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

November 28

Time of Use Power Meters

Time-of-use meters supplied by Energy Australia charge for power at 3 different rates: Peak,Off Peak and Shoulder. Which is all very well until you come to Daylight Saving when we all have our clocks and lives adjusted to one hour later. THE METERS STILL READ STANDARD TIME INSTEAD OF DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME. If I turn my dishwasher on at 10pm when Off Peak is supposed to start why does'nt the meter think it is 9pm and charge me Shoulder rate?Milwhee (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC).

The same with my electricity meter in the UK. At a guess, could it be because of the costs involved in sending someone round to your house twice a year to change the time on the meter, and doing that at exactly the correct switchover time? Astronaut (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The Radio teleswitch article my help. --Aspro (talk) 11:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

unknown building in Thailand

In Thailand near Krabi I saw a nice great building. I'm interested in what this is for a building. Can somebody talk me more about? Can I find photos of this at web? You find this building at 8,025 N 98,768 E.--79.210.217.19 (talk) 10:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Could it be this building, the nearest photo I found in Google Maps. Astronaut (talk) 10:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Job benefits

What jobs are there that offer full housing, clothing, and food or at least a subset of these? I'm thinking about whether it's the employer or the employee that has to worry about these things, not whether or not the cost is technically deduced from the paycheck. --85.76.87.120 (talk) 11:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Don't know where you are but in the UK managing a pub meets these criteria: also maybe running a children's or old people's home. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Many posts in the Armed Forces / military will come with accommodation, food and clothing - well, i'm not sure about 'slacks' but certainly the clothing required for your job. ny156uk (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

As well as the chance of travel to far flung and 'interesting' locations, and a good chance to meet the locals. - 220.101 talk^\Contribs 15:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Or working in some of the travel industry - e.g. on a Cruise ship or as a Holiday rep. ny156uk (talk) 14:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Do people working in cruise ships normally work all year round? If not, if they really want to are they able to stay on the cruise ship or other accomodation provided by their employer when off duty for longer stretches? Nil Einne (talk) 17:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Typically not, however sailors from some countries (the Phillipines and China come to mind) do tend to have long contracts. Also, while cruise ship operators may provide some work-related clothing, i.e. uniforms for officers, whites for kitchen staff, it certainly wouldn't qualify as a general-purpose wardrobe. Cheers. Haus^Talk 18:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

You could become a monk. HiLo48 (talk) 20:23, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Or a Priest, probably most religious orders provide the basics, though the pay is likely to be pretty poor! - 220.101 talk^\Contribs 15:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Or a convicted criminal (at least in the United States). The basics might not be that appealing, but being in prison does meet the criteria stated. --Quartermaster (talk) 21:10, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

In the U.S., farmers — especially those who run small, independent operations — often hire farmhands and pay them with room and board. It's hard work, very labor-intensive and usually requires being available seven days a week, often 12 hours or more a day. (But you can be certain the farmer will be working even more than that!) — Michael J 00:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Being a member of a commune. --62.142.167.134 (talk) 22:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia censorship

To whom it may concern: I'm inquiring about the censorship policies of Wikipedia? While recently doing a project on Nazis and the Occult, I ran into some roadblocks in my research, as you have no pages focusing on the actual "The Vril Society", "Maria Orsic", or the other members who disappeared in 1945. I read somewhere that there had once been a page dedicated to "Maria Orsic", but was taken down.This raised questions to me about the censorship policies of Wikipedia. I am aware that Wikipedia is a privately-owned corporation and is owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, but it is also an encyclopedia website and therefore should not be censored at all. I'm concerned about biases within the larger facet of the website and would like to know your stance on censoring content that may be controversial, but does not conflict with your "copyright, etc." policies?

Thank you, A. Alexander —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.10.96.79 (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

To answer your specific situation, we do have some substantial coverage of the Vril Society at Vril, specifically Vril#Vril_society. I can't find any sign that we've ever had a page on Maria Orsic - this would appear to be as there's been no particular coverage of her outside the context of the Vril Society.

Wikipedia's lack of article coverage of this seems to me to be far more related to the fact that these topics have gained very little mainstream or scientific coverage in reliable sources, and hence a general-interest encyclopedia struggles to produce verifiable, neutral articles on them. You may be interested in reading Wikipedia's "not censored" policy - simply being controversial is no impediment to an article (see, for example, Depictions of Muhammad)). But certain controversies that are more akin to bizarre conspiracy theories are often simply too disregarded by mainstream media to produce a reasonably sourced article in an encyclopedia. ~ mazca ^talk 13:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

From some searching, the OP must be referring to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Orsitsch which was deleted due to the lack of evidence the person even existed along with a lack of any notability of the legend? that they did. You can see it here [1] and it's clear to me from that deletion was justified. To emphasise Mazca's point, we have plenty of article on bizarre conspiracy theories or controversies considered nonsense by the vast majority of mainstream sources provided that there is sufficient coverage in these sources, e.g. Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories, Holocaust denial, Climate change denial, vaccine controversy, Chemtrail conspiracy theory, Moon landing conspiracy theories, Paul is dead and we even have a List of conspiracy theories. Nil Einne (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Cross posting. This has already been answered at the help desk. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:04, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Dutch Tulip Island

According to this article the Dutch planned to build an island in the shape of a tulip. However, I can't find any information about this project since 2007. Can anyone else? --188.220.46.47 (talk) 13:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

My reading of that article and similar articles of the time is somewhat different from yours, it sounded a highly speculative idea (I don't think it could even be called a proposal). That was also in 2007 before the world economic meltdown really started to be noticed. In any case this ref from mid 2008 [2] suggests something similar to mine, the idea was more of one to get exposure and people talking then a serious proposal although there are (or rather were at the time) some more serious proposals being considered along with ongoing projects, just not in the shape of tulips. It also includes some names which may help in searching for more info on them. Nil Einne (talk) 16:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Mosaic Law + Christians

What's the term used to refer to Mosaic law and its antiquated, non-binding nature for Christians? There's a Wikipedia article on it, but I can't remember the word and it doesn't show up in google searches. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 16:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm way outside my area of competence here, but are you thinking of New Covenant Theology? --Antiquary (talk) 16:59, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Maybe Biblical law in Christianity is the article you're thinking of? Deor (talk) 17:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Nah -- it was a word that is used to mean "the no-longer-bindingness of the Mosaic Law." DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a complicated question. I am not sure there is an exact term for it, but the relationship between Christians and laws listed in the Old Testament is complex. On the one hand, Jesus states

“ 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." ”

in Matthew 5:17 (NIV). This makes it clear that Jesus expects his followers to obey the laws that came before him. However, later in Matthew:

“ 34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” ”

in Matthew 22-34-40. Many Christians look at these two passages, and consider that Jesus is holding Christians to a higher standard that the Old Testament. That is, rather than looking to the Old Testament for a complete list of all possible laws one might break, which is impossible since the Old Testament does not contain an example of every situation a person might find himself, instead Christians should hold himself to the standard of a) Loving God and b) loving others; and should act in accordance with that love. If one acts in that manner, one will already obey the Mosaic law, but will also act in a manner which is pleasing to God in situations not covered in Mosaic Law. --Jayron32 20:33, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that I've seen the article on it, but I can't remember what the word was and I can't seem to find it through google. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. I've done a bit of googling on this and I must say, if there is a word for this, nobody seems too keen on mentioning it :). I'm sure you've run into the same thing, but my Google searches bring up several very well-structured web pages about the concept that cite various authorities, discuss historical aspects, and yet never provide a specific term for it. Sorry! Do you recall if the article you read was here on WP or was it somewhere else on the internet - or in a magazine? Matt Deres (talk) 23:24, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Antinomianism? WikiDao ☯ (talk) 23:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

We have a winner -- thanks, WikiDao! DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, antinomianism is ordinarily leveled as a criticism, whereas the view that the Jewish Law per se (or at least the "ritual" portions of it) do not apply to Christians is pretty much part of the Christian mainstream. Are you sure you're not looking for dispensationalism? --Trovatore (talk) 01:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Supersessionism? 66.30.118.93 (talk) 23:59, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Eating a hamburger

I have, for quite some time now, followed two different styles of eating a hamburger.

• If it's served in a fast food restaurant, like McDonald's or Hesburger, I wrap the hamburger in a thin layer of paper, grasp it with my hands, and eat it directly with my mouth.
• If it's served in a more "classy" restaurant - basically any restaurant that is more "classic" than a fast food restaurant - I eat it like it was a steak, i.e. cut slices of it with a knife, skewer them with a fork, and eat them from that.

Is this how it's supposed to be done? Are there any established guidelines about this? Are there any differences in regards of nationality or type of cuisine? JIP | Talk 21:42, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Miss Manners says that when food is made to be eaten by hand, it is not rude to eat it with your hands (she adds that it is rude to put your guests in the dilemma by serving, for example, fried chicken at a dinner party). At a somewhat more 'classy' restaurant, I've seen at least once etiquette teacher say that you should first cut the burger in half, then lift one half with your hand to eat it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I think that, even in the classiest restaurants, a hamburger is still considered a sandwich, and is thus intended to be eaten like one, that is with the hands, sans utensils. Of course, you are free to eat it any way that makes you comfortable. The hamburger sandwich is of course a sandwich version of the hamburger steak, which was originally eaten with a fork and knife. But its OK to eat sandwiches like sandwiches, even in really nice restaurants. --Jayron32 21:48, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

All this sounds very American, like in an old Pizza Hut advert over here "They're eating the pizza slices with their hands, well, they're Americans". Even in England, classy = knife and fork, while in France, well they do dunk their breakfast bread and butter in their coffee, but only at home. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

That's true - although to an extent I also find that getting a hamburger in a "classy" restaurant is actually fairly unlikely in England. In my personal experience, most any restaurant that serves you a hamburger formatted in such a way that you can eat it with your hands with dignity probably won't mind you doing so. ~ mazca ^talk 22:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I've eaten hamburgers at non-fast food joints (at classy restaurants, not diners), and I along with other customers eat with our hands. No weird looks are exchanged, just as long as you're not sloppy and you don't get food all over yourself. 24.189.87.160 (talk) 02:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Mazca. In England, if a hamburger is on the menu, the restaurant isn't classy. (Unless it's the Fat Duck and the hamburger is made out of irradiated clover or some such.) Having said that, there are some places that serve overpriced hamburgers. Only been in such places once or twice, the buns were so full of assorted stuff (chorizo, aubergine fritters...), that you would not have been able to eat them with your hands, and indeed people were tucking in with knife, fork and undue reverence. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Not at all, I've been to very nice restaurants that serve hamburgers, one even went so far as to explain which steak the meat was minced from, and ask how I would like cooked - my first rare burger. Having said that, the vast majority of classy restaurants don't serve burgers, or if they do, they serve it as an "open burger" or "deconstructed burgers", which you can eat with a knife and fork as there is no possibly way to balance it all without looking uncouth.--Worm 11:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Sit-down restaurants in the US will often bring a burger with the top bun set to the side, which suggests the choice of either eating it by hand or cutting it like a normal steak. Some of those buns-and-meats are rather larger than your typical McDonalds fare, and eating it by hand can be a tad awkward. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I've always assumed that the top-bun-next-to-burger arrangement was provided so that one could easily add condiments without needing to disassemble the burger on arrival. (Though it certainly does make the deconstructed burger option easier as well.) It also has the added effect of making the portion appear larger – which may or may not be desirable – by covering a larger area of the plate. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

(EC w/TOAT) YMMV, of course, but I don't that's any indication of how it might be eaten, it's just a way of keeping the tomatoes and lettuce, etc. from getting wilted on the hot burger. At least if they're doing it correctly. Matt Deres (talk) 14:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Good points. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I always assumed that hamburger intended for knife and fork was steak tartar. Aaronite (talk) 17:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, no, because steak tartare [sic] is uncooked. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Steak haché. Steak haché. 86.161.109.130 (talk) 00:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

One wonders if one is supposed to eat a $175 hamburger with a knife and fork. Gold knife and fork, perhaps? Corvus cornix_talk 19:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

As an American, I declare myself an expert on the subject matter and decree:

1. A hamburger should never be eaten with silverware, even at the fanciest restaurant. Exceptions are made for quasi-hamburger creations with so much stuff in them that eating with hands is impractical.
2. A hamburger is by no means exclusively low cuisine just because bastardized versions of the food are served at fast-food places. Any restaurant may serve a hamburger without reducing its level of class, and indeed, every steakhouse should have a hamburger on the menu. (It's quite common in North America to see upscale restaurants serving hamburgers for $15 or more, some of them going over the top with stuff like wagyu beef.) -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I had a $50 burger in Vegas once. Still with the hands, mind you. And not very good, either. Aaronite (talk) 04:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Come visit me sometime, and I'll take you to a place where you can order a very good $9 hot dog. In general, their generous relish toppings make a fork necessary. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:53, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

More on gourmet hamburgers: [3]. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

@Mwalcoff: I'm intrigued by your comment "every steakhouse". Are steak houses generally regarded as fancy restaurants in the US? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Some but not all steakhouses are fancy. Steak and Shake is decidedly unfancy. Googlemeister (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think I'd call Steak and Shake a steakhouse- they sell burgers, but not steaks. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

November 29

Chicago history disasters

Was there a type of title wave on lake michigan chicago waterfront in approximately the 1950s that drowned some people that were fishing on the breakwaters, or piers ? GSWW70.232.47.126 (talk) 13:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)GSWW

June 26, 1954, according to ezinearticles . com/?The-Day-a-Tidal-Wave-Hit-Chicago&id=172583, which however is a blacklisted site, so I've de-linked it. I'll see what else I can find. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

It's called a seiche, and here's a brief writeup by Chicago weather guru Tom Skilling: [4] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The seiche article mentions the 1954 event and links to this:[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

And, just for the record, it's a "tidal" wave (not "title"), though that is a misnomer since tides have nothing to do with them. See tsunami. Searching for Chicago tidal wave in Google would have given you the story you wanted. Matt Deres (talk) 14:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

MAYDAY SERIES

Can you buy the Mayday Series on DVD? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.67.38.150 (talk) 14:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Not yet all. See for yourself. --Ouro (blah blah) 14:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Picture of Bach

Why is there a naked man under the table of the Bach's? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Anna_Magdalena_Bach.jpg

--helohe (talk) 17:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a satyr, though that doesn't explain much. 81.131.31.109 (talk) 18:57, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

If you click on the link given on the image page you will get this explanation: "And what is the significance of the satyr sliding out from beneath the table? Might it be a specific and bawdy reference to the Bachs' parental prowess? Most likely it is not; it most likely is a reference to some of the "earthier" songs in the collection." However, this explanation very much depends on whether the interpretation that it is a picture of Bach is true, which to me seems very inconclusive (and speculative). But, the author of that essay has one thing right, namely that there was a love of personifications in the art of the 18th century. They also did love hidden meanings and symbols, but the simple truth may very well be that the satyr represents the rural joy of the citizens having fun in the park. Pastorals, especially with inspiration in the Greek and Hellenistic poems and stories was all the rage at the time. --Saddhiyama (talk) 19:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Maybe the satyr was "drunk under the table", as the saying goes. Meanwhile, I'm impressed by the resemblance to an "internet cafe", with the lady working on her primitive laptop. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

UK Monarchical Succession Laws

Imagine a scenario wherein Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother had had two daughters, Elizabeth (now Queen Elizabeth the Second), and Princess Margaret (now deceased). Then imagine that she (the then Queen Mother) was pregnant at the time of her husband's death (George 6th). At the moment of his death, the official proclamation would normally have been "The King is dead, God Save the Queen". But given that her mother was pregnant (in this scenario), and might have been carrying an unborn son, would the declaration of succession in favour of Elizabeth (our present Queen) have been delayed until after the birth of her brother or sister, given that in the case of a brother, he would succeed to the throne instead of Elizabeth II? 92.30.54.5 (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I believe the declaration would have been delayed. If the baby turned out to be a boy, he would have been proclaimed King at birth, but obviously a Regent would have to be appointed until he turned 18. But if the baby was a third girl, then Elizabeth would be proclaimed Queen retrospective to the moment of her father's death. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Elizabeth is likely to have been made Queen Regent, especially if her parents were old enough that is was likely that there would be no more children; she would have been groomed to rule. As a follow-up to the OP, what would happen if the Queen Mother (also called Elizabeth, by the way) only realised that she was pregnant after her daughter was proclaimed Queen? How long is there normally between the death of the previous monarch, proclamation of the new monarch, and the actual coronation? I assume the first two happen within a few days, but the coronation takes a few weeks to arrange. CS Miller (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Coronation is irrelevant to this; it's a token ceremony, because nobody ever becomes a British king or queen solely because of a coronation. Coronations can be as late as 16 months after the accession (QEII acceded in February 1952 but was not crowned till June 1953). Proclamation usually happens within a day or so. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, you made a small error in your question by saying "she (the then Queen Mother)" which should of course say "the then Queen". Sussexonian (talk) 22:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Nasciturus pro iam nato habetur, quotiens de commodis eius agitur may be of interest, particularly the point about Queen Victoria's accession, which was declared with the caveat that if the widowed Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen turned out to be pregnant with an heir to the throne, Victoria's sovereignty would be revoked. They might just as easily have done the same with Elizabeth, allowing an unbroken succession with the caveat that if her unborn sibling turned out to be male her accession would be null and void. Karenjc 23:43, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

This has happened a few times in history (although I don't know if female succession was ever an issue). John I of France and Ladislaus Postumus, for example; others are listed at Posthumous birth#Royalty and nobility. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

An excellent article, if I may say so. (**cough**) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 03:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

A related question. During Queen Victoria's reign, was her mother referred to solely as the Duchess of Kent? Was she ever referred to as Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld following her marriage to Victoria's father? Corvus cornix_talk 23:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

consumption of imported products

Hi, I have a question and hope to hear your opinions. Consumption of imported products is seen by many as harmful to the domestic economy: like making other nations richer off us or making local people out of job etc. People may choose to consume local products based on morality grounds, supporting their own villages/provinces/nations and such that.

But I'm wondering in what ways can consumption of imported products (which have equivalents produced locally) will not be harmful, or even benefit, the local economy? What do you think about this issue? Thank you! 123.16.155.166 (talk) 20:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

You'll want to check out comparative advantage. "Example 2" is something of a counterintuitive kick in the pants. 88.112.56.9 (talk) 20:49, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

(EC) While you're welcome to ask for sourced explanations of the benefits of importing products, as the header says, what we think is irrelevant. Nil Einne (talk) 20:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

With many imported products, particularly those grown in the developing world, only a small proportion of the price goes abroad. A lot will be paid to agents, importers, transport, marketing, and possibly because something's imported there will be a mark-up for a product seen as luxury or exotic which will be added by the retailer (little spending on food actually goes to the farmer[6]). So you may be contributing money to many people in your own country.

Also, from another perspective, you're exporting the risk of environmental damage which has to be paid for - it's cheaper to pollute somebody else's land, which benefits your own. This also applies to using their water[7]. --Colapeninsula (talk) 21:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The use of some imported products may increase the use of other, domestically produced products. For example, the importing of cheap steel from China may make American cars more economically competitive than if they could rely only on more-expensive American steel. Looking at it more broadly, the availability of cheaper foreign goods frees up more disposable income for the purchase of domestic goods and services. Americans may spend less on TVs, dishwashers, microwaves, etc., than they did in the past thanks to low-cost foreign imports. An RCA color TV in 1960 cost about $500, which is like $3,700 in today's money. People spend less on clothing as a percentage of their income now than they did in the 60s since clothes now come from low-wage places like Guatemala or Indonesia instead of the U.S. With more leftover money to spend, Americans (or Europeans or Australians or whoever) can go out to eat more often, take fancier vacations, go to more sporting events and do other stuff locally. This is just looking at the positives of the rise of foreign imports, not the negatives. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually I think you'll need to cite a source when using the color TV example. Advances in electronics manufacturing techniques are what I think are more responsible for the price reductionsince 1960. I bought an American-made TV around 1991 which was about $500. (Then we can debate what percentage of the TV's components were "American-made", of course.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

See [8] for a list of what TV sets have cost through the ages. It's true that the same technology is a lot cheaper now that it used to be, but also keep in mind there's a lot more technology in electronics now than there used to be. A 1960 21-inch, VHF-only TV with no remote control cost more in constant dollars than a 55-inch HD TV with 3D capability does today. If we asked the Chinese to make a 1960-style TV today, they could probably make it for $20. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The relationships that Mwalcoff notes between cheap imports and improved domestic spending are actually a core value in the capitalist economic system. You'll note that Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, Book IV, wrote about this topic extensively back in 1776. He comes to basically the same conclusion as Mwalcoff; that protecting native production of goods which can be produced cheaper elsewhere is ultimately wasteful and actually harms the local economy. This is in direct contrast to the primary economic theory of the 18th century, known as Mercantilism, which held that it was most important for a country to maintain control of the entire supply chain of whatever goods it was making; thus under mercantilism, if you wanted to make cars, you needed to have and control a domestic supply of steel, rubber, and glass, and then needed to maintain control over manufacture of every component yourself. This is why colonialism went hand-in-hand with mercantilism; raw materials that the home country could not obtain were obtain from their colonies. Smith recognized the wastefulness in this system, which led him to propose alternate theories that today are called Capitalism. --Jayron32 03:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

November 30

Harry Potter film location

Resolved

In the Harry Potter movie that recently came out, Harry and Hermione are on the run and end up in some pretty neat locations. One of the locations was rather unusual and I'd like to know more about it. The location looks over a valley but what made it interesting were the rocks that they were standing on. Think of a large sheet of rock that is hit with a gigantic hammer so that there are thousands of cracks running throughout. But the cracks aren't jagged and sharp. They've been rounded off so that you're left with all these sort of rock islands with round edges and each rock is only separated by a couple inches from the one next to it. For those who've seen the movie, it was the location where H & H had decided to go to Godric's Hollow. Does this sound familiar to anyone? I've looked through the images at IMDb but didn't see any of this location. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 06:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Wait, no. I found a pic of the scene: [9] Thanks for any info, Dismas|^(talk) 06:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

In films, it can be hard to tell matte paintings and such from the real thing, especially nowadays. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks kind of like pillow lava. Compare with [10] 161.222.160.8 (talk) 07:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It reminded me immediately of The Burren in western Ireland. A limestone landscape that has been eroded by rain over millenia, all those clints and grikes look similar to the HP scene. Here [[11]] is a selected picture. Richard Avery (talk) 08:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It's limestone pavement all right, but it appears to be filmed near Malham Cove rather than The Burren. See here. Karenjc 09:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Agreed; look at this[12]. The imdb page lists the Yorkshire Dales National Park (which Malham is within) amongst the locations[13]. Alansplodge (talk) 09:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

There's no doubt that it was Malham Cove, I recognised it the moment I saw it in the film. Mikenorton (talk) 10:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks all! The Malham Cove article even mentions that filming took place there. Dismas|^(talk) 10:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hot ice?

Mother always said that hot water freezes quicker than cold; was she right?--Artjo (talk) 12:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hot water, no - but there is some research that shows that warm water can freeze faster than cold water. The reasons still seem to be debated, but it's often suggested that in a still environment like a freezer, the warm water has stronger convection currents that result in uniformly faster heat transfer. See Mpemba effect, which covers this fairly well, and also this article which goes into quite a bit of detail. ~ mazca ^talk 12:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Great thanks, answered quicker than frozen!--Artjo (talk) 12:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Fascinating. I'm still not fully convinced. But the implication of that article is that with warm water you're liable to end up with smaller cubes. There's no fooling mother nature. But there's a better reason to start with cold water, which is that the hot-water pipes are more likely to have various kinds of gunk in them, and less palatable for consumption, which is why in cooking it's normally recommended to run your saucepan full of cold water and bring it to a boil. And even with cold-water pipes, it's typically recommended to run the water about 30 seconds before consuming any of it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be in the Science Ref desk? My understanding is (or was?) that hot water has slightly less oxygen than cold water. (Right?) So given a hot water pipe and a cold water pipe side by side, when a hot water pipe freezes, there is less room for the freezing water to expand, and the pipe sometimes bursts, while the cold water pipe does not. (Leading some to believe that hot water freezes first?) I'd be skeptical of any research that indicates that warm water freezes faster than cold water. They both need to reach 32°, and it seems obvious that the cold water would get there first.... Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 17:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Cold or hot, water expands 5-10% when it freezes and would probably break either of your water pipes. Googlemeister (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Switching off the refrigrator

Is it a good idea to switch of the fridge daily for a few hours to save electricity during winters? I am told that frequent switching of the fridge wil result in some loss of the gas filled in it. Can anyone give me a detailed answer?Sumalsn (talk) 15:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Ask yourself about the value of saving a few pennies of electricity cost vs. the potential risk to yourself and your family from food spoilage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:40, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It shouldn't save energy. Fridges have thermostats in them, so they already don't run when they're already cold.

(Of course, if you leave it off long enough you'll save energy and your food will get warm.)

The second part of your question will require a mechanic to answer, but I can't imagine why it would lose refrigerant. APL (talk) 15:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

You would be better of making sure it is properly defrosted and that the coils behind has any fluff vacuum off them. Switching off will only cause it to run for longer when you switch back on again. The compressor in domestic fridges are sealed inside the sump so nothing will leak out simply because its off. . If your the very reincarnation of Jack Benny, then leave a metal container of water outside overnight to freeze then put that in the fridge. You might need to add a little salt to get the temperature down to 5 Centigrade (40 F) but it might help to raise a laugh from your neighbours. --Aspro (talk) 15:58, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Yea, if you don't need a freezer, in many areas you could probably go one step farther and not use your fridge at all during the winter months. Some combination of leaving stuff on the windowsill and keeping portable coolers cold with icepacks frozen outdoors would probably be adequate for many people. (A little labor intensive, though.) APL (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

(ec)APL's cogent comment farther up reminds me of the old joke about having a truckload of parakeets and the truck being overweight, so "we have to keep half of them flying". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Scientifically, that could be feasible if the truck was such that air could pass in large quantities to and from the birds wings from outside the truck. It would not work for an enclosed cargo area though. Googlemeister (talk) 20:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I think in parts of Scandinavia they have a cupboard (closet I think in American-english) with the outside uninsulated, that serves as a fridge. 92.28.247.40 (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Many older residences in Northern California have a kitchen cabinet adapted for keeping vegetables. The shelves are wire, to facilitate air circulation, the inside door is solid, and there are screened vents to outdoors at the top and bottom. Not as good as a refrigerator, but cheaper, and reasonably effective in our mild climate. PhGustaf (talk) 16:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

The culinary term for these storage cupboards or rooms is Larder--Aspro (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Which, along with its root word lard, come from Latin, for fat or bacon.[14] It's fair to say that if one's diet had substantial lard in it, the cost of electricity should be the least of their worries. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Lard! This saturated fat issue has been over-hyped by the vegetable oil industry. Saturated_fat#Association_with_diseases. The worst thing about having a large a pot of lard in the larder is if it falls off the top shelf and lands on one's toe -that really hurts!--Aspro (talk) 18:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I haven't seen anyone mention the fact that whatever rise in temperature that occurs due to the fridge being turned off/unplugged, you'll have to make up for once you turn it back on/plug it back in. The best way to save energy is likely just not opening it as often to keep as much of the cold air inside. Dismas|^(talk) 17:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Aspro did in his first comment, although the reason was implied. --Saddhiyama (talk) 17:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Whatever you do, don't empty the fridge out, unplug it, and leave it alone with its doors closed for months. Mold will run riot, deliriously happy, inside the refrigerator. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

If the mold is in the dark, where does the energy come from for its growth? 92.28.247.40 (talk) 20:21, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

A mold can sit in the dark, eating food, and exist quite happily, just as you or I could. Molds are fungi, and one of the distinguishing characteristics of a fungus (differentiating it from plants) is that it does not have chlorophyll and does not use sunlight for energy. —Steve Summit (talk) 20:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. I moved into an apartment once where the idiots had turned off the power and left the fridge door closed. Eek. I should point out that while I did not observe any mold, the fridge smelled like seriously spoiled milk. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I can go one better (or worse) than that:[15]--Aspro (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Two points:

1. Theoretically, switching off a fridge for a while would save energy (though this does not make it a good idea!). Yes, when you switch it back on, it's going to have to cool down again, but the energy it takes to do that will be generally be less than the amount of energy that would have been required to keep the fridge fully cold for the duration, counteracting the inevitable heat leakage. The argument is the same as the one which refutes a widely-held urban legend, namely that turning off your heat when you're not at home during cold weather wastes energy, because of the extra work your furnace has to do to heat the house back up when you return. (On the contrary, turning off the heat saves energy, of course.)
2. Speaking of urban legends, the one about fridges being damaged by turning them off is a doozy. It might have had some credence a hundred years ago for some completely different refrigeration technology, but for a modern refrigerator, it's nonsense. Turning off a refrigerator, or unplugging it, is no different in its effect on the fridge's internal components than the normal on/off cycling which the thermostat does all the time. Presumably the fridge doesn't damage itself when it turns itself off, so it won't be damaged when you turn it off, either. —Steve Summit (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

But with your point one, if you turn your refrigerator off longer than it would have cycled itself off anyway, your food will get warm. APL (talk) 22:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

What I would add to 'point one' is that when it comes to things like ice-cream (which also has a high specific heat capacity) it can still be below freezing but will be spoilt if it raises above -12 C. In fact I think it might need to stay below -16 C.--Aspro (talk) 21:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes? Since a fridge stays above freezing, ice cream kept in it for any great length of time will be spoilt anyway. A fridge that went below freezing would be faulty, and turn salad to mush. Turning it off won't change a fridge's inability to store ice cream properly. You are thinking of a freezer. 86.161.108.241 (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Don't be disingenuous. One of the most common meanings of the word 'refrigerator' is a stand-up combination appliance containing compartments both above (refrigerator) and below (freezer) freezing. Go ahead, do a Google Image search on 'refrigerator' — you'll be lucky to get one fridge-without-freezer appliance in the first couple of pages of hits. See also synecdoche. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The formal term I used to hear was "refrigerator-freezer", indicating the combination, but nowadays the typical "refrigerator" also has a "freezer compartment" - even many of the little boxy refrigerators you find in hotel rooms. Hence the normal usage "refrigerator" (or "fridge") is assumed to also have a freezer compartment. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, 86.161 isn't alone in thinking "refridgerator" refer only to above-freezing coolers. To use the word "fridge" to describe something that keeps food below freezing would be extremely odd where I live (England). The OP might (or might not) think the same way. Vimescarrot (talk) 18:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

"Fridge" might be an Americanism, and might derive from the brand name "Frigidaire" as much as from "refrigerator". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Note that according to EO,[16] "refrigeration" can refer to freezing as well as cooling. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:40, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Note also that the Frigidaire corporation[17] sells freezers separately, but that all of their products labeled just-plain "refrigerator" also appear to have freezer compartments. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

In my experience, the freezer compartment of those little mini-fridges is worthless for storing icecream as it is barely below freezing. Googlemeister (talk) 20:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Exterior mirrors

Are there such things as mirrors designed for exterior use? I would like one or two to put next to a skylight in a flat roof, to blot out an ugly view and direct more light down the skylight. They could have other uses too - I'm intregued by the idea of building a grotto in my garden so that I can be outdoors without the traffic noise. Thanks 92.28.247.40 (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Unless you enjoy seeing the sun in the mirrow, you might be better off to get some of those reflector things that photographers use in outdoor settings to add extra light to the subject. File:Photographing a model.jpg They're kind of like mirrors but with less likelihood of blinding you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Nah, Perhaps he wants the sharp, high contrast lighting you get when the sun is shining into your window. (As happens naturally from time to time without the need for mirrors.)

You probably want something designed for garden use. This is an example : [18] APL (talk) 19:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I presume that those fish eye mirrors they put on the road side so that cars coming out of a driveway or road can better see who's coming are designed for exterior use. I don't know if that's what you want though. Nil Einne (talk) 20:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

They are convex mirrors. 92.28.247.40 (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes fish eye mirror redirects there but I forgot to link it Nil Einne (talk) 04:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, although I don't see why seeing the sun in a mirror would be any worse than seeing it directly. The advantage of a mirror rather than a white wall is that the mirror should be invisible and make it appear that you are instead looking at the sky or whatever. The acrylic garden mirror looks good, and perhaps its possible to buy the acrylic sheeting directly from somewhere without the big mark-up in price. 92.28.247.40 (talk) 20:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It wouldn't be worse, it would be just as bad. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Glue some of these onto a board of your choice. [19]--Aspro (talk) 20:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

December 1

Alpha-dog

What is the meaning of the nick name "Alpha-dog" which US embassy has dubbed Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin?--115.75.12.229 (talk) 03:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

We have an article on the notion of "alpha" in biology. While the term is not unique to dogs, that's one of the most familiar examples. — Lomn 03:53, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

More question. Is the nick name Alpha-dog a friendly nickname or is it an offensive one?--115.75.12.229 (talk) 04:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

It depends on the context but it's usually not meant to be offensive. Where did you see it used? Dismas|^(talk) 04:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Er see the first post Nil Einne (talk) 04:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I did and it doesn't provide enough context. Dismas|^(talk) 04:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if there is much more context. Our article on the issue (linked to by the OP below or on the main page) currently links to [20] but it's easy enough to find other references for the alpha-dog claim if you're interested. But from what I've seen most of them just say one of the cables refers to Putin as an alpha-dog (i.e. what the OP already said above). I don't think the cable itself has been released yet, e.g. [21] (safe search off) so there's probably not much more context available at the moment unfortunately. P.S. Rereading the OPs comments above, perhaps it was not obvious they were referring to the recent cable leak. As I'd read about the Putin comment and also have a mild interest in the cable leak anyway this was obvious to me right away but I now see the OP's comments may not have been clear to someone unfamiliar with the leak so I apologise for any confusion in that case. Nil Einne (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

This one. It said that this information come from the recent leak of WikiLeaks. Because I don't know how to read all these 250,000 documents, I can't know the context of the document in which US embassy has used this nickname to dub Putin  :-). BTW, thank you all for your answers, I have got the picture now.--115.75.12.229 (talk) 04:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

In an organizational context it usually means, "he's the one who asserts dominance." I doubt Putin would take offense to it. When applied to females, the term is obviously pejorative (as it implies they are a female with masculine qualities, which is usually not meant favorably), but when applied to someone like Putin, who is notably aggressive both physically and mentally, it is fairly neutral, in my reading. It's not too different from them calling him "the big Chief" or "the head honcho" or "El Jefe" or something like that. --Mr.98 (talk) 04:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

"when applied to females, the term is obviously pejorative" – not really, the rank of alpha female is a respectable position in its own right, among humans (in my experience) as well as wolves and other social animals. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 17:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I've known women who were referred to as "alpha dogs" by their colleagues, and it was not meant positively or respectfully. It implied they were aggressive and assertive, which are not qualities generally respected in human females by human males. Aggressive or assertive women are usually treated with suspicion if not outright contempt in my experience, in US culture anyway, even among the extremely well-educated and supposedly enlightened male population. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

In ethology, being the alpha female does not (necessarily) require "un-female-like" behavior. Eg. our Alpha article says: "In the case of wild canids the alpha male may not have exclusive access to the alpha female; moreover, other pack members may guard the maternity den used by the alpha female; such is the case with the African Wild Dog, Lycaon pictus." WikiDao ☯ (talk) 04:19, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks you very much.--115.75.12.229 (talk) 04:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The cables also refer to Putin as Batman and Medvedev as Robin, which is much more hilarious. We do have an article about alpha wolf, which is probably what is meant by "alpha dog" (although Alpha Dog was a movie a few years ago, perhaps that's where the term came from in this case). Adam Bishop (talk) 05:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

And it's worth noting that making Putin the head and Medvedev the second banana is, of course, something of an insult to Medvedev, since ostensibly he's the one whose role is supposed to be in charge. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Kind of like the built-in insult leveled by Ronald Reagan, when he implored Mikhail Gorbachev (not Erich Honecker) to tear down the Berlin Wall? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't know. Any way you slice it, Gorbachev was the more powerful person in the more powerful country. It would be more like imploring Honecker to reform the USSR — Honecker isn't supposed to be the powerful one, so it would be an insult to Gorbachev. All of this is making for a rather strained analogy, though. --Mr.98 (talk) 21:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

According to this link, Putin took these nicknames as a unrespectability from US. BTW, thank you all for these in-depth explanations. Wikipedia is truly an Alpha-dog of online reference sources :D--115.75.12.229 (talk) 16:01, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

How does Facebook make its money?

We have read time and again, Facebook has made millions of revenue every year. Where does the money come from actually? Who pays them these millions? Do we the end users, pay them? How exactly? I hardly see many adverts or flashy promos from sponsors of the site. I have seen other less spoken of less known sites have more adverts and flashy logos than FB. of course there are a few ads on the right side of every FB page, but is that the only source of revenue? Does FB and other sites like Wikipedia generate revenue every time a user clicks on the site ( what they call every hit??) Im not a techie and for me this aspect of internet business is very fascinating and intriguing, so I would prefer detailed replies, not vague one line replies like "they make money per hit"... what I would like to know is who actually pays them and how the money is actually generated from end user till the owner of FB... just out of curiosity. No nefarious intentions here :))) --Fragrantforever 06:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fragrantforever (talk • contribs)

The same way free, over-the-air TV broadcasting does: Advertising. Specifically, companies pay Facebook to place ads on it. Facebook uses algorithms to match users with ads which they are likely to be interested it; because of this sort of targeted advertising they are able to charge a premium. Also, remember that on the internet, ads pay per view, and with over 1/2 a billion users, Facebook gets a LOT of page views. Facebook#Company actually discusses the business model in some detail. --Jayron32 06:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, I see that you cite Wikipedia as en example, but note that Wikipedia does not make money every time a user clicks on the site. WikiMoney is "made" from donations, unlike Facebook or Google. «CharlieEchoTango» 06:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the early replies... I would expect more replies and more details to give more inputs regarding FB Business Model... Thanks Jayron and Charlie... about wiki not making money everytime a user clicks on the site, isnt this daft? why would they not do that? Unless otherwise they prefer to apepal for donations and not make money everytime a person clicks, as a policy decision. Which takes me back to my main question.

How does a click from an end user actually translate into money?--Fragrantforever 06:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fragrantforever (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia does not choose to accept advertising because it would compromise the appearance of impartiality. Wikipedia wishes its articles to be based on existing scholarship, not on the influence of outside money. That's why it exists solely on uncredited donations. It also makes enough money to support its mission exclusively through donations, so there is no pressing need to advertise to supplement the donations. As to how internet advertising works, its pretty simple. Companies pay websites a small fee everytime a user views an ad. So, for example on Facebook, when you load a new page on Facebook, if there is an advertisiment for Johnny's Widget and Dohickey Service, then Facebook gets paid some amount of cash every time you view that ad. These rates are negotiated with the advertisers, and the number of views is likely negotiated as well, so for example Johnny's might pay facebook $1,000 for 100,000 page views in a month; then Facebook will show the ad semi-randomly (the ads are targeted to users who might be inclined to use Johnny's Widgets and/or Dohickeys) 100,000 times over the course of a month. This is a bit of a simplification; Johnny's probably doesn't pay Facebook directly, rather they employ an advertising service that negotiates the terms for all the companies that it represents, but the principle is still pretty simple. Companys pay Facebook to show you advertisements, and that's how they make money. --Jayron32 06:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The thing that comes to my mind here is that a user seeing an advertisement does not guarantee the user will actually buy the product. Actually, at least when it comes to me, the more intrusive an advertisement is, the less I am inclined to actually buy the product. If the advertisement is sneaky - in other words, it doesn't admit to being an advertisement but disguises itself - I make it a definite decision not to buy the product. I suppose, then, that the advertiser knows this but can not help it - he/she must be satisfied with the potential customers the advertisement actually influences. JIP | Talk 20:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but TV commercials don't guarantee that you'll buy the item advertised either. Yet, they must make the companies money because I still see ads on TV for Bud Light, though I don't drink it. --Jayron32 04:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Note also that there are different models. If you are an Amazon.com affiliate, you get paid a percentage of actual purchases made by customers visiting Amazon via your site (as far as Amazon can determine - the algorithm is not foolproof). For Google ads, you get a certain amount of money per click on the ad (which sends the customer to the advertiser's site). Both of these give more control to the advertiser than the "pay per impression" model. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Jayron for the elaborate answer... now I get it. You are so ( frigteningly) well informed .. Impressive :))) I was tempted to see your user page then I got to know you are a ( decorated) editor almost a veteran here, no wonder you are so well informed, thanks again.--Fragrantforever 07:01, 1 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fragrantforever (talk • contribs)

Don't forget about all the revenue coming from facebook apps. Facebook get a 30% cut of the credit transactions when people purchase virtual goods. Zynga, owner of the popular facebook game Mafia Wars made an estimated $200M (edit: The Zynga wiki page stated the company made $600M in 2010) Royor (talk) 07:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Nut cracking

How cracked nuts and edible kernels are produced on an industrial scale? I mean, what they sell at markets, groceries. I use nutcracker and/or hammer for this purpose at home, and wonder do they have, like, giant nutcrackers at factories. 195.158.7.82 (talk) 12:01, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The nuts are sorted by approximate size, and then passed between hard metal rollers that are slightly smaller than the diameter of the still-shelled nut. This compresses the shell of the nut, ideally cracking it and separating it from the edible kernel: [22]. Our nutcracker article unfortunately doesn't touch on commercial/industrial-scale processes. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

See Universal Nut Sheller for a medium-range one operating on the same principles as TenOfAllTrades described. --Sean 18:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

That article pretty much also answers the question I had, which is how they separate the "meat" of the nut from its husk. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Googling for industrial nutcracker finds some commercial devices. 88.112.56.9 (talk) 19:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

penny stock

Who is the originator of the penny stock market and what is his age?76.7.227.110 (talk) 19:42, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there is such a thing as the penny stock market. There are penny stocks, which are traded in a variety of different ways, some of them on mainstream stock markets. Marco polo (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

As noted, there is no penny stock market. In the United States, most penny stocks are traded on the OTC Bulletin Board or Pink OTC Markets. The latter is the older and was established as National Quotation Bureau in 1913, so its originator would be at an advanced age if he were still alive. John M Baker (talk) 21:18, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The National Quotation Bureau (NQB) was not a market when it was established, but rather a publishing venture. Per this source, the NQB was co-founded by Arthur F. Elliot and Roger Babson. However, what they founded was not a stock market. Marco polo (talk) 23:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

While it's true that the NQB was a publisher, not a market, NQB published the pink sheets, a quotation system that gave significant impetus to the over-the-counter market. In the old days, penny stocks were often referred to as trading on the pink sheets, although technically you're right that they were only quoted on the pink sheets and traded over the counter. And, in reference to the OP, over-the-counter trading is the oldest trading there is and has no price minimum, so in that sense the penny stock market goes back to the beginning of stock trading. John M Baker (talk) 15:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

arctic

How many people are currently in the arctic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.173.217.17 (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

You could start by specifying exactly what region you mean. But I'm not sure that there is an answer to be had even then. --ColinFine (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I found online estimates of the population of the Arctic Circle of round about 2 million people, but these were unsourced. Our article Arctic Circle lists a few of the largest cities/towns in the region; the resident population of these looks to be around the 600,000 mark, but obviously this excludes those living in smaller villages and settlements, visitors, the crews of ships/aircraft passing through, etc. Karenjc 21:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

By "the population of the Arctic Circle" I think you mean "the population north of the Arctic Circle." Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:55, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_networking_websites;

Question removed. This question is already on the Entertainment desk. Please do not crosspost the same question to more than one Reference Desk. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

What career path should i take?

Hi,I'm going to attend university by the end of this year but i still don't know which career should i study,please help me.I want to work in a children asylum,with children with physical handicaps,i want to educate them,be a teacher to them, i have patience,I'm gentle and i understand them, i can easily connect with them. understand their inclinations and motivations.nurse them. be like a psychiatrist or a psychologist to them. i have a great awareness that allows me to penetrate beneath the surface of things and people. work and assist them socially too. so which career, job or path should i take? thank you for your answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.129.82 (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I think in many ways you've answered your own question. I do, however, have a question myself: have you actually worked with children with disabilities? Before you go to university, you can do some work - paid or unpaid - with them. There are very few actual residential homes for such children in the UK these days, I guess it's different in other parts of the world. If you find, after you've worked with them for a few weeks, that such work is not what you thought it would be (and I get the impression that you're a bit of an idealist), then you may wish to reconsider the group of people you want to work with.--TammyMoet (talk) 21:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, i have worked with children with disabilities, in fact my cousin has cerebral palsy, and i have another cousin who is deaf,mute and can't walk.and also I worked in a nursing home during 1 year when i was in high school, i live in the USA, and also i have Mexican citizenship.thank you for your advice. but I'm not an idealist, i know how it feels to be around special-needs children, and i would like to work with them. their needs are real. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.129.82 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Since you seem to have a specific career and a specific type of facility in mind, I would first find and visit some facilities of this type and volunteer, if possible, in order to find out whether the job is all that you envision it to be; and then I would ask the managers of the facility what education or other experience they require in order to hire people in that position. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:10, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

As a high school teacher I'm delighted to see someone seeking a career in an area that truly interests them, rather than where they think they can make the most money. Doing what you love is always going to be a rewarding path. Just do it. HiLo48 (talk) 22:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah,thank you all,my question is that i don't know what career to study!Please help me choose my career,i gave you guys some background of the things i want to do. i want to find also some role model achievers along these lines to give myself ideas and see how they handle their own diversity.thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.129.82 (talk) 22:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

As others have said, the best people to ask would be people who work with disabled children. The first thing you mention is teaching, so you might pursue a degree in education with a specialty in special needs education. I would think that in the United States, the ideal degree to pursue would be a masters in (special) education, but along the way it might make sense to get a bachelor's degree in a related field, such as psychology. Again, the best people to ask would be people who work in this field (and there is a good chance that none of the contributors to this Reference Desk work in this field), followed by an admissions officer at a university school of education (if in fact you are primarily interested in teaching, as opposed to, say, nursing). Marco polo (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Are there any other special interests that you have, that you would like to combine with working with children with special needs—music, art, writing, theater, sports, physical therapy, information technology for universal access to computers? Maybe that would be something that you would want to bring to the attention of an admissions officer at a university or a career guidance counsellor elsewhere. Bus stop (talk) 00:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I just want to work with physically-disabled youth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.129.82 (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Find someone that does the job you want to do, and ask them how to get that job. It's really that simple. If you want to work with physically disabled youth, find a school or an agency that works with them, and ask the people who do that job what kind of training they went through. They will tell you. --Jayron32 04:28, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2

What kind of birds are these?

[23] From a picture taken in Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. 67.169.5.125 (talk) 05:52, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Common Myna? ---Sluzzelin talk 06:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

(Its scientific name, Acridotheres tristis, means sad grasshopper-hunter. In my persistent quest for useless facts, I discovered that this species probably got its triste attribute for wearing a dour plumage, not for singing a sad song. [24] ---Sluzzelin talk 06:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC))

Venezuelan National Anthem & the Cuban National Anthem

Hello, I'm wondering if all national anthems are in the public domain. I have found that in the US these are in the public domain. But how can I find out if a party owns the copyright outside of the US? Any idea?

Thanks! J.G. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.147.175.203 (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Most national anthems are public domain. The link provides a contact who may know of any exceptions. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I drank what?

Many moons ago in my younger and much more naive days, I purchased an elixir/medicine at a Chinese grocery store. It was over the counter and 5 dollars for a very large bottle. The writings on the box and on the bottle were all in Chinese but the tiny English instructions found on the side of the bottle said to take a tablespoon a day for general health. My friends and I drank an entire bottle each and got f-u-c-k-e-d-u-p. It was a thick, almost cough medicine type of drink that we phonetically pronounced as 'Sah-Wu-Che' or 'Sah-Woo-Chi'. Does anyone know what we drank? --Endlessdan (talk) 16:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

According to this source, "the Chinese patent medicine Shou Wu Chih has Polygonum multiflorum as its primary ingredient, as well as Li's other basic ingredient Polygonatum sibiricum". Polygonum multiflorum, as known of fo-ti, has unclear pharmacology, but is noted to have a laxative effect. Polygonatum, also known as Solomon's Seal, also has unclear pharmacology. Looie496 (talk) 19:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Tonics of that sort sometimes use an alcohol base. Medicinals in Chinese medicine usually don't contain alcohol, but tonics aren't viewed as medicines. You probably got an Asian version of Jaegermeister. --Ludwigs2 19:38, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Did it suggest to take it with Red Bull? Googlemeister (talk) 19:50, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I see now that we actually have an article, Shou Wu Chih. Since the article says it is 15% alcohol, getting fucked up would be a natural consequence of drinking a large bottle. Looie496 (talk) 20:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Snowy UK weather normal for US?

Over the past few days it has been unusually cold in the UK, with lots of snow. Is this kind of sub-zero (centigrade) weather what you get in most parts of the US for six months of the year please?

I'm wondering if price of the comparatively inexpensive and spacious 'real estate' that you get in the US, compared with the UK, is having constant snow and ice for half a year over most of the country. Thanks. 92.24.186.163 (talk) 17:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I can only speak for myself but I live in the North East by New York City and we get snow fall for about 2-3 months a year. Normally January through March. However I'd sooner wanna live in a place that has snow fall year round than ever living in the UK.--Endlessdan (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Based on your very poor sentence construction, we'd probably not want you in the UK, old chap. You'd fail the entrance exam ;) --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

The OP's IP is located near Manchester, a city in the UK. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I think Tag was responding to Endlessdan's expression of disinterest in living in the UK...? WikiDao ☯ (talk) 22:22, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

The trends for US population (including migration patterns) is to the warmer, more temperate areas of the south west and south east. Real estate prices also tend to be higher for these more desirable areas. In general, you can get larger and cheaper houses and property in areas where the weather is more inclement. Comparing the US to the UK in this way is also problematic because of the huge difference in size of the two countries: the land mass of the UK is approximately the size of the state of Oregon (one of the 50 states). --Quartermaster (talk) 17:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Our Climate of the United States article has a lot of well-presented weather information for a representative sample of different regions. The closest to having half a year below freezing seems to be Anchorage, Alaska (and just about everywhere else is warmer on average than there...). WikiDao ☯ (talk) 18:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Two of the most expensive urban areas in the United States (in terms of real estate) are New York and Boston. These areas both get substantial snowfall every year. In Boston, snowfall is normal from early December to early April (so for about four months), and average snowfall over the season is about 60 inches (just short of 2 meters). Of course, we never have more than about 48 inches of snow on the ground at any one time, and seldom more than about 24 inches, because at least every couple of weeks we get a day or a stretch of several days with highs above freezing, and the snow melts. By late February, the sun is strong enough that any snowfall melts within a few days. Chicago, with an even colder climate than Boston, is also not an inexpensive city. As WikiDao has said, the only part of the United States with 6 months of severe winter weather is Alaska, which is thinly populated. The only areas without snow that are more expensive than Boston or New York are in coastal California. All of the warm and sunny southeastern states, such as Florida and Georgia, have much lower real estate prices than Boston, despite the lack of snow and serious cold. It isn't the weather that explains real estate costs in the United States, but, primarily, average salaries (which are highest in the Northeast and California), and, secondarily, a quality something like fashionability, which is hard to measure. Boston, New York, San Francisco, and Washington are the most expensive U.S. urban areas (except for Honolulu, whose prices are inflated by the demand of wealthy Japanese for vacation homes). What distinguishes these places is not their weather, but their concentration of high-paying jobs and amenities such as excellent restaurants, museums, live music and theater, and interesting, intelligent people. Marco polo (talk) 18:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, average real estate prices in Boston and New York are comparable to those in Southeast England and higher than those in other parts of the UK. Prices in central London compare only to the most expensive districts of Boston and New York, which contain a similar population of people who work in finance or have inherited money. Marco polo (talk) 18:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

The only part of the US where there is snow and ice for half the year is Alaska (not counting a few high mountain zones in the Pacific Northwest). Looie496 (talk) 19:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm Canadian but like most Canadians, I live within a few hundred kilometres of the US border, so I'll call that close enough to be able to help answer your question, as I have heard weather in the northern prairie states is very similar to the southern parts of the prairie provinces (I know nothing about any other parts of the US though). Snow is pretty much unavoidable anywhere from December to March, common from October to April, unsurprising from September to May, and certainly possible (although rare) even in the summer months. (I don't personally remember it ever snowing in July, but I could be wrong.) This has a lot to do with being in a wide-open flat area nowhere near any significant body of water.

And as for Boston, I was there for a week last February and everyone was panicking about the weather. (In fairness, there were significant storms elsewhere in the eastern US, particularly Washington DC at the time, so that probably fuelled the panic.) But all it ended up being was a mildly chilly couple of days with a little wind and light sleet. And still all the people there were freaking out and saying what horrible terrible weather it was. So "bad weather" is a fairly relative concept. I don't know about the rest of Canada, but in Alberta, if it's thirty below with two or three feet of snow, we generally still manage to go about our daily lives. It's gotta get a lot worse than that before we start shutting down schools, transportation, and businesses, like they were doing in Boston when I was there. (Although like I said, they were expecting it to get worse than it actually did, so it's not entirely fair to portray them as a bunch of weather wussies :P )

As for real estate prices, it is usually cheaper in the US than in Canada. In fact a lot of Canadians are buying property in Florida and Arizona, very warm parts of the US that almost never get anything resembling winter, because it is so dang cheap. So as Marco Polo said, I think it's safe to conclude that climate has almost nothing to do with it. 142.66.102.138 (talk) 19:55, 2 December 2010 (UTC) (Oops, didn't realize I wasn't signed in...) Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 20:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Cherry Red (if I may be so informal), I remember that week last year. It was not a typical Boston reaction to the weather. We were anticipating that the snowstorm that immobilized Washington, DC, was about to arrive. As you say, it didn't. But people were anxious because they thought that it was. Also, some Bostonians' reactions to snowstorms have changed since we had a massive snowstorm (maybe 18 inches) about two years ago. Employers in the region waited until the heaviest and most rapid snowfall arrived and then simultaneously released their employees. The sudden mass exodus just as snow had begun to pile up prevented the plows from clearing the roads, and many people were stranded on highways for 6-8 hours. As a result, many people now arrange to work remotely when snow approaches (though some of us trudge in regardless). That said, I'll agree that eastern Canadians definitely deal with more severe weather than Bostonians. (In western Canada apart from coastal B.C., it is colder, but I don't think it snows as much.) Marco polo (talk) 20:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

There are plenty of places in the U.S. where they rarely if ever get snow: Miami, Houston, San Diego. But there's something to be said for the change of seasons and for a beautiful coating of white that muffles all the sound. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:16, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Because of its size, diverse geography and various distance to large bodies of water, the U.S. weather varies wildly from region to region. The state of Oregon alone has at least 5 distinctive weather zones. The northern prairie states probably have the greatest temperature variation: at or close to 100 on the hottest days of summer, and down to 40 below on some of the coldest days of winter. Meanwhile, south Florida (Miami area) and south Texas (Harlingen/Brownsville area) are sub-tropical and it almost never freezes, never mind snow. (When it does freeze, typically at the wrong times, the citrus crops are threatened in both areas). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, the high plains areas are cold for much of the year. I don't know if it's literally 6 months or not, but Yellowstone National Park is covered with snow for a good portion of the year, and by contrast can get pretty hot at the peak of summer. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Yellowstone and other parts of the northern Rockies will often have snow on the ground for six months of the year or more, and it can snow at any time (I went there in mid-September a few years ago, and had a snowball fight with my parents). The higher peaks will usually be snowcapped year-round. --Carnildo (talk) 02:51, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

I see that the tallest mountain on the British Isles is Ben Nevis, at roughly 4,400 feet, which in terms of US mountains is just getting started. In fact, Yellowstone is about twice that altitude, on average. Obviously, warm vs. cold air is a function of both latitude and altitude, plus other factors. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:14, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

presidential cell

Does president Obama have one or more private, unmonitored cell phone for his personal use? Would it be up to him to pay the bill for it, or would it get paid by the government? Googlemeister (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

There is no such thing as an unmonitorable cell phone though there are encrypted phones that are available to POTUS from a government agency. In 2008, Verizon employees allegedly breached President-elect Obama's cell phone records (video). He no longer uses that phone. However he reportedly[25] has both the US nuclear launch codes and Oprah Winfrey's cell phone number. The closest you can get to phoning Barack Obama is his office (866) 675-2008[26]. (Someone tried to peek at his phone number.) Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

When I say unmonitored, I am referring to not recorded as a matter of course like the majority of his communications. I can't see how he could live with the utter lack of privacy. Googlemeister (talk) 22:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Just how is he going to pay for it? If I find it hard enough to get put through to a blob of sentient liveware when reaching my phone provider to sort out a credit card payment, how is Obamar going to get anywhere? “”Listen, what might be better is if you just bill me for the flowers. I'm sure it'll be okay with your boss. Well, I don't know if you recognize my voice, but this is the President. (beat) The United States. (they've hung up) Hello, hello...[27]..--Aspro (talk) 23:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Hollywood has anticipated Aspro. There is a bit very much like that in the 1995 movie The American President. --Anonymous, 01:07 UTC, December 3, 2010.

Doesn't the US Presidential Records Act require all calls are logged [28] [29]? So even if he did us private phones they would presumeably still have to be 'monitored' to the extent necessary for logging and it's likely to be controversial anyway like the Bush White House e-mail controversy. In the same vein I don't see any indication all calls are recorded as a matter of course, in fact the evidence suggests they're not hence why most Presidents and their aides use/d a lot of phone calls instead of email and other methods which are completely documented [30] (see also the earlier links). Nil Einne (talk) 00:45, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Weighing balls

What is the solution to the problem in the last panel of today's Dinosaur Comics? 12 balls, 1 is either lighter or heavier than the rest. Determine which ball is different with 3 weighings. 149.169.122.142 (talk) 23:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

This is a well-known puzzle. Here's a solution. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:00, 3 December 2010 (UTC)