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

April 16

Where is Gunnam Island?

In the 1955 book The wild flowers of Kuwait and Bahrain [1] mention is made of the "plants of Gunnam Island" collected by Sir Rupert Hay in 1940-50. Where is this island?--Melburnian (talk) 01:58, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

There's a town (or myeon) in Yeonggwang County named Gunnam. Not sure if it's an island, but Korea is a peninsula. Close enough for some people. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:21, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

It has a Flood Control Theme Park, which sounds fun. It may also suggest floods turned hills to islands, and needed to be controlled. With places like Duck Island, Water Spider Habitat and Typhoon Observatory (on Typhoon Road), sounds at least a bit wet. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:24, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks InedibleHulk, that's quite possibly the coolest Flood Control Theme Park I've ever seen :-) I'm assuming, however, that this particular Gunnam Island is likely to be the Middle East region.--Melburnian (talk) 07:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, wasn't a very confident guess, especially given the book title. But worth a swing. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:36, April 16, 2014 (UTC)

Probably Al Ghanam Island now in Oman of the Musandam Penisular, have a look at http://wikimapia.org/24333902/Jazirat-al-Ghanam-Goat-Island or http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/jazirat-umm-al-ghanam/view/?service=0 MilborneOne (talk) 08:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that seems likely to be it.--Melburnian (talk) 01:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

victory ship Twin Falls Victory

was air force radio tech assigned to this ship on Inchon Korea Invasion.. we had a cook knife another and stopped entire convoy in middle of ocean to have doctor come over to tend the injured crewman. Om Board from Japan and departed at Inchon, Korea Just wondering what happened to that ship/ Art Weart, USAF Sgt telcom guy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.12.13 (talk) 02:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

There's this article about the USNS Twin Falls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USNS_Twin_Falls_(T-AGM-11) --Dreamahighway (talk) 02:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Figure for human lifespan

Median age figures for 2001. See the articles: Ageing, Gerontology. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 13:55, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I know that there is no real fixed age limit to a "normal human lifespan" and that there is no real way to measure it either. Like it's hard to determine when a person is supposed to die. So what is the traditional age given for the human lifespan? Personally, I would use either 60+ or 27+. I was thinking of age 60+ because 60 is the cut-off age defined by the United Nations as the beginning of old age. On the other hand, I was thinking of 27+ because loss of body mass, in fact, usually (but not always) begins at age 27, and 27 is also supposed to be the maximum age we are able to live to for our body size. But I'm not sure if there's a specific age cut-off used for statistical purposes. Ac05number1 (talk) 10:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

The traditional age, at least in Christian-influenced cultures, is 70; the Biblical "three-score and ten". Rojomoke (talk) 12:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

That's Psalm 90 by the way.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

According to the CDC, life expectancy in the U.S. was 78.7 in 2011. I'll keep looking for something more global. (I notice someone inserted a map of median ages worldwide, but I don't think that represents life expectancy -- I think it is the average age of living people in each region, not the average age at death.)--Dreamahighway (talk) 18:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

See List of countries by life expectancy: "Worldwide, the average life expectancy at birth was 71.0 years (68.5 years for males and 73.5 years for females) over the period 2010–2013 according to United Nations World Population Prospects 2012 Revision, and 70.7 years (68.2 years for males and 73.2 years for females) for 2009 according to The World Factbook." Not sure if this is what you want, I'm a little confused about what you mean by "traditional" and "statistical."--Dreamahighway (talk) 18:27, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• Other related articles Biological clock (aging), Senescence, and telomere. --Jayron32 18:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• There's a massive difference between life expectancy at birth and the average age at which adults die. Even in the most highly developed countries, infant mortality reduces life expectancy at birth by a measureable amount, and in places where many children die, the average adult will live many years beyond life expectancy at birth. Other factors are also relevant, such as the fact that males are more likely to be killed in warfare or in other types of physically risky situations. Old people in poor, war-torn countries may not live quite as long as old people in Japan, but once you're old enough that most people are living quiet lives (i.e. not doing much of anything that's intentionally risky), the gap between the two countries will be far less. Nyttend (talk) 02:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• That's quite true. Most major gains in life expectancy have NOT come from extending the age at which healthy adults die of "being old". There's actually been very little change at that end of the equation. Instead, most life expectancy changes have come from two things 1) preventing deaths from communicable childhood diseases by the use of vaccinations and 2) safe, clean, and medically supervised methods of childbirth. Prior to modern medicine, what killed most people before "being old" killed them was diseases they got in childhood (before they had a strong enough immune system to deal with them) or women dying in childbirth. In his book A Little Commonwealth, John Demos did a detailed demographic study of Plymouth Colony in the 17th century. If you were a man who lived into adulthood, OR if you were a woman who lived to menopause (and thus stopped having children) you basically could expect to live into your 70s pretty reliably. That hasn't changed much. So the "natural" human lifespan (whatever that means) seems to be basically that number; other studies, both formal and informal, basically confirm that. You can see at Life expectancy, there's a small section that looks at a study of members of the English aristocracy who were males who lived to at least 21. Excepting for the time period of the Black Death, the numbers for that specific subpopulation (varying from 64-71 years depending on the century) don't look that bad even compared to modern life. The aristocracy would have had every advantage possible (sanitation, relative isolation from others, good food, not-too-strenuous a lifestyle) and thus would have had the best advantage to live to whatever age "being old" kills you. And the numbers don't look too bad, even compared to modern life. --Jayron32 11:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Although "The number of centenarians in England and Wales has increased five-fold over the last 30 years, according to the Office for National Statistics" and that's despite today's centenarians surviving the Spanish Flu Pandemic and World War II. Alansplodge (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Time to steam cook my Easter ham

This year I want to try steaming a ham (for the first time). I have a rather large steamer (a stock pot with a metal steamer basket insert). I'm also an advocate of slow cooking, which allows the heat and flavors to distribute more evenly. The ham is 10 pounds, refrigerated, precooked and partially spiral sliced. I intend to spread out the slices and insert pineapple slices between them when I steam it. I realize I won't get any browning by this method, so may pop it in the oven at the end to brown it.

So, my question is, how long do I need to steam the ham, presumably at 212F/100C, at normal atmospheric pressure ? I've only found figures for steaming much smaller portions, in my web searches. I realize that this temperature is much lower than you would use to bake a ham in the oven, but the steam in the air should also carry the heat to the ham more quickly, right ? This ham is precooked, so I could get by with just warming it up, but would prefer to heat it enough to kill any bacteria. StuRat (talk) 17:21, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

This recipe suggests 6-8 hours on the "low" setting on your slow cooker, no added water needed. --Jayron32 18:02, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Unfortunately, that recipe doesn't specify the size of the ham or what temperature "low" is. StuRat (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Most slow cookers don't have temperature settings, just "low" and "high". This reference suggests the low settings tend to be around 200F. - Eron^Talk 23:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

OK, good. I'm not sure what the point would be in setting the temperature higher than boiling, though. Wouldn't a non-pressurized cooking vessel stay at boiling temperature, as the water boils off ? So you'd just use more electricity, producing more heat and steam in the house, while not cooking it any faster. StuRat (talk) 13:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Behavior of water on a hot plate. Graph shows heat transfer (flux) v. temperature (in degrees Celsius) above T_S, the saturation temperature of water, 100 °C (212 °F).

I thought you'd trained as a Chemical Engineer, Stu? [2] Maybe it was some other type of engineering. Regardless, boiling with more heat, giving a more vigorous boil, empirically cooks it faster. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 15:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Mechanical Engineering, actually, although I've only worked as a computer programmer. That chart seems to show the best heat transfer is around 140C, if T_s is the boiling temp, and if I can read that nonlinear scale correctly. StuRat (talk) 15:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

That seems a reasonable conclusion. I hope this has helped. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Yep, thanks so far. I'm a bit worried that if I leave it to steam overnight the water will run out. I wish I had a device to automatically add water when the level drops too low. StuRat (talk) 17:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

That would be one of the many benefits of a slow-cooker. I doubt leaving a steamer running overnight like that is safe, as it will indeed probably boil dry. Or maybe you need to embrace the joys of a pressure cooker, which magically produces meltingly soft meat in very little time? (the main mistake people make with pressure cookers is overcooking things). 86.146.28.229 (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I think my setup essentially is a large slow-cooker, as I do put a lid on it, and water vapor that condenses on the lid does fall back down into the pot, although some steam also escapes, due to the pressure. I'd still expect evaporation from a formal slow-cooker, as it can't be sealed, or the pressure would build up from the steam. I just can't find a slow-cooker large enough to cook a full sized ham or turkey, so that's why I use a stock pot with steamer basket instead (also using my gas stove is cheaper than electricity). A pressure-cooker seems dangerous, as it could explode, and inconvenient, since you can't open it up to add ingredients that need a different cooking time. And after the Boston Marathon Bombings, anyone who buys a pressure cooker here is a terrorism suspect. StuRat (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

No, you aren't a terror suspect for buying a pressure cooker. You can go down to Target right now and buy one and no one will care. And you can then make really good stews in like an hour or two. --Jayron32 02:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

An electric slow cooker can deliver lower heat than your hob, in a controlled way, and so can keep the food just hot enough to cook without boiling dry for many hours. It is assisted in this by the high heat capacity of the usually ceramic pot, and the well-fitting lid. I can leave mine on the low setting for 12 hours with no fears of boiling dry or burning. It is very cheap, much cheaper than running a gas hob, because it uses so little energy. My big one is big enough for any ham I've seen, although not for the turkey that would feed my family. But then, I've never wanted to boil or steam a turkey: I've also never felt that my turkey was dry or needed brining or whatever, so I accept American turkeys may just be different.

If you're an idiot, or use an old pressure cooker with a weight on top, then it is dangerous. If you're a normal person who uses a modern pressure cooker according to the instructions, it is perfectly safe. I have never needed to add ingredients part-way through, because it generally only needs to be heated for about 10-20 minutes to cook my stews perfectly. I can't say I've ever felt the need to keep adding ingredients throughout the main cooking stage of anything like that, and certainly haven't needed to when cooking a joint of meat. It "could explode" just like your car could. I assume you use sharp knives, even though those are dangerous and could cut your fingers off?

If your neighbourhood is so weird as to imagine any consumer who buys a pressure cooker is a terrorist, I had to wonder why they wouldn't have lynched the sellers of kitchen equipment? Honestly, these are odd objections. Your current set-up works, but is inefficient and cannot be safely left unattended. If you want to leave it alone while you sleep or leave the house, or you want to reduce your energy bills, you'll either need a slow cooker or a pressure cooker (the last not to be left unattended, but to drastically reduce cooking times so it never comes up). Better cooking through engineering. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 20:33, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Are all pressure cookers designed in a way that they can't possibly explode ? Or can the pressure relief valve fail in an "always shut" position, allowing pressure to build up to a dangerous level ? I just had a power spike last week with voltage up around 140 volts for days (110-120V is normal range here), and I can easily imagine that resulting in more than the proper amount of heat.

As for adding ingredients at different times, my last stew included beans, which need to be cooked for hours, along with other ingredients that would turn to mush if cooked that long. StuRat (talk) 21:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: I did a test and left my stock pot (with steamer basket) on low heat for 13 hours, no problem. Less than 10% of the water evaporated. At that rate I could keep it on for some 5 days before it would run dry ! StuRat (talk) 10:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: I steamed my ham for 7 hours so far. It's rather dry and mealy, unfortunately. Apparently the fat melted off of it. I'm thinking I need to baste it with some type of oil. Any ideas ? StuRat (talk) 14:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

UPDATE: The ham didn't go over particularly well at Easter. Everyone ate theirs, but nobody wanted more. It turned dark brown, and very much reminds me of the "pork" in a can of pork and beans. In fact, I added some to a can of pork and beans, and it seemed right at home there. I think the mistake must have been that I cooked it as long as an uncooked ham would need. Since this ham was precooked, it needed far less steaming. StuRat (talk) 04:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

What is an "Easter ham"?

An obvious follow-up to the above question...

The question is written as if all readers are expected to know what an Easter ham is. I don't. I'm familiar with a custom of fish on Good Friday (and chocolate on the Sunday), but ham?

Is this a custom on which Wikipedia doesn't have an article? Who follows such a custom? HiLo48 (talk) 17:34, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

As far as I've been able to tell, this is an American custom. They have a ham instead of lamb (as in Britain, much of Europe, and many other places) or some other festive food. I can't really find any good references (there's a lot of the usual suspect sites, with a lack of references and attributing everything to Eostre as if we knew anything about her), but the general believable idea seems to generally be that sheep weren't really an important food-source in America, and pigs were; therefore, the Paschal Lamb became the Pascal Ham. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Ham is the traditional Easter Dinner dish served in America. I have no idea why or how it came to be, but like turkey is served on Thanksgiving and hot dogs are traditionally eaten at baseball games, ham is traditionally served for Sunday dinner on Easter. this site suggests that ham, as a preserved food, kept over the long winter, so was the available large cut of meat which most people had access to in the early spring, when Easter tends to fall. This site claims that the pig was a symbol of luck, though I am disinclined to believe that over the other, more practical, explanation. --Jayron32 17:55, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Jayron. We do have an article on the Christmas ham, something with which I'm very familar. Should we have one on the Easter ham? ("Mmmmm, ham!") HiLo48 (talk) 18:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Not everyone in the States has ham for Easter. My family tradition (going back at least to the early 20th century) is lamb. Marco polo (talk) 19:16, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I remember going to an Easter service once, where the preacher was doing that lead-in thing that they do to get the crowd comfortable before they address the meaty topics (aside: I suppose it must have a technical name in homiletics? Anyone know?). He was talking about the meal that most of the parishioners would be having at their family homes, and said ham was fine, as long as you didn't know the reason for it, which he claimed was that Jews don't eat ham, so it was a symbol of not being like the Jews. (Aside: I expect the pig doesn't feel "ham is fine" even in that case.)

Anyone know whether there's anything to that claim? --Trovatore (talk) 19:24, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

From what I've been able to find online, ham is a US tradition mainly because it was the meat most widely available at this time of year in pre-refrigeration days. Sheep were historically not raised much in the early United States. (Pastures in much of the US don't hold up well to sheep grazing due to hot and sometimes dry summers.) The explanation that ham is a "Christian meat" looks like an attempt to give religious sanction to a practice that developed for other reasons. Marco polo (talk) 20:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I hope it was clear he said "...as long as you didn't know the reason for it". --Trovatore (talk) 20:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I've also found references to ham as a traditional food in some European countries as well, also based on the availability of ham in spring over any other meats. Some sources suggest that Easter tended to coincide with when the first hams from the fall slaughter were cured and ready to eat. - Eron^Talk 20:10, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I had assumed ham was traditional for a Byzantine Catholic Easter, as all my Rusyn and Polish relatives served it. But apparently Lamb was tradition if you could afford it. Ham was cheaper and preserved longer, since it usually lasts for most of a week. This website I can't link to, www.examiner dot com/article/how-to-put-together-a-traditional-carpatho-rusyn-easter-basket-for-the-blessing-of-the-easter-foods website] confirms my mother's explanation. Lamb shaped molds were created for the butter, and peppercorns wer used for its eyes. μηδείς (talk) 20:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

This website shows a traditional Easter basket taken to the church for blessing, with a Ham, and the priest's assertion Ham was traditional among Slavs. μηδείς (talk) 21:50, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

That would explain my slavish devotion to the Easter ham. :-) StuRat (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Traditional Russian Easter fare includes kulich and paskha. The article makes no mention of it, but the Russians of my acquaintance eat kulich with ham. It's a slightly sweet bread, so that combo doesn't sound quite right, but it's delicious. Imagine eating a denser and yeastier panettone (minus the raisins etc) with ham and you're more or less in the gustatory ballpark. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

The tradition of eating lamb at Easter is symbolic, the Paschal Lamb eaten at the Last Supper "prefigured symbolically Christ, "the Lamb of God", who redeemed the world by the shedding of His blood".[3] Alansplodge (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, "the Ham of God" (Perna Dei?) doesn't quite have the ring of my old girlfriend Agnes Day. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

The thing about Easter is that it's a celebration of the coming of Spring, so you have lamb or chicken, both of which are at their prime in springtime. Ham is for Christmas, when you are confined to cured meats. DuncanHill (talk) 19:40, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

In previous decades, the anthem at our church on Easter Sunday was always Worthy is the Lamb that was slain from Handel's Messiah. Returning home to a lovely roast leg of lamb, you didn't need to be a theologian to spot the connection. Alansplodge (talk) 21:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Handel also wrote "All we like sheep", so lamb seems ideal. HiLo48 (talk) 23:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

This thread deserves a standing ovation. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:46, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

On reflection, the lamb thing is probably just a remembrance of the Jewish connection to the lamb (e.g. their spreading of lamb's blood on the doorway to ward off the Egyptian plagues, remembered in the Passover), and the fact that Jews were forbidden from eating any pork products as being unclean. Jesus was, if nothing else, a Jew (their King, no less). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

If, on the contrary, anyone's interested in highly speculative but educated guessing on the significance of the pig, even to the Hebrews, which Robert Graves said they held sacred, and ate once a year, see his magnum opus, The White Goddess. μηδείς (talk) 04:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

(link fixed)

April 17

code

Can someone tell me what kind of code is this YnV0IGhpZ2ggc2hlIHNoT290cyB0aHJvdWdoIGFpciBhbmQgbGln, and how do i decode it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asff1123 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

It's Base64 encoding, and I think the "T" should be a "b". --Carnildo (talk) 03:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

It's part of a quote from Thomas Moore's O That I Had Wings: "Where idle warblers roam; but high she shoots through air and light, Above all low delay, Where nothing earthly bounds her flight, Nor shadow dims her way."-Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:45, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

although to be clear, the quoted string gives 'but high she shOots through air and lig' (emphasis and quotation marks added). 'YnV0IGhpZ2ggc2hlIHNob290cyB0aHJvdWdoIGFpciBhbmQgbGln' will give 'but high she shoots through air and lig' (emphasis and quotation marks added) hence why Carnildo suggested it may have been intended. Nil Einne (talk) 06:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

dividend distribution by mutual funds

How does a mutual fund distributes dividend. what is the source of income. Is it from the dividend earned from the investment in equities or the profit earned from trading in the share market. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.248.102.236 (talk) 11:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

It's from dividends produced by the individual stocks. The profit from trading stocks is reflected in a change in the price of the mutual fund itself (less management fees, etc.). StuRat (talk) 13:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Not correct for the mutual funds I've had shares in (here in Canada). Capital gains from the fund trading the shares, as well as dividends earned by the shares, flow out to the mutual fund shareholders as dividend distributions. I have to report mutual-fund distributions on my income tax return, correctly categorized as Canadian dividends, non-Canadian (dividend) income, or capital gains—the mutual fund provides me the appropriate details on their tax information slip. However, these distributions can be implemented in two or more ways by different funds. One way is that you are told you now have more shares. Another way is that you are told that the value of the shares has increased. (Maybe it is also possible to take the distributions as a cash payout; I don't know.) But this is a choice made by the fund, not a function of what type of income is being distributed. Of course, the value of the mutual-fund shares can also change because the value of the stocks held by the fund changes, or because of those management fees. --50.100.193.30 (talk) 04:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Profits flow to shareholders as capital gains contributions. See Mutual fund. RudolfRed (talk) 00:28, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Dividends are a small part of the income that mutual funds see. Shadowjams (talk) 04:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Will this setup water my plants?

A few hours before I'm set to go on a business trip for two weeks, I realize that I've set nothing up to take care of my three plants. With little other options, I've done the following:

1. Use a needle to punch a tiny hole in the lids of three plastic bottles. So the water comes out drip by drip. 2. Prop the plants up against my glass window, so they get sun. 3. Tape the bottles to the window so that their lids are in the soil.

Ideally, the water drips out slowly second by second, and this flow is enough to tide them over until I get back.

The instructions that came with the plant a very long time ago says that they only need to be watered once every three days, and they were fully watered today. I don't know their names, but they're just leafy greens. It's unlikely you guys will be able to reply before I have to leave in like one hour, but do you think this getup will keep the plants alive? 98.27.247.86 (talk) 19:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

If you're really pressed for time, I would place the plants out of direct sunlight. It's all guesswork since we don't know the actual rate at which the water is seeping out of the bottles. But it's better than nothing. Even if the plants look crispy when you get back, you'll probably be able to trim them back and revive them. OttawaAC (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

I found this. No warranties stated or implied, but maybe it's worth a shot. --Jayron32 01:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

• To be safe, assume that all the water will drip out much more quickly than you expect. Make sure that if this happens you will not leave a puddle. You can stand the plants in the bathtub and leave the bathtub light on with an inch of water standing in the tub, although that will also drain unless you can really seal it unusually tight. (They'll do fine for two weeks without lots of light.) Otherwise, out of the sun like said, and make sure the heat will not run, at least not over 60F while you're gone. μηδείς (talk) 02:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

• I agree that the risk of water damage is more of a concern that dead plants. However, the kitchen sink might provide both drainage and light, if you have a window nearby, so I suggest that rather than the tub. You can use the inverted bottle method in the sink, possibly taping the bottle to the faucet. (You could also set the faucet to slowly drip, although you might get way too much water and drown the plant, and wherever the water drips you would want to put a rock, to prevent it from splashing mud out.) StuRat (talk) 16:25, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

April 18

I want to rent an apartment in changzhou,jiangsu

How can I rent a nice apartment in changzhou,jiangsu,China??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicacheng728 (talk • contribs) 11:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

"We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." Sorry about that. You may try searching the web, though. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 13:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

If you can read Chinese, you might try a site like this one. If you can't, you are more likely to find someone with local knowledge on this forum than on the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Marco polo (talk) 18:01, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Just some comments on apartment rentals in general:

1) Ask specifically what is included and what isn't, as it can vary wildly. Heat and water may be included, or may not. The stove and refrigerator and microwave oven may be included, maybe not. Even furniture and cookware/dishes are sometimes included. A parking space or carport may cost extra. Later insist on a signed copy, in writing, listing everything they said was included.

2) If they control the thermometer and they pay for heat, expect to be cold all winter long.

3) Don't fall for only viewing a model. Insist on seeing the actual apartment before you sign anything, or you may end up in a place that stinks of urine, etc. Flush all the toilets, run all the faucets to see if you get hot water, etc., and turn on the heat and A/C, if so equipped, long enough to tell if they are working, and bring a night light you can plug into all the outlets, to tell if they work. If they have the utilities shut off, that severely limits your ability to check it out. Also check if all the windows and doors open up, including cabinets and closets.

4) Consider any money you give them to be lost forever, even if it's a deposit, as many of them claim enough damages to keep your entire deposit, no matter what. Also insist on them signing a statement acknowledging all the existing damages you can find, before you give them any money, in the hopes that you might not get charged for those.

5) Talk to the neighbors alone, to find out if they have had any problems. (They might be afraid to tell the truth if you are there with the landlord.)

6) Ask exactly how much you will spend each month, including taxes, additional fees, etc. Again, get it in writing.

7) Avoid any place that makes you sign a long lease, and yet has the right to increase your rent during that lease. Plan on your rent going way up whenever the lease/rental term ends, in any case. StuRat (talk) 20:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Later insist on a signed copy, in writing, listing everything they said was included - I totally agree, Stu. After all, a signed verbal list isn't worth the paper it's not written on. And the signature is often hard to make out.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:25, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I was trying to exclude the possibility of them signing a paper saying they agree that the renter won't be charged "for the items we discussed", without explicitly listing them. StuRat (talk) 21:38, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Strike the bit about talking to the neighbours, unless the OP speaks Chinese. There is very little English here in China, mostly because, in spite of all the schooling, people just find it hard. It's the same for us learning Chinese - the gap between the languages makes it hard. My neighbours are fine and there is no raucous noise, and I'm in a regular downtown sort of area in Jiangsu. Unless you speak Chinese, just get some help from a local with paperwork, and yes, look at photos. That said, I think about 2000rmb per month will net you a decent place. Electricity is cheap, and almost every place has aircon, as far as I am aware. I know nothing about bond etc. IBE (talk) 00:55, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The OP's last name is "Cheng", so I think there's a fair chance she might speak Chinese (I wonder what portion of people named "Cheng" speak Chinese). StuRat (talk) 01:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Taking the piss

Whilst in Germany, I noticed an incredible indifference to public urination. In my country, if you are caught urination you are immediately apprehended by the police. However, in my experience people in germany seem to take a blind eye to it, urinating in residential areas, in towns, municipal facilities like train stations etc all seems to be relatively tolerated, providing you show some attempt to be discrete.

Heck, I even saw a parked police car and a guy urinate by a tree a few feet in front of the vehicle in plane sight.

Can anyone clarify what's going on here, is Germany just ultra liberal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.96.72 (talk) 14:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Urine is relatively sterile and fairly harmless (or actually beneficial to plants as a source of nutrients) when applied in small quantities to soil. It is only a problem when applied in large quantities or on impermeable surfaces where bacteria can metabolize it into fouler-smelling compounds before it is washed away by rain. So in congested urban areas, it is a nuisance that might deserve police attention, but there is nothing inherently wrong about public urination except in the eyes of a person coming from a place where it is culturally stigmatized. In Germany, the cultural stigma just isn't as strong as it is wherever you come from. Marco polo (talk) 15:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Tell that to the pernickety people of Portland, please. A man was caught pissing into their dam, so they have decided to drain it for fear of contaminating their precious citizens. That's 144 million (!!) litres of water just thrown away. And please tell the local birds and animals not to crap in the dam in future. What a sad joke. Nanny society, your time is now. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:21, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

There may be more to that story than meets the eye. First (I hadn't realized this myself) the reservoir in question is what's called a "finished drinking water" reservoir — that is, it gets piped from there straight into homes with no further treatment. Supposedly, Portland is rigorous about excluding both humans and animals from the watercourse, though exactly how they manage that in practice I have trouble explaining to myself.

So, still pretty stupid, but not quite as stupid as you might think if you thought this was a more normal sort of reservoir that holds water that's treated en route to homes, or else used to recharge groundwater.

But that's not half of it. In 1993, there was an outbreak of cryptosporidiosis in Milwaukee that killed quite a few people. See 1993 Milwaukee Cryptosporidiosis outbreak. In response, or maybe a better word would be "reaction", the Environmental Protection Agency started a long rulemaking process aimed at eliminating uncovered finished-water reservoirs. See Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule This is a great pity because the result is not going to be very attractive, and the connection to the supposed reason for it is shaky at best, but I do kind of agree that it's not an ideal way to store finished drinking water if you were starting from scratch.

Turns out that the most important city that sued the federal government over this rule was — Portland.

So I don't fully follow it all myself, but there's a substantial possibility that this action has a complicated political subtext. Not that that makes it any less stupid, but it makes it stupid in a more interesting way. --Trovatore (talk) 02:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Keeping drinking water in opened ponds seems stupid, to me. Aside from all the natural contaminants, that's an obvious temptation to terrorists to poison the water supply. StuRat (talk) 03:06, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Even aside from that extreme possibility, if urine contamination, even superhomeopathically dilute contamination, is a real concern, they ought to erect barriers to prevent access by random persons. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I would assume they've already done that, but I can think of several way past a barrier, like a ladder, a catapult, a mortar, or a plane drop. Or they could just throw something over. StuRat (talk) 03:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Personally, not very worried about the terrorism angle. This isn't Gotham City, and the Joker doesn't have a little test tube that's going to make everyone freeze or whatever it does. I think poisoning a large supply of water is harder than you think. --Trovatore (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Smilex helps us smile. But he has plenty of others. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:33, April 19, 2014 (UTC)

Note that poisoning your enemy's water supply has been used in warfare for thousands of years, most recently in Sudan, where bodies were thrown down wells to poison the well. So, any water handling plan ought to keep threats to the water supply in mind. StuRat (talk) 21:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

It's impossible to fully secure something as massive as a water supply system, which must inevitably pass through populated areas. Better to not upset too many people who might become enemies. And worrying so much about terrorists doesn't help. If you're worrying all the time, they've won. HiLo48 (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

You can secure it a lot better than leaving it in open ponds. Drilling through to a buried water main would be a difficult operation, likely to cause a flood and draw attention, and would affect fewer people, in any case. StuRat (talk) 14:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

How much plutonium would it take ? (Perhaps supplied by angry Iranians after a military strike on their nuclear program.) StuRat (talk) 03:39, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

More than you think. The bad thing about plutonium is if a piece gets in your lungs, because it stays and keeps irradiating the same spot. It's essentially harmless outside your body, because your skin blocks the alpha radiation.

So I don't really see how you're going to get plutonium into your lungs from the water, not reliably anyway. To be sure, it's not great to have it in your bloodstream either, but I think it would take quite a lot to cause any noticeable casualties, even if you could solve the problem of making it water-soluble, which I don't know how to do. --Trovatore (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

They'd still manage to cause panic if it could be verified that they got any plutonium into the water supply. StuRat (talk) 03:50, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that part's true. --Trovatore (talk) 03:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Metallic plutonium is very heavy. Even tiny pieces would quickly end up on the bottom of a reservoir. Outlets are never right at the bottom. HiLo48 (talk) 04:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Lots of drinking water is kept in open ponds. What do you think reservoirs are used for? While large numbers of people do get drinking water from aquifers, many others get it from surface water sources like reservoirs. The Quabbin Reservoir provides water for much of Massachusetts, Falls Lake for the Research Triangle, the Ashokan Reservoir for New York City, etc. etc. --Jayron32 03:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Jayron, I don't know how much you read of my mini-essay above, but the question is not whether it's drinking water, but whether it's finished drinking water — that is, sent directly to customers with no further treatment. I think that's what Stu meant. --Trovatore (talk) 03:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure that's finished drinking water ? I think in most cases that's an input to the water treatment plant. StuRat (talk) 03:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Then there's the concern that somebody may see a man's penis. In the US, public urination can thus get you put on the sex offenders watch list, for the rest of your life, and often there is no distinction made on that list between such people and rapists. StuRat (talk) 16:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

That's harsh...so what if you're a woman. Is there equal concern of seeing your vagina, and if so does that also attract the same sanctions? If not, looks like men are sort of penal-ized....86.6.96.72 (talk) 17:12, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually, deliberate exposure of one's vagina could lead to penalties in the United States similar to those for penile exposure. There is a really strong current in the United States of public prudery (often voiced by people who are later caught engaging in sex acts that hypocritically violate the norms they espouse). Marco polo (talk) 17:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC) 17:42, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

In theory, yes, but in reality women are less likely to be charged. StuRat (talk) 20:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Two things to consider. It's easier for men to unzip and whip than for women to take their pants half down. So more common, hence more commonly busted. In standard peeing positions, a man's penis is visible from the front and both sides, while a vagina is just from behind. The last time I was stopped by cops for open beer, they suggested I go off the sidewalk rather than walk a few houses down to my friend's toilet. So if it's a crime here, it's one of those crimes. Probably different when there are kids around. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:56, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

vulva ≠ vagina —Tamfang (talk) 13:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Different cultures, different social mores. Do Americans and Brits pee under their lemon trees? It's an old custom in Australia and New Zealand. Well, for men, anyway. HiLo48 (talk) 22:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

So that's why lemons are yellow. :-) StuRat (talk) 22:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Lemon trees only grow indoors here, so no. Peeing in public places is regarded as very antisocial in the UK mainly I suspect, because of the unpleasant smell after a few hours. The police don't tolerate it here; I'm not sure of the exact offence but it's not exposure that's the issue. "GETTING tough with drunken yobs who urinate in Glasgow streets has seen violent crime plummet by almost 70%, police chiefs today claimed" and "DRUNKEN yobs caught urinating in the street in Hull city centre are being made to clean up after themselves with a mop and bucket" are two random examples out of many pages of search results. It used to be a very noticeable practice in France; on a camping trip there in the 1970s, our Scouts began to refer to trees as "Frenchmen's toilets". Alansplodge (talk) 16:44, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Why are the yobs targetted by this racist policy, while the natives get away with it? μηδείς (talk) 02:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yobs are natives. It's just a local term for hooligans, troublemakers, or generally obnoxious (usually male) people. See Yobbo. --Jayron32 02:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Even worse! So, the indigenous yobs are targetted for prosecution by an oppressive southern regime. No wonder they want independence. μηδείς (talk) 17:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

In Glasgow, the police enforcing the measure will be as Scottish as the yobs. The second story relates to Hull, which is in England. --Dweller (talk) 18:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I believe "yob" originated as a term of abuse, as in "backwards boy" in England. Can't back that one up though. --TammyMoet (talk) 08:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the OED confirms that it's just "backslang for boy", recorded as early as 1859, and used by John Osborne in Look back in Anger (1957). The pejorative sense seems to have started about a hundred years ago. Dbfirs 11:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Backslang is traditionally associated with the butcher's trade in London. When one of my Scouts got a Saturday job in the butchery of a local supermarket a few years back, he quickly developed an interesting backslang vocabulary, so it's still alive and kicking, although "yob" seems to be the only backslang that has made it into the mainstream. Rechtubs’ Kaycab Geenals (Butcher's Back Slang) has more details, should you wish to become fluent. Alansplodge (talk) 21:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

April 19

How to find sources about honorary mayors?

I did book and internet searches for a page that talks about honorary mayors. I got results about honorary mayors from across the United States, but nothing that actually discusses what an honorary mayor is and how the concept formed/spread across the country Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 09:13, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I found some French book sources that mention people being given the title maire honoraire by the king of France. Also some scattered other sources referring to honorary titles given out during the Middle Ages in England, Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands, and elsewhere (honorary bailiffs, chamberlains, earls). The Church gave out honorary titles as well. I suspect honorary mayors have a long history in Europe. Some honorary civic positions came with a small stipend. My guess FWIW is that the specific privileges that go with the title would differ from city to city. OttawaAC (talk) 14:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure there's any organized system or anything like that. Organizations (including governments) create honorary titles for having a nice little public ceremony to pin medals or hand certificates to prominent citizens. That goes on all over the world, and in many many different contexts. Universities offer Honorary degrees. The state of Kentucky names Honorary Colonels. Nebraska has Honorary Admirals (for a landlocked state no less!). Wikipedia does have at least one article about an honorary mayor: Mayor of Hollywood. --Jayron32 19:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

April 20

MH370 (flight)

Is it common for news reporters to refer to a missing aircraft by its flight number, such as "MH370"? The aircraft has its own serial number apart from the flight number. (A similar phenomenon occurred when news reporters began to refer to a series of aircraft crashes by simply stating the month and date of the crashes, "9/11".)
—Wavelength (talk) 03:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

It's very common here in the States. A flight number is generally shorter and/or easier to remember than the aircraft's tail number. (I'm guessing that by "serial number" you mean tail number.) The tail number can be up to 5 or 6 characters long and thus rather cumbersome to say again and again. This is one reason why pilots and air traffic controllers will often abbreviate an aircraft's tail number while communicating. MH370, Flight 93, Flight 175, or Flight 77 are easier to say and remember. Add to that the chances of a second instance of MH370 going down being rather slim, there's little reason not to use the flight number. Dismas|^(talk) 03:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this is common. News reports about such events never mention aircraft registration numbers. Airlines retire flight numbers that have experienced deadly crashes. "9/11" is more memorable than the 4 individual flight numbers. I do note that US Airways Flight 1549, in which everyone survived, is better known as the "Miracle on the Hudson".—Nelson Ricardo (talk) 03:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

(ec) Yes, universally common. You won't find "MH 370" written anywhere on the fuselage, assuming it's ever found. But the flight number is the public identification of the flight and hence the plane. Its serial numbers, Aircraft registration (for Malaysia it's always 9Mxxx), and any other identifying features are all too technical for the public to grasp. Now, if there were another major incident involving a different plane also travelling on flight MH 370 (at a different time), that would be confusing and some extra ID would be necessary to disambiguate the two events. But I've not heard of that sort of coincidence ever happening. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) By convention, flight disasters are known by the flight number, not the airplane call number or serial number. United Airlines Flight 93, Pan Am Flight 103, Air France Flight 447, etc. are all known by their flight number. --Jayron32 03:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

And especially the infamous Flight 191. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I remember reading somewhere that airlines "retire" flight numbers after fatal accidents, so United no longer has a Flight 93 and Air France don't have one numbered 447 any more, and so on. If they fly the same route on the same schedule it gets a new number. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

How come United gets a singular verb (has) but Air France get/s a plural verb (don't)? Just curious. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:58, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Isn't it something to do with American English using plural verbs for organizations, while in Europe either is fine? KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 21:28, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

No. "Doesn't" is correct in the US of A. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I thought it was the around, sorry. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 05:45, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Playing or Ripping a broken dvd

If this question can be asked here, Can anything be done with a DVD that is broken and missing plastic? My idiot sister intentionally destroyed some of my stuff and in the batch of broken items is an EXTREMELY rare DVD that can literally not be found anywhere online now and it took me a lot of time and effort to find it for sale in the first place. It's literally one of a kind and it is extremely important to me. I've only had it a few days, I haven't even watched it all the way through, and now the DVD is broken and missing plastic due to my idiot sister's antics. Not much talk of broken dvds at Google since they're so freaking old and no one really uses them anymore I guess, but I figured if anyone has the answer it's Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.106.52 (talk) 03:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

There exist companies that specialize in recovering data from damaged media such as DVDs. I also found This utility that claims to recover lost data from damaged CDs and DVDs. This company claims to be able to recover such data for you. --Jayron32 03:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, I would not expect the price for a recovery service to be cheap. I checked into it once for a hard drive that failed and it was several hundred dollars at least. A DVD may be easier to read than a damaged hard drive though. Dismas|^(talk) 03:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

We've had an article on IsoBuster (Jayron's link) since September 2005 (there seems to be some dispute over the optional download of an additional browser toolbar). It would be interesting to know if anyone has tried this recovery software. If the DVD is broken and has missing plastic, then I think recovery is unlikely (despite built-in error recovery in the format) and it might be simpler to find someone who has another copy. Dbfirs 07:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The disc is so damaged that my laptop won't even play it, so I don't think IsoBuster will help since the DVD can't even be read. I tried tape but all that and the misshapen parts of the disc did was prevent the DVD from spinning in the drive. I can't believe this has happened. I've only had it a few days and I haven't even watched it all the way through. It was my most prized possession and it's now destroyed. Jeez. I couldn't even get an apology out of her. She was like "Just buy another one." and I was like "I can't because THERE ARE NO MORE!" I hate her. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.106.52 (talk) 09:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about your loss. I don't think tape is a good idea because it might damage your drive. I'd have tried superglue, but I don't know the exact condition of the damaged DVD. If you tell us the title, perhaps someone here might know a source, though if it's as rare as you claim then perhaps not. Dbfirs 11:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I want to, PURCHASE AN ALBUM

Hello, I "HOPE" you can help me. I am trying to purchase an album by, Matraca Berg (Country) with the song, "It's Easy to Tell" on it. Do you know where, how or IF I can purchase it. I had one and someone liked it so much, they STOLED it.

IF, you can help me, I would appreciate it very much.

SINCERELY,

Thad L. Ardo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.93.65.82 (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I deleted your phone number. It's a bad idea to post personal contact info on the internet. The album "Bittersweet", which would have featured that track, was apparently never published, according to our article on Matraca Berg. If you had the track on another album, let us know what that was called, and we may be able to help further. Rojomoke (talk) 10:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I believe the song is on some CD releases of Lying to the Moon, which can be found at Amazon.com: [4]. You can also download the individual mp3 from Amazon. --Jayron32 21:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Hail to the Chief Saluting

Does the military (salute) and civilians hold their hands over their hearts when "Hail to the Chief" is played> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.126.75.97 (talk) 18:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I never do, if that's any guide. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The president is saluted by military personnel when Hail to the Chief is played, since the president is Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military.[5] Civilians would stand at attention, but not salute. As for holding the hand over the heart, is that not what people do when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance? OttawaAC (talk) 20:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

People? Or just some people? Did nobody get Jack's point? Like him, I probably wouldn't respond that way when "Hail to the Chief" is played. In my case that would be because I have no idea what it sounds like. HiLo48 (talk) 22:14, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

OK, US citizens. I wouldn't recognize either "Hail to the Chief" or the Pledge of Allegiance if I heard them. OttawaAC (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

That's probably why you are only Canadian. μηδείς (talk) 01:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Okay, I'll be the first US citizen to respond, I guess. Civilians do not salute or put their hand over their heart when HttC is played. Standing is done more as a matter of respect than due to the music being played. We do put our hand over our heart when the national anthem is played in our presence (we don't normally do so at home when we see it sung/performed on the TV). Standing quietly with our hands at our sides is also an acceptable option for many. It's simply a cultural thing after all. We could remain seated or continue doing whatever you were doing though you may receive some dirty looks. As for the Pledge, hardly anyone outside of grade school says it anymore and, again, hand over heart is the usual thing to do while reciting it. Dismas|^(talk) 01:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

As a fellow American, I concur with your summary. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

What are any warning signs that lightning is going to strike nearby whilst you are outside?

Exactly as the question says. I am also wondering if eyes hurting are also a possible warning sign. I also wonder what might cause the lightning to flash red (not blue) when striking the ground.

Simply south ...... discombobulating confusing ideas for just 8 years 18:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

See [6]: "A soft or loud buzzing, clicking, hissing or cracking sound. A tingling sensation. Hairs on the arm or head standing on end. Nearby metal objects emitting a soft, blue-white glow called 'St. Elmo's Fire'". Though I'd have to suggest that none of that seems particularly reliable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Was burning eyes beforehand just a coincidence? And why did I see the lightning strike as red? Simply south ...... discombobulating confusing ideas for just 8 years 20:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Either those are signs of demonic possession, or you should seek a physician. Given it is an open question whether priests are licensed professionals. Random guys on the internet are not lp's; although various admins here will violate wikipedia policy if you know whom to ask. I suggest you search the talk page. μηδείς (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I like what Andy said... I've read anecdotes about lightening victims giving similar feelings. There are probably some physiological effects right before a strike. Of course, at that point it's probably way too late. Don't be outside in a thunderstorm, is the take home point. Shadowjams (talk) 07:48, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

April 21

Bright orange light over the English Channel 20.4, around 2200z

Hello Wikipedians.

I have a question concerning something I observed on the night sky, south-southwest of Portsmouth, UK tonight. I consider myself an avid aviation enthusiast, so I feel I know very well the distinction between strobe lights, navigation beacons, collission lights and landing lights on commercial jetliners. What I observed, however, did not fit with any of these. It moved roughly from east-northeast to west-southwest, and was a bright orange hue - and of course I thought of fire and flames. It flickered somewhat, but the city air could have been disturbed. It moved at a speed common for commercial jetliners, though I couldn't tell the range or height very well. I certainly would not think it above 30,000 feet - much more likely it was between 10 and 20,000 feet. There were no lights apart from the bright orange, which was also much greater in size than a single steady wingtip or beacon light might've been. It kept a steady height as far as I could tell, but I only had it in view for 20-30 seconds before it passed behind a block of houses.

So. Presumably an aircraft with a bright orange light. When does that ever happen? What is the likeliest explanation for what I witnessed? Thank you in advance for any help. 213.104.126.183 (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Own edit: Based on the receipt from Tesco I figure the observation was made at 23:20-25 local time. 213.104.126.183 (talk) 00:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

A military jet using afterburner? AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:09, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Often, these mysterious lights in a dark sky (so, impossible to judge size, height, speed properly) turn out to be floating lanterns. 212.183.140.42 (talk) 00:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I just checked with the wind direction (why hadn't I done so before?) and that definitely seems the most plausible explanation now. I'll settle for that, especially seeing as flightradar shows no flights of a similar heading during that time. Thank you. 213.104.126.183 (talk) 02:09, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, one of my favorite parts of nighttime "UFO sightings" is claims that the object had some specific diameter or was traveling at some specific speed, when it's obviously impossible to determine either of those things without knowing the object's altitude, something that's not easy at night (unless, again, you have an idea of its size or speed; determining these things is circular). Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Sky lantern.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, which floating lantern redirects to. I assumed a registered user would create the redirect for the plural, but I see I was too sleepy to remember to ask. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 09:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Why don't more mass scale auto companies imitate exotic designs?

Although I don't have a source for this, I think it would be reasonable to assume that most people find the designs of exotic cars like Maseratis or Ferraris to be more aesthetically appealing than more conventional cars like Toyotas or Hondas. Why don't the latter, the more conventional car companies, imitate the sleek designs of exotic car producers?

Obviously, copying cars verbatim is probably against some copyright laws, but why don't Toyota or Nissan make more of an effort to shape their average sedans or coupes to resemble those of exotic car companies?

I understand that a lot of high-end cars use more expensive materials like carbon fibre, but surely Toyota, for ex, could just recreate it using steel. It can't be more expensive from a material perspective right? It's more or less the same mass of metal.

Obviously I only speak for myself, but I would be more inclined to purchase a 2-door Honda Civic if it looked similar to a Ferrari F458 or something.

THanks. Acceptable (talk) 01:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

They do with certain models. Almost every major car company has models designed for either performance, or are more exotic looking than the average family sedan. Toyota makes the Lexus RC, Honda has the NSX, Nissan/Datsun has always had the Z-series, GM has the Chevrolet Corvette, Ford has the Ford Mustang, Chrysler has the Viper, etc. However, not everyone wants to buy such cars. Many people have lifestyles unlike you, and actually want things like 4-door sedans and minivans and the like. --Jayron32 02:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

How do you plan to fit your spouse, children, groceries, etc. in your Ferrari F458? Also, making an SUV look like a sports car just invites ridicule. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Reminds me of the Volkswagen with a faux Rolls Royce front. Not a pretty sight. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the more relevant question for you, OP, is why don't more people want exotic looking cars. If the companies thought that consumers wanted it, they would likely make them and thus increase sales/profits. But they don't, so there must be a market reason and not necessarily that they just don't want to make exotic looking cars. Dismas|^(talk) 02:51, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

How do aerodynamics and fuel mileage factor in? Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm intrigued with the marketing aspect of car design, like the way car headlights, grilles, etc. have deliberately anthropomorphized features... car makers have gone so far as to test focus group members' brain wave responses to test designs.[7]. Some people prefer friendly-looking designs, some prefer "angry"-looking designs. The manufacturers put a lot of research into design. My guess is that it comes down to what niche markets prefer, and not everyone wants to drive a sports car. OttawaAC (talk) 03:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I understand that a car shaped/structured like a F458 won't be practical for a family, but perhaps Honda could shape their 2-door coupes to look something similar. For their 4-door sedans, maybe they can copy design cues from a Maserati Quattroporte or something. Minivans I guess would be excluded from this discussion. Acceptable (talk) 04:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

You don't think a Honda Civic would sell better if it looked like this instead?

[[8]]

Acceptable (talk) 04:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)