Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:08, 14 September 2018

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.

September 7

Illegal?

Say I discovered something akin to the Popul Vuh or Dead Sea Scrolls, aka an ancient text in the US. Would it be illegal if I kept it to myself. Makuta Makaveli (talk) 01:44, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK the Treasure Act 1996 stipulates that any treasure found regardless of the circumstances in which it was deposited, even if it was lost or left with no intention of recovery, belongs to the Crown. The export of antiquities is now heavily controlled by law in almost all countries and by the 1970 UNESCO Convention. The ownership of the Dead Sea Scrolls is disputed among the Jordan, the Israel, and the Palestinian Authority. The Popol Vuh seems to originate in oral tradition transcribed by Father Ximénez of the Dominican Order whose documents passed to the Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala from which Abbot Brasseur may have stolen the volume and taken it back to France. DroneB (talk) 03:24, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the United States, the answer is, "maybe." There are both state and federal laws that apply: Treasure_trove#United_States. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:30, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This may or may not be a real life example, depending on your point of view. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:31, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First, someone would have to find them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:27, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have a photo of a couple of UFOs.

Where can I submit the photograph, so people can tell me what they think is seen in the photo? --Hacker1 (talk) 02:09, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One possibility is Imgur. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most UFOs are later identified as conventional objects or phenomena. This is a list by country of UFO organizations and these are notable UFO researchers. DroneB (talk) 02:53, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anywhere on Wikipedia that is appropriate to upload the photograph of the potential UFOs? --Hacker1 (talk) 22:04, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Luster" in the Book of Mormon

Out of curiosity, I started reading the Book of Mormon here (beware annoying voice narration kicks in, presumably for those who can't read, but have somehow managed to navigate to this page... switch sound off before clicking) http://bookofmormon.online/lehites/7. I only got 8 verses in, when the text talks about "luster". I assumed it meant someone who lusts, but it seems from context (comparison with brightness) "lustre" is intended. Is that a typo in this edition? AmEng? Or is "someone who lusts" really intended? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Luster is an acceptable spelling in American English. See Here in Merriam-Webster, the pre-eminent American dictionary. --Jayron 32 11:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. Thanks. Chalk up yet another unfortunate ambiguity to the English language. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 11:17, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My teacher asked me to give her one good reason for non-sequiturs. So I gave her one. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 11:17, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And you added a double entendre into the bargain! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.60.253 (talk) 14:43, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. My favourite type of ambiguity. I love a big one. Ambiguity that is. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:07, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cat jump height

Can cats jump from ground to rooftop or jumping up one storey directly from the floor? Once they jump up to high places, is it true that cats are less afraid of heights than humans? Planet Star 21:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Videos showing a Cat jumps 1.96 m (9 times own height) while others overestimate their abilities. DroneB (talk) 22:05, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They have good reason for relative confidence while high, with their smaller paws, sharper claws, lower centres of gravity, wider bases and (if those all fail) tendencies to land upright. Some say they can't comprehend their own mortality, which might help. Others say they have nine lives, which also helps. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:27, September 7, 2018 (UTC)

Simply having four feet helps. It's well known that many humans in such situations will descend to all fours to give themselves greater stability. HiLo48 (talk) 22:44, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, wider bases, stable like a table, good for chairs, too. As long as everything's moving slowly, humans don't sweat perching on a precariously gabled roof for a few minutes. But sooner or later (depending on our flexibility and fitness), we're going to feel the burn in our odd-shaped hip joints and inefficent shoulders, and start to shift and wobble. Then comes the self-doubt, the worry, possibly the vertigo and the angry awning birds who think you're after their eggs.

You spring up like a poor man's frog, mind ready for the chase, as your body somersaults awkwardly onto the wrought iron fence below. The last thing you recall is your cat looking down on you from the weather vane, with her feet and belly on the same damn level, as if to say "What, you couldn't do this?", and you finally realize that's about as low as any mammal can go.

They also have very nimble tails, almost snakelike, and these work something like a tightrope walker's pole to counteract dangerous leaning. Nowhere near as useful as a monkey's, which is why you typically don't see cats fearlessly charging through hundred-foot tree canopies (that and thumbs), but you'll also rarely see a dog walking along even a five-foot railing (unless he's trained for it, doesn't wag carelessly, puts one paw in front of the other and has pointy ears). More common sight than a pig descending a ladder, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:56, September 8, 2018 (UTC)

I know cats who routinely catch dragonflies and bats flying about 1 meter/1,20 meter high but they can't jump much higher. But I knew a mother cat who would climb from the courtyard level to the first floor balcony running along the vertical wall carrying a kitten in her mouth. 194.174.73.80 (talk) 18:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC) Marco Pagliero Berlin[reply]

WolframAlpha states that a cat can jump 1.5m, but doesn't give a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LongHairedFop (talk • contribs) 20:23, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 8

Danger of fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq for US infantrymen

Using WW2 as a reference, are there any figures for comparing the rates of fatalities for, say, every 1,000 infantryman years in these conflicts? Muzzleflash (talk) 01:21, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The survival rates were 90.2% in Iraq and 91.6% in Afghanistan, compared with 86.5% in Vietnam". [1] Still looking for comparable WWII stats. Alansplodge (talk) 14:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those survival rates of 90.2% in Iraq and 91.6% in Afghanistan are the proportion of wounded personnel who survived. -- ToE 00:35, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right ToE, I stand corrected. Alansplodge (talk) 12:46, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ref: VanHemert, Kyle. "What Were a U.S. Soldier's Odds of Dying in Each War?". Gizmodo. -- Only includes actual "wars" (not war-like "operations" such as Operation Enduring Freedom) —107.15.157.44 (talk) 18:15, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not surprisingly, the American Civil War was by far the worst. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:29, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 10

Position of the District of Columbia in an alphabetized list of U.S. states

I have noticed that in the relevant menu in web forms that include fields for an address in the U.S., the District of Columbia is shown after Delaware and before Florida. It seems to me that it should be listed after Colorado and before Connecticut, especially since the four states that officially call themselves "Commonwealth of..." rather than "State of..." aren't listed ahead of the other states. So how was this decided? I looked at List of states and territories of the United States and U.S. state and didn't find an answer. Thanks in advance. -⁠-⁠Dyspeptic skeptic (talk) 18:15, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because nobody says "Commonwealth of Massachusetts", they just say "Massachusetts". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:18, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bugs. Also, no one says just Columbia - always District of Columbia or D.C. for short. --Xuxl (talk) 19:23, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A story I heard somewhere is that, when names were being considered for what was to become the state of Washington, one of the candidates was "Columbia", but it was rejected — out of concern that it would be confused with the District of Columbia. Would be interested to know whether there's any truth in it. --Trovatore (talk) 19:34, 13 September 2018 (UTC) [reply]

That sounds familiar, and it's also what Washington (state) says. Note that it would have been a logical counterpart to British Columbia. The whole thing could have been called Columbia (for the river), but it had already been labeled the Oregon Country. The river, in turn, had been named for a ship called the Columbia, whose name came from the same source as the District, namely Columbia (name) - which of course all originates from Christopher. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:48, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many lists place D.C. at the end, after Wyoming. → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 22:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Under what definition does the District of Columbia count as a state? 194.174.73.80 (talk) 12:24, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Marco Pagliero Berlin[reply]

It's not. But it's analogous to a state, for convenience, along with US territories which also have two-letter postal designations. See List of U.S. state abbreviations. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:21, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the situation. I'm fairly sure residents of DC don't consider themselves analogous to a state when elections come up and they find themselves without any vote for Senators and only voting on a house delegate who can't vote on bills, and where that same Congress can change their laws in any way they want for any reason. In some ways even worse for territories of course, who don't even get to vote on who gets to throw paper towels at them although Congress tends to have less say on their laws [2]. Nil Einne (talk) 16:24, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does. In terms of representation, it's not the same as a state. But it has a "state" postal code and zip codes within it, so from the viewpoint of the postal service, it's kind of analogous. As far as the citizens having no voice in Congress, there's no anchor keeping them there in DC. Nearby states await. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:20, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Puerto Rico does vote in the presidential primaries and Trump did not do well there. Rmhermen (talk) 20:55, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That explains a few things. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:20, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 11

I have a question about thirty-something people

What do you call it if someone has a life crisis and they are in their mid thirties? Its not exactly a mid life crisis and its not a quarter life crisis. So what is the exact term? 66.183.26.219 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you assume there has to be a special term for it? --Viennese Waltz 15:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And it might depend on the nature of the crisis. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:55, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Without specification to age, these are generally called Existential crisis. --Jayron 32 16:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mental breakdown.
Sleigh (talk) 02:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If it's on the younger side of thirty-something, it's just Tuesday. Tomorrow it'll be Wednesday. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the BBC, The Guardian and The Times it's a midlife crisis even if you're in your 30s. Apparently it's also possible to call it a "30s life crisis" or a "mid 30s life crisis", which may be unimaginative coinages but at least the meaning is clear. Admittedly with only 91 unique Google hits they don't really seem to have caught on. Similarly, the midi-life crisis, which hits you at 30, only has 84 unique Google hits. --Antiquary (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 12

English name for a type of car headlight

In my car I have two switches for the main lights (not counting turn signals etc.). One is a thingy that looks like a dimmer but has notches. If I turn it from the off position by one notch, it turns on a pair of weak lights (1), and two notches also turn on a pair of strong lights (2). You use both pairs for night driving. The other switch - a lever behind the steering wheel operates a very strong pair of headlights (3), which you use for night driving on an empty road, or you can flash them on-off. I believe #2 are called low beams and #3 are high beams. What's the name of the light #1? 93.136.68.38 (talk) 04:38, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have always know them as "Park lights", this article suggests they may also be called "sidelights". Murchison-Eye (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think of them as "running lights" but our article is called Daytime running lamp. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:52, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In British usage, they are sidelights, dipped headlights and main / main-beam headlights. -- SGBailey (talk) 06:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also in British usage "running lights" are the lights which are on all the time and cannot be turned off (mandatory in cars produced since 2011). These are separate to the sidelights and headlights. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In American English and modern cars equipped for American roads, whenever the car is in gear, white daytime running lights will be on, facing to the front. 1 are parking lights; on a modern car when these are on there are white or amber to the front and sides near the front, red to the rear and side near the rear. When the control is moved to 2, the low-beam headlights are added to the parking lights. These lights are intended for when other cars are in front of you. When the lever is moved, the headlights change to high-beam mode, which is meant for when no other cars are in front of you. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OrOur Automotive lighting article seems fairly detailed. As Jc3s5h has said, parking lights and daytime running lights are not generally the same thing. Nil Einne (talk) 15:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC) 16:11, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally (I agree with the side lights replies) in BrEng I've never heard #2 referred to as "low beams" and #3 referred to as "high beams". Only as "headlights" and "full beam headlights" respectively. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Low beam and high beam are a bit more descriptive of those lamps. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:54, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, it seems "parking lights" gets me the results I want on eBay. I'm not in an English speaking country, and frankly I don't know what these are called in my own language either, so I couldn't look it up in a dictionary :) 78.1.188.8 (talk) 20:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC) ~~OP[reply]

Just to add a small fly to the ointment, in the 1980s the regulations on side lights changed requiring that they be brighter, for a time these were called "dim-dip lights to make a distinction with the older and dimmer side lights. Haven't heard it for a while though. Alansplodge (talk) 10:25, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is also mentioned in our article linked above, as well as the reason they are no longer required (one of the times where 'evil EU regulations' actually applies, assuming you actually think this is 'evil') Nil Einne (talk) 16:11, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 13

Reverse sunk cost fallacy?

I wonder whether I an experiencing a sort of reverse sunk cost fallacy. A while a go I bought a very cheap car for my daughter to practice driving while learning and hopefully for the first year when insurance on all but lowest insurance groups is expensive. I spent X on the purchase and then another 10% on new tyres, which I thought was reasonable if it lasted 6 months and good if it lasts a year. Six months on it is due for an MOT (UK vehicle test), and needs almost X spent on it again to pass. I have a feeling "I will have spent 2X on this car and that's a lot for an old car, perhaps its time to look for a newer one. Logically though if I were in a position now when someone offered me a repaired car with newish tyres and a 12 month MOT for price X i'd think it a very good deal. Am I experiencing a reverse Sunk cost fallacy? I can't get over the strong feeling that I shouldn't get the car repaired even though logically it seems like a good deal-- Q Chris (talk) 11:33, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find a newer and hopefully better car with a 12 month MOT for less than 2X in six months? Otherwise I would get this one repaired. 194.174.73.80 (talk) 12:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Marco Pagliero Berlin[reply]

And that is an example of what I think is the reverse sunk cost fallacy. The actual test would be "Can you find a newer and hopefully better car with a 12 month MOT for less than X", the first "X + 10%" is already sunk! -- Q Chris (talk) 12:42, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So there would be 3 possible situations?

1. Sunk cost is included to bias in favour of investing more in the current state (sunk cost fallacy)

2. Future costs estimates are the only cost input into the decision (pure rational)

3. Sunk cost is included to bias against investing more in the current state (reverse sunk cost fallacy)

I'd say, Q Chris, that you are making sense, if that is what you mean. Not sure if it has been studied by academics in psychology, like the sunk cost fallacy has, though. --Lgriot (talk) 14:48, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, the test should be "less than X" and not "less than 2X": if I only can find another car for e.g. 1.5X but not less, I should probably keep the old one. Except the newer car is so much better that I can anticipate it will spare me much trouble in comparison with the older car. On the other hand: the old car I know well while with the new one I risk some hidden quirks will make me curse the day we met. In this case the new car should cost substantially less than X (Another case of half full vs. half empty?). 194.174.73.80 (talk) 14:08, 14 September 2018 (UTC) Marco Pagliero Berlin[reply]

September 14

Identification of statues

I was recently visiting an university for some academic work and I came across a fascinating installation.Does anybody have any idea as to it's depiction and/or it's meaning? I tried to find some plaque (for the purpose) but in vain.∯WBG^converse 13:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to the file name of this other image at Commons, it's called Integrity and is by someone named Debabrata Chakraborty. I'm not finding much else about the installation or the sculptor on the Web. Deor (talk) 13:55, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
 :::3. Sunk cost is included to bias '''against''' investing more in the current state (reverse sunk cost fallacy)
 :::I'd say, [[User:Q Chris|Q Chris]], that you are making sense, if that is what you mean. Not sure if it has been studied by academics in psychology, like the sunk cost fallacy has, though. --[[User:Lgriot|Lgriot]] ([[User talk:Lgriot|talk]]) 14:48, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
+::::You are right, the test should be "less than X" and not "less than 2X": if I only can find another car for e.g. 1.5X but not less, I should probably keep the old one. Except the newer car is so much better that I can anticipate it will spare me much trouble in comparison with the older car. On the other hand: the old car I know well while with the new one I risk some hidden quirks will make me curse the day we met. In this case the new car should cost substantially less than X (Another case of half full vs. half empty?). [[Special:Contributions/194.174.73.80|194.174.73.80]] ([[User talk:194.174.73.80|talk]]) 14:08, 14 September 2018 (UTC) Marco Pagliero Berlin
 = September 14 =