Talk:Pigment

GA reassessment

I am failing and delisting the article for the following reasons:

• Physical basis section is entirely unsourced.
• New sources for historic pigments entirely unsourced.
• Manufacturing and industrial standards entirely unsourced.
• Scientific and technical issues entirely unsourced.

There's enough unsourced content that I have to delist it. Wizardman 15:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Pigment-producing bacteria

Is this worth uploading? Should this article have a section about it? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pigment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add Template:Tlx after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add Template:Tlx to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110711101825/http://www.tvo.org:80/TVOsites/WebObjects/TvoMicrosite.woa?bi?1175976000000 to http://www.tvo.org/TVOsites/WebObjects/TvoMicrosite.woa?bi?1175976000000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Solubility in oils or water claim should have citation

The introduction states that the distinction between pigments and dyes is that pigments are inorganic, and non-water soluble, while dyes are organic and water soluble.

Given the fact that this statement pertains to the very definition and distinction of pigments and dyes, I think a citation should be provided or required. It is a statement with far reaching implications. Applying to every dye and pigment. I think taking any definition at its word without a citation should be avoided. Within reason, of course.

For topics with two different terms which seem to refer to the same thing, but are very different on a technical level, this is especially important as there can be a lot of confusion and conjecture surrounding the differences.VoidHalo (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

This is not a controversial claim, and you can find a description in any introductory source on this topic. Here's one I found in 1 minute of searching: –jacobolus (t) 17:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Broadly true - the source (Gurses) states that dyes are soluble, but the solvent does not have to be water. A number of well-known dyes are usually dissolved in organic solvents, such as alcohols.Plantsurfer 18:02, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I rewrote the first few sentences to more closely match this definition. –jacobolus (t) 18:42, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

If this is the case, then shouldn't what you just cited to me be included as a citation for the claim in the article? That was really the point in me posting this. That it's a statement pertaining to the definition, but with no citation. It shouldn't be up to the reader to look it up.

And even if it's common knowledge in industry, a reader's knowledge shouldn't be assumed.

In any case, I'm glad a solution was found which everyone, myself included, can agree upon. I appreciate your input and will check out the citation you provided. Thank you for your input, and for being a contributor in general. I know it's a terribly thankless task. VoidHalo (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

It's of course fine to provide citations for any claim in wikipedia, and I tried to put a couple of decently useful survey sources in the footnote. But my point is that is an easily verifiable basic definition, not a controversial statement. –jacobolus (t) 00:26, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

history source

If anyone is interested in expanding the history section, this seems to be a nice summary:

–jacobolus (t) 06:14, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Printing

Almost nothing about printer inks on here. Also, the article says that you can't put pigments in water. Then how does one explain water-based pigment inks, such as "iX"? 79.106.203.88 (talk) 17:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)