Talk:Green

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jzana (talk | contribs) at 15:03, 8 November 2023 (→‎CIELAB: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former good articleGreen was one of the Art and architecture good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 9, 2007Good article nomineeListed
February 8, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
June 14, 2019Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article
WikiProject iconColor B‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is supported by WikiProject Color, a project that provides a central approach to color-related subjects on Wikipedia. Help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards; visit the wikiproject page for more details.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Color choice

I'm curious about the choice of Lime (hex 00FF00) in the infobox rather than Green (hex 008000). I know there are a lot of greens, but I think the latter would better represent the color.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 17:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agreed with you. In Web colors, green is coded as #008000, but not #00FF00 (which is lime). Those inconsistency should be corrected. UU (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"008800" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 008800 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 15 § 008800 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. –MJLTalk 07:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EngVar

Why are we flipping from American (how this has been for years) to British English? MOS:RETAIN is pretty clear that we shouldn't be doing this. It notes that When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, maintain it in the absence of consensus to the contrary, and this variety has been consistent for a good number of years. I see no consensus to flip this to British English at this point, given that it's been consistently American English and has not caused problems. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:27, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RETAIN is also pretty clear that

An article should not be edited or renamed simply to switch from one variety of English to another.

...which is exactly the case here. I doubt we could ask the IP that changed it a while ago for the explanation, but it will surely not be bad to conform to policy and change it to the original variety. Summer talk 19:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been stable for a decade. The point of MOS:RETAIN is that when an article is stable in a particular usage, it's fine and should not be flipped. I see no MOS:TIES reason that Green is more associated with the United Kingdom than any other English-speaking country, and I don't think the fact that there was inconsistent usage of "color" vs "colour" prior to that point motivates us flipping the EngVar now. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:33, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The point of RETAIN is not to flip between varieties when we have the original variety, which indeed was British English. Why do we have to flip now when this could have not even been an issue by just reverting the initial violation? Or no one really cared, like in case with the notoriously long lasting violation that turned out to actually take the community consensus with it and remain? Summer talk 19:43, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The manual of style point only asks us to go back to the first non-stub version only when no English variety has been established, but we have an established variety here—American English. Regardless if people from the early 2000s used "color" or "colour" inconsistently, the Amercian English version has become well-established with time ({{Use American English}} has been there for about a decade, and use of EngVar in the article prior was somewhat inconsistent depending on who's writing it). You are free to open up an WP:RFC if you disagree with the fact that we use "color" for green, but I would encourage you not to as it would use a good bit of editor time for something that doesn't actually impact the value of the article to our readers (the point of that guidance from the MoS is to avoid people using time flipping varieties back-and-forth and engaging in extended discussions on this topic). — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2023

Railwaymania14 (talk) 17:55, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone add the file:BR Mark 1 BCK 21214 at Eridge.JPG to green please?

 Question: Where in the article do you think it should be added? Actualcpscm (talk) 18:19, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CIELAB

Please correct: L*=87.7; C*=119.8; hab= 136° ZJ (talk) 15:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]