Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

July 12

proverb

can you tell me about the proverb Practise makes man perfect in about 100 words —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.52.26 (talk) 02:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The proverb is usualy stated as simply "Practice makes perfect". Googleing that give me this [1]. APL (talk) 04:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think these are equivalent, and perhaps that's the point. For one, I've only heard "Practice makes perfect" as the familiar adage. The act of "practicing," I've always understood in the sense cited by APL, indicates repeating an action as the route to "perfecting" its performance. This is not identical to making the person perfect per se. The high utility of practice relates to a Latin proverb, Repetitio mater studiorum est – "Repetition [e.g. rote memorization] is the mother of study." In this context, it supports that particular form of pedagogy. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

If you practice writing 100 word essays you'll surely reach a level of perfection that is above desiring the help of the reference desk. -LambaJan (talk) 20:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

iq question, once more, this time, i remember it exactly

a 1970's looking car is on a bridge with similar looking ends. this is the sideways view, so, i can't see any headlights or tailights. there's nothing more in the diagram.also, it's a small diagram, so there's no diagram of the driver. (there are cars with three windows, like toyota innova)

well, my friend noticed that the left side of the car(our left side) is a little nearer to the ground than the right side, as if passengers were sitting there. so he concluded that the driver was on the right side and so the car was moving to the right.

did this help you? is there any other answer?

i know the diagram is very uninformative... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.248.231 (talk) 02:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

How would you know if the car wasn't moving in reverse? Again, I don't see this as being a very well-posed question. It's certainly got nothing to do with IQ. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure your teacher wants you to work this out on your own and not ask internet strangers to help. Regardless, this sounds like the sort of puzzle that depends on noticing some small detail on the diagram, without seeing it we'd just be guessing. APL (talk) 04:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The car is not moving.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

As regards the puzzle's exact wording here, are you quite sure it's "car" - and restricted to the sense of a conventional passenger vehicle... or might it be some form of commercial vehicle? You see, I'm familiar with a version of the puzzle, and interpreting the configuration of visible features along with comparable features that can be imputed for the unseen side, is the key to its solution. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

N.B. For a similar comment, see what Grutness responded (later) to your earlier posting, "iq question". -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if you've misremembered the question and it was supposed to be a bus, not a car. A bus will have a door on the pavement/sidewalk side, so if you know which country the bus is designed for and which side of the road they drive on, you can tell very easily which end is the front. - 79.71.249.109 (talk) 11:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In a similar vein, if you can see doorhandles, side mirrors or mudflaps then you can tell which end is the front. Does "similar looking ends" include front and back windshields or just the bumper areas? If the picture shows a difference, the front windshield is the one with the gentler slope. While these things could help determine which end is front, except for mudflaps none of them will indicate direction of travel. What I mean is that even if you determine where the front is, the car could still be travelling in reverse gear. When you learn the answer, please come back and let us know. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Fresca Healthy?

Is Fresca soft drink really as healthy as it is marketed to be? On the nutrional label on the back, it claims to have 0 calories, 0 sugar, almost 0 everything- very much like water. Is Fresca as harmless as water? Acceptable (talk) 03:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not healthy. It has an artificial sweetener, which is bad for you, and lots of acid, which is bad for your teeth. I'd stick with water with a few drops of lemon juice for flavor. Or you might want to actually get some vitamins and minerals from your drink by going with fruit juice or milk. StuRat (talk) 04:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Stu, do you realize that your links don't support your claims and that you prescription for avoiding acid in your drink is to add acid to your drink? And that you didn't mention the medical claims against fruit juice (far tougher on the teeth, etc.) Rmhermen (talk) 14:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a matter of degree. A few drops of lemon juice adds far less acid than you find in any soda. And the links I provided bring up the medical conerns on both counts, listing both arguments for and against. StuRat (talk) 05:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It may also depend on how you feel about glycerol ester of wood rosin and brominated vegetable oil.

Atlant (talk) 18:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

As a slight aside, sucralose could totally kick aspartame's ass in a bar fight. Current scientific evidence seems to side with it being safe, though there are possibly immune reactions at 750 mg/kg bw/day (for an average human, that's 5000 Splenda packets per day). Long-term studies to check for possibly accumulative effects would still be helpful though. 24.76.161.28 (talk) 02:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I once drank a couple cans of that stuff after having quite a few cold beers...I woke up feeling like spiders were crawling all over me. I stay away from it. cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 23:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I will stay away from any artificial sweetener until they have 30 years of safe usage under their belt, as it seems to take about that long for the long-term consequences of things like trans-fats to become widely known. I see no reason to take any chances with any nasty chemicals until then. Meanwhile, I'll either stick with sugar or use stevia, a natural sweetener that does have over 30 years of safe usage under it's belt (in Japan and elsewhere). StuRat (talk) 05:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

My ancestors lived well for many millenia drinking H₂O. Artificial colors, sweeteners, flavors, and carbonation provide no benefit in achieving optimal hydration. Edison (talk) 05:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

They also lived 'well' for many millenia without antibiotics. Not saying that drinking water is a bad thing, or that drinking fizzy sweet liquids is good, but that's not really a relevant point. What things provide benefits for optimal hydration vary from circumstance to circumstance; if you had diarrhoea, plain water would not provide optimal hydration. Sorry for wandering off the point... Blah. 79.66.54.186 (talk) 17:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Unless you've got significant Native American ancestry, odds are they didn't. Anywhere with high population densities has problems with waterborne diseases. The European solution was beer (alcohol kills bacteria); the Asian solution was tea (so does boiling water). --Carnildo (talk) 23:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

also, excessive consumption of phosphate, as in carbonated soft drinks, leads to weak bones (being composed of calcium phosphate you need to keep the two ions balanced in intake for optimal bone formation).

as for artificial sweeteners in general, the question is not which is best, but just why? aside from diabetics and tooth decay, there has never been any demonstration that artificial sweeteners, particularly in soft drinks, have any appreciable improvement over sugar sweetened soft drinks. they just released the results of yet another similar study not that long ago. and that's just the publicly funded studies; you can assume the sweetener and soft drink companies are running these studies privately all the time trying to get some kind of marketing handle, and if they did you'd hear about it. it's not as paradoxical as one might think; it's not like you spend your day pouring soft drinks and carbohydrates down your throat as much as you can get your hands on, so altering the amount available affects your intake. in fact your hunger and thirst are under the control of a lot of things, but very definitely including your body set points for weight, blood sugar, etc. and it's not too surprising that an extra teaspoon of sugar at one part of the day will mean you intake a teaspoon less at another point; and if you replace that teaspoon with artificial sweetener, then you get that missing teaspoon somewhere else. some of the studies of artificial sweetener have quantified this effect, seeing subjects unconsciously increasing their food intake to maintain the same total caloric uptake when sugar is replaced on a double blind basis, totally unconsciously. the ugly side is that when the sugar is returned on a double blind basis, replacing the artifical sweetener, the total volume intake remains the same, and the calories go up, higher than they were to start with, completely unknown to the subject. again, it's not completely surprising that there should be an asymmetry in appetite modification, given that for a billion years or so our ancestors (back to the bacteria) were in danger of starving most of the time. so, your body doesn't like it when it's deprived of calories and tries to replace them, but when a few more are supplied, it doesn't feel the need to alter behavior to avoid them.Gzuckier (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Brain drops keep falling from my head...

A few days ago there was a Palestinian terrorist who drove a tractor into a crowd of Israelis, and this was covered on BBC News. The shocking part, to us poor innocent Americans, is that they showed somebody shoot him in the head with his brains splattering out. Is this sort of thing usual for BBC News ? StuRat (talk) 04:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall seeing that on the BBC coverage for the UK. The BBC usually edits out all the scenes that it considers unsuitable for viewing on the part of the public. I guess it's all part of the nanny state ethos that is so prevalent over here. On the other hand we have all seen - many times - the clip of JFK losing some of his brains in the Zapruder film. Perhaps that has some sort of historical interest that overrides the censor. On another tack it strikes us here in the UK as odd that gruesome scenes as you describe are shown with freedom in the US but the slightest hint of nipples, nates or nudity are censored with disproportional rigour. (nice headline btw) Richard Avery (talk) 06:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Now I'm in need of a translation for Americans...what are "nates" ? StuRat (talk) 13:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

medical term for buttocks, used for euphony. Richard Avery (talk) 13:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know whether this is still the case, but around the late 1980s I (expat American) was told that scripted television programming (i.e. not documentary or newscasts) in the UK included explicit representations of physical violence unacceptable to US audiences. For example, in a fistfight the American TV viewer would see the swing and hear the impact but not view the punch connecting, let alone the aftermath gore, which would be routine for the UK audience. I don't know whether this held for "foreign films" broadcast on network TV at that time before cable and satellite. (And btw, a "nicer headline" would have stopped after the word "falling"...!) -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I get the impression that TV is censored much more in the US than in the UK. The US seems to censor everything except bloody violence - sex is avoided at all costs, profanity is bleeped out (even in adult shows) and even T-shirt slogans are covered up with fuzziness (why is that BTW?). In the UK, particularly after the 9pm watershed, I am never surprised to see sex or bloody violence, or hear profanity in the UK. The exception would appear to be in UK news broadcasts where I have almost never seen blood and gore where it involves real people in real-life situation. I believe this is done to protect the privacy of real people and their realtives. UK news even goes as far as showing out of focus pictures or filming people's feet. Astronaut (talk) 12:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I think T-shirt slogans are blurred because of copyright issues. The T-shirt maker could argue in court that people watched the TV show because of the witty saying on the T-shirt, and that they should therefore be compensated. StuRat (talk) 13:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about the man driving a bulldozer into a bus. The footage of the man being shot was shown on BBC News, but only during the 10pm bulletin. The editor has blogged about the decision here and the BBC have responded to the complaints they received here (they say that "on reflection, we felt that the pictures featured on Wednesday's News at Ten did not strike the right editorial balance between the demands of accuracy and the potential impact on the programme's audience"). — Matt Eason ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 13:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

In the US, there is a distinction between fictional violence and real violence. In fictional violence just about anything goes (with the possible exception of child murders), whereas real violence is heavily self-censored, with murders or violent assaults rarely shown. And, of course, it also depends on the media. Much more violence is acceptable in a movie rated for adults than on TV rated for kids. I suspect, based on the comments above, that BBC News doesn't show real violence against allies (like the Israelis who were killed), but does show it aginst enemies (such as Palestinian terrorists). StuRat (talk) 12:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I would dispute StuRat's suspicion of a pro-allies bias to BBC news coverage. In this case, it strikes me as obvious that they had footage of the Palastinian's death but did not have footage of the earlier Israeli deaths because their correspondant wasn't there at that time - the editor's blog supports that view. However, the BBC does attract criticism from some quarters for a supposed bias against Israel. I really do not subscribe to that view, and find the coverage by BBC news to be as balanced as the best in he world; even if that means it does not glorify the actions of off-duty Israeli soldiers. Astronaut (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Why, Astronaut, do you suppose that the BBC's failure to broadcast footage of the killing and wreckage spree that preceded the shooting can be explained by the nonavailability of any such material? It's all the more likely that it was available, given that the events unfolded in broad daylight on a weekday in a populous city, in close proximity to the Israel Broadcasting Authority's headquarters, and were possibly filmed by bystanders as well. If we're into speculating, how likely is it that Israelis, public or private, would refuse to make photos available to foreign media that show a possible terror attack in progress? Even if such footage had to pass Israeli military or police censorship, the value of broadcast coverage would probably expedite that process. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The editor's blog says: "The incident happened near the BBC's bureau and our correspondent immediately ran to the scene. He caught on camera the man being shot dead." Yes, they could have sought to obtain other footage as well, but if they did it is not mentioned in the blog. It's not a bad assumption to make. Astronaut (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of anti-Israel bias in BBC news reportage (if it purports to be objective, which perhaps it does not?) generally center upon a disproportionate presence/absence of context and content in coverage and background of actions by Israeli forces vs. those of the Palestinians and related Arab bodies. The "actions of off-duty Israeli soldiers." in this incident and the recent Mercaz HaRav Yeshiva massacre, are similar if not identical to those which might be taken in such circumstances — i.e. hot pursuit of a rampaging murderer still armed and dangerous — by an off-duty policeman in one of your Western countries. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I was just pointing out that in my experience, the BBC news coverage is usually free of bias. If you feel the BBC's coverage was biased, I would be interested in your opinion on where/how the coverage was biased. Astronaut (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you judge its being usually bias-free based on your experience of comparing its coverage of this particular issue to that of other media outlets, biased or otherwise? As for me, I'll re-state as above: my being aware of allegations of bias in BBC reporting, the nature of which involves selectively withholding information that would cast Palestinians or Arabs in an unfavorable and Israelis in a favorable or sympathetic light, in the context of the ongoing internecine and cross-border conflict. While I myself have only minimal exposure to foreign news coverage, I'm personally resigned to what I consider the impossibility of those media's presenting a balanced picture in these circumstances that are overdetermined and far from zero-sum. "In war, it isn't a matter of who's right, but who's left..." -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

However you'll also find there is the opposite, allegations of bias in BBC reporting involving witholding information that would cast Israelis in an unfavourable light and Palestinians or Arabs in an unfavourable & sympathetic light. As well as allegations that the overall presentation and assumptions made, and words used are biased towards Israeli and against Palestinians and Arabs. (My personal opinion which I will not discuss any further is that the BBC is better then most American media but is far from perfect and definitely biased towards the Western view which in general favours Israel more then the Palestinians and other Arabs. One needs to watch and read other sources, e.g. Al Jazeera, that are not necessarily less biased but do provide a different context and think for yourself to get a more complete picture. I would agree with DJ that it's inherently impossible for any media to be free from bias. Some of course, e.g. Fox News, don't even seem to try. ) Nil Einne (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

If you find BBC news biased DONT watch BBC News 24.. which approaches 'north korean' like approval of all british actions.. or maybe that's what you have been watching.. Maybe having to read the news 24hrs a day gets boring, and the readers like to add a little emphasis - just for fun?87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes - it's unusual, practically exceptional. However images of dead bodies are shown on UK tv, for some reason foreign dead are acceptable to show, british dead not? (end of rant).87.102.86.73 (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC) There is usually a warning before eg "some viewers may find the following distressing.."87.102.86.73 (talk) 20:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I watched a segment on CNN last night about pilots of remote aircraft flying missions in Iraq from their computers in the US. They showed a clip of 4-5 people being blown up - killed, right in front of you - and then the guy talks about how he likes to go to Taco Bell for lunch. Talk about distasteful. They didn't even acknowledge that human beings had just been killed. Meanwhile pictures of an American soldier in shackles is preceded by a dramatic "some viewers may be disturbed by this footage" warning. Plasticup ^T/C 14:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Distance seems to be a big factor in US news. A long range photo that shows no detail is deemed acceptable while a close-up of body parts is not. StuRat (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

English accents in star wars?

Why do all the "bad guys" (those that are human) in the Star Wars movies (the empire) all speak with stilted English accents? Are they all from england? And why does Dark Vader pick up an English accent when he turns evil, as Hayden Christensen never had an English accent as Anakin? Or is Darth Vader faking an English accent (a la Madonna) to fit in? That has always bugged me. Homotlfqa83 (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Darth Vader doesn't have (or fake) an English accent, though, and Madonna was raised by parents who spoke French and Italian. You're right about the other Star Wars villains, though. I think it's to make them sound stuffy and formal to American audiences, emphasizing the staunch, militaristic feeling of the Empire. --Masamage ♫ 06:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the internal shots in the first movie were all shot at Elstree Studios in London, so they probably just used local actors. I'm not a big star wars fan though so I could be wrong.Iiidonkeyiii (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I hate to burst the bubble but English accents were obviously not used to identify the bad guys in Star Wars. To prove that I need say only two words - Alec Guiness. Likewise Ewan MacGregor, who deliberately gave young Obi-Wan English accent and speech patterns "aware that he was going to grow up to be Alec Guiness". DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

There was a while when British actors were used as the bad guys in a lot of US movies. It became a bit of a running joke, in fact - see [[2]]. I think its justb another example of the cultural stereotype where the "old empire" is always seen as being disreputable by the "new empire" (the US thinks the Brits are shady, just as the Brits thought the French were, and so on back to disparaging comments made by the Romans about the Greeks). And no, Darth Vader's accent doesn't in any way sound British, nor does it sound like he's faking one...and neither does Madonna. Grutness...wha? 12:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I heard it was because hollywood likes to give the bad guys a different accent so the audiencies can easily tell them from the good guys. At first it was non-english accents (often enemies of the US - German or Russian), but then they latched on to idea that British actors were much more available and spoke english anyway so they didn't need a voice coach, and it made it easier for the audience to understand them.

As for Star Wars, there would have been a lot of British extras, but the main characters were still played by their regular actors. I'm not sure about the putting-on of accents, but of the principle bad guys, Palpatine was played by Ian McDiarmid (British), Grand Moff Tarkin was played by Peter Cushing (British), Count Dooku was played by Christopher Lee (British), and Darth Vader was played by David Prowse (British, but voiced by American actor James Earl Jones) then by Hayden Christensen (Canadian). However, several of the good guys were also played by British actors: Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alec Guinness and Ewan McGregor) Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson), C-3PO and R2-D2 (Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker respectively). Astronaut (talk) 12:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Liam Neeson is Irish. Malcolm XIV (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think a more glaring example than starwars is Scar in the lion king. How is it that only one lion in the whole pride has an english accent, and he happens to be the bad lion? I will say that "english villains" tend to be clever and devious, which I suppose is something like a compliment. TastyCakes (talk) 16:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Americans like to think of themselves as loose, informal, cocky, Wild West gunslingers. They see sophistication and ornateness as being associated with being effeminate. They see the British as very effeminate compared to them, concerned with tea and peace rather than rustling cattle. A sophisticated enemy with a British accent is actually effeminate despite being evil—effeminate bad guys are a big thing for Americans. (It goes without saying that these visions of themselves and of others are wholly fabricated, part of a deep national mythos. Unfortunately that mythos often translates into policy—note the ridiculous notion held by a great deal of Americans that they need to have handguns in case the US government "gets too big for its britches," when it is clear that a few yokels with 9mm pistols would not have a snowball's chance in hell to overthrow a totalitarian state, and the US government has no fear of internal revolution no matter what.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe it is because (I believe they had said this on a special) that either most actors on the original Star Wars were English except for the main characters and most of it was filmed in a studio somewhere in England so that was why they used mostly English actors. In fact, though he is Scottish, Ewan McGregor's uncle played in one or more of the films, so they probably stuck with local actors from that side of the ocean to play the other roles and Darth Vader was either English and forgot to hide his accent after a while or being in those surroundings rubbed off on him, maybe like Madonna. Take that how you will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.241.20 (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't put too much stock in the location for accents. Films are filmed all over the place and don't reflect that in the accents of the actors. Actors often have very different "natural" accents than their "screen" ones. (I was particularly shocked to see a clip of Jamie Bamber talking informally off-camera. I had totally bought into his "American" accent in Battlestar Gallactica; and to see that he is actually British was horrifying, weird.) Rest assured, if they didn't want British accents, they wouldn't have had them. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Very true. British actors (with the exception of Sean Connery) can usually do pretty good imitations of foreign accents - consider the actor once regarded as the epitome of playing "upper class twit" characters, Hugh Laurie. If they hand't wanted British accents for the roles, they wouldn't have had them. Grutness...wha? 00:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

If you watch some of the original footage they filmed for the first film (God, I'm a geek), you'll hear a lot of the extras speaking with various British accents. These were dubbed over for the actual film, including Aunt Beru and the beings in the cantina. So it was definitely a choice. Incidentally, on some of that footage you can also hear Chewbacca speaking lines of dialogue, before the roars are dubbed in! 79.66.67.219 (talk) 02:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

This is entirely based on personal research (well, watching too many movies) but as far as I can tell the tendency of Hollywood to use bad guys with British accents entirely stems from Alan Rickman's performance in Die Hard. Anyone able to contradict that (with obvious exceptions of cases where the bad guys had to be Brits, like Revolutionary War movies). DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Clearly that is not the case, since Star Wars (1977) came out some time before Die Hard (1988). It dates back much further than that.

For example, if you watch Spartacus (1960), the noble, heroic gladiators and slaves all have American accents, whereas their effete, corrupt, villainous and tyrannical Roman overlords are all played with English accents. Similarly, in Ben-Hur (1959), the noble, heroic Hebrews all have American accents, whereas their effete, corrupt, villainous and tyrannical Roman overlords are all - surprise! - played with English accents. At its most ridiculous, in The Adventures of Robin Hood (1953), the noble, heroic Englishmen all have American accents (even though Robin himself is played by a Tasmanian), whereas their Norman overlords, being effete, corrupt, villainous and tyrannical, are naturally played with English accents.

What this really boils down to is the ridiculous self-aggrandising United States creation myth, specifically the "heroic rebels versus decadent imperialist overlords" schtick which is drummed into every American schoolchild from the First Grade on. In point of fact, both sides in what you laughably call the "Revolutionary War" would have spoken with pretty much the same accent, given how recently many of the participants had moved to the colonies and given that many of the Loyalists were colonials themselves. Of course, that doesn't stop Hollywood painting the British as sneering, brutish proto-Nazis... Malcolm XIV (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

i think at some level there's kind of a homophobic subtext; i don't want to make too much of that, but i don't know how else to call it; the "effete" sissy who speaks prissily. see also the german accents of lots of bad guys. Gzuckier (talk) 20:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

jet aircrafts

i need a list of top ten jet aircraft(used in defense purpose) with their speed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.11.44.213 (talk) 19:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Some names for you: Mig-31 'Foxhound', Mig-25 'Foxbat' and SR-71 Blackbird (which was a spy plane, but military - I'm not sure how strictly you're taking 'defense' to be defined). These are the fastest three that I'm aware of, all in the region of Mach 3 (although the Foxbat's structural integrity was extremely poor at such speeds). Are you including experimental aircraft such as the XB-70 Valkyrie? Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 20:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you meant top 10 by use? or by effectivness? or by speed (see above) ???87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

• 1. X-15, Mach 6.72, 354,200 feet
• 2. SR-71 Blackbird, (YF-12) Mach 3.2+ 85,000+ feet
• 3. MiG-25R Foxbat-B, Mach 3.2 123,524 feet
• 3. X-2, Mach 3.2 126,200 feet
• 4. XB-70 Valkyrie, Mach 3.1 77,350 feet
• 5. MiG-31 Foxhound, Mach 2.83 67,600 feet
• 6. MiG-25 Foxbat, (Ye-155) Mach 2.8 118,900 feet
• 7. F-15 Eagle, Mach 2.5 60,000 feet
• 7. F-111 Aardvark, Mach 2.5 60,000+ feet
• 8. X-1, Mach 2.435 90,440 feet
• 9. Su-24 Fencer, Mach 2.4 57,400 feet
• 10. Tu-144 Charger, Mach 2.35 59,055 feet
• 10. MiG-23 Flogger, Mach 2.35 60,700 feet
• 10. Su-27 Flanker, Mach 2.35 59,055 feet
• 11. F-14A Tomcat Mach 2.34 58,000+ feet
• 12. F-106 Delta Dart Mach 2.31 57,000 feet
• 13. IAI Kfir Mach 2.3 75,000 feet
• 13. English Electric Lightning Mach 2.3 60,000 feet
• 13. MiG-29 Fulcrum Mach 2.3 59,060 feet
• 13. F-107 Ultra Sabre Mach 2.3 48,000 feet
• 14. Tornado ADV Mach 2.2 69,997 feet
• 14. F-4 Phantom Mach 2.2 62,250 feet
• 14. Mirage 2000 Mach 2.2 59,055 feet
• 14. F-104 Starfighter Mach 2.2 58,000 feet
• (120,800 feet NF-104A)
• 14. B-58 Hustler Mach 2.2 64,800 feet
• 15. F-105 Thunderchief Mach 2.1 52,000 feet
• 15. A-5 Vigilante Mach 2.1 52,100 feet

24.118.228.239 (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Although as the Mach number article points out, the mach number coincides with different speeds depending on altitude and atmospheric temperature. The higher the altitude, the slower (in miles/hr) a particular mach number is. TastyCakes (talk) 15:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Geographical Details

I was trying to find out details of an area in San Bernardino County called Old Woman Mountains, I wanted to find geographical descriptions and details and a map about this place, where could I go to find this information? I also had a few other places to look up so is there a web site that gives these details about certain land areas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.241.20 (talk) 23:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You can search at the US Geological Survey's Geographic Names Information System: [3]. This will also link you to various maps which include the name. Rmhermen (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Or you may be able to find Wikipedia articles on places such as Old Woman Mountains. Just use the search box. Marco polo (talk) 01:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

July 13

Fly identification

Please identify the type of fly in this photo. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 00:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an entomologist but I looked around and am reasonably certain that it's call a Face Fly (Musca Autumnalis). There are apparently several flies that are similar in appearance to the House Fly and this is one of them. I made up my own mind about it because it's the one that looks to me to be most similar to your picture and it's also the one that's by a camel's eye, which fits the m.o. because the tendency to pester livestock eyes is how it got it's name. See for yourself whether I'm right or it's another one. I'm glad they put that site together. -LambaJan (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Where did you take the photo? Astronaut (talk) 05:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Southern California at a farm. GregManninLB (talk) 01:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

How can I "bulletproof" my mind?

How do I lock it so no one gets in there? An intellectual island with the mental weaponry of a nuclear viper! How do I get to know everything and ALWAYS be right? Is there a CIA type school out there that teaches the mental skills necessary to adapt to this chaotic, dangerous world?--Dr. Carefree (talk) 01:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, for the first question, some people swear by these. Good luck with that. - Eron^Talk 02:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I sincerely question your carefree credentials. Vipers do not carry weapons. Nobody knows everything. Nobody is always right. If you don't want anyone in your mind then be careful about what you say so that you only let on what you intend to let on and maintain a sense of justice in evaluating the things people say to you so that you can fairly judge the merit or lack thereof in their arguments. I'm unaware of any such school but if you value your mind stay away from the US military. They don't value your mind, they value their agenda. They are the borg, not the jedi. -LambaJan (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Be like Sherlock Holmes—know what is relevant to your world, and know that well. And know what you don't know much about—everyone has blind spots, and knowing where they are counts for a lot. You'll never "always be right". We're all wrong sometimes. Being right is easy—almost everyone thinks they are right. Knowing and admitting when you are wrong, and making good on it—that's actually the hardest part. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 02:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

By "know everything" are you asking us how you can become omnipotent? Last I checked we weren't the Q Continuum... 24.76.161.28 (talk) 02:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There are people...that walk around. And they know. It radiates from thier presence. Once you meet someone like this, you'll never forget it. I aspire to achieve intellectual undark enlightenment.--Dr. Carefree (talk) 02:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

They are full of crap, and are simply lying with confidence. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Right. You don't know what they know and what they don't know. They exude charisma, confidence. That's not the same ting as knowing things. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

A Kevlar helmet? Astronaut (talk) 23:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What you request is very difficult. On the one hand, your mind might possess God's Truth, and be absolutely correct in its beliefs. On the other, you might be wrong and deluded, and people are only trying to relieve you of brainwashing you have received. If you adopt the philosophy"My mind is made up. Do not attempt to confuse me with facts" then no amount of reasoning and scientific demonstration should be able to change your beliefs. That is not a good outcome in many such cases. Edison (talk) 05:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Spend enough time on Wikipedia and you will soon know everything. That's how I did it. Plasticup ^T/C 12:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This reminds me of Socrates, particularly Plasticup's comment above. Just watch the History Channel for three years and you'll get it. Don't talk unless it's academic; even if you're of average intelligence, it'll work. ;) · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Become a religious fundamentalist. You will think you know everything and are always right. You will be totally immune from influence by logic, competing ideas or compassion. Take lessons from this guy. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Terry Pratchett creates a character called Vorbis, an ambitious, intelligent, utterly self-assured fundamentalist described as having a mind "like a steel ball" (ie nothing gets in, nothing gets out). When Vorbis actually encounters the god in whose name his every action is performed, the god (who happens to be trapped in the form of a small and rather shabby tortoise, for reasons it is not necessary to go into here), reacts with horror:

"Him! ... Kill him! ... Find something sharp! ... Push him overboard! ... Look at his mind!" -- Karenjc 18:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

first of all you have to have a researchy/skepticy kind of mindset. when somebody tells you something don't take it at face value. additionally, be curious. read everything you can. back of a cereal box at breakfast. evaluate the validity of all this evidence you have accumulated with regard to the conclusions you have reached; there are things you are absolutely sure about, things you don't have any clue about, and things in between to various degrees. don't upgrade your conclusions; if you've seen something somewhere on the internet that says something, don't put it in the same category as something which you have seen proved many times by sources usually taken as reliable and is taken as fact by 99.99% of humanity. now: when you are in a discussion don't bring up one of the maybe things as a "for sure". but when you do bring up a "for sure" thing, you will have no doubt. when bringing up something that you're not sure about or have no clue about, make it quite clear that you're not staking your reputation on it. on the other hand, don't make it a big point when you bring up something you are sure about. eventually people (including you) will realize that when you make just a flat statement about something, it is reliable. also: the best way to prevail in a discussion/argument is to be on the correct side. don't find yourself defending the undefendable or arguing something silly just to save face. if you do find yourself proved to be on the wrong side, admit it ASAP. if necessary, apologize. don't get annoyed at somebody who just taught you something, even if he/she is a sore winner. again, people (including you) will get used to you being reliable. of course, not all arguments have a factual basis at bottom; politics, religion, etc. but usually you get involved in subarguments about who did what at what date or such, and you want to be the person who can state it with authority and, if necessary, when challenged dig up the reliable source you got that from; you don't want to be the guy who's stuck with "i saw on the internet or tv or somewhere that some guy said something like this......" and not only can't back it up, isn't even 100% sure it's correct. Gzuckier (talk) 20:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

n-alarm fire

I've often heard, almost exclusively in American contexts, references to 'three-alarm' fires or the like. What exactly are the 'alarms' referred to, and what is the significance of the number that means it needs to be specified? Does it mean the number of different fire stations whose services are summoned? Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 13:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe that's literally how many times they ring the alarm at a given fire station, and measures the severity of the fire and the type of response needed, with 1 alarm being the least severe and 5 alarms being the most severe (although this might vary by location). There would be a tendency for those on the high end to require additional fire stations to respond, but it's not directly related to the number of alarms. Other factors, like how near the next fire station is to the fire and the capabilities of their own station, will also play into if other stations are called. StuRat (talk) 13:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks! :-) Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 14:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not the ringing of the alarm - have you ever heard an alarm ringing at a fire station? It's the same as an alarm at any other building, like during a fire drill at school, just one long continuous ringing. The number refers to the number and type of trucks they send, which probably come from two or more fire stations (although "two alarm" does not necessarily mean only two stations sent trucks). Here is an example from Toronto, which goes up to seven. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It varies by jurisdiction; each fire department will have its own internal definitions. A particular 'alarm' level is linked to the mobilization of a particular quantity of men and materiel to the fire site. There's a good – and readably short – answer here, it also includes historical context for the term. For the New York Fire Department, a two-alarm response includes 25 vehicles and 106 firefighters. In Washington DC (info here) a two-alarm response involves ten fire engines, four ladder trucks, assorted ancillary rescue and support vehicles, and about 110 firefighters.

Other communities (particularly smaller ones) are apt to define a smaller response for a given 'alarm' level, allowing them to more precisely allocate their resources in response to a fire. Obviously, the number of fire stations from which equipment or men are drawn is correlated with, but is not necessarily equal to, the number of 'alarms' at a fire. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

One more note—we seem to have an article on multiple-alarm fire, but it needs some work. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the wealth of information, and to TenOfAllTrades for the friendly message alerting me to the further replies. It was mostly a curiosity question, but the history was interesting to know. So, even if it's not necessarily set in stone, I get the idea. Cheers! Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 17:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

In a bit of a rush, so I just scanned through the responses. A similar question was asked a few months back. You might try a search of the archives for other responses. Dismas|^(talk) 00:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In Chicago, I understand they use the term "box" rather than "alarm." The idea is that if a highly combustible highrise building occupied by a huge number of people and which is the headquarters of several major businesses catches fire, sending one fire engine with 4 firefighters would be inadequate, The fire requirs multiple ladder trucks, multiple pumpers, multiple search and rescue teams, multiple paramedic squads, etc. In the country, is an isolated cabin catches fire, one truck and four firefighters can save the foundation and prevent the spread of the fire into a general conflagration. Common sense. In large cities, there may be pre-planned responses dictating how many engines, supervisors, etc. are sent for a fire in specified structures, such as the World Trade Center, the Sears Tower or other towering infernos. In rural areas (and some cities) "mutual response" is a strategy by which fire engines and crews from neighoring towns respond to large fires in any one town. The neighboring engines may help in fighting the fire, or they may just pull into the vacant fire station and be prepared to respond to the next fire. In the 1871 Chicago fire engines from other towns were dispatched to Chicago by express train to assist(not covered in the article). Edison (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

My understanding was that "n" meant the number of stations responding to the fire, so a 2-alarm fire means that the fire captain has called another station to send more crews, and 3-alarm means that everyone is getting involved. By my logic, one-alarm is handled by the first station, two-alarm is when a call goes out for more help; three-alarm is when the call goes out that we've got a big problem here. I'll defer to the actual example links given though. Franamax (talk) 10:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

but i will bet a silk pajama there isn't any 3-l llama Gzuckier (talk) 19:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

As an aside, the UK fire services classify fire severity by the number of "pumps" (fire engines) that are needed to deal with the incident. See London_Fire_Brigade#Determining_the_size_of_an_incident. Exxolon (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The n-alarm system comes from the old tradition of using pull stations to alert the local departments to a fire in their area. The box would send a message to all local stations by telegraph that there was a fire, indicating the location as a number: (station area) - (box number), e.g. 11-2. Fires are still dispatched as "box alarms," following this tradition, with maps broken up into a grid of "box areas."

The initial dispatch is referred to as the first alarm. Subsequent alarms are calls for additional units as needed, usually because the fire has grown or the incident is taking long enough that firefighters on scene need to be replaced. The number of alarms doesn't necessarily indicate the size or the severity of the blaze so much as the size of the incident and how long and hard the firefighters had to work to control it. Normally the first alarm dispatches the largest number of units, and each subsequent alarm deals out another handful. The units dispatched depends on available resources, and so changes from department to department. For more of the history, see TenOfAllTrades' link.

In response to franamax, even a single alarm normally pulls in units from multiple fire stations. In my county, the first alarm is 4 engines, 2 trucks, an ambulance and a rescue squad. on average, only 3 or 4 units are available from a single station in my area. Requests for mutual aid from outside jurisdictions (counties) doesn't usually happen until the 3rd or 4th alarms, but that really depends on the location of the incident and the resources of the county. --Shaggorama (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No IQ commercials

What is it with these commercials, and what is the most idiotic commercial around?! They're getting worse.65.173.105.27 (talk) 21:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What commercials are you talking about, on what network in what country, and do you have a factual question about them? The reference desk is not a place for debates; that's what most of the rest of the internet is for. Algebraist 22:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

You name the network, etc. they're there. Burger King has some really idiotic ones, so does some insurance companies. I'm not trying to start a debate.65.173.105.27 (talk) 04:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I would nominate most U.S political commercials, and most commercials for medical "remedies" which do not even make claims of effectiveness, but just say where to apply the remedy, along with testimonials from persons who claim to have used the remedy with amazing effects. Edison (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I name the BBC's TV, which has no commercials at all. Will you at least admit what country you're in? Algebraist 09:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

WHOIS says the IP's from the US. But I don't see an answerable question here unless someone's done some sort of test to determine the most "idiotic commercial". Here's a google search for "dumbest commercial" - hope that helps. Perhaps if you gave us an example of a commercial you find silly, we might be able to help. Note that the purpose of adverts is to sell products, not to be clever. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I find it idiotic when commercials try to connect two unconnected statements as though they are an article. "We all want to protect our children, that's why I buy XXX soap powder".

those snickers "feasting" commercials are kind of silly, but I love them. and in fact they have raised my frequency of snickers purchases, if anyone from the company is reading this. Gzuckier (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

HeadOn#Commercial is brilliantly idiotic, which is the whole point. Rockpocket 17:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Help!

My maroon clownfish was eating a bunch of air bubbles and now she is floating to the top and struggling to stay down! What should I do?--76.176.124.169 (talk) 23:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you burp a fish ? I'd guess that the air will pass out of one end of the fish or the other. If she's eating bubbles that come from the airator, you may need to isolate her from it somehow, say with a divider with holes too small for her to pass through. StuRat (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that “eating” bubbles isn’t the cause of this problem. Sometimes fish get gas, especially if their diet is not optimal. Try to feed the fish some brine shrimp, this often acts as a laxative for fish. Then optimize your fishes diet. --S.dedalus (talk) 05:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

July 14

Ink anti-theft things

Does anyone know how I can get one of these off of clothes? My sister bought something and they forgot to take it off- any way to remove it without going back to the store? And is there a real name for these (do we have an article on them?) 70.162.28.222 (talk) 00:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This was asked a couple months ago by someone who claimed to have bought something in another country and didn't discover the tag until they got it home. You might try searching the archives for the answer. Dismas|^(talk) 00:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's the link to the old thread. They're called benefit denial tags. Your best bet is taking it back to the store (with receipt). Or you can mess with power tools and screwdrivers and run the risk of screwing it up. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The article is at Electronic article surveillance. Security tag redirects there. My advice is go back to the store. If it's a chain store (presumably it is) then any stores in that chain will help you, providing you have a receipt. Also consider the fact that if this has happened to your sister before, she may well be a shoplifter. Neıl ☄ 13:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

battlefield 1942

I recently installed Battlefield 1942 on my computer. The game runs fine, but my mouse is unresponsive when I try to play, like I cant move it. Im running it on windows vista, if that helps. Has anyone else had this problem or know how to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.121.45 (talk) 04:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about that game specifically, but many games have an Options panel where you can select to use either the mouse or keyboard or other controls. StuRat (talk) 04:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It might be better to ask on the computing desk. --S.dedalus (talk) 05:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Make sure the mouse is compatible with the game. If it's an old PS2 one, rather than a USB one, this may be why. You may need to update your mouse drivers, also. Finally, go into the game settings and turn the mouse sensitivity up. Neıl ☄ 13:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

PS/2 or USB shouldn't matter, because both gets abstracted to a HID device by the OS anyway. Did you alt-tab out before or does it happen when you initially start the game? Can you see your normal Windows cursor? --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Rifle in picture

I was reading this article and notice that the on the left, there is some sort of rifle that I can't identify. What is it? Is it some sort of prop for the show? Perhaps it's a real rifle used by the prop people? And where can I get more information about it? I oddly like the design of it. --Blue387 (talk) 05:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if it was based on a real weapon, but considering it shot phaser beams, I'm pretty sure it was just a prop. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.49 (talk)

If I remember correctly, it did not fire phaser beams but used regular ammunition. I think it is a real firearm. --Blue387 (talk) 08:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This website might interest you - according to them, it's a Muzzelite MZ14 -- Ferkelparade π 08:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh! Sorry, I was thinking of a different episode. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Really weird blog

Can anyone give me a clue about who the author of this blog is and what he is doing ? [4]. 69.157.227.80 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably thinks he's count of St.Germain Count of St. Germain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 12:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Also see book of solomon key of solomon First key of solomon second key of solomon as well as the first and second book of adam and eve all of your other apochryphil (spelling) biblical connons, and my personal favorite book of enoch hope that helps, if these dont link anywhere, fiddle with em a bit they all have articles under some or other name much as the first link above concerning me, um, er let just say St. Germain, or the Wandering Jew—Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Any of that related to The Book of the Goetia of Solomon the King and the things mentioned there? 79.66.54.186 (talk) 17:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

yes, directly related. pretty cool stuff if you have the time and patience to perform those spells, and they can keep you alive for millenia, but i feel i should also add that this crowley version is a bit rubbish, these things need to be followed to the letter, exaclty, so no quote unquote clean up is required, just get the originals manuscripts, which can be done online, and then all those angels and demons mentioned in your weird blog OQ can be at your beck and call to serve your every desire. but, be careful what you wish for. etenal life, or to wander the earth for all eternity can be rather tiresome. Enoch for instance wandered from biblical/atlantian times through christs first comeing, through the st gerain days and is now a regular on wiki adding spots of carnel knowlege here and there, but still i cant spell lolwandering jew86.18.33.2 (talk) 20:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)wandering jew, aka Zionist aka st. germain aka enoch

Really wierd blog? Really wierd answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 13:41, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Flies

How high do flies fly.--88.109.14.109 (talk) 06:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This site supports my idea that flys fly only as high as they need to. There's no reason for a fly to fly high just to get high. They're in search of food and mates. Those two things aren't found very high up. Dismas|^(talk) 08:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

As Dismas above said, flies will only fly as high as they need to, and in my experience this is usually no higher than the average height of a house. However, consider a tall apartment block or skyscraper; they fly will most likely have come in at grown level and worked it's way up, but if it goes out the window then it will have a long way down. To answer the question of "how high can flies fly" then I would say they would probably keep going upwards until they run out of energy and die, or when the atmosphere becomes too thin for they to breath (acutely flies and other insects don't breath but exchange gases through a system called vertebrate trachea), which ever comes first. Hope I've been helpful, as I plan to be around for a good long while. Myther moth (talk) 08:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume you actually meant invertebrate trachea, seeing as that's what flies, being invertebrates, have. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please see sentence structureand dont end them with a have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please to be more pleasant and not try to enforce your personal grammar rules where irrelevant. kthnx. 79.66.54.186 (talk) 17:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Now, now boys, please behave!--88.109.14.109 (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Assumptions assumptions... 79.66.54.186 (talk) 23:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I can think of two other factors limiting the max height a fly could attain: reduced lift due to thinner air, and freezing up due to low air temps aloft. I would expect them to run out of energy or freeze up well before they reached that height normally, but let's say one is released from a high altitude balloon all warmed up, full of energy, and properly depressurized. In that case the lack of lift due to the thin air may come into play before it freezes. StuRat (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Every evening there are swifts and house martins flying around high above the rooftops here. I always thought they were catching small flies, so why are those flies so high?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Shantavira, those birds are not feeding they are most likey juveniles, Juvin youngsters fighting/sparring for mates, noisy buggers too eh? i can sit and watch them for hours... perry-mankster at work 195.188.254.82 (talk) 13:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, the question should have been phrased "How high could a housefly fly if a housefly could fly high?" 152.16.16.75 (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Overflow

If everyone flushed their toilets at the same time, would the sewers explode? What would happen? Ceeping kalm (talk) 08:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nothing, a toilet flush is minor. However if it rained a lot, thats a different story. All recent sewers (last 50 years) are designed to accomodate future growth, don't take stormwater and havent reached full capacity. Older sewers are "combined" with stormwater disposal and feed into harbours or rivers generally. A long period of heavy rain causes overflow and pollution problems. Mhicaoidh (talk) 10:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Pressure varies only with hydraulic head, so flushing all the toilets at once probably wouldn't increase the sewer pressure enough to burst the pipes underground. Instead, all the pipes would drain more slowly as the "backlog" drained away. An interesting case would be a very tall apartment building - if they were the last to flush, the water would stand in the downpipe waiting to drain, the pressure head might burst the thinner drainpipe within the building (but they probably design for that); and if the apartment at the top was the last to flush, the toilets on the lower floors might get a little backflow. Water tends to go to the easiest path, it won't bother trying to burst a pipe when it can just overflow onto the bathroom floor. Franamax (talk) 10:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Which is why all buildings have a gully trap or similar device outside to vent internal or sewer overflows to the outside world rather than the lowest apartments shower or bath. Mhicaoidh (talk) 11:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This sort of thing actually happens during large sporting events. When the Super Bowl breaks for halftime, and between the sets at Wimbledon, the water pressure in major cities drops as millions of viewers simultaneously take the opportunity to relieve themselves. Plasticup ^T/C 12:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Citation needed. --LarryMac | Talk 12:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Here. Seems to be more of a sewerage issue. Fribbler (talk) 13:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll see your article and raise you an admitted "legend". --LarryMac | Talk 13:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

O.k. I fold [5]. Fribbler (talk) 13:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, not exactly the type of "pot" I wanted to win :-) --LarryMac | Talk 14:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, a bit of a bum deal. Fribbler (talk) 14:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The quality of puns on the reference desk has really "bottomed out". Plasticup ^T/C 14:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

As has the professionalism of its volunteers (see comments directly above for example). Ceeping kalm (talk) 15:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"Professional volunteers" is almost a tautology. Don't let bad puns drive you round the U-bend. Neıl ☄ 17:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In the TV series The West Point Story (TV series) there was an episode in which a cadet had said in an engineering class that the waterhammer or pressure transient from simultaneous toilet flushing could rupture the sewer. His professor said he was wrong. In the end, a practical demonstration showed he was right. Fiction, but still, an expresion of the belief. As for "modern sewers:" is there a town somewhere which has removed all the hundred year old sewers? Edison (talk) 19:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If my memory is correct, in this episode of "The West Point Story," the cadet predicted that the water main (not the sewer) would rupture from the back pressure when all the flush valves closed simultaneously, and based on the water system layout, he predicted the location of the anticipated failure. The cadet was depicted standing at the predicted location, and his salute to an officer also signaled his colleagues to flush, resulting in an eruption of water that soaked his superior.

I seem to remember that when Cleveland Browns Stadium or Progressive Field was built, they recruited volunteers to for a simultaneous flushing of all of its toilets to test the plumbing system. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

job center

Hi, my friend once told me that if you go to the job center they have to find a job for you that is within your area of experience, and that if for example I said I was an astronaut or gallows attendant, they will be unlikely to find me a job and they'll have to put me on the doll. Is this true? If it is some suggestions of obscure jobs would be excellent as I have no desire to work. Many thanks. Myther moth (talk) 08:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It kind of depends on which country you're in, for starters. (The words "job center" and and "the dole" lead me to believe that you're probably British, but...) In any case -- and this is probably going to be the case all over the world -- if you're going to lie, there are often ways of whether what you say is true. (It is literally possible to check the identity of just about every astronaut in the world, for example, and if you don't happen to be one of them, well, so much for that.) In most cases, you would probably be expected to provide some proof of prior employment or training as an astronaut or a gallows attendant, or whatever you claim to be. I doubt any country in the world has a system where they just take your word for being the president of Paraguay and then shrug and start paying you when they can't get you that exact super-specific job. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 09:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Try telling them that you're a treacle bender and that you trained with Andy Capp. Seriously, they start off with suggesting jobs in your area of expertise but can quite quickly move on to trying to convince you that the cleaning job they have been trying to fill is the career opportunity of your lifetime. Itsmejudith (talk) 10:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's rubbish - they try to find you a job within your area of expertise, yes, but if you turn everything down because it's "not your area of expertise", then you will be asked to go on training in something else (plastering, typing, IT, join the army, whatever). Turn that down as well, and you stop receiving JSA (Job Seekers Allowance = the dole). Which is quite right, as people who refuse work for no reason and just want to leech off the state are useless parasites. Neıl ☄ 13:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that the best thing to do is take job interviews, but subtly undermine them. I knew someone who used to put Unionism and Left-Wing Politics in his interests on application forms to put off prospective employers. You could also fill in the form really badly, with a lot of mispellings, tea stains, etc. Some other suggestions to avoid getting a job:- Be VERY VERY interested in holidays and sick pay if you manage to get an interview. Try leering at the interviewer, and use subtle sexual innuendo in your answers. Dress like you slept in a gutter for the last 3 weeks. Keep a sweaty, stinky shirt to wear for interviews so they think that you have BO. Get horribly offended at an innocent comment made by the interviewer and justify it by claiming that they are "prejudiced" against you. However, being on the dole isn't that much fun, according to the people I know who are on it, and they'll end up trying to get you on training courses and so on eventually. Why not try to find a job that you enjoy (or at least can stand)? It beats living on benefits!195.27.12.230 (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It is my understanding that if they believe you deliberately failed a job interview they can stop your benefits. Quite right too. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In my very recent experience, you can only get Job Seekers Allowance for 6 months, then they'll kick you off that benefit onto something (anything) else to make the figures look better for the Department of Work and Pensions. During the first 3 months on JSA, they let me restrict my job search to one thing I was qualified to do - you still have to come into the Job Centre once every 2 weeks to sign and they expect you to bring evidence of your job search in a log book. They then have you in for an interview where they ask you what else you might be able to do and you're expected to expand your search to at least 3 job titles. At the same time they put you on weekly signing for 6 weeks and still want to see the log of your job hunting efforts each visit. After that you go back to the fortnightly signing. I was promised some help with training - but only after I'd been signing-on for 6 months and would be classed as "long-term unemployed". I never did find out if that happens because I landed a job. TBH, it's a whole lot of hassle to go through for £57 a week (compare that to the ~£200 a week you would get for a full-time job at minimum-wage and you'll see it's not going to be easy to survive long-term), but they do keep your National Insurance payments up to date for you and it made me a little more enthusiastic in looking for a job. Astronaut (talk) 15:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You'll probably be better off by just getting a job and doing your best at it. Make more money, too. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Royal Marriage

I wish to read about Royal Marriage however, I wish to read about the institution, inbreeding, and uspurperism, not some card game, any advice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Royal family gives some useful links to specific examples

perhaps List of family trees may also be usefull as well.

Inbreeding#Royalty_and_nobility is particularily helpful.

usurperism? we have List of usurpers. 87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to re-redirect you to the humanties page where I imagine you should get better answers..

please see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Royal Marriage.87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Identify this book

I riffled through a book in a bookstall sometime back, that was written by a Japanese woman staying in USA. It was about a little girl and her extremely optimistic elder sister, and how they faced life in an alien country. The elder sister dies at the end of the book, and the title of the book was most probably something like Kiri-kiri. Can anyone give me more information about this book?? 117.194.227.50 (talk) 13:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

HELLO!!! It's been two days since I posted this question. Somebody say something!! 117.194.225.200 (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

No-one here knows anything. Shouting at us isn't going to help. Algebraist 11:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The reason folks aren't finding information about this book is that they're looking up the title you gave, which is almost, but not quite, right. You're thinking of Kira-Kira, by Cynthia Kadohata. It won a Newberry award in 2005, and while I haven't read it myself, several of my students have told me how much they enjoyed it. It's available on amazon.com, but as a fairly recent release and an award winner, you'll probably find it on the shelf at your friendly neighborhood bookstore, too. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Retirement

In the US, let's say you're eligible to retire and receive some sort of pension or retirement benefit (not a 401k). If you retire and start receiving this benefit, are you allowed to take another job? This is just a hypothetical question not a request for professional advice. If it matters the specific situation I'm interested in involves a US federal government employee in the CSRS retirement plan. ike9898 (talk) 14:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

With Social Security you can. See here. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 17:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it really depends on a lot of details about the pension. My mother gets a pension from the state government but they hire her as a contractor now and then (and pay her more than she used to make at the job). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 19:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It is very common for eligible former U.S. government employees, civilian or military, to receive retirement benefits from their government service (once they attain the necessary combination of age and years of service) and take another job. The phrase is "double-dipping." One of my first bosses ended up as a triple-dipper. He was a retired Navy captain, had worked for the Postal Service, and while drawing retirement from both of those was working for a non-government corporation. That said, the details of what a private pension program allows are part of that pension program. When I turn 60, I will begin receiving pension benefits from a Fortune 100 company. Nothing in that program prevents me from working elsewhere while drawing those benefits. So the short answer is, "It depends." As for the Civil Service Retirement System, try the OMB Retirement page. I see in this brochure for example, that if the agency is authorized to offer early retirement, a person under CSRS who has either (a) 25 years of service or (b) 20 years of service and is at least age 50, can retire voluntarily on immediate annuity (meaning, will start receiving whatever amount he's eligible for). OtherDave (talk) 02:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

numberplates

When were numberplates introduced into England and when were they made compulsory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceeping kalm (talk • contribs) 15:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

According to Vehicle registration plates of the United Kingdom, "The Motor Car Act 1903, which came into force on 1 January 1904, required all motor vehicles to be entered on to the Government's vehicle register, and to carry number plates." --LarryMac | Talk 15:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles

Did The Beatles pull a PR stunt back in the sixties by suggesting that McCartney was dead and buried under Strawberry Fields? Moancical (talk) 15:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

See Paul is dead for info on the legend. Fribbler (talk) 15:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Moancical (talk) 15:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

commercial airliner designs

why... do american (and european?) airliners all have low wing designs, and russian airliners apparently all have high wing? Gzuckier (talk) 15:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I once flew on a Tupolev Tu-154 (though it might have been a Tupolev Tu-134 or an Ilyushin Il-86) to Bulgaria and it was of a low-wing design. Astronaut (talk) 16:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty high-wing American/European airliners. See BAe 146, Bombardier Dash 8, ATR 72 and so on. Equally, there are low-wing Russian designs: Tupolev Tu-334, Tupolev Tu-134, Tupolev Tu-154 and so on (from other manufacturers, too: Ilyushin Il-114).

She's as sweet as Tupolev honey... sorry. anyway, what's the difference between the two designs? i imagine on a little Cessna vs a piper, it's a matter of pilot visibility up or down, but on an airliner? Gzuckier (talk) 19:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

A high wing is more stable. A low wing allows easier mounting of the undercarriage (lighter, less costly), better survival in a forced landing (wings help absorb the impact) and full headroom through the fuselage (a high wing means you have to duck under the mounting). That's what I gather anyway. Here's some reading: [6][7]. Franamax (talk) 20:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Low wing is easier on maintenence, high wing reduces the chance of engine damage due to loose articles on the ground and allows the fuselage to come closer to the ground. The latter is why you'll see a lot of military cargo with high-wing. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Low-wing design has a high ground effect on landing, which means it's less accurate and more complicated to land, which means an increased minimum runway length. But it also consolidates the two most stressed components of the plane: the wings and the landing gear. Instead of 2 points to strengthen there's now 1 point, which means a lighter, easier to design and manufacture plane. High-wing design has a lower landing runway length requirement so it has better STOL performance, but the landing gear stowing system means there'll be a hole in the fuselage, or have a bump outside the fuselage which increases the drag. If the engine is attached below the wing a high-wing design also reduces damage to the engine by surface rocks and things like that, something quite important for planes operating on improvised runways. A high-wing plane also has a lower fuselage floor, which makes load and unloading cargo much easier than low-wing planes. --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

ah; i am enlightened. thanks, all. Gzuckier (talk) 14:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

And then there are mid-wing aircraft like the Boeing 247: the wing spar runs through the passenger cabin at knee height. Nobody makes them anymore. --Carnildo (talk) 00:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, there's plenty of good information here that could be used to create a new section for Fixed-wing aircraft. Anyone with handy references feel like improving the article? 152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

location of Winfield Alberta vs Winfield, British Columbia, Canada

When I clicked on the link for information on Winfield Alberta (52 57'52.57'N 114 25' 45.72" W) it comes up with information about Winfield, BC (50 01' 45.28N 119 24' 16.58"W) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.193.82.252 (talk) 15:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Where did you see a link for Winfield, AB? We don't seem to have an article, the Winfield disambiguation page only shows the BC entry as far as Canadian locations. It is listed on Hamlets_of_Alberta, but as a redlink. I checked the list of articles on the "what links here" for Winfield, BC and didn't see anything that looked incorrect. And a site-specific Google search didn't really show anything. if there's a bad link somewhere, we'd like to fix it, but you'll have to give us a starting point. --LarryMac | Talk 16:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I fixed the coordinates in the template in the Winfield, British Columbia article, which were actually the coordinates for Winfield, Alberta (about which, as you said, we don't have an article). Deor (talk) 16:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Here you go: Winfield, Alberta Plasticup ^T/C 15:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Reversi

Hello. What is the largest number of possible moves on anyone's turn at anytime for Reversi? For example, dark has four legal moves on its first turn. Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 18:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, anyone can make only one move per turn. If you talk about move possibilities, I'd say sixteen. (not so sure about this, but all situations I've come up with have this number of possibilities). Admiral Norton ^(talk) 00:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm posting your question at the math desk. Check there for answers over the next week. --Shaggorama (talk) 20:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Learn different accents online

Does anyone know where I can go on the internet to learn how to speak English in different accents? I'm American and I would like to know how to speak with a British accent or an Austrialian one.... --Anthonygiroux (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

How about this? Fribbler (talk) 19:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You might also want to use an online text-to-voice synthesizer which handles different accents, like this one which features US, UK, and Indian English accents: [8]. StuRat (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Listen to BBC radio programmes on line.There are many different accents there.hotclaws 21:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

For your convenience (and for anyone else interested) here is a direct link. You can listen live or use the "listen again" feature to hear programmes from the last 7 days. You will need RealPlayer or another similar application. -=# Amos E Wolfe ^talk #=- 11:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I never knew there were so many different British accents. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The Magneto (band) of today

What is Magneto doing this day and age? Ericthebrainiac (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

According to the article... Nothing since 1996. Dismas|^(talk) 20:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

dc lawnmower motors

having taken apart two different makes of electric lawnmower over the weekend, 110 volt plugin not rechargable; both are DC with a big bridge rectifier mounted on the motor. why in the world?Gzuckier (talk) 20:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

(why not the science desk?)

What did you expect?

AC asynchronous (ie electromagnetic stator and rotor with slip rings for stator and communtator for rotor) : probably a bit buzzy/hummy?

AC synchronous (induction) - in a word NO. (not a good idea can run backwards)?

? why does the DC one have a rectifier??? in case you plug in the battery the wrong way?

I give up; what's the answer? 87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Note DC motors are reliable , and operate well at a range of loads and speeds, and I'd imagine that the rectifier is not expensive - so maybe it's a good idea...?87.102.86.73 (talk) 13:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Permanent magnets have become capable of enormously greater strength over the last few decades. This has made it much more attractive to use permanent magnets to form the "field" of the electric motor as compared to the past when an electromagnet would have been used. That, combined with the fact that a diode bridge rectifier is now a very inexpensive component has meant that a many designs that would, in the past, have used a universal motor now just use a straight permanent-magnet dc motor design. Brushless dc motors are now in the ascendancy as well, replacing the mechanical commutator with electronics.

Atlant (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Gee, you mean AC motors are not as great as they have been made out to be? Edison (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Edison, I'll take it that you're joking because I'm quite confident that you understand all the issues in detail. But I'll answer you for the benefit of everyone else reading. Yes, (most) AC motors have the distinct advantage of not having a commutator or slip rings, so they have fewer moving parts to wear out or break. In some applications, though, the fact that the speed of an AC motor tops out at the line frequency (so 3,000 or 3,600 RPM for 50 or 60 Hz) is a distinct disadvantage, although I wouldn't expect this was the case for a lawnmower (where the gasoline engine usually is governed at 3,600 RPM); to go faster, you need a variable-frequency drive. And as 87.102.86.73 points out below, that then starts to beg the question of which motors are "AC" motors and which are "DC" motors. (I also suspect (but have no proof) that a modern permanent magnet motor is lighter than an induction motor for a given mechanical power.)

Atlant (talk) 13:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Mmmh what is an AC motor?? eg in Brushless dc motor the current is being turned on and off electrically eg stepper motor so isn;t the current actually AC??

maybe..87.102.86.73 (talk) 19:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

(have you really come back from 1882 just to continue your pointless war with Tesla?) you died in 1931. 87.102.86.73 (talk) 20:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind cleaning/changing the commutators I'd say DC motors are in every way superior to AC in power transmission applications eg electric car...87.102.86.73 (talk) 20:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

History of restaurant term "cover"

Hi there

I know a "cover" in restaurant terminology refers to a single place setting or person.

However, I am keen to ascertain the history of this term - I have seen a reference to it in "Dubrovsky" by Alexander Pushkin (published circa 1830) so I know it dates from at least then.

Hope you can help and thanks for your time!

Cheers Anne —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.31.81 (talk) 22:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like it might be related to the OED's meaning 7, 'The utensils laid for each person's use at table; the plate, napkin, knife, fork, spoon, etc.' They have quotes back to 1612 for that. Algebraist 22:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If you hadn't mentioned the use in Russian, I would simply have assumed that the English term is borrowed from the French "couvert". But perhaps the Russian term also comes from the French? Itsmejudith (talk) 22:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This is definitely not used in Russian. I think they says something along the lines of занятие. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 23:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the OP means that the term was translated from the presumably-original Russian to English, the term being discussed being used in the latter. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 23:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This article: The Server's Lexicon: Preliminary Inquiries into Current Restaurant Jargon, Michael Adams,American Speech, Vol. 73, No. 1(Spring, 1998), pp. 57-83, Published by: Duke University Press says it comes from the French "couvert" per Judiths answer. Websters says the same. Mhicaoidh (talk) 00:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify: Couvert: place setting; cover, shelter . Les couverts - silverware, flatware, cutlery. Related: mettre le couvert - to set the table. Mhicaoidh (talk) 10:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't know if it helps, but in restaurants in Italy, the first thing they put on the bill is coperto for 2 euros or so. Kind of the same way a garage dings you an extra $2 for "shop supplies". Franamax (talk) 20:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Wounded bluebird

Resolved

 – StuRat (talk) 17:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Greetings from the center of Hurricane Bertha. Apparently my internet connection still works, so I'll pose you a question. I just picked up a wounded bluebird. Its wings flap fine, but the poor thing can't fly. He is in a little bucket right now so that nothing gets at him. What can/should I do with it? Plasticup ^T/C 23:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep it alive as long as you can, then when things are in order again there, take it to a vet.65.173.105.27 (talk) 00:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If it's the Eastern bluebird (which is native to Florida, so at least close to you in Bermuda), they eat bugs, so go collect a few from the garden when the weather clears. They also eat fruit, especially berries, so give it some fruit, too. You might want to put the bird in something more secure than a bucket, in case it tries to fly and ends up flopping around the house. Perhaps an upside-down laundry basket might work, if the mesh is tight enough (you might need to stuff towels in the handle openings). I'm sure it would also appreciate a bowl of water for drinking and bathing. Put some newspapers under it to make clean-up easier. StuRat (talk) 03:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

We padded the bucket with kitchen paper to stop him from sliding around. We dug up some worms last night and put them on a little plate for him, but I don't think he was too interested. Left him some fruit this morning, so we'll see how that goes. I also put rice in a sock, microwaved it, and put it in one side of the bucket as a space heater. He cuddled up to it on his own, so I think that's a good sign. Anyway, he slept soundly through the night and when he dried off we could see that he was missing most of his feathers. Is plumage the right word? He has large patches of soft downy feathers, which is probably why he can't fly. We are picking up a second-hand cage this afternoon, and some bugs from a local pet store, and plan to keep him until his proper feathers return. Plasticup ^T/C 12:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. Our article didn't mention them eating worms, just bugs and fruit. You did provide water, I hope ? StuRat (talk) 06:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I did, but alas the little fella croaked it while I was at work. I did the best I could, under the circumstances. Plasticup ^T/C 14:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh well, perhaps it had internal injuries as well as the missing feathers. StuRat (talk) 17:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Moral Question

You are driving on a roadway, and you find a perfectly preserved UFO. It is HEAVILY ARMED (With powerful "assault/demolition phaser-like" weapons, same with the "disruptor" weapons, powerful assault/demolition energy and particle weapons and antimatter weapons, weapons replication tech to create more antimatter weapons), well shielded from any attack from all Earth weapons, some alien weapons, can go across the galaxy in seconds, like you see in Star Trek or Star Wars, has excellent living quarters, a highly advanced and powerful computer core, a regenerative power source, so it never runs out of power at all, is "telepathically" (bio-linked really) set to operate for you only.

What would you do with it? Conquer Earth? Enforce peace on a race of beings that cannot comprehend peace at all? Other? This is NOT a debate at all. Just a moral question65.173.105.27 (talk) 23:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. --antilived^{T | C | G} 00:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

With great power comes great responsibility :)--Lenticel ^(talk) 05:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible" (Frank Herbert) I'd gladly trust some dude found on the highway with such a discovery than heavily bred and groomed (set of) politicians.  ;-) --Prestidigitator (talk) 06:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

From my extensive experience watching The Twilight Zone, I'd say "run far away". This ship is tuned specifically for you? There's obviously a catch there somewhere. --Trovatore (talk) 00:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Would you step in it and claim the ship or, as this person said, run like hell?65.173.105.27 (talk) 00:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

So, you're having moral doubts about the new toy you picked up while driving on Route 50, ain't that right, 65? I'd suggest you package it nicely and give it over to U.S. Navy and, of course, address it to "Admiral Norton". Just kidding! What you do in this situation has to do with who you are. If you're honest, you'd give it up and send it to the authorities or just bury it somewhere down the road. If you tend to exploit things or use the for your own interest, you'd take it and have fun. It's an example of a social dilemma. Of course, since I already own this thingy, I'm on Mars right now and there are no roadways up here, so no dilemma for me. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 00:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If you're honest you'll give it to the authorities???? Please say you're joking. I'd trust myself with it before I'd entrust it to the State. (Any State.) --Trovatore (talk) 00:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Have it shipped to Cheyenne Mountain - but first write your name on the moon. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

But don't drop the cutting tool, right? --Trovatore (talk) 00:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't know what honest people do. ;-) Admiral Norton ^(talk) 12:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I would steal the ship and use it for the purposes of joy-riding and exploration. One serious concern is that I would eventually I would be caught and punished by the law enforcement of whatever society created the ship. But I'd have a blast until then. (Incidentally, I hope the ship has a space-suit that fits me, not having one may limit the reckless fun I could have with a space ship.) APL (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

From the point of view of living for awhile, you don't steal the ship, you don't touch the ship. You don't contact the government, you contact the press. Then you go into hiding for awhile. If you're fortunate, then the press reports on the thing, on you finding it, and your name gets big enough that nobody is going to get any advantage out of you "disappearing". (And getting inside any vehicle you don't know how to drive is going to get you killed, much less one that flies and is designed for a different species. It'd like letting a 10 year old try to fly a helicopter. They wouldn't "have a blast," they'd crash in five minutes, assuming they could get it off the ground at all. No thanks.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

This is a reference desk, not a discussion forum. Please take your question to one of the million opinion forums out there. Matt Deres (talk) 12:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe the question (with the whole space ship deal) was badly worded, but the underlying philosophical question, should someone except absolute power if it were offered?, is an acceptable question for the reference desks. --S.dedalus (talk) 06:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it is not acceptable. Your interpretation, which is definitely not what the OP asked anyway, is still just a call for opinions to open a discussion on ethics. That's not what we're here for; this is a reference desk, not a chat room. Matt Deres (talk) 15:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Your assumption is that ethical question do not have an answer that can be proved through sources. This is decidedly NOT the case. Ethical questions can be “proved” just as much as scientific questions can. There is no policy which says that philosophy questions cannot be asked on the desk. If you think there should be, I suggest you bring it up on the talk page first. --S.dedalus (talk) 07:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll bite. How do you "prove" an answer to an ethical question such as, for example, the acceptability of eating animals? FWIW, I'm relaxed on the whole notion of discussion on these desks. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Except if philosophical questions (and reference desks are where to find answers of all sorts of questions including philosophy and miscellaneous hence the miscellaneous and philosophy reference desk) are inappropriate for reference desks then why is there a reference desk for philosophical questions. Still, however I can relate to this subject because, this isn't really all that miscellaneous as it is philosophical, and its answer cannot be proven, just like "cherrie's are the best fruit" can't be proven, it can only be widely agreed upon, take this from someone who plans on devoting his life to philosophy. If you are that upset about it take it up with the writer and ask him to put it in with philosophy.

Philosophia X Known(Philosophia X Known) 14:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Even if you could provide provable answers to ethical questions (I don't think you can, but you could provide evidence in support of one position or the other), that's not what's going on here. You would realize that if you had read the OP's question or my reply to you. He's not asking if might makes right or about the ethics of absolute power, he literally asks us what we'd do if we found an advanced technology spaceship. Please read what's written and reply based on that instead of constructing straw men arguments and knocking them down. Matt Deres (talk) 18:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I have read what the OP said thank you. He makes it very very clear what he means: “This is NOT a debate at all. Just a moral question.” This question is even NAMED “Moral Question.” The replies here have indeed been debatish, but that’s our problem, not his/hers. I suggest that if you wish to continue this discussion, that we take it to the talk page. --S.dedalus (talk) 03:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Although it's increasingly hard to tell these days. Malcolm XIV (talk) 18:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh lighten the fuck up, it's not hurting anyone and it's an interesting topic. Commons is better than en because of precisely that "these rules must be obeyed and anyone else will be EX-TER-MIN-ATED" mentality. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd be too scared to touch it incase the aliens installed a self-destructing anti-theft device... --Candy-Panda (talk) 13:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Does it have the keys in the ignition and a large pink neon sign that says "Please steal me" ? Obviously it is an alien bait car. Gandalf61 (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

One other thing, the alien ship will help you get get laid by both the Earth women and the alien women. 65.173.104.138 (talk) 00:00, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

To Antilived's comment: Power only corrupts people who use power incorectly (immorally I should say, there isn't correct or incorrect, only a different point of view). I.e. power is represented by an extremely fast car on the freeway, now imagine the driver is a man on a killing sprea, and imagine the corrupt power and how much damage it would cause, but a man behind the wheel of the car carrying medicine to a place where an epidemic that could kill all woman in a 23 mi radius has an outbreak and imagine all the lives that would be saved. And to play devil's advocate, not all people would do that, but to advocate my advocate, no not everyone would do that and they are the immorals, but there obviously are people who do because, there are over 350 million people on this planet. Philosophia X Known(Philosophia X Known) 14:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

July 15

accents

so, if american girls find french, english, and pretty much any accent attractive in a guy, do girls in other countries find american accents sexy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.121.45 (talk) 02:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Map of nations using English as an official language or as the predominant non-official language.

Well if we're going with stereotypes with a bit of truth to them, then how could they; Americans are (mostly) monolingual.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

In other English speaking countries they could. . . --S.dedalus (talk) 06:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I used to have a subtle speech impediment. This was that I sometimes had difficulty pronouncing the “r” consonant correctly (for middle American English). Most people thought I had and English (or maybe Dutch) accent. While some girls were actually attracted to me because of this single fact, the vast majority were neutral in regards to my “accent.” --S.dedalus (talk) 06:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

People tend to find foreign accents attractive because they are 'exotic' or they have an association with something (e.g. French has long been considered an attractive accent in films). I suspect that there will be many girls from other nations that find the American accent attractive, perhaps those that aspire to be in America/admire America would be the most likely? Personally I think most accents when 'softened' can be attractive, but when they are broad they tend to be less so. E.g. a soft geordie accent is nice, but a broad one can be rather hard to understand and isn't as appealing. 194.221.133.211 (talk) 10:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

In all my travels I have never met anyone who liked an American accent, at least on the first date. This is unfortunate because despite my eclectic origins I have somehow developed a blended American accent. My guess is that the accent is so ubiquitous that it is no longer exotic. That, and America (rightly or wrongly) is either mocked or reviled by almost every country on Earth. Plasticup ^T/C 18:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you're being a little hard on your accent. I think a lot of British girls like American accents, but perhaps more because they've been associated with projecting confidence and other stereotypes about the "typical American persona" than how they literally sound. TastyCakes (talk) 18:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Estelle likes American Boys... --Candy-Panda (talk) 13:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Rockport

Is Rockport generally considered as an upscale brand in North America? 99.240.177.206 (talk) 04:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No. --Endless Dan 12:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Cigarette Smoking

I'm a 17 year-old girl. I smoked a cigarette from my dad's packet a few months back, and got addicted to smoking. Unfortunately, dad gave up smoking just after that, so I haven't had any opportunities to smoke any more cigarettes after that. I got so addicted that I made my own "cigarette" my rolling up a bit of cotton in a piece of newspaper, and lighting a fire to make it just smoulder. It's not much, and it gives out a lot of smoke, but any kind of smoke does for me. My question is: Is this kind of smoking even more harmful than cigarette smoking, as it gives out more smoke and ash?? 117.194.224.177 (talk) 09:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

We can't give medical advice here, but this cannot be good for you. Please see your doctor or go to your local stop-smoking service. Don't be afraid/embarrassed to explain it to them. Good luck. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

You do not get addicted to smoking from 1 cigarette. As Itsmejudith says you should seek medical advice/help regarding your home-made cigarettes, though seeing as the content has no nicotine there's no reason to suggset these 'cigarettes' would ever produce the same effect you (apparently) crave. I suspect you are being silly because neither the starting of your addiction, nor your attempts to satisfy your craving are realistic in terms of nicotine addiction. More likely the thing you crave is attention... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.133.211 (talk) 10:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Heck no! Nicotine is not what I crave. What I like is the smoke. And as for being addicted to smoking from 1 cigarette, what else will you call the feeling that I have?? I always think about the next time I'll see smoke belching out of my nostrils... 117.194.224.190 (talk) 13:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The feeling may be of 'withdrawl' or it could be infatuation with the idea/memory of smoking, but it is certainly not an addiction. 194.221.133.211 (talk) 13:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps what you think of as an addiction is actually a fetish. It's extremely unlikely (well, just about impossible, really) that you would become addicted from a single cigarette, but if it pushes some kind of a psychosexual button for you, you'd probably notice that right away, the nature of a fetish being what what it is. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 13:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Take a hint from your father and stop before you start. Why don't you talk to him about why he quit smoking and how hard it was to do? Do yourself, your lungs, your teeth, your face, your pocketbook a favor and don't go down that path. I see women every day in my town who look a decade older than they really are because they spent their whole youth smoking. It's ugly stuff and there's no takebacks. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I had something to say, but 98.217 just nailed it. Don't waste your time, health, money, and beauty on something so disgusting. Plasticup ^T/C 18:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

UK Power Outages

where can I find statistics on power outages in regions of the UK ? Thanks. 212.137.53.1 (talk) 11:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

There may be something in the National Grid's current seven year report here. Fribbler (talk) 15:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Commi

While reading the article tibetan buddism I came across a line that read, to paraphrase, some of the larger monastaries were rebuild after the fall of communism in china. OK? This made me think, I always though that communism was still active in china, but just had some alterations made to join in with global capitalism. So I was very suprised to find that we have no article on communism in china nor chinese communismthis one does link but is not what one expects to find. fall of communism in china etc etc etc any help would be appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you talking about the line about Mongolia? The communist government there fell in 1990. Algebraist 11:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I assumed they were one and the same, controlled from the centre. Great, thanks, is there an article on that specifically? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Communist Mongolia was an independent state, aligned with the Soviet Union and opposed to China. I already linked the relevant articles. Algebraist 11:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind, though, that Inner Mongolia, is actually outside of Mongolia the country, and is really part of China. (There's a good explanation for the terminology at Outer Mongolia, which, confusingly, is almost-but-not-quite the same as the current country of Mongolia.) -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 19:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Maroon 5 Cover?

Hello, does anyone know the acoustic version of "makes me wonder" by maroon 5? Is it a cover? If not, is it released somewhere? TastyCakes (talk) 15:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The Makes Me Wonder article has some information, but nothing about the acoustic version. Regardless, it is an original song by Maroon 5. Cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The results from this Google search lead me to believe it's Maroon 5 performing their own song. I can't find a CD version, perhaps it's available for download. --LarryMac | Talk 17:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm I think they may have only released it on radio, as shown here. TastyCakes (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Legalese in ALL CAPS

Why is it that sections of license agreements dealing with warranties are often written in ALL CAPS (as in, for example, the BSD License)? In particular, why is it that the implied warranties of MERCHANTABILITY and FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE are often written like that? Is it required by law or just a tradition? « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 19:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Note: if it changes anything, I'm in the US. « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 19:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I seem to recall there being some court case that made it clear that such warranties and etc. had to be written in a way that emphasized how important they were, that drew attention to them. Of course, like all things like this, the unintended consequence is that we all just ignore such bits as being pure legalese and being almost meaningless. This page for example discusses a few such cases in which the importance of having said warranties "stand out" was ruled upon. I believe the official terminology is that implied warranties must be "conspicuous" which means all capitals, different fonts, etc. It's in the Uniform Commercial Code that it must be conspicuous, and of course it is up the courts to figure out what "conspicuous" means, and all caps is one easy way to get that. --140.247.248.35 (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The Latin uppercase is much harder to read (only one height, no descender, etc), so the warranties are read more slowly. There are much better ways of emphasizing text. MTM (talk) 12:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Font

How can you type in, let's say, Boldface textualis, or "Gothic" style font? Earthan Philosopher (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the question. Generally, when writing on computers, you simply choose a suitable font from the program you're typing in -- provided that such a font is installed on the computer... but this seems so obvious that I wonder if you're asking about something else entirely. Could you be a little more specific? -- Captain Disdain (talk) 21:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps they are asking how to change the font in Wikipedia ? StuRat (talk) 06:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

If so the answer seems to be yes/maybe - if you must.. eg :

<font face="Trebuchet MS" size="3">My Text is written here</font>

gives

My Text is written here

I don't know where you can find a list of available fonts.87.102.86.73 (talk) 09:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Many of these will work http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/html-tutorial/fontlist.htm

My Text is written here

My Text is written here

My Text is written here

My Text is written here

etc.. 87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

There's more at Font family (HTML) - what it displays may depend on your browser...87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Causes of death Vs 9/11 deaths graph, can you find it?

Hey all, interesting request; A while back (i expect submitted to digg, but diggs search is shite so i can't find it) someone released a bar graph showing the yearly deaths in the US (due to heart disease, cancer etc) vs deaths due to 9/11 - with the main result being it wasn't many at all. Does anyone know where i can find this graph as i'd very much like to use it in future. Many thanks -Benbread (talk) 22:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't know any such graph off hand, but all in all, including everyone in the two towers, the planes and on the ground, there were 2,974 victims (excluding the hijackers). That's a lot of people, obviously, but compared to the annual death toll in the United States, it's a drop in the bucket. A very quick Google search turned up these statistics from 2005, which indicate that over one million people die every year from other causes. (I'm not sure how dependable the site's statistics are, but for a country with a population of over 300 million people, I would really expect nothing less.) Of course, the 9/11 deaths are significant for all sorts of other reasons, the least of which -- from a statistical point of view -- isn't that so many people died during a very short period of time as a result of a criminal act... but if you ignore the reasons for and the implications of those deaths, the number doesn't really stand out when compared directly to the number of annual deaths in America. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 23:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Seconding the above, but also adding that to compare deaths from disease and natural causes with murders is not exactly commensurate. You could take other "important deaths"—lynchings of Blacks in the 1960s, deaths of civilians in Iraq, total US dead in Vietnam—and they will always pale in comparison to illness. That doesn't make them unimportant. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course, even if you take violent deaths for comparison, 9/11 wasn't much more than a blip—statistically speaking. In 2001, there were more than 16,000 reported murders and non-negligent homicides—not counting the September 11 deaths[9]. (Note also that even if you did count the 9/11 deaths, the U.S. had more murders and non-negligent homicides every year from 1987 to 1996 than occurred in 2001.)

There were roughly 30,000 deaths by firearms in the United States in 2004[10]. About 45,000 people were killed in U.S. motor vehicle accidents in 2003[11], so you're still safer flying than driving.... TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

To say whether the deaths were statistically significant, you shouldn't compare the 2,974 victims to the average number of deaths from other causes, but to the statistical fluctuations in deaths from those other causes. For example, on an average day, the number of deaths from all causes in the U.S. is on the order of (300,000,000/(75*365)) (population/number of days in a lifetime, approximately) = 11,000. Those deaths can be expected to approximately obey Poisson statistics, because most deaths are uncorrelated. There are exceptions (motor vehicle accidents, structure fires, etc.) but the approximation should be good. Thus the standard deviation in number of deaths per day in the U.S. from all causes is approximately sqrt(11,000) = 105. Therefore, the 2,974 deaths on one day represented a 28-sigma deviation from the average, which is exceptionally significant. You can do the same thing with your annual totals of deaths from violence and accidents, and reach the same conclusion, that the 9/11 deaths were highly significant on an annual basis. On the other hand, if you compare the 9/11 death totals to the total annual U.S. deaths (~4,000,000/year; sqrt(4,000,000) = 2,000) it's only a 1.5-sigma event (i.e. of low statistical significance, similar to the expected year-to-year fluctuations in death totals). -- Coneslayer (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as the vast majority of the victims of 9/11 were office-based employees I would expect that the average-age of a 9/11 victim is much lower than the average age of dieing in that year. It would be more fair to compare the death-rate of that average age against the 9/11 toll because of the 100s of thousands dieing every year a large majority will be dieing at ages far above the average of 9/11 victims. It's always tough to compare the statistics of a tragedy to the more routine/daily death-count because of the nature of their deaths - but I think if people are to they should be a little more 'fair' in the way they do. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that either one of you or I mistunderstands Coneslayer or I misunderstand you. S/He is saying that the number of people to die on an average day in the US is a Poisson variable with a mean of 11000 and a standard deviation of sqrt(11000). I don't think there was an implication that the average age at death in 2001 was the same as the average age of someone in the WTC on that day. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

194's text preceded mine, and was not a response to my discussion of statistics. -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Apologies all round. I should add "or I am a blind moron" to my first sentence. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I would be interested to know how many people die each year from tea-cosy related incidents. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

July 16

Tennis on the news

Is there some kind of reason why when the tennis scores come on the news they always put on the worst possible picture of the two competitors, especially so with the womens games. Is it a running inside joke within the media or just tradition or because they can't be bothered to find any niceish ones? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.107.197 (talk) 00:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

They do the same with politicians!--88.110.139.63 (talk) 06:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

They do worse with politicians! There's a trick where you take two pictures in rapid succession; the person puts on a good face for the first, and the second catches them reacting to the flash. You print the second. 79.66.90.252 (talk) 22:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they buy the best-value photos, rather than spending a fortune on Associated Press shots that only appear on screen for 5 seconds? This way the newspapers pay for the pricey 'high quality' shots, and the tv stations save money by having the 'budget' shots that are perhaps less flattering/not as sharp/less dynamic etc. Photographs are rather expensive and businesses are always looking to cut costs, this could be one way of doing that I guess? Just speculation though, but then I suppose seing as 'worst possible picture' is opinion based a speculative response is as good as can be expected. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Or maybe they are using photos of the athletes doing what they are good at, i.e. competing in a sporting event, rather than looking glamorous. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

San Diego bus route question

As the title suggests, I live in San Diego, California. I want to know if you can get a single day bus pass, so you can ride as many busses as you want for that day. I also want to know what the route to the Us/Mexico border is on the bus route. Thank you75.62.207.163 (talk) 02:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Day passes are detailed here and the routes to the border at San Ysidro are 932 and 929. Rockpocket 02:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

If you are near the San Diego Trolley, you can take the Blue Line to San Ysidro. Nricardo (talk) 10:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

WWII and FDR

I recently saw a picture in which FDR is declaring war after the Japanese Pearl Harbor bombing. The caption specifically mentions the president wearing a black band without explaining its significance. What does the black band on his left arm mean? Is it something that presidents wear traditionally when declaring war or something? And also, when was the last time we officially declared war? Was it WWII?--A Real Kaiser...NOT! (talk) 07:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

See Armband. At that time, it wouldn't have been necessary to point out why he was wearing the black armband. They're worn when someone close to you has recently died or when some significant event has caused many deaths and you are in mourning. That custom is no longer widely observed though. Dismas|^(talk) 07:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

For the second question, see Declaration of war by the United States. The short answer is June 5, 1942. Dismas|^(talk) 07:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The armband was for his mother, Sara Delano Roosevelt, who died 7 September, 1941.—eric 07:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

On a side note - this custom is still observed in the UK though mainly within sporting-events (footballers often can be seen sporting black-armbands). Politically I haven't noticed any recent times Prime Ministers wearing an armband, though wearing a memorial-day poppy is standard-issue for anybody appearing on tv in the weeks around Remembrance Sunday. The flag flying at half-mast policy seems to be the preferred method used in the UK for marking a tragic event. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 07:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify the Poppy is the symbol of the sacrifice of so many men in WWI. The fields of Belgium were covered in poppies as the men died. Poppies of all sizes are marks of donations to assist today's injured troops.86.200.134.214 (talk) 10:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)DT

Eeehhh *wibble motion with hand* Sort of. The association of poppies with the dead of WW1, the wearing of them and the whole remembrance thing was so grassroots in many ways, and in many ways continues to be, that it's hard to say exactly what it symbolises or marks to any given person. Certainly getting a plastic poppy involves making a donation to assist soldiers, or feeling horribly guilty, but I'd be careful of assuming someone wearing a poppy means the same as you do. 79.66.90.252 (talk) 22:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The arm band was more likely due to Pearl Harbour than it was for his mothers death, however his reasoning could have been two fold193.115.175.247 (talk) 13:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)Zionist

This site agrees that it was for his mother. A Google search finds a number of mentions (and images) of him wearing it prior to the Pearl Harbor attack. Deor (talk) 16:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

He started wearing a black silk armband after his mother's death. "Mr. Roosevelt wore a dark blue business suit and black tie. On his left arm was a black silk band. He wore his glasses." (Washington Post, 10 September 1941, burial of FDR's mother) That's the only time the press mentioned the arm band—my bet is that he was still wearing it a few months later when Pearl Harbor was attacked. They saw fit to comment on it when he first put it on, but nobody said a thing about it later, leading me to think he hadn't changed anything about it. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

spanish city

capital of moorish spain in 8th century —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.237.157 (talk) 11:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Elvira, part of modern Granada in Andalucia, southern Spain, which went on to become the Alhambra Palace, one of the truly "must see" collections of buildings anywhere. Wiki has a very good series of articles about the Alhambra and Granada and their place in the Muslim Kingdom that was eventually conquered by the Spanish Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella in 1492, thus returning all of Spain to Christian rule. 92.3.31.27 (talk) 11:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

And here are the links: Granada, Andalucia, Spain, Alhambra. StuRat (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The questioner asks for the capital of Moorish Spain or Al-Andalus in the 8th century. Granada did not become the capital of what remained of Al-Andalus until the 13th century. At the beginning of the 8th century, the Moors had not yet invaded Spain. After they conquered most of Spain, they established their first capital at Seville in 715. Four years later, in 719, the capital shifted to Córdoba, where it remained for the rest of the 8th century and right through until the 11th century. Even after the fall of the Caliphate of Córdoba, Córdoba remained the chief city of Moorish Spain until its conquest by Castile in 1236. It was only during the final phase of the Moorish civilization in Spain that Granada was the Moorish capital. Marco polo (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

funny short story

Hi, I'm doing an funny short story for class and I wanted to know which is worse, Kate Humble dressed as Bill Oddie or Bill Oddie dressed as Kate Humble? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.88.87 (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Worse in what way? Itsmejudith (talk) 14:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

That is a value judgement, and since you are the author, you're the one who gets to make the judgement. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

A male dressed as a woman is generally used more often for comedic effect than a woman dressed as a man. Namely because a woman in man's clothing isn't as easy to 'notice' the difference visually (plenty of female clothes look like men's clothes but with the exception of kilts and a few other items, men in dresses are instantly noticed as no dressed in 'male' clothing). For that reason I would suggest Bill Oddie dressed as Kate Humble... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.133.226 (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree that men dressed as women tend to have more comedic potential, but Kate Humble (at least on Springwatch) doesn't really dress in a particularily feminine way. As far as I remember it is pretty much just jeans and jumpers, so unless he has got a curly blonde wig on as well then it may not look that strange. Franmars (talk) 15:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Has anyone seen the Goodies ?? 62.56.89.38 (talk) 00:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

That links to a disambig. page, so I'm guessing you mean specifically The Goodies? If so, to answer your question, no. Dismas|^(talk) 00:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, to answer the question yes (given that "anybody" can be anybody, and someone somewhere must have watched it). I did, for one. Bigfoot, they call him bigfoot... Grutness...wha? 02:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Aribert Heim

So they believe him to still be alive and well and living in SAmerica. So 1, why doesn't some one just go there and strangle the bastard as has been done in the past by some Sonderkommando survivers as detailed in the movie and book Shoah. 2 could his daughter be prosecuted for harbouring a fugetive? or some other sort of crime such as hiding a mass murderer, conspiracy, aiding and abetting or accomplace to whatever. Thanks Zionist193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Finding one person in a place as vast as South America (which is 17,840,000 km squared according to the article) isn't exactly as easy as just 'going and doing it'. Secondly resorting to barbaric tactics against a barbarian reduces that individual to their level. Better that they are placed on trial and made accountable in a court-of-law for their actions, that way the hideous crimes they have committed are not reduced in significance by an angry-mob taking vengence on the person. Finally yes if someone is harboring a suspected criminal then my understanding is that most nations will consider that a criminal offence and upon finding them they too will be subject to prosecution and potential punishment for their crimes. ny156uk (talk) 15:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Why don't they go in and murder the guy? Well, the Sonderkommando survivors themselves are, at this point, in their eighties at best. They're not likely to be in any shape for trekking through South America and engaging first in possibly dangerous and positively arduous detective work and then some wet work. So why doesn't someone else do it? Because it is murder, for starters -- justifiable, possibly, but I'd say that most people don't see the appeal in murdering a guy who's so old that he's liable to drop dead any day now from natural causes (supposing that he's not dead already), no matter how much of an utter bastard he is. I don't think too many people want to go to jail for him. That's in addition to the fact that finding him is very, very hard, what with South America being just a little on the large side.

As for his daughter, prosecuting her might well be possible, but then again, that would require evidence that she knows where he is and that she has aided him, which is probably easier said than done. (In practice, this would probably require catching Heim himself first, as that would probably result in said evidence.) If she is helping him, they're probably not being stupid about it, as evidenced by the fact that he hasn't been caught yet. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 17:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

What species is my hat?

I have an old Russian fur hat(apparently a few decades old, since the label says "CCCP"), and I'm not sure what kind of fur it's made from. The fur is slightly coarse in texture, each hair about half an inch long, light brown and tipped with a darker reddish-auburn color. There are patches where off-white skin is visible. Based on this information, can anyone determine what animal the fur came from? 68.123.238.140 (talk) 16:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Ushanka might be helpful. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 00:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

From your description, it sounds like muskrat, or Ondatra zibethicus. Marco polo (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Joshin ya

Moved to the Language Desk: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Joshin_ya -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Tie-breaking procedures

Are there standard tie-breaking criteria for FIFA or CONCACAF football matches? I've been looking all over for the criteria for the [2008 Canadian Championship] and [2008 North American SuperLiga]. Can someone help me out? 75.21.167.0 (talk) 17:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

In general, in a knockout tournament (in a league a draw's a draw, of course), you possibly have a full replay, followed (or replaced) by extra time, followed by a contest of kicks from the penalty mark. If you mean you want to know how ties are broken in league tables, it's normally on goal difference. But all this is not standardized; you should read the competition regulations to be sure. Algebraist 18:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Here are the Canadian regulations. I'm having trouble finding them for the superliga. Algebraist 19:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

archaelogical materials

What defines archaelogical materials? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.240.83 (talk) 18:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Any material that would be of interest to an archaeologist, see archaeology

Was the question intended to be more specific??87.102.86.73 (talk) 19:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way archaeology means 'study of old things'.87.102.86.73 (talk) 19:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

July 17

Citations

On the North Irish Horse page authentication of the four Tank Brigades, in which the Regiment was a component, is requested. How do I provide the necessary proof?

Gerry Chester —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerry Chester (talk • contribs) 02:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

A goverment document stating the make up of the brigades would do, as would a newspaper saying the same.

Also a history book which states the same is also a good reference.

If you can find any of those simply add the reference see Wikipedia:Citing sources to begin.

If you get stuck with the editing of the references just ask - someone will be able to help you (or look at Wikipedia:Citation templates or Wikipedia:Citing_sources/example_style)

If you get the document (it doesn't have to be a book - a historical documentary can also be used) simply add a reference section and something like this

Book title, publisher, author, page numbers...

87.102.86.73 (talk) 03:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

You can also use a web site as a reference.87.102.86.73 (talk) 03:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Studying Abroad

Does it cost more to study abroad then to study in your own hometown? SlaveofBetrayal (talk) 06:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Usually, but it depends on many things. In some countries higher education is completely free. Most students also need to think about their living expenses. In your hometown you might be able to live with parents or relatives and you would know how to find a part-time job to help finance yourself. Some countries do not allow international students to work at all. Itsmejudith (talk) 07:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

To expand on Itsmejudith's comments, countries that have free or subsidised higher education do not always extend it to all overseas students. UK Universities have subsidised fees (or free in Scotland) for UK citizens, which I think is available to all EU citizens but not people from other countries. On the other hand some Universities have scholarships exclusively available to overseas students. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Not EU citizens, strictly. You have to have been ordinarily resident in the EU for three years, IIRC. Algebraist 10:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Note: whilst EU residents are typically regarded as 'home' students, I don't think this is the case in Scotland, for some reason. The fees here are free only for Scots - English students who come up to study have to pay something comparable to the fees down south (or cheaper - fees for non-ancient universities are generally much lower, I believe, being in the region of £1,500 rather than ~£3000). Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 13:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

In the US, at least in California, in-state residents are charged lower fees to attend state schools, than out-of-state residents are charged. Corvus cornix_talk 21:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"Send this in confidence to..."

OK, this might be dumb question, but what precisely does it mean to send something to someone else "in confidence"? Zagalejo^^^ 06:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It means to send it in such a way that intermediate people who have to handle it understand that it's intended for the end user, and is private for their eyes only. -- JackofOz (talk) 06:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Thanks! Zagalejo^^^ 07:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Download original Vocals?

I've recently started playing around with some electronic music production software and have found plenty of sites where I can upload any music I produce. But what I can't find are sites where I can download other people's original vocals that I can incorporate into my songs. Does anyone know of a site like this? There must be singers out there with original compositions but no instrumentation, who want people like me to put music to their work, where can I find them? Thank you. Iiidonkeyiii (talk) 07:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

This looks like a possibility, but you have to sign up so I didn't check. And here's the google search I used with a few similar sites on it. Fribbler (talk) 10:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the way football (soccer) looks and is played

Watching the Euro 2008 tournament last month, I was struck by a few changes in the way professional football looks and is played now from when I used to follow it as a boy in the 70s and 80s. I would like to know the reasons for these changes, which would include:

• Previously, the goalkeeper would always wear a green shirt, and the rest of his strip was the same as the outfield team. Nowadays, he seems to wear whatever colour he likes.
• Previously, the referee would only ever wear all black. Now, again, he wears all sorts of colours.
• Previously, the team would wear numbers 1 to 11 for each match. Therefore, if a team played a different (for example) goalkeeper from one match to the next, both goalkeepers would wear number 1. Nowadays, players have squad numbers which they keep throughout the season, always wearing the same number for each match.
• Previously, if the ball went well out out of play (for example, into the stands), it had to be retrieved. It was important that the same ball be used for the whole of the match. Nowadays, there is an endless supply of balls which are brought into play from the touchline if the ball goes well out of play.
• Previously, if there was a draw at the end of a big game such as the FA Cup Final, a replay would take place. Nowadays, it is decided on penalties. I can guess the reason here - that a big final needs to be decided on the night - but I don't necessarily agree with it. And if that's the case, why were replays used for so long?

--Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The referee not wearing all black is likely due to games involving teams with near-black kit themselves. The numbers thing is likely for convenience - you don't need to have several different numbered shirts for a substitute to wear, he just wears his own - and the finals thing I would reckon is due to the problems of scheduling (TV and real life) such a large match at short notice. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

• In order to maximise revenue from shirt-sales goalkeeper kits are more 'designed' now than in the past. Provided they are noticeably different to outfield players tops they can be any colour. This is required to make it possible for officials to tell them apart with ease.
• As noted provided the ref wears colours that make them stand out this makes it possible for clubs to be more flexible in their shirt-designs. Clubs like Newcastle Utd/Inter Milan/Ac Milan have a lot of black in their kits so it is better for refs to wear more contrasting kit wherever possible.
• In the Premiership teams choose between the 'multi-ball' approach and the 'single' ball approach. There was some controversary when during a game I think it was Spurs removed all the spare-balls from the side of the pitch to 'waste time'. The reason for multi-ball is less time is wasted retrieving a ball, so more time is spent with the ball in play (the ball is in play for a shockingly small amount of a game of football as it is).
• The modern game has huge numbers of fixtures. Replays have been removed to ensure that players do not play 'too many' games, and to ease fixture congestion. I wouldn't be surprised if there was also a part of this that was to do with broadcasters wanting to ensure that they maximise viewing-figures - if it is a one-game final that must end on the day the incentive to stay watching a dull 0-0 is much higher than if you know that with 20 minutes to go both teams are going to end up playing for a replay rather than risk getting beaten.

Other changes you may have not noticed/perhaps purposefully didn't mention:

• The pass back rule - introduced to make the game flow better and to make negative play harder
• 3 points for a win - designed to promote more attacking football
• Removal of foreign-player limits. I think it is not only 3 non-EU players per-squad for European competitions, previously I think there was a different rule (can't remember what though)
• 'active' and 'non-active' off-side. Aimed at making off-sides occur less it seeks only to stop the game when an 'active' player is in an off-side position. This is a controversial law.

There are others but I don't have the time spare to go into any more, sorry 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that, most useful. You seem to know a lot so let me ask you something else about offside. I'm sure I remember there used to be a rule that a player could not be offside if the ball was played forward to him from within his own half. But I can't find any reference to such a rule in the literature so am I imagining it?

On the ref wearing black kit, I take the points made but what I don't understand is why this change has only taken place in recent years. In the 70s Newcastle were wearing black and white but I bet the ref still wore black to officiate at Newcastle matches back then. Or if he didn't, I bet it was only for Newcastle matches that he wore a different colour, he reverted to black for other matches. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 11:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Could another reason for having players "own" the numbers be that it helps with shirt sales? Seven seems like a popular number so give it to guys like Beckham and sell more shirts. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

1) The ownership of shirts was to help the match officials - if every player has their name of their back, it reduces the risk of the wrong name going into the book when a player is booked (especially if a shirt has been replaced during the macth, e.g., if it's been damaged and a new one is put on for the second half). It also makes identifying players easier for commentators. It's an idea imported from sports like baseball and gridiron, and not a bad one.

2) There was never an offside rule about the ball being passed from the players own half. however, a player cannot be offside if he was in his own half when the ball was played. As far as I know this law hasn't changed.

3) It wasn't quitethe case that 'keepers always wore green. They did in the UK and some other countries, though if they were an international keeper they were entitled to wear yellow. It was different in some countries, though - ISTR the great Dino Zoff wearing black for Italy during the 1970s.

4) Not sure about the refs, though with the increasingly exotic colours of team strips, it may have been necessary for referees to have "away strips". IIRC Manchester United briefly toyed with a black away strip, which if worn would have caused problems for refs (as for "only Newcastle united matches", there would have been the same problems with West Brom and some other teams. ISTR that one of Scotland's club sides wears black sometimes, too).

5) Replays are far better than shootouts, and were regularly used in the days when scheduling was less tight. With modern football it isn't always possible for teams to arrange replay dates - and for big matches the logistics of organising security services, of booking the stadium, and of arranging media outside broadcasts are also major considerations. The FA got fed up with scheduling problems with replays sometime around the late-80s and have used penalty shootouts ever since (sadly). Grutness...wha? 13:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Nazi

Why when so many Nazis were sentanced to death, did some of them, who were quilty of astounding crimes against humanity, get life sentances, or shorter, or were released from prison after just a few years? Why was the extrodition of so may of them not granted by countries like Argentina, Chile, Brazil ect to countries like Israel, Poland ect, and why does this continue today, see Albert Heim question above. Furthermore, if so many Nazis escaped via ratlines to various countries, why did Hitler not. These ratlines were organized by the inner cirlce, so why did he not jump ship too? Can some one please provide me with links to alternative theories on what happened to Hitler after the war. Thanks people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hitler killed himself because he was a zealot facing the unthinkable - that he had been wrong. As for what happened to him, there are no other theories worth mentioning. He killed himself. Plasticup ^T/C 12:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Great question! Well, there's no definite way to know why Hitler didn't escape, since the only guy who knows for sure is Hitler, and he's dead. But we can make some well-educated guesses. First of all -- where the hell would he run to? Your average guy in some other country wouldn't know who Aribert Heim is, for example. Everyone would recognize Hitler; he was the personification of all of Nazi Germany, arguably the most famous face of World War II and certainly the most demonized man of the era. He wasn't someone who could easily blend into a crowd, and he would be the most wanted man of all. There are people who could slip through the cracks in the confusion, but Hitler would be very unlikely to be one of them.

Furthermore, he didn't want to escape. He was fanatical about the German military might and destined victory, and was pretty clearly in denial about the outcome of the war for a long time, insisting that they could still win even though it was becoming completely obvious that they could not. When he finally accepted that they couldn't, it was a great blow to him, but at that point it was too late to run -- they were already surrounded by the enemy. He could've cut out before, but now it was virtually impossible.

So why suicide instead of surrender? Well, he undoubtedly felt betrayed and harassed. Hermann Göring had attempted to assume control of Germany, Heinrich Himmler was secretly negotiating with the Allies. Hitler apparently didn't want to get executed like Mussolini. And even if that didn't happen, the humiliation of defeat was probably bad enough for him; getting further humiliated in a trial was probably an even less appealing thought -- and he really couldn't look forward to anything but another execution after that, if a little more formal one.

As for extradition, I'm sure money was a factor in it, but it's not the whole truth: it's not as if people like Aribert Heim are necessarily protected by the countries they're in, even if the governments of the time were friendly to them. They undoubtedly have false identities and long-running ties in the country. The governments in question are unlikely to know what their current names are or that they are Nazi war criminals. That's the whole point: if someone were to contact the Argentinan government and say "hey, by the way, that guy by this name and who lives in this address is actually a Nazi war criminal, and here's the evidence for that, could you go and arrest him and deliver him to us?", they would be likely to say "sure thing, we'll get back to you in a couple of hours when we've picked him up." But they don't know where Aribert Heim is, what his name is, where he lives, or even what he looks like today. They can try and track him down, sure, but it's not like he's living publicly under that name in some nice house with a sign that says "Old Nazi Bastard" on the front...

And finally, the sentencing: the death penalty is a pretty controversial sentence, even for Nazi war criminals. And they did hand out quite a bunch of them: of the 24 accused in the Nuremberg trials, for example, 12 were sentenced to death. Only three of them were acquitted. One of the 24 committed suicide before the trial, and one was eventually tried in another trial. The rest of them got prison sentences ranging from 10 years to life imprisonment. So why did Karl Dönitz, for example, get only 10 years? Because he was a naval commander, who perhaps fought dirty, but he was a soldier. It can be argued (and has been argued) that it's hypocritical to accuse him of those actions, when the people responsible for events that claimed extraordinary numbers of civilian lives, like the Dresden bombing or nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- just to pick the two obvious examples -- on the winning side don't end up in comparable trials. Of course, Dönitz was a Nazi and a dick, but neither of those things are in themselves crimes. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

And now for an alternative theory... DAVID ŠENEK 17:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Not only is that one of my favorite Python bits, it's also a lot more credible than most other theories. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 18:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

and don't forget the power of the teutonic myths in the whole nazi movement; lots off heroic tragic endings, going down in flames, etc. way better than getting captured and sentenced. Gzuckier (talk) 18:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

which gives me an excuse to bring up my favorite webpage again: Fuhrerpants!!! Gzuckier (talk) 18:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

If Hitler had shed the stupid haircut and mustache, he could have become "Senor Shgruber" and lived to age 80 in South America, seeing his grandchildren via Eva Braun grow to adulthood. Numerous other ex-Nazis moved there and prospered. At the end, he had a pilot and an airplane available. Edison (talk) 05:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ach! Das Wagenphone ist ein nuisancephone! Adam Bishop (talk) 07:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Flax Seed Oil

Where is food-grade flaxseed oil sold? Can I pick it up at most grocery stores and/or mega retailers, like Wal Mart? Or is this an item I would need to get from GMC-type place? Also, what is the average cost for a bottle? Are we talking five bucks or twenty plus?

FYI - I have no access to the internet (other then Wikipedia..) so I can't look this up myself. Thanks in advance.--Endless Dan 17:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

According to some random guy on a random internet forum, Walmart sells 8 ounces of organic flaxseed oil for around $5.50. [12] Plasticup ^T/C 17:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! --Endless Dan 18:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

it's in the vitamin aisles at stop and shop, etc. mostly in capsules, although i do have a recent small bottle of just the oil, wants to be kept in the fridge when open, one teaspooon per day. or were you looking for frying quantities? Gzuckier (talk) 18:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I wanted to look into taking it as a health supplement. Any noticeable changes? I've read it's a long-term commitment.--Endless Dan 20:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand it's high in phytoestrogens so may be helpful if you're going through the menopause. It has multiple uses, not just in cookery but in the home and workshop, e.g. as a wood preservative. In principle it should be very cheap, but food grades are obviously much more expensive than household grades (which may be blended with turpentine or other inedibles). Itsmejudith (talk) 21:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Male Cardinal (bird) behavior

The trim on my house is painted brick red and when it get wet and the light is not full brightness due to cloud cover or dawn or dusk male Cardinals are attracted to it and chirp and hop and fly around it as if to claim it as their own or as if they are calling a mate or the owner. They will do this for about five to ten minutes at a time. They do not seem to be attracted to other red objects such a vehicles. What might explain this behavior? -- adaptron (talk) 21:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

...further reading suggests this is territorial. -- adaptron (talk) 22:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

WTF - A Googlebomb on wikipedia

I Googled "Jokepedia" which is a wiki about jokes, and Google said: "Did you mean Wikipedia?"

Google "Jokepedia" and you'll see this. 65.173.104.138 (talk) 23:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It's just trying to be helpful and correct your spelling. The same thing happens if you type "vickipedia", or various other things with a "K" and a "pedia" in them. --Masamage ♫ 23:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I think this looks like a googlebomb. bibliomaniac15 23:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, forgot that part. Had to look up grok in your statement. bibliomaniac15 03:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Then you do not grok google bomb, which is an attempt to influence the ranking of a given page in results returned by Google. What we are seeing here is not a top ranked listing. What we are seeing is an (entirely normal, as per the first reply) suggestion by google that you might be looking for something else. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

As said, I Googled "Jokepedia" and it said, "Did you mean Wikipedia". At the bottom of the page is similar matter, thus is why I suspect a "Googlebomb".65.173.104.138 (talk) 00:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Deep breath. Look at this google search for George Bosh. Note that's Bosh. See the "Did you mean: George Bush" lines at the top & bottom? That's google trying to be helpful. Now click on the image to the right so you can see it really big. That's a google bomb. A search for "miserable failure" has brought back George Bush as the first listing. Notice that there are no "did you mean xxx yyyy" which is what we are seeing in the jokepedia instance under discussion? Now can you see the difference? --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You can suspect whatever you want, but you're still wrong. What you're seeing is an ordinary Google spelling suggestion. If it were a google bomb, it would appear as a search result, with the associated "Cached", "Similar Pages", etc., links and the URL in green. -- Coneslayer (talk) 00:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks guys. Now to find out where I can move in here at. Don't say "the shithouse". 65.173.104.138 (talk) 00:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

(Image was removed and replaced with a "nonfree image removed image", which is confusing. The original image is this one. Click it, yo.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

July 18

Ethiopian Wolf Picture

Does anyone have a copy/link to the original version of this [13] portrait of an Ethiopian Wolf. It was based off a picture in National Geographic a while back, I think. 67.169.56.232 (talk) 00:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Meaning of the Proverb

Can any one tell me the meaning of the proverb/idiom "As good as a mile!" its origin and where to use that? --202.83.165.250 (talk) 03:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This would get better/more responses on the Language desk. Dismas|^(talk) 04:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Recorded in Remaines, concerning Britaine, William Camden, 1605 as: An inch in a miss is as good as an ell, and a 3 December, 1825 entry in Sir Walter Scott's journal: "He was very near being a poet—but a miss is as good as a mile, and he always fell short of the mark." Smith, William George. (1935). The Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs.—eric 04:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

"Close only counts with horse-shoes and hand grenades." (Nearness to the target helps to win in the game of horse-shoe tossing, and in the military tactic of handgrenade throwing). If a bullet misses, it just simply misses, and the target is not inconvenienced by being torn asunder or affected in any way at all. A bullet missing by 1/2 inch is equal to a bullet missing by a mile, as if it had been fired in the opposite direction from the target. Edison (talk) 05:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Blue chip client base

Does anyone know what a blue chip client base is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.213.240.1 (talk) 11:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

A blue chip stock is that of a large company with relatively large shareholders' equity relative to its assets. Your client is an entity you do business with. A client base is a set of clients you regularly do business with. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Important question

Does someone feigning Munchausen's syndrome have Munchausen's syndrome?

Adambrowne666 (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

How would someone feign Munchausen syndrome? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Why would you go to a mega concert?

Why do people go to megaconcerts like U2 and the like? Isn't it like watching television if you are not in the front?

Mr.K. (talk) 11:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Largely for the atmosphere, also because it is an event to attend. Watching something on tv is enjoyable, but going out the house and having a night-out watching it will be a different experience. So you watch it on the tvs there? So what - you're still at the concert, you're still hearing it live (rather than through your tv) and you're still experiencing the atmosphere/excitement of a live-concert. I can honestly say that i've seen comedians live that were amazing, but on tv come across terribly. Tv coverage is great and i'm not going to say it's 'worse' than being there, but it is definitely a different experience. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

A comedian in a small room is definitely something different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.K. (talk • contribs) 12:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Mario Shindou

What is the difference between "Super Mario 64" and "Super Mario 64 - Shindou Edition"?

September songs

Why do many songs have the word September in them, like Green Day's "When September Ends" or Evan Taubenfeld's "Best Days of Our Lives" and various other songs which I can't remember?