Talk:Shades of pink

Inaccurate information.

The color referred to as "Shocking Pink" is not the same color as "Neon Pink". Neon pink is interchangeable with "Bright Persimmon" which will flouresce under UV light. Shocking pink is a darker shade of Hot pink. These two colors are classified differently in both print, and fashion. Any textile manufacturer will confirm the extreme difference of the two shades. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.40.13.3 (talk) 21:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Color icon pink.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Color icon pink.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus, so not moved. An identical (or at least massively overlapping) set of articles has been listed for discussion in at least 4 separate locations: Talk:Variations of brown, Talk:Variations of cyan, Talk:Variations of pink, Talk:Variations of gray.
Listing the same articles in multiple locations is totally contary to WP:MULTI, and disrupts consensus formation by fragmenting discussion.
I am therefore closing all 4 discussions as "no consensus", without prejudice to an immediate renomination of the same set in one location. Guidance on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting_multiple_page_moves, and I will be happy to help doing that if asked on my talk page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

---

Variations of pink → Shades of pink – All relevant articles should be unified as per as per discussion.

Most follow currently the "Shades of …" naming scheme anyway, so change the remaining "Variations of …".

• Shades of white: leave unchanged
• Variations of gray: move to => Shades of gray
• Shades of black: leave unchanged
• Shades of red: leave unchanged
• Shades of green: leave unchanged
• Shades of blue: leave unchanged
• Variations of cyan: move to => Shades of cyan
• Variations of pink: move to => Shades of pink
• Shades of violet: leave unchanged
• Shades of yellow: leave unchanged
• Shades of orange: leave unchanged
• Variations of brown: move to => Shades of brown Tony Mach (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

• Support all for consistency, and because "shades" more clearly relates to colors. bd2412 T 17:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
• Support all: While shades has a specific meaning ( adding black / making the color darker, e.g. from wiktionary: "A variety of a colour/color, in particular one obtained by adding black (compare tint)." ), it also has the wider meaning of changes in hue etc. I believe I linked to a few dictionaries regards to this one of the previous times this topic came up several years ago. And spot checking online shows similar results. For example from Collins English Dictionary "a colour that varies slightly from a standard colour due to a difference in hue, saturation, or luminosity: a darker shade of green.". PaleAqua (talk) 18:27, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

  See also my comments at Talk:Shades of black#Variations of vs shades of. after I reverted a move of that page to Variations of black. PaleAqua (talk) 18:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Note that the lead of most of these articles state tints and shades, and infact links to the artice Tints and shades too. IE, shouldn't these be Tints and shades of brown, etc? Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 20:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

  If wanted to use painting terminology we should also add in hues, tones, etc. to that mix. Note the 2nd paragraph at the page that states "In common language, the term "shade" can be generalized to furthermore encompass any varieties of a particular color, whether technically they are shades, tints, tones, or slightly different hues." PaleAqua (talk) 00:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. I would move the other way for consistency. Why use the potentially confusing/misleading "shades" when we have "variations"? Srnec (talk) 03:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Variations of brown which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Possible removal from list

Colors removed

Entries in List of colors: A–F contained links to this page. The entries are : Chinese pink Chinese red (#CD071E) Dark pink Electric pink Entries in List of colors: G–M contained links to this page. The entries are : Lotion pink Metallic pink An entry in List of colors: N–Z contained a link to this page. The entry is : Nadeshiko pink Philippine pink Royal pink Strong boy pink I don't see any evidence that these colors are discussed in this article and plan to delete them from the list per this discussion: Talk:List_of_colors#New_approach_to_review_of_entries If someone decides that these colors should have a section in this article and it is added, I would appreciate a ping.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:59, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Bright pink

I am concerned about the color bright pink.

In general, I think that an entry in an article discussing a color name should have reliable sources supporting the use of the name as well as reliable sources supporting the color attributes, either specifically identifying that hex triplet or specifying some other parameters that can be reliably converted to a hex triplet. This entry has neither.

Following is a very brief history of this color name in Wikipedia:

• 2007 Color name added. (This was prior to an article split so at the time the article name was "pink") at the time it was added, the hex code used was #FF0080. That entry had a source but that source is no longer a live site. It exists in the Internet archive but that source did not mention "bright pink" nor did it mention the hex code used at the time or the one being used currently.
• 2008 Hex code changed to #FF007F (this occurred in more than one step. An editor added a chart of variations which included bright pink as a variation with the new hex code, but did not change the infobox color hex code at that time)
• 2011 infobox color hex code changed to #FF007F
• Unknown date - infobox color template removed
• Unknown date - color swatch template added with hex code #FF007F

Caution when looking for reliable sources. Sites such as:

• 99 colors
• Colorhexa

Have been used at various times as sources, but some of those sources obtained information from Wikipedia, so we have to be careful about circular referencing. For example, I see colorhexa mentioning bright pink in 2013 but not in 2012, which suggests they picked up the name from Wikipedia (or some other place). We need to find sources for the color name which predate 2007 and hex codes which predate 2008.

Caution: the above research has not been double checked, so don't hesitate to update my history if you find I have something wrong.

It is my opinion that if we do not find solid sourcing for the color name and the hex code, we should remove the entry from the article.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:38, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

"Dark pink" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Dark pink and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Dark pink until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 23:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Consistency issues

Some sections say "At right is displayed the color X" while others say "The color X is displayed at the right", among other wordings. We should change this to be consistent throughout the article, but I do not know what wording to use. TypoEater (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

CIELAB

Please coorrect data: L*=56.9; C*=93.9; h_ab= 340.9° (the calculation method is wrong) ZJ (talk) 11:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

"Dusky pink" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dusky pink has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 29 § Dusky pink until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC)