Talk:Standing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Images[edit]

I've replaced the lead (and only) image with one that better illustrates a standing position. The one I chose is the best one I found in Commons:Category:People standing and it's sub categories, but there are so many I possibly missed some. What I think we need from the lead image is listed below

  • A full-length portrait shot, including the feet.
  • A neutral background
  • One or more people, but ideally no props or other subjects.
  • Definitely not leaning
  • Ideally standing fairly naturally, i.e. not to military attention (we should have a separate photo lower down for this), nor exaggerated posing.
  • Wearing clothing that does not overly hide the body shape, particularly the lower legs - a space suit or wedding dress is very wrong for this article; shorts or a short skirt with bare legs are probably best. A swimsuit might also work depending on the focus of the image.
  • Probably not a fashion photo, as these will tend to focus on the clothes where we want a focus on the natural standing posture.
  • Ideally the subject should be barefoot or wearing flat shoes - high heels give a different posture.
  • Ideally a sharp, in-focus image. A painting might work, but not something in the impressionist style.
  • A single image showing a man and a woman would be ideal - due to differences in their hips men and women stand slightly differently.

The current image, File:Working Uniform.jpg works for some, but not all of these. The previous photo, File:A man standing in forest.jpg wasn't very good - the man is wearing baggy trousers, isn't very prominent within the image and the surroundings are very distracting. Thryduulf (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This shouldn't be an article.[edit]

Anything of interest relating to the verb "to stand", e.g posture, already has its own article. The sections "falling" and "leaning" are laughable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:4870:95F0:7BD1:FBF6:8DEA:5D8 (talk) 22:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The more I read, the more I agree. This article is written terribly, and has no useful information besides redirecting to better articles. ZASNK (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]