This article is within the scope of WikiProject Measurement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Measurement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This page says, "625-740 nm — wavelength of red light". However, if you follow the link from "red" that other page says, "Red light has a wavelength range of roughly 630-760nm." So, which is the more accurate wavelength range for the color red, "630-760 nm" or "625-740 nm"? -- 220.127.116.11 23:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Essentially these figures can only be an approximation, due to the fact that each eye is distinctive in its perception of colour and light. So I don't think it would be correct to state either of these ranges, unless they are stated as approximations only. Glooper 10:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I would like to point out a disparity between articles, similar to that stated above about the red wavelength. niggers However, I believe my concern over indigo is more justified than that of the concern about red.
My concern is that I don't believe that indigo is as important or as large a colour range as red or blue, I doubt it should be stated here. Additionally it is not stated in the table here and yet it is on this page. Obviously, if this is simply a matter of difference of opinion, that should be stated. Thankyou, Glooper 10:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that, too. But this page seems to explain it. And seems to also point that Indigo and Cyan are not major colors. LINK. Thanks, Marasama (talk) 02:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I was wondering who sets the standards for these things, because the colour blue (for example) is a pretty vague thing. Although I think that Georgia State University is a fairly authoritative source, it would be nice if there was an international standard on hand. Thanks for your help though, it is much appreciated. Glooper (talk) 11:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)