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 19

Small letters

Is there any where in wikipedia where i can find a collection of puns and jokes from ref desk? i find it amusing to read those, and im sorry im not sure if this is the right place to ask MahAdik _usap 01:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Some editors keep their own personal selections. Maybe one will happen along and give you a link.

Btw, what does "small letters" have to do with what you're asking about? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I always see jokes and puns in small letters, im just trying to be creative. ;-) MahAdik _usap 01:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

<small> tags produce small letters. Jokes are usually between these tags. Dbfirs 08:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I started using small text after I was asked to minimize my puns. :-) StuRat (talk) 17:53, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

You can also put small in braces and it will come out slightly smaller, except it won't allow links from within. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I haven't used small braces since I was in short pants. :-) StuRat (talk) 05:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Back in the old days, there used to be pages called Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense, containing assorted silliness from all over Wikipedia. But that got killed. You can still find copies of it, the top google hit I find is bjaodn.org. 88.112.59.31 (talk) 11:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia still has these pages at Wikipedia:BJAODN.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Here are a few of mine: User_talk:StuRat#Puns_and_jokes. The Darwin one was my fave, but has since descended. StuRat (talk) 17:48, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah, a natural selection! Edison (talk) 05:00, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

What is the male:female ratio on Wikipedia?

This seems like a dumb question to ask, but what is the male:female (male-to-female) ratio on Wikipedia? I know it is unimportant, but I have a funny feeling there are more males than females here (yes, I do take a sneak-peek at userpages and userboxes out of curiosity). Or is it my perception? SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 01:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It's quite true, and there was a bit of a media fuss about it earlier this year. See, for example, this piece in the New York Times, which says that less than 15% of Wikipedia contributors are women, and consequently topics of interest to women are covered less thoroughly than topics of interest to men. Since editing Wikipedia is an entirely voluntary activity, it's hard to know what might be done to change that. --Nicknack009 (talk) 01:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Not that anything need or should be done about it. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, depending on the problem, there can be things which can and should be done. If the problem is only that it is an activity which interests men more than women, then obviously you might look at that and say it is the way of things. If it is because the wiki is often an unpleasant place for women, because of unthinking comments and jokes by certain contributors that make it feel hostile and unwelcoming to women (I have certainly witnessed many unthinkingly sexist comments, or comments that assume a default male audience, although these are less common and less tolerated than they used to be), then we can and should do something about it. Many people do. If it is because female contributors feel unsafe, because they experience stalking and hounding by creeps who latch onto women when they see them, often crossing over into real life stuff, then we can and should do something about that. We should also bear in mind that this will suppress the apparent proportion of women, because a lot of women will not admit to their gender.

This is largely coming up as a talking point precisely because most of the internet is no longer like this. 5 to 10 years ago, most of the internet was a fairly hostile place for women, and women overwhelmingly used neutral or male identities to avoid the negative side of things, even joining in with pretty unpleasant misogyny to avoid being targetted themselves, because they wanted to join in with other aspects of communities. Over the last 5 years, at least, there has been a significant change in perceptions. Part of this has been that enough women are now online that once one comes out, enough others join them that it counteracts a lot of the previously kneejerk reactions. Part of this is that female-friendly communities developed online, which have led to women no longer assuming that they have to hide their gender online: these communities have grown users who expect to be able to contribute confidently as women online, and they carry that into other communities. And these combine to change expectations, so that the culture changes across the internet and people generally expect different things.

I would guess that this has unfortunately changed at a time when Wikipedia has actually become less welcoming to new and casual editors, meaning it has both taken a smaller share of the newly confident female internet users, while becoming more harsh towards 'outgroup' contributors. Established users mostly come from the old culture, long before the general change, and (worse) many of the contributors who bought into many of the old wiki ideals (who objected to the Protecting of pages, who objected to the widespread use of semi-Protect, who objected to the restrictions on un-signed-in editors, who objected to personalities affecting rating of edits and judging of behaviour) have disproportionately left as the project evolved, when they might be expected to be the most tolerant of 'outgroup' editors. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 12:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It is important and is almost central to the way Wikipedia is constructed. The New York Times article strikes at the heart of the problem - and it is a problem. I also wonder whether women are more likely to attract unconstructive attention by having a name like bubblygirl246 instead of trident 3452324.

I am male by the way! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.171.89.20 (talk) 14:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Well nobody's perfect. (source). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

A bit of "IMO" here but popular sports have the same problem of a gender gap. We don't seem to have an article of Women in sports or Gender gap in sports but I imagine if someone figured out the "sports problem" it would also address the gender problem at large regarding the Internet. I have my own opinions why WP has a lack of female editors and what we could do about it, but this isn't the place for that discussion. Cheers! :) Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the sports issue and the Internet issue are related at all. They're two totally different issues — the fact that the Internet is co-ed and sports are not is a huge, huge, huge difference, aside from the fact that sports are public (in the sense that you must self-identify to participate) and Internet usage is relatively private (in the sense that individuals are harder to identify). Anyway, the issue isn't whether women use the Internet — they do. They just are underrepresented in specific communities on the Internet. It's a very different set of issues. --Mr.98 (talk) 04:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

It may be that the overall diversity of subjects is not affected but the importance that subjects are given is, the New York Times article suggests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.169.132.117 (talk) 07:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Asking for gender ratios is not a dumb question, here or in many other places from the boardroom to demographics. Sue Gardner, the chief exec of the Wikimedia Foundation, has written about the issue of systemic bias, particularly with regards to women. Here's a relevant entry on her blog. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that article reminded me how I found the Reference Desks, why I haven't signed in for years, and why I no longer contribute substantial text or reworkings to articles, like I used to. We did used to have attempts at social networking and friending, as well as spaces to chat generally about our experiences editing. All deleted in the move towards We Are Respectable. But it would take a lot to get past the great tiredness I feel at the thought of the conflict and fighting involved whenever I consider making a substantial edit, and I don't think I'm alone in that. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Water billing in Ireland

How does it work right now? I've read that they don't even have water counters and are pissed off for having to pay from now on. So, can Irish people simply leave the tap running and still pay the same? Quest09 (talk) 01:53, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

You can do that in most of Canada. You pay a flat rate for municipal water, and you use what you use. (Hot water is different because you have to pay the cost of heating it.) Where I live, out in the country, we have wells hooked up to the house, for which there is no charge, except that keeping the wells and the piping in good condition is our responsibility, as would be the drilling costs if we needed a new one. Bielle (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Here's an article on the controversy in Northern Ireland at the moment. Bielle (talk) 03:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, so in these places, it's theoretically possible to attach a generator to your tap and get energy for free too? Quest09 (talk) 14:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

"A generator to your tap"? I know little about science, but have never heard of a generator fuelled by tap water. (Niagara Falls, yes, but not tap water.) The only limits I know for water use occur in times of water restrictions (watering ban or, in the UK, hosepipe ban). This happens rarely in eastern and western Canada, but drought sometimes affects the central regions. Bielle (talk) 15:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't mean it's technically impossible to build one, however. Out of curiosity, I did the back-of-the-envelope calculation for how much power might be available from the tap. Water supply talks about a typical residential pressure of 4-5 bar (60-70 psi), which corresponds to 40 or 50 meters (150 feet) of hydrostatic head. If we assume that we can get 20 liters per minute from the tap still under that pressure (which is probably a generous assumption) the amount of energy available there is 150 watts, or 3.6 kWh per day. So depending on the efficiency of your generator and electricity rates in your area, you'll be able to harvest between ten and thirty cents' worth of electricity per day, while wasting thirty thousand liters of water. And that dribble of energy is 'free' only if one assumes no cost to the equipment required to generate and store it. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I was not suggesting that people indeed do it. Just asking is it's theoretically possible. Obviously, you can do better than just one tap. You get the idea: if water is completely free, you'll end up using it for any imaginable purpose at any possible amount without thinking about those thousand liters of water. Quest09 (talk) 16:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It's actually not 'obvious' that you can do (much) better than just one tap—there is a limit to the amount that a standard municipal water connection will supply to a given household, based on the diameter of the supply pipe and pressure characteristics of the municipal water supply. The pressure you see at the tap (or taps) decreases as the flow rate increases, and there is an absolute limit to the amount of water you can draw per minute through a supply pipe of a given diameter. There's a reason why your shower gets so uncomfortable after someone flushes the toilet.

Also, even in areas with completely unmetered usage, it is likely that the utility company will eventually notice that a home is drawing tens or hundreds of times more water than it should. There will definitely be restrictions and regulations regarding permissible uses of unmetered water, and I expect that home hydroelectric generation would probably fall afoul of those rules. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

In England and Wales where water is normally unmetered in various areas, the water companies have the right to force you to use a meter if you use lots of water for a swimming pool, running a garden sprinkler, or other purposes.[1] If you run a business you're also billed differently. It's not much different from other "unmetered"/"unlimited" services like unlimited internet, unlimited phone calls, etc: there's a combination of technical restrictions and contractual fair usage restrictions. --Colapeninsula (talk) 19:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

One is reminded of the "prosecutions for water wastage" endured by that unfortunate Irishman De Selby: "At one hearing it was shown that he had used 9,000 gallons in one day and on another occasion almost 80,000 gallons in the course of a week. The word 'used' in this context is the important one. The local officials, having checked the volume of water entering the house daily from the street connection, had sufficient curiosity to watch the outlet sewer and made the astonishing discovery that none of the vast quantity of water drawn in ever left the house." Deor (talk) 00:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, here's a little snippet of personal knowledge that can't be sourced: Living in an apartment complex the head maintenance man (who also lived there) and I became friendly. He told me to run my clothes & dish washers on cold water b/c the meter only monitored the hot water line. Everything else was just based on an average, largely depending on how many people you reported living in the unit. Following his advice, my water bill decreased dramatically. My neighbors did not believe me until we followed the water lines and realized there was only a single meter reporting for the entire building, with a second meter that ran back to the hot water heater in each unit. Also, I one time left my outdoor water hose (for the plants, etc) on accidentally for three days before it was noticed, and my bill was still the same (despite flooding a good part of the commons lawn), so I think there is probably something to what you are saying. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Gadgets driven by tap water:

• In a British school chemistry lab I have seen simple suction pumps that one attaches to a water tap (US: faucet). They have no moving parts and are somehow driven by water flowing through them to waste.

• There is a device for squeezing water out of clothes that consists of a metal cylinder with a rubber balloon inside. Water fed from a tap through a hose to the balloon causes it to swell and press clothes against the inside wall of the cylinder.

• I have a shower head that lights up when the water flows. It's sealed but I assume it contains a tiny turbine generator of enough power to light a few LED's whose colour shows the water temperature. It's impressive if you shower in the dark. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

In regions where this sort of thing is legal, there exist water driven sump pumps. Presumably on the theory that power failures are common, but water failures are not. 76.127.236.202 (talk) 10:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

J J Kent Inc.

I have been trying for months, including asking the British Library, If there is such a publication, beside that found on the www, called, 'PRECIOUS STONES IN THE EARLIER AND LATER BREASTPLATE' by J. J. Kent. Especially Volume 9. All I get is "J.J. Kent is closed for business.". I simply wish to purchase the complete work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LenBee (talk • contribs) 21:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Err , it looks as though Vol 1 to 11 is only available to be read/copied from online? [2]--Aspro (talk) 17:01, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

sacred music during the Middle Ages - instruments or not?

Hello.

I'm a student at the Lemmensinstitute for Arts and Science in Leuven, Belgium. Since I study the Flemish bagpipe I'm doing some research about the use of (bourdon)instruments with plainchant in medieval churchmusic. Very little is known about this subject and therefore I'd like to ask you kindly for your help. Does anyone happen to have a bit more information on this subject?

On Wikipedia, in the article called "Hymn", I read the following:

"Music and accompaniment In ancient and medieval times, stringed instruments such as the harp, lyre and lute were used with psalms and hymns. ..."

This suggests that indeed there were instruments being used in church. I also found an article that says Hildegard von Bingen (not on Wikipedia) composed sacred music with instrumental accompaniment. Also Boethius accompanied his chants with instruments, so says another article.

However, these articles don't mention anything more about it, nor do they refer to the source of this information...

Can someone help me on this one? Thank you.

˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deedontree (talk • contribs) 21:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea, but we do have an article on Hildegard of Bingen, including a discography. --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

PS: Sorry, I may have misunderstood your parenthetical comment "(not on WP)". --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I found this essay called Musical Instruments in Medieval Psalm Commentaries and Psalters. As you say, very little seems to be known for certain. Alansplodge (talk) 00:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

It is known for certain that cathedrals had organs as early as the 9th century. During the high and late middle ages (Gothic period) all of the more important churches had organs. However, according to the German Wikipedia's article on church music, other instruments were hardly ever used in churches at that time. Marco polo (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

If you do a Google search on "illustrated manuscripts with instruments" you will find many references. Here is one you might like to pursue. Here's another one. Hope these help and you can find more with the Google search. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

One possibility to consider is that masses and other liturgies performed for a lay public might have been treated restrictively, while liturgies and less formal performances in an ecclesiastical or monastic environment might have been treated more liberally. I am pointing this out because the depiction of instruments on a composition by a monastic such as Hildegard von Bingen doesn't necessarily show that such instruments were used in churches during public rites. (On the other hand, I am no expert, and for all I know they were used.) Marco polo (talk) 18:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

While that is possible, and one cannot necessarily extrapolate back from current behaviour, that is the opposite of what I would expect based on current practice in the Catholic Church. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 11:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The essay I linked to above says that the evidence that exists is a) plenty of illustrations of instruments being used in worship and b) plenty of tracts from senior clergt explaining why instruments shouldn't be used in worship. What conclusions can be drawn from this can only be conjecture. Alansplodge (talk) 13:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The reason for my speculation is that in medieval times, monastic communities and clerics posted to major cathedral churches formed a privileged, elite, and sophisticated class. In such a context, it would not be surprising if one set of practices applied to liturgies performed for the masses — particularly in rural parish churches which would not have had the funds for an organ, much less instrumentalists — while another set of practices applied to liturgies performed within a privileged, wealthy ecclesiastical community. If this was the case, I suppose it wouldn't be surprising if lay aristocrats also sometimes enjoyed instrumental accompaniments to liturgies in their private chapels. The present-day context is of course very different. The Catholic Church, under attack from Protestants and secularists since the time of the Reformation, has in modern times tried to improve its image by reducing the privileges enjoyed by "insiders" and trying to cultivate an attitude of service toward the lay congregation (disservices to the congregation's vulnerable youth notwithstanding). Marco polo (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

November 20

Ski-Doo Rotax Engines

What is the Skidoo Rotax 800 H.O.? What is the Skidoo Rotax 800R Powertek? What is the Skidoo Rotx 800 H.O. DMP?

What is the differences between the three Skidoo Rotax engines provided above? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.11.82.215 (talk) 05:12, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

These are Austrian 2-stroke engines for snowmobiles. Here is the manufacturer's website. Wikipedia has historical information at Bombardier Recreational Products#Development of the small snowmobile. This site has Ski-Doo engine tuning information. If you can translate German then willkommen in unserer Welt unt wir haben ein kontaktadresse. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 01:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Meta meta meta question

What proportion of questions that people ask on the Wikipedia Reference Desk are answered correctly? And which of the separate Reference Desks on Wikipedia have the highest "success rate"? Harley Spleet (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

There's likely no way to answer your question for two reasons. 1) I doubt that anyone has ever kept such statistics and more importantly 2) How do you judge a "correct answer". It may be possible to figure out (if someone was dedicated enough) which questions went entirely unanswered, but what makes an answer "correct"? --Jayron32 19:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Another meta reply: First determine how many questions asked can be answered correctly? How many have a single correct answer? Does it count as 'correct' to provide links that partially answer the question? For actual answerable questions I bet the science and math desks have a better record of correct replies than humanities and, especially, miscellaneous. And yes, correct, that is my opinion. Pfly (talk) 20:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

In my own observational experience, the likelihood of getting an eventual correct, or at least "reasonable", answer is fairly high. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The proportion is less than 100% and will remain so. There will be a finite probability of receiving responses that are disinformative as long as the desks are open to the whole Internet population of anonymous unqualified users with no requirements to provide reliable references for what they say, to show any previous aptitude for encyclopedia contribution, or to correct errors in own posts when they become apparent. The desk with the best quality of answers is the Mathematics desk because of its limited and objective scope. It is more helpful to give questions an informative title that does not repeat the term "question". Cuddlyable3 (talk) 01:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I fixed your link, Cuddlyable3. WP:RDM is the Miscellaneous desk; the Mathematics desk is at WP:RDMA. --Theurgist (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Theurgist for that help. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

One question farther down is whether angels exist or not. There is no possible "correct" answer to a question like that... beyond saying "there is no possible correct answer." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:33, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There will be a finite probability of receiving responses that are disinformative as long as the answers are provided by anybody more fallible than God. I've heard that even at regular library reference desks, people are sometimes directed to the wrong shelf. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Hence To err is human to forgive is divine - said Alexander Pope. Is it forgiveable blasphemy to claim one is always wrong or is that just a paradoxical flight from responsibility? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There was an academic study done on this very question a couple of years ago. In keeping with the results, I can't be bothered to find a link. --Sean 16:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Not just one study, but 87 studies:[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

What insurance covers braces/Invisaligns?

I hope to get it sometime before getting said braces.

Failing that, what is the cheapest place in America (or preferably Kansas) where I can get them? How much will they cost, and do they have a monthly payment plan for the entire duration I wear said braces/Invisaligns? Thanks. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 19:25, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

You should ask your insurance provider. The answer will depend on some specific things that if you don't know we certainly can't either. Shadowjams (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The general answer is dental insurance (which is separate from medical insurance), but not all plans carry orthodontic options, and not all orthodontic options will probably cover Invisalign. Whether you are buying it on the open market, or subscribing to a group plan (through your employer, or your parents' employer if you are under whatever the cutoff age is in your state) will affect the cost and options. If you are getting your medical insurance through your employer, check with your human resources representative. As for the price of the orthodontics, you'd do better to call up the offices of orthodontists in your local area and ask them, than to ask on here. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

These days it often cheaper for a US citizen to forgo insurance premiums and fly aboard for their dental treatment. --Aspro (talk) 22:43, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I assume you meant "abroad". Is it actually possible for a U.S. citizen, for example, to get the benefits of the socialized medicine of a European country, for example? If so, in the long run wouldn't that tend to raised the cost, i.e. the taxes, of the citizens of that country? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

You're touch typing is obliviously butter than mine. Bee that as it may. The benefit these other countries with socialized medicine can enjoy by treating their US cousins, is that they get offered jaw-dropping-opportunities to put their money into Gold Plated US investments, in such like companies as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which spring to mind. Then there are all those banking investments - oh the list can go on-and-on--Aspro (talk) 00:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

WHAAOI. --ColinFine (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Not necessarily a good one though, that article is a mess with stuff like "Although some think it is a good idea to simply go to the country as a tourist and find a dentist there, rather than to find dentists on the Internet, you take a great risk just walking into a clinic having done no research" and "One other important consideration is location. If you go all the way to India or Singapore or Argentina for a dental procedure, and something goes wrong, it is a long way to go to have to return and get them to fix it.". BTW, I think the OP is well aware of dental tourism, at least when it comes to India, I guess for some reason they decided against the idea, perhaps concern over getting adjustments done locally. Nil Einne (talk) 10:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

A bit more Googling; apparently the average cost of Invisalign, uninsured, is around $5000, but can be as low as $3500 and as high as $8000 depending on where you are.[4] As for insurance, there are many, many, many different dental insurance plans available to you, assuming you are looking for the open market and are not doing it through your employer. You will really need to do some research on them. The good news is that dental insurance is a lot cheaper than most other insurance — premiums are often around $15-30 a month, which is not so bad if you are using it. The bad news is that often insurance providers pay for only a portion of orthodontics, so it could still cost you several thousand dollars out of pocket. But the exact details will determine on the plan you have. I would start with any options available to you through your employer, and branch out from there. If you Google "dental insurance kansas" you'll find lots of sites with lists of potential providers. Approach is methodically, especially since you have one major goal in mind. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Does dental insurance commonly exclude pre-existing conditions? Like for example squint teeth needing orthodontic work? It doesn't seem a good business model to insure people who have bad teeth. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, pre-existing conditions are usually not covered. It also seems to be a common exclusion on new dental insurance policies that unless you can produce dental records that show you have visited a dentist within the last 12 months (which would, presumably, identify any pre-existing conditions) then any treatment arising from your first check-up under the policy is not covered. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

(EC with above) I had the same thoughts. Obviously if you're using your parents plan then this likely doesn't apply. Or if your dental insurance comes from university or work then I guess it's possible they've negotiated something like this under the assumption the risk balances out overall for the workplace. Similarly if your local jurisdiction has legal requirements which require dental insurers to insure people. But in cases where it's purely commercial, it does seem to me it would be difficult to find one where it's that easy to get more out of the insurance then you put in. Meaning where you can join, pay $15-$30 a month and within a month or two get them to put in say $1000 for your braces (which from some research seems a commonly quoted figure for those who offer coverage for braces) and when you don't need braces anymore, say in 2 years time, quit if you don't feel the coverage is worth it. It would seem likely anyone who wanted braces and had a bit of sense and time would be doing this. I guess they could hope enough people will stay to make this worthwhile or it's too complicated to try to exclude these cases, but it does seem surprising to me. While not relevant to the OP, this UK one excludes pre-existing conditions for the first 2 years [5]. Some refs suggest there is commonly a waiting period [6] [7] possibly 1-2 years in the US. There may still be an advantage for insurance. E.g. I've seen some sites which mention you can get specific coverage for braces, I presume these are in case something goes wrong or your case turns out to be unusually expensive, in other words, if everything goes fine you'll probably end up paying more (since as most insurance, you pool the risk) which may be worth considering. Nil Einne (talk) 10:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

November 21

Angels

Do angels exist? Is there any proof of their presence on earth?95.176.214.169 (talk) 00:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

No, and no.

Well, they might exist, but there is certainly no proof in the scientific sense. HiLo48 (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

They may well exist, but there is no scientific proof of their existence. It is a matter of faith. Edison (talk) 01:33, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

First select your type of angel. The Australian band of them definitely exists and Wikipedia says unequivocally that this book about angels is non-fiction. The article Angel describes the kinds of divine angels that are said to exist (but all the descriptions cannot be right so logically some or all are nonsense). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As HiLo suggests, it is not possible to say definitively whether they exist or not, and any "proof" comes from faith, not physical evidence. An angel is supposed to be a "messenger from God", so there's no reason it would take only one form. It might take a form that makes sense to a particular culture. One can argue that angels are manifested through other humans. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Bugs, I thought for sure you believed in angels. — Michael J 07:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As came up in a recent architectural theory lecture I attended, Kant argues that since we cannot even be certain of the nature of the world outside of ourselves, when it comes to things that we cannot sense at all, cannot see or smell or feel or even begin to understand, there is no way we could prove anything one way or another, and that therefore even trying to decide based on no evidence is a waste of time and effort. 148.197.81.179 (talk) 07:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

By 'eck, that sounds like a good description of dark matter/dark energy... --TammyMoet (talk) 13:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Except that those two (completely unconnected) things are attempted explanations for phenomena that we have observed, insofar (as per Kant) that we can observe anything. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.149 (talk) 16:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The Biblical Jacob was called יִשְׂרָאֵל Yisra`el, meaning "one that struggled with the divine angel" and Rembrandt snapped the clinch. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

While the bible does describe the fight between Jacob and the angel, the name "Israel" does not mention the word "angel", but rather God. Our article on Jacob contains several different possible meanings of the name, but none of them include the word "angel". While authorities argue over the meaning of the prefix "Isra"/"Yisrae", the suffix "el" is unambiguosly "God". An angel is "malach" in Hebrew. --Dweller (talk) 20:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Gregory the Great said England was the land 'not of Angles, but of Angels'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• Those of my religion exist and intervene constantly for the benefit of people of my religion. Those of your religion (for we have differing religions) do not exist, and are either misapprehensions of demons and monsters, fairies and youkai, due to your lack of the fundamental religious virtue common to people of my religion allowing you to see these beings correctly; or, are in fact, delusions of a diseased mind as people not of my religion are more commonly mentally ill than people of my religion. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Well you would say that wouldn't you. For interest, what do you call your religion of such exclusive fundamental virtue and what does it say about respecting other people? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

For a person with firm religious beliefs, Fifelfoo's position is completely logical. (If not rational.) HiLo48 (talk) 09:21, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

This can only be a personal musing, not a real answer, and I won't offer proof of angels' existence, but in lieu of this, it may be possible to describe them in such a way that their existence can be taken as a matter of personal perception. Which is to say, angels can be described as the personification of concepts which undeniably or at least probably have meaning, and the degree to which this personification is literal or symbolic is a matter of personal expression. It is important to note that to avoid making angels into a polytheistic concept, the roles of the angels should in some way represent a logical partition of the message of God, rather than being viewed as deities in themselves which can be arbitrarily declared with arbitrary and intrinsic characteristics. To put it vulgarly, the powers and qualities of an angel might devolve from the office it holds, rather than being innate - a better analogy might be that the existence of separate angels is akin to the existence of separate orbitals, for example, the three p orbitals, which are defined by how an observer looks at them, but which don't actually have separate existence from some universal perspective.

Specifically, consider the (sometimes) seven archangels, possibly equated with the Seven Spirits of God and the seven virtues. These may also be compared with the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, as they precede the "fifth angel", Exterminans, in Revelations. Now drawing the specific equations is at best uncertain, more likely a matter of creative expression, but the idea is that if virtue or adversity can be divided up conceptually into specific realms (e.g. Gabriel, fortitude, and war), and if the virtues represent divisions of the will of a personal God, then there should be a personal face for these virtues also, i.e. the angels. Wnt (talk) 02:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Can you name the music in this video?

starts in 06:40 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4YQnACGpJs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ofplef (talk • contribs) 01:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The choral music at 7:00 is Land of Hope and Glory sung to one of the Pomp and Circumstance Marches by Edward Elgar, probably recorded at a The Proms#Last Night of the Proms concert at the Albert Hall, London. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 02:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. You can see the whole thing here, conducted by David Robertson (an American chap, but we won't hold that against him). Alansplodge (talk) 11:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Scientists murdered by Christians

Galileo, Darwin, etc. were persecuted by the church but not killed. Were there any scientists who were actually killed by the church? The only one I remember is Hypatia. --70.250.212.95 (talk) 02:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

You first need to define the words "scientist" and "murdered" and "by". --Jayron32 04:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

And "the Church"? What Jayron means is that it is difficult to answer the question because "the church" does not usually go around murdering anyone, including scientists, and before relatively recently (the past few hundred years), there were no "scientists" in the modern understanding of the word. Darwin and Galileo for example are certainly scientists, but Hypatia was more of a philosopher...and in any case she wasn't killed by "the church", she was killed by a mob for reasons that had little to do with being a scientist. Galileo was persecuted not specifically for being a scientist, but because he was kind of a jerk to people who didn't immediately believe him (the Pope especially). Darwin was never persecuted at all, although some members of the church disagreed with him (and this was quite a different church than the one that existed in Galileo's day, which itself was much different than the one in Hypatia's time). However, to give a simpler answer, you would probably be interested in reading about Giordano Bruno. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thomas More was a social scientist killed by the Church of England, depending on your definitions (he's a martyr to Catholics, so his death was more to do with church politics). I suspect there's quite a few who were killed for taking sides in conflicts with a religious dimension, such as Lazare Carnot, physicist and leader of the rationalist French Revolution, who was executed following the restoration of France's Catholic monarchy in 1815, but like most distinguished victims of the executioner, from Jesus onwards, he was actually executed by the state not the church. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

List of people executed by the Holy See may be relevant, but the only people I would describe as scientists are Bruno and the poisoner Giulia Tofana. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Giordano Bruno is basically the only case of a major scientist executed by the Church because of his scientific beliefs/teachings. The idea that the Church held a huge, murderous power over scientists is a bit overblown. Darwin was not personally persecuted by the Church and lived a quite comfortable life with the exception of his recurring illness. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Except that, as the article points out, many see him as being executed for his religious beliefs, not his scientific ones. Rmhermen (talk) 15:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but in his case they were pretty intertwined. But it's a general point that Inquisition persecution was never about just one thing — Galileo's house arrest was as much about politics as it was about the particular positions he took. --Mr.98 (talk) 03:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(EC) Though that raises the question of the changes in definitions (by the Church) between then and now of the divisions (or not) between the proper spheres of enquiry of religion and (what we now call) science. The possible existence of other inhabited worlds, for example, was then considered (by the Church prosecuters, who clearly had the whip hand) a religious question, while today most would concede it to the scientific realm. On a more general point, "history is written by the winners" and the Church as prosecutor in this and other cases (just as other Establishments, such as the rulers of Athens who condemned Socrates) clearly long had the advantage in controlling what was recorded for posterity. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.149 (talk) 16:46, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Could you give us a reference for anyone who was ever prosecuted by anybody for suggesting "the possible existence of other inhabited worlds"? It seems a bit unlikely. Alansplodge (talk) 17:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

That was (though I couched it in modern terms) one of the charges against Giordano Bruno, to whose already mentioned case I was referring in the first part of my response. When I broadened to make a more general point, I was not intending to assert that other individuals had also been prosecuted by the Church for exactly the same offense, though it would not surprise me to learn that other more obscure figures had, or had been threatened with prosecution to silence them, or had self-censored for fear of it. Please note that I am not trying to promote an "Ooh wasn't the Church horrible" message. Different times were different to ours, and one can be interested in that without trying to impose contemporary sensibilities on them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.40 (talk) 21:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

From the article, the full list of charges was holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith and speaking against it and its ministers; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith about the Trinity, divinity of Christ, and Incarnation; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith pertaining to Jesus as Christ; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith regarding the virginity of Mary, mother of Jesus; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith about both Transubstantiation and Mass; claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their eternity; believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the human soul into brutes, and dealing in magics and divination. Even with changing boundaries between science and religion, these are primarily theological charges. Many of these charges individually would have been sufficient for a sentence of death after conviction. Rmhermen (talk) 00:14, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

And to continue cutting and pasting from the article that we've all read where you left off:

"In these grim circumstances Bruno continued his Venetian defensive strategy, which consisted in bowing to the Church's dogmatic teachings, while trying to preserve the basis of his philosophy. In particular Bruno held firm to his belief in the plurality of worlds, although he was admonished to abandon it." [My italics].

I'm not suggesting the last was the only charge, merely that it is one that, in today's terms, is relevant to the scientific theme of the OP's question, and (unlike some of the others) was upheld and led to his execution. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.40 (talk) 03:11, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

In the UK at least, the scientific community in the 17th to 19th centuries was well populated with Anglican clergymen. A comfortable income, few duties and a university education meant that they were well placed to persue their interests in botany, geology, entomology, astronomy and so on. An example that springs to mind is the Reverend Nevil Maskelyne. A European example of an ecclesiastical scientist is Gregor Mendel. Alansplodge (talk) 16:43, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

See Christian pacifism.

—Wavelength (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

In the 14th century the inquisitor Nicolau Aymerich persecuted followers of Ramon Lull. Lull wrote on a number of topics, including maths. I don't know if that amounted to any prosecutions or executions, or even whether anyone could find out at this late date. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The general problem, I think, is that, whenever large-scale persecution of nonstandard world views was in place, it was difficult for "scientists" even to rise to prominence without being shot down.

The concept of "science" only emerged when persecution by the Church was on the decline. It was born in late 1600's in England, partly due to tolerant attitudes of the young Church of England at that time. There's only a handful of individuals that we might consider true "scientists" who lived before that time - Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo.

The famous Spanish Inquisition was very active in 16th and 17th century and executed at least 1400 people between 1540 and 1740. Going through the list of Spanish scientists, I only see a few names dating from that period, and at least one of them, Michael Servetus, was executed by the Inquisition. In the List of alchemists, I don't see any notable alchemists to come out of 16th to 17th century Spain either. --Itinerant1 (talk) 00:36, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

To anticipate diversionary quibbles, Servetus was actually tried and condemned by, and executed on the orders of, the Protestant Geneva Council, although the French Inquisition had already condemned him and wanted to extradite him for execution anyway, and he was condemned for heretical theological views rather than any scientific teachings. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.40 (talk) 03:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Good point, I've missed that part when skimming the article. So the number of known prominent scientists executed by the Spanish Inquisition goes back down to zero. In any event, any promising alchemist or scientist born in Renaissance-age Spain probably had a good chance of attracting attention and potentially becoming one of the 1400 before he could make it into textbooks. --Itinerant1 (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

"The concept of "science" only emerged when persecution by the Church was on the decline." This is nonsense. There was plenty of systematic inquiry during the Middle Ages, most of it funded by the Church. This is a common-enough misconception that we even have an entry in it on the List of common misconceptions (see point #3 under Ancient to early modern). The idea that there were no scientists before Copernicus is patently ridiculous. Copernicus did not get the idea, the means, or the training to study astronomy out of nothing! He comes out of a rich tradition of Church-sponsored study of the heavens. The omission is clear when one goes from Copernicus, Kepler, to Galileo without mentioning someone like Christoph Clavius, who was the biggest Church-sponsored guy in between, and whose textbooks would have been mandatory reading for folks like Galileo. Clavius "rose to power" just fine, and was no stooge or dummy. (So not-a-stooge was he that he eventually conceded that Galileo's observations must be true, and a Ptolemaic model could not hold. Which is why the idea that Galileo was persecuted for opposing the Ptolemaic model is false — the Church had by that point already adopted the Tychonic system, which was at that point observationally identical to a Copernican one.) It is true that your average science textbook doesn't teach any scientists before then, but there were scads of people investigating the world, some more systematic than others, some more wrong than others. But do not mistake the textbook narrative of the history of science (the endless upward movement towards truth!) for the reality of it. What happened in the "Scientific Revolution" is less that science was born than science became connected with government and commerce, which put it on a pretty different path than it had been on before. I am no great defender of the Church (I'm not religious), but the idea that they were going around all during the Middle Ages and squashing anyone who dared to look at the sky (or other phenomena) is nonsense, and the idea that the entire idea of studying the world just suddenly came into the heads of a few random people is also nonsense. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:30, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The early modern with the least epicycles and the most observed predicted phenomena wins. But our article on the Tychonic system implies that was Tycho. And he did "win" if we consider the sociology of science reception. Until new observed phenomena appeared. Fifelfoo (talk) 21:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say that there were no scientists before Copernicus, did I? I said that scientists were very rare. And indeed they were. With regard to Copernicus, you say "he comes out of a rich tradition of Church-sponsored study of the heavens." And yet he was still working off the Ptolemaic system, dating 1500 years before his time. The only advances in 1500 years were incremental improvements in numbers and properties of epicycles, mostly made by Islamic astrologers.

By the way, Copernican system is observationally equivalent to Ptolemaic, differences are mostly mathematical and ideological, and Tychonic system is a partial ideological regression back to Ptolemy. The first system that is observationally different from any of those (which also happens to describe planetary motion with more accuracy and fewer free parameters than Ptolemaic/Copernican) is the Keplerian model.

Edit: I stand corrected here, there is a difference with regards to phases of Mercury and Venus. There is no difference with regards to motion of planets.--Itinerant1 (talk) 23:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

But here's a better way to illustrate my point. Count all world-class European scientists you know who were alive in 1500. I can come up with Copernicus, Leonardo, Paracelsus, Agricola, and maybe a couple of less important alchemists.

Now count all world-class scientists who were alive in 1700. Just in Britain, we have Newton, Hooke, Wren, Locke, Stirling, Flamsteed, Halley, Taylor, Maclaurin ... On the continent, the scientific revolution took off a bit later, but we still have Leibniz, five different Bernoullis, Cassini, and de l'Hôpital. --Itinerant1 (talk) 23:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Mr. 98. Science can be considered the bastard son of the Catholic church really. Organized religions played a very important part in encouraging sciences and preserving scientific literature in the Dark Ages. Monks and scholars slaving away copying manuscripts they probably did not even understand is the reason why we still have some ancient texts today that would otherwise have been lost.

But then again to Itinerant1's point, most of the famous scientists were those who were born to noble families, had large fortunes, or managed to secure powerful patronage. And they still tiptoed around the base "facts" established by the Bible or the Koran. We really don't know how many amateur radical ones got burned at the stake for witchcraft.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 06:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

UFOs

From 1960 to 1972 I worked for CBS News in Philadelphia, at WCAU-TV. Channel 10. During that time I recall some respected source saying that the most nearly credible reports of UFO sightings was a cluster of sightings near a Soviet city that was a "closed" city for security reasons, sightings said to have been reported by hundreds of people. I do not recall the name of the city, but I see no mention of that incident. Do the authors of your page have any information about that? Donald Barnhouse [removed email address before they see it] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.36.209.48 (talk) 07:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I removed your email address as we do not reply by email. I'm not sure which page you are referring to. Do you mean our article on closed city?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I suspect he means our UFO article. Alansplodge (talk) 10:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The area around Astrakhan, particularly Kapustin Yar, was popular for UFO sightings (according to the article Kapustin Yar and a wide range of websites of uncertain credibility). This area was a centre of Soviet space research, so there were doubtless lots of strange lights in the sky. There's not much about the UFOs on Wikipedia - maybe there's a shortage of reliable sources of information. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There is a book dated 1968 that catalogues almost 200 eyewitness reports of UFOs in the Soviet Union. Reports are all over the place, but there is what looks like a cluster of about 30 sightings in July to October 1967, in the region of Donetsk, Lugansk and Rostov-na-Donu. The center of the triangle formed by these three cities is about 300 miles west of Kapustin Yar. In addition, there are about 10 reports in the vicinity of Kapustin Yar, and a few further south. Reports are not consistent with space launches, but could make sense if there was research into experimental aircraft going on nearby. As far as I can tell, there were no known closed cities in Donetsk/Lugansk area. --Itinerant1 (talk) 06:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Odd pop culture question.

MC Frontalot's 'Critical Hit' is a satire of a bunch of rappers, I am sure, but not being familiar with the genre, I don't know which ones. Which real rap songs typify the artistic form that Frontalot is ripping off? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I assume you are talking about the video and not the song itself? The song lyrics don't stand out to me as being an homage to any form in particular, either in content or delivery. His video doesn't seem to have much by way of reference to rappers, but other pop culture characters, like David Bowie (the Aladdin Sane garb), Paris Hilton (the green "sex tape"), and David Carradine (the erotic asphyxiation bit), among others which I was not familiar with. My take on it, anyway; I didn't think the rapping sounded like an homage to anything I've heard, and I do consider myself fairly familiar with hip hop trends... --Mr.98 (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I'm talking about the genre of rap song about how cool he is and how great his life is? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 (talk) 21:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

My interpretation is that it's just a common form of DJ boasting that has been done in hip hop since its inception. The earliest hit hip-hop song, "Rapper's Delight", is basically nothing but boasting. My limited understanding is that this is in part because of the influence of rap battles, in which two (or more) MCs explain why they are the best, and their opponent is, well, not. Anyway, I don't think Frontalot is referencing anything specific — it's a very common trope in rap. What makes Frontalot different of course is that he does it in reference to D&D terminology, which is unusual in rap. --Mr.98 (talk) 03:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

But not entirely unusual in nerdcore, which is the very genre that he is said to epitomize, in spite of its limited scope.--WaltCip (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure. But Nerdcore is pretty fringe when it comes to the whole of hip hop and its history. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:39, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - yes- the battles thing makes a lot of sense. I don't pick up a strong D&D theme in the song (except the nat 20 ref), it seems like that framing story is really emphasized in the video more. Other than Rappers Delight are there other non-nerdcore songs that really stand out as iconic in the genre of talking about the qualities of the rapper (whether or not they simultaneously denigrate others)? Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.159.19 (talk) 19:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

A huge amount of the work by Jay-Z and Nas is about their proficiencies as rappers and general awesome-ness. Other rappers usually sprinkle it throughout all of their work no matter what the subject matter. My all-time favorite couplet about rapping skills comes from Notorious BIG: I got techniques drippin out my butt cheeks / Sleep on my stomach so I don't fuck up my sheets. There's something so self-effacing, while self-flattering, about that particular line, along with its obvious crudity... --Mr.98 (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

November 22

highest number of blood donor

what is the highest or maximum number of blood donor in a single blood donation camp,in world till nowHalka fulka (talk) 01:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Possibly one in Mumbai, India on 25 April 2010. 25,065 donated blood over 12 hours. See [8]. Not sure if it has been surpassed since then. --Jayron32 01:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Prostate Cancer

No, this is not a medical question, but I wonder if there are statistics which show that male porn stars have a lower incidence of this problem, (as I presume that they have more sexual activity than most of us), since I have seen a claim that the greater this activity the lesser chance of getting this cancer.--85.211.153.242 (talk) 07:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

No idea of the answer. Just being a spelling pedant. It should be Prostate, with only one r. HiLo48 (talk) 07:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Interesting question. After 3 minutes in Google Scholar, I don't see any studies of porn stars, but I see a meta-analysis study dated 2002 that reports a 20% increase in the risk of prostate cancer for an increase in sexual activity by 3 times a week, a 20% increase per 20 lifetime sexual partners, and a 130% increase if you were ever infected with syphilis.

On the other hand, I just saw an article recently that claimed that residents of Okinawa are 7 times less likely (age adjusted) to die of prostate cancer than Americans. That was attributed to high-vegetable, low-meat Okinawa Diet. (I also saw a documentary movie claiming an even greater reduction, but I haven't had time to check that claim.) That might be an easier way to avoid dying from prostate cancer (among other things) than becoming a porn star.

I've seen so many medical studies (often contradicting each other) that I tend to take them with a grain of salt. But a 7x difference in mortality rates is usually an indicator that something significant is going on.--Itinerant1 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Okinawans, Sardinians, and Seventh-Day Adventists from Loma Linda tend to live the longest, apparently. 80.122.178.68 (talk) 10:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know about Sardinians. Mormons in Utah tend to live at least 5 years longer, on average, than typical for Americans. I don't think it's been fully explained.--Itinerant1 (talk) 11:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

A grain of salt will reduce cramp pains.--85.211.153.242 (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Being no less a spelling pedant than HiLo48, I have corrected the question title for easier reference. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

"Red Indian"/ American Indian Names

Why do Red Indian names always go like "Stands with a fist", "Howls at the moon", "Kicks with his feet"?? The names are in their language, right? So why would anyone translate the meanings of those names into English while referring to those people? Even (real) Indian names have meanings in the corresponding languages, but I don't see anyone translating them literally while writing them in English... 223.190.239.230 (talk) 13:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

One look at Sitting Bull's Indian name, for example, might give a clue why the names are translated. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The term "Red Indian" is mildly offensive; depending on the context "American Indian" is less so, and "Native American" (US) or "First Nations" (Canada) are more accepted terms for pre-Columbian residents of North America; the least offensive thing is to refer to people by their individual nations of which they are decendent (Oneida, Cherokee, etc.). The naming system you note, where Native American names are translated into English, is not as prevalent as the Hollywood Movies would have you believe. The practice is not entirely unknown (Ben Nighthorse Campbell, William Least Heat-Moon, etc.) however there are many Native Americans who are known either by European names (Jim Thorpe, Graham Greene) or by names in their own native languages (Pocahontas, Sacagawea, Massasoit, Cochise). I'm not entirely certain of why the translation occurs; my suspicion is because many of their names may have been difficult for Europeans to properly pronounce. --Jayron32 13:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(ec)

For starters, they aren't always. Sometimes they are known by our best mangled pronunciation in our language: Chief Seattle for Si'ahl, (pronunciation: [ˈsiʔaːɬ] or [ˈsiʔaːtɬʼ]; Tecumseh for Tekoomsē, also known as Tecumtha or Tekamthi, whose article describes the sign which occurred after his birth that his name derived from. Native American names were often describing a sign or significant event so the meaning was the important thing to convey (some of the sounds of the Native languages are very difficult for Europeans as well). Names may be acquired at birth, after an adulthood ceremony, or after a significant life event. This page comments on modern trends of having an Indian name and a Christian (everyday name). Compounds of European names are also common like Leonard Crow Dog, or Luther Standing Bear (originally Ota Kte meaning Plenty Kill but renamed at residential school). Rmhermen (talk) 14:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The answer is really simple: "That white guy asked for my name. He doesn't know the words I use, so if I tell him, he won't understand. Yesterday, he asked what I call a crow, and then he tried to say it and it sounded like a monkey was trying to talk. I don't want that to happen to my name. So I need to tell him using the words he uses." Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

on that explanation. If you are inventing your own explanation, please indicate so... --Jayron32 14:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I mean, you have presented an answer to the OPs question as an authoritative answer, but have done so without any indication where that answer came from. If the answer comes from a Wikipedia article, please link it. If it has come from another online source, please link that. If it comes from something you read or saw on a TV show, please indicate where. If it is merely some speculation you have, please indicate that as well. --Jayron32 14:30, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh. OK. Personal knowledge. Now try to say Tłʼízíłání... ;) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Jayron, as Seb az86556 is active on the Navajo Wikipedia, this is apparently his or her own personal explanation for what s/he him/herself does. Marco polo (talk) 14:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I pronounce it Many Goats, of course (I think from quick google search). If someone could sort out this line in the Allen Dale June article, it would be nice: ..."born for Tłʼízíłání, and his father was named Yéʼii Dineʼé, born for Tachíiʼnii." born into? born of the? what is the meaning here? Rmhermen (talk) 14:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

born into/born of (nilį́igo)=first clan, born for (yáshchíín)=father's clan. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(outdent) Pocahontas whose real "secret" name was Matoax or Matoika or Matoaka but who was called Amonute as an adult until she became Rebecca Rolfe is a good example of some of the complexities. There is also the explanation of the common addressing of elders as "Grandfather" as that their sacred names are too special to use as a mere form of address. Rmhermen (talk) 14:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's possible to generalize about Native American names. There is at least as much cultural diversity among the indigenous peoples of North America as there is among indigenous peoples of a similarly sized region in the Old World (therefore greater diversity than among the peoples of Europe). Each ethnic group has its own practices, and individuals may vary in their practices. Marco polo (talk) 14:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I've read something on this topic, but can't remember at the moment what it was--will try to remember. Meanwhile, the practice of using English words for Native American names (whether rough translations of their native names or wholly new names) goes way back, but so does the use of native names, even long, hard to pronounce names (though often "Anglicized" to some degree).

Not all Native American names could be translated--depending on the culture. Personal names in the Pacific Northwest, for example, typically did not have a specific meaning. For example, Chief Seattle ("Si'ahl"), as far as I know, doesn't mean anything in particular in Duwamish; nor does the name of his relative, Chief Kitsap; nor Chief Leschi; nor Maquinna or Wickaninnish of earlier times farther north. As far as I know these names mean as little in their languages as Jayden does in English (whatever original meaning there might be is non-obvious to most people).

There is also a long history of natives acquiring and using English names (or French, Spain, etc) for various reasons (especially converting to Christianity and being given a Christian name, and as a result of intermarriage). (as an aside, I'm fond of the Christianized names of two Native Alaskan saints, Peter the Aleut and Herman of Alaska)

I used to think the use of names like "Red Cloud" only became common in the 19th century and mainly for the Plains Indians, but there are numerous earlier examples, like Handsome Lake and his half-brother Cornplanter, yet a contemporary Seneca was called Sayenqueraghta; also Cornstalk and fellow Shawnee Blue Jacket. Red Jacket was known as Otetiani among the Seneca, but later given a new name, Sagoyewatha. As with the Iroquois, there was a wide variety of name-types among the Cherokee. The first example that comes to mind is Attakullakulla and his son, known as Dragging Canoe in English (though I doubt he or any of his "Chickamauga" followers would have used anything but his Cherokee name). Anyway, I will try to find the source I am thinking of...maybe coffee will help my brain. I suspect the more well-known (or stereotyped) style like Rain-in-the-Face, White Man Runs Him, and One Who Walks With the Stars is remembered so well because the Lakota and other Plains Indians were among the last to be subjugated and among the most romanticized since the end of the Indian Wars. By that time, the mid-to-late 1800s, practice went both ways too--Custer was called "Yellow Hair" by some of his native enemies. Pfly (talk) 18:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I just have to cite the example of Young Man Afraid Of His Horses, which, according to the article, is a translation of his real name. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:27, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

You beat me to it, I was going to post that, although the article doesn't jibe with what I have read, in that the Sioux word for horse was their word for "big dog" and the real meaning of his name was "His enemies even fear his camp dogs". The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Angela Merkel's mudra

Why is Angela Merkel often doing a kind of mudra? (search for Angela Merkel superglue to see it). I don't see any German politician doing anything similar... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.8.74.46 (talk) 14:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

It's obviously just a personal habit or mannerism. Lots of people have physical habits like that. Hers has attracted attention because she is in the spotlight a lot and because a lot of people (especially in places like Greece) dislike her and therefore want to ridicule her. Marco polo (talk) 14:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, why is she still doing it, if people is laughing at it? 88.8.74.46 (talk) 16:05, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Why does Bill Clinton point with his thumb if people mock it? Perhaps it doesn't bother her. People have lots of mannerisms, and famous people with characteristic mannerisms see those mannerisms show up in caricatures of them. It doesn't mean they care... --Jayron32 17:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

In her hakina mudra (Sanscrit) or "that which brings joy" position, Merkel's five fingers represent the elements of the cosmos. The tip of the thumb represents the center of the fire element The tip of the index finger is the center for the air element. The tip of the middle finger is the center for the sky element. The tip of the ring finger is the center for the earth element. And finally, the tip of the little finger is the center for the water element. Angela needs the mudra's calming effect when she warns that Europe could be living through its 'toughest hour since World War Two'. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Believe me when a German tells us that we could be in for the toughest hour since World War Two we take it very seriously. -- Q Chris (talk) 09:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Chris: people don't know what you are talking about, when you say 'we' or 'us' on the Internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.205.34 (talk) 18:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

what does this mean

Hello, have received this text and I do not know what they could mean! Can anyone help me?

It's dem, veed deur bebyffeet, uh, hoommeeggburds 'n meelky veys, doooohhhh, It's dem, hurde-a yuoor sea shells, doooohhhh, Bloo oooot de-a beeg veeck, It's dem, it's dem, it's dem,

Nu nut yuoor beetemins, doooohhhh, oor peelloo oor muneecle-a, uh uh uh, dees oone's dgoost reeteuoosness helff fooll 'n lugeecel meunveboohll remute-a ebsuluut, 'n noohehe-a t' gu, boot oonerd 'n uperd, clesp croons gruoond de-a heert, uh, let trunsmeesshoon cummess, hellu, guudbye-a derk, Reel i vundeh is dees ell meteheeel, Dees cun't be-a heee, de-a leete-a is tuu dooll De-a furss teeme-a i spuke-a moost hebe-a beee

it duesn't luuk leeke-a un ice-a scoolptoore-a... oor dues it, dooh...uh...? iff i reel peyeed ettenshoon teeme-a voodd mube-a festeh 'n festeh, lundscepes 'n stetes ooff netoore-a voodd gellup 'n seenk beff'e-a me-a, uh uh uh, 'teel ell ves steell 'n un oorcheed ne-a instunt, uh, oone-a reech vheete-a boorsteegg oorcheed stuud in chunnels 'n de-a reebehs deep beloo beooty, greemece-a, uh uh uh, flee-a, uh uh uh, suools dun't neeed shelteh, neteebe-a veboohll smehts redeeetigg druoogh shune-a, uh uh uh, vhet's scereed smell seete-a, a sveemmigg preezm's grey cure-a vheech oone-a veell iheck a deffeenishoon f' sheeh bleess 'n set its sembeless seessere-a 'n oobboohjeck veed preede-a doon gently beff'e-a a glube-a ooff dgooje-a 'n grooje-a in oopee f'oom...i deenk... nu oone-a, uh uh uh,hoondreds ooff duoosunds ooff chetteheegg seelbeh feceed munkeys screech und feend dem fesceenetigg, elduoogh noohehe-a t' be-a fuoond oon de-a peheephehy ooff, uh uh uh uh uh, sume-a geneheshoon, hooh i'm nut femeelier veed zee, dooh uhh, tehm,

bueelid tu a creck, heppy noo, uh uh uh uh uh uh, vhu'll be-a burd in hund, uh uh uh uh, i'be-a beee mooteeletid tryeegg, teecheegg myselff preffehess, techneeke-a 'n ecceptebeeltiby, it seems yuoor sun is ooff cunsoomed, uh uh uh uh, bueelid tu a creck, vhet du yuoo meun dehe's nu ooer, dooh...uh...? ell de-a reshoons, dooh...uh...? suoond de-a elerm, dehe-a moost be-a a stooevey, a dreep, bure-a, uh uh uh, a creck 'n a treeckle-a, uh uh uh, suun de-a hooll gedeheed its budy, und dey ell droon t' meet veed a green, steeck 'n hunkehcheeeff, uh uh uh uh uh, emeed zee, uh uh uh, flooeboohreegg doost ooff zee, irrr, crussrueds, doooohhhh, dun't peteh oooot oon me-a noodroost yuoor feest intu zee, IRRRR, soonset, uh,

textoore-a veedin zee, uh uh uh, fuutpreents 'n un ind etup zee, uh, zee veend, uh uh uh uh, i feel leeffleeke-a...sumedeegg sumedeegg t' crevl oon, soonleet smell, a vree beneed zee, IRRRR, sueel presess beyund vells, doooohhhh, ert is ibehyvhehe-a, uh uh uh, i reffoose-a t' knoo vhehe-a, uh uh uh, i vundeh t' knoo vhehe-a ert is, doooohhhh, ibehyvhehe-a i vundeh t' knoo vhehe-a ert is, doooohhhh, ibehyvhehe-a i vundeh...

next teeme-a i'm bured, uh uh uh uh, de-a mun's gueegg doon i'll st'p oon unyune's broonbeg 'n loonch...vhee dey're-a nut luukeegg. it's nut eckooel bed rep, i dgoost dun't feel it, uh, dehe-a i seeed it. Um de hur de hur de hur. Cloddy Hans (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks like someone trying to spell a heavy central continental European accent. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 15:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(ec)I can't tell all of it, but much of it is understandable if you read it aloud, for example "it duesn't luuk leeke-a un ice-a scoolptoore-a" would be "it doesn't look like an ice sculpture"--Jac16888 ^Talk 15:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

http://www.allthelyrics.com/lyrics/dose_one_boom_bip/its_them-lyrics-1249180.html Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 15:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

That's pretty impressive dude!!! Richard Avery (talk) 18:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

This looks like it's a piece of text that has been run through the Dialectizer, many times, each with a different dialect. It's too heavily dialected for me to make sense of it right now, I would have to take more time to take a closer look at it. JIP | Talk 18:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it looks someone already figured out what it means. JIP | Talk 18:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Tapir in da house

Malayan tapir

Would a Malayan tapir be able to get into a normal house (say a 1870's terrace), ascend the stairs onto the first floor, and then, at a later point, descend the steps to the ground floor and leave the house again without any damage to the tapir or house? Harley Spleet (talk) 21:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure, if the door is open and the stairs aren't too steep -- see the picture. Looie496 (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if the OP is considering having one as a pet.

And I wonder if they would make good pets or if they would be trouble. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the OP woke up in the night and found a tapir in his/her room and (s)he is trying to work out if it was real or a dream Richard Avery (talk) 08:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Military mail and supply lines

Are the supply lines delivering military mail to war zones typically kept separate from those that are of enough strategic importance to potentially be targets of an attack (e.g. those carrying food or munitions), at least in the case of high-value insured mail? NeonMerlin 21:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know: military orders, intelligence information and post etc., are sent to together by the fasted possible route and means of transport (i.e. often by air). So I suppose they are kept separate in that sense. --Aspro (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

November 23

what to do when new family throw away valuble documents that eventually mean changing everything we ever knew of?

and also we are never told the truth about it and have to make educated guesses about absolutely everything even who we really are! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bombdiggydeathstar (talk • contribs) 00:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• You may be interested in archive local history and family history. It is actually quite surprising how many trustworthy document sequences survive—in particular governments regularly hold series of documents on people in relation to tax, military service, births deaths and marriages, and similar document sets. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what "new family" refers to in the title of this section. Bus stop (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I would guess that means the family which adopted the OP, who then disposed of the birth-parent records. StuRat (talk) 05:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

And following on from that assumption... Depending on where you live and/or where you were born, you might have the right to see your birth-parent records once you reach a certain age (often 18 years old). Astronaut (talk) 05:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Glowing mammals

Are there any mammals that glow? 58.109.24.198 (talk) 02:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

There has been at least one mammal that has been made to glow (apparently now there are a few other species that have been treated in the same way). I'm not sure there are any naturally glowing mammals, though. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

There are none mentioned in our list of bioluminescent organisms. The closest thing to bioluminescence some mammals have developed naturally might be tapetum lucidum. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:17, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

It's said that horses sweat, gentlemen perspire and ladies glow. Ladies are mammals. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Most definitely. Edison (talk) 15:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Are there any other proven ways of causing a mammal to glow? 114.74.186.102 (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Does the perfect amount of a fine wine or whiskey count, lol? Heiro 19:56, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Something that has been observed in birds might be possible in mammals too. Around 1897 there began a series of reports of mysterious, glowing entities bobbing about low in the night sky in East Anglia. Several subsequent investigations, observations and encounters between about 1908 and the early 1920s demonstrated that the phenomenon was due to owls (several specimens were actually obtained) with patches of luminous feathers.

It was theorized that the owls (mostly Barn owls) were nesting or roosting in tree holes contaminated by "phosphorescent" or bioluminescent fungus (there are several kinds, some poisonous, notably Armillaria; some of the owls involved were clearly in poor health, one indeed was found in a dying state) which had transferred to their feathers. Similar instances were reported from Ireland and Spain. For full details see 'The Luminous Owls of Norfolk' by David W. Clarke on pp 50–58 of Fortean Studies Volume 1, Ed Steve Moore, John Brown Publishing, London 1994, ISBN 1-870870-557. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.23 (talk) 20:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

This must be an example of a glowing mammal. (The box says that the cat food "makes the fur of your cat glow".) JIP | Talk 20:30, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

(And the last frame has "at night" as stage directions, and "go away" in its speech bubble). ---Sluzzelin talk 21:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I thought it would be obvious from the context, once the reader understood that the cat food made the fur of the cat glow. JIP | Talk 21:50, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes; if you believe the adage: "Horses sweat, men perspire and women glow". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:23, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Those who read threads will have already encountered this adage up above. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

First female head of state of an African country

The main page today says Ellen Johnson Sirleaf is the "...first democratically elected female head of state of an African country". Was there an earlier female head of state of an African country (obviously, not democratically elected)? Astronaut (talk) 05:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Cleopatra? Rmhermen (talk) 05:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

And Nefertiti may have ruled quite a bit earlier than that (whether she ruled alone is open for debate). StuRat (talk) 05:42, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I meant in the modern political sense rather than ancient royalty. Though don't restrict it just to the title of "president" either. Astronaut (talk) 05:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

If you count Madagascar as African (and the 19th century as not ancient), Queen Ranavalona I was quite well known. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.65 (talk) 05:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Queen Elizabeth II was head of state of South Africa until 1961. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth II was also head of state of independent Nigeria from 1960-63. Today she isn't head of state of any African nation. The unrecognised state of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) claimed Elizabeth II as their Queen in the late 60s, but she didn't accept this (since Britain refused to recognise its independence until it gave blacks equal rights). --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Commonwealth realm has more info. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

If we are going to include English queens ruling over African colonies, we can surely go back further to Queen Victoria. However, I don't think the English had any African colonies back in the time of Elizabeth I. StuRat (talk) 05:16, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Portugal did. Ceuta was theirs until it was Spanish. So in Isabella II of Spain might count. Although she was a contemporary of Victoria. --JGGardiner (talk) 06:21, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The question is about independent countries, not colonies. Hence the British empire in Africa doesn't count, but the Commonwealth realms do. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

This isn't an exam. The question was actually somewhat vague which is why StuRat was able to muse about British Africa under Victoria, which predated the creation of African dominions. I just pointed out that Spain also had African territory and a Queen at the same time. That's why I was careful to say it "might count". I would also suggest that Spain's 19th Century African territories were only "colonies" under certain definitions and not others. Kind of like suggesting the Kola peninsula was a Russian colony and not merely Russian territory in Elizabeth's time. --JGGardiner (talk) 05:30, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Zewditu I was Empress of Ethiopia from 1916 to 1930. The article describes her as "The first woman head of an internationally recognized state in Africa in the 19th and 20th centuries". Not democratically elected, but interesting. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Carmen Pereira was the first female president from Africa. And the only one so far, except Sirleaf. --Soman (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Hatshepsut. She was preceded by other female monarchs but they were short-lived and they served only as regents/interim rulers. Hatshepsut's rule was longer and she ruled with full power as a male pharaoh.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 17:42, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

You missed the fourth line of this thread..... Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Oops. LOL. Was wondering why Nefertiti and Cleopatra were mentioned but not her. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 17:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

November 24

Mustard Oil

Is Mustard Oil considered "good oil" (meaning less saturated fat) or "bad oil" (meaning more saturated oil) and how in each case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.105.195 (talk) 01:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The wikipedia article titled Mustard oil has a breakdown of the different types of fatty acid which makes it up. --Jayron32 01:27, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

You would also need to know the ratios of the various fats of other oils, and have a concept of what ratios constitute 'good' and 'bad', to identify where on the spectrum mustard oil lies. Some information in this table - {{Comparison of cooking fats}}, and there are a range of foodstuffs, including oils, linked to from this page and which'll tend to give you values for each of the fats. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:03, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect School colors on schedule page

When I view the Pepperdine Waves basketball page for this year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011-12_Pepperdine_Waves_men%27s_basketball_team), I notice the colors on the roster are grey and white. When I check into the roster box, I see that it says teamcolors=y. When I look at the Pepperdine Waves page, I see the colors are blue and orange. So my question is why aren't the team colors showing up correctly on the school page? Every other WCC school doesn't have this problem. I can't find anything that's listed different on the school or the schedule page. Is there something that needs to be adjusted, will it not add the colors for a few days, or is there something else I'm missing? Bigddan11 (talk) 03:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't look as though anyone regularly serving as a virtual librarian on this Reference Desk is able to answer (or even understand) your query. These Reference Desks are really intended for factual queries about the world in general. Yours is more about a technical problem or anomaly with Wikipedia itself. You are more likely to get an answer - or corrective action - through asking at the Help Desk (which is about how to use and edit Wikipedia) or on the Technical Section of the Village Pump (which is for discussing aspects of how the site works). Both of those, by the way, are linked from Wikipedia's front page in the same area as the link to the Reference Desks. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.12 (talk) 23:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

You never know who might be passing...

That page uses Template:CBB roster/Header - if "teamcolors" is set to "y", it will use the colours listed on two other pages, corresponding to the "team" parameter which, in this case, is "Pepperdine Waves". The two pages listing the colours are Template:CollegePrimaryHex and Template:CollegeSecondaryHex. However, there was no entry for Pepperdine Waves.

I have added entries [9] [10]. I could not find any information with exact colour codes, so I used standard Web colors for blue and orange.

Now, 2011-12 Pepperdine Waves men's basketball team is displaying an orange and blue roster.

Of course, anyone can edit the pages, if the colours are not correct.

(And the first response was quite true, too; you'd be better asking this type of question over on WP:HD, in future. I just happened to see it.)  Chzz  ►  06:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Understanding river stages

So, I live in the U.S. Southeast. On the local News program, they always show a graphic on the river stages. As an amateur kayak-er, I am interested in this info...but am unsure how to interpret it. For instance, the graph might show the following numbers: "Yazoo river 18 feet / +1.2 feet." OR "Mississippi river 20 feet / -.07 feet."

Now I am pretty sure the second number is the rise/fall in the water level, but what about the first number? Is the first number the level above sea level? The level of discharge? The level below flood stage? I'm embarrassed to ask other kayak-ers about this, so any help would be appreciated. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 04:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I would think that's just the depth of the river, at a given checkpoint. Obviously the depth will vary over it's length, as it will tend to be narrow and deep in some places (possible whitewater) and wide and shallow in others (possible portages). StuRat (talk) 05:10, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

USGS has an explanation for stream stages. It's basically the height of the water surface above an arbitrary reference elevation (though it's usually the mean sea level). Geology.com also has explanations for different hydrographs.

There's an example for Devils Lake, North Dakota here. You can see the reference elevation is 1400 ft asl. The current water surface elevation is 1453.31 ft asl, thus the stage is 53.31 ft.

The + and - values are more mysterious though. Can you show an example graph? I think that's the difference between the last gauge measurement. i.e. "Yazoo river 18 feet / +1.2 feet" might mean Yazoo river currently has the stage of 18 ft, rising 1.2 ft from last measurement.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 05:55, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

What use is a baby?

Faraday was asked in the 1830's "What is the point of your work with Electricity? He replied "What use is a baby?" Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:09, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

And what is your question? Faraday is asking a rhetorical question. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:20, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Faraday's point — which I think is rather obvious — was that electricity was in its infancy and had huge amounts of future potential. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:35, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Also if you run out of fuses babies are somewhat conductive Fifelfoo (talk) 12:38, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

A young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragoust. See A Modest Proposal. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

See also Child labor, Child abduction, Baby farming, International adoption#Child trafficking or child laundering, Crack Baby Athletic Association, etc. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Is this yet another question about the purpose of life? (Hmm, I always seem to link to that via the redirect. Perhaps the page should be moved from "meaning" to "purpose", since people seem more concerned about purpose. Meaning of life#Popular views agrees.)  Card Zero  (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Too many of them is certainly a bad thing. Hence why I'm a conscientious objector to baby-making.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 20:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I'd always thought a conscientious objector to baby-making would be one who was concerned about overpopulation.--WaltCip (talk) 23:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

It's a grave concern of mine.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 03:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Faraday answered a question with another, inscrutable question. Given the date, I think it unlikely that Faraday could have anticipated even a fraction of the "huge amounts of future potential (a pun Mr98 ? I am not a pun resistor and I know you have the capacity to make them to induce hilarity.)" electricity had. Reasons: he was a theoretical physicist not an engineer, his induction experiments had led only to lab demonstrations and not to a useful machine at that time, the law

$\nabla \times \mathbf {E} =-{\frac {\partial \mathbf {B} }{\partial t}}$

named after Faraday would not yet have been brought into a unified electromagnetic theory by Maxwell who was only 4 years old in 1835, and Faraday was working with electric power sources of only low voltage and power i.e. chemical cells and the Faraday disc. Without foreknowledge of forceful electric machines, electric lighting (Edison 1879) or radio, what "baby" could Faraday have been thinking of? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps his meaning was that it is as pointless to ask why a scientist studies nature as it is to ask why humans reproduce. It is their nature to do so. --Saddhiyama (talk) 11:25, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

That interpretation sounds like the response was an impatient put-down to the questioner. You may be right. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:55, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

program,armed forces radio,1967,Christmas in Milwuakie

As a young soldier in Vietnam I listened to this program.Two young ladies presented it.Please congratulate them in retrospect. Did they continue with careers in radio? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.162.29.159 (talk) 13:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

"Christmas in Milwaukee" was apparently put together by the Rho Tau Beta broadcasting fraternity at Marquette University in 1967. The Milwaukee Journal (January 10, 1968) has this article about the broadcast: "Recording by MU Touches Hearts of GI's". I was not able to locate the names of the presenters, but someone else here may have better luck. It doesn't look like Rho Tau Beta is still active, but presumably there is a student society under some new name which is heir to their activities and – possibly – records. The University's archives have a file on Rho Tau Beta as well ([11]), but I don't know whether that would be useful or not. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Crown prosecution service in UK extradition cases

Hi,

Why did the UK Crown prosecution service instruct the barrister for a Swedish prosecution authority in the High Court Assange extradition proceedings (related to an alleged crime which AFAIK was never prosecuted in the UK)?

Thanks. Apokrif (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I think it's just the name of the case that's misleading; really, the respondent is the CPS because the case is whether or not the CPS should extradite him to Sweden. That's how I see it anyway. It is certainly common for the case names to be misleading in some fashion, not sure about the specifics of this case. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:29, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The extradition proceeding was not a determination of guilt or innocence. The Swedish prosecution service sought to present their case for extradition of Mr. A. in a British court. In this case the UK prosecution service was not itself a party since there was no crime in the UK, but it was qualified to direct the presentation of the Sweden's case to the court. N.B. Wikipedia is not qualified to advise in legal matters such as extraditions where proceedings are mainly based on precedent. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:33, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand how this constitutes advice. You indented that as a reply to me, I wonder whether you clarify if there is any disagreement. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with your statement "the respondent is the CPS because the case is whether or not the CPS should extradite him to Sweden". The CPS in this case is just a servant of the court and has no opinion to be heard. My nota bene is meant to be a disclaimer that says no one here can or should try to offer guidance on this legal matter (the indent is not significant because that just restates the desk guidance heading). Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to an appropriate professional. I hope that clarifies what I posted. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:00, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The party to this case is "The judicial authority in Sweden", not the Crown pro-se. The CPS acts because it is mandated to do so by the Extradition Act 2003. The act requires that it show the alleged acts would constitute offences in England and Wales, the CPS are obviously the qualified people to do so. What is unusual is that the CPS doesn't have client in the same way it usually does (the crown) but acts statutorily (see this Times article). A significant effect of that is that the normal test for prosecutions, whether the public interest is served, is not a factor it can consider (the Times writer is essentially saying it's running on autopilot). Another issue is that the UK bears the cost of extraditing someone to another country (at least another European country); this has led to some countries seeking to extradite their nationals from the UK for penny-ante issues (see this Economist article), things the CPS would likely not consider a cost-effective use of public money if they had the choice. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 21:16, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Dutch pastry

I recall, some years ago, having a Dutch pastry at this time of year (ST Nicholas' eve). It was like a sausage roll, but with marzipan instead of sausage-meat, so sweet, and served hot any idea what it was? Its not in Category:Dutch confectionery nor Category:Dutch cuisine. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:35, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe something like the Gevuld Speculaas I'm eating right now (here's the picture from the nl:Speculaas article). Didn't know it was supposed to be eaten warm. Astronaut (talk) 18:42, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, but no, that's not it (though it looks delicious). What I mean looks like this, only longer. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

You mean like a cannoli but eaten warm? Cannoli are an Italian desert, traditionally, but perhaps there is a similar Dutch desert... --Jayron32 20:09, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The thing in the picture doesn't look like a cannoli. It looks more like a sort of pasty or pierogi. --Saddhiyama (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Not really. Pasties are turnovers (halfmoon or triangle shaped, and the size of a hand). Pierogis are smaller and roughly similar to ravioli or potstickers. The OP linked a cylindrical tube filled with meat, open at both ends. They also indicated that the desert they sought was a similar tube filled with a sweet substance like marzipan. A pastry tube filled with such cream is a cannoli in Italian. A similar french pastry may be an eclair though the tube is of a very different pastry than a cannoli is. Neither of this is like a pasty; if someone told a desert looked like a sweet pasty I would send them to Turnover (food) and if they said it was a desert shaped like a pierogi I'm not sure what I would have mentioned. But a cannoli is the same shape as the food they showed. --Jayron32 00:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

The image from Andy looks nothing like a pieróg (singular of pierogi), and if it's supposed to be even longer it would be something entirely different. More of a cheburek (rather the Ukrainian variant), but these don't come sweet, they're only savoury, but it's still way off. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:19, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

My comparison was not so much the actual exact look but a reference to the type of ingredients used, namely a shortcrust pastry with filling, which creates a soft crust, as opposed to the cannoli, which applies a dry pastry that hardens into a crunchy shell when baked. The comparison to the eclair is probably more apt. --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Banket would be my guess. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 03:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I asked a Dutch colleague whether my Gevuld Speculaas should be eaten warm. He said no, but then described something similar called Speculaas Staaf as being "filled with almond paste, shaped like a sausage and usually eaten warm". Astronaut (talk) 10:35, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Vitamin K

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page.

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis or prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page. --~~~~

TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:29, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Trucks or lorries in private personal use?

Are there any trucks or lorries in private personal use, where someone just likes to drive one, and does not provide transport as a professional service? JIP | Talk 22:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

• Chris_Eubank#Career_beyond_boxing - "a huge American Peterbilt 379 truck cab". --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

It's got a personalised number plate as well (shame he can't spell).[12]--Aspro (talk) 23:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

It reads like that because it's not actually a personalised number plate but a normal one that happens to almost spell his name, i.e. CHR 111 S. --Viennese Waltz 06:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Some Vintage lorry enthusiasts keep on trucking in Ireland. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I have occasionally attended Steam Fairs and Rallies (What, no general articles? Oh, there's this one.) in the UK, like the Great Dorset Steam Fair. As you'll see in that article's Exhibits section, 'vintage' commercial (internal combustion) vehicles are also shown, including lorries, and something not mentioned are the exhibits of old military vehicles from WW2 or sometimes earlier, usually restored to their wartime condition, which also include trucks/lorries. Most such vehicles appear to be owned and maintained (in roadworthy condition for the most part) by private enthusiasts: I believe a few owners may sometimes defray some of the not inconsiderable costs in time and money required by their hobby by making their vehicles available for period TV and film shoots, but for them this does not amount to a profitable commercial enterprise. Some owners, typically Old Age Pensioners unconstrained by job commitments, spend their summer travelling from fair to fair in the UK and Europe as a sort of extended caravan holiday. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.12 (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Some people use them as campers or to haul horses, boats, etc: [13], [14] 75.41.110.200 (talk) 03:12, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

November 25

deal or no deal

if u won the million dallors on deal or no deal how much of it do u realy get — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gar113 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

It depends on how much you would have to pay in state and federal taxes (assuming you mean in the U.S.) --Jayron32 03:29, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

According to "Financial Secrets of Game Shows: Advice From Past Winners", about 60% or $600,000 after taxes if you're an American (unless you're in some weird tax bracket). Maybe all of it if you're a Canadian on the American version, after a tussle with the IRS that is (see Doug Hicton in the same article). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:38, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

(EC with all above.) This seems to be an unclear question. If you win a million dollars normally you would expect to get 1 million dollars (unless it's a spam win). At most, perhaps the transfer to your bank will result in some small fees taken from the original amount which for such a large win would be too insignificant to be relevant. Some countries may tax such wins but this will depend on the country. Do you have the situation in a specific country in mind?

The UK obviously does not use dollars so I guess you aren't referring to the UK version. The New Zealand version never offered a 1 million prize so I guess you aren't referring to that version either. The Australian version did once a while ago but since it's not the norm I would guess you're not referring to that version either. The Canadian version did have a million dollar prize although it's no longer produced. In countries like Australia [15] [16], and I believe Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom [17], normal contestants aren't generaly subject to income tax for one off wins. (Professional contestants and those who receive appearance fees may be taxed.) The Canadian version article specifically mentions the winnings are tax free.

The older US version did have a $1 million prize. And I believe the US does subject even such one off wins to income tax. However, I'm not sure if the company actually witholds an amount for taxation purposes. Possibly they do not in which case you will still get 1 million dollars or thereabouts, but also a hefty tax bill later. Since the US has a progressive income tax structure, the precise amount you will pay will depend somewhat on how much you earned besides the prize, if you earned nothing else the amount is likely to be less then if you have an annual income of $1 million before the prize.

Nil Einne (talk) 03:58, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

The above ref suggests state tax may be witheld in the US, and seems to imply federal tax may be witheld from the Doug Hicton case although isn't so clear on that point. Nil Einne (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

If you were a UK citizen or a visitor from Canada, Australia etc. temporarily in the USA, would you get the full million? Conversely, if an American citizen wins a million in the UK version, are they liable for state and federal taxes in the USA on their British winnings? Dbfirs 10:35, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Video for Deploying Lifeboats

Hey everyone, I'm writing a book that deals with an incident where the characters are trying to deploy lifeboats. I was wondering if anyone could find a video or instructions how to deploy lifeboats. Now, I don't mean the lifeboats where they are deployed and then a smaller boat brings the inflatable boat to safety. I mean these ones, that are lowered into the water and the people inside boat themselves to safety. A video of the actual lifeboat being lowered into water doesn't really help. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! 64.229.180.189 (talk) 03:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I just Googled for 'how to deploy a lifeboat' or 'how to deploy lifeboats' (and other combinations with verbs like use or utilise... have you tried this? I also found pages of manufacturers, like this or this with specs and others. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

This video shows what not to do with a lifeboard (premature emission!). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Both movies that I have seen dealing with the Titanic have shown lifeboat operations in some detail. If I remember correctly, Titanic (1997 film) has a better depiction than A Night to Remember (1958 film). Astronaut (talk) 10:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Expansion project

Why don't you sell a version for portable devices to generate income? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.24.43.83 (talk) 10:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Probably because due to Wikipedia's generous licencing terms, there's nothing to stop other people offering free versions of Wikipedia for mobile devices, and it would be bad business to try and sell something that other people could offer for free. If you want to use a mobile version, you can still make a donation. (Edited to add: Also, Wikimedia's goal is to produce educational content available as widely as possible[18], and this would not be met by selling access when it could be provided for free.)

However, this discussion probably belongs on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) rather than the Reference Desk, which is not for discussing Wikipedia but for answering non-Wikipedia-related factual questions. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I hope you mean that the Ref. desks answer Wikipedia-related factual questions.

Such a service called "Ask Adam" is already provided in Denmark, Norway and Sweden.Part translation from Norwegian: One of the mobile services being marketed is "Adam"...You enter a subject keyword to 2236 (Adam) to receive 3 messages with information about the keyword. Answers are collected from Wikipedia and they are sold for 5 crowns each. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2011 (UTC)