text:
File:Neal-Stephenson-in-the-beginning.jpg

Fair Use rationale
Although this image is subject to copyright, it is covered by US fair use laws because:
 * 1) The image is only being used in the article about the book In the Beginning...was the Command Line for informational and educational purposes.
 * 2) Use of the book cover visually identifies the book in a manner that mere prose cannot, and meets all criteria in WP:NFCC.
 * 3) This image enhances the article in which it's displayed, as it provides an immediate relevance to the reader more capably than the textual description alone.
 * 4) The image is the primary means of visual identification of the article topic.
 * 5) The image is not replaceable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted image of comparable educational value.
 * 6) The image is a low resolution image of a book cover, in an inferior graphics format (JPEG).
 * 7) The image is only a small portion of the commercial product.
 * 8) The use of this image will not affect the value of the original work.
 * 9) The use of this image will not limit the copyright holder's rights or ability to distribute or make a profit from the original.


text:
Aleš Hemský

Aleš Hemský (, born 13 August 1983) is a Czech former professional ice hockey player. He was originally a member of the Edmonton Oilers, who selected him in the first round, 13th overall, of the 2001 NHL Entry Draft. In the NHL he played for the Oilers, Ottawa Senators, Dallas Stars and Montreal Canadiens. He represented the Czech Republic at two Winter Olympics.

HC Pardubice
Hemský entered professional ice hockey as a 16-year-old, playing for HC Moeller Pardubice of the Czech Extraliga, in his hometown of Pardubice. He split the 1999–2000 season between Moeller and their junior club, HC Moeller Pardubice Jr. Hemský decided he had a better chance to be scouted if he played in the Canadian junior leagues than if he tried to make the jump to the Czech Extraliga, and he subsequently became the first selection of the Hull Olympiques in the 2000 CHL Import Draft.

Hull Olympiques
In 2000, Hemský moved to North America to play for the Hull Olympiques of the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League (QMJHL). The following season, 2000–01, Hemský led all rookies in scoring with 36 goals and 100 points. He was named to the All-Rookie team, was selected to play in the 2001 CHL Top Prospects Game, and was awarded the Mike Bossy Trophy as the QMJHL's top pro prospect.

Hemský continued his success in Hull during the 2001–02 season, with 27 goals and 97 points in 53 games, and finished 19th in the QMJHL scoring race.

Edmonton Oilers
On 12 October 2002, Hemský recorded his first career assist against the Nashville Predators. On 4 January 2003, Hemský scored his first career goal against the Montreal Canadiens, in his 26th game of his rookie season. During his rookie NHL season, he scored six goals and 30 points in 59 games and was a healthy scratch for 23. He also went pointless in all six of Edmonton's playoff games.

Hemský returned to the Czech Republic to play 47 games for HC Moeller Pardubice during the 2004–05 NHL lockout. During that time, he scored 13 goals and 31 points, fifth on the club. Pardubice won the 2004–05 Czech Extraliga for the first time in 16 years, and Hemský was named playoff most valuable player for his efforts.

During the 2005–06 season, Hemský had a career year, setting personal bests in every major statistical category. He scored 19 goals, 58 assists, and 77 points while playing in all but one game for the Oilers during the regular season. The Oilers captured the eighth and final playoff seed in the Western Conference. In the playoffs, the Oilers went on to eliminate the Detroit Red Wings in six games in round one, then beat the San Jose Sharks in games as well in round two. In the Conference finals, the Oilers knocked off the Anaheim Ducks in five games. The Oilers, however, lost the Stanley Cup Finals in seven games to the Carolina Hurricanes.

Hemský was an important part of the Oilers run to the Finals. Among his opportune goals were two he scored in the third period of game six against the Detroit Red Wings, including the series-winner. Hemský underwent a biopsy on an inflamed lymph node on the right side of his neck during the playoffs. Results have not been made public.

Edmonton re-signed Hemský in the summer of 2006 to a six-year contract worth US$24.60 million. The 2006–07 campaign saw Hemský notch 53 points in 64 games, missing 18 games due to shoulder injuries. During the season, on 4 January 2007, Hemský managed to tie a game against the Dallas Stars after Patrik Štefan fell in front of the Oilers' empty net, turning the puck over to Edmonton. After receiving a stretch pass from Ryan Smyth, Hemský managed to slip the puck into the Stars net with two seconds remaining on the clock. Despite Hemský's efforts, Edmonton would ultimately lose the game to Dallas in a shootout. The singular point gained from the shootout loss would end up placing the Oilers one place ahead of the Chicago Blackhawks, who would ultimately win the first overall pick and draft forward Patrick Kane. The 2007–08 season was a short one, as the Oilers missed the playoffs. Hemský finished first on the team overall in points scoring 71 and was first in assists with 51. He sat in third place for goals with 20, a career-high. The 2008–09 campaign was another that saw injuries for Hemský, who played 72 out of the 82 regular season games and finished first on the team with 23 goals and 43 assists for 66 points. Hemský recorded seven goals and 15 assists during the first 22 games of the 2009–10 season before suffering a left shoulder injury following a check from behind by Los Angeles Kings forward Michal Handzuš. The injury required surgery and Hemský missed the remainder of the regular season.

In the 2010–11 season, Hemský was named to the 2011 NHL All-Star Game but did not participate due to a concussion. Hemský missed the remainder of the season due to a shoulder injury. Hemský, Taylor Hall, and Sam Gagner, led the Oilers with 42 points for the majority of the season, until the trio of injured players were surpassed by Jordan Eberle. Hemský recorded his 400th career point scoring a goal, in a 9–2 victory over the Chicago Blackhawks.

After missing the first part of the 2011–12 season due to injury, Hemský struggled, posting just 11 points in his first 25 games, including a nine-game pointless streak. He picked up the pace thereafter, scoring 15 points in his next 22 games, leading the Oilers to sign him to a two-year, $10 million deal on 24 February 2012. On 21 March 2012, Hemský recorded his first career NHL hat trick, finishing with four points in a 6–3 victory over the Nashville Predators. After coming back from two shoulder surgeries, Hemský had a disappointing start to the season and finished the year with 36 points in 69 games.

Ottawa Senators
In the final year of his contract and with the Oilers again out of playoff contention, on 5 March 2014, Hemský was traded to the Ottawa Senators for a fifth-round pick in the 2014 NHL Entry Draft and a third-round pick in the 2015 NHL Entry Draft. He quickly found success on Ottawa's top line alongside center Jason Spezza, recording six points in his first three games. He finished the season with 17 points in 20 games as the Senators fell short of the playoffs.

Dallas Stars
Unable to agree to a new contract with the Senators, Hemský signed as a free agent on a three-year, $12 million contract with the Dallas Stars on 1 July 2014. In signing with the Stars, he was joined by Senators linemate Jason Spezza, who was coincidentally traded to the Stars earlier in the day. He also joined former Oilers teammate Shawn Horcoff in Dallas.

Montreal Canadiens
Going to free agency, Hemský signed a one-year, $1 million contract with the Montreal Canadiens on 3 July 2017. A severe concussion suffered during a game against the Anaheim Ducks on 20 October ended his season after only seven games. By September 2018, the Canadiens had not renewed his contract and no other team had yet shown interest, although symptoms from the concussion were gone.

Retirement
On 15 May 2020, Hemský officially announced his retirement from professional hockey.

International play
Hemský was a member of the bronze medal-winning Czech team at the 2006 Winter Olympics. Czech ice hockey icon Jaromír Jágr had a large influence on Hemský's selection, to the point where he insisted that Hemský skates on his line. The two had previously played together on the Czech team that won the 2005 IIHF World Championship during the NHL's 2004–05 lockout season. Hemský scored twice in the Olympic tournament, and the Czech Republic defeated Russia in the bronze-medal game. He missed the 2010 Winter Olympics, but was selected for 2014 Olympic ice hockey tournament at Sochi in 2014 and became the highest scorer for the Czech team during the 2014 games, with three goals and four points. Hemský has also represented his country in three International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) world ice hockey tournaments, winning a gold medal with the team in 2005 and bronze in 2012. He made his first appearance in a Czech uniform for the 2002 World Junior Ice Hockey Championships.

In addition to representing Czech Republic in ice hockey, Hemský represented his country in the IIHF inline hockey World Championship tournaments in 2008 and 2012. In the 2008 tournament, Hemský tied for fourth place in scoring with six goals and five assists while leading the Czech Republic to a fifth-place finish.

Personal life
Hemský and his wife have two sons.

On 13 December 2017, Hemský, along with teammates Jordie Benn, Andrew Shaw, Karl Alzner, Jeff Petry, Charles Hudon, and Artturi Lehkonen, all went bald as part of the Leucan Shaved Head Challenge, as well as raised $33,000 for children battling cancer.

Individual

 * 2001 QMJHL All-Rookie team
 * 2001 QMJHL Mike Bossy Trophy
 * 2001 CHL All-Rookie Team (Hemský was to also represent the QMJHL in the 2001 CHL Top Prospects Game, but an injury forced him to withdraw)
 * 2001 QMJHL Rookie of the Month (January)
 * 2002 QMJHL second All-Star team
 * 2002 CHL third All-Star team
 * 2005 Czech Extraliga Playoff MVP
 * Selected to play in the 2011 NHL All-Star Game (did not play due to injury)

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

title: Aleš Hemský


text:
BRW (magazine)

BRW (formerly Business Review Weekly) was an Australian business magazine published by the Fairfax Media group. The magazine was headquartered in Melbourne. It regularly compiled lists which rank corporations and individuals according to various criteria, similar to Fortune magazine in the United States. BRW provided news and commentary on the economy, business and investment in Australia. The magazine reported on successful business strategies, investments and entrepreneurialism. Cover stories and features concentrated on ways to make money and improve businesses. Each week BRW focused on a sector or topic relevant to business people or investors.

Print edition axed
In October 2013, Fairfax announced that the print version of the magazine would be discontinued, with the 28 November 2013 magazine being the last edition.

Online edition
From December 2013, BRW became an online-only publication and the paywall previously in place was removed. Some popular annual lists will also be published in Fairfax's The Australian Financial Review. On 4 March 2016, Fairfax announced the closure of the BRW website, with staff and the BRW website to be redirected to a new section of The Australian Financial Review. Rich lists, which would also be published by The AFR would continue to carry the BRW branding.

BRW lists
Each year BRW named the 200 richest people in Australia and the magazine regularly published stories about how the wealthy made their money.

Other annual lists published by BRW included:

 * Fast 100 list
 * Young Rich list
 * Top 50 Sports earners
 * Top 50 Entertainers
 * Executive Rich list
 * Fast Franchises list
 * Fast Starters list
 * Australia's Best Places to Work
 * Entrepreneur of the Year
 * Private Business Awards
 * The BRW/beaton Client Choice Awards
 * The 30 Most Innovative Companies

BRW Fast Club
In 2009, BRW launched the BRW Fast Club, which was developed to drive new business opportunities, forge partnerships and discuss current business issues for Australia's fastest growing businesses. The BRW Fast Club is a community of like-minded entrepreneurs that comprises members of the BRW Fast 100, BRW Fast Franchises and BRW Fast Starters lists from the past five years; members of the BRW Top 500 Private Companies List; and businesses who fit the criteria of the above and supply their company financials for verification. The BRW Fast Club meet throughout the year to network and discuss topics relating to cash flow management, strategic planning, business expansion, offshore expansion, finance (including managing capital and finding new sources), sales, how to sell your business, and IPOs.

title: BRW (magazine)


text:
Category:Mountains of Eswatini

The mountains of Eswatini.

title: Category:Mountains of Eswatini


text:
Dongfeng County

Dongfeng County is located in southwestern Jilin province, China and is under the administration of Liaoyuan City.

It is mainly agricultural with the main crops being wheat and maize (corn). Its major industry is a pharmaceutical company (Dongfeng Yaoye), after which the county town's main street is named. Deer are also raised for their meat and antlers, which are used in Chinese medicine.

It is a relatively poor county with salaries starting at Y300. Many people in the county town are unemployed and rely on riding "daoqilu" (pedicabs where the driver is seated at the back and the passengers at the front) and tuk tuks to make a living.

The county is linked by a single track railway to Liaoyuan and Siping in one direction and Meihekou in the other, with trains running to Beijing, Tonghua and Changchun amongst other places. There is also a frequent bus service to Meihekou, the nearest large town, which can also be reached by shared taxi for Y20 or Y5 a person. Buses also link Dongfeng with Liaoyuan, Siping, Changchun, Shenyang, and other cities and counties.

Temperatures range from up to 30 C in the short summer to minus 30 or even minus 40 C in the long winter, during which snow covers the ground and the rivers and drains are iced up.

Most of the people living in Dongfeng are Han Chinese, but there are also scattered ethnic Korean communities, and a Korean Township. However, the local media do not have any Korean language programmes or newspapers to cater for them and many of the Koreans in Dongfeng have lost their Korean language skills even though there is a Korean language secondary school and a Korean church available to them.

Administrative divisions
The county administers 12 towns, one township, and one ethnic township.

title: Dongfeng County


text:
Redmond O'Hanlon

Redmond O'Hanlon FRGS FRSL is an English writer and scholar.

Early life and education
O'Hanlon was born in Dorset, England. He was educated at Marlborough College and then Oxford University. After taking his M.Phil. in nineteenth-century English studies in 1971 he was elected senior scholar, and in 1974 Alistair Horne Research Fellow, at St Antony's College, Oxford. He completed his doctoral thesis, Changing scientific concepts of nature in the English novel, 1850–1920, in 1977.

Though very religious when he was young, O'Hanlon became an atheist upon his discovery of the works of Charles Darwin.

Career
From 1970–74, O'Hanlon was a member of the literature panel of the Arts Council of Great Britain.

He was elected a member of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History in 1982, a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society in 1984 and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1993. For 15 years he was the natural history editor of the Times Literary Supplement.

O'Hanlon has become known for his journeys into some of the most remote jungles of the world, in Borneo, the Amazon basin and Congo. He has also written a harrowing account of a trip to the North Atlantic on a trawler.

Between September 2009 and May 2010, O'Hanlon was a guest and co-presenter on the programme Beagle: In Darwin's wake for both Canvas in Belgium and VPRO Television in the Netherlands. In the programme, the clipper Stad Amsterdam re-traced the route that Charles Darwin took aboard HMS Beagle (1831–36), a journey that played a seminal role in his thinking on evolution.

He attended the Science & Technology Summit at the World Forum Convention Center in The Hague on 18 November 2010. Fellow Beagle shipmate Sarah Darwin was another featured guest at this convention.

In November 2011 VPRO Television began broadcasting O'Hanlons helden (English: O'Hanlon's heroes). In this eight-part series O'Hanlon introduces the viewer to his heroes of the nineteenth century. The programme was awarded the prestigious Dutch television award, De Zilveren Nipkowschijf (English: The Silver Nipkow disk). This Silver 1st prize is awarded annually by a professional jury to the best quality television programme. A second eight-part series of O'Hanlons helden was broadcast during the winter of 2013–2014.

Published works

 * Charles Darwin 1809–1882: A Centennial Commemoration (1982) (contributor)
 * Joseph Conrad and Charles Darwin: The Influence of Scientific Thought on Conrad's Fiction (1984)
 * Into the Heart of Borneo (1984)
 * In Trouble Again: A Journey Between the Orinoco and the Amazon (1988)
 * Congo Journey (1996), American edition: No Mercy: A Journey Into the Heart of the Congo (1997)
 * Trawler (2005)
 * [with Rudy Rotthier] God, Darwin en natuur (2009), English translation: The Fetish Room (2011)

title: Redmond O'Hanlon


text:
Bayonne School District

The Bayonne School District is a comprehensive public school district serving students from pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade from Bayonne in Hudson County, in the U.S. state of New Jersey.

As of the 2020–21 school year, the district, comprising 13 schools, had an enrollment of 10,059 students and 763.0 classroom teachers (on an FTE basis), for a student–teacher ratio of 13.2:1.

The district is classified by the New Jersey Department of Education as being in District Factor Group "CD", the sixth-highest of eight groupings. District Factor Groups organize districts statewide to allow comparison by common socioeconomic characteristics of the local districts. From lowest socioeconomic status to highest, the categories are A, B, CD, DE, FG, GH, I and J.

After the state rejected a budget plan that would have cut 85 positions and raised taxes by almost 4%, the board of education voted in April 2017 to cut a total of 300 positions, including 260 non-tenured teachers, to achieve $6 million in savings from the earlier proposed $133 million budget.

Awards and recognition
During the 2008-09 school year, Public School #14 Gifted & Talented was recognized with the National Blue Ribbon School Award of Excellence by the United States Department of Education, the highest award an American school can receive. In 2009-2010, Washington Community School was awarded the Blue Ribbon Award.

For the 2004–05 school year, Mary J. Donohoe No. 4 School was named a "Star School" by the New Jersey Department of Education, the highest honor that a New Jersey school can achieve. It is the fourth school in Bayonne to receive this honor. The other three are Bayonne High School in 1995-96, Midtown Community School in 1996-97 and P.S. #14 in the 1998-99 school year.

During the 2008–09 school year, Washington Community School was awarded the ASCA Honor Council Excellence Award, which is given to school's Student Councils who have met the requirements and completed projects in the areas of in leadership, citizenship, and community service.

Schools
Schools in the district (with 2020–21 enrollment data from the National Center for Education Statistics ) are:
 * Elementary schools
 * John M. Bailey School No. 12 (656 students; in grades PreK-8)
 * Albert McCormick, Jr., Principal
 * Mary J. Donohoe No. 4 (459; PreK-8)
 * Philip J. Baccarella, principal
 * Henry E. Harris No. 1 (637; PreK-8)
 * Maria Kazmir, principal
 * Lincoln Community School No. 5 (433; PreK-8)
 * Keith Makowski, principal
 * Horace Mann No. 6 (641; PreK-8)
 * Catherine Quinn, principal
 * Nicholas Oresko School No. 14 (444; PreK-8) an advanced school for gifted and talented students in academics, the arts, and physical education
 * Charles Costello, principal
 * Dr. Walter F. Robinson No. 3 (772; PreK-8). The facility was originally opened in 1910 as Bayonne High School, and was changed to an elementary school in the late 1930s when the present high school facility was completed. In 1977, it was renamed after a prominent history teacher who became school principal and assistant superintendent of schools and authored a history of the city of Bayonne.
 * Karen J. Fiermonte, principal
 * William Shemin Midtown Community School No. 8 (1,230; PreK-8). In November 2019, the school was renamed to honor World War I Medal of Honor hero, and Bayonne resident, William Shemin.
 * Wachera Ragland-Brown, principal
 * Phillip G. Vroom No. 2 (485; PreK-8)
 * Stacey Janeczko, principal
 * George Washington Community School No. 9 (677; PreK-8)
 * George Becker, principal
 * Woodrow Wilson School No. 10 (747; PreK-8)
 * Maureen Hurley-Brown, principal
 * High school
 * Bayonne High School (1,290; 9-12)
 * Richard Baccarella, principal
 * Bayonne Alternative High School (141; 9-12)

Dress code
The Bayonne Board of Education has implemented a dress code that took effect in the 2006-2007 school year for students in Pre-K through 8th grade. The plan was intended to "increase student identification with their schools and the district, Eliminate many of the distractions associated with differences in social or economic status, Allow the children, their teachers and the Board of Education to concentrate on shared pursuit of educational excellence and Instill a sense of belonging and school pride". A heated battle was fought between enraged parents and grandparents and the board, with parents and grandparents upset at the manner in which the policy was imposed, the cost of the uniforms, the loss of freedom of expression to students in choosing the clothing they wear and issues regarding the manner in which the contract was awarded.

Administration
Core members of the district's administration are:
 * John J. Niesz, superintendent
 * Daniel Castles, business administrator
 * Gary Maita, board secretary

Board of education
The district's board of education is composed of nine members who set policy and oversee the fiscal and educational operation of the district through its administration. As a Type II school district, the board's trustees are elected directly by voters to serve three-year terms of office on a staggered basis, with three seats up for election each year held (since 2015) as part of the November general election. The board appoints a superintendent to oversee the district's day-to-day operations and a business administrator to supervise the business functions of the district.

In a November 2015 referendum, voters approved by a 3-1 margin a change from a Type I (appointed) to Type II (elected) school board.

title: Bayonne School District


text:
User:Ollie holton

I am 21 years old and currently studying Chemistry at Oxford University.

So far the number of articles which I have added to is only small but I would like to contribute more in the future.

I have done some basic work on the acetal and thioacetal pages, but would appreciate it if someone with more extensive knowledge added to them further.

title: User:Ollie holton


text:
Lightning Comics

Lightning Comics may refer to:
 * Lightning Comics (1940-1942), an Ace Magazines comic starring Lash Lightning
 * Lightning Comics (1967), a defunct comic book company
 * Lightning Comics (1990s), an independent comic book company

title: Lightning Comics


text:
Ch'u-chou

Ch'u-chou may refer to:

 * Chuzhou, or Ch'u-chou in Wade–Giles, a city in Anhui, China
 * Chuzhou (disambiguation)
 * Quzhou, or Ch'ü-chou in Wade–Giles, a city in Zhejiang, China
 * Quzhou (disambiguation)

title: Ch'u-chou


text:
Talk:Chirality (chemistry)

Sugars
The comment about the natural chirality of sugars may be incorrect. The entry on [Optical Rotation] states that there are natural sugars of both chirality.

Are the Pictures correct?
Using the "CORN" method for amino acids, is the picture in the left hand really an L-amino acid, and is the picture in the right hand, really a D-amino acid?? BillChia (talk) 13:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)BillChia, 24 February 2010.

I think the lower right hand figure about the C1 C2 chiral and achiral example molecules is wrong. The example molecule does not have a C2 axis. You would need to have all X terminations (or at least 2 X on one side and Y on the other). As is it has no symmetry, though it is deceptively close to a S4 operation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjv500 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

 * It does have a C2 axis, just like hydrogen peroxide. See http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.49724.html or https://www.chemtube3d.com/symhoohc2/, for example. The point group of all these molecules is C2. --Ben (talk) 21:11, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Why
No mention of what explanations are being hypthesised for the right-handedness of biology. Two I know of are

 * 1) it just turned out that way
 * 2) the weak nuclear force makes one way more low energy that the other

Pmurray bigpond.com 06:03, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes

Biology is right handed? NPR's Science Friday said all multicellular life on Earth uses "left-handed" amino acids.--64.107.201.150 19:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Different parts of "biology" (as a whole) have different handedness (assuming that means "sign of optical rotation" or "correspondence to certain stereocenters"?). The Chirality article doesn't describe biology as being any particular handedness, so when someone finally answers the question, just have to make sure to avoid introducing any such generality. DMacks 02:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It should probably be amended that ALL amino acids are L type rather than just most. from Chiral Recognition in the Gas Phase, Powis p23. The only possible exception would be from Cysteine where the chirality is impeded by steric hindrence from the bulky sulphur group. 128.243.253.116 (talk) 22:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge?
Would it make sense to merge material from Enantiomer? --Tabor 18:22, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I think so, I will add the proposed merge template to both pages. --Aaronsharpe 11:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

 * this merge proposal is not valid, you cannot have merge discussions lasting 1.5 years. tag removed V8rik 19:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I have put the tags back and if no one comes up with a good reson not to I will complete the merge in the next few days. TomViza (talk) 19:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * If you merge enantiomer into this article, you should merge diastereomer and atropisomerism, as these are all examples of chirality in chemistry. One cannot discuss diastereomers without first discussing enantiomers anyway.  You could actually merge enantiomer and diastereomer into the stereochemistry article instead, which IMO would make more sense. There is no reason to only merge enantiomer into chirality, as there are many other forms of chirality in chemistry. Endtothemeans (talk) 03:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps logically that is correct, but only the two articles that I have suggested to merge have large overlaps in terms of their current content. How about the following: move all of the content from here relating to enantiomerism into that article and have this article simply be a short one with links to enantiomer, diastereomer and atropisomerism? TomViza (talk) 16:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

 * This would work. There is no need for an explanation of enantiomers in an article on chirality in chemistry...they can just be linked.  Endtothemeans (talk) 02:04, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

General issues
Alterations and restructuring are needed to properly represent use and meaning of the word chirality. Please join the multi-disciplinary discussion on Talk:Chirality. --Cigno 22:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Wrong word?
Surely the word is asymmetry, not dissymmetry. I was also taught that the correct terms were laevorotatory and dextrorotatory. 21:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * OED. dissymmetry: Symmetry between two objects, disposed in opposite directions, such as the right and left hands or feet, or between crystals alike in all respects, save that their angles lie opposite ways. Bueller 007 (talk) 06:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Bueller is right regarding dissymetry. Apparently dissymetry and asymmetry do not mean the same thing and in this case it is the former which we want to use. Levorotary vs laevorotary is interesting. Again, I am not a linguist, so I do not know if this comes from simplifying words (like encyclopaedia → encyclopedia), however in this particular case it could be annoying to people who know Latin (I am not one of them), because it looks like levo in latin means I lift or I raise, whereas laevo is dative case of laevus which means left or on the left side, among others. Waydot (talk) 10:01, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

poorly executed content move
Content of optical isomerism has been moved to chirality (chemistry), and optical isomer is now the redirect. The result is that many links to this article are now disabled. Please consider fixing the links or better revert the process as chirality (chemistry) is not an elegant name for an article. V8rik 21:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

"Elegant name"? Encyclopedias are simple, understandable, and concise, but elegant? I think it confuses the layman far more to attempt to understand how optics is related to chirality, than it is to simply explain the concept using the hand example (which is not very clearly explained in the article). I also think a three dimensional image would help greatly (in place of the 2d one that is currently there; it doesn't show the tetrahedral shape of the molecules). Fuzzform 06:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Isotopes
Is it possible to have this property using isotopes? Suppose in the Alanine molecule the H3C methyl group is replaced with Deuterium instead of hydrogen, does this create an optical isomer? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.10.127.58 (talk • contribs).

 * In a glycine molecule where the methylene group is CHD instead of CH2, that carbon is a chiral center, and the molecule has two possible enantiomers. DMacks 20:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Not all L
The article says:
 * [...] the D/L system remains in common use in certain areas of biochemistry, such as amino acid and carbohydrate chemistry, because it is convenient to have the same chiral label for all of the commonly-occurring structures of a given type of structure in higher organisms. In the D/L system, they are all L;

They are not all L; there are lots of D's. Or do I misunderstand the sentence? There's for example D-Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate at a prominent position in glycolysis. AxelBoldt 23:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think this is probably a very poor attempt at pointing out that in the living, human body; the chiral ratio of amino acids is actively shifted to make L-amino acids dominant (90% L, 10% D); and conversely D-monosaccharides are dominant. Only the L-forms of amino acids are active in humans, only the D-forms of monosaccharides are active in humans, so the body keeps that gradient there. After you die, the ratio naturally switches back to 50:50.--KX36 20:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Some dodgy stuff in here
There is an implication that all enantiomers are optically active - which is rubbish. Also the term is asymmetric, not dissymmetric - Look up most major textbooks it will use that term

Arguably the R & S nomenclature is the most important so surely that should be placed ahead of the d/l and D/L paragraphs - although I am saying this as a chemist rather than as a biologist

Stui 194.72.70.114 13:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

 * OED. dissymmetry: Symmetry between two objects, disposed in opposite directions, such as the right and left hands or feet, or between crystals alike in all respects, save that their angles lie opposite ways. Bueller 007 (talk) 06:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Rule surrounding C
The rule where if a tetrahedrally-bonded C has 4 different substituents, then it is chiral applies to any tetrahedrally-bonded element, although C is the most common example. This is according to my university textbook. Mike.lifeguard 00:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

 * It's true. The article here notes that C is a simple example, and it's the case most wikipedia readers will likely encounter or be likely to recognize or are here to learn about. But actually, it's not even limited to atoms that have 4 bonds, and it's not even limited to atom-centered things at all...see BINAP for example. DMacks 16:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

D-L Chirality Notation Error
I changed the content of the article because it was just plain wrong!

It said that after putting the lowest priority group at the back, if the remaining constituents were counterclockwise it was D config. If clockwise L config.

This is wrong!!

If a chiral molecule has a counter-clockwise configuration it is L (corresponding to S in Organic Chemistry) If a chiral molecule has a clockwise configuration it is D (corresponding to R in Organic Chemistry)

Just letting everyone know I fixed that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MikeMurko (talk • contribs).

I'm affraid it was right the first time and I changed it back. You can check this one yourself. Find yourself a picture of for example D-Alanine, turn the hydrogen away from the viewer and the order COOH R NH2 is counterclockwise! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Looking at the (claimed to be) L -(S)-alanine image on the alanine page, R is the methyl group, H is in the back, and I see (COOH)-(R)-(NH2) running counter-clockwise. This also seems to agree with the L -(S) stereochemical assignments on the glyceraldehyde page per the description of the origin of the L / R nomenclature (NH2 instead of OH, methyl instead of methylcarbinol). DMacks 02:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

You are right. Sorry about that!

counter clockwise w. r. to...
suggest adding "counterclockwise as viewed against the direction of propagation" or something similar regarding polarization rotation under the History section, in addition to that in the optical activity naming convention section. Angelafit 06:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)angelafit

Letter example - huh?
A para in the article says:
 * By contrast, the operation of superimposition is trivial for a non-chiral mirror image (e.g., the letter "A"). Because letters such as "A" are not three-dimensional, though, no chiral letters exist to demonstrate the contrary.

Doesn't "L" 'demonstrate the contrary'? (i.e., it's chiral.) If that's not what the para is about, it needs fuller explanation. -R. S. Shaw 18:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Superposition vs Superimposition
One or more anonymous users (get a user account!) feel that this article should use superposition and not superimposition to explain chirality. I know that McMurry, March etc. use superimposable but what the heck is the difference between the two!. Is is one of those flammable / inflammable thingies that non-native English speakers always mess up or a UK vs US English difference? Any ideas? V8rik 17:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The plain-English definitions (i.e., Wiktionary) suggest that superposition might be more appropriate than superimposition since we're usually talking about things not images. But the former seems to talk more about arbitrary stacking whereas the latter seems more about having some certain alignment (which is what we care about). And we're looking more for a technical term than a linguistic solution I think? I've only ever heard "superposition" in this context as part of the slow-motion revert war here. DMacks 03:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi DMacks, thanks for your comment. I am assuming for now that you would be in favor of the term superimposition. So the IM in imposition stems from IMage? I did not realize that until now. I will wait and see if there are more comments otherwise I switch back the article. V8rik 17:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm in favor of "superimposition" both in my mind and because we can support it with McMurry, Wade, Streitwieser/Heathcock/Kosower, and Morrison & Boyd. I'd actually never noticed the "IM" word-root similarity:) DMacks 17:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Made a switch back V8rik 17:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Slow motion revert war indeed. IUPAC uses "non-superposable". --Rifleman 82 (talk) 06:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Just for the heck of it, here's the Google Books Popularity Contest result: enantiomer superposed, 61 hits; enantiomer superimposed, 322 hits. In my opinion, both are equally valid. I don't know if it is due to regional differences or if it is random, though. --Itub (talk) 09:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 * There's no debate. "Superimpose" is flatly wrong.  ANY two objects can be "superimposed".  "Superimpose" just means "putting one thing on top of another".  Further, if you "superimpose" something onto something else, both are typically *still visible*.  There is no nuance of "exact fit".  "Superpose" is a geometric term and it specifically means "transfer one into the space occupied by the other two show that they coincide".  Enantiomers are ***non-superposable*** mirror images of one another.  IUPAC is correct.  Bueller 007 (talk) 06:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

 * It's not likely that the non-technical audience will appreciate, or even understand the distinction. Please continue to clarify and simplify (within reason). Kortoso (talk) 23:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

"Superimpose" is not wrong. The Oxford English Dictionary says explicitly that both terms can mean "bring into coincidence" and both can also mean "place over" (Etymologically, both words, in Latin, meant "place above" in various senses - "super" = "above", "-pose" (-ponere) = "to place", "-im-" = "in/on" (see O.E.D.)). lifeform (talk) 23:18, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

The textbook, Organic Chemistry by Solomons and Fryhle, 10th edition, wiley states that " To be supersuperposable is different than to be superimposable . Any two objects could be superimposedsimply by putting one object on top of other, whether or not the objects are same. To superpose two objects (as in the superposition ) means, on the other hand, that all parts of each object much coincide. The condition of superposability must be met for two things to be identical . "  RIT RAJARSHI (talk) 15:37, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

D/L typesetting
I notice that all of the instances of "D" and "L" are wrapped in <small> tags. If they're supposed to be in smallcaps, we should use <span style="font-variant:small-caps"> instead: small-caps. I didn't convert over myself because I'm not certain this is what the small tags were intended to accomplish. Bryan Derksen (talk) 05:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The D and L in this context are indeed intended to be small caps. <small> is heck of a lot easier to type than a longer, er "span" of text. DMacks (talk) 16:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There is now a template that produces .  (One of the very few "good" templates in Wikipedia: among other qualities, it does make editing easier, it can be immediately and completely learned from a single example, and does not generate more visible text than the template call itself.) --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 22:29, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Ibuprofen
Ibuprofen is another example of a chiral molecule. One entantiomer has pain relieving effects while the other is inactive. Also, if I remember correctly, the body can convert the inactive form to the active form, which extends the duration of the pain relieving effect of the drug.

KingHanneman (talk) 04:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)KingHanneman
 * Yup. See the "Stereochemistry" section of the Ibuprofen article for more info. DMacks (talk) 10:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment on the origin of homochirality
From the article:

 * "The origin of this homochirality in biology is the subject of much debate. Most scientists believe that Earth life's choice of chirality was purely random, and that if carbon-based life forms exist elsewhere in the universe, their chemistry could theoretically have opposite chirality."

I was under the impression that the weak interaction is often suspected as having a role in the origin of homochirality, based partially on indicative experiments involving crystal growth like those of Compton and Pagni (sorry, I don't have a cite off the top of my head). I realize that it's still very speculative to believe this with regards to amino acids in particular, but I wonder whether it's significant enough to comment on in the article? (chemistry isn't my area, so I cannot say)

Even if the hypothesis involving the weak interaction isn't significant enough to include here, the assertion that "most scientists" believe the origin of Earth-bound life's homochirality to be purely random seems misleading. There are certainly plenty who believe it could be the result of natural physical laws. -- 98.26.182.245 (talk) 22:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Are hands really chiral?
Amputated hands represent a pair of enantiomers. But while still attached to the body, and ignoring our blemishes and the "enantioselective" placement of organs, the hands are not chiral since we are Cs-symmetric. So the analogy to hands is flawed. We are however prochiral. Am I missing something?--Smokefoot (talk) 16:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

 * agree but analogies will only take you that far. The concept of chirality should be explained on the chirality page itself. As long as you say hands are each others mirror images that is okay. To say (as the article suggests) that a hand is chiral is taking it too far. Are we also homochiral as the heart is always on the left side of the body?  V8rik (talk) 20:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

 * It is not unreasonable to use an analogy when describing a technical topic. Perhaps the word "example" leads readers to assume that hands are actually chiral. Kortoso (talk) 23:11, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

 * There is no inconsistency and one need not resort to surgery. A single hand is definitely a chiral  object.  The whole human body (ignoring internal organs and "accidental" shape variations) is not chiral. A pair of hands from the same individual may or may not be chiral, depending on how they are arranged in space. That is a common situation in chemistry: a molecule with chiral parts may be not chiral as a whole. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 22:37, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Greek IPA /cheir/
The term chirality is derived from the Greek word for hand, χειρ-(/cheir/). I'm know this is improper IPA (which is what one uses inside phonological brackets "/ /"), so I'm guessing that the original editor was simply putting the standard romanization in parentheses. Therefore, I've edited out the brackets. 99.141.180.36 (talk) 02:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

 * The pronunciation "cheir" seems to be that of Modern Greek, but is neither the Ancient Greek pronunciation, nor the pronunciation from which English /kaɪˈræl/ derived. From various internet sources, it seems that the (conjectural) Ancient Greek pronunciation was /kʰěːr/ with a hard /kʰ/ sound like in English "keep". By the 4th century CE the Koine pronunciaton was /xir/ where /x/ is a hard "h" sound, as in Scottish "loch" or German "nacht". By the 10th century it became /çir/ where /ç/ is the sound of "ch" in German "nicht"; which seems to be the Modern Greek one. The English pronunciation of "chiral", with a hard "k" sound, must have come from a possibly inaccurate "Scholar's Greek" pronunciation, something like /kʰeiːr/ or /kʰaiːr/, that was in use by Western European scholars and scientists a couple centuries ago; possibly the (assumed) Homeric Greek pronunciation used in Classics studies. (Likewise, the pronunciation of Latin generally used in Romance countries, since the Middle Ages, is quite different from that used in English-speaking ones; and both are surely different from that of the Ancient Romans.) So, which pronunciation should be given?  Ideally we should find the true origin of English "chiral"=/kaɪˈræl/ ("Western European Scholar's Greek"?) and give its pronunciation. Failing that, it may be OK to say "from Ancient Greek χείρ"; but its pronunciation should be given as /kʰěːr/ (in IPA) or "ker" (in English-like spelling), rather than "cheir". --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:54, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

 * In Modern Greek it's /çir/, not "cheir". There may have been a point in time when the χ was pronounced /x/ while the ειρ was still pronounced /ěːr/ or /ějr/ — I don't think we really know which change occurred first. I doubt that scholars pronounced the χ like a hard k, it's just that the k sound is the usual way to pronounce words that had a χ in Greek, like "Christ" or "architecture", or the word "scholar" itself. The only exception I can think of in English is the word "cherub", which normally should be pronounced "kerub". Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

"chiral center" vs. "chirality center"
I've seen both, is there any difference? Is it worth mentioning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.250.142.56 (talk) 01:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Superposition vs Superimposition again
I found in the the first two paragraphs of the introduction part of the article an incorrect wording :-"non-superposable mirror image".So I corrected it to "non-superimposable".Superposable has a totally different meaning in physics and mathematics.Please check article on Superposition Principle for verification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichgab (talk • contribs) 07:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC) The correction to superimposable was done by me User Ichgab.I forgot to sign my comment.Sorry for the mistake.Ichgab (talk) 07:47, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have undone this change per the WP:RS noted in the discussion earlier on this talk-page. As a chemistry article, IUPAC is more authoritative than physics/math technical meanings in their fields (and your change was not supported by that cite given in the article). I have added a heading...because this was filed under '"chiral center" vs. "chirality center"', it's no wonder nobody else noticed or bothered to respond at the time to your separate issue. I have added an additional IUPAC ref that specifically defines "Superposition" as it is used in chemistry to help clarify its meaning in this field. It's definitely different than the superposition principle, so I have removed the link to that target. DMacks (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Is there another way to describe this without resorting to technical terms that require their own definitions? Kortoso (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Chirality of phosphorus
Should the chirality of phosphorus (as in sarin) be included? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 21:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The article should definitely note the general idea that a lone-pair can be considered a substituent (or at least consume a geometric position like one), and therefore give a stereocenter. The "Chirality of amines" section is a start, but it focuses on the transient nature due to rapid inversion, not the fact that each single state is chiral. Probably best to put the idea of chirality for molecules like RR'RN and RR'RP and RR'SO in the "Stereogenic centers" section (including how to name them R/S, etc.). Then separately can have some commentary on the fact that some chiral molecules can invert under standard conditions (pulling together the conformational-changes from "Stereogenic centers" and the amine-inversion idea). There was a discussion on the science ref-desk within the past month or two about barriers to inversion of P and N centers, I think with some links to other WP articles and/or literature sources. DMacks (talk) 02:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Naming conventions
It states that " it is labeled R (for Rectus, Latin for right), if it decreases in counterclockwise direction, it is S (for Sinister, Latin for left)." That is incorrect. rectus means straight (such as rectus abdominis), right in latin is dexter. Where does the R come from then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.11.19 (talk) 14:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * good point, R is from Rectus (straight, correct) the text should be changed V8rik (talk) 22:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

 * In English, "right" can mean "correct", but it can also refer to the side opposite "left". In Latin, "rectus" seems to refer to the former, "dexter" the latter, though "right" is a 100% acceptable translation of both words—the problem is that "right" has multiple meanings. Is this as simple as a very old conflation of terms? Or is "rectus" really an additional word for the side opposite left in Latin (even though "dexter" has that covered)? 70.172.214.70 (talk) 04:58, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

 * I also spotted this ... imperfection. R must come from Rectus, there is no doubt about it. This looks wrong to some of us, because there's apparently a pair of right and wrong and another pair of right and left. I am not a linguist but this must be related to the fact that most of the population is right-handed. Right side is the good side, while left side is the bad side. Right in English has several meanings, in Latin sinister has that property. It could help perfectionists to change the translation to something which includes correct. Waydot (talk) 09:53, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Here is a quote from a 1793 book in latin that uses "recta vel sinistra" ("to the right or to the left"?). So "rectus" it may have been acceptable synonym of "dexter", at least in Medieval Latin -- which is where scientific "Latin" terms are usually taken from. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Chiral sugars?
Do all sugars have chirality? Or is it only for monosaccharides? 173.17.169.171 (talk) 08:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Almost any sugar that has at least one stereocenter is chiral. A polysaccharide is simply a polymer of monosaccharides, and forming a polymer does not change the chiral fact of the individual monomers within it. If your left and right gloves are chiral, a shopping cart full of gloves is just a whole lot of chirality. DMacks (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * In theory, one could connect an even number of monosaccharides to make an achiral molecule. For example, by connecting a -glucose to an -glucose by a 3-3' bond that replaces two hydrogens (or two hydroxyls). The resulting molecule would have a plane of symmetry.  But I don't see how to do that with normal glycoside bonds. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

 * Dihydroxyacetone is a three-carbon sugar that is not chiral. In principle you could have other ketoses that would not be chiral if there are an odd number of carbon atoms and the ketone group is on the central atom. In that case there would be chiral forms but alwo "meso" forms that would not be chiral. But as far as I know, ketoses always have the ketone group on the carbon next to the end. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 * 3-Pentulose and 3-hexulose are known. DMacks (talk) 13:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * And 3-heptulose and 4-heptulose and 5-nonulose. Several stereoisomers of 3-pentulose, 4-heptulose, and 5-nonulose are meso compounds. DMacks (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Thanks. I wonder, do those ketoses exist naturally? I mean, I suppose you could make any ketose you wanted synthetically. By the way, I learn'd recently that there were many unsuccessful attempts to synthesize sucrose (from glucose and fructose) before it was finally achieved in 1953. I wonder whether the problem was to cause the condensation, or to get the right isomer. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 08:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Error in RS section of Naming conventions
Dear Editors,

The article currently states the following in the RS section of the Naming conventions:

 * If the center is oriented so that the lowest-priority of the four is pointed away from a viewer, the viewer will then see two possibilities: If the priority of the remaining three substituents increases in clockwise direction, it is labeled R (for Rectus, Latin for right), if it increases in counterclockwise direction, it is S (for Sinister, Latin for left).

This disagrees with the standard definition (see, e.g., Voet and Voet).

A suggested correction follows:

 * If the center is oriented so that the lowest-priority of the four is pointed away from a viewer, the viewer will then see two possibilities: If the priority of the remaining three substituents decreases in a clockwise direction, it is labeled R (for Rectus, Latin for right), if it decreases in a counterclockwise direction, it is S (for Sinister, Latin for left).

Thank you

Mewalloffice (talk) 19:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for spotting the error. It is is the result of vandalism (21 March 2012). It is already corrected.

Δ and Λ complexes
User:Rifleman 82 disagrees with my edit, but I do not understand why there should be pictures of both Δ and Λ conformations isomers. Indeed, if it should, then which design is preferable? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Why don't you use the following:

Showing both delta and lambda enantiomers highlights how chirality can exist apart from tetrahedral carbon compounds, the latter of which, is the most common. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 15:23, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

 * "Stereoisomers" not "conformations". But anyway, the whole point of this article is to discuss and illustrate the idea of chirality, and especially the differences among stereoisomers. Only having a picture of one possibility and then saying "and there's another" does not help anyone who does not already understand the key aspect of the difference or to illustrate the quick definition of the "other" symbol. But I also think File:Énantiomères octaèdriques.jpg might be too oversimplified, since it doesn't help if you don't really understand the molecules being represented. Maybe the [Fe(ox)3]3– 3D-balls images from Complex (chemistry) would be better here? DMacks (talk) 15:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not object against any picture but JPEG, and any changes but destruction of typography fixes and wikification already made by me. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We have indeed been moving away from JPEG to PNG or SVG images, but JPEG images should not be removed unless an equally good replacement is available. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 16:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And agree with this statement too. A JPEG is better than nothing and better than an image that doesn't illustrate the appropriate/relevant content. File format is *not* the most important aspect of an article. DMacks (talk) 16:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

What could illustrate this downscaled heap of muck? Incompetence of the creator and low quality of contributions of the user who placed it here, IMHO. I do not think that this loathsome image could really help to understand the 3D structure of complexes even accurately remade in SVG but with exactly same graphical features. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:51, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

There are two equilateral triangles in this graphic (either enantiomer), and they mark the face formed by three vertexes of the octahedral metal complex. The round lines join two vertices together; they represent a chelating ligand. By seeing how the "propeller" rotates, you can assign delta or lambda symmetry to the compound. Some chemists prefer such a representation that omits the central metal atom, but I'm not a fan. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 17:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Chiral molecules with different properties?
I'm curious as to if there are chemicals with different melting points, or such, when flipped. I mean it doesn't seem like there would be according to simple valance electron theory, but then again, He3/He4 are very different beasts when isolated (spin-related cause).

I'm curious as to if some trios of atoms have a preferred relative orientation. Think of particle physics and the layout of the brain where globally it seems they're reflections but locally they might not be. They turn out to only be good approximations.71.196.246.113 (talk) 19:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * In their pure forms and when not mixed with other chiral compounds, two enantiomers have the same melting point and such as each other because whatever their preferred relative orientation, it's a relative orientation. The mirror image would have the same relative orientation, just in the opposite direction. Diastereomers could be as different as any two unrelated compounds (except for same molecular weight) precisely because of different relative orientations. DMacks (talk) 20:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not think that something like this is possible under typical circumstances because both electromagnetic and nuclear force are P-invariant. Though, it is perfectly possible under the same external influence which is not P-invariant. I can easily imagine two chiral isomers which have different properties if irradiated by the same circularly-polarized light. Or, say, under superposed electric and magnetic fields which are not perpendicular – parities of E and H fields are positive and negative respectively. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was thinking of the magnetic and spin properties. A neat (and lethal) thing is that H2 has biologically different effects than the H1 that is in most water molecules.  For microbes, it slows them down to about half speed (twice as much energy needed to move the same number of hydrogen atoms?) but for animals... does a lot more than just slow us.  Another thing that seems odd at first sight is that helium actually becomes toxic at high enough depths.  I think it was related to neuron connections? I actually doubt too many if any molecules will have detectable differences in melting points but I'm willing to bet that muons or something will react differently.  μ+SR and μ-SR (Muon/Mu Meson/Mu-Electron bombardment) is an interesting technology.  Not everything can be done at places like the CERN LHC.  We need smaller-hadron colliders, too!  ;)  Too bad there's no practical way to do Muon-chemistry in electronics.  I could see a lot of potential applications.  71.196.246.113 (talk) 19:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Deuterium is toxic because it has different chemistry, it's C-H bonds are slightly stronger than those of normal hydrogen and enzymes have a very hard time dealing with that (see Heavy water. I think helium toxicity (HPNS) is caused by it building up in the tissues to such a point that it becomes disruptive (similar to Nitrogen narcosis).Project Osprey (talk) 20:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Lede
Tried to clean up the lede so it was clearer to the uninitiated. If the result is technically inaccurate, please help. Kortoso (talk) 23:16, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

"Most" amino acids are L
If the "rule" is supposed to be L amino and R sugar (in fact in many sources we see "all"), then what are the exceptions? Where do we encounter R aminos and L sugars? Archaea? Kortoso (talk) 23:24, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

How life turned left
An interesting discussion of how amino acids might have become (mostly?) homochiral. Also good examples of clear, simple language:
 * http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/life-turned-left.html Kortoso (talk) 23:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

All life needs to be modified
This article Chirality_(chemistry) has it that "all life on Earth being homochiral". Perhaps that phrase should be modified a bit then to mark what is actually homochiral in "all life"? Amino acids, proteins and sugar, yes. Higher level structures of DNA, perhaps not so much. I suspect one could modify it to either "all amino acids, proteins and sugars" or perhaps "all primary level chirality of molecules" or something to that effect, but I am not qualified to make the change right now. Star Lord -   星王 (talk) 15:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Higher level structures are just a composite/effect, not an independent nature. The helicity (screw-thread direction) of the double-strand of each form of DNA always has the same handedness, or at least different stabilities and biochemical interactions when both directions are possible (see Nucleic acid double helix). This higher-level handedness is due to the atomic chirality details. Same with other macromolecular details, such as the direction of a protein alpha-helix (see Alpha helix). DMacks (talk) 16:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

le Prof's comments, moved from article
I am moving the extended comments from editor leProf and putting them here. The long list of tags is distracting. "Multiple issues: This is a central, critically important, highly in-referenced WP article, but it has become, at many places, a very weakly sourced hodgepodge of information unlike any authoritative source. Moreover, it has become poorly sectioned, and presents poorly paragraphed text. Because this has now gone on for some time, experts in organic, inorganic, and other chemical specialties are needed to take Eliel and other authoritative sources and decide on an organization, then remove trivial and unsourced/otherwise dubious content, and organize and fill in the rest with quality material in encyclopedic fashion (removing poor and partial sources as you go."
 * inadequate lead
 * refimprove
 * page numbers needed
 * Agreed that the article needs help. One comment: in Wikipedia-Chem do not often cite page numbers for books.  Doing so would be ideal, but we are dealing with reality not ideality. i.e., we are lucky to have Eliel cited, much less the page number.  Let's just get good book sources as your suggest but pushing for pagination is too much.
 * One further comment, why dont you dig into the nomenclature section and fix it? You are probably better qualified than most of us, and you know what you want.--Smokefoot (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

My concerns for this particular page:
 * This article is one of several articles defaced recently. Wikipedia provides a lot of tags and any child can add any number of tags to any page. These tags tend to stay on that page for a long time: interested readers are discouraged to continue reading and editors are reluctant to improve the page.
 * 1) Why is the expert needed: what inaccuracies do exist? Deal with them or explain yourself on the talk-page rather than just complain
 * 2) With regard to the naming conventions: what is the irrelevant information? One purpose of Wikipedia is to actually explain a concept: I do not see any how-to content
 * 3) Sources: why not find those sources that this page is consistent with and include them as a reference rather than just complain. It is really not a lot of work
 * 4) Why complain about page-needed? Pointless dull labour, do the work yourself
 * 5) Why introduce an empty section "Methods and practices". Do the work yourself, do not expect others to do the work for you
 * 6) Do not expect a reference when a topic like enantiomeric excess is mentioned: this topic has a page of its own with references on that particular page
 * 7) What is the deal with the "Further reading" section: do not patronise your fellow editors. They know what a library looks like. If you feel that the current Wikipedia page is consistent with any of these texts include them as a reference. V8rik (talk) 22:20, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

If we're seriously contemplating major changes to this page then I think we need to contemplate merging Enantiomer, Diastereomer and Stereocenter into this article. I know you're first thought is probably "No. Those pages are far too developed" but just take a moment and look at them; the amount of duplicated content between here and there is going to be huge. --Project Osprey (talk) 10:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Exactly the wrong approach, the creation of huge ugly articles. Think of the 95% of those readers arriving on this page, what do they want to take away from it? Not enantiomers or stereogenic lone pairs! The specialised stuff should not belong on this general-interest page but on one of the specialised pages, there is no need for content duplication, a lot of the current content on this page could be scrapped because it already exists in the specialist pages for example naming conventions and Stereogenic centers. The section "Stereogenic lone pairs" could be handled by lone pair as well. Important pages do not need to be big pages V8rik (talk) 19:22, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I often do not agree with V8rik on merging etc, but in this case, maybe he's on to something: that Chirality focus on what chirality is and that the fairly short article facilitate shunting readers to the the subtopics. The spirit of what Osprey is asking about is what are these other topics?  We could possibly devise an ideal outline:

 * symmetry criteria; dissymmetic vs asym; decent in symmetry CH4 → CH3X → CH2XY → CHXYZ?
 * history focused on Pasteur and Werner (organic is not central)
 * the 'cosmic' question about the origin of D-amino acids, etc
 * example gallery with comments: amino acids, thalidomide? quartz? [Ru(bipy)3]2+, a helicene
 * Where would we guide readers to resolution, enantiomers & racemates & meso, ways to describe absolute configuration?
 * I have started some of these changes today, if you two think that these changes are a bad idea, then revert.
 * --Smokefoot (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not one of those two people already discussing here yet, but I support your offloading of the RS/DL/+– nomenclature details to Absolute configuration. That's a pretty specialized aspect that does need a bunch of space for the technical details, but is not critical to understanding the idea of chirality itself. DMacks (talk) 22:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The more advice (or shoveling) the better. BTW, although LeProf can be annoying with his tagging, he did real content work on many articles recently (in addition to excessive tagging), so he is not all talk. --Smokefoot (talk) 22:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Even after 10 years of editing the central issue of big articles vs dedicated articles has not been settled. Not good. I stay away from articles with excessive tagging so for this article you are on your own. On the other hand it is nice to be able to collaborate with people on an article or set of articles so I will help out where I can on some of the related articles V8rik (talk) 22:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

On mentioning handedness
Currently (and the article is seeing a lot of change at the moment) this article describes chirality solely in terms of molecular symmetry. I feel this is starting from a far too advanced point. Even undergrads struggle with such descriptions and they already know what chirality is. Standard practice is to begin with a description based on human hands and I feel strongly that we should have a brief paragraph on this - if only for the lay readers. --Project Osprey (talk) 22:33, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree that we need to be careful, approachability is one of the real challenges. My feeling is that the elementary explanations should be near the lede but they should be couched in chemistry.  The article is about chemistry, not about chirality in general.  Hence my abrupt (apologies) removal of the discussion about hands. Further comments (without solutions):

 * The symmetry perspective is absolute and concise, can't beat that. It can seem rigid or opaque, and maybe we need to work on that angle.  It might be worth finding a similar drawing of a chiral molecule to illustrate symmetry elements withing a dissymmetric molecule.
 * The area of chirality is packed with terminology (racemic, enantio..., dissy- vs asym.., ). The article needs a concise summary of these terms.
 * The area of chirality is also packed with ways of describing configuration. Hopefully LeProf will prove that he can write by tackling this aspect.
 * Overall, I hope that we hear from a lot of editors about how to tackle this tricky but core topic.--Smokefoot (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm...Well I'll hold of for now until other editors chime in (hopefully). I do agree that we're going to need more pictures though. This is a visual phenomenon after-all. --Project Osprey (talk) 10:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Restoration of disambiguation note
I've restored the disambiguation note that was recently removed by user Smokefoot on the grounds that it "seems obscure". That is, the note that says: ''"L-form" redirects here. For the bacterial strains, see L-form bacteria.''

Just in case this is controversial, here are my reasons.

 * It is plausible that a reader looking for information on L-form bacteria might type "L-form" into the URL. One of the functions of the redirect system is to facilitate that kind of shorthand.

 * Wikipedia better meets its objectives if readers can serendipitously discover new information, as they can in a print encyclopaedia. Disambiguation notes are a good way to facilitate this.

 * In my experience it is not common practise to remove disambiguation notes simply because the topic insufficiently well known.

(For the record, I have an account but choose not to use it. No need to reply to this parenthetical aside.)

14.2.35.204 (talk) 11:31, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Moved from article
The following resources and comments for editors was placed within the article, but it is more appropriate here. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

The following are principle sources for the developing content in this article, that contain further information that may be of interest to readers. In the books listed, the material on chirality appears throughout, and so page numbers should be given for specific ideas and quotations drawn from them that are introduced above.
 * Further reading
 * A high quality introductory to intermediate textbook of organic chemistry:
 * A seminal, authoritative work on modern organic stereochemistry: For a further but less stable source of the same text that provides access to the relevant material, see, same access date.
 * An important brief expert comment on misuse of stereochemical terms: For a further but less stable source of the same text that provides access to the relevant material, see, same access date.
 * A recent review providing definitions, examples, and history:

Moved from article
I'm moving the following comment for editors which was placed in the "Methods and practices" section to here. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

One or more sections, again with reference to Eliel, describing the methods and tools used in determining structure, generally, and then determining chiroptical properties, and absolute and relative configuration, and methods and tools for characterizing and quantifying enantiomers and diastereomers in mixtures, for resolution and racemization, for studying topicity and prochirality with special emphasis on NMR), and for stereoselective synthesis (stub referencing main article).

Achiral/needs better definition
Achiral redirects to this article as a whole, e.g. from xylitol, but the only definition is an example embedded in a table under Definition. The latter is so terse and the language so technical that even I, as a BSc in Chemistry, have trouble following it. Either achiral should have its own stub, or the definition of chiral needs to be clarified and include achiral, and redirects on achiral should link to the Definition section.
 * As so many compounds, especially biologically active compounds and drugs, are chiral, the article is likely to be read by those unfamiliar with current technical language and stereoisomer diagrams, and needs clarification. WP is a general cyclodaedia, not an advanced chemistry dictionary.
 * I also tend to agree with the usage 'asymmetric'. 'Dissymetric' may be technically correct, but is controversial and unfamiliar to many. D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 23:27, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

 * I also agree. This article as written is nothing but confusing, and then jargon.  So it is absolutely worthless.  Definitions are just flat-out wrong, starting with the "mirror image" statement.  Needs a complete re-write.  98.194.39.86 (talk) 13:32, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chirality (chemistry). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160521132055/http://www.cem.msu.edu/~reusch/VirtualText/sterism3.htm to http://www.cem.msu.edu/~reusch/VirtualText/sterism3.htm

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) 05:47, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Chiral molecule used as example is not chiral
The allene used as example as chiral molecule with a C2 axis in "Molecular symmetry and chirality" table (section: Definition) is not chiral, as it contains an S4 axis. --MarcoCappelletti (talk) 10:26, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ABC3A'B'plusAttemptedS4.png

It's got axial chirality.--Smokefoot (talk) 11:04, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Agree with --MarcoCappelletti, this molecule contain S4 symmetry (n-fold rotation followed by reflection in plane perpendicular to axis) and is thus not chiral. Axel Fredrik (talk) 18:59, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Allene derivatives of the type RR'C=C=CRR' have axial chirality. They lack an Sn axis.  That point is what I tried to demonstrate with the drawing above where S4 does not generate the same structure, it generates an enantiomer. Visualization of the effect is tricky, and for that reason often discussed.  Maybe I am incorrect, but then so is allene and the corresponding German article.--Smokefoot (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

It is called axial chirality. Chirality of allene derivatives was investigated (theoretically) by J. H. van 't Hoff in 1875. The main chemical thing about allene are its π-bonds – they bind atoms rigidly and the molecule lacks a usual conformational freedom characteristic for ⋯C–C–C⋯ chains. One can deem the molecule a rigid body for the purposes of symmetry. Allene’s symmetry group is [2,2]+, a subgroup of the regular tetrahedron’s group consisting of identity and three 180° rotations. If even a tetrahedron having all four vertices distinguished is chiral, then a rigid >C=C=C·· thing more certainly is so. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I agree with Smokefoot that the molecule drawn above is chiral and does not have an S4 axis. However this diagram would be clearer if A' and B' were written as A and B, which would eliminate the need for the parenthetical comment "(ignoring A vs A' etc.)".

 * As for the diagram in the Definition section of the article, the drawing of the relevant molecule (row C2, column chiral) also needs improvement. Specifically, the C2 axis should not be in the plane of the article (i.e. of the computer screen) but rather at 45° to the screen. Or else the C2 axis can be left alone and the four substituents rotated 45° about the C=C=C axis.

 * Since I lack the software to redraw the diagrams, I will have to leave these suggestions for someone else. Dirac66 (talk) 00:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Indeed, allenes of type (A)(B)C=C=C(X)(Y) are chiral (where A≠B and X≠Y). I added a cite to Allene for the first theoretical (by van 't Hof) and experimental (for 1,3-dinaphthyl-1,3-diphenylallene) reports of it. DMacks (talk) 05:52, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

"Different groups" versus "Distinct atoms"
In the section "Stereogenic centers", I had written
 * Many chiral molecules have point chirality, namely a single stereogenic center that coincides with an atom. This atom usually has four or more bonds to distinct atoms

It was changed to
 * Many chiral molecules have point chirality, namely a single stereogenic center that coincides with an atom. This atom usually has four or more bonds to different groups

This passage is not precise anyway; it is a "usually" sort of claim. The point of saying "distinct atoms" was to exclude multiple bonds to the same atom, as in acetylene. On the other hand, "different groups" is not precise either, because a carbon in a pyranose ring (say) is connected to only three groups (one of them divalent). I wish this paragraph could be made more precise, but I don't see how to do that without making it inaccessible to the general reader. Suggestions? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 23:32, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Stereogenic centers x stereogenic atoms
The article now says
 * While the presence of a stereogenic atom describes the great majority of chiral molecules, many variations and exceptions exist. For instance it is not necessary for the chiral substance to have a stereogenic atom.

The definition of "stereogenic center" (whose article sorely needs cleanup, by the way) says that a stereogenic center need not be an atom. While the presence of a stereogenic atom is not necessary, a stereogenic center is, no? If so, this article should say so. ... Or is the concept of "stereogenic center" a bogus one? Achirality requires a reflection across a plane that leaves the molecule unchanged apart from a rotation. If the rotation can be null, that plane is a (proper) "symmetry plane"; if it must be not null, the point where the axis cuts the plane is a (generalized) "symmetry center", and any plane through it has the same property. Thus that plane or point can be considered the "source" (more appropriately, the "witness") of the achirality. But chirality means only the absence of such a symmetry plane or center. It does not make sense to say that the absence of such a thing is located in a particular place; does it? Moreover, in all the examples given next, some stereogenic atoms do seem to exist. In FClBr-adamantane, for example, the carbon connected to F has three other bonds that are not equivalent, because each leads in two C-C steps to a carbon with a different substituent. So the vertex carbons are all stereogenic atoms, no? All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 00:09, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

 * Good point. I have rewritten that sentence and modified the next two. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Chiral ethane
The article notes that asymmetrically-substituted amines NRR′R″ are not considered chiral, even though the three bonds are not planar, because of the low interconversion barrier between the two enantiomers. Maybe it should note also that the same can be said of ethane in a state that is neither staggered nor eclipsed: such states are chiral, but they are not considered in chemistry because (I suppose) they are on the slope of an energy valley, with the enantiomer on the other side. Right? However, it seems possible that some phase of solid ethane has all or some molecules in such a chiral configuration, in racemic ratio or not. If not ethane, there surely must be compounds with this property (dynamically achiral in liquid or gas, chiral in solid). No? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 00:22, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think rotamers are normally considered chiral, except in the case of atropisomers. --Project Osprey (talk) 00:58, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes, I think it could happen that crystals of a nominally achiral molecule be chiral. I have added a little paragraph about that possibility. In that case, one would usually get a mixture of right-handed and left-handed crystals, but (as noted in the article Chiral resolution) one could get just one kind by seeding the liquid with small crystals of the desired chirality. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 * NRR'R" are certainly chiral in my book but I am a coordination chemist and must deal with the fact that once coordinated, the inversion is often frozen. A recurring case is for secondary amines (RR'NH) like triethylenetetramine.

 * Perhaps related to Jorge's other comment, sodium chlorate crystallizes in a chiral habit. When saturated solutions are stirred and concentrated, typically only one enantiomer precipitates, although which one appears is random. See "Chiral Symmetry Breaking in Sodium Chlorate Crystallizaton" Dilip K. Kondepudi1, Rebecca J. Kaufman1, Nolini Singh, Science  16 Nov 1990, Vol. 250, Issue 4983, pp. 975-976 DOI: 10.1126/science.250.4983.975. BTW our Symmetry breaking article needs help.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Interestin'. An even better-known example is sillicon dioxide, which forms chiral quartz. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 08:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomenclature (R/S, L/D)
A Nomenclature section is missing in this article. It should deal with "R/S" and "L/D" symbols.

In S (disambiguation) there is "S, a label that denotes one of two chiral center configurations in the R/S system pointing to "Chirality_(chemistry)#By_configuration:_R-_and_S-" but there is no such section.

And it's very strange, because a can see talks about them, in this page.--Meridiana solare (talk) 00:14, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I added a mention about nomenclature, with link to absolute configuration. That article talks about R/S and other systems. DMacks (talk) 00:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. But I dare that it's and hard way to follow for users coming from those disambiguating pages: they will look for "R" or "S" or for "L" or "D", not to "absolute configuration", which may be meaningless to them. --Meridiana solare (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Good point! Updated. DMacks (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * So I think it may be better to point from R (disambiguation), S (disambiguation), L (disambiguation) and D (disambiguation) directly stright to a propoer article. Should absolute configuration be right for all 4 of them? Or Stereocenter?
 * At rhem moment they point to "chirality (chemistry)#By configuration: R- and S-", which I suppose that is a no more existing section.--Meridiana solare (talk) 11:48, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Are inherent, axial, and planar chirality well defined?
Are the terms "axial chirality", "stereogenic axis", helical chirality, "planar chirality", "stereogenic plane", and "inherent chirality" well defined, or are they loose terms defined only by approximate descriptions and examples? For example, trans-cyclooctene is described here as "commonly cited example of a planar chiral molecule" but it doesn't fit the definition at planar chirality, since it lacks two non-coplanar rings (and what counts as a "ring"?); the cyclooctene article mentions chirality but not planar chirality. On the other hand, BINAP meets the definition for planar chirality but is offered as typical example of axial chirality. The WP articles and sources I have are all vague about these terms when examined closely. "Stereogenic center" and "central chirality" are clear enough, but we should be precise about the other terms somewhere, or mention that they are only loosely defined. –MadeOfAtoms (talk) 01:03, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Perhaps regrettably, they are not included in this article itself, and I think they should be. If you have the time please include them.  Although I work in asymmetric catalysis, stereochemical terminology is something I am reluctant to edit, because it it notoriously easy to give an incorrect definition.  For example, the definition of planar chirality in the planar chirality article is wrong -- there only needs to be one reference plane with a left and right side that are "different" and a part of the molecule that is forced to sit above or below that plane.  In the case of trans-cyclooctene, that plane is the plane of the alkene.  The Greg Fu type ferrocene derivatives are the most famous examples, but, as trans-cyclooctene shows, they are not the only type of planar chiral molecule. The definition given by Eliel (p. 1121 to 1122) is quite elaborate and difficult to explain.  The glossary of Eliel merely defines planar chirality as "chirality resulting from the arrangement of out-of-plane groups with respect to a reference plane."  Gawley and Aube is another rigorous resource containing definitions in a glossary.  There is a definition of stereogenic plane, but the full definition is also somewhat involved.

 * I think the articles themselves should definitely have a correct and full definition (from either Gawley and Aube's Principles of Asymmetric Synthesis or Eliel's Stereochemistry of Organic Compounds). However, the degree of rigor that this article should adhere to for these tough definitions is, in my opinion, a topic of debate. If you can give a concise and reasonably rigorous definition, please do so!! Alsosaid1987 (talk) 01:36, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * When there is a IUPAC Gold Book definition, we should certainly ensure our articles are in line with it. Of the terms mentioned by, I can find only axial chirality, planar chirality and the related stereogenic unit. This suggest to me that the other expressions are more likely to be loosely defined and need further explanation with sources like Eliel or March's Advanced Organic Chemistry (my 4th edition from 1992 has its chapter 4, pages 94–164 devoted to the stereochemistry). Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Thanks Alsosaid1987 and Mike Turnbull for your perspectives and references. The IUPAC definitions are clearer than I realized, now that you mention that is wrong. That article really threw me for a loop. Axial chirality first line also appears vague and wrong . Axial chirality and Inherent chirality both claim helical chirality as their own. Thankfully IUPAC's "helicity" is clear enough. Precise rules would be great if they are widely used and accepted, but I mainly want to give at least brief useful definitions here in this article. I have only Mislow, and Clark et al (both "Intro to Stereochemisty") which aren't helping. I'll try to improve the situation and hope you'll be picky about my edits. –MadeOfAtoms (talk) 00:33, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Adamantanes
I noticed your recent edit to the article. You took out a diagram but left in the text which refers to it, hence leaving readers puzzled. Please could you fix that? The wording does indeed need changing as the example adamantane shown has several stereogenic units: four by my count, one at each tertiary carbon apex. User:Alsosaid1987 may like to chip in as they added the diagram, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you,. I removed the text.

title: Talk:Chirality (chemistry)


text:
Talk:Gyeongju Basin

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gyeongju Basin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051002171831/http://www.iranrivers.com/New%20Rivers/newin81/Azar/canada-18%20congeress%20in%20i%26d/HS_R.08.PDF to http://www.iranrivers.com/New%20Rivers/newin81/Azar/canada-18%20congeress%20in%20i%26d/HS_R.08.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) 06:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gyeongju Basin


text: Category:Bulgarian cuisine

title: Category:Bulgarian cuisine


text:
Vasile Tomoiagă

Vasile Tomoiagă (born 20 January 1964) is a retired rower from Romania. He competed at the 1984, 1988 and 1992 Olympics and won silver medals in the coxed pairs in 1984 and 1988. He won a silver and a bronze medal in this event at the 1985 and 1987 world championships, as well as a gold medal in the coxed fours in 1989.

title: Vasile Tomoiagă


text: User talk:216.204.233.26

title: User talk:216.204.233.26


text: Category:Hitchhiking

title: Category:Hitchhiking


text:
Right of possession

The right of possession is the right of a person to possession of property. It is a right of a person who currently holds property in hand or under their control to retain such possession, or alternatively for another person who claims superior title or right to possession of the property. There is a legal dictum in law that “possession is nine-tenths of the law”, meaning that a person in possession is presumed to have a right to such possession unless another person claiming possession proves they have a superior right to it.

Examples
Several examples have been given of the right of possession:
 * A business buys a vehicle and obtains financing. The entity purchasing the vehicle becomes the registered owner and has both possession and right of possession. The finance provider would be the lienholder and have a security interest that, upon default, would become a right of retention. If the business that bought the vehicle then rented it to someone, that individual would then have possession but would not have right of possession. The company renting the vehicle to them could repossess the vehicle, for example, if they hold the vehicle past the contract period. Also, if the rental company missed payments to the lienholder, the lienholder could also repossess the vehicle from the person having possession.

 * I purchase a pen at a store. I have all three attributes (possession, right of possession and right of property). If I loan the pen to someone, they have only possession. If they fail to give it back, they conceivably could have all three, if I was unable to find them, since it is unlikely it would be possible for me to prove that an inexpensive item such as a pen was borrowed and not returned.

 * An owner of a residential rental property wants a property management company to manage the property and to handle the necessary legal matters in the event an eviction (unlawful detainer) is necessary. So that the owner does not have to be personally named as the plaintiff in the unlawful detainer lawsuit, the property management contract includes an assignment of the right of possession so that the property management company may be the named plaintiff in the unlawful detainer action.

title: Right of possession


text:
NME Originals

The NME Originals is a collection of articles and reviews from the NME and Melody Maker magazines about one band or genre. The first issue was about the Beatles, published on 3 April 2002. Many issues in the series were produced by NME editorial director Steve Sutherland, but some of the later titles, such as those on the former Beatles' solo years and Mod, were under the editorship of Chris Hunt.

 * The Beatles - (April 2002)
 * Punk - (April 2002)
 * Oasis - (June 2002)
 * Manic Street Preachers - (October 2002)
 * U2 - (November 2002)
 * Nirvana - (February 2003)
 * Madchester - (April 2003)
 * Radiohead - (June 2003)
 * Bob Dylan - (August 2003) - an Uncut Legends edition
 * The Rolling Stones - (August 2003)
 * John Lennon - (October 2003)
 * 1960s - (December 2003)
 * The Who - (February 2004) - in conjunction with Uncut
 * Kurt Cobain - (March 2004) - an Uncut Legends edition
 * The Clash - (April 2004) - in conjunction with Uncut
 * Glam - (July 2004)
 * Gods of Rock - (September 2004)
 * Goth - (October 2004)
 * Bruce Springsteen - (December 2004)
 * 80s - (January 2005)
 * Mod - (April 2005)
 * The Solo Years of The Beatles - (June 2005)
 * Elvis - (April 2005)
 * Britpop - (Volume 2, Issue 4 2005)

title: NME Originals


text:
Mashmakhan/The Family

Mashmakhan/The Family is a 1995 album by the Canadian rock band Mashmakhan, compiling both of their early 1970s albums.

Production
Mashmakhan debuted in 1970 with three singles, "As the Years Go By", "Gladwin" and "Days When We Are Free", which were compiled into their self-titled debut album. Mashmakhan later launched their second album, The Family in 1971, which had little-to-no success, Mashmakhan started to realise that fact, and broke up shortly after. In 1995, both of the albums, were compiled into one compact disc for the first time. However, the last track of The Family, "Mr. Tree", was cut off due to time restraints.

Reception
The album was well received by critics, receiving a four and a half out of five star review from Allmusic. Allmusic critic and writer Keith Pettipas stated in his review, "Looking back, Mashmakhan was ahead of their time; they did progressive rock for a commercial audience," while progressive rock is primarily used for underground music. Pettipas went on and said Mashmakhan incorporated "flutes and strings" when "hard rock was dominant" and they were "one of the first Canadian acts to become international stars."

Personnel

 * Rayburn Blake – guitar, vocals
 * Pierre Senecal – guitar, keyboards, saxophone, vocals, wind, woodwind
 * Brian Edwards – bass, vocals
 * Jerry Mercer – drums, vocals

title: Mashmakhan/The Family


text:
Alexander Andreyevich Ivanov

Alexander Andreyevich Ivanov (Алекса́ндр Андре́евич Ива́нов; 28 July [ O.S. 16 July] 1806 – 15 July [ O.S. 3 July] 1858) was a Russian painter who adhered to the waning tradition of Neoclassicism but found little sympathy with his contemporaries. He was born and died in St. Petersburg. He has been called the master of one work, for it took 20 years to complete his magnum opus The Appearance of Christ Before the People.

Early years and education
Alexander Andreyevich was born to an art professor Andrey Ivanov. Aged 11, he entered the Imperial Academy of Arts and studied at his father's course together with Karl Briullov. For his good achievements he was awarded with two silver medals, in 1824 he received a golden medal for the painting 'Priam Asking Achilles to Return Hector's Body'. In 1827 he was honoured with the Big Gold Medal of the Imperial Academy of Arts for 'Joseph interprets the butler's and the baker's dreams' and was promoted to the XIV grade artists.

Ivanov's benefactors decided to send him abroad to study art, but required one more picture, thus he creates 'Bellerophon sent to a campaign against the Chimera'. In 1830 Ivanov departs to Europe, first in Germany, then to Italy.

Italian years
Ivanov's first works in Rome were copies of The Creation of Adam of the Sistine Chapel and some drafts of Biblical scenes. He dreamed to create an epic painting of the Messiah coming to people, but first he decided to try himself on lesser-scale picture. In 1834–1835 he finished Appearance of Jesus Christ to Maria Magdalena. The painting had great success both in Rome and St. Petersburg. The Russian Imperial Academy of Arts granted Ivanov an honorary academic degree in 1836.

He spent most of his life in Rome, where he befriended Gogol and was influenced by the Nazarenes.

The Appearance of Christ Before the People
Ivanov spent 20 years (1837–1857) in Rome, working on his greatest masterpiece The Appearance of Christ Before the People.

Death
Ivanov died of cholera on July 3, 1858. He was buried in St. Petersburg at the Novodevichy Cemetery. In 1936, he was reburied with the transfer of the monument to the Tikhvin Cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

Influence and critics
Critical judgement about Ivanov improved in the following generation. Some of the numerous sketches he had prepared for The Appearance have been recognized as masterpieces in their own right. The most comprehensive collection of his works can be viewed at the Russian Museum in St. Petersburg.

title: Alexander Andreyevich Ivanov


text:
Caine Prize

The Caine Prize for African Writing is an annual literary award for the best short story by an African writer, whether in Africa or elsewhere, published in the English language. Founded in the United Kingdom in 2000, the £10,000 prize was named in memory of businessman and philanthropist Sir Michael Harris Caine, former Chairman of Booker Group and of the Booker Prize management committee. The Caine Prize is sometimes called the "African Booker". The Chair of the Board is Ellah Wakatama, appointed in 2019.

Between 2020 and 2022 it was styled as the AKO Caine Prize for African Writing due to a three-year grant from Nicolai Tangen's AKO Foundation.

History and background
The Caine Prize is a registered charity with the aim of bringing African writing to a wider audience through an annual literary award. It is named after businessman and philanthropist Sir Michael Caine (1927–1999), former Chairman of Booker plc, who also chaired the "Africa95" arts festival and the Booker Prize management committee for almost 25 years. After his death, friends and colleagues established the prize to be awarded annually in his memory.

The prize was first awarded in 2000, to the Sudanese writer Leila Aboulela for her short story "The Museum", at the Zimbabwe International Book Fair in Harare. In its first year the Caine Prize attracted entries from 20 African countries.

The winner is announced at a dinner in July, formerly held in Oxford but most recently at SOAS, University of London, to which the shortlisted candidates are all invited. This is part of a week of activities for the candidates, including readings, book signings and press opportunities.

Additionally, the Caine Prize arranges writers' workshops that are held in a different African country each year.

Supporters
Among supporters of the prize are friends of Sir Michael Caine in the UK, United States and Africa, the Oppenheimer Memorial Trust, the Zochonis Foundation, the Marit & Hans Rausing Foundation, the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, the Headley Trust, the Esmee Fairbairn Charitable Trust, the David Alliance Family Foundation, the Cairns Charitable Trust, the Botwinick-Wolfensohn Family Foundation, the Sunrise Foundation, the Von Clemm Charitable Trust, the Royal Over-Seas League, Sarova Hotels, Bata Shoes (Kenya) Ltd and (Zimbabwe) Ltd and Kenya Airways.

The five African winners of the Nobel Prize for Literature have supported the Caine Prize as patrons: Wole Soyinka, Nadine Gordimer, Naguib Mahfouz, J. M. Coetzee and Abdulrazak Gurnah. Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, Sir Michael's widow, was founding President of the council and Jonathan Taylor the first Chair.

Critical reception
In 2011, Nigerian-American writer and critic Ikhide Ikheloa criticized the Caine Prize: "The creation of a prize for 'African writing' may have created the unintended effect of breeding writers willing to stereotype Africa for glory. The mostly lazy, predictable stories that made the 2011 shortlist celebrate orthodoxy and mediocrity. … The problem now is that many writers are skewing their written perspectives to fit what they imagine will sell to the West and the judges of the Caine Prize."

In 2019, a story was removed from the shortlist after "an allegation" led to admission of "the author’s failure to attribute a core source", i. e. Laleh Khadivi's 2014 story.

title: Caine Prize