opposite. "She told me walking everyday is good for the brain" indicates second hand knowledge.

A person may also describe somebody as his right-hand man, which means that he relies heavily on this person; this may derive from the importance of the right hand in right-handed individuals. The commonness of right-handedness may be the source of attitudes of importance and superiority on the right over the left by many cultures. This is exemplified by phrases such as "to be seated at the right hand of the gods when Judgment comes."

Lending a hand is an English phrase that means helping someone. If I ask you to "Lend me a Hand," then I am asking you to come help me.

The hand is also an archaic unit of measurement, and is currently used as the standard unit to measure the height of horses.

The hand in watches is an indicator, usually made of a thin, light piece of metal, very variable in form, which moves over a graduated dial or scale. Watches usually have three hands showing the hours, minutes and seconds.

To be caught red-handed is to be caught in the act of doing something. Most likely derived from finding somebody with blood on their hands, indicating their guilt of a crime.

Big Hands

I think you should add a wiktionary article on the Tyler Gillette and how massavie hands can be a struggle for the youth. Tyler Gillette is an insperation for us all. If you could better understand his giant hands would be very helpful to the public. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyler Rice (talk • contribs) at 14:30, May 10, 2006 (UTC)

Other primates

In order to emphasize the point that hands aren't exclusively a human phenomenon, it would be nice to see some pictures of hands of other primates, whether they be apes, monkeys, lemurs, etc. --saforrest 21:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

First person

The first person voice is inappropriate, especially since the article may be read by people without hands. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 17:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed

Removed a Citation needed tag for the line that states how many fingers we have on one hand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.70.254 (talk) at 21:24, April 28, 2007 (UTC)

facts need sources. You can't just claim the human hand has five fingers without something to back you up. You can't just look at peoples' hands yourself, because that would constitute original research. I mean, I can look at my hand and say that humans only have four finger, but I would be wrong. So, you need a source for these types of claims. You wouldn't believe how much "common knowledge is, in fact, false. 139.102.241.40 21:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a source now. --Selket ^Talk 21:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I added a source for this, and now someone wants a citation for "people have two hands". I don't want to screw around anymore, so here it is in case someone wants to add it: http://tangible.media.mit.edu/content/papers/pdf/AudioToolkit_CHI98.pdf Illuminatedwax 13:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that every phrase on this page needs to be citated, for example "The human hand has at least 27 bones" where is the source? These facts could very well be made up, especially as it says at "at least". In any case if some one is born with less than 27 bones in thier hand, does this make them not human? I might also add that this page is open to such scrutiny due to the joke that everything needs citation including the hand has 5 digits (one thumb and four fingers). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.83.128 (talk) at 17:49, May 29, 2007 (UTC)

If you say that a typical human has five fingers on each hand, and a typical human has 2 hands shouldn't that work (because typical is not really factual because it is not including all humans)--TANK 15:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Having a citation for George Washington meeting the King of France is one thing. Having a citation for the number of fingers on the human hand just makes Wikipedia a laughingstock. Lots42 03:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The only reason there is a "citation" for the number of fingers on the human hand is this Bash.org quote: http://www.bash.org/?757724. I'm going to remove this since there is NO need to have a citation for the number of fingers on the human hand -- unless of course you want to be sheep who are playing right into this little joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.232.104 (talk) at 10:41, June 19, 2007 (UTC)

This comes a bit late, but I'd like to apologize for being the originator of that quote. I had no earthly idea that just saying something like that in a completely unrelated IRC channel would spiral out of control and cause so much vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.209.225.230 (talk) at 17:00, September 21, 2007 (UTC)

References

The references section says, among the references, the article needs references. Something isn't right here. And above the warning box is the odd text 'ABC LTD'. What's that? Lots42 19:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

More info

yeah, its good and all, it says the muscles and stuff, but what do all the muscles actually do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yourfrendmadz (talk • contribs) at 21:30, July 17, 2007 (UTC)

Anatomical position

The bones of the wrist section (and maybe other sections as well) on this page is backwards. It puts the scaphoid on the medial side on the wrist when the scaphoid is actually closest to the thumb. First of all, in the anatomical position of the body, the thumb is lateral (see http://mywebpages.comcast.net/wnor/terminologyanatposition.htm and many other pages). Second, a lot of people using Wiki aren't going to know this, so it would be clearer to say that the scaphoid is on the side closest to the thumb. As an aside, arrows on that x-ray would be nice showing the bones. Or what about an overlay? Maybe one copy without the drawn-in overlay and one copy with? The Pisiform is particularly confusing (where'd they go? how'd you get four bones in the proximal row?) in an anterior view X-ray, and the Hook of Hamate would be nice to see as it is functional. A0900 20:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Average hand size

Does anyone have any more detailed info on this? It is mentioned briefly in the article but it doesn't mention where or how is it measured... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.146.9 (talk) 00:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

See the added image. JohnABerring27A (talk) 17:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

med./lat. for Thumb?

All the fingers have it, odd the thumb is left out. Шизомби (talk) 05:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The word is pollex. I'm not comfortable adding it myself because I'm not sure if the thumb is a finger in English so I don't know how to phrase it – right now, the article mentions that there are four fingers, and at the same time talks about the thumb and other fingers. It confuses me. Phizq (talk) 09:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Missing

Missing from this article is the palm and heel of the hand. --Una Smith (talk) 21:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

What would the "heel of the hand" be? --Joe de Coy (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Section hard to follow - diagrams would be nice

The section ‘Muscles and tediagrams, showing how you extend or flex your fingers, and why certain movements are impossible. That would help a lot because this is essentially spatial information that is much more easily captured by an image than a block of text. So if there is someone who knows how the hand works, pleasew some diagrams. Doesn't have to be very artistic in a first version, I'm sure I or some other person could transform the sketches in nice SVG diagrams. 82.139.87.89 (talk) 12:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Please someone put a more proper/encyclopedic picture

without rings? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.158.152 (talk) 05:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC) you're just jealous —Preceding unsigned comment added by ManathMagesinger (talk • contribs) 23:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Please update this picture with a picture relating to the Article, ie. Hand, a decorative ring as nothing to do here. Since when are Human beings born with gold rings on their fingers? This is an Encyclopedia here - please update with proper picture.

It sure is a nice ring but it shouldn't be on the main picture showcasing a Human hand.

If there were a photo pair without ring of equal quality, I could agree on that. But when looking at the available photos on commons I could not spot a suitable replacement. -- Klaus with K (talk) 18:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Missing language

I request editing in order to add the Haitian creole equivalent to the list of languages in the left-side column. RajkiandrisRajkiandris (talk) 06:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Rodents and other not-so-distant relatives

The article mentions other primates, and how some, like the koala, have appendages similar to hands, but most rodents as well as flying squirrels have hand-like paws that are genetically related to our hands, distinct digits and the ability to grab stuff. I mean, appendages that are similar to hands coincidentally or functionally are one thing, but these guys share more genetic code with us in these "paws" that have common ancestry with our hands, so it might be worth saying something in that respect here. When I see a mouse, a squirrel or a rat, I feel more tempted to say they have hands than paws or claws. They even have rough thumbs. I suppose in general these are called "paws" because they're "animals", but that's more cultural and historical in general than scientific or biological. Who is like God? (talk) 23:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Not a gallery

Sorry for the red link in my edit summary, I meant to link to WP:NOTGALLERY. I think the gallery in this article is already a problem and if we are going to add to it then we should have a specific good reason.--Taylornate (talk) 15:08, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

main photo

The aspect ratio appears to be off, squishing the top view. I think we should correct that. Ideally the user who created the work would do it over so we don't have to make a guess at it.--Taylornate (talk) 15:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Front/ Back of the hand

While many people refer to the dorsel of the hand as the back, the front of the hand can actually be argued as the fingertips with the rear being the portion which connects to your body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.112.42 (talk) 21:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I've never heard anyone use that designation.--Taylornate (talk) 03:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Sexual dimorphism

Stopped by for some info after wife's hand procedure. It is confusing to the non medical student reader (me) when different sections switch between the finger names and finger numbers. I had to follow the link to 'digit ratio' to find out that the thumb is finger #1. I added the names to this section as I see other comments with this same confusion, so it appears to be an issue needing clarification. -- Steve -- (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the hand surgeons I've worked with also prefer to use names instead of numbers because it is more clear to them as well. The proper names are thumb, index finger, long finger, ring finger, and small finger. I would support changing any remaining digit-number references.--Taylornate (talk) 03:12, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't planning to do any more proofing. I just scanned and saw that part. -- Steve -- (talk) 04:02, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress about "Palm"

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Arecaceae which may impact this page, as it involves the usage of "palm". Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:11, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Moles

Moles have fingers and opposable thumbs. And use them for grasping. Yet there is a hesitance among many to call their paws "hands" because they are not primates. Why is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.216.131.132 (talk) 21:02, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Fuck knows. --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 21:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Image: Bones of the left hand. Dorsal surface

The image file information's description is (incorrectly?) "... right hand ...". How do make of this discrepancy? Tony Ho (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Raccoons have hands too!

Hands also evolved independently in raccoons. Do a Google Scholar search and you will find many WP:RSes that refer to a raccoon's forepaws as "hands".

One of many such sources: A successful multifingered hand design-the case of the raccoon by Walker, I.D. ; Dept. of Electr. & Comput. Eng., Rice Univ., Houston, TX, USA. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=526158&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D526158 refers to "...the kinematic design of raccoon hands..."

Chrisrus (talk) 06:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chrisrus - Info on link unavailable without fee. Its stated in the lead that often a paw may be described as a hand. Clearly animals like squirrels use their front paws as hands but the defining characteristic is the presence of opposable thumbs. Cheers --Iztwoz (talk) 09:33, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

We don't need to pay the fee. The link shows that experts call them "hands". The title is "A successful multifingered hand design-the case of the raccoon" and the summary says "...the kinematic design of raccoon hands...".

For more such WP:RS sources, please use Google Scholar to search for "raccoon" and "hands". You will find many, including A critical re‐examination of food “washing” behaviour in the raccoon (Procyon lotor Linn.) M LYALL‐WATSON - Proceedings of the Zoological Society of 1963, specifically where it says: "The usual pattern is for the raccoon to sit up on its haunches holding the object between its hands."

Others you will find if you do such a search include How skilled are the skilled limb movements of the raccoon (Procyon lotor)? AN Iwaniuk, IQ Whishaw - Behavioural brain research, 1999 - ElsevierAlmost. It says "...invariably (96% of grasps observed), raccoons use their hands to pick up objects ..."

Still others include The Raccoon: Some Mental Attributes LF Whitney - Journal of Mammalogy, 1933 - JSTOR. It states "... The raccoon is not only dexterous with his hands but he often appears to do things that are indicative of a high order of intelligence. ...

Let me know if more such citations are necessary to convince you that experts call raccoon forepaws "hands".

Second, this article should not state that any/all paws are called "hands", because it's not true. For example, bear paws are never called "hands". That's not how English. I plan to delete that sentence.

You are right that opposibility of the first and fifth didgits seem to be the answer. While raccoon tracks show that all five digits align more like paws while they are watching, raccoon digits can at any moment splay out so far that the first and fifth digits touch from opposite directions, practically 180 degrees. See here: http://www.raccooncapture.com/assets/images/animals/20140207163042_3.jpeg Chrisrus (talk) 00:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

See the page Racoon citation 98. Cheers --Iztwoz (talk) 08:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Organ?

The hand is not an organ. The Wikipedia page on the foot calls it an anitomical structure which is a better description of a hand as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.127.113.78 (talk) 01:16, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2020

"Several of primitive hand features"

Please change this to "Several primitive hand features" or "Several of the primitive hand features." 2601:5C6:8081:35C0:3CB2:F80C:E9CC:EE5F (talk) 02:34, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done (the first way). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Further reading

John R. Napier, Hands (1980). 84.94.37.73 (talk) 09:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

"Iltye" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Iltye. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 26#Iltye until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Certes (talk) 16:57, 26 November 2021 (UTC)