Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Variations of blue

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Variations of blue[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete? - seems to violate Wikipedia is not a directory and is redundant to the templates for shades of blue and shades of cyan. I'm not seeing the encyclopedic value. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The goal of the variations of green article was to remove a lot of crap out of the green article where it had been previously, and consolidate a bunch of never-likely-to-be-more-than-stub articles. The variations of blue article has a similar goal. Personally, I wish that we had a clear standard for notability of color names, that we could stick to, and a clear standard for sources of representative colors for those names. That would take a lot of organizational work to get enough people to agree about though. user:Keraunos has put a lot of work into various minor color name endeavors, and though it is in my opinion (and the opinion of several others) misguided and not especially encyclopedic, no one has really had the time or desire to build a consensus around any solutions. The “shades of blue” and “shades of cyan” templates in my opinion should not exist, at least not in their current form. –jacobolus (t) 22:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up on this, there are a lot of stub articles (or articles of several stubs combined, or articles consisting of stubs + trivia sections) about various “blue” colors: Alice blue, Azure (color) (scroll down and look at the variations), Baby blue, Bleu de France (colour), Bondi blue, Brandeis blue, Cambridge Blue (colour), Carolina blue, Ceil, Cerulean, Columbia blue, Cornflower blue, Deep sky blue (“capri”), Denim (color), Dodger blue, Duke blue, Electric blue (color) (“Displayed at right is the color rich electric blue, a color widely used in the sex industry because it is a popular color for women's bikinis.”), Eton blue, Federal Blue, Glaucous, Iceberg (color), Iris (color), Majorelle Blue, Midnight blue, Navy blue, Non-photo blue, Palatinate (colour), Periwinkle (color), Persian blue, Powder blue, Royal blue, Sapphire (color), Steel blue, Teal (color), Tiffany Blue, Tufts Blue, UCLA Blue, Yale Blue, Aqua (color), Cadet grey (lists some "blues" too), Cyan, Indigo (scroll down; the top part is fine), Lavender (color) (scroll down), Robin egg blue, Turquoise (color), and probably others that I don’t know about. And that’s just colors close to “blue”. Some of the content of these many pages is clearly encyclopedic, but on the whole the articles are in shoddy shape, and straightening them out would be a huge job, for which there hasn’t been a whole lot of interest by anyone willing to actually devote time and effort.

Deleting this single “variations of blue” article as a hit-and-run deletion (that is, by editors uninterested in working to improve all the rest of these color-related articles overall) does almost nothing to clean up Wikipedia’s coverage of color. It would be more useful to instead merge many of these stubs into variations of blue, so that, all in one place, they could be kept track of and any unencyclopedic content could be removed. –jacobolus (t) 15:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep It's a legitimate spinoff from the article blue. The encyclopedic value, of course, is that people would consult such an article to determine the differences between navy blue and midnight blue. It may well be that this simply needs to be redirected to a picture of the template, or to the page Category: Shades of blue, however. Mandsford 01:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - We already have ample articles on colors, including Blue, Aqua and countless others. We don't need more mindless permutations that add nothing. Shadowjams (talk) 07:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the purpose of the article is to display the major shades of blue that there isn't room for to display in the article on blue itself. Keraunos (talk) 10:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Template:Shades of blue is included in the original article, but one has to click on it to display it; why that is, I have no idea. Mandsford 19:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because the shades of blue template is an arbitrary set of color names, some quite obscure, with unsourced or unreliably sourced RGB definitions. It’s bad enough that it exists at all; it's quite fine collapsed by default. –jacobolus (t) 00:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - As jacobolus points out, if we get rid of this one, we'll have a bigger problem killing off all the other blueish stubs. Until we have a better strategy, this article also helps keep Keraunos from bloating the blue article with this stuff. Dicklyon (talk) 16:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the RGB color system Cyan and Azure are NOT just shades of blue. There are 12 major colors of the RGB color wheel at intervals of 30 degrees. Cyan and Azure are two of these 12 colors besides Blue itself. Cyan and Azure are major and important colors in their own right apart from Blue. Keraunos (talk) 04:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 12 major colors of the RGB color wheel

The 12 major colors of the color wheel, at 30 degree intervals on the HSV color wheel (RGB color wheel) are the following: red (Color #FF0000 (0 degrees or 360 degrees), orange (Color #FF7F00) (30 degrees), yellow (Color#FFFF00) (60 degrees), chartreuse green (Color#7FFF00) (90 degrees), green (Color#00FF00) (120 degrees), spring green (Color#00FF7F) (150 degrees), cyan (Color#00FFFF) (180 degrees), azure (Color#007FFF) (210 degrees), blue (Color#0000FF) (240 degrees), violet (Color#7F00FF) (270 degrees), magenta (Color#FF00FF) (300 degrees), and rose (Color#FF007F) (330 degrees). This constitutes the complete set of primary, secondary, and tertiary color names. Keraunos (talk) 04:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this 12-pointed RGB color wheel is something made up, with as far as I know no scientific, psychological, or prominent art-education basis. –jacobolus (t) 19:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't claim to be an expert on colors by any standard, but it seems like the tremendous ambiguities involved in naming colors argues against a list article. One person's (e.g.) "light blue" is another's "pale blue". In the absence of reliable sources that a particular shade of blue is named and notable this article strikes me as a repository of original research. I personally have no problem with a series of stubs about various shades of blue if there is reliable sourcing to back up the name of the shade. This and similar articles strike me as magnets for original research. Individual articles on various shades can include reliable sourcing regarding the particular shade. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 04:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reliable source for most of these stubs, or when there is a reliable source it is only cited, telephone style, via a couple of people's personal websites. The stubs are not only also WP:OR magnets, but they can't be kept track of nearly as easily as a few consolidated articles (unless there are some people here volunteering to do clean-up work of all the color stubs... that'd be great). –jacobolus (t) 19:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I think. Tough one. Seems like the argument that we need a place to keep all the info on the variations of blue that 1) would clutter the Blue article but 2) don't need an article of their own makes sense. Herostratus (talk) 04:01, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as trivial and pointless an article as I can conceive of. Stifle (talk) 09:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you volunteering to spend some time working on cleaning up blue-related stubs? –jacobolus (t) 00:51, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.