User talk:8-leaf clover

Welcome!

Hello, 8 leaf-clover, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 01:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Original research at Orange (colour)

Thank you for including an edit summary in your revert (diff) of the hex color value at Orange (colour). This is very helpful to other editors who collaborate on the article. In your edit summary for that edit you said:

80 is almost always taken as the midpoint between 00 and FF, because it's a round number, plus the fact that 80 + 80 = 100 (256 in decimal) (the total number of values that red, green, and blue pixels can take), while 7F+7F=FE (254 in decimal)

but this is something that we call "original research" at Wikipedia, which is invalid in any article at Wikipedia. Putting it in other words: no editor may use their own theories or their own logic for determining what goes into an article, no matter how logical it seems. We *must* follow what the reliable sources say.

The burden of proof to provide citations to reliable sources is on the editor adding or changing material in an article. When you changed the hex value, the burden was on you to provide citations, so you should have included some citation that supported your content; simply theorizing in the edit summary about it isn't sufficient. When I changed the hex value again just now, the burden was on me. So, I added a citation to the source that Wikipedia recommends (it's the standard W3C CSS3 Color Module recommended at Wikipedia:WikiProject Color/Sources for Color Coordinates, and linked from the {{Infobox colour}} template in the § Parameters section; see "source" in the table). The value for "orange" at W3C can be found in the W3C colour table here. Numerous other web resources also confirm this, such as Color Hexa or Encycolorpedia, and I added citations to those as well, but actually that's a bit of overkill, because just the citation to the recommended W3C Color Module is sufficient.

Thanks, and if you believe I've made a mistake, please raise a discussion at the article talk page, or contact me at my user talk page. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia leaves you a task

Could You Translate The Page Primary Colors in Psychology to Spanish Wikipedia a page translation will help you improve on Wikipedia 2806:103E:B:B385:C2A:96E7:F766:8B49 (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I started translating the article a few days ago, but I think that the article needs more sources to be published. The Spanish Wikipedia's administrators are really strict with that, and they may block my account if I do it. But I think that if I don't include the unsourced parts it will be just fine. 8-leaf clover (talk) 22:35, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hello.

Hey, could you help me improve the Article Primary Colors in Psychology You can check the external links and get more information and add it to the Article 2806:103E:B:55D0:7D77:3551:9153:BEF4 (talk) 06:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help me

If you really like color theory, could you help me to find more information in Primary Colors in Psychology, either by searching Google for information on Primary Colors in Psychology or if you can't find almost any information, replace the name and search for Psychological Primary Colors and you can also consult more information in the external links of Primary Colors in Psychology Galansi (talk) 17:33, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Original research at Shades of violet

You were previously advised about the importance of citing sources and not engaging in original research on color articles. This is a reminder and a warning not to engage in speculative writing in Wikipedia articles, and to ensure that everything you add to articles is WP:Verifiable. Further edits of this type may be viewed as WP:DISRUPTIVE. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Munsell hues

Hi 8-leaf clover, I reverted your Munsell hues diagram at Munsell color system. Not trying to step on your toes here, but I think your diagram gives a false impression of Munsell's goal. Munsell's purpose with his numerical color ordering was to get away from a concept of specific color names, "secondary" hues, etc., which he thought were unscientific/pseudoscientific. The specific hues chosen as 5Y, 5R, 5G, 5B, 5P are not intended to be special or unique, or what a human would pick out as "the" red, yellow, green blue, or purple. They are instead supposed to be perceptually equally spaced, and the particular point chosen to be e.g. 5R is substantially arbitrary. This is entirely different than the Swedish Natural Color System which is based on a concept of unique hues and does not aim for perceptually uniform spacing. Even the previous diagram has a chance of giving a somewhat false impression insofar as it compares these hues at widely varying value/chroma, which already somewhat diverges from Munsell's purpose.

I think it is misleading (and more or less "original research") to imply that there's a special geometric relation between the particular numbered Munsell hues, the way your diagram does. The way Shades of blue etc. currently are phrased ("The color defined as blue in the Munsell color system (Munsell 5B) is shown at right") is in my opinion also misleading. In my opinion specific Munsell colors should never be presented without a full specification of the form "Hue Value/Chroma". But those "shades of X color" articles are in general a trainwreck that I have avoided wading into. –jacobolus (t) 14:41, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Color solid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Violet. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]