Talk:High five

message: Why is the insider article being used as a source for what is referenced in the article?
"Too slow!" (with finger-guns)[28]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.61.215.105 (talk) 17:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No longer. -- GreenC 16:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Finger guns

message: 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)
replies: text: 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. ... discospinster talk 16:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Question about the high five couple 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: this is the problem with wikipedia. everyone takes editing wikipedia way too seriously. donnellan Donnellan0007 (talk) 11:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is up with the pictures? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Phil Silvers Show