Talk:Gluteus maximus

Anatomy: Gross Mid‑importance

	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.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Gray

"In Gray's Anatomy, it is considered a part of the thigh muscle group."

What is this passage all about? -Unsigned

I don't know, I say chuck it. And also, how did it come about to name this page "gluteus maximus muscle"? Is this a disambiguating thing? No other major muscle adds 'muscle' to its wikipedia entry. I suggest we chuck the 'muscle' suffix, also. Rhetth 00:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is chucked. Gorman 13:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Largest

It is the largest muscle of the body. I think, this is important enough information to be inserted in the article. SurDin (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This information has been added at some point. It is a wonderful world (talk) 06:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antagonist?

Muscles like the rectus femoris have their closest possible antagonist match listed (hamstring in that case) so could we list this for the glute as well? Since it is primarily a hip extensor, I would be led to think a hip flexor would be the antagonist. What I don't know is if we should just generally list that, or a more specific hip flexor (Iliopsoas?) which also internally rotates and abducts the hip to contrast the glute's secondary roles as well. Tyciol (talk) 22:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a collapsed muscle in the right side of my Gluteus maximus which has left a @ 1" deep indentation and some dark coloring which does not seem to be a bruise. What is the cause and the cure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.164.119 (talk) 00:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fibrous septa

fibrous septa, the Septa part currently links to a public transport company, I don't know what it should like to since I am no expert on the matter, but it needs change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.147.137.77 (talk) 22:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This has been fixed at some point It is a wonderful world (talk) 06:14, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Actions Section

Currently reads: "Its most powerful action is to cause the body to regain the erect position after stopping, by drawing the pelvis backward, being assisted in this action by the rectus femoris, semitendinosus, semimembranosus, and adductor magnus".

I think this should read "Biceps femoris, semitendinosus...". Rectus Femoris is a hip flexor, (pulls the pelvis forward, not backward). Biceps femoris, OTOH, would be a hip extensor in conert with G. max, and the other hamstrings.

I don't have a reference on me for this (any anatomy text will do), but I'm correcting the text. Ajasen (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 May 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 17:52, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gluteus maximus muscle → Gluteus maximus – Per WP:CONCISE. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:14, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. No such user (talk) 11:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support as obvious only use. — JFG ^talk 19:05, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Roadmap for GA

Hi IiKkEe, good to work with you. My goal here is to get this article to GA with you (not all editors agree, but I find this at least a 'defensible' standard even though it's not completely peer reviewed).

My approach will be:

Fix anything immediate (pointless external links, improve captions, remove any unnecessary images, and retitle / reorder sections according to the manual of style guideline: WP:MEDMOS#Anatomy)
Survey the article to plan my edits. My first impression is that firstly, lots of things will need references (and as I put these references in I'll need to check the content that they reference). Secondly, there are gaps in comprehensiveness (I'm looking at the MEDMOS:Anatomy guideline here) - most particularly relating to clinical significance section, the muscle in animals, and the history / social significance of the muscle. I'll need to go out and find some sources for this... usually I'll consult some books for stuff that will reliably be there (eg diseases or anatomy), and then google scholar for things I don't have immediate access to, like animal anatomy or history of a muscle.
At this point I'm going to spend some time preparing these sources, maybe a few days, and my personal style is to read a WP article that I plan to improve to GA standard a couple of times first so I have an idea of where it's at and where I want to go.

I see that the main issue you have is making too many edits. It seems other editors find this frustrating because it overwhelms their ability to quality check our work and monitor an article, and it means edits relating to a single concept (eg copyedits) which could be one edit, occurs over many instead. So how about we copy this article to a sandbox with you, and then make those edits there, and copy/paste either the completed work, or completed parts of it back once we're both happy? Also a small hint but just double checking you are 'previewing' your edits before you submit them? I often find new things (such as this comment) arise before I publish the edits --Tom (LT) (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. Yes, I do preview each edit before I submit it. Thank you for outlining your goals; it's clear we have different goals and approaches - I personally think what each of us are up to regarding editing are both valid and compatible. Let me think about your proposal to go to a sandbox together... and could you give me a short lesson on the logistics of sharing a sandbox? I've not done that before. Regards, IiKkEe (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. What are your goal and approach to editing the article? Regarding sandboxes - copy and paste the text to a new article under your sandbox at the address you want. I've done that here: User:Tom_(LT)/sandbox/Gluteus_maximus. It's just like any other article / draft in terms of who can edit it. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Switched images

I have switched the skeletal animation to the first image on the page. I moved the previous most prominent image to the gallery. I did this because the skeletal animation did a much better job at illustrating the location of the muscle, which is perhaps the most important piece of information about it. After a minute of starting at the previous most prominent image, I still could not understand where the muscle was in the human body. This is probably because I am completely new to the subject, and therefore this article should now be more accessible. It is a wonderful world (talk) 06:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]