Talk:Color picker

Relevance

Most web designers and other professionals don't usually have color codes memorized. Color tools are used fairly heavily and so I feel it justifies an article. I will expand this article as I have time, and if others want to contribute, please do! (Bjorn Tipling 04:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC))

I like the idea. But that long list of external sites isnt a good foundation for an article, and is likely to get ruthlessly edited. I suggest you change the format/name of the article to something like Comparison of file archivers or even just List of file archivers. (See Wikipedia:List guideline for more info, and Category:Comparisons for more examples to steal code/ideas from). --Quiddity 06:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, good idea. I'll work on it. Thanks for the suggestion. (Bjorn Tipling 06:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC))

Perfect :)

Now, possibly it should be moved to something like List of color tools, but i'm not sure. No rush though, and it would depend on how much you expect to expand the intro paragraph. --Quiddity 22:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I expanded the article a bit. (Bjorn Tipling 01:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC))

Ordering

Is there a method to how the list is currently ordered? If not, I'm hoping to think of a good alternative to basic alphabetical; something that places the obviously superior tools near the top of the list, without being blatantly POV. Suggestions welcome. -Quiddity 18:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, when I made the list I was just using Google search results for 'color tool' at first, and then I went through some other resources. I don't really know what criteria we could use to organize the list. (Bjorn Tipling 00:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC))

Removed list of color tools

It was just being abused. There are plenty of sites out there that list color tools. (Bjorn Tipling 20:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC))

Discussion before removing section

I have been using several of the color tools, and having written one of them. There needs to be discussion around BEST tools out there. My last revision was a ranking based on utilitarian and hedonic quality for an HTML web tool (My tool was #3 behind two easyrgb and v2 of another).

By just removing the tools section is worse than creating some equitable method to rank and judge them.

(Monte Shaffer 20:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC))

I suggest you start using the bookmark feature on your browser. (Bjorn Tipling 16:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC))

Wow, that was an intelligent response! (Monte Shaffer 20:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors try to be civil and assume good faith in others. I recommend you read more about Wikipedia before engaging in discussions. (Bjorn Tipling 16:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC))

This makes me want to puke. KenFehling (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussing tools and choosing the best, would, it seems to me be "original research", and hence forbidden in Wikipedia. This is a problem with many of the "lists of ..." in Wikipedia. Notinasnaid 17:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I just found this: WP:NOT#LINK and this: WP:NOT#DIR which should end any discussion about that list of links. (Bjorn Tipling 04:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC))

Also WP:EL and WP:SPAM. --Ronz (talk) 19:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Image

I'm curious about that image. The text input fields include H, S and L, yet the graph is for H, S and V. Might readers not find this confusing? SharkD (talk) 08:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The use of L/B/V for HS_ color spaces is pretty far from standardized, and yes, it is confusing. Photoshop calls this HSB, and I've seen each of HSL and HSV color spaces called all three terms in different color tools, explanations, etc. Feel free to swap that image out for a better one though if you like. --jacobolus (t) 08:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect Request: "Colour"

Searching for "colour picker" should automatically redirect to "color picker"; it doesn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SarahTehCat (talk • contribs) 20:43, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

@SarahTehCat: Done Colour picker now redirects to this article. Thanks for the suggestion! Cheers! Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 20:58, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

@Apparition11: Thanks. I can see it works perfectly indeed. :)