Talk:Fingerprint

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fingerprint article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 90 days

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Anatomy: Gross Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Dermatoglyphics#:~:text=Dermatoglyphics (from Ancient Greek derma,superficially similar pseudoscience of palmistry.|dermatoglyphic]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Reference of Fingerprint in the Holy Quran

Fingerprints are unique to each individual. We all have fingerprints however they are unique. Even identical twins have different fingerprints. However nobody knew this 1400 years ago. But it was mentioned in the Quran that on Resurrection Day Allah will recreate humans with all details even their fingertips. Today we know that those contain fingerprints which are unique to each individual.

Quran: 75.4 Yes indeed; We are Able to reconstruct his fingertips.

Direct link to the verse

On Resurrection Day Allah will reconstruct our bodies to the smallest detail even our unique fingerprints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yusuf.islam.al (talk • contribs) 04:00, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Didier NIYITANGA 197.157.184.12 (talk) 18:59, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Classification systems

The part of this section beginning with "The system used by most experts" is very confusing. There are two mathematical formula, which do not match each other ( ${\frac {a}{b}}+{\frac {c}{d}}$ does not equal ${\frac {a+c}{b+d}}$ ) and there's an additional 1 added in the calculation that isn't part of either stated formula. It seems, from Henry Classification System, that the quantity is usually not reduced: you can have the fraction 32/32 and that's not written as 1/1, nor as 1. This part also isn't cited, which makes it hard to determine what was intended. -Apocheir (talk) 23:28, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewritten this portion to make it more straightforward -- including an explicit formula -- with attention to the point about not reducing the fraction. (I also removed the maintenance tag.) — r.e.s. (talk) 18:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request in section "Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries"

The paragraph in section "Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries" ends with "In 1880 Henry Faulds suggested, based on his studies, that fingerprints are unique to a human.[43]".

That is not in the 17th or 18th century. It doesn't belong in that section. The next section is titled "19th century" and Henry Faulds is already mentioned there in more detail, so the reference at the end of the 17th/18th century section should be removed. 200.68.77.103 (talk) 07:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is an obvious error. I moved the statement from the 17-18th Century to the following para where it belongs. — RB Ostrum. 16:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Typo in text. "Fringerprint" as opposed to "Fingerprint". Additional r after F. Camicarva (talk) 19:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

😃HANIA 139.135.38.179 (talk) 14:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble sourcing a claim

Hello! I recently noticed that all claims citing the existence of 'The Volume of Crime Scene Investigation—Burglary (Qin Dynasty)' wherein the authors make the claim of palm and finger printing being used in the Qin Dynasty come from a single 7 page article:

Xiang-Xin, Z.; Chun-Ge, L. The Historical Application of Hand Prints in Chinese Litigation. J. Forensic Ident. 1988, 38 (6), 277–284.

I was curious as a Chinese Historian as I had never heard of this primary source before - and given the limited primary sources about the Qin dynasty I wanted to investigate. Every source I have been able to find making this claim always cite this single source (or like the citation in this article, cite someone who cites this source) and never the primary source directly. I can not find a copy of the journal article to verify the claim (though https://archive.org/details/sim_journal-of-forensic-identification_1988-1997_38-47_cumulative-index/page/668/mode/2up shows it does indeed appear in that journal). I'm not prepared to spend money to try and verify the claim and wanted to know if someone more familiar with this journal could take a look and make sure this is a reliable claim and not just a case of circular citation off-discipline. Relm (talk) 20:04, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]