Talk:Blue hair

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Blue hair 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

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

keep, December 12, 2010, see discussion.
delete, March 11, 2010, see discussion.
redirect to blue rinse, November 19, 2005, see discussion.

1869 Book As A Source

The source for the supposed biological change to blue hair is from the eighteen hundreds, and seems likely to be suspect. Reading the actual source the passage seems anecdotal and not scientific. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:AF2F:A059:9881:3931:9735:2EE3 (talk) 00:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of notability

For the avoidance of doubt, and repeating the opinion stated multiple times on this article's latest AfD (which it would seem Colonel Warden WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT), this article is an indiscriminate collection (WP:IINFO) of unrelated mentions of blue hair, relating to historical art and modern fashion. As such, it lacks notability as a topic. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 08:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you creating this section when you already stated this in the ongoing AfD? Silver seren^C 18:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"remove notability tag as we have lots of sources now and no supporting discussion on the talk page" -- Colonel Warden playing disruptive games yet again. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, assuming the outcome of the AfD is keep, that will give the article presumed notability, since AfDs are meant to ask the community whether article topics are notable. It looks like CW jumped the gun a bit, but the AfD outcome seems a bit obvious at this point. Silver seren^C 05:31, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, lacking a particularly dodgy Admin closure, the outcome will most probably be "no consensus", meaning that the article has no "presumed notability". Colonel Warden deceitfully and tendentiously removed the notability tag when it was blatantly obvious that its notability is under heavy dispute at the AfD! And to be bluntly honest, I've long since lost interest in the credibility-free excuses his cheerleaders make for him. I likewise view such defences as WP:IDIDNOTHEARTHAT (of the full weight of the evidence against him -- in this case of the repeated, policy-based, dispute of this article's notability at the AfD). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blue hair and feminism

There've been a few edits to the lead claiming that blue hair can be caused by exposure to feminism. This is like saying baldness can be caused by exposure to a hair clipper. The sentence in question is clearly about physical processes, such as dyes. Any reliably-sourced link to feminism can be put later in the article, such as in the section on fashion. clpo13_(talk) 04:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's just troll vandalism. Revert, block and ignore. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blue hair. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150220165511/http://ajer.synergiesprairies.ca/index.php/ajer/article/view/710 to http://ajer.synergiesprairies.ca/index.php/ajer/article/view/710

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]