text:
Agrobacterium tumefaciens

Agrobacterium tumefaciens is the causal agent of crown gall disease (the formation of tumours) in over 140 species of eudicots. It is a rod-shaped, Gram-negative soil bacterium. Symptoms are caused by the insertion of a small segment of DNA (known as T-DNA, for 'transfer DNA', not to be confused with tRNA that transfers amino acids during protein synthesis), from a plasmid into the plant cell, which is incorporated at a semi-random location into the plant genome. Plant genomes can be engineered by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors.

Agrobacterium tumefaciens is an Alphaproteobacterium of the family Rhizobiaceae, which includes the nitrogen-fixing legume symbionts. Unlike the nitrogen-fixing symbionts, tumor-producing Agrobacterium species are pathogenic and do not benefit the plant. The wide variety of plants affected by Agrobacterium makes it of great concern to the agriculture industry.

Economically, A. tumefaciens is a serious pathogen of walnuts, grape vines, stone fruits, nut trees, sugar beets, horse radish, and rhubarb, and the persistent nature of the tumors or galls caused by the disease make it particularly harmful for perennial crops.

Agrobacterium tumefaciens grows optimally at 28 C. The doubling time can range from 2.5–4h depending on the media, culture format, and level of aeration. At temperatures above 30 C, A. tumefaciens begins to experience heat shock which is likely to result in errors in cell division.

Conjugation
To be virulent, the bacterium contains a tumour-inducing plasmid (Ti plasmid or pTi) 200 kbp long, which contains the T-DNA and all the genes necessary to transfer it to the plant cell. Many strains of A. tumefaciens do not contain a pTi.

Since the Ti plasmid is essential to cause disease, prepenetration events in the rhizosphere occur to promote bacterial conjugation - exchange of plasmids amongst bacteria. In the presence of opines, A. tumefaciens produces a diffusible conjugation signal called N-(3-oxo-octanoyl)-L-homoserine lactone (3OC8HSL) or the Agrobacterium autoinducer. This activates the transcription factor TraR, positively regulating the transcription of genes required for conjugation.

Infection methods
Agrobacterium tumefaciens infects the plant through its Ti plasmid. The Ti plasmid integrates a segment of its DNA, known as T-DNA, into the chromosomal DNA of its host plant cells. A. tumefaciens has flagella that allow it to swim through the soil towards photoassimilates that accumulate in the rhizosphere around roots. Some strains may chemotactically move towards chemical exudates from plants, such as acetosyringone and sugars, which indicate the presence of a wound in the plant through which the bacteria may enter. Phenolic compounds are recognised by the VirA protein, a transmembrane protein encoded in the virA gene on the Ti plasmid. Sugars are recognised by the chvE protein, a chromosomal gene-encoded protein located in the periplasmic space.

At least 25 vir genes on the Ti plasmid are necessary for tumor induction. In addition to their perception role, virA and chvE induce other vir genes. The VirA protein has autokinase activity: it phosphorylates itself on a histidine residue. Then the VirA protein phosphorylates the VirG protein on its aspartate residue. The virG protein is a cytoplasmic protein produced from the virG Ti plasmid gene. It is a transcription factor, inducing the transcription of the vir operons. The ChvE protein regulates the second mechanism of the vir genes' activation. It increases VirA protein sensitivity to phenolic compounds.

Attachment is a two-step process. Following an initial weak and reversible attachment, the bacteria synthesize cellulose fibrils that anchor them to the wounded plant cell to which they were attracted. Four main genes are involved in this process: chvA, chvB, pscA, and att. The products of the first three genes apparently are involved in the actual synthesis of the cellulose fibrils. These fibrils also anchor the bacteria to each other, helping to form a microcolony.

VirC, the most important virulent protein, is a necessary step in the recombination of illegitimate recolonization. It selects the section of the DNA in the host plant that will be replaced and it cuts into this strand of DNA.

After production of cellulose fibrils, a calcium-dependent outer membrane protein called rhicadhesin is produced, which also aids in sticking the bacteria to the cell wall. Homologues of this protein can be found in other rhizobia. Currently, there are several reports on standardisation of protocol for the Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. The effect of different parameters such as infection time, acetosyringone, DTT, and cysteine have been studied in soybean (Glycine max).

Possible plant compounds that initiate Agrobacterium to infect plant cells:
 * Acetosyringone and other phenolic compounds
 * alpha-Hydroxyacetosyringone
 * Catechol
 * Ferulic acid
 * Gallic acid
 * p-Hydroxybenzoic acid
 * Protocatechuic acid
 * Pyrogallic acid
 * Resorcylic acid
 * Sinapinic acid
 * Syringic acid
 * Vanillin

Formation of the T-pilus
To transfer T-DNA into a plant cell, A. tumefaciens uses a type IV secretion mechanism, involving the production of a T-pilus. When acetosyringone and other substances are detected, a signal transduction event activates the expression of 11 genes within the VirB operon which are responsible for the formation of the T-pilus.

The pro-pilin is formed first. This is a polypeptide of 121 amino acids which requires processing by the removal of 47 residues to form a T-pilus subunit. The subunit was thought to be circularized by the formation of a peptide bond between the two ends of the polypeptide. However, high-resolution structure of the T-pilus revealed no cyclization of the pilin, with the overall organization of the pilin subunits being highly similar to those of other conjugative pili, such as F-pilus.

Products of the other VirB genes are used to transfer the subunits across the plasma membrane. Yeast two-hybrid studies provide evidence that VirB6, VirB7, VirB8, VirB9 and VirB10 may all encode components of the transporter. An ATPase for the active transport of the subunits would also be required.

Transfer of T-DNA into the plant cell
[[File:Transfection by Agrobacterium.svg|thumb|300px|right|

]]

The T-DNA must be cut out of the circular plasmid. This is typically done by the Vir genes within the helper plasmid. A VirD1/D2 complex nicks the DNA at the left and right border sequences. The VirD2 protein is covalently attached to the 5' end. VirD2 contains a motif that leads to the nucleoprotein complex being targeted to the type IV secretion system (T4SS). The structure of the T-pilus showed that the central channel of the pilus is too narrow to allow the transfer of the folded VirD2, suggesting that VirD2 must be partially unfolded during the conjugation process.

In the cytoplasm of the recipient cell, the T-DNA complex becomes coated with VirE2 proteins, which are exported through the T4SS independently from the T-DNA complex. Nuclear localization signals, or NLSs, located on the VirE2 and VirD2, are recognised by the importin alpha protein, which then associates with importin beta and the nuclear pore complex to transfer the T-DNA into the nucleus. VIP1 also appears to be an important protein in the process, possibly acting as an adapter to bring the VirE2 to the importin. Once inside the nucleus, VIP2 may target the T-DNA to areas of chromatin that are being actively transcribed, so that the T-DNA can integrate into the host genome.

Hormones
To cause gall formation, the T-DNA encodes genes for the production of auxin or indole-3-acetic acid via the IAM pathway. This biosynthetic pathway is not used in many plants for the production of auxin, so it means the plant has no molecular means of regulating it and auxin will be produced constitutively. Genes for the production of cytokinins are also expressed. This stimulates cell proliferation and gall formation.

Opines
The T-DNA contains genes for encoding enzymes that cause the plant to create specialized amino acid derivatives which the bacteria can metabolize, called opines. Opines are a class of chemicals that serve as a source of nitrogen for A. tumefaciens, but not for most other organisms. The specific type of opine produced by A. tumefaciens C58 infected plants is nopaline.

Two nopaline type Ti plasmids, pTi-SAKURA and pTiC58, were fully sequenced. "A. fabrum" C58, the first fully sequenced pathovar, was first isolated from a cherry tree crown gall. The genome was simultaneously sequenced by Goodner et al. and Wood et al. in 2001. The genome of A. tumefaciens C58 consists of a circular chromosome, two plasmids, and a linear chromosome. The presence of a covalently bonded circular chromosome is common to Bacteria, with few exceptions. However, the presence of both a single circular chromosome and single linear chromosome is unique to a group in this genus. The two plasmids are pTiC58, responsible for the processes involved in virulence, and pAtC58, once dubbed the "cryptic" plasmid.

The pAtC58 plasmid has been shown to be involved in the metabolism of opines and to conjugate with other bacteria in the absence of the pTiC58 plasmid. If the Ti plasmid is removed, the tumor growth that is the means of classifying this species of bacteria does not occur.

Biotechnological uses
The Asilomar Conference in 1975 established widespread agreement that recombinant techniques were insufficiently understood and needed to be tightly controlled. The DNA transmission capabilities of Agrobacterium have been vastly explored in biotechnology as a means of inserting foreign genes into plants. Shortly after the Asilomar Conference, Marc Van Montagu and Jeff Schell discovered the gene transfer mechanism between Agrobacterium and plants, which resulted in the development of methods to alter the bacterium into an efficient delivery system for genetic engineering in plants. The plasmid T-DNA that is transferred to the plant is an ideal vehicle for genetic engineering. This is done by cloning a desired gene sequence into T-DNA binary vectors that will be used to deliver a sequence of interest into eukaryotic cells. This process has been performed using the firefly luciferase gene to produce glowing plants. This luminescence has been a useful device in the study of plant chloroplast function and as a reporter gene. It is also possible to transform Arabidopsis thaliana by dipping flowers into a broth of Agrobacterium: the seed produced will be transgenic. Under laboratory conditions, T-DNA has also been transferred to human cells, demonstrating the diversity of insertion application.

The mechanism by which Agrobacterium inserts materials into the host cell is by a type IV secretion system which is very similar to mechanisms used by pathogens to insert materials (usually proteins) into human cells by type III secretion. It also employs a type of signaling conserved in many Gram-negative bacteria called quorum sensing. This makes Agrobacterium an important topic of medical research, as well.

Natural genetic transformation
Natural genetic transformation in bacteria is a sexual process involving the transfer of DNA from one cell to another through the intervening medium, and the integration of the donor sequence into the recipient genome by homologous recombination. A. tumefaciens can undergo natural transformation in soil without any specific physical or chemical treatment.

Disease cycle
Agrobacterium tumefaciens overwinters in infested soils. Agrobacterium species live predominantly saprophytic lifestyles, so its common even for plant-parasitic species of this genus to survive in the soil for lengthy periods of time, even without host plant presence. When there is a host plant present, however, the bacteria enter the plant tissue via recent wounds or natural openings of roots or stems near the ground. These wounds may be caused by cultural practices, grafting, insects, etc. Once the bacteria have entered the plant, they occur intercellularly and stimulate surrounding tissue to proliferate due to cell transformation. Agrobacterium performs this control by inserting the plasmid T-DNA into the plant's genome. See above for more details about the process of plasmid DNA insertion into the host genome. Excess growth of the plant tissue leads to gall formation on the stem and roots. These tumors exert significant pressure on the surrounding plant tissue, which causes this tissue to become crushed and/or distorted. The crushed vessels lead to reduced water flow in the xylem. Young tumors are soft and therefore vulnerable to secondary invasion by insects and saprophytic microorganisms. This secondary invasion causes the breakdown of the peripheral cell layers as well as tumor discoloration due to decay. Breakdown of the soft tissue leads to release of the Agrobacterium tumefaciens into the soil allowing it to restart the disease process with a new host plant.

Disease management
Crown gall disease caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens can be controlled by using various methods. The best way to control this disease is to take preventative measures, such as sterilizing pruning tools so as to avoid infecting new plants. Performing mandatory inspections of nursery stock and rejecting infected plants as well as not planting susceptible plants in infected fields are also valuable practices. Avoiding wounding the crowns/roots of the plants during cultivation is important for preventing disease. In horticultural techniques in which multiple plants are joined to grow as one, such as budding and grafting these techniques lead to plant wounds. Wounds are the primary location of bacterial entry into the host plant. Therefore, it is advisable to perform these techniques during times of the year when Agrobacteria are not active. Control of root-chewing insects is also helpful to reduce levels of infection, since these insects cause wounds (aka bacterial entryways) in the plant roots. It is recommended that infected plant material be burned rather than placed in a compost pile due to the bacteria's ability to live in the soil for many years.

Biological control methods are also utilized in managing this disease. During the 1970s and 1980s, a common practice for treating germinated seeds, seedlings, and rootstock was to soak them in a suspension of K84. K84 is composed of A. radiobacter, which is a species related to A. tumefaciens but is not pathogenic. K84 produces a bacteriocin (agrocin 84) which is an antibiotic specific against related bacteria, including A. tumefaciens. This method, which was successful at controlling the disease on a commercial scale, had the risk of K84 transferring its resistance gene to the pathogenic Agrobacteria. Thus, in the 1990s, the use of a genetically engineering strain of K84, known as K-1026, was created. This strain is just as successful in controlling crown gall as K84 without the caveat of resistance gene transfer.

Environment
Host, environment, and pathogen are extremely important concepts in regards to plant pathology. Agrobacteria have the widest host range of any plant pathogen, so the main factor to take into consideration in the case of crown gall is environment. There are various conditions and factors that make for a conducive environment for A. tumefaciens when infecting its various hosts. The bacterium can't penetrate the host plant without an entry point such as a wound. Factors leading to wounds in plants include cultural practices, grafting, freezing injury, growth cracks, soil insects, and other animals in the environment causing damage to the plant. Consequently, in exceptionally harsh winters, it is common to have an increased incidence of crown gall due to the weather-related damage. Along with this, there are methods of mediating infection of the host plant. For example, nematodes can act as a vector to introduce Agrobacterium into plant roots. More specifically, the root parasitic nematodes damage the plant cell, creating a wound for the bacteria to enter through. Finally, temperature is a factor when considering A. tumefaciens infection. The optimal temperature for crown gall formation due to this bacterium is 22 C because of the thermosensitivity of T-DNA transfer. Tumor formation is significantly reduced at higher temperature conditions.

title: Agrobacterium tumefaciens


text:
Presumption of constitutionality

In constitutional law, the presumption of constitutionality is the legal principle that the judiciary should presume statutes enacted by the legislature to be constitutional, unless the law is clearly unconstitutional or a fundamental right is implicated.

United States
In its strongest form—advocated most notably by James Bradley Thayer—the presumption of constitutionality gives Congress, rather than the courts, the primary responsibility for interpreting the Constitution. This view is in tension with the view of judicial review articulated in Marbury v. Madison, however. Thus, a less strong form of the presumption, repeatedly articulated by the Supreme Court of the United States, has become the dominant approach in American law: "[r]espect for a coordinate branch of Government forbids striking down an Act of Congress except upon a clear showing of unconstitutionality." Constitutional law scholars Gillian E. Metzger and Trevor Morrison summarize this principle as follows: "although the Court's determination of constitutional invalidity always trumps the contrary judgment of a coordinate branch, the Court should not lightly arrive at such a determination."

The presumption of constitutionality is linked to the doctrine of constitutional avoidance (the doctrine that courts will not make rulings on constitutional issues if the case can be resolved on a non-constitutional basis) and the rule that courts will not interpret an ambiguous statute to be unconstitutional in the absence of clear unconstitutionality.

The Supreme Court has held that statutes implicating certain fundamental individual rights are not subject to the general presumption, and are evaluated instead through heightened levels of scrutiny. By contrast, economic legislation is subject to the presumption of constitutionality.

In Federalist 78, Alexander Hamilton wrote that courts should be able strike down a statute as unconstitutional only if there is an "irreconcilable variance" between the statute and the constitution. Otherwise, a statute should be upheld. Likewise, at the 1787 Philadelphia Convention, Virginia delegate George Mason said that judges "could declare an unconstitutional law void. But with regard to every law, however unjust, oppressive or pernicious, which did not come plainly under this description, they would be under the necessity as Judges to give it a free course."

Professor Randy Barnett from Georgetown Law argues that such a presumption is itself unconstitutional and suggests that government should be forced to prove that laws that violate liberty are necessary, replacing the presumption of constitutionality with what he calls the "presumption of liberty."

Outside the United States
The presumption of constitutionality is part of the constitutional law of a number of nations outside the U.S., including the Republic of Ireland and Singapore.

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

title: Presumption of constitutionality


text:
Talk:George M. Dallas

Dallas City Namesake?
I took out statement that the city of Dallas was named after GMD--according to Dallas Historical Society, it is unlikely that the city was named after George Dallas. Glendoremus 05:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Britannica Eleventh Ed.
DALLAS, GEORGE MIFFLIN (1792-1864), American statesman and diplomat, was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the 10th of July 1792. He graduated at Princeton in 1810 at the head of his class; then studied law in the office of his father, Alexander J. Dallas, the financier, and was admitted to the bar in 1813. In the same year he accompanied Albert Gallatin, as his secretary, to Russia, and in 1814 returned to the United States as the bearer of important dispatches from the American peace commissioners at Ghent. He practised law in New York and Philadelphia, was chosen mayor of Philadelphia in 1828, and in. 1829 was appointed by President Jackson, whom he had twice warmly supported for the presidency, United States attorney for the eastern district of Pennsylvania, a position long held by his father. From 1831 to 1833 he was a Democratic member of the United States Senate, in which he advocated a compromise tariff and strongly supported Jacksons position in regard to nullification. On the bank question he was at first at variance with the president; in January 1832 he presented in the Senate a memorial from the banks president, Nicholas Biddle, and its managers, praying for a recharter, and subsequently he was chairman of a committee which reported a bill re-chartering the institution for a fifteen-year period. Afterwards, however, his views changed and he opposed the bank. From 1833 to 1835 Dallas was attorney-general of Pennsylvania, and from 1835 to 1839 was minister to Rus ~a. During the following years he was engaged in a long stru gle with James Buchanan for party leadership in Pennsylvania. He was vicepresident of the United States from 1845 to 1849, but the appointment of Buchanan as secretary of state at once shut him off from all hope of party patronage or influence in the Polk administration, and he came to be looked upon as the leader of that body of conservative Democrats of the North, who, while they themselves chafed at the domination of Southern leaders, were disposed to disparage all anti-slavery agitation. By his casting vote at a critical period during the debate in the Senate on the tariff bill of 1846, he irretrievably lost his influence with the protectionist element of his native state, to whom he had given assurances of his support of the Tyler tariff of 1842. For several years after his retirement from office, he devoted himself to his law practie, and in 1856 succeeded James Buchanan as United States minister to England, where he remained until relieved by Charles Francis Adams in May 1861. During this trying period he represented his country with ability and tact, making every endeavour to strengthen the Union cause in Great Britain. He died at Philadelphia on the 1st of December 1864. He wrote a biographical memoir for an edition of his fathers writings, which was published in 1871. His Diary of his residence in St Petersburg and London was published in Philadelphia in 1892.

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain. Brittannica was correct about his position 1829-31--U.S. attorney for E.D. Pennsylvania, same as his late father. I'm surprise the cite, U.S. Senate Art & History got the position title wrong (federal prosecutors are not district attorneys.Jweaver28 (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced reference to Democratic Party
Quoth the article:

"After the War of 1812 ended, Pennsylvania's political climate was chaotic, with two factions in that state's Democratic party vying for control."

I know this is taken right from the US Senate website (there's a reference), but it can't be right. The Democratic Party did not exist in the 1810s. I'm going to change this to the Democratic-Republican party, which is I assume what's meant? --Jfruh (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Actually< I'm going to hold off because the rest of the section refers to events in the late 1820s. But I'm still dubious about the reference -- maybe the period under discussion is actually the early to mid 1820s, when the D-R party was dissolving?

Not his father, but rather his father's father.
Quoth the article:

>> Family and early life >> George Dallas was born on July 10, 1792, to Alexander James Dallas and Arabella Maria Smith Dallas (born Devon, England) in Philadelphia.[1] His father, Dr Robert Dallas, born in Kingston, Jamaica,...

 * The 2nd sentence here seems to clearly say George Dallas's father is Dr. Robert Dallas. Shouldn't it say his *grandfather* (or more specifically his father's father) is Dr. Robert Dallas??

--KS on Wikipedia (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Not only that but his father was Secretary of the Treasury, not Secretary of War and his grandfather was neither Secretary of the Treasury or War (just compare with the lists of Secretaries of the Treasury and Secretaries of War here in Wikipedia) Overlordnat1 (talk) 02:07, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:George M. Dallas


text:
Procedural due process

Procedural due process is a legal doctrine in the United States that requires government officials to follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty, or property. When the government seeks to deprive a person of one of those interests, procedural due process requires at least for the government to afford the person notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a decision made by a neutral decisionmaker. Procedural due process is required by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

The article "Some Kind of Hearing" written by Judge Henry Friendly created a list of basic due process rights "that remains highly influential, as to both content and relative priority." The rights, which apply equally to civil due process and criminal due process, are the following:
 * 1) An unbiased tribunal.
 * 2) Notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it.
 * 3) The opportunity to present reasons for the proposed action not to be taken.
 * 4) The right to present evidence, including the right to call witnesses.
 * 5) The right to know the opposing evidence.
 * 6) The right to cross-examine adverse witnesses.
 * 7) A decision based only on the evidence presented.
 * 8) Opportunity to be represented by counsel.
 * 9) A requirement that the tribunal prepare a record of the evidence presented.
 * 10) A requirement that the tribunal prepare written findings of fact and the reasons for its decision.

Not all the above rights are guaranteed in every instance when the government seeks to deprive a person life, liberty, or property. At minimum, a person is due only notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a decision by a neutral decisionmaker. Courts use various tests to determine whether a person should also be guaranteed any of the other above procedural rights.

title: Procedural due process


text:
Eastman Chemical Company

Eastman Chemical Company is an American company primarily involved in the chemical industry. Once a subsidiary of Kodak, today it is an independent global specialty materials company that produces a broad range of advanced materials, chemicals and fibers for everyday purposes. Founded in 1920 and based in Kingsport, Tennessee, the company operates 36 manufacturing sites worldwide and employs approximately 14,000 people.

Eastman was spun off from parent Eastman Kodak in 1994. In 2023 it had sales revenue of approximately $9.21 billion.

Business segments
Eastman manufactures and markets chemicals, fibers, and plastics. It provides coatings, adhesives and specialty plastics products, is a major supplier of cellulose acetate fibers, and produces copolyesters for packaging.

The company's products and operations are managed and reported in four operating segments: Additives & Functional Products, Advanced Materials, Chemical Intermediates, and Fibers.

In this segment, Eastman manufactures chemicals and adhesive resins for products in the coatings and tires industries in transportation, building and construction, durable goods, health and wellness, and consumables markets. The development of cyanoacrylates ("super-glues", or instant adhesives) is attributed to Harry Coover, an employee of Eastman. The adhesives were patented in 1956.
 * Additives & Functional Products

In this segment, Eastman produces and markets specialty copolyesters, cellulose esters, interlayers, and aftermarket window film products for use in transportation, consumables, building and construction, durable goods, health and wellness, and electronics.
 * Advanced Materials

The Chemical Intermediates segment leverages large scale and vertical integration from the acetyl, olefins, and alkylamine streams and proprietary manufacturing technology for specialty fluids to manufacture diversified products that are sold externally for use in markets such as industrial chemicals and processing; building and construction; health and wellness; energy, fuels, and water; consumables; agriculture, as well as used internally by other Eastman segments.
 * Chemical Intermediates

In the Fibers segment, Eastman manufactures and sells Estron acetate tow and Estrobond triacetin plasticizers for use primarily in the manufacture of cigarette filters; Estron natural and Chromspun solution-dyed acetate yarns for use in apparel, home furnishings and industrial fabrics; and cellulose acetate flake and acetyl raw materials for other acetate fiber producers.
 * Fibers

Early years
An effect of World War I was a scarcity in raw materials such as photographic paper, optical glass, gelatin and many chemicals, including methanol, acetic acid and acetone. After the war ended, George Eastman, founder of Eastman Kodak, began working to develop an independent supply of chemicals for his photographic processes. His search for suitable quantities of methanol and acetone led him to the southern United States.

In 1920, George Eastman founded Tennessee Eastman with two major platforms: organic chemicals and acetyls. Products such as calcium acetate, sodium acetate, acetic acid, and acetic anhydride became the basis for the company’s platforms.

During World War II, RDX, a powerful explosive, was manufactured for the U.S. government at Holston Ordnance Works at Tennessee Eastman sites. At the peak of production near the end of the war, the ordnance plant was producing a million and a half pounds of explosives each day. Tennessee Eastman was responsible for managing the Y-12 National Security Complex at Oak Ridge, Tennessee which produced enriched uranium for the Manhattan Project, from 1943 to May 1947.

In 1960, there was an explosion at Eastman's Kingsport plant. It occurred in the Aniline production. Some 16 people were killed and many more were injured.

Since the 1980s
In 1983, Eastman opened the first commercial coal gasification facility in the United States at its Kingsport plant site to produce chemicals from syngas rather than petroleum. The "Chemicals from Coal Facility" at the Kingsport plant was recognized in 1995 as a National Historic Chemical Landmark by the American Chemical Society.

In 1994, Eastman was spun off from Eastman Kodak and became an independent corporation. In early 2005, Eastman broke ground on the first world-scale manufacturing facility using IntegRex, a technology that reduces the number of intermediate process steps in producing PET resin. This technology is now owned by DAK Americas.

Since 2000, Eastman, and its many subsidiaries have paid more than $82 million in EPA fines.

In July 2012, Eastman completed its acquisition of Solutia Inc., a manufacturer of performance materials and specialty chemicals, for $4.8 billion.

In December 2014, Eastman Chemical Company completed its acquisition of Taminco Corporation for $2.8 billion.

October 2017 explosion
On the morning of October 4, 2017, an explosion occurred at Eastman's Kingsport Plant around the coal gasification building. In April 2018, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation determined the cause to be a valve blockage due to slurry or debris intrusion.

Circular economy
In 2019, Eastman began commercial-scale chemical recycling for a broad set of waste plastics that would otherwise be placed in a landfill or incinerated. Eastman Advanced Circular Recycling technologies complement mechanical recycling by processing a wide spectrum of waste plastics that traditional recycling methods cannot, including polyesters, polypropylene, polyethylene, and polystyrene. These waste plastics are derived from a variety of sources, including single-use plastics, textiles, and cuttings from discarded carpet.

Eastman's recycling technologies - carbon renewal technology and polyester renewal technology - provide a true circular solution of infinite recycling for materials, allowing them to be reused repeatedly. Eastman began commercial operation of carbon renewal technology in October 2019 at the company's largest manufacturing facility in Kingsport, Tennessee. In 2020, Eastman will use carbon renewal technology to recycle millions of pounds of polyester carpet that would otherwise have been placed in a landfill.

In January 2021, Eastman announced plans to build a methanolysis plant that will convert polyester waste into durable products. The company expects to spend approximately $250 million to build the facility. When completed by the end of 2022, the methanolysis plant will use over 100,000 metric tons of plastic waste that cannot be recycled by current mechanical methods to produce premium, high-quality specialty plastics made with recycled content.

In January 2022, Eastman announced it would invest up to $1 billion in a material-to-material molecular recycling facility in France that would use Eastman's polyester renewal technology to recycle up to 160,000 tons annually of plastic waste. The plant is expected to be operational by 2025.

Mexican pine sourcing controversy
An April 2017 article in The Daily Beast reported that Eastman Chemical's plant in Uruapan, Michoacán bought pine rosin (refined, solidified resin) from a supplier that was known to be controlled by the Knights Templar criminal cartel, even after being notified of the supplier's criminal links. The supplier (Unored) was using the cartel to extort the raw pine resin gatherers to accept sub-market prices, with a portion of the reduction passed on to Eastman in lower prices.

Manufacturing sites
Eastman Chemical Company operates 36 manufacturing sites in 12 countries:

 * United States
 * Alvin, Texas
 * Anniston, Alabama
 * Axton, Virginia
 * Chestertown, Maryland
 * Columbia, South Carolina
 * Fieldale, Virginia
 * Kingsport, Tennessee
 * Linden, New Jersey
 * Longview, Texas
 * Martinsville, Virginia
 * Pace, Florida
 * Springfield, Massachusetts
 * St. Gabriel, Louisiana
 * Sun Prairie, Wisconsin
 * Texas City, Texas
 * Watertown, New York

 * Latin America
 * Mauá, Brazil
 * Santo Toribio, Mexico

 * Europe
 * Antwerp, Belgium
 * Ghent, Belgium
 * Kohtla-Järve, Estonia
 * Oulu, Finland
 * Dresden, Germany
 * Leuna, Germany
 * Marl, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
 * Ávila, Spain
 * Newport, United Kingdom

 * Asia Pacific
 * Dalian, China
 * Nanjing, China
 * Suzhou, China
 * Wuhan, China
 * Zibo City, China
 * Ulsan, Korea
 * Kuantan, Malaysia
 * Hefei, China
 * Shenzhen, China

Corporate responsibility
Eastman has been a member of Responsible Care, a voluntary initiative developed autonomously by the chemical industry to improve health, safety, and environmental performance, for more than 25 years. In 2013, Eastman was named Responsible Care Company of the Year in the large company category by the American Chemistry Council (ACC). Eastman was awarded the 2009 Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge Award presented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The award recognizes technologies that incorporate the principles of green chemistry into chemical design, manufacture, and use.

In 2013, the EPA designated a 3-km radius circle around the Eastman facility in Kingsport, TN as non-attainment for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The State of Tennessee continues to monitor ambient sulfur dioxide levels within the non-attainment area.

Through 2015, Eastman improved energy intensity by approximately 8% compared to a 2008 baseline. The company established a goal to improve energy intensity 20% by 2020. In 2014 and early 2016, Eastman converted two boilers at its Kingsport, Tennessee, site from coal to natural gas combustion. Three additional boilers will be converted by 2018 for a total of five. The Kingsport boiler conversion project is the most significant air pollution control project in the history of Eastman and will diversify the Kingsport facility’s energy mix from 90% coal to 50% coal and 50% natural gas. Eastman also converted a coal-fired boiler at its Indian Orchard facility in Springfield, Massachusetts, to natural gas in 2015.

As of 2019, Eastman has been recognized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as an ENERGY STAR Partner of the Year eight consecutive years. Eastman has also been recognized three consecutive years by Glassdoor as an Employees’ Choice Best Place to Work and by Ethisphere Institute as a World’s Most Ethical Company.

title: Eastman Chemical Company


text:
Agrobacterium

Agrobacterium is a genus of Gram-negative bacteria established by H. J. Conn that uses horizontal gene transfer to cause tumors in plants. Agrobacterium tumefaciens is the most commonly studied species in this genus. Agrobacterium is well known for its ability to transfer DNA between itself and plants, and for this reason it has become an important tool for genetic engineering.

Nomenclatural History
Leading up to the 1990s, the genus Agrobacterium was used as a wastebasket taxon. With the advent of 16S sequencing, many Agrobacterium species (especially the marine species) were reassigned to genera such as Ahrensia, Pseudorhodobacter, Ruegeria, and Stappia. The remaining Agrobacterium species were assigned to three biovars: biovar 1 (Agrobacterium tumefaciens), biovar 2 (Agrobacterium rhizogenes), and biovar 3 (Agrobacterium vitis). In the early 2000s, Agrobacterium was synonymized with the genus Rhizobium. This move proved to be controversial. The debate was finally resolved when the genus Agrobacterium was reinstated after it was demonstrated that it was phylogenetically distinct from Rhizobium and that Agrobacterium species were unified by a unique synapomorphy: the presence of the protelomerase gene, telA, which causes all members of the genus to have a linear chromid. By this time, however, the three Agrobacterium biovars had become defunct; biovar 1 remained with Agrobacterium, biovar 2 was renamed Rhizobium rhizogenes, and biovar 3 was renamed Allorhizobium vitis.

Plant pathogen
Agrobacterium tumefaciens causes crown-gall disease in plants. The disease is characterised by a tumour-like growth or gall on the infected plant, often at the junction between the root and the shoot. Tumors are incited by the conjugative transfer of a DNA segment (T-DNA) from the bacterial tumour-inducing (Ti) plasmid. The closely related species, Agrobacterium rhizogenes, induces root tumors, and carries the distinct Ri (root-inducing) plasmid. Although the taxonomy of Agrobacterium is currently under revision it can be generalised that 3 biovars exist within the genus, Agrobacterium tumefaciens, Agrobacterium rhizogenes, and Agrobacterium vitis. Strains within Agrobacterium tumefaciens and Agrobacterium rhizogenes are known to be able to harbour either a Ti or Ri-plasmid, whilst strains of Agrobacterium vitis, generally restricted to grapevines, can harbour a Ti-plasmid. Non-Agrobacterium strains have been isolated from environmental samples which harbour a Ri-plasmid whilst laboratory studies have shown that non-Agrobacterium strains can also harbour a Ti-plasmid. Some environmental strains of Agrobacterium possess neither a Ti nor Ri-plasmid. These strains are avirulent.

The plasmid T-DNA is integrated semi-randomly into the genome of the host cell, and the tumor morphology genes on the T-DNA are expressed, causing the formation of a gall. The T-DNA carries genes for the biosynthetic enzymes for the production of unusual amino acids, typically octopine or nopaline. It also carries genes for the biosynthesis of the plant hormones, auxin and cytokinins, and for the biosynthesis of opines, providing a carbon and nitrogen source for the bacteria that most other micro-organisms can't use, giving Agrobacterium a selective advantage. By altering the hormone balance in the plant cell, the division of those cells cannot be controlled by the plant, and tumors form. The ratio of auxin to cytokinin produced by the tumor genes determines the morphology of the tumor (root-like, disorganized or shoot-like).

In humans
Although generally seen as an infection in plants, Agrobacterium can be responsible for opportunistic infections in humans with weakened immune systems, but has not been shown to be a primary pathogen in otherwise healthy individuals. One of the earliest associations of human disease caused by Agrobacterium radiobacter was reported by Dr. J. R. Cain in Scotland (1988). A later study suggested that Agrobacterium attaches to and genetically transforms several types of human cells by integrating its T-DNA into the human cell genome. The study was conducted using cultured human tissue and did not draw any conclusions regarding related biological activity in nature.

Uses in biotechnology
The ability of Agrobacterium to transfer genes to plants and fungi is used in biotechnology, in particular, genetic engineering for plant improvement. Genomes of plants and fungi can be engineered by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors. A modified Ti or Ri plasmid can be used. The plasmid is 'disarmed' by deletion of the tumor inducing genes; the only essential parts of the T-DNA are its two small (25 base pair) border repeats, at least one of which is needed for plant transformation. The genes to be introduced into the plant are cloned into a plant binary vector that contains the T-DNA region of the disarmed plasmid, together with a selectable marker (such as antibiotic resistance) to enable selection for plants that have been successfully transformed. Plants are grown on media containing antibiotic following transformation, and those that do not have the T-DNA integrated into their genome will die. An alternative method is agroinfiltration.

Transformation with Agrobacterium can be achieved in multiple ways. Protoplasts or alternatively leaf-discs can be incubated with the Agrobacterium and whole plants regenerated using plant tissue culture. In agroinfiltration the Agrobacterium may be injected directly into the leaf tissue of a plant. This method transforms only cells in immediate contact with the bacteria, and results in transient expression of plasmid DNA.

Agroinfiltration is commonly used to transform tobacco (Nicotiana). A common transformation protocol for Arabidopsis is the floral dip method: An inflorescence is dipped in a suspension of Agrobacterium, and the bacterium transforms the germline cells that make the female gametes. The seeds can then be screened for antibiotic resistance (or another marker of interest). Plants that have not integrated the plasmid DNA will die when exposed to the antibiotic.

Agrobacterium is listed as being the vector of genetic material that was transferred to these USA GMOs:
 * Soybean
 * Cotton
 * Maize
 * Sugar Beet
 * Alfalfa
 * Wheat
 * Rapeseed Oil (Canola)
 * Creeping bentgrass (for animal feed)
 * Rice (Golden Rice)

The transformation of fungi using Agrobacterium is used primarily for research purposes, and follows similar approaches as for plant transformation. The Ti plasmid system is modified to include DNA elements to select for transformed fungal strains, after co-incubation of Agrobacterium strains carrying these plasmids with fungal species.

Genomics
The sequencing of the genomes of several species of Agrobacterium has permitted the study of the evolutionary history of these organisms and has provided information on the genes and systems involved in pathogenesis, biological control and symbiosis. One important finding is the possibility that chromosomes are evolving from plasmids in many of these bacteria. Another discovery is that the diverse chromosomal structures in this group appear to be capable of supporting both symbiotic and pathogenic lifestyles. The availability of the genome sequences of Agrobacterium species will continue to increase, resulting in substantial insights into the function and evolutionary history of this group of plant-associated microbes.

History
Marc Van Montagu and Jozef Schell at the University of Ghent (Belgium) discovered the gene transfer mechanism between Agrobacterium and plants, which resulted in the development of methods to alter Agrobacterium into an efficient delivery system for gene engineering in plants. A team of researchers led by Mary-Dell Chilton were the first to demonstrate that the virulence genes could be removed without adversely affecting the ability of Agrobacterium to insert its own DNA into the plant genome (1983).

title: Agrobacterium


text:
Clark's Teaberry

Clark's Teaberry is a brand of chewing gum. The D. L. Clark Company of Pittsburgh's north side purchased the patent for it from Charles Burke, who experimented with various flavors of chewing gum in the basement of 533 McClintock Ave, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Clarks Teaberry Gum is a trademarked brand owned and registered by a family operated confectionary company Iconic Candy, LLC of  New Jersey that specializes in the return of authentic original retro candy, Snack and chewing gum brands and products.

The gum dates to 1900 but the popularity of Teaberry peaked in the 1960s. It was additionally popularized when Pelican Films (292 Madison Avenue, New York, New York) produced a series of commercials using music from Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass. Clark liked "The Mexican Shuffle" from the South of the Border album, and commissioned Alpert to rerecord it as "The Teaberry Shuffle".

This nostalgic and traditional gum has a delightful wintergreen like flavor that is unique to teaberry gum. Its proprietary and distinct flavor has been exclusive to Clark’s Teaberry Gum for over 100 years. The gum is a traditional stick gum pink in color, individually wrapped in foil with a paper sleeve in a pink Clark’s logo paper.

title: Clark's Teaberry


text:
XLS

XLS or xls may refer to: X and or /..&..\ x
 * Microsoft Excel file format, a spreadsheet file format
 * Cadillac XLS, a prototype Cadillac concept car
 * Exelis Inc. (NYSE symbol), a global aerospace, defense, information and services company
 * Lusitanian language (ISO 639-3 code), an Indo-European Paleohispanic language
 * Midwest Questar XLS, an American ultralight aircraft design
 * Saint-Louis Airport (IATA airport code), near Saint-Louis, Senegal

title: XLS


text:
Talk:Clear Channel memorandum

Recent verified version
I've got this article on my watchlist, but in the event that I'm unable to keep up with it, I'm going to try to maintain a link to a recent verified version of the article. Tons of the edits to this article are done to add songs that aren't on the referenced list, or occasionally to remove a song that is on the referenced list. Hopefully, this will make it easier to revert such changes, even if the article goes for a month or two without being checked.

4 September 2007 version

--Dachannien TalkContrib 19:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

 * The recent verified version includes "What a Wonderful World" by Louis Armstrong - are you sure of that? I can't imagine even the wingnuts at Clear Channel finding anything objectionable in that song. - Mark Dixon 15:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It is indeed on the list. See the sources cited at the end of the article.  Personally, I have trepidation regarding the veracity of these sources, since they seem to have arrived at the information second- or third-hand.  Nevertheless, the cited sources seem at least to agree on the song list, and investigation by reputable sources (snopes.com) indicate that there was some sort of list issued by ClearChannel at the time.  Whether this list is the actual list released by ClearChannel is anybody's guess, but the AfD last year would seem to indicate that even the questionable sourcing provided is good enough to evade deletion.  If we're going to treat those sources as verifiable, then the article should match those sources.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 20:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I would imagine that "What a Wonderful World" made the list for irony reasons. How do you think it would sound on the radio to hear, "Breaking news!  The World Trade Center in New York City has been bombed.  Both towers have collapsed, killing thousands of people.  Stay tuned for updates on this tragedy as they become available.  In the meantime, enjoy "What a Wonderful World" by Louis Armstrong."  68.221.218.218 (talk) 04:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * See our article on the song: "It was included in the soundtrack for the film Good Morning, Vietnam in 1987. In the film, the song plays over a montage of bombings and other violence...This use of the song in an ironic way has since become something of a cliché in film and television." Rmhermen (talk) 03:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Article title
The article's title is misleading. It invites people to come and add songs arbitrarily, despite there being a single referenced list for the songs that was generated by a single third party (ClearChannel). I'd like to propose moving the article to something more indicative of the purpose of this article, such as "ClearChannel's list of songs with..." I'll go ahead and take care of this if there's no response within a week or so. --Dachannien TalkContrib 19:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * go for it. 72.189.48.223 20:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Went for it. Moved the article back to its old home, which coincidentally decreases the number of double redirects by a hefty amount.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 21:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Commentary at article head
This article has been plagued with people coming in to alter the list away from that presented by the cited sources, but it also has a lot of original research in the lead-in section regarding songs that are about (insert topic here) but were for (insert bizarre reason here) reason not included on the list. I'll go through and delete all of it in a few days unless cited sources can be presented for those statements as well. --Dachannien TalkContrib 21:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Somebody beat me to it. Thanks :)  --Dachannien TalkContrib 15:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Rename and work into an article?
I'd heard of this article before and just came across it randomly looking at recent changes where an editor linked to it from another article. I did a Lexis/Nexis search and found a number of useful articles referring to this list (and the controversy surrounding it) in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. The article could be sourced much better, and indeed does not need to be a list--it could be a full article. We could cover reaction from various observers, from Clear Channel, and the ultimate conclusions about the whole list scandal (I think Snopes pretty much got it right in the article we already cite, but we could go into a lot more detail). I think a change in title would obviously be in order if we wanted to rework this, perhaps something along the lines of "Clear Channel 9/11 Song List Controversy" (ideally we would think of something better as that title is unwieldy and annoying, but it might have to be).

This might be something I could put some time into, as could anyone with access to Lexis/Nexis. Any thoughts on changing this from a list article to a full blown article? We could either keep the full list here or (probably a better option) simply link to it on Wikisource or somewhere else.

Here's one examples of an interesting source from L/N, an article in Billboard from October 13, 2001 called "Ban Rumors Dispelled, Songs Don't Suffer."

In an exclusive analysis of airplay at Clear Channel-owned stations monitored by Broadcast Data Systems (BDS), Billboard has determined that songs on the list have, by and large, not suffered in light of the Sept. 11 events. In fact, many of the allegedly banned songs are currently receiving similar amounts of airplay on Clear Channel-owned stations as they did prior to Sept. 11.

Rage Against the Machine, alleged recipient of the "across the board" ban, is currently receiving airplay on Clear Channel-owned XTRA San Diego and KIOZ San Diego with such socio-politically charged songs as "Guerilla Radio" and "Testify." The amount of airplay given to Lennon's "Imagine" has barely changed over the past few weeks, according to a review of BDS-monitored heritage rock stations.

Anyhow, I'd like to hear what others think about turning this into a fully sourced article.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 07:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be a huge improvement. Are the sources you mentioned freely available online?  --Dachannien TalkContrib 15:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * One would need access to LexisNexis, which is generally available through most universities but also through a number of law firms, media outlets, and I would imagine a number of corporations. It's also probably the kind of thing that could be accessed through a good public library, but I don't think it's free to the general public. Most folks in college/academia or in the legal world could get into it though. I can try try to work on this down the road (not in the next few days) and place some new material on the talk page. Any title change suggestions?--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 18:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Snopes
Wouldnt the Snopes article seem to indicate that there was no "list" at all? Torturous Devastating Cudgel 17:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

 * There apparently was a list of some kind and Clear Channel did admit to it, which is exactly what the Snopes article says. The "falseness" of the urban legend is that the list was a "banned" list. Rather, it seemed to have been circulated among programming directors (probably originating away from the central corporate office) and was merely a suggested list of songs that may have been inappropriate after 9/11--it was not binding in any way. I came across one article where a Clear Channel spokesperson--acknowledging the existence of the list but noting it was not a ban and claiming it did not originate from corporate headquarters--even noted that some of the items on the list were a bit beyond the pale, in particular Louis Armstrong's What a Wonderful World. Anyhow, there was some kind of list, and it did stir up a great deal of controversy and obviously became a classic urban legend, so we should have an article explaining what really happened and how folks reacted. There are plenty of sources.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 18:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the real problem here is that there are no reliable sources for what was or wasn't on the list. I've been following this article for two years, and NOBODY can produce a PDF of any written list or e-mail.  As far as I can tell, THERE IS NO DOCUMENT.  So, we can discuss the urban legend, but how can we possibly have any kind of list presented here with any confidence?    MortonDevonshire  Yo   · 17:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Considering that Slate, Snopes, E!, the New York Times, and so on reported on the list and some of them reprinted a version of the list, I don't see why you insist on a primary source. We as an encyclopedia depend on secondary sources.  We should assume that the journalists for these organizations saw a document with the list and, as they tend do, did not scan it for publication but rather reproduced the text. Croctotheface 18:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Then put citations to them in the article. Fuckedcompany is not the NYT.    MortonDevonshire  Yo   · 18:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I'll put them here:, , , , . This is just a few sources I got from quick research.  I'm sure there's better stuff out there.  I'm not going to make footnotes and put them after every single song. Croctotheface 18:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

 * In the absence of a copy of a memo or e-mail, it may be difficult to be certain about the exact songs on the list. I'm not sure that this matters too much to me, as I am in favor of reconfiguring this article so it is not a list but rather a discussion of the controversy.  While Morton is correct that their is no "primary source" so to speak, they're clearly are secondary sources, and Clear Channel did admit to the existence of some kind of list (not a ban list) so it's existence is not in question, though the precise songs might be.  As far as secondary sources, as Croctotheface notes, this Slate article reprinted what it claimed to be the list "with original spellings intact" (I don't know how this compares with the list we have now, but we should look at that).  Slate is obviously a reliable source for our purposes, and the fact that they claimed they were presenting a copy of the list is sufficient--we don't need the primary source.  My proposal would be to create a document at Wikisource (though I know nothing about the rules over there) which lists all of these songs and sources the list to Slate or, if we can find them, better sources or additional sources. This article can just become a regular article, and we can link to the full list at Wikisource.  What do people think of this?  I'm open to other suggestions but I think something along these lines would be workable.--Bigtimepeace | talk |  contribs 19:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm not 100% opposed, but I don't see this list as violating the spirit or letter of any policies governing what is or is not appropriate for the encyclopedia. If we can have List of notable cover songs, List of songs of Oklahoma, and innumerable other such lists of songs, I don't see a good reason that this list should not exist while those do.  The fact that this list not compiled from multiple sources, in my mind, does not mean that it has a different quality than the lists that are.  Croctotheface 22:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, still no citation to reputable secondary sources in the article describing what's "on" the list. What gives? Tick tock.  MortonDevonshire  Yo   · 02:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

 * "Tick tock?" What does saying that accomplish?  So far, three editors have commented on the issue here.  Two hold my position, and you are alone in yours.  Croctotheface 02:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * See above. Slate reprinted a list of songs, and that is certainly a reputable secondary source which can be put in the article. I'm also not sure what the "tick tock" reference is supposed to mean.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and added in a cite to the Slate article, though folks should feel free to move it somewhere else. I still think someone should compare the Slate list with the one we have. Also I still think this article should be made into more than just a list and I still might try to work on that down the road but not in the immediate future.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:54, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

This topic should be removed
This topic should be removed without question because most, if not all of these songs were produced before September 11. They make no reference to September 11 and in my mind, I do not think of September 11 when listening to any of these songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.134.81 (talk) 14:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not really the point of the article, but if it ever comes up for AfD again, feel free to chime in. --Dachannien TalkContrib 15:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I also agree with Dachannien. Although their decisons hypocritical, I think the article should stay. Such as them taking every song that had to do with a plane out, although "On The Run" by Pink Floyd dealt with a plane taking off and crashing, and wasn't taken off the air. I found 2girls1cup disgusting. Should we take that off? George W. Bush is a horrible president. Should we delete his article because we dont like him? Obviously not. -Rocker820 (talk) 22:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

This is a historically important article. I knew nothing about this before coming across it. It definitely should not be deleted. Aloha, --Laualoha 04:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laualoha (talk • contribs)
 * I don't think it will be deleted anytime soon, perhaps transformed a bit but I think it's too notable to be deleted or even put up for AfD.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 08:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I vote we delete it. I think that this list is wrong.204.14.14.152 12:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Wrong in what sense? It has sources to verify it if you mean in the veracity sense. If you mean in some sort of moral manner, wikipedia articles shouldn't be determined by moral compass but rather by encyclopedia standards and I feel this is important enough to keep up. Wolfman Walt 09:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I was a Clear Channel employee in the programming department of one of their radio stations at the time of September 11th and I assure you that we did NOT receive any sort of "list" of songs. We were encouraged to review our music libraries and exercise our best judgement about songs that may have been in poor taste for the current state of the nation and / or may be likely to invoke images or thoughts in the minds of our audiences that could be perceived as insensitive...

But we were NOT directed not to play certain records. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.136.109.83 (talk)

 * I wonder if your IP traces back to ClearChannel...
 * Anyway, it is irrelevant. It is clear that this list existed and was distributed. It wasn't a banned list, it was a list of songs they didn't want played. Yes, it does betray something of a pro-war slant (or perhaps, they felt that playing pacifist songs like Imagine would piss off the more militant of their audiences?) but clearly they didn't ban the songs (as they were played). I suspect that it may not have been universally distributed and/or it was simply ignored by most people or simply came off as a "try not to play anything that might offend people." Of course, if there's ever a time to play "Its the end of the world as we known it (and I feel fine)" and similar music, it is after a major terrorist attack. Titanium Dragon (talk) 05:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, if you're curious, my IP does not trace to Clear Channel. Nearly (probably talking about 99.9999%) all Clear Channel computers have a 207.230.xxx.xx IP.--74.136.109.83 (talk) 07:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

They look to me like a simple list of songs which might have upset people at the time. We have stuff about airplanes, middle easterners, and death. I could make a better argument that to not play such songs was anti-war. If you were pro-war you'd be playing "Bodies" nonstop. While you may see songs which glorify such things as the height of entertainment, if you've ever known anyone who died suddenly and unnaturally you might have a clue. Anything that reminds you of the event is upsetting. If you hear a song that's too close to the details on the raido--and it happens to you a hell of a lot for a while--you change the station. Clear channel may certainly be a bunch of hypocritical aholes, but this "scandal" says a lot more about their critics than about Clear channel. 71.128.195.213 (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe this article is rediculous to say the least. Historically important? Why? Did this list have such a great impact on our lives and thinking? No, I don't think anyone could say that this list has been worldchanging. You could say it is historically interessting as an example of the 'anxiety culture' or 'conservative terror' in Bush's U.S., however that is not what we mean by historically important. I think it is good to evaluate the exact encyclopedian value of this article, it might not be "wrong" from the intersubjective perspective but it certainly isn't important. Furthermore this article is about a controversial opinion, this should at the very least be noted in the article. - NewElwood, 22 December 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NewElwood (talk • contribs) 15:35, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I changed the opening sentence it now states that the 2001 clear channel memorandum is 'a controversial document'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.119.110.77 (talk) 20:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't think of deleating this
This subject should not be removed because its not what you think has to do with 9/11. Its that people used the death of over 3,000 people as an exscuse to censor people who they that were too exspresing and showed their oppinions or just played the wrong music. If they think people shouldn,t hear it then let them at least learn about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.162.217.46 (talk) 17:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Still correct?
Does anyone know if this "list" still applies? Just wondering... 67.86.126.40 (talk) 03:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Clear Channel says that there was never an official list that applied to anything. This list was apparently of an advisory nature to local stations.  That's my understanding, anyway.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 12:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think this list still applies; I hear a bunch of these songs on the radio still. I suspect it was never meant to be permanent, and just to be a short-term thing; Americans are too vacous to care for more than a year anyway. Titanium Dragon (talk) 05:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

They banned "What a wonderful world" By Louis Armstrong immeadiately following the 9/11 attacks because wouldn't it be kind of weird if you heard "What a wonderful world" right after an special radio interruption of the second tower going down? 76.88.72.249 (talk) 06:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)eryko

Changes I've made
I've made large, but hopefully mostly uncontroversial changes to this article. The most noticeable of the changes being shifted from a text formatting with lots of headers to a table formatting style. I believe this formatting will be clearer to read and easier to scroll around in than the old formatting. other minor changes include taking independent notes that were in the article and making a notes section at the bottom (so the table formatting isn't cluttered), adding Guns N' Roses' song Knockin' on Heaven's Door, which is sourced in the external links reference, spliting a song that had two artists, and listed both artists seperately and correcting alphabetical order, such Steve Miller Band (moved from 'M' to 'S') and Paul McCartney and Wings (changed from that to the Wings article and alphabetized under W). If you have any question or anything, feel free. —  Κ aiba 22:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Thanks much!  --Dachannien TalkContrib 05:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Your welcome :] —  Κ aiba 07:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I see no valid reason for filing "Steve Miller Band" under 'S.' "Steve Miller" is a name and all variations including "Band" should be under 'M.' And another thing, you're being inconsistent with Paul McCartney & Wings under 'M.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.71.76.143 (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Why?
Why wasn't Born in the USA or Beautiful Day on this list? --Kingforaday1620 (talk) 22:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Because they weren't deemed inappropriate by Clear Channel after 9/11. If you mean "why weren't they deemed inappropriate," I don't see why either of them would be... Someone the Person (talk) 21:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think Clear Channel compiled this list in a hurry after the attacks. It is reasonable to assume that they just never thought of those songs. Captain panda  21:03, May 1 2008 (UTC)
 * "Born in the USA" is about the Vietnam War, which means it is unrelated to the terrorist attacks. Someone the Person (talk) 21:05, May 1 2008 (UTC) It also appears as if some songs were banned for title alone.
 * "Beautiful Day" is about a man that lose all of his belonging and realized how beautiful the world is.
 * From the perspective of writing articles on Wikipedia, paraphrasing Alfred, Lord Tennyson: "Our's not to reason why, our's but to do and die."  In other words, you're not going to learn much by asking us why.  We're just here to write articles based on the sources.  Clear Channel would be a much better source for such information.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 00:06, May 2, 2008 (UTC)
 * In reality, Clear Channel is not a good source for any information, especially this topic, and their backpedaling, denials, contradictions, and waffling have been noted by multiple journalists in numerous reliable sources. Viriditas (talk) 03:05, August 5, 2008 (UTC)

Heh, my first thought was, "They didn't get Miami 2017 by Billy Joel? The song is actually about the evacuation and destruction of New York City." 192.197.178.2 (talk) 17:17, May 28, 2008 (UTC)

 * I know we shouldn't be discussing this on a talk page, but I can't help but feel the inclusion of Cat Stevens' "Peace Train" is a bit scary. A song promoting inter-faith communication and colour-blind peace for us all? So dangerous... Phyte (talk) 00:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * We can discuss it, because secondary sources have made note of it. We can also discuss that in the article using those sources. Viriditas (talk) 03:06, August 5, 2008 (UTC)

"hey its so awesome and overwhelming to see that none of the songs from Nirvana is on the list. They surely are beyond this." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.162.48.91 (talk) 06:02, January 21, 2009 (UTC)

Nirvana? Are you serious? 190.161.18.221 (talk) 23:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Why to most of these?
I don't understand why clear channel wouldn't have wanted a radio station to play "New York, New York" after the 9/11 attacks. It seemed appropriate to me, kinda showing support for new yorkers at the time --Nerd42 (talk) 14:32, March 24, 2009 (UTC)

 * "These little town blues, are melting away"? I think at best, a song this cheery and upbeat would sound like "We'll Meet Again" at the end of Dr. Strangelove if it were played with the WTC still burning.  At worst, well: melting.  C'mon.--NapoliRoma (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I definitely agree that a section on rationale should be added. Furthermore, a section should be added on "contraversial choices" that directly questions why CCR chose certain songs and not other seemingly less approptiate ones. I mean, it really seems random in many ways: very depressing and very cheerful songs are discouraged; as are those that praise New York and those that question it etc. At the very least, there seems to be an inconsistency. As someone ealier pointed out, there discussions are included in some of the cited materials, so there's no reason for the citation nazis to get out of line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.253.190 (talk • contribs) 20:33, April 6, 2009

 * Don't attempt to read the minds of Clear Channel executives as a group. That way lies madness.  How can any Wikipedia editor possibly know "why" these choices were made?  (Unless and until some former Clear Channel executive who was in on the meeting chooses to write a book about it -- then we could cite the book, perhaps ...)  Paul (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

why "What a Wonderful World" it is about how wonderful the world is. it has no violent lyrics. it talk about how beautiful the sky is,clouds, trees,red rose,rainbows,friends and babies. how is there one questionable word in the song.
 * Since the whole thing was about piety, it seems quite reasonable that after such unwonderful a thing it might seem inappropriate to play one of the most well-known songs yout how wonderful the world is. That is not saying the world isn't wonderful, but a question of appropriateness.--77.4.127.38 (talk) 16:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

fuked up ... Clear Channel should be bull whipped for banning freedom of speech of these songs ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.95.15.49 (talk) 05:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with the guy above. Don't try and understand this list, just accept it for what it is, a piece of tosh that arose from the (very understandable) hysteria post-9/11. When under attack many governments/'official' groups panic and censor the crap out of things Cls14 (talk) 23:17, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you, NapoliRoma, as the song regained its long lost popularity due to three snippets of it being used at the beginning of the pilot episode for the CBS TV crime drama Blue Bloods. If you have Netflix look up the series, play the pilot episode from the beginning and you'll see (or rather, hear) what I mean. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 19:39, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * And as for you, unknown editor, watch your language, as this is an online encyclopedia, not a porn site. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 19:39, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

"Get Together" by The Youngbloods
How strange that Clear Channel promotes what they call "Christian rock music" on more than a thousand AM stations but at the same time suggests banning a "Christian" song that encourages people to "smile on your brother, everybody get together, try and love one another right now." Compare these lyrics with 1_Corinthians_13. Perhaps it would be accurate to describe Clear Channel as anti-Christian? I wonder how their supporters in the Christian right would feel about that. Viriditas (talk) 12:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Please note that article discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article. They are not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 15:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Pleas note that I am using this talk page to propose improving and expanding the article, particularly in relation to the listing of a song in the article.  Please also note the words compare these lyrics and perhaps it would be accurate to describe in relation to this content.  Please also note my curiousity in relation to these improvements.  The subject of this article is fair game for discussions related to such improvement, and if the opinion of their  supporters can be represented, they will be in proportion to the topic.  It occurs to me that the opinions of the artists who have been singled out are also fair game, and should be added.  Please also note the lack of content in this list, and  in that respect my proposal for expansion  becomes even more necessary. Viriditas (talk) 20:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised that you consider your motivation to be the improvement of this article, when your first comment above was pure POV. The addition of other sources to the article was a good thing, but please tread lightly when it comes to interpretation of the motivation for songs being on the list.  As even your sources indicate, nobody apparently has any clue anymore (if they ever did in the first place) why some songs were included and others weren't.  Without evidence one way or the other, the article can't really discuss the topic in any detail.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 00:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It appears you have difficulty distinguishing between "POV" and observable statements about a topic. I have expressed no POV whatsoever.  Your sense of humor may be impaired or you may have trouble understanding the subtleties of language, I don't know, but noting the contradictions of Clear Channel's actions in relation to their support of Christian ideology is in fact, on topic, relevant, and timely.  You would do well to read more about the topic. The current article is inappropriately titled, lacks accurate information, and is in need of a serious rewrite.  You are free to help out, but I predict you will simply ignore the hard work that needs to be done.  Viriditas (talk) 03:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You reached the thinly-veiled conclusion that Clear Channel was "anti-Christian" without an ounce of evidence (as opposed to conjecture) to back it up. How is that not POV?  In any case, I'll help out by monitoring the article through your edits and ensuring that Wikipedia's policies are maintained.  --Dachannien TalkContrib 01:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Try reading for comprehension. "Your sense of humor may be impaired..."  Viriditas (talk) 11:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite in progress
The present state of this article is atrocious, with the current content either deliberately distorting the sources cited or ignoring them altogether. As a result, I am attempting to fix this problem. Please be aware of the "in use" tag. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 04:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Name change
I've changed the problematic article title from List of songs deemed inappropriate by Clear Channel following the September 11, 2001 attacks to the short and neutral title of 2001 Clear Channel memorandum. This title more accurately reflects the subject. Viriditas (talk) 04:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good call. Much improved. -- Vary | Talk 01:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Guns N Roses
The article mentions how one version of the same song can be on this list, but not another, and gives examples (like Michael Jackson and Alien Ant Farm's versions of "Smooth Criminal", among others). However, Wings' version of "Live and Let Die" happens to be on the list, but not the Guns N' Roses version. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 03:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Probably because even Clearchannel has the good musical taste to not give airplay to that monumental piece of hackdom, and if you understand G&R's story behind recording it, know that was ironically part of its intent, as nobody ever plays either version now. BTW AAF's smooth criminal was pure genius, and I love both versions. just sayin'!Batvette (talk) 13:37, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

lyrically questionable instrumental piece?
I see the list has Black Star of Malmsteen which is an instrumental piece. Either the "lyrical questionability" aspect is not central to the list or there is a mistake "Black Star" being there. Or the guys were pretty confused while making the list. fyi. Mrmandman (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I think Clearchannel recognized the embedded ulterior evil of Em scale sweep arpeggios. That or recognized the threat posed to their religion if people found the truth that Yngwie really is God! I think we can assume whoever made this list or even conceived of the idea of making it was VERY confused.Batvette (talk) 13:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate Titles
Are you actually serious? Frank Sinatra's "New York, New York"? Is that meant to be comical? If so, then this page should be deleted from Wikipedia. I do not find this to be humorous or informational at all. I am a native New Yorker and I lost a few close friends on this horrible day. 71.190.145.53 (talk) 23:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, some of the titles may suggest plane crashes, but Savage Garden's 'Crash And Burn' is a love song, DMB... sexually suggestive (at least to me), Phil Colins' 'In The Air Tonight was about his divorce... I could go on. This list actually makes me laugh. --raganbaby_6 19:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raganbaby 6 (talk • contribs)

No, it's not 'meant to be comical'. The songs on the list are not necessarily there because there is anything inherently inappropriate about the songs, but because someone felt they could be upsetting to people in the immediate aftermath - e.g. an upbeat and jolly song about a city which is going through a tragedy. (you may not agree with the list of songs, but it's a genuine reason). You are not meant to find it humorous, but it is certainly informational - it gives info on a list that was created. 86.156.119.51 (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Wait a Second...
The Message is not included on this list? That song was the first thing that came to mind when I heard about this list. It includes the line "I swear, I might hijack a plane." Why wasn't it included?--66.177.73.86 (talk) 04:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm shocked, really shocked that Killing an Arab by The Cure was not on the list. I know some pro-war folks played it just to give their critics the finger. -- Brianmacian (talk) 02:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Clear Channel apparently missed both songs. And the line in "The Message" was probably just a metaphor. Also, do not use this talk page as a forum!--69.248.1.200 (talk) 00:31, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Verification of some songs
I've been researching a lot on this topic, so I decided to compare this revision of the article with the Slate and Hits Daily Double lists which are being used as references in this article.

The Hits Daily Double list is apparently the original list, and the following songs are in the linked Wikipedia revision, but not in the Hits Daily Double list:

 * Bad Company - "No Smoke Without a Fire"
 * David Bowie and Mick Jagger - "Dancing in the Street"
 * MC Hammer - "Have You Seen Her"
 * Megadeth - "Killing Is My Business...and Business Is Good!"
 * The Rolling Stones - "Shattered"
 * Sugar Ray - "When It's Over"

Because the Hits Daily Double list is apparently the original list, for now I have removed these songs. However, three of the above songs are present in the Slate article, whose list also claims to be the original list, "with original spellings intact."

 * Bad Company - "No Smoke Without a Fire"
 * The Rolling Stones - "Shattered"
 * Sugar Ray - "When It's Over"

Do you think these three songs can be included in the list or not? Holiday56 (talk) 04:46, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

 * http://zephyr.unr.edu/zephyr/arts/archives/art_dutpuch_musicindustry.html
 * In 2001 Clear Channel memorandum on 2011-05-25 07:07:57, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 2001 Clear Channel memorandum on 2011-06-10 06:58:16, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Controversy
I guess the open-gaping mouth is implied in this article? Or does it demand a controversy section?

I for one wish I had gone to high school with the losers who worked on the published the list, so that I could have harassed/bullied them and then later bragged about it at the bar as I got into my mid-late twenties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.158.112 (talk) 10:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

More like a LULZ section, I've read this so called list and I was literally suffocating because of the laughing... I really enjoy the actions of white supremacist christians do in the US... Is like those funny blooper videos with animals, except these "animals" are practically shooting their own feet...

Seriously I can't think of any improvisation without ruining the LULZ...--FaustoLG (talk) 23:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Dubious information (Taylor Swift)
That all songs by Taylor Swift would be banned in 2001, before her career had begun seems beyond suspect and indicates that the text preceding the list probably needs further review. VHKLMHA (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This is the Post-9/11 world. Things don't have to make sense. Carry on. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:51, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

One forgotten song that was very popular, so popular at the time, it can't be taken down or banned!
Clear Channel (now iHeartMedia) couldn't suggest people not to play this song after 9/11, because it's like saying goodbye, however, it was a very popular song at the time, so popular, not only it's in the Top 10 (even #1), it also can't be brought down by the memorandum and that song was, yes, NSYNC's Bye Bye Bye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan7157 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

How can...?
How can "Imagine" by John Lennon be listed here if the song's message is mostly positive? If you don't believe me read the lyrics to the second pre-chorus:"Imagine all the people living life in peace" and to the final pre-chorus:"Imagine all the people sharing all the world". How is that viewed as a negative message? Does this song mention, or even encourage, war? Also, by saying "Imagine there's no countries" I think what he implied is that the world exists as a single country, hence the lyric "Imagine all the people sharing all the world" I quoted earlier. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 15:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a good question to ask the Clear Channel team 16 years ago, but doesn't have a lot of bearing on this article.--NapoliRoma (talk) 17:31, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2001 Clear Channel memorandum. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lipmagazine.org/articles/featwishnia_142.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020923200949/http://content.clearchannel.com/corporate/article/NationalBannedPlaylist.pdf to http://content.clearchannel.com/corporate/article/NationalBannedPlaylist.pdf

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) 03:09, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Omission by Clear Channel
In the memo Clear Channel sent with the list of songs, they forgot to include USA for Africa's "We Are the World" (and the follow-up remix by 25 for Haiti) due to the lyric about "people dying". I think both versions of the song should have been included. Or else both songs re-recorded with "people dying" being replaced with "babies crying" to symbolize the beginning of a new life. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Page Title
While I agree calling it 2001 Clear Channel Memorandum might be odd since there hasn't any other memorandum, perhaps it should have been renamed 9/11 Clear Channel... which, is in fact, what it is. Isn't it? ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 23:00, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Clear Channel memorandum


text:
User talk:Stinkoman K

Surely you mean 'why did you balete the finkbiner article'... The content, under another title appeared on Votes for Deletion and was deleted some days ago. If an article has been deleted then someone re-submitting it under a different title will make little difference, it will still be deleted. Have fun editing -- Ams80 21:45, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Stinkoman K


text:
Talk:Manorialism

Merge from Manor
In theory, a manor is one component of manorialism, but in practice that article goes into the same depth of social context as this one does about manorialism in general, and this one goes into the same depth about the parts and operation of a manor. The details of coverage are somewhat different, so I think it makes sense for the two to be merged under the more general topic, which will spend much of its length talking about its core component. -- Beland (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree. SilkTork (talk) 09:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Useful content has been merged, and the manor title has been restored to a disambiguation page, which it originally was. SilkTork (talk) 09:49, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

 * It hasn't been a dab page since 2011. I think there is a primary meaning and I wonder why "manorialism" (the construct) is deemed the appropriate title for the main article. Srnec (talk) 02:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

 * I think it is worth having a discussion on the name. I expect that the average reader would not be that familiar with the term "manorialism". I think they would be more familiar with the term "manor system" or, less so, "manorial system". Manorial system is an existing redirect so I have added it as an alternative name in the lead. I am unsure about using "manor" as the name for this article as people commonly conflate "manor house" with "manor" so the term "manor" for some readers means the house not the land nor the manorial system. We could have a quick straw poll here and see if it's worth going to a full name change discussion.
 * Which name do people feel is most appropriate for this article:
 * Manor
 * Manorialism
 * Manor system
 * Manorial system
 * I have a slight personal preference for Manor system as I think that is easier to understand, but it's not the most common term in reliable sources. Reliable sources mostly use Manorialism, and as that is the existing name, that is the one I feel is most appropriate. I don't think using Manor would be appropriate as "manor" is a unit of land in manorialism (or the manor system), so "manor" is only a part of what this article is about. However, it's not worth having a separate article on "manor" as the [one] explanation for what a manor is would be this article, so the two articles would essentially just duplicate each other. I am also not keen on having Manor redirect here as the primary term, because enough people use "manor" to mean the big house, rather than the unit of land belonging to "manorialism" that they may get confused landing here after typing "manor" to get to an article on manor house, whereas at the moment they land on the disamb page and can quickly and easily find what they are after. SilkTork (talk) 02:56, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

 * It seems absurd to me to define a manor in terms of manorialism. Like defining a fief in terms of feudalism. Does manorialism exist by definition wherever there are manors? Srnec (talk) 02:12, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think we are in agreement, which is why I feel manor should redirect to a disamb page. The word has multiple meanings, only one of which is that a manor is a unit in manorialism. A manor is often understood to be a house - generally the main house in the area, often called The Manor, even though it may never have been the official manor house, sometimes a house and the estate around it (would could be distinct from manorialism - just a house and estate which never had a manor court, etc), in slang a manor is a person's local area, etc. Better for us to deal with each of the meanings of manor in their own articles than to try and explain it all in one article and to have a disamb page allowing people to find the actual meaning they were looking for, and also to see that there are other potential meanings. This article, manorialism, isn't about manor, it is about the manor system. I don't think the manor system itself is one of the possible definitions of manor.
 * Ah. I see! I have now made a slight adjustment in what I wrote on the 9th - changing "the" for "one". I had the previous manor article in my mind as I wrote that, which did attempt to describe a manor simply as a unit in manorialism, ignoring the other possible meanings - see . SilkTork (talk) 08:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

English Dialect
An anonymous IP address has changed some of the spelling of certain words of the article to match British spelling. I would argue that, while reverting their changes was the right thing to do, we should make clear which dialect the article is written in and under MOS:TIES there is a strong tie to Britain and England and thus British English should be the correct dialect for the Article. I would be happy to make the necessary edits if there is consensus. Jtrrs0 (talk) 16:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Was thinking that actually ... I have a slight preference for British English here (because they were used in England), but don't mind that much either way. Graham 87 16:32, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just think it makes the most sense. I'll leave this up for a couple days to see if anyone thinks otherwise and then I'll make the change.
 * Agree. SilkTork (talk) 09:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think that there is enough consensus to do the change. I have added the BE template to the top of this page and will start making the language of the main article consistent.Jtrrs0 (talk) 12:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Pirenne-these
The Pirenne-these has been disproved. 134.58.253.20 (talk) 14:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This comment refers to this edit about Henri Pirenne's thesis (that's the English word, but it seems it's called a "these" in Dutch). I know very little about the subject but that seems like a reasonable edit to make. Graham87 (talk) 14:58, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Manorialism