Talk:Orange (colour)/Archive 2

message: * Orange (colour) → Orange (color) … Rationale: The article, except for its title,  has finally been changed to U.S. spelling, in accordance with virtually every other Wikipedia color article. … Please discuss/vote at Talk:Orange (colour). Matveims 20:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
* Oppose, this move is against policy; also, the victorious wording of the nomination strongly suggests that policy hasn't been followed in other areas. James F. (talk) 23:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Further oppose because I see this has been proposed and rejected twice already. There should be some policy against this sort of mischief: there are much better things to waste our time on than regular attempts from people who won't accept a previous result. Notinasnaid 08:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move to "Orange (color)": April 2006

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
* Oppose, this move is against policy; also, the victorious wording of the nomination strongly suggests that policy hasn't been followed in other areas. James F. (talk) 23:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Further oppose because I see this has been proposed and rejected twice already. There should be some policy against this sort of mischief: there are much better things to waste our time on than regular attempts from people who won't accept a previous result. Notinasnaid 08:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: In case anyone was wondering, I did a quick AE -> BE conversion (but couldn't stop myself from "fixing" a few wordings and so on - the incessant copy-editor in me, I suppose) and then reverted myself, and put the fixes back in; this is the result of converting BE to AE - that is, the effect of the edits since the anon, above, changed the article over. So minor a thing to quibble over, really.
James F. (talk) 01:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: It seems to me that the Burnt Orange article is kind of out of place. Perhaps it should have its own article, like all other shades of colo(u)rs, and also be placed in the 'Shades of Orange' section at the bottom of the page. This is the only shade of a colo(u)r that I can find that is placed within its "mother colo(u)r's" page. --Redtitan 06:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's rather silly to include all these slight variations of the colour. I agree that they should be removed from this article and perhaps moved to their own articles. At most there should be links to these colour's own articles. Jecowa 03:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But if those other articles would be permastubs, then I think it's better that they be kept here or moved to a page like "shades of orange" or something - only remove unverifiable stuff, please. Nihiltres 03:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Jecowa 03:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I've moved most of the section to Variations of orange. "Shades" wasn't accurate as many of them were actually tints. I was going to give them all their own articles and list them on , but as Nihiltres said, that would make lots of stubs. Jecowa 05:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burnt Orange 

message: The article says "Native Americans associated the colour orange with kinship".... is this all Native Americans, or particular tribes, or such? //// Pacific PanDeist * 02:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Native Americans? 

message: Should there be mention of the difficulty monitors (or other display units) have with displaying orange correctly? Oranges displayed are rarely fully representative of how the colour will print. Various shades of orange seem dull/brownish on most screens I've used. In fact, on some recent Apple Macintosh monitors, I've seen red displayed as indistinguishable from orange. Mr.bonus 01:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer monitors 

message: Should there be mention of the difficulty monitors (or other display units) have with displaying orange correctly? Oranges displayed are rarely fully representative of how the colour will print. Various shades of orange seem dull/brownish on most screens I've used. In fact, on some recent Apple Macintosh monitors, I've seen red displayed as indistinguishable from orange. Mr.bonus 01:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Something of great concern with printing in particular is that subtractive coloring must be used to achieve any given co lor. Since the CMYK color system is so unreliable relative to a monitor's RGB color system, it is unsurprising if orange does not display properly relative to a print version. Different lighting conditions for the user also affect perception of color: under some light conditions certain colors may experience drift because of quirks in human perception. It isn't necessarily the monitor: orange is simply a color which does not fare well under careful scrutiny. Nihiltres 05:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer monitors 

message: Whose idea is it that the "colour wheel" orange should be exactly half way between red and yellow in a gamma=2.2 RGB space?  That's what the combined statement and code #FF7F00 imply.  Why not take the green primary to half intensity instead of half code value?  Is there any source for this concept at all?  It certainly doesn't agree with the web-color definition of orange. Dicklyon 21:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Color-wheel orange

message: The etymology section makes little sense. If the Indo-European word naranj is what the orange fruit derives from, then how possible can the next sentence say "Before this was introduced to the English-speaking world" and talk about Old English? Old English is more recent than Indo-European and seems to be an artifact from when the word origin was listed as Arabic. Artrenadys 06:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support This page should be consistent with all of the other color pages. They all use the English spelling of color, and Wikipedia is all about consistency. Fraggy4 (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *And it was probably moved because the first few revisions of the page used colour. There are no move logs for this page, do the logs not go back that far? I (talk) 00:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Google stats are often quoted to make some point, but are rarely useful. This is a case in point. Every single webpage designer in the world is FORCED to use the  tag even if they're French, German or whatever  (that's supposed to be in green) doesn't work. How many pages do you think there are documenting html codes? Jooler 02:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Why does that warrant not following the conventions? I (talk) 03:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What specifically about WP:ENGVAR are you invoking? I am stating that American English is more widely spoken and since there is no room for a common ground, the American English should take precedence by force of numbers. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If an article has evolved using predominantly one variety, the whole article should conform to that variety, unless there are reasons for changing it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic. In the early stages of writing an article, the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used, unless there is reason to change it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic. In my estimation, it has been colour the majority of the time, and therefore should remain that way. I (talk) 00:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You do realize that in that diff, color without a u is used once, while with a u it is used three times? And in the original draft of the article, both versions were used? And with a u has been the predominant style for most of the article's history? I (talk) 01:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: 1) How does it improve user ease? 2) Why is it more clear that way. 3) The only legitimate argument IMO 4 )Both spellings were used in the original page, and it has been with a U for the majority of its existence. 5) Numbers do not have bearing in WP:ENGVAR; only ties to certian forms and original version do. I (talk) 02:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't invoke ENGVAR.  Renaming this article will improve user ease as it will reduce confusion for a great number of people.  Wikipedia is used by a great number of children who have internet access.  As was noted above, a far greater number of American English speaking people write on the internet than do speakers of other forms of English.  From this it is reasonable to infer that a greater number of American English speaking children use the internet.  As the young are more easily confused than most, I want to minimize confusion as much as possible for these children.  This change will also lead to a more clear article name for everyone else looking for information about this color, because of greater numbers and because of conformity (this is exemplified by the repeated questions above about the name).  This speaks to both my reasons 1 and 2, although they are separate.  What is most compelling, however, is that there are only advantages of moving it, and no material advantages of leaving it as it is.  I should add that "get used to it," as seems to be stated in opposition, is not a reason.  Nicholas SL Smithchatter 03:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I thought I'd take a look at this guide -- After review of WP:ENGVAR, consistency is a preference inferred from the section on Consistency within articles.  Consistency will be achieved both within a group of tightly knit articles and within the WikiProject Color; and so, the spirit and reason for WP:ENGVAR promotes this change.  I don't really want to get into lawyerism, but according to proposal title box above, this page was originally "Orange (color)."  because of this, WP:ENGVAR specifically promotes this move.  Nicholas SL Smithchatter 06:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment. User:Nslsmith has engaged in votestacking with posts to four other users: User:Animum, User:Tempest115, User:Monobi, and User:Atropos. Three of those users have since commented here. He has also engaged in similar behaviour on another move request. The user has been warned of this behaviour. --DeLarge 16:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Comment. DeLarge's claim of vote stacking is completely unfounded,  I did not inform any editors who have ever voted on this topic.  I have only informed other editors which have asked questions about why this article has the name it does currently.  There are no repeat votes, no repeat debate actions; this behavior does not reflect vote stacking.  I have been excluded from other debated by DeLarge in the past, possibly because of my differing opinion.  I work to include anyone who is interested.  Nicholas SL Smithchatter 01:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, that isn't neccesarily true. There is no discussion in March of 2004, so I don't know what it's referring to. In addition, this comment says the article was originally titled with a u. There are no logs for this page being moved, although that could be because of how far the logs go back. I (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Any additional comments:
:Every other page concerning colors uses the English spelling.  This article should not be exempted from the current layout of colors on Wikipedia.  Fraggy4 (talk) 13:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Colour" is the English spelling. You want to replace the English spelling with the American spelling. Not every Wikipedian is an American; we better get used to it.--Orange Mike  | Talk 14:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please keep in mind that an earlier iteration of this topic has a hallowed place at WP:LAME, and maintain your sense of humo(u)r accordingly. Also, note the six previous discussions, tallied at the top of the page. Acroterion (talk) 21:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: The mention in the survey above of Google invites comment...this is IMO the best example I've yet seen where we can guarantee that the Google results will be quite worthless however the Google search is devised. WP:NC talks of the greatest number of English speakers (the exact wording of this has been the subject of quite recent discussion, but that's today's version!). That's not the greatest number of English website authors, it's the greatest number of English speakers. There's no reason to expect this to correlate to the Google results, and there are many reasons to think it won't. Andrewa (talk) 16:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Google

message: Q: - Is Orange the brightest colour visible to the naked eye?
:I don't understand the question.  What are you intending to fix (keep constant) when comparing brightnesses? Dicklyon 00:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the question might be referring to the color to which the human eye is most sensitive.  The answer to this is actually "bright" or "neon green" at wave length of 555nm (on the yellow side of green), with the corollary that red and violet (at 380nm and 760nm) invoke the least retinal response in most humans.  This response shifts to the blue side (~507nm) in dimly lit situations because of the transition from cone to rod receptors.  These numbers are averages and differ slightly from person to person, and are completely different for different animals.  Street signs are often in orange because of the durability of orange dies, as well as the strong contrast shown by orange against black.  See [Sensitivity of the human eye at giangrandi.ch].  Nicholas SL Smithchatter 03:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions and Answers

message: Why is it "so called redheads" in the burnt umber section?
Plus, I do not understand why the hair color part is in that section at all, plus it seems that the hair color part is an opinion, (the fact that I disagree with it's opinion may be noted) as the hair color known as red (that without dying) is able to cover many different shades and not just one shade of orange, and is therefore misleading. Oh yeah, and what is up with the "so called?" I would edit it myself, but, I don't know if I should while in my condition, as my grammer is sort of off along with my syntax. Melune (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "so called?"  

message: Can someone change the title of this page to "Orange" to end the edit war? I mean the view title, the one on the top of the page. Or change it to Orange (c) or something?
--202.156.14.83 (talk) 07:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What edit war? Orange goes to a disambiguation page, as it should, and Orange (c) means nothing. Every month or so, an American tries to "correct" it, and ends up learning something about other variants of English. Acroterion (talk) 11:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title Change 

message: I've been reverting the inevitable spelling "corrections" for a while now on this article and have reached a few conclusions on the folks who compulsively change "colour" to "color."  I should first note that I'm from West Virginia, where there ain't no "u" in color, nor in rumor, nor humor.  Well, at least not in color.
The correctors fall into three tribes:
*Proud spelling chauvinists who are convinced of the inherent superiority of their variety of English.
*People who believe that Wikipedia is an American project, and who are convinced that all spelling must therefore reflect American practice, WP:ENGVAR be damned.
*Saddest of all are the people who really don't know that there are other ways to spell colo(u)r.
I feel better now.
Acroterion (talk) 01:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You forget the people who note that this page is not of inherent importance to a region where the English spelling is preferred and who note that it is very inconsistent that the color page itself uses the spelling "color". -170.223.0.55 (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: A Short Lament

message: I don't understand why this page settled on colour.  The WP:ENGVAR page says that topics with no strong ties to either custom should keep the spelling that the page was started with.  From what I can tell, this page started with the spelling color and was moved in March 2004.  -170.223.0.55 (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This article was started 08:46, 13 August 2002 by User:Jeronimo (who I believe is from the British Isles) with a mixture of the two spellings; two edits later it was switched to "colour" throughout, and has remained that way in text ever since, except for :WP:LAME reversion wars. --Orange Mike  |  Talk 02:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone have a link to the original version? BOVINEBOY2008 05:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Here.  It's easy to get via the article's history link.  Originally it used "color" while still a stub, but in third edit it changed to "colour", which stuck.  It's too late to revisit that. Dicklyon (talk) 05:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, I see.  What name was the page started under?  It's difficult to tell that from the history. -170.223.0.55 (talk) 01:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for clarification 

message: I've removed the incivil comments that were here.  Please note that en.wikipedia uses both American and British variations of English.  The relevant policy is WP:ENGVAR; please read it. Dicklyon (talk) 02:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: Please read here for new article proposal. ANDROS1337 01:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Distinguishing red from orange in language" article proposal 

message: Given that this move has failed for the 6th or 7th time. I've going to slap a British English tag on the page, and that should be the end of it. Jooler (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A British English tag is inappropriate for this page as it is not written in British English, nor does it relate specifically to a British topic. Nicholas SL Smithchatter 03:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "orange" does not specifically relate to British English. The fact that "colour" is used in the title and in the article does not mean that the article relates to British English. — Wenli (reply here) 03:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The tag is appropriate. It says that the article is written using British spelling. Whether or not it is related to a British topic is irrelevant in terms of the template. I (talk) 04:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The tag is there to inform users that the spellings used in the article should not be changed willy nilly. It is an information tag. Jooler (talk) 19:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't belong in the article but on the talk page.  If need be, make the hidden comments bigger and bolder. JIMp talk·cont 00:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: British English tag

message: This isn't a real proposal yet, so no !votes required. Please don't think this is another imperialistic American seeking to invade British soil =D  I'd just like to start a discussion the prospective possibility of a move to neutral territory, per Wikipedia:ENGVAR#Opportunities_for_commonality-
Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English.
* Universally used terms are often preferable to less widely distributed terms, especially in article names. For example,  is preferred to the national varieties  (British English) and  (American English).
* If one variant spelling appears in an article name, redirect pages are made to accommodate the other variants, as with Artefact and Artifact, so that all variants can be used in searches and in linking.
::~~~
Articles such as English plural and American and British English differences provide information on the differences between these major varieties of the language.
So. What kind of effect might this have? For example, to the other col[o|ou]r articles?  --King Öomie 19:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd go for that.  -132.183.138.201 (talk) 03:43, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to throw a monkey wrench, but I'd predict such a discussion would get oppose votes because of the technical issue of what the first sentence of the Hue article currently says: "Hue is one of the main properties of a color" (emphasis added). The Orange article currently lists different variations of Orange, each having different color characteristics. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I could actually see hue working for other articles, but in the case of orange one of interesting details is that oranges and browns have the same hues, and it's actually the relative shade that distinguishes the two. See :File:Optical grey squares orange brown.svg for an example. I'm sort of surprised the article doesn't mention more than this than the slight reference of brown as a "dark orange". The other common cases like this are pink and red, or in some cultures light blue and dark blue. PaleAqua (talk) 07:46, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion: possible move to Orange (hue)

message: The history section says:
:Orange is the national colour of the Netherlands, because its royal family of Orange-Nassau used to own the principality  of Orange (the title is still used for the Dutch heir apparent). There is no etymological connection between orange (the fruit and colour) and Orange (the name of the principality), and the similarity is fortuitous.
This contradicts itself, by stating that the colour orange is used "because" of the principality of Orange, but then stating that there is no etymological connection between the colour and the principality. I assume the latter is correct and the causality implied by the word "because" should be removed, but I leave this to an editor who knows for sure.
-dmmaus (talk) 23:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had a bash. Does that clear it up? Cnilep (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of orange by Netherlands

message: Hi folks, that was me.  The reports on Mrs Hogan are wonderful as a speculative exercise, but I cannot locate anything authorative to back up the claims.  The source link from her section went to a local paper in Pennsylvania, which quotes speculation by persons who have never met Ms. Hogan.  This is exciting to think about, but just not solid enough evidence to meet Wikipedia standards.  Sorry. 8-(  Ken McE (talk) 14:46, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Was The "Medical" Section with Mrs Susan Hogan, the Alleged Tetrachromat Removed? 

message: The section on the religious significance of Orange talks about orange being the color of Hinduism, then in the accompanying photo it says "Orange: the color of Buddhism". Is orange also the color of Buddhism?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephjoaquinmartin (talk • contribs) 17:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion section 

message: Orange-colored Kurti means Orange-colored Tunics, which are commonly worn by Sufis in Sindh since the 13th century.www.harmeendesign.com/embroidered_kurtis.html— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mughal Lohar (talk • contribs) 10:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Orange

message: Why not have it be "Orange (colo(u)r)" so it includes both the British and the American way of spelling the word? - Bagel7T's 00:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe because it's not WP style to do so.  See WP:MOS and WP:AT.  The nested parens are a novel touch though.  Dicklyon (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We could do it the regexp way and name it Orange (colou?r).—Chowbok ☠ 20:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, but user interface options (probably, depending on the region for IPs) could solve the problem permanently. There are several wikis (Serbian Wikipedia, Chinese Wikipedia, Kurdish Wikipedia, Kazakh Wikipedia) which allow conversion between scripts. Here the conversion of bulk of the text is not required, and some more subtle solution may be satisfactory. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the article title (probably for the 100000th time) 

message: Yes, in historical works (before RGB’s definition of blue became dominant) the complementary of orange was commonly called “blue” (). But nowadays the standard term for near-spectral colours between RGB’s blue and cyan is azure. Although “blue” may denote azure (along other nearby hues), the word “azure” is preferred because is much less ambiguous. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Call it what you will, but in the RGB system it's called blue.  Dicklyon (talk) 15:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: We're talking about the complement of orange. Orange is 100% 50% 0%, and so its complement must be 0% 50% 100%, not 0% 0% 100%. Blue is 0% 0% 100%, and it is the complement of yellow (100% 100% 0%.) Georgia guy (talk) 15:51, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, sorry, I jumped the gun, was thinking of yellow for some reason.  Perhaps Incnis was right to call me a dick for it.  No, that wasn't productive, was it?  Anyway, find a source for what it's called, or omit it.  Dicklyon (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia's Azure (color) article says azure is 0% 50% 100%, so it must be what we want. Georgia guy (talk) 15:57, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

text:  Will http://encycolorpedia.com/ff7f00 qualify? The difference is in only one point. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:31, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The trouble with things like 0080FF and 0% 50% 100%  is the implicit assumption of linearity in a colorspace that's well known to be very nonlinear.  And the trouble with "azure" is that there are not standardized tertiary color names in the RGB system (or if there are, find us a source).  This book and others call it "blue-cyan".   Dicklyon (talk) 04:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, I'm seeing sources that describe the complement of orange as "blue green". Another way to find the complement is on a color wheel rather than with RGB numbers. Best to take the line out altogether if sources and definitions don't agree. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue or azure? 

message: Ok, I used to play a mmorpg (Dark Ages) that had a very deep level of player involvement. One could enter contests with literature entries etc. So during the course of creating a lore entry I had decided upon doing one related to colour codes. While I researched into the gaelic languages in order to get the ancient gaelic names for colours to use as the 'names of the glyphs' for my entry, I discovered that there was no ancient gaelic word for orange. I also learned that the early irish had no word as well (I think) as its been around 8 years since I did the research).
So I was a bit dissatisfied with the current etymology as I looked at that. I decided to approach the issue of naming the colour in the context of my lore through the eyes of someone who had available neither a word to represent the colour and access to ancient celtic and roman languages (as these are the 'Old tongues' within the context of the game)
I decided that a person would only have CAUSE to require naming a colour if they SAW a colour for which they had no ready word already. I thought up 1 word garm? I think it was? anyway it was the ancient gaelic for beak but I was a bit dissatisfied with that so I kept looking. The latin word for gold is or. So I thought, well sometimes the SUN is a rather orange looking colour. especially in the northern hemishpere around the harvest time. Even now its all about orange and black right? So by extrapolation of the Ancient gaelic word for Halloween -Samhuinn; sam, summer, and fuin, end, sunset, we get the fuin out of it. So such a type of person might readily look up to the sun on a October evening and said of it to be a Golden Sunset -Orfuinn / Orhuinn. It was at that point that I realized I had come almost full circle back to the actual word Orange and that it wouldnt take many generations or accents for Orfuinn or Orhuinn to evolve into Orange.
My hypothesis is that individuals speaking dialects of ancient gaelic, and latin such as the people of the dark ages to early middle ages of the british isles could have easily developed the word and in fact did.
It is interesting to note that the celtic druids had special festivals related to seasons and harvest and the sun, so there would be a pretty good reason for then to have a word to represent the colour of the sun during harvest. this word could have easily passed back into arabian lands during the periods of the crusades or earlier through trade and people speaking to each other, and in some course the j sound got back in there. I assume that in most likelihood due to it being a turbulent time in history with few litterate people, actual records that may prove my hypothesis may not exist but it explanation actually sounds a bit more reasonable than the stuff the last person to formally consider the etymology of the word. O and there is the added fact that the gaelic language has the glutturel stops or whatver. I think that in communicating the word to arabic people they werent able to inflect the word "properly" or something and it just got that j sound at the end. Sorry guys for not sounding and writing more professional looking. I only have a grade nine education and I am a new editor to wikipedia so I don't know the conventions (& odd jargon) you seem to have.
Thanks, Davnoctu (talk) 01:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to Wikipedia. Strictly speaking, this talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, so while it's certainly possible that someone will come along and share their opinion on your hypothesis, you'll probably have better luck at the Language reference desk. — Reatlas (talk) 12:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the Etymology of the word Orange- A differing hypothesis. 

message: Move to Orange (color) to be consistent with Color.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.2.215.2 (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A perennial comment, but there's no requirement for consistency or standardization on one national form of English. See WP:ENGVAR. Acroterion (talk) 04:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Orange (color) to be consistent with Color 

message: Hi, I think it was on QI that Stephen illustrated the newness of the word orange by pointing out that we call gingers people with red hair, even though the color is quite obviously orange. Another example on the other end of the spectrum might be this this italian drink, which is called yellow even though it is orange. --1Veertje (talk) 14:56, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  illustration of newnes of the name 'orange' 

message: Every wikipedia indicates a different sRGB, thus a different tone of orange. Isn't there a standardized orange? --2.245.111.186 (talk) 01:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "orange"? 

message: The section on China has a source, but I wish the information had more depth. The section notes that the Chinese word for the color is based on saffron rather than the fruit that gave the color its namesake in many Western languages. The article neglects to tell us the specific word used in Chinese for the color. As a student of the Chinese language, I note that modern Chinese follows the same system as Western languages in naming the color after fruit - Orange is either 橙色 (cheng se), from the orange fruit, 橙子 (cheng zi), or 橘色 (ju se), from the tangerine fruit,  橘子 (ju zi). Meanwhile, in modern Chinese, the herb that we call saffron has two different names, both of which are three characters long. Adding the color suffix, 色, to the end of either of these words would make a four character word, which is too long for a Chinese color word (which are always two or three characters).
Also, there's plenty of linguistic evidence to suggest that perception of orange as separate color is relatively new in Chinese culture, and still today many things that an English speaker would describe as "orange" are usually classified as yellow or red by Chinese speakers - carrots in Chinese are often called 红萝卜 (hong luo bo), which means red radish, while Chinese often describe the changing leaves of autumn as being yellow in color. --222.80.175.20 (talk) 15:56, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: China

message: The usage and topic of "Orange" is under discussion, see Talk:Orange (word) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:50, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: "{{noredirect|Orange}}"

message: There seems to be a disagreement about the format of the galleries, and one editor has, without discussion, reverted back to the old format.  When I first put up the galleries in ancient 2013,  I didn't know anything about packed galleries, and I used the most basic and now outdated form.  Therefore I recently updated the format.   I think that packed galleries are a much better format, since the pictures are larger, clearer, better organized, and there's no wasted space between them.  I think it looks much more professional than the old 2013 gallery.  They can be made smaller, but I think the packed format should be retained.  I also think that the title "Shades and varieties" for the first gallery should be changed to "In nature and culture" since the pictures are not about either shades or varieties (Those are the subject of a different article)  but  common occurrences of orange in nature and culture, illustrating the lead.    I would like to restore the changes, and welcome the opinion of other editors.  Respectfully. SiefkinDR (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: To me, the problem is exactly that. The images are larger. The articles on wikipedia should be about text, not images. With that new gallery format, the article seems much like a album, and it seems to diminish the text. I believe it is fine the way it is now. You could use that new gallery format but make the images smaller at the same time, but this is just my opinion though. I will ping  here to see what he thinks. Huritisho (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid I don't entirely agree with you that the text is more important than the images, especially in an article on color.   A picture really is worth a thousand words, and many readers get all the information they need from the pictures and the captions. The images should support the text, and the text supports the images.   Now the images are so small that you have to enlarge them one by one to see anything at all.   However, I can certainly accept your suggestion and make the individual images smaller, maybe 150px instead of 200px, and see how that looks. Respectfully, SiefkinDR (talk) 09:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure, go ahead and try it. In case someone else still disagrees, that editor is free to leave a message here and undo the change. Huritisho (talk) 11:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Packed galleries 

message: I believe we should not have a separate section on "shades of orange" in this article.  In the not-so-distant past, all the colors had sections on shades of those colors, and those sections grew and grew, with the names and descriptions of commercial brands, until they were much longer than any other sections in the articles.  Thanks to the ingenuity of paint companies, there is no limit to the number of shades of any major color;  even the article on white had a section on shades of white, none of which were actually white.    I hope we can keep the articles on shades, if we have them at all, with a link but otherwise quite separate.     Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 18:18, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shades of orange section? 

message: Can we stop putting Wests Tigers and Blackpool in this article.
Both these clubs wear different colours to orange - Wests Tigers wear gold, Blackpool wear tangerine. Weststigersbob (talk) 06:39, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports Teams 

message: Well explained is the origin of the fruit's name, but there is little reference to when this term came to refer to a colour. This article is about the colour, so the etymology section should be about the origins of this word being used to refer to the colour - and not just in English. It definitely didn't start with English, though the article currently does make it look like 1512 was the first time anyone did it. A text from 1282 shows that it was already used to refer to a colour (always of carpets) in Middle Dutch, where the term had entered through Old French. Another notable aspect is that rebracketing caused the loss of the original "n-" in several European languages, but not all, meaning the word had already entered the vocabulary of a lot of languages before a commonly accepted form could be established in Europe. The fact that so many languages added some form of it to their vocabulary, that it appeared in Middle Dutch only in regards to the colour of rugs and that it gained traction so widely from Arabic (about as widely as some scientific terms, of which it is obvious why they spread) hints at it already being used as a colour (at least for certain trade goods like rugs) by the Persians and perhaps the Indians. This isn't much of a stretch as the Persian and Hindi words for the colour "orange" also come from the Persian and Sanskrit names of the fruit, respectively. It would be great to actually have a source that can give a clearer picture. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 15:38, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the etymology only pertain to English? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Orange (colour). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130228041745/http://www-fst.ag.ohio-state.edu/Pubs/2004/delwiche-fqap1.pdf to http://www-fst.ag.ohio-state.edu/Pubs/2004/delwiche-fqap1.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:51, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Would it be appropriate to remove sports team color list, and start a new article like "List of sports teams using the color orange" ?  This would potentially be applicable to other colors as well.
DancerEE (talk) 22:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. There are a large number of sports teams around the world that features this color (or some shade of the color). We really do not need a list. If we're discussing seldom used sporting colors such as pink or brown then a list is more appropriate. Not only is the list long on this page, we're missing a number of teams.G. Capo (talk) 19:24, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports Teams 

message: An entry in List of colors: N–Z contained a link to this page.
The entry is :
* Pastel orange
I don't see any evidence that this color is discussed in this article and plan to delete it from the list per this discussion: Talk:List_of_colors#New_approach_to_review_of_entries
If someone decides that this color should have a section in this article and it is added, I would appreciate a ping.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:46, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible removal from list 

message: In the infobox at the top of the page, the HEX triplet and the RGB values do not match. The HEX code shown is #FF7F00, which corresponds to the rgb values of (255, 127, 0). The RGB values shown are (255, 128, 0) which has the HEX code #FF8000. Which should we use? IlSoupylI (talk) 20:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: IlSoupylI. In terms of classifying colours by 30 degree increments in hue, the correct triplet is FF8000. I have adjusted this to match the RGB values provided. However, the source to these values has since become offline. A new reliable source should be found and the values changed if needed. SchizoidNightmares (talk) 07:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hex triplet and RGB do not match 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:08, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: There appears to be some history of editors using their own theories about the proper hex color value to use in the infobox, or are choosing a hex color based on an arbitrary web site that happens to match their preference. Reliable sources should be used for this instead. Note that template  links to Wikipedia:WikiProject Color/Sources for Color Coordinates which provides recommendations on what source(s) may be cited to define hex value for colors, and suggests the W3C TR CSS3 Color Module. The value for orange may be found in the table there in section § 4.3. Extended color keywords. This is now the source which is cited in the Infobox to support the hex value. If you disagree with the template recommendation, please discuss and give your reasons below. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:48, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research and hex color 

message: It looks like Orange is the only colour with the word following in brackets, so maybe it should be shortened to look the same as the rest? Malcolmr1982 (talk) 02:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Orange and violet both have numerous alternate meanings that require disambiguation. Other colors don't have that problem. No change is needed or desirable. Acroterion (talk) 02:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title change?