From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Anatomy (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.
WikiProject Animal anatomy (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Animal anatomy, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to animal anatomy apart from human anatomy. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Animal anatomy. This project is an offshoot of WikiProject Animals
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Help this page[edit]

This page was originally created by user:Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason to provide information about abdomens in general. Many animals besides humans have one. Please help clean up or add to this article. TheLimbicOne 18:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

TheLimbicOne and I have been discussing my recent editorial boldness and the need for Abdomen to broadly cover the topic. You can follow it in my talk page and Limbic's talk, but if you're disinclined, here's my last post:

TheGrimReaper is a gayass admin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

  • I take your point about the intent of the Abdomen page and must say I didn't appreciate its purpose at the time. My toes are quite intact, thankyou, as is my spirit. Abdomen really is in dire need of some work. My first thought was it needed a disambiguation page, but now I'm thinking maybe some article that is informative, but provides the disambiguation links as well, may be more useful. I'll stick this to the abdomen discussion page in case others are more inspired to have a go. --Mattopaedia 01:33, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

This article need complete rewriting because: the style is poor, facts are incomplete or wrong, structure is chaotic. Nothing about the article should be in Wikipedia. For a doctor this is a disaster. jmak 05:24, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Rewriting the article[edit]

I have done a rewrite of the first two sections of this article and added appropriate references. I have also removed all the material I believe to be incorrect. Please review this edit and add to it. I don't have a particularly good knowledge of invertebrates so I have left this section, any help would be most welcome. Blacknightshade 22:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I`ve done quite lot of corrections and some factual changes in first two paragraphs. ^^^^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmak (talkcontribs) 09:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Almost rewrited introduction and vertabrates (unvertebrates untouched). Keeeping the structure (my last 3-4 corrections) jmak 07:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Abdomen: vertebrates, Arthropoda, etc.[edit]

In my opinion Abdomen (vertebrates) and Abdomen (Arthropoda) should be two separate articles.

The illustration for abdomen (Arthropoda) should be a more generic one such as The one used now is that of a very especialized group, ants, that doesn't represent the abdomen structure very well. --Polinizador (talk) 15:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Human abdomen[edit]

Human Abdomen and Abdomen need not be separate. The article looks in good shape after I merged it. Give your inputs. Piano no who (talk) 08:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

What about spiders?[edit]

Unlike other Arthropods, insects possess no legs on the abdomen in adult form,

Spiders don't have legs on the abdomen either. (talk) 20:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Seriously out of all the pictures with people with six packs, you choose that one of that teen. If your going to write about a six pack get a decent picture at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Example of a physically fit human male abdomen.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Example of a physically fit human male abdomen.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Polish wikipedia[edit]

I want to tell that 'abdomen' don't means only 'odwlok' in Polish language and biology, but bots always change my edits. Please, do something with it --Jeremski (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Recommend edit[edit]

The line in Vertebrate abdomen section: "Abdominal organs can be highly specialized in some animals. For example the stomach of ruminants (a suborder of mammals) is divided into four chambers - rumen, reticulum, omasum and abomasum." seems out of place and incoherent in context. IMO it either should go elsewhere, be elaborated in a structure in which it fits usefully, or be removed. I may get around to deleting it myself if no one else does something useful first. JonRichfield (talk) 16:17, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


I put a reference of subcostal margin to subcostal plane, so that it now reads: "The upper lateral limit of the abdomen is the subcostal margin (at or near near the subcostal plane)". Is this correct anatomically? What exactly is the "subcostal margin" defined as for that matter? Jimw338 (talk) 15:18, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Muscle section corrections[edit]

The second paragraph in the muscle subsection ( needs some work. The last sentence is broken up and should mention that visibility of abs is mainly dependent upon having a low body fat percentage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:40, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Midriff and Waist into this article[edit]

Consensus is to not merge.--Tom (LT) (talk) 03:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A merge has been proposed between here and Waist. --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose these are two subjects that are both widely known and, I believe, not interchangeable (eg "The intestines are in the waist"... does not make much sense). --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
    • Tom (LT) Are you sure you understand the proposal? The proposal is to merge midriff and waist into this (abdomen) article. Lightbreather (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
      • My point is that these terms are not interchangable and should remain separate. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge, I think. Unless someone can explain the encyclopedic merit of separating either of the two from this article. If we merge, we would of course have waist and midriff bolded in the lead along with abdomen. Peter Isotalo 22:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - we would then have to split the article into "abdomen (physiology and biology)", "abdomen (fashion and culture)" and "abdomen (waist)". All the best: Rich Farmbrough00:02, 20 February 2015 (UTC).
    • We cover both biology and culture in every imaginable article. We don't keep bear (biology) and bear (culture), for example. The bear article covers both myths and scientific descriptions of the animals. Please explain why this article should be an exception. Peter Isotalo 12:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - per LB and Rich. Ridiculous. - Sitush (talk) 14:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - per Tom. The terms are not interchangeable. --Tilifa Ocaufa (talk) 06:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - because they are easily separate articles. However, you can decide to connect one article to another without merging them. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 11:34, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Midriff article is more slanted on society perspective, while the Waist article slants more to general article, rather than a human body article. I opposed the merges, but you may like to connect one article to another with decent flow. Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 11:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The person making the request didn't say why the articles should be merged. The abdomen article seems to be biology/physiology/anatomy oriented, while the waist article does not. SlowJog (talk) 02:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Waist is the term which is used separately in considetation of shaping, body constitution ect. Abdomen is very generic term from anatomy (note, not exactly human's anatomy). Alex Khimich (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abdomen. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)