Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:10, 31 December 2013

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/M

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.

December 25

Christmas Wishes

Last chance to get your mince pies and sherry ready.--Aspro (talk) 00:12, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please post your Christmas wishes in the form of a question. :) Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:32, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK Newyorkbra. Let me rephrase it: Dear reference desk. On the approach to this Yuletide, what do I have to do, to persuade father Christmas to ignore the fact the I don’t have any chimney in my house to squeezes himself down,.. but if my stocking is not filled, then I may stop believing in him. I know the scientists have trouble explain qubits, just as they could not explain continental drift -once upon a time. Yet, this guy seems to be able to be able to achieve super-duper superposition and so by, descend every chimney at once. So. Mince pies and sherry at the ready!--Aspro (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Can Krampus swim? InedibleHulk (talk) 00:41, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not when the pond is frozen. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is creepy now. My little cousin asked me my question a few days, after a bunch of snow and creosote fell down the chimney and onto our fire (we neglect it as often as we do Santa). She was particularly worried about him drifting to this continent "across the pond". Good answers! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:20, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hristos raždaetsja! μηδείς (talk) 04:16, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Higher Resolution

Why am I unable to see the higher resolutions of photographs. Often when I click on the linked photograph I am taken to a smaller file. I was able in the past to view the larger file. Its disapointing I am no longer able to see a higher resolution photograph of Michelangelo's Pieta sculpture for example. Pieta 70.181.197.25 (talk) 03:16, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try hovering your cursor over the image. If it changes (for example, to a magnifying glass with + sign icon) click the image. It should be full size. —Nelson Ricardo (talk) 05:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And sometimes there's a list of available resolutions below, and you can pick on one of those. (If it doesn't fit on the screen, it may still give you a preview that fits, then you have to click on that to get the full sized image with scroll bars.) StuRat (talk) 14:37, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

UK terminology: "registered alcoholic" ?

In the article Jack Wild he is refered to as having been a "registered alcoholic". Can anyone explain what this term mean to a Yank like myself? A citation or dictionary entry would be extra appreciated. F6697^{FORMERLY 66.97.209.215}_TALK 11:28, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a well-worn phrase in the UK, but a quick Google didn't reveal any official status for it. Alcoholics (and other drug and substance addicts) have access to a range of benefits and services in the UK, which I imagine would need a medical practitioner's certification that you do indeed have a problem. Getting this done might be what is known as "registration" although I don't believe that there is any national register. Sorry that I couldn't be more definite - maybe another editor can do better. Alansplodge (talk) 12:20, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having spent a good part of my life in the NHS as a nurse I am not aware of any type of register for alcoholics or any form or certificate that was given by a medical practitioner to indicate a person was a "registered alcoholic". I think this is a dramatic journalistic artifice that is similar to a person being on "the danger list" or taken off "the danger list". In the UK there never was a "danger list" kept in any hospital that I ever knew. Of course the USA may have a different arrangement. Richard Avery (talk) 08:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a joke of some kind. Americans talk of someone being "certifiably insane", or "certifiable" for short - even in reference to themselves sometimes, whether "officially" declared mentally ill or not. Also, thanks to the days of the Red Scare, where the expression "card-carrying communist" turned up (and likely a reference to something early, such as a card-carrying member of a union), anyone who's heavily into something might say that they are a "card-carrying" member of that something's real or imagined "fan club". We might use "registered" that way too, though I haven't heard it too often - maybe because the term "registered sex offender" is a real thing and is not a joke. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:56, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK in the 19th century, certificates of insanity were indeed issued, and here's a law mentioning them. It's quite hard to research this thanks to a Mr Alice Cooper, but I shall have a go at seeing what else I can find. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC) It seems to go back to the 1774 Act, according to this site. As to "registered alcoholic", again I have been unable to get a reliable source for this, but at least I've managed to find stuff about certified lunatics! --TammyMoet (talk) 19:23, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Certificates of insanity" are completed in the UK today as part of the operation of the Mental Health Act 1983 where two doctors are required to explain why the afflicted person should be detained in a safe place. Richard Avery (talk) 08:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the article out of its misery and removed the word "registered". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:37, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Soviet Union appears to have used the term 'registered alcoholics' in the sense of "the nation has more than 4.5 million registered alcoholics who receive medical treatment."[1] Sweden used the term registered alcoholic.[2] Registered alcoholics may be a term used by Alcoholics Anonymous. However, it generally seems to be used as a dramatic journalistic artifice as Richard noted above. I liked Jimmy on H.R. Pufnstuf. I didn't know about his troubles until now and wished his life turned out better. -- Jreferee (talk) 12:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) I looked in to this a few days ago but didn't post because I didn't find anything that great but I might as well mention this. I don't think it remains totally a journalistic invention that no one uses any more (regardless of how it started), as e.g. some people appear to have called themselves that in trials [3], [4] and by solicitors describing their clients or people the are prosecuting [5], [6], [7], [8] and by judges describing people [9] as well as in local government reports [10], [11], [12], [13]. Also plenty of cases of people describing their spouses/parents/neighbours and other random stuff like [14].

However I'm not disagreeing the term doesn't actually seem to mean anything in the UK. The term seems to often be used in concert with the claim that "registered alcoholics" receive more benefits so I wonder if this may be partially how it arose.

Incidentally, this claim is also unsurprisingly largely bullshit. It does appear a small number of people with alcohol dependency/abuse problems as their primary condition do receive additional support. But it's a lot rarer than people suggest and the figures seem to include both alcohol and other drugs anyway [15], [16]. And not surprisingly from what I can tell e.g. [17], [18], [19] (I obtained a copy of this but it appears to be a copyvio so I'm obviously not linking to it), [20], you do need other conditions/problems caused by the alcohol dependency.

And it is fairly contentious with a fair degree of inconsistency and unclarity, about precisely what you can receive when and what evidence or effect there needs to be for that to apply. And support here doesn't of course necessarily mean direct financial support but other forms of support which obviously have a financial cost but the money isn't going to the person needing the support. In fact it's possible that people with such problems may receive less direct financial support with e.g. rent instead being paid direct to the property owner/manager [21] (although not a great source). I saw one source suggesting it used to be the case many years ago that "registered alcoholics" would automatically receive more support but I strongly doubt this claim too.

I assume then that in so much as the term "registered alcoholic" means anything, it generally refers to those who have had their alcholism assessed and accepted as contributing to their disability either as a primary or secondary condition (although I'm not totally sure if it's always made clear whether their alcoholism was accepted). Perhaps it could also include those who have their alcoholism on record with the NHS or the GP, although I'm less sure of this. There definitely does not appear to be any central register of alcoholics. And all the aforementioned would I assume be covered by privacy legislation meaning unless the person tells people about it or shows documents relating to it, there's no way anyone except for the select few involved who aren't allowed to spread it, can know. (I would assume this would apply to most court cases as well.)

Despite its prevalance in some sources, it doesn't seem to get much discussion although a small number of sources did mention that the idea is basically meaningless [22], [23] although the later source does mention an addicts (not sure if it included alcoholics) register may have existed in the 1950s. Funnily enough this source [24] which despite the nonRS nature of the site hosting is apparently from a FOI request of the contract between Department for Work and Pensions and Atos (specifically that mentioned inWork Capability Assessment I presume) mentions "Registered Alcoholic" as a condition requiring medicial examination. And the quotes are not mine suggesting even they're aware of the term but recognise it doesn't mean anything. You can see [25] to confirm it isn't an OCR artifact. (They also mention alcohol dependence.)

Nil Einne (talk) 19:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jack of Oz: Thanks for the mercy deletion at Jack Wild. :)

Everyone: Much appreciate all the info. Interesting tangential discussions too. What is "the danger list" exactly? Sounds a bit like "the critical list" which also does not actually exist at hospitals. I think it is a triage term used in large scale emergencies where there are lists of the injured (minor, major, critical) and the dead (not yet, mostly, really really).

And just to close the loop, "registered alcoholic" is definitely not an AA term, it would go against the "self-responsibility" core of the program. Putting a person on some sort of mythical oversight list would allow the psychological crutch of letting someone else be accountable for your actions. However, perhaps someone in the AA org might have insight into this apparent slang terminology. I'll send AA an email and ask. F6697^{FORMERLY 66.97.209.215}_TALK 17:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

What is this toy called?

What is the name of those stick noise maker toys where you turn them upside down and there's something inside that slides down and makes a noise similar to someone being sick or moaning? You sometimes seem them in pens nowadays and if you move them back and forth fast enough they make a higher pitched warbling noise. When I was a kid in the UK we would refer to them as sick sticks but I've been unable to find an official name for this toy and searching for something you can't easily describe is difficult. Anyone have a clue what they're called? 63.95.64.254 (talk) 19:33, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is it something like a rain stick? Looie496 (talk) 19:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Similar idea but instead of lots of little pieces moving downward it is basically an empty tube with one mechanism inside that air moves through to make the noise (I'm assuming - the ends of the tube always have little spaces). Think more like those cow noise makers you give to kids that you turn over and they moo. 63.95.64.254 (talk) 20:08, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That specific type is Cow in a Can. I think the generic name is just "noise maker". InedibleHulk (talk) 21:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is opened up, showing how the sound works. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We used to call them "giggle sticks", like these. 86.157.149.15 (talk) 13:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That brought up a lot of accurate results so seems to be more universal. Thanks :) 63.95.64.254 (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 28

Nagpur (India) tall buildings

I want to request you to include Nagpur (India) in the list of tall building. As other cities of India are already included in this category. There are cities smaller than Nagpur in this list. So, why not Nagpur? There are number of high rise buildings under construction in the city and its outskirts. This will provide information to those people who want to live in high rises in Nagpur. Trushu (talk) 05:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Better then suggesting it, you should do it yourself. The only qualification to fix a Wikipedia article and make it better is to want to see it done. Since you have expressed that you want to see it done, you are quite literally the most qualified person in the world. No one else could do a better job of it than you, right now, because you want to, and obviously no one has yet wanted to do it, lest it would have already been done. Which it isn't. So you should get on that. --Jayron32 06:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, according to The Times of India in a report called Nagpur Municipal Corporation imposes new charge for tall building's on May 10, 2012, "At present, highest building in the city is only 42 metres. However, construction of taller buildings has started. An under construction building at Godrej's Anandam township is tallest at 64 metres." If you go to our List of tallest buildings in India, you'll see that there are 106 buildings that currently stand at 115 metres or higher, the tallest is currently The Imperial (Mumbai), Tower One being 254 metres high. Under construction, also in Mumbai, is the World One building, which is planned to be 442 metres. This is some way behind Burj Khalifa in Dubai, which stands at 828 metres. The World One will be in the joint number ten slot in the world's tallest building rankings, unless something taller is finished first - the Kingdom Tower in Saudi Arabis is planned to be 1,000 metres high. But don't be disheartened, England dropped out of the List of tallest structures in the world in 1549 when the 160 metre spire of Lincoln Cathedral fell down. Alansplodge (talk) 20:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 29

Biggest animal that ever lived

You say Balaenoptera Musculus is the biggest animal that ever lived,what about Argentinosaurus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.12.221.208 (talk) 01:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sauropods are long, but mostly skinny neck and tail. See this. μηδείς (talk) 01:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And if you are interested in why, a land animal as large as a blue whale just couldn't support it's own weight at 1 g. Bones can only take so much weight. In water, the whale's weight is supported by the water. StuRat (talk) 08:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Khichuri part of Pakistani and Indian cuisine?

When did Khichuri or Khichdi become a part of Pakistani and Indian cuisine? I thought it was a Bengali dish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.64.20 (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not so long ago, part of Bengal became East Pakistan which became Bangladesh. The rest of it became subsumed into India. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:45, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are human rights more practiced in wealthy western countries than underdeveloped ones?

Venustar84 (talk) 02:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of several reasons:

1) Those rights are often obtained by protests, such as strikes and marches. In a poor nation, where people will starve if they leave their jobs to do such things, you don't get as many mass actions.

2) Poverty also frequently means a lack of education and knowledge of the rest of the world, so they may not realize it's better in other places and can be better there.

3) The oppressive government will find it easier to hire henchmen to keep the people oppressed, if the people are poor and willing to work for peanuts (perhaps literally).

4) In poor nations you often get civil wars, with people fighting over the meager resources the nation has, and civil wars can bring human rights violations on both sides.

5) Even if a nation has sound laws, it often takes expensive lawyers to get them to follow those laws. So, poor people are sometimes denied equal protection under the law. (When free lawyers are provided to the poor, they may be incompetent or unmotivated.) StuRat (talk) 08:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also Maslow's hierarchy of needs (including the critique thereof). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 11:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History is also a significant factor. The Enlightenment happened in what we now call the "western world". The process of "exporting" the concepts of human rights from the western world to other places is not yet complete. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are implying a reversal of cause and effect. It's those nations that respect individual life, liberty and happiness that achieve the common good. μηδείς (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, China, some OPEC countries on the Arabic peninsula and the early Industrial Revolution are counter-examples to the preceding μηδεί-an hypothesis. All of these countries have advanced the common good with little respect for the individual. In my above reference to Maslow I have pointed to the critique (ethnocentricity, failure to differentiate between collectivist and individualistic societies) of his theory. It may be simplistic but futile to measure all cultures by the same standards. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

China has only become wealthy in modern times with the rule of law and economic liberalization. Sixty million murdered under Mao and It's glorious to get rich under Deng Xiaoping and his successors. The size of its market helps. Tiny countries like England and Holland became inordinately wealthy for their size with the advent of classical liberalism following thinkers like Locke and Spinoza. The OPEC countries are dictatorships with a lot of oil wealth they stole from the West and still rely upon the West to refine, ship, and pay for. Compare North and South Korea, East and West Germany. Look at the fact that living standards were higher before Castro than after, before the Ayatollah than now. Freedom brings wealth. μηδείς (talk) 21:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wealth brings more freedom to more people... eventually. Although it's no picnic being an average citizen in China now, it's relatively better than during Mao's reign of terror. But they've got a long way to go before they achieve a fair balance of power. Eventually the workers might decide that they're tired of being pawns, and try to form unions. And as with the early days of unions in America, it could get very violent and bloody. The 1 percent do not share power willingly. There was a reasonable balance in America during the 20th century until cheap developing-nations' labor became available, making the American unions (and hence the American middle class) vulnerable. China is currently in the "robber baron" stage, and American business is trying to retrogress to that stage. It's always a struggle to find a fair balance. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

China seems to be becoming a kleptocracy, where the same people make the laws who own the businesses. This inevitably leads to laws that favor businesses against workers, to an extreme degree. Ironically, this may ultimately result in a communist revolution against the "Communist Party". StuRat (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be funny. (From a distance, anyway.) But as a practical matter, how could anyone or any group neutralize or purge the current collection of leaders? And who would finance it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from what Medeis said. The wealth of a 'nation' or in other words, its people (as opposed to its is mineral resources etc.) is usually scored as Per capita income. For example: poor Afghanistan is fabulously wealthy on the book value (vis population) of its unexploited minerals. Yet, no one would regard the 'nation' as wealthy. When only a small minority hold most of its nation's wealth, the majority do not have the means to take the risk to become entrepreneurial and so create business and industry to increase their county's wealth. Another good, modern day example is the US. Fabulously rich but the wealth is is now in the hands of so few people that the quality of life and living standard for the majority of its population is going down, down, down. When I last looked at the World Health Organization's (WHO) I was shocked at the lowering of their average life expectancy. Historically this is not unexpected. There appears to be a 400 year cycle where economics and might, vacillates between the far east and the west. China is now in the ascendancy. Its people are slowly getting more freedoms. There is nothing the western politicians sitting in Congress can do about it, because just like 'old' China, they (the US ruling classes) have to, increase their hold over 'their' population evermore, to support their own elevated living standards and prestige. Remember the old adage: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". So in short, when an old order collapses, when it did in (say Britain) during the the Black Death). The common people's new freedom revitalized the economy -the nation prospered . England's King Henry VIII further reduced the strangle hold of the ecclesiastical grip on common commerce – the nation prospered still more. Cromwell loosened the grip of the the Monarchy -and the 'nation' prospered even further more and so on and so on.--Aspro (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plug Adaptor from UK plug to Vietnam

What type of plug adaptor would I need for Vietnam? Is it the standard two-pin (round) European type? Or would I need the two-pin (flat version) used in Spain and Japan? Or both, as I did in Korea? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without more info about where you'll be, it's hard to say. See Mains electricity by country. Dismas|^(talk) 06:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hanoi is my destination. Basically I should take both A and C versions, it seems. Thanks. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can Full-Grain Leather not have pores?

I recently received a Saddleback Leather item, a company known for producing items with full-grain leather. However, an inspection with the naked eye and under a loupe reveals a lack of hair pores on the leather surface. However, the leather does feel very high-end. Is it possible to have high-quality full-grain leather that does not have hair pores? Many online guides suggest that full-grain leather MUST have visible hair pores. Acceptable (talk) 08:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eggnog

In the UK, Eggnog is neither a popular Christmas drink nor is it readily available in shops. According to our article it is a UK invention that spread to the colonies and is now pretty ubiquitous in North America. Is eggnog's decline in the UK related to the dairy rationing of World War II? 13:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.143.8 (talk)

Well, I can remember back to the early 1960s, and I can never remember any mention of eggnog in a UK context, though Warnink's Advocaat used to be advertised a lot on tv - I was never tempted to try it. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 14:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I couldn't see anything specific, but it seems to have fallen out of favour over here long before that. The The Oxford Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America (p. 671) has it as "a tradition of Christmas and New Year's celebrations throughout the United States" although it "reflect[s] the English heritage in America". Most of the references on Google to eggnog, egg-nog or egg nog in England seem to refer back to the 1800s. Tastes in drinks change regularly, in the 19th century Englishmen in pubs mainly drank porter. I recently found a 1960s London newspaper advertisement for Christmas drinks; heading the list were numerous brands of sherry, Babycham and that noxious canned beer called Double Diamond and its equally unpleasant rival, Long Life ("specially brewed for the can"). Also in the list was Bol's Advocaat, which our article notes "is similar to eggnog". Alansplodge (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell how any of those things could be more noxious than eggnog itself. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it were "available" in Britain, you'd be advised to avoid the disgusting gum and preservative-ridden commercial concoctions, and just whip an egg in a glass of chilled milk and add a little rum or creme de menthe for sweetness. I assume rum, creme de methe, milk and eggs are available across the pond. μηδείς (talk) 16:48, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Correct assumption. We even have electricity. Pointless. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Highest recorded temperature

The weather channel shows april 2006 Coos Bay Oregon high as 180 degrees?? Is this possible and true youwiln — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.234.202.153 (talk) 17:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it is not true. That's an incredibly high temperature, far higher than the record listed here: Highest temperatures ever recorded. I suspect the digits were transposed, and it should be 108, not 180. Is it possible? Probably not under natural circumstances, but I'll leave that to more expert opinion. Mingmingla (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they made a mistake of some kind...there are disputes about the record temperatures - but they only differ by a few degrees - it would be truly unbelievable to have a temperature break the current record by over 40 degrees F. SteveBaker (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The unofficial heat burst record is 189 F (87 C) in Abadan, Iran in June 1967, so 180 F isn't _impossible_ - I don't know how long a heat burst has to be before it becomes a "proper" temperature record. That being said, Coos Bay, Oregon does not appear on the heat burst chart, and it seems like an unlikely location for such a high temperature, even transiently. Tevildo (talk) 23:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With heat like that, metal and stone surfaces wouldn't only cook eggs, but burn up the discarded shells, apparently a problem for Death Valley this year, around the centennial of another "hottest day on Earth" (134 Fahrenheit).

Coos Bay doesn't even hold the record among typos. I can't recall the exact city, date or temperature, but according to an edition of Jay Leno's Headlines, a Midwest US town went well into the 900s around 1995. (I'll try to find that, unreliable as it is). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:43, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Can't find the clip, but by remembering another headline from the episode (with SleepTite mattresses "rats get in, but they don't get out"), I've found it was probably from June 1996. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:58, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

December 31

Military quotation

A military commentator, discussing (I think) the Congreve rocket in Napoleonic times (or thereabouts), said something along the lines of "If rockets had been invented before guns, the inventor of the gun would be hailed as the greatest engineer of all time." What's the exact quote, and who said it? Tevildo (talk) 00:55, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've read that quote before, but I've just spent a very frustrating half-hour or more sifting through the dark recesses of Google to no avail. Maybe I'll have another go tomorrow. I have an idea that it was later, maybe in the Crimean War. Alansplodge (talk) 02:05, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carroll Hall Shelby's Can-Am Racer

> Hello, > > I was looking for information on the Shelby CAN-AM racers designed by David Bruns, Peter Brock and ol Shel himself in 1989. Do you know why these cars are nearly > non-existent when talk of Mr. Shelby's accomplishments are listed? > > I see even Wiki does not acknowledge the existence of the cars.

File:PX2 Rt side.jpg