Jump to content

Talk:Red hair: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 75: Line 75:
[[Special:Contributions/78.40.176.181|78.40.176.181]] ([[User talk:78.40.176.181|talk]]) 14:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/78.40.176.181|78.40.176.181]] ([[User talk:78.40.176.181|talk]]) 14:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


:{{note done}} The only sentence where "Israel" occurs also mentions "Palestine", so there is no need for any changes. Israel is a country recognized by the United Nations, and is geographically part of the Levant, just as the sentence says. [[User:Arthur goes shopping|Arthur goes shopping]] ([[User talk:Arthur goes shopping|talk]]) 14:25, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
:{{not done}} The only sentence where "Israel" occurs also mentions "Palestine", so there is no need for any changes. Israel is a country recognized by the United Nations, and is geographically part of the Levant, just as the sentence says. [[User:Arthur goes shopping|Arthur goes shopping]] ([[User talk:Arthur goes shopping|talk]]) 14:25, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:30, 29 October 2015

WikiProject iconFashion C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion 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.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Genetics

Neanderthal genes.

It now seems to be a fact that Europeans have about 3-5 per cent Neanderthal genes. What is most interesting is that it has been found out that Neanderthals had the gene for red hair. In fact European red hair and blond hair may be a Neanderthal trait. Look at this clip. The red hair gene comes in about minute 40: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uRCVyJ7-0c Pipo.

Major factual error by direct quotation

Redheads constitute 1-2% of the USA population prior to the 1960's immigration reform. As people of European descent officially constitute no more then 13% of the world population such a high number would have resulted in every 7th European descended person being a redhead, something that we do not observe. -Dany

March 10:55 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.247.192.141 (talk)

South park introducing the term "ginger" to the US

I reverted your edit @SStephens13: because of multiple reasons. @Liz: had some good points, but I also would say that the uncited claim that South Park was what introduced the term "Ginger" is an outrageous claim at best. It *might* have increased awareness of the term, or increased its usage, but that will still require sourcing. Jcmcc (Talk) 14:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate Image

(this image may be deleted)

Take a close look to the left picture. How is this considered red hair? This is obviously dark blonde hair. And for the most part the same is the beard of the man, only the sideburns could be hardly considered red, but they do not look convincingly red to say so, the sideburns rather look darker brown, while the rest of the hair and beard lighter brown/golden brown. The sideburns of Caucasoids are usually darker than the rest of the hair and beard, so even the sideburns of the man are just a darker shade of brown.

  golden brown

This is the color that mostly resembles the left man, that his hair appears red from distance is an optical illusion but if you look close there are only traces to blondism to be found. Compare the left and the right pictureEvropariver (talk) 13:19, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Obviously" blond? Says who? It looks obviously red to me. (I have red-haired people in my immediate family, and have grown up in a place with many varieties of red, blond, brown, and black hair, not all of the same shade.) That you refer to "Caucasoids" in this context suggests you need to review some current reliable sources on human genetics. The photograph is fine for this article. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 14:35, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion of semantics and colour tones are not relevant. The man on the right is a redhead, in a good photograph and representation of red hair. The man on the left is also a redhead, of a different shade, but in an inferior quality photograph . It is therefore not an improvement to the article, and your interest in featuring it might be considered to be a conflict of interest, on account of it being you. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Escape_Orbit, I think you got "right" and "left" mixed up in your "14:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)" post, but it's easy to see what you mean. Flyer22 (talk) 03:14, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So I did. Sorry if I confused anyone. I must have been looking through a mirror, or something. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 13:51, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The left doesn't look like red hair to me,(probably beard partially) what I see is blond/brown hair, That's why I changed it, otherwise I would not use an image of myself, to use my hair to correct the inappropriate image was the first thought that came to my mind. The image of the man should be replaced by any suitable image because the shade is at least controversial, preferably with more intense shade if it will be in the lead. Maybe the man on the left is red-haired but the camera did not capture his shade red, this often happens to my photos.Evropariver (talk) 15:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, the one on the right seems wrong somehow, is that definitely genuine? The one on the left looks reddish to me. An interesting question - I'm a red-head, of that there is no doubt, but with age my hair color is now very blonde. Should we have a photo showing how the color changes with age? Doug Weller (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I actually think the image on the right is of inferior quality. Out of focus and poorly lit. --NeilN talk to me 17:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let's compare with celebrities, for example the Irish wrestling superstar Sheamus.

His hair is

. I notice a contrast between him and the man in the article with the

color.Evropariver (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There may be better photos out there. The photo of you isn't one of them. And I think it's unseemly on your part to continue this effort to push it into the article. --NeilN talk to me 19:24, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are better images of course, the more important thing is that the current image may be not a redhead and actually out of place in this article. Find a better image than mine, it is with what I show the contrast between golden brown and red hair color, I don't insist that it should necessarily be pushed in the article. The hair of the man on left still looks like golden brown to me. That's a basic assumption of mine, I am not an expert on colors. I had expected that everybody was going to agree that the hair of this man is obviously blonde/brown, but it did not happen actually. I hope more people will take part in the discussion, especially experts on colors should take part. Somebody who understands well the colors should better define these hair colors. --Evropariver (talk) 23:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean by "someone who understands well the colors". Do you mean "someone who agrees with you"? I would say that most humans are very apt at identifying colors unless they are colorblind. I am certainly not colorblind, and to me, that is definitely red hair. Also realize that replacing stock photos that are of professional quality with blurry webcam pictures of yourself is edging on COI. I know lots of people that would like to be the cover boy for redheads. You do have a lovely shade of hair though. Very, very red. If you had a professional picture of high resolution and high quality and it was clearly a superior picture, I doubt there would be nearly the amount of objections. But as it stands, that picture of you is of low quality and it seems the general consensus is that the man on the left has red hair. Jcmcc (Talk) 23:29, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'd object. Wikipedia is not the place for vanity publishing and the current photo is perfectly good. We don't want the article turned into "redhead of the month". Interestingly, if you do a google search on the current photo for similar images, what do you think you get? A large selection of red-headed actors. So google's image algorithms certainly have no difficulty seeing it as a red hair. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:30, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it's an illusion, but to me the pic on the right looks like it's illuminated with yellowish light, obfuscating the true hair colour. The lighting on the left pic looks far more natural. Also, I think the inclusion of beard and sideburn hair in the left pic makes it more informative.
File:Free Main Header photo of Saul Canelo Alvarez.jpg
I think what Evropariver's comments do indicate is that there's a range of hair colours that can be called considered "red". The boxer at the right is at one extreme. The article would benefit from a pic of a male with red at hair the brighter, redder extreme. Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 02:14, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how Evropariver is defining red hair, unless he is stating that the man he considers to have "obviously dark blonde hair" is a strawberry blond (see the Varieties section of the Blond article). But even then, it is still clear to me that the man on the left is a redhead. Furthermore, strawberry blond people are more often than not considered to be redheads. Other times, they are considered to have blond hair if the hair is more blond than red. Like Gabrielle from Xena: Warrior Princess used to say, "I'm more of a redhead, really." All of the images currently in the article are of redheads. And, Evropariver, I ask that you do not head to the Blond article and start editing disruptively there. Flyer22 (talk) 02:25, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And, yes, that fictional character stated that line about her hair often enough that my siblings and I have never been able to forget it. (I'm the eldest; I mean my older siblings, rather than my youngest ones.) Flyer22 (talk) 02:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Granted, her hair color did get lighter as the series progressed. Flyer22 (talk) 02:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing: Evropariver, you stated (your "08:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)" post at the Physical attractiveness talk page) that you have green eyes. Your eyes do not look green in the image above. If you want to attribute that to lighting or whatever else, they don't look green. Flyer22 (talk) 03:14, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2015

In this text, Israel is written, and considered as a country. However, it's called Palestine. I hope you would change Israel to Palestine Thank you 78.40.176.181 (talk) 14:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The only sentence where "Israel" occurs also mentions "Palestine", so there is no need for any changes. Israel is a country recognized by the United Nations, and is geographically part of the Levant, just as the sentence says. Arthur goes shopping (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]