Talk:Color blindness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Things to fix[change source]

  • In certain cases (when information needs to be processed very fast, eg. in an emergency), the brain drops color vision altogether (and only works in shades of grey). Probably needs more explanation, and reference, if possible.
  • Other causes of color blindness/How the brain works out colors: Needs consolidating/merging. We do not want to say things several times. Refs would be nice
  • Can we get an example of (reversible) transient/temporary color blindness (with ref). Also, perhaps examples of substances that cause temporary/permanent color blindness (with ref)
  • What color blindness is not is somewhat hanging in the air.
  • Can we get numbers of how frequent the different types are?
  • Red link fixing

I think for GA, it should be enough to consolidate the two sections as outlined.--Eptalon (talk) 21:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I found a couple of issues when I was reading the article, and I'll post them here so someone with more knowledge and wikipedia skills can double-check them:
  • There are cone cells in the human eye. Instead of three different types, there are only one or two types of cone cells. This seems a bit long-winded because of the first sentence. Possible solutions to me are, "There are cone cells in the eye, but instead of three different types, there are only one or two types." Or simply "There are only one or two types of cone cells in the human eye."
Fixed --Peterdownunder (talk) 02:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  • In the paragraph on Rod monochromacy, it is written It is very rare. Is this redundant because that fact is already written in the paragraph before?
fixed --Peterdownunder (talk) 02:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Overall, the paragraph I've mentioned above is very choppy and has odd punctuation and such. This detracts from its clarity. I suggest a rewrite of that one paragraph.
  • Before talking about the two types of complete color blindness, the article says There are two main types of total color blindness:. Are there only two, in which case the article should not say "main". If there are more (unless there are many obscure types), I suggest you write about them.
  • Red-green color blindness is the most common form of color blindness, between five and ten percent of males suffer from it. I think this is a comma splice, and should either be split into two sentences or you should a word should be added after the comma.
  • In the section on blue/yellow color blindness, equally is linked to equal. I can't quite see why, and I think, if anything, it should be lined to the wikitionary entry.
  • In the section on other causes of color blindness, there is a semicolon after certain parts of the eye have color blindness. This should probably be changed to a period because the two phrases don't really relate to each other.
  • In the section "What color blindness is not", the section seems to be wrong. I'm assuming that the two pictures on the top row are the images that a regular person sees while the two on the row below that are what someone with the disease sees. The paragraph states the contrary.

I'll look over the other sections some more later. I hope I haven't been color blind about these issues :)  Mm40(talk | contribs)  21:42, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Images: Dotty 74 vs US Flags?[change source]

For me, the stereotypical colour blindness image is the dotty 74 towards the end of the article, not the flags of the USA. Before even reading the article, I see the flags and I think "US History" or or "US [something]". In the same way, if I saw the apples first I'd think, "An article about apples". How about promoting the dotty 74 to the top, and leave the flags until further in the article?--Leathp (talk) 05:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I put the flags there to show the different kinds of color blindness. The dotty number is relevant when it comes to finding (certain types) of color blindness. Note also that the flags image is an original illustration from the 19th century, the dotty number is not. In short, the flags probably illustrate the concept better. The apples image are a simulation, in any case. The image is the same in both cases, and the coloring was changed in one case. --Eptalon (talk) 13:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Too complex?[change source]

Some phrases seem to be too complex, such as "maximally sensitive", "absorbed spectra", "receptors is stimulated", "Some forms of acquired color blindness are reversible". I also had trouble understanding the point of the section on "what color blindness is not", Peterdownunder (talk) 22:53, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Other complex words needing explanation include: distinguish, analyzed, converted, associated, react, permanent, temporary, optic, contrasts, scheme, visual, interface, emergency, confusion, electrical. --Peterdownunder (talk) 11:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Made some changes a few more needed. Any ideas for a simple way of describing "interface"? - --Peterdownunder (talk) 02:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Linked it to user interface, also added img of kill switch--Eptalon (talk) 08:52, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Great image, that really helps. Reading figure stats are looking good as well - Flesch 65.2, Fry 8.1 --Peterdownunder (talk) 03:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)