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

October 24

Reading an electricity meter

Imagine you have entered a place where the laws of physics, logic, reason and common-sense no longer apply, "It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge", you've just crossed over into The Billing Zone.</Rod Serling impersonation> cue The Twilight Zone theme music (season 2+).

I was just wondering if anyone could tell me what this electricity meter reads here, which I have posted to flickr. I'm quite sure I know, but an unearthly visitor from the Billing Zone seems to violate logic, reason and physics to disagree. (nb. There are no 'legal' (or illegal!) 'activities' of any sort connected in any way to this query. ;-) 220 of ^Borg 07:46, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

If I had to guess intelligently I'd say it was 7179.8ish. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 08:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

And I'd say 07079.6 Dmcq (talk) 08:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm going with 07079 (ignore the last dial). See http://www.edfenergy.com/products-services/for-your-home/my-account/how-to-read-your-electricity-meter.shtml. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 09:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Than you gentlepersons for your replies.

• I think Dmcq & Cucumber Mike get to share the Kewpie doll! :-)

• Marketdiamond on the other hand may have to be banished to the Phantom Zone. (You never worked as a meter reader did you? ;-) ) You do realise that the meters don't all turn clock-wise? The '1000' & '10' dials go anti-clockwise. The only disputable one as has been noted is the'100' dial. You need to note the lower reading, which in this case is zero, not one. A very easy mistake to make!

• Consider this also, If 7179 was correct, then the needle on the 100 dial would have to be closer to 2 than 1 on the dial. And it isn't!

Sorry about the pic. quality, I had to use my tablet with only a 5 mega-pixel camera which I am not proficient with. The other picture may be clearer?

This particular meter is only for an external sensor-light with an energy saver fluoro lamp. I was therefore rather miffed when after the dials had barely moved for 12 months or more, they suddenly 'jumped' from 7068 to 7168, 3 months ago. (~A$25 at 24.9¢ per KW/h) Since then in 3 months, only 11 Kw/h has been used. 220 of ^Borg 16:05, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I've just got about 15 emails from power companies that want my "special skill sets" lol, banished? hardly lol. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 19:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Weight loss

When someone loses weight, where exactly does the excess weight go? Is it converted into energy?--86.157.138.182 (talk) 14:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

No, it is not converted to energy. Mostly it comes out as water and carbon dioxide, which result from respiration and cellular respiration. This nice radio program (NPR science friday [1]) discusses this exact question, and many misconceptions surrounding it. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:09, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

And urine contains much of the waste from cells burning fat. StuRat (talk) 16:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Converting weight ("mass" if you're a physicist) into pure energy requires a nuclear reaction - E=Mc² and all that stuff. The amount of energy that would produce would be truly spectacular. A modest diet plan should allow you to lose about one pound per week. One pound of fat, rapidly converted into pure energy would produce a 10 megaton explosion - more than enough to level a large city and leave a crater a mile across! So it's safe to say that the weight you that you lose when dieting is not "converted into energy"!

When looking at where the weight actually goes, I find this image useful (it comes from a NASA study). Notice that each day, you consume about 2.5 lbs of food - but you only poop out 0.3 lbs of solids. Notice also that more water goes out than comes in - and the weight of the gasses you breathe out exceed the weight of what you breathe in. The total in and out adds up to the same number (at least when you're not putting on weight or dieting). So right there, it's clear that about 85% of the food that you eat turns into water and is combined with the oxygen you breathe to make CO₂. When you lose weight, the amount of food coming in goes down - but the amount of CO2 and water coming out stays about the same...so you lose weight.

We talk about "burning calories" and that's (roughly) what happens. If you consider sugar - it's a "carbohydrate" - which is a word that basically means "carbon and water". It has a chemical formula of C₁₂H₂₂O₁₁ - which is just carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. When you break it down to produce energy, you end up with 11 molecules of water (H₂O) and 12 atoms of carbon - which, when combined with 24 atoms of oxygen from the air you breathe makes 12 molecules of carbon dioxide. That's also what happens if you burn a sugar cube. Fat is a similar deal. Fats are also "carbohydrates" - and they break down in a similar way - producing CO2 and water...and that's where the weight goes.

SteveBaker (talk) 16:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Great to see you are back. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 17:07, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Fights, etc

Is there any web site or something that rates the best places to develop a fictional fight [this question sounds weird to me but maybe you can understand it better than I do] Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Your question is unclear, but there are often scandals in the US where people of authority; prison guards, teachers, babysitters, even parents; force prisoners, students and children to fight for the purpose of betting or filming for the internet. If you want a voluntary fight, then any boxing club and some martial arts clubs will do. μηδείς (talk) 19:19, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I mean a fight between a man and a woman. I don't know where I heard that the location for a certain scene is, sometimes, the key of the whole thing. So I wanted to know what would be a good location for a fight. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Where do men and women fight? In the home (domestic violence). At work. In the street. In a cafe or restaurant. But if it is fiction, you can choose something unusual. In a theatre dressing room, in a bank, on a submarine, in the queue for a tourist attraction, on a fishing boat, in a barn, under a bridge, in an airport baggage reclaim, at the dentist's. And old favourites: on a rooftop, in an underground carpark, in a cellar, in an abandoned factory. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Are you talking about an argument or a physical fight? Also, the phrase is et al. --Dismas|^(talk) 19:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Argument, no punches or kicks or anything else and... as Jack advised the other day... thank you. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 20:00, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Dismas, I don't follow your last comment. Which phrase should have been et al? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:46, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

The question title was originally "Fights et all". Usually et al is used to mean 'and other people', so it should really be etc. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 21:13, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

What he said, she said. Dismas|^(talk) 21:50, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. The perils of being longitudinally challenged wrt the real world (not to mention latitudinally). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• Perhaps they could offer hostile opinions at an internet reference desk, end up being blocked after a week of incivility, then meet in person and have make-up sex? μηδείς (talk) 21:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:MakeUpSex is a policy I musta missed, in more ways then one apparently :-(. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 23:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

It has to be preceded by WP:MakeUpFight. Itsmejudith (talk) 07:33, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

We're not allowed to make up, that would be WP:OR. (this pun may rely on a british idiom, not sure if make (things) up has the same meaning in the US) MChesterMC (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Pretty sure it's the same over here (Britain). Make-up (cosmetics) and make up (repair / create / fabricate / lie) are common usage. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Aw now we have to get all gussied up for it, that's no fun. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 10:48, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I must have missed something, because I can't understand the joke... Ohhh, now I wish I was an English native speaker. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The jokes are based on puns. "Make up" can mean "become no longer angry at each other after a fight", or "create a false story" or "cosmetics that a woman wears on her face". Duoduoduo (talk) 15:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, righty. Thanks. Still trying to decide which place will work better. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:14, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

So, Miss Bono, how does one say "make-up sex" (sexo de reconciliacion) in Spanish? μηδείς (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Sexo de reconciliación, al menos yo lo digo así. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 16:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Muy Buen! and that is a double entendre! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 08:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

It is said: Muy bien :) and why is that a double entendre? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 13:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't an argument between a celebrity and his girl in front of other people be weird and unlikely?? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 13:48, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Was Actress Audrey Hepburn Saved By Jesus?

My name is Mr. Silber. Please tell me if actress Audrey Hepburn was saved by Jesus? I know she was a christian. Can you get back with me without sending you my email? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.139.19.143 (talk) 20:35, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Nobody on Earth can possibly answer this question. Where do you expect anyone would find the answer? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Nobody on earth indeed, but as Mr Silber will already know, I have sent him a telepathic message, without needing email addresses, and without the involvement of the NSA and all that bother, confirming that Audrey Hepburn was indeed saved by Jesus! Greetings from the hinter-life, and welcome, when your time comes. Wikipedian in the Sky (talk) --20:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

That's odd, I thought she'd been saved by Prof. 'Enry 'Iggins. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

It might be wiser to clarify with 169.139.19.143 what exactly is being asked, perhaps 169.139.19.143 meant she was 'born again' or some similar verifiable meaning, but I am happy to know we have wikipedians capable of telepathy. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 21:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Apparently several 'earthlings' have "possibly answer[ed] this question", here and here but user 169.139.19.143 might best respond if this is the material they were inquiring about. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 21:45, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

• The simple answer is no, she died of a rare type of cancer of the appendix in 1993. μηδείς (talk) 21:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I took the question to mean that 'saved' wasn't the status of her physical health. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 21:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

It's up to the OP to explain himself clearly. We can provide facts according to standard usage. I linked to our article, which the OP did not do. If he is using some esoteric sectarian term he should clarify his meaning. μηδείς (talk) 22:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

That's the most disingenuous thing I've read all month. When people say "Jesus saves", nobody believes they're talking about being made physically immortal. It's about Salvation (Christianity). That is the "standard usage" in this context. Surely you know that. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, no Jack, Catholics certainly don't talk this way, nor do Muslims, although they believe in Jesus. If you or the OP want to assume everybody holds the same beliefs as you, y'all might want to move to Texas. μηδείς (talk) 00:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Keep this important fact in mind: Jesus saves. Moses invests. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Irrelevant whether Catholics or Muslims use this terminology. The point is that people who do use it, almost always mean the same thing by it, which makes it standard usage. --Trovatore (talk) 00:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

How many wikipedians does it take to debate the meaning of an OP lol. . . ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 23:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Not many, if the OP bothers to follow up and clarify. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:24, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Hint, hint, OP...& yes thank you for being more direct (after some suitable time allowance) with my subtle hint Bugs. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

According the unreliable nndb, she was a Christian Scientist. In which case, according what everybody knows whoever means whatever they mean by what they mean, the answer is probably no. According to Francis, however, even atheists can go to heaven. μηδείς (talk) 01:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

That's good. I'd like to at least visit... HiLo48 (talk) 01:33, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The page List of Christian Scientists (religious denomination) says her mother was a "devout" Christian Scientist but that Audrey "chose not be attached to any particular religion". The cited source doesn't appear to be particularly reliable. Hack (talk) 08:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

According to the biographer and theologian Donald Spoto, in Enchantment: The Life of Audrey Hepburn (2006), page 159, Hepburn was never a traditional observer of any religion. This suggests that she probably was not "saved"; we don't know her interior life, of course, but if she had identified herself as having been "saved," then it is likely that she would also have identified herself as a Christian and that her biographer would have known about and mentioned this, particularly in light of her biographer's interest in theology. John M Baker (talk) 14:48, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

folks… when somebody leave his contact info in a desk… or... he expect that somehow he will be notified, he won’t come again until he get notified!

So… maybe there is a pretty big chance that we’re talking to ourselves here

Years ago when I asked my first question here (a homework), I left my email and spent the rest of the week thinking “oh man, what informal and rough people!” and then, weeks later when I come back and saw that my question wasn’t here haha “very very rough people” that happened in my first year at college and I guess I came back again at the endings of the fourth

Iskánder Vigoa Pérez (talk) 15:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

When I first came here I thought the same, has my mind changed any? lol. Oh and there are many editors here that enjoy the conversation "with themselves" & yes I do have to look in the mirror occasionally. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Market and Iskánder My first question was about writing fanfictions and they were not so nice to me. Then, with my following Bon-uestions Medeis thought I was a troll :P Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 13:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

October 25

Is television coverage a reliable source?

So is substantial coverage on television a reliable source? Or must an RS be in print? Like, if 60 minutes does a feature on a certain subject can we use that for a citation as a RS on Wikipedia? How would we cite it? ThanksFishface gurl (talk) 05:41, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Reliable sources do not need to be in print. They simply need to be published (online, on paper, over the radio, on TV), and they need to be recorded somewhere (i.e. possible for another editor or reader to retrieve). And of course they need to meet the other standards for reliable sourcing. You would use the {{cite episode}} template to cite it. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

• In addition to Someguy1221's good info, many TV news shows (even those on cable networks) have a link to transcripts on their websites with many having video links too. If it was a very notable episode or newscast there are sometimes newspaper accounts of it which are especially useful for those broadcasts of the pre-internet age. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 06:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

• One thing to beware of, though, is infomercials which try to trick you into thinking they are news broadcasts. They will have "reporters" interviewing people wearing white lab coats in a studio, all talking about some brilliant new discovery, which amazingly is available absolutely free for $20 (that being the non-refundable shipping and handling). StuRat (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

VW Golf

I don't know much about cars, just that I love Maserati Quattroporte. And I was looking for a car for the main character of my story and I just found this beauty and I fell in love with it. The questions are: Are these cars good? How much they cost? How lasting they are? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:50, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Largely depends on what model year, some of the early ones weren't all that reliable, tho they were always very affordable. There is a cartalk history of the make here and VW viewed this model as the heir to the international success of the famed Beetle of the 1960s and early 70s. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

edit conflict ::Cannot follow the link. A model from 2003, maybe, and another one from 2012. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:24, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

http://www.edmunds.com/volkswagen/golf/history.html is the link, but if your looking for the last 10 years see below, VW is a pretty reputable brand recently and known as an economically affordable (reasonably priced) product. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Truly bad cars are rare these days - so whether it's "good" depends on what you want out of it. Speed? Acceleration? Handling? Economy? Cheap price? Heated seats for a cold climate? Crash safety? Available in shock pink? Room to have hot sex in the back? Ability to haul 5 kids to soccer practice? Off-road capability? Room for a golf bag in the trunk? Stick shift or Automatic? Will-it-fit-in-my-garage? Cost of insurance? ...a million variables affect what every person thinks is a "good" car.

In the US, a 2014 Golf is selling for $19,995 to $25,200 depending on the options you get. Most modern cars are easily good for over 100,000 miles - probably 150,000 is when they start being more trouble than they're worth - I'd be surprised if the Golf was significantly better or worse than that.

For a character in a story, you need a car that speaks more to the person's character - and a VW Golf is a fairly characterless 'blah' car. I think you need something that speaks more loudly about the characters' personality and social position. For that price, for example, you might want to consider a MINI Cooper (my favorite car - I've owned seven of them so far!) - it's fairly similar to the Golf in price and performance - but it has a more unique style that says something about the owner. If you really want to make your character stand out from the crowd, how about choosing a nicely restored car from the 1950's or 60's? If the person is really eco-friendly, then you're going to need a hybrid or an electric car. If the person has a super agressive personality and more money, how about an Ariel Atom? If the person is dirt poor then a beat up old Jeep or something like that might speak more to their style. But a VW Golf says "I can't be bothered to think of a cool car"...OK for a real person - but very bad for a character in a story. A character in a story might have modified the car to better fit their personality - racing stripes, an air-horn, stiffer suspension, louder exhaust, racing numbers on the doors!

Part of being a novelist is to put yourself in the place of the characters you're writing about - the make the person more interesting by making their differences from you more extreme - then think about how this more extreme person would express those extremes in how they dress, where they live, what job they do, what they drive, what they eat, who they hang out with...everything. The car that *you* would like isn't necessarily the one your character would pick.

SteveBaker (talk) 18:23, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Didn't Jack Ryan drive a VW Golf in Patriot Games? 24.23.196.85 (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Can see that you know a lot about cars. I was thinking about that, if you think that a Golf says "I can't be bothered to think of a cool car", then that's the car I like the most and I am going to put it at number one of my list of favourit models, right before of the Maserati Q. -which was at the first spot until, say, a couple of minutes ago. Then, I have to choose a car according to my character personality, but if I don't know much about cars... how will I know. which want to choose? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

You may try to search for "reviews" of the 2002-2013 model Golf's, usually you find out so many interesting things from owners and potential buyers online and much of what SteveBaker went into above.

However, most novels don't go into super detail about a characters car, first it takes away from the story and second it makes for a longer possibly more irrelevant read. Without knowing how central the car thing is for your story simply leaving it at color, style and that it is a recent Golf should suffice any curious reader. Novelists also usually love to leave some things as a mystery and to the imagination only giving part of any picture or profile especially of things like what car a character drives. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 18:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, yep. But I wanted to know if my character could afford buying a Golf. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:43, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

A quick glance at Exchange and Mart shows the cheapest Golf with an MOT I could buy within 20 miles of my home address at £300 ($450 US). Unless your character is _really_ poor, he can afford a Golf, but not necessarily a new one. :) Tevildo (talk) 19:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

The character is not poor but not rich either. She's a student. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:49, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

What nationality? Students in Britain generally can't afford to run cars (and they don't usually need to). Itsmejudith (talk) 20:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

College student at Stanford University. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 20:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I owned a car in college, (three used ones, sequentially, actually) and would say more than 50% of my fellow undergrads did, at least by the time they were juniors or seniors. Of course, this was the US, not the UK. If a student did ow a car she either had generous parents or, like me, a paying job in a lab, or as a waitrix. μηδείς (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

lol w/ "waitrix" both the portion size and the uniforms get skimpier every year! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 00:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

When you're served by a waitrix, you never, ever complain about the food and you always leave a big tip, lest you be "disciplined". Clarityfiend (talk) 08:53, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Isn't the point to complain? Oh and my tip is bigger then yours lol. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 12:12, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

The VW Golf is an iconic car in a slightly unusual sense. It's the first "classless" car, at least in Germany. It's predecessor, the (original) VW Beetle was a lower-class car, e.g. the archetypical student car (together with the Renault 4 and the Citroën 2CV). The Golf, on the other hand, was something new. It's layout was so convenient, and the quality "good enough" to appeal to nearly everybody across the economic spectrum, at least for people who did not want to make a statement with the car. Student and professor, professional and cleaner - they all bought the Golf. Rich people bought it as a second car for "the wife" or "the kids". In the last 30 years, the lower end has been eroded by cheaper cars like e.g. the VW Polo based on the same general principles. In a sense, having your character drive a Golf is making the statement that the car has been selected for convenience and practicality. That said, some variants have a different connotation. The Cabrio version was the archetypical "rich daughter" car. And the GTI version was more of a "I want a sports car but cannot afford a real one" statement (not that the GTI did not have quite good performance for the time). In the US, Laura Holt, the person behind Remington Steele, drove a VW Golf Cabrio. Disclosure: My first (and only) car was a 1982 VW Golf Diesel - which I sold in 1997 when I moved to a big city with bad parking and good public transport, and also finally had a real job and thus could afford rail travel and taxis ;-).--Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:39, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

This is way off-topic - but I have to protest that last answer. There is no way that the Golf could be described as "the first "classless" car". Not even close! The classic Mini cost 600 UK pounds (about $1000) in the 1958 - it was just about the cheapest proper car on the market and as a consequence was exceedingly popular amongst the poorest motorists and starving students (I owned one when I was a student in the 1970's). Yet it was owned (and driven and loved) by Ferdinand Alexander Porsche, Enzo Ferrari, Steve McQueen, Clint Eastwood, all four of the Beatles, Mary Quant and many, many other upper class people. Queen Elizabeth II herself bought one to drive around London. (Dale Ernhardt Jr has a nicely restored one too!)

Starving student to Queen of England and little old ladies to race car drivers - and the designers of both the Porsche 911 and the Ferrari is about the biggest class divide imaginable - and the Golf wasn't even a glimmer in VW's eye in the 1960's. The Golf doesn't come within a million miles of being "classless" - and it sure as hell wasn't the first! Even in Germany, the Mini was something of a cult icon and spanned the range from people who just wanted a cheap car to the rich and trendy who wanted to make a statement. You might successfully argue for the BMW Isetta as the first "classless" German car...it's debatable because "classless" is a pretty vague term. SteveBaker (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi bono! Si lo que andas buscando en un carro casual (que entonces no sé cómo llegaste a considerar al Quattroporte) me parece que el golf no es tu mejor opción, y ser icónico tampoco lo ayuda, ni tampoco ser alemán, me parecen mejores opciones un nissan sentra o un hunday accent ;)

mira Top Gear

Suerte con lo que estás escribiendo!

Iskánder Vigoa Pérez (talk) 03:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Ohhh no, No considere el Quatroporte para mi personaje... It's my favourite car. personal opinion. Soooo, you guys, what car do you recomend? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Selling aircraft carrier USS Forrestal (CV-59) for one cent

Why is the thousands of tons of steel, copper aluminum and other metals in an old aircraft carrier, along with any useful hoists, pumps and motors, or any collectible items, worth only one cent? Is it that expensive to tow it to a scrapyard? Is it that expensive to cut it up and ship it to a factory for repurposing? In 2012 goods-carrying ships were fetching $350 to $450 a ton as scrap per Bloombverg news. If this ship amounts to 60,000 tons, that would be $21,000,000. Edison (talk) 20:36, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Ships of that era are stuffed full of asbestos, and have cables made with hard-to-dispose-of dioxin-filled insulators. Such was the case with the French carrier Clemenceau, the disposal of which at Able UK was a contentious business. Laws in the US and other developed countries increasingly prevent the export of such problem hulks to low-standards countries like India, and proper disposal at advanced facilities like Able is super expensive. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 21:01, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

cf United States Navy reserve fleets, whole islands of stinky unusable deathboats all waiting for someone to pay for them, like unwanted puppies at the shelter. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 21:11, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about the current laws, but I asked my father about this, who worked in the Philly shipyards on sister ships of the Forrestal. He said there was one ship scrapped for a dollar while he was working (this would have been around 1960) which the owner, without ever taking physical possession, resold for the copper and iron scrap rights, making over a million dollars. As Finlay's pointed out, the regs have changed. But Dad was of the opinion they should have set a million dollar minimum bid on the Forrestal. μηδείς (talk) 21:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Correction: Dad worked on sister ships of the Forrestal in the early 60's, but the $1 ship that was resold for over a million was scrapped in the 90's, which heard about when he worked at the WTC. μηδείς (talk) 21:22, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Alang in Gujarat, India, is the place where less scrupulous owners have their unwanted ships scrapped. The hulks are beached on the sand, and "as the tide recedes, hundreds of manual laborers dismantle each ship, salvaging what they can and reducing the rest into scrap. The salvage yards at Alang have generated controversy about working conditions, workers' living conditions, and the impact on the environment." Alansplodge (talk) 09:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

October 26

Greg Iles short story

I read on Greg Iles home page that a long short story is being released in e-book form for free or for $0.99 . That it will set up the next Penn Cage book Natchez Burning , that is coming out in May 2014. I have searched but cannot find info please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvw64 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

His new long short story in e-book form that sets up his next book Natchez Burning where can I find info — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvw64 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Hold your horses, buddy. You've asked basically the same question twice in 41 minutes. Give our experts a little time to respond. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:06, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

You are asking about the e-book that sets up Natchez Burning? Do you have a title of that book, I have found some things on how the author is developing Natchez Burning here and at Examiner. com/article/greg-iles-signs-new-penn-cage-trilogy-deal-with-william-morrow, but not certain if that gives you some further pieces to the puzzle. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 08:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I've combined these questions. Shadowjams (talk) 13:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

International expert in 7 years

I recently read an infographic which says reading 1 hour per day in one's field for 7 years makes you an international expert. Similarly Shri Arun Shourie recently said that in India standards are so low that in two to three years of study in a particular subject makes one a national expert .How true is that? Sumalsn (talk) 14:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

That's all silly. An expert is somebody who knows things and can do things, not somebody who has spent time staring at words on a page. Looie496 (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Of course, this depends on the field. In some fields, there is no way to get practical experience, like a theoretical physicist specializing in string theory. So, studying is the way to become an expert there. But I agree that we shouldn't solely look at either time spent studying or, I would add, time spent hands-on, to make somebody an "expert" in their field. Some people will naturally be better at something than others, and therefore some will become experts before others, and yet others can spend their whole lives in a field without ever becoming an "expert". StuRat (talk) 16:27, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Recent losing VP candidates, for example. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:59, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Or winning ones! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Methinks you missed that one debate. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

MALARKEY! lololol ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 06:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

This sounds rather like a watered-down version of Malcolm Gladwell's ten-thousand-hour rule (which at an hour a day would take over 27 years). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 21:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

A friend of mine posted the infographic that I think the OP is referring to to Facebook yesterday. It doesn't provide a source. The infographic reads:

• 33% of high school graduates never read another book the rest of their lives.
• 42% of college grads never read another book after college.
• 57% of new books are never read to completion.
• 70% of US adults have not been in a book store the last five years.
• 80% of US families did not buy or read a book last year.
• The more a child reads, the likelier they are to be able to understand the emotions of others.
• Reading one hour per day in your chosen field will make you an international expert in 7 years.

Some interesting stats, if they're true. Dismas|^(talk) 08:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm prepared to accept all those statements, except the last one. There is no generally accepted definition of an expert, let alone an "international expert". (What is that last thing, anyway? I edit a website that's open to all humans; does that make me an "international editor"?) Given that, I suppose anyone could claim to be an expert (God knows, we have plenty of regular visitors to the ref desks who implicitly suggest they're experts in every field imagineable, as they're always ready to provide unreferenced answers, no matter what the topic may be). But would they be accepted as experts by their peers, or the wider community? Not bloody likely. Not just from having read zillions of words on the subject. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 17:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

wikt:imaginable Tevildo (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. See, even internationally recognised spelling experts sometimes make mistakes.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

And here is a perfect example of a regular respondent talking through his hat. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks like these stats are unreliable. This Pew study says that instead of 80% of American families not reading a book last year, 78% of respondents DID read a book in the previous year. And, unsurprisingly, college-educated people read more than high school graduates, not less.

Something else to add is that some fields require far more experience and training than others. So, if your job is to empty trash cans, you can probably become an expert in that in 1 day, while becoming an expert in brain surgery requires many years. StuRat (talk) 18:54, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Lest we forget: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Sebastian Garth (talk) 04:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

A recent survey has revealed that half of college graduates can't read, half can't write, and the other three quarters can't do arithmetic. Tevildo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Tevildo, that wouldn't surprise me with the commoditization of "diploma mills", but do you have a link for this? ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 04:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Maybe re-read what he wrote. Particularly the last phrase. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:39, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

The word "other" is key. Without it, it's a logical statement. StuRat (talk) 14:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, maaattthhh. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 20:44, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Or . . . 50% of the time it works . . . Everytime! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 21:17, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

A little girl was crying, all by herself in a far corner of the school playground. A teacher saw her and came over. "What's the matter, Mary?" - The others never want to play with me. "Oh, I see. So, when do they never want to play with you?" - Always! -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:18, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Niiice!Nobody goes there anymore cause it's always crowded! ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 06:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Comparative properties of common cooking fats (per 100g)

Hi there.. How can you compare the properties having (per 100g), if you don't have (per 100g each)in all examples? The title implies all examples would have 100g. Butter, Suet, and Vegetable shortening (hydrogenated) have less than 100 grams.

Regards,

Stan- 98.155.38.186 (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Is this a question about one of our articles? The tables at Cooking oil and Vegetable oil express the fat content of the various oils as a percentage, not as an amount per 100g. Tevildo (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Well by copy and pasting your title into Google the first hit I got was Comparative properties of common cooking fats (per 100g). CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 21:16, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Fascinating! The answer to the OP's question is therefore that butter (etc), unlike most of the other items on the list, aren't 100% fat, but contain other components (mainly water and some protein for butter). However, most of the entries on the GourmetBlends list don't add up to 100%, so this may not be the only problem with their table. Tevildo (talk) 22:40, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Well...that table seems to come from Lard in the first place. And that comes from the US Nutrient Database, and those numbers indeed are puzzling: where are the other grams of lipids? Each entry says, for example for soybean oil, 100g lipids, but then the lipid breakdown only adds up to 96.173g. The full reports add a little bit of other stuff, but there's still missing. (Regardless, that table doesn't need to be in Lard.) --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 19:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

A-ha! It's explained at Template talk:Comparison of cooking fats. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:05, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

For butter that has had most of it's non-fat (water and milk proteins) removed, see Ghee. --Jayron32 16:48, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

October 27

Aircraft v submarine

Some 35 years ago I met a pilot who said that not only had he flown Winston Churchill around (somebody did for sure), but he also claimed to have forced a German submarine to surface and surrender. Does anyone know of the facts in this case please?85.211.197.82 (talk) 07:00, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

To my recollection there were several instances such as this, possibly dozens by the RAF alone. See Anti-submarine_warfare#Battle_of_the_Atlantic and depth charge, if your looking for a specific news account of a certain incident do you happen to remember the pilots name and the name of the sub? ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 07:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I found Travels with Churchill], about one of the pilots of Churchill's Consolidated B-24 Liberator. They were indeed used in the anti-submarine role, since they were the only Allied aircraft with the range to bridge the Mid-Atlantic gap. However, the particular pilot in the article worked for RAF Ferry Command and wouldn't have been hunting U-Boats. I'll do some more digging when I have time. Alansplodge (talk) 08:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

The Consolidated B-24 Liberator by Forest Garner says; " According to one author, RAF Coastal Command Liberators sank, or assisted in sinking, 70 U-boats", always assuming that your pilot was actually flying a Liberator in the U-boat attack. Therefore, I don't think we're going to pin this one down without more details. There isn't a likely looking match in Category:Captured U-boats. Alansplodge (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Winston Churchill : Wartime Traveller by Ged Martin says that Churchill also flew in a de Havilland Flamingo during the Battle of France and a Boeing Clipper flying boat for transatlantic flights. Alansplodge (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Finally, after March 1943, Churchill used an Avro York, piloted by William Vanderkloot who had also flown Churchill's Liberator, according to Finest Hour: the Journal of Winston Churchill, Issue No 148 (p.13). Alansplodge (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

October 28

chess

this is not a question but could you pass it on. in the "Capablanca chess" article some of the "Variants postdating Capablanca chess" hyperlink to outside wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.177.82.193 (talk) 01:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

That's not a problem unless there is something wrong with the targets of the links. Looie496 (talk) 02:08, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I would say it is a problem. Per WP:EL, external links should be kept out of the body of the article except in certain rare cases. Most of those are when the link goes to a sister project like Wiktionary. That said, I'm not familiar enough with chess or the Capablanca chess article specifically to be comfortable making an edit. Dismas|^(talk) 07:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The best place to discuss this is on the talk page Talk:Capablanca chess. --ColinFine (talk) 10:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Press conference

Hi guys!

How does a celebrity or someone famous organize a press conference? Who do (is it does or do here?) the job? What can be said there? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 14:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

It's "Who does the job". StuRat (talk) 15:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

That would be a press agent's job. StuRat (talk) 14:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Our article on the press agent is not so good. Is there any website that says how to organize a press conference. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 14:54, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, since that's normally the press agent's job, you would first hire one and then let him handle the details. I suppose, if a celeb wanted to do it on their own, they could rent an auditorium with a podium/microphone/speakers, then send out invitations to local news organizations. Of course, if you're a minor celeb, they might not show up, unless they are promised something newsworthy. StuRat (talk) 15:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah, so that explains why we're forever being told that "So-and-so will announce tomorrow that blah-blah ...", and then, when they do actually announce it, we're told "Breaking News! In a shock announcement today, So-and-so revealed that blah-blah ...". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but, I don't get yer point. Am I missing something? -- said Miss Bono in a mid-class Irish accent. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I think Jack's point was that there's often a great deal of hype before a press release, to get people to pay attention, and the actual announcement can then be quite a disappointment. One example of this was the Segway Scooter, which is basically just a more expensive alternative to a bicycle, not "the future of transportation". StuRat (talk) 21:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh I get it. So what's the usual topic on press conferences? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 17:42, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Whatever the person giving the conference wants to promote, or whatever the journalists want to ask about. Usually a press conference will be held either when somebody has some message they want to publicise (eg release of a new product or work) or because something has happened that they expect the press to be very interested in (eg some disaster or atrocity). --ColinFine (talk) 19:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

So, if celebrity A has a new product they can held a press conference, but if the journalists wants to ask them about that, they can held one as well and ask the celebrity to participate? It's to messy.

Let me see if I get this right... I am a writer and I've released my new book, I held a press conference for the journalists to be able ask me questions about it; but if I release the book, can the journalists ask for a press conference?

Also, if I hired --as StuRat said-- a press agent. Who will s/he be sending the invitations? The CEO of the local news organizations or the secretary?? Sorry 4 so many questions. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

In the case of a newspaper, the invitation should probably go to the person who does book reviews for that paper. StuRat (talk) 06:56, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

A journalist would probably ask you for an interview, not for a press conference, if he wants to know something from you. If many ask you for interviews at the same time, which is the case regarding hot news, then you could announce a press conference. Obviously, prominent people with breaking news (deaths, terror attacks, murders of sweet looking children, and major disasters) will attract more journalist than unknown people who are just trying to get some publicity. Many things that look like press conferences are actually public announcements of a book, product or whatever. The audience in these cases is a mixture of journalists, aficionados, professionals in the fields and so on. OsmanRF34 (talk) 20:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

And an announcement that a new book has come out is rather dull stuff, so most of the press won't show up, unless you happen to be JK Rowling. For run-of-the-mill news, which is unlikely to get any reporters to show up, you just issue a press release, meaning you send them a printed announcement (or your press agent does). Even if you do a press conference, you might also want to have printed copies of the press release there, to hand out to reporters, and also send it to everyone else after (as sending them out before would reduce attendance at the press conference). Of course, emailing them out is the quickest way, these days. StuRat (talk) 21:15, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, just to say this; the question is for my novel, I am not going to held a press conference or something lke that. Look at me :D I am 19 Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

It also greatly facilitates cutting and pasting the press release verbatim into the news item. All the journo has to do is put their name as "author" on the piece, and hey presto, cutting edge journalism appears before your very eyes. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I should also mention that these days it's also possible to bypass the press entirely, and send your announcement directly to the public. If you have a popular web site, blog, etc., you can post your announcement there, or if you have email addresses of previous customers, you can spam them all with the announcement of a new product. StuRat (talk) 06:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

The publicity for the publication of a book is done by the publisher. I'm sure that the publisher will liaise with the author's agents, but it is the mainly the publisher's responsibility to get maximum press coverage. For a high profile celebrity book, a tour will be organised; this must be planned about a year in advance. During the tour, the author will be interviewed on chat shows. For any book, review copies must be sent out in advance. Press releases will go out with the review copies. Reviews are embargoed until the official publication date, usually a Thursday. The aim is to have the book reviewed in newspapers and magazines on sale at the coming weekend. A launch party may be held. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:07, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed with all of the above (also see publicist or public relations), however I keep seeing Miss Bono asking about the so-to-speak 'motivations' and how exactly the person gets the press or the press requests the person etc. Something that needs to be kept in mind in many cultures where "press conferences" take place is that there are dozens or actually hundreds of 'media outlets' that is blogs, TV stations, cable networks, tabloids, newspapers etc. all of which or competing with each other sometimes even in cut throat ways to get the best story, best picture or best question in.

On the flip side if you are an author, corporate executive, actor/actress or politican you also are competing sometimes in a very 'cut throat' way with others in your profession to be on the "front page" of the newspaper or get the most media coverage.

Long story short the media that flock to 'press conferences' and let's say the author that is requested to call a press conference are both extremely motivated to arrive to one. It is a bit like asking about a newly wed couple on the wedding night, no big equation of social sciences is needed to understand what both of them want. The pressure and stress for both the 'media' and the (in this case author) isn't about "calling a press conference", that is pretty much just a given that usually needs no big effort to organize or request participation in, they are both "industries" that desperately need each other and fight for access to each other. The author sells more books and the media get higher ratings and sell more magazines/newspapers, the real "problem" is if media have no press conferences to go to, they want to show up and make it a news item. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 04:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you guys, actually, in my novel is not a wrtier but a singer the one who is going to hold a press conference. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

What's the difference between passion and obsession?

Are obsessions just passions, ours or of others, that we dislike? OsmanRF34 (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

See Passion (emotion) and Idée fixe (psychology). Dmcq (talk) 20:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

This would be a good Language Desk Q. An obsession indicates it has control of you, and you can't resist it. StuRat (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Contour maps and details

Does anyone know of an online free contour map of England please? Also I'd like to find an article on Lowestoft that is more detailed than Wikipedia's, if possible. --TammyMoet (talk) 21:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

You can find a number of maps by going to an Internet search engine such as google and typing in your query contour map of England. If you do not find what you are looking for, please tell us how the search failed you, so we can suggest other ways to search the web. 88.112.41.6 (talk) 22:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Try OpenStreetMap (http://www.openstreetmap.org). The "cycle map" layer shows contours. Looie496 (talk) 23:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

As do the Ordnance Survey maps available at Bing (select "Ordnance Survey Map" from the drop-down menu next to "Road") or at the Ordnance Survey's Get-a-map service. Deor (talk) 09:09, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

October 29

definition of a country

I read at Wikipedia that Scotland is a country while reading about Scotland, yet, reading about Great Britain I read that Scotland is a territory of that country. How can I clear up these ideas as I read about geography as I try to learn about our changing world and its borders? 76.178.213.41 (talk) 00:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

"Country" isn't actually isn't that well defined. See this video for an explanation: How Many Countries Are There? Mingmingla (talk) 01:19, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Further elaboration: Ask yourself if Taiwan is a country. You may think so, Mainland China and most other countries pretend for political reasons that it is a constituent part of the PRC. For all practical purposes, it is: it trades with other nations, determines its own laws, participates separately in most international sporting events, but isn't actually recognized as an independent country. Mingmingla (talk) 01:26, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, Taiwan also thinks that it is part of China, it just hosts another Chinese gov't than the one in Beijing. --Soman (talk) 03:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you're confusing the meanings of the word 'territory'. Firstly, there is no such country as Great Britain. There used to be between 1707 and 1801, but it's now part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Today, 'Great Britain' is strictly a geographical term, which refers to the island on which England, Scotland and Wales are located. Our article Great Britain says it "is an island in the Atlantic Ocean, ... Politically, Great Britain refers to the island together with a number of surrounding islands, which constitute the territory of England, Scotland and Wales." That means the geographical territory, and does not mean that England, Scotland and Wales are political territories in the sense of sub-national entities (although in a sense they are, but not in the same way that the Northern Territory is a territory of Australia, as distinct from a state like New South Wales; or Puerto Rico is a territory of the US, as distinct from a state like Florida). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:57, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, Terminology of the British Isles might give you a handle on this amazingly confusing issue. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:00, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

• The first thing to remember when thinking about definitions is that they are contextual. Concepts don't exist in some fantasy world of Platonic Ideals. They are tools and we define them as is useful, and hence, consistent with a context.
• the second step is to look at the etymology of the words involved. Country comes from the French contree, the Latin contrata, specifically the terra contrata, the bordering land. Country Hence country was used as a synonym for the bordering lands: e.g., the lands of the Belgians, and Germans, and Swiss, and Italians, and Spaniards and Basques, and English if you were French. Eventually countries were defined as the land of the peoples who lived in them.
• This is compared to a nation, which was defined by common birth (g)natio cognate to the English term kin, as opposed to land. The nation was the people, to which one belonged by birth or adoption. nation
• Then there's the state which originally referred to the order a land was put in, then its autonomy as such. state
• Eventually, there arose nation-states, like France or Germany, which unified some or all countries (Burgundy, Provence, Brittany, L'Ile de France) of one ethnic nation under a sovereign state.
• Of course this is history, not physics, so human will comes into play, and countries like wales and the basques are incorporated into states with different nationalities according to the vagaries of historical accident. States like Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia break up into their constituent countries due to lack of a single national identity.
• But again, if you are writing about geography, and not politics, it's perfectly legitimate to distinguish between the alpine, versus the lowland country--or countries--depending on your context. Just choose a reasonable definition to fit your needs and stick to it within that same context. μηδείς (talk) 04:41, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

No, do not look at the etymology. Do so, of course, if you want to understand the historical context, but it will not tell you anything reliable about the current meaning: see etymological fallacy. --ColinFine (talk) 09:39, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Disney costumed people

Are there multiple people dressed up as, for example, Mickey Mouse walking around Disney World/Land at any given time? I'd imagine there could be if they were good about staying in separate areas of the park and therefore not causing confusion for little kids who might wonder why there are two Mickeys within eyesight. Or are there just so many characters in the Disney universe that they don't bother with multiple people dressed as the same characters and only have one of each walking around?

Note: This is not a request for medical or legal advice. Dismas|^(talk) 06:41, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd expect they would have several of each, in order for each kid to be able to meet one. Kids small enough to believe they are real would be easily fooled by any convenient lie, like "that's Mickey's twin, Mortimer Mouse". StuRat (talk) 06:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

They usually congregate with multiple 'pop-culture'/'universal-genre' characters around the entrance to the parks (Main Street USA, EPCOT's globe thing etc.) The way Disney usually lays out its parks (at least from 1971's Disney World on) is kind of like spokes on a wheel so except for possibly the train ride at the Magic Kingdom or actually walking the long way around most guests choose to go through the core of the parks and thus past the Mickey, Pluto type characters. That said on occasion you will see some multiple Mickeys or Goofeys at different locations but it is rare since there are literally dozens of other "attractions" to discover and explore (and not just of the "ride" or "show" variety) and that the different sides of all the parks are kind of themed (A Modern Marvels or a CNBC hour long focus stated that Walt once was aghast that a Frontierland "cowboy" walked through Tommorowland and ruined the aesthetic, so Captain Hook and Peter Pan would only come out in Adventureland etc.)

As hinted above, there are tons of characters that come out, at Disney Studios for example there are even Groucho Marx, Marylin Monroe and Indiana Jones types not only taking pictures but putting on some campy street performances, EPCOT Center has traditional type of "actors" at Italy (what I remember as a sort of 'gypsy wagon' street show), France (mimes etc.), UK and so forth to keep both the kids and adults entertained. I'm sure there are some reliable sources on this but suffice to say I had a distant relative that basically had me visiting the Florida complex for almost 2 decades basically every month if not more in addition to the college I attended having a few of my fellow students that paid their bills from "pixie dust" as they like to say within the Reedy Creek Improvement District. ^{Market St.⧏} _{⧐ Diamond Way} 07:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

A distinct word appearing in two unrelated texts or videos

So I may be over-reacting, but lately I've noticed that whenever I take note of a certain word, either because I didn't know the meaning previously or it just sounds interesting, that particular word would appear in some unrelated text or video. Doesn't happen always but most of the time. Take for example just yesterday I was flipping random pages of the dictionary, and I came across "resplendent". Later on, I got bored and watched this video... "Resplendent" appeared in it! And prior to that I had never noticed the term "resplendent" pop up in any video or text I have read. Understandable if it's "Earth" or "tree" or "water"... But "resplendent"? What is this syndrome (?)? What are the odds of this happening every time? Okay this may come across as weird but I've no better way to phrase this dilemma of mine. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:22, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is an enemy action. (taken from Ian Fleming's novel Goldfinger)196.214.78.114 (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

What is this?

Sorry for the undescriptive title, wasn't sure how to even phrase one around this. Is there an article about the state of mind one enters when one decides to dislike something simply because they can't obtain it? I seem to remember it being illustrated with the story of a fox and an apple tree. The fox wants the apples, but it can't reach them. After spending hours trying, the fox goes home hungry, grumbling "I didn't want those apples anyway. They're probably sour and hard. Nasty, rotten things." I'm making up the speech, it's not a direct quote, but is any of this ringing any bells for anyone? 81.147.166.89 (talk) 14:10, 29 October 2013 (UTC)