Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Queenplz, with his sidekick Shinoshijak, has continued to remove elite scholarly material from this articke while replacing it with unreliable sources published by Lulu.com and SPCK:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blond&oldid=953358044

He gives the following edit summary:

"Nothing wrong with Shinoshijak edits, I also added something a bit more to help his links. Go to the talk page or dispute notice board if you think there's a problem with Shinishijaks edits."

In fact, the only person who needed to go to the talk page was Queenplz, since I already eviscerated Shinoshijak's original attempt to post this garbage here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Blond#Misrepresentation_of_references_by_Shinoshijak

^ You see, Shinoshinak originally falsified these references by listing them has being published by such prestigious outlets as "Harvard university press" and UCLA. They are, in fact, published by Lulu.com and SPCK, a Christian spirituality house with no peer review.

Obviously these references are not reliable sources and Shinoshijak knows that best since he's the one who falsified their publishing info.

Chao, Robert (2019). Mixed Race Student Politics: A Rising “Third Wave” Movement at UCL < published at Lulu.com

Guizhou: The Precious Province  Paul Hattaway < - published bY SPCK

"Hmong: History of a People is a book by H. Keith Quincy that states Hmong have blonde hair and blue eyes.[57]" Government Department" (). Eastern Washington University. December 6, 1998 < - Another lie - Hunan201p (talk) 08:16, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I have helped improved Shinojisak edits and the links. Do not just revert everything if it's just a very minor edit, because you could easily helped out if you choose too. According to wikipedia rules, if the mistakes are minor than it shouldn't need complete removal of everything. Do not revert everything, you already had multiple edit warrings. The mistakes is the confusing of references but nothing wrong with text itself.I've checked Amazon book details, the location of the publisher, including the books of front and back cover for accuraccy. So try and carefully point out what is not correct. Also I suggest that for Huangdi edit ( I will do it later ) that most scholars considers Huangdi a mythical God. except for your1 or 2 sources, every source basically claim him as a mythical that never existed, which make yous claiming him as blonde extremely unrealistic and easily dismissed in any arguement.

The Tuvans are a Turkic ethnic group occassionally with a occasional occurence of blonde hair with freckles, blue-green eyes.^[1]

Historically Hmong people were as blonde hair and blue eyes by the Chinese in ancient China. The Chinese were able to distinguish Hmong people because of their phenotypes.^[2]

The ethnic Miao people of Guizhou province from China are a subgroup of Hmong people and were described with blue eyes and blonde hair. According to F.M Savina of the Paris Foreign missionary society the appearance of the Miao were are pale yellow in their skin complexion, almost white, their hair color often being light or dark brown, sometimes even red or corn-silk blond, and a few of them even have pale blue eyes.^[3]

I've correctly checked everything and if there's the slightest mistake it doesn't mean to remove it all, but help fix it.Queenplz (talk) 05:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but you can't fix the fact that Lulu.com and an SPCK book are not reliable sources for biomedical info like hair color frequency. - Hunan201p (talk) 03:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, your edits regarding the Yellow Emperor are POV. None of these sources address Chang or mention the color of Huangdi's hair, and are thus irrelevant and POV clutter. - Hunan201p (talk) 03:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

There was nothing wrong with the wiki user's Shinoshijak edit except for one of the publishers. I corrected it, those books are from UCLA Asian American Studies Center| and Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge(SPCK). He was only wrong on Lulu.com not SPCK. For Huangdi you can't claim him like he was a real life person same for Alan Gua, both are clearly described as mythical beings in their own wikipedia.Queenplz (talk) 05:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I find it really strange that he is adding unconfirmed mythical figures as real live living people with blonde hair. On the blonde wikipedia page Asia section. Hunan201p insist of editing the mythical figure Huangdi as blond and Indo-European and claiming Bodonchar Munkhag as blonde hair, but he was born from mother Alan Gua whihc is a mythical mother and his text are based on rashid al-din controversial 14th century text.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond#Asia

In the red hair of the Asia section. He basically adds the same thing about Rashid al-Din text from the of 14th century 'Compendium of Chronicles', authored by Rashid al-Din under the auspice of Ghazan Khan claiming Genghis Khan have red hair and just like the Genghis Khan wikipedia section, it doesn't mention "the factual of these natural arec controversial". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair#Asia_(all_regions)

Is there anything I can do about this. To me strange that he only add the Asia section like that. In the Europe, Africa, Oceanic section there's nothing about these types of claims on any historical figure or ancient/medieval ethnic groups.Queenplz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree with removing Huangdi. Huangdi reign existed around 2590BC or 2690BC, even the earliest mention of him was only from the Warring States around 375 BC or 356BC. We are talking aboot a 2215 to 2325 years or 2234 to 2334 years (over 2 millennium ) of not a single recorded history on him.

The immense vast majority of scholars, historians, linguist reject and denies that Huangdi was a living person.

K.C. Chang, Chinese/Taiwanese-American archaeologist and sinologist. Sees Huangdi and other cultural heroes as "ancient religious figures" who were "euhemerized" in the late Warring States and Han periods.

Mark Edward Lewis, American sinologist and historian of ancient China. Speaks of the Yellow Emperor's "earlier nature as a god". American scholar Mark Edward Lewis says "modern scholars of myth generally agree that the sage kings [including Huangdi] were partially humanized transformations of earlier, supernatural beings who figured in shamanistic rituals, cosmogonic myths or tales of the origins of tribes and clans."

Roel Sterckx, a professor at University of Cambridge, calls Huangdi a "legendary cultural hero"

Henri Maspero French sinologist and Marcel Granet French sociologist, ethnologist. Published critical studies of China's accounts of high antiquity for example, Granet argued that these tales were "historicized legends" that said more about the time when they were written than about the time they purported to describe

Sarah Allan, In the late Warring States period, the Yellow Emperor was integrated into the cosmological scheme of the Five Phases, in which the color yellow represents the earth phase.

LLothar von Falkenhausen speculates that Huangdi was invented as an ancestral figure as part of a strategy to claim that all ruling clans in the "Zhou dynasty culture sphere" shared common ancestry.Given that the earliest extant mention of the Yellow Emperor was on a fourth-century BCE Chinese bronze inscription claiming that he was the ancestor of the royal house of the state of Qi, Lothar von Falkenhausen speculates that Huangdi was invented as an ancestral figure as part of a strategy to claim that all ruling clans in the " Zhou dynasty culture sphere" shared common ancestry.

Michael Puett, historian and Professor of Chinese History and Anthropology at [[Harvard University] writes that the Qi bronze inscription was one of several references to the Yellow Emperor in the fourth and third centuries BCE within accounts of the creation of the state.

Yang Kuan, a member of the same current of historiography, noted that only in the Warring States period had the Yellow Emperor started to be described as the first ruler of China. Yang thus argued that Huangdi was a later transformation of Shangdi, the supreme god of the Shang dynasty'

Shiji, The figure of Huangdi had appeared sporadically in Warring States texts. Sima Qian's Shiji (or Records of the Grand Historian, completed around 94 BCE) was the first work to turn these fragments of myths into a systematic and consistent narrative of the Yellow Emperor's "career".

Charles Leblanc, "The most ancient extant reference" to Huangdi is aninscription on a bronze vessel made during the first half of the fourth century BCE by the royal family; who calls it "the most ancient document on Huangdi" ["le plus ancient document sur Houang Ti'

Jan Yun-hua was a Chinese language researcher and Anna Seidel, a german sinologist agrees with Charles Leblanc

I agree with removing Huangdi, he is definately not a real person. As for Alan Gua, I don't know if she was real but her story is obviously too supernatural to be real Hapa9100 (talk) 23:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I support Queenplz and Hapa9100. Huangdi is mythical and Bodonchar Munkhag is controversial, both of them should be removed from the blond article page. Shinoshijak (talk) 09:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I also agree that the inclusion is unnecessary embellishment of a mythical figure and reeks of bias Kezo2005 (talk) 09:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)kezo2005

Sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place where you can censor info based on your original, synthesized research. There are plenty of references to mythical figures like Jarl and Sif on this page, so even if Huangdi was just a mythical figure, it wouldn't justify your edits. The fact that anyone would support removing this info (backed by high quality sources) speaks to their own bias, not mine. - Hunan201p (talk) 00:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

You are doing original research and too many exaggerated edits. You don't edit mythical figures in those sections; If you had strong evidence that he was blond you should have edited it in the cultural perception area... Kezo2005 (talk) 01:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

The second paragraph (of the etymology) has been long-standing with no evidence, citations or any form of reference to even slightly validate the statements made. In fact, Blundus and Flavus are not related at all and even any form of Blundus in Latin dictionaries or even translate refer to no/any association to Flavus ("goldish"). A one-man saying.

I highly suggest that this second paragraph down to the section before the statement of it being introduces again in the 17th century be entirely removed. It has no basis, therefore the weasel word notion stands with it. There is no solid back-up reference except a hearsay paraphrase from the single source which does not reinforce the so-called Latin origin; likewise the reference seems to be written in a similar manner to Chinese whispers - there are no reliable sources to support the claim.

Also, note that the actual origin and meaning of this word is still unknown and therefore should be clearly mentioned along the lines of this section in context so that readers better understand the origin and meaning cannot be pinpointed instead of confusing them.

In the first paragraph of the article, it mentions "...reddish 'strawberry' blonde or golden-brown ('sandy') blonde". I strongly suggest removing <"golden-brown"> text as it is already in use with brown-haired people that are not blond - meaning they have a light and pale shade of brown that does not reflect or resemble blondes. It is also worth notice that natural blondes are never single-toned unlike black/brown-haired people and using golden-brown is inaccurate as it is already used to refer to a specific shade of brown (and uses the word brown itself which correlated to the brown hair article's light brown hair) in hair salons and dye without no gradient differentiations unlike that found in natural blonde hair. Likewise the term is also used in baking and always refers to a positively concrete brown tone (like the colour "tan"). The term in the parenthesis (sandy) plenty better defines the preceding words anyway. Sandy is a recognised colour and hue and is what majority readers have a clear vision of; unlike golden-brown which is vague when applied to the term 'blond'.

Simply using a single source for a majority of the section is in no way good, especially with half the definitions used being speculatory from a single source - also noting the source site does not extend its own source findings (citation, text, etc.) to actually provide surface-level support.

Please be wary of the valid points above and take them into account for editing loose and lacking information/text on the article page. QuickReving (talk) 04:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

remove the word supreme when describing the nordic race Journey02 (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done Terasail^[✉] 00:40, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

I recently removed the following passage from the article,

There are multiple alleles associated with blond hair in modern Europeans. Blonde hair may be associated with over 200 genetic variants.[30][31][32][33][34]

In 2020, an extensive study titled "Genetic variation related to the adaptation of humans to an agriculturalist lifestyle" was carried out by researchers at the University of Mainz.[35] Close analysis of the pigmentation of a large number of individuals belonging to the WHG and EHG genetic clusters was carried out. It was discovered that blond hair was not present in the Eastern European Hunter-Gatherer (EHG) population. However, blonde hair was present in individuals belonging to the Western Hunter-Gatherer (WHG) genetic cluster. The researchers concluded that blonde-haired and blue-eyed phenotypes likely originated in Central European WHGs:

Phenotypic reconstructions based on ancient DNA suggested that some of the hunter-gatherers of Central Europe had a unique appearance as a result of a dark skin tone in combination with light eyes and a light hair color. Blonde-haired and blue-eyed phenotypes originated in Europe before the onset of the Neolithic and rose in frequency over time. Derived alleles in related genes such as TYRP1, HERC2 and OCA2 can be found in the Central European Western-Hunter-Gatherers at elevated frequencies, in contrast to the Eastern European/Russian hunter-gatherers.

The 2020 study by Blöcher highlights that despite that blond hair originated in Mesolithic Europe, a gradual selection took place before it became common.

The initial statement fails verification and all five references ([30][31][32][33][34]) are primary sources, which is not appropriate for biomedical information. The "extensive study" mentioned (Blöchar) is not in fact a study, but a student dissertation:

https://portal.dnb.de/opac.htm;jsessionid=bzaOLWNrWyC2L1zSGFW2DVrQyC3uP1JH0BQC-6K5.prod-fly8?query=+%22Genetic+variation+related+to+the+adaptation+of+humans+&method=simpleSearch

...which can be uploaded to any repository anywhere, but is not found in any legitimate peer reviewed journal, according to multiple search engines. It also flies in the face of the established research, which raises alarm bells for me. Hunan201p (talk) 04:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I will quote a few sources that are not self-published:

From David Reich, Who We Are and How Ae Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past, page 96:

Analysis of ancient DNA data shows that Western European hunter-gatherers around eight-thousand years ago had blue eyes but dark skin and dark hair, a combination that is rare today.³³

[...]

The earliest known example of the classic European blond hair mutation is in an Ancient North Eurasian from the Lake Baikal region of eastern Siberia from seventeen thousand years ago.³⁵. The hundreds of millions of copies of this mutation in central and western Europe today likely derive from a massive migrstion of people bearing Ancient North Eurasian ancestry, an event that is related in the next chapter.³⁶.

From Gavin Evans, Skin Deep: Dispelling the Science of Race, page 138:

When it comes to skin color, full genome DNA analysis suggests there were at least three variants in the Europe of 5,000 plus years ago: the dark skins, dark curly hair and blue eyes of the Western European hunter gatherers such as Cheddar Man, the lighter skins, brown eyes and dark hair of the first European farmers who migrated from Anatolia, and the pale skins, brown eyes and mainly dark (but also blond) hair of the pastoralists from the Russian steppe.

Continuing on page 139:

Japanese research in 2006 found that the genetic mutation that prompted the evolution of blond hair dates to the ice age that happened around 11,000 years ago. Since then, the 17,000-year-old remains of a blond- haired North Eurasian hunter-gatherer have been found in eastern Siberia, suggesting an earlier origin.

[...]

But whatever the evolutionary causes of blond and red hair, their spread in Europe had little to do with their possible innate attractiveness and much to do with the success of the all-conquering herders from the steppes who carried these genes.

From Carlberg, et al., Skin colour and vitamin D: An update:

Interestingly, ancient North Eurasian derived populations, such as eastern hunter‐gatherers and Yamnayas, carried the blond hair allele rs12821256 of the KITLG gene to Europe.[66]

[...]

Differences in the relative admixture of ancient hunter‐gatherers, Anatolian farmers, Yamnaya pastoralists and Siberians explain the variations in skin and hair pigmentation, eye colour, body stature and many other traits of present Europeans.[60, 74, 78, 79] The rapid increase in population size due to the Neolithic revolution,[64, 80] such as the use of milk products as food source for adults and the rise of agriculture,[81] as well as the massive spread of Yamnaya pastoralists likely caused the rapid selective sweep in European populations towards light skin and hair.

As you can see from these seven quotes, the statements I recently removed from the Wiki article, which were added by user Nuuskamuikkunenn are completely contradictory of the established academic consensus. So, any claims that Western European hunter gatherers had blond hair, and that Eastern European hunter gatherers lacked this trait, and that its prevalence in western or central Europe is due to "gradual" or "sexual" selection, should be regarded as WP:FRINGE, particularly when the source given is an essay in a public library. Hunan201p (talk) 05:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Request to remove or edit the following text in the introductory paragraph:

'In the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century, scientists identified blond hair and blue eyes as characteristics of the Nordic race.'

Remove: The pseudo-science involving blonde hair is discussed further in the article, and this association between blonde hair and scientific racism seems needlessly redundant and out-of-place in the intro section.

Edit: If this text should remain, then please make the clarification that this view of 'science' and blonde hair's association with the so-called Nordic race stems from scientific racist theories regarding race and is not the predominate view of contemporary scientific consensus. Apparently edits of this sort were made in the past but reverted over 'tendentious POV-pushing' despite no reliable sources being cited to provide any evidence that race science is anything but archaic bunk. Backchannels (talk) 23:21, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I may also add that Blonde hair is not associated with beauty, and blonde hair is not associated with sexual attractiveness. This article sucks, and it needs to be unlocked, deleted, and written from the ground up. If anything, most people find Blonde hair repulsive.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.142.227.196 (talk) 01:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC) 

Changing the hair pigment to blond does not help efficient adsorption of vitamin D. It's simply due to lack of vitamin D over long period of time as outlined in the text. Blond people therefore, have no advantage of such compared with non-blond when it comes to vitamin D adsorption and synthesis. The article is misleading in the context that it claims an evolution has caused the change to achieve a "better synthesis". Whilst is not the case. Amirpsl (talk) 11:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)  Done I think you're talking about the assertion in the lead? I agree, as worded it seems to be suggesting that blond hair itself helps with vitamin D synthesis. Reworded, is that any better? Girth Summit _(blether) 11:38, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia about Blonde hair is that "In Western culture, blond hair has long been associated with female beauty. Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love and beauty, was described as having blond hair.".. this is simply not true, it is clearly evident in Ancient Greek paintings that Aphrodite is represented as having Black or Brown hair, not Blonde in any way. This silly Nordicism must be corrected, there are countless examples of Greek and Roman dark hair and none showing Blonde hair in Ancient Greek or Roman Statues or Paintings or Mosaics, especially not involving Deities like Aphrodite and Ares, so this must be corrected. Hellas7005 (talk) 11:15, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Greetings, was Aphrodite really associated only with blonde hair? According to Synesius, the Homeric epithet "golden" does not refer to color of her hair:

"Now adornment of hair seems to become men more than women according to Homer, for when he discourses of the beauty of women, he does not so often seem to have recalled to mind their hair. He praises those amongst the deities who are female, in other ways, he makes Aphrodite "golden", Hera "ox-eyed" and Thetis "silver-footed"; but in the case of Zeus he praises his hair most of all: "The ambrosial locks of the king floated waving from his head."

Bacchylides also describes her as "golden, violet-haired Cypris". "Violet" is usually considered an epithet for dark hair.

In the vast majority of surviving images Aphrodite/Venus is shown with dark hair or shades of brown. I think someone should delve into this issue and correct the article. Becarefulbro (talk) 17:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I fear Wikipedia is trying to cuddle or spread Nordicism, at the expense of the Hellene Culture and the Phenotype factually expressed in the paintings depicting APHRODITE and other Greek Deities. This sneaky Nordicism must end and be corrected. The entry of Blonde hair in Wikipedia must be unlocked and it's incorrect contents be allowed to be corrected in accordance with Archeological and Biological fact pertaining to the History or Greece and it's Genetics and Myths. APHRODITE was never Blonde and the Greeks never rotated their Deities as Blonde. Hellas7005 (talk) 11:21, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Hellas7005 There are some images of Aphrodite with light hair, although most images depict her as dark-haired, yes. "Greeks never rotated their Deities as Blonde" - Artemis and Apollo were described as golden-haired by some poets, but the classical Greeks preferred to portray them as dark-haired:

"I met Sophocles the poet in Chios, when he was sailing to Lesbos as the general: he was a man very pleasant over his wine, and very witty. And when Hermesilaus, who was connected with him by ancient ties of hospitality, and who was also the proxenus of the Athenians, entertained him, the boy who was mixing the wine was standing by the fire, being a boy of a very beautiful complexion, but made red by the fire: so Sophocles called him and said, 'Do you wish me to drink with pleasure? and when he said that he did, he said, 'Well, then, bring me the cup, and take it away again in a leisurely manner.' And as the boy blushed all the more at this, Sophocles said to the guest who was sitting next to him, 'How well did Phrynichus speak when he said—

       The light of love doth shine in purple cheeks.

And a man from Eretria, or from Erythræ, who was a school— master, answered him,—' You are a great man in poetry, O Sophocles; but still Phrynichus did not say well when he called purple cheeks a mark of beauty. For if a painter were to cover the cheeks of this boy with purple paint he would not be beautiful at all. And so it is not well to compare what is beautiful with what is not so.' And on this Sophocles, laughing at the Eretrian, said,—' Then, my friend, I suppose you are not pleased with the line in Simonides which is generally considered among the Greeks to be a beautiful one—

       The maid pour'd forth a gentle voice
       From out her purple mouth.

And you do not either like the poet who spoke of the golden-haired' Apollo; for if a painter were to represent the hair of the god as actually golden, and not black, the picture would be all the worse. Nor do you approve of the poet who spoke of rosy-fingered. For if any one were to dip his fingers in rosy-coloured paint he would make his hands like those of a purple-dyer, and not of a pretty woman.' And when they all laughed at this, the Eretrian was checked by the reproof..." - Ion of Chios.

Becarefulbro (talk) 12:39, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Becarefulbro, Translations are easily corrupted, why would the Greeks say APHRODITE or APOLLO were Blonde, and then depict them as Dark haired instead?, this indicates that the translations are being contradicted by the material, palpable reality of the Archeological facts... translations are given to error, but actual painted statues of the Greek Deities and paintings being shown as Dark haired and not Blonde is the reality of what the Greeks meant, so any translations that say the Greek or Roman deities were Blonde is proven false by the Art of the Greeks that portray APHRODITE, APOLLON and the rest do the Deities, as Dark haired and not Blonde at all. The precious few Greek and Roman statues that have survived intact have Black or Dark hair such as the statues of APOLLON and ATHENA, and all the paintings of APHRODITE and ARES, ZEUS and HERA, depict them as Dark haired. Translations can be corrupted by Socio-Political agendas, but the Art of the Greeks is very clear and Axiomatic, they portrayed their Greek Deities as Dark haired, not Blonde, and the translations of their words to be either intentionally incorrect, or accidentally flawed by modern academics.

The Greeks and Romans were very clear in their Art, and also, it must be taken into consideration, that in ancient Greece and Rome, Blonde hair was associated with Slavery, Barbarism and foreigners, and given the depictions of their Deities as Dark haired and Olive skinned, it would be quite erroneous to believe the translations are correct, since the Art of the Greeks totally contradict them at every word. So translations are incorrect, but the Art of the Greeks and Romams is not. Hellas7005 (talk) 13:18, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Hellas7005 Most gods were described as black-haired (Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Dionysus) and xanthos(brown/auburn/tawny)-haired (Hera, Athena, Demeter), but Artemis and Apollo were indeed described as golden-haired, and some art shows it: 1 2. You are very radical if you think that absolutely all gods had always been portrayed as dark-haired, friend. Greeks had a minority of light-haired gods and people just like now. Becarefulbro (talk) 14:40, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@becarefulbro for some reason you are having difficulty understanding the fact that one thing is for TRANSLATIONS which are easily mistranslated, to describe the APOLLON or ARTEMISA as Blonde, and quite another for the Greeks to portray APOLLON and ARTEMISA as Black haired in their Statues, Mosaics and Paintings, which totally Cancel the translations that you are so insisting upon, and bring to light the corrupted nature of Anglo Germanic translations of Ancient Greek who wish to see Blonde hair in APOLLO and ARTEMISA something that is simply not shown by Ancient Greek statues of APOLLON or ARTEMISA... to sum it all up, whatever Greeks may have written about their Deities being Blonde is CONTRADICTED, by the statues of the Deities which does not show them as Blonde at all, but shows them as being Black or Brown haired, or Dark haired, which means that either the translations are corrupted by Socio-political interests, or they are accidentally erroneous translations since the Art of the Ancient Greeks shows their Deities as not being Blonde at all, but being Black haired... who are we to believe, the translations which are subjective, modern translations or the Art of the Greeks itself which is unobservable, palpable fact?... I guess you can choose to ignore reality at your peril. Hellas7005 (talk) 03:05, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't the man in the photo at the top of the article have hair which is just dyed blond? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.242.54 (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Ipipccl22 (talk) 06:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

In Portugal, the national average of the population shows 9% of varying traces of blondism, peaking at 15% blond people in Póvoa de Varzim in northern Portugal.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

“ A significant majority of Caucasian women (perhaps as high as three in four) dye their hair blond.” No citation given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedanticfrog (talk • contribs) 20:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Noted, much of this sectionfails to verify. -- Hunan201p (talk) 19:02, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

I have have removed part of it for this reason. Will Tyson for real (talk) 09:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I’ve done some minor changes to the article. For one thing the narrative was far to “Blond/Blonde hair=feminine” to be reasonable. It certainly can seem that way with a lot of media trying to tout that these days but assuming every western society for awhile is laying things on a bit thick, let alone the few sources quoted for a very large part of this article. I also took note of some other requests on here. Will Tyson for real (talk) 09:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Also, noting that a Norse pagan “goddess” was blonde doesn’t seem significant to me, most male Nordic pagan “gods” were depicted blond too. Although I didn’t touch those remarks in the lead.Will Tyson for real (talk) 09:31, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Will Tyson for real This sentence: The fact that many Nazi leaders, including Adolf Hitler, was noted with irony by the Allies of World War II. Is it missing something? Girth Summit _(blether) 09:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

oops, yes, somehow deleted out the middle. Will fix. Will Tyson for real (talk) 10:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

@Will Tyson for real: Well done with the changes, this article may as well have been called "blond women" before your edits. It would be interesting to include more content on blond men, though quick google results don't provide much in terms of reliable sources. At least it's slightly more balanced now and I'd encourage you to add more if you are aware of other good material. TylerBurden (talk) 22:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Can somebody add a wikilink to pigmentation for the word pigmentation in Prevalence/Europe? 72.23.45.110 (talk) 20:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done Actualcpscm (talk) 20:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

@TylerBurden: My edit was reverted, so I figured we should discuss this. [1] There are already 16 images in this article. There doesn't need to be that many per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. There is already a relevant linked wikimedia commons category linked at the end of the article if people really need to see endless pictures of people with blonde hair. [2] I figured that getting rid of a black and white photograph would be the least controversial to remove from the article. While you can see that his hair is light, you can't tell from the photograph itself if it was a light brown or some other lighter pigment. I don't really see the point.

In my opinion, the most relevant images (because of their variety and illustrative purpose to the article) are:

• File:Lars-Unnerstall2.jpg because it shows a man with blond hair and a blond beard
• File:Anonymous Ferdinand of Austria in Hungarian costume (detail).jpg because it shows baby blondness
• File:Blonde girl Vanuatu.jpg as it's relevant to the text about the genetic mutation that causes blondness in Oceania
• File:Hitler-Jugend Deutschlands Zukunft Ansichtskarte Postkarte Ludwig Hohlwein Aquarell NSDAP propaganda HJ Fahnen Postcard issued by Deutscher Jugendverlag Hitler Youth Germany's future No known copyright restrictions 3201200095.jpg because there's a whole section that's essentially devoted to Nazi propaganda.

Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I disagree, there are not so many images that it bloats the article, and the image is relevant regardless of being black and white. The placement of it next to the image of Marilyn Monroe also sets good examples of both male and female blond "sex symbols", so overall I don't think there is a good reason to remove it. TylerBurden (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The section on Africa seems a bit out of place compared to the others. The other regional sections discuss the indigenous/autochthonous presence of blond(e) hair but the Africa section seems to be exclusively external in source.

The first paragraph mentions blonds, but only as they exist in the South African European descended immigrants. While demographic change can surely be used to justify inclusion, why not have a section on North America?

The primary issues is with the second paragraph. The second paragraph only makes mention of mummies, also existing at a time of increased outside influence and in one color segregated grave, more likely indicating familial connection than presence of the hair color in Africa. This isn't even to mention the troublesome issue with hair color and human remains, where it isn't uncommon for the hair to lighten over the millennia. Take for example red-haired mummies in the Americas where there exists no evidence of a mutated MC1R or other cause for the hair color. There has been some work done by Dr. Janet Davey with donated hair and wigs but such was limited and couldn't replicate thousands of years of aging. It's just overall a very limited and specious inclusion that sticks out.

Could the section be amended to include extant examples of blond(e) hair, particularly in immigrants outside South Africa? Or a section on the Americas for that matter. Additionally, there are certainly more examples of living blonde Africans (albeit from Albinism) than blonde mummies and there is no mention of them, either. The Egyptian example given is a singular outlier that ultimately might not have even been lighter in hair color and could very well represent foreign influence. It's a tenuous inclusion in absence of more relevant and representative information. Prime Paladin (talk) 06:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

The South African material is unsourced and hardly notable for inclusion otherwise, so I think it should be removed.

However, there is a genetic basis for red (and blond) hair in Amerindians; there's plenty of studies published about their notable frequency of albinism, particularly OCA2 albinism which is associated with non-rufous red hair.[3] As for your comments about Jean Davey's work; it is unclear to me whether she refers to the mummies described in the article. Jean Davey has published forensic evidence suggesting that the mummies natural lifetime hair color has been preserved and was not altered exogenously.[4] If you have competing sources please share them; otherwise this seems to be original research. - Hunan201p (talk) 15:32, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

User @Tylerburden keeps editing in completely bogus claims regarding the hair colour. He has cherry picked a couple of badly researched sources that are not related to the subject of this article. I suspect his motivations to be ideological. We have mosaics from both the era of Berenice II and Alexander the Great showing them with dark hair. NoMoreBu11 (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

The quote "rugged, blond good looks" that is used by Joseph L. Coulombe comes from the book Alexander’s Bridge by Willa Cather, and is in fact fiction. NoMoreBu11 (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

First of all, these comments are clearly a violation of WP:AGF, second, I didn't add these references, everything on the article is not written in WP:WIKIVOICE, but simply presenting established reliable scholars on the subject. If anything, it seems like @NoMoreBu11 is removing the content on basis of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. TylerBurden (talk) 18:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, yes you did not write that section. The truth however is that the quote on Alexander was is in fact not written by scholar, it is from a Willa Cather novel.

Here, you may read it yourself.

https://imgur.com/a/OCRPxfS NoMoreBu11 (talk) 19:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I see, then the last bit should be changed to reflect that it is from a novel. However, the Fletcher reference that you have also been removing clearly refers to Alexander as blond, and that is not a novel. TylerBurden (talk) 12:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

The last bit should be removed in its entirety, the section is about historical perceptions in ancient Greece. NoMoreBu11 (talk) 22:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC)