National High Five Day was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 20 October 2015 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into High five. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Annie Rauwerda (October 5, 2023). "On Wikipedia, Anyone Can Be a Model". Slate. Retrieved October 7, 2023. It's immediately obvious that Wikipedia's models are real people, not actors. The couple from the "High Five" article ended up getting married to each other, and last year they re-created the photos with their kids.
Why isn’t the high five as seen in the James Bond film “The Man with the Golden Gun“ considered the earliest high five? It is clearly used in a celebratory context.
Wikipediun2000 (talk) 08:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See previous discussions about antecedents. The motion of slapping palms up high is probably over 300,000 year sold (age of Homo Sapiens) . We're interested in the cultural phenomenon called the "high five". This term did not exist at the time of Bond. Nor was there any popular understanding of a distinct named gesture, nor understanding of what it means. -- GreenC 14:14, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are we saying that only high fives performed in US sport can be considered? Regarding the term, are we looking for the the origin of the phrase or the act? The high-five in the Bond files is clearly congratulatory and I am struggling to see why it is culturally different (apart from not being performed in a US sport). It seems that by specifying that the action must be called the 'high five' to be considered as the 'original' high five, that will exclude any non-English speaking country from originating the high-five. Is there any evidence that the term was in use when Glenn Burke did the high five in 1977?
Yeah that's how Wikipedia works. Unless you have a reliable source that calls it a high five - and in this case would need to argue it being the first high five - then you have nothing but a personal opinion, which is not a reliable source. You would benefit from reading the sources in the article. The article reports what the sources say, we don't just say whatever we want or believe is right. -- GreenC 19:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As I raised above - " It seems that by specifying that the action must be called the 'high five' to be considered as the 'original' high five, that will exclude any non-English speaking country from originating the high-five."§
That would make sense. A gesture is a cultural meme, not an immutable universal understanding. Shaking hands meant one thing to Europeans and another to Indians. Like all memes its meaning is informed by the culture where it originated, it's history and context of use. -- GreenC 22:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The context in the James Bond video is a celebration, identical to the use in sports. I see little reason to discount it as an antecedent. There seems little to discuss when the high five is clear for all to see. Wikipediun2000 (talk) 23:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you have a reliable source that calls it a high five - and in this case would need to argue it being the first high five - then you have nothing but a personal opinion, which is not a reliable source. GreenC 17:03, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We know when this was filmed so it is clearly a gesture called a high five that took place in 1973 82.16.172.242 (talk) 10:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're being anachronistic. It was filmed in 72 or 73, yes, but your conclusion is not valid as you cite articles from 2015 and 2021 (I'm not clicking on the blogspot which is obviously not an RS). It appears to be a celebration and post facto it is labeled a high five, but nothing from 1973 to 1977 suggests it predates the article's given origins, nor any of the retrospective articles you supplied suggest its primacy in memorializing the action, just describing it using the now-common English expression 50 years after the act. JesseRafe (talk) 13:47, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The espn article supporting the Glenn Burke and Dusty Baker high five is from 2011?
And the Glenn Burke and Dusty Baker is 'post facto' labelled a high five, it wasn't done at the time. 82.16.172.242 (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The ESPN article is making an argument for it being called the high five at the time (or soon after the initial slap). Your article does not, it's an anachronistic usage in a single sentence, the writer makes no assertion it was actually called a high five at the time. Anachronisms are very common, writers use them to make something from the past relevant to modern readers. - GreenC 14:48, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where in the article does it mention Glenn Burke or Dusty Baker (or anybody present) use the term high five (or soon after)? 82.16.172.242 (talk) 08:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It mentions obliquely how the term was used by contemporaries afterwards both to describe the specific instance and the broader act but doesn't give a year except that it was before 1980 that the Dodgers had already merchandised the expression on T-shirts and had trademarked a depiction of a high five for the same. You're moving goalposts to mix a sports metaphor, and seemingly just being argumentative. There's no reference to support that the 1973 Bond film was called a high five or even acknowledged as a curio at the time of its release, unlike, as evidenced by references, the other discussed possible origins in this article. JesseRafe (talk) 15:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, so in short the answer is "no" - the article does not state that anybody used the term, either at the time or soon after.
And I am not being argumentative, just querying. GreenC stated " the article is making an argument for it being called the high five at the time (or soon after the initial slap)." While also saying "your article does not". But as you have stated, the ESPN article does not state that it was used at the time. It was years later that this was used. 82.16.172.242 (talk) 11:11, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's been a while since I looked at the ESPN article but the entire piece is specifically about the origins of the high five cultural phenomenon. If you can find a source about the high five (like ESPN and some other sources we have) and which also discusses James Bond that is something. The high five is composed of three elements: physical gesture + name + cultural meaning. Otherwise, we are just playing a game of who can find the oldest depiction of hands slapped up high, and the current record is 3200 BC (see picture) although a good argument can be made that over millions of years of chimpanzee and human evolution it occurred with frequency. On the pommel there are two figures high-fiving each other.. To your point the name came after the initial event, this may be true, but there was an event that sources believe was the origin and there are no sources that trace it to James Bond. Something first popularized the gesture that lead to it being named and taking off in culture. Anything prior to the is an antecedent because while it contained the physical gesture, it lacked either the name (or a direct linage to the name), or lacked a cultural understanding. GreenC 16:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think at the least it should be included in antecedents. Wikipediun2000 (talk) 08:23, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the most part, Wikipedia articles are about topics, not terms (WP:NOTDIC). If this article is about the gesture currently described as a high five, then any instances of such a gesture are in scope to be covered in this article, as long as they are documented by reliable sources as such—whether or not those sources are contemporary to the event itself. This is why, for example, Handshake discusses handshakes in prehistory, despite the term hand-shake being attested only as early as 1801, and despite there being no demonstrated link between, say, handshaking in Ancient Greece and the modern cultural phenomenon. I see no reason why an arbitrary line should be drawn for the high five that excludes certain instances of it, or why undue weight should be placed on modern English terminology. Ibadibam (talk) 06:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's original research. Got a source? OK then different story. Until then, Wikipedia isn't a dump of every old movie, painting, sculpture etc.. that a random anonymous Wikipedia editor believes looks like a high five. -- GreenC 13:31, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If a cited, reliable source calls it a high five, then it's not OR. And I'd say the Radiolab source passes RS. Ibadibam (talk) 20:58, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And the GQ article I posted above describes it as a high-five. Wikipediun2000 (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The quality of writing mixes in modern stuff, the very next sentence also mentions a "leather-bound iPhone 6". The writer is appealing to what modern readers understand, not seriously suggesting this is the oldest known high-five. Nobody at the time the movie was released used the term high-five or gave the gesture a name, much less a meaning. The article is not going to contain every possible mention of high-five that someone thinks they saw in some old movie, statue, carving, cave painting, etc.. it's useless trivia. See also WP:IPCEXAMPLES third bullet point. -- GreenC 15:19, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody keeps moving the goal posts...
Of course the writing refers to 'modern stuff', the article was written in 2015! The espn article supporting the Glenn Burke and Dusty Baker high five is from 2011, should that be discounted because it mentions text messages? Nor does the ESPN article claim that anybody used the term 'high-five' until some years after the Glenn Burke and Dusty Baker high five... 82.18.36.40 (talk) 14:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those are not comparable articles, they specifically talk about the origin of the high five. The GQ article is a minor mention with no assertion about anything. If you can't see the difference I don't know what to say. As I said, the article is not going to contain every possible mention where someone thinks they see it in an old movie, statue, carving, cave painting, etc.. it's useless trivia, unencyclopedic "in popular culture" junk. See the image of the pommel up right .. anyone can say they see a high five in anything. Even chimpanzees can do it and thus pre-dates the James Bond movies by about a million years. -- GreenC 17:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of replying to my rebuttals, you again move the goal posts… Wikipediun2000 (talk) 07:41, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What "goalposts"? Your GQ source is unreliable for the assertion made, which is a surprising assertion BTW, since no other sources on high five says anything like it. The GQ source is a single sentence throw away comparison, it makes no argument or assertion for it being an early version of the high five. Unlike the ESPN article. Your inability to see the difference between these sources is strange. A single sentence minor mention in one light poppy article not about high fives vs. an entire article on the topic in another (written by Jon Mooallem a well known author of cultural history magazine pieces) . -- GreenC 23:24, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also add, there is certainly room for someone to do an in-depth original research study of this gesture, whatever it is called, over the course of human history. Such a study need not be limited to when the term was coined in the 1970s. This study could be published in a magazine, journal or book. It would then be appropriate for inclusion into Wikipedia. I'm surprised this has not happened, yet, given the interest in the topic. It appears all the sources try to determine when the gesture was coined and became popular and basically stop there. -- GreenC 04:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I ended up here because of the high five couple doing an AMA on reddit as the high five couple. And I have to say it is really weird to see them high fiving on an article on wikipedia, talking about it in the media. The other comments here about is it necessary for them to be IN the article seem relevant. It isn't like they are selling pics of themselves elsewhere. But it does seem like they used wikipedia to get a little a bit of fame and to post things on youtube or wherever as "the high five couple"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.63.157.32 (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The pictures were originally added in 2010, so it's unlikely that they uploaded those pics in order to get a bit of fame 12 years later. From what I understand, Input Mag approached them about the photos, so it does not seem like they themselves used Wikipedia for promotional purposes. If they choose to take advantage of that fame now, it doesn't reflect on the Wikipedia article. ...discospinstertalk 16:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To add.. we often see users who contribute to Wikipedia become "famous". They even end up with articles written about themselves, because of their contributions to Wikipedia. See Category:Wikipedia people. This doesn't even come close, in terms of level of fame, number of sources, and an article about the couple. What concerns me is this continuous drumbeat that they used Wikipedia to become famous. That's clearly incorrect and bad faith, bordering on a personal attack. It looks like sour grapes. -- GreenC 01:14, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why are all the pictures of real people clearly doing staged high fives? What is up with that high five couple? It is distracting from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.63.157.32 (talk) 15:46, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What is up with the complaining about the 'high five couple', ever since the article appeared in Inputmag, it's like sour grapes, trying to take them down. As for "staged", a better word is demonstration. This is an encyclopedia. See finger gun for example. Lots of things like that -- GreenC 16:46, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
this is the problem with wikipedia. everyone takes editing wikipedia way too seriously. donnellanDonnellan0007 (talk) 11:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
this source makes a case for the high five originating in the Phil Silvers Show in the 1950s. Well, maybe, but it plays loose with a couple things: the high fives are at chest level and don't look like what we call a high five today; and, the high five is composed of in part by it's very name "high five", which we known didn't originate until the 1970s. Otherwise any slapping of hands up high in history becomes a high five and that goes back to ancient Egypt, if not all primates for millions of years. So we have this one bloggy source for Phil Silvers, maybe more sources will make it worth including as one of the antecedents. -- GreenC 17:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Bilko often high-fives with members of his platoon. Worthy of mention. Dadge (talk) 12:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
