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 keep‎. – robertsky (talk) 19:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Olo (color) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Page which suffers from a severe case of WP:TOOSOON, being based upon the contested color "Olo". The first version on April 24 was a redirect to imaginary color by Rlendog which OfficialWatchOS7 decided to overwrite with a stub on May 1 without any talk page discussion. To me, since the color is not as yet verified at most it can be a redirect. Rather than getting into an edit war etc time to go to AfD to discuss enforcing redirect (or not). Ldm1954 (talk) 16:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Engineering. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability is based on reliable sources -- The Guardian, Scientific American, and LiveScience among many others you can find by just googling. Clearly meets WP:GNG and as it represents a possible research method it's notability isn't likely to go away. TOOSOON is an essay that says "If sources do not exist, it is generally too soon for an article on that topic to be considered." But many sources clearly exist, even if the study hasn't yet been replicated. All the article should do is acknowledge that. It's contested whether it's a new color, but that's mostly semantics -- it's a stimulation of the optical cells that doesn't occur naturally, which is interesting. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - the article needs expansion but there are plenty of reliable sources about this topic, including new ones since the originally story broke, e.g., [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Rlendog (talk) 17:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per @Mrfoogles and @Riendog AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 00:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Having voted keep above, I think that once more research is done on this topic we might end up moving the article to an article on laser-stimulated colors (or whatever they end up being called) rather than having a page for each one. But that's far in the future right now as far as I can tell. Mrfoogles (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the page, Olo may be imaginary, but that doesnt mean we cant see it we have the color pallete for it dispite being super satured. Douglas15amor (talk) 18:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep There seems to be a lot of very notable RSes supporting this article, including the Atlantic, Smithsonian Magazine, and more. While the color is technically imaginary, that does not hurt its notability if it has the sources, which is why imaginary colors has its own section on the impossible color page. Definite keep. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:47, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, there is enough evidence, media, and even a peer reviewed journal (Science Advances, whose impact factor is >10). I would agree with WP:TOOSOON if it was only available through preprints, but it's not the case: this research has been peer reviewed, it has certainly gone through several months, if not years, of revisions in the academic world. So I would keep it, it's informative and up-to-date. Eynar Oxartum (talk) 22:27, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I've expanded the article with reliable sources, including Nature, The Atlantic, and the BBC, directly addressing WP:TOOSOON concerns. Coverage of "olo" is extensive, both in high-quality WP:RS such as Scientific American, The Guardian, and a peer-reviewed study in Science Advances, as well as additional sources noted by other editors here per WP:NEXIST. Notability is clearly met per WP:GNG. HerBauhaus (talk) 14:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep after the addition of sources by HerBauhaus. Really interesting article by the way. I love colors. Iljhgtn (talk) 06:40, 9 May 2025 (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.