Talk:Red hair/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The colour of Menelaus' hair in the Iliad and Odyssey is not red but blond (xanthos), the same colour as Achilles' hair, and yet there is a long tradition which says his hair is red or reddish or red-gold. How come?

Contents

Martha Stewart show bit

I took out a paragraph describing a Martha Stewart show on redheads, as I don't think it added anything. Someone else disagreed and put it back - fair enough. But it's also (IHMO) poorly written at the moment. Would someone care to try to improve it? Ocicat 19:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

East Asian red-tinted hair

Numerous people I know with Chinese/Japanese/Korean origin have NATURAL red tint to their jet-black (from afar) hair. Is this a variant of "the ginger gene" or some other cause? It seems that most (Northern Mongoloids) have a red tint in their hair, naturally, in my experience. I am aware of the popular practice of dying hair a red tint in Asian countries, but many people have this naturally. Additional info? Shoudl this be added to the article? Chilledsunshine 21:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, especially a good picture. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 09:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

红须绿眼

theres also a chinese saying, refering to western people. 红须绿眼 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinoiserie (talk • contribs)

What does that translate as? Hbackman 06:24, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Google translates it as "Red to green eyes."--Gandalfe 17:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

red beard green eyes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinoiserie (talk • contribs)

Muhammad

It is not only white-history that claims that muhammad had red-hair, other sources also maintain that he did, Martin Lings for example. Von Scherwins work contains most of the informataion on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.82.48.54 (talk • contribs)

"According to some sources" is easy to justify with "some" references. A Google search for "Martin Lings" + "red hair" + various spellings of Muhammad comes up with eight unique hits, none of which corroborate this claim.
chocolateboy 00:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Apparently there are hadith (narration about the life of Mohammed) that say he had red hair in his beard, but that's all. See Talk:Muhammad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.104.185.49 (talk • contribs)

He was supposed to have used henna, so you'd have to be clear on what his real hair color was supposed to have been. Esquizombi 16:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Africans

"Red hair also occurs amongst people of African descent; famous African-American redheads include Malcolm X."

Whoaa- Malcolm X attributed his red hair to the fact that his grandmother (or great grandmother?) was raped by her Scottish owner. Don't quote me on that because I don't have his autobiography with me here. But I asked about that on the Malcolm X entry and someone confirmed that is in his autobigraphy. My point is - Is there ever red hair in black people from Africa that are not mixed race? Also, that is kind of a loaded sentence. I don't think you could just leave it the way it is without an explanation. IMHO --cda 17:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


I agree, in X's autobiography, he said he was racially mixed because of rape, and that was the reason for his red hair.

http://kubilik.blogspot.com

I am well versed in genetics and I have to say that's a big load, if he was racially mixed, that would NOT give him red hair because red hair is a RECESSIVE gene and both copies if it must be present in order for it to be expressed, blacks only have black hair, it's a fact of genetics, unless he had another parent with the red hair gene, it's highly unlikely so the genetic mutation explanation makes sense to me.

Faris b 08:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


But he could have had a second copy of the red gene from several generations back. Many African-Americans have more than one European ancestor, and this might have been the case with Malcolm X. Fionah 07:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Gingerphobia? Redophile?

Can someone put some kind of reference up for those terms? They seem awfully unencyclopedic and made up.

They are certainly not scientific. While "gingerphobia" is quoted (without attribution), "redophile" is treated as an established term. Seems more like a pun on the word "paedophile" to me. -- Ashmodai 07:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

The Catherine Tate episode includes the line, "the police are some of the most gingerphobic people in society" (2x01). Also see [1]. Dunno about "redophile".
chocolateboy 22:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
That's picky, somehow. I have seen ginger-head police-people myself here in dublin, ireland, more than once. What's true is the superstition about redhead, barefoot woman (in the middle age): you must cross your fingers then. If it is a redhead boy, you must spit out. If he does, then you are bewitched for that day. At own sites, i have the freedom to tell people things which are not completely true (but they contain some truth). If you see a redhead person, that's also good luck. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 08:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Gingerphobia and bullying of gingers seems to be most common in the British isles, as ironic as it seems. I'm Finnish and a redhead by birth, and heard more stupid jokes about my hair in a year in the UK than I had in my lifetime in Finland (and we have far less gingers). Of course, being a student didn't help... but yeah, gingerphobia definitely should be mentioned, since it's surprisingly common in the UK (and assuming Ireland as well).--Snowgrouse 15:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Should something be mentioned that "gingerphobia" is not that common in the States? I'm a natural redhead and I've never had anyone bully or make fun of me for my hair. If people say anything about my hair it's generally positive Pnkrockr 18:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Australian info

i added some info from Australia i thought should be on there about the word Wranger before another Australian beat me to it!

Offensive

I removed the reference to ginger minger as it is deeply offensive, probably racist and no longer "part of popular culture". It never was. Redheads were an easy target for lad culture on TV in the UK for a short time but broadcast guidelines now consider it offensive and its prevent.

Similarly for wranger. Although I haven't lived in OZ for a couple of years I have never heard of this term, and no doubt its use will also disappear from TV in time. Supposedly the terms comes from comparing readheads to Orangutans. Would it be acceptable to compare a black person to an ape because they somehow resemble an ape. Definitely not.

The popularization of such term on Wiki is deeply offensive. Would Wikipedia considered the popularization of similar offensive terms for blacks or asians acceptable? Definitely not.

If you think this is over the top, wait till you have a red-headed child as I have and encounter people who think insulting terms like these are "smart" because they've seen them on TV or websites like this.

Shame.

  • Wow. Extremely well written, anonymous. SOme of this, especially the first paragraph should go on the main page. I think it is better to instead of just deleting something, that we should document the history. I think the word nigger is on wikipedia and the historic timeline. I agree that racism against redhaired people is real ethnic racism. What, for example are you talking about UK TV. Is there something written that says "from now on no one can be racist against red-haired people"? I'd like to know about that. Maybe there should be a page just about racism against red-heads. Is there a page just about racism against black people or is it all together?--cda 00:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

WTF? Ginger minger is certainly alive and well, especially amongst young people and other immature idiots. --Snowgrouse 15:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, no it is not. BTW Good on you, 1st writer of this section!! Well done!! You should add it on the main page; however, i don't think that there should be a page on the prejudice- why bother? There is more to this than racism. After all, we don't seem to have a page specically on, say, brunette prejudice (I have heard some nasty jokes- not cool at all), so why bother?

disscusion

i dont think its offensive, i have red hair myself and get called Wranger, Wrangs but most of the time now its more of a nick name then a insult. I think its a bit much to says its racist its more of a fad, people used to dine out on jews, then italians calling them wogs and things,japanies and chinese with things like slanties, dark skinned people before all that, i mean its a passing thing and its almost over any way, soon society will find a new target to vilify. But there is reason to take it off as it isnt very purdent to have it on a encyclopedia but there could be a sub section put in a while once the red haired hype has died down.


Well, so do I, and I find it extremely offensive. It is okay only really between good friends, so perhaps it is not offensive to you from your friends, but really, from anyone else, or in public, it is very rude. my friends do occasionly make some jokes, but it is gentle ribbing, not trying to be rude. It is indeed racist to be called one of the red haired names, and it was deeply derogitory to be called any of the other names that are mentioned. You are however, correct in saying to remove the section, so well done.

phobia/philia - some word clearing required

phobia: greek word, fear of something. usually it makes up compound words. philia: greek word, love or affection of something.

it occurs, but mixing greek and english does not sound very much. latin is more compatible (though not anyone speaks it). for red: ruber m, rubra f, rubrum n -rubraphil (to charge it only to love redhead woman) -ruberphil (does not sound) or try japanese: red-> "aka" -> "akaphil". does not sound. probably "akai"?

people talk in greek and latin words, but do they know their concepts, styles, views (their ancient world)? it really helps to use a dicitonary.

i do not "hear" the word "redophil" sounding much valid. something like "podo-phil" (no one uses it). it sounds redo-phil (the affection/a preference to re-do something). red-o-phil is "bad" style (something like "future-o-rama"). people should not use such contructions.

if you do not understand things: i cleared up words using a dictionary. alex 11:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

There is not sufficient evidence of the term "redophil" on the internet. "redophilia" gives 124 hits (arachnophobia gives 232,000 hits). Hence it is a "slang term", but a uncommon one. alex 12:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The word is "redophile", not "redophil". It has 10,900 hits on Google. What's your point? Fnarf999 00:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
WOW. Feel free to use it. I am not redo-phile. If i paint my hairs red (not coloring them red), using real paint, this speaks on its own. I do not require this term. I do not see it efficient to edit this article anymore. redo-phile: the philia to redo something. ME NOT. It does not belong to (the) weasley article. Probably i remove it from there, when someone adds it. Because, thank of you, good grief, i can call it non-sense, and un-related vandalism. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 16:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You miss my point again. I have no opinion on whether "redophilia" belongs in this article or not. I don't care one way or the other. I was merely pointing out that the justification YOU give for YOUR objection is based on a misunderstanding and a spelling error: you googled for the wrong word when you did your research. That's why you got so few hits; you spelled the word wrong. Please refrain from editing this article. Fnarf999 17:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Nicknames for people with red/orange hair

  • Tomato
  • Redhead
  • Ginger

Hello red-heads. How do you feel about these terms? Any other friendly words? Do you see this list "vandalism/offensive"? alex 16:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The specific vandalism I referred to was your claim that 'ginger' is used as a nickname for the Gaiety Theatre on South King Street in Dublin, Ireland. Not only is that not true but it is entirely irrelevant in an article on red hair. That said, the edit you are talking about here issuperfluous. We already mention that 'redhead' and 'ginger' are nicknames and I dispute the use of 'tomato' which you did not cite. I'm also going to remove your NPOV tag because you have not mentioned your reasoning here. --Yamla 16:35, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Superfluous --> useful word, i keep it in mind. I believe the first part of the word "Gaiety" refers to the french "gai", in a sense of meaning "merriment". Cockney is a bit rude and talks in tomatoes, see the entry. Hence it is not violating the rules of cockney. Sorry if it looks like doing a bit vandalism. alex 16:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The removing of the NPOV tag: it does not bug too much, and i do not believe the article is neutral, perfect or complete. "Tomato" --> htpp://rottentomatoes.com

Huh? What does rottentomatoes.com have to do with red hair? No one is suggesting that "tomato" is not a word; it's just not a word REFERRING TO RED HAIR. Fnarf999 00:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Probably you are too picky with asking for quotations, it is not a reason to discard data (by policy), but it is possible to put a template on an article, which "does not cite its sources". This means the complete article, not a single sentence. redophilia is not very widespread as well, 124 hits do not suggest that it is official slang.

By the way i would like to take steps to improve this article, but i am too technical sometimes. alex 16:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Being technical:

"We already mention that 'redhead' and 'ginger' are nicknames and I dispute the use
 of 'tomato' which you did not cite..."
  • I do not know: who is "We"
  • It is accepted practice to produce "extract" sections, which contain data which is "most relevant", especially in list form. alex 16:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

One of my favorite nicknames for red-heads is "french fry with ketchup on top." Cheesy yes, but also quite funny since standard french fries are often quite pale/white (like red-heads) and then there is this bizarre mop of vibrant color on their heads! --Pseudothyrum 20:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

cockney slang

Is not it more the usage "something is ginger", which means queer, somehow, or dubious (like a unserious contract)? I do not believe that cockney calls "redhead" people "ginger", to outline their membership to a special population group (i.e. one which is frequents bars). The article gives this idea. It requires to consult someone how knows cockney, to verify it. I believe cockney says "this is ginger to me", and it does not have any reference to "redhead" people.

Well, I must say this is more likely than your contention that "ginger" refers to a specific building in Ireland. Nevertheless, you raise a good point. It is entirely possible that the term, "ginger", does not refer to either gay people or a building in Ireland. Regardless, neither have anything to do with red hair and so I will remove the reference. --Yamla 14:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I am no particular expert in Cockney rhyming slang but I have certainly heard "ginger" used as rhyming slang for "queer" (i.e. from "ginger beer"). The implication was homosexual but not especialy pejorative. There was no association with red hair.

By the way "Red hair" just refers to animated objects with red hair, this includes various animals. The article needs rewrite towards talking about "Red hair" only, and not "Red-haired_People".

The pictures of "Redhead people" are nice, i like them personally. But, i do not see where to draw a line (how many to include), or why to include a specific person. A "gallery" of redhead people should be open to anyone red-head, probably it suits to open a special wiki for it. It is out of scope of a wikipedia article. I can connect a wiki immediately, one which is open to anyone to edit/add content. An article might include a picture of a prominent person (which is international recognizeable).

The doughbarber.com site displays adverts, and opens pop-up windows. Hence it is a link to adverts, which might get removed (anyway it does not have to take place). The sub-page containing the information is not "advert-free", and not "pop-up free". alex 08:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

REWRITE

if you prefer not to talk to me- probably you are scared from other websites. I am absolutely pro-redhead. However, this article is about the hair, and not the people. I plan to re-write it, and requested an extra article abuot the people. The cockney remark belongs to a dictionary of cockney, a reference to it is OK. There, it is possibly to demand that it figures the truth. (cockney: something "looks" ginger) Wikipedia is not a closed society. Any redhead person can add pictures of own, how it looks... I would love it, but it is not an image gallery. It does not bug me and i wont remove the images, just saying. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 14:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Now, this article undergoes various edit steps, which are not announced/discussed here. I have added the template Weasel words, someone has removed it again. The passage about "redophilia" is gone, but it still has weasel words, especially "some". I have added ==Nickname for redhead people==, including tomato (there is evidence for this). This was called "vandalism". Now i try discuss this on the village pump (vandalism vs edit mistake). Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 12:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

    • Akidd dublin: your many edits to this page are a source of frustration for me. They are of a uniformly low standard. I am guessing that you are not a native speaker of English, because you are obviously intelligent but make many, many small errors in spelling and grammar, of a sort that are unlikely in someone who is simply uneducated. Small errors like these can be corrected. But larger ones, of comprehension and appropriateness, cannot so easily be fixed.

In addition, you have continually mixed up different topics. The accusation of "vandalism" was made in reference to a completely different edit than the one you claim; it was about the Gaiety Theatre and cockney rhyming slang. That insertion was both inaccurate and inappropriate. Vandalism is too strong a word for this error, and the person who said has retracted it. But it's more than just a simple error.

The edit to which you are referring to here, like most of your edits, is grammatically incorrect (should be "Nicknames") and, again, pointless: the information is already in the article, except for "tomato". You claim evidence; let's see it.

In short, I would like to encourage you to add value to the articles you edit. If you make valuable edits, others can correct your spelling and grammar. But if you add off-topic or repetitive nonsense, these edits must be removed. Fnarf999 17:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I absolutely do not get the point. I have not made many edits to this article. I added the section nicknames, three lines, and re-spelled the ghey line. That's all the edits, Yes, of course the templates. There were successful: "redophil" is gone. Guess no one says that. Like podo-phil, theretically valid, but not used. So what are these many edits?
Can you list mistakes i made within other articles? I do not spell small letters, i know it is not accepted for articles. There are numerous places as of 2006, where this takes place. I am not the only one.
I do not get if you refer to my edits to this articles, or to which other articles, i have created, or edited. There are visible from CTR-L (signature).
You say pointless (duplicate data), see the Yahoo! Groups (i have edited much of it). I do believe some want to read float-text, others are looking for a feature list. I do believe it is good right now, and not full of mistakes, like most of my edits.
I do not understand, why Yahoo! Avatars is unrelated- they support the display of redhead avatars. Personally i do not know, if a link to Cockney makes sense, or if it is (again) considered edit mistake/vandalism, if i just add one internal link. For other articles, i am not that pedantic, however i do not really remove data (see Matsuri, can you do it better? - it has political connection, and was in bad state. It is not required to remove the link table. It is valid to use html exceptionally). A little talk about few my edits (grammar?) - see rottentomatoes.com. The Dough Barber site pops up adverts, or it has popped up adverts in the past. It would not be wrong to switch to pop-up free web hosting. I do not get the point why i can not add rottentomatoes.com to here, just because i can not proove that it relates to "tomato" nickname. I have read (more than once) the british make spelling/grammar mistakes themselves. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 08:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
You do not understand why a link to "rottentomatoes.com" is inappropriate for an article on red hair? Are you serious? Fnarf999 23:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
It puts people (browsing the article) to cinema movies - so to speak. that's NPOV, true, polically correct talking that red haired people are not... we leave it at this point. This site (rottentomtoes.com) does not attack red-haired people. Look, the article contained unsuitable stuff before i arrived. By the way i do not respond to Akidd_dublin anymore. Akidd dublin•tl•ctr-l 16:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Removal of the South Park reference

Why was the link to the episode of South Park entitled Ginger Kids (can't get any more on-topic than that) removed from the Red Hair in Popular Culture section? South Park is a well known social satire and expresses the opinions of a lot of people, the episode itself highlights many views of people with Red Hair and therefore it is appropriate to this article. Added it back in

Removal of link

I removed a link that I found to be not working. Just letting you know.Cjflash 03:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)cjflash

Changing of picture

I changed the picture of the redheaded dude, it was more Auburn. Instead I have put in a picture of a man with very red ginger hair. Fnarf999 changed it back to my annoyance, he clearly hasnt got a clue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgovan20 (talk • contribs)

Be civil, please. Editors can have a difference of opinion on things like this without being clue-impaired. Auburn and "ginger" are both shades of red, and it's a judgment call which is the better image. Since it's your picture we're debating, maybe your annoyance comes from taking this a little personally?
Also, please add comments at the bottom of the page, not the top. · rodii · 01:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I dont like the other pic, the guy looks a little creepy. Also its just distracting from the article, but I have decided to leave it seeing as the general consenus is that it should stay. However I added another picture, which is most definetely of cultural significance seperate from the other.

I've reverted the picture back - the editors here need to talk this out on the talk page rather than playing revert tennis. Settle on a consensus on the images THEN change them - Peripitus 10:21, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh and Peripitus, do not call the picture "unattractive", i'm quite sure my friend would take offense to that. I dont see your picture on here at all...i wonder why. There is a page for people who look ugly you know, it doesnt have to go in your profile. - Ed

Perhaps you have misunderstood. The picture is unattractive that is not-aesthetically pleasing. This is not a slight on the subject but on the composition and overall impression the picture gives. The older picture is clearer and better illustrates the subject of the article - Peripitus 12:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
It's not "your friend," it's you, and the only thing you've contributed to Wikipedia is to plant pictures of you on various pages--and none of them are really satisfactory images for the articles they're in. I don't like either picture, actually, but the older one is definitely better to illustrate red hair. For one thing, there's only one person in it, so there's no potential confusion. It's also more of a closeup, so more detail is visible. · rodii · 11:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Talk about a lame edit war. I've protected the page and request both sides to discuss the pros and cons of the images here on the talk page. Angr (t • c) 12:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

No its not me, it is my friend Ben Thompson. I know the summary of the pic says E W Govan, but that was meant to mean I took the photo. Roddi...put "wan" and "ker" together and that is what you are. The current picture is far too "in your face", he looks a bit creepy and generaly does not make it very "aethetically pleasing". My friends picture is not so "in your face", it get the message across clearly. HOW was that a personal attack?! i said Roddi not Rodii. I do hope there was no confusion there...get real people --unsigned comments from Edgovan20 (talk)

Your intent was clear. --Yamla 18:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree. I made the original revert. The substituted picture by Edgovan20 was a very blatant vanity pic of some dudes sitting on a couch, nyuk nyuk nyuk. I have no attachment to the original picture but it at least clearly shows red hair in an unambiguous way. My actual preference would be to get rid of it altogether; I think there are quite enough pictures of redheads here to get the point across. What I don't understand is why such a seemingly innocuous article as this should attract so much flamebait, hostility, posing, and sheer lunacy. For some reason most of the people who flock to this page have only harm in mind. We've had all this argument about the pictures before when people were arguing about which girl in which picture was "hotter". This is pathetic behavior. Please leave your personal vanity OUT of the project. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 22:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Compromise - People, the lack of civility and the triviality of this argument is not improving the article. How about not having either of the pictures on the page? The three left surely show red hair well enough - Peripitus 22:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

See my thoughts on this at User talk:Angr#redhairedguy.jpg. In brief, I consider it a violation of NPOV to have more pictures of women than men in articles on physical appearance. This is the reason I added redhairedguy.jpg to this article in the first place. If you want to remove both of these images, then by NPOV one of the women should go as well. Angr (talk) 22:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I've unprotected the page since no one has been discussing the issue any more. Angr (talk) 05:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to see only two pictures on the page, one male and one female. The point is to demonstrate visually what red hair looks like, not to provide publicity for oneself. I would nominate the first picture of the unidentified woman and the picture of Robin Cook, deleting the pictures of Loreena McKennitt and the young man. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ Hello Fnarf. Indeed, i agree. Well, only to a certain extent. I think that the picture of the young man should go, and i dont have an problem with the other pictures. I dont like the picture of the young man, it is too weird and just distracts from the article. I am not saying my suggestion of replacement picture is the only one, i just changted it before because i owned the rights to the picture. edgovan20 \ talk Oh excellent someone changed the picture...well done. Oh hello yamla if your reading this

Red Heads in Popular Culture / Maureen O'Hara

Why do you keep deleting Maureen O'Hara who was known and admired for her luxurious red hair and was perhaps the first Hollywood beauty to be praised for her Natural red mane and dubbed the "Queen of Techicolour" because of it, she belongs specifically on this page as a Hollywood Legend and Icon, she is embedded in American Film culture and her image will continue as long as film is preserved she was and is a role model for redheads particulalrly given that there is a unfounded opinion that redheads or "ginger mingers" as they are soemtimes referred to today are not attractive people. 86.12.253.32 21:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)-

I think it's okay the way it is now, with just her name. The previous versions had a little too much gushing enthusiasm to be really NPOV. Angr (talk) 22:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

sorry to gush - but when you are a redhead and you have to deal with people who classify you as being sub-human and make jokes becasue of it particularly in teh UK you become very protective of any source of redheaded beauty and O'hara was the epitome of redhaired beauty and to not have her specifically singled out in an article like this is not appropriate. I dare say because of her Hollywood history her image will be known 100 years from now - I doubt that others in the same paragraph will be - but who knows.86.12.253.32 22:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

That's a shame, redheads are very well thought of over here. There's no problem with listing O'hara in the article but to note that she is the epitome of redhaired beauty is simply too much POV to stay. Anyway, I think the compromise that seems to have been reached is to allow her name to stay without the adjectives. I hope that's okay. --Yamla 22:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, agreed but I still beleive that an article about redheads that includes "famous redheads" and then lists the group that are there in the paragraph - none of which (except O'Hara) are known specifically for their red hair was not appropriate and in fact soem oftheose listed perpetuate the idea that redheads are "ugly". Yes unfortunately in the UK redhair is less than desirable and I was amazed that in America it is almost prized, I think it may have something to do with it being associated with irish and Scottish descent - and Irish and Scots Americans are very very proud and protective of their heritage even if it was 5 or 6 generations back and red hair may be a badge of pride when it turns up. But seriously in the UK the abuse that redheads take from jokes and general public comments would not be allowed against any other individual - you would not be allowed to make fun of someone because they are black or jewish or chinese or disabled or any other specific visible physical trait - yet redheads are fair game and it perpetuates the dislike of the hair colour even among children. They call it Ginger and rarely use the term redhead. My maternal family are all redheads and my paternal grandmother was a redhead - I am originally from Ireland living in the UK I have 6 children 4 of which are redheads and they all hate it, yet when we go back to Count Cork or when we visit New York they are happier because they are not ridiculed as they are here in the UK. 86.12.253.32 23:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

It's common in the UK to take the mickey out of things that are not only not hated but actually loved. I wouldn't take it too seriously, hence the comedy references.

As for Maureen O'Hara. This article isn't meant to be an exhaustive list of famous redheads: there's already an article for that.

chocolateboy 08:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for replying and yes I don't take it too seriously BUT when you have (small) children who cry because they have red hair and don't want to meet new friends and don't want to go beyond their "safe" environment because it means having to get used to a whole new set of people making fun of them because it is "acceptble" to take the "mickey" it does not make you feel too good - especially when it is your fault they have the red hair! My point is that this type of "mickey" taking would not be acceptable to make-fun or ridicule any other physical trait or ethnic background - yet the super "politically correct" Brits see no wrong in victimising redheads - parents of redheads have to constantly reassure their children that their hair colour is normal, is beautiful and that there is nothing wrong with it - parents of blondes and brunettes do not have to do this. I had to have a very stong talk with the local education board over this and threaten to take them to court if the "mickey taking" in school did not stop - the sad part is that teachers also saw no harm in this type of bullying and simply take it as part of our (British) culture e.g it is okay to make fun of gingers and they should expect it attitude. As for Maureen O'Hara, I understand that this article is not an exhaustive list and there is a more comprehensive list of famous red heads - BUT again my point is: she was/is known specifically for her red hair (and beauty) so if a section of this (very good) article is to include some well known redheads - surely she belongs there over perhaps another redhead who is/was not known for their hair as part of their "celebrity status" as she is/was or is it more coincidental that they happen to be famous and have/had red hair - My intention was to make a positive contribution and improve the article by addressign what appeared to be an oversight through a clear example of a well known (world famous) redhead but it seems to have been mis-understood and as O'Hara has again been deleted in favour of less dramatic examples of a red mane such as Woody Allen (yuk), Ron Howard (now bald) Conan O'Brien (does he ahve hair) and D.H Lawrence (this name certainly brings visual images of redhair to mind) the only ones in that section that make sense to include in a "good" articel in my opinion is Juliann Moore who is clearly a redhead and the Weasleys from Harry Potter as they are current and redhair is part of their characer make-up not coincidental - Lindsey Lohan changes her hair colour with each role but I am not going to get into a delete and enter war - you don't want O'Hara in so leave her out. 86.12.253.32 15:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Mars influence

Oh, come on. Is there any reason for this to be in here? I'm going to strongly recommend this section be clipped. 198.20.40.50 22:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this shouldn't be here.--cda 22:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed it. I can't believe this was ever included. 72.139.185.19 19:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Though it does SEEM incredibly ridiculous, there has actually been SOME serious research done in this area; the idea is that if Mars was on or very close to the Eastern horizon when a baby is born (near the "Ascendant"), that child is statistically MUCH more likely to have red-hair and features typical of those born with red-hair (red-beard, fairer skin, freckles, etc.) because Mars is known as the "Red planet." PLEASE do a few internet searches before you arrogantly write this 'phenomenon' off as pure pseudoscientific bunk; the problem is that many people want to try and discredit things they've never bothered to study or research because they are viewed as 'illogical' or 'irrational' and aren't deemed worthy of serious study by the (very conservative/constricted) Academy. So, the moral is that people should be willing to research ANYTHING before it is written off as BS; you might be suprised what you find! --Pseudothyrum 20:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

This section seems very un-encyclopaedic. I really think it should be moved to an Astrology article. Red hair is a genetic/racial trait. Jkspratt 21:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the section on the purported "serious research", leaving only the reference to red hair in astrology, which is sociologically meaningful. The study that was quoted fails standard statistical tests. Births are a Poisson random process. With 500 people, we would expect ~83 people in each 60º portion of the year (16.67%, approximately). 9.8% of 500 people is 49, 27.2% is 136. Such variation is within 2 sigma of the expected value and is therefore of marginal significance and meaningless. This assessment assumes that there are no biases in the study, which I cannot assess. Biases would make the statements even more meaningless. Michaelbusch 04:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry dude, but you simply cannot apply statistics, "biases," and "scientific principles" to things such as this that clearly aren't scientific. It is clear that ideas such as these cannot be understood or even measured by science, so you look like a total buffoon when you try to brush it all aside with figures and percentages and 'rationally' explain it away as not statistically verifiable. Your answer sounds contrived, empty, and pathetic, a spouting of numbers and arcane theories meant to confound/confuse (or even intimidate) rather than enlighten someone reading this. Shame on you. --64.12.116.131 11:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Pakistani Girl's ethnic origin

Kalaha people often have rather distinctive dress, the girl in that os wearing fairly ordinary clothes, she could be pashtun? (unsigned)

(I moved this to the bottom where new entries should be posted, maybe you are new here.) This image really bothers me. I looked at the original and it says nothing about the people in the picture. That girl could be the child of Baptist missionaries from Alabama. I vote to delete it because it supposed to depict that people from all over have red hair but we don't really know where that girl is from or who she is. --cda 22:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
That picture is definitly of a Pakistani; it could be of Kalah or a pashtun girl. I got no proof except that I have traveled to Pakistan's northern area and seen these places. Beautiful country with a group of very diverse people, also; foreign missisionaries are hardly seen here. --Advil 8:19, August 15 2006 (UTC)
thanks for verifying that the girl in the image could very well be Pakistani. That's fascinating. Thanks Advil. It's just unfortunate that there is no information with the image and the submitter isn't very active (that was the only thing he has contributed). but maybe we could get some more details from him? --cda 12:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


Vikings, Celts and Normans

I removed the following sentences from the “Historical Distribution” section:

Viking invaders, who later founded Dublin [2] and York, had a significant amount of redheads among them. The Celts had predominatly red hair. [3] The Normans, being descended from Scandinavians that settled in France, who invaded in the 11th and 12th centuries, also had a substantial number of redheads.

The referenced links did not substantiate any of these statements, and there seems to be no proof other than “these were some groups of people that immigrated to Ireland and Scotland” + “Ireland and Scotland currently have the highest proportion of red hair” = “these groups had substantial numbers of redheads”. What about the other groups that inhabited these areas e.g. Picts? In any case, it is unlikely that the Celts had predominately (i.e. greater than 50%) red hair since no modern group has more than 13% redheads. Fionah 08:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Vikings did found Dublin though (and York? maybe time for another citation), and were redeaded, you can keep that. The link however about the Viking invaders does not match the Celtic redhead thing (whom were not, history and their own art tells us), and is probably a result of various people revising the same thing over and over.

The referenced link, however, says nothing about red hair. Are there any reliable sources that show a Viking/red hair connection? Fionah 07:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Red Hair More Common Amongst Sephardic Jews?

Does anyone know of any research that could verify my hypothesis that red hair is MUCH more common amongst Sephardic Jews than among the Ashkenazim (who often have black and/or very dark brown hair). This often applies to men's beards too, such as the person may not be a FULL redhead but still has some trace elements of red in their hair and/or beard. These same people also often seem have lighter colored eyes than Ashkenazi Jews (whose eyes are often brown or darker in color). Has anyone else noticed this red-headed "trend" amongst the Sephardic population? Thanks for the info! --205.188.112.149 07:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

language usage "ginger"

today i found this information (previously the article included information about various meanings of "ginger").

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/jazz

1. Music 2. Slang. 2.c Miscellaneous, unspecified things: brought the food and all the jazz to go with it.

Now, my argumentation is that "ginger" may be used in a similar way, without explanation of possible meanings. By the way it has nothing to do with that music style, it is called analogy. I do not know if (and how) it makes sense to include that information into the article.

User:Yy-bo 14:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Photograph in header - Sarah Ferguson

That "woman at a rennaisance fair" looks very like Sarah Ferguson (ex-wife of Prince Andrew of England). I seem to remember that the royal family did an "It's a Royal Knockout" program some years ago where they all dressed in medieval costumes and played games to raise money for charity. Maybe the photo came from this program, or maybe the woman just looks like "Fergie". Fionah 08:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

New category

Category:Red haired kings hope you do not just delete it. User:YBO 23:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)