text:
Acer saccharum

Acer saccharum, the sugar maple, is a species of flowering plant in the soapberry and lychee family Sapindaceae. It is native to the hardwood forests of eastern Canada and the eastern United States. Sugar maple is best known for being the primary source of maple syrup and for its brightly colored fall foliage. It may also be called "rock maple," "sugar tree," "sweet maple," or, particularly in reference to the wood, "hard maple," "birds-eye maple," or "curly maple," the last two being specially figured lumber.

Description
Acer saccharum is a deciduous tree normally reaching heights of 25 –, and exceptionally up to 45 m. A 10-year-old tree is typically about 5 m tall. As with most trees, forest-grown sugar maples form a much taller trunk and narrower canopy than open-growth ones.

The leaves are deciduous, up to 20 cm long and wide, palmate, with five lobes and borne in opposite pairs. The basal lobes are relatively small, while the upper lobes are larger and deeply notched. In contrast with the angular notching of the silver maple, however, the notches tend to be rounded at their interior. The fall color is often spectacular, ranging from bright yellow on some trees through orange to fluorescent red-orange on others. Sugar maples also have a tendency to color unevenly in fall. In some trees, all colors above can be seen at the same time. They also share a tendency with red maples for certain parts of a mature tree to change color weeks ahead of or behind the remainder of the tree. The leaf buds are pointy and brown-colored. The recent year's growth twigs are green, and turn dark brown.

The flowers are in panicles of five to ten together, yellow-green and without petals; flowering occurs in early spring after 30–55 growing degree days. The sugar maple will generally begin flowering when it is between 10 and 200 years old. The fruit is a pair of samaras (winged seeds). The seeds are globose, 7 – in diameter, the wing 2 – long. The seeds fall from the tree in autumn, where they must be exposed to 45 days of temperatures below 4 C to break their coating down. Germination of A. saccharum is slow, not taking place until the following spring when the soil has warmed and all frost danger is past. It is closely related to the black maple, which is sometimes included in this species, but sometimes separated as Acer nigrum. The western sugar maple (Acer grandidentatum) and southern sugar maple ((Acer floridanum) are also treated as a varieties or subspecies of northern sugar maple by some botanists.

The sugar maple can be confused with the Norway maple, which is not native to America but is commonly planted in cities and suburbs, and they are not closely related within the genus. The sugar maple is most easily identified by clear sap in the leaf petiole (the Norway maple has white sap), brown, sharp-tipped buds (the Norway maple has blunt, green or reddish-purple buds), and shaggy bark on older trees (the Norway maple bark has small grooves). Also, the leaf lobes of the sugar maple have a more triangular shape, in contrast to the squarish lobes of the Norway maple.

Ecology
The sugar maple is an extremely important species to the ecology of many forests in the northern United States and Canada. Pure stands are common, and it is a major component of the northern and Midwestern U.S. hardwood forests. Due to its need for cold winters, sugar maple is mostly found north of the 42nd parallel in USDA growing zones 3–5. It is less common in the southern part of its range (USDA Zone 6) where summers are hot and humid; there sugar maple is confined to ravines and moist flatlands. In the east, from Maryland southward, it is limited to the Appalachians. In the west, Tennessee represents the southern limit of its range and Missouri its southwestern limit. Collection of sap for sugar is also not possible in the southern part of sugar maple's range as winter temperatures do not become cold enough.

The minimum seed-bearing age of sugar maple is about 30 years. The tree is long-lived, typically 200 years and occasionally as much as 300.

Sugar maple is native to areas with cooler climates and requires a hard freeze each winter for proper dormancy. In northern parts of its range, January temperatures average about -18 C and July temperatures about 16 C; in southern parts, January temperatures average about 10 C and July temperatures average almost 27 C. Seed germination also requires extremely low temperatures, the optimal being just slightly above freezing, and no other known tree species has this property. Germination of sugar maple seed in temperatures above 50 F is rare to nonexistent.

Acer saccharum is among the most shade tolerant of large deciduous trees. Its shade tolerance is exceeded only by the striped maple, a smaller tree. Like other maples, its shade tolerance is manifested in its ability to germinate and persist under a closed canopy as an understory plant, and respond with rapid growth to the increased light formed by a gap in the canopy. Sugar maple can tolerate virtually any soil type short of pure sand, but does not tolerate xeric or swampy conditions.

Sugar maples are deeper-rooted than most maples and engage in hydraulic lift, drawing water from lower soil layers and exuding that water into upper, drier soil layers. This not only benefits the tree itself, but also many other plants growing around it.

The mushroom Pholiota squarrosoides is known to decay the logs of the tree.

Human influences have contributed to the decline of the sugar maple in many regions. Its role as a species of mature forests has led it to be replaced by more opportunistic species in areas where forests are cut over. The sugar maple also exhibits a greater susceptibility to pollution than other species of maple. Acid rain and soil acidification are some of the primary contributing factors to maple decline. Also, the increased use of salt over the last several decades on streets and roads for deicing purposes has decimated the sugar maple's role as a street tree.

In some parts of New England, particularly near urbanized areas, the sugar maple is being displaced by the Norway maple. The Norway maple is also highly shade tolerant, but is considerably more tolerant of urban conditions, resulting in the sugar maple's replacement in those areas. In addition, Norway maple produces much larger crops of seeds, allowing it to out-compete native species.

Maple syrup and other food use
The sugar maple is one of the most important Canadian trees, being, with the black maple, the major source of sap for making maple syrup. Other maple species can be used as a sap source for maple syrup, but some have lower sugar content and/or produce more cloudy syrup than these two. In maple syrup production from Acer saccharum, the sap is extracted from the trees using a tap placed into a hole drilled through the phloem, just inside the bark. The collected sap is then boiled. As the sap boils, the water evaporates and the syrup is left behind. Forty gallons of maple sap produces 1 gallon of syrup. In the southern part of their range, sugar maples produce little sap; syrup production is dependent on the tree growing in cooler climates.

The samaras which are the seeds can be soaked, and—with their wings removed—boiled, seasoned, and roasted to make them edible. The young leaves and inner bark can be eaten raw or cooked.

Timber
The sapwood can be white, and smaller logs may have a higher proportion of this desirable wood. Bowling alleys and bowling pins are both commonly manufactured from sugar maple. Trees with wavy wood grain, which can occur in curly, quilted, and "birdseye maple" forms, are especially valued. Maple is also the wood used for basketball courts, including the floors used by the NBA, and it is a popular wood for baseball bats, along with white ash. In recent years, because white ash has become threatened by emerald ash borer, sugar maple wood has increasingly displaced ash for baseball bat production. It is also widely used in the manufacture of musical instruments, such as the members of the violin family (sides and back), guitars (neck), grand pianos (rim), and drum shells. It is also often used in the manufacture of sporting goods.

Canadian maple, often referred to as "Canadian hardrock maple", is prized for pool cues, especially the shafts. Some production-line cues will use lower-quality maple wood with cosmetic issues, such as "sugar marks", which are most often light brown discolorations caused by sap in the wood. The best shaft wood has a very consistent grain, with no marks or discoloration. Sugar marks usually do not affect how the cue plays, but are not as high quality as those without it. The wood is also used in skateboards, gunstocks, and flooring for its strength. Canadian hardrock maple is also used in the manufacture of electric guitar necks due to its high torsional stability and the bright, crisp resonant tone it produces. If the grain is curly, with flame or quilt patterns, it is usually reserved for more expensive instruments. In high-end guitars this wood is sometimes Torrefied to cook out the Lignin resins, allowing the greater stability to climate & environmental changes, and to enhance its tonal characteristics as the instrument's resonance is more evenly distributed across the cellulose structure of the wood without the lignin.

Urban planting
Sugar maple was a favorite street and park tree during the 19th century because it was easy to propagate and transplant, is fairly fast-growing, and has beautiful fall color. As noted above, however, it proved too delicate to continue in that role after the rise of automobile-induced pollution and was replaced by Norway maple and other hardier species. It is intolerant of road salt. Sugar Maples are commonly planted as a street tree in cities within the Mountain West region of the United States, usually a different cultivar such as the “Legacy” sugar maple. The shade and the shallow, fibrous roots may interfere with grass growing under the trees. Deep, well-drained loam is the best rooting medium, although sugar maples can grow well on sandy soil which has a good buildup of humus. Light (or loose) clay soils are also well known to support sugar maple growth. Poorly drained areas are unsuitable, and the species is especially short-lived on flood-prone clay flats. Its salt tolerance is low and it is very sensitive to boron. The species is also subject to defoliation when there are dense populations of larvae of Lepidoptera species like the rosy maple moth (Dryocampa rubicunda).

Cultivars

 * 'Apollo' – columnar
 * 'Arrowhead' – pyramidal crown
 * 'Astis' ('Steeple') – heat-tolerant, good in southeastern USA, oval crown
 * 'Bonfire' – fast growing
 * 'Caddo' – naturally occurring southern ecotype or subspecies, from Southwestern Oklahoma, great drought and heat tolerance, good choice for the Great Plains region
 * 'Columnare' ('Newton Sentry') – very narrow
 * 'Fall Fiesta' – tough-leaved, colorful in season, above-average hardiness
 * 'Goldspire' – columnar with yellow-orange fall color
 * 'Green Mountain' (PNI 0285) – durable foliage resists heat and drought, oval crown, above-average hardiness
 * 'Inferno' – possibly the hardiest cultivar, with more red fall color than 'Lord Selkirk' or 'Unity'
 * 'Legacy' – tough, vigorous and popular
 * 'Lord Selkirk' – very hardy, more upright than other northern cultivars
 * 'Monumentale' – columnar
 * 'September Flare' - very hardy, early orange-red fall color
 * 'Sweet Shadow' – lacy foliage
 * 'Temple's Upright' – almost as narrow as 'Columnare'
 * 'Unity' – very hardy, from Manitoba, slow steady growth

Use by Native Americans
The Mohegan use the inner bark as a cough remedy, and the sap as a sweetening agent, and to make maple syrup following the introduction of metal cookware by Europeans.

Big trees
The United States national champion for Acer saccharum is located in Charlemont, Massachusetts. In 2007, the year it was submitted, it had a circumference of 5.92 m at 1.3 m above the ground's surface, and thus a diameter at breast height of about 1.88 m. At that time the tree was 34.1 m tall with an average crown spread of 27.7 m. Using the scoring system of circumference in inches plus height in feet plus 25% of crown spread in feet resulted in a total number of 368 points at the National Register of Big Trees. A tree in Lyme, Connecticut, measured in 2012, had a circumference of 18.25 ft, or an average diameter at breast height of about 5.8 ft. This tree had been 123 ft tall with a crown spread of 86 ft, counting for a total number of 364 points.

In popular culture
The sugar maple is the state tree of the US states of New York, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

It is depicted on the state quarter of Vermont, issued in 2001.

title: Acer saccharum


text:
Talk:Drag equation

Why this isn't on the drag coefficient page
Nothing on this page is really something that should not be included on the drag coefficient page as far as i can see... (i have a doctorate in theology and i've based my thesis on this! ) byo 01:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Drag equation is a good well bounded topic, and this article is about complete. Drag coefficient is where all the details come it. That page could be greatly expanded in the future, if anyone was interested. Drag Coefficient is however an advertising term, and as you see, that article is overrun by car pictures. Meggar 05:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I think separating the topics of Drag Coefficient and Drag Equation is good - just look at the mess the discussion of Lift Coefficient has become. 194.98.70.136 (talk) 13:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)tom

Can people clarify

 * 1) Is the drag coefficient a property of the object, or of the object and the fluid in combination? (i.e. if I switch fluids, does the coefficient change?)
 * 2) What is the "reference area"? Is it something like "the projection of the object onto a plane perpendicular to the direction of motion"?

 * Cd is a function of the Reynolds number, which depends on the viscosity and density of the fluid, among other things. Reference area is now described (I won't go so far as to say defined) in the article.  -- Heron

--Ryguasu 00:23 Jan 27, 2003 (UTC)

velocity squared

 * Of particular importance is the V² dependence on velocity, meaning that fluid drag increases with the square of velocity. A car cruising on a highway at 50mph may require only 10 horsepower to overcome air drag, but that same car at 100mph requires 40hp. In other words, doubling the car's velocity quadruples the power needed to overcome air resistance. Contrast this with other types of friction that generally do not vary at all with velocity.

 * I don't get it. In the above example, since the drag force quadruples with a doubling of velocity, wouldn't the power required increase by a factor of eight?

 * You are absolutely correct, and I am sorry for the error. I didn't translate properly from my head into the text :) Jcobb 20:55, Apr 3, 2004 (UTC)

Could someone look this up or at least explain this? Looking at drag/horsepower calculators on the internet, there seems to be a split between camps which claim that the power required goes up by a factor of 4 or 8. 204.86.34.1 12:54, 2005 September 13.

 * See if the last sentence is any better now. Meggar 03:37, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I am also confused. If ones velocity goes up by a factor of two, v^2 goes up by a factor of 4 NOT 8. I'm confused as to why some think that it would go up by a factor of 8... Fresheneesz 06:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Ok i'm not confused anymore. I fixed up the page and added a section on power. Fresheneesz 06:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

This page is incorrect. By simply squaring the velocity, the force is not a vector. 72.84.88.38 (talk) 17:40, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

deleted section
While a dimensional analysis can be done with any equation, it doesn’t necessarily lead to a result pertinent to the article. As I understand the policy page the entry remains original research while without a supporting reference demonstrating a direct relation. There are other reasons I believe that it shouldn’t be included; original research ought to be the easiest. Meggar 05:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Its more than a dimensional analysis, its a quick derivation of the drag equation (to within a constant). The derivation of an equation is certainly relevant to an article devoted to that equation. The only thing better would be a full derivation. A reference is "Dimensional Analysis" by H.E. Huntley, page 103. What other problems are there? PAR 03:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Low velocity
The second of the "drag" discussions omits the low-velocity case discussed in the first, where drag is linear with velocity. (Marty, 8 May 2006)

 * As speed becomes low and drag is more a linear function of speed then Cd will change and the result will be hold correct. Of course this is a dynamic formula, so in a situation where viscous drag predominates it would not be concidered an appropriate tool. Meggar 04:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

units table = useless
Any units for any of those parameters can be used. Why have an incomplete units table to take up more space? Fresheneesz 06:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand
I don't get it. Can someone please explain to me why a derivation of the drag equation does not belong in an article on the drag equation? PAR 01:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I will try to explain, but this might take some work for both of us. It is not derived from anything. It is an exact representation of the physical model mentioned in the article. That is all there is to it. Seems too simple; but Rayleigh was known for taking bafflingly complex problems and making simple solutions that, as in this case, are as good as ever a hundred years later. Pause a while and admire the coincidence of both elegance and utility in this small equation. Meggar 05:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

 * But the physical model (as noted in the article) is unrealistic. The dimensional analysis method is not; it shows that a realistic model (whatever it may be) will give the same results as long as the given parameters are sufficient to describe the model. I do admire the coincidence of both elegance and utility in this small equation, but then the dimensional analysis method is known for taking bafflingly complex problems and making simple solutions that do not rely on unrealistic models which happen to yield correct results. This is not to put down Rayleigh - I will bet that his intuition was dimensional in nature and he cooked up this simple model as a way to convey the essential aspects of the problem and its solution. Dimensional analysis is a more elegant and general approach to the problem. I know that the application of dimensional analysis is not as simple and straightforward and may take some time to appreciate, but its not like the reader is being forced to understand it in order to read the rest of the article. If the learning curve is too steep, then they can skip it, if not, they can learn and appreciate it. PAR 15:09, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay what in the world?!??!?!?
I've been snooping around the internet today (as alaways) and I see that on every page in the world there is a different drag equation!

Can someone explain this? Is there more than one drag equation out there, because I need an official set-down equation.

And I actually think the equation on this article is COMPLETELY wrong, because on NASA's site, it has a different equation (like despite the fact it is arranged differently, the whole negitive 1/2 thing isn't right)... Hyperkraz

 * I looked at NASA's "modern" version an it is the same except for a sign change, and NASA uses r instead of ρ for density. The sign change is not a big problem, just remember that the force is opposite to the direction of the velocity. The Wiki article defines the plus direction as the direction of the velocity, the NASA article defines the plus direction as the direction of the force. PAR 03:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Agree. There is only one equation but for arrangement and symbols. The 1/2 is correct. The negitive sign is optional. It makes sense if we look at velocity as the body moving through the fluid, not as the fluid is moving over the body. We should leave it off to be more general, drag only acts one way or we would have to call it something else. Meggar 02:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with Meggar in that the equation should be generalized to the positive form, leaving the user of the equation to determine whether or not the negative sign should be used, based upon the assumed directions of the specific problem. I would like to point out that the equations on the drag coefficient/equation pages should be the same, otherwise wiki users who aren't familiar with the particular equation will become easily confused, as the user who added this discussion section was. I am rather adamant about this correlation, so I will post a comment on the coefficient discussion page to see if this inconsistency is corrected. If there is no change within a week, I will change the one on this page since it is the one that uses an assumption in direction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlboyce (talk • contribs) 14:53, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Land Speed
amd why does 'land speed' redirect to here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seb-Gibbs (talk • contribs) 22:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge "Drag (physics) derivations" into "Drag equation"
I propose to merge Drag (physics) derivations into here, since they contain in large parts the same information. This article (i.e. "Drag equation") seems to be more dynamic and developing, so I suggest to keep this one and to make "Drag (physics) derivations" a redirect to here. -- Crowsnest (talk) 21:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * There were no objections, so I performed the merger. -- Crowsnest (talk) 11:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted sentence
I deleted this sentence from the intro:

 * "The reference for a wing would be the plane area rather than the frontal area."

What is the plane area? area of the plane? (what plane?) Area of the airplane? (what part of the surface of the airplane?). If you want to reinsert the sentence, please revise it to make it clear. Thank you. Paolo.dL (talk) 14:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

 * The conventional definition of "wing area" for Drag, Lift and Performance Calcs is usual Planform Area (the area if you drew it on a piece of paper looking from above). But other disciplines/industries/professions use reference areas more relevant to themselves. The key thing is you make sure you use the consistent one for the domain you are working in. 194.98.70.136 (talk) 13:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)tom

Example possible ?
A Boeing 707 had 4 engines with 19.000 pound drag force each. In Newton that gets around 4 * 4.44 * 19000 = 337400 N or 337.4 kN for all four engines together. Can the acceleration be calculated from this (airspeed= 0, altitude = 0 m above sea level) supposed a full thrust when pilot releases the breakes ? Acceleration in m/s2, and speed at any given time, and how much runway that remains at any given time (f.i. 3300 m, at release of the breakes) all 337.4 kN used all the time at runway ? I would be very glad if someone can help me with this example. If possible. 83.249.168.151 (talk) 23:56, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the initial acceleration can be calculated very easily. The acceleration in m/s2 is simply the total thrust (in N) from all engines divided by the mass of the airplane (in kg). It is only the initial acceleration that can be calculated easily in this way because as speed increases the drag on the airplane and the rolling friction force on the wheels become increasingly significant and those two forces are unknown. Airplane manufacturers have to measure actual take-off distances in order to publish information about the required take-off distance. Dolphin  ( t ) 00:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Thanks very much. At max gross weight the B707 weight 143335 kg. (Source is Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 and a downloaded B707) "Ideal acceleration" (without concideration of air and rolling friction) should then be 337400 N / 143335 kg = 2.35 m/s2 !? I've experimented a bit with this issue and have come to the conclution that the average acceleration up to 180 knots is around 1.6 m/s2 in this simulation. As You state friction makes the difference 83.249.168.151 (talk) 02:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

"Derivation"
I strongly think the current "derivation" is completely bogus, since it is not directly grounded on physical laws and starting with the definition of the drag coefficient (the line $$C_D=\frac{F_D}{\frac{1}{2}\rho Au^2}$$), immediately reveals itself to be (quasi-)circular logic, since one had no idea that such a coefficient would have such a dependence without the drag equation itself.

If it is merely an empirical result such as that with a coefficient of friction, then we should leave it at that. If, as I suspect, more fundamental physical laws can be used to derive it, then that should be given as the derivation. One cannot "derive" an equation in physics without it being either a fundamental physical law, or using other already-known equations (including assumptions).--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes, "derivation" is maybe too strong a word, and should be reserved for arguments from more basic principles. The argument is not bogus, though. It's a dimensional analysis argument, and *assuming* you have collected the relevant physical parameters, the conclusions are sound. PAR (talk) 03:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Drag equation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080414225930/http://www.ac.wwu.edu:80/~vawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Dynamics/Forces/DragForce.html to http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~vawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Dynamics/Forces/DragForce.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:01, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Should we mention Mach number here
Should we mention Mach number eg in the Experimental methods section ? or should we move that section to the Coefficient of drag article ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

 * I don't think Mach number should be mentioned in this article. The drag equation at the centre of this article is an equation applicable only in sub-transonic flow (speeds below the drag-rise Mach number.)
 * I see no good reason for the section on Experimental methods to be in this article. I think it should be moved somewhere more appropriate. Dolphin  ( t ) 12:36, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Drag equation


text:
Talk:Sesame Street

"The King Banishes the Letter P" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The King Banishes the Letter P and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 24 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678   05:27, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

'update at respects to histograms at my histogram(s)' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:4C02:9379:6089:4CBA:8686:DAA3 (talk) 21:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

List of episodes
Is there a list of episodes for Sesame Street? If not, a list should be created.Cwater1 (talk) 03:55, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

 * @Cwater1, this is actually a question that comes up from time to time, although it's been a while. There has been a consenus to not create an episode list; see Talk:Sesame Street/Archive 3, which explains the reasons. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:41, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I see the point now. It would be a lot to fill since there are now 52 seasons which 53 coming soon. There is the Muppet wiki that has the episode guide. It was just an idea. It's a good thing I brought it up on the talk page rather than trying to create a list.Cwater1 (talk) 05:52, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Cwater1, it wasn't a horrible question. ;) Yes, it would have been a total waste of your valuable time! 'Cause more than likely someone (like me) would've reverted it. There are so many other things to do here, especially with articles about The Show. Best, Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, Christine (Figureskatingfan). It has been quite a while. Just thought I come back and maybe see if just the list of seasons can be added, not the list of each episodes. I understand on why we are not adding the list of episodes. I am aware of Muppet Wiki like I said last time.

Cwater1 (talk) 04:43, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

 * @Cwater1, my feeling about episode lists is that I've always been against them. Of course, I was under the impression that episode lists refer to a list and description of each and every episode, like what Muppet Wiki does and what other WP articles about TV shows do (i.e., Ted Lasso), and I'm still opposed to it because, as I've said, that would make this article way too large and unwieldy. However, now that you've demonstrated the chart above, I'm willing to change my position. I think that including the chart above into this article would be fine, but I also think that you need to find as many sources as possible for the dates. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I can try to find good sources. There's nothing wrong with ideas. Wikipedia will always grow. Cwater1 (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe a list of episodes isn't all that necessary. I don't think the Wheel of Fortune (US show) article covers every episode there was. I think the Dr. Phil show was the same way. The Ellen DeGeneres show has episodes for who was on there. I do wish you all happy editing. Cwater1 (talk) 19:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I like the idea. I think that it's doable, although not likely a solo process. I'd be willing to work on it. Tvfunhouse (talk) 23:12, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Tune
I'm under the impression that the Sesame Street tune is based on this song from 1964: The Boy from New York City. Should a reference be placed? WritersBlok (talk) 15:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

 * Do you have a source for that claim, or is it just your original idea? Because the latter has no place in Wikipedia. I can hear some similarities, but without proof that it was an influence on the theme song, it's not appropriate to include. oknazevad (talk) 00:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit request
Reference [32] says SS YouTube has nearly 5 million subscribers. As of December 30, 2023, it has nearly 24 million. 2605:A601:A54B:2D00:859:B7C6:3161:99D4 (talk) 23:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sesame Street


text:
Talk:Roman à clef

TV Shows?
Da Vinci's Inquest/Da Vinci's City Hall are widely-known to be based on former Vancouver coroner and then mayor Larry Campbell. Could a section on TV shows be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.70.15 (talk) 05:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably better added as a subsection in Film à clef. Heavenlyblue (talk) 20:19, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

2003 - 2007
The X-files reference seems pointless and silly (and I'm a fan of the show) - I'm inclined to cut it. Thoughts?Danmusic 05:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

In disambiguating Mapping, I just unlinked it from this page, since it didn't seem be being used in any technical sense. Certainly the use here doesn't match any of the technical sense on that page if it's allowed for an event or character in the novel to correspond to more than one event or character in real life (which it seems to me does happen sometimes). However, if it is being used in a technical sense, then please let me know -- or better yet, add this sense to the Mapping article! -- Toby 23:57 Jan 26, 2003 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I wasn't using it a technical sense, precisely. I was using it as a single word encapsulating the meaning "data indicating the one-to-one correspondence between elements in set A and elements in set B.". One event or character in the novel corresponds exactly with one event or character in real life (in a true roman à clef), so it's close to the technical meaning. Is the term, in my non-mathematical sense, in common usage, or is it just how I think about things? -- Dreamword 02:19 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)

I'm sure that the use of the term here is certainly appropriate.What I wonder is about is a link to an article discussing a technical use of that term. If a given character in a true roman à clef can only correspond to at most one item in real life, then this would qualify as a function (or at least a partial function, but that distinction is probably an irrelevant technicality), but I'll let you decide if a link to Function (as mapping, presumably) is a good idea or not. -- Toby 03:47 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

 * I'm inclined to leave it unlinked and, if anything, replace "mapping" with "correspondence." (Goes to show what havoc occurs when a trivium guy starts using quadrivium terms...) -- Dreamword 18:43 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

Well, to the extent that the quadrivium is about the various guises of number, then that must be me! ^_^ -- Toby 05:39 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)

Re: The Devil Wears Prada: if the author denies that a character is modelled on a specific figure then we need some convincing evidence to the contrary before we call it roman a clef and put it in the list. Even if the evidence for that one figure was overwhelming I'm not sure one figure drawn from life a roman a clef makes. -- Antaeus Feldspar 11:51, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There is far too much list and not enough article here. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:36, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Indeed there is too much list. A few examples across a variety of times and places would be sufficient.  Perhaps a separate entry containing a list of famous romans a clef  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.94.210.205 (talk) 13:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Worse, the list doesn't look like a very good list. An autobiographical novel like "The Bell Jar" is such an open door that no clef is called for. Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood" seems to me more of a Reuters transcript than a novel of any kind. Orwell wrote allegories, or perhaps homilies, but Stalins are so common in history, and indeed in the news, that again there is no lock-key correspondence to be seen. Naming Jack Kerouac screams out for the novel this wiki-writer has in mind, at risk of falling into the old "This is a roman à clef about so-and-so" jape. I didn't know Hunter Thompson had written any novels, I thought it was all journalism, and so it goes.
 * Lord Fnord (talk) 14:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Re: Re: The Devil Wears Prada: For that matter, the figure drawn from life must not be the author -- half of contemporary lit fic would be roman a clef if that were so, and thus Tim O'Brien's "The Things They Carried" is far from the form. I think it's also a given that the models for the fiction have already enjoyed some celebrity or notoriety -- part of the fun of reading a roman a clef is the chance to figure out who is being spoofed. If the author is just writing about a friend or relative and changes the name, they're not playing the game. 70.33.85.166 06:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Would it not be, rather, that not ONLY the author must be drawn from life, but a large part of the cast of characters?       Heavenlyblue (talk) 20:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

English Language Bias
While the list is interesting there is a clear English language bias. It might therefore be useful to include examples from other languages and cultures, not just to expand the list but also to note if there truly is an Anglo-American cultural oddity. The expression seems French; it might therefore be worthwhile to add something on the history of the expression.

I know there are examples in Norwegian literature (one case that relates to the internal world of publishers, a few years ago) but this is too small a country to be of general interest.

 * Given the value of this technique in avoiding controversy, I expect that it has been used since the very origins of writing. Vectro 20:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Please add what you have.   Heavenlyblue (talk) 19:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I would call it bias. After all, this is an English language project. But point taken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.94.210.205 (talk) 13:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

A Dance to the Music of Time
The article summarises this series as a "sequence of twelve novels satirising English cultural and political life in the middle of the 20th century." The series includes satire, but that's only one of its strands, and by no means the chief one. I'm not sure how one would do "Dance" justice in a one liner, but feel that this brave attempt falls short. Countersubject 13:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

proust
"In Search of Lost Time by Marcel Proust is perhaps the epitome of the roman a clef novel, winding through 3000 pages of Scott-Moncrieff's translation of the authentic French text, it lays down the complexities and subtleties of life for future 20th century authors to utilize at their discretion." i am aware it is semi autobiographical, which i suppose makes it roman a clef, but what is all the rest of that? it sounds to me like an overzealous fan, but i'm not precisely sure what it's getting at so i don't want to snip it. --dan 04:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Citizen Kane
I think Citizen Kane is a far more notable, more famous and just plain better example of roman à clef in cinema than The Great Dictator. Any detractors? --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 17:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Sounds right to me.   Heavenlyblue (talk) 20:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

 * And so it is included in Film à clef. 99.120.130.167 (talk) 13:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The Great Gatsby
This novel is "a comment on the prohibition of alcohol sales"? Really? I know it's many things to many critics, but this seems an odd way to characterize the novel. 152.78.64.180 (talk) 16:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Seconded. It reads more like an attack on society and socialites. Prohibition is a minor detail in the main character's backstory, nothing more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.171.163.185 (talk) 12:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Removed. Whatever it is, it is not a roman a clef. elpincha (talk) 01:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Roman à clef and Faction
It's my position that these two terms both identify the same literary device. Any possible distinction between the two would be limited to scope. For example, it may be argued that "roman à clef" is best limited to novels in the strict sense of the word, while faction could apply to other formats, like films, short stories, novellas. But that's arguable, too. Some argue that "Roman à clef" has evolved to include more than just the traditional novel. Regardless, the word "faction", although not always found in dictionaries, is common enough that both terms need to co-exist on the same page, because recent authors of novels are indeed using the word "faction" to describe a roman à clef, perhaps because of the obvious awkward sound and spelling of the French term as it appears to the English speaker. One such author is the well-known writer Fr. Malachi Martin, Ph.D, author of numerous books under his own name and pen names, who talked about the word "faction" and its history in interviews (available on YouTube), and how it applied to his roman à clef, "Windswept House." He used the word "faction" despite the fact that he was fluent in French and a number of other languages. There is no other distinction between the two as to time perspective, etc.

Also see, for example: http://wordsmith.org/words/roman_a_clef.html

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_%C3%A0_clef

Indeed, the word "faction" is a rather recent invention, but one that is being used by multiple writers of novels that are romans à clef.

I'm going to let others decide and do the editing. MeSoStupid (talk) 02:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

 * So, you're claiming the word "faction" was creaded by Fr. Malachi Martin to support his book? I think, perhaps, that may be sufficient evidence to delete the article entirely.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 07:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure that wordsmith.org qualifies as a reliable source; are there any sources like usage in newspapers and magazines by people who are, say, professional literary critics? Any use in academic journals?  Accounting4Taste: talk 15:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi - see here. I'll keep looking. It's difficult to search for because the word obviously has alternative meanings that are more common. MeSoStupid (talk) 03:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

This is information about the book noted at the above link: A History of American Literary Journalism: The Emergence of a Modern Narrative Form, University of Massachusetts Press (2000). Book of the Year Award, American Journalism Historians Association (2001). History Award, AEJMC History Division (2001). This information comes from the author's webpage. MeSoStupid (talk) 05:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Rubin also just deleted again my addition of the book "Windswept House" to the list of notable books saying it wasn't "notable", despite that fact that this book is very noteworthy and created quite a bit of controversy. It's more well-known than most of the books on the list. A key to the real identities of the character is available online, to which Martin remarked was "well done." In interviews, he stated the book was at least 80% real events. See [ http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=15689 here]. This book created a lot of controversy in the world of Catholicism especially because Father Malachi Martin claimed to have been one of a limited number of persons shown the original Third Secret of Fatima in February, 1960, and claims were made about it in this book. After the book came out, Martin then appeared on national radio in the United States, Coast to Coast, and made claims about the contents of the Third Secret which had been suppressed for nearly forty years by the Church. These interviews are available on Youtube, where he discusses his book, and also the history and use of the word "faction." Less than two years later, and less than a year after Martin's death, the Vatican Secretary of State released what it claimed to be the authentic Third Secret, only to be accused of not divulging the true or whole Third Secret by quite a number of well-known Catholics in part due to Malachi Martin's claims, including Mother Angelica, founder of the EWTN television network. Multiple books were then published contradicting the Vatican Secretary of State's release. As a side note, I've been having quite a lot of problems with user Arthur Rubin, and there is a current case pending against him. MeSoStupid (talk) 04:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

After you read Arthur Rubin's comment to this section asserting that I was claiming that Malachi Martin "creaded"[sic] the term to support his book, and then compare it to what I actually wrote, I think it's quite revealing. MeSoStupid (talk) 21:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

. Notable, but better known than others in the list? I think not.
 * "Amazon.com Sales Rank: #154,565 in Books"
 * And you did attribute the use of the word "faction" to the author of this book. Since I couldn't find a more reliable source for the term, I assumed you were telling the truth, that he did create the term.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 22:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The Amazon sales rank doesn't reflect total sales of books. It's based on sales over a recent period. A sales rank for a book is often much higher when the book is first released than it is a year later. That number doesn't have particular relevance here. Also, I found other books on the list that are up in the millions or over 500,000 on this ranking list, so I don't exactly understand your point. I said it was more well-known than most of the books on the list, i.e. more well-known than over half of them. MeSoStupid (talk) 02:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * "Faction" is an ugly, stupid, and useless brutilization of the English language. There's no need whatsoever to discuss it in this article. TheScotch (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Roman à clef versus autobiography and historical fiction
I'm concerned that the criteria for the "Notable romans à clef" list are too broad. The list includes many titles that are simply "autobiography" or "historical fiction," not specifically roman à clef. I just added Orwell's "Animal Farm" to the list; in fact, I was surprised that it wasn't already there because it really is a perfect modern example. The roman à clef doesn't simply include real-life characters under pseudonyms or recount real events under fictional guise; it is most often a thinly veiled polemic or social critique of a contemporary situation. It is different from something like Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises" or Kerouac's "On the Road," books which are informed by real people and events but function as autonomous works of fiction and transcend contemporaneity. These examples (as well as many others on the current list -- "The Bell Jar," "Buddenbrooks," etc.) don't belong in the same category as "Animal Farm," which has more to do with allegory and satire. I don't want to use my example as a new criterion of inclusion, but only as a reminder that the list ought to be precise. There are other places on Wiki for about 50% of these titles. Trrenaud (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Animal Farm is not a perfect example (though it is one interpretation), because it is heavily fictionalized in the interests of making a readable story - allegory/parable is not the same as roman a clé. I agree though that the example list would ideally be massively culled to say 6 solid examples. But people are always going to want to edit the page to add their own favourite books, so this isn't really likely unless you fancy fighting edit wars for all eternity. I think concise lists of examples are one area where a freely-editable wikipedia is doomed to fail. 79.72.98.50 (talk) 17:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Imply vs Infer
In the last sentence, first paragraph:
 * "This "key" may be produced separately by the author, or inferred through the use of epigraphs or other literary devices.[3]"

The one who is "using" epigraphs or other literary devices here can only be the author, therefor the key is being "implied", rather than "inferred" in this sentence. I'll change it. Heavenlyblue (talk) 20:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Added links
I have added links for the following: 99.120.130.167 (talk) 12:39, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Jean V de Bueil
 * Carl Van Vechten
 * Harlem Renaissance
 * Las Vegas
 * James A. Pike
 * William Woodward, Jr.
 * Chandra Levy
 * Ciudad Juárez
 * Sonora

WorldCat Genres
Maximilianklein (talk) 23:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Roman à clef


text:
Sugar Minott

Lincoln Barrington "Sugar" Minott (25 May 1956 – 10 July 2010) was a Jamaican reggae and dancehall singer, record producer and sound-system operator.

Biography
After working as a selector on the Sound of Silence Keystone sound system, and then his own Gathering of Youth system, he began his singing career as part of The African Brothers in 1969, along with Tony Tuff and Derrick Howard. The group released several singles in the first half of the 1970s on labels such as Micron and their own Ital label, and were an early example of the Rastafari movement's influence on the Jamaican music scene, taking a clear lead from The Abyssinians. After recording "Mysterious Nature" for producer Rupie Edwards, the group recorded 1974's "No Cup No Broke" for Studio One, breaking up shortly after. Minott then teamed up with the producer Clement "Coxsone" Dodd, as studio apprentice at Dodd's Studio One, working as a singer, guitarist and percussionist, and soon began recording his own singles. Minott developed a talent for writing new songs to fit over existing rhythms (which at the time was common when singers performed live, but rare in the studio), often proving more popular than the original songs, pioneering an approach that would be central to the emerging dancehall style.

After a number of moderately successful hits for Studio One, such as "Vanity", "Hang On Natty", "Mr. DC", and "Jah Jah Children", his debut LP Live Loving made his name and increased his popularity, and is regarded as pioneering the dancehall style that would dominate the early 1980s. It was followed in 1979 with a second album, Showcase, which included his singles that had been omitted from the first album.

The Bittersweet album followed, and then the third album of 1979, Ghetto-ology, which saw a return to roots reggae. Roots Lovers (1980) saw a move towards lovers rock, which was a UK hit. He became a bigger star in the UK than in Jamaica, his self-produced "Hard Time Pressure" being a major UK reggae hit in 1980, leading Minott to relocate to the UK, where he became a focus for UK reggae.

Singles such as "Run Come", "Not for Sale", "African Girl", "Lovers Rock", "In a Dis Ya Time", "Africa" and "Make It with You" (with Carroll Thompson) were hits in the years that followed. "Good Thing Going" (a cover of a song originally recorded by Michael Jackson in 1971) was picked up for distribution by RCA and reached Number 4 in the UK Singles Chart in March 1981, leading to an album of the same name. The Herbman Hustling album saw a return to dancehall and roots reggae.

He released an album of recordings from Channel One Studios, With Lots Of Extra in 1983, collecting several hits from his time working with Winston Holness.

Returning to Jamaica, his Youth Promotion sound system performed regularly in Kingston's Maxfield Park, featuring Jah Stitch and newcomers who had been nurtured by his organization such as Ranking Joe, Captain Sinbad, and Ranking Dread. His Black Roots label featured his productions of these artists plus others such as Barry Brown, Tenor Saw, Little John, Tony Tuff, Barrington Levy, Horace Andy, and one of his discoveries from England, Trevor Hartley. Minott also produced early works by Nitty Gritty, Junior Reid, Yami Bolo, Colourman, Daddy Freddy and Garnett Silk.

In 1980s he was working with producers in Jamaica including, Mikey Dread, George Phang, Sly and Robbie, Philip "Fatis" Burrell, Channel One, Prince Jammy, and Donovan Germain, as well as recording for United States-based Lloyd "Bullwackie" Barnes (the Wicked A Go feel It album from 1984). His biggest hits included "Herbman Hustling", "No Vacancy", "Jamming in the Street", "Rub A Dub Sound", "Buy Off The Bar", "Rydim", and "Devil's Pickney".

He linked up with Sly and Robbie for 1984's "Rub a Dub Sound Style" single, which is regarded as a prototype for the ragga style that developed in the mid-1980s. Sugar Minott continued to record on his Black Roots label, Youth Promotion Label and for Major and Independent labels. His albums receive increasingly exciting reviews. He released over 60 albums and hundreds of singles. He is one of the artists who appeared on the (2006) record, Radiodread, released by the Easy Star label, providing the guest vocals on the song "Exit Music (For a Film)".

Minott's desire for independence led him to leave Studio One in 1978 and form his own Black Roots Records label and Youth Promotion organization, the latter with the aim of helping young singers from the same ghetto background as himself. Minott also ran the Youthman Promotion sound-system, giving young performers their first public exposure. Youthman Promotion has new selectors working alongside the veterans of Major Stitch, Ragga Steve and Drifter, Daddy Ants, Mr Shorty and Jimmy Knuckles. The selectors most recently added to the sound are DiGeneral Starry B in 2007, alongside Poochiny and Jr War, who were added in 2012. Ragga Steve has taken full control of the sound with Earl Minott in the UK.

Minott married music executive Maxine Stowe, niece of Clement Coxsone Dodd in 1993, she was then working at Columbia Records. They met At Coxsone’s Music City in [[Brooklyn], New York in 1978, where they collaborated and produced the album ''Roots Lovers'#'#. They have four children, Rachiim, Jahson, Candice and Osunya. Sugar has 13 children with one, Alton, predeceasing him. The other children are Tamar, Lincoln Jr., Daniel, Debbie, Andrew, Tamar Elaine, Kelly & Linval.

Death
Minott died on 10 July 2010 at the University Hospital of the West Indies in St. Andrew Parish, Jamaica, after being admitted earlier that day. The cause of death remains undisclosed. He had been affected by a heart condition since early 2009, and cancelled several performances in May 2010 due to chest pains.

He is survived by his widow Maxine Stowe and 13 Children, grandchildren, brothers and sisters

In May 2012, a charity concert was held at his former home commemorating his birthday, with Minott's children (who include daughter Tamar, aka Pashon) joined by Bounty Killer, Sizzla, Beenie Man, Junior Reid, Ken Boothe and John Holt. Proceeds went to the Youthman Promotions Music Centre and other causes helping local poor people.

In 2019, he was honoured with a Reggae Gold award by the Jamaican government for his contributions as artist and producer.

Discography

 * Live Loving (1977, Studio One) Roots Archives states 1977, Discogs says release year is unknown
 * Showcase (1978, Studio One, probably a smaller edition in Jamaica by Studio One already 1977, ); reissued in US as Showcase (1992, Heartbeat) with different mixing; reissued as Jah Jah Children 2012
 * Black Roots (1979, Black Roots Records & Gorgon Records in Jamaica; 1979 by Mango for US and 1980 by Island Records for UK and (Germany) with other, shorter names on the 10 songs). The LP-album Black Roots, released for the Jamaican market on Black Roots Records, Gorgon Records and Thunder Bolt is dated 1978, so the album is recorded before the year 1979.
 * Bittersweet (1979, Gorgon Records in Jamaica; Warrior Records in UK); also released as Give The People (1979, United Artists Records) in UK
 * Ghetto – Ology (1979, Trojan) – reissued as Ghetto-ology + Dub (2000, Easy Star Records in US
 * Roots Lovers (1980, Black Roots); in Jamaica also released as Music for the Roots Lovers (1980?, Black Roots) with Sugar Minott & Black Roots Players
 * African Girl (1981, Black Roots); pre-release album was produced and released 1980
 * Sweeter Than Sugar (1981, Sonic Sounds for Jamaica, Hummingbird Records for US and UK)
 * Good Thing Going (1981, RCA for UK); (1982 Heartbeat for US); Re-issued with smaller edits as Good Thing Going (1994, Black Roots Records)
 * More Sugar Minott (1982, Studio One) – released on Jamaica
 * Dancehall Showcase (1983, Black Roots)
 * With Lots Of Extra (1983, Hitbound)
 * Herbman Hustling (1984, Black Roots)
 * Slice of the Cake (1984, Black Roots)
 * Wicked a Go Feel It (1984, Wackies)
 * Leader for the Pack (1985, Striker Lee)
 * Rydim (1985, Greensleeves)
 * Time Longer Than Rope (1985, Greensleeves)
 * Inna Reggae Dance Hall (1986, Black Roots)
 * Sugar & Spice (1986, Taxi)
 * Jamming in the Streets (1987, Wackies)
 * African Soldier (1988, Black Roots)
 * Buy Off De Bar (1988, Sonic Sounds)
 * Sugar Minott & Youth Promotion (1988, NEC)
 * Lovers Rock Inna Dance Hall (1988, Youth Promotion)
 * Sufferers Choice (1988, Black Roots)
 * Ghetto Youth Dem Rising (1988, Black Roots)
 * The Boss Is Back (1989, RAS)
 * Ghetto Child (1989, Black Roots)
 * Smile (1990, L&M)
 * A Touch of Class (1991, Jammy's)
 * Happy Together (1991, Black Roots)
 * Run Things (1993, VP)
 * Breaking Free (1994, RAS)
 * Stir it Up (feat. Daddy Freddy) (1994, Music of Life)
 * International (1996, RAS)
 * Musical Murder (1997, VP)
 * Good Thing Going (1998, VP)
 * Easy Squeeze (1999, World)
 * Simply the Best (2000), World
 * From the Heart (2000), Blackwacks
 * Leave Out a Babylon (2005), Discograph
 * In A Lovers Roots Style (2008), Pinnacle
 * Tribute to Studio One (2009), Tad's
 * New Day (2009), Stop Look Listen

 * Split albums:
 * Rockers Award Winners (1985, Greensleeves) (Sugar Minott & Leroy Smart)
 * Double Dose (1987, Blue Mountain) (Sugar Minott & Gregory Isaacs)
 * Showdown Volume 2 (Channel One) (Sugar Minott & Frankie Paul)

 * Compilations:
 * With Lots of Extra (1983, Hitbound)
 * Best of Vol 1 (1988, Black Roots)
 * Collectors Collection Vol 1 (1996, Black Roots)
 * RAS Portrait (1997, RAS)
 * Sugar Minott's Hidden Treasures (1999, Easy Star)
 * Hard Time Pressure: Reggae Anthology (2011, VP Records)

 * With the African Brothers:

title: Sugar Minott


text:
Motorola 68008

The Motorola 68008 is an 8/32-bit microprocessor introduced by Motorola in 1982. It is a version of 1979's Motorola 68000 with an 8-bit external data bus, as well as a smaller address bus. The 68008 was available with 20 or 22 address lines (respective to 48-pin or 52-pin package) which allowed 1 MB or 4 MB address space versus the 16 MB addressable on the 68000. The 68008 was designed to work with lower cost and simpler 8-bit memory systems. Because of its smaller data bus, it was roughly half as fast as a 68000 of the same clock speed. It was still faster than competing 8-bit microprocessors, because internally the 68008 behaves identically to the 68000 and has the same microarchitecture.

Motorola ended production of the 68008 in 1996.

Details
The 68008 is an HMOS chip with about 70,000 transistors; with a speed grade of 8 and 10 MHz. There are two versions of the chip. The original is in a 48-pin dual in-line package with a 20-bit address bus, allowing it to use up to 1 megabyte of memory. A later version is in a 52-pin plastic leaded chip carrier; this version has a 22-bit address bus and can support 4 megabytes of RAM.

Usages
The Sinclair QL microcomputer and Luxor ABC 1600 use the 68008 as their main processor.

title: Motorola 68008


text:
Biographical evaluation

Biographical evaluation (عِلْمُ الرِّجال; literally meaning 'Knowledge of Men', but more commonly understood as the Science of Narrators) refers to a discipline of Islamic religious studies within hadith terminology in which the narrators of hadith are evaluated. Its goal is to establish the credibility of the narrators, using both historic and religious knowledge, in order to distinguish authentic and reliable hadiths from unreliable hadiths. ʿIlm ar-rijāl is synonymous with what is commonly referred to as al-jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl (discrediting and accrediting) – the criticism and declared acceptance of hadith narrators.

Significance
In his Introduction to the Science of Hadith, Ibn al-Salah, a renowned hadith specialist, explained the importance of the study of hadith narrators. Introducing the chapter entitled, 'Recognizing the trustworthy, reliable narrators and those who are weak and unreliable,' Ibn al-Salah said, "This is from the most distinguished and noble types (of hadith study) as it results in recognizing the authenticity of a hadith or its weakness." He then explained that any criticism directed at a narrator was permissible due to the "maintenance of the Shariah, purging it of any mistakes or misinformation".

Stressing the importance of biographical evaluation, Ali ibn al-Madini, an early authority on the subject, said, "Knowing the narrators is half of knowledge."

Time of the Companions
While many Companions narrated hadith, according to Ahmad ibn Hanbal there were six who were the most prolific narrators of them, who lived long lives enabling them narrate to a large extent. They were: Abu Huraira, Abdullah ibn Umar, Aisha, Jabir ibn Abdullah, Ibn Abbas and Anas ibn Malik with Abu Huraira being the most prolific of them. According to Ibn al-Salah the most prolific narrators from the Companions was Abu Huraira followed by Ibn Abbas.

In spite of the Companions' efforts in narrating their hadith, there was no need for them to evaluate each other's narrating capabilities or trustworthiness. This is because, as Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi said, that Allah and his Prophet declared the Companions to be upright and trustworthy, and, therefore, there is no need to investigate their reliability, however, one must investigate the condition of those after them. However, there are many established narrations originating from the Companions praising some of the Tabi'un with some criticism of specific individuals from them.

After the Companions
As for the Tabi'un, the generation following the Companions, their praise of narrators was plentiful, while disparagement from them was seldom. Those narrators who were criticized from the Followers were not criticized for fabricating hadith, but, instead, due to heresy, such as the Kharijites, or due to weak memory or due to their condition as narrators being unknown.

Evaluating the narrators of hadith began in the generation following that of the Companions based upon the statement of Muhammad Ibn Sirin, "They did not previously inquire about the isnad. However, after the turmoil occurred they would say, 'Name for us your narrators.' So the people of the Sunnah would have their hadith accepted and the people of innovation would not." The turmoil referred to is the conflicting ideology of the Shias after the passing of the Prophet, and later the Kharijites that had emerged at the time of the third Sunni Caliph Uthman ibn Affan's assassination and the social unrest of the Kharijites in opposition to the succeeding rulers, Ali and Muawiyah. The death of Uthman was in the year 35 after the migration.

In the following generation, Tabi' al-Tabi'in, and afterward, the weak, unacceptable narrators increased in number, necessitating that a group of scholars clarify the condition of the narrators and distinguishing any narrations that were not authentic.

Early specialists
According to Ibn al-Salah, quoting an early religious authority, the first to specialize in the study of hadith narrators was Shuʿba Ibn al-Ḥajjāj, followed by Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan and then Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahya ibn Ma'in. Al-Bulqini added some names to the aforementioned: Ali ibn al-Madini and 'Amr ibn 'Ali al-Fallas, and then mentioned Malik ibn Anas and Hisham ibn Urwah as having preceded them in evaluating narrators.

Narrator criteria
A hadith is subject to criticism on the basis of two matters. The first relates to the continuity of the hadith's chain of narration; if there is discontinuity between two or more narrators, that hadith is criticized on this basis as discussed in depth in the hadith terminology article. The second relates to criticism of a narrator, or more, in the chain of narration of a particular hadith.

Hadith narrators are evaluated in light of two qualities in determining the overall grading of a hadith. These qualities are derived from the definition of a hadith that is sahih constituting two of its five conditions. The first, uprightness (al-ʻadālah), is defined as the ability an individual possesses to adhere to moralistic decorum (al-taqwā) and maintaining proper social graces (al-murūʼah). The second, precision (al-ḍabṭ), is of two types, the first is pertaining to memorization and the second to writing. Precision in memorization (ḍabṭ al-ṣadr) refers to the ability to retain the specified information, recalling and conveying it at will. Precision in writing (ḍabṭ al-kitāb) is the preservation of the written information from the time it was heard until its transmission.

Grounds for criticism
The grounds upon which a narrator is subject to criticism are numerous some relating to moral uprightness and others to precision. Ibn Ḥajr identified and enumerated ten qualities in which a narrator could be criticized. Five relate to trustworthiness and the other five to precision; however, he presented these ten qualities in order according to severity:
 * 1) A narrator intentionally lying, claiming a statement to be a Prophetic hadith when it is not. The inclusion of a narrator of a hadith as such renders that hadith fabricated (Mawḍūʻ).
 * 2) An accusation of fabricating a hadith. This would be due a narration that clearly contradicts established religious principles originating from the direction (as it pertains to that hadith's chain of narration) of that individual. Or, that a narrator is known to lie in his ordinary speech but not while narrating hadith.
 * 3) Plenitude of mistakes in a narrator's hadith.
 * 4) Lack of attention to accuracy.
 * 5) The commission of wrongdoing by statement or action as long as it does not constitute apostasy.
 * 6) Misconception due to narrating on the basis of misunderstanding.
 * 7) Contradiction of that narrator's hadith of another established narrator.
 * 8) Unspecification of that narrator's standing in their narrating capabilities.
 * 9) Heresy, being the belief in an innovated matter that contradicts the established religious practice originating with the Prophet due to a misconception, not obstinateness.
 * 10) Poor memory, differing from number three above in that the mistakes of that narrator outnumber instances in which they are correct.

Methods of evaluation
Hadith scholars of the past employed various methods by which to evaluate the narrating abilities of a narrator. From these means are the following:
 * 1) Observing that narrator's religiosity and asking others about it.
 * 2) Requesting the narrator in question to narrate from a particular living scholar and then returning to that scholar and comparing his narrations with those of the narrator under examination.
 * 3) If the narrator narrates from a deceased scholar, inquiring when he, the narrator in question, was born, when he met that scholar and where and then comparing the dates provided in his response to the recognized dates of that scholars death and travels. So, perhaps, the dates provided by the narrator may contradict the established dates, for example, claiming that he heard from a particular scholar after the recognized death of that scholar.
 * 4) Comparing the narrations of the narrator with those of narrators of established reliability, comparing them seeking any distinctions that might be unique to that narrator, in particular, while contradicting the others.
 * 5) Examination of the narrations either written or memorized by that narrator after the passage of time observing any discrepancies with their initial narrations.
 * 6) Deliberately altering the wording of a hadith or more for the purpose of examining the ability of the narrator being examined to detect those alterations. This is considered an acceptable practice as long as those alterations are brought to light following the examination process.

Evaluation terminology
As a result of the evaluation of narrators, each scholar would then conclude by describing the standing of each narrator. A system of terminology developed to codify the standing of each narrator, with some variation in usage of terms between the individual evaluators. These are divided into two categories, those terms that constitute praise (taʻdīl) and those that constitute criticism (jarḥ). al-Suyūṭī gathered the various terms and arranged them in order of strength. He quoted four levels of strength for praise from Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn al-Salah, adding that al-Dhahabi and Abd al-Rahim ibn al-Husain al-'Iraqi added an additional level and Ibn Ḥajr one above that. Thus according to al-Suyūṭī, there are six levels of praise. Similarly, al-Suyūṭī described six levels of terms used to criticize a narrator; he arranged them beginning with the least severe and concluding with the most severe criticism.

Levels of praise

 * 1) Ibn Ḥajr held that the highest level of praise was expressed was through the use of the superlative, for example, the most established of the people (athbat al-nās), or the most reliable of the people (awthaq al-nās).
 * 2) Al-'Iraqi and al-Dhahabi were of the opinion that the highest level was the repetition of adjective, or adjectives, in praising a narrator. For example, reliably reliable (thiqah thiqah), or reliable, firm (thiqah thabt).
 * 3) The highest level according to Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn al-Salah the highest is the use of a single adjective in describing a narrator. Examples of this are: reliable (thiqah), precise (mutqin) or firm (thabt).
 * 4) Trustworthy (ṣadūq) and worthy of trust (maḥallahu al-ṣidq) are both examples of the next category to Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn al-Salah while al-'Iraqi and al-Dhahabi consider the latter term to be from the next level.
 * 5) Next is respectable (shaykh) along with worthy of trust (maḥallahu al-ṣidq) according to some. This level would also be inclusive of an individual accused of heresy.
 * 6) The lowest of the levels of praise is, for example, satisfactory in hadith (ṣāliḥ al-ḥadīth), meaning according to Ibn Ḥajr, this includes acceptable (maqbūl) meaning, when supported by other narrators.

Levels of criticism

 * 1) The least severe level for the criticism of a narrator is soft in hadith (layyin al-ḥadīth) and, according to al-'Iraqi, they have spoken about him (takallamū fīhi). This level would also be taken into consideration as a corroborating narrator, but at a level less than the lowest level of praise.
 * 2) Next is he is not strong (laysa bi l-qawī). The hadith of a narrator determined to be at this level would also be taken into consideration, as with the previous level, however, this narrator is weaker than one of the previous level.
 * 3) More severe than he is not strong is weak in hadith (ḍaʻīf al-ḥadīth), however, none of these first three categories are rejected outright.
 * 4) The fourth of the levels of severity of criticism includes terms such as: his hadith is rejected (rudd al-ḥadīth) and very weak (ḍaʻīf jiddan).
 * 5) The fifth includes terms such as: his hadith is abandoned (matrūk al-ḥadīth) and destroyed (hālik).
 * 6) From the most severe level of terms of criticism are: compulsive liar (kadhdhāb), he lies (yakdhib) and fabricator (waḍḍāʻ) among other terms.

Sunni
Collections of narrator biographies are sometimes general and sometimes specific to particular categories of narrators. Among the most common of these categories are:

General evaluation

 * The Great History by Muhammad al-Bukhari.
 * al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʻdīl by Ibn Abi Hatim.

Particular to a specific period of time
Books particular to the Companions:
 * The Book of Knowledge about the Companions by Ali ibn al-Madini.
 * The Comprehensive Compilation of the Names of the Prophet's Companions by Yusuf ibn abd al-Barr.
 * Finding the Truth in Judging the Companinons by Ibn Ḥajr.
 * The Lions of the Forest and the knowledge about the Companions by Ali ibn al-Athir.

General chronology

 * The Book of the Major Classes by Ibn Sa'd al-Baghdadi.
 * Tadhkirat al-huffaz, The Memorial of the Hadith Masters, a chronological history of hadith scholars' biographies by al-Dhahabi.
 * Mizan al-Itidal by al-Dhahabi
 * Lisan al-Mizan by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, a reworking of Mizan al-'Itidal by al-Dhahabi.
 * Tahdhib al-Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
 * Taqrib al-Tahzib by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
 * Tarikh al-Islam al-kabir (تاريخ الإسلام) 'Great History of Islam' (50 vols., in Arabic); Ibn Hajar received it from Abu Hurayra ibn al-Dhahabi; comprising over 30,000 biographical records.
 * Siyar a`lam al-nubala (سير أعلام النبلاء) ('The Lives of Noble Figures') by al-Dhahabi, 28 volumes, a unique encyclopedia of biographical history.

Geographically specific

 * History of Baghdad by Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi.
 * History of Damascus by Ibn Asakir.

Gender specific

 * Al-Wafa bi Asma al-Nisa by Akram Nadwi

Evaluation of the narrators of specific books

 * Al-Kamal fi Asma' al-Rijal, by Abd al-Ghani al-Maqdisi, is a collection of the biographies of the narrators of the hadith contained in the Six major Hadith collections.
 * Tadhhib Tahdhib al-Kamal by al-Dhahabi; abridgement of al-Mizzi's abridgement of al-Maqdisi's Al-Kamal fi Asma' al-Rijal, a biographical compendium of hadith narrators from the Six major Hadith collections.

Shi'i
Early Shi'ite rijāl collections include:

 * Rijāl al-Barqī ("al-Barqī's Men"), by Aḥmad al-Barqī (died c. 893)
 * Ikhtiyār maʿrifat al-rijāl ("The Selection of the Knowledge of the Men"): an abridgement made by Shaykh Tusi (995–1067 CE) from the Rijāl al-Kashshī ("al-Kashshī's Men") by Muhammad ibn Umar al-Kashshi (c. 854–941/951)
 * Rijāl al-Najāshī ("al-Najāshī's Men"), by Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī al-Najāshī (c. 982–1058)
 * Fihrist kutub al-shīʿa ("The Catalogue of the Books of the Shi'ites"), by Shaykh Tusi (995–1067 CE)
 * Rijāl al-Ṭūsī ("al-Ṭūsī's Men"), by Shaykh Tusi (995–1067 CE)

title: Biographical evaluation


text:
Elementary charge

The elementary charge, usually denoted by e, is a fundamental physical constant, defined as the electric charge carried by a single proton or, equivalently, the magnitude of the negative electric charge carried by a single electron, which has charge −1 e.

In the SI system of units, the value of the elementary charge is exactly defined as $e$ = $1.602$ coulombs, or 160.2176634 zepto coulombs (zC). Since the 2019 redefinition of SI base units, the seven SI base units are defined by seven fundamental physical constants, of which the elementary charge is one.

In the centimetre–gram–second system of units (CGS), the corresponding quantity is $4.803 statcoulombs$.

Robert A. Millikan and Harvey Fletcher's oil drop experiment first directly measured the magnitude of the elementary charge in 1909, differing from the modern accepted value by just 0.6%. Under assumptions of the then-disputed atomic theory, the elementary charge had also been indirectly inferred to ~3% accuracy from blackbody spectra by Max Planck in 1901 and (through the Faraday constant) at order-of-magnitude accuracy by Johann Loschmidt's measurement of the Avogadro number in 1865.

As a unit
In some natural unit systems, such as the system of atomic units, e functions as the unit of electric charge. The use of elementary charge as a unit was promoted by George Johnstone Stoney in 1874 for the first system of natural units, called Stoney units. Later, he proposed the name electron for this unit. At the time, the particle we now call the electron was not yet discovered and the difference between the particle electron and the unit of charge electron was still blurred. Later, the name electron was assigned to the particle and the unit of charge e lost its name. However, the unit of energy electronvolt (eV) is a remnant of the fact that the elementary charge was once called electron.

In other natural unit systems, the unit of charge is defined as $$\sqrt{\varepsilon_0\hbar c},$$ with the result that $$e = \sqrt{4\pi\alpha}\sqrt{\varepsilon_0 \hbar c} \approx 0.30282212088 \sqrt{\varepsilon_0 \hbar c},$$ where $2,997,924,580$ is the fine-structure constant, $4.803$ is the speed of light, $ε_{0}$ is the electric constant, and $α$ is the reduced Planck constant.

Quantization
Charge quantization is the principle that the charge of any object is an integer multiple of the elementary charge. Thus, an object's charge can be exactly 0 e, or exactly 1 e, −1 e, 2 e, etc., but not $c$ e, or −3.8 e, etc. (There may be exceptions to this statement, depending on how "object" is defined; see below.)

This is the reason for the terminology "elementary charge": it is meant to imply that it is an indivisible unit of charge.

Fractional elementary charge
There are two known sorts of exceptions to the indivisibility of the elementary charge: quarks and quasiparticles.
 * Quarks, first posited in the 1960s, have quantized charge, but the charge is quantized into multiples of $ħ$ e. However, quarks cannot be isolated; they exist only in groupings, and stable groupings of quarks (such as a proton, which consists of three quarks) all have charges that are integer multiples of e. For this reason, either 1 e or $1⁄2$ e can be justifiably considered to be "the quantum of charge", depending on the context. This charge commensurability, "charge quantization", has partially motivated Grand unified Theories.
 * Quasiparticles are not particles as such, but rather an emergent entity in a complex material system that behaves like a particle. In 1982 Robert Laughlin explained the fractional quantum Hall effect by postulating the existence of fractionally charged quasiparticles. This theory is now widely accepted, but this is not considered to be a violation of the principle of charge quantization, since quasiparticles are not elementary particles.

Quantum of charge
All known elementary particles, including quarks, have charges that are integer multiples of $1⁄3$ e. Therefore, the "quantum of charge" is $1⁄3$ e. In this case, one says that the "elementary charge" is three times as large as the "quantum of charge".

On the other hand, all isolatable particles have charges that are integer multiples of e. (Quarks cannot be isolated: they exist only in collective states like protons that have total charges that are integer multiples of e.) Therefore, the "quantum of charge" is e, with the proviso that quarks are not to be included. In this case, "elementary charge" would be synonymous with the "quantum of charge".

In fact, both terminologies are used. For this reason, phrases like "the quantum of charge" or "the indivisible unit of charge" can be ambiguous unless further specification is given. On the other hand, the term "elementary charge" is unambiguous: it refers to a quantity of charge equal to that of a proton.

Lack of fractional charges
Paul Dirac argued in 1931 that if magnetic monopoles exist, then electric charge must be quantized; however, it is unknown whether magnetic monopoles actually exist. It is currently unknown why isolatable particles are restricted to integer charges; much of the string theory landscape appears to admit fractional charges.

Experimental measurements of the elementary charge
The elementary charge is exactly defined since 20 May 2019 by the International System of Units. Prior to this change, the elementary charge was a measured quantity whose magnitude was determined experimentally. This section summarizes these historical experimental measurements.

In terms of the Avogadro constant and Faraday constant
If the Avogadro constant NA and the Faraday constant F are independently known, the value of the elementary charge can be deduced using the formula $$e = \frac{F}{N_\text{A}}.$$ (In other words, the charge of one mole of electrons, divided by the number of electrons in a mole, equals the charge of a single electron.)

This method is not how the most accurate values are measured today. Nevertheless, it is a legitimate and still quite accurate method, and experimental methodologies are described below.

The value of the Avogadro constant NA was first approximated by Johann Josef Loschmidt who, in 1865, estimated the average diameter of the molecules in air by a method that is equivalent to calculating the number of particles in a given volume of gas. Today the value of NA can be measured at very high accuracy by taking an extremely pure crystal (often silicon), measuring how far apart the atoms are spaced using X-ray diffraction or another method, and accurately measuring the density of the crystal. From this information, one can deduce the mass (m) of a single atom; and since the molar mass (M) is known, the number of atoms in a mole can be calculated: NA = M/m.

The value of F can be measured directly using Faraday's laws of electrolysis. Faraday's laws of electrolysis are quantitative relationships based on the electrochemical researches published by Michael Faraday in 1834. In an electrolysis experiment, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the electrons passing through the anode-to-cathode wire and the ions that plate onto or off of the anode or cathode. Measuring the mass change of the anode or cathode, and the total charge passing through the wire (which can be measured as the time-integral of electric current), and also taking into account the molar mass of the ions, one can deduce F.

The limit to the precision of the method is the measurement of F: the best experimental value has a relative uncertainty of 1.6 ppm, about thirty times higher than other modern methods of measuring or calculating the elementary charge.

Oil-drop experiment
A famous method for measuring e is Millikan's oil-drop experiment. A small drop of oil in an electric field would move at a rate that balanced the forces of gravity, viscosity (of traveling through the air), and electric force. The forces due to gravity and viscosity could be calculated based on the size and velocity of the oil drop, so electric force could be deduced. Since electric force, in turn, is the product of the electric charge and the known electric field, the electric charge of the oil drop could be accurately computed. By measuring the charges of many different oil drops, it can be seen that the charges are all integer multiples of a single small charge, namely e.

The necessity of measuring the size of the oil droplets can be eliminated by using tiny plastic spheres of a uniform size. The force due to viscosity can be eliminated by adjusting the strength of the electric field so that the sphere hovers motionless.

Shot noise
Any electric current will be associated with noise from a variety of sources, one of which is shot noise. Shot noise exists because a current is not a smooth continual flow; instead, a current is made up of discrete electrons that pass by one at a time. By carefully analyzing the noise of a current, the charge of an electron can be calculated. This method, first proposed by Walter H. Schottky, can determine a value of e of which the accuracy is limited to a few percent. However, it was used in the first direct observation of Laughlin quasiparticles, implicated in the fractional quantum Hall effect.

From the Josephson and von Klitzing constants
Another accurate method for measuring the elementary charge is by inferring it from measurements of two effects in quantum mechanics: The Josephson effect, voltage oscillations that arise in certain superconducting structures; and the quantum Hall effect, a quantum effect of electrons at low temperatures, strong magnetic fields, and confinement into two dimensions. The Josephson constant is $$K_\text{J} = \frac{2e}{h},$$ where h is the Planck constant. It can be measured directly using the Josephson effect.

The von Klitzing constant is $$R_\text{K} = \frac{h}{e^2}.$$ It can be measured directly using the quantum Hall effect.

From these two constants, the elementary charge can be deduced: $$e = \frac{2}{R_\text{K} K_\text{J}}.$$

CODATA method
The relation used by CODATA to determine elementary charge was: $$e^2 = \frac{2h \alpha}{\mu_0 c} = 2h \alpha \varepsilon_0 c,$$ where h is the Planck constant, α is the fine-structure constant, μ0 is the magnetic constant, ε0 is the electric constant, and c is the speed of light. Presently this equation reflects a relation between ε0 and α, while all others are fixed values. Thus the relative standard uncertainties of both will be same.

title: Elementary charge