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

March 28

How to make this kind of image?

--39.171.190.99 (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it was made using ggplot2 in R with geom_plot() and geom_smooth() layers. --Wrongfilter (talk) 15:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

March 29

US pertussis resurgence in the 1980s

Why did pertussis go from historically low levels due to vaccination to increasing levels in the 1980s in the US? Is it because of the rise of the religious right during the Reagan admin, and their presumed opposition to vaccination? Viriditas (talk) 02:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Foreign workers (legal) and their families? Foreign students? Tourists? Immigrants?
Sleigh (talk) 03:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Pretty sure the vaccination rules applied to them as well. Viriditas (talk) 03:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Pertussis rates were high in Australia at that time too. I don't remember us blaming foreigners. HiLo48 (talk) 04:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't recall any widespread opposition to vaccinations during the Reagan administration. That seems like a much more recent phenomenon. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

• "In the early 1960s, Kennedy's Vaccination Assistance Act thus targeted poor children, those older than five years of age, and provided the four vaccines that were then available: polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus. That act was renewed during the Johnson administration, but the funding mechanism changed under President Nixon to a set of block grants to states, some of which chose to put the funds to other public health uses...In the 1970s, Jimmy Carter's plan, which included shots for seven vaccine-preventable diseases (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, measles, rubella, and mumps—the latter three having been developed since 1963), also focused on poor children. Carter's Childhood Immunization Initiative relied more on volunteers and attempted to keep the federal footprint subordinated to state oversight. After leveled or diminished funds for childhood vaccination during the Reagan administration, and a measles epidemic from 1989 through 1991, reporting on US vaccination policies often compared them (rather negatively) to those of poor countries. Bill Clinton's plan, like his overhaul of welfare a few years later, relied on what was termed personal responsibility, even though it was clear at the time that vaccination rates were related to socioeconomic status. Regardless of the semantics, the program has been successful in diminishing nonvaccination among the poor and improving rates overall. A comparison of vaccination rates from the mid-1990s to today demonstrates that over a twenty-year period that began in 1995, significant gains were made in improving rates of MMR and polio vaccination for infants up to thirty-five months, and that most other childhood vaccination rates have improved marginally over time. In 2015, only 0.8 percent of US children under the age of three years received no vaccinations at all." (Hausman 2019, pp. 18-20.)
• "Reporting in Time and the New York Times in the 1980s focused primarily on low vaccination rates, measles outbreaks, and extending recommendations for physicians to get the flu vaccine. Especially in New York City, efforts to ensure that schoolchildren were vaccinated for the measles dominated coverage. Late in the decade a series of measles outbreaks dominated news on vaccination... The measles outbreaks of 1989–1991 were widespread, and President George H. W. Bush was attacked for not prioritizing public health (immunization programs of the 1970s had lapsed during the Reagan/Bush years). President Clinton’s Vaccines for Children program was, in large part, a response to low vaccination rates that were thought to have caused the 1989–1991 measles outbreaks. Parent blaming emerged in reporting after the passage of this program in 1993, although much of that reporting also suggests that many parents faced multiple difficulties getting their children vaccinated, so the blame was tempered by sympathy. As immunization rates rose through the 1990s, though, the mildly inflammatory reporting associated with the topic’s overt politicization diminished." (Hausman 2019, p. 39.)

From the abstract of an article with the title The decline and resurgence of pertussis in the US:^[1]

Further, despite this spatial variation, broad patterns in pertussis epidemiology can be described by two dominant phases: (1) a period of decline ending in the mid-1970s, followed by (2) nationwide resurgence. Together, these patterns explain 89.7% of the variation in US case notifications between 1951 and 2005. This resurgence was interrupted, however, by a synchronized downturn in 2005 that continues to the present in many large states. The causes of these two transitions in pertussis epidemiology remain hotly debated, though our findings suggest that evolution of the Bordetella pertussis bacterium, loss of immunity and persistent transmission among adults, and demographic drivers are more probable explanations than changes in reporting or the introduction of acellular vaccines.

 --Lambiam 08:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

How is "the dalai lama" nowhere recognised as peonage (of a child)?

For comparison.. "a 17-year-old girl was reported to have been sold into peonage at the age of two by her own father" from the page Peon. And.. "He held an old mala that had belonged to the 13th Dalai Lama, and the boy Lhamo Dhondup, aged two, approached and asked for it. The monk said 'if you know who I am, you can have it.'"

The religious "fluff" aside, both at the age of two, and both meeting the definition of "a person with little authority, often assigned unskilled tasks; an underling or any person subjected to capricious or unreasonable oversight.". Ybllaw (talk) 10:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

"Peonage is the pledge of a person's services as security for the repayment for a debt or other obligation". It doesn't really fit. The young 14th Dalai Lama was given a priveledged upbringing rather than a life of enforced labour. Alansplodge (talk) 12:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Thus you say that a 2 year old being abducted from their family is "[being given a] priveledged upbringing"?

And you say that "mentally 'training' your entire life to be a fantasy to others is not enforced labour" and "having no control over your own future and your own identity is not enforced labour"?

Have you any idea of what a person goes through? The mental indoctrination? The dismissal and condition out of any personal ideas/initiative of what a person may choose with their life?

What are you basing your claim "that he is priveledged" on?

Are you saying that a 2 year old is of consenting age? Ybllaw (talk) 13:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

"Peonage is the pledge of a person's services as security for the repayment for [an] obligation". That entirely fits. The obligation is the fabricated claim "that their arbitrary ritual is said to be proof that a person is obligated to be this country'scult's spiritual leader".

Debt bondage almost entirely fits..

"Debt bondage only applies to individuals who have no hopes of leaving the labour due to inability to ever pay debt back.".

The person made "dalai lama" has no realistic option to ever purchase their freedom. People have decided their identity for them. The kind of mental help required to escape such a situation of indoctrination from a very young age is not available to them, as they are surrounded by people that endorse the abuse. Ybllaw (talk) 13:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

It is however, not debt if there is no story of "him being able to pay it back". Thus in that case perhaps human trafficking is a better label. Ybllaw (talk) 13:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

"Abducted" doesn't seem to be the correct term. He wasn't stolen AFAIK. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:53, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

He didn't consent to being taken from his parents. And the systemic pressure of "once they say your child is 'the dalai lama' you cannot refuse" means that consent was impossible, hence abducted. Ybllaw (talk) 12:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Parents decide what's best for their very young children. Consent from a two-year-old is not usually a major issue. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

In this region in the 1930s, I wouldn't think the parents realistically had agency to consent (or not) to such a mandate. Within academic studies of Tibet and China there's serious debate over issues of conditions of the region prior to, during, and after Communist takeover -- see e.g. Serfdom in Tibet controversy. This was not a nice place. SamuelRiv (talk) 01:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

"Parents decide what's best for their young children". This is false. Parents decide for their children, but not "what is best". To see proof of this see the documentary "born into brothels", where parents forbid their children to go to school so they can grow uo to become prostitutes like them. Ybllaw (talk) 10:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia capitalizes the titular name Dalai Lama throughout articles about those considered to be successors in a line of tulkus leading to the incumbent 14th Dalai Lama whose article includes a section 14th Dalai Lama#Criticism. Material here must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy. This dictates immediate removal of contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced. Arguments by the OP that verifiable sources for their peculiar claims should exist ("so why aren't there any?") are just their own synthesis that cannot qualify as WP:RS. Be warned that attempts to promote anti-religious attacks on article or talk page spaces can be reported to this noticeboard. Philvoids (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

The question here is not "that it should", that is a false accusation. I won't deny that that is my opinion, but the question here is how it is legally possible that it isn't classified as such, even though it seems to meet all criteria. Saying that my question, which is entirely about publically accessible information amounts to "anti religiousness" is not only false, as it is about a very specific case not religion in general, it would also be censorship. Ybllaw (talk) 12:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

I think we would need at least a reference that showed that whichever legal system had jurisdiction over the particular place and time had a concept of peonage in order for it to be "legally possible" to be classifed as such. ColinFine (talk) 18:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Obviously the OP is asking about whether the international community would/could/should object to such a practice based on some notion of universal human rights, namely (per OP) peonage and child abduction. Furthermore, one surely would not dismiss concerns over the condition of slaves in the antebellum United States for the fact that slavery and such treatment was often explicitly legal [edit: and tacitly or explicitly supported by the international community right until the end].

To address your response to OP, per legal concerns [edit: all of this is assuming at face value that peonage and/or abduction is roughly accurate], most international law recognizing the rights of individuals was established after WW2. (For example, it was only the Fourth Geneva Convention in 1949 that directly addressed civilians, plus the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights, but it's not much later with the Rome Statute, etc. that there's some agreed enforcement of individual rights in international law -- prior to all this international law was essentially understood to apply only to states and/or just war.) Noting that the 14th Dalai Lama was selected in 1937, none of this would apply or likely be recognized as applicable. Regarding a concept like peonage, maybe one could have made an argument regarding serfdom in Tibet that international condemnation is justified per the 1926 Slavery Convention, but that probably would be a huge stretch for the time. (Note I have nothing resembling qualifications in this field -- this is just what I'm gathering from my reading over the months.) Now, while the greater international community may not have had much to say in the 1930s (as far as my lack of reading), Mao Zedong was certainly willing to use serfdom and the inequity of the priestly class as part of the drive for toppling Tibet's government in 1959 after the 1951 annexation. SamuelRiv (talk) 19:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for that detailed contribution. Ybllaw (talk) 10:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Iliinois electoral College ballot of 2004

Hello. I have a little curiosity and I don't know if you can take it away from me, since it's been a long time as well, but I'll try anyway. To anyone's knowledge was the Illinois electoral College ballot of 2004 like the one in the link below? The ballot in the link, goes back to the 2008 presidential election. I know this is a bit of a special request so don't worry if you can't help, no problem! Thank you very much. https://www.google.it/search?sca_esv=b9d6d2bbf88385f9&sxsrf=ACQVn09c6V3MCuuMMrqGPefvx7ht2LyefQ:1711726739199&q=illinois+electoral+college+ballot&tbm=isch&source=lnms&prmd=nivbz&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj66veB55mFAxXBhv0HHaV6DW8Q0pQJegQICRAB&biw=2133&bih=1021&dpr=0.9#imgrc=yA-xZ6nEmhhLtM&imgdii=J_qDC516vm-G5M 2.39.110.85 (talk) 15:49, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

March 30

Update (?)

Hello. Under the heading 'English nationality,' perhaps some updates should be made regarding ethnic groups and their respective national identity? The current source dates back to 2004; is it possible that the figures have changed? What do you think? Thank you very much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people 2.39.110.85 (talk) 21:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are constantly in need of updating. If you are unable to do this yourself, the place to make suggestions for the improvement of any article is the talk page of that article, in this case Talk:English_people, but you will first need to find a reliable source. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

March 31

Have parents ever said "no" to adults trying to make their child a "dalai lama"

As monks come and do some arbitrary procedure to then claim "your child recognised these clothes thus they are the dalai lama", has it ever happened that parents of that child said "no you can't take my child and make them your religious fantasy"? If it did, did they then let it go or did they obses over trying to get that child by pressuring/coercing those parents until they caved? It seems that if they "could pick another child if one refused" they would lose all credibility, hence there is a massive conflict of interest there against consent. Ybllaw (talk) 12:21, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Not as far as I can tell. I think you're trying to apply 21st century Western and secular attitudes to a deeply religious and deferential society. It seems more likely to me that parents of an child identified as a lama would consider it the greatest blessing imaginable and a wonderful opportunity for their offspring. Alansplodge (talk) 13:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

It's a bit more than that. "A lama" : "Dalai Lama" ≈ "a priest" : "the Pope". But what is more, the Dalai Lama is the current reincarnation of Avalokiteśvara, who achieved the highest level of enlightenment. To call this an "opportunity" is a bit like saying that the Virgin Mary considered it a wonderful opportunity for her son Jesus that He was identified as the Son of God.  --Lambiam 18:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, maybe a bit understated, but I was trying to explain in basic terms. Alansplodge (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

That is like saying "the stereotype of the suicidal Asian child is a lucky child for all of that performance pressure and lack of autonomy over their own life". It still amounts to complete inhibition of a person to define their own identity. Ybllaw (talk) 11:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

With another difference being that "enlightenment" isn't even objectively measurable, relying entirely on anecdotal "evidence". Like telling a person "you must have the perfect body" only to push them into anorexia or some other BDD, where it is never enough. Ybllaw (talk) 11:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Well the only question here is "has it". And I don't believe "that there has ever been a society where all people were 'deeply religious'", perhaps afraid to be detected disagreeing, hence running into an exception at some point seems statistically only realistic. Ybllaw (talk) 11:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

The procedures are not "arbitrary"; they are very thorough, but the main point is that the family will already have a close connection with the relevant monastery or whatever. (If you're basing your question on the plot of the film Little Buddha, most of that story is utter nonsense.) Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a wealth of, or opponents may say a glut of, Depictions of Gautama Buddha in film. The example Little Buddha (1993) that is mentioned uses the device of a story within a story: the inner story is a reverential one about the ancient prince Siddhartha attaining enlightenment as Buddha while the outer one is an obviously fictional one about a supposed rebirth of a lama in modern Canada. While their candidate child is not averse, his disbelieving parents are understandably sceptical to monks' plans to take their child to Bhutan to be tested. This occurrence in a fictional film is a fantasy that does not rate a reply of "Yes, it has actually happened" to the OP. It would not be necessary to repeat the warning I gave the OP about anti-religious attack that impinges on a living person if their continuing tirade didn't show that point is not well taken. If we endorse films at all then I recommend "Kundun" (1997) that depicts the youthful selection of the now-living Dalai Lama based on his own recollections. Philvoids (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Your personal hostility to me, however subtle you are trying to make it using words such as "tirade" sparingly, seems to me to be close to if not already a violation of the policy of asking questions on this page. You are free to disagree, but you are at this point attacking me personally it seems. In this comment you seem to assume "that my entire comment was based on something from a fictional film", one that I have never heard of before nor seen, thus this assumption would be false. Ybllaw (talk) 11:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a debating platform, and the Reference desk is not meant for offering opinions.  --Lambiam 22:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Your claim that "these procedures [...] are very thorough" seems nonsense. There is no such "as objective evidence about a claim of reincarnation", it doesn't matter how long of an array of fallacies you concatenate, it is all anecdotal evidence, thus calling it "thorough" is impossible, as thorough means objective. Ybllaw (talk) 11:11, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I think the answer to your question has already been given by User:Alansplodge, not as far as we know. regarding your comment on User:Shantavira, your definition of the word "thorough" isn't the common one, which is "Painstaking and careful not to miss or omit any detail". see thorough on wiktionary. That means that you can be thoroughly subjective. Rmvandijk (talk) 12:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Not the answer to my question has not been given by User:Alansplodge, as his contribution was far from confident, all he said was "not as far as I can tell", not contributing anything with significant confidence that would make this question close to answered.

As to the discussion about how the word "thorough" is presented as "evidence" here..

Using the other definition on that same page which is "Utter; complete; absolute.". You can't be complete about something for which there is no objective evidence. Only objective evidence can be objectively complete. Subjective anecdotal claims, which "alleged reincarnation evidence" relies entirely upon, is not objective thus cannot be complete.

Regardless of the definition of the word "thorough", to stick to logical analysis of evidence, it mattes WHAT those details are. Not sure if this is correct usage of "non sequitur", but the words "it does not follow" do apply here. There are no details from which the proof "reincarnation" follows, hence "thorough" doesn't add any logical evidence, it only tries to create a false emotional pressure of "thoroughness" through saying "I am very invested hence that counts for something", no it doesn't. Perhaps the word for that is "sunk cost fallacy". Ybllaw (talk) 11:32, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Ybllaw, please see our articles Evidence of absence and Argument from ignorance, the latter being an Informal fallacy. Alansplodge (talk) 11:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

This is not about "disproving reincarnation", both Argument from ignorance and Evidence of absence are about expecting a negative, in this case I assume you mean "expecting reincarnation to not exist". That is not part of my argument. My argument is that there is no objective base, regardless of whether reincarnation is so or not (which cannot be objectively proven). And to take this back to where this started, my calling the procedure that "says to prove reincarnation" arbitrary, no matter the quantity of evidence, as it has no quality. Ybllaw (talk) 11:41, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Criticizing users who are trying to answer your questions will certainly yield better answers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Assuming this is meant as a covert way of accusing me of criticising users. I did not in my view. I criticised their provided claims, which, yes, that does yield better answers as testing the evidence is a scientific process. Ybllaw (talk) 11:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm still trying to figure out what "Not the answer to my question has not been given" means. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Given your ease with words I think you have had no problem figuring out that that was a typo for "No, the answer to my question ...". Ybllaw (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

You're still misinterpreting "thorough". A detailed method based on false assumptions can still be thorough. Then back to the main question, : No, this has never happened as far as we know/As far as the people responding have been able to find out.

As an additional point, your point that reincarnation has never been proven is irrelevant when most of the population shares the believe that it exists. If the parents believe in reincarnation (and the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama in particular), they won't be inclined to refuse the priests, because for them it is not a "religious fantasy", it is their religious belief and if the investigation by the priests is sufficiently thorough for the parents to believe. That was (is?) the case in the region the Dalai Lama typically comes from. Aside from that, having your son become the next spiritual leader of your people is an honour (I'd assume). All of that would make it unlikely that a refusal would have occurred.Rmvandijk (talk) 08:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

April 1

England Census 1861

North Furse noted as family's residence. Wikipedia advises me there is no such place. I don't wish to learn how to make and article or to play in the sandbox - that's all too complicated for my cancer fogged brain. Worthyebs (talk) 08:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Where does Wikipedia advise you there is no such place? We don't have an article about it, since as far as I can see it comprises a couple of houses in the parish of Chittlehampton (where it is spelled Furze). The spelling of place names changes considerably over the years. I don't think it would merit an article, as I can find no reliable sources to assert its existence as a separate entity. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:54, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Google maps even knows North Furze Farm, so this might just be the address. --Wrongfilter (talk) 10:21, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

It was still spelt "Furse" in this 1878 book (the reference to Shebbear is apparently the name of the hundred (county division) rather than the nearest village).

This book says that North Furse consisted of a "farm and a mill" in the 14th-century (probably not much help).

However, this 1875 book goes with a "z" spelling. Samuel Thorne who was born there in 1789 was apparently a preacher and publisher in the world of Methodism; see Thorne family, of Shebbear.

This 1878 gazeteer of Devon lists the inhabitants of North Furze as "Thomas Elsone, farmer" (p. 213) and "John Bend, farmer and thatcher" (p. 702), so there must have been at least two households there at that time. Alansplodge (talk) 17:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

This 1887 OS map just shows it as "Furze" with three or four buildings (towards the top right of the map). Alansplodge (talk) 18:05, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2

Patterns in popular cultural exports

I can't help but notice that some of the most popular cultural exports that have become closely identified with their home nations over time, began as outliers espoused by so-called outcasts, the estranged, and the oppressed. This pattern keeps coming up, from Flamenco (Spanish culture), to Impressionism (French culture), to Jazz (American culture). Why is this, and what does it say about human culture? It is as simple as saying that humanity is highly resistant to any kind of change and will go to great lengths to insure cultural continuity of older ideas, or is there something more to it? Why must there always be a fight or struggle to present something new and different? Are our brains hardwired to reject this? Viriditas (talk) 23:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Is Status quo bias or Social inertia helpful? --136.54.106.120 (talk) 00:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes! That should keep me busy for a while. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

You can add Jamaican Reggae to your list of examples. Xuxl (talk) 13:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the list is long. Viriditas (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Ars longa, vita brevis. See also Newton's 3rd law. MinorProphet (talk) 14:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

cf Derek Jarman and the 'ars longa vita brevis' Tradition. Should that be "arse longa"? MinorProphet (talk) 14:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I suspect another effect also plays a role. The outcast status also allows people to escape from the stranglehold of the dominant cultural norms and develop a vibrant counterculture. Eventually, this is tamed and gentrified, and the cycle starts over.  --Lambiam 21:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant. Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Our Underclass article quotes: "The underclass rejects many of the norms and values of the larger society. Among underclass youth, achievement motivation is low, education is undervalued, and conventional means of success and upward mobility are scorned." Alansplodge (talk) 11:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I think Devine & Wright should have added a couple more uses of the qualifier "conventional": "motivation for conventional achievement is low, conventional education is not highly valued, and ...".  --Lambiam 17:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

"...conventional" equals "predictable" ? --Askedonty (talk) 17:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Not in this sentence. The authors did not mean to say that the underclass youth spurn predictable means of success.  --Lambiam 22:12, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Here's an interesting coincidence: the article on Teleseme is in the lead DYK spot at the moment. The penultimate sentence reads, "A broker of PBX systems in 1914 wrote that hotels with telesemes were reluctant to switch systems." Viriditas (talk) 22:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Money money money --Askedonty (talk) 16:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

April 5

...

Struggling with self worth and excessive negative thoughts about myself.

Anyone knows a way for me to accept myself ?

I often think of myself as worthless and stupid, but I am often scared of sharing these feelings to other people.

I usually get anxious and paranoid when in social situations, and this has only worsened how I feel about myself.

When I experience strong feelings, usually negative, I bottle them up and hide them from other people in fear of being judged.

I am sharing these feelings here because this is where I feel more safe to talk about these kinds of things since I am more anonymous here. Usersnipedname (nag me/stalk me) 17:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

As you get older, you will get more used to yourself, and will also become more brave. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The problem isn't being brave or getting used to myself, it's largely how I value myself. Usersnipedname (nag me/stalk me) 10:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Almost everyone who is not a grandiose narcissist has occasional tinges of doubt about their qualities and thereby about themselves. It is not normal if such thoughts and feelings become so strong that they begin to interfere with one's ability to lead a fulfilling life. The environment can play a huge role (for example, parents who continually disparage everything a child does), but the issue can also be endogenic, such as being caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain involving the neurotransmitter serotonin. I cannot determine whether your specific situation requires medical diagnosis (in which case we are not supposed to answer it) or not, but in any case I think you may want to talk to your family physician (assuming you have one) or else a psychiatrist. If you are confident the issue is not a medical one, there are many self-help books on gaining confidence in oneself.^[2][3] Something very simple that has been reported to help some people is to use quiet moments to talk to yourself, repeating encouraging things over and over again, such as, "I am a beautiful person. I am compassionate and honest. People should be happy if they can call me their friend. Like everyone else, I can stumble, but I won't be defeated; I get up and go on."  --Lambiam 09:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Usersnipedname (nag me/stalk me) 10:25, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Once, I used to be like you. I was miserable and sad.

One day, I sent a message to, at that time, my only friend:

Man, I've been feeling really unhappy lately. Can you help me?

He replied back. He said this:

Just do something, man. That's all you gotta do.

I was originally kind of confused, but I soon got his point. I wasn't doing anything. All I would do was stay in bed and think about how "worthless" I was. But all the happy people I knew were great do-ers. They were great at doing things.

So, naturally, I went out for a walk early in the morning the next day. I bought some wheat-free bread, uncut salami, whole-fat butter and a litre of water. I went back home, put the food in my fridge, and went out to my local park. I sat on a bench and I listened to the birds chirping while watching the beautiful sun shine above me.

I talked to someone and shook hands with them before I went to a nearby KFC and got myself some 8-piece chicken strips. I savoured every moment I had of eating them.

I went to the gym and had a great workout. When I went home, I made myself some guacamole and ate them with salted tortillas while watching TV. I slept great that night.

The next day, I went out for a jog and I took about 2000 steps according to my phone. I then went to the park, then ate something, then took another jog, ate, and so on.

{{{1}}}

Then, I realised why I used to be so miserable: I wasn't exercising, I wouldn't take care of my body, I wouldn't eat much – hell, I wouldn't even shower! I would literally do nothing but stare into the screen.

...

So my advice to you?

Just do something. Anything.

79.119.97.43 (talk) 10:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Very very much. Usersnipedname (nag me/stalk me) 10:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

That means "anything except sit staring at a screen". Physical movement of the whole body - not just the fingers - is the key. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 17:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Usersnipedname, if you have access to it, there is a feature article in the current (6 April) issue of New Scientist very relevant to your circumstances. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 151.227.130.213 (talk) 12:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

April 9

BYD Seagull

Why are American car manufacturers completely unable to deliver a quality electric car like the BYD Seagull, which China is selling for US $13k and has already produced 200,000 vehicles? I've looked deeply into this problem, and all I see is intentional foot dragging, running out of the clock, and hemming and hawing from US CEOs. There's also an enormous amount of propaganda and disinformation about electric cars and the subcompact model in the US, with car companies seemingly telling the public that nobody wants either an electric car or a subcompact. This is odd, as everyone I know wants exactly that. Furthermore, why is the US market forbidding this car to be sold in the US if, as they claim, "nobody wants it"? This doesn't add up. The US car industry is insistent on telling the public that they must want SUVs and ICE cars, but the facts show an entirely different matter. Viriditas (talk) 22:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe something to do with Protectionism. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I mean, the newer Chevy Bolt isn't all that different, except the price is astronomical compared to the BYD Seagull. Why can't the Bolt be made cheaper, as only one example? Automation has increased, labor has decreased, parts are being mass produced by 3D fabrication, so all the costs should be coming down, not going up. This is the same problem in the American healthcare industry. Prices should be getting cheaper due to technology and distribution yet they are getting more expensive because of the middlemen. Same thing with many different sectors. We need government regulation to bring prices down, and that's the one thing that isn't happening in the US. Viriditas (talk) 08:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

This YouTube video offers the following explanation. In the US, SUVs are classified as "light trucks", which are nor subject to the same safety and emissions standards as compact cars. The US auto industry has been heavily pushing light trucks and SUVs to avoid regulations, meaning more profit. This does not quite explain the disdain for EVs, which should meet the emissions standards, but the safety standards remain an issue. In any case, it is safe to assume that the US auto industry aims to maximize profit and expects profit will suffer from offering a compact or subcompact EV for a normal price.  --Lambiam 08:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeppers, I'm aware of that loophole. It likely is a major reason for the issue, as well as zero political will to fix it. Viriditas (talk) 08:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

The EPA imposed fuel consumption standards and planned reductions during the Obama Administration, but these were one of a number of environmental measures overturned by the Trump Administration.[4] The Biden Administration has just gotten around to reinstating them this year. [5] Also, one of the reasons that cheap Chinese electric vehicle may not be available in the U.S. is that they may not meet U.S. crash test standards.[6] Xuxl (talk) 14:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)