Jump to content

Talk:Shades of green

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Kelly green)

ASU for Army Green

[edit]

Citation for 2014 wear out date http://www.marlowwhite.com/army/uniforms/service-dress-blue/asu-wear-policy.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.75.81.64 (talk) 17:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation can also be found at http://www.army.mil/asu/faq.html at Q3. 173.74.245.34 (talk) 04:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Plan

[edit]
  1. Gather fragmented pages to this page.
  2. Expand and cite everything
  3. Delete things that can't be cited
  4. Step back and see what's next.

Simple, quick, efficient, and deadly (in a friendly way) Wrad (talk) 01:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles we should leave alone are Ao (color) and Vert. They aren't exactly shades of green. They deal with a different concept. Wrad (talk) 02:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Only two that I still see out there are Spring bud and Spring green (color). What should we do with the trivia/human culture sections for example Jungle_green#Jungle_green_and_tropical_rain_forest_in_human_culture (as of revision 161464806)? PaleAqua (talk) 03:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just squish it all into the Jungle green section for now. Most of it won't last long, anyway. Wrad (talk) 03:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly green

[edit]

Joni Mitchell's song "Little Green" is about her daughter named Kelly, that she had to give up for adoption. Kelly as in kelly green. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.57.99.106 (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The color swatch is wrong. Kelly green's got more blue in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.134.7 (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duffy Green

[edit]

What are the color coordinates for the so called "Duffy Green" color used by the San Diego County Sheriff's Department? 72.209.42.92 (talk) 17:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Myrtle

[edit]

Why is myrtle immoderately dark? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drofe (talk • contribs) 08:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Optical green

[edit]

Is this also called "optical green"?

  • Green-yellow is near the center of the light spectrum visible to the human eye, and is very eye catching to humans. For this reason many emergency vehicles and uniforms exhibit green-yellow.

--Pawyilee (talk) 12:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eau-de-nil

[edit]

This needs adding. Johnbod (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While google can't decide if its a blue or a green, Wikipedia has put it under blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.134.7 (talk) 21:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remove school colors?

[edit]

Recently, school colors have found their way into this article. They probably should be deleted or moved to a new article concerning green in school uniforms or to the articles on each school. Most of these school colors' notabilities extend no farther than the boundaries of the school, and since there are many schools with green as a school color, half the shades of green listed here could be school colors Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 23:57, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well said. As well, I thought CPP's green was identical to CP-SLO's green, anyhow. Wrong? YellowAries2010 (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other colors.

[edit]

Malachite, viridian, chartreuse, verdigris, olive, seafoam, jade, emerald. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.134.7 (talk) 21:47, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apple green? oops, found it Manytexts (talk) 06:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about sage green? I think it is similar to either Russian green or asparagus, but I'm not sure of the exact shade. That's actually what I came here to find out. --H-ko (Talk) 03:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feldgrau

[edit]

The article currently states that feldgrau "was one of the first standardized uniforms suitable to the age of smokeless gun powder". The connection between a colour for uniforms and the use of a certain type of gunpowder isn't made clear. Can anyone elucidate? --Picapica (talk) 08:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it might have to do with not having the cover from smoking gunpowder when the guns were fired, so soldiers would have to wear more dull-colored uniforms so they couldn't be picked out so easily when it came to rifles and artillery. Can't recall the book, but I'll find it later. --Buspirtraz (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a possible source for you. It's Niall Ferguson's 2011 book Civilization: The West and the Rest. The full reference is available for you. Unfortunately, the book does not provide page numbers but instead sections within a chapter, so no page numbers. The quote is available for you.
Actually, the theory behind the field gray was more of my thinking rather than the book, but the book, especially the surrounding quote, did help guide me to that logic.
Source:
Ferguson, Niall (1 November 2011). "5. Consumption > The Birth of the Consumer Society". Civilization: The West and the Rest (1st American ed.). New York: Penguin Press. ISBN 9781594203053. [...] Yet the military innovations of the nineteenth century, which greatly improved the accuracy and power of artillery, as well as introducing smokeless gunpowder, necessitated a shift from the bright coats of the eighteenth and nineteenth century to altogether drabber uniforms. [...]{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
--Buspirtraz (talk) 18:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Green (HTML/CSS color)" vs "Office green"

[edit]

Any particular reason why this (#008000) deserves two separate sections? If noone disagrees, i intend to merge the second section into the first one. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 11:19, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, i just realized there are more ovelaps than the above-mentioned one... Here are the other two: "Castleton green" and "Sacramento State Green" are both #00563F, and "Emerald" and "Paris Green" are both #50C878. I believe these should also be merged. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 11:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Devil's green

[edit]

From Flowing Wells Witch Trial:

a preference for wearing devil's green (a shade between chartreuse and lime),

--Error (talk) 00:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dartmouth green

[edit]

The various sources for "Dartmouth green", including Dartmouth's own style guide (cited), are inconsistent with each other:

Hex RGB H° S% V% C% M% Y% K% Source
#00693C 154 100 41 100 0 43 59 Dartmouth style guide "Pantone 349", Pantone swatch
#006E3C 153 100 43 100 0 45 57 Dartmouth style guide "Pantone 349", Alt source 1 of Pantone swatches[1][2][3]
#006134 152 100 38 100 0 46 62 Dartmouth style guide "Pantone 349", Alt source 2 of Pantone swatches from CIElab 35, -43, 18
#006233 151 100 38 100 0 48 62 Dartmouth style guide "Pantone 349", Alt source 2 of Pantone swatches from #006233
#00940D 125 100 58 100 0 91 42 Dartmouth style guide CMYK (100, 0, 91, 42)
#00703C 152 100 44 100 0 46 56 Dartmouth style guide RGB (0, 112, 60), Encycolorpedia
#00703C 152 100 44 100 0 46 56 List of colors: A–F, Shades of green, Encycolorpedia
#0C7F0E 121 91 50 91 0 89 50 List of colors: A–F previous HSV (121, 90, 50)
#0D800F 121 90 50 90 0 88 50 Shades of green previous CMYK (93, 33, 92, 25)

In particular, the CMYK values given in Dartmouth's style guide are so far off from any of the Pantone simulations or the RGB values they gave, I think they are probably typo'd in some way (like maybe the 91 was supposed to be 41, equivalent to RGB #009457 ———).

I chose to leave it as #00703C in this article and the lists, and correct the HSV and CMYK coords, because of it's being in the Dartmouth source as well as Encycolorpedia and other sources on the web. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brunswick Green, source information request.

[edit]

Hi, I would like to get in contact with the writer who did the section on Brunswick green in the Wikipedia, shades of green article. The section contains historical information with citation links which only refer to colour swatches. I am interested in tracing the source of the historical information, which I, albeit speculatively, agree with. My email is: samuelkirby88@gmail.com

I would be highly appreciative if you could get in touch, and I believe the information I am gathering in regards to Brunswick green will be beneficial to the Wikipedia article. When I have collated more information I will submit it.

Thanks

Sam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.94.8.208 (talk) 05:47, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see the current information is incorrect, at least in dating the colour name to 1764. This is the date of the original discovery of the copper compound, and the information wasn't even published in German until later, according to The Pigment Compendium (N. Eastaugh et al.; Elsevier 2004), which cites as its source Kruenitz's Oekonomisch-Technologische Encyklopaedie (1789). The earliest date I have seen for the colour name in English is in a Bradshaw's Railway Manual of 1869. Myopic Bookworm (talk) 15:22, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Shades of green. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bronze green

[edit]

This could use addition. It's possibly a UK-specific term. It's similar to a brunswick green or british racing green. It was used by the British Army for vehicles (maybe just from post-WWII), and by the British car industry (BMC and components) for powertrain components, such as engine blocks. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:46, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Racing Green

[edit]

How about including Racing Green? It's pretty common in Britain, used a lot on kitchen ware, kettles, toasters, etc. It was originally used on racing cars Picknick99 (talk) 19:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

British racing green. It's not one fixed hue though. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lime (color)

[edit]

Lime (color) is not represented in this article, not mntioned or linked to.Wetman (talk) 12:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible removal from list

[edit]

An entry in List of colors: A–F contained a link to this page.

The entry is : Celadon blue

I don't see any evidence that this color is discussed in this article and plan to delete it from the list per this discussion: Talk:List_of_colors#New_approach_to_review_of_entries

If someone decides that this color should have a section in this article and it is added, I would appreciate a ping.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed here: Shades_of_cyan#Cerulean--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Possible removal from list

[edit]
All entries have been removed

Entries in List of colors: A–F contained links to this page.

The entries are :

  • Chinese green
  • Dark lemon lime
  • Deep moss green

Entries in List of colors: G–M contained links to this page.

  • Gray-asparagus
  • Green Cola
  • Green slime
  • Harlequin green
  • Light moss green
  • Mango green
  • Menthol
  • Metallic green
  • Mughal green

An entry in List of colors: N–Z contained a link to this page.

The entry is :

  • Old moss green
  • Oxley
  • Philippine green
  • Royal green

I don't see any evidence that these colors are discussed in this article and plan to delete them from the list per this discussion: Talk:List_of_colors#New_approach_to_review_of_entries

If someone decides that these colors should have a section in this article and it is added, I would appreciate a ping.[[[User:Sphilbrick|S Philbrick]](Talk) 19:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladesh green

[edit]

The section Bottle green states that "another name for this color is Bangladesh green." That statement is followed by a reference but it's a dead link. I did a brief search looking for alternative sources and have come up empty so far. The preceding sentence suggests that this color is the background color of the flag of Bangladesh. That statement has an archived reference. However, while that reference discusses the specifications of the flag, it nowhere identifies the green used in the flag as "Bangladesh green". I don't plan to edit this article as my current focus is on the color lists articles (e.g. List_of_colors:_A–F). I do plan to remove this entry from that list, but if someone does some research and can can find evidence that this color is commonly called "Bangladesh green", it can be restored.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Poly Pomona green

[edit]

It is clear that Cal Poly chose official colors, and one of those colors may have been a version of green also known as one of the Pantone colors (PMS 349). Whether that fact turns out to be true or not, it can be verified that the color chosen had hex code #1E4D2B.

Although the link included in the INFOBOX color template is no longer a working link, it can be found in the Internet archive: archived page

That page clearly identifies the hex code.

However, that page refers to the color as "logo green".

It is my hypothesis that the term Cal Poly Pomona green is not used by the school, no by anyone else except websites that have copied from Wikipedia.

A search for the term in a search engine generate some hits to school sites but none of which (at least among the ones I examined) actually uses the term "Cal Poly Pomona green". if you do a more restrictive search with quotes, I don't see any sign that the term is used as a color except on sites that are likely to have been scraped from Wikipedia.

A search of the Cal poly site turns up some pages talking about logos and graphics standards, such as:

Sites generally refer to the color as "green" — none of them use the phrase "Cal Poly Pomona green".

The editor who added this entry has has not edited in over two years, so I don't see any value in trying to reach out to them.

I propose removing this entry, unless someone can establish that this name for a color is in use.--S Philbrick(Talk) 01:03, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic green

[edit]

Islamic green was part of the original article created 2007-10-11, as RGB #009900, referring to "the shade of green used in the Flag of the Organization of the Islamic Conference", here (dated 2007-07-16), which used the flag image File:Flag of OIC.svg here, which was actually the slightly-different color #009A00. At 2008-09-28, the flag image was changed to the much darker #006230 here. Meanwhile, the color in this article was changed to #009000 at some point, and was recently changed to #038927 without a source.

The original source was shown as "Vexillogical" and linked to the flag article. I think this means that it was sourced simply from the image and named by the author of the article, the name "Islamic green" not being based on any source. Based on this, and my inability to find a non-circular source, especially from that timeframe, I think the color should be removed here and in the list articles in which it appears. (Pinging possibly interested users Keraunos, Desmond Goh JW, Jim1138, Sphilbrick, Altay8) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 18:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AlanM1, Thanks for the research, I removed the entry. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:28, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Is there something wrong with this source: https://www.colorhexa.com/009000 ? Or this one: http://www.99colors.net/name/islamic-green ? Or these: https://encycolorpedia.com/009000 https://rgbcolorcode.com/color/islamic-green https://html-color.codes/hex/009000 http://hexcolor16.com/009000 http://islamic-green.colorcode.is/ https://www.flatuicolors.net/009000 https://www.htmlcsscolor.com/hex/009000 https://www.spycolor.com/009000 ? Also, why is this color being singled out, when there are plenty of other colors listed on this page whose RGB values are unreferenced? E.g. Reseda green, Bright mint, Brunswick green, Jade, Kelly green, Pakistan green, or Paris green. It is fairly clear that #009000 is seen as Islamic green from a number of different sources. Is there some reason why it should be excluded?  - PaulT+/C 10:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. They have generally been found to be WP:CIRCULAR with Wikipedia when it comes to naming of specific RGB colors and not a valid source for such names without a deep dive over history and archives to see if they were first (usually just better to look in original sources, like Pantone lists (with conversion problems), X11 colors, etc.). Sadly, it has become widespread practice on the web to create sites that are nothing more than an automated collection of other people's data (esp. WikiPedia) with no editorial control and little value added, in order to attract eyeballs and see ads or other clickbait. Many "color" sites are just such animals. This is easily observed by adding a color to WP and then watching the other sites for a while to see how long it takes it to show up. If you wait three months and get nothing, it may be OK, though some sites seem to have expended the least effort possible, extracting an old dump and presenting it nearly unchanged, without periodic updates.
Islamic green was singled out because it was edited by someone to (again) change the color without a source. See my research above for what I did to try to find out the "truth". I found no evidence of a specific consistent shade of green being called "Islamic Green" (as a proper noun). All I found was sources regugitating Wikipedia at various points in history (with different values), and a few sources that were simply analysing the appearance of something like a flag, saying the color green represented Islam, the red star represented the USSR, etc. – not claiming any specific, consistent shade of green as being a well-known color and naming it "Islamic Green". See the difference?
Ideally, for a vexillogical source to be reliable, I'd expect to see mutliple independent confirming references that show a specific color, usually sourced from a specific named and dated flag, and naming that color it specifically. If it has RGB or CMYK values that are consistent with an image, all the better, though we can attempt to gather it from the image directly, roughly, depending on image quality. But the point is to get a name that is used by multiple independent sources for the same specific color and a somewhat reasonable approximation for the hue, saturation, luminance, and how to produce it with an LED RGB colorspace. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 15:09, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of the sites I listed above, I ended up using Encycolorpedia to restore the content to the article. That site is used as a reference for 8 other sections here (despite your valid WP:CIRCULAR concerns, which apply broadly to this article in general). I understand your point (and appreciate your research) about not finding support for the idea that there is a single green shade to identify "Islamic Green" (proper noun). That is a problem but perhaps a better solution would be to describe this in the prose (I took a crack at it, but there is significant room for improvement). Or maybe have a separate section for entries that don't have a specifically defined shade like Malachite, Jade, Hunter green (NOT Gotham green), Emerald, Celadon/Celadon green, Brunswick green, Army green, etc.. - PaulT+/C 15:39, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the case of shades that have been well know for over 1,000 years, I don't think that references to colour-only sites recording some particular commercial classification are either required, or to be trusted. The rubbishy quality of this article is shown by the mostly inaccurate section on celadon, which doesn't even link to our article. Neither the colours "Celadon" or "Celadon green" per the article represent what is normally regarded as "celadon" - what makes us think the sources here are WP:RS? Johnbod (talk) 13:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you have arguments or better sources, by all means, bring them for discussion. The articles are in much better shape than they were just a few years ago, thanks to a few editors spending hundreds of hours on them. There is admittedly much more to do. We are just humans, and need to break off to other subjects in between, to avoid this being just (unpaid) drudgery . —[AlanM1(talk)]— 15:09, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding back the section, with no sources other than the admittedly questionable Encycolopedia, and a clear hot-point contrasting green/paradise/Shia and black/jihad/Sunni, while there is not yet a consensus here, is clearly not the right thing to do. What's the rush? The argument seems to be "we can't find a source, so let's just pick one" that is admittedly questionable and has no further source in it. Why is that color the one we call Islamic green and not any of the other colors in the prose, like that used in the referenced SA flag (#006C32), the OIC flags (#009900, #009A00, and #006230), or many other greens used in Muslim nation flags? This is NOT encyclopedic. It doesn't belong here. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 14:25, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic green listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Islamic green. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:35, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Should Emerald (color) be its own page?

[edit]

Emerald (color) seems like it should be a page of its own, not one big section. The main article could be linked from this page. --NovaBrunswick 11:21, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I'll make a split request. LightProof1995 (talk) 12:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emerald Green

[edit]

Hi there, I was thinking of adding some more information to the "Emerald Green" section of this article. This would just be a more in-depth look at the bizarre history behind this color. This is an assignment for my Digital Media class. Let me know what you think. --Kenziejsikesq Feb 29, 2020

One of the things that would need to be addressed is this passage:

Emerald was invented in Germany in 1814. By taking acetic acid, mixing and boiling it with vinegar, and then by adding some arsenic, a bright blue-green hue was formed.[42]

Vinegar IS a 5% solution of acetic acid, so this statement is redundant.

DocKrin (talk) 16:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

#00FF00

[edit]

There are three separate sections with three different infoboxes for this particular shade of green, each with a different name. It shows up under Green, Electric Green, and Lime (X11). I can understand that this color may have multiple names, but can we at least merge them into a single section? It doesn't seem useful to have three separate infoboxes for the same shade of green. Altay8 (talk) 02:45, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ISCC-NBS descriptors

[edit]

I don't know much about how the ISCC-NBS descriptors for the infoboxes are chosen, but they appear to be incorrect. The most notable are the colors Castleton green and Sacramento State green which are described as "dark yellowish green" and "very dark yellowish green" respectively, despite both having a hue of 164° which is actually most of the way to cyan (180°) from green (120°), not even remotely yellow (60°). Bottle green, which has exactly the same hue, is described simply as a "dark green". 52 of the 71 colors on this page with an ISCC–NBS descriptor have either "yellowish" or "yellow" in that descriptor, and while several of them deserve it (e.g. Asparagus) I don't think it's reasonable for anything with a hue of 120° or greater. Only five of the colors on this page have an ISCC–NBS descriptor with "bluish" in it, and the least blue of them is Persian green with a hue of 135°, which makes it particularly ridiculous that anything bluer than that is described as "yellowish". Altay8 (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nile Green

[edit]

I found this color, without a corresponding swatch on this page. I think it is worth adding, but am not familiar with syntax for color variations, as I do more edits on the language and history side. Assistance please?

Nile Green  
Notable reference Nile green, discussed in the Paris Review 13 Feb, 2018, accessed 30 Aug 2020.
On Wiktionary Nile Green
Jax MN (talk) 17:30, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary has a link for eau de nil, lighter swatch too, as you suggested. Jax MN (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The specifications of green

[edit]

I would like to know why the shades of green page was reverted. Firstly, I was one who made this paragraph:

In a color proximity sense, a primary color has a color range of 120° (60° on each side of the color's hue) and any color has to be within that range to be considered a variation of that color. Secondary colors have a color range of 60° (30°), tertiary colors have a color range of 30° (15°), quaternary colors have a color range of 15° (7.5°), quinary colors have a color range of 7.5° (3.75°), and so on. Because green is located at a hue angle of 120°, it has a tertiary color range of 105° and 135°, and any color out of this range is more related to chartreuse or spring green than green.

From a mathematical/scientific point of view, any color from a hue between 105° and 135° is a true shade of green, and any color outside of this range is not a true variation of green. Colors like Artichoke and Avocado are shades of chartreuse (yellow-green in simple terms), and colors like Teal and Midnight Green shouldn't be considered a type of true green, but rather spring green, or even cyan. (blue green in simpler terms) ThunderBrine (talk) 20:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From a mathematical/scientific point of view, colours are continuously variable and any border drawn between them would be completely arbitrary. A shade doesn't suddenly stop being green and become something else.
Your colour angle definition is just as arbitrary as any other. Note also that the colour angle of a particular sRGB colour depends on the colour appearance model used and possibly on the viewing conditions as well.

Grass green

[edit]

Grass green is missing; for a possible source see Maerz & Paul.

"Celadon(color)" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Celadon(color) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 6#Celadon(color) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Army green" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Army green and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 27#Army green until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 04:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Asparagus (colour)" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Asparagus (colour) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 27#Asparagus (colour) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:33, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Gray-asparagus" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Gray-asparagus and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 8#Gray-asparagus until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Dark Olive" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Dark Olive and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 8#Dark Olive until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Dark olive drab" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Dark olive drab and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 8#Dark olive drab until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Moss green" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Moss green and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 11#Moss green until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Pine Green" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Pine Green and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 11#Pine Green until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:05, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Sacramento State green" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sacramento State green and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 11#Sacramento State green until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:49, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Spring green into Shades of green

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
No consensus to merge, given the uncontested objection/counterproposal with stale discussion. Klbrain (talk) 17:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These two pages have a LOT of redundancy. The content of Spring green should probably be merged into Shades of green. Steel1943 (talk) 05:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Context - Much of the current situation was created by ThunderBrine during early 2021. (See "other" banners at the top of the talk page.) These issues were noted recently at several redirects for discussion. (See above.) I've started a broader discussion regarding them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Color/Archive 9#"Shades of" articles. – Scyrme (talk) 16:21, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge Spring green is a very different concept from Green in that it is the halfway point between cyan and green. LightProof1995 (talk) 18:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Color is not and cannot be purely mathematically defined by some random (and unsourced) appeal to a color wheel, which are by their nature artificial constructs what with the electromagnetic spectrum not being a closed loop. Neither the human eye, nor the English language, let alone physics, actually work that way. It's still green. It's even in the name. Merge. oknazevad (talk) 05:59, January 26, 2023 (UTC)
    I respectfully disagree. Colors are completely defined by physics, math, biology. Spring Green is the color Red: 0, Green: 255, Blue: 127 when using RGB values. These values correspond with the red, green, and blue cones and rods in your eyes. This is a completely separate color from Green, which is Red: 0, Green: 255, Blue: 0. I admit many of the colors on the Spring green page could be moved to the Shades of green page, but not all, e.g. I wouldn't move Aquamarine, Caribbean Green, or apparently any color that says "Mint" (Mint, Magic Mint, Bright Mint, Mint Cream) over to Shades of green. LightProof1995 (talk) 12:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  • Oppose While I agree that color cannot be "purely mathematically defined by some random (and unsourced) appeal to a color wheel", I don't see how you use that to justify merging Spring green into the Shades of green article. Color wheels didn't appear randomly one day. They are an important part of how we categorize hue. The fact that the word "spring green" has "green" in it doesn't make it a subordinate color concept; it's a limitation of English semantics. Incidentally, spring green is also the complementary color of rose in the color wheel. It has its place. Bumm13 (talk) 02:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, already closed! Bumm13 (talk) 02:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Split Proposal: Emerald green

[edit]

Sapphire (color) and Ruby (color) have their own pages. Compare Shades of blue#Sapphire and Shades of red#Ruby with Shades of green#Emerald. Emerald (color) deserves its own page and all content about that color here should be moved there. I can complete this for us if given support.

Support:

  1. As nom LightProof1995 (talk) 12:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

  1. Neither of the two pages mentioned clear the "non-trivial" requirement of the general notability guideline, notability must be demonstrated before they can be used as precedent for a third page. Orchastrattor (talk) 03:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because no policy or guideline-based rationale has been given, other than it "deserves its own page". Will be happy to reconsider, if this is closed, and reopened (not right away, please) with a better rationale. Mathglot (talk) 03:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shades of green

[edit]

Useiiesi 2600:1012:B1AA:4720:F154:F65:8686:DEB9 (talk) 23:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shades_of_green&oldid=1247352990"