text:
Buckram

Buckram is a stiff cotton (occasionally linen or horse hair) cloth with a plain, usually loose, weave, produced in various weights similar to muslin and other plain weave fabrics. For buckram, the fabric is soaked in a sizing agent such as wheat-starch paste, glue (such as PVA glue), or pyroxylin (gelatinized nitrocellulose, developed around 1910), then dried. When rewetted or warmed, it can be shaped to create durable firm fabric for book covers, hats, and elements of clothing.

Etymology
In the Middle Ages, "bokeram" (as the word was sometimes spelled in Middle English) designated a fine cotton cloth, not stiff. The etymology of the term remains uncertain; the Oxford English Dictionary considers the commonly mentioned derivation from the name of the city of Bokhara unlikely.

Use in bookbinding
In bookbinding, buckram has several attractive qualities. In addition to being highly durable, buckram does not allow the bookbinder's paste to seep through and cause discoloration or stains on the book's front and back covers.

In bookbinding, pyroxylin-impregnated buckram is often favored due to its resistance to water, insects, fungi, and general wear. This is especially important for library binding, where many people will be repeatedly handling the same books. However, pyroxylin fabrics are less chemically stable than starch-filled fabrics and can be affected by extreme temperatures.

Use in millinery
Millinery buckram is impregnated with a starch which allows it to be softened in water, pulled over a hat block, and left to dry into a hard shape. Millinery buckram comes in many weights, including lightweight or baby buckram (often used for children's and dolls' hats), single-ply buckram, and double buckram (also known as theatrical buckram or crown buckram).

title: Buckram


text:
Cozia

Cozia may refer to several places in Romania:

 * Cozia Monastery, Vâlcea County
 * Cozia Mountains, Vâlcea County
 * Cozia National Park, Vâlcea County
 * Cozia, a village in Cornereva Commune, Caraș-Severin County
 * Cozia, a village in Cârjiți Commune, Hunedoara County
 * Cozia, a village in Costuleni Commune, Iași County
 * Cozia, a village in Pristol Commune, Mehedinți County
 * Cozia (river), a tributary of the Bohotin in Iași County

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

title: Cozia


text:
Global North and Global South

Global North and Global South are terms that denote a method of grouping countries based on their defining characteristics with regard to socioeconomics and politics. According to UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Global South broadly comprises Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia excluding Israel, Japan, and South Korea, and Oceania excluding Australia and New Zealand. Most of the Global South's countries are commonly identified as lacking in their standard of living, which includes having lower incomes, high levels of poverty, high population growth rates, inadequate housing, limited educational opportunities, and deficient health systems, among other issues. Additionally, these countries' cities are characterized by their poor infrastructure. Opposite to the Global South is the Global North, which the UNCTAD describes as broadly comprising Northern America and Europe, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand. As such, the two terms do not refer to the Northern Hemisphere or the Southern Hemisphere, as many of the Global South's countries are geographically located in the former and, similarly, a number of the Global North's countries are geographically located in the latter.

More specifically, the Global North consists of the world's developed countries, whereas the Global South consists of the world's developing countries and least developed countries. The Global South classification, as used by governmental and developmental organizations, was first introduced as a more open and value-free alternative to “Third World”, and likewise potentially “valuing” terms such as developed and developing. Countries of the Global South have also been described as being newly industrialized or in the process of industrializing, many of them are current or former subjects of colonialism.

The Global North and the Global South are often defined in terms of their differing levels of wealth, economic development, income inequality, and strength of democracy, as well as by their political freedom and economic freedom, as defined by a variety of freedom indices. Countries of the Global North tend to be wealthier, less unequal, more democratic, more peaceful, and capable of exporting technologically advanced manufactured products, among other characteristics. In contrast, countries of the Global South tend to be poorer, more unequal, less democratic, less peaceful, and heavily dependent on their largely agrarian-based economic primary sectors. Some scholars have suggested that the inequality gap between the Global North and the Global South has been narrowing due to the effects of globalization. Other scholars have disputed this position, suggesting that the Global South has instead become poorer vis-à-vis the Global North in this same timeframe.

Since World War II, the phenomenon of “South–South cooperation” (SSC) to “challenge the political and economic dominance of the North” has become more prominent among the Global South's countries. It has become popular in light of the geographical migration of manufacturing and production activity from the Global North to the Global South, and has since influenced the diplomatic policies of the Global South’s more powerful countries, such as China. Thus, these contemporary economic trends have “enhanced the historical potential of economic growth and industrialization in the Global South” amidst renewed targeted efforts by the SSC to “loosen the strictures imposed during the colonial era, and transcend the boundaries of postwar political and economic geography” as an aspect of decolonization.

Definition
The terms "Global North" and "Global South" are not strictly geographical, and are not "an image of the world divided by the equator, separating richer countries from their poorer counterparts." Rather, geography should be more readily understood as economic and migratory, in the "wider context of globalization or global capitalism."

In general, definitions for Global North and Global South, do not refer to the geographical North or the geographical South. The Global North broadly comprises Northern America and Europe, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, as per the UNCTAD. The Global South broadly comprises Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia excluding Israel, Japan, and South Korea, and Oceania excluding Australia and New Zealand, also according to the UNCTAD. Some, such as Australian sociologists Fran Collyer and Raewyn Connell, have argued that Australia and New Zealand are marginalized in similar ways to other Global South countries, due to their geographical isolation and location in the Southern Hemisphere.

The Global South is generally seen as home to China, India, Indonesia, Brazil and Pakistan, which, along with Nigeria and Mexico, are the largest Southern states in terms of land area and population.

The term Global North is often used interchangeably with developed countries, whereas the term Global South with developing countries. Characteristically, most countries in the Global South are commonly identified as lacking in their standard of living, these include having: lower incomes, high levels of poverty, high population growth rates, limited educational opportunities, deficient health care systems, among other issues. Also, cities in the Global South are identified for their poor infrastructure. Economies of the Global North are diversified, whereas agriculture sector happens to be the major contributor of economy activity in the Global South.

Development of the terms

Carl Oglesby used the term "global south" in 1969, writing in Catholic journal Commonweal in a special issue on the Vietnam War. Oglesby argued that centuries of northern "dominance over the global south […] [has] converged […] to produce an intolerable social order."

The term gained appeal throughout the second half of the 20th century, which rapidly accelerated in the early 21st century. It appeared in fewer than two dozen publications in 2004, but in hundreds of publications by 2013. The emergence of the new term meant looking at the troubled realities of its predecessors, i.e.: Third World or Developing World. The term "Global South", in contrast, was intended to be less hierarchical.

The idea of categorizing countries by their economic and developmental status began during the Cold War with the classifications of East and West. The Soviet Union and China represented the East, and the United States and their allies represented the West. The term Third World came into parlance in the second half of the twentieth century. It originated in a 1952 article by Alfred Sauvy entitled "Trois Mondes, Une Planète". Early definitions of the Third World emphasized its exclusion from the east–west conflict of the Cold War as well as the ex-colonial status and poverty of the peoples it comprised.

Efforts to mobilize the Third World as an autonomous political entity were undertaken. The 1955 Bandung Conference was an early meeting of Third World states in which an alternative to alignment with either the Eastern or Western Blocs was promoted. Following this, the first Non-Aligned Summit was organized in 1961. Contemporaneously, a mode of economic criticism which separated the world economy into "core" and "periphery" was developed and given expression in a project for political reform which "moved the terms 'North' and 'South' into the international political lexicon."

In 1973, the pursuit of a New International Economic Order which was to be negotiated between the North and South was initiated at the Non-Aligned Summit held in Algiers. Also in 1973, the oil embargo initiated by Arab OPEC countries as a result of the Yom Kippur War caused an increase in world oil prices, with prices continuing to rise throughout the decade. This contributed to a worldwide recession which resulted in industrialized nations increasing economically protectionist policies and contributing less aid to the less developed countries of the South. The slack was taken up by Western banks, which provided substantial loans to Third World countries. However, many of these countries were not able to pay back their debt, which led the IMF to extend further loans to them on the condition that they undertake certain liberalizing reforms. This policy, which came to be known as structural adjustment, and was institutionalized by International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and Western governments, represented a break from the Keynesian approach to foreign aid which had been the norm from the end of the Second World War.

After 1987, reports on the negative social impacts that structural adjustment policies had had on affected developing nations led IFIs to supplement structural adjustment policies with targeted anti-poverty projects. Following the end of the Cold War and the break-up of the Soviet Union, some Second World countries joined the First World, and others joined the Third World. A new and simpler classification was needed. Use of the terms "North" and "South" became more widespread.

Brandt Line

The Brandt Line is a visual depiction of the north–south divide, proposed by West German former Chancellor Willy Brandt in the 1980s in the report titled North-South: A Programme for Survival which was later known as the Brandt Report. This line divides the world at a latitude of approximately 30° North, passing between the United States and Mexico, north of Africa and the Middle East, climbing north over China and Mongolia, then dipping south to include Japan, Australia, and New Zealand in the "Rich North". As of 2023 the Brandt line has been criticised for being outdated, yet is still regarded as a helpful way to visulise global inequalities.

Uses of the term Global South
Global South "emerged in part to aid countries in the southern hemisphere to work in collaboration on political, economic, social, environmental, cultural, and technical issues." This is called South–South cooperation (SSC), a "political and economical term that refers to the long-term goal of pursuing world economic changes that mutually benefit countries in the Global South and lead to greater solidarity among the disadvantaged in the world system." The hope is that countries within the Global South will "assist each other in social, political, and economical development, radically altering the world system to reflect their interests and not just the interests of the Global North in the process." It is guided by the principles of "respect for national sovereignty, national ownership, independence, equality, non-conditionality, non-interference in domestic affairs, and mutual benefit." Countries using this model of South–South cooperation see it as a "mutually beneficial relationship that spreads knowledge, skills, expertise and resources to address their development challenges such as high population pressure, poverty, hunger, disease, environmental deterioration, conflict and natural disasters." These countries also work together to deal with "cross border issues such as environmental protection, HIV/AIDS", and the movement of capital and labor.

Social psychiatrist Vincenzo Di Nicola has applied the Global South as a bridge between the critiques globalization and the gaps and limitations of the Global Mental Health Movement, invoking Boaventura de Sousa Santos' notion of "epistemologies of the South" to create a new epistemology for social psychiatry.

Defining development
The Dictionary of Human Geography defines development as "processes of social change or [a change] to class and state projects to transform national economies".

Economic development is a measure of progress in a specific economy. It refers to advancements in technology, a transition from an economy based largely on agriculture to one based on industry and an improvement in living standards.

Being categorized as part of the "North" implies development as opposed to belonging to the "South", which implies a lack thereof. According to N. Oluwafemi Mimiko, the South lacks the right technology, it is politically unstable, its economies are divided, and its foreign exchange earnings depend on primary product exports to the North, along with the fluctuation of prices. The low level of control it exercises over imports and exports condemns the South to conform to the 'imperialist' system. The South's lack of development and the high level of development of the North deepen the inequality between them and leave the South a source of raw material for the developed countries. The North becomes synonymous with economic development and industrialization while the South represents the previously colonized countries which are in need of help in the form of international aid agendas.

Furthermore, in Regionalism Across the North-South Divide: State Strategies and Globalization, Jean Grugel stated that the three factors that direct the economic development of states in the Global south are "élite behaviour within and between nation states, integration and cooperation within 'geographic' areas, and the resulting position of states and regions within the global world market and related political economic hierarchy."

Theories explaining the divide
The development disparity between the North and the South has sometimes been explained in historical terms. Dependency theory looks back on the patterns of colonial relations which persisted between the North and South and emphasizes how colonized territories tended to be impoverished by those relations. Theorists of this school maintain that the economies of ex-colonial states remain oriented towards serving external rather than internal demand, and that development regimes undertaken in this context have tended to reproduce in underdeveloped countries the pronounced class hierarchies found in industrialized countries while maintaining higher levels of poverty. Dependency theory is closely intertwined with Latin American Structuralism, the only school of development economics emerging from the Global South to be affiliated with a national research institute and to receive support from national banks and finance ministries. The Structuralists defined dependency as the inability of a nation's economy to complete the cycle of capital accumulation without reliance on an outside economy. More specifically, peripheral nations were perceived as primary resource exporters reliant on core economies for manufactured goods. This led structuralists to advocate for import-substitution industrialization policies which aimed to replace manufactured imports with domestically made products.

New Economic Geography explains development disparities in terms of the physical organization of industry, arguing that firms tend to cluster in order to benefit from economies of scale and increase productivity which leads ultimately to an increase in wages. The North has more firm clustering than the South, making its industries more competitive. It is argued that only when wages in the North reach a certain height, will it become more profitable for firms to operate in the South, allowing clustering to begin.

Associated theories
The term of the Global South has many researched theories associated with it. Since many of the countries that are considered to be a part of the Global South were once colonized by Global North countries, they are at a disadvantage to become as quickly developed. Dependency theorists suggest that information has a top-down approach and first goes to the Global North before countries in the Global South receive it. Although many of these countries rely on political or economic help, this also opens up opportunity for information to develop Western bias and create an academic dependency. Meneleo Litonjua describes the reasoning behind distinctive problems of dependency theory as "the basic context of poverty and underdevelopment of Third World/Global South countries was not their traditionalism, but the dominance-dependence relationship between rich and poor, powerful and weak counties."

What brought about much of the dependency, was the push to become modernized. After World War II, the U.S. made effort to assist developing countries financially in attempt to pull them out of poverty. Modernization theory "sought to remake the Global South in the image and likeliness of the First World/Global North." In other terms, "societies can be fast-tracked to modernization by 'importing' Western technical capital, forms of organization, and science and technology to developing countries." With this ideology, as long as countries follow in Western ways, they can develop quicker.

After modernization attempts took place, theorists started to question the effects through post-development perspectives. Postdevelopment theorists try to explain that not all developing countries need to be following Western ways but instead should create their own development plans. This means that "societies at the local level should be allowed to pursue their own development path as they perceive it without the influences of global capital and other modern choices, and thus a rejection of the entire paradigm from Eurocentric model and the advocation of new ways of thinking about the non-Western societies." The goals of postdevelopment was to reject development rather than reform by choosing to embrace non-Western ways.

Challenges
The accuracy of the North–South divide has been challenged on a number of grounds. Firstly, differences in the political, economic and demographic make-up of countries tend to complicate the idea of a monolithic South. Globalization has also challenged the notion of two distinct economic spheres. Following the liberalization of post-Mao China initiated in 1978, growing regional cooperation between the national economies of Asia has led to the growing decentralization of the North as the main economic power. The economic status of the South has also been fractured. As of 2015, all but roughly the bottom 60 nations of the Global South were thought to be gaining on the North in terms of income, diversification, and participation in the world market.

However, other scholars, notably Jason Hickel and Robert Wade have suggested that the Global South is not rising economically, and that global inequality between the North and South has risen since globalization. Hickel has suggested that the exchange of resources between the South and the North is substantially unbalanced in favor of the North, with Global North countries extracting a windfall of over 240 trillion dollars from the Global South in 2015. This figure outstrips the amount of financial aid given to Global South by a factor of 30.

Globalization has largely displaced the North–South divide as the theoretical underpinning of the development efforts of international institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO, and various United Nations affiliated agencies, though these groups differ in their perceptions of the relationship between globalization and inequality. Yet some remain critical of the accuracy of globalization as a model of the world economy, emphasizing the enduring centrality of nation-states in world politics and the prominence of regional trade relations. Lately, there have been efforts to integrate the Global South more meaningfully into the world economic order.

The divide between the North and South challenges international environmental cooperation. The economic differences between North and South have created dispute over the scientific evidence and data regarding global warming and what needs to be done about it, as the South do not trust Northern data and cannot afford the technology to be able to produce their own. In addition to these disputes, there are serious divisions over responsibility, who pays, and the possibility for the South to catch up. This is becoming an ever-growing issue with the emergence of rising powers, imploding these three divisions just listed and making them progressively blurry. Multiplicity of actors, such as governments, businesses, and NGO's all influence any positive activity that can be taken into preventing further global warming problems with the Global North and Global South divide, contributing to the severity of said actors. Disputes between Northern countries governments and Southern countries governments has led to a breakdown in international discussions with governments from either side disagreeing with each other. Addressing most environmental problems requires international cooperation, and the North and South contribute to the stagnation concerning any form of implementation and enforcement, which remains a key issue.

Debates over the term
With its development, many scholars preferred using the Global South over its predecessors, such as "developing countries" and "Third World". Leigh Anne Duck, co-editor of Global South, argued that the term is better suited at resisting "hegemonic forces that threaten the autonomy and development of these countries." The Global South / Global North distinction has been preferred to the older developed / developing dichotomy as it does not imply a hierarchy. Alvaro Mendez, co-founder of the London School of Economics and Political Science's Global South Unit, have applauded the empowering aspects of the term. In an article, Discussion on Global South, Mendez discusses emerging economies in nations like China, India and Brazil. It is predicted that by 2030, 80% of the world's middle-class population will be living in developing countries. The popularity of the term "marks a shift from a central focus on development and cultural difference" and recognizes the importance of geopolitical relations.

Critics of this usage often argue that it is a vague blanket term. Others have argued that the term, its usage, and its subsequent consequences mainly benefit those from the upper classes of countries within the Global South; who stand "to profit from the political and economic reality [of] expanding south-south relations."

According to scholar Anne Garland Mahler, this nation-based understanding of the Global South is regarded as an appropriation of a concept that has deeper roots in Cold War radical political thought. In this political usage, the Global South is employed in a more geographically fluid way, referring to "spaces and peoples negatively impacted by contemporary capitalist globalization." In other words, "there are economic Souths in the geographic North and Norths in the geographic South." Through this geographically fluid definition, another meaning is attributed to the Global South where it refers to a global political community that is formed when the world's "Souths" recognize one another and view their conditions as shared.

The geographical boundaries of the Global South remain a source of debate. Some scholars agree that the term is not a "static concept". Others have argued against "grouping together a large variety of countries and regions into one category [because it] tends to obscure specific (historical) relationships between different countries and/or regions", and the power imbalances within these relationships. This "may obscure wealth differences within countries – and, therefore, similarities between the wealthy in the Global South and Global North, as well as the dire situation the poor may face all around the world."

Future development
Some economists have argued that international free trade and unhindered capital flows across countries could lead to a contraction in the North–South divide. In this case more equal trade and flow of capital would allow the possibility for developing countries to further develop economically.

As some countries in the South experience rapid development, there is evidence that those states are developing high levels of South–South aid. Brazil, in particular, has been noted for its high levels of aid ($1 billion annually—ahead of many traditional donors) and the ability to use its own experiences to provide high levels of expertise and knowledge transfer. This has been described as a "global model in waiting".

The United Nations has also established its role in diminishing the divide between North and South through the Millennium Development Goals, all of which were to be achieved by 2015. These goals seek to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve global universal education and healthcare, promote gender equality and empower women, reduce child mortality, improve maternal health, combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases, ensure environmental sustainability, and develop a global partnership for development. These were replaced in 2015 by 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs, set in 2015 by the United Nations General Assembly and intended to be achieved by 2030, are part of a UN Resolution called "The 2030 Agenda".

Digital and technological divide
The global digital divide is often characterized as corresponding to the north–south divide; however, Internet use, and especially broadband access, is now soaring in Asia compared with other continents. This phenomenon is partially explained by the ability of many countries in Asia to leapfrog older Internet technology and infrastructure, coupled with booming economies which allow vastly more people to get online.

Media representation
Mass media has often compared the Global South to the North, and is thought to be an aid in the divide. Western media tends to present a generalized view of developing countries through biased media coverage, mass media outlets tend to focus disproportionately on poverty and other negative imagery. This common coverage has created a dominant stereotype of developing countries as: "the 'South' is characterized by socioeconomic and political backwardness, measured against Western values and standards."

Mass media has also played a role in what information the people in developing countries receive. The news often covers developed countries and creates an imbalance of information flow.

Subregions of Global North

 * Global Northwest
 * North Atlantic
 * NATO
 * North Pacific

Subregions of Global South

 * Global Southeast

title: Global North and Global South


text:
Talk:Great Vowel Shift

Request link to explanation of vowel symbols
Like others who have posted above, I can't understand the table on this page. (And that's a shame beacuse I find the subject fascinating.)

This problem would be easily solved with a link (just above the table) to a list of all the vowel symbols, showing how to pronounce them. But where is such a list? I've searched Wikipedia and the only thing I could find was this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language (under the 'Vowels' section) However, that list seems quite different to the vowel sounds used in the table here, with many symbols not listed.

Clearly, the symbols used in one of these two pages is either wrong, or incomplete. Someone needs to fix it!

Grand Dizzy (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

 * The table looks OK to me (and is extremely helpful, well done to whoever put it up). Everything in it is IPA, but many of the symbols are inevitably not in the English language article, as they are historic rather than present-day English sounds. The reader will need to look at the full IPA article to understand the symbols, but I think that's preferable to giving a dumbed-down version which only gives vague approximations.
 * My only criticism is that the typeface for the symbols is too small (and can't be adjusted) for it to be clear what exactly is underneath the eː in 1500 and the oː in 1700 and 1750. I assume it's the "lowered" diacritic (shaped like a T), but can't tell for sure. Vilĉjo (talk) 16:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I`m sorry that you think that having examples would be "dumbed down". Like the user who follows, I am an amateur at phonetics.  I don't consider myself to be that "dumb"; I'm an educated person with a university degree, but I don't know the IPA alphabet and I rather imagine that most non-specialists who use Wikipedia for information are in the same situation.  Linguists fluent and conversant in IPA symbology probably don't come to Wikipedia for this information; they've learned it elsewhere and/or have access to specialised references.  It is, I think, rather too much to ask that the reader look up several different articles and tables in order to understand the concepts that this article is trying to explain.  For myself, and – I suspect – many other users, the tables with only IPA vowels shown /vowel/ is close to meaningless.  I (we) don't know what sounds are meant by those symbols.  If those meanings are unknown to the reader, then the symbols become useless, and the reader is just left without any understanding, and therefore, unenlightened about what the Great Vowel Shift is actually about.  I've left this article with only a vague grasp of how the great vowel shift changed the sound of spoken English, and isn't the point of an encyclopædic article to inform the reader? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.54.253.142 (talk) 00:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I am a rank amateur in phonetics. Please consider this example from the summary above the main chart:

Middle English [ɛː] raised to [eː] and then to modern English [iː] (as in beak).

I can find no reference to the Middle English [ɛː] symbol in any Wiki-supplied SAMPA or IPA chart. Yet the OED guide to pronunciation has precisely this symbol which it describes as pronounced like the 'are' in 'square'. To have to go to the main IPA article in Wikipedia and find out that the colon-like symbol following the epsilon-like symbol makes the preceding sound 'long' is not a clue that helps me lengthen the 'e' in 'bed' which is how the IPA indicates the epsilon-like IPA symbol is pronounced. It would have been helpful if each stage was followed by a word in modern English that sounds like the Middle English. Given that the article provides a phonetic combo of symbols for which the OED finds perfectly easily a modern examplar, couldn't the article be modified to do the same?

The article needs to have EVERY phonetic symbol it displays provided with a modern English example or a brief explanation of what modern English sound(s) approximate it.

This is a fascinating subject that an amateur ought to be able to work out from the article w/o spending days excavating sources to find information.

I have no complaints about the article other than this one, which is kind of central - how the heck did the actual sounds change?

What about having little sound-bytes for each sound at each stage of the GVS? Ken M Quirici 16:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kquirici (talk • contribs)

It is a weakness of Wikipedia that pronunciation is such a difficult issue. Many times I have followed a pronunciation link and given up quickly. Definitely the tables in this article need the old vowel sounds explained with reference to words we know. Timmytimtimmy (talk) 02:27, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Unhelpful
For people like me, who know nothing of linguistics, this article is not particularly helpful. Maybe you could include some practical examples. Since I do not know the subject I am at a loss as to how to improve the entry, but I can say that this entry has not helped improved my understanding of the subject. Perhaps the authors should write for people who go to an online encyclopedias for a basic understanding of the subject rather than for each other. To be specific: Suppose I am a 17 year-old assigned the Canterbury Tales in school. This has sparked my interest in the evolution of the English language. On Wiki I read "[aː] (ā) fronted to [æː] and then raised to [ɛː], [eː] and in many dialects diphthongised in Modern English to [eɪ] (as in make). " This means nothing to me. I literally do not have any idea what you are talking about. You have not contributed to my knowledge in any way. As an encyclopedia, this entry has totally failed except as a sandbox pissing contest among experts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.84.35 (talk) 16:56, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree. This article is an incomprehensible waste of space on some server somewhere. The only people who can make head or tale of it are people who already know it. I know the IPA symbols used in modern dictionaries, so am disappointed I have to look up more to understand this twaddle... This kind of elitist rubbish should be deleted. 111.68.120.158 (talk) 08:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This sort of recurring completely unconstructive criticism also seems like a waste of server space FWIW.
 * It is difficult to tell what exactly is the problem. The phonetic transcription? The subject cannot be explained in detail without a notation more fine-grained than what is required for transcribing pronuciation in dictionaries. This is not a bug, it's a feature.
 * In particular, I suspect that a confused understanding of the concept of vowel length may be a key difficulty?, but again, hard to tell form this kind of comments. The concept of vowel height is another prerequisite. Hence, both are linked right from the 3rd paragraph.
 * What would be helpful is knowing what people actually expect of this article. To somehow explain the history of vowels in English to people who do not understand what vowels actually are and how they work in general? -- Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 22:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I have changed the link above the chart to a page that has all the symbols used, with built-in sound files. This means the confused readership can hear the different vowel sounds. I hope this addresses the various complaints on this talk page. Davidelit (Talk) 08:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

 * The article seems to take on faith that this Great Vowel Shift happened. How do we know?  Shouldn't there be at least one sentence explaining how we know it happened? 50.49.134.141 (talk) 17:19, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * This is exactly what I came here to ask. I'm quite surprised there is no explanation as to "how" we know the pronunciation of words changed. It is not as if we can rely on poetry seeing as poets will take liberties with rhymes, correct? I truly would love to know this. I guess I am off to dive into site:edu searches. Wish me luck. :-) Dhugot (talk) 13:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

pitched way to high
people an encylopedia should be accesible to the general reader this article is not get thee to rewrite

after reading thru some of the comments, most of them seem to be some variant of what i said: this article is incomprehensible oto 90% of readers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:192:4701:BE80:403D:F8F2:7CF0:CEBD (talk) 03:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes, the problem with Wikipedia is too many articles like this one, that were written by experts in the subject who never had to teach the subject to beginners. The passion to get every single word of every single sentence technically accurate has meant that accuracy has crowded out intelligibility.
 * By no means the only article to have this flaw.
 * Encyclopedia articles need to be understood by people who know nothing of the field. This one fails. Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 00:53, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I very much agree with this. This page is unfortunately dominated by people who think that just because they put in the effort to learn IPA, everybody else should. As someone who has mastered a large number of different technical notations, if I didn't have better uses for my time, I could no doubt learn IPA, but that would be just as stupid as other people learning HTML and CSS to read the source text of this page without using a web browser. If IPA is really any good there should be automatic tools that enable it to be translated into audio in a wide range of different spoken forms - just select the one that suits you. This is presumably what people who know IPA do in their heads. Wikipedia could then provide access to this just as it provides access to existing audio and video samples. It would then be easy for users to understand all the information on a page like this without having to learn HTML, CCS, JavaScript or IPA! No doubt the idea of having their knowledge encoded into a mere computer program would horrify the average IPAite! 31.50.203.115 (talk) 12:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Well said Timmytimtimmy (talk) 02:28, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

"*all* middle English long vowels were changed"?
What about 'long u' (u:)? As in, rude, or dune. s that vowell not pronounced pretty much the same way that it was in middle English? At most there are some slight dipthonging variations in some dialects, but those aren't great vowellshift related... Firejuggler86 (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

 * I think we're saying here that /u:/ mūs became /aʊ/ mouse. Wolfdog (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

The linguistic knowledge level displayed by some of the commentariat here is truly remarkable
The common thread is more or less, how do we know if the GVS happened at all, and then continue to go from there, kind of agitating each other ('raging anglo-autistic folly'). Superior british edusys? But help is on the way.

Consider the fact that english developped from a merger of 'german' and 'french' (which may well have been the cause for the subsequent GVS). Then see how the vowels are being pronounced in most european languages. There are even words in english that have retained the pre-GVS sound, like (A-E-I-O-U) dunce-ten-sin-ton-bush

But you need to differentiate: The vowels appear in short syllables (like in these five examples) and are then spoken 'open', or in long syllables and spoken 'closed'. Example for sound A: dunce - dance; sound I: sin - seen; sound U: bush - rouge. The first word is short/open, the second long/closed.

Do you feel the principle? You will need to, because this is the way to solve the issue with non-existing (in english) long E and O: by extrapolating from the three examples just given. E: Try ten (short/open) and form a fictitious word with a long/closed sound. O: Ditto, parting from ton.

Until here I avoided to use the IPA script, although quite clearly it would help to show the difference between short/open and long/closed. Thus for the sake of completeness - again first short/open, then long closed:

A   [a] [aː] E   [ɛ] [eː] I   [ɪ] [iː] O   [ɔ] [oː] U   [ʊ] [uː]

So don't worry about all the other IPA signs you may see, these are the ones you need for the vowels.

Caveat: This little article is written as a 'popular-scientific' essay, cutting out extreme accuracy in the interest of making the issue more widely understandable. Let's make sure we do see the wood for the trees! Contorista (talk) 09:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The above is bunch of nearly impenetrable ranting. Try getting to the point very clearly and without invective. And we're not really in a position to take linguistic advice from someone who confuses the Anglo-Saxon dialects with German. They're both German language, but that's like confusing Old French with Romanian just because they're both Romance languages. Ultimately, though, none of what you say here is of any interest to anyone without reliable sources that very specifically back up all of the claims you are making. Wikipedia is not a place for your own novel ideas like what might have lead to the GVS and whether particular sound changes pertain to syllable length. Wikipedia and its editors are not here "to solve the issue" of any question about this subject. Previously published reliable sources that we refer to are what "solve the issue"; we simply report on their solution. If they don't provide one, then we cannot either. If you don't already understand this about Wikipedia, you may be at the wrong site and should maybe be posting your novel opinions on a blog or in social media.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  10:18, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Is that really so? You have refuted not even one of my arguments. Instead, you sound aroused in authoritarianism. Such a performance would be unsuitable and embarassing even if you were much older than you seem to be   .) Contorista (talk) 09:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Great Vowel Shift


text:
Talk:Charge-coupled device

Untitled
This is the discussion/talk page for: Charge-coupled device.

Technicality
I've gotta second the technicality tag here. I got to this article from the main page, but i have absolutely no idea what it's saying, and i'm fairly well versed in electronics, for a non-professional. Archtemplar (talk) 17:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * can you elaborate on the particular section(s)? User A1 (talk) 23:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Paragraphs 1 and 2 should be simple enough for us non-Nobel Prize winners to stretch our minds around. I don't mind doing some research to figure out later paragraphs, but the introduction could be a little more accessible. Archtemplar (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, having read it with your comment in mind, I now see what you mean. I will fiddle with this in about 9 hrs. If you have any more sections that you think are inaccessible, just jot them down here. User A1 (talk)

the entire 'history' section is absolutely not wikipedia style at all.. definatly needs reworking. you'll understand what i mean after just merely skimming through. inspy

Thanks A1, i think i understand its purpose better now. It says, though, "for example conversion into a digital value"...it does other things too? Archtemplar (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Bubble memory for one. Here you are, instead of using an Analog to Digital Converter, you are using a simple 0-1 conversion. Theoretically it could be used to do anything where you need charges moved around -- you could even use it to do weird things, like store an audio signal in an analog manner for later output (without digital conversion). It would work, but it would be very odd AFAIK. User A1 (talk) 23:20, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I googled "ccd bin" and "charge coupled device bin" with no relevant results. I think we need an article describing what the "bin" is and a link to that article. Eddietoran (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

A significant portion of the "history" section is plagiarized verbatim from a book called "Catchers of the Light" by Stefan Hughes with no credit to the author in the references section.

Remove Corporate References?
This articles seems to have references to amateur astronomy companies such as SBIG, Astrophysics and Losmandy even though they contribute nothing to the content of the article. In the case of SBIG, the claim is also very misleading because the A0-7 isn't even SBIG's only autoguider and other companies make autoguiders too. Additionally, the AO-7 is an adaptive optics system which uses a smal, fast mirror in addition to standard autoguiding methods to keep target stars centered and to compensate for errors which standard autoguiders cannot. Likewise, Astrophysics and Losmandy are not the only companies to make "study mounts" and debatably not even the best. Lastly, these references are only to amateur companies, not professional telescopes where some of the cutting edge work in CCD astro-imaging is going on (ex: The Sloan Digital Sky Survery).

I would make changes, but I thought I'd put it here for comment first.

I agree - take the corporate references out. SBIG is, IMO, misusing this page for commercial purposes.

- I don't think it's SBIG, just some user who likes SBIG stuff, because they keep describing the AO-7 incorrectly (or at least imprecisely) as an autoguider when it's really an adaptive optics systems. It's like describing a handheld computer as an electronic appointment book. I've changed it back (again). - In the text it is said that because of the quantum efficiency of the CCD detectors astronomers started using them. It worked the other way around. Astronomers were the ones developing CCD's for beter detection of astronomical sources. When telescopes reached a certain size, it was too expensive to build bigger ones. The only way to detect fainter sources was to build bigger telescopes at the time. This was the drive to design better instruments for detecting fainter sources. This lead to the CCD. Just as the photo sensitive emulsion in film was first developed by astromers and used in photographic plates. -J.P Kotze

Add circuit diagram?
Alison Chaiken 17:00, 26 September 2005 (UTC): A simple circuit diagram illustrating the topology of the array and the attachment to the D/A and power supply would help this article a lot. The image doesn't have to be fancy, just illustrate how things are connected. I'd volunteer to make a drawing myself if I knew the layout details for certain.

CCD's in Non-Tracking Telescopes
I was interested in your comment: "An interesting astronomical application is to use a CCD to make a fixed telescope behave like a tracking telescope and follow the motion of the sky." I've not heard of this application before, do you have any further details or links? -- The context I've heard about it is: take a bunch of frames of the moving target with relatively fast shutter speeds and align them based on some common bright objects in all of the frames and then use a stacking algorithm. Stacking is not as effective as long exposures though. --

Stacking has other advantages. By taking a large number of frames and selecting only the best to stack, one can avoid the image degradation of atmospheric seeing or other transient factors inherent in long exposures.Wschart 01:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC) -- I think what the comment actually refers to is not stacking, but drift-scanning. In this technique, the CCD is oriented so that the stars will appear to move (due to the earth's rotation) along a column of the CCD. The CCD is then "clocked out" at the same rate that the stars are moving. Thus, the accumulated charge travels along with the star's image. The main downside is that you have no control over the exposure time; the exposure time will be however long it takes the star to cross the CCD. The upside is that you're continuously reading out the CCD; you don't have to close the shutter and waste a couple of minutes doing a readout. Here is a web page about drift scanning with amateur equipment]; the technique is also used on the Palomar 48-inch Schmidt telescope and the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (they call it TDI, time delay and integrate). -- Coneslayer 19:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Basis of 70%
PizzaPuzzle, I am a little puzzled by the statement "CCDs commonly respond to 70% of the light to which they are exposed", because I'm not sure what the 70% is a measurement of. Is it the percentage of the CCD surface that is covered by sensing material, as opposed to inert structures such as metal conductors? Or is it the percentage of the incident energy in the visible spectrum that falls on the sensors that is converted to electric charge, instead of being reflected or absorbed as heat? Or is it the product of both of these? I would be grateful for clarification. -- Heron

 * The latter, 70% of the photons react with the CCD - the rest are "wasted". As opposed to only 2% usage by a photographic plate. It would probably be useful to divide this page into astronomical CCD use, and more general/technical aspects. Pizza Puzzle

Thanks. I added your 2% figure to the article, and moved the section to "Applications" to avoid repetition. Perhaps only the general/technical aspects should be described here, with the applications (astronomical and otherwise) moved to digital photography. What do you think? -- Heron

Why does light cause an accumulation of charge? Omegatron

You have to know a minimal bit of quantum physics for that. When a photon strikes an atom, it can elevate an electron to a higher energy level. CCDs are commonly made of negatively-doped silicon with many electrons - when light strikes them, it frees electrons to move around and they accumulate in the capacitors (I believe these are also called "wells.") Those electrons are shifted along the CCD and "counted" by a capacitor, giving an effective black & white image of how much light has fallen on each individual pixel. Several things can affect whether a photon releases an electron: polysilicon circuits on the front-illuminated CCD surface can block light from entering, certain depths of the CCD may be penetrated by longer wavelengths without interaction with the atoms, certain screens may reflect off or absorb some wavelengths of the light, etc. (Thus BOTH of Heron's interpretations above are accurate.) Some wavelengths of light can free more or less than one electron per photon. Knowing how many of the photons which fall on the CCD will release an electron is an accurate measurement of the CCD's sensitivity. This figure is called "quantum efficiency." Some CCDs can be made to reach as high as 95% QE. Several Japanese companies have developed many methods of increasing the sensitivity of the CCDs. For example, illuminating the CCD from the side without circuits, increasing the area of the CCD which is receptive to light. Socrates's Universal Disclaimer: I don't know anything about anything. - Nocturnal [edit:] Correction: the doped layers have spare electrons, but if they were free from the start that would of course defeat the purpose of the CCD! Sorry, I'm not a physicist, just an amateur photographer.

Frigoris 12:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)ithink we need more about *how* a CCD work in the article

Hey can anyone tell me avout how it works in taking X-ray images ?

Actually hitting a CCD with x-rays will destroy the CCD. All X-ray images taken with a CCD are imaging a phosphor/scintillator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.176.118 (talk) 19:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Achitecture
We certainly need a few diagrams here. The architecture is also not very clear from the text alone. Those who can, please do. JMK 19:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

-- A closely related device is the analog Bucket Brigade Device, which was (is?) used for audio delay lines. Some typical examples are the EG&G/Reticon SAD-1024 and the Panasonic MN3004. It may be useful to add this to the article.

Sensitivity and bandwidth
Can someone please say something about sensitivity (I read something that about 8 photons are necessary to stimulate a CCD while 70 are neccessary to "switch" a grain of photo-sensitive chemical in a film) as well as the bandwidth of sensitivity of a "normal" CCD (in nanometer wave length). THANKS -- Michael Janich 09:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Camera specifications
Can someone explain the meaning of the measurements given for CCD size by camera manufacturers? For example, what is 1/2.5" vs. 1/1.7"?? Originally, I thought these were shorthand inversions of inches (ie 1/2.5" = 0.4 inch diagonal), but it doesn't seem to work out correctly. Thanks!  Slowmover 15:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC) EDIT: As far as I know the inch used for describing CCD-sizes isn't 25.4 mm, it's something around 16 mm. This came from the old vidicons. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidicon

I can explain this. When imaging tubes were used in TV cameras, they were measured by their physical diameter. The last size for broadcast tubes, for instance was 17mm, or 2/3rds of an inch. The target size in these was necessarily smaller, to accommodate fro the thickness of the glass wall and the electrodes, so was 11mm diagonal. When broadcast CCD cameras arrived they kept this standard of 11 mm diagonal to be able to use the same lenses. THe same designation, 2.3rds, was used for the CCDs, although it did not make much sense for the. There fore a 2/3rds CCD is 8.8x6.6mm, which seemingly bears no relationship to the 2/3rds number. This was the size used in the first digital compacts, and was referred to as 2/3ds, but when smaller sensors arrived for compacts the manufacturers something illogically kept the same convention, calling them be a size which was about 50% bigger than the diagonal of the sensor. So it's illogical, but derives from TV nomenclature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.171.20.117 (talk) 13:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Technical Details
I added the technical template to the top of this page. I've had small electronics courses and I had trouble understanding the article--I can't imagine what it would be like for a layperson. Certainly more context, preferably less jargon, etc. I don't know enough to do it myself, though. Thanks to anyone who can help! 71.57.91.231 08:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Cooling of CCDs
The article claims that astronomical CCDs are cooled because of their infrared sensitivity to the emission of blackbody radiation from room-temperature sources. This is not true. CCDs are cooled because of the "dark" current produced by stimulation of electrons into the conduction band by thermal excitation from the temperature of the CCD itself. Astronomical CCDs, and perhaps all CCDs, are not sensitive to the wavelengths where the blackbody peaks for room-temperature (around 10 microns or so). AmberRobot 19:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Physics of operation
The "Confusing" template was added to the "Physics of operation" section in April 2007, but the comments about the confusing nature of the section were inserted into the article rather than being placed on the talk page, so I'm transplanting them here. These aren't my opinions necessarily, but just what was on the page, mildly edited for reference translation and grammar. --Drake Wilson 23:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

 * "The first two paragraphs of the section are extremely confusing. The paragraphs below, concerning the physics of operation, are confusing, but it seems they are necessarily so. See Janesick's book (2001) Scientific Charge Coupled Devices, for any serious study of astronomical imagers (i.e., imagers like the one described below)."

 * The problem with this section is that it contains very little physics. The bulk of it provides details of the manufacturing process, which is not physics.  I would like to see a discussion of what happens when a photon interacts with the CCD, the conduction band, etc.  For example, at visible light frequencies, I do not believe a photon has enough energy to create an electron-hole pair with the electron in the conduction band.  I imagine that at such frequences the photon will create phonons (lattice vibrations), and if enough photons interact, the cumulative energy will be enough to get some electrons in the conduction band.  This is just speculation on my part, but I feel that it illustrates the type of discussion that belongs here. Ty8inf (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

 * A simple calculation shows that an IR wavelength of 9800A corresponds to an energy of about 1.3eV. I chose 9800A because that is the wavelength of the infrared signal from an IR remote, which can be recorded using a video camera.  But I thought that CCDs have a band-gap of about 3-4eV, which means that a 1.3eV photon cannot directly excite an electron from the valence to the conduction band. Ty8inf (talk) 17:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Physics of operation, first two paragraphs
I find these two paragraphs (cable and ring electrodes stuff) incredibly confusing and they don't make any sense to me at all, despite reading them ten times and having studied a very fair deal of semiconductor physics as well as electronics. Shouldn't they be deleted or rewritten? The guy who made the edits (Arnero) seems like a real contributing user but as i said this makes absolutely no sense.

Grapetonix 20:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with this assessment. These two paragraphs should be removed and replaced.Brews ohare 18:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Interline transfer LESS sensitive to IR than frame transfer?
Hello, I was just look at "http://www.tpromo2.com/ssmag/cctv/cctv3.htm" where it says that frame transfer CCD's are much less sensitive to infrared light than are interline transfer CCD's. This article says the exact opposite??? 65.183.135.231 (talk) 14:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

4/3" sensor size wrong?
If you look at the the wikipedia article Four Thirds System it says the sensor size is 18×13.5 mm (22.5 mm diagonal), with an imaging area of 17.3×13.0 mm (21.6 mm diagonal), while the table here says it 22.500×18.000 mm (28.814 mm diagonal). What is the actual number? The one here seems to be wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.99.12 (talk) 01:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC) The name "4/3rds" is derived from the broadcast TV "2/3rds" standard which is 11mm in diameter.The "4/3rds" is approximately double this, so the 22.5mm dimension is the correct one. "2/3rds" itself is ultimately derived from imaging tubes, where it referred to the overall diameter including the thickness of the glass walls.Wmck (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Use of CCDs in scanners
Can someone please add a Scanners section, describing how CCDs are used in optical scanners?

In particular, please could someone who is qualified explain the difference between a "3-line CCD (R,G,B)" and an "Alternative 6 line CCD" that you see are used in various models of scanner? Which one produces better quality images?

81.141.52.169 (talk) 09:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

CCD blooming
I think that the article should mention CCD blooming. What do you think? --pabouk (talk) 12:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure -- Be bold and add it, if you have the time! User A1 (talk) 08:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks like the photo labeled as 'vertical smear' is in fact an image of blooming/pixel overflow —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.176.118 (talk) 18:59, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the links, pabouk. I agree that this article should mention "blooming". So I added a new section on "blooming" and used your links as references. --DavidCary (talk) 04:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

 * I edited it a bit, as it didn't agree with what I know about anti-blooming structures. Dicklyon (talk) 04:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Gain
There is no discussion of gain in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lzkelley (talk • contribs) 07:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC) The article could most certainly use some work -- you can add it! Then again I could have, but havent -- were all passing the buck :) User A1 (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Provenance and the Nobel Prize
There is an issue brewing with regard to the completeness of credit to those behind the work for which Smith and Boyle are being honored with a Nobel Prize in Physics. According to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Spectrum, as available on http://spectrum.ieee.org/podcast/semiconductors/devices/who-deserves-credit-for-the-nobelprizewinning-ccd, Michael F. Tompsett and Eugene Gordon, also then at Bell Labs, may have had a signficant hand in the work. There is a series of links provided, in chronological order, all within the IEEE site.

I lack sufficient experience in Wikipedia to know how best to proceed. Thanks! Dhugot (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Aluminum vs Aluminium
Both are fine to use, there is no argument there. However, since the rest of the article uses American English not British English, (based on the spelling of color), the use of aluminium is inconsistent. Consequently, I am changing it to aluminum.The Lamb of God (talk) 02:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Media?
Not that it actually matters, but isn't the Media Wikiproject a very long way from getting to *this* article? One might as well include "rechargeable batteries" in media, after all, journalists use rechargeable batteries...or "leather" because they wear shoes....or "tomatoes" because journalists often eat pizza. I've taken the liberty of removing that tag. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:39, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

the photoactive layer
What the basics of operations section needs is a description of how the photoactive silicon layer works. Or a link to a description of how it works, but I couldn't find one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.38.239.72 (talk) 14:53, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

 * See if the edit that I just made is helpful for that. Dicklyon (talk) 01:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have changed your edit, because CCDs use MOS capacitors to do the job done by p-n junctions in photodiodes. But the article still lacks a device physics perspective on the generation of electron charges. I'll give it a try based on Sze's Device physics. Mathieu Perrin (talk) 16:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

intensity vs. irradiance
I just reverted the change of "intensity" to "irradiance" in "causing each capacitor to accumulate an electric charge proportional to the light intensity at that location." I can agree that intensity of is not very specific, but "proportional" can hide all times of factors, like the integration time and spectral weighting. However, "irradiance" is probably too specific, as it suggests equal weight for all wavelengths, which would certainly not be accurate (not even to first order); it would be no more correct than "illuminance", which is wrong in the same way, even though it is commonly used, in the measurement "lux-seconds". Getting into more detail makes sense only if we have something that's correct and sourced. Dicklyon (talk) 20:38, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Microelectronic
Can you imagine a non-IC CCD? Picture rows upon rows of 6SN7s glowing away...it would be like a vacuum-tube CD player or cell phone. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:23, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

 * And the relevance of this piece of trite to improving the article is what exactly? DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Sze
The 4th line below the heading "Design and manufacturing" contains the string "Sze". Is this a typo? If not, please explain it. I think this article is NOT confusing at all, though I, too, would like to see a little more physics. Tim Coahran (talk) 02:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

 * It's Dr. Sze's last name; not a typo. Dicklyon (talk) 02:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

CMOS VS CCD
"In applications with less exacting quality demands, such as consumer and professional digital cameras, active pixel sensors (CMOS) are generally used; the large quality advantage CCDs enjoyed early on has narrowed over time."

Um, no. In video at least, CCDs are still generally preferred to CMOS sensors, partly because CCDs use intra-frame compression, while CMOS chips use inter-frame. The practical consequence is that some CMOS camera moves can produce flutter that is easily visible onscreen.Jim Stinson (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

 * For scientific instruments (read satellite telescopes) CCD's are still the preferred camera. A lot of high end cameras have post processing to deal with stuff like flutter. CombatWombat42 (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Charge-coupled device. 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/20120727032200/http://learn.hamamatsu.com:80/articles/ccdsatandblooming.html to http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/ccdsatandblooming.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) 18:17, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Charge-coupled device. 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/20071228122423/http://www.nae.edu/NAE/awardscom.nsf/weblinks/CGOZ-6K9L6P?OpenDocument to http://www.nae.edu/NAE/awardscom.nsf/weblinks/CGOZ-6K9L6P?OpenDocument

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:38, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

EMCCD Formula Wrong
The giant formula given for EMCCD counts is wrong. In fact, it is nutty. If the gain is g=1, then P(n|m) = kronecker_delta(n,m). The formula fails the simplest possible sanity check.

2600:1700:C280:1CF0:69FB:6EAF:DFA5:32FB (talk) 21:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Charge-coupled device


text:
Talk:A. J. P. Taylor

Untitled
I can never remember the conventions for biograpical entries, but shouldn't this be at AJP Taylor? That's what everybody knows him as. Tannin

Whatever the conventions are, I definately agree. I saw the article on my watchlist and took a moment to register why it was on my watchlist at all. "Alan John Perci... who?" -- Sam wot is taylors ihistoriagraphical postition

This article needs more headings. Ben Finn 20:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Quotations to Wikiquote?
Is it not favourable that the inline quotations be moved to Wikiquote and cited from there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.67.222 (talk) 02:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Irony over ignoring speed limits
It says this;

"I have been driving a car for 45 years. I have consistently ignored all the various speed limits. Never once have I encountered the slightest risk as a result."

Then much further down, the article reads:

"Taylor was badly injured in 1984 when he was run over by a car while crossing Old Compton Street in London."

Certainly ironic, so that irony could be mentioned in the article? Is it known if the car that hit him was speeding? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.210.174 (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Political leanings
I disagree with this comment - "Throughout his life, Taylor was basically sympathetic to the Soviets". I quote from Europe: Grandeur and Decline - "Democracy will show itself ever more fertile and constructive and Communism will be shown for the barren thing it is" and "either the Russians abandon all their fear, disarm at once, drop their suport of Communism, or else there is no alternative but World War III."

"Fawning" biography of Beaverbrook, not neutral too much point of view if the person wants to critise the book on the basis it is biased then do so, otherwise omit the expression as I have done Backnumber1662 23:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Backnumber1662

I disagree with the description of A.J.P. Taylor as a "socialist". A reading of the introduction he wrote for The Communist Manifesto (printed 1967, published by Penguin Books) clearly marks him as a supporter of capitalism. He is critical of Marx and Engels, describing them as confused and pointing out apparent contradictions in their theories. 220.239.115.43 11:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC) Sukrit

You do know that you can be influenced by socialist theory and be a socialist without supporting the views of Marx and/or Engels. Secondly, Taylor, self-addmittingly, stated when he left the British Communist party that he did so because it was not radical enough for him. mpearse 22:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

The following sentence is used 'Taylor championed less government secrecy and perhaps ironically for a staunch leftist, fought for more privately-owned television stations.' This is heavily laden with political bias. It is not a contradiction to be on the left and wish for a plurality of free speech. In fact freedom is a central tenet of socialism. Kiern Moran

Monty Python
He was also mentioned by name in the cult classic, Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail, more evidence of his fame with the general public,

First place, wrong move title, but I think whoever wrote this may be confusing Holy Grail with the "world of history" episode of Flying Circus where Carol Cleveland (I think) in lingerie and the voice of a man play the role of historian A.J.P. Taylor. Does anybody know for sure? john k 07:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC) It was The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra Goes to the Bathroom. (I'm new to Wikipedia, am I doing this right?) TomHinde (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

No, Holy Grail had someone who looked like Taylor but was simply named "A HISTORIAN". In the Monty Python and the Holy Grail Booki, he was listed as "the historian who isn't A.J.P. Taylor" and his wife as "the historian who isn't A.J.P. Taylor's (honestly!) wife".

Clean-up?
I was just looking at the article... and thought, that it would need some cleanup. The article is a huge block of text; more of an essay than an encyclopedia article. Possibly subheadings would do the trick? Does anyone else think the same? --85.49.229.165 20:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, this needs to be sorted out, I think first of all we need to agree on what subheading should be used (eg. early life, other bits of life, political leanings, family life, works etc etc) and then people can get to work at cleaning it up. --Horses In The Sky 17:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually, I think it's one of the better articles on Wikipedia. Just don't make the subheadings too distracting. Njál 15:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Since Taylor wrote about so many different periods, including his work on events during his own lifetime, it would be best to (at the very least) separate this into one "Works" section and one "Life" section. The way the man wrote about history changed significantly throughout his life, but they are not so intimately tied as to be inseparable.

Good God this is long and boring. It MUST be split up for ease of general reference. Most people (I suspect) want to have a brief rundown of Taylor's life/career, and not an in depth analysis of everything he ever wrote. Can't we split it along theory lines, i.e.e his thoughts on different works/topics? Megawattbulbman 15:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree...this article reads well, but the whole concept of the block of text is not very attractive to readers wanting to just find facts about 'the man'. I do like that idea of splitting it into areas of debate/views on certain issues/events.
 * There also needs to be a sub heading within Origins about not only his revisionist defence of appeasement, but the criticisms that he also had with Chamberlain and the way appeasement was soemtimes carried out. It actually encompasses quite a few points on the topic but this text seems to focus mainly on the revisionist controversies that were created. - Whatman, 27 Aug 07

Move material elsewhere?
The long section on The Origins of the Second World War ought to be moved to an article on that book, The Origins of the Second World War - one we don't seem to have yet, although we ought to have one. If no one objects, I'll create one, and move this text, at some point. Noel (talk) 22:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Origins of the Second World War Eurocentric?
More recently, Taylor has been criticized together with many other historians of his generation for perpetuating what many modern historians now regard as shop-worn myths in The Origins of the Second World War''. It has been argued that Taylor's account is Euro-centric. Through Taylor mentioned Japanese aggression against China and fighting along the Soviet-Manchurian border, he largely focused on developments in Europe at the expense of developments in the Far East.''

In the introduction to the American edition Taylor tackles the point head on - his book is about why war broke out between Germany, Britain and France on 3rd September 1939 and acknowledges that in other countries "the Second World War" is considered to have started at other points - 1941 for the US and 1937 for China. (Indeed even in Europe the British, and I presume the French, think the war began on September 3rd despite the Germans and Poles having been fighting for forty-eight hours at that point.) I'm not sure if this criticism mentioned is that he didn't address the origins of war in the Far East (which was never the focus of the book - the problem is perhaps the title but it's too famous a book to retitle for a modern/international audience) or that events there had a major influence on events in Europe. Timrollpickering 01:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Absolutely correct. This "criticism" is totally without grounds and, I see, without attribution. I think it's safe to slice. Albrecht 00:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

.                                     I think the point here is more a historiographic debate on where lines of arguments come, In Taylor's Origins it's pointing out his arguments were probably influenced by focusing on European evidence, which of course was his aim, but the postmodern theory wishes to highlight how purpose and certain perspectives influence history. -Whatman, 27 August 2007

Wikipedia is not for publishing essays
The bane of Wikipedia: people who use Wikipedia to "publish" their school papers. A previous poster had it right -- this is more like an essay than an article. It's long-winded and filled with opinionating and unsourced assertions, too many to enumerate here -- not a single footnote! I'll try to clean it up and add citation tags, but it's still a huge, pompous mess. No way this is a "Class-B" article, and I think "Class-C" is being generous. J M Rice (talk) 21:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

 * It is true that this is more an essay, but otherwise I don´t agree with Rice. For me, it is not "long-winded", I found it certainly not pompous, but rather very readable and constructive, even if I would see the subject a little differently here and there. The article is I think comparatively even-handed, which is laudable considering how much AJP has gone out of fashion, at least in his own country. Those worknig on this paper have put good work in and they don´t deserve to have their work disparaged as a "school paper". I´ve just checked the history of the article and am relieved that Rice did not follow up his intention (or maybe threat...) to "clean up" - for someone who says "opinionating" when meaning "opinionated" should maybe leave off changing the text.
 * Also, it is very easy to sprinkle "citation needed" tags over the text, making it unreadable. The key is "add citations where appropriate". Compromiso (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Filling an article with with fact tags may not be constructive, but it would show just what needs to be done. The article needs inline citations for anything that could be challenged (see WP:V). What needs to be done is for someone to get a biography of AJP and start adding some citations to the article. Nev1 (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

leftwing bias
I´ve deleted the sentence:
 * However, Taylor's view can be considered as biased, as he (being left-wing) was naturally against the conservative nature of Otto von Bismarck.

Taylor was too much of an idiosyncratic leftwinger to be "naturally" against Bismark, any more than he was "naturally" in favour of and against appeasement. It he had been right-wing he would have had an equally probable chance of being biased. It´s therefore simplest to delete the sentence than get involved in debates on bias and neutrality. Compromiso (talk) 19:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Agreed, best removed. Nev1 (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Leaving Oxford??
"Taylor was a tutor in modern history at Magdalen College, Oxford, from 1938 to 1963 and a research fellow there until 1976." - http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/584783/A-J-P-Taylor

I don't know how this ties in with Oxford "refusing to renew his term" or whether becoming a fellow and tutor are precisely the same, but it seems explain the current "Steve Mann says" bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterBiddlecombe (talk • contribs) 14:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

 * I'm not 100% sure how fellowships work as Oxford but I think a fellowship there is a position that is distinct from a day-to-day tutorship. The latter one can be sacked from, the former is much harder. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Structure
I'm going to attempt to structure this article along the same lines as the one for Niall Ferguson - career, subject matter, criticisms, personal life, bibliography. There is no proper structure at the moment. Neelmack (talk) 09:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Great. Please add in refs too if you have them. Span (talk) 12:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Of Scottish Descent?
I'm tempted to add a 'citation needed' for the assertion that Taylor is of Scottish descent. Sisman's biography states that Taylor's grandfather Edmund Taylor "arrived in the country from Scotland" - I'm guessing the reference came from that source. However, my grandfather was a paternal cousin of Taylor and I know from our family history that Edmund was born in Rochdale, Lancashire. Of course, I fully understand we have to base Wikipedia on authoritative published sources so I've no qualms with this myth about Scottish ancestry remaining, as long as the source is stated. Hope that pedantic explanation is of use!! Sionk (talk) 19:05, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

New introduction and first inline citation
I have rewritten the introduction and, amazingly considering its length, added the first inline citation of the entire article. That said, lack of citations aside, most of it is quite well written, readable, and seems to cover all of the many aspects of his life. It has been suggested before that the article be split between life and work. I will make a start on this in the near future. So I would appreciate any help in the form of criticism, suggestions, sources, and things that should be removed or added, etc.--John Allen (talk) 20:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

New format, rewording and inline citations
I have implemented some of the changes suggested above, listing below the alterations made.

 * Format
 * Public intellectual renamed Opinions, and moved from a subsection of Biography to become a new section between Work and Criticisms. The appropriate subsections from Biography and Work moved into the new Opinions section, with Biography renamed Life. This completes the separation of Life and Work, suggested in 2006 but only partially completed until now.

 * Rewording and inline citations
 * Minor rewording in Early life, unsourced headmasters description removed, replaced with a sourced quote from Bootham contemporary Geoffrey Barraclough, and inline citation added for Labour Party membership. Book reviews and newspaper columns renamed Journalism and expanded with inline citations. Television renamed Broadcasting, and expanded to include radio.--John Allen (talk) 13:25, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Works Section
I think that this section needs to be looked at, particularly the first couple of books. It looks like the description of these books turns into a discussion of a completely different book or aspect of Taylor's life in the middle of the section. Either the sections should be split up, or the headings should be changed to more accurately depict what is in the section. Cenna22 (talk) 04:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Opinions
"in a 1976 speech in Dublin that it would be best for Britain if London would agree to let the IRA, whom he regarded as freedom-fighters, expel the entire Protestant Unionist population of Northern Ireland in the same manner that the Czechoslovak government had expelled the ethnic Germans of the Sudetenland after the Second World War." There is no citation attached to this statement which, in the circumstances, would have been highly contentious in 1976. Should this stand? --Gepid (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

 * The source seems to be Adam Sisman's 1994 "A.J.P. Taylor: a biography" on p. 378. I don't have access to the book so I can't verify the reference. There's also a reference on p. 45 of "In Search of Solutions: The Problem of Religion and Conflict" by Clinton Bennett but it's unsourced - I suspect he got it from Sisman whose biography is, as far as I can tell, the only one to mention his support for expulsion. I suspect Wrigley et al. aren't very keen to write about that particular aspect of Taylor's beliefs. Atchom 21:31, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I found a source for his comments from The Times.--Britannicus (talk) 11:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

festschrift "an extraordinary and rare honour"
source for this please? They seem in my experience (as a reader and researcher) to be fairly common. --134.153.14.79 (talk) 13:03, 16 October 2019 (UTC) ps if the word is italicized, and pluralized as in German, shouldn't it be capitalized, as it is in the article Festschrift? --134.153.14.79 (talk) 13:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

"It was suggested that he had an affair with Kitty Muggeridge"
By whom? The only source for this section "personal life" is his own "A Personal History" --134.153.14.79 (talk) 13:16, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

 * I've removed it. "It has been suggested that" is not good enough, still no citation 2 years on from you raising the matter here and nothing on the web that I can find to give credence to the claim. I've also removed the uncited Margaret/Eve household sentence. Mattstan (talk) 14:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Useless reference - "Burk 2001"
There are several references to "Burk 2001", but no such work is listed. DuncanHill (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:A. J. P. Taylor


text:
Amka

Amka (עַמְקָה), also known in Arabic as Amqa (عمقا), is a moshav in the Matte Asher Regional Council of Israel's Northern District, near Acre. The location of the moshav roughly corresponds the former Palestinian village, depopulated during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. Yemenite Jews founded the village's successor Amka in 1949. In its population was.

Etymology
Palmer thought the name Amka to come from the Arabic form of “deep”, while Ringgren suggested that the name preserves the name of Beth Ha-Emek, a city mentioned in  as part of the allotment of the Tribe of Asher.

Ancient period
Amka is identified with Kefar Amiqo (כפר עמיקו), a place mentioned in the Mishnah and Tosefta. Walid Khalidi writes that during the Roman period, the village located at the site was called Kefar Amqa.

Middle Ages
During the Crusader period, Amka was referred to as Amca. In 1179 Joscelin III acquired the land of the village, and in 1220 Jocelyn III's daughter  Beatrix de Courtenay and her husband Otto von Botenlauben, Count of Henneberg,  sold  their land, including ‘’Amca’’, to the Teutonic Knights.

In 1283, Amka was mentioned as part of the domain of the Crusaders during the hudna between the Crusaders based in Acre and the Mamluk sultan al-Mansur (Qalawun).

Ottoman Empire
Incorporated into the Ottoman Empire in 1517, Amqa appeared in the 1596 tax registers as being in the nahiya (subdistrict) of Akka under the liwa' (district) of Safad, with a population of 215. All the inhabitants were Muslim. The villagers paid taxes on a number of crops, such as wheat, barley, olives, cotton and fruit, and on other types of produce, such as goats and beehives.

In the early 18th century the village was under control of Shaykh Najm. He had an agreement to sell the cotton from this and other villages under his control exclusively to the Dutch trader Paul Maashook. In return, Maashook would pay the miri (tax slated for funding the annual Hajj caravan), which was normally payable by the village shaykhs (chiefs). The Syrian Sufi teacher and traveler Mustafa al-Bakri al-Siddiqi (1688–1748/9), who traveled through the region in the first half of the 18th century, said that he prayed in the village after visiting the citadel of Atlit. In 1776 the village was used as a base by Ahmad Pasha al-Jazzar to suppress a revolt led by Ali al-Zahir, one of the sons of Sheikh Zahir al-Umar, who ruled the Galilee between 1730 and 1775. A map by Pierre Jacotin from Napoleon's invasion of 1799 showed the place, misnamed as El Mead, In the late 19th century, the village was described as being built of stone, situated on a slight rise in a valley, surrounded by olive and fig trees, and arable land. There were an estimated 300 Druze living there. Later, the residents were described as  Muslims who maintained a village mosque. In 1887, the Ottoman authorities built a school in ´Amqa.

A population list from about 1887 showed that Amka had about 740 inhabitants, all Muslim.

British Mandate
In the 1922 census of Palestine conducted by the British Mandate authorities, Amqa had a population of 724 inhabitants, of whom 722 were Muslims and two Christians. The population increased in the 1931 census to 895, all Muslims, living in a total of 212 houses.

In 1945 the population of Amqa was 1,240 Muslims, with over 6000 dunum of land according to an official land and population survey. Of this, 1,648 dunams were plantations and irrigable land; 3,348 used for cereals, while 36 dunams were built-up (urban) land.

Israel
The village was captured by Israel's 7th Brigade on 16 July 1948 during Operation Dekel. It was largely destroyed, with the exception of its school and its mosque, and most of its inhabitants were expelled, with the exception of its former Druze inhabitants, who still live nearby. Some of the inhabitants remained in Israel as present absentees. On 1 March 1949 a UN observer reported villagers from 'Amqa amongst a large group of people expelled by the IDF which arrived at Salim in the West Bank. He also noted other villagers from 'Amqa in a group expelled on 26 March. In February 1950, the village was declared a closed area. The Arab population remained under Martial Law until 1966.

A group of Yemenite Jewish immigrants were settled in Amka in 1949. Depopulated during the 1948 Arab–Israeli war, all that remains of the Arab village structures are an elementary school for boys, founded under Ottoman rule in 1887 and one mosque. The majority of the remaining Arab buildings of Amqa were destroyed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in the late 1950s on the orders of the Israeli government. The mosque and a schoolroom now used as a warehouse, are the only remaining buildings.

Archaeological sites
Three khirbas (archaeological ruins) lay within Amka's vicinity and contain the foundations of buildings, well-chiseled building stones, presses, and a cistern. During archaeological searches of the area remnants of a Byzantine church were discovered but due to the destruction of the village no foundations could be established. The Amka mosque was inspected by Petersen in 1991. The date of the mosque construction is not known, but it bears a general similarity to the nearby mosque of al-Ghabisiyya, and is probably of a similar age, i.e. early 19th century.

External links and references

 * Welcome To 'Amqa
 * 'Amqa, Zochrot
 * Survey of Western Palestine, Map 3: IAA, Wikimedia commons
 * 3amqa, Dr. Moslih Kanaaneh

title: Amka