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

January 15

Mail Without Postage

If a piece of mail is sent without proper postage, it is typically returned to the return address listed on the outside of the envelope/package, yes? If that's the case, what's to stop me from skipping the stamp and just writing my intended address as the return address? Voila, free postage. I can't imagine that this would actually work, but I can't figure out why not. Obviously, if the mailman came everyday to find a stack of letters without stamps, he'd soon figure out my scheme, but that just means I'd have to drop them in a public mailbox somewhere. Or maybe packages without postage don't get returned to the sender. But if that's the case, what happens to them? 98.228.74.177 (talk) 01:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

If you place enough stamps for say air mail on a package from the U.S. to U.k. and just place it straight in the post box without having to go inside the post office and have it checked to see that it has enough postage.It will arrive in the U.K. not franked,so then you can pull off the stamps and use again on a new packet.You can effectively use the same stamps over and over again until it might just get franked,by that time,you have used the same stamps a dozen times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Just so that we have all of the parameters, what would you propose for the "address" of such mail? hydnjo talk 01:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Depending on the country in which you live the following may happen - If you are in Town A and address a letter to Town B with a return to sender address in Town C, as soon as the item of mail hits the sorting office in Town A it is scanned and checked for correct postage and the stamps (if any) are marked/franked as used. If the machine detects that the letter does not have the correct postage it will mark it as such and send it for returning to sender. It is very unlikely it will ever reach Town B. When the return to sender address is being checked, the post person will go 'hang on, the frank on the stamp says this letter first entered the postal system in this town, how can the return address be another town? For this letter to have got from Town C to Town A when it's addressed to Town B isn't a very likely occurrence, and hey, it doesn't have enough postage anyway so should have been rejected in Town C when it entered the mail system, I'm confused, oh well, I'll just throw it in the dead letter bin. Nanonic (talk) 02:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

In the UK, the postman would knock on your front door with your letter in hand (stamped "excess postage due") and ask if you wanted to pay the excess postage to take delivery of the mail - you pay up or he'd take it away and destroy it. It happened EVERY year with a particular aunt's Xmas card. That was a while back though things may have changed. SteveBaker (talk) 02:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

These days, the postman (or woman) leaves a card stating excess postage is due. The postman cannot take cash from customers so there is an option to stick stamps on the card, or you can go to the post office to pay the fee. In the case of franked mail, and insufficient postage, the excess is charged to the account of the person or company that sent the item. -=# Amos E Wolfe ^talk #=- 11:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

If the postman can't take cash - how are COD (Cash-on-Delivery) transactions handled? Perhaps they aren't handled anymore? It was certainly a curious system where the post office acted (in effect) as an escrow service. SteveBaker (talk) 15:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

COD would be handled by a courier, not Royal Mail. --Tango (talk) 22:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

There may be a few legitimate cases when the return address isn't where the mail was sent from. For example if you're holiday in town A for a short time your still going to write your sender address as in your home town. In any cae I seem to recall hearing that this happened sometimes in NZ primarily with Asian (or was it Chinese?) students although I don't know how common it was/is. It could have just been a few incidents which someone took hold of because of the 'evil foreign students' angle Nil Einne (talk) 13:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

The post office has obviously considered this. A USPS rule proposal from the 1990s notes that " As is currently the case with mail bearing no postage, mail displaying no return address or a return address that is actually the address of the intended recipient would be sent to a Postal Service mail recovery center." Presumably they detect the latter case by looking at where the postage is deposited, as others have suggested. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I vaguely remember that in the Netherlands, such a letter is (or was) just delivered anyway because with such a mass process any other action than the standard one would be too expensive. Provided it doesn't happen too often. For most people the cost a stamp is nothing compared to the value of the message in the letter, so people are not going to take risks, so it will only happen infrequently, when people forget. They've got the stamps in their homes anyway. But that may be changing now that paper letters are getting ever less common, as they are being replaced by email. I think that in the last 5 years I have sent a stamped letter maybe twice. All other paper mail is prepaid - either a response to something sent to me or in a special envelope to my bank, which doesn't require a stamp. So maybe the way the post office deals with this has changed by now. Oh, btw, what about holiday cards? Little point in returning them to sender. :) DirkvdM (talk) 12:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

There is certainly point in returning holiday cards to the sender. Grandma's around the world are sticking $20 bills inside cards to send to distant grandkids. SteveBaker (talk) 15:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I think Dirk meant postcards, sent to friends at home while one is on holiday ("vacation"). As he says, not a lot of point in sending those back where they came from, as most people will have finished their holiday and returned home by then. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Well as I mentioned above (after you posted), if you are sending mail while on holiday you would usually put your return address as your home address. At least I would. Of course, most postcards don't have place for a return address so it's a bit of a moot point there Nil Einne (talk) 13:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I suspect Dirk is right. I've always thought that is what the post would do particularly if it's only slightly short of postage but I've never been sure. I suspect it's usually the same if they do return to the sender. Of course, once people start to game the system, things may change Nil Einne (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Just to add to the mix my personal experience: Two of my friends (A and B) once took a piece of their homework and folded it in half, put A's address in the to spot, B's address in the from spot. They threw it in a public mailbox 2 hours away. It ended up in B's mailbox, without being actually sealed or anything. --omnipotence407 (talk) 01:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Publically Produced, Privately Provisioned Postal System

The above question got me thinking about my usual perspective on a publicly (produced) mail system (I make the distinction between "production" and "provisioning" of a good or service because government can choose to intervene in a market in either or both ways, however, choosing to "provision" (deciding who sends what where) isn't exactly applicable in this case).

What arguments exist in support of a public postal system in developed, western countries? Or more specifically, if one didn't exist today, what argument exists to create a public system rather than let the free market (with some subsidies for low-volume locations) do the job?NByz (talk) 09:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

One thing that comes to mind is the legal aspects of the mail system. Even with subsidies, FedEx or whoever could still decline to deliver mail to a given location, and the government would have no way to mail you your tax bill, which is a part of the government they tend to keep running with great dedication and zeal. --Sean 12:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

That's not really an issue though - the US government passes laws requiring telephone and broadcast TV services to service everyone in their coverage area no matter the cost or difficulty. It could to the same with private mail service. In fact, it's only the existence of the USPS that makes such a law unnecessary. However, just as with the phone service - there are issues with international connections. For example, there are agreements between countries in the world so that (for example) a letter posted in France with a French postage stamp and the money from that stamp going to the French government - will be accepted by the USPS and delivered free of charge to the appropriate address here in the USA...PROVIDING THAT a letter mailed in the USA with a US stamp on it gets the same treatment in France. This bilateral agreement is an essential thing. However, if there were more than one "carrier of choice" - so if FedEx and UPS were the mail carriers and the USPS didn't exist - there would doubtless be major problems in how mail from France got delivered in the USA - would FedEx do it for free? Would UPS do it for free? If the law required it to be done for free would FedEx refuse to do it on the grounds that FedEx mail to France is delivered by FedEx's French subsidiary so they aren't getting fair recompense for their efforts in delivering mail from the French postal service for free. This is not by any means a simple matter.

What's interesting is how this is developing with the Internet - where the costs for sending a message are shared 50/50 between sender and recipient instead of being paid for exclusively by the sender. Where the bandwidth requirements are symmetrical - it all seems very fair - but when (for example) YouTube transmits millions of times more bytes than it recieves - the symmetry is broken and ISP's want to start charging them for the bandwidth they consume.

It's fairly amazing that telephone services still work across national boundaries - but somehow that's still working out OK. It may not last! SteveBaker (talk) 15:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

In the Netherlands, that's what we 'always' had. Then, in the privatisation craze of the nineties, the postal service was also privatised. In the name of the free market. Except that there is no free market because there is still just one postal company (for normal mail, I mean, not for special deliveries or mass mail). Everything has remained the same. So I now wonder about the opposite. How does this work in a free market? Does every postal company have its own stamps and mailboxes in the streets and mailmen? Sounds horribly inefficient. Does that even exist anywhere? I have travelled a lot and sent mail from all over the world and can't remember being faced with choices between companies anywhere. DirkvdM (talk) 13:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

So long as there is just one 'preferred carrier' you're OK - it doesn't particularly matter whether it's government owned or private. In the letter market - there is (essentially) no choice - but even in the Netherlands, you must have a choice for parcel mail - I'm sure your local postal service competes with (at least) FedEx. Parcels are (increasingly) where the business is because letters are being made largely obsolete by email, phone and fax - where purchasing things over the Internet has pushed the parcel business to new heights. If you consider the mail services as becoming increasingly a parcel service that also supports very formal document handling (eg contracts and such - which are frequently Fed-Ex'ed around the world) - then the world has already changed. SteveBaker (talk) 15:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

In NZ we do have competing postal services since ~1998[1] [2]. But they were never really successful and many died [3]. Some were or are used to a limited by businesses I believe but still I don't think much. Indeed I'm only aware of one that offered a full nationwide service and only a few offered international mail. Local parcel services and couriers have of course been more successful although even there, many aren't used that much by mainstream customers, more by customers who use them frequently (businesses, people who sell a lot of stuff on TradeMe etc). Even then NZ/Courier Post does dominate and these are more commonly courier or almost courer service (i.e. relatively high cost but relatively high speed.) For cheaper parcel rates albeit at a lower speed and with limited or no tracking and limited insurance NZ Post is really the only provider. Also these are all semi-local companies though, none of the lare multinational conglomerates have any real presence except perhaps for the important document business (not sure there). (The same in Malaysia from my expeirence.) Technically I guess since NZ Post has an agreement with DHL you could say they have some presence but nearly anyone using Courier Post is more thinking NZ Post then DHL. The international market is somewhat different of course where the multinationals (DHL, FedEx, UPS etc) do play a role although only in the courier market. (Again same in Malaysia,) Actually in terms of international parcels I don't know of anywhere that has competition in the cheaper, low speed, with more limited tracking and insurance, non courier market (although particularly in Asia, many postal providers offer services that somewhat blur the distinction) and whenever I sent stuff between Malaysia and New Zealand or elsewhere I use post as has anything I've order over Ebay or wherever been likewise sent. Definitely in the case of the US the USPS is the only one I've ever seen offer decent rates. Nil Einne (talk) 13:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Name of a song

I play the piano but am in a different country from it at the moment (the last time I played the piano was 1.5 years ago) so I don't have my music book. I remember a song quite well; it had "night" and "symphony" in its name but I am unsure what its exact title is. Does anyone know what I am talking about? It might help to note that its first three notes follow a similar pattern to the toy symphony (depending on your version of the song). PST

A little nightmusic? --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 11:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes! Thanks. PST

Being the sub-title of the piece, in English it's usually given the full treatment with capitals, and the "Nachtmusik" is broken into 2 words on translation - "A Little Night Music". -- JackofOz (talk) 13:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

rising of moon

could you tell me in which direction the moon rises? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.43.50.199 (talk) 12:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

From the east, just like the Sun and all the planets and stars. It's actually caused by the Earth spinning. Sometimes a little more northeastish or southeastish, but always eastish. --Sean 12:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Correct, but the question might be asking which direction it moves in the sky as it rises. This is also the same as the Sun: it rises in a direction that angles away from the vertical by an amount equal to your latitude, and toward the equator. For example, in Houston, at latitude 30° north, the Sun or Moon rises in a direction that is tilted south by 30° from the vertical. (That is, this is true initially. As it continues rising, its path becomes more and more horizontal until it starts going down again.) --Anonymous, 13:00 UTC, January 12, 2009.

To illustrate this, at the North and South Poles, in their respective mid-summers (late june and december), the Sun (and presumably invisible Moon) move horizontally just over the horizon, and in their respective mid-winters (late december and june) it moves horizontally just under the horizon. At other times of the year, it moves somewhere in between there, but always parallel to the horizon. (Actually, because this changes, there should be a slight angle, but that's nitpicking.) As you move away from them, you get an ever bigger angle, until at the equator it rises vertically. At least during the equinoxes (equinoces?) (late march and september). How is this at other times? Does it rise and set vertically then, except not at opposite ends? Interested though I am in astronomy, I have always found it difficult to wrap my head around these things. DirkvdM (talk) 13:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It might be different where you are (although I can't imagine that's actually the case), but the new moon is not invisible in Australia. The outer ring is visible if you know where to look. A light-filled metropolis might obscure the moon and the stars, but that's not the same thing as saying they're invisible. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Really? I've never seen a new moon like that and I've spent most of my life living in the countryside (in the UK). The new moon is only above the horizon during the day anyway (or possibly just before sunrise or after sunset, I guess, it will never stray far from the sun, though), so light pollution can't be a factor. --Tango (talk) 22:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

There may be a terminological confusion here. The only time it's actually invisible (according to the article, but I'm still not 100% convinced it's ever truly "invisible") is when it's a dark moon. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

According to that article, the new moon (as we use the term today) is in the middle of the dark moon period. The only time it's going to be 100% invisible is during a solar eclipse, but obviously you can see its silhouette then. At non-eclipse new moons, there will be a tiny amount of light visible at either the top or bottom (depending on whether it passed above or below the sun), but it will be so close to the sun that it can't be seen. If it weren't for the atmosphere, you could shield your gaze from the sun and see it, but the atmosphere scatters the light so even that wouldn't work. --Tango (talk) 04:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm going to check this out in a few days when the new moon turns up, and see what I can see (or not). -- JackofOz (talk) 22:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

The apparent movement of the Moon at the Poles is a little more complicated than Dirk's description. The (invisible) new Moon is, like the Sun, below the horizon at the Poles around their respective winter solstices, since the Moon at that point in its revolution around Earth is more or less on the same side of Earth as the Sun. However, when the Moon is full, it has moved to the side of Earth facing away from the Sun, so at each Pole's winter solstice, the full Moon circles the horizon at nearly 23° above the horizon. During winter, as the Moon waxes, it rises while circling gradually higher above the horizon over a period of several days. The situation is the opposite at the summer solstice. At the summer solstice, the Sun circles each Pole not quite 23° above the horizon. The (invisible except during eclipses) new moon makes a similar motion. At the summer solstice, a waxing crescent Moon might be faintly visible near the horizon in a sunlit polar sky, but the full Moon would be below the horizon and would never appear. Marco polo (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

By extension, the full Moon rises to the north of east in the Northern Hemisphere winter (December-January) sky. At its highest point, the full Moon is as high as the summer sun in the Northern Hemisphere winter sky. The full moon arcs around to set north of west in the northern winter. By contrast, in the northern summer (June-July), the full Moon rises south of east and climbs no higher at its highest point than the winter sun would climb. The situation is the opposite in the Southern Hemisphere. (The full Moon rises south of east and sets south of west in winter (June-July) and rises as high as the summer sun; it rises north of east and sets north of west in summer (December-January) and rises only as high as the winter sun.) Marco polo (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It's in fact even a little more complex than that. The orbit of the moon is tilted about 5 degrees with respect to the ecliptic. That implies that at its highest point, the full moon will be somewhere between five degrees higher and five degrees lower than the summer sun in the Northern Hemisphere winter sky. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 01:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

'suitability of carburetor from Kawasaki KE 175 on-off road motorcyle for a smaller KE 100'

I foolishly purchased a 28 yr old small motorcycle (Kawasaki KE 100). Unfortunately there is no carburetor on the bike and the only I have found on line is from a 1978 KE 175. Is there anyone who knows if the carb from the 1978 KE 175 will work for the Kawasaki KE 100 ?

Thanks for any light you can shed. So far I haven't been able to get any mechanic's opinion on such and adaptation. AZcardfan (talk) 22:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a KE100 carb on sale on eBay right this moment - $80 'buy it now' price - for the next 13 hours only - it's here: [4] Even if you don't buy it - grab copies of the photo and compare with your KE 175 carb. SteveBaker (talk) 02:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia editor breakdown by country

Is it possible to find out the breakdown of the nationalities of all the editors that edit the English Wikipedia? BigDunc^Talk 23:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No. The best you can do is find out the location of the IP addresses people edit from, which data is gathered at meta:Edits by project and country of origin. Algebraist 23:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for swift reply. BigDunc^Talk 23:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Also see Category:Wikipedians by ethnicity and nationality. Dismas|^(talk) 23:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Though note that the data from that category means nothing. Most Wikipedians don't add themselves to such categories, so the category itself has little meaning as to the overall breakdown. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you took my comment to mean that it would provide accurate data for all Wikipedians. There are only ~130 Wikipedians in that cat. Dismas|^(talk) 04:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Definitely more then 130. I think you're confused by the subcat figure Nil Einne (talk) 13:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure I remember seeing a pie chart of editors by nationality somewhere around, though I can't think where that might have been, especially as it has little relevence to anything I remember looking at on here recently.148.197.114.207 (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

When - precisely - does a new US President assume power?

In Britain, and presumably elsewhere, there is a protocol that dictates, "The King is dead, long live the King (or Queen)", which clearly passes power from the last heartbeat of the deceased monarch to the new incumbent, even long before a somewhat delayed Coronation. But in the US, and presumably elsewhere, the transition from old to new is not so absolute as both the outgoing and incoming participants are usually alive and standing close to each other on inauguration day during a relatively sombre and lengthy ceremony. So when, precisely, as a point of pedantry, will G.W. Bush cease to be Commander-in-Chief and relinquish his powers as President? And who would assume control should a national emergency occur on the scale of 9/11 during said ceremony? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.190.110 (talk) 23:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution, §1: "The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin." --Milkbreath (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The only problem with that is that it doesn't specify a time zone. Presumably local time at the capital is intended, but is this laid down in law anywhere, or just a customary interpretation? Algebraist 00:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That's about when GWB ceases to be president. But it does not mean that Obama suddenly becomes president at the stroke of noon. There's no "the king never dies" doctrine in the U.S. He does not become president until he's actually sworn in, which would be some time after noon. In the intervening minutes, I'd say the office of president was vacant. Unless they chose to swear him in before noon to avoid the gap, but that might be unconstitutional. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That view seems to be contradicted by the clause and the terms of their successors shall then begin. Algebraist 00:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The official annotated constitution is clear on this: the president-elect becomes president before he/she takes the oath/affirmation of office. Algebraist 00:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Its probably largely a moot point. The apparatus of the government keeps working before, during, and after the few minutes between the end of the Bush administration and the start of the Obama administration. As the case of David Rice Atchison shows; this is an old problem. There was actually technically almost 24 hours between the end of the James Polk presidency and the swearing in of Zachary Taylor. Some have claimed for a long time that that made Atchison the acting president for that day; however most serious scholars simply hold that either a) Taylors presidency retroactively applied once he was sworn in on March 5, 1849 or b) The nation was without a president on March 4, 1849. Strangely enough, the fabric of space-time was not ripped apart by the lack of a President. Its a fun little activity to decide what happens between the official end at noon and the swearing in, but it really has little bearing on how the real government works. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Since launching an attack on the US would take weeks or months then, but only takes minutes now, the importance of not having presidential gaps is now higher. So, has there ever been a critical national emergency that spanned the swearing in ceremony ? StuRat (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The government and military could likewise respond in minutes. If a fleet of nuclear missles were bound for the U.S. during the swearing in ceremony, I doubt that the entire military of the U.S. would be sitting around waiting and saying "Come on, hurry it up there!" for the President to become official. Its not a one-man show. The President is important, but not omnipotent, and he's also unavailible for other reasons for just as long as when he'll be being sworn in. The government doesn't stop when he takes a particularly long dump, does it? Indeed, if his decision making was needed immediately, they would just issue the oath in the car on the way to the White House and he would dive right in to whatever crisis he was needed to preside over. Consider that Lyndon Baines Johnson was sworn in on Air Force One on the way back to Washington, and that Calvin Coolidge was issued the oath by his father in the Parlor of his Vermont farmhouse. Its REALLY not a big deal; the ceremony is all nice and stuff, but the government will survive if we don't have a ceremony and a big speech. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I wonder what happened if the president refused to attend, or otherwise missed out on his own swearing in. His term of office would begin (as per above), but would he be able to wield power? I imagine his political opponents would start kicking up a fuss after a day or two, but what if he signed bills into law in the interim? I suppose that'd be a question for the courts, but I wonder what sort of precedent they'd rely on. 24.2.176.64 (talk) 03:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

(ec; I had the same question, but since I went to the trouble of typing it out, I'll let it stay) Just idly musing here: If Obama took the view that he becomes president at the stroke of noon, and whether or not he's sworn in makes no difference, what would happen if he said "Stuff it. There's too much to be getting on with to waste time on a largely symbolic ceremony, so I'm just gonna start doing the job I was elected to do"? What constraints would he encounter by not being sworn in? -- JackofOz (talk) 03:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the Constitution specifies that he must take the oath. If he refused to take the oath, I suspect the Supreme Court would take the view that he was not in office. Presumably his duties would pass to Joe Biden, assuming the latter had taken the oath. --Trovatore (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The wording of the constitution is that he becomes president prior to the oath/affirmation, but must take the oath/affirmation 'before he enter on the Execution of his Office'. I have no idea how such a crisis would work out in practice. Algebraist 03:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Also there's no requirement that there be any ceremony surrounding it. Traditionally the oath is administered by the Chief Justice, but Coolidge (I think it was) was famously sworn in by his father, in a lonely cottage, upon learning of his predecessor's death. --Trovatore (talk) 03:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8: "Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." (Note the outmoded irrealis.) Mr. Obama would be in violation of the Constitution. I suppose that he could be removed from office for that if he persisted. I think we need a Constitutional scholar at this point. --Milkbreath (talk) 03:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I take that to mean that he would be the president, and would be entitled to all the respect normally shown to occupants of that office; but he would be incapable of actually doing anything relevant, such as sign laws. That would be even worse than having a lame duck president. This duck would be crippled (or a double amputee). For all intents and purposes, therefore, he may as well not be the president until he's sworn in. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, since it would take rougly one minute or less to actually say the oath, it seems a minor point. As I said above, in the event of a crisis, he could be administered the oath by any duly appointed public official (judge, justice of the peace, notary public, etc.) in the car on the way to the White House if needed. The actual stating of the oath would not take up enough time to meaningfully prevent Obama from doing his job. A big ceremony with speeches and pomp and circumstance on the steps of the Capital would take a while, but as noted, there is no ceremonial requirement. He just has to say one 35-word sentance. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

In face of the above problems, The Vice-President takes the oath before the President. Phil_burnstein (talk) 13:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone know how many have "affirmed" instead of "sworn"? I imagine the "affirmation" version was to placate those who have a religious ban on oaths (Jesus said swear not at all, a pretty direct command that Christendom hasn't traditionally taken very seriously). I have to say that the "affirmation" thing strikes me as a fairly technical and transparent evasion of the command, which continues Let your yes be yes and your no be no, for more than this comes from evil. --Trovatore (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Our article Oath of office of the President of the United States gives Franklin Pierce as the first president to affirm rather than swear, but fails to indicate if there have been any others. The article on Pierce claims Herbert Hoover is the only other case. Hoover was a Quaker, while Pierce seems to have felt an affirmation had less religious connotation than an oath, as evidenced by his not using a bible. Our article oath indicates that an oath, properly understood, always involves invoking some sacred witness. This idea lives on in the English court system, where I (as an atheist) was made to give a juror's declaration beginning 'I do solemnly declare and affirm' while my colleagues said 'I swear by almighty God'. Algebraist 22:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I've heard that Nixon "affirm"ed. —Tamfang (talk) 05:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's a minor point, in the context of this question, which is about establishing "the precise moment" when a president-elect becomes president. Thinking of scenarios where a president dies or resigns, am I right in believing that the V-P does not instantly and automatically become president at the moment the incumbent left the office (in the way that Prince Charles would instantly become king should QEII abdicate or die)? My understanding is that, in these circumstances, the VP does not accede to the presidency until they're sworn in. Because he/she could say "Thanks, but I'm going to decline. I hadn't mentioned this, but I was going to resign from the vice-presidency next week anyway, so I'll still be leaving. Give the job to whoever's next in line". Otherwise, the new president would have to formally resign if they didn't want the job. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, various aspects of the Constitution deal with all of the various eventualities. Understand that any invokation of the United States presidential line of succession beyond the Vice President is untested, and would likely lead to a Constitutional Crisis, however Article Two of the United States Constitution, the Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution all work together to answer the question. The 20th for elected but not yet served presidents, and the 25th for deceased presidents. Article 2 states "the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected." The current law, which is the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, may very well be unconsitituional, as it contains two persons (Speaker of the House of Representatives and President Pro Tempore of the Senate) who may not meet the consitutional definition as "Officer"s of the government, which elsewhere in the constitution ONLY refers to executive branch members. The question is whether, legally, the phrase "Congress shall provide by Law" trumps the understood definition of "Officer". Since it has never been tested, the question is unanswerable at this point. However, the situation you describe, which is a drawn-out succession crisis because of a VP refusal to serve, is entirely different than a gap of a few minutes between the death of a president and the swearing in of the new one. Very different problems. The former is a real problem, the latter is no problem at all. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

January 16

Solar-powered car

I remember in the mid 1980s one of the European automakers develoed a car with solar cells in the roof. The solar cells did not power the car (it had a regular engine), but they were used to operate the air conditioning system. The logic was that on a sunny day the driver could park in the sun and the AC would run and keep the interior cool. Does anyone remember such a vehicle, and how were its sales figures? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.120.95.34 (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they ever sold such a thing. It could easily have been a concept car though. Given the weight of solar cells in the mid-1980's - I'd bet that the additional weight of the solar panel would have consumed more gasoline than it would have saved. Furthermore, I don't know of any cars from that era with electrically powered air conditioners...even on modern cars (with a VERY few exceptions) they are driven from the serpentine belt with an electrically operated clutch to disconnect it when it's not in use. It's not impossible that you're right - but I think it's unlikely as a commercial product. SteveBaker (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

A more practical application may be to use the solar cells to operate a small fan to exchange the hot air inside the car with cooler outside air. StuRat (talk) 02:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That's just ventilation, not aircon. It doesn't help much on a hot day (and you could just open the windows). --Tango (talk) 03:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It can make a huge difference on a hot day, from 150°F inside to 100°F. That's the diff between burning yourself and not. Opening windows helps, but leaves the car susceptible to rain, insects, and thieves. A small, covered exhaust hole in the roof, with a fan and screen, could solve most of those probs. StuRat (talk) 05:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Solar powered car ventilators have been available for many years. They fit at the top of the window, so the window is effectively closed against intrusion, but there is a fan and an air passage. The old ones did not move much air, since they had a small low power solar panel and a small fan. New ones are under $10 on the web[5]. A factory installed powerful one would be a vast improvement. Edison (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah - that's much more likely. You can buy solar powered fans for your car quite easily. But airconditioners need a compressor and those are chunky, power-hungry machines. SteveBaker (talk) 20:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Edison: The comments on the link you mentioned say it was an optional equipment on Mazda's 929 in the mid-nineties. So these things were available as a factory-installed option once. -- 78.43.64.211 (talk) 21:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I car I heard of had amorphous cells on the transparent sunroof. A friend was repairing the car and was curious to see terminals on the glass, took him a while to discover it wasn't a demisting system but a solar panel. Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 20:41, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Military SOP for human shields

- - Does the U.S. Military have a standard operating procedure or policy regarding its approach towards the use of civilians as human shields by militants on both a micro- and macroscopic level?

- - For example, if a terrorist uses a civilian in front of him and is firing towards U.S. troops, is the U.S. soldier allowed to return fire and kill the civilian in the process?

- - Similarly, if militants are in a building with civilians and firing rockets towards U.S. troops, assuming that a hostage rescue is not possible, can the U.S. troops demolish the building - killing both the hostages and civilians? Acceptable (talk) 00:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The rules of engagement vary from one operation to the next, but in general, civilians are considered acceptable collateral damage. --Carnildo (talk) 01:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

(EC) That's a good question. It definitely seems to be a pretty murky issue, and I hear words like proportionality and discrimination of response thrown around a lot in relation to it. Also, I believe that often military's are unwilling to disclose the exact rules of engagement their soliers are operating under, as that could provide a tactical advantage to those they are fighting. Sorry I don't have a great answer, but I do have a follow-up question, in case someone who does have a great answer comes along: does it matter if said civilians are willing versus unwilling human shields? I've heard of cases where civilians have chosen to place themselves in harm's way. Does their decision to willingly act as a human shield somehow compromise their civilian status, even if they are still acting as noncombatants? - Azi Like a Fox (talk) 01:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I would expect many factors would go into the decision:

1) How many militants ?

2) How many civilians ?

3) What type of civilians ? Women and children probably count for more than military-aged men.

4) Are the militants a real threat or just an annoyance ?

5) What's the local political situation ? If everyone in that village already hates Americans and backs the militants, then killing a few more of them won't change things.

6) Is there likely to be press coverage of the civilian casualties ?

7) I would think that them be willing shields would make them less worth saving, as that could be used against them in the press. StuRat (talk) 02:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the key point in this scenario in that the US forces are under fire. I would expect a soldier is allowed to take whatever action is necessary to defend themselves. Obviously, it needs to be truly necessary, there can't be an alternative plan (possibly including surrender - I'm not sure if you would be expected to surrender, but you almost certainly wouldn't be if you know the enemy doesn't take prisoners). Killing the civilian in order to get the enemy combatant would probably depend on the circumstances, but killing the civilian in order to save your own life and those of the rest of your unit is another matter entirely. --Tango (talk) 03:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

If unwilling human shields were U.S. citizens in the U.S., who spoke the same language and were of the same ethnicity as the troops, they would likely show great restraint in using lethal force which would kill the shields as well as the shooters. If it were a village on the other side of the world where they all had a religion, language and ethnicity unlike that of the armed forces, historically there has been less restraint in, say, firing rockets or dropping bombs. Consider Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, where local civilians were killed in large numbers because of a fear that armed enemy were among them. I cannot think of many recent cases in the U.S. of massive firepower being used against hostages/human shields to destroy the armed "bad guys" sheltering behind them. Instead, hostage negotiators are usually called in. Children known to be present can be considered "human shields." The federal siege at Ruby Ridge is noteworthy as an exception in this discussion. The dropping from a police helicopter of a bomb on a building occupied by Move radicals in Philadelphia in 1985, which killed four children, is also noteworthy. The federal attack on the Branch Davidian is also noteworthy, in that the attack killed 21 children. Analogous to active attack is the withholding of aid in a disaster and preventing people leaving the disaster site. After Hurricane Katrina, state and federal forces did not provide food, water, medical assistance or evacuation to thousands of suffering people in New Orleans, due to fear that individuals or gangs in the city might shoot at the soldiers, police or aid workers. They also sought to prevent other individuals or groups from providing such aid. See Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina. Edison (talk) 15:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Black light search

Okay, i drive an old Police car, meaning i have the regular dome lights and a 'ticket writing' light. i wanna replace that bulb with a black light. the size of the bulb is 1156, and im not having any luck whatsoever. Does anyone know a good place to buy one? 71.223.235.58 (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

IF you are a cop, google this matter. IF NOT, get that equipment off of the car, or you could face criminal charges, such as impersonating a police officer. Powerzilla (talk) 03:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Isn't a ticket writing light just a regular light positioned so that the officer can see to write someone a ticket? I don't see how having one on your car is impersonating a police officer. (I'm not entirely sure what "dome lights" are.) I very much doubt the police would sell on their old cars without removing the bits that mark them as police cars. --Tango (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The dome light is the light inside the car on the roof/ceiling (top of the dome). Automotive lighting#Convenience_lights. It sounds like he wants to replace one of the interior lights with a black light, not an exterior one. --Bennybp (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. I've known a few people who have bought old police cruisers and all of them have had the markings and lights removed before sale. They also remove the device which alternately flashes the headlights. Dismas|^(talk) 04:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

In case you were interested, that's called a Wig-Wag--omnipotence407 (talk) 00:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

yeah, its just an extra dome light, basically. i've found a seperate one that runs wires from out of the dome into a seperate bulb that i would mount myself, but i'd rather see if i can get a regular bulb first. 71.223.235.58 (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

An enclosed socket and reflector designed to hold a 1156 incandescent bulb would likely overheat if somehow you found a blacklight bulb with the same base. Blacklight bulbs have a coating to absorb most wavelengths of light, and the get extremely hot. Look for a battery powered or 12 volt blacklight with a fluorescent bulb or LED bulb and just add it. See [6] for instance. Note that UV or blacklight can be injurious to eyesight and health. Edison (talk) 18:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

CRIPTIC CROSS WORD

I recently did a criptic cross word. The question was THE DOGS NAME IS McNEILL and the answer was WHISTLER. Could you please tell me how the word whistler relates. Thankyou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.53.130 (talk) 08:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It's a tough clue, but I think it's referring to the lithograph the Butcher's dog by James Abbott McNeill Whistler... but I don't know how you could have got that...-- WORMMЯOW  08:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

What crossword was this? Different setters have very different styles and rules, so it can help to know. Algebraist 18:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That style of clue does not match anything I would call a cryptic crossword, which generally rely either on puns or double meanings, or on chicanery with the letters of the solution. --ColinFine (talk) 01:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

There's a number of crossword forums on the net which probably are a better bet for solving things like this. You might find one that even specializes in your particular crossword using google. For prize crosswords they have a rule that the crossword must not be discussed until after the entry date. Dmcq (talk) 14:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Obviously, you were supposed to get Whistler from McNeill, but I also think I detect a play on words, as in "whistle her," because you call a dog by whistling. Pavel (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

cannon

Does anyone recognize the model / make of the anti-aircraft cannon in this video? What the hell is that gun and how did it get there?! --Dr Dima (talk) 08:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Cannon is quite an overstatement, perhaps a translation problem. The rounds laying on the floor are .50 caliber or similar. The video is dark, but my SWAG is that this is the 12.7 mm NSVT, --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It's a 50mm machine-gun - which is a reasonable effective weapon against low flying aircraft - certainly helicopters. But the video doesn't prove much. NOBODY sets up a 50mm machine-gun on it's tripod inside a stairwell. To use it against any reasonable target it's got to be on the roof or outside. So it's pretty certain that somebody moved it - and then went to all the trouble to set it up on it's tripod in a place where it's never going to be fired. Hence you have to ask yourself - did the owner of the weapon move it and set it up again there? Why? There is no reason to do that. However, if you're taking publicity photos to show off a weapons hoard you've found - you want it to look impressive - so you set up the big-assed gun someplace. This essentially proves that the gun was moved. Whether it was moved from the roof of the mosque down into the stairwell - or whether from outside or even some other building - we may never know. However, it doesn't seem to be proof that it was ever stored or fired from that building...it may have been...it may not. If it had been up on the roof with 50mm shell casings everywhere - then maybe. SteveBaker (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Impact of recession in India

What will be the Impact of recession in India —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielpillai06 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

SOme articles that may lead you to some good information are the Global financial crisis of 2008-2009 and Late 2000s recession. The second one has a small section devoted to India. FWIW, this map lists India as a "severly affected country", whatever that means. Hope that's a help! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That map is a bit confusing, I assume "severely affected" means "not in recession but feeling the effects from those that are"? The description could use some clarification. -- Mad031683 (talk) 16:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

"Hit by recession" as in brought into recession? Julia Rossi (talk) 09:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Alarm System Instruction or User Manual

Does Anyone know where I can get a instruction or user manual for a SC 8C OTMA alarm system on the net ?

Scotius (talk) 15:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't find anything when I did a Google search with that in quotes. Perhaps "SC" expands into the name of the manufacturer ? If so, I'd try a search like that. Who is the manufacturer ? StuRat (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure but I think OTMA is the manufacturerScotius (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not finding anything that matches. Have you opened up the unit and looked at all the labels or tags inside ? (Cut the power to the unit first.) StuRat (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I also could find nothing. The nearest was an insurance company 'OSMA' who sell alarms - but it looks like they sell other brands - not their own. There are several websites out there which have the manuals for all sorts of alarm systems on-line - but none of them remotely fits "SC 8C OTMA" or any variation on that. Surely there must be some other words or labels or serial numbers on the machine. SteveBaker (talk) 20:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

OTMA seems to be an acronym regularly associated with "overtemperature alarms" - at least that's what my searches keep getting hits for. 152.16.59.190 (talk) 23:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe SC is "Siemens Cerberus" - but the only reference I see to '8C' is on an eBay auction where someone is selling circuit boards for Siemens Cerberus alarms and mentions that some board or other is compatible with the Siemenc Cerberus 8C. This appears to be a big industrial-type alarm system - not some small home security alarm - right? The trouble is that the Cerberus web site only talks about the SC4 and SC6 - with no mention of SC8 nor SC8C. SteveBaker (talk) 08:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

As far as I knew, it's for a home setup. When someone asked me if I could get the imformation for it, all they could give me was SC 8C OTMA alarm system bit. I don't know if it was SC 8C OTMA or OTMA SC 8C because they had it written down the first way. Scotius (talk) 10:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

If you just can't find a manual for the SC8 model, try the SC6 manual, it may have enough in common with the SC8 to be useful. StuRat (talk) 14:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The SC6 and SC8 are HUGE industrial things - the kind of gizmo you'd use to secure a chemical plant or a factory or maybe a huge building. It has a bunch of separate circuit boards inside for hooking up hundreds of sensors. I don't think either of them would be found in a home. But if it IS an industrial system then dropping an email to Siemens-Cerberus should solve the problem. SteveBaker (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Okaydoke, thanks anyways

Scotius (talk) 15:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I am so sorry, when I asked about this I got told it was for a ADE SL 8C OTIMA Compact. On the ADE bit the D is overlapping the E so we're not sure if it's an E or not. Again sorry.

Scotius (talk) 12:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe it is ADE. Did you mean "OPTIMA" instead of "OTIMA" ? Their manuals are available here: [7]. However, when I picked on "SL8 User" or any of the "OPTIMA" manuals, I can't download them. Does it work for you ? StuRat (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry yes I did mean "OPTIMA". Yes I was able to download the "SL8 User" manual, I'll try the others now. Thanks. Scotius (talk) 12:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. StuRat (talk) 14:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Names of particular vintage military pieces of uniform

I am interested in the names of certain pieces of the dress worn particularly by the british army through the 18th to the 19th century, I've looked ever so hard but information is scarce. There are many photos though, so discribing what particular peices I'm after is not a problem. What is the name of the jackets worn by what I reckon would have been admirals one is vidible in the video to walking on a dream video by empire of the sun it was the only example of where i could find it. KingstonJr (talk) 15:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

If you post links to some of these photos, we'll be able to help you a lot better. Algebraist 15:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe this is what Kingstonjr refers to. I found it on this video. --Sean 20:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi that is exactly what I am talking about, any ideas? KingstonJr (talk) 23:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Royaume Du Maroc Stamp

I recently found a Royaume Du Maroc stamp in my home. I'm trying to find out what year was this issued (I can't read the date from where it was marked), and how much is its value (it is used)? Below is a link to a scan of the stamp.

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l191/bheid/stamp.jpg

Any information would be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.133.184.64 (talk • contribs) 21:00, January 16, 2009

Well, the portrait on the stamp is of Hassan II of Morocco, who reigned from 1961 to 1999. This page, which shows a stamp obviously from the same series, just with a different denomination, says that the stamp was issued in 1988. As for the current value of the stamp, the most recent Scott catalogue, which I don't happen to have at hand, should be able to help you. Deor (talk) 05:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Now that I look more closely, your stamp, like the one on the page I linked to, has the date of issue printed along the right-hand edge. Deor (talk) 16:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

This page on Flickr: [8] ...has two other stamps from the same series - both postmarked 1998 - but if you zoom up that image - one stamp has 1981 and the other 1996 written on it! It's hard to imagine someone saving a stamp from 1981 and waiting until 1998 to post it! So that same series of stamps must have been in circulation for at least 15 years with each denomination coming out in a different year with much the same design. But the image you posted of your stamp is to low-rez to read the date on it. You need to look on the actual stamp itself - the year is printed sideways on the right-hand side. As to the value - if this was the 'standard' stamp that was used for 15 solid years - they must have been made in huge numbers - which suggests a low value - unless you got very lucky and there is something special about the one year yours is marked with.

Just to complete what the previous poster said. This particular stamp was the most common one used in Morocco for over 20 years (while Hassan II died in 1999, the postal service did not come around to issuing another series of common stamps until a number of years after Mohammed VI succeeded his father). The stamp is basically worthless. --Xuxl (talk) 15:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Stealing From Hotels

"Oh, lots of people take towels from hotels. "

"I took the bed. Winched it out of the window to my mate outside. I was renting this flat. It was unfurnished."

"So you went to a hotel and stole the bed? "

"I stole the entire room, actually. Armchair, dressing-table, carpet. Even the fitted wardrobe. The only thing I didn't take were the towels. "

- Red Dwarf

Pretty much every touring stand-up comedian I've ever seen has, as some point or other, done a lazy routine about stealing stuff from hotel rooms, but I was wondering what the actual statistics are on thefts from hotel rooms by guests, and what hotels do about it. I'm guessing that if you try to leave with a TV in your luggage you'll probably have to explain yourself to the police, but what about smaller stuff - linen, towels, lamps etc. Do hotels just write them off as inevitable losses or do they actually report such thefts? And how many people are actually prosecuted for theft from hotels? Thanks.

PS. This isn't a request for legal advice. I'm not planning a grand burglary tour of my local area, I'm just curious :P 87.112.26.250 (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Google has lots on the subject: [9]. --Tango (talk) 00:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

"I figure I can take anything from the hotel room that isn't nailed down...and anything I can pry loose isn't really nailed down, is it ?" StuRat (talk) 07:21, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

In my experience, hotels don't seem too bothered by towels or toiletries going missing, but they seem much more concerned about their bathrobes; some leave a card stating that missing bathrobes will be charged at $100 each, while others invite you to buy one from reception (with the implied threat of charging you if you were to steal one). I did stay in one hotel in Bangkok, where there was a prominently placed price list, listing every item in the room and how much you would be charged if an item was to go missing - IIRC, top of the list was the TV at $1769 all the way down to the soap dish in the bathroom at $2.50. Astronaut (talk) 10:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

• I'm still surprised people steal anything from hotel rooms. I mean, they've got your name and address at reception. Why would anyone seriously expect to get away with it? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Not just your name and address...also your credit-card number. SteveBaker (talk) 19:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

In fact, some hotels I've stayed at have signs up to let you know that missing towels will go on your credit card. APL (talk) 01:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Never having stolen a towel from a hotel, I have no way of knowing this for sure, but I've always thought of that as a kind of an empty threat. What if the person restocking the towels just didn't bring enough? Do they document the number of towels in the room before and after my stay? Most hotels flat out refuse to be responsible for things I leave in the room during the day, but they'll still guarantee that one of the staff didn't take or misplace a towel or bring one too few?

I mean, if they charge me for a towel afterwards and I make a stink of it, it's their word against mine. (And you know I'm not going to be signing for a towel when I check out, as the room won't be cleaned at that point.) If they can't even prove that the stolen towel was there in the first place, how on Earth could they ever get paid? Moreover, they can't even be sure that it's not just a case of delivering one towel too few. Do they really want to piss off a guest when they can't even be sure it's not their own mistake? Or do they just include the occasional missing towel in their overhead, jack up the average room price by a dollar or euro or whatever to cover for it, and then post a couple of cheap signs to discourage people and let it go, unless the theft is really obvious?

My money's on the latter. Maybe some hotels really are zealous about this kind of thing, but I'm pretty sure those are going to be rare exceptions. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

My experience here in Australia, as well as in China has been similar to Astronaut's. Places I've stayed in had a list of things that should be in there when you get there and you need to check that they're there, because if they're not there when you leave, then you are liable for the cost. This applies most to the cheaper places. More expensive places didn't have that, but rather had the linen, towels, etc. for sale in reception. Toiletries, I think are expected to be used (the little bottles of shampoo, soap, etc.) so they would be not noticed. As to finding out how widespread the theft is, Google is probably best, or a friend who runs a hotel, if you have one. Steewi (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Identify this ditched aircraft

Can anyone identify this ditched aircraft that I found while Googling Garuda Indonesia Flight 421:

Picture 1 Picture 2

The linking page is here, but is not helpful. It's not Garuda Indonesia livery of today, and I can't identify the livery. It doesn't seem to match the descriptions in any of the commercial aircraft ditchings in the nice new "Commercial Ditchings" category template. The picture name has "B707" in the title. Any help? Thanks - Tempshill (talk) 23:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The plane in question is a Boeing 707 operated by an Arabian cargo operator which crashed into a lake in Tanzania in 2000. I found a brief article about the crash here, which also additional pictures. 87.112.26.250 (talk) 00:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

And this search might help, if you;re thinking about an article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you! Tempshill (talk) 00:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

January 17

Dragon Warrior III for GBC

Hi again. Yesterday I started replaying through Dragon Warrior III (GameBoy COlor version), and today the wierdest thing happened. I got to the town of Ashalam, and decided it was about time to save. After going back to the castle in which the game begins (Aliahan), I talked to the king to save. He said my hero would level up in x amount of experience points, said the same for my thief, and then when he got to my warrior he said "Ares (what I named my warrior) has gained experience in a way I can't determine. Your level will be clear in battle." After that, he said my cleric would level up in x amount of levels. The next battle, my warrior leveled 43 times from one battle, going from level 14 to level 67. I think this is a glitch, but what the king said got me thinking that maybe it isn't. Any gamers wanna clue me in? Thanks.--AtTheAbyss (talk) 05:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC) P.S. I know this belongs in a game forum, but I figured I would get answers faster on wikipedia. Thanks again.

You really are MUCH more likely to find an answer in a forum that's more tightly focussed on this particular game - there are lots of sites that have discussions and HUGE lists of published cheats and easter eggs that will probably mention this. One I'd suggest would be GameSpot's DWIII section. I agree that the programmers gave you a huge clue that there was some kind of plot point - or perhaps 'easter egg' coming up soon - but it's also possible that it's an unrelated bug. Yes, shocking though it is - we games programmers do make the occasional boo-boo. SteveBaker (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Well I did get some money once for delivering something to some Japanese and them not being able to find a single bug when they tested it. But yes that's rather rare unfortunately. Dmcq (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, not being able to find a bug during testing and there not BEING a bug are two horribly different things...which is really the heart of the problem! Nobody ever found a bug during testing of any software I ever shipped - but I'm certainly not going to claim that ANYTHING I ever shipped was 100% bug free because for software of more than (say) a hundred thousand lines of code there are quite utterly guaranteed to be bugs - and don't let anyone ever tell you otherwise! The best you can do with comprehensive testing is to ensure that the bugs aren't going to show up for most people most of the time - and hope that if they do, they'll be minor ones. SteveBaker (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Smile.dog

Good evening people at wikipedia.

There is an internet Phenomenon known as 'smile.jpg' or 'smile.dog'. Strangely, this doesn't feature anywhere on wikipedia, and there are rumours that say it's deleted as soon as a page is created.

The picture has no source, the author is unknown and it's very difficult to obtain this. (Search google and find almost 0 results for this). It is claimed that whoever looks at the picture will suffer some mental problems, leading many to suicide. I have this picture, but i'm not going to post it. The picture shows a dog (or a doglike creature), it is the colour red/orange and seems to be in some sort of negative version. The teeth show, sure enough its pretty creepy. There is also a human hand (described as beckoning).

Could anybody over there at wikipedia shed any light on this matter? hi I found some pictures on googel gona add the link https://www.google.no/#q=smile+dog

81.151.235.105 (talk) 10:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a foolish hoax. Tb (talk) 10:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Could be the Wolverine. [10]. Tb (talk) 10:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Could be a hoax, but seriously, try to find any material on it on the internet, and you'll be shocked to find very little. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.235.105 (talk) 10:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Why would I be shocked? Most people don't care about dumb hoaxes so you're not going to find any information about so dumb hoax that few people have heard of Nil Einne (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyone who believes that a picture of a creepy-looking dog gives everyone who checks it out mental problems and leads many of them to suicide is likely to have a hard time reasoning their way out of a burning paper bag. Does that shed any light on the matter?-- Captain Disdain (talk) 14:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Sounds a lot like the recent horror movie, named The Ring, where anyone who sees a movie clip ending with a black circle soon dies, unless they can show it to somebody else within a week. StuRat (talk) 17:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

These 'rumors' that the article is deleted as soon as it's created are almost certainly true. But that's not a mystical or magical thing - and it's not some kind of conspiracy - it's how Wikipedia routinely operates.

Whenever some short-lived internet meme pops up, someone (and typically SEVERAL someone's) will try to create an article about it. If the article fails to include solid references for the claims it makes - or if it's considered to be a short-lived phenomenon - then such an article would fail our notability test. Articles on junk like this are typically deleted 'on sight' via a process called 'Speedy Deletion'. If there is some doubt about the deletion - or if you complain about an article being speedy-deleted (following the appropriate guidelines at WP:AfD) then you may instigate a proper discussion and a "vote" to get it reinstated. But you'll need to prove that the article can be improved and that the subject is appropriate according to our internal guidelines such as WP:NOTE.

But in this case, where pretty much all there is is a picture (which must be owned by someone - hence has a copyright - and hence is tricky for us to publish), plus a bunch of weird and unsubstantiated rumors - we have no further relevant things to say. So I'd be VERY surprised if the article passed any kind of serious scrutiny.

At any rate - there is no secrecy about the process. You can to go to our deletion log and search for any deleted page if you know the title, the author or a rough range of dates over which it was created. You won't be able to read the article - but you'll see who deleted it and why - and then you can go to their User: page and discuss it with them...this should convince you that it's not black magic or a government coverup or pink aardvarks from the planet Aard - it's just some Wikipedian following our standard rules for keeping crap out of the encyclopedia.

If you check the deletion logs - you'll notice the depressing fact that we delete articles at a rate of about ten every minute, day and night, 365 days of the year - so the fact that this one vanished is not a mystical or even very surprising event. SteveBaker (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

For anyone who cares to read more about this B.S - the whole thing is spelled out in this Google cache here: [11] - there is a lot of complaining about Wikipedia's deletion policies - and the predictable round of unverifiable (and highly unlikely) stories and conspiracy theories. Really - it's a load of crap - and it certainly should never make it into a Wikipedia article unless the meme becomes MUCH more widespread. SteveBaker (talk) 19:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yawn. It's a semi-decent ghost story, but to take it seriously... I mean, I liked to work myself up over stuff like this when I was twelve, too, but c'mon. Or maybe this level of detail seems incredibly convincing if you've never read a book, or you're just a kind of a dim bulb. What tops it off nicely is that what appears to be the picture in question is a laughably bad Photoshop job. I particularly like the paste job on the hand that "beckons" and the teeth that are just kind of plopped on top of the dog's face! Way to blend those suckers in. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh great, now you've done it - I looked at it only 2 minutes ago and already I'm showing mental problems...argh! Suddenly I'm unable to spell 'aardvark' anymore...watch: A-A-R-D-V-A-R-Q - see? Curse you smile.dog SteveBaker (talk) 18:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. My work here is done. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 18:22, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Mystical ghost photograph... taken with an Olympus Digital Camera in 2002, modified in 2003 with Photoshop 7.0. (yay for metadata). Riiight. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Euwww - ectoplasm all over the keyboard. SteveBaker (talk) 20:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Steve, count your blessings. It could have been endoplasm trying to eat your keyboard. Phil_burnstein (talk) 14:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion Smile.jpg deserves to be mentioned in the Wikipedia. It is a popular urban legend at least, even despite the controversy about that legend being true/fake. And by the way, that red/orange version with that earless noseless ugly thing is a fake. Another version looks more real-like. And the last version, that is claimed to be the real one does not look any scary. And the dog on this version isn't smiling. Seems more that it's talking (maybe saying «Spread the word!») Summary of three existing versions:

• First version (red/orange) is rather disgusting than scary. More looks like a semi-rotted corpse from Silent Hill.
• Second version looks more real-like, despite the fact that it's probably just an attempt of reproducing the missing original pic. Quite a successful attempt.
• The third version seems to be like . . . semi-real. Althrough it looks real, the dog itself does not match the description of those, who had seen the real Smile.jpg. This dog doesn't have human-looking teeth and it's not smiling.

In conclusion I want to say that it worth mentioning in Wikipedia. Even the sickening hello.jpg (the loathsome pic from now-dead goatse.cx website) is mentioned here. Why Smile.jpg can't be mentioned?

indian army

Does the indian army own modern equipment?Jaysin1234 (talk) 12:15, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you try looking at our article Equipment of the Indian Army and finding out for yourself? 87.112.25.162 (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

(ec) It depends how "cutting edge" you expect it to be, but Equipment of the Indian Army suggests the army is well equipped - mostly with Russian made equipment. In coming years, the army will be getting the AS 550 helicopter, the new Arjun main battle tank, and several other items of equipment to replace existing equipment (although the Arjun's production delays have prompted the purchase of more T-90s from Russia). Astronaut (talk) 12:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they have modern equipment. They phased out elephants in favour of tanks some time ago & have been using rifles at least since the 1800s. AllanHainey (talk) 14:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Where can I get a bowling ball, a feather, and a scale?

Good afternoon. Could any of you kind folks point good ol Charlie in the right direction as to the purchase of said items? ??? Thank you, and God bless, --GarageShipbuilder (talk) 13:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

You don't say where you live but feather dusters are usually available from stores which sell homeware. E.g. some supermarkets, hypermarkets, discount stores or even specific homeware stores. You could also buy a feather duvet or similar although more expensive. If there are wet markets near where you live you could try there. You may even be able to find a loose feather in a bird/pet store (although I don't recommend you try pulling them off the birds) or just lying around outside. If you have a cat, you may find them outside your room (I do). Similarly, you can probably get a scale (whether a kitchen scale or bathroom scale) from many stores selling homeware. As for a bowling ball, try a bowling alley (some may sell them) or perhaps a store selling sports gear Nil Einne (talk) 14:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I assume you're trying to determine whether feather and a scale fall at the same rate when dropped from a bowling ball. For such a brief experiment, I'm sure a bowling alley will simply lend you a ball if you explain that it will be used in the furtherance of science. --Sean 16:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Unless by scale you mean one of those that balance in the middle when the weights either side are the same. If so that might be a problem as they seem quite rare now, though I have heard that you can still find them at the back of a cupboard in an old enough kitchen. 148.197.114.207 (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

You can get two-sided scales, try an old fashioned cookery shop, or somewhere that sells 2nd hand bits and pieces (car boot sales, jumble sales, etc.). --Tango (talk) 22:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Did you mean a weighing scale or a Scale (zoology)? Balance scales are not that hard to find, the cheapest one I saw went for $10US. However, finding one that would take the weight of a regulation 10 pin bowling ball (available at multiple sites on the net) (16 pounds (7.2 kg)) might be a bit harder. Although a 5 pin or candlepin ball weighs less and you might be able to find a balance scale to take that. I notice that this is also called a balance scale. Feathers can be purchased from 80c and up. Other places have them in bulk. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Funeral Home Embalming

This is not a pleasant subject but I have always wondered what happens to the residue and chemicals that are flushed from the body during the process of embalming. Is the bodly fluids such as wastes ,blood and chemicals flushed down the normal public sewer syatem or are the contents by law retained and disposed of some other way?I would appreciate an answer as would others I am sure.Thank you to the individual or persons with the knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onlysonbuck (talk • contribs) 15:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

• They're managed as medical waste, ideally. In the US, just in the last few years, under the Clean Water Act, the EPA has stopped embalmers from using injection wells and large capacity cesspools. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there an international standard style for expressing monetary amounts?

Is there an international standard (and currency-independent) style for writing monetary amounts using currency codes? If there is one, would 100 Canadian dollars be written as "100 CAD" or "CAD 100" or in some other way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.146.183 (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I would expect the order depends on the language being used. In English, it's normal to put the currency code before the numerals. Tb (talk) 18:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

There are many "standards" - but no "one true way". Wikipedia (for example) has a whole list of guidelines for doing this as a oart of our Manual of Style. If there were one "official" standard - you can be sure we'd be using it. You can see the detailed Wikipedia guideline for formatting currency here: Wikipedia:MOS_(dates_and_numbers)#Currencies - but realise that other publications can - and do - choose different rules. SteveBaker (talk) 18:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone have access to the full text of ISO 4217? It seems unlike ISO to not specify this. Algebraist 19:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

rubber duck / wheeled digger

If possable can any one tell me why a wheeled excavator is called a rubber duck ?

I drive one but don't know why

hopefuly yours James 90.192.168.166 (talk) 17:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Possibly because excavators are often painted yellow and rubber ducks are often yellow as well. I've never seen one on wheels that I know of, only tracks... an excavator that is. I've seen rubber ducks on wheels. Dismas|^(talk) 17:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

This must be a UK usage, as I've never encountered it in the US. Probably because it's yellow and runs on rubber tires? Acroterion _(talk) 19:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Could be cockney rhyming slang...Rubber duck...Truck? It's a long shot though. SteveBaker (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

It is interesting that a google on: "rubber duck" excavator; returns many hits, most (all?) being UK sites, often plant rental places. The vehicle datasheets do NOT include the word duck - so it looks very British. -- SGBailey (talk) 00:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Certainly the term must be in common british use - it's all over the place on UK construction and farming web sites. It certainly only refers to wheeled excavators - the almost identical machines that have tracks never seem to be called that. Anyway - I added a redirect and a disambiguation entry to Rubber duck (disambiguation) - plus a line (with reference) explaining this usage of the term in Excavator...none of which helps our OP. It sure would be nice to find the etymology. SteveBaker (talk) 02:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The Cloud

Does anyone know what thecloud.com is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elatanatari (talk • contribs) 18:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

The Cloud (who own thecloud.com) is a company that operates WiFi hotspots at various places like cafe's and such. SteveBaker (talk) 18:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you know who owns The Cloud?

No - but their main website is http://www.thecloud.net - (note ".net", not ".com" because they are a network). I presume the .com address (which demands username and password) is for users of the WiFi hotspots they provide. According to the "investors" tab, they are funded by five different venture capitalists. The company was founded by Niall Murphy and George Polk. Murphy is still on the board, Polk is not - it's not clear how much (if any) of the company they still own. SteveBaker (talk) 07:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

whois thecloud.com gives an address: The Cloud Networks Ltd, 54 Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7RY. —Tamfang (talk) 04:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you guys are good.Elatanatari (talk) 05:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Mascara

A friend of mine says that mascara contains guano. Is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.58.155.40 (talk) 21:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Mascara often contains guanine, which has no relation to guano. Guanine is one of the four nitrogen bases which make up the coding parts of DNA, but it has other uses too, for example, making cosmetics shiny. Tb (talk) 22:17, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, actually, it's called guanine because it was first extracted from guano. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 02:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Regardless, it is not usually currently extracted from guano. So yes, mascara contains an ingredient which also happens to exist in shit. But, then again, that same ingredient exists in every cell in your body. And the guanine in mascara is not currently obtained from shit, so you're OK. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:57, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm waiting for the follow up question "Is it true that there is pee in pretzels/cigarettes/soap/moisturisers?". Nanonic (talk) 05:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

It's much more fun to point out that (according to our article) "guanine form by the polymerization of ammonium cyanide" - so people can go around claiming that it's not "guano" that's in mascara, it's "cyanide". SteveBaker (talk) 07:41, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

They make perfume with whale vomit, so why not mascara with poop? --Sean 13:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Oooh! I'd forgotten about that one! Awesome. SteveBaker (talk) 16:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

January 18

negative memory?????

Moved to Wikipedia:RD/C#Negative_memory Nil Einne (talk) 03:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Time of Obama's actual oath

I've searched the Internet, and I've confused myself. Will Obama take his oath at 11:30am or noon EST? The Inaugural Committee's website states that the swearing-in ceremony begins at 11:30, which suggests that Obama will take his oath at 11:30. However, based on the Wikipedia article, it appears that the swearing-in ceremony includes some pre-oath events, such as an invocation and some musical selections. Based on this, if the ceremony begins at 11:30, Obama's actual oath-taking would appear to occur around noon.

I'd like to watch Obama take his oath, but if it happens at 11:30, I won't be able to watch it live. So, my question: does the swearing-in ceremony, which begins at 11:30, include events that will occur prior to Obama's taking of the Oath of Office, thus delaying his oath-taking until about noon? —Kal ^(talk) 07:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

According to our article: Barack Obama 2009 presidential inauguration the event commences at 10:00am and the oath will be sworn and inaugural address given at Noon. Further down the article is a list of events for the day where it says that the time will be "around noon" - so you might not want to cut it too close! SteveBaker (talk) 07:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the Constitution requires that the oathtaking not take place before noon. Tb (talk) 08:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, as discussed above. Algebraist 10:15, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Ekchooli, the Constitution says he has to take the oath before executing his office. It doesn't say how long before, and he assumes his office at noon on the dot. I know I'll be watching. --Milkbreath (talk) 16:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I presume the "taking the oath before executing his office" thing means that he has to take the oath before signing any laws or issuing any orders as president. Since he can probably hold off doing that for at least a few hours - there isn't any urgency to take the oath on the dot of noon. He IS president at the dot of noon - but he can't use his powers until the oath is taken. Since he only has to take the oath sometime before he executes his office - he could also take the oath before noon. It's just convention to do it with this big hoopla on the dot of noon. Indeed, should the date he takes office fall on a Sunday - he takes the oath in a small private ceremony and the full blown inaugural happens on the following Monday. SteveBaker (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

sex and sexuality in the 1890s

Hey, this is a homework question but all I'm looking for are some links for thing to read online, I hope that's ok. The topic is scientific research into sex and sexuality in the 1890s. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.240.66 (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 and the Labouchere Amendment are rather interesting (for context), even if they're 5 years prior to the time you're researching. Seraphim♥ 16:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't see anything about scientific research in those articles. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Which is why I clarified the reasons for providing the links in brackets... Seraphim♥ 00:23, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Try looking up the work of Richard von Krafft-Ebing—that should give you plenty to work with. There's also always Sigmund Freud, of course. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

You could find resources on this topic by googleling it.--Apollonius 1236 (talk) 23:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I was going to offer some links, but then I got a glimpse of a woman's ankle and got too excited to continue. :-) StuRat (talk) 23:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

For homosexuality in the 1890s, I'd suggest some research on Oscar Wilde, Havelock Ellis and Magnus Hirschfeld, as well as Edward Carpenter and John Addington Symonds. Havelock Ellis is part of the scientific group that you should definitely look at. Steewi (talk) 00:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the ideas everyone. Apollonius 1236 I know I can google it but I was hoping for links to specific academic journals and such, there is an awful lot of google results to look at. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.240.66 (talk) 12:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Death

If death is so certain, why does it terrify? 117.0.1.59 (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Because we're certain of it happening, but not of what happens next. Chaosandwalls (talk) 17:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Or, because it means we can no longer reproduce so those of our predecessors that were afraid of death and so avoided it lived longer and had more offspring, which were also afraid of death. Over many generations this resulted in the entire human race (or, more likely, a larger population - all animals, possibly) being afraid of death. --Tango (talk) 17:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

But such a inevitable, post-facto evolutionary explanation runs up against the fact that from what we can tell, people had very different attitudes about death even just a few hundred years ago than they do today. There is much in our approaches and attitudes towards death which is cultural, not biological, in nature. One can see this even among people whom we know—some people are terrified of death to the point of being paralyzed in their lives, while others are accepting of it and willing to do quite dangerous things. There's quite a wide spectrum of possibilities, even assuming that at some level those who don't die before they reproduce are going to be selected for. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

People have feared death for all of human history and throughout the world, as far I know. That's why almost all cultures have a concept of an after-life or reincarnation or something else to make death not seem as scary. --Tango (talk) 21:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

"As far as you know"... you might spend a little more time researching the subject. There is a rich literature on the history of death and the fact that responses to it, literary, psychological, etc., vary quite a bit from time period to time period, culture to culture. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 23:17, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you give an example of a culture that doesn't/didn't fear death? --Tango (talk) 23:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, if that's the reason, it doesn't work very well, as Chaosandwalls pointed out, long after Shakespeare.

To sleep, perchance — to dream, aye, there's the rub. For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause.

Death as nonexistence is in some sense far less scary. But it's incomprehensible; the mind rejects it as inherently impossible. --Trovatore (talk) 21:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I guess because we should avoid it so evolution has made it something we fear. The article death doesn't even ave a reference to anything useful, the article fear has more. fear of death just leads to the phobia about dead things. Dmcq (talk) 20:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

[Conflict] Human happiness is based on order - it's what the human race has ultimately been trying to achieve in the past millennia. Death is inherently uncertain; that's why it is so scary. Also, most things rely on concious thought to determine - at least you can think about it. Everything we know is like this, except after death it does not exist - so it's so new. Additionally, the fact it is certain makes us uneasy because there's nothing you can do about it. You could save a million lives, and yet you'd still die. It's out of your hands, and that's partially why people fear death, because you want to do something about it but can't. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 21:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

People worry more about things they feel they can do something about, so death being certain should decrease peoples worry about it. I don't know where your business about happiness and order come from, and personally I'm not particularly worried about either of them. What is this business about a million lives too please? Isn't that avoiding it a good idea reason enough like worrying when you're at the edge of a cliff? We come at the end of a long line of creatures that have avoided dying rather than just jumping over the cliff. Dmcq (talk) 21:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I've known people who were sick or old who anticipated it as one might await the arrival of an old friend. Not everyone finds it terrifying. Edison (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Evolutionarily speaking, there is no need for people to avoid death once they're reproduced (or, at least, once they are no longer of use to their families). --Tango (talk) 23:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes it's not so much about death itself, but about whatever leads up to death. That could include agonizing and debilitating diseases (hence euthanasia), being horribly burnt and scarred in an accident, becoming decrepit and unable to function, torture, being murdered in a zillion excruciating ways, etc. The pain and suffering of transition is often worse than the mere trifle of ceasing to exist; which is why many people would prefer to go to bed one night and just not wake up. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

As Woody Allen put it: "I am not afraid of death, I just don't want to be there when it happens." AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

What I find odd is that people I've talked to about death and possible 'afterlife' scenarios seem happy to know that they'd be reincarnated after death - they even seem happy if I say "But of course you'd be reincarnated without any memory of who you are now?" - and surprisingly - they are happier with this than with "nothingness". So given that somewhere in the world, a child will be born (or perhaps, conceived) at the very instant of your death - does it matter whether that child is "you - but without your memories" or "someone else"? So if it helps you to believe in reincarnation - go ahead - it's entirely equivalent to not believing in it. Personally, I'm happy if my genes and my memes make into the next generation. So far, my son has got the 'genes' thing reasonably well covered...now it just remains to make sure the memes don't disappear. SteveBaker (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Edison's comment relates to something I was going to point out int he order thing, where someone asked what the dealw itht hat was.

I officiated a great-aunt's funeral last summer, and she was suffering with cancer; int he months leading up to her death, she spent that time, in her mind, putting an order to things; she had time to do this. Hospice worked wonderfully to help with that. I think sometimes, as JackofOz noted, it is what leads up to it, becuase poeple fear not being able to put things in order. They also fear going before their loved ones; hence awaiting an old friend when it finally comes. All of one's loved ones and friends are gone, one is ready to join them in leaving this mortal coil. Also, I've found what upsets people more about death is when someone dies "out of order" - for instance, an elderly man I know lost a son in his early 40s a couple years ago (older brother of a school friend.) One thing that upset him most was that he felt hid children should all outlive him; it was a more logical order, in his mind.

However, while one is healthy, one wishes to avoid thought of it because one doesn't want to think about one's life here being over. If things are pleasant, they think, why focus on change. When I was totally a wills and estates attorney, you wouldn't believe how many poeple either: 1. Promised they'd have me do their wills and never did, or did only after 5-6 years; or, 2. Had me do their wills when they were in their 60s or older, and had either never had one or their last one was 40 years earlier and only done to name a guardian for a minor child. So, I think the fact things were going well and they didn't want to think about the fact "you can't take it with you" kept some from thinking about it.Somebody or his brother (talk) 15:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Fear of death is handy because it discourages suicide. If there were no FOD, people would knock themselves off whenever they had a serious cold. The same would apply to adolescent angst. Now that we have FOD, people wont kill themselves unless the pain is so bad that it overcomes the fear. Phil_burnstein (talk) 15:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I never could understand this business of people committing suicide because of pain. It just seems unrelated to me. Dmcq (talk) 19:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand it perfectly. Excruciating pain is ... well, excruciating. And if it goes on for weeks, months and years, with no possibility of relief apart from being sedated to a comatose or vegetable-like state, then what's the point of existing like that? Not that I'm advocating suicide in these circumstances, but if I were in that position, I may well choose to end it rather than having zero quality of life. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Well I can see one would be being very counterproductive if one was just being looked after in a vegetable like state. Personally I'd be tempted to walk over a cliff if that was what was about to happen. I don't think long term excruciating pain would do it though. Dmcq (talk) 10:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

January 19

Golf Balls

Can anyone tell me where I could buy glass-centered golf balls (used or new)?--Pufferfish4 (talk) 00:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

as in the glass is in the ball instead of the ball going through the glass window? google should be your friend, but I'm having no luck with it. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

No, I mean golf balls with a glass center instead of a rubber one. I think they stopped making them thirty years ago but I'm hoping someone might still be selling them.--Pufferfish4 (talk) 23:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You were clear, but the results were elusive. This patent 5743815[12] for a glass encased transponder within a golf ball for identification is dated 1998. Perhaps eBay? Julia Rossi (talk) 09:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

No - I checked ebay. These things are not mentioned anywhere - I'm beginning to doubt the reality of them. Conventional golf balls have a densely-wound rubber core around a fluid filled center. Building one with a glass center would change the properties of the ball dramatically - and it's hard to believe that such a thing would even be legal. Of course, 30 years ago the rules of the game may have been less specific about the nature of the ball - and people might well have experimented with all sorts of alternatives. But I can find no mention of them anywhere on the web...and golfers talk about the kinds of balls they use A LOT online - so it's exceedingly surprising to find no mention of them at all. Sadly, I'm pretty sure you're out of luck. SteveBaker (talk) 14:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I found one Sunday and I used it. I liked the feel of it, but it rolled into some bushes and I lost it. I know it was glass centered because it said so on the side.--Pufferfish4 (talk) 04:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried posting at a golf forum, or a wanted notice at eBay? With luck you could revive an oldie but a goodie. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Gas import/export

Accord to Natural gas by country, Russia produces 656,200 million m³ of gas, consumes 610,000, exports 237,200 and imports 58,300. According to my calculator, that involves 132,700 million cubic metres of natural gas appearing out of thin air. What's going on? All the numbers are apparently from 2007 and all are from the same source (CIA World Factbook). I could understand a discrepancy of a few percent, but this is 19% more gas being consumed and exported than is being produced or imported, it makes no sense! --Tango (talk) 03:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Those figures do indicate a much larger consumption than should be available. Maybe they're tapping into already processed reserves? Those would have to be some incredibly huge reserves, though. Three other nations in that list have unusual numbers: Iraq, Syria and Tunisia. The first two I can understand, but what's up with Tunisia? Another case of tapping reserves? This report doesn't answer the question of where the excess is coming from, but it does make for some interesting reading about the predicted, and now actual, serious gas shortfall in Russia (more demand than supply). 152.16.59.190 (talk) 09:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Just because those numbers are listed in the same source doesn't mean that that source got them from the same place, using the same assumptions. In the case of Russia, they have some disputed regions which the Russians might consider Russia but others do not, and whether those areas are included or excluded could cause you to get different numbers. StuRat (talk) 14:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Knights and peers who die before gazettal

There have been cases where a person was awarded an honour such as a peerage or a knighthood, but died before the award was formally gazetted.

There are numerous cases with knighthoods. Two that come to mind are Henry Cotton and William Throsby Bridges.

• In accordance with protocol, Cotton was approached privately beforehand to indicate his acceptance/rejection of a knighthood, and he accepted. Before the 1988 New Years Honours list was published, however, he died. His award was officially dated to his date of death, to prevent the knighthood being awarded posthumously, which never happens.
• General Bridges was seriously wounded at Gallipoli in May 1915. George V was made aware that he would die very soon, and on 17 May he awarded him a knighthood. On 18 May, Bridges died. The knighthood was not officially gazetted until 22 May. We still refer to him as "Sir William Bridges", however, because the intent was apparent prior to his death, even if the normal protocol could not be gone through due to the circumstances.

Contrast this with Sir John Forrest. He was advised that he was to be elevated to the peerage, and he immediately started signing his name "Forrest" as if it were a done deal, but before the peerage could be officially created by letters patent, he died. Consequently, we make quite a to-do in his article (to which I have been as much a party as anyone else) about why it's not appropriate to refer to him as "Lord Forrest".

Why do we allow knighthoods to creep in under the wire (the wire being the formal establishment of the title) in these sorts of circumstances, but not peerages? Is it simply a difference between a gazettal (applies to knighthoods) and the creation of letters patent (applies to peerages)? -- JackofOz (talk) 03:34, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's the fact that to hold a peerage you have to be presented to the Lord Chancellor in the House of Lords and have two supporters: peerages have to be claimed in person to prevent fraud. Whereas knighthoods are deemed to have been awarded on acceptance, not on collection of the award. IMBW - it's been 30 years since I studied the British Constitution! --TammyMoet (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes good sense. I'm just thinking about the normal process. First, the person agrees to be given the peerage (or has made it previously known they'd welcome such an honour; or has asked for one). Then it's conferred by the monarch (this is the monarch agreeing that such a title be created). Then it's announced publicly, usually in some Honours List. Then the title is formally created by letters patent signed by the monarch under the Great Seal, and associated behind-the-scenes red tape. Then the person turns up at the House of Lords and is accepted as a new peer and can take their seat and participate in proceedings if they wish (the majority don't). The red tape must obviously precede this step (there'd be no point in turning up at the House of Lords, only to be told "Sorry, sir, we have no record of any Barony of ... so please go away"). If Forrest had died after the letters patent had been signed, he would have been Lord Forrest at his death, despite never having had the opportunity to appear in London in person to claim the title. So, he must have died before the letters patent were signed - which was something entirely out of his control. I'd have thought these red-tape matters would normally be attended to very promptly after the public announcement, just in case the newly-announced peer died (as Forrest did). He was advised in February 1918 that the King had conferred the peerage, and he didn't die till September. In the intervening 7 months, he was madly signing his name "Forrest", on the perfectly reasonable basis that he had been a peer since February, which, retrospectively, he would have been if only the letters patent had been signed. It seems there must have been some delay at the palace and the letters patent were never done, so bye-bye "Lord Forrest". -- JackofOz (talk) 23:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Spanish trip

I am travelling to Madrid, Spain in a couple of days and I would like to know what things I can see there. I have already been to Barcelona: is Madrid a better place to see (i.e does it have more sights)? Where would be the best places to eat or roam around? I know that there is a tourist bus which roams around the city: is it any good? If so, does it go to every interesting places or does it miss out on some? I am not too worried about going to some parts not solely intended for tourists (i.e don't translate everything to French or English) because I can speak Spanish fluently. So do you recommend any such places (note that I have never been to Madrid before). Thanks to everyone for your help! --PST 08:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Any thing I get excited about is in Bilbao and Catalonia, such as work by Anonio Gaudi. No doubt someone will be by soon to excite you in the Madrid direction. Interestingly it is in the apparently geographical centre of the country. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know Madrid well, but if you have time, you could take the AVE to Toledo (half hour ride). It's one of those places you'll never forget. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

DO take a ride on the Red open-topped Double-Decker Bus before doing anything else - for several reasons - 1. whether you speak Spanish or not each seat is provided with a new pair of earphones and a multi-lingual audio-guide and YES you will be able to see the most important and scenic buildings and places of interest. 2. Your ticket lasts for 24 hours so you can go in the afternoon and again in the morning for 1 price and also, you can get on and off as many times as you wish within that 24 hour period, and 3. The buses themselves are built here in Scotland so you will be helping the Scottish economy which is being badly damaged by the US Mortgage and Banking disasters. 92.23.47.85 (talk) 12:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou everyone! I would like to know whether there are any particular places that I should see in particular. The bus mentioned above will probably take me to the important places (thanks!) but are there any small villages nearby that would be good to see? If so, how can I go there? User:Sluzzelin: what is the price to go from Madrid to Toledo? Thanks again! --PST 15:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

EUR 9.45 one way, according to renfe, EUR 15.15 for the round-trip (20% discount for round-trips). From what I could see online, the bus fare Madrid-Toledo costs less than half the train ride, but the estimated travel time is about twice to three times as long. (This information is from travel sites, I didn't find any official prices). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you looked at Madrid? ...y en Español [13]. (- also check out the links from there). Apart from the "must see" touristy sights, a lot depends on what you like. [14]. Por exemplo: I'm not into architecture and get bored 3 minutes into the first "magnificent" church; but I love window shopping and flea markets. (All of which can be found in Madrid.)--76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Soundproofing bathrooms

How can I soundproof the bathrooms in my house? I can't go the bathroom in the middle of the night without waking at least one member of my family. My family wont get a new house unfortunately so how can I deal with this issue of privacy? --124.254.77.148 (talk) 14:23, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, for starters, have you read our article, Soundproofing? --Tango (talk) 14:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Change your habit,the body usually breaks down and uses food for energy or disposes of food as in number two in about a twelve hour period,so,if you eat later in the evening,you will go to number two later the next morning,and not go in the have to flush the toilet and make the noise from flushing.Better than not flushing number one,so there is the smell for any other family member first thing when they use the toilet next morning.No need to spend unecessary money sound proofing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

(ec) Soundproofing the entire bathroom is going a bit a far. The noisiest bathroom activity at night is usually flushing the toilet. Either don't flush the toilet until morning, or try to quieten the flush by fitting a quiet-fill device to the valve (usually a strip of plastic that dangles from the valve to the water so that the incoming water doesn't splash so much - your local hardware/DIY store should be able to help). Closing the lid on the toilet seat also reduces noise. However, it could be your toilet's design. Those toilets with the tank high up on the wall and a long chain you pull to flush are particularly noisy. In that case you could see about getting a new (quieter) toilet fitted.

There are other things you can do to reduce noise - eg. if you are male, aim for the sides of the pan when urinating. If you are showering in the middle of the night and singing, maybe you should consider some adjustment to your lifestyle - don't sing, shower earlier or when you get up in the morning.

If all else fails you could always get the rest of the family some earplugs :-)

Astronaut (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

We need to identify exactly what is causing the noise. For example, pipes can make noises, either due to rattling in the walls or air pressure, both of which can be fixed by a plumber. Also, if the noise is carried out of the bathroom by pipes, soundproofing the walls of the bathroom would be completely ineffective. Perhaps soundproofing the bedrooms would work better (and also protect from other noises). StuRat (talk) 14:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

It depends on what country you are from too. Plumbing systems in UK homes (for example) have a cold water storage tank in the attic. When you use cold water, that tank has to refill - which is noisy (especially if you are in the bedroom right below it). In the US, cold water for toilet flushing comes directly from the water main - so that doesn't happen. I suppose one thing you could do to cut the noise of flushing would be to fill up a bucket of water in the bathroom before everyone goes to bed. You could tip that directly into the toilet instead of flushing - and perhaps it would be quieter. However, in the end, if you've gotta go, you've gotta go and the rest of the family need to recognise that. SteveBaker (talk) 16:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Since your user talk located you in Melbourne, try the following: [15], [16], Sometimes a simple solution to dampening bathroom noise is installing a fabric shower curtain and drapes [17]. (The more folds and swags the better. Just install tension rods in front of existing shower doors.) Natural or artificial plants can also help "swallow" some of the noise [18]. A non-slip mat in your shower will reduce the noise from the water hitting the pan. [19] Good luck. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 06:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Minimalist bathrooms with hard surfaces everywhere are echo-chambers; soft furnishings will help absorb sound. Then there are ear plugs. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Your bathroom is too tidy, you need piles of dirty clothes in there to absorb all the noise. :-) StuRat (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

mutilation,shreding and dead pigs killed by their brothers. why? and friendly coment about peta

BEFOREHAND ok if your in peta stop reading now your not going to like what im going to say, better yet stay and think about what i say. dont question what i have to say, dont denie me of what i know, what i say here now is from first hand experience. i know that i spell abunch of words wrong but please look past that. i am 16 years old and the son of a farmer. we have a 400+ year old farm has been in the family for about 100 of the 400.

i have noticed in our young pigs (which went into our weaning pen and we never casterated them, then they got too big to. (about 100-150lbs, little more than a foot wide, 2.5 ft long).) have been nibiling on each other, first we thought it was because they were hungry/didnt get enough food, but soon after we start to realize that they were eating less and less. corn i mean.(we have a 2.5-3 ft tall 8-10 inches wide, feeders that hold about 15 galons. the corn we feed them is ground to practicly a powder, we also add in nutrience.) any ways we started to noticed that more tails were missing first it was only a select few and there were about 25 pigs in a 15-20' by 10-15' pen. then the lack of tails got more noticeable and comon. then they started to just eat each other and we cant understand why i would like to know your opinions and facts or if u can point me in the right direction to the answer.

(Soapbox portion removed. This isn't a forum to express random opinions or start debates.)

thank you for your time and replies —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike sharpe16 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The wikipedia reference desk is not for "express[ing] what you believe". Stop wasting our time. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Don't overlook the fact that there is actually a question in there. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you considered asking a vet? --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Cannibalism is a common response to the unnatural and stressful conditions of factory farms, which is why debeaking birds and tail docking or tooth clipping pigs is a common countermeasure. Your choices are basically to give the animals a less stressful environment or to start cutting troublesome parts off when they're piglets (here is a how-to). FYI, I've got a few pigs free-ranging on pasture, and I've never had this problem. --Sean 16:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm with Sean, if you keep them in uncommon conditions then they will do uncommon things. Just like human beings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.182.202 (talk) 16:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

It's never a good sign, (and somewhat insulting) when a question starts off by telling certain people not to read it. In any case, this seems like a request for veterinary advice. The ref-desk isn't supposed to answer that sort of question. APL (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Pigs are omnivorous, so a protein-deficient diet may result in cannibalism. Check with a vet for the protein requirements for your pigs, and see that they get at least that amount. StuRat (talk) 18:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

StuRat, are you speaking with any actual knowledge of pigs or are you just reasoning as you go along? Sometimes I find your answers to be worse than just saying nothing at all, as it is clear you just try to reason your way through things that actually could benefit from some specialized knowledge, but you portray everything as if you are quite certain about it. The only useful thing I see in the above comment is "check with a vet" which is really all anyone ought to say here, unless they have real experience with animal medicine. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 02:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Which part of my logic do you find questionable ?

1) Pigs, like all animals, require protein.

2) Any animal which is deficient in protein (or any nutrient) in it's diet will actively seek that nutrient, by having a stronger desire for it and therefore tendency to consume foods which provide it.

3) Pigs are omnivorous, which means they sometimes eat meat to get protein.

4) Omnivores sometimes resort to cannibalism.

5) Pigs, being omnivores, may also resort to cannibalism when their diet is deficient in protein.

I also disagree with your idea that people shouldn't reason through their problems. If the poster asks the vet if a protein-deficient diet may cause cannibalism in pigs, they will get their answer. If so, then this might help to solve the problem. If not, then it's no big loss, just the time it took to ask and answer the question. StuRat (talk) 04:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, since you insist on "expert sources", and reject reasoning, here is one which supports my claim: [20]. I hope that, in the future, you will put more faith in reason (and, specifically, in my ability to reason correctly). StuRat (talk) 04:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Stu, I think people come here seeking actual knowledge, not to observe the contest between editors to exhibit superior reasoning skills. Or SteveBaker, who does both and supplies links and references. It's nice that you produce a source, but you did that to defend your reasoning, where you could have just supplied the source in the first place to help the OP, rather than refute the one who questioned your derivation. Interesting too that you use the source to defend your impeccable logic but skip over the bit where it says "The causes ... are poorly understood ..." and just focus on the inevitability of cannibalism. That source refutes my suggestion below to put a tire in the pen but at least I've been there, done that, tried to keep the suckers alive and killed the ones who weren't going to make it. Stick to your areas of expertise, or bring the authoritative sources when you first post please. Franamax (talk) 09:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

What you added below is "original research", with no supporting expert source, which is banned under our guidelines: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Guidelines#Guidelines_for_responding_to_questions. I personally have no problem with OR, however, or logic, or providing expert sources. Any way that the poster can get a good answer is fine with me (and, frankly, I can't understand why others complain about correct answers that come from a source other than experts). And, since my answer agrees with the expert source, and your tire answer does not, that seems to say that my logic provides a more accurate answer than your OR. Yes, the source does say "The causes ... are poorly understood ...", but then goes ahead to list possible causes, including a lack or protein in the diet. And, when the experts don't fully understand something, that's when things like OR and solving problems with logic have the potential to be the most beneficial. What's the alternative, should we say "the experts aren't sure, so we can't tell you anything, now go away" ? StuRat (talk) 14:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Temple Grandin's book Animals in Translation mentions the way pigs will bite other pigs, especially tails, when experiencing stress. She gets into some detail about how difficult it is to determine what exactly might be causing the stress. It might be some minor aspect of their environment that goes unnoticed by the people caring for them. She offers a variety of ideas on how to figure it out. Pfly (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, castrate the pigs. Call the vet to anesthetize them and get it done. Especially if there are females anywhere close, the males will fight and if the loser is injured, it will be killed and eaten. Unless you're raising a boar, castrate the males, otherwise you will only have one left anyway.

Hang a used tire in the pen about a foot off the floor so they have something else to chew on. Throw in some 2" dia. stones for them to chew on. Pigs need to root and chew, they're quite intelligent and they get bored hanging around a plain old pen. Our pigs would find a tiny crack in the floor or walls and turn it into a cavern.

Check with your local farm district on guidelines for space too, and go to the high side. Pigs love to be together, but they like having a bit of space to roam around too. You can tell when they have enough room when there is one spot where they all drop their dung, and another spot where they have straw to sleep on. (No straw left = bored pigs eating it 'cause there's nothing else to do) 10x15 is too small for 25 pigs, 15x20 is reasonable IMO. Mostly though, give them something interesting in their environment other than each others tails. Franamax (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with giving them interesting things to play with to avoid boredom, which can lead to destructive behavior. This is called "enriching their environment". Intelligent animals need variety, so toss something different into their pen periodically for them to play with (a paper bag (not plastic), a cardboard box, a fallen tree branch, etc.). Make sure you don't give them anything dangerous, of course, keeping in mind that they're likely to nibble on anything you give them. StuRat (talk) 14:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Forgot this before, but was reminded while ranting at StuRat - sorry Stu btw :)

No prob, Fran, but I hope I've convinced you that experts aren't the only source of knowledge; my logic and your OR are also good sources. StuRat (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Also I wouldn't advise feeding only supplemented corn ground that fine. Coarser grind, throw in some other higher protein grains, and I do hope you slop the feed with water so they can spend an hour rooting around. Stu is on track at least that you need to look at Total Digestible Nutrients and ensure that all categories are supplied. Corn with a nutrient supplement makes me suspicious. Your local feed mill can help you out or put you in touch with someone - in Canada, I would call Shur-Gain. Both of those can help you with the behaviour also. Franamax (talk) 10:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

While we've given some good advice on how to prevent pig cannibalism, you may also need some advice on how to stop it now that it has started. One approach is to coat the bitten areas with something "yucky" that pigs won't want to bite. Of course, this must not be harmful to the pig being treated, and will be in contact with open wounds. Here's a patent application for one such formula: [21]. However, again, ask your vet what they recommend for this purpose. StuRat (talk) 14:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, I gave an expert source previously on ways to prevent this behavior in pigs, but it may have gotten buried in a discussion about the way I solve questions with logic. So, here it is again: [22]. (Note that it comes up tiny on my browser, so I have to hit the button just above the text to increase the magnification a few times, you may have to do the same.) StuRat (talk) 15:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Desi documentaries

Is there any documentaries dealing with the South Asian community(Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani and Sri Lankan) in Toronto and and the word "Desi"? Many South Asian youths don't like using the word "Desi", but they use the brown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.204.75.80 (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Have your read our article Desi? It seems to cover this stuff rather comprehensively. SteveBaker (talk) 03:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I wanna fly away!

Well, actually float. I've had a silly, albeit half-serious idea in my head for a few weeks. I've heard of the tale of the man who tied dozens of huge balloons to his lawn chair, intending to float harmlessly in the air for a short while, but accidentally soared up some ridiculous height into the air, and all sorts of unintended consequences abounded. I thought that (in moderation), this could have been a good idea. My version would entail a helium tank and normal, run-of-the-mill, balloons, like those you would see at a party. One would simply keep tying helium-filled balloons to their body until they fundamentally weighed less. An assistant would probably have to be present, to prevent the floatee from floating off.

Would this be possible to pull off? Would "moon jumps" be possible? And if it could be done, how many balloons might it take to lift a 150 lb. / 70 kg. person?--The Ninth Bright Shiner 16:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, the guy you're thinking of was Larry Walters. I can't answer your other question except to say that you lowered your effective weight with a huge collection of balloons you'd probably be very vulnerable to wind. APL (talk) 16:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

A description of the most well known example of this is here. It requires a lot of balloons - weather balloons work better than party balloons, since they are much larger. According to Lighter than air, you would need about 70 cubic metres of helium to lift you - that's a lot! Obviously, a bit less is required if you just want to be light enough to jump really high - perhaps 50-60 cubic metres? --Tango (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The fact that Larry needed a forged requisition to get those weather balloons implies that I (an ordinary citizen) wouldn't be able to easily purchase them. And 50-60 cubic meters of helium...what kind of cost would that be running?

And to take wind into account...I'd probably need a good length of rope anchored to something, doing this on a calm day, as well as a few assistants to pull back on the rope if need be.--The Ninth Bright Shiner 17:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Edmund Scientific Sells weather balloons. APL (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a kind of "hot air balloon ride" often offered at county fairs and such, where it's anchored and the customers go up, stay a while, and straight back down to the same spot. I see no reason why you couldn't do the same with multiple helium-filled balloons. Windy days would be out, however, as noted above. Where you attach the balloons to your body can also be tricky, as pulling on your armpits and crotch gets to be uncomfortable in short order. If you want to float upright, you'd need to attach most balloons to your armpits. StuRat (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Just don't use as many balloons as this 2008 Darwin Award nominee. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

--cringes-- The thought of free-floating is a bit too scary for me, considering how that's gone for others; all of my envisioned escapades would still be tethered to the ground.--The Ninth Bright Shiner 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The Mythbusters tried to reproduce Larry Walter's feat - they found that it took an astounding amount of helium to do it. Let's crunch the numbers to understand why:

This web site [23] sells helium for about 0.50p (UK money) per cubic foot in tanks you have to return when empty or more like 2.00 per cu.ft in disposable cylinders. So the 70 cubic meters you would need to get airborne would be about 2,500 cu.ft - which is going to set you back maybe 1300 UKpounds - about $1850 US. Now - recall that you're also going to need a few thousand balloons (they aren't really 1 cu.ft each). How long would it take you to fill (let's say) 4,000 balloons? One every 30 seconds? That's 33 hours straight - with no breaks. Nah - it's gonna take you three days to do it - 11 hours per day - one every 30 seconds. Your fingers are going to be red-raw from tying off all of those balloons! Ah - but there's a problem here. How long does a helium balloon stay inflated? Not for 3 days, that's for sure!

So, my conclusion is that you can NEVER get that many helium balloons in one place at one time without a LOT of people helping you. Perhaps you could find 100 people who'd be prepared to help you do this? OK - but you've still gotta find many thousands of dollars for an experience that can only last a day or so.

This is why Larry Walters used weather balloons - they are MUCH larger than party balloons - so you need a lot less of them and you stand a chance of getting them filled quickly enough. The Mythbusters found it was possible - but it took them a LOT longer and a LOT more helium than they estimated. Part of the reason for that is the elasticity of the ballons. If you inflate a balloon, the gas inside will be at considerably higher pressure than air pressure. This does two very bad things to one's estimations: Firstly, it takes more gas to get up to that pressure - so it takes TWO cubic feet of gas to inflate a 1 cubic foot balloon to (say) 2 atmospheres. Secondly, when you put gas into the balloon under pressure, it's denser than it would be at room temperature - and that means that the balloon weighs more and has less lift. So what you want is big, floppy not-very-elastic balloons.

In the end, the cost and inflation time is what kills you - and you spend all that money to do it just once!

It starts to look like a VASTLY better deal to go for something like this [24] - a one-man hot-air balloon. Sure, it's HUGE - but compared to 4,000 party balloons?! You can fly it as often as you want for the cost of a tank of propane...maybe $10. They cost something like $15,000 and cost about $15 per flight. So compared to the cost of helium - the thing pays for itself after about half a dozen flights.

SteveBaker (talk) 00:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Would Hank Hill sell me one of those? Seems like the ultimate "propane accessory". --Trovatore (talk) 00:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

;_; My dream...crushed...but at least it's still possible with one of those one-man hot-air balloons. <whine> But $15,000...? </whine> Oh well...it seems like this will be another super-long-term goal for me. Thank you everyone!--The Ninth Bright Shiner 00:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

To be honest - it's worse than that. You really can't just climb into one of those things and fly. If you read the FAQ at the web site I linked to, you'll see that you need to be an experienced 'conventional' hot air balloon pilot before you can even think about a cloud hopper. So perhaps a reasonable shorter term goal would be to take some hot air balloon trips and consider getting lessons. SteveBaker (talk) 00:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The previous analysis seemed to use common elastic party balloons, but there is a metallic type of balloon with better properties, it's far less permeable to helium, so holds it in far longer, and is less flexible, so it doesn't increase the pressure as much. Then there's always hydrogen-filled balloons. Yes, they can explode, but only with an ignition source. Assuming you would avoid flying on days with thunderstorms, this isn't very likely. If the balloons are black, you might also get enough of a lift from solar heating to be a significant portion of the total lift (though you'd need to leave some empty space in the balloons to allow for expansion under heating, or they might pop). StuRat (talk) 04:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't try cluster ballooning with hydrogen: one of the candidate ignition sources for the Hindenburg was static electricity, and cluster balloons rubbing against things could certainly build up a charge. --Carnildo (talk) 00:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Of course we have an article on this topic: Cluster ballooning. Pfly (talk) 08:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

In 2008, this Brazilian thought it was a great idea at the time[25] until Priest floats off under party balloons. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Even with those metallic balloons, it still looks more economically viable (in the long, looong term) to get the cloudhopper. After getting enough money. After becoming an experienced hot air balloon pilot. After I take a hot air balloon ride for the first time. Meh. Thanks again, everyone!

I wonder why all the good dreams take so many years to fulfill. :-) --The Ninth Bright Shiner 20:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Monkey Menace

How do i get rid of monkeys that scale into my apartment and mess around with anything around, they tore my shirt to a hankerchief and my trousers are getting patchy everyday.The worst is, they even bit my neighbour hence i am a bit concerned now. Just dont want to hurt them but if i can ward them off as they are very agressive. anyone?Vikram79 (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Do they climb in through windows ? If so, I suggest some bars on the windows, perhaps with outward facing spikes. Make them something you can easily open but monkeys can't, and remember they're smart, but something with a latch on the inside (they can't reach from outside) might work. A big mean dog might work, too, as long as it doesn't do all the same things the monkeys do. Unfortunately, this carries the risk that you might find bloody monkey parts all over the apartment one day when you come home. Another idea is to leave a stereo playing sounds of common monkey predators, but they might be smart enough to figure that trick out. So, we're back to my original suggestion of physically blocking all the entrance routes. If monkeys are a problem in your area, I would imagine the sell "monkey bars" just for the purpose of keeping them out. StuRat (talk) 18:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Hardware cloth] (might have a different name in non-U.S. countries) or even Chicken wire set in a wood frame screwed to the window frame should keep them out nicely, at a lower cost than metal bars. Edison (talk) 20:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

A bigger, meaner monkey perhaps? TastyCakes (talk) 20:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

A specific answer would kind of depend on what type of monkey you are talking about. Baboons, for example, can be vicious. Where I used to live it was far more common to find bloody dog parts around, when a canine has the misfortune to mess with a troop of baboons. Rockpocket 00:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Airline tracking

Are passenger manifest public information or is that considered a violation of the Privacy Act? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colodreamn (talk • contribs) 17:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

In what jurisdiction? Algebraist 19:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

And which Privacy act? Under U.S. laws, airlines are private organizations, and are free to set their own stipulations on selling you a ticket. One of those stipulations can be "the right to let the entire world know that you flew on a particular flight and sat in a particular seat." If you don't want the information public, you are fully allowed to NOT buy said ticket from that company. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I asked one time if a relative had made a flight (in the US) and was told that they couldn't give me the information, all they could tell me was if the flight they were scheduled on had left on time or not. AnyPerson (talk) 00:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't mean the law prevents it, they probably just have a policy against it. "There's no reason for it, sir, that's just our policy." StuRat (talk) 00:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

That also backs up my point. It is probably entirely up to the whim of the company as to how they handle that information. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

This makes me wonder if it may be a case of we have always done it that way. It looks from some of the things said that prior to 1997 US airlines may not have had manifests that matched the actual people on the aircraft. Canadian airlines tend not to provide information on aircraft passengers. Of course if you are polite, ask properly and can read between the lines then it's sometimes possible to get the information from an airline agent. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I supect they are worried about being sued. Also a companion may not be a spouse, and if the spouse finds out by reading the manifest, the airline will probably lose customers. Phil_burnstein (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

What is this song?

The snippet of tune after the opening theme...

A-Punk by Vampire Weekend — Matt Eason ^{(Talk &#149; Contribs)} 19:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

COPC

By certifying ourselves for COPC, how does it help? finally are there tools to learn it?thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.36.6 (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You can try our article COPC Inc., but that acronym may also refer to Community Outreach Partnership Center, Community-Oriented Primary Care, Chemical of Potential Concern, Contaminant of Potential Concern, Customer Operation Performance Center, Constituent of Potential Concern, Code of Professional Conduct, Command Privilege Code or Central Order Processing Center. Can you please give us the context? --Thomprod (talk) 19:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Website?

Are there places I could go to on the internet that have lots of information of particular topics, providing statistcs, arguments and such like for all sides of disagreements.

Particularly I would be interested now in a site with lots of information about the cost to the environment of building 'environmentally friendly' new buildings, compared to the cost of improving the environmental friendliness of existing buildings, and the effectivnes of these two approaches, though I expect I will often need to find similar amounts of information on a lot of other topics. Possibly a site similar to this one, that gathers as much information as possible.

148.197.114.207 (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia IS a good place for that - but you have to pick where you go. Here on the RD, we're focussed on answering specific, short-term questions. So we don't gather a lot of information beyond what is strictly needed - and in a few days, it's archived and mostly forgotten. In 'article space', you might start contributing to articles related to this issue - but the related Talk: pages are NOT intended for discussion about the subject - they are about the content of the article only. But the "best fit" for your interests is to find Wikipedia 'Projects' that relate to your needs. A project typically consists of a dozen or two people interested in a particular general area of interest who collaborate on producing or improving a larger number of related articles. On the project's Talk: page - you can discuss the material that exists on the subject - pull in more stuff - discuss the relevance of it and fit what works into articles. You might start by looking at Wikipedia:List_of_WikiProjects. You might (for example) want to discuss this question on Wikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineering or Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy. There are literally hundreds of projects to choose from - and (if you REALLY want to) you could even start your own if you can find enough other editors to join in. Our sister projects WikiBooks, WikiSource and Wikiversity might also be attractive to you. SteveBaker (talk) 00:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

For statistics you can find a lot of info at [26]--76.97.245.5 (talk) 06:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

What is the music in this youtube video?

What is the music in this youtube video? It could be the music from SimCity 3000 according to one comment. The link is here. --Blue387 (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Highway Blues by Marc Seales on the album Speakin' Out. If you have Windows XP, it's included in Windows Media Player. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 21:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! --Blue387 (talk) 22:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

January 20

ACCA

Hello!I am an ACCA student and want to go to Ireland for further study.I have heard that some from a non.european country complete ACCA in Ireland .they gave him nationality automatically .Is that true?I have read this in the ACCA Official Magazine Student Accountant. Thanks for any info —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.45.69 (talk) 07:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

If I understand the question, you're asking about ways to get Irish nationality. The best place to get that information would be the Irish immigration authorities, go here. You could ask the ACCA as well, go here. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 12:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I very much doubt it, see Irish nationality law. The best I would have thought you could get is to be allowed to count the time studying as going towards naturalization as normally it wouldn't. You'd have to check upon that. Dmcq (talk) 18:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Opening guests at tech conferences

I was looking at the Lotusphere article due to it being in the news tonight and I am a bit confused by something. What does the Special Opening Guest do? I see people like Avery Brooks, John Cleese, Patrick Stewart and Dan Aykroyd listed but I don't see what they have to do with Lotus or IBM. So, what do they do at these things? Do they just do a autograph signing and collect a paycheck for it? Or is it more involved than that? Dismas|^(talk) 08:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Besides bring cachet and raise brand awareness? (got to watch those marketing people) -- Julia Rossi (talk) 09:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

They typically give an opening speech. This could be anything from some sort of inspirational 'future direction' thing - to nothing much more than a stand-up comedy routine that's been slightly tailored to the nature of the event. Sometimes, some luminary from the field of the conference might give a retrospective of his or her memories about the former leaders in the field. Typically takes up the first hour of any major business conference. SteveBaker (talk) 14:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Steve. Dismas|^(talk) 04:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Middle names in US Presidential inaugurations

I noticed they used "Hussein" today, which has been pronounced by conservatives to try to imply that Obama is a Muslim terrorist. Is this always done at inaugurations, or was this done to try to rattle him ? StuRat (talk) 17:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a reference or link to provide at the minute but I strongly think that it is customary to use the President-elect's full legal name. I remember years ago hearing "William Jefferson Clinton" when Bill was sworn into office. cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 17:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

On the "inaugural invitations" that the Obama people sent out the used the middle name. I don't think it was a conspiracy of any sort. It's his middle name. He's not ashamed of it. That conservatives could be ignorant about it hardly matters at this point. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:54, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

They used George Walker Bush's middle name too. Rockpocket 18:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

This unreferenced CBS blog entry by Katie Couric says that Reagan left out his middle name for the oath and James Earl Carter was "Jimmy". Ford used his middle initial, Nixon used Milhous the first time, but left it out at the second inauguration. Cleveland, Wilson, and Coolidge omitted their first names.

I'm particularly curious about Truman's middle initial at the inauguration. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Moreover, middle name is insignificant if you want to fly.Vikram79 (talk) 18:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Our article on the inauguration says that Obama himself chose the actual phrasing, so obviously it wasn't done to rattle him. Certainly some idiots will make a fuss if he uses it and a different fuss if he doesn't, so if those idiots weighed on his thinking, I guess he chose charges of rubbing our noses in his terrorist allegiances over charges of being a cryptomuslim. --Sean 19:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The decision to use Hussein in the inauguration was Obama's own. He stated that he was so doing as to be "historically consistent" with past inaugurations. Even this, of course, was not without controversy as Rep. Steve King from Iowa complained about this usage, dismissing Obama's explanation as obviously false and proclaiming the inclusion of Hussein as a heinous double-standard [27]. The accusation of its usage being a double-standard was prompted by the Obama camp's complaints in response to commentators such as Ann Coulter referring to Obama as "B. HUSSEIN Obama," and other emphasizing of the middle name during the campaign in a transparent and childish attempt to somehow thereby smear Obama. Apparently that tricky concept we refer to as context eludes Representative King. As for the usage of middle names during recent inaugurations: Neither Jimmy Carter nor Ronald Reagan used it, both Bushes did, and Ford got just the middle initial (all of these are on youtube, links upon request). Anyway, my understanding is that all but a small handful of presidents have used their full names. I believe there was even some controversy regarding Carter's usage of "Jimmy" rather than his full legal name.

As an aside, the former King Hussein of Jordan, an ally of the United States who made peace with Israel after decades of war, was described by George HW Bush as an "old friend", and whose funeral was attended by 4 US presidents and their wives and numerous other dignitaries from all over the world would appreciate it if Americans would please stop with the "Hussein" paranoia. Thanks. - Azi Like a Fox (talk) 19:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Heck, I've even known an "Osama", who, thankfully, was rather short, or he might be at Guantanamo Bay as we speak. It's stupid to judge people based on their name being similar to other people we hate. I do question parents who name their kids "Hitler", etc., though, as intentionally trying to cause trouble. Obviously this would only apply if the kid is named after the name in question has become infamous. StuRat (talk) 20:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Even naming kids "Adolf" would be asking for trouble. As would "Saddam", "Dracula", and various others. Those are special cases. But this is not about Obama being given some contentious name like that. "Hussein" is an extremely common name in the culture of Obama's father, and will continue to be so, despite Saddam. Even if that were not the case, there's absolutely nothing irregular about anyone swearing an oath and using their full legal name, whatever it is. In some contexts, a person swearing an oath would be required to give their full legal name, whatever it is. That presidents-elect are not required to give their full legal name, but can get by with their commonly known name if they choose, does not make the choice of the full name in any way inappropriate. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Hussein is so common a name in the world, stopping using it because of one two-bit dictator would be akin to stopping using names like "Smith" and "Jones" should a crazy two-bit dictator with THAT name come along. I don't think having a name as common as Hussein represents any sort of political liablity, except in the minds of those that wear tin-foil hats and run in fear from the black helicopters. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Children taken from their parents because of their names - in the United States. AnyPerson (talk) 00:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

In New Zealand, a count intervened to assist a child named Talula Does The Hula From Hawaii. Rockpocket 01:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Which count ? Count Dracula ?  :-) I don't see a prob with that name, assuming everyone will just call her "Talula". StuRat (talk) 07:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Yup. ;) Oddly enough she simply went by "K" (though the reason for that isn't obvious). I agree that it doesn't seem as bad as Sex Fruit, though. The best thing about that article is the comments at the bottom. Poor Craig Gogay... Rockpocket 08:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

What about Miss Hooker? What a name! [28] 122.107.203.230 (talk) 09:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe courts do have to explain to parents that a netuser name is not the same as a living child title. Evidently there are some contemporary Ghengis Khan's around, too. (OR here). One weird-name survivor has to be Ima Hogg. Julia Rossi (talk) 11:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I see no inherent problem with naming a child after a famous person, like Martin Luther King, unless you consider confusing generations of school children to be a problem. :-) StuRat (talk) 17:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

President Obama's post inauguration income.

I understand that Mr and Mrs Obama will have less income as President and First Lady than they did previously as lawyers, senator, author, and company director, given, in part, that she receives no income for her role as first lady. I know they will live rent-free in the White House and that they will have extensive security, travel, hospitality and catering provision but still, with no other legitimate income during his term(s) as President, they could ostensibly leave office in a relatively impoverished condition. That said, and given I live in the UK and have no political or other affiliation with the Obamas other than one of admiration, could I legitimately make (and could they legitimately accept) a genuine goodwill cash donation for their personal use, now or in the future? 92.10.160.235 (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Almost all presidents take a big pay cut on taking office. Unlike most (almost all recent presidents have been multi-millionaires) Obama's assets are (relatively) thin; but he'll receive decent income from the two books he's published before taking office, at least for a while. As you say, while he has a rather modest income, he will have very few day-to-day expenses (I think the kids' school fees will be the biggest item), so he won't become poorer. Bill Clinton really did leave office impoverished, as he owed millions in legal expenses associated with the Jones and Lewinsky matters - but he's since made millions speaking and consulting. Obama will likewise, so there's no need to take any pity on him. 87.113.74.22 (talk) 21:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Presidents do make a stipend, at last check it was $140,000 per year of office which would still put the family in the upper 10% tax bracket. Cash donations are very carefully monitored and earmarked for specific purposes. Like the above user said, former presidents can make a significant jump in income after their term is over with book deals, speaking tours and general visits. Jimmy Carter has turned his fame in to charity donations, while Bill Clinton has turned his fame in to millions of dollars on the speaking circuit. You really have nothing to worry about with the Obama's financial situation. Livewireo (talk) 22:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• The correct number is $400,000. The last two raises were both to double the previous level, so it's never been $140,000. --Anonymous, 23:37 UTC, January 20/09.

Maybe I had it confused with senate pay (which is now $170,000 give or take)? Either way, $400,000 is a lot of walking around money. Livewireo (talk) 15:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Both Barack and Michelle could write more books. And if I'm not mistaken, one of the previous White House pets had a book deal. So, there's nothing stopping Sasha and/or Malia from having a book ghost-written for them, which would earn them royalties... Dismas|^(talk) 22:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

They have to pay some of their living expenses in addition to the private school tuition. Malia has been shown on TV taking photos nonstop with a little digital camera at events over the last few days. Were she so moved, is there any reason she couldn't publish a book of photos, (or sell them to the highest bidder, providing they are vetted for security)? Is there any reason Mr. and Mrs. Obama couldn't write books while in office and benefit from the sales? Edison (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Found it. Millie, the first Pres. Bush's dog had a book ghostwritten for her. Dismas|^(talk) 11:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Level of Ballistic Protection on the Glass

The podium that Obama was standing on had a layer of glass on top. What is the level of ballistic protection offered by those panels of glass? Can it stop a .50 BMG from 1000 yards out? Acceptable (talk) 22:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Its unlikely that the Secret Service would give specs on the glass. Various media are reporting that it is "laminated with four layers of virtually unbreakable plastic to resist chemicals, flames and multiple gunshots." According to Tony DiPonio, the vice-president of operations at Pacific Bulletproof Co, commenting on the glass used at his acceptance speech in Chicago: "For Obama, they used a level five, which could withstand a 7.62 mm round armor piercing, which you’d see out of a rifle." Glass with a level five protection rating also sufficiently shields debris from an explosion about 10-15 feet away. [29] Rockpocket 23:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Belgian Browning Shotgun with interchangeable barrels

I inherited a Belgian Browning Shotgun with two sets of interchangeable barrels. One barrel is a 20 gauge over/under shotgun. The other barrel is a 30.06 over/under rifle. Does anyone know what model this is or how much it is worth. I was told it was a special order gun.Dogpapa (talk) 23:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The approximate age, (which you could probably look up from the serial number), a model number or photo might help gun fanciers to locate info for you. A website Allexperts.com gives a phone number for the Browning company and says their website is at www.browning.com. Edison (talk) 23:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The Mysterious Biped

Where can I find the article "The Mysterious Biped", by Stephen Jay Gould, online? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.116.16 (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

here? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

January 21

What country has the biggest official residence for its head of government?

What country's head of government has the biggest official residence, in terms of interior square footage (or some other relevant measures)? --173.49.15.243 (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

India. According to the 'Trivia' section of article Rashtrapati Bhavan, it is the biggest residence of any President in the world. manya (talk) 04:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, but he's not the head of government. The head of government of India is the Prime Minister. If we are counting head of state, then things like Buckingham Palace get into the works. Tb (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

The Sultan of Brunei does pretty well for himself. Does he count? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 07:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah - I'd be really surprised if the Sultan isn't #1 in this regard. I once did some work for him (indirectly, through the company I worked for at the time) - and came close to being flown out to Brunai on his personal Jumbo jet (which he likes to pilot himself) to install some equipment at his palace. Sadly, (I guess) he decided to simply ignore his contract with our company and abruptly lost interest in our product for no well-explained reason. As our contract lawyers pointed out - suing the ruler of a foreign dictatorship rarely turns out well in the end - so we let him get away with it and were stuck with something like a million dollars of losses as a result. The amount of money he can splash around (and the attention that gets) is nothing short of astounding. We engineers like to abbreviate everything - but we took particular relish in shortening "The Sultan of Brunai" to "The SOB" in all subsequent internal communications relating to the project. SteveBaker (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

How do Radio Station Censor Songs?

When listening to rap songs with explicit lyrics on North American radio stations, one will always hear the explicit words censored out. There are several ways of doing this: some radio stations "beep" out the word, some blank it out and other replace the explicit word with a non-explicit word. My question is, how do they replace the explicit word with a non-explicit one? Does the artist lend their voice for that single word? Or does the radio station somehow digitally emulate the artist's voice? Acceptable (talk) 04:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes the artist records two different versions (My Name Is by Eminem, for example). When the words are bleeped or blanked out, it isn't done by individual radio stations, but by whoever they got the song from (the record label, I suppose). Adam Bishop (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

That is generally the case, but it's straightforward to blank or bleep out a word in a song using sound editing software, and some radio stations will do it themselves if there is something they wish to play which does not have a radio-friendly version available (for instance, something by a local act). Warofdreams talk 11:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

If you have iTunes (this is the program I am familiar with, others may offer the same feature), you can search for Clean versions of songs. Like Adam Bishop mentioned, many record labels record clean versions of songs for air play, sometimes even altering the content of the song (Purple Pills by D12 for example). Livewireo (talk) 14:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Are there any money-free psychic chat rooms online?

Well, I was wandering around the Internet searching for a chat room where I can talk to psychic people who would help me on problems and issues on friendship, because I got an online friend on Yahoo! Messenger who I try to talk to him, but he doesn't respond, so I was thinking that something must be up with him. I'm searching for a money-free chat room, meaning that I'm searching for a chat room where I don't have to pay or cost money to enter. So, are there any money-free psychic chat rooms online? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.167.201 (talk) 06:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Psychic abilities do not exist. It would be wiser to locate a self help chatroom or a message board frequented by older people in similar walks of life who will have dealt with the same sorts of difficulties you are dealing with now. They will be able to give you just as good or better advice than any alleged psychic could. Other refdeskers can probably point you towards an online community that fits the bill. 152.16.15.23 (talk) 07:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

At Wikipedia, the goal is to be impartial as explained by Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View. At least that was what I was lead to believe somewhere along the line. Might have been something I read... who knows. Anyway... Distressed Wiki-Surfer, the Psychic article demonstrates some information I believe you might find helpful on your personal quest to believe or not believe in parapsychological phenomena. As for your missing friend, I do sincerely hope you hear from him soon. In the mean time, if you know his basic information, 9 times out of 10 the police department in the area he lives (at least in the US) can help you make sure he's ok. My Best Wishes to you. Operator873 (talk) 08:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

To Operator873: Wikipedia is indeed required to be impartial - but that in no way forces us to tell lies. Please read WP:FRINGE and (easier reading): Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia cannot claim the earth is not flat which make it abundantly clear that we are NOT supposed to go around saying that psychic powers are real when the abundance of peer-reviewed, respected scientific journals says they are unambiguously NOT real. We are allowed to say things like "Psychics claim such-and-such (insert reference here)but mainstream science says this is all bullshit." - that's what "impartial" means in our terms...it most certainly DOES NOT mean that we give equal weight to the wild-assed opinions of nut-jobs as you are clearly doing. If you cannot abide by those rules - then go take your crazy theories someplace else because they aren't welcome here.

To our OP: There is no such thing as psychic powers - there really, truly isn't - no matter how much you and others wish there were. Hence anyone claiming to have them is either (a) a charlatan (a liar - a con artist) or (b) self-deluded (a lunatic). In neither case should you be going to such a person for help with personal matters. There are plenty of OTHER chatrooms where you can get help from caring people who aren't out to mess you up even more. So-called psychics are the worst possible people to go to because they are either crazy or out to screw you in some way - and in neither case do you want them advising you on matters like this.

SteveBaker (talk) 14:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

As the above responses indicate the existence of psychic powers is unproven to date but there are many people who claim to have them. These people almost always require some payment for their services and you are unlikely to find a free 'psychic website'. I would advise you to seek some other way to contact or find your lost friend. Richard Avery (talk) 08:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

ICE Conditions of Contract

In England many large construction projects are issued the terms and conditions backed up by the ICE 7th Edition Conditions of Contract, issued by the Institute of Civil Engineers. In these T&C's there is term called "Engineers" Instructions, when can this be used and what are the implications of using it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glyndotcom (talk • contribs) 09:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Development of The Louvre Pyramid

Was the cavernous/underground section all developed at the time of building or were there existing underground tunnels/connections? It looks to be all modern inside (when I visited) but I couldn't find out whether this was all just excavated during the development of this, or not. Any help/input would be great. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

If you're referring to the Cavern specified in The Da Vinci Code at the bottom of La Pyramide Inversée, I don't think it exists - as per the La Pyramide Inversée article. -- WORMMЯOW  10:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Nah sorry i'm talking about literally just the main-entrance area (that is set below ground with the giant pyramid above). It's a huge area and it just seems to have lots of tunnels pushing out from it, just wondered if that was stuff that was there before or if they dug it all out when the Pyramid was made. No mystery/conspiracy type stuff. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

months of the year

From where did we get the names of the months? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.211.63.50 (talk) 12:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Rome. 209.247.5.207 (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Julian_calendar#Month_names, Gregorian_calendar#Months_of_the_year.--droptone (talk) 13:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

xbox 360

what games come out 2009? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.3.18 (talk) 13:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

See 2009 in video gaming. Cycle~ (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Place Stanislas

Hello, My name is Robert bowling from the United States. I acquired a painting of the Place Stanislas wich was painted 1n 1n 1944 by L Husson. I am in the military and know Nancy was liberated by the 3rd army in 1944. I am just curious about this painting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.24.208.187 (talk) 15:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

What do you want to know about it? Algebraist 15:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Scottish Banknotes.

Now that The Royal Bank of Scotland has been 80% taken over by the UK Treasury; and given that The Bank of Scotland is now wholly owned by Lloyds TSB; and given that The Clydesdale Bank is no longer a Scottish owned institution, what is the point of these 3 "banks" continuing to print and issue their "own" banknotes, especially so as they merely serve to confuse English and other tourists as they are so different from Bank of England banknotes; and also as they are usually unacceptable in England, and also on the continent where even though the Euro is the accepted legal tender, some currency exchange shops will accept English notes, but NOT Scottish ones? 92.21.251.196 (talk) 16:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Your claim that Scottish notes are "usually unacceptable in England" is not sustained by my weekly commutes between Scotland and England; in five years I've never had a Scottish note declined or even questioned anywhere in England, nor even looked at twice north of Leeds. I don't think English people are nearly as easily confused are you imagine. 87.113.74.22 (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

2012?

why are people so convinced the world is going to end in 2012?  Buffered Input Output 17:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

This idea seems to be connected with the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar used by various Mesoamerican civilisations including the Maya. Gandalf61 (talk) 17:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

President Obama Pledge and the FOIA

Does this mean that people will use this to ask about UFOs and the like? I have just seen this as his people were being sworn in on CNN, Fox News, other news outlets. He just indicated that "there will be transparency in government." 75.88.20.12 (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Got logged OUT. Server trouble on my end. Powerzilla (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)