Talk:Red hair/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Scots

Wiki article says: Freckles are angel-kisses, it's a fact. :)

"Scotland has the highest proportion of redheads, as 13 percent of the population has red hair and approximately 40 percent carries the recessive redhead gene. Liz Hypes of Denison University, of Scottish descent, is the leader of the Denison Red Head Anti-Prejudice Alliance (DRHAA). A very successful organization in and around the Granville community."

but its reference actually says:

"As many as 10% of Scots and Irish people have ginger or strawberry blond hair," —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.20.56 (talk) 22:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

That 70s Show

I deleted "In That '70s Show Jackie's main target of insults were towards Donna's red hair". It was unsourced, and largely untrue. I have seen every episode of that show at least once, and have never heard Jackie rip on Donna for having red hair. She usually rips on her for being tall. --65.33.225.208 (talk) 17:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I've heard Jackie rip on Donna on her hair a few times. But the majority of her insults are about her tall Stature.Anonni (talk) 08:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Anonni's memory jives with mine.--75.4.202.97 (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

We can all agree that Donna is fucking hot, and jackie is pretty hot sometimes too..

Beards ?

I have a red beard and facial hair, but dark hair on my head and the rest of my body. I couldn't find anything in the article which explains what genetically might cause this. --Demonsforever (talk) 07:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It is very common in Turkey what I am origin of. My brother has also brown hair with a red beard, i know at least 4-5 people with brown hair and light colored beards.

Hey, I had a beard of red, brown, and blond depending on what part of the chin, mustache, or sideburns it is. (I shaved it off on my 40th birthday (i.e., in 1998), but kept the mustache, which was a mix of light brown and red-blond.) But the hair on my scalp is dark colored. My ancestry is mixed European, and you have to go back to my grandfather to find a redhead. It appears that the myth of redhair being completely recessive is false. It is only partially recessive. The gene often expresses itself in the facial hair of males. Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 00:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

From Coon (I hate him, btw but no other resources):

The unexposed skin color of the Turks is mostly brunet-white or swarthy (von Luschan #11-16), the head hair color, in 90 per cent of cases, dark brown. Black hair, however, is found in less than 5 per cent, and blondism is rare. The ratio of dark brown hair is constant, except in the eastern provinces, where it is nearly 100 per cent. The beard hair is often lighter than the head hair; only 70 per cent are black or dark brown, while reddish shades are found among nearly 10 per cent. Reddish and blondish beards are by far commoner in the western and northern provinces than elsewhere, and are in these places found in one-third of the group observed. Zylan (talk) 14:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

My fathers facial hair is also orange, but when he still had hair, it was brown. He isn't of Turkish descent, so there must be some other genetic explanation? Littelbro14 (talk) 02:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

My family is from Mexican descent, and two of my family members have copper hair. One of my cousins, and my grandmother. Some of my uncles in my family also have brown hair with red facial hair. What is strange is that I have red/copper hair on my armpits. Exedous (talk) 10:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.55.174.158 (talk)

My brother has a reddish colored beard. He just had a redheaded child. We haven't had red hair in the family in 3 generations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.32.80 (talk) 12:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I knew a rabbi with this phenomenon as well. I assumed that it was latent redheadedness coming out in the face.FlaviaR (talk) 11:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe it is also a fairly common occurence in blonde haired people (of primarily norse descent) to have reddish facial hair.

Maybe?

Perhaps including a picture of a certain notable red-haired lead singer from Guns 'N' Roses? (who ironically is also famous for being hot-tempered.) Only suggesting out of pure curiosity, doesn't mean you have to include it. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Someone please do this...it would be cool. 10/10/2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.99.172 (talk) 01:34, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Wild historical innacuracy

In the section headed "Modern", there's a statement: "This matches the movement of the Celts and Picts as they were pushed westward and northward in Britain and Ireland during the Roman conquest of Britain, as well as the pattern of Viking settlement in the north of England".

The old fashioned view is that the Celts were physically pushed to the North and West by the Anglo-Saxons. It's widely believed now that the Germanic invaders formed a ruling elite while the majority of the population remained genetically similar, and that the displacement was more cultural than genetic. In any case, even if there was a physical displacement it was 500 years after the Roman conquest.

The bit about Viking settlement in the North of England doesn't make sense in context, it should be changed to "Viking settlement in the British Isles".

I don't have an account, so couldn't change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.96.79.149 (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Another possible inaccuracy

If you scroll to the "Historical" sub-section, you see a row of pictures of historical figures with red hair. The last is mentioned as possibly being Catherine of Aragon, who was one of the wives of Henry VIII of England. However, I believe it is actually her sister, Juana the Mad, who was the mother of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain. Compare this picture to the one in Juana's article, and I think you would agree. Raphael (talk) 22:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed. Fences&Windows 23:32, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject banner spam

An anonymous editor appears to have dedicated him-/herself to spamming talk pages with long lists of WikiProject banners. This goes against the good advice at WP:WikiProject Council/Guide#Article_tagging and WP:WikiProject Council/Guide/WikiProject#Over-tagging, which recommends against speculatively spamming a long list of tangentially related WikiProjects to an article.

The editor often adds empty {{todo}} lists and usually {{talk header}}, even to empty talk pages, which also violates the instructions for their use.

While WikiProject Medicine is normally happy to have articles obviously within its scope tagged by any editor, I have removed the WPMED tag from this article because it doesn't fall within the core "diseases and their treatments" scope of the project. WikiProject Medicine does not support the inappropriate medicalization of everyday life. (I may or may not have removed other banners at the same time.)

If you believe that there is a significant medical connection to this subject that I've overlooked, please do not re-add the banner. Instead, take these steps:

1. Read Is WPMED the correct WikiProject to support this article?
2. Read the instructions on the WPMED template.
3. Then leave a message at the doctors' mess to ask whether the article falls within the scope of the project.

I continue to attempt to communicate with this anon editor, but the IP address changes very frequently, and efforts so far appear to be unsuccessful. If the anon editor places the WPMED banner on this article again, I ask for your support in removing it again. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Archive

This talk page had grown to be quite large. I moved all the apparently finished discussions to the archive. I stopped when I reached the last comment from June 2008. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Hebrew mistranslation

In the section about red hair in Biblical times, there is a mistranslation. Adam, (אדם) the person, is spelled the same way as the word for person, which is pronounced 'a-dam'. The word for red, however, is spelled ( אדום). Words in Hebrew that are not spelled the same have no common origin. -A native Hebrew speaker 129.64.211.113 (talk) 22:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

If the words have the same three consonants for their root, then they may well have a common origin, or at least a semantic relationship. Adam and adom both have the same root (ALEF-DALED-NUN), as has the word adamah, "earth, ground". The bare earth has a reddish color, and in the book of Genesis it is written that God created the first human being out of the earth. -Another native Hebrew speaker --89.139.253.205 (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Redhead map

Hi everyone, I was wandering if anyone could make a redhead map for the article, similar to the one found in the blond article, so we can see what countries have the highest percentage of redheads per capita, I think it is either Ireland or Scotland, thought I'm not sure, thanks. Supaman89 (talk) 23:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

It's Scotland with 13% of the total population of redheads. Says so in the article. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

It says so in Wiki's article but I took a look @ reference for it, it actually says, "As many as 10% of Scots and Irish people

have ginger or strawberry blond hair,"! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.20.56 (talk) 22:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Make sure you include Canada on that map since Canada has more red-heads than the US does. Canada also has more red-blond-brown heads because this combo occurs naturally among the irish, french canadians, germans, icelandics and ukranians (all common in Manitoba).

Nada (Fulla's friend) has very natural looking red hair.

Most of the actors who play the Weasleys in the movies have orangy hair rather than red hair - there is quite a difference between the two. There is also quite a difference between the fake red you see on many acresses (ie Xmen, Spiderman) and real looking red hair. 13:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)13:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.81.154 (talk)

Here are a couple of maps for both Europe and Northern America:

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/8095/redhaireurope.png http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/8994/redhairamerica.png

According to this study: "Red hair(among 20-30 year olds) reaches greatest levels of distribution in the world in Scotland, Udmurtia(Russia) and Wales(11%); followed by Ireland(9%); Australia(7%); England, Canada(6%); USA, Norway and Iceland(5%). The average frequency in Europe being 1.5%, with 2.5% in Northern Europe and 0.5% in Southern Europe."

Hope this helps. All research is available for use. 94.156.40.82 (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Jimmyolsen.png

The image File:Jimmyolsen.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --11:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Spelling variant

"International readers are more used to US spelling"; utter garbage. Wikipedia policy is that either AmE or BrE is acceptable in articles which are not country specific, like this one. The variant should not be changed without consensus, so where's the consensus here? Incidentally, the very first edit used mixed AmE and BrE, but if you look at the early history the article settled down with BrE. Mister Flash (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Please be civil. I happened to edit this section and it seemed like the right idea to alter the spelling since I (as an international reader, albeit having completed my degree in the US) am used to AmE, as goes the standard study program for the English language in my country. Are you actually claiming that UK English is more common around the world? NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 19:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't mean to be incivil. It's difficult to say which version is more widely used: 300,000,000 in USA use AmE but there are many people in India who use Indian English, which is close to BrE. I know AmE is used a great deal in Israel, but the point is, as made by Martin451, we are told not to change the spelling on a page without good reason. Mister Flash (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

That reason is a rubbish reason to blanket change the spelling on a page. If the article started off as Br English, then it should stay that way. Martin451 (talk) 19:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wow, didn't mean to incite all this patriotism :) Keep your spelling, all is good, let this be the worst of our problems! As Homer Simpson said once during a British award ceremony: "In your country, a homosexual is a poofter; in our country, a homosexual is a well known Hollywood actor whose name I won't mention because he might sue." NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

@NotAnotherAliGFan. you've added a sentence about modern hebrew slang, but the meaning or significance of the sentence is unclear. Can you elaborate or clarify please? --HighKing (talk) 21:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

It's simple: incidental relevance. I've added this sentence right after mentioning of the Ancient Hebrew word (which, by the way, has been preserved to this very day as the literary term for "red-haired"). NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 21:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

If it was so simple, I wouldn't have asked for an explanation. Which btw, is still absent. I know you added the sentence. I know you added it after mentioning of the Ancient Hebrew word. But why? For what reason? Why is it significant? --HighKing (talk) 23:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You can add me to the list of those who fail to see the point of NotAnotherAliGFan's addition. I'm sure "ginger" has translations in many other languages. Do we add them too? What's so significant with Hebrew slang? The "Interestingly enough", apart from being an opinion, would suggest there's some importance to it, but I find it more a total irrelevance. I am, however, happy to have it explained to me. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

It's curious that the etymology of the word was influenced by Ancient Hebrew, yet has influenced Modern Hebrew - kind of a cause-and-effect reversal. NotAnotherAliGFan (talk) 13:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Please cite the statement; "the etymology of the word was influenced by Ancient Hebrew, yet has influenced Modern Hebrew". Perhaps then this cite can explain the point you are trying to make, as everyone remains mystified as to what you are on about. Here's a start; when you say "the word", which word are you talking about? "Admoni"? "ruddy"? "Ginger"? "גִ'ינְגִ'י"? And which word has influenced which?? What you are adding is not clear at all.

If you cannot produce a cite then you are indulging in original synthesis. And as I said before; the statement "Interestingly enough" is WP:POV. Only once you produce a cite can we discuss if it is relevant enough to merit being in the English language article, when all other languages slang isn't.

Also; despite what you have repeatedly said, it is not a case of no-one should revert this until consensus is reached. It is a case of; you do not add it until consensus is reached. You added it a month and a half ago and it has continually been removed, and continually questioned as lacking a cite, and you haven't yet produced one. Your latest cite leads no-where that I can read and I doubt it verifies what you are say. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought NotAnotherAliGFan was talking about "Ginger", which is not derived from Hebrew, so I fail to the the relevance this interesting fact. According to wiktionary the etemology of Ginger is:

Late Old English ġingiber, from Latin gingiber, earlier zingiber, from Ancient Greek ζιγγίβερις, from Prakrit (siŋgabēra), from Sanskrit, from Malayalam ഇഞ്ചി (inchi), from Tamil இஞ்ஜி (inji) (directly).

Martin451 (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Red Hair in Japan??

I lived in Japan over a decade and never once saw a Japanese with naturally red hair. I think this assertion needs more back up than an obscure article from 1967. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.121.254 (talk) 01:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Conan O'Brien

Can we get a picture of Conan O'Brien on this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.254.9.28 (talk) 00:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The rarest colour?

The Evolution section has "Red hair is the rarest natural hair colour in humans." WP:Albinism states that about one in 17,000 humans has some type of albinism; this inclines me to think that the very pale/white hair colour of most albino people should instead be considered "the rarest natural hair colour in humans". I suppose one might argue that albinism is usually considered "a condition", and red-hairedness "natural", but they're both recessive traits due to entirely natural genetic variations. Nor would I think it fair to argue that albinism is associated with medical problems, and red-hairedness not: albinos can suffer from visual problems and increased risk of sunburn and melanoma, but then again one should note the Medical implications section in the Red hair article.

I'm not trying to be contentious here; I'm simply striving for accuracy. What do the rest of you think? Kay Dekker (talk) 18:47, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

You may have a point. However, surely you can have pale/white hair without having albinism. So the occurrence of this hair colour is not limited to just the 1 in 17,000 with albinism. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 10:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed so. A problem that the use of "rarest colour" exposes is that natural hair colour is a set of continua, not of sharply-demarcated categories. You're quite right in saying that the very pale hair of albino people does shade imperceptibly off into the "blond(e)" spectrum; on the other hand, "red" hair also shades into the "blond(e)" and "brown" spectra. But then "Red hair is the rarest natural hair colour" speaks firmly in the language of categories. How should WP express the idea of frequency when talking about such ill-defined things, do you (all) think? Kay Dekker (talk) 19:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Could we resolve this by saying "rarest natural color", or something that indicates that red-headedness doesn't spring from an abnormal (<< by which term I mean absolutely no insult to albinos!) condition? FlaviaR (talk) 11:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Modern fiction

Rorschach/Walter Kovacs is ginger as well - since Watchmen is one critically acclaimed novel, shouldn't we add him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 17lswllstrt (talk • contribs) 01:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Distribution

Some Native Americans(not really a whole lot, obviously) have red hair. And no, none have genetic influences from other people. Why is this not mentioned? As red hair can literally be found amongst every people. This is common knowledge(I think, or would hope).Anonni (talk) 08:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Illiad

The word [Iliad] in section 1.1 is misspelled. The link works through redirection, but it could be fixed. Atterlep (talk) 03:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks. --NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 03:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It is also a note of historical sigmificance that Alexander the Great died his hair red with saffron. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.172.202 (talk) 17:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Can you give us sources for that fact? -- Joel M. Chat ✐ 16:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Protected

I was just wondering why this article was protected, I was kind of suprised when I looked up 'Red Hair' and saw the padlock. Is it because of the spammer on the talk page or was there some other vandalism? Thanks 76.120.100.231 (talk) 06:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Other vandalism. The page is frequently targeted by people who think it's just the place to make dumb comments about people they know with red hair. Unfortunately it's still acceptable in many quarters to make insulting jokes about red heads that wouldn't be acceptable about other minorities. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}} in the last sentence under "Modern" there is a missing space: "In Argentinaand Brazil" "please change "In Argentinaand Brazil" to "In Argentina and Brazil"" 09:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Done BejinhanTalk 09:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Some red heads turn blond with age

In the article there is a statement that red-heads' hair turn more brown with age. Sometimes it turns blond depending on the person. Also, I have mostly experienced people making good associations with red-hair. I thought I would mention that to balance some of the claims of "stero-typing" of red heads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.29.7.178 (talk) 06:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed. Fences&Windows 23:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I come from a family of redheads, and I can vouch for this. My older sister's hair was red hair and is now a platinum blonde naturally. Jcmcc450 (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

We still need a reliable source to cite. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, I was just throwing that out there to hopefully spur research instead of dismissal Jcmcc450 (talk) 02:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Caucasus, why there was not any information about this region?

My parents are from Caucasus and they have dark brown hair. I am redheaded guy with dark brown eyes. Also, my aunt from Caucasus, Grandma are freaking red-haired. Also I know some people from there with red hair too. I found some information in books on genetics, there was told that red-hair gene is saved better in small mountain regions with European race, because it is pretty olden gene of Europe people and in small populations its consentration is higher. So that in Scotland and Ireland and Scandinavian countries it is so high. In Caucasus it, of course, much rarer, but it is Southern-Eastern part of Europe. In the article there was nothing about this, why? I am sorry for my English, as you might understand, it is not my native language. --95.27.171.89 (talk) 12:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)ArthurArthur

Famous Gingers

There ought to be a list of famous people with red hair Brett (talk) 03:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing notable about having red hair and being famous, unless you are famous because you have red hair. Very few people match this criteria. This article used to have a list of "famous redheads", but it just got out of hand and a random mess, as these kind of lists usually do. So we don't need it back. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

How about individuals like Carrottop? Without red hair, he would not be famous, ergo he is famous because of his read hair. Brett (talk) 21:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

By now there's at least this again: [[1]]. --VKing (talk) 02:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of redheads. I have a list here: User:Arichnad/List of redheads. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 03:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

You can't say famous, the correct term on Wikipedia is "notable", not famous, but believe me, Red hair isn't as rare as you think, there are too many notable people with red hair for us to make a list about, and we can't distinguish clearly between natural red heads and ones who dyed their hair, plus every notable on wikipedia is able to dye their hair red, that's an overflow of information. If you want, i suggest Ron howard and Seth Green. --75.159.2.59 (talk) 04:07, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The cop who pepper sprayed the UC students has a red mustache. It all comes together.

caption error

The caption for the first picture in the article should be "a stunning woman with red hair". Say whatever you like, you know i'm right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.186.127.88 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Ragavan eelam, 28 April 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} M.I.A's video for Born Free has been banned by YouTube because it depicts a number of gun carrying 'soldiers' executing redheaded people in graphic detail. Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/music/newsid_10080000/newsid_10087800/10087809.stm Video Source: http://showhype.com/video/m-i-a-born-free-video-official-real-and-explici/

Ragavan eelam (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for the suggestion, however, I won't add it to the article at this time, for a couple of reasons;

• Firstly, the 'edit semiprotected' should only be used with a specific request, such as 'please add THIS to THIS section" (with references, etc)
• Secondly, I'm not sure that it is appropriate to add this fact, because Wikipedis is not for news items, and because we try to avoid trivia sections - please check those links.

If you would like to consider it, and perhaps come up with a specific request, then please do so below, and other editors can consider it and perhaps form a consensus.

Thanks again for the thought, which will not be ignored - others will see this too. Best,  Chzz  ►  13:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

 Not done

Stealth red-heads

I am English with dark brown hair, but if I attempt to bleach my hair using over the counter products, it turns bright ginger rather than blonde. Needless to say I only tried this once, and have refrained from making "ginger" jokes ever since. I was subsequently told by my former barber (sadly now deceased) that the red pigmentation occurs in the centre of the hair whereas the brown pigmentation is nearer to the hair's surface. Hence a stronger "bleach" is needed to overcome both colours. Perhaps the article needs to describe how the red colouring manifests itself, with a comparison to the more common brown and black colouring. 87.113.119.148 (talk) 23:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

minor edit to be done

In part 2.2.1 called "Origins", the 2nd sentence reads "The pale skin associated with red hair may advantageous in..." Can somebody fill in the "be" or "have been"? Ghettosauce (talk) 07:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

emigration and invasion

FILWISE has added a statement about red hair in parts of Europe three times now, but without providing a cite to allow it to be verified. Please do not add it again until you can cite a source for this. Claiming that emigration and invasion is part of European countries histories doesn't verify anything, as there is nothing to demonstrate that the existence of red hair in those countries is the result of this. And that is before you even demonstrate that significant emigration and invasion from Nordic countries and Celts happened. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}} Under "Religious and mythological traditions", I'd like to request either a citation for or the removal of the sentence, "The name Rhys may have been derived from the local word for red hair." While it may be related to "fiery" phrases, it's not conclusively associated with redheads.

Eldatari (talk) 23:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Done Spitfire19 ^T/_C 23:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't realize Howard Rourke was part of religion or mythology. 75.191.151.75 (talk) 01:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Stereotypes in literature

I had heard that red hair in the bible generally denotes an evil streak: Cain, Herod, Samson etc.. But I can find no reference for this yet.

The following is from: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/Shakespeare/chapter13.pdf

"In Disability, Whose Handicap, Ann Shearer (1981) takes a more historical approach to representation, highlighting the moral attitudes underlying discrimination. In Classical drama, the villain had red hair; in Victorian children's books, crippled young people teach messages of courage, forgiveness and generosity; witches were always ugly, and villains generally have had impairment-Captain Hook, Long John Silver and all." Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 24.79.100.218, 9 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} The opening sentence says "This article is about people with red hair, also sometimes called redheads or CHELSEA MCROSTIE." Please remove the name at the end. Thank you

24.79.100.218 (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. That was a bit of vandalism, and in addition to removing it I have also warned the user. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. Intelligentsium 15:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit Request Under the "Modern" section, it indicates that "Red-hair is found commonly amongst Ashkenazi Jewish populations.[12]" However, the citation refers to book about Jewish Genetic disorders, which creates an offensive implication. Red hair is not a genetic disorder among any population, including Jews or Hebrews. Perhaps there is a better reference? Below is a link to a picture of a red haired toddler of Jewish parentage who has no genetic disorders (taken by me this morning and never used anywhere else), if you want to include it: http://www.annataubstudio.com/photos/2010_06_15_001.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangepride (talk • contribs) 23:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number (about 100) selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Penfding changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC).

Should the photo be changed or deleted?

Right now, the article is illustrated by a photo that bears the caption, "Woman with red hair." This image has the title "Woman redhead natural portrait," but is she a natural redhead? If you look at her hair, there are several indications that her hair color may not be natural. She seems to have relatively dark roots. These may be a sort of reddish brown, but they are not the orange-y red of her lengthy hair. In fact, her hair gets lighter the longer it is, suggesting that it may be dyed red. I don't think it's appropriate for a photo of a dyed redhead to be the illustration for the Red Hair article. There plenty of natural redheads who could illustrate this article. Even if her hair color is natural, is she really the best choice to illustrate red hair? How about a ginger with uniformly red hair? Poldy Bloom (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

People don't generally dye their eyebrows as well. Her hair colouring looks natural to me. It is not unusual for someone's hair to lighten as it gets longer. I see nothing to suggest she is definitely not a natural red-head. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, also the top right side of her hair looks dark almost gray a bit... Weird.. I was about to ask the person who uploaded the photo about this when I noticed the photo was from Flickr. I searched the Flickr account to see if I can find the photo again with no luck. I don't know if this brings up some kind of copyright question... I'll look into it. -- Joel M. Chat ✐ 16:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

No, if the picture was released under a CC license, that's irrevocable. So no copyright issue. Fences&Windows 17:05, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

my hair was naturally red, my eyebrows are darker auburn, my eyelashes are blonde with red roots. Redheads put up with a lot of "did you dye your hair" discrimnation, we get asked that a LOT. well yes, when we start to go grey we will, like other hair colors sometimes opt to cover the greys with dye. so even if her hair is treated, it does not neccesarily mean she is not a natural redhead, she may just be going grey (mine started going grey at 19 so age is not an indicator there) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aen13 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Subsection title - Prejudice and discrimination towards redheads

Wouldn't it make more sense if it said "Prejudice and discrimination AGAINST redheads"? HiLo48 (talk) 09:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Why would it make more sense? -- Joel M.Chat ✐ 15:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

In my country, Australia, there have been programs of affirmative action to get more women and more indigenous people into public service positions. That is discrimination TOWARDS a minority group. That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about actions that hurt a minority group. That is discrimination AGAINST that group. HiLo48 (talk) 20:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Discrimination towards a group just means that the group are being treated differently -- in itself that wording carries no implication about whether the discrimination is favourable or unfavourable. 2.25.121.79 (talk) 23:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

minor pruning

Under the area "Religious and mythological traditions" the final entry is Ayn Rand. This could just be my personal prejudice, but that's not exactly a "Religious and mythological traditions" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.18.210 (talk) 00:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Red heads and pale skin. It is not true that all natural redheads are light skinned, I have two nieces, both natural redheads, neither of which are light skinned nor freckled and they both tan rather than burn. An interesting note, both were born with black hair which turned red one the baby hair came out.

Siobhon Mc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siobhon Mc (talk • contribs) 21:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Carrot Top the comedian

typing Carrot Top into the wikipedia search field takes one directly to this page. it should go to the comedian Carrot Top's page instead. 99.60.179.53 (talk) 03:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)neil

Red hair is exotic.

Because red hair is so rare within the worlds population, frequently in less caucasion populated countries red hair is considered sacred and exotic. In other cultures it is seen as an impure mutation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelseyredhead123 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Red hair is pretty, there's actually whole fetish devoted to red hair. --75.159.2.59 (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Is is worth putting Red hair fetishism as a paraphilia? --75.159.2.59 (talk) 03:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 67.135.148.2, 20 June 2011

Mary Magdalene is commonly portrayed with long red hair, as in this picture by Anthony Frederick Augustus Sandys

It is not a picture by Anthony Frederick Augustus Sandys but a painting. 67.135.148.2 (talk) 19:37, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for the request. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 20:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Gallery

I've taken out the gallery from the history section. The main problem with it is that it doesn't illustrate the subject in a useful way. The thumbnails are too small, (only a couple can actually be identified as showing red hair) but if they were any larger they'd dominate the article. It's possible one or two of them could be integrated into the prose. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 14:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

May I recomend an addition be made into this section, It has become common usage in the states of Vic and NSW, to refer to an individual person with red hair as a "ranga", it is also recently common practice to refer to a stationary group (4 or more people) with red hair as a "Pod of ranga's" and a travelling group of people with red hair as a "flock of ranga's". I myself am witness to this. It is also reported in most other states these terms are used also.

Red hair in Australian slang.

In Australian common usage the term "blue" or "bluey" has declined significantly in the last century and could be considered archaic depending on region. In at least the state of Victoria the term "Ranga" (ræŋɑː) has superceded "bluey" or similar. "Ranga" is often considered a derogatory term however, unlike "bluey".

121.219.80.100 (talk) 12:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Should it be removed from the intro paragraph? It's hard to find references for the prevalence of particular slang terms, so this is pretty much an editorial decision. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 14:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I have no verifiable sources, but I can vouch that "Ranga" is used all over Australia, rather than Victoria. The term "Ranga" is just short for the red-haired ape, Orangutan. It is moreso a term of the younger generations, with "bluey" belonging to the older. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 02:16, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

If it's not documented in reliable sources, it probably shouldn't be in the article—see WP:NEO for the guidelines. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the slang terms from the lead, if there are no objections. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't remove it. It's correct, and verifiable. This should be enough: [2]. If not, [3], [4], [5] all refer to the current Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard as a ranga. Also, if your looking for a more humorous look, [6]. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 09:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

At least a few of those are blogs, which aren't generally considered "reliable sources" (see WP:BLOGS). In any case, even if the information can be verified, that doesn't necessarily mean it should be featured in the lead. It would probably be more appropriate to 5.3.2. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 17:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

The one labelled "3" is not a blog, it is published by the Australian Broadcasting Cooperation. And "6" is from the Brisbane Times website, a news article. I never said it had to be in the lead. Remove it by all means, so long as you place it somewhere else. However, should you remove it, I suggest also removing the other terms, such as bluey and ginger. Having said that, the words "ranga" and "ginger" are such core words used to describe people with red hair in today's culture, so I don't see why it shouldn't be in the lead. In my opinion, they are very commonly used "nicknames" if you will, and should be treated as such (e.g. Saxophonist, Julian Adderley- I can say without a doubt and without looking at the article, that his nickname, "Cannonball" would be in the lead). That's probably not the best example, but do whatever you want. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 01:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, [3] is a blog. The ABC can host blogs too. Just look at the url, the multiple contributors, and the language. Classic blog content. But I agree that Ranga has become common, particularly among under 30s, in my part of Australia (southern Victoria). It has to emphasised though that, unlike the the other slang terms for red hair, it's very often intended as derogatory. (Which is sad for orang utans. It's probably an insult to them at times.) I also have a 40 something year old friend commonly known as Blue to his friends of all ages, so don't write it off yet.

Yeah, for sure, [3] has a blog-ish content, but the point is that it is published by the Australian Broadcasting Cooperation. According to WP:BLOGS, it's not important whether it's a blog or not. Just if it's self-published, which this isn't, so it's reliable. I think "Ranga", like "Ginger" can be derogatory, but only if you so choose. For example, not all African Americans are offended when their friends call them "nigger", but yeah, they both certainly can be offensive. So in summary, I think "Ranga" is a verifiable nickname for those with Red hair, certainly used more commonly by the younger generation of Australians, can be used in a derogatory manner, but is only as offensive as "Ginger". For the record, 40 is pretty old for me. I do have a very young ranga friend who is called bluey, but only by someone who is 50 something. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 07:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the "bluey" and "blue" terms from the lead and moved the one you added. It still needs a reference, though. Feel free to add the other terms back as well, although they're probably not noteworthy enough for the lead. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 18:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I still believe it should be in the introduction. Why do you need to move it? And, I provided a blog (published by a company), a news article, and a genius piece of comedy. What more do you want? --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 23:58, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

There are several reasons it doesn't belong in the lead— "redhead" is by far the most common term, is not slang, and has significantly different connotations from "bluey", "blue", or related terms. A simple list in the introduction implies semantic equivalence, without providing any cultural context. It is thus likely to be misleading to someone who does not already know the term. Consider also what is most useful to the reader: someone looking up bluey will find the definition in the disambiguation page. I'm not saying that country-specific slang can't be included in the article if it's properly sourced; it just doesn't belong in the lead. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 00:48, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Feezo. I have similarly removed the confusing and unexplained reference to "titian hair" in the lead. It's not a commonly used term, and having it right at the start of the lead was a needless digression. I've also reorganised the lead a little. I think it's more important that we explain the factual aspects of red hair first, before discussing POV flavoured detail like how many shades it comes in.--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 09:20, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

That's fine by me. I just wanted to know why you were so desperate to move it. --ProfessorKilroy (talk) 12:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Ginger as a separate article

I split Ginger (hair) into a separate article, to discuss the issue of discrimination against redheads, particularly in modern Britain. Then I got reverted.

In my opinion, Ginger is a separate subtopic of red hair. The term is generally only used in places where redheads are viewed negatively. Also, a person who types in Ginger and goes to the disambig page is sent to this page, which is a lot broader of a topic than people are looking for. Thoughts? D O N D E groovily Talk to me 16:09, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. My thoughts are;

• What sources do you have to support that "The term is generally only used in places where redheads are viewed negatively"? That sounds like a subjective assessment and not, in my experience, true. Indeed, I don't believe it's even possible to define "places" where redheads are viewed negatively, as any discrimination isn't bound by geography.
• You cannot assume that those looking up "Ginger hair" wish to read about discrimination rather than red hair. The opposite is more likely.
• If you wish to create an article about Discrimination against redheads in Britain you be better naming it exactly that. I'm not convinced that there is a need for such a separate article, but happy to hear your reasoning.

--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, discrimination is routinely regional. I'm an American, and was actually surprised to hear that redheads face discrimination in Britain, as I've never heard of this in America. Stereotypes, sure, discrimination, no. I also had never heard redheads called "Ginger" until I read the Harry Potter books, so I do think the term is much more common in Britain than elsewhere. So, an article about discrimination in Britain might be justified, under the title you suggest. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 18:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Most vandalism on this article references a satirical episode of an American TV show (which only goes to show that satire goes over many people's head). Ginger is a perfectly usual term for redheads in the UK. It's only discriminatory if you choose it to be. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request - Fashion and Art

Christina Hendricks is not a natural redhead according to her wikipedia bio.... should be deletedTreadshred (talk) 13:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

The section needs work, but it currently says "...can boost sales of red hair dye", so I'm not sure it would help to make this particular change. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 19:11, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request - History

The mummy of Ramesses II, in ancient egypt, is probably one of the earliest records of people having red hair. The roots of the hair folicles where analysed and found that this pharaoh once had red hair.

Further information can be found on the Ramesses II page in the mummies section. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramesses_II#Mummy

"Microscopic inspection of the roots of Ramesses II's hair proved that the original color of the king's hair was once red which suggests that he came from a family of redheads.[63] This has more than just cosmetic significance; in ancient Egypt, people with red hair were associated with the god Seth, the slayer of Osiris, and the name of Ramesses II's father, Seti I, means "follower of Seth."[64] After Ramesses's mummy returned to Egypt, it was visited by then-President Anwar Sadat and his wife."

Marsoups (talk) 14:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Additions to the Australian slang section

May I recomend an addition be made into this section, It has become common usage in the states of Vic and NSW, to refer to an individual person with red hair as a "ranga", it is also recently common practice to refer to a stationary group (4 or more people) with red hair as a "Pod of ranga's" and a travelling group of people with red hair as a "flock of ranga's". I myself am witness to this. It is also reported in most other states these terms are used also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.208.107 (talk) 01:39, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

As a teacher in a Victorian high school, I'm certainly familiar with use of the term ranga as you describe, but I haven't come across those collective nouns. But really, you need a reliable source describing what you claim before we can add anything. HiLo48 (talk) 03:00, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Of course, the additions I am suggesting, are simply reports of popular colloquialism, formal references on such things are not commonplace as I'm sure you are aware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.208.107 (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and that can be a frustrating restriction with editing Wikipedia. While your observations may well be right, we cannot include original research. HiLo48 (talk) 07:19, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

please mention Ginger Pride Day, etc

Please mention- Ginger Pride Day, Gingerism [religion], ginger appreciation, etc 99.112.69.157 (talk) 06:10, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

If you want to add a write-up about "Ginger Pride Day", feel free to do so. Make sure you add reliable references and put the addition in the right section using correct wiki mark-up. The word "Gingerism" is used 5 times in this section. If you know of any notable religious connections to Red hair/Ginger hair, again feel free to add them to the article. It is recommended that you create an account if you are going to do work here but you are not obliged. If you do create an account you can set up alternative ways for people to contact you (e.g. by email). It is NOT appropriate to publish your email address on talk pages. -- fg^TC 08:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Electrical Pain Tolerance

Somebody is apparently a reddist, because the article is attempting to undermine the claim that redheads are less sensitive to electrical pain. When I saw, "vague" and "citation needed", I simply put in the keywords, and clicked on the first link to his article: http://wellness.blogs.time.com/2009/08/12/do-redheads-really-feel-more-pain-the-jurys-still-out/ But, how come I cannot edit the page? Can someone with an account correct this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.47.149 (talk) 07:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Here is another article backing that up, and suggesting red haired people might actually have higher than average pain tolerance, electrical being specifically mentioned: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/magazine/11ideas_section3-22.html - The study seems to be reering to pain in general, with electrical stimuli as merely the way the pain response was generated. Aindriahhn (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I saw that, so I fixed the citations. 06:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Everyone, if you are looking to edit the pain tolerance section, do not use the phrase "pain sensitivity" because it suggests that redheads are more sensitive to pain. Only one study was conducted which showed that red headed women needed more anesthetic to withstand heat-induced pain, and this was only regarding women using an anesthetic, while, as it says in the article, less is needed for an analgesic; regardless, this does not conclude that they actually experience a lower pain tolerance, just that the anesthetic was ineffective. Multiple studies have been done on red-haired humans and mice, using shock and trauma, which shows that the mutation actually increases pain tolerance, as they do not withdraw as quickly. It was suggested that the gene actually keeps from inhibiting the interactions of endorphins and opiates in the brain which help cope with pain.

The person above me forgot to sign their post. I will try to look into this over the weekend. I think there is a study or two on the subject, but how accurate are these studies? I have never heard of this phenomenon before reading about it here. CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 02:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The term Ginger, not usually offensive.

Possibly a mention that calling someone ginger isn't usually an insult, just a word to describe a certain type of redhair....just the existence of blond jokes doesn't mean blond is an insult. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.194.46 (talk) 22:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Thats like saying "nigger" is a proper way to say "black person"... Jcmcc450 (talk) 22:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

That is an unfair anology, and you certainally could make your point without typing that word.--75.4.202.97 (talk) 03:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

yet people can easily type "ginger" and no one minds... Its only "unfair" due to the minority/majority thing. Jcmcc450 (talk) 02:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

It really depends on the tone. If you said "oi ginga" or " he has ginger hair". Only one would be offensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.170.141.247 (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, I didn't know redheads were called gingers. Is this term used in the USA or in other areas? About it being offensive, the analogy was unfair. Redheads were not made into slaves and called gingers while they were being hunted down. And even if it were to be offensive, it should still be documented as an offensive term for redhead. Wikipedia isn't censored which means we don't hide information/facts because they are ugly. -- Joel M. Chat ✐ 16:28, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hunted down? Guess you didn't read up on this article about redheads being considered a "Witch", "Vampire" or "Satan Spawn". Which was something that was usually dealt with through fire. Lots of fire. I never said saying the term "ginger" was not to be on wiki, just that it shouldn't be used loosely. If you wiki "african american" you wont find the word "nigger" thrown around colloquially. Jcmcc450 (talk) 07:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I watched the film Sherlock Holmes (2009)[7] last night and noticed that the term ginger was used for a redhead male throughout the movie. -- Joel M.Chat ✐ 15:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I watched the film "Blazing Saddles". Need continue? Jcmcc450 (talk) 07:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Having not seen that movie, I have no idea what you're talking about, but I imagine it was an example of offensive use of the term. In my experience in Australia, Ginger is most often a term used by adults in positions of responsibility for kids (teachers, sports coaches) to address that kid with red hair whose name they don't know. It's not overtly offensive, but because it's always from an adult to a kid, it could be seen as a form of diminutive, and power, in that the adult is choosing the name and not giving the kid a choice. HiLo48 (talk) 00:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Ginger is not an inherently offensive term. It is not a swearword or anything like that. I've only ever read of it being used in a derogatory way. I've never actually experienced it. If you want to claim it's an inherently offensive term, you need to be able to cite it. Claiming that it has the same historic baggage as the N-word is just offensive.Redtizzy (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The term Ginger is very usually offensive. Has this article been entirely written by brown,blonde,and black haired people? Has anyone actually asked a redheaded person their thoughts or feelings toward the subject of "gingers?." Obviously not, because any true redheaded person (I refuse to use the word "ginger")who HAS a soul, mind you, would say that the word is crast,offensive,and/or annoying and furthermore should be eradicated from our society's vocabulary.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.135.227 (talk)

I'm ginger and do not consider this article to have any obvious neutrality issues. The fact that "ginger" is a term used to describe red-heads (I personally dislike that term) must be mentioned in the article and it is. fg^t_c 00:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

It's almost a certainty that across the diverse usages of the English language all around the world there will be places where the term is derogatory, and places where it's not, plus a whole lot of gradations in between. HiLo48 (talk) 08:11, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I have been called a ginger several times, most of them by my friends. They say it in a jokeingly way, one even calling me "gingerale". They don't care that I'm a ginger, we enjoy joking about it. But, I have been called a ginger in offensive ways. When playing soccer, a kid called me a dirty ginger. Before I knew it, I went on a rampage and slide tackled the kid. It was as if it were a reaction, an example of my short temper. People who call me a ginger in an offensive way are always at the top of my hatelist. So, basically,if someone jokingly calls you a ginger, just laugh with them, I personaly enjoy it. But, let people know not to mess with us if they hate us (gingers). They should know we have high pain tolerance and have a short temper. After they know we're not going to let them call us offensive names, they won't do it again. Hopefully, they will have learned we can take "ginger" by our friends and laugh at it, but we will not tolerate deliberatly insulting a red head by calling us gingers. They may not know it, but that is why many gingers go on rampages. Now, we're not like the "gingers have souls dude", so don't go around thinking that. Gingers are lovable, friendly people, but I warn you, insult them, and they can't control their temper. Insulting a ginger can be like lighting dinomite, you better watch out! Anyway, hope this was helpful. (Ryan) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.100.55 (talk) 04:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Question of disappearing redheads

The page dismisses the scenario of redheads vanishing from the human population as a myth, pointing out that the gene is not going to vanish. But since the gene is recessive, and since people of Scottish, Irish, or other redhead-rich populations increasingly marry outside their region of origin, the number of people with *two* copies of the gene -- i.e. redheads -- may in fact become vanishingly small. Shouldn't the page make this clear? 71.174.193.81 (talk) 16:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

What you are describing is an increasing dilution of the gene. The chance of any two individuals both having the gene may be reduced amongst a wider population, but a greater number will carry the gene. Actual numbers may decrease, but the potential will always be there. The article could describe this, but a cite would be needed. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

well, according to the same logic, albinos should have become completely extinct, since that gene is both recessive and naturally selected against, and is also much older tham the red hair gene. But since there are still some albinos around, that should pretty much answer your question- yep, gingers aren't going to dissapear so soon...

Wrong. The concept of extinction shouldn't extend so far such that sexual reproduction should be inhibited to prevent it. Killing off all the white tigers is a case of extinction, allowing the white ones to breed with the orange ones is not a case of extinction. Gene exchange is always a case of transaction, with the affected genes deriving from the old. There is always some part the old plays. Genes are always mutating, and what could appear recessive now might be dominant in the future. Indeed what could be recessive now, may be creep up as long as it is present, or re-mutate even though it was thought gone.Neveos (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Personaly, in my opinion, while redheads may be rare, I don't think they will disappear from Earth. I am a redhead in America. I know that you have to have red hair on both sides of the family. My mom has red hair, but my dad doesn't. I got my red hair from both genes. It turns out, his grandfather or some old relative was a red head. My point is, more people have red head genes then you think. Many don't even know it, as it usually skips a few generations. (Just call me Ryan). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.100.55 (talk) 03:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC) The total number of people with red hair and the red hair gene are forecasted to decrease substantially because of three primary reasons: 1) the countries with white people and red hair are not reproducing enough offspring for replacement levels. The replacment level in these countries is 2.2 but since the introduction of birth control their fertility rates are about 1.6 children. 2) A large portion of white people with red hair are baby boomers. Although they are living longer they will not live much longer, hench a decrease of the redhead population. 3) Has been noted above. The interbreeding of redheads with people who dont carry the gene, means that the combination of white skin and red hair will never be expressed again. This dillution is because of massive immigration to countries where white redheads live and the consequent interbreeding. Sources for point #1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#Europe, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate, Point #3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Hispanic_Whites

Do you have any sources for any of the above? This talk page is not a place to voice your own theories/research. And Wikipedia articles cannot use other Wikipedia articles as sources. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:39, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Well i already submitted Discovery magazines gene expression, not sure why that is not good enough. here are more from reputable sources: http://www.economist.com/node/18488452 http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/11/us-birth-rates http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2008/feb/27/white-europeans-an-endangered-species/ http://pewsocialtrends.org/files/2010/10/755-marrying-out.pdf http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2009/ois_yb_2009.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.91.228.93 (talk) 18:33, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Where do these mention red hair? Simply taking other research, combining it and then deciding it applies to red hair is original synthesis. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:59, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I dont think you understand the debate. Geneticists are not demographers. the assume a constant demographic population. A) the gene will not go extinct is correct. the gene can be transmitted to africans and asians without the gene being expressed. B) In demography as the white population decreases so will the total number of white redheads, although their percentages will remain about the same. Should'nt this page make that clear? when people think of redheads most people assume a white person (as your photos on the page proves). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.151.231.194 (talk) 18:58, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

1%-2% have red hair

Makes no sense. Since only red hair occurs in a small percent of the north-west european population and the diaspora of them. Some mod need to remove this nonsense. Maybe 100 years ago this may have been true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.89.237 (talk) 18:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

These figures are cited. Have you anything to back up your statement? --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 23:08, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you read the article? Red hair may be most common among northwestern Europeans and their descendants, but it isn't limited to them. Red hair is found in many populations, including Ashkenazi Jews, Italians, Berbers of North Africa, Udmorts of Russia, and even Melanesians. The ancient Chinese described red-haired Tocharians living in Central Asia and western China, while Roman records noted red hair as being common among the Germanic tribes to their north. --98.114.176.218 (talk) 07:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

well, acourding to the same logic, there shouldn't be any albinos left in our world today, since that gene is both recessive and harmful (naturally selected against) and much older than the red hair gene (exists amoung all ethnic groups). But since albinos still exist, that pretty much answers your question- yep, gingers aren't going to dissapear so soon...

Natural selection is very much a watered down process in modern humans. Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit (talk) 16:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

1-2 %? That's about 70 million to 140 million people in the world having red hair. When you look at it, it seems to be right, we may say that there are more redheads than all Indigenous Americans, excluding Mestizos. --75.159.2.59 (talk) 04:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Blood Nuts - please add

There is a section towards the end which states that "ranga" (from Orangatan) is a common term for a red head. This is true, and indeed our Prime Minister is happy to be referred to as such. We also use the term "blood nut" in the same way. I tried to add it, but this article is locked, so could someone with the ability to make additions add "blood nut" to the "ranga" section? Cheers! 123.3.84.53 (talk) 04:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 December 2011

Please change

...with terms such as "gingerphobia" (hatred towards redheads)...

to

...with terms such as "gingerphobia" (a fear of redheads)

Note: phobia implies a fear. Gingerism would include a hatred towards redheads, as that is what a prejudice is, a hatred for a specific group of people. Gingerphobia is a word used in modern popculture and therefor I believe it is appropriate to cite an otherwise unreliable, non empirical source: the famous urban dictionary.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gingerphobia

76.217.191.200 (talk) 00:22, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think urban dictionary is ever an appropriate cite. It is user-generated and not a reliable source. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 00:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

japanese have no red hair

its impossible, the reference was no data or link just some book from 1967 where some one writes something what heard maybe, seriously what kindergarten wiki is kids want to add anything--Kloos952 (talk) 08:41, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Seriously... You claim it has no citation, but point out it for a fact had a citation. You think 1960's published hearsay is too old and unproven to count, yet the very study you are just pretending to be practiced in typically relies upon unproven, published hearsay... From ancient Rome. It's no wonder it's rich in misinformation and lacking in facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.98.8.202 (talk) 08:16, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

And, yes, Japan has hair color diversity ranging from red to black, they do not actually all have black hair naturally. They also don't all have straight hair naturally. The "permanent" hair straightening many curly-hair Americans love so much... It came from Japan, and was used on Japanese people, not their foriegn minority. Look up on geishas. You'll find it stated that geishas often had to dye their hair black and straighten it... Because their purely Japanese DNAed hair wasn't naturally black, or straight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.98.8.202 (talk) 08:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 February 2012

Please remove references to "also know as Ginger hair" . Remove the comment "("ginger" is not often considered insulting). It is very insensitive and a racial slur. Thank you. Larry78cj7 (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 05:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the issue of whether the term "ginger" is insulting in the UK... It would seem to me that a citation should be required to support this statement in order to retain it in the article. Does it make sense to require a source to remove an unsupported subjective statement like this? Adding citation tag, will leave it for others to decide whether it should be retained or not. --Dfred (talk) 06:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem. A claim either way should be cited. HiLo48 (talk) 06:53, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Sexual selection

Does the article in question (Rees JL (November 2004). "The genetics of sun sensitivity in humans". Am. J. Hum. Genet. 75 (5): 739–51) really say anything about sexual selection? I admin I haven't read it thoroughly several times, as I'd need to do to be certain. The word "sexual" does not exist in the article, though. Searcing for "select" in the article text gives me this. "Several systematic or case-based studies of MC1R diversity have been published. In African populations, low genetic diversity at MC1R suggests it is under functional constraint, whereas diversity is increased in European populations and, to a lesser degree, in Asian populations (Rana et al. 1999; Harding et al. 2000; Makova et al. 2001). Two interpretations of these findings have been considered. One is that there is selection for functionally significant variants in non-African populations (Rana et al. 1999; Makova et al. 2001)." Possibly the "sexual selectio" stuff is in the Rana or the Makova article. The citation still looks weird. --Siden (talk) 21:52, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Even the guy who put the ref there couldn't find it in the source! [8]! Removed. --Siden (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Prophet Muhammad

Citation #85 for the sentence "Red is the preferred dyeing color in Islam. It is said that Muhammad used to dye his hair red." links to an article which says

"Abu Bakr, the father of Aisha, and thus, the father-in-law of Muhammad, was the first Caliph of Islam (AD 632-634). He was slenderly built, and white-skinned; also, he dyed his grey beard red, in an attempt to gain a more youthful appearance. [Günther (1930) 163.]"

http://www.articlesafari.com/2010/10/red-hair-arabs/

It says nothing about Muhammad himself dyeing his hair red. This sentence should be modified.--SlapChopVincent (talk) 17:30, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Noted. I've changed it. What the cite says is that some Muslims dye their hair red, because it is reported (so some element of doubt) that Muhammad had red hair. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:40, 11 February 2012 (UTC)ve

I (another reader than that wrote the above ) also disagree with stating that Prophet Muhammad (PHB) had red hair as far I know there is no proof and it was never mentioned these are only claims with no bases

Ginger IS offensive

I find the term ginger offensive especially here in the UK as it has very rarely been used without a sniggering undertone or as anything other than a pre cursor to another insult.

Please cite your claim. Your personal experience is not universal. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

In such a subject, no citation is possible/needed. Ginger (referring to a redhead) does not show up in the dictionary due to being an informal, slang word. Due to not having an exact definition, there is no "universally" accepted term for ginger. Some will find it offensive (such as the person above, and most redheads you will meet), but some will consider it a standard term. As to being offensive or not, due to being an informal word, it is entirely in the air as to if it is offensive or not. It cannot be proven nor disproven. In such an instance it is best to take a "neutral" stance on it. Do not purposefully place it to offend people, nor use it like a standard word (Once again, it does not have an exact definition in the standard English dictionary. Ginger is considered "informal".) But this also does not mean that "ginger" cannot be explained. If you, Escape_Orbit, or anyone else feels like writing a paragraph on the word "Ginger" and its informal, ambitiousness be my guest. Jcmcc450 (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you think it's "impossible" to supply a citation for slang (Wikipedia has many articles about slang terms), or that slang terms do not "show up" in dictionaries. I don't know what your "standard English dictionary" is, but Collins defines "ginger" as "a reddish-brown or yellowish-brown colour", and mentions the word's use as informal term for "a person with ginger hair".

There may be some cross-purpose confusion here between describing someone as having "ginger hair" (which I'd say was a neutral description, and not even slang) and describing the person as "a ginger" (which is slang, and definitely offensive). I'd back up earlier observations that "ginger hair" is very commonly used as a simple descriptor in the UK, probably moreso than "red hair", with no slang or pejorative connotations to it. --McGeddon (talk) 11:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

After a bit of digging around, I found this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Red_hair/Archive_4#Red_hair_in_Australian_slang.

It seems this has already been discussed and debated ending with it being decided not to use slang terms in the opening sentance.76.166.246.73 (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)76.166.246.73

It was argued that, being slang, "bluey" does not have "semantic equivalence" and shouldn't be presented as such. The term "ginger hair" appears to be a formal synonym rather than slang, in the United Kingdom - a Google News search for the term turns up plenty of results from UK broadsheets, the BBC and police descriptions. --McGeddon (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with McGeddon. "Ginger" is far beyond mere slang. It is not the same vein as "bluey". It is a word which is used formally in the UK all the time. Rememeber, Wikipedia is not censored, we aren't here to cater for people whose feelings are hurt by the description. I think it should be re-included into the opening sentence. SaintDaveUK (talk) 03:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Source? HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I have restored this long-standing content until there is consensus to remove it. "Ginger" is a term for someone with red hair with a long history. Oxford dictionary. It is unfortunate that it may be used in a negative and insulting manner, but that doesn't negate the word's frequency. And we cannot simply ignore the fact that Ginger hair redirects here. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

On second thoughts.. it would appear that this is not as long standing as I'd thought. So I've reverted it for now. My points above still stand. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Caucasian? Please

Thus it is viewed as racist and derogatory by some Caucasians.

I'm white European, and I find the term "Caucasian" insulting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.77.148.225 (talk) 02:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Why? Anyway, your opinion is irrelevant. Reliable sources are what count here. HiLo48 (talk) 04:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Ginger IS offensive

I find the term ginger offensive especially here in the UK as it has very rarely been used without a sniggering undertone or as anything other than a pre cursor to another insult.

Please cite your claim. Your personal experience is not universal. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

In such a subject, no citation is possible/needed. Ginger (referring to a redhead) does not show up in the dictionary due to being an informal, slang word. Due to not having an exact definition, there is no "universally" accepted term for ginger. Some will find it offensive (such as the person above, and most redheads you will meet), but some will consider it a standard term. As to being offensive or not, due to being an informal word, it is entirely in the air as to if it is offensive or not. It cannot be proven nor disproven. In such an instance it is best to take a "neutral" stance on it. Do not purposefully place it to offend people, nor use it like a standard word (Once again, it does not have an exact definition in the standard English dictionary. Ginger is considered "informal".) But this also does not mean that "ginger" cannot be explained. If you, Escape_Orbit, or anyone else feels like writing a paragraph on the word "Ginger" and its informal, ambitiousness be my guest. Jcmcc450 (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you think it's "impossible" to supply a citation for slang (Wikipedia has many articles about slang terms), or that slang terms do not "show up" in dictionaries. I don't know what your "standard English dictionary" is, but Collins defines "ginger" as "a reddish-brown or yellowish-brown colour", and mentions the word's use as informal term for "a person with ginger hair".

There may be some cross-purpose confusion here between describing someone as having "ginger hair" (which I'd say was a neutral description, and not even slang) and describing the person as "a ginger" (which is slang, and definitely offensive). I'd back up earlier observations that "ginger hair" is very commonly used as a simple descriptor in the UK, probably moreso than "red hair", with no slang or pejorative connotations to it. --McGeddon (talk) 11:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

After a bit of digging around, I found this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Red_hair/Archive_4#Red_hair_in_Australian_slang.

It seems this has already been discussed and debated ending with it being decided not to use slang terms in the opening sentance.76.166.246.73 (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)76.166.246.73

It was argued that, being slang, "bluey" does not have "semantic equivalence" and shouldn't be presented as such. The term "ginger hair" appears to be a formal synonym rather than slang, in the United Kingdom - a Google News search for the term turns up plenty of results from UK broadsheets, the BBC and police descriptions. --McGeddon (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with McGeddon. "Ginger" is far beyond mere slang. It is not the same vein as "bluey". It is a word which is used formally in the UK all the time. Rememeber, Wikipedia is not censored, we aren't here to cater for people whose feelings are hurt by the description. I think it should be re-included into the opening sentence. SaintDaveUK (talk) 03:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Source? HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I have restored this long-standing content until there is consensus to remove it. "Ginger" is a term for someone with red hair with a long history. Oxford dictionary. It is unfortunate that it may be used in a negative and insulting manner, but that doesn't negate the word's frequency. And we cannot simply ignore the fact that Ginger hair redirects here. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

On second thoughts.. it would appear that this is not as long standing as I'd thought. So I've reverted it for now. My points above still stand. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)