Talk:Eye color: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Eye color/Archive 5) (bot |
Mikeymo1741 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
the article is messy, incomplete and contains obvious mistakes. anybody feeling like writing it again?. i'm new to this, it shouldn't be me, i don't know if that is even possible...? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.53.78.198|83.53.78.198]] ([[User talk:83.53.78.198|talk]]) 14:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
the article is messy, incomplete and contains obvious mistakes. anybody feeling like writing it again?. i'm new to this, it shouldn't be me, i don't know if that is even possible...? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.53.78.198|83.53.78.198]] ([[User talk:83.53.78.198|talk]]) 14:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== Pigments == |
|||
In once place in the article it says that there are three pigments, including blue, green and brown. In another place in the article, it says there are no blue or green pigments. This is obviously contradictory. |
|||
[[User:Mikeymo1741|Mikeymo1741]] ([[User talk:Mikeymo1741|talk]]) 22:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:31, 12 June 2016
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Eye color article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Hazel Eye Picture On The Right
The picture on the right hand side of the hazel eye section does not match the description of hazel eyes, as it is blue with central heterochromia (brown around the pupil). The hazel eye description says nothing about hazel eyes being blue in any way, so i trust this is a mistake that needs to be changed immediately, i propose one of the following pictures be shown in it's place as they match a golden light brown hazelnut colour:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hazel_eye_of_a_mixed-ethnicity_female.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Amber_Brown_Green.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:S7307583.jpg#.7B.7Bint:filedesc.7D.7D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HumanFemalewithAmberIris.jpg
http://toponthelist.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/amber_eye.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mocuishle_photography/2340845990/sizes/l/in/photostream
Poor Description
Hazel is not green and brown or a combination of colours, only idiots will say it is and argue that point, hazel is brown with tones of gold and red throughout, sometimes minimal amounts of green can be present but they can't be too obvious and green is never an actual requirement for the colour hazel as a hazelnut contains no green whatsoever. So why does your description say hazel is a combination of brown, green and gold and either colour could be dominant? i've never seen a hazelnut thats green in any way shape or form, and the line at the end which states; "hazel is sometimes considered synonymous with light brown or gold as in the colour of a hazelnut", what do you mean sometimes? it is always considered synonymous with light brown as that is what the colour hazel is, the only people who use it for eyes with combined colours are either ignorant or uneducated on the matter. why are you giving a ridiculous meaning of hazel eyes when you could look up any website with colour definitions which would state hazel is a light yellowish or reddish brown as in the colour of the nut, who writes this stuff, like seriously?
This map is outrageously ridiculous
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Augenfarbe.svg
It's absolutely false that anywhere in north Africa or in middle east (perhaps with the exception of some areas in Israel) can be a % of light eyes higher than in Spain, Italy, Romania and Bulgaria.
Morocco 20/49 % light eyes? Lol, I've been in Morocco 4 times, I can say I never met a native with grey, blue or green eyes, and I think anyone who visited Morocco can agree with me, almost all the people have black or dark brown eyes as it happens among the other arabs, maghrebians, kabyles, riffians and anyone else lives in North Africa. Only very very very few people have hazel eyes, which are even not considered light eyes.
The eye color map of europe
The reason behind the change does not make any sense. Where does the "science-fiction study..." come from? Someones personal blog is not a very reliable source. Also, one of the reasonings behind the change says that on the previous map it included green eye color. Green eye color is considered as a light eye color! And the map clearly stated it shows frequency of light eyes around europe. And now to the best part, this "new" map, also shows frequency of light eyes, including green, so what is the problem? The "new" map is based on a study made around 1930s, im sure you can do better.
Also to all this estonians having 99% blue eyes talk. First of all, blue eyes is often a synonym for light eyes. This 99% hype is just an honest mistake made by the author of the article. The real number is 89% and the fact remains that 89% of estonians have light eyes, blue/green/grey. The number is about the same in Finland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alfredopatuliano (talk • contribs) 17:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
how about some heavy editing nearing re-writing the whole thing?
the article is messy, incomplete and contains obvious mistakes. anybody feeling like writing it again?. i'm new to this, it shouldn't be me, i don't know if that is even possible...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.53.78.198 (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Pigments
In once place in the article it says that there are three pigments, including blue, green and brown. In another place in the article, it says there are no blue or green pigments. This is obviously contradictory.