This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Electronic color code article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Adopted orphan redirects for searching: Electronic colour code
Big Boys Race Our Young Girls But Violet Generally Wins Gold Silver is currently taught in technical schools. Sponsion (talk) 00:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Is blind beggars roast our young goats, but vegans go without actually in common use? I have never come across it whilst I have frequently come across the black bastards rape our young girls but virgins go without mnemonic. Or is this a location / era thing? SGBailey 23:56 Dec 14, 2002 (UTC)
[Note: I have no intention of starting an edit war here; if you want it in there I will not keep taking it out, though I will probably make it into a statement of fact instead of a recommendation. But the advice given above is good--think about it. --Len.]
It is in current use, but is perhaps too non-PC for something that minor. The easy way is to delete that paragraph entirely. I definitely do not want a "wiki made up" mnemonic. SGBailey 23:17 Dec 15, 2002 (UTC)
I'm Mr. Non-PC, but there's a difference between non-PC and bigoted. The fact that the mnemonic exists is fine; the suggestion that people go use it goes over the line. But out of curiosity, why does the origin of your mnemonics make a huge difference? Do you feel uncomfortable using memory aids which haven't been "blessed" in some way? What difference does it make? --Len.
This is an encyclopaedia, not a work of fiction. The mnemonic I listed is one in active use. I am not trying to suggest anyone should use it or any other mnemonic, it was just a report of how things are. As I said, it is easier to omit it. SGBailey 09:27 Dec 16, 2002 (UTC)
Hmmm...you seem to be missing the point, but I can't see much use in laboring it further. You can put the original in if you say, "Most American EEs are taught the color code using the following mnemonic..." since that would be a statement of fact. You won't get far putting it in there as a suggestion: "Hey folks, if you want to remember the color codes, try this!" However, putting a new suggestion into the article doesn't make it a work of fiction; though it would be "fiction" if somebody wrote, "Everyone uses this mnemonic...." You seem not to grasp the distinction I'm making here, though I don't think it's a deep and subtle one. Can you help clarify what you don't get here? --Len.
The mnemonic in question is not there to be read anymore but I have no trouble guessing which one it was. (Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.) Anyway, I would like to remark that it may not be PC but actually IS a good mnemonic. People tend to remember it rather well. This is probably significant in some way or another but that is beside the point. The point is a popular (and well working) mnemonic exists. I'd say, mention it as it is and perhaps if you feel people would be offended offer a PC alternative.
I see what's been going on...No wonder the second paragraph reads so weird 65.95.225.181 00:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
This is certainly not the first or last time that offensive, but historically correct material is continually deleted. I will add a note to the entry pointing to this discussion. I was taught the sequence as "Bad Boys Rape..." sequence in high school (Berkeley, 1969) by an instructor who said he had been taught a more offensive version as official curriculum in a Navy electronics tech class in the late 1950's. So far there has been no discussion of the tolerance sequence, which alternately goes "...for Gold or Silver" or "Get Some Now" for 5% and 10% or 5%, 10% and 20% (none). 64.142.50.87 17:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok. Here's how it works:
This means that if someone removes a notable mnemonic because they find it offensive, revert them.
At the same time, however:
This means that if someone adds a mnemonic that they made up, offensive or not, that's not already popular or notable, revert them. — Omegatron 03:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
The version I learned in 10th grade high school electronics class 34 years ago was "Bad Boys Ruin Our Young Girls But Violet Gives (or Goes) Willingly", which is slightly more PC but still has much of the flavor of the version you mention. It was also very popular among radio hams at the time, at least on the east coast of the USA, so I would mention it here simply because it was common.
IMHO, political correctness has no place in Wikipedia (except perhaps as the title of an NPOV article on that subject, if that's possible.) We're supposed to be descriptive, not proscriptive. If something is or was commonly used, that fact alone should be enough to merit a mention. User:Karn 24 May 2005
I'm pretty sure that the mnemonic is "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly." Its not very PC, but my high school physics teacher (who was a woman) told it to us after class. Furthermore, I never forgot the codes after that. At least its not racist like the "black bastards" one is. However, the "black bastards" mnemonic doesn't let you forget the order of Black and Brown.
The mnemonic that I learned is "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls, Beautiful Virgins Getting Worried". The internal logic of this sensational pronouncement is credible and the change in syllabic rhythm after the comma raises it to the heady realms of poetry. Cuddlyable3 09:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
This Wiki article more closely resembles a classic forum post argument than anything I have come to respect and appreciate Wikipedia for so far. But while I'm here... to confound and compound the problem, how about... 'Bobby Brown runs on yellow grass but Violet Grey walks'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.77.217.195 (talk) 06:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Any specific reason why the "Bad Boys Rapes..." is attributed to New Jersey? I am sure the phrase was more widespread during the 70s (as this was the mnemonic taught at Michigan Tech). Sidar 06:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
In the US Navy's avionics school, I learned "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly".
It should be noted that the above mnemonic is published in "Literature and Domination: Sex, Knowledge, and Power in Modern Fiction" By Booker, M. Keith, which is making a historical reference to the US Navy's usage of the "offensive" mnemonic. Therefore the mnemonic is notable and should be included in the article as a historical fact. The link below is Google's scan of the referenced text. http://books.google.com/books?id=EEt6pm0e5IAC&pg=PA105&ots=5WFzofxqUq&dq=%22bad+boys+rape+our+young+girls%22&sig=njfuNiBbH8FsQ6frNNPJQPenTs4
Some of the examples given are impure "semi-" mnemonics because they quote colour(s) literally. Thus the chastity of a female named Violet is often impugned, as is the controversial Black. Cuddlyable3 07:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I took the suggestion of the cleanup tag and the note to editors comment, and cleaned up the Mnemonics section. All mnemonics that remain are sourced to books (well, maybe one is just to a web page). Let's not mess this up. Feel free to add other iff you have a reliable source; what you remember being taught is not relevant. Dicklyon (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
And our collective memories are not to be totally discounted. This sort of thing was often not written down and is part of our cultural heritage (for better or worse). Remember, it is beer swilling Engineers that used them.
I learned this from my 10th grade electronics class teacher in 1969. It's not just some imagined phrase... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.215.15.171 (talk) 04:35, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
"Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly" is what my father taught me, as I grew up with an electrician father in the 1960s who had a garage full of electronics experiments. Then in vocational high school, where I studied electricity and electronics from Sept. 1973 - May 1977, that was the mnemonic taught us in an oral tradition. At that time there were ZERO girls in electronics, electricity, and other traditionally male-only shops. However, when I again took an electronics course in 1990, and we had several females in our class, and those of us who already had an electrical/electronics education brought up the traditional-but-unsanctioned mnemonic device to our teacher (in a wink and nod to the male chauvinist world in which we were raised), our teacher told us that would NOT be the mnemonic we would be using in this class. I draw a blank as to what mnemonic he had us use instead, the forgetfulness of which is a testament to the strength of the "true" and original mnemonic in culture. Since the original mnemonic was common (in the most literal definition of the term "common") to everybody in the electronics world at that time, it boggles the mind to think there are some here who want us to pretend "Bad Boys Rape..." wasn't an artifact of history. Perhaps anecdotal evidence is rightly not permitted in an encyclopedia, but taken collectively, "Bad Boys Rape..." was the prevailing mnemonic of the period. Personally, I think it is as outdated as owning slaves, but my opinion now is only retrospective. We can't help the Zeitgeist of the times in which we are a member. Was anybody taught any other mnemonic for remembering resister color codes before 1990? I'm guessing not, but you are invited to prove me wrong. giggle (talk) 15:48, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
There is simply no reason to have all these mnemonics listed in this article. Yes, I realize they are all sourced. But certainly some are referenced more than others or in more prominent sources, and we should limit the article to them. I'm not sure what it is about this section, but the desire to add every sourced mnemonic under the sun really distracts from the article. jheiv talk contribs 03:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
There was no discussion about how to tidy up this section so I split it off onto its own page, List of electronic color code mnemonics. The Electronic color code's page was mostly the mnemonic section which was ridiculous. I'm sure there will soon be an AfD on the list page, so if you're interested in seeing these survive, please add it to your watchlist and participate in the AfD discussion. jheiv talk contribs 18:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it not central idea of wikipedia to be a progressive source for information? If we continue to propagate negative connotations, I think that there are greater harms done in the name of preserving 'the way we used to do it'. I think that we don't need to be stringent in our 'PC' analysis of articles, but at the same time, there is no service done in maintaining these acronyms... imho.Jarekanderson 01:15, 09 September 2007 (EST)
The line about not including what one was taught is rather silly. I was taught a different way of doing it...at DEVRY, by my INSTRUCTORS. It's not offensive in any way and yet I don't see it listed. It's not something I can link to a book source, sorry. However I can tell you that hundreds of people who have attended Devry of Phoenix will be able to recite it back to you.
Black Berries Ripen On Yonder Gates But Violets Grow Wild —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.67.237 (talk) 17:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
1) I learned "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly" In 1971 high school electronics class, from Mr. Anderson Elk Grove HS Illinois.
2) Why use scientific notation in the color code multiplier? 10 to the zero power is just stoopid! Please keep it simple!
...Willingly for Gold & Silver! Don't forget about the tolerance bands! Stacybsmith1975 (talk) 20:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
I didn't know this article existed, and I just made this table for Wikibooks:
Color | 1st band | 2nd band | 3rd band | Multiplier | Tolerance |
Black | 0 | 0 | 0 | ×100 | |
Brown | 1 | 1 | 1 | ×101 | ±1% (F) |
Red | 2 | 2 | 2 | ×102 | ±2% (G) |
Orange | 3 | 3 | 3 | ×103 | |
Yellow | 4 | 4 | 4 | ×104 | |
Green | 5 | 5 | 5 | ×105 | ±0.5% (D) |
Blue | 6 | 6 | 6 | ×106 | ±0.25% (C) |
Violet | 7 | 7 | 7 | ×107 | ±0.1% (B) |
Gray | 8 | 8 | 8 | ±0.05% | |
White | 9 | 9 | 9 | ||
Gold | ×0.1 | ±5% (J) | |||
Silver | ×0.01 | ±10% (K) | |||
None | ±20% (M) |
it is better in some ways, worse in others. the markup is very ugly and the colors are awful in firefox (i changed some it looks better now). streamline it if you can. and convert to pretty hex colors please. and the blank cells look ugly in internet explorer. i don't know why. Someone should merge the best qualities of each, make them better, and put them both in this article and on Wikibooks:Electronics:Component_Identification#4-band_Axial_Resistors. Please? - Omegatron 19:44, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
The current table in the article links to "Template:Electronic colour code," and this contains an error in my opinion. When the color black is a significant, it should not be "-". it should be "0". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.201.214 (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
what exactly are they supposed to mean? Plugwash 03:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Is there a standard color code for wires based on there voltage? ie. red - 5 Vdc
black - DC gnd
etc. If so where can I find it. Thanks
I'm unaware of a citation, but it appears (IE this is deduction, original research, and doesn't belong on the main page), that it's preferred to write zeros on the right rather then the left when there is a choice -- that is, 100 is brown black brown, not black brown red. (This makes sense, as it gives two significant digits rather then one.)
If somebody could find a reference for this and add it to the body of the article, that'd be lovely. Theorbtwo 00:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
i found inside a wireless phone a 5 band resistor thats blue violet black gold and white, wtf means the white stripe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minimegahyper (talk • contribs) 00:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure this sentence meaningful in the abstract : In the days of classical chassis televisions, overheated resistors would change their color bands, making it virtually impossible to distinguish brown from red from orange. 11:42, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
--Wtshymanski (talk) 15:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
From the cited links:
"Discussion of potentially objectionable content should not focus on its offensiveness but on whether it is appropriate to include in a given article."
The history of sexism and racism in electrical engineering absolutely has valid merit, but is tangentially related to resistors and resistor color codes. There is already an appropriate mnemonic that doesn't include sexual violence, and a link to many others in a section specifically on the history of the resistor mnemonics, which is ideally where it belongs. Hence, the phrase in question does not facilitate understanding of resistors when introducing historical context showing sexism in electrical engineering: the exact same subject matter on resisters can be learned the same way in the absence of this phrase.
On the plus side, inclusion of it facilitates deeper learning, but on the con side there are many other social, economic, and cultural aspects of the resistor that are cite-able, valid information and NOT included, as they would make the article far too large, for example: impact to local economies where resistors are made due to political trends, referring to fabrication disruptions in China during the late 1990's.
In fact, the entire mnemonic paragraph could be moved to the mnemonic page, as the main page is already quite lengthy and the mnemonics are actually more about electrical engineering studying techniques than they are about resistors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.55.55.41 (talk) 02:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
This table, although it looks like other tables, it's unique because it introduces the three columns in the left specifying the type of unit (H, F, Ohm) and one more important thing: it displays graphicaly the "real" rank given by the 3rd ring to each type of unit (BK:unit's-BN:100's-1-RD:k's-10k's-YL:100k's-GN:1M's-BL:10M's-VI:100M's), one may be mislead when looking at the power of ten given by this 3rd ring.. for the 2nd ring parameter always multiplies by "10" on top of the other.
Obviously for less than 2% tolerance, with one more ring, there is another table
Ring color | Significant figures | Multiplier | Tolerance | Temperature coefficient | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Name | Code | RAL[nb 1] | Percent [%] | Letter | [ppm/K] | Letter | |||
None | – | – | – | – | ±20 | M | – | ||
Pink | PK | 3015 | – | ×10−3[2] | ×0.001 | – | – | ||
Silver | SR | – | – | ×10−2 | ×0.01 | ±10 | K | – | |
Gold | GD | – | – | ×10−1 | ×0.1 | ±5 | J | – | |
Black | BK | 9005 | 0 | ×100 | ×1 | – | 250 | U | |
Brown | BN | 8003 | 1 | ×101 | ×10 | ±1 | F | 100 | S |
Red | RD | 3000 | 2 | ×102 | ×100 | ±2 | G | 50 | R |
Orange | OG | 2003 | 3 | ×103 | ×1000 | ±0.05[2] | W | 15 | P |
Yellow | YE | 1021 | 4 | ×104 | ×10000 | ±0.02[2][nb 2][3] | P | 25 | Q |
Green | GN | 6018 | 5 | ×105 | ×100000 | ±0.5 | D | 20 | Z[nb 3] |
Blue | BU | 5015 | 6 | ×106 | ×1000000 | ±0.25 | C | 10 | Z[nb 3] |
Violet | VT | 4005 | 7 | ×107 | ×10000000 | ±0.1 | B | 5 | M |
Gray | GY | 7000 | 8 | ×108 | ×100000000 | ±0.01[2][nb 4][nb 2][3] | L (A) | 1 | K |
White | WH | 1013 | 9 | ×109 | ×1000000000 | – | – |
--Mcapdevila (talk) 14:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
The 'body-end-dot' or 'body-tip-spot' system was used for radial-lead composition resistors sometimes found in very old equipment; - we should quantify "very old" - we're not talking about my 2002 1.8 megapixel camera here. I've seen body-end-dot in tube gear but when did it decline in use? End of WWII or earlier? Or later? I don't recall seeing it in the 1960's tube-type TV sets I used to tear apart as a kid. This coding scheme was listed in my 1979 ARRL handbook but was gone in the 1991 edition - not sure when it was dropped from the handbook. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I would say they were no longer used in consumer equipment made after the 1930s. Certainly by that time they were in serious competion with the stripe code system, and looked decidedly ugly in comparison! BTW: why has my edit gone into some kind of time warp, where you see it in the editable text, but not on the actual page? 193.60.63.224 (talk) 11:30, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
i've changed the radio amateur's handbook reference to an earlier version (50th from 55th), since this version has an isbn. the page number is the same. Alecjw (talk) 19:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
there aren't as many resistors as examples, and the first resistor doesn't match up with any of the examples... Ws04 (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
In the photo showing 4 through hole "resistors", the first one (the green one) is an inductor. I'm not sure of the value because I've never seen a 5 band coded inductor. 560 uhenries +/- 2%? But there's no silver band to represent military grade.
But if its green/blue it should be an inductor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:420:293:1262:4454:296B:98B5:3811 (talk) 02:04, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
An edit in 2006 introduced the use of 1k2 to mean 1.2 k ohm. I see numerous Google hits where people ask "What the hell is 4k7?". Clearly some writers or vendors are using 1k2 and 4k7, or readers would not be puzzled about it. In a check of electronics books published in the last 10 years and electronics magazines from this year I found schematics and parts lists only using "1.2 k ohm" terms. I tagged this article's use of the "1k2" as needing a citation. If someone has a textbook or industry standard explaining the 1k2 terminology, it should be added to the article, to satisfy verifiability. Whose neologism is it? When was it introduced? In what countries is it predominant? Is it SI nomenclature, and does any Wikipedia manual of style call for it? Claims of "I've seen it" are insufficient, as are arguments that "Periods are hard to see." I've never had a problem seeing periods in printed, handwritten or photocopied circuit diagrams or part lists. Edison (talk) 23:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
In my opinion the "green" in the color table:
Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 23:16, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Have been updating some of my tables to the latest standard, IEC 60062:2016. In the standard, and I might be reading this wrong, it has Tolerance for Orange as +/-0.05, Yellow as +/-0.02 and Grey as +/-0.01. So which is correct now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.135.86.140 (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
All electronic components are small - at least, any that have color coding on them. Certainly anything mounted by its wire leads is small. Mustn't waste the readers' time. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
What year was the RMA resistor color code specification released by the Radio Manufacturers Association (RMA)? We need an exact year instead of "1920s". Just a reminder that RMA created color codes for other types of parts too, so please don't get them mixed up with resistor colors. Thanks in advance! • Sbmeirow • Talk • 08:52, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
I am rusty on this, but the photo indicates that the resistor is: 'A 2260 Ω, 1%-precision resistor with 5 color bands (E96 series), from top, 2-2-6-1-1; the last two brown bands indicate the multiplier (×10) and the tolerance (1%).'
My color chart (I am cheating and using an App) says that is Band 1: 2, Band 2: 2, Band 3: 6. That would translate to 2,2,x1M or 22M ohms. Not the 2260 ohms in the caption.
I realize now that, this being a precision resistor, has three bands for the number and the 4th band is the multiplier. None of the descriptions that I found, under resistors, explains this.
Would it make sense to have a subcategory under resistors to explain the difference between 4 color bands and 5?
Cite error: There are <ref group=nb>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a ((reflist|group=nb))
template (see the help page).