Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

[[:|{{{1}}}]]

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.

October 22

Faint, head-rush feeling when standing up

You know sometimes when youve been sitting down for a while, and then you stand up, you sometimes get an intense head-rush/fainting feeling, like your gonna pass out? I presume this does happen to lots of people not just me? is there a name for it? why does it happen? i get it quite often, and sometimes when ive not been sitting down. i rather enjoy the feeling actually. Once it happened while i was lifting a dumbbell, and it became as light as a feather momentarily. why? Willy turner 05:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

High Blood Pressure?--88.110.33.229 06:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the phenomena is called postural hypotension and is not typically a symptom of high blood pressure, quite the opposite infact. (the above answer is a good example of why we shouldn't offer medical advice.) This article explains why it happens [1]:

Normally, when you stand up blood tends to pool in the veins in your legs. This is stopped by nerves, which contract the veins in your legs ensuring that enough blood returns to your heart and that there is no reduction in the amount of blood that your heart pumps. This maintains the blood supply to your brain. However, if there is pooling of blood in your veins, less blood returns to your heart and less is pumped out which means a reduction in the amount of blood going to your brain. This causes symptoms of dizziness and some people may faint. This is exactly what happens to guards on parade when they faint because they have been standing in one position for too long. You can mimic this effect when you squat down for a while, for instance when looking at books on a low shelf, and then stand up suddenly.

If you are concerned that is it a symptom of an underlying medical condition, see a doctor. Rockpocket 06:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accessing Wikipedia entry through major search engines

To Whom It May Concern,

Could you please let me know when and how the entries made into Wikipedia become available on the major search engines. I recently updated two articles on Wikipedia and when I tried searching for them on yahoo, neither came up as a link for the searched topic. I am not sure whether I am missing a step in making my entries available to the search engines. I would be most thankful if you could clarify this for me.

Sincerely, DenverU 08:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that's a question you need to ask the Search Engines, not Wikipedia. As soon as you save your edit it is 'live' on the internet, and available immediately to search engines. How often the search engines trawl Wikipedia and update their databases is their issue. It's also possible that the articles you are editing simply don't rank highly in the search engines or with the search terms you are using, but rest assured it is nothing you are doing wrong here that is the problem. For what it's worth I have found edits I have made in Wikipedia in Google searches within less than a day. --jjron 08:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll echo Jjron's answer and note that we don't control when or how often Google (or another search engine) indexes our pages. It will help, however, if the Wikipedia article is linked to from other Wikipedia pages. Appropriate internal wikilinks will help readers of Wikipedia and search engine spiders find new articles. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you create a new web page (not on wikipedia, just generally) that has some links to it, it usually takes Google about six weeks to get to it and index it. On the other hand, when a new story appears on a really popular website like Slashdot, it's indexed within a day, because this is completely new information that's most relevant right after the story is posted. While wikipedia is a very highly ranked website, the changes are small and incremental, so there's no need to index the new information right away. I would guess it takes about a week for a change to an article of average importance to get into Google. risk 14:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The way search engines work is that they have massive banks of computers that gradually read every single page on the Internet and add it into their index (this is called 'spidering the web'). However, the Internet is awfully big - 2 million pages of English-language Wikipedia alone! So it takes even the best and fastest collections of machines weeks and weeks to spider all of it and rebuild their indices. Sometimes you get lucky and add the new information just before the spider pays it's visit to that page and the new information pops up in a day or two - other times it takes well over a month. The smaller search engines tend to take longer because they have less resources to devote to doing it - so on the average, you'll see your page come up sooner on Yahoo and Google than many of the others. Some search engines specialise in certain sorts of pages or are smart enough to recognise the kinds of page that change frequently and have those pages spidered more often - at the cost of the more static/less-accessed pages being re-indexed less often. But there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it - it'll happen when it happens and not before! SteveBaker 18:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the wheel?

Hello, I've just learned about Fifth wheel coupling (we don't call it like that in German) and I wonder why it is called so. Where's the wheel #5? Thank you, --Wolli-j 11:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the article notes, the term dates from horsedrawn days. The "fifth wheel" is the pivot which allows the front wheels to steer into corners. It's not really a wheel as such, but it is an axle and something pivoting around it. Here is a photo of such an arrangement. FiggyBee 12:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That makes it a lot clearer to me. Thanks a bunch! --Wolli-j 14:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

M249

Isn't it kind of stupid to have a SAW that uses 5.56*45mm NATO round? I understand they don't want over-penetration in urban enviroments where civilians are in close proximity to hostiles, but it seems like they could move up to the 7.62*51mm round. --MKnight9989 14:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are logistical and tactical benefits to having the SAW use the same ammunition as the squad's assault rifles. The smaller ammunition also weighs less, which I believe is the main consideration - the M240 and its ammunition is simply too heavy to lug around all day. FiggyBee 14:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Squad automatic weapon, in case anyone cared. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In short, the SAW was designed mainly to provide squad level suppressive fire instead of full-scaled obliteration. Acceptable 21:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modern infantry maneuver combat commonly occurs at short ranges with moving targets. At these ranges, a 5.56 round does as much damage as 7.62. The rifle has less recoil which means it can sustain a higher rate of fire, important for moving targets. The lighter round means more ammunition can be carried. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 06:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 girls 1 cup

What is it...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.187.66 (talk) 16:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shock site aimed at disgusting people. Skittle 17:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aimed at causing disgust in people, or aimed at people who are disgusting? --Masamage ♫ 17:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As soon as I clicked 'save', I realised I'd need to specify verb and not adjective, but then the error came. Skittle 21:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps both? From a google search it suggests these individuals are stuck in the anal stage of Freud's description of development. I've not subjected myself to the watch, so may well be wrong. ny156uk 18:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a web site depicting coprophilia, more specifically human coprophagia. MrRedact 18:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting someone pregnant

Is it possible for a girl to avoid pregnancy by being on top? I heard that gravity plays a role that makes it harder for the sperm to travel upwards. Thanks! 68.143.88.2 18:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sperm can live (and travel) for days. So, no, this is not an effective means of birth control. Friday (talk) 18:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

100% agreed - this is an urban legend. If it was as easy as that to avoid getting pregnant - the world would be a very different place! SteveBaker 18:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I strongly recommend that you not rely on the fictional stoners in Knocked Up for medical advice. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are no sex positions that can prevent pregnancy. This is one of a number of common misconceptions about birth control. MrRedact 18:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However, 69 (sex position) is pretty ineffective at getting the woman pregnant unless the woman retrieves the semen from her mouth and transfers it elsewhere.

Atlant 00:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I just meant various intercourse positions, not oral sex positions. MrRedact 00:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a complete fallacy. You can get pregnant in any position. Not to mention :-

You can get pregnant the first time you have sex.
You can get pregnant during your period.
You can get pregnant even if you haven't started your periods.
You can get pregnant if he pulls out before ejaculation.

The only 100% foolproof method is not to have sex. Even the very best birth control has a chance of failure. Exxolon 19:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but responsible use of birth control—much less simultaneous use of multiple forms of control (she takes the pill, he wears condoms) can make the chances of accidental pregnancy low enough to be almost negligible. If one is having sex, one should be using protection and be well-educated about it. Unfortunatley abstinence-only education and advocacy results more often in complete failure to use birth control at all when youths have sex (which is common no matter what kind of education one uses), which is about the worst possible scenario. --24.147.86.187 23:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I strongly believe in sex education, use of birth control and responsibility. I think abstinence only programs are asinine and I certainly don't advocate this approach. However it is a statement of fact that if you have sex there is always a chance, however miniscule, of a pregnancy resulting. I read about a case where a woman had gone through the menopause, the man had had a vasectomy and they used a condom and she still managed to get pregnant. Exxolon 00:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Had gone through the menopause" is a little vague, since periods gradually become increasingly erratic and infrequent for years before they stop altogether. More importantly, assuming statistical independence, we can multiplying the typical-use failure rates of a vasectomy and condom use to give a combined real-world failure rate of only about 0.02%. In comparison, somewhere in the ballpark of 20% of women have had extramarital sex. So the probability that the woman has had an affair is about 1000 times greater than the probability that both the vasectomy and condom use failed. If I were in that man's shoes, I'd be demanding a paternity test. MrRedact 03:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The risk of pregnancy while using some effective form of birth control is certainly much less than with having intercourse with no form of birth control. See Comparison of birth control methods. You also can't get pregnant from oral sex, unless she accidently dribbles some of the semen onto her labia or something. MrRedact 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An addition to the list: You can get pregnant while breastfeeding. It's surprising how many unwanted pregnancies are caused by that one. risk 23:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, although it's not 100% perfect, under the proper conditions the lactational amenorrhea method can work quite well. See Comparison of birth control methods. MrRedact 02:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only sex position that is 100% safe is when you lie back on the bed with the handset in your hand having phone sex when your partner is a minimum of 100 miles away :P ---- WebHamster 20:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That table at the bottom of Comparison of birth control methods is rather unclear. It gives the changes of getting pregnant during the first year. But doesn't that depend heavily on the frequency with which a couple have sex? Wouldn't it make more sense to give the chances of getting pregnant for one intercourse? Of course, that may depend on other factors, such as 'that time of the month'. But one can just average that out. And anyway, over a year you still have that problem. At the very least the table should say how often the couple have sex. Assuming it's one steady couple, another complication. What use is this to a couple having a one night stand? Especially they would want to know their risks. DirkvdM 05:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well the article was going to be worked on but the guy that was going to do it pulled out at the last moment. Lanfear's Bane | t 09:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like he's got the rhythm of this conversation then. ---- WebHamster 12:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand - Kaikora North to Otane

In what year did Kaikora North change its name to Otane? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.28.136.29 (talk) 21:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A book that i read a while ago

i asked this question about a year ago and no one could help me, so i'm gonna ask again. There was this one book that i read, and it was about this guy that was about 15 or 16 and he wanted to join the army during world war 2. His brother had bad eyesight, and could not go, so he joined under his brothers name. He made this friend, charlie or chucky (i can't remember but i'm pretty sure its one of those) who was later killed during a mission. He was a pilot, and during one of his missions, his plane was shot down, and all of his friends were killed. He landed in Germany, and was almost killed. he made his way to a hospital and was later sent to the U.S of A. He had a girlfriend that he had met earlier, but had lied about his age. He then tells her how old he is and she still decides to stay with him (eww). That was basically all i could remember, but it was one of my favorite books. I'm not asking for u guys to look for it in google or anything, just if you know the book or not. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.154.173.213 (talk) 21:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it that you can't remember the title? --Masamage ♫ 21:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like The Last Mission, by Harry Mazer. It's still in print in a Laurel Leaf paperback edition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Catrionak (talk • contribs) 15:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sine Bot, YOUR MY HERO!!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.192.197 (talk) 21:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, glad to see so much love for the bot that signs unsigned comments! :) (I think User:Catrionak is the one you meant to thank) -Elmer Clark 00:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But *I* would like to thank Sine Bot for covering for me on my very first Reference answer!Catrionak 18:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Media Ownership

Someone recently told me the whole (90%+ of newspapaers and TV) of the media is owned by 7 people, 4 of whom he named as Rupert Mordock, Silvio Berlusconi, Ted Turner and Haim Saban. Is this true, if not what is true, and if so then how do we know there isn't a media conspiracy?

Thanks, Quincel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.153.9.220 (talk) 22:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Start at Concentration of media ownership --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The concentration of media ownership doesn't imply a conspiracy...Look at the huge variety of opinions/stand-points that the media companies owned by News Corporation has. It ranges (in the Uk) from libertarian to populist, right-wing liberal to mildly national-social. The hard-reality is that to sell newspapers/media you have to push a vision that people believe. Now many will get some parts of their beliefs from these outlets (so there will be an element of influence) but the media also by and large holds up a mirror of its readership. Do the media make you what your newspaper says or do you make the newspaper say what you think? Who knows for sure, but certainly there is an `amount of both. The sheer volume of variety of medias is wide enough to account for virtually all tastes. In short - the conspiracy is (as most conspiracies are) pretty weak. Many will (perhaps reasonably) complain about the mass-ownership of media but really in the business environment to survive you largely have to provide to the demands of the consumer, the media needs viewers to sell papers/magazines/tv-shows, and without the viewers they won't get it. ny156uk 23:02, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that the control is there. If a political party threatened or paid News Corp to be super pro-that-party then they've just cornered a masssssssive percentage of the media --⁪ffroth 00:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is that less scary? It's ok because the media tell us what we want to hear? What about the plain truth? (in so far as there is such a thing)

In concordance with Froth, too much power in too few hands is always a very bad idea. Like with a dictatorship (or, rather, an oligarchy) - even if the present dictator can withstand corruption, who is going to succeed him?

One consolation: they don't control the Internet. Or do they? At least they don't control Wikipedia and, more relevant here, Wikinews. Nor can they ever. Right?

This is an exceedingly important issue. All cars in the world being produced by just a few companies is one thing. But our societies depend very heavily on information, through democracy and the free market. Our dollar voting power is already heavily corroded by commercials. But misleading voters is potentially much more dangerous. A large chunk of the media suddenly giving only one side of the story is scary enough. But if people only get positive feedback about their preconceptions then an important basis for democracy is rendered invalid. The Internet may be the only solution, but only if it forces people from different standpoints to interact. Such as on wikis and other broad-spectrum message boards and chatrooms and such. But they also need a neutral source for basic information. Maybe the media should be handed over to scientists, but I don't see how that could be put into practise. DirkvdM 06:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the wisdom of the Harry Potter series: "So the Daily Prophet exists to tell people what they want to hear?" "The Prophet exists to sell itself, you silly girl." Skittle 07:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot that is all very helpful and exactly what I was looking for. Cheers, Quincel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.153.9.220 (talk) 08:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth pointing out that while News Corp. is controlled by the Murdoch family, Viacom by the Redstones, Tribune Co. by Sam Zell and The New York Times Company by the Ochs family, GE, Disney, Time Warner and Gannett are each widely held, with no one person or family controlling them. So while the media in the U.S. may be concentrated in the hands of a few corporations, it's a stretch to say it's in the hands of a few people. -- Mwalcoff 01:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most media outlets also have a policy of editorial independence - journalists can be a cantankerous lot and don't appreciate being leant on by proprietors. FiggyBee 02:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But they can get fired. So the media will replace them with whoever wants to write the stories the way they want them to be written. So we not only get biased, but likely also amateuristic journalism. DirkvdM 11:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever worked for a newspaper, Dirk? It very rarely works like that. -- Mwalcoff 23:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I work at a radio station now, but that's irrelevant. It's not about how it usually works, but about what might happen if too few people end up having too much power. They might decide to exploit their position for political purposes. DirkvdM 08:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Market capitalization

Where can I find specific statistics on the total market capitalization (share price x shares outstanding) of all publicly traded stocks in the United States? I'm not looking for one particular exchange, but all public stocks traded in the United States. Annual statistics, such as the market cap on January 1 of every year for the past 20 years. ? I'm looking for something similar to http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1401_united_states_and_foreign_stock_markets.html, but more up-to-date, and ideally a way to calculate it monthly. Sonic Craze 22:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I immediately thought of Hoover's, but I only have access to the free pages so I don't know what is in the subscriber-only section. You may be able to find out some of that info from the free pages, though - let me investigate... Hassocks5489 11:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I think you mean for the country as a whole ... in that case, ignore the above. Sorry. Hassocks5489 11:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is some annual information in the reports in here; check the bottom of Page 8 of each report. Data appears to be annual and in €. 2006 data seems to be in the 2007 reports and so on. I couldn't see which specific date in the year it applied to. Hassocks5489 12:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The last link is quite useful, thank you. However, it only goes back as far as 2003, and I'm hoping to analyze a longer time frame than that (20 years or so). Any other suggestions? Sonic Craze 15:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Financial Times will have records, your local archive/library will also keep records (though perhaps not in database format. The major newspapers of the US that list shares will have them. THe stock-exchanges themselves will hold this information. I know from my attempts to track something similar in the UK (I wanted the FTSE-100 members at inception V today/various points in history) that it is extremely difficult to find information of this nation online. ny156uk 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further to what ny156uk says, a Google search using various terms has turned up surprisingly little. A reference on page 35 of this essay, comparing the 1990 and 1998 figures, leads to a book by Emmanuel Todd, After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), but I doubt this would have a breakdown of other years as well, unfortunately. Hassocks5489 18:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UT2004 voice actor

What's the name of the female voice actor who does the status messages in UT2004 like Double Kill, Multi Kill up to Ludicrous Kill and HOLY S**T! I don't mean the "sexy quake" voice pack which sounds similar, I mean the announcer that ships with UT2004. What's her name? I'm really curious to see what she looks like after hearing her voice thousands of times.. --⁪ffroth 23:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure, but the likelihood is that it's either Shannon Ewing or Lani Minella ---- WebHamster 23:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I found her. Wait, aaah! --⁪ffroth 01:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logging In

Does anyone know why people would log into any messenger and not say anything to anyone that is talking to them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.249.3.93 (talk) 23:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They might not respond to "strangers" for a variety of reasons. Maybe everyone is a stranger to them.

They might be logged in, so a happy yellow face (or whatever indicates "active") appears on their friends' friendslist, showing that they're online. Maybe none of those friends is online for a while, or have nothing to say, and people just stay logged in for hours while they're at or near their computer.

They might be waiting for messages from one special person, and nothing else counts. Maybe that person isn't online yet, or maybe he/she will never post a message.

---Sluzzelin talk 00:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they aren't online at all. Maybe they're eating a sandwich in the other room and didn't log out. Maybe they don't want to talk. Maybe they don't want to talk TO YOU. Maybe they are talking to someone else! Maybe they just want to see who else is online. There are an unlimited number of reasons. --24.147.86.187 00:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my limited experience, people tend to use the setting that automatically logs them in when the computer starts up. They don't bother logging out when they don't intend to chat or when they are on the phone, answering the door or having lunch/dinner. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is true for me, with cable internet it automatically connects when I log into windows, and stays logged on until I restart/login from somewhere else or another computer in the house. It's just me there(single 25yo guy here), so when I lock down windows(windows key-L) there is no chance of anything else going on. Dureo 09:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm often watching a DVD so would'nt reply.It can't be so urgent that you can't wait for a reply for an hour or two.--hotclaws 10:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe somebody else is using the computer. Sonic Craze 15:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 23

Wikimedia fundraising

There are those messages on my screen such as "Keep up the good work Wikipeople!" Is there a page where I can read all the messages? A.Z. 01:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - try here. SteveBaker 01:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Those are an interesting read. A.Z. 02:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I'd known anyone would care, I'd have composed something moving and poetic. :-) SteveBaker 14:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the golden quadrilateral NHAI project of Govt of India

Can any one pl tell me how is the road route between Delhi and Mumbai any different now that the golden quadrilateral project is complete? Does the new route by pass some cities/towns or is it a completely diffrent route. sudhir —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.94.228.13 (talk) 01:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

good / bad links

good link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_table bad link: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/PeriodicTable

Can the latter be linked to the former?

Gbressani 03:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)gbressani[reply]

No, for a few reasons:

Wiktionary and Wikipedia are different projects. Wiktionary is a wiki dictionary, Wikipedia is a wiki encyclopedia. Not the same thing.
The latter is just a bad CamelCase link. There is a Wiktionary entry for periodic table already. Wikimedia projects don't use CamelCase (anymore).

--24.147.86.187 03:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate domination conspiracy theory

With all the conspiracy theory info that crops up here, I thought someone might be able to help with one that I heard about years ago. The idea behind it was that there was a group of maybe 30-50 people who had been CEO, CFO, or some other high ranking official of various corporations. This group had controlled most of the major U.S. corporations for years with little variance or control by people outside this group. I was shown a chart that detailed the people's moves from one company to another but it was years ago that I saw the chart. So, does this ring a bell with anyone? Does this have a name? Or even an article here? Dismas|^(talk) 03:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might it be related to the Bilderberg Group? Skittle 07:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's in the open (although what they talk about isn't), it's worldwide and it's for all sorts of influential people, including politicians.

I once heard about something like that. The guy told me to look up a writing below a triangle on a US one dollar bill, but that image only shows one side, so it must be on the other side. DirkvdM 08:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, that is not what I was referring to, though I appreciate the link since I had never heard of that group before. The group that I am referring to does not have royalty and heads of state as "members". I remember now that there was a web site at one time that espoused this theory. You could click on peoples names and it would show corporations that they currently worked for as well as those that they had worked for in the past. As you navigated through this list you started to realize how they were all moving around in essentially the same circles.

The group that Dirk is referring to is most likely the Freemasons. Their symbology is supposed to be all over U.S. currency. Dismas|^(talk) 08:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not the freemasons. It was something I had never heard of before. DirkvdM 17:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny I can remember several of these types of societies from Robert Ludlum (usually related to a specific cause) novels, and one of the Flynn novels by Gregory Mcdonald has one, and I am sure it is based on real one, not the masons though, let me do some digging. Dureo 08:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few of the ones I was thinking of, Trilateral Commission(International) and Skull and Bones usually fictionalized accounts are based on the Bilderburgs, or the S&B's types. Dureo 09:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like Skull and Bones to me. SteveBaker 14:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found it! I remembered seeing something like this a while back, with a fairly fancy website showing how incestuous corporate boards are. The search that finally found it was "Template:Websearch". Here's the site: www.theyrule.net. --Sean 14:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes! That's it! I had no idea what to put into google in order to find it since I didn't have any of the names of the people and just searching corporation officers was way too broad. Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 21:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I've found that in general when you're searching for evil, adding "kissinger" improves the results. :) --Sean 01:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Paris Club or (linked within the article) the London club? ny156uk 18:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to see our articles about the Bohemian Club/Bohemian Grove.

Atlant 13:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

date of deepawali in 1949?

what was the date of deepawali in 1949? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.164.238 (talk • contribs)

Good question! The new moon in October 1949 was at 21:23 UTC on the 21st [2], which would have been early in the morning of the 22nd in India. So I think, from my very short study of the Hindu calendar, that Diwali 1949 would have been the 22nd of October, or Asvina 30 in the Indian national calendar. FiggyBee 15:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seal (animal)

What are the seals predators? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.83.26 (talk) 10:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other seals, killer whales, great white sharks, polar bears. I suppose other sharks would snatch a small seal if it swam close enough to bite. We don't know everything that goes on down there. --Milkbreath 11:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But we do know--cannibalism aside--that our pinniped article does not cover predators well / at all. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And let's not forget humans. FiggyBee 11:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warranty void if seal broken? Lanfear's Bane | t 12:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

chicken

Ki Ora, Im a chicken farmer from New Zealand, and I'm shitting myself with confusion. Thieves keep on breaking into my warehouse and stealing meat. Ive done everything i can thik of but they still get it. Ive considered storing meet in the forest to make it safer. Does anyone have any suggestion? Ta.

Call the police? Dismas|^(talk) 12:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Security Cameras to record the details and then pass onto the police?82.153.9.220 13:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bug a chicken? (no, not bugger) DirkvdM 17:20, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would chicken meat go off in the forest? I think you wouldn't be able to sell it for human consumption if you don't store it according to regulations. My first suggestion would be to hire someone to keep watch for a few nights (especially if there is a pattern. If someone's watching, they're less likely to try, and might go somewhere easier. Your local police station might be able to give you more information about preventing breaking and entering, especially if you've reported multiple crimes. Steewi 06:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question of storing things in the forest had been raised on the Refdesk a few months ago.

However, of the things that might help considering installing some security devices (fences or such), or do hire someone to watch the perimeter. Advancements in technology offer solutions like video surveillance, photosensors or presence detectors that trigger a (silent) alarm when they sense something. Also, yeah, what Steewi above wrote. Good luck! --Ouro (blah blah) 10:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity

How do i calculate what fraction Latvian I am? If all 4 of my grandparents were Latvian i guess that makes me 100% Latvian, although i have lived in Great Britain all my life as have my parents. It confuses me when people say 'how much Latvian are you?' i would like to have a witty and infromative answer for them, thanks alot RobertsZ 13:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, 4 grandparents being 100% Latvian would make you be 100% Latvian, 3 would be 75%, 2 would be 50% and 1 would be 25%. Not a hard calculation. However, it's not like being Latvian is a genetic thing - so I'd say you were about as Latvian as you feel. I'm English with some Scottish ancestry, my wife is French with some Algerian ancestry. My kid spent all of his life from age 2 until 16 here in Texas and speaks with an American accent...what do you think he thinks he is? British - as it happens. When people ask you "How much Latvian are you?", I would put my hands about 6" apart and say "About that much."...it's about as meaningful as anything else you could answer. SteveBaker 14:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about "omelet" pronounced OM-uh-lett (I'm a Lett)? Maybe "solid amber". Baltic baby. Me, I'm Slovenian, German, French, English, Irish, and God knows what else. --Milkbreath 15:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've always wondered how people can have so much ethnicity in them. bibliomaniac 15 A straw poll on straw polls 20:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course this means that your Latviannes (Latvianity?) is completely dependent on how far up your tree of ancestors you go for the calculation. If you go one level up to your 8 great grandparents, two of them may come from Europe, and you're suddenly 75% Latvian. Go far enough back, and we're all 100% African. You can solve this by adding some kind of dampening, ie. your parents contribute 0.5, your grandparents 0.25 and so on. By that measure you're between 25% and 50% Latvian. The choice of how much your grandparents contribute, compared to your parents is completely arbitrary of course, so there's no really meaningful answer the question of how Latvian you are. risk 22:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a question about ethnicity, not citizenship. Steve, your kid might have British citizenship, but can you really argue he has British ethnicity, with all that wonderful ethnic commingling in his family tree? My kids have always been Australian citizens, but by ethnic background one of them is predominantly Russian (with bits of Kalmyk, Serbian, Polish and Jewish thrown in), and the other is half Irish-cum-Scottish-cum-English and half predominantly Russian (with bits of Kalmyk, Serbian, Polish and Jewish thrown in). -- JackofOz 02:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to ethnicity: An ethnic group or ethnicity is a population of human beings whose members identify with each other...if our OP does not identify as Latvian, then how can we call this person a part of the Latvian ethnic group? It's not genetics, it's not country of birth, it's not citizenship and it's not the same thing as "race". It's just a belief thing. SteveBaker 04:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An enlightened, if unscientific approach might be to ask "Do you feel British"? If yes, you're British. The negative side of this question is the notorious Tebbit cricket Test. --Dweller 11:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - yes, I'd forgotten that one! Still, it's hard to know how my kid could cheer for the French, Algerian or American national cricket teams! Tebbit was aiming this barb at the large numbers of Indian and Pakistani people who had immigrated into Britain following their expulsion from Uganda in 1972 (they all had British citizenship). Both India and Pakistani cricket teams have massive following amongst those people and Tebbits "test" was basically aimed in their direction. SteveBaker 14:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys, this is really interesting stuff, i think the discussion has highlighted my dilema with ethnicity over citizenship, or even patriotism, but now i have some interesting talking points if it comes up in conversation, which it undoubtedly will in the future. And i dont think the Latvian cricket team is up to much these days, ha ha ha, thanks again, RobertsZ 14:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might enjoy reading "Man Who's 1/16th Irish Proud Of His Irish Heritage". :) --Sean 17:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO CHANGE THE TITLE OF AN ARTICLE ?

Would anybody direct me to an instruction how to change the Title (The name) of the article that I wrote? Krzysiulek 15:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to Kofler Edward, it's already been fixed. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As to how to - there's a "Move" option to the right of the "edit this page" option. (Or above, or below, depending upon which skin you;re using to read wikipedia.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that very new users are unable to move articles. Jon513 17:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, though Krzysiulek is not such a user. Algebraist 21:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it true

Is it true that a baby has to have either their mothers blood type or their fathers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.240.25.47 (talk) 16:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the table at ABO blood group system#Inheritance. In short, no, a baby can be O when mother & father are A and B. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But an O parent cannot have an AB child or vice versa. — A related point came up in an episode of Northern Exposure that I saw (again) recently. Ed, a foundling, learns that the only two AB-negative people in Cicely are himself and a woman who's about the right age to be his unknown mother. But the parent or child of an AB is not much more likely to be AB than the general population (I haven't got around to computing the odds). —Tamfang 18:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

al Capones' Grave Stone

On a recent visit to see where Al Capone is buried, we noticed there were pennies scattered on his headstone. I have searched and searched and can not find the reason behind it. Why do people place pennies on headstones?Daisy2008 21:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure, but if I were to guess, I'd say it probably has some connection to the ancient Greek belief that a person needed a coin to pass the River Styx and continue to the underworld. However, I could be completely wrong about that. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 22:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Objects are often left on top of headstones by those who visit them. Not only coins but sometimes flags, toys, model cars, etc. Some cemetaries frown on this, Arlington National Cemetary in the United States, I think is one that doesn't allow such trinkets. They are often items that would be symbolical of the person buried there. I'd agree with the above as far as, specifically, the coins go though. Dismas|^(talk) 00:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 24

Voyeur "porn" - porn or not?

I wonder wheather or not voyeuristic photographs of sexual acts (e.g. people having sexual intercourse without one/all of the involved knowing this is filmed/photographed) should be regarded as pornography or not. It it pornography mainly because it can be arousing, or does it have to be intended as pornography to be such?/Q'n'a-man 02:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's probably intended as porn by those who took the photographs, or those who distribute them. FiggyBee 02:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first two sentences of pornography makes it pretty clear. SteveBaker 04:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds odd to me that one can participate in porn without even knowing it./Q'n'a-man 10:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of pornography need not be aware of it; they need not even be a living person. The subjects in pornographic cartoons, for example, know nothing of their actions, but the definition of pornography doesn't hinge on that. Pornography is the act of duplication of the sex act (through media of some form), it is not the sex act by itself. Sex that nobody is watching or distributing is not pornography. --24.147.86.187 12:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The suffix graph in words like 'pornography' means "writing" or perhaps "drawing" (as in calligraphy - or by extension, in modern terms, telegraph, photograph, computer graphics, etc). That's why participating in something sexual isn't pornography. Pornography is the "writing" or "photographing" of those acts. (It's like the old joke: "Hey, Mister, ya wanna buy some pornography?...Sorry, no, I don't have a pornograph.") SteveBaker 13:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Differences between Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome

Hello, I am currently looking for resources that highlight the differences between Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, such as differences in the politics and government, military, culture and society. I've found a few essays on the internet with this ([3], [4] and [5]) but they are all quite short and do not provide in-depth information. Is there anything like this on Wikipedia? Thanks in advance. 207.45.181.26 06:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of basic topics in classical studies might help. Btw, I found that by typing in 'greece rome' and looking through the list of results. Might be more there. DirkvdM 11:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This question would probably get better answers on the Humanities desk. They live for this sort of thing over there. --Milkbreath 12:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jiko

who invented the first energy saving efficiency cook stove(jiko) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.24.99.154 (talk) 09:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jiko is Swahili for "a cooking place", according to Wikipedia. What kind of cook stove do you mean? Rmhermen 19:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keira knightley's religion

can anyone tell me to which religion keira belongs or follows —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepakr12 (talk • contribs) 11:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Kabbalah.[6][7] MrRedact 12:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to question Keira Knightley's religion, but I do find it odd how so many famous people follow the more obscure/non-traditional religions. Is it a consequence of being famous, a PR thing, just coincidence or something else? Of course I have no idea what Kabbalah is - it could well be very widespread, but certainly there is a theme in celebrity to not be part of the mainstream ones. ny156uk 16:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kabbalah is not a religion per se; it's a branch of arcane knowledge within the Jewish religion. If I recall correctly, before you're allowed to study it, you're required to be 40 years old, married, and have a beard. But I may not recall correctly. --Trovatore 17:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I must say, Keira Knightley has a fetching beard. --Masamage ♫ 05:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think with Scientology they deliberately seek out celebrity adherents, for money and marketing purposes, presumably. --Sean 17:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kabbalah is the word for Jewish Mysticism, a group of books long rejected by mainstream Judaism for being too 'old-fashioned' (they describe how anyone can achieve miracles and the such like, things modern religions, usually shun). However, the religion of Kabbalah was set up recently which claims these books as their holy books. In reality, a cynic would probably describe Kabbalah as a cult, since it advocates such practises as reading the holy books by running your finger rapidly down the page and drinking holy water and wearing holy string, all of which must be provided (bought) from the Kabbalah organisation for high prices. They have also been accused of taking people away from their families. As for celelbrities joining unusual religions, we cannot be sure. Certainly minor religions seek them out to gain their large cash reserves and fame to publisise (Maddona promoted Kabbalah as 'Estar' for a long time). However, I also suspect the celelbrity lifestyle encourages people to lose sight of normal life and seek the answers anywhere. I may be wrong, my spelling has certainly detereated rapidly.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.153.113.112 (talk) 10:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helium 3

After reading the featured article on China's Moon exploration, and then the Heluim 3 article I would now like to know: 1 What colour is Helium 3 2 is it a gas? 3 Is it invisible? 4 can some one provide a picture? Thanks people 12.191.136.2 13:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helium 3 is an isotope of helium - just like the stuff you find in balloons - but with one less neutron in the nucleus. So just like regular helium, it's an 'invisible' colourless, odourless gas at room temperature/pressure. It's hard to provide a photo of something that's invisible - although there is a photo of a bottle full of helium in our Helium article - it looks just like a bottle full of air or a bottle full of nothing. Helium 3 looks just like the regular kind (Helium 4). SteveBaker 13:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the color of a substance depends on the arrangement of electrons in it, and that won't be affected by the number of neutrons in the nucleus, that makes perfect sense. Still, I wonder if anyone's ever actually verified it. I mean, purified helium 3 is not easy to produce no matter whether you extract it from helium or from the products of nuclear reactions. Is there any report of someone with access to enough of it having filled a reasonable-size glass bottle and confirmed that it has the expected appearance?

(Isotopes don't always behave as identically as you might expect, nuclear reactions aside. The greater mass of its nucleus causes deuterium to behave differently in chemical reactions, with the result that if you drank only heavy water, it would kill you in a matter of weeks. But colors are another matter.)

--Anonymous, 21:51 UTC, October 24, 2007.

Helium-3 isn't that rare - people do low temperature physics using refrigerators running He³ for example. But I have no idea whether anyone ever had enough to look at. But since almost all elemental gasses are colourless and given that He⁴ is colourless and (as you say) different isotopes of the same atom aren't generally differently coloured because colour is more to do with electrons than the nucleus - it's really VERY unlikely that He³ would be coloured. SteveBaker 01:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signature vs. Initials

My company advises customers to use their full signature when electronically signing off on legal documents rather than just their initials. I know that this is related to "Sarbanes Oxley" compliance, but I would just like to know more reasoning behind why a full signature is so much more valid than just initials. Does it have to do with being able to trace hand writing better? Why must you use your full signature on legal documents?

Thanks for your time, Wonderwoman7Wonderwoman7 13:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since signatures (and especially digital signatures) are utterly trivial to fake - and it's just as easy to fake a full name as initials, at it's roots, this can't be anything more than tradition. However, Sarbanes/Oxley is just full of ridiculous and pointless red tape - so it's probably required somewhere in there. SteveBaker 13:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

trailblazer starter

how do change the starter on a 02 trailblazer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.165.108.247 (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, you'd want to refer to a repair manual for an 02 Trailblazer (not an endorsement, just the first google hit). If spending $30 isn't what you had in mind, you could try swinging by your local garage and seeing if they'll let you take a look at their copy. If you plan on regularly working on a car, though, I figure one of these is a good investment.

On the other hand, you could grab a replacement and start looking at the car to determine how the replacement part matches up against the currently installed one, and then start pulling parts off. This is where the Car Talk guys tend to grade their callers' technical aptitude on the scale of "afraid to adjust tilt steering" to "builds nuclear reactors from cardboard", by the way. — Lomn 14:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the above responder basically said, just get a Chilton's or Haynes' manual from your local autoparts/book store or borrow a copy at the library. Dismas|^(talk) 20:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the Trailblazer, but starters are easy, generally. First, be sure the starter is bad. More often that not it's really the battery. Sub out the battery to test. Don't test with jumper cables, they're unreliable. Call parts stores to find a new starter. To replace the starter, remove the negative battery cable from the battery post. Really. They always tell you to do that whether you really have to or not, but this time you do. Chock the rear tires. Jack and support the front of the vehicle. Draw a picture of what wire goes where at the starter. Remove the wires from the starter. The bolts holding the starter in should be fairly large and obvious; remove them, writing down which one goes where, leaving the one easiest to get at for last, bearing in mind that the starter is heavier than it looks. Don't let it fall; use a second jack to get it down if you have to. Use a flashlight to inspect the teeth on the flywheel that you can now see where the starter came off. If they look chewed up or any are broken, put everything back and get towed to a shop. Wipe the starter off a little, put it in a box, wash your hands, and take it to the parts store. Buy a new one, and compare it to the old one to make sure. Ask the guy if he can tell you what the torque is supposed to be on the mounting bolts. If he can't, take your new starter home and call around to other stores until somebody knows. If the guy is a gal, and you're not, flirt. Motorhead girls are worth some effort, as a rule. Go home, put everything back together in reverse order with the new starter, start the engine, turn it off, let the vehicle down, and be happy. --Milkbreath 00:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CA Fires: Arrest and FBI Probe

Just seen on the news (FOX News and CNN, other news sources) that the police has a arsonist in custody and looking for more of them. Can this be placed anywhere in appropriate articles ? The arrest has happened literally minutes ago. 65.173.104.140 21:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait another ten minutes, and if it's verified, it'll turn up on one of their web pages, where it'll be more easily verified by other editors, then add it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you all have cable TV and/or Satellite TV, turn it on. This may be on the FOX News website and the CNN website by now. 65.173.104.140 21:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd place it myself, but my ISP keeps fucking up and shitting on all connections. I'm on one of those Wi-Fi units. Should be called "Why-Fucked" since it does'nt work most of the time. 65.173.104.140 22:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just calm down. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news site. When there are easy to verify details it'll get in, there's no question about it. --24.147.86.187 23:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American Town Private Airfield.

Hi, A few months ago I remember reading about a town a think was in America where a lot of the houses owened aircraft and had hangers for them. Also the roads could be used as runways. I have not being able to find any reference. Can anybody help me?

Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.70.82 (talk) 22:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Airpark. Dismas|^(talk) 22:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hardest/easiest drug to make

Please note that the question is purely for curiosity purposes. Which of the popular illicit drugs (MDMA, cocaine, heroin, meth, etc...) is generally considered the hardest to make? As well, which is considered the easiest to make? Thanks. Acceptable 23:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few of them are found in nature - magic mushrooms for example. They don't need any effort to make...you just kinda find the only ingredient growing someplace and you're done. SteveBaker 01:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The chemists at my place of work tell me meth is pretty simple to cook and to get hold of the materials. MDMA is more tricky, but still well within the grasp of a decent chemist (if you can get hold of the materials required). Crude forms of crack cocaine and heroin (essentially morphine) are also not that difficult, but high grade heroin is more technically challenging, as you are likely to blow yourself up if you are not careful, likewise freebase coke. They tell me, and I quote, "it depends whether you mean 'hard in terms controlling reactions to get good product' or 'hard in terms of the risk of burning your face off'". However, a poll of them suggested meth was easiest and high grade heroin was the hardest (though, to be honest with you, only one of them looks like he may have practical experience to speak from). Rockpocket 04:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that magic mushrooms are not necessarily illegal, which is what the questioneer was asking about. Undried, it is (still) legal to trade in mushrooms in the Netherlands. In the UK, I've heard, it is illegal to pick them, but not to eat them. So the only legal way to take them would be grazing. :) Which illustrates quite nicely Steve's point. They don't need to be made - they're already there. The same goes for coca leaves and qat, but again, those are not generally illegal (I think). But cocaine is illegal and production is fairly complex. As a very rough rule of thumb, as the production gets more complicated, the higher the chances are it's made illegal in various countries. Raw opium is probably an exception, because harvesting that isn't too complicated - just cut the plant and scrape off the dried sap a while later (I think). Marijuana is also quite easy - after picking you just need to dry it so you can smoke it. Or if you can't wait for that, you can put it in a cake (it has to be heated to become active) and eat that. Wine is fairly easy to make, even though it takes some time. But alcohol in only (largely) illegal in some muslim countries afaik. DirkvdM 09:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coca leaves are not generally legal. See Coca#Legality. Rmhermen 15:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol is quite possibly the easiest to make. Lots of people make it accidently when their fruit juices ferment in the fridge. --Mdwyer 20:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strange instruction of flight attendant

On being about to land on a recent flight, a flight attendant noticed that I had a sweater tied around my waist (by the sleeves) and told me to take it off from there and put it on over my head. I was so taken aback by this strange instruction that I meekly complied without query. What possible safety reason could there be for having to do this? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 23:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why you would take it off is probably because in an emergency situation the knot of the sweater around your waist would be very uncomfortable, and maybe even a safety risk (interfering with the seatbelt). Why you should put it over your head I don't know. Maybe they thought you were cold? Steewi 00:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By "over my head", do you mean wearing it or literally wrapping it around your head? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.208.110.207 (talk) 06:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed that that meant 'in the overhead compartment'. --Masamage ♫ 06:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed that meant "put it on in the normal way, by pulling it over my head". FiggyBee 06:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He meant "put it on", but on reflection that may not actually have been part of his instruction to me. He may just have been suggesting something to do with it. As for the fact that it was around my waist, I really can't see that there is any safety justification for that. The chances of it interfering with the seatbelt are infinitesimal to zero. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 07:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Immediately prior to takeoff and landing, flight attendants are required to check that all passengers have their seat belts securely fastened. Depending on precisely how or where the sweater was tied, the flight attendant could have had one of any number of concerns.

The sweater could have concealed the belt buckle, making it impossible to check that it was fastened.
The attendant could have been concerned that the sweater might have been snagged in the buckle in a way that was not immediately obvious, interfering with its function.
In the event of an evacuation, the sweater could snag on the seat belt (or something else) delaying you or others in your escape from the plane.
If the sweater were under the belt, the attendant could have been concerned that the extra padding would prevent the belt from holding you securely.

There may be other scenarios that I can't come up with off the top of my head, as well. In any case, the flight attendants are usually pretty busy, and will tend to err on the side of caution: "What's the quickest, simplest way that I can be sure that this passenger is as safe as possible on landing?" TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 25

ATTENTION!! ANSWER QUICK PLZ!!

Hi I need help with this. Even if you don't agree with these questions please answer to the best of your ability:

Reasons why executives terms in office should be 7 years

Why executives should not serve more than one term.

Why justices should serve more than one term.

68.5.11.28 00:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Longer terms mean you can build up experience and become better at your job, while shorter terms don't allow for that so much. Shorter terms, however, can help stop people from thinking they run the place, because they remember better that they're temporary. --Masamage ♫ 00:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Six minutes! Is that quick enough for you? If so please say "thank you" or something. - hydnjo talk 01:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judges have an indefinite term so that they remain largely independent from day-to-day politics. —Tamfang 22:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re.: Verification - Arrests in CA Wildfires:

Two newspaper links.

libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart-cgi?Artnum=204313
latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arson25oct25,0,1196901

Also Google: California Fires/ Arson Arrests' for more.

Someone requested verification. Due to a faulty Wi-Fi, and a rotten local ISP, bandwidth is a problem. Where I'm at, they think a computer is science fiction and/or witchcraft, given the way they handle a ISP. 65.173.104.140 02:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, but the appropriate place for these items is in the relevant article. The reference desks are for asking reference questions. --Sean 14:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese movie

Hello! I am wondering about a movie that I saw a long time ago, but I don't remember all of it or the title (← that's what I'm trying to find). A girls parents are turned to pigs when they stop at an abandoned town and start to eat the food that is at a restaurant there. She is stuck there, working as a maid or something of the sort, because if she leaves, her parents will be eaten by the residents. The residents of the town are ghosts, I think. Some characters that I remember are: a woman who is like a vulture, a tall ghost like blog thing :), the girl, her pig parents, etc. This sounds made up, but it isn't ^_^ I do remember something about a spa there... oh well. Thanks for any help! Ciao --極地狼 ( 我是一头死的狼 ) 03:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is called Spirited Away. Good movie! Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 03:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent movie, in either language. After about three viewings you'll understand it better. :D --Masamage ♫ 05:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yeah. Thanks for the info guys! --極地狼 ( 我是一头死的狼 ) 13:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plastics Make it Possible

American television viewers would be familiar with that slogan created by the Plastics Council for an ad campaign years back. The campaign and others like it puzzle me. What was the council looking to achieve? How would giving plastics a positive image stimulate sales? It's not like plastics has a bad reputation. I could understand the coal industry's ad campaign to give coal a better image because contentious and very public political battles are inevitable but plastics?

75.36.40.106 04:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This link is one release from a plastics manufacturer discussing some of the motivations behind the campaign. Its purpose is as a reinforcement of a largely positive image that consumers have of plastics. However, some concerns have been growing in recent years regarding possible health and environmental issues with using some of the components used in common food packaging, such as a persistent urban legend about plastic water bottles being unsafe and recent indications that plasticizers used in baby bottles and toys are likely to leach out. In my own household, we have largely replaced plastic storage containers with more inert and "safer" materials, and my spouse always scolds me if I'm caught reheating leftovers in any type of plastic container due to concerns of chemical leaching. Think of the campaign as a pre-emptive public relations move. Sonic Craze 05:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For a little bit of background on the concerns in food packaging, see Bisphenol A. --Bennybp 05:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see it less as pre-emptive and more as reactive. Plastics aren't biodegradable on any human timescale. Factoring in roadside waste (which is the public's fault, not the plastic's, but...), landfills and difficulty of recycling, the fact is that plastics were indeed taking an image hit. Instead of the standard "paper or plastic" question at the grocery store, some would ask "cut down a tree or destroy the environment?" With eco-consciousness on the rise, plastic was becoming less popular. Negative image leads to two main things - decreased sales and increased legislation. An ad campaign that cost millions was probably seen as saving tens of millions by boosting sales and decreasing the likelihood of increased regulation. Of course, the industry spin would be "reinforcing an already positive image." That's advertising for you. 152.16.59.190 05:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

High-speed rotation

Why is it that when wheels or fans spin at high speeds, they look like they're going backwards? I can understand in general why the image appears to skip, but why doesn't it look like it's going forward? Is there a reason? --Masamage ♫ 05:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When viewed on film or under AC-powered HID streetlamps, a rotating object may appear to spin backwards if it completes slightly less than one cycle (or slightly less than one even fraction of a cycle, if the object is composed of multiple symmetrical segments) between each frame or each power cycle. So say the wheel turns through 350 degrees each frame - that looks the same as if it were turning backwards 10 degrees each frame, and your brain tends to assume that it's made the smaller movement. FiggyBee 06:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wagon-wheel effect and Temporal aliasing. --Anonymous, 08:24 UTC, October 25, 2007.

Also see stroboscope.

Atlant 13:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't dogs hyperventilate?

When dogs or other mammals are really interested in some scent, their rate of respiration increases dramatically- in fact, for all mammals that depend on smell, a really interesting scent makes them increase their rate of respiration. So what prevents them from hyperventilating when they encounter some really interesting scent? 71.112.129.232 05:26, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is all the reason, but they have gigantic lungs, bigger than they need to, so I guess they're used to taking in a lot of air. There's some good information about their physiology in the dog article. --Masamage ♫ 06:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you watch a dog carefully when it is checking a really interesting scent it will seem to concentrate really hard but the amount of air it samples is quite small. Dogs sniff for scent, that is take in many small amounts of air, just enough to reach the smell sensors. If anything they are in more danger of suffocating. Put some trace of food on your fingers and watch closely when the dog investigates it. Richard Avery 06:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's stranger that they don't hyperventilate when they pant for a long time. --Sean 14:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that they aren't taking deep breaths - just really rapid shallow breaths. That means that they aren't actually exchanging much of the air in their lungs. If each 'pant' or 'sniff' only exchanged (say) 10% of the air in the lungs - then that would be no different from taking a deep "100%" breath ten times less frequently. All they need to do is to move the air in the mouth/nose out and replace it with fresh air - and that's a much smaller volume. SteveBaker 22:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One hell of a website!

C'mon people, Wikipedia is one hell of a fine website. Donate to Wikimedia! They've helped this IP with matter concerning the CA wildfires. 65.173.104.140 06:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

While true, there is the banner, this is not a question or what this page is used for and many people feel uncomfortable if they think they are being pressurised into donating. Smalled. Lanfear's Bane | t 08:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Speaking as someone who hates it when their ears pop and doesn't even like swimming to the bottom of the pool, I would be extremely uncomfortable being pressurised into donating. 38.112.225.84 14:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OMG I nearly fell of my chair when I read that! Hyper Girl 14:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Adelie Penguin

Which Explorer is the Adelie Penguin named after and what was his nationality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.83.26 (talk) 07:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In 1830, French explorer Dumont d'Urville named them for his wife, Adélie. See Adelie Penguin--Tagishsimon (talk) 07:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

we learn something every day. I had assumed that the penguin was named for Adélie Land, but it seems D'Urville named both independently. —Tamfang 22:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American Town Private Airfield.

Hi, A few months ago I remember reading about a town a think was in America where a lot of the houses owened aircraft and had hangers for them. Also the roads could be used as runways. I have not being able to find any reference. Can anybody help me?

Thanks,

Zsamana

You may be thinking of Jumbolair where celebs such as John Travolta live. Foxhill 09:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also, the first couple times you asked this question and you were directed to Airpark as there are many of these communities. Dismas|^(talk) 12:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crow stealing chicken eggs

Hi fellow wikipedians, my sister keeps chickens, and a crow steals the eggs. This is a problem. We want some suggestions regarding how to stop the crow. Since we're in Australia, firearms, slingshots and archery type gear are out of the question. The chooks (chickens) have a large area fenced off, with no roof, and a small area with their shed (where they lay eggs) with a roof and a door. The crow lands in the main yard and walks into the chicken shed, rolls the eggs out (I'm sure it'd pick them up and carry them if they couldn't be rolled out) and carries them off. We can't lock the chooks in the roofed area because it's too small for them, we can't roof in the open area because it'd be too much trouble.

--Psud 09:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"the cow lands" and "we can't roof in the open area" ... Does the cow come in by plane? DirkvdM 09:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure I wrote crow not cow --Psud 11:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No wonder I thought is was a odd question indeed. :) DirkvdM 09:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in what country would ' firearms, slingshots and archery type gear' be an option? DirkvdM 09:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USA. Googled it and the general theme of suggestions originating from the US was "shoot it", the suggested weapons included shotguns, rifles, slingshots and bow & arrow. --Psud 11:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Airsoft weapons may discourage the crow. Depends how you are about shooting / killing animals. Lanfear's Bane | t 10:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The importation of airsoft (BB) firearms is restricted under the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956" according to [this]. Also I'd much rather not have to kill the bird. --Psud 11:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a plan for a crow trap, a thing I never knew existed. Check your local laws, right? What you're supposed to do with the crows once you've trapped them, I don't know. Give them a stern talking-to? Tar and defeather them and run them out of town on a rail? Place them in a remedial program for egg-sucking vermin? Clip their flight feathers and let the dingoes do your dirty work for you? --Milkbreath 12:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder how far I'd have to move a crow to keep it from returning. Also, no need for dingoes (good thing too, none of those around here), the chooks would sort it out if it couldn't fly away. --Psud 12:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are the chooks doing while the crow is fumbling with an egg? I think you can forget about relocating crows. I just looked at an article from Smithsonian (Crows fly far and wide, but there's no place like home. By: Gilbert, Bil, Smithsonian, 00377333, Aug92, Vol. 23, Issue 5) that says crows will fly 80 miles from their roost to find food, and they migrate as much as 600 miles. Birds are pretty mobile. I can't link to the article because it's through a proxy.

I wonder if you could put a puppy in with the chickens and let it grow up there. Not a heeler, you know, maybe a spaniel. That sort of thing works with sheep-guarding dogs, I hear. --Milkbreath 12:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The chooks will chase and peck at the crow if they see it, but the crow just waits until all the chickens are at the other end of the yard. A dog? I've heard of raising a puppy with various animals as a guard, even with ducks. So that'd probably work. --Psud 07:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should spray the crow with a water hose? ...With mildly annoying/aversive substances like alcohol? Perhaps one of those devices that shoots a pulse of air ("Sonic Blaster" was a toy by that name formerly available in the U.S.) might affect their behavior? Very loud noises? Rap music? George W. Bush speaking?

Atlant 13:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm starting to think that the only two options that are likely to work are (1) roofing the chicken run with chicken wire; or (2) putting in enough decoy eggs to increase the effort required from the crow.

I don't think squirting the bird would work - it'd simply wait until there weren't any people watching it. -Psud 07:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know jack about "chooks", but why can't you just close the shed door or the entrance to the smaller pen when the chickens are out and about in the open-air pen? Chickenwire around the shed with a gate maybe? Also I've heard of these things called scarecrows, beats me if they work; I remember buying a fake owl for pigeons in AZ and it not being particularly effective. Finally, what about Australia precludes projectiles? Whack it with a boomerang or something if you are willing to kill it but just lack the means. 38.112.225.84 14:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe a scarecrow would work - the crow's not scared even of real people. Can't leave the the small roofed area shut off because the various chickens lay at different times of day. --Psud 07:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Psud's problem is a tricky one. Anything that will freak a crow out will drive a chicken insane, and, from what I've seen poking around online, anything short of corvicide is only marginally effective, anyway. Any obstacle short of an impenetrable barrier will be circumvented by the wily crow. A hawk or owl decoy will actually attract crows, who hope to drive the predator off its kill or pick the carrion. I'm starting to think roofing the whole enclosure with chicken wire is the only thing to do. --Milkbreath 14:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Corvicide? Eek! Corvus cornix 21:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be a typical American, but I'm shocked that you're not allowed to use a BB gun of some kind in an agricultural area. What if dingoes try to eat your baby? --Sean 14:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In an agricultural area, I'd be able to use rifle or shotgun or bb gun, but I'm not in an agricultural area, I'm in the suburbs of the federal capital city (Canberra). --Psud 21:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This document [8] list two kinds of crows as native but not protected species in South Australia so hunting them may not be out of the question. Good eating on a crow, so I hear (may be an acquired taste). Rmhermen 14:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-assess how much trouble covering the open area is. One large job versus years of futility and irritation?--hotclaws 15:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a kid my mum used to try and stop cockatoos from eating our walnuts by spraying them with a Super Soaker. --Candy-Panda 06:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for shooting at or otherwise trying to kill crows, the futility nothwithstanding, crows are extremely intelligent animals -- among the world's most intelligent. Please don't try to shoot them or otherwise wound or kill them. And in any case, scaring off a few, or wounding/killing a few is not likely to solve your problem. Sounds to me like a roofed enclosure, even if it is "too much trouble", is the way to go. ...can I say it once more? Crows are amazing creatures and although troublesome at times, don't deserve their historically negative image. On the contrary, they deserve our respect. If they are a problem, please find a solution other than killing, wounding, or traumatizing them. Thanks. Pfly 08:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Imaginary Friends

Do people who have imaginary friends actually think they're real and that people who question them are blind/liars, or do they just find solace in the concept of an imaginary friend and yell at others for the fun of it? Eggs.Shown 09:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the person: If you have a younger sibling who probably hasn't attended school for that long, it'll be their imagination at work, and they'll think them real; however, older people, particularly those suffering depression or alienation may find this the only outlet to express their feelings. The Updater would like to talk to you! 10:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to have a look at the article on religion which details many, many imaginary friends. Lanfear's Bane | t 10:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno. I'll have to ask my friend Harvey. Clarityfiend 08:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Work Placement

Hello all,

I was wondering whether News Corp. institutions accept work placement programs. Thx for ur help. The Updater would like to talk to you! 10:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They do, but these are only advertised per-institution. For example, The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) has a program for accepting work placement/experience candidates but is not currently actively seeking people. Foxhill 11:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

movie stills

I have a movie in my computer and i was wondering whether it is possible to get movie stills from the movie or will i be intruding the copyrights of the movie? There is a 'print' button in that movie player to print the paused view.so is it possible to get the stills? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arya237 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check the copyright at the start of the film first. It may forbid you from reproducing the film in part in any medium. Lanfear's Bane | t 10:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would be possible, but you'd be violating copyright in 99.99% of the cases. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do however read the article on fair use, it might be OK; do however read the Fair_use#Common_misunderstandings section too. Lanfear's Bane | t 11:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Way to be copyright paranoid, guys. A single still or two from a feature-length movie is almost certainly going to be fair use under U.S. law unless he is putting them on T-shirts and selling them. Anyway assuming you are talking about a DVD the easiest way to get the stills is to use a program that will easily capture them for you (I think VLC does this), otherwise you have to turn your video hardware acceleration down to zero and then you can take regular screen captures. --24.147.86.187 12:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The main point to consider here is what you're going to do with the screen captures. Copyright law really only comes into effect once you start distributing the copied goods. Perhaps hanging a screen capture on your wall is officially a copyright violation, but this is where the boundaries between 'copying' and 'viewing' get really murky. Wikipedia itself uses screen caps in articles, under a strict fair use policy, so in many cases it does qualify as fair use. Also, the reference desk has this thing about not giving out legal advice, so if it's important, ask a real lawyer. risk 14:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ear gas

Is there a list of songs that either have been used or are recommended for use in driving people out of a barricaded position? I think that's the funniest thing in the world. My favorite is "These Boots Are Made for Walkin'". --Milkbreath 14:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it is somewhere documented what music the United States used against Manuel Noriega? Me, I'd think George W. Bush speeches would be the ultimate torture for humans, even if not for crows. Unless Vogon poetry becomes available.

Atlant 15:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a piece on NPR a week or two ago about the use of loud and repetitive music for the purposes of torturing terrorism suspects in US detention centers. The guy who recorded one of the pieces they use was talking about suing them over it...now, if only I could remember who that was! SteveBaker 22:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are three .gif images of an after-action report regarding the Noriega psyops. Apparently they were getting requests for tunes as messages for Noriega. Great stuff. Tony Fox (arf!) 22:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One that I don't see listed, which was later used in a parody of the use of these songs in The Drew Carey Show, was "Panama" by Van Halen. In the show Carey is to be forced out of his home due to some imminent domain deal, if I remember correctly, and the characters in the house try to figure out the lyrics of the song. Dismas|^(talk) 23:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The deal might have been imminent, but it was one of eminent domain. --LarryMac | Talk 14:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strange donation comment

On Tue, 10/23/2007 - 23:30 an anonymous user donated $500.00 to Wikimedia with the comment: "For tripling the number of Elephants in Africa!" What the hell did they mean by that? Weasly 15:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia on The Colbert Report. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 15:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help to create a table with MS Word

Hi!, I really need help to create a table with MS Word XP (2002) that is wider than 22" (or with Adobe Acrobat Professional 6.0, but it has to be wider than 22"[and not with MS Excel]). It will not be for printing. I have searched for help on the web for hours, without being able to find anything useful. I feel very frustrated and am under a lot of stress. I will greatly appreciate any good help that I can receive. Thank you very, very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.65.132 (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not for printing, why does the physical width matter? Can't you just use a small font (and a large zoom factor if necessary)? AndrewWTaylor 16:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, this thread gives a plausible explanation of the 22" limit AndrewWTaylor 16:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you elaborate a bit on why you need it and what you would be using it for, perhaps we can help you come up with a good alternative. As it is, the 22" width is hard-coded into Word and cannot be directly gotten around, but depending on what you want to use it for there may be indirect ways to get around it and achieve the same result. --24.147.86.187 17:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tick dormancy at low temperatures?

At what low temperature do ticks become dormant? It seems that when the temperature drops below freezing the ticks wouldn't be able to move around. They are cold blooded, right? I walk in the woods (California, Sierra foothills) a lot and wonder when I am safe from these pests. I already know that ticks here are inactive (or at least much less active) during the hot, dry summer. Dry is the key. Now I'm trying to figure out when they are inactive during the rainy season. Probably scientists have learned what the cut off low temperature is for tick activity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Annecallaway (talk • contribs) 17:26, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no tick expert, but I found a couple of papers online that shed some light on your cold tick. One says they call it quits at around four degrees Celsius. The other says they found ticks by flagging when it was two below Celsius with snow on the ground. They sample an area for ticks by dragging a large piece of cloth over the bushes, "flagging". There must be a zillion species of tick, and I wouldn't expect them to all behave the same, but maybe this gets you in the ballpark. Bottom line, the woods ain't never safe. --Milkbreath 02:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought: when it's colder, aren't you more likely to wear long pants and long sleeves? If so, isn't the problem of ticks rather mitigated? --24.147.86.187 03:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lockhead Martin and Boeing advertising campaigns

The plastics question was answered very well so I have a new similar question. What did either of these companies have to gain from advertising to the general public? By improving their image were they trying to garner political support for keeping manufacturing jobs tied to weapons projects alive?

63.199.245.117 20:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There can be a lot of reasons to advertise, some of which are not necessarily specific in intent. I always read those ads—and it is worth paying attention to the limited types of publications they appear in (e.g. The Atlantic Monthly, not Entertainment Weekly)—as being about prestige. "We are an important and relevant company," always seems to be the message, which doesn't itself get them much except when it is used in conjunction with lobbying (e.g. if you are primed to think they are important, maybe you will treat them as such when you sit down to talk with them or about them). But I don't really know what they have in mind when they take out such ads; it would be interesting to see how exactly their PR strategy works. --24.147.86.187 00:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shareholders. They want their stock price to rise and advertising to people who buy stocks and shares increases demand and pushes the price up. SteveBaker 13:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me

What are the 8th, 9th and 10th largest cities in Victoria, Australia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.217.152.215 (talk) 22:26, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depending how you count cities, there may not be 8 of them in Victoria. Unfortunately, I can't say off the top of my head the largest urban areas in Vic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steewi (talk • contribs) 01:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The web site www.citypopulation.de has population statistics for many countries. For Australia it has tables of both "urban areas" and "local government areas" such as cities, and you can just pick out the ones in Victoria. See www.citypopulation.de/Australia-LGA.html --Anon, 01:55 UTC, October 26, 2007.

If you want the "urban area" definition, here is the ranked list for Victoria as of the 2001 census:

1. Melbourne

2. Geelong

3. Ballarat

4. Bendigo

5. Melton

6. Mildura

7. Warrnambool

8. Sunbury

9. Traralgon

10. Wangaratta

If you want the "local government areas" definition, here is the ranked list as of 2006:

1. Casey

2. Geelong

3. Brimbank

4. Monash

5. Boroondara

6. Hume

7. Knox

8. Whitehorse

9. Moreland

10. Kingston

Marco polo 02:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would not go by the LGA definition, as these are the names of city/shire councils - they are not places (you wouldn't say "I live in Whitehorse", you would say the actual suburb/city). Wikipedia has List of cities in Australia by population, although it lists the largest cities all over Australia, they do list also the state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.208.110.207 (talk) 06:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The trouble with our List of cities in Australia by population is that it only has the top 43 cities - and only 9 of those are in Victoria:

Melbourne 3,592,591
Geelong 160,991
Albury-Wodonga 96,288
Ballarat 85,197
Bendigo 81,939
Latrobe Valley (incl. Moe, Morwell, Traralgon) 73,476
Mildura 46,035
Shepparton 44,599
Warrnambool 30,392

With the last one on that list only having a population of 31 thousand, I wonder whether there actually are more than 9 cities in Victoria. (and what about "Latrobe Valley (incl. Moe, Morwell, Traralgon)" - is that considered a city?) That would explain the abrupt ending of that list of cities as just 43 places. I presume Australia is more like the UK in placing a larger lower limit on the size of a city. Here in the US, the term "city" refers to how the place is governed - not to how big it is. In the UK, to be a city you used to have to have a cathederal - so some very small places ended up being cities with other, much more populated places being 'towns'. I don't know how Australia sets the limits - but if it were "Any place with a population of 30,000 or more" - then those 9 places are it.

SteveBaker 13:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 26

why does the wind blow??

its a question that i can't be able to solve —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.8.201.164 (talk) 01:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the same reason anything on Earth moves: because the Sun shines. The Sun heats some parts of the Earth more than others, hot air rises, and cool air blows in to displace it. Of course it's a lot more complicated than that, but the Sun is the ultimate source of energy. —Keenan Pepper 01:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want more detail, read our article Wind and the articles linked to it. Marco polo 01:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suppose there were no Sun. Something tells me that there would still be wind due to Earth's rotation, but I can't think how that would happen. The air would become very cold and still, wouldn't it? DirkvdM 09:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were there no Sun, the planet would too become cold and probably die sooner or later (but then again - no sun means no planetary system). Wind is caused by changes in air pressure, which are caused by many, many diverse factors. I think. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 11:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the sun 'went away' and assuming there was some kind of very even heat source preventing the atmosphere from freezing - yet not creating any hot-spots, the Coriolis effect would keep the atmosphere churning around and thus create wind. Even if the earth stopped rotating (hence no more coriolis), the moon would exert tidal forces on the atmosphere (the same as it does with the ocean) - which would manifest itself as wind. It's really quite hard to imagine a planet with a gaseous atmosphere but no wind! But in the real world, by far the biggest effect is that the sun heats one side of the planet while the other side cools and the oceans change temperature very little while the land heats up and cools down rapidly. Because hot air is less dense than cold air you get pressure differences between the air over areas of the earth that are at different temperatures. Thus you get winds blowing between areas of different temperature. Once the air gets moving, things like coriolis prevent it being a nice simple air flow and the shape of the land and ocean (which heat and cool at different rates) add more complexity. When cold air moves in to replace warm air, that changes precipitation and also cools the land - which results in even more temperature variations. When warm air moves in over water, it causes evaporation and the air becomes humid. If humid air subsequently cools down (eg when the sun sets) - that creates clouds which will later reflect more sunlight back out into space than the land does. So now you get yet more temperature variations. The result of is this "chaotic" (in the mathematical sense of 'chaos theory') swirling pattern of winds that are impossible to predict on a small scale over periods of more than a few days. SteveBaker 12:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Odd question :)

Hello again! I believe that this is *ahem* a weird question, but I remember seeing something on the Wikihate talk page about two templates (the first was "This user has given you the finger" & the second was "This user has given you a blank stare") that I'd like to track down again. They were funny to see :) Just thought some wikipedians here might remember seeing them. Thanks again! --極地狼 ( 我是一头死的狼 ) 02:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know User:The Hybrid/Finger. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 02:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I know User:The Hybrid/Blank. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 11:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Handguns of the 1950s USA

I'm working on a work of fiction (of sorts) set in the mid 1950s (Eisenhower era). I need the make and model of two guns that would have been common at the time. The first should be relatively low stopping power but high accuracy, and the sort of thing that a cop might have (e.g. the equivalent of a Glock 9mm today). The other is a much larger gun, less accuracy but high stopping power, ideally intimidating looking, as much for show and noise as for actual killing (e.g. the equivalent of maybe a Desert Eagle or something even larger today).

Thanks for your help! I know someone out there will know this sort of stuff quite easily... --24.147.86.187 03:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cops of that era would have invariably used the S&W Model 10. For a "flashy" looking gun you could go with a tricked-out M1911 or even a Colt Python if you need something powerful (although the Python wasn't first manufactured until 1955, and was never common). FiggyBee 03:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Those both look perfect for the purpose. --24.147.86.187 13:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transporting Blimps

How are blimps moved from venue to venue. Do they just fly them there, or do they deflate them load them on a truck and drive them?--ChesterMarcol 03:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to Goodyear, "when traveling cross-country the blimps fly wherever they go, and the crews try for an eight-hour day, or about 300 air miles." [9] Rockpocket 07:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"they fly to wherever they go"? Good thing they don't end up somewhere else! (off to edit the blimp article ....) --LarryMac | Talk 14:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Helium is too expensive to just let it out into the air and repressurise with new gas each time. The equipment to suck the helium out and repressurize it into easy-to-transport cylinders would be cumbersome. They fly at around 35mph - but because they can do that in a dead straight line without traffic delays - when you consider the time and effort to properly deflate them and reinflate them (that's not just a simple gas bag - it has lots of internal equipment and there are several 'ballonets' inside that actually contain the gas, it's certainly faster to fly them where they need to go. SteveBaker 13:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some Questions about U.S. Politics

Hi, I have a few questions about politics in the United States. I am from Australia, and am confused with how it works. I am unable to find much information on the Internet (it all assumes you know a bit about U.S. politics), so I appreciate any answers you could give me. Sorry if these questions are a bit obvious.

1. In the US, you not only register to vote, but also can register with a party. What effect does it have? Why is it neccessary - it's not like it binds you to vote for that party, does it? If you register with that party, does that mean you can only vote for members of that party in elections?

2. What exactly is the electoral college?

3. Which house (the upper house or lower house) is the president part of?

4. Why do I never see footage of George W. Bush speaking in parliament like the prime minister does in Australia? You never see Bush arguing or answering questions posed from the opposition in parliament - I only ever see him make scripted speeches in other places.

5. And finally, why are people so passionate for certain parties in the US? I see whenever key politicians make a public speech there are streamers, balloons and crazed fans. People in Australia may prefer a certain party/politician, but they aren't like people are in the US.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.208.110.207 (talk) 12:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here goes;

1) If you are a registered Democrat or Republican, you get to vote in Primary elections for candidates for that party.

2) The United States Electoral College is a group of representatives from each state who select the president. The article has much more detail.

3) Neither. The United States has a seperate executive and legislature, unlike the Westminster system used in Australia where the members of the executive are also members of the legislature.

4) because of 3.

5) Who knows? It's certainly getting more that way in Australia though. I'm sure that most Americans aren't quite as polarised as we see in the media though; it's always the partisan hacks that make the most noise, rather than the middle-of-the-roaders. FiggyBee 13:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me (as a Brit living in the US) have a shot at this one (it's good practice!):

I believe (and I'm not an American) that if you register with a party you also get to vote in the primaries to decide which of the guys in your party gets to stand for election. The final election vote is secret - so you could still vote for the other party's candidate if you wanted to.
The theory is that when you vote in the presidential election, all you are really doing is picking some guy in your area to become a part of the "electoral college" (which is nothing to do with a 'college' in the usual sense of the word). All of the people who are a part of the college then decide who gets to be president. (In theory they could pick someone other than the candidate you voted for!) What this does in practice is to change the system from simply counting the number of votes for each candidate (which would have lost the present president his first election by a significant margin) - to a system where each state gets some fixed number of seats in the electoral college. This means that some states have a disproportionately large number of electoral college seats and others disproportionately fewer. I have no clue why this might ever be considered a good idea...but that's how it is.
The US system has four branches of government - the two houses, the judiciary and the president. The president is not a part of either house.
The president may (on occasion) speak in front of one or other house - but because he's not a part of either of them, there is no special requirement to do that. (I think the annual "State of the Union" address may be an exception to that).
Americans are nuts. Live with it.

SteveBaker 13:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The House of Representatives and the Senate are usually considered as being two parts of the Legislature, rather than two seperate branches of government. Re the State of the Union Address being mandatory, Article II of the Constitution says "He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union", but exactly how (and how often) he must do that is not specified; as Toby observes on The West Wing, he could buy them a newspaper subscription and that would probably qualify. FiggyBee 13:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In certain states - Virginia being one - a voter is allowed to vote in a primary election of either party. i.e. a registered Democrat may vote in the Republican primary or vice-versa. I believe a non-affiliated voter may vote in either one as well. It looks like the 2008 Presidential primaries for both parties will occur on the same date, so a voter will need to select which ballot he will be voting upon arrival at the polling station. --LarryMac | Talk 14:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Westminster system does have a separate executive, since the Governor General is the head of state. So you don't see Michael Jeffery, or in my case Michaelle Jean, arguing in the legislature, but you do see them giving scripted boring speeches on occasion. But it's not quite the same because the US President has considerable more power than the Governors General (I don't know what the Australian GG does, but Canada's, while she legally has enormous US-president-type powers, in reality has none at all). Adam Bishop 14:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comic Books and Law

I am working on my senior thesis, which relates to legal issues within comic books. The most prominent issue that I am working on is the Mutant Registration Acts. If anyone else could suggest topics to explore, or legal issues that would arise, it would be most appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.238.69.103 (talk) 14:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Amazon user accounts

How many people in the UK (or worldwide) hold accounts with Amazon? Thanks