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

February 7

Reynolds High School Troutdale Oregon

From Facebook profile in Wikipedia for Reynolds High School in Troutdale, Oregon: Please also include the School logo prior to 1989. It was the Reynolds Lancers in your Reference files so we graduates prior to 1989 can use it in our profiles on different web sites. Example: On my facebook page I list Reynolds as my High School. The Currant Raiders Logo shows up from your wikipedia site. I am not sure how to change it to the Lancers Logo, it is in your info when you click on Reynolds High School. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.90.113 (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

This is not really a reference desk question, but FWIW the article in question: Reynolds High School (Troutdale, Oregon). Your points would be better raised on the article talkpage, although admittedly that may see little traffic. Re the second part of your issue, I can't immediately see where the Lancers Logo can be found; we may well not have access to the historic logo. And even if we did add it to the article, it is likely that your Facebook profile will still display the present logo as that would remain the lead image. --jjron (talk) 10:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

In other words, as of this date, the expected behavior is Facebook raisin the currant logo. Whether we should have both logos in the article or prune it down to just the one, I can not say, although more illustrations can keep an article from being too dry or shriveling down to nothing. :-) StuRat (talk) 10:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Regional Newspapers

I have been using your search engine, to assertain details of a Regional newspaper I used to work for in the early 60's. The newspaper was called the Manchester Evening Chronicle, based in Withy Grove, Shudehill, Manchestr, England, UK. Each time I enter the title,the response is "Do you mean, Manchester Evening News", and proceeds to give me pages of info about said paper. How can I access the information I require. Many thanks94.192.153.222 (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, there seems to be a misleading redirect here. Using our advance search feature, I can find a few articles that seem to refer to the Chronicle, but we don't have an article on it: [1]. Sadly, though we like to convince ourselves that we have an article on everything, it seems that in this case we don't, and possibly should. I'll see if there is an appropriate place to suggest this, and also see if I can get the misleading redirect removed. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

It seems OK that Manchester Evening Chronicle redirects to Manchester Evening News. http://www.withygrovefellowship.co.uk/history/ says: "Then in 1961 the Manchester Evening News gained control of the Evening Chronicle and the “Chron” closed in 1963". Other sources agree. http://ketupa.net/gmg2.htm says: "1963 merger of Evening News and Evening Chronicle as Manchester Evening News & Chronicle". PrimeHunter (talk) 03:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it - we should probably mention the merger in the article, if we are going to have the redirect. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Why do I smell a population conspiracy with China's vehicles?

In certain cases, situations, etc., even the 1-child policy may not be doing enough, especially about the poor being public charges. Moreover, I suppose that the 1-child policy gets circumvented all the time in various ways and places.

Therefore, does China decide to take population growth control some steps further in a passive manner: By not enacting life-saving safety features on domestic vehicles that imports get to enjoy? (If not, why wouldn't they take care of this obvious problem?)

(I suppose that they don't worry about the imports' safety features because anyone who can afford them would, natch, be in the interests of the government to keep alive. Buick and Volvo may be a few of the safest examples around.)

Just look at these videos. If they don't deliberately forego mandating safety advances on domestically-produced vehicles to keep the population under control, then why don't they put them up already?

^{(One good sign is that the expressways still have speed limits. However, if there is a conspiracy after all, perhaps they didn't remove them because it would get obvious around the world.)}

Watch how Chinese cars crash. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 07:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

A government, or any person or entity, cannot conspire with itself. I sort of get your drift, but I doubt "conspiracy" is the correct label. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 07:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Grossly simplifying things here but each extra piece of safety equipment will (generally) increase the production cost of the car, which will increase the price for the end consumer. Perhaps the Chinese government are currently focussing on getting more people into car-ownership and then in the longer term will worry about car-safety? Having seen some of the factories out there (on tv) it would seem it's not just car safety where their health & safety regulations are somewhat different to most of the western world. ny156uk (talk) 07:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Also note that back when the Western world first got into cars big time, they were rather unsafe, too. StuRat (talk) 09:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Death is expensive to an economy; killing your citizens is very different to simply reducing the birth rate. First of all, most adults who die in car accidents will be workers, and their death will leave the business in the lurch, reducing the company's efficiency. Secondly, the knock-on effects of bereavement will harm others - from an economic perspective, bad for their work or education (there are a fair few papers that investigate this, although none are Chinese. Here's one from the Phillipines). Thirdly, not everyone involved in a crash will die, and bad car crashes (particularly in cars without airbags) can lead to paralysing head and neck injuries - if your goal in reducing population is to make living more sustainable, making people unable to work would be counter to your goal, since they'd keep consuming food and energy but wouldn't be able to contribute as much back to the economy. As an aside, although China's car death rate is fairly high (slightly old data), it doesn't seem to be any worse than the other BRIC countries, and it's very low compared to most African or Middle Eastern countries. Smurrayinchester 11:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

It's also worth considering that mass usage of automobiles is rather new in China and as a result there are quite a lot of patchy practices and regulations. My favorite article on the subject is here (not all online, alas, but you can Google it) — pretty amusing/horrifying from a Western perspective. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Among the main goals of China's government is to satisfy its middle class. Rising living standards is the government's main source of legitimacy in the minds of its public. That may include investors in Chinese car manufacturers, which realize a higher profit if not burdened with safety costs. It almost certainly includes middle-class consumers, who, though middle-class by Chinese standards, have much lower median incomes than North Americans and Europeans. These people want to be able to own a car. Safety enhancements could raise the cost of a car above their reach and make them less satisfied with their government. Marco polo (talk) 16:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Come on — have you ever known anyone whose life was saved by an air bag? Maybe you have, but at most one or two, right? Out of all the people you'd have had a chance to find this out about? Safety equipment has an impact on individual lives, but virtually none on demographics. --Trovatore (talk) 19:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

You will, however, likely know someone who has been in some form of road-accident...and whilst they may not have died if the safety features on their car weren't there, car safety doesn't just save lives - it reduces the severity of injuries you can expect to happen. I, for instance, have a friend (driving) who was hit side-on by a car doing about 30mph . They walked away a little shaken up but entirely unharmed. Had their car not had things like airbags, seat-belts, pre-tensioners, side-impact bars, crumple-zones etc. we can quite safely assume that they may have had more serious injuries. Sure, they probably wouldn't have died but that's not the only role of car safety... ny156uk (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Car safety equipment does all kinds of good things. It does not, however, noticeably affect population statistics, which seemed to be what the question was about. --Trovatore (talk) 21:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Good point, wasn't thinking from population perspective! ny156uk (talk) 22:51, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

There are some confusing things here that should be disentangled, lest someone get the wrong impression. One is whether traffic safety equipment works. It does work. It does affect how many people die in accidents per year. The second question is whether that matters over the total population. This is somewhat misleading. There are two statistics to pay attention to here. One is the amount of traffic deaths per so many people in the population; the other is how many traffic deaths per so many automobiles. China has OK "per population" statistics. This is probably because it has a huge population, most of whom don't drive. (They rank about the same as India here, and many other Asian nations. They are still pretty high IMO, though, considering the number of folks who don't drive, and the total number of people in the country.) China has far worse "per automobile" statistics — those who do drive are roughly 30X more likely to die than drivers in Europe or the United States. (refs). The car safety, local driving practices, and infrastructure probably contribute to that difference rather handily. That being said, I don't think the number of traffic related deaths is going to have a huge demographic impact, which is indeed what the OP was asking about. But one should not draw the conclusion that safety equipment doesn't save lives, or that traffic accidents are uncommon. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Historical US news and world report civil engineering

Does anyone have historical versions of this ranking: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/engineering-doctorate-civil I can only find that year. --Waseekla (talk) 08:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

This was the best site I found. I couldn't get the proper archives but Berkeley uses the U.S. News and World Report rankings to keep track of its own position and includes the top 10 from 2005-2011. I hope that this is some use to you. Biggs Pliff (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Uninhabited islands

Are there any uninhabited islands that could sustain long-term human settlement without substantial external support? Most of the one's I have looked at so far, have had no permanent fresh water, no flat land for farming, no easy access from the sea, or have been way too cold. Astronaut (talk) 12:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry this doesn't answer the question but I'm looking for a clarification... How can an island not have "easy access from the sea"? Dismas|^(talk) 12:03, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

It may not have a suitable harbor, or even a beach. Some islands are cliffs on all sides. I believe Henderson Island (Pitcairn Islands) is almost like this, although people managed to live there once. StuRat (talk) 21:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

And the whole "uninhabited island" thing. Certainly there are intentionally uninhabited islands that are reserved for wildlife. Something more about the conditions you are setting would be good, too, is the Crusoe allowed to possess farming materials or must he live off the land? Crusoe had the advantage of an impressive amount of salvage from shipwrecks.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:10, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

depends on what is meant by “uninhabited”. Alarbus (talk) 12:29, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Inaccessible Island is actually accessible for the sufficiently determined, and has been inhabited. It's presently a nature reserve. Acroterion (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

By "no easy access from the sea" I mean an island that is surrounded by steep cliffs. For example, the islands of St Kilda are substantially surrounded by steep cliffs that make access very difficult. (edit) I'm thinking of the kind of island on which you could be shipwrecked, but it is nice enough that you might decide to not seek rescue, and without officious park rangers coming by to shoo you off this island paradise. Astronaut (talk) 12:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Well there's Taransay (if you don't mind a few holidaymakers). See also Lucy Irvine. Good luck!--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Tetepare Island looks promising - it had a thriving native population until the mid-19th century. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Bikini Atoll - if you don't mind an early death from cancer. Roger (talk) 14:17, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

That's overstating the risk rather a lot. In 1997 – fifteen years ago – the estimated exposure for an individual living on Bikini and eating a locally-grown diet was 15 mSv per year. That's significantly more than typical background in most (but not all) places, but it's still not a huge dose. Nuclear industry workers in most jurisdictions are limited to an average of 20 mSv per year of occupational exposure (with a maximum of up to 50 mSv in any one year). Pilots and aircrew who regularly fly the New York to Tokyo polar route receive about 9 mSv per year from increased exposure to cosmic rays.

If you spent thirty years on the island eating the local food, you'd pick up a total of about 0.5 Sv, which adds roughly a 2% chance to your lifetime risk of dying of cancer. (For comparison, the 'normal' lifetime risk of dying from cancer is about 23%; the radiation exposure on the island would bump that to about 25%.) I'd be much more concerned about the lack of timely access to modern medical care. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

It's also not clear that any cancers would be "early". The probable development time for that sort of thing is usually 20-30 years or so. As far as risks of living on an uninhabited island go, that's a relatively non-risky. --Mr.98 (talk) 19:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Scotland has a number of islands that held often substantial populations in the past, but have now been abandoned. Having sustained settlement in the past (in some cases for over 1,000 years), they could presumably do so again (conservation status notwithstanding). This site has quite a good 'shopping list' of islands, and our article List of islands of Scotland has a list of uninhabited islands to look at as well. This site should explain about the access rights, if you were thinking of setting up on one of these islands, but the site seems to be down right now. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 15:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The Kerguelen Islands southeast of Africa have a lot of space, a flock of sheep as well as feral sheep, reindeer and rabbits, native vegetation and a bearable climate. Yet it has no permanent population due to its isolation from everywhere else. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:41, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Clipperton_Island is a good candidate. --Kvasir (talk) 18:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

There are a number of uninhabited islands in the Great Lakes and Lake Nipigon which could sustain a small population of sufficiently vigorous hunters/gatherers/anglers, if not for government regulation precluding settlement. Vein, Wilson, Simpson and St. Ignace of the Casque Isles near the north shore of Superior are all large and sustain populations of Cervidae and hares--and wolves and coyotes and foxes in turn. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 04:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

And, incidentally, are also good examples of islands without easy access from the sea. Warofdreams talk 11:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I suppose that depends on what you mean by "sea". See definition 4 on: [2] --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 12:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

As the OED notes, this use is obsolete, except in the phrase "inland sea" and in certain proper nouns. Warofdreams talk 12:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

And as an "inland" sea is exactly as you see Lake Superior described nowadays, e.g.: [[3]]. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 20:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Although it appears "freshwater sea" also occurs: [4] [5] [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atethnekos (talk • contribs) 21:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Driving without lights

The question above about Chinese car safety reminded me about a question I was going to ask as a follow up to my earlier question about driving in China. One of the links provided in response to my earlier question, pointed out that some drivers in China drive at night without turning on their lights. I have heard the same said of drivers in many other parts of the World (usually developing countries). Why on Earth would anyone, whether in a developing country or not, drive at night without turning on their lights? Surely this creates an unacceptable hazard to the driver and to other road users including pedestrians, donkey carts, cyclists, or truck drivers. Yet it seems a common enough occurrence that some travel advice sites specifically mention this as a significant hazard and reason enough to not drive at night (refs: [7], [8], [9], [10], etc). Astronaut (talk) 12:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like colloquial bullshit to me or at most hyperbole. These warnings seem to all be of wildly different countries with the supposed rationale that the people in question are too primitive to know that turning off the lights does not save fuel.

In all my years in a remote portion of a third world country, I have only encountered a handful of instances where people were driving without lights at night. And those cases were obviously not by choice; more than a few were driving slowly on the shoulder of the road instead, and a couple were valiantly using flashlights as makeshift headlights. In all these instances, it was quite obvious that the reason was because their headlights malfunctioned in the middle of nowhere and rather than stopping in an unfamiliar place, the drivers opted to go on in the hopes of finding a repair shop (which may be miles away). Streetlights are not quite as ubiquitous in the highways of developing countries (especially in rural areas), it's really quite impossible to drive here at night without lights so there's absolutely no reason I can think of where anyone would do this by choice.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 14:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Does turning off lights really not save fuel? I mean, I'm sure it doesn't save much. But the energy to light them has to come from somewhere, and it's not from waste heat like the heater. I suppose it might make you drive differently, which could swamp the effect from the extra resistance in the drive train, but I'm not sure in which direction. --Trovatore (talk) 22:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

If each headlight uses 55W and we make a generous assumption for the other lights, instrument lights, and occasional use of high beams, we might get to 200W. 1 HP about equals 750W, so they might use about 1/4 HP all told. Most cars normally use only a fraction of their rated horsepower, but the added load would still be under 1% of normal power generation. Acroterion (talk) 22:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

[11] and [12] Apparently in the UK in built-up areas with sufficient street lighting, only the side lights need be on. Collect (talk) 14:28, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

That Brit Highway Code Lighting requirements (113-116) cited by Collect is different from US driving laws I seen, which require headlights at night regardless of whether you're in a city with street lights. If the alternator or other battery-charging circuitry in a car fails, a charged battery (perhaps charged from an AC powered battery charger before the drive) can power the ignition for a very long time. In battery statistics, this time is the "reserve capacity" (as opposed to the "cold cranking amps"). This rating might be an hour and a half or longer. If loads such as headlights, fans,air conditioner and a radio are operated, the battery may be so drained that it cannot run the ignition after a fraction of that time, leaving the passengers stranded. Doubtless some motorists have chosen to drive home without headlights rather than paying for a tow truck, emergency road service, a motel, etc. , even if they run the risk of hitting something or being hit. Some cars have the safety feature that the headlights go on automatically when it gets dark, or they are on in a less bright "running light" mode whenever the car is running. Also there is the possibility as Obsidian mentioned, that the headlights might have suddenly failed, and the motorist thought it better to drive without than to stop and wait for daylight, or leave the car and walk, if they did not have a celphone and AAA available. Maybe if they are poor or stupid, they let the headlights degrade until high beam and low beam were burned out on both sides. Even then, there are "fog lights" on some cars which would provide some illumination. I've always thought it a good practice to carry in the car emergency kit fused test leads with which I could power up a headlight directly from the battery if the headlight switch or relay failed. There are "urban legends" of street gangs whose initiation requires the wannabe member to murder some motorist who flashes his headlights at their car, which is driving with the headlights off. See Snopes . Edison (talk) 16:32, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I have heard of this in two instances. The first, and probably more reliable is from Lakota Woman by Mary Crow Dog, where Lakota young men would apparently drive at excessive speeds without headlights on unlit roads at night. It's been a little while since I read the book, but if I remember correctly, Crow Dog states that this arises out of a desire for the men to prove themselves, as they could no longer adequately demonstrate their ability as warriors. The second is from WikiTravel, stating that in Georgia (I may be mistaken) it's the "macho" thing to do to drive without lights. In any case, I can no longer find mention of headlights in that article, so either it's the wrong one, or someone has removed that piece of information. Likely it is just a rumor. Falconus^{p t c} 17:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Driving at night without headlights is not uncommon in the former Soviet Union, though usually only on well-lit streets. Many people say that they forget to turn them on. Some say that they are trying to conserve gasoline or battery charge. There is a widespread notion that you can drain your battery if you are stuck in stop-and-go traffic with your headlights on. Some are simply not concerned whether others can see them or not. One additional problem is that, in many cars, there's no light sensor, auto headlight shutoff, or intelligent electronics of any kind. If you manually turn on the headlights and then forget to turn them off before walking away from the car, either headlights or some peripheral lights (parking lamps, taillights) might stay on, and the battery could be dead by the time you get back.--Itinerant1 (talk) 22:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

There's also that as well. The things western motorists take for granted - tow trucks, motels, 24-hour [franchised] repair services, etc. do not exist or are rare in newly or non-industrialized countries outside of large cities. Tow-trucks and repair services particularly. I've never even seen a tow-truck in my life, LOL. The closest I've gotten to are helpful passing motorists who offer to tow a stranded vehicle (usually long-haul truck drivers who regularly help other truck drivers in the same circumstances). And sure, you can get the number of your neighborhood mechanic, but chances are you'll be hours away from them when you do break something and they'll probably be asleep. Meanwhile, you face the choice of leaving the car (and have it stolen), staying in it (and possibly get mugged or worse), flagging down passing motorists (who will almost always never stop at night), or try to make it to the nearest place you can leave it safely at least (and possibly get in a pileup). The anecdotes of drivers without headlights do not seem to mention whether they encountered them in cities or in highways though.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 17:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Western motorists also take for granted that when the mechanic says "it's your headlight relay" they will then walk over to a shelf and take a new one out of a box, or call NAPA to have one delivered in an hour or two. Franamax (talk) 18:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Talking of taking things for granted, the NAPA that is the National Automotive Parts Association (as opposed to the Pakistani National Academy of Performing Arts or the National Academy for Prisons Administration, for example) services the USA, Canada, Mexico and parts of Latin America and the Caribbean. There's more to the West than those places. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Then there is the Readers Digest anecdote of a German technologist right after World War 2 who was nabbed by US soldiers while driving at night without headlights, using infrared vision technology, while attempting to get from the Soviet zone to the US zone of occupation. Edison (talk) 06:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Scotland has it's fair share of idiots who drive either without headlights on or with one broken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.142.228 (talk) 08:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

A friend of mine experienced this near one of Egypt's Red Sea resorts. A small convoy of taxis were ferrying passengers along a desert road at night and they took it in turns to be the front vehicle, which was the only one to have its lights on. Apparently, that wasn't the only hair-raising aspect of their driving. --Dweller (talk) 16:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Identify book and author

My professor was telling us this anecdote about a book he'd read (he said it was "The Fourth Horseman" by Stephen King, but I searched and found no book of that name by any author, let alone King) which was about a lab somewhere in Texas (?) that researched in new strains of viruses, meant for biological weapons. It dealt with how one day, there was a malfunction, and two of the infected guards left the area, and contaminated the people in the city by sneezing. Does anyone know which book he's actually talking about? Apparently, each short episode of contaminating a new person ended with the phrase "and he sneezed" which showed the first symptoms of the virus becoming active in the host's body. 117.226.141.77 (talk) 19:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like The Stand to me; there's an essay about it entitled The Fourth Horseman in "The Science of Stephen King: From Carrie to Cell, The Terrifying Truth Behind the Horror Master's Fiction" (ISBN 0471782475). --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 21:09, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I saw the movie, but didn't read the book. I liked the start of the movie, which was about science gone wrong, but not the end, by which time it morphed into a supernatural fight with the Devil. They did seem to get a bit carried away with how quickly the disease killed, though. In the lab they had people drop dead instantly upon exposure. Is the book the same ? StuRat (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

The book is much better, because it is mostly about the two "forces" (Randall Flagg in Vegas and the Old Lady in Colorado) "drawing" people to them. The "final battle" at the end is much less of a thing in the book; the TV movie version condenses all of the various journeys the characters take; so it emphasizes the ending more than the book does. --Jayron32 06:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The book doesn't fall for the instant-death trope, but the latency and incubation periods for the disease are suspiciously – implausibly – short. The book's first victim is symptomatic perhaps five hours after exposure and dead within less than a day of exposure. Exposed individuals tend to be infectious within very brief periods of time after exposure. Aside from irking the readers who know something about infectious diseases, I think that King made a mistake in passing up the extra bit of suspense that a more realistic latency period could have offered. I haven't seen the film, but the book relies quite heavily on the annoying supernatural stuff, too. (The major criticism I would have is that King violates an implicit promise to his readers—the story spends a lot of time setting itself up as a science fiction disease-outbreak thriller, but it turns out that's all just window dressing and plot machinery to arrange the final battle between mystical Good and magical Evil.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:52, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

What bothered me about it was that Good and Evil were both located in the U.S. It makes me wonder if someone in Juarez got called either to Nuevo Laredo or Culiacán. :) (And how about illegals staying in the U.S.?) Our data on incubation periods of various viruses don't go under a day, which seems right; at least influenza is one of the faster ones - but speedying up the replication of a normal virus is quite a trick. Wnt (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

A Canticle for Liebowitz and Swan Song are also guilty of making god and the devil American. I liked both better than The Stand though.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 07:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

February 8

Energy consumed by a smartphone?

Approximately how much is the energy per second consumed by an iPhone and/or other smartphones? And how much energy can the battery of these cellphones store at a time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.119.79.70 (talk) 02:01, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Depends on the state of the phone. If it sits idle in your phone doing nothing except waiting for someone to call you, it may consume on the order of 20 milliwatt. If you're watching a video or playing a game, it goes up to 1-2 watt. The battery contains on the order of 5 watt-hours. --Itinerant1 (talk) 06:47, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

My Killawat plugged into my iphone at full charge is 0.0... meaning the trickle charge is miniscule. The charge on larger items, like a laptop, tend to hit around 13 watts or so... maybe i'll run down my iphone all day trying to figure out an answer. Shadowjams (talk) 11:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

If you use it for it's "primordial" purpose and make an actual phone call with it, the power consumption could go as high as 3 to 4 watts. Roger (talk) 12:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I would hope so since trickle charging a lithium ion (including lithium polymer) cell is a good way to make it blow up. [13] [14] Nil Einne (talk) 21:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

A few ballpark figures for the G1:

Startup: ~1.2W

Idle, dim backlight: 0.3-0.5W

Idle, full backlight: 0.7-1.2W

WiFi: 0.5-2.0W on top of other functions

Source 131.111.255.9 (talk) 14:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

0.5W on idle is too high. That level of consumption could make sense while the screen is on, but it wouldn't last more than 10-12 hours on one charge if it spent 0.5 watt idle.--Itinerant1 (talk) 05:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hence 'dim backlight'. I did mean to include true idle, but forgot. IIRC, this was on the order of 0.01W but of course this will spike unless the radios are turned off. 131.111.255.9 (talk) 17:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

v8 s10 swap

I have a 1989 5.7 with computer and wiring harness still attached. taking out a 1989 4.3. as I was unplugging the wiring harness from the 4.3 i noticed the wires were different colors. question is. Will the 1989 5.7 wiring harrness plug into the 1989 4.3 fuse block? or do i have to chang any of the wires ? this is a 1989 s10 2wd blazer. if so what wires do i need to change ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.132.175.230 (talk) 15:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I know this is something about cars, but it would be really useful to tell us which car (make, model) and in which country. Astronaut (talk) 17:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Probably the Chevy S10 pickup truck. RudolfRed (talk) 00:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Charles A. Mercier, M.D. (1852-1919)

Can you find someone who can write a biographical article on the above person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.31.177.79 (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

No. Can you?

Joking apart, I suggest you choose a WP:WikiProject appropriate to him and ask there. --ColinFine (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

It looks like he would satisfy WP:BIO so I will write up an article on him. He was a noted doctor who wrote several books on criminal psychology, mental illness, and education, some of which won prizes. He rejected Lombroso's view that there were "criminal types," and argued instead that "every man is a potential criminal" if circumstances exceed his "breaking point." (from his 1919 obituary). Edison (talk) 21:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Humm, yes. Interesting. It is easy enough to find his works (long out of copyright, of course) for download [15], and a quick scan through the chapter on 'Melancholy' (something I know about from personal experience) in his Sanity and Insanity suggests that he is worth reading even now. Definitely a good subject for an article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:17, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Principal Gentlemen of Quality

At the Proclamation of accession of Elizabeth II, some mysterious "Principal Gentlemen of Quality" were mentioned. Who were they exactly? -- Kvasir (talk) 17:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Although those who issued the proclamation described themselves as "the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of this Realm, being here assisted with these His late Majesty's Privy Council, with representatives of other Members of the Commonwealth, with other Principal Gentlemen of Quality, with the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of London", most of that is merely historical hangover (from 1603, would you believe?). Contemporary account summarise the actual meeting as having been of 150 Privy Counsellors and the Prime Minister. - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 18:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I can appreciate the superfluous language used in formal circumstances like these. I'm more interested in WHAT it refers to originally -- GQs (in our modern sense) who were upstanding members of society or someone with a respectable professions? --Kvasir (talk) 18:38, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it's just a catch-all term to describe anyone else that was there. A gentleman is a member of the nobility (although not necessarily titled - the titled ones fall under "Lords Temporal") and "Principal" and "Quality" are just saying they are important gentlemen, as evidenced by the fact that they were there at all at such an important event. --Tango (talk) 20:38, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I have tried and failed to find any other references to "Principal Gentlemen of Quality" outside the context of an Accession Council. I think, therefore, that they way this should be read is like this:

WE, therefore, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of this Realm, being here assisted with these His late Majesty's Privy Council, with [as well as] representatives of other Members of the Commonwealth, with [and] other Principal Gentlemen of Quality, with [namely] the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of London, do now...

The representatives, the aldermen and the citizens of London would not necessarily have been Privy Councillors, but would have been Gentlemen of Quality. Although, as Jarry1250 says, the phrase doesn't really have a contemporary application now. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't think a citizen would necessarily be a gentleman. A citizen has to be a freeman (that's what freedom of the city originally referred to), but there are levels between serf and gentleman (serfdom was abolished about 30 years before James I acceded to the throne, so actually by then everyone was free - they weren't all gentle, though). --Tango (talk) 01:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

"Gentlemen of Quality" is a frequently-used term. This book notes that lords lieutenants and their deputies were the "prime gentlemen of quality in the counties". Warofdreams talk 11:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Progressing on those lines (I fixed your link btw, hope you don't mind) one might argue that the "Lieutenants, deputy Lieutenants, Sheriffes, justices, & all Maiors, Bailiffes, Constables, Headboroughes, and all other Officers and Ministers" referred to later on could be reasonably included in Gentlemen of Quality - or more, a subset of them, rather than all of them, which would have been impossible to organise. - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 12:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Excellent answers! Thank you all! -- Kvasir (talk) 19:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

February 9

trains

what website was it to buy train tickets in the UK, I know there is one, but I can't remember what it is called. I thought it was the national rail enquireys site, but apparently that only shows the times and prices. 148.197.81.179 (talk) 01:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

[16], for one. There are others. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Beware these sites, you can sometime get a better deal from the train line direct by telephone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.142.228 (talk) 07:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I presume you mean, telephone the train operating company direct. The Trainline is the site Tagishsimon pointed at, and I can recommend it. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I do not recommend it; it adds a booking fee on to all train fares. Any train operating company website will sell you train tickets with no booking fee, and if you look at one of the operators which covers your journey, they may have some special web-only offers. Warofdreams talk 10:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

It adds a booking fee of £1 per transaction (you can buy many tickets in one go, and pay only once). Going via specific operators is fine, but it can mean many different transactions for long journeys and/or restrictive tickets. - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 12:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Plus the fact that you'd have to know which train operators did which routes - you'd even have to know who they are, and if you are not in the UK (or unfamiliar with the UK train system in such details), you wouldn't have a clue where to look. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, National Rail Enquiries will tell you the operator for your chosen services. But I agree it's a hassle, and that's why TheTrainline sells so many tickets every year (many of them to me). - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 12:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Any train operator will sell tickets for any journey. The only reason to find one which covers your journey is to check for any special offers; if that's too much effort, just pick any one (such as East Coast, recommended by someone below). There's no advantage to paying the booking fee and using TheTrainline. It seems to me that they sell so many tickets principally because they advertise heavily, and lots of people don't realise that they can get the same service with no booking fee elsewhere. Warofdreams talk 13:14, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

http://www.eastcoast.co.uk/ don't charge any booking fees and you can book tickets to and from anywhere. Much better than thetrainline.com SmartSE (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Do they do integrated tube tickets? (Also, the £1 you gain from no-booking fee gets charged back to you if you choose to have the tickets posted to you rather than printing them yourself.) - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 13:17, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

According to our thetrainline.com article, "it provides the website services for 14 of the 18 UK train operating companies operating under their own brands". I've certainly heard before that several of the TOCs' websites offer an identical service to thetrainline, without a booking fee. 130.88.73.65 (talk) 13:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep it does - you can get a tickets to/from any zone 1/2 station for only a tiny bit extra than going to a main terminus. SmartSE (talk) 12:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

http://nationalrail.co.uk has a train search engine that will divert you to the appropriate train company when the time comes to buy a ticket (if you have javascript and possibly cookies enabled you will not have to reenter your journey). It does not charge booking fees (unlike thetrainline). IMO the best train times website in the uk is http://traintimes.org.uk/, infinitely less painful to use than the operator sites, the trainline and nationalrail, but you can't buy tickets there. Tinfoilcat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 9 February 2012 (UTC).

Where are payments for blood & plasma donation the highest?

I hope to move from the US soon as it is going to pot, but no matter where I am, I'd still like to donate blood and plasma. Having been in Germany in toddlerhood from 1987-1990, there's no donating until a reliable screening test method for vCJD is developed. However, this restriction is, AFAIK, US-specific.

What nations would not have said restrictions (that still have English as a majority language), and how much would I be paid per donation? --129.130.102.230 (talk) 21:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

In the Netherlands you don't get paid at all for donating blood/plasma/platelets. Jarkeld (talk) 21:12, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Nor in UK. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:29, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Nor in Finland. Actually, I find your interest in how much you'll get paid for donating blood as a primary interest in earning money, which can be dangerous both for you and the possible recipients of your donated blood, not to mention unethical. It's called "donating blood" instead of "selling blood" for a reason. JIP | Talk 21:46, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

You get 20 Euros for your "time" spent donating plasma in Austria. I guess you didn't learn any German since you were a toddler when living in Germany, but I don't think the language would be that much of a problem. 109.97.136.39 (talk) 22:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Here in the U.S., plasma donors get paid a minimum of $20 for each donation, and up to $60 if they are regular donors. Plasma donors producing Anti-D get paid up to $100 each, but you need to be of a negative blood type for that. Generally, you can only donate twice a week.--WaltCip (talk) 22:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

See also Blood donation. If any of this can be sourced, it could be added there. BrainyBabe (talk) 02:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't come to Australia. You won't get paid, and we don't want any more greedy bastards here anyway. HiLo48 (talk) 06:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

more money for different blood types? I'm AB-, can I export my blood to america for a nice profit? 79.66.96.108 (talk) 10:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I would imagine the majority of paid blood donations come from people who are desparate, rather than greedy, HiLo 48. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

That's at least partly true, and leads to sad stories of "donors" presenting themselves at multiple clinics in order to be paid for their body fluids far more often than is good for their health. I don't like much at all about the idea of being paid what is still strangely called a donation. HiLo48 (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

February 10

More illegal to hack the server of a bank

• Background: When I worked in a bank, and we got laid off, the regional boss warned us against stealing anything on our last day, because he said that stealing from a bank is a federal crime (he said it tongue in cheek, but was somewhat serious as well). Therefore, stealing from a bank, even a call center, was a worse crime than stealing from a normal call center.
• Question: I've noticed Anonymous doing a lot of hacking recently. Strangely absent, however, is them hacking into banks; my time in the call center showed me that banks aren't always as careful as we'd like to think when it comes to data protection. So I wonder: is it ipso facto more of a crime to hack into a bank than it is another institution, even if the the result of either is the same? (e.g., stealing nothing financial, or stealing the same amount of money).

Of course, this is not in any way, shape, or form a request for legal advice. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

According to the FBI [17], they have jurisdiction over bank robbery. I don't know if that is just the traditional "put the money in the bag" type crime or if it also extends to other crimes involving banks. RudolfRed (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

It applies to most, if not all, bank thefts. It's certainly not limited to Hollywood style robberies. The federal bank robbery statute's somewhere in Title 18... I read it once... I believe there's a dollar limit but it's remarkably small, and you'll also find that there are other factors that could make an otherwise petty crime a federal one. That said, there's nothing "special" about federal versus state crimes. Most prosecutions are for state crimes. However there are some reasons that federal crimes tend to be seen as more severe, not the least of all federal sentencing policy. Shadowjams (talk) 07:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Anonymous did do some stuff regarding Bank of America [18] but as explained in this source, it didn't really win a lot of points in the media. Note that a 'true' Anonymous action is political, not just a bank robbery - conversely, the goal of a hacker stealing money should be to collude with the victim to keep the crime out of the press, and indeed unreported, so that the victim doesn't suffer the bad publicity of being hacked into and the hacker isn't at risk of jail. Wnt (talk) 08:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Im the states all banks are insured by FDIC, so any theft from a bank is a de facto theft from the federal government, making it a federal crime by default. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Not all banks are FDIC insured, in theory. Federal banks must be, but some state financial institutions do not require FDIC insurance. In practice I'm not sure I've ever heard of a bank that's not FDIC insured. However the "de facto" logic isn't how criminal statutes are written, and it's irrelevant since there's plenty of other statutes that cover it. Shadowjams (talk) 08:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Most important people

Who were the 10 most important/influential people of all time? --108.227.30.246 (talk) 03:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

That's entirely subjective, and so outside the general remit of the Ref Desk. You could always consult a search engine, however. — Lomn 04:00, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Rather than rejecting the quite appropriate question, you might check for poll results as to the "most important" or "most influential" people of all time. Such polls may suffers from "recentism." A listing by Michael Hart put Muhammed at number 1, Newton at 2, Jesus at 3, Buddha at 4, Confucius at 5, St. Paul at 6, Ts'ai Lun (the supposed inventor of paper) at 7, Gutenberg at 8, Columbus at 9, and Einstein at 10. (Thomas Edison only rated number 35.) Edison (talk) 05:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow, what timing. I've just been saving this newspaper article about the manipulation of polls to share with students at school who are studying such things. The last part of the article is about a Time magazine poll on this very matter, which identified Kemal Ataturk as the most influential person of the 20th century. Kemal who, you ask? Read the article. HiLo48 (talk) 06:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Adam and Eve were quite important. If we want to be a bit more scientific, Mitochondrial Eve. (Image if you made a time machine and went back in time to kill her!) Mitch Ames (talk) 12:56, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Then we'd have 7 billion other people here instead of us. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Define "most important". Most popular (the US president is always the most popular person at the time of his inauguration)? People who's contributions resulted in long-term revolutionary changes? And define "influence". Is it a long-term impact or short-term impact? John Locke? He is considered the central figure in modern philosophy. So his impact is long-lasting. Gaddafi? He was all-in-all in a tiny country for a specific period of time, but now nobody wants to know who was Gaddafi. He was influential, but has no long-term influence. As pointed by Edison, most of the lists suffer from recentism. So it is important to a create a list based on the long-term impact of the individuals. Here is what I'll say:

1. Muhammad - well you know his influence

2. Jesus - ditto

3. Galileo - father of modern science

4. Newton - most influential scientist of all time

5. Darwin - it is because of him we (Homo sapiens) know who we are

6. Gutenberg - it is because of him the enlightenment became a reality

7. John Locke - the central figure in modern philosophy, the father of liberalism, the dominant ideology of modern world

8. Adam Smith - father of modern economics

9. Karl Marx - the most influential among political theorists, his ideas divided civilization into two conflicting ideological camps

10. Hitler - responsible for the most destructive war in history, which in turn altered the dynamics of international politics, led to the creation of the UN

But again, it is entirely subjective, no survey in the world can be taken as a final judgement to create a list of "most influential people". --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 13:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

And yeah, Mitochondrial Eve, as said by Mitch Ames, was the most important human being to have walked on Earth. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 13:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Indulging this kinda pseudo intellectualism has got to be more impressionistic on a young mind than all the nuanced, realistic, and accurate history that we argue over here all the time... and then why amongst this do I find out that HiLo is a teacher. -_- Shadowjams (talk) 13:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't quite see the point of that post. I will emphasise that my point in using the article about the survey was to demonstrate how meaningless such polls are. HiLo48 (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, my point wasn't about you, but in agreement with you. But re reading that I see that I didn't say that very well. I meant no offense. Shadowjams (talk) 21:43, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Cool HiLo48 (talk) 21:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

That reflects something of a (popular) misunderstanding about the role and significance of most recent common ancestors, including so-called Mitochondrial Eve (mtEve) and Y-chromosomal Adam (yAdam). Our article on mtEve gives a pretty good introduction to some of the more popular misconceptions, so I won't belabor them here. Among other essential points, mtEve was not the only female alive on Earth at her time, not the only female of that era who has living descendents, and not the only source of our genetic material; she is merely the youngest human being from which we are all descended following only matrilineal lines of descent. (yAdam, who probably lived a hundred thousand years after mtEve, is the equivalent for patrilineal descent. Humanity's most recent common ancestor – the last great-great-great-great-grandparent that we all have in common, and from whom we all still carry at least a little DNA, probably lived less than four thousand years ago.) And don't forget that mtEve wasn't the only woman of her era to carry essentially the same mitochondrial DNA; her mother, and her mother's mother, and so on shared it as well. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

It would be a more fruitful intellectual exercise to try and come up with a useful definition of "important", than to actually try and make up lists. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

(EC) I can imagine that there have been lots of biologically important individuals, including original sources of diseases (see index case) and mutations. It would be difficult to identify them, though. Actually, that makes me wonder if the identity of Mitochondrial Eve is ever likely to change - maybe somebody alive now will one day be the most recent common ancestor of all humans. 130.88.73.65 (talk) 14:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

How about you have your students make a list, and then justify/debate about them. The concept may blow some minds, but justifying positions tends to be the touchstone of honest debate, if you're into that. Shadowjams (talk) 14:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree justifying positions does not have any logical value, but if we consider religion to be the most important part of human culture, then Jesus must be the most influential person (Christianity being the largest religion). What I really don't understand is why The 100 places Muhammad and Newton before Jesus. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 15:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I suspect it's because there is independent biographical evidence of the existence of Mohammad and Isaac Newton. --TammyMoet (talk) 15:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

(Does size matter the most?) Jesus is such an interesting example, given that there isn't a whole lot of evidence that he actually existed as one individual human being who did all of the things the Gospels said he did. Not trying to debate that here, but it points to the difficulty of this sort of assessment: if Jesus did not exist, and instead a pastiche of myths, then what does that say about the "importance" of an individual person, if we think Christianity is "important"? What matters more — the actual physical presence of the individual, or what people credit to them afterwards, or do in their name? --Mr.98 (talk) 20:41, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

More than a page of the book is devoted to defending the choice of ranking Muhammad above Jesus, the section starts out thus:

Since there are roughly twice as many Christians as Moslems in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), it was St. Paul who was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proseolyter, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament.

In the following paragraphs, he argues that Muhammad was responsible for the theology, ethical and moral principles of Islam, proseolyting the new faith, and authoring the Moslem holy scriptures. He finds it probable that the relative importance of Muhammad on Islam has been greater than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity. He also emphasises the fact that Muhammad, unlike Jesus, was a secular as well as religious leader, and the driving force behind the Arab conquests. The author states that there is no reason to believe that the Arab conquests would have happened without Muhammad. Jesus is ranked as #3, St. Paul as #6. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 10:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the clarification. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 11:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, this question is rather subjective and can be anyone's personal opinion. However, people like Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, Hitler, Einstein or Newton will usually be in such lists. Time Magazine's Person of the Year is a good place to find possible candidates, but recentism can affect it. Basically, your mileage may vary when it comes to this, but for me, the most important person is Jesus, followed very closely by Muhammad and Hitler. Or perhaps, the most important person is God? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

God is a "person"? (I've still really no idea why Einstein is often named on these things. He was a smart guy and relativity is important for understanding physics, but arguably so are a lot of scientific theories that actually affect our lives more meaningfully from day to day. Nobody lists Faraday or Maxwell, for example. And before you say, "but the atomic bomb!," Einstein didn't invent the bomb, he played a very small role in its creation, it certainly would have been invented had he never lived, and you don't even really need any relativity to make sense of how the bomb works.) --Mr.98 (talk) 15:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

as mentoned above, St Paul was rather influential. What about George Eastman, though, developed cleap, easy to use electronics, mass advertising and catchy slogans and the idea of creating new improved models every few months, basicly the entire modern consumer industry. 79.66.102.225 (talk) 20:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

The person or people who invented The Pill had a huge impact on society. HiLo48 (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps also Tim Berners-Lee, since his invention practically changed the way our world worked and how communications worked. Also, James Watt; thanks to his invention, rapid advancements in technology became possible, even if they later didn;t use his invention: without him, it's likely we would still not have much technology, we wouldn't have Internet, cars, electricity, or this very website! It's too bad no one mentioned Jimbo yet... Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 22:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Or Guglielmo Marconi (radio); or John Logie Baird (TV). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 23:17, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course! Without the latter we Australians wouldn't have The Logies. He WAS important. HiLo48 (talk) 23:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Roch Voisine

I didn't know where to go to get you some information...but you might want to do some more research about the singer Roch Voisine. I just went to his Wikipedia page and noticed that you mention his wife. What isn't on the page however, is that the name you have is his SECOND wife. His first wife's name is Deanna, and he has a few girls with her. I know this because my mom was a friend of hers for years...and she would call and let us know where Roch was and how the kids were. I know there are alot of people in the world and it is hard to know every aspect. i just thought you might want to update his Wikipedia site on here and have the corrections put in. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.70.197.47 (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah the thing is, there is no "you" who writes Wikipedia, it's a joint effort by thousands of individuals. That can include you, if you want it to. You can edit the page yourself and correct the error if you wish. The problem is though that personal knowledge like yours is not really suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. In order to say on his page that Deanna was his first wife, there needs to be a reference in a book, magazine, newspaper or professional website saying that. If you can provide such a reference, please do so. --Viennese Waltz 16:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

atocha size of largest emerald

: ) 

Could you please tell me what the size of the largest emerald that was recovered from the Atocha shipwreck off the florida keys? mariaelena — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.63.149.40 (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

According to this site, "the largest cut emerald from the Atocha", "The Atocha Star weighed 25.87 carats before it was cut." After cutting, it now weighs either 12.73 or 12.72 carats (the site gives both figures). Clarityfiend (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Airline ticket abbreviation

What does "St: OK" mean? It's after NVA: date, NVB: date, and BAG: 1PC. My Google foo keeps me pointing to pages where st. is just street... 88.9.108.139 (talk) 22:27, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

"Status OK" I think, meaning that the booking and flight are all in order. --Viennese Waltz 22:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense, thanx. 88.9.108.139 (talk) 00:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

February 11

Countries or cultures were notable people who keep their year of birth a secret are common?

This is similar to two identical questions I asked before. I know in Japan, keeping years of birth secret is quite common with celebrities, with examples including Mell and Kaori Utatsuki (but there are many more examples: singers, mangakka, illustrators, seiyuu etc.). My question is not about why they do it (that was already answered before), but in what other countries have a significant number of cases like it. Although on the Japanese Wikipedia only Japanese people who have unknown birth years are listed, on the Italian Wikipedia, people of any nationality seem to be included (although almost only Italian and Japanese people are listed, and in the case of the Italians, most of them don't have articles here on English Wikipedia, and those that do have articles have years of birth listed). This implies that the practice is common in Italy as well, although since most of the people I checked have no article here, it's hard to confirm. I also know a few celebrities in my country who keep their age secret (Allan K is a good example, I think), but the practice is fairly uncommon and almost all mainstream celebrities have known birth years. Which other countries aside from Japan and Italy have a large number of notable people that keep the year of their private? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 09:39, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It has been common practice in the UK for ladies to keep their ages secret, in fact it may still be considered rude to ask. In this day and age it's harder for us to do this, particularly with birth registers now being online: if you know the name at birth and location of birth you can track the actual birth down if the name is uncommon. For example, a cousin of mine took seven years off her age, and her family registered her death under her adopted age. It wasn't until I started doing the family history that the "mistake" was uncovered. I know this doesn't address the "celebrity" part of your question, but it may shed some light on the practice. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Not addressing your query re cultures (sorry), but happening to have learned this only today from a book I'm reading, I'll mention that Austrian racing driver Roland Ratzenberger pretended to be 2 years younger than he was for professional reasons. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.247 (talk) 13:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, Ratzenberger's (may he rest in peace) year of birth is known. He changed it to be more attractive to racing teams, which may be the same reason why many Japanese celebrities keep their ages private. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 14:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

As – re Ratzenburger – is explained in the article I linked (as well as the book in question, Malcolm Folley's Senna versus Prost), which is why I linked it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.194 (talk) 11:23, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Age requirements in gymnastics says it's not unusual (I know, not the same as common) for elite child gymnasts to age themselves up (or rather their coaches/parents do this) in order to compete before reaching legal age requirements.--184.147.128.151 (talk) 20:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, there was a big controversy in 2008 about some gymnasts from mainland China whose papers were allegedly doctored to make them appear 16 even though they were 13 or 14.--Itinerant1 (talk) 22:29, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

No, this is about keeping ages private, not changing them. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 22:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Just for the record, celebrating birthdays was not common in early modern Western culture until about 250-200 years ago. The date may have been known (although often only the date of baptism would have been recorded), but it was not celebrated and many people would not have been able to tell their own exact age. --Saddhiyama (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

This is pretty common in US acting circles as well--for instance, an actress sued the Internet Movie Database for listing her age. Here's an article about it. Meelar (talk) 00:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

But she appears to not be a well-known actress, and if she had an article here, it would be deleted as non-notable. I don't know any current mainstream actors like Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp whose year of birth is unknown, but I know that the practice was quite common in the early days of Hollywood. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Electronic checks

These days, in the US, when you write a paper check, they can apparently change it to be an immediate electronic check, without the approval or notification of the check-writer. Thus, instead of getting a cancelled check back at the end of the month, you get a cryptic EFT entry, which may not even include the name of the payee, much less any comment on the check explaining what it's for. This also prevents any possibility of stopping the check, and you lose the interest you would have accrued before they cashed it. They've essentially changed a check into a debit card transaction. This is in Michigan. So:

1) Can you request that a bank not do this ?

2) Do policies vary by bank on this ?

StuRat (talk) 19:33, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

This is due to Check21. I don't think you have any voice in the matter, but you could call your bank and ask. RudolfRed (talk) 19:46, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that first, you can get an image of the check in almost every case, and second, the technical name of the type of transfer is an ACH transfer. Banks really prefer the method, although it does eliminate some float from a lot of checks (which is why businesses like it). Shadowjams (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Three late 14th century crucifixes in Piran, Kotor and Split, The Adriatic Coast

I have twice visited Piran in Slovenia to see the late 14th century crucifix in the church there. It is said to be one of three, all by an unknown carver; the remaining two being in Split, Croatia and Kotor in Montenegro. The Piran crucifix is the only one I can find on line and from a very brief article, refernce is made to the general whereabouts of the other two, i.e. Split and Kotor, but not in sufficient detail

I've spent ages, years actually, surfing the web for references to the other two and wonder if you can help, please? Very occasionally I get the tantilising word, 'crucifix' in a heading, but no follow-up when I open the article. I simply want to know where I can visit the remaining two crucifixes. Thank you. Brigid M. 87.242.191.235 (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Gothic Sculpture in Istria mentions that the Piran crucifix ..."displays a striking similarity to homogeneous Dalmatian examples, especially to the crucifixes in the cathedrals in Split and in Kotor." Knowing that they are in the cities' cathedrals should help locate some more information. Warofdreams talk 00:30, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The only crucifixes mentioned by the Cathedral of St Domnius (Katedrala Svetog Duje) page are; "Next to the doors of the cathedral, one can see a late-Gothic polychromed crucifix carved by the Split cathedral canon Juraj Petrovic in mid 15th century. In the chorus, there is another big polychromed Crucifixion (on the cross in the form of the letter “Y”)." Alansplodge (talk) 11:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

See also Old crucifix in Kotor cathedral.jpg. The Kotor, St Tryphon's Cathedral page says "But most stirring is a large wooden crucifix, its image not quickly forgotten and mystifying in that its provenance is another unknown." The article infers that it is in the reliquary chapel of St Tryphon. Alansplodge (talk) 11:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

February 12

Finding an alternative way to contact someone

How would I go about finding other site that this person might be on? --Imaskinaquestion127 (talk) 02:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried searching "Darius Almighty" on Google? You may be able to find good results. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Results of said Google search notwithstanding, you (Imaskin) might struggle if the name is a pseudonym that the person uses only on Fanfiction.net. If this is the case, obviously the best way to get in contact with his real-life persona would be to message him directly on that website.--WaltCip (talk) 03:29, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

It is a little more complicated than that. He hasn't updated his story in a while so I don't think he has logged in for about the same amount of time. His profile that I linked has a link to his DeviantArt account here. --Imaskinaquestion127 (talk) 05:03, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

See if his DeviantArt is active. If not, tough luck. Besides, why do you want to find him anyway? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 05:34, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

His DeviantArt account is no longer active. The point of the question was to figure out a way to assemble all available information into something I can use to contact the person (i.e., another artist site, Facebook, etc.). --Imaskinaquestion127 (talk) 06:33, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The question now is how can I assemble all available information into something useful? --Imaskinaquestion127 (talk) 15:03, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Harassing emails

Hi

I hope I am at the right place. To ask a simple question is made very complicated by you.

I have someone from IMEI - +27730235682 harassing me with blank emails: All it says is "Keep this message From: IMEI:352146748412546" When you open the message it is blank. This comes through in the middle of the night and anytime during the day. At the moment I am sitting with 139 messages for the past 3 months.

Please advise why I am receiving these emails and also please if you are able DISCONTINUE sending these notifications. It is harassment and I am now forced to report this to the Consumer Council if this harassment does not stop.

I trust you will be of assistance or redirect me to the correct department to assist me with this dilemma.

Regards

Ronelle Van Rooyen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luluthia (talk • contribs) 07:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

1) I added a title to your question.

2) Why do you think emails from "IMEI:352146748412546" are coming from anyone at Wikipedia ?

3) I suggest you block e-mails from that address. If you will tell us which e-mail system you use, we might be able to tell you what steps to take to block it. StuRat (talk) 08:01, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Googling Keep this message From IMEI yields a number of results, so it seems that other people have had the same problem. I can't vouch for any of the answers given on the different forums, though.Sjö (talk) 08:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

This is nothing to do with Wikipedia. From a search with Google, it appears that Keep this message From: IMEI is part of a message that some Android phones with anti-theft software send out when a new SIM is inserted. Since +27730235682 appears to be a South African mobile phone number, it might be worthwhile trying to phone them to find out what's going on. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 12:42, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Facebook

Is there any tool by which I can track the people (other Facebook users) who visit my profile in Facebook? --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 08:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

No. As Sophos says, "Remember, functionality does not exist in Facebook to allow you to find out who has viewed your profile. So many people are being tricked into believing that it might be possible, that Facebook has had to include a firm denial in its FAQ." Any post on Facebook which claims to offer this functionality is at best wrong, and at worst malicious. Sophos regularly posts on this subject; like here and here and here. I recommend subscribing to their blog if you or any of your Facebook friends feel tempted to sign up for any of these Facebook 'tools'. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 13:33, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Mike! I asked the question because some days ago I saw some wall post in a Facebook page claiming such functionality. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 13:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Take care with such claims! They could be a way to trick you to install some malware. 212.170.181.95 (talk) 13:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Normally the idea is not to get you to install malware as such, but to entice you to take a survey or sign up for a premium-rate text service. At the same time you often hand over some 'rights' to your Facebook account, allowing the scammers to post things without your permission, and make it look as if you wrote it. Malware is a little different, being software that is installed on your own machine, with or without your knowledge, for the purpose of finding out your password or gain access to your data. What SupernovaExplosion has come across is more like phishing, in that the aim is to get you to willingly hand over sensitive information by making you believe you will get something in return, e.g. 'OMG!!1!!!1 lolz i haz seen hoo luk at my facebook klik here 2 see who lukin at ur profil!!11!!1!!'. Or something... - Cucumber Mike (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you need to have a valid passport to leave a country?

Imagine you lost yours, but are flying back with your ID to your country. Would the authorities normally let you out? 212.170.181.95 (talk) 13:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Some countries will, some won't. Those countries that practice exit control (which means they keep tabs on everyone leaving) are much more likely to. Some countries require an exit visa (which is usually attached to a passport); Pakistan, for example, has an Exit Control List which prevents a few of its nationals a few named people from leaving the country. In practice this may be harder, as some countries hold carriers like airlines responsible if they deliver someone to the airport who doesn't have a passport - so airlines will insist on a passport (or an equivalent document, such as a temporary travel document) before they let someone board. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 14:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The airline wants to know that you are admissible at the end point of the journey. If you present documentation that assures them of that, you will be allowed to board. Because they may be required to get you out of the country where you have been refused admission. In addition, if your journey passes through the US, you will need to show admissibility there, as you can't "transit" through the US.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

If you are an EU National travelling between two countries within the Schengen Area then you can travel with a national ID card, and should not be required to have a passport. NB - Some airlines (e.g. Ryanair) will require a passport anyway. And ALWAYS check with your airline, or your national embassy or consulate if you are unsure - we can't offer legal advice here, and anything we do say may be wrong. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 14:36, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Expanding on Wehwalt's point, in many jurisdictions airlines are held responsible for checking the identification of their passengers at check-in and boarding, and can be fined quite heavily by the authorities in the destination country for allowing passengers without proper documentation to fly. Just because you're standing there with (say) a California driver's license, the airline can't be sure that you're actually eligible to enter the United States (you could be a foreign national who acquired the license while visiting on a now-expired visa, for example) and they will be reluctant to allow you to check in and board.

Different rules may apply depending on the countries involved. If you do lose your passport while abroad, your best course is almost always going to be to contact your own country's consulate to seek advice and acquire appropriate temporary passports/visas/paperwork. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:01, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Urine sample

This is a question about doctors and medicine, but is not asking for medical advice so please don't delete. I went to the doctor a while ago over something, for this question it doesn't matter what. I was asked to provide a urine sample, which I did. The problem I had is now resolved and I never heard anything more from the doctor. But I assume they scanned the urine sample, and my question is; if there was something else wrong with me which showed up in the urine would they contact me over it? Is that standard procedure? 94.223.131.217 (talk) 15:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

No one here can answer for your doctor. So call him. I trust my doctor to do that sort of thing (I go to him because he is very conscientious) but I don't know your doctor.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I make the same deduction when my GP does not report a result, since I know that if there is anything wrong he will recall me fast. It's in his interest as well as mine.--85.211.170.102 (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, they would notify you if any problem was apparent. However, they don't test the urine for every possible condition, as this would be expensive and insurance wouldn't cover it. They only test for conditions you are likely to have. StuRat (talk) 18:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

While I agree that they don't test for all conditions every time, usually a urinalysis will test for a number of diseases. This is a standardized set of tests always run the same way, part of it is just dipping a test strip in. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 19:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)