Talk:List of human positions
|WikiProject Anthropology||(Rated List-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Anatomy||(Rated List-class, Low-importance)|
- 1 Main Image
- 2 study says straight posture is the worst, contrary to article
- 3 stuff
- 4 external link to Sitting Pretty book review
- 5 related links?
- 6 Prominent people
- 7 External links
- 8 Posture
- 9 Editing
- 10 Lying on your side
- 11 flabby/squatting/hewes etc
- 12 No such Idzikowski paper
- 13 Transgender issues
Why do we a have a semi-artistic photo of a man standing on the woods (quite afar from the camera), with a non-obvious posture, instead of, let's say, a diagram or picture of human physiology, etc.? Seems rather unprofessional to leave it as it is, because of the current photo, as "artsy" and nice as might be considered, does not represent the subject of the article. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
study says straight posture is the worst, contrary to article
I'm not sure this article is entirely serious, but I added "down" to
For sleeping and sexual activities one often lies
because otherwise it's really only true of the second.
I'm not sure squatting in a moving vehicle is as bad as portrayed either; I've squat in the subway a number of times without noticing any particular stability problems. --Charles A. L. 19:27, Nov 24, 2003 (UTC)
What about sleeping posture? 22.214.171.124 13:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
This article is just weird. Is it serious? Devoblue 10:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
The info in basic human positions is obvious common sense, not encyclopedic. Needs to be replaced with biomechanics. Cayte 22:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Cayte
as a newbie, the link to the book review seems odd - uninformative advertising.
Why does this article link to lodging? Its not related at all as far as I can tell.
- The bit about sleeping sitting etc. is related.--Patrick 22:27, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
The picture is not erect posture. It is an exaggerated arch for dramatic effect Cayte 20:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Cayte
i tried adding info and was "rejected" by eagle for "self-promoting." too bad, because the quality of info i linked to would have added value to this forum. furthermore, i've seen DOZENS of wiki pages with external links leading to product pages; so, apparently the policy for such matters isn't clear and/or simply not effective.
I think this section should be removed unless their posture can be evaluated by an expert. Being photogenic . doesn't guarantee good alignment.
The section on optimal posture needs references so the link should be restored. An inline link is inappropriate because the content spans more than one concept. The page is authoritative because it is provided by a professional org Cayte 23:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Cayte
Sagging, rounded shoulders and a hanging head restrict rhythm and balance and increase the oxygen debt during movement —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC).
Fixed grammar, added verbs, removed first person, clarified some jargon, made several comments in the article; someone should take a look at them. Also, apparently, I don't know how to do comments, so I am going to try to fix that now. 22:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Lying on your side
"it is a position were the body of a person is in lying movements. it also persue a body composition by its native doer or an action." What does this mean, if anything? Obviously, the capitalisation is wrong. Does anyone know what the intent of these sentences is? 188.8.131.52 15:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
This article is very flabby. It would be nice if we had a better set of commons images. The work of Gordon Hewes is useful. I am starting work on the "squatting position" in my sandbox: User:Penbat/squatting position. Any feedback gratefully received. It will probably take quite a long time before it is set up as a new article. It should impact this article as well. --Penbat (talk) 09:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
No such Idzikowski paper
User:Cassierain added the qualifer "cisgender" to the urination positions section. I've changed "cisgender" to "anatomically typical". This isn't just a matter of being fair to transgender people; this wording is more precise, as (a) many intersex people don't conform to either of the two typical human anatomical norms, but still consider themselves to be the gender they were assigned at birth; and (b) both transmen and transwomen either may or may not have had lower-body sexual reassignment surgery. -- The Anome (talk) 13:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)