Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

January 19

Cover of the Album "Dangerous"

Anybody recall Michael Jackson's Dangerous album cover? I'd like to bring your attention to the lower left hand corner of the cover, in which you see a depiction of Aleister Crowley. Then on top his head is a cheeky looking shortie... Who is that? I'd swear I seen that guy's face somewhere (maybe Ripley's?), but I just can't put a name to that face under present circumstances. Anyone knows? Cheers. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

A number of people on the Internet seem to be under the impression that what you're calling "a depiction of Aleister Crowley" is actually P. T. Barnum (compare the image at the bottom of this page), which would suggest that the vertically challenged guy is General Tom Thumb (compare the image here). Admittedly, I'm not finding, in a Google Images search, any images of Barnum or Thumb (or Crowley) that exactly match the ones on the album cover. Deor (talk) 12:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes! Tom Thumb! Thanks a lot. Cheers, Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 13:43, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

French drawer knobs

> I bought several white procelain knobs at an antique shop that say" 6th arroundissement, Paris France, each has a variety of single letters, plus commode and vetement." I am guessing they were used for some kind of dresser. Can you help me identify them? Martha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troxell21 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you have pictures of them? It's hard to identify anything without seeing it. Also, Wikipedia does have an article on the 6th arrondissement of Paris --Jayron32 16:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

"Vetement" means "clothing", while "commode" means something like "convenience" or "comfort". I take it this is used as a euphemism for something else. StuRat (talk) 19:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

See Commode. It's a chest of drawers. RudolfRed (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I wonder whether the chest was designed for a private house or a shop? Can anyone make a guess? Itsmejudith (talk) 20:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Jaws the Revenge shark exploding

Posting this as miscellaneous because I don't know if it's more science or humanities.

At the end of the movie Jaws the Revenge, the shark eats some kind of device that is meant to give off an electromagnetic pulse. As I understand what the characters are saying, since sharks are hypothesised to incorporate some electromagnetic sensing ability into their sensory perception, the EMP will at least confuse it and at worst make it disoriented and uncompfortable. But in the film, after activating it several times the shark explodes. There's plenty of online reading devoted to the plot holes in this movie, but no one really seems to address this. 210.210.129.92 (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Direct from the article: "The film contains many scenes that are considered implausible, such as the shark swimming from a New York island to the Bahamas (approx. 2000 km) in less than three days, and following Michael through an underwater labyrinth, as well as the implication that it was seeking revenge. The Independent says that "the film was riddled with inconsistencies [and] errors (sharks cannot float or roar like lions)".[21] The special effects were criticized, especially some frames of the shark being speared by the boat's prow. Also, the mechanisms propelling the shark can be seen in some shots.[1]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.196.85 (talk) 06:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

A shark's organs of electroreception are its ampullae of Lorenzini. There's nothing explosive about them. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 16:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Our article has a section called "Ending changes" which touches on this. Rmhermen (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Guitar

Do the nylon strings of classical guitars make them easier to play than the steel string acoustic guitars? Are they pressed down more easily and with lesser pressure on the finger? 117.227.100.191 (talk) 21:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes. --Jayron32 21:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

only extra thing I would add is that because of the low tension of the strings, the action (distance between string and frets) must be higher, this means that although your fingers don't have to press so hard, they have further to push on a classical guitar. With less expensive badly made beginners classical guitars this effect can be made even worse. There is rarely a truss rod in classical guitars so they can be very affected by changes in the humidity of the air, and this can cause the action to be raised also. Steel strung guitars have a truss rod usually and are a bit more stable on the whole, and can be more easily adjusted. ---- _nonsense ferret 13:06, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll second what nonsense said; to add to it steel string guitars require more strength to play, but conversely I find them much more forgiving and more versatile; even with the difference required in hand strength the steel string guitar is usually easier to play, from a skill point of view. But yes, they do require less strength and less pressure to hold the string against the fretboard. --Jayron32 18:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

When I learnt guitar many years ago I found steel strings caused lots of pain and even cut my fingers, whereas the nylon strings were much easier on my fingers. Didn't stop me developing calluses though! --TammyMoet (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

January 20

Natural horn

What's the (written) range of a natural horn? Double sharp (talk) 02:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused by this Q. By "natural horn" do you mean a horn carved from a ram's horn, or some other material ? If so, each will have a different range of frequencies it can produce. StuRat (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

See the Natural horn article. :-) Double sharp (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Yup: StuRat, see Natural horn: "The natural horn is a musical instrument that is the ancestor of the modern-day horn, and is differentiated by its lack of valves". I don't think our article provides the answer though - it may depend on whether you include notes available by switching crooks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

What's the range available without switching crooks, then? (And what about with?) Haydn 31 has a written D6 (played as E4), which should be somewhere near the highest note. Double sharp (talk) 02:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

That's Symphony No. 31 (Haydn) for those not in the know (which included me until the penny dropped. I was thinking maybe he wrote 31 horn concertos, but that felt a little extreme.) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Here's what I understand after browsing through natural horn and some of the links at the end. Please consider checking this out further yourself.

The natural horn is available in multiple lengths. On some horns, you can change the length using crooks. The length determines the lowest note the horn can play and the "key" of notes that are easiest to play. The music notation should indicate the lowest note or "key" of the horn. For example, the notation in Symphony No. 31 (Haydn) shows "Hoorn in D". The footnote explains the lowest note of the horn is transposed to a C in its written notation. My understanding of instrument transposition is that when it is used, the sounding key of the instrument is always transposed to the written key of C.

On a natural horn, the easiest notes to play are the harmonic series of the lowest note. Other notes between the harmonic series notes are achieved by positioning a hand in the bell. The Natural Horn and Its Technique shows notation of the harmonic series, "the pitches that one may sound on an open tube", with the lowest note as (scientific pitch notation) C2 and the highest note C6. Based on that notation, I suspect that no matter what key of natural horn is used, the written range is C2 to C6. A Google search for natural horn range found The Natural Horn Today from Composition:Today which shows the same written range.

Older notation might use a different starting octave. Heinrich Domnich and the Natural Horn says "NOTE: Old notation, used by Classical composers and most composers of the period, notated horn pitches in bass clef an octave too low. New notation, utilized by Domnich, is commonly associated with twentieth century composers".

--Bavi H (talk) 15:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

In that case, then why did Haydn write the D6? Double sharp (talk) 12:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

A Google search for natural horn range Haydn 31 found Re-inventing the Classical Horn which says

Many of us who perform with period instrument groups on the classical horn play instruments that have been copied from examples made in the early 19th century[...]. The 19th century classical horn was designed to play effectively in the 19th century orchestra, at a time when the range from the top of the staff up to the 16th partial and beyond were no longer used regularly[...].

and

In this period after 1750, [...] composers such as [...] Hadyn [...] still asked horn players to play often in the clarino range above the staff, sometimes into a range that seems excessive for us as modern players. The early 19th century horn that many players have been playing as their classical instrument, can be difficult in this range, and upon examining the types of instruments actually in use at the time, the mid 18th century horn was quite a different instrument, and was much better suited to this range than the larger later instruments.

The 16th partial is the notated C6, and I guess "top of the staff" means the top line of the treble clef staff (F6). These statements suggest the natural horns often used today are difficult to play above notated C6, but natural horns used in Haydn's time were less difficult to play above notated C6. --Bavi H (talk) 02:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

for digging borewell

i want to dig a borewell...could you please suggest some methods for the accurate detection of water inside the earth ????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.67.149.213 (talk) 07:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Usually - by digging a borehole. Maybe by ground-penetrating radar or reflection seismology. Not by dowsing. Rmhermen (talk) 13:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Ask neighbours how deep their wells are, or ask a well drilling company to make an estimate for you using geological maps. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, and specifically ask how low the water table is in your area. StuRat (talk) 05:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

And of course, depending upon what country you are in, you may need permission from your local water authority before you can extract water from the water table. -- SGBailey (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Flavorful peppers (very subjective, unscientific question)

There is a Scoville scale that measures the hotness of peppers. But here is a question: do only the hotness go up in peppers, or do the flavor also go up as you travel up the Scoville scale? Could this even rise faster than the hotness? For example, could you get more flavor in your food by adding a little bit of Habanero instead of a lot of Jalapeno? I always believed that the really hot peppers pretty much just have burn and no flavor. Are there ones that are recommended for a nice chili flavor? 105.236.57.198 (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC) Eon

Different chilies do have different flavours. Experiment and you'll find ones you like. I've been known to use 3 different types of chili in one dish to get different effects. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know the direct answer to your question, but I suspect that there's no particular reason for the amount of capsaicin in a pepper to vary at exactly the same rate as the other flavour compounds. What I wanted to note, however, is that both the flavour and heat of even a single pepper can be modified to a great degree by actions such as removing the inner membrane (which reduces the heat) and cooking/smoking (which alters and ups the flavour); even the size of the pieces plays an important role. In practice, you can take whatever pepper you enjoy the flavour of and dial the heat/flavour ratio to what you want. If you enjoy habanero, but don't like the amount of heat, remove the seeds and membranes, chop it into relatively large pieces, and singe or smoke the pieces. Matt Deres (talk) 16:24, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

In my experience, chilies absolutely do have different flavors aside from the pepper itself. I find habeneros to have the best "depth of flavor", being complex besides just being hot. The heat can be overwhelming, but under the heat is much broader a flavor profile than other peppers. I find the smaller green peppers like serrano peppers to be very bright and fruity (again, outside the heat) flavored, almost like an apple. Jalepenos, rather ubiquitous peppers in americanized Mexican foods, I find rather bland and uninspiring; they aren't even that hot, and they don't bring much other than their heat. Chipotle peppers, the smoked version of Jalepenos, I love however, so it does matter how you treat the fruit in terms of what you get out of it. Pepperoncinis are crisp and clean. It goes on. Chili peppers are very diverse and very different in their flavor profiles. --Jayron32 18:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

With serranos you have to be careful to use only the ripe (orange) ones. The green (unripe) ones don't taste like much except of that unpleasant "plant" taste that green bell peppers also have.

Habaneros are nice for their sweetness, but even better are Scotch Bonnets, which look a little like a habanero with extra curves, and red instead of orange. I can't find them locally, since I moved to California. In Texas and in Toronto they were easy to find. --Trovatore (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, even if - as in the case of the habanero - it's like trying to admire the colour of a jet while standing directly in front of the engine exhaust... Matt Deres (talk) 22:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Note that some peppers with little or no heat whatsoever still have flavor, like (green, red, orange, purple, or yellow) bell peppers or sweet Italian peppers. StuRat (talk) 05:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I suppose you can call what green bells taste like a "flavor", if you want to. Dirt-flavored is a flavor, I guess. --Trovatore (talk) 05:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. Green Bell Peppers have one purpose: in a sofrito or other general vegetable medley where the flavor will be cooked down and you aren't interested in the individual flavor. If I'm interested in the flavor of the bell pepper itself, Red bell peppers are the only way to go. If I'm going to cook the bejezus out of it, I'll use green ones, but if it's to be eaten raw or quick cooked (like a stir-fry), then you should go with red. If you want a mild, large, green pepper which tastes good, go with a poblano instead. --Jayron32 05:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you're washing your green bell pepper properly, if it tastes like dirt. Mine never do. StuRat (talk) 05:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

You understand that the reason they're green is that they're not ripe, right? If you let them get ripe they would turn some other color (usually red), and taste much much much better. Of course you're entitled to your own preferences, but mine are that I don't like unripe fruit (even vegetabley fruit). --Trovatore (talk) 06:56, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

So no fried green tomatoes, then ? In any case, "unripe" and "dirt" are not the same thing. StuRat (talk) 07:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Food labelling

If "protein powders" are added to, say, beefburgers, for sale in the EU, what has to appear on the label? Ought the label to indicate whether the protein is of animal or vegetable origin? Itsmejudith (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

According to one of the news stories in the week, they come under the heading of "seasoning"...! But I'm sure someone with better google-fu than I will be able to trace the real answer for you. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:16, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Tesco has been using the same catering company for years, so apparently it's been going on for donkey's. If you are vegetarian, I think that's fine. Horses for courses, as they say. :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

If you're put off by the horse burgers, have you tried Tesco's meatballs? I heard they're the dog's bol**cks..... gazhiley 16:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I've read all the jokes that have been trotted out. Any food industry experts in the house? Itsmejudith (talk) 17:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/labellingnutrition/foodlabelling/index_en.htm doesn't say much, but it might help. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK)

Workers' Party of Korea

The article Workers' Party of Korea states:

Membership of the WPK is essential for any DPRK citizen who aspires to a post of any seniority in any government, management, educational or cultural institution, since all these bodies act as "conveyor belts" for party rule over all aspects of DPRK life and effectively creates a nomenklatura within society. All senior military officers must also be WPK members.

How does a DPRK citizen generally become a member of the Workers' Party? Is it an option available for all citizens or only for the elite? JIP | Talk 20:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

13 in the design of the dollar bill

what is the significance of 13 (13 stripes, 13 arrows, 13 stars, 13 levels of the pyramids etc...) in the design of the dollar bill? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.175.225.137 (talk) 20:31, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

interwebs seems to think it is 13 original colonies ---- _nonsense ferret 20:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec)There's a number of mystic interpretation to the number 13 (see thirteen), but for the US dollar bill, the most likely reason (in addition to the possible mystic connotations) is the Thirteen Colonies, aka the thirteen states that founded the United States. -- 71.35.98.191 (talk) 20:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

It's in your flag too (the red and white bit). Alansplodge (talk) 23:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

They always used to tell us that the 13's had to do with the 13 states. A tipoff is the flag that flew over Fort McHenry, which had 15 stars and 15 stripes. After that they reverted the stripes to 13 and kept it there. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

As usual, we have an article on the United States one-dollar bill. The devices you note are part of the Great Seal of the United States, and the article includes a section on the symbolism of items numbering thirteen to honor the original thirteen states. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 01:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

January 21

Does this creature in the anime drawing look like any creature from mythology or from any swamp monster movies about 1950's?

Does this creature in the anime drawing look like any creature from mythology or from any swamp monster movies about 1950's? http://sailormoon.wikia.com/wiki/Thetis?file=CS012-383.jpg Here a better pictures of the creature: http://stardusting.nekomaki.com/?page_id=664 http://sailormoon.wikia.com/wiki/Thetis?file=CS012-383.jpg Venustar84 (talk) 19:24, 21 January 2013 ]

Your second link doesn't work. The first image looks like a Eurasiatic shaman in a fertility dress, see the priestesses of The Mists of Avalon which were based on research by Marion Zimmer Bradley. μηδείς (talk) 07:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Never mind this response, I thought she was wearing deer antlers, but apparently she isn't. μηδείς (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't have anything to do with her appearance, but the first one's name is "from mythology". Deor (talk) 13:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Here a better pictures of the creature: http://stardusting.nekomaki.com/?page_id=664 http://sailormoon.wikia.com/wiki/Thetis?file=CS012-383.jpg Venustar84 (talk) 19:27, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Challenger Train

Do you know where there is a Challenger Train on display for the public. I thought it was in Sacramento. I loved your article about the Challenger, but couldn't find reference for where I could actually see one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.138.53 (talk) 14:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

There seems to be one in Pomona and another at the Cody Park Railroad Museum. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 17:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Black Magic

What is the significance of finding chicken bones in the trunk of a car?

What is the significance of finding a rat skull and tail in the trunk of a car?

Are these incidents related to Black Magic? If so, how are they related and what do they mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.155.138.31 (talk) 15:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Sounds to me like you have a rat infestation in your car (this is quite a common thing). Rats might bring chicken bones into the car. If a rat died in your car in the distant past - then that would explain the rat bones. Black Magic should be almost the last possibility one would consider. SteveBaker (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, rats and mice sometimes set up home in cars, particularly in cold weather.[1][2] And they do indeed bring their food in there, including chicken[3]. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 15:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually the only bones were chicken leg bones, and the skull only of the rat! Where would the rest of the body be? And there was the rat tail as well.... and the skull was in plain view in the trunk which is used and cleaned regularly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.91.81.56 (talk) 15:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a rat scavenged the bones from rubbish to me, or they fell out a rubbish bag in your trunk. Are you quite sure it was a rat skull and tail? --TammyMoet (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

We know nothing of you or your life circumstances, so we are in no position to know the significance of these events. As for Black Magic, what leads you to even have this on the list of possibilities? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

As for religions which involve chicken bones, skulls, etc., two that come to mind are Voodoo and Santería. StuRat (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Detroit jacket

Why is the Carhartt jacket called a "Detroit" jacket ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.158.118 (talk) 17:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears to simply be the name they selected for the product. You may be more likely to get a good answer if contact the company directly. Mingmingla (talk) 20:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Some speculation: the Carhartt line was basically developed for tradesmen. Detroit is often portrayed as a "working man's" or blue collar city. Why is a line of trucks called silverado? I think they are just pandering a bit. (I happen to be wearing a Carhartt jacket as I type. They are pretty nice!) SemanticMantis (talk) 00:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Carhartt is headquartered in Dearborn, Michigan - a Detroit suburb. They also make a Dearborn jacket. Rmhermen (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Could the term not also refer to a straight jacket, given "d'etroit" means "of the strait", and the city is b@t$h!t insane? μηδείς (talk) 05:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

As a Detroiter, I must say, I resemble that remark. But, personally, I've always thought "Detroit" came from "debt" + "riot". :-) StuRat (talk) 07:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The play on words is even better if you spell strait jacket correctly. (And détroit is one word.) —Tamfang (talk) 08:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

What would be better to create

I´m a game designer and i´m in a dilemma! I need to know which would be cheaper and faster to produce and market: a dice-tile board game or a trading collectible card game? and which do you think would sell better? thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.166.108.122 (talk) 22:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

As this is a reference desk, we can't give really good, reliable responses to requests for opinions. But from my own experience in the gaming field as a hobbyist and volunteer demonstrator over more than a decade, I would strongly advise against the CCG model; the market is saturated, and has been dominated by a tiny handful of giants for years. The tile-laying model is well-tested but less completely saturated, and lacks the off-putting 'money sink' element that CCGs have become notorious for. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I will follow your advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.166.108.122 (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

May I suggest a bit more market research than the opinion of a single ref desker before starting off down a likely costly and lengthy process of trying to make it in the board game market. And presumably (I have never tried to make a game before) you actually have an idea of a game rather than just a genre?! I would personally suggest thinking of ideas for games rather than just a genre, and then base your choice on market research of those products. Maybe have some friends or ever better a group of strangers try them out and give you their opinion... Then, based on that research, you can consider taking it to market... gazhiley 09:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

There are a lot of people selling both kinds of thing making $$$ over on www.kickstarter.com - there is a special section for tabletop/board/card games so it's really easy to surf through those to find games similar to the kind of thing you have in mind - and they mostly give information about the relative costs, risks, etc. You can also compare the number of backers for each successful project to get an idea of the relative market sizes and the prices that those customers are prepared to pay.

(Kickstarter is an extremely vibrant market for this kind of thing by the way...the barriers to breaking into that market have dropped spectacularly in the last year or two. It's particularly good because you don't have to take risks...if you know that you have to sell (say) 200 copies to break even, you can set up your Kickstarter project so that you only get the money if at least 250 people buy a copy - if you fail, you lose nothing (except for your effort in presenting it) - if you succeed then you get all the money you need at the get-go, so you know how many to make - and you have the up-front funding to get the work done. You can also discuss the project directly with your customers and that helps you to tune your design to their likes and dislikes. It's *perfect* for this kind of project.)

We need more information though: "Cheaper and faster" depends on what your starting point is. Can do your own digital artwork? In 2D or 3D? What quality do you have in mind? What quantity do you want to make? How important are up-front costs versus per-part costs?

For example - if your board game can use standard kinds of wooden counter, plastic disks and dice that you can buy in bulk from all sorts of online companies in China - then all you need is a board. A laser-cut plywood board can be made by plenty of companies that will make them for you for about $1 per minute of laser cutter time - maybe just a few bucks each with zero up-front costs. Full color printing on heavy board might be cheaper - but the setup cost may be much higher. On the other hand, if you need fancy objects in your game (like the shoe, car, locomotive, etc from "Monopoly") then if you have 3D art skills, you could get small quantities made using 3D printing technology quite easily. But there is another trade-off. 3D printing has low startup costs - but expensive per-object costs (maybe $1 per small object). But if you pay tens of thousands of dollars up-front to have injection molds made - then the cost per-object tumbles to a penny or two.

If you compared the cost of making a chess game versus a checkers game (for example) - chess needs 8 different designs of "counter" in two colors...but checkers needs only one design in two colors. In small quantities, it's much cheaper to make checkers than chess. However, in large quantities, it probably makes no difference.

You could probably make a basic game (think "checkers") for $10. On the other hand, my son came up with a really great "board game" that couldn't be manufactured for under $60 - and is therefore uneconomic - which is a huge shame because it's really good fun to play! Card games are also pretty cheap to make if you go "low-quality". If you can design the artwork yourself - then you can get a deck of 52 cards printed on thin card for a few dollars a sheet. If you need very few designs, you could print them yourself on glossy card right out of your computer...providing you trust yourself to guillotine them into individual cards. But when the quantities go up, and if you need fancier printing - then you might want die-cut cards with fancy glossy printing.

There is just too much 'depth' to your question to come up with a clear answer.

20:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Definitely the dice-tile game. I have no expertise whatsoever in the field of games production, but your ability to succeed is going to depend on how you balance your costs and revenue. Assuming revenue depends on how good the game is, how well you market it, and how lucky you are, without more information from you, there's not much to choose between the two options. On costs, I'd guess your major hits will come from manufacturing and transportation. If you can make the dice game small, there'll not be much difference in transportation costs, so that leaves manufacturing. Creating something that involves collectibles means you'll need to produce a large range of different items. The dice tile game will be the same every time, so if you're producing a decent quantity of items, you'll have economies of scale. Assuming you don't need fussy specially-produced ones, you could also probably buy the dice (and maybe even blank tiles) from someone who specialises in producing gazillions of the things, saving money because of their enormous economies of scale. So, dice tile wins, unless you can see a variable elsewhere that swings it (like you have a much better idea for a collectible, or you know that collectibles are more 'in' among your target audience, etc). --Dweller (talk) 11:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have the idea already, and well i know basic graphic design, nothing too complex. And i have seen the a few game cards dominate the market such as Magic The Gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh

Then you DEFINITELY need to check out the gamer projects on Kickstarter - they are doing exactly what you want to do, there were about 4,000 game projects last year and about a third of them were successful(!). A few of them were spectacularly successful (one game raised two million dollars, three others came close to raising a million dollars and over thirty games got over $100,000)! The 1300 successful projects collectively earned close to seventy million dollars.

My g/f recently earned $42,000 for her game project (with a 50% profit margin) and despite very little initial outlay (under $500!), she now has a thriving, debt-free business and now does this as her full-time job. With expansion packs and other online sales, she can reasonably expect to earn $150,000 in 2013. There are numerous forums where you can discuss your ideas with gamers and other creators - and gamers and creators alike are efflusive with their desire to help each other make it through the process. http://TheWellOiledScabbard.com is one that she sponsors. SteveBaker (talk) 15:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Was your gf´s game a tccg or another genre?

If you have more followups, we should probably take this to either your or my Talk: page - or you can email me from my user page...it's getting off-topic for the Ref Desk...however...

Actually, neither - it was for production of model buildings for Dungeons & Dragons players. (See [4]). The amount of money she raised was comparable to a typical board or card game - but she had a higher-cost product and fewer backers than most - so in that regard, her project wasn't so typical. She's doing all of the manufacturing herself using an $8,000 laser cutter purchased with cash from the Kickstarter. You pay 5% of your 'earnings' to Kickstarter and roughly 5% more to Amazon credit services for credit card transactions - and the remaining 90% is yours to do what you need to start your business and to manufacture & ship the rewards for your backers. Her cost breaks down to about a quarter of the money raised was for the laser cutter, a quarter goes on shipping and the rest is basically payment for her work (aka "profit") at about $50/hour - materials costs are negligable for this kind of project - and the only advertising she did was to launch a "social media" competition to win $400 worth of our product (which in truth were the prototype models we made using time on a local hackerspace laser cutter that cost us about $0). The time to design the product and make prototypes should probably be factored in - but it was fun and nobody needed payment to do it - so we conveniently ignore that in our analysis! SteveBaker (talk) 15:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

January 22

Sustained rate of fire on all cannons of the Civil War

I am a Civil War buff. I read and watch all types of movies and books about the war. I have always wondered what the sustaind rate of fire was for the various cannons used in that war. I know that all kinds of marvalus things happen in the movies, but I would guess that the rate of fire is way off. Even with morden weaponary they only can be fired for a certian amount of rounds before they have to stop, and left to cool down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotrod824 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you mind telling us which nation's Civil War you have in mind, please? It makes a substantial difference to the answer to your question. AlexTiefling (talk) 00:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

• American, most likely — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Probably, but I didn't want to make the crass assumption that people who say 'the Civil War' and expect us to just know which one they mean are all Americans. There was a Civil War over here in England (indeed, a complicated bunch of them) in which the use of cannon was crucial - to take just the other really well-known English-speaking example. AlexTiefling (talk) 01:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

• But do the English refer to it as "the Civil War", especially if there were several? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

• Everyone knows unqualified terms like "president", "constitution" and "the Civil War" apply to America. That's why Truman airlifted in our boys to defeat the Brits in WWI. Jesus wouldn't have it any other way. μηδείς (talk) 01:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

That wasn't very civil of you, old chap. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The English (as opposed to the British generally) have certainly tended to refer to the English parts of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (1640s) as 'The Civil War'. AlexTiefling (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I have an idea. Rather than being snippy and unhelpful to the questioner, why not try to answer the question for multiple civil wars? I'm sure the cannon firing rate was different in the Spanish Civil War and in the American Civil War and in the various English ones. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 06:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Field artillery in the American Civil War KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Obviously, it would be good if the OP could clarify which war. But the term "Civil War buff" sounds like an American expression. Would very many Brits be referred to as "buffs" (i.e. "enthusiasts") of their own civil war(s)? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I think that members of the Sealed Knot would probably characterise themselves as such. And as to why I raised the question: as can be seen from the article that KageTora linked, each civil war was characterised by quite a range of field artillery. So doing as Jpgordon has proposed, and providing all the information for every civil war we can think of, would be a huge mass of information. As it happens, KageTora's article, though highly interesting to the right people, doesn't mention rates of fire. Assuming that we've guessed the OP's intent correctly, where could the relevant data be found - and could it be added to the article? AlexTiefling (talk) 12:48, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Googling [civil war rate of cannon fire] and [civil war sustained rate of cannon fire] turns up a lot of potential avenues worth looking into. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

This is OR, because I am a wargamer, and I think it was generally one shot every 30 seconds (about), and the same time it took to reload a rifle. They had to wait for orders to fire. However, it was unfortunate if you were called 'Will'KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears the rate of fire was usually 12 rounds per hour normally for sustained barrages, perhaps 4 rounds a minute in dire emergencies. More than 1 round in 2 minute was sometimes a court-martial offense (either for wasting ammunition or for using up your supply quickly so you could withdraw and some other gunners would have to be in harm's way).[5][6] Rmhermen (talk) 05:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

What are the things Ernest Hemingway is holding on this photo ?

Hello practical ones ! http://www.dhm.de/magazine/spanien/Abb. 22.htm

I wonder what Hemingway is holding in his hands while visiting a spanish battlefield with Joris Ivens & 2 german communist officers : I hesitate between sub-machine guns clips (italians ? found on the soil ? ) - and maybe macquerel or sardine tins (4 , for 4 men to picnic with...). All (sensible) suggestions welcomed and thanked beforehand. T.y. Arapaima (talk) 09:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The link to the image seems to have been mistyped. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes , Saddhi, sorry, seems I'm an old web-goofer. Here it is again:

http://www.dhm.de/magazine/spanien/Abb. 22.htm

Hope it works, but (for the really good samaritans) : you can find an OK-working link on the french version of Hans Kahle , quote n°25. Thanks again Arapaima (talk) 09:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately that was still wrong, the image can be seen here [7]. --Viennese Waltz 10:23, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Russian Wikipedia has a bigger version of that photo (which they say they sourced at that dhm.de site; they may just have blown it up) here. It's clearer, but not hugely so. Cigars, perhaps. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 00:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

They look awful large for cigars, but that's a far better guess than my original thought, beer bottles. μηδείς (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Sure the way EH holds the items between his fingers makes you think of little bottles. But those hanging from his left hand look rather flat. Or are they very thin little bottles ? Hey, I remember something...In his short story « The Denunciation » (4th page) , EH answers (in 1937, in downtown Madrid) to a friend who asks him what he is drinking at Chicote's  : «Gin and tonic. Schweppes Indian Tonic water. This was a very fancy café before the war... ...We just found out they still have the tonic water and they are charging the same price for it ». Were 1930 Schweppes bottles sold in Spain so thin ? I am going to try & ask on WP spanish if that image rings a bell, they are very keen on every subject touching their Civil War. Thanks a lot to all again Arapaima (talk) 07:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)  

I don't think they're bottles of anything. Full bottles are heavy. These things are so light that he's holding them easily between his 2nd and 3rd fingers on his left hand (our right), and between his 3rd and 4th fingers on his right hand (our left). Further, the pairs seem to be attached, so it may be just be one odd-shaped object he's holding in each hand. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I am frankly shocked, Jack, that you think they must be light objects. I can carry four full 16 oz. beer bottles per hand that way. (These look half that size.) You macho Aussies should do even better. μηδείς (talk) 20:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I like to frankly shock people. It's all part of being a macho Aussie. (So I'm told.) But seriously, can you carry bottles that way, without using either of your thumb or forefinger, as Hemingway seems to be doing? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Two bottles between my three middle fingers? I guess you have never been a waitress. Or hosted a party. I mean, really. I must be misunderstanding your question. μηδείς (talk) 05:49, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

You at least know I could not possibly have ever been a waitress. I haven't even been a waitrice. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 07:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The ones in his right hand look like they are connected at the bottom end (the end nearest his hand). Is it some kind of tool, like a pair of tongs of sorts? --Viennese Waltz 05:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

That was what I was suggesting above. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 07:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Why is there no focusing knob on rifle scopes?

I have never personally used a rifle with a telescopic sight. I have used binoculars thought. In video games and from looking at pictures, there never seems to be any focusing knobs on the rifle telescopics that adjusts for blurriness depending on how far the object you're looking at is. In contrast, you have to focus the binocular to look at an object a certain distance away and have to re-focus when you look at something at a different distance.

How come rifle telescopics do not have focusing knobs? Is it because it has something to do with the fact that you're only looking through it with one eye? Acceptable (talk) 23:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Telescopic sight#Adjustment controls has a picture: no knob, but you can adjust the focus ring. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

(EC) There are no knobs, as where would you put them? There are focus rings at the back, the same as in binos. It has more to do with the production costs and development costs of the weapon itself. As well as making the weapon more usable. Nobody wants to carry around a weapon with loads of extra buttons. So, they make it simple. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The focus adjustment on a rifle scope brings the aiming reticle into focus; this is an adjustment that need only be performed once for a given user: [8]. This doesn't answer the OP's question, which could be rephrased as, 'why doesn't the focus have to be adjusted to form sharp images of targets at different distances, as one has to do with a pair of binoculars or a telescope?' TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Then somebody needs to fix the article: "Focusing control at the ocular end of the sight – meant to obtain a sharp picture of the object and reticle". Clarityfiend (talk) 00:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Some sniper scopes do have focus adjustments e.g.. In practice, you need a sniper rifle to shoot things that are hundreds of feet away, when the focus is (or might as well be) at infinity (if it was close, you wouldn't need a scope, and could just shoot using the iron sight). So some scopes are just set to infinity, which means there's one less thing to go wrong. Long-range target shooting scopes have parallax adjusters info. Much of this doesn't really map in a worthwhile way to the simulation on a computer screen, so it's no surprise that they don't try to simulate it. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 00:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The reason binoculars to have a focus is that you might reasonably want to look at a small bird in a tree 50 feet away, and see the details of its pretty plumage. But snipers (military ones) aren't shooting at nearby birds and don't care about the fine details of such things. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 01:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Except that, at half a mile, the location of someone's head is a fine detail. --Jayron32 03:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Acceptable ! If you care for the souvenirs of someone who hunted in the past & happened to do some very short range shooting with a scoped rifle : through the scope you then see something grey or yellowish going or coming unto you very fast, & you are grateful that the scope-builder bored through the mount a little tunnel to allow you to quickly & instinctively aim under the scope and shoot shot-gun wise, & you are not thinking of pixels at all. I'm of course referring to hunting (not to snipering or varminting) , with what was the european standard scope kit : a x4 with thin cross reticle , allowing you to reasonably hit any still target within 50 to 200 m (knowing your bullet's ballistics) , which was quite far enough . T.y. . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arapaima (talk • contribs) 08:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, a head at half a mile is fine detail, but the difference in focus between half a mile and infinity is very tiny, and probably not worth making the adjustment. Fixed-focus sights seem to be set somewhere around the range at which they are expected to be used. The bird in the tree fifty feet away would be slightly out of focus, but a sniper who can hit a head-sized object at half a mile (I can't -- I've tried, though not on a real head) would not have much problem with an out-of focus bird at 50 feet. Dbfirs 08:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I sure hope nobody's shooting a rifle into the air... or at a tree. Shadowjams (talk) 15:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

At distances like that, you have to adjust for wind direction, and in many cases you might not even be looking at the target. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

January 23

Eye exams (not a request for medical advice)

Is it true that when you go to an eye doctor and they do a checkup for any potential problems, they put in special eye drops that render your vision temporarily blurry? If so how long does it last? And what is the solution made out of? 70.55.108.19 (talk) 02:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

It is true. there are all sorts of drops. This site says dilation can last 4-24 hours. I have driven home after eye exams without a problem, so a basic exam may not be hugely disturbing. Ask your doctor what to expect and how to behave. μηδείς (talk) 02:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

It is true. It usually lasts a few hours. I'm not sure what the fluid is. The site describes the exam but just says "drops" are placed in the eye: http://www.nei.nih.gov/healthyeyes/eyeexam.asp RudolfRed (talk) 03:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

If it may cause stinging, is it necessary to warn your doctor that your eyes may be sensitive? My eyes burn every time I cut onions or cry. 70.55.108.19 (talk) 03:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

You should it discuss it with your doctor. I'd say that's true of any procedure. RudolfRed (talk) 03:30, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

There is nothing by itself irritating with such drops as there is with onions which contain irritating sulphur compounds. You can and should insist on discussing any expected discomfort ahead of time with the doctor, who can and should address your concerns by his actions. μηδείς (talk) 03:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

OP, it isn't always true, but it may be true. When I have my eyes checked, there's a fairly thorough check done of various things, without drops. Then, if and only if I can assure them that I've made transport arrangements and will not be driving home, they do some more tests involving drops and blurry vision. The blurriness lasts anywhere from 4-8 hours in my case. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 03:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I won't be going alone, and it'll be my first eye exam and I'm near-sighted without knowing why, so it's very likely they'll end up using those eye drops. I'm just very anxious of what's to come. 70.55.108.19 (talk) 03:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

request a sedative if you think it is necessary. I never allow myself to be intubated or drilled upon without a sedative. μηδείς (talk) 04:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

It's an eye examination, not a heart transplant or admission to ICU. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 04:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

There are two kinds of common drops used to examine eyes. One that dilates the pupil, more of which you can read here and here and fluorescein which is used more often in the emergency department and highlights any scratches or damage on the cornea. The mydriatic drug that opens your pupil causes the blurred vision and the fluorescein is yellow and will make your eye look a little yellow for a short while. Both may be slightly but briefly uncomfortable and you will certainly not need any sort of sedation. Jack has it right - as usual! Richard Avery (talk) 08:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I take that as my first compliment of 2013, thanks Richard. At this rate, I'll have 15 by Christmas.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 10:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely no need to be anxious. If the examination involves eye drops which temporarily affect your vision, you should be told beforehand so as to ensure you are aware of resrictions on driving etc. But even in this case the effect on vision is, in my experience, minor and the drops are not at all irritating. If you have any concerns, ask your doctor to explain what the examination involves. They will be used to this, it is a common request, and it is in their interests to make you as comfortable and relaxed as possible during the examination. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say there was a need for all people undergoing examinations to be sedated. But having any liquid squirted in your eyes is a highly unnatural and potentially disturbing matter. One of my nephews was fitted for glasses at age four, and I do not blame him for having bitten the bastard who forcibly held him down, separated his eyelids, and dosed him with drops as he lay crying. That being said, 5-10 mg of Valium at a doctor's discretion is hardly asking for a presidential pardon for eating undercooked school children. The OP should be confident to man up if he can do so but also to insist on reasonable doctor-sanctioned palliative care if he needs it. μηδείς (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah... so anyway... as Richard says, the common "drops" are either to 1) dilate your eyes (which will make your vision blurry for a while; about an hour or two), 2) numb your eye so they can test the pressure in your eye to make sure you don't have glaucoma, or 3) to dye the eye so they can see abnormalities. None of them are painful, they all go away quickly, and there's nothing to be concerned about. Shadowjams (talk) 15:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

My experience over the years is that eye-numbing has become less common as the glaucoma test has gotten more high-tech. When I was young they had to numb the eye to apply a metal device (a ghastly procedure), but recently I've either had them used a plastic device (still not great but much more straightforward) or an air-puff device (much preferable to anything that touches the eye though still a game you have to play with your blink reflex), neither of which have ever been presented with drops to me. This is anecdotal, of course, and refers to practice in the United States. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• The metal device, hopefully not used these days, was called a Tschiotz tonometer. Richard Avery (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

My experiences have been similar (also in the United States), although lately it is more and more unlikely that they will test for glaucoma at all if you aren't in the demographic of 'People Who Seem Likely to Get Glaucoma'. I have terrible eyesight and a family history of eye problems but I have to specially request the glaucoma tests since the doctors will not usually give me one. For the last several years, the air puff test has been the way things are done, at least in the offices I have visited. The drops that cause dilation as used to enable the doctor to look at the lens inside of your eye, through the opened iris. Helene O'Troy - Et In Arcadia Ego Sum (talk) 17:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

When I see my ophthalmologist every year or two, they do use those dilation drops. The main side effect is that it makes my eyes more sensitive to light for two or three hours. For the trip home, you may want to wear a darkening filter they will give you, that you wear inside your glasses. If you do not wear glasses, use a pair of sunglasses, you should have one anyway. They use a puff test for glaucoma.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the info guys, it actually helps me feel less nervous about the exam itself now. 70.55.108.19 (talk) 22:30, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• Here's what to expect. μηδείς (talk) 23:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have the idea already — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.166.108.122 (talk) 05:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Special education statistics

Where can you find information on the number of special education students in US schools by year (for example, seeing how many there are now compared with, say the 1980s?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.244.148.235 (talk) 14:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Possibly in one of these reports? [9] Rmhermen (talk) 02:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

JSDF

Do the Japan self defence forces now consider themselves military? Clover345 (talk) 17:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Japan Self-Defense Forces calls them military. I've not asked every single member thereof what their personal opinion on the matter is, however. --Jayron32 18:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Besides allexperts, Yahoo answers is there another good question free online site that people answer right away?

Besides allexperts, Wikipedia reference desk, Yahoo answers is there another good question free online site that people answer right away? Venustar84 (talk) 19:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

There are many many many subject specific forums that fulfill those requirements. Dismas|^(talk) 20:13, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The IRC channels for help, I'd think.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Quick answer do not mean good answers. Yahoo! is pretty terrible, and we aren't always the best either (but we're better than them). Mingmingla (talk) 00:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Succession duty and inheritance tax

What's the difference, if any, between a succession duty and an inheritance tax? – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I am not an expert, but we should probably have only one article. It looks like 2 different names for a range of similar taxations. --Lgriot (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Briticism vs. Americanism. Also called Estate Duty or Death Taxes.DOR (HK) (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Succession duty seems to be an old name. It's always called inheritance tax in the UK these days. --Tango (talk) 12:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Steam train fireman

Why did steam trains have a fireman manually shovelling coal rather than some automated hopper that just fed coal?

It does not seem like it would be beyond the wit of Victorian engineering, what stoped clean and shiny steam punk evolving before diesel replaced it in the 40s? 2.98.130.182 (talk) 21:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Probably an unnecessary complication given that labourers were cheap. -- SGBailey (talk) 22:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Fireman (steam engine)#Mechanical stoker -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 22:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

From our article: firemen are responsible for "raising or banking the fire as appropriate for the amount of power needed along particular parts of the route" -- To do the job requires at least some skill and judgment, not just a continuous feed of coal. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Towards the end of the steam-locomotive era, they did have automated stoking. The reason why manual labor was used for so long is that it's easier, cheaper, and more reliable -- mechanical stoking only saw mainstream use once the volume of coal needed exceeded what a fireman could handle with a shovel. --Carnildo (talk) 02:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

January 24

Burning your tongue

Do typical burns from hot food have any effect on taste buds? How severe a burn would it have to be to affect your sense of taste? 70.162.4.242 (talk) 01:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

California Highway 110 ever change name back to Pasadena Freeway

I've checked it up on Google satellite and even Wikipedia articles said California Highway 110 changed its name back to Arroyo Seco Parkway, since north 110 of Four Level Interchange to Downtown Pasadena is technically a Freeway, all the 110s connect with I-5, the freeway guide now reads SOUTH I-5 Fwy Santa Ana NORTH CA 110 Pkwy Pasadena, I looked up all the guide signs connects to 4 Level Int. It all (three) reads US 101 North Ventura I-110 Fwy South San Pedro CA-110 Pkwy North Pasadena. It is weird since CA 110 North of US 101 interchange is still technically a freeway I wonder how they call it a Parkway, because the signs should read Freeway not Parkway, it is possible they will revert it back to calling it freeway or communities like to call it Parkway instead of freeway, I don't know the reasons.--69.228.25.10 (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

There are not universal agreed-upon definitions of the terms "highway", "freeway", "expressway", "parkway", "turnpike", etc. The best definition of this kind of road is a Controlled-access highway. Some states do use names to differentiate somewhat (for example, in the New York City metro area, any controlled access highway with the name "Parkway" in its name does not allow commercial vehicles, while those with other names do) but these rules don't have any widespread acceptance, and there is no consistent definition. I've known cul-de-sacs to bear the name "Parkway", and then there's roads like the Garden State Parkway or the one you note. In Greensboro, North Carolina they're naming all of the newly constructed controlled-access highways "boulevards", like Painter Boulevard and Bryan Boulevard, which in other areas has a different meaning. So, don't read too much into the name of a road when deciding what "class" of road that it is. The 110 itself hasn't changed its nature just because the name has changed. --Jayron32 02:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)