Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

July 9

Any speaker-builders out there?

Hi, all. My kid is attempting to build a couple of speaker cabinets for bass guitar work; I'm involved due to the need to use power tools from time to time :-)}. He's done much research, we have purchased a couple of books, and read a couple of others; while there's a great deal of science in parts of the process, there's a glaring lack of it in one area. Perhaps we have experts on insulation here?

We are struggling with how much or how little insulation to add to the box, and of what type.

• One author said he had lined his cabinet with leftover asphalt shingles, which in my opinion is as good as no insulation at all -- they're dense and rigid, and expecting that surface to soften or eliminate interior echoing is flat-out counterintuitive.
• Some authors say a couple of inches of fiberglass (or its non-fiberglass equivalent) is sufficient. This implies to me that the goal is to reduce but not eliminate interior sound.
• One book shows a picture of low-density egg-crate style foam. This stuff absorbs a lot of sound energy (I think) -- and implies (to me, at least) that the goal is the opposite of what I concluded in the previous bullet!

So, is there ANY science here? What are we REALLY trying to accomplish with insulating the box? How much? How little? Or does it not really matter that much? Many thanks, --Danh (and his kid), 67.40.169.42 (talk) 00:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought the intent is to dampen standing waves found at resonant frequencies, for which purpose both of the last two techniques - fibreglass, or foam - seem appropriate. And I think it's reasonable to say that there will be better or worse egg-crate profile foams; I'd think some would be inferior to fibreglass. How much or how little is, I think, mainly a tuning issue which is best accomplished by experimentation. You can work out the resonant frequencies of your box since wavelength equals the velocity of sound divided by the frequency, and standing wave lengths will be the whole or fractions of the distance between parallel surfaces ... but I don't think that knowledge will help in determining how much insulator to stuff into the thing. My limited experience: the bigger the cabinet, the more is stuffed into it. See also Loudspeaker enclosure#Closed-box enclosures--Tagishsimon (talk) 00:41, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

First of all: you dont need two cabs; one will be quite sufficient because 2 cabs will only give you 3 dB increase (which is almost inaudible).

Second, the wadding inside is to reduce the cabinet resonances (not the panel resonance). BAF wadding is commonly recommended. It also increases the apparent volume of the cab (which is a good thing) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.144.199 (talk) 00:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Please see Bass instrument amplification for more info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.144.199 (talk) 01:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that reference, I hadn't run across it yet. Could you elaborate slightly on those two red terms, the types of resonances? (I'd read the articles, but they don't exist yet!)

That said, though, I don't see anything in the referenced article (or your response) that answers the two primary questions: how much wadding is actually needed, and is there any science behind it -- anything as formalized as the myriad Thiele/Small variables? --Danh, 67.40.169.42 (talk) 03:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Cabinet resonances are the "standing waves" inside the cabinet - and so depend on the dimensions of the cabinet - and lead people to build weird pentagonal shaped speakers etc...

Panel resonances are the vibrations of the stuff the walls are made out of eg wobble board - use stiff enough material and these shouldn't be a problem.87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Additing asphalt or gluing heavy rubber sheets to the walls can damp panel resonances. I'd still use something else in addition to stop box resonances.87.102.86.73 (talk) 14:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense; thanks. Does anyone have an opinion on chipped-foam carpet underlayment? It's only half an inch thick, and maybe too dense for sound absorbtion -- but I can get a lot of it for free! --Danh, 67.40.169.36 (talk) 12:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you'll find a lot of it is just determined by experimentation. And it's pretty easy to add or remove stuffing or even foam on the interior walls and run another round of experiments. The hard part is determining subtle differences and whether they sound "better" or "worse". By the way, if we're talking about wall resonance, Dynamat ([1]) is a good material to consider. Many other techniques have been tried through the ages as well; Wharfedale once built speakers that had an outer box and an inner box with sand packed between the two. That was one pretty acoustically-dead enclosure!

Atlant (talk) 22:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Dead panels? Probably. No cabinet resonances? Who knows? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.184.112 (talk) 00:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, of course; that's what I meant.

Atlant (talk) 10:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Hornets&wasps when do they?

Hi I was wondering when do Hornets&Wasps go to sleep,how long do they sleep for and when do they come out? I'm up at 5:00am and I've seen them flying around and in my pool(alive) I didn;t think that they were "up" at that hour. So what I can;t find on Google,Yahoo and in your artticles is ther sleeping habits. Does temp. affect there sleeping or what? THANK YOU FOR UR TIME AND FOR TAKING THE TIME TO ANSWER ALL OF MY ABOVE Q'S Sincerly:§IrishPhantom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.116.26 (talk) 00:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The best I can give you, quickly, is from Signatures Of Sleep In A Paper Wasp by B.A. Klein, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, who states: "Polistes flavus paper wasps spent extended periods from dusk until several hours after sunrise in a relatively motionless state, with bodies usually contacting the substrate, antennae lowered, and with occasional limb-dangling in the direction of gravity." You did not say when sunrise is, wherever it is you live. I suspect other wasps, or even other colonies of paper wasps, might have slightly different sleep patterns. Oh - and this looks good. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

9/10 of a cent on gas prices

When are they going to stop with that ridiculous 9/10 of a cent on a gallon of gas? The difference between 3.979 and 3.98 is 1 cent per $40. About 1-1/2 cents on a 15-gallon fillup. They started that when gas was less than 20 cents per gallon. This is too small to worry about. Why not make the price a whole cent? Bubba73 (talk), 03:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey man, you don't want to get them started. First it'll be one cent, then two, then ten, then... best leave things how they are! --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

For those who don't know what the OP is referring to (i.e. everyone who hasn't visited the U.S.), we have a system that adds $0.009 to the price of a gallon of gas. I think it's just the U.S. that does this, my apologies if I'm pointing out the obvious and other countries do this as well. Dismas|^(talk) 03:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have been clear that this is about the pricing of gasoline in the U.S. Bubba73 (talk), 03:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Could it possibly be part of a complex plot to make the United States of America look like an idiocracy? "Ooh! Instead of buying my gas here where it's $4.20, I'll drive over there where they are selling it for a mere $4.199 per gallon!" Edison (talk) 05:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Every price I've seen for many years has the 9/10 of a cent. I don't think it makes sense to have it anymore. Bubba73 (talk), 05:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It happens elsewhere too. UK prices are along the lines of 121.9 pence per litre (e.g. See the min and max prices here), and this site shows similar in Germany. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 08:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

When are the Americans going to join the rest of the world and give up fractions ?86.200.6.219 (talk) 10:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)DT

Well, as far as history goes, when it first started, when 1 cent was a HUGE difference, people didnt want to raise it a whole cent, but wanted to still raise the prices. So it worked its way up to 9/10 of a cent. Now, its just tradition, albeit a stupid one that should end, but still it goes on. --omnipotence407 (talk) 12:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

But now 1-1/2 cents on a tank of gas is practically nothing. 1.5 cents of gas will carry you approximately 400 feet. Bubba73 (talk), 15:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I just calculated that with my 12mpg in town and gas at $3.90, it costs me 32.5 cents to go a mile or 244 feet on 1.5 cents of gas. That's depressing. At least it's a lot better on the freeway. Useight (talk) 15:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Someone should link to Psychological pricing. I guess I just did. Rmhermen (talk) 12:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

That mentions the problem. But as far as I know, nothing else in the US sold to consumers has a fraction of a cent on it. If you buy a pound of beef, for instance, it never has a 9/10 of a cent on it. I can't think of anything that does, except gasoline. It seems like an anachronism. Bubba73 (talk), 02:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It's like that in Canada too. This morning I was excited to find that gas was "only" $1.315 per litre. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Half a cent per liter is far more significant than a tenth of a cent per gallon. The half cent per liter works out to around 2 cents a gallon, or some 20 times more. In a 30 gallon gas tank that would be $0.60, which is well worth crossing the street to the cheaper station. StuRat (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

See also Douglas Adams and John Lloyd's The Meaning of Liff, wherein one finds the following definition:

"Kibblesworth (n). The footling amount of money by which the price of a given article in a shop is less than a sensible number, in a vain hope that at least one idiot will think it cheap. For instance, the kibblesworth on a pair of shoespriced at £19.99 is 1p."

Cheers. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The simple solution would be a law stating "all gasoline prices must be given to the exact cent as of the following date: xx-xx-xx; and any stations which fail to comply will be charged a fine of $1000 per day". This would bypass the problem of no gas station wanting to try to sell gasoline for $4.00 a gallon when the station across the street is selling it for $3.999. I'd think any legislature that ended this idiotic practice would be almost universally applauded, although comics might miss this opportunity for humor, like when the Simpson's went to Bob's Discount Gas (because their prices always end in 8/10 of a cent instead of the usual 9/10). StuRat (talk) 14:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

How does the men's hair color product called "touch of gray" actually work?

Touch of Gray made by the same company that makes Just for Men hair color dyes some of the hair but leaves other parts gray. It does not work with ammonia or peroxide. How does it know where to leave the gray? how can it color only part of the hair even though it is applied all over? Just how does it work? Thank you very much.

Jonny (talk) 04:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Paul Walls

EGGS

Why when i boil an egg (chicken) and leave it in the hot water does the yellow inside go black, unlike when if I put it in cold water it stays yellow? What reacting takes place to cause this? 86.159.56.251 (talk) 09:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The colour is caused by iron sulphide formation. See http://www.biochemj.org/bj/014/0114/0140114.pdf for details. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Polish History

A friend was trying to tell me about a war or series of wars that occured in Poland a few hundred years ago, he said that the common folk, farmers and peasent and such like took up arms and fought with pitchforks and syths from thier fields and fought armies who were rather scared of them. After this or these events Poland was disbanded or ceesed to exist for a hundred years or so. Does this ring a bell with any of out resident historians? If so please provide me with a link or two so I can go back and have an intelectual debate with my learned friend. Thank guys and keep on learning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Several hundred years ago, those weapons would have been common in many countries' conscript armies, not unique to Poland. You will probably want to look at History of Poland (1569-1795) and partitions of Poland. The history is quite complex. Rmhermen (talk) 12:41, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Could it be the January Uprising? or Kościuszko Uprising see List of Polish wars

It was the Partitions of Poland that erased poland from the map.87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Kościuszko Uprising Thats it!!! Thanks people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 14:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Sports

Why are most baseball and basketball players African Americans? 208.76.245.162 (talk) 12:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

They don't - at least not in baseball where they make up only 8%.[2] Rmhermen (talk) 12:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

They did make up 67% of NHL football players as of 1997[3]. Perhaps that is what the questioner meant. They do make up 80% of basketball players.[4] This source probably also has information on the why's. Rmhermen (talk) 12:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

There were (at least) 3 football players in the National Hockey League in 1997?! -- Coneslayer (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

For basketball, at least, it's for the same reason that East Africans dominate some running sports and Eastern Europeans often dominate chess: they're extremely popular in that culture, and many kids in that culture want to excel at them and are encouraged to do so. Any other explanation is a just-so story, in my opinion. --Sean 13:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

People from West Africa tend to be faster than people from other countries. At the level of the average person, the difference is too slight to be important, but at the extreme ends of the bell curve, the difference is exaggerated. Thus, the fastest 0.01% of people in the world are disproportionately likely to be of West African descent, just as the best marathon runners tend to be from East Africa. Most African-Americans are of West African descent. In the case of basketball, the sport's great popularity in urban areas probably explains more than any biological factor. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

At the risk of adding a slightly controversial note, it's worth mentioning that there are slight (when averaged overall) skeletal differences in body shape between different ethnic groups. The waist tends to be proportionately higher in many African races and proportionately lower in Polynesian races, for instance (the difference is minute, but enough to help pathologists and the like in their work). High waist = longer legs = faster; Low waist = lower centre of gravity = greater pushing strength. Therefore, Polynesians are more likely to take to sports like Rugby or American football, and African-Ameriucans are more likely to take up sprinting and basketball (there are exceptions, of course, and these are general average trends only). Grutness...wha? 02:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

At the risk of offending those who believe that every population on the planet is exactly equal in every aspect, hasn't there been scientific documentation of differences in the muscle types of different populations with respect to the ability to jump or to win a 100 meter race, i.e. "fast twitch muscle"? See [5] Science, 30 July 2004, Vol 305, pages 637-639. Edison (talk) 04:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

John Entine's Taboo : Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We're Afraid to Talk About It discusses many of these ideas.--droptone (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think Mwalcoff has it really. There are slight differences, but they are more specific than 'black' and 'white', and they only really have a significant effect at the extremes. If you're looking at olympic athletes and records, these things will come out. If you're looking at general basketball, cultural factors are going to be more significant. 79.66.67.219 (talk) 03:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What type of duck is this?

Okay, a question from my mum, who is currently abroad. She's taken img187.imageshack.us/img187/6606/031hq3.jpg a photo of a duck. She says she took the photo in a campsite near Bordeaux, in France. Any ideas what type of duck it might be? Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 12:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

A white crested duck? Like the picture at the bottom of Domestic duck. Fribbler (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. It appears we have an article on Crested Duck (domestic breed), which appears to be it. The external link in the article seems to have photos that match up to the one she took. Thanks for the help. :) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 13:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Last European Question, I swear!

What would one need to do to enable an emmigration from UK, with no qualifications other than finishing high school, to Eastern Europe, eg Poland, Ukraine, Russia. How would one find work? would this be possible? Any relavent info would be greatly appreciated thanks a bunch —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 14:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't answer your question, but note that migrating to Poland is a very different proposition from the other two, as Poland is in the European Union. Algebraist 15:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) yes, effectively you can go and live/work in poland if you are an EU citizen, will very little extra paperwork..87.102.86.73 (talk) 15:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

What's "no qualfications other than finishing high school" in a UK context? Do you have no GCSEs at all? Itsmejudith (talk) 15:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok so lets concentrate on Poland, yes, I have A level equivalent. Please help me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, if you're a British citizen, it's not that difficult, really, provided the Eastern European country you want to live and work in is a member of the European Union, as the United Kingdom is. Citizens of EU member states can move about freely and work in other EU countries without visas, work permits or whatnot, thanks to the Four Freedoms. As Poland is an EU member, that would work just fine. Russia and Ukraine are likely to be a little more difficult, though by no means impossible. This means essentially that you can just about jump on a plane to Poland right now and get a job there, if you can find one. Of course, it's not really that simple -- if you don't know the local customs and don't speak the language, that's going to be challenging, for example. There may be other hurdles, and certainly there's a degree of bureaucracy involved. But these aren't so much obstacles as they are things you have to take care of; if you bother to learn enough of the language to get by and put in the paperwork (which I understand to be fairly simple), you can do it. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 15:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You'll want passport/proof of identity - that's really all you need, plus a train/boat/plain ticket. Enjoy your stay in Poland!87.102.86.73 (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thank you, but i dont speak the language, and thus what sort of job could I get, and what are the chances of acctually getting one? and what would the pay be like? could I acctually live in a decent way? how much of a barrier would the language be? what sort of paperwork would be required? I have been there several times and appsolutley love it! Thanks again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, according to our article on Demographics of Poland, 97.8% of the population speaks Polish. That might mean that there are fewer support structures for people not speaking the language. Since you've already been there several times you've probably got a good idea what it's like to get around in that area. Do you have a hard time ordering food, following directions, asking questions, etc? If so, you're going to have a really tough time trying to be a productive member of that society. If you were a skilled worker or had some other demonstrable assets, companies would probably be more willing to overlook language issues (or foot the bill for some classes), but a guy that offers little will get offered little. That's no different anywhere you go. Matt Deres (talk) 18:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

If your qualifications are vocational that might help you to get a job. In some EU countries you would need translations of your certificates by a registered translator in order to be allowed to practice a trade. If you have City & Guilds or BTEC then they should be able to supply an explanation of what your certificates cover. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's an article on the only Englishman who works for the Polish Fire service, and how he came to get that job. -- Arwel (talk) 20:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

There is (was?) an RD regular user:Ouro from Poland. He has been inactive for about 2 months. Try his page for local advice. Good luck. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Woodworking - how to make a long thin wedge

In need to make some long, thin wedges of wood. Much like a standard wooden shim, but at least 2x longer. I have most of the common power and hand tools. I think that somehow this could be done with a table saw, but I'm not sure how. ike9898 (talk) 16:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I would instantly have though of using a plane for that (or a power-plane if you have one). Get your wood, mark it, plane it. Maybe I'm missing something though (haven't been woodworking for about ten years). Fribbler (talk)

You can just run the stock through the table saw at a small angle. If you have an adjustable angle pushblock it's simple. Rmhermen (talk) 17:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you elaborate? I don't understand what holds the board at an angle. ike9898 (talk) 17:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The pushblock. Or you can clamp a wedge to the fence - it wouldn't need to be as long as the one you were trying to make. Rmhermen (talk) 17:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Good grief. We do not have a picture of a table saw. If we did, we'd be able to show the pushblock - a raised section of metal or plastic used as a guide for the wood - set at an angle such that the wood can be presented to the blade at an angle suited to making long thin wedges. But we cannot. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I understand now at least enough to look for more specific instructions in my owner's manual. Thanks! I'd take a picture of my saw for the article but my basement is dark and cluttered and it's too hard to pull the saw out. ike9898 (talk) 14:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Child porn

The Child porn article says that it is illegal to take or possess a naked image of a child, and that a child is a person who has not reached the age of 18. But what if my 17 year old girlfriend sent me a picture of her naked? At 16 in the UK we can have sex legally, so why would a pic of her be illegal? I am also 17. 86.159.56.251 (talk) 16:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably written from American POV. Generally there's some level of common sense applied, for instance it is unlikely someone would be charged if they had photos of their children naked. Similarly, there's a level of common sense applied to sex with minors - edit: in the UK, a 16 year old is not likely to be charged with statutory rape for having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Um, the last statement is true in some jurisdictions and not others. Age of consent can vary greatly. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I think in some jurisdictions, the girlfriend is violating laws to take pictures of herself naked. Also, I always wondered why there's American movies where 17 year olds are naked on camera (American Beauty (film) comes to mind). --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

While Mena Suvari may have been portraying a 17-year-old, I believe she was older than that when the filming was taking place. Joyous! | Talk 01:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It was Thora Birch who appeared naked (or topless, at least) - and yes she was 17 at the time. Grutness...wha? 02:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

At least in the US, the words "common sense" and "child pornography" don't go together. --Carnildo (talk) 22:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Nudity is not the same as pornography. Naked pictures are not necessarily pornographic. Plasticup ^T/C 01:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

There have been some truly insane cases where teenagers have photographed themselves and been prosecuted for having pictures of their own bodies. Exxolon (talk) 01:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The current controversy in Australia over the work of photographer Bill Henson may be informative on this, by the way. Grutness...wha? 02:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Did the robots want her brain because the ship was named after her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glsoone (talk • contribs) 16:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably, yes. The Girl in the Fireplace was an excellent episode. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

How did you decide Dr. Who was the subject here? Rmhermen (talk) 17:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't think what else it might be referring to. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I'd bet money that Mattbuck is right. It wasn't at all obvious to me until he said it though. There should be some sort of award for answering the most non-specific question of the week. APL (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

And to think I was originally just going to delete it as trolling. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Iran/Isreal

With the current sabre-rattling by both Iran and Israel, it seems ever more likely that with a couple of years we're going to come to a crunch point. Now i'm going assume that Israel will launch a first airstrike as that tends to be their normal strategy, but after this airstike how will events likely play out with regards to Iran's inevitable counterattack and any possible escalation to involve other countries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.19.150 (talk) 18:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The reference desk is not a discussion forum. We're no more in a position to speculate on this than your average pub bore. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I think we are. We can point out some facts, like that Israel has nuclear weapons and presumably any strike would occur before Iran had them, thus giving Israel a critical advantage. This wouldn't mean no counter-strike from Iran, but rather would only limit such a counter-strike to something not likely to threaten Israel's existence and thus put the use of their nuclear weapons on the table. StuRat (talk) 14:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Shahab-3 may also be relavent in this case. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 18:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia accuracy philosophies

N.B. I am not attempting to be insulting or controversial. I am simply asking for clarification. If anything here offends you, please know I mean no harm, and I am just using examples extracted from the relevant articles and drawing logical conclusions. If I have offended you, feel free to let me know. However, whether you were offended or not, do NOT post biased drivel as a response to my inquiry!

I've read the appropriate articles on MediaWiki, I've read their respective talk pages, and I've browsed through users in their related categories, and still I wonder…what is the fundamental difference between eventualism and immediatism????

I recognize that there are differences in what they stand for, such as the allowance of non-registered edits and of stubs, but these seem to only be examples added to further contrast the two philosophies without ever defining them...

My original post was almost essay-sized, but I've decided against placing that here for now. Instead, I'll ask a smaller question, one that could prove to be controversial and offensive if taken at face-value.

Do these philosophies imply that the immediatist takes an active role in editing, while the eventualist just sits back and waits for someone else to do the appropriate edits? A great portion of the articles lead to this conclusion. Yet, it also seems that immediatists would rather delete stubs than improve them, which argues against the "active role in editing" I suggested.

P.S. (well, is it really a P.S. if I haven't signed yet?) If this is not the appropriate venue for this question, please redirect me. If you want to know why I chose to post here, just ask me; there was a loooong deliberation process involved! -- Skittleys (talk) 18:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is deleting stubs not an active role in editing? Unless immediatists delete all articles labeled as stubs instead of just the ones with little or no content, they're still sorting through and deciding what's keepable and what's not, and that's an active role in editing, imo. But yes, the immediatists seem to be the ones who take an active role in editing because they want everything to look the best as soon as possible, and it seems like the eventualists ignore it because it'll eventually get fixed (or go to hell). Since it's raining here, first analogy I can think of is that the immediatists will wash their car after it rains because it looks bad, while the eventualists waits till either someone else washes it, or it rains again and makes it look cleaner, or it rains again and makes the point of washing it moot. Why is this that controversial? --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

You're right, deleting stubs is a very active role. I should have said it's not an "active role in article improvement" or something—it does play a active role the improvement of Wikipedia in general, but not for that specific article. Skittleys (talk) 04:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

An eventualist says, "don't worry if that article doesn't have much in it yet, it'll get there someday." The immediatist says, "until it's in a certain form of good shape, it shouldn't be here." The immediatist is more concerned with the appearance of Wikipedia right now, whereas the eventualist is more concerned with it over the long term. An eventualist is not going to worry too much about any given current state of Wikipedia, the immediatist does. Obviously there's something of a spectrum between the two positions in practice, and both approaches have things going for them. Perhaps one way of summing it up could be that the eventualist has faith that people will still want to use Wikipedia in the future even if it is not very good in the present; the immediatist is worried that how Wikipedia is judged today will affect whether it will be vibrant and active tomorrow. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 19:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I do understand that eventualists are more "relaxed" about how Wikipedia appears at the moment, but does this mean they don't edit? If so, is the general consensus that eventualists are, in layman's terms, lazy and/or don't care? Does that make pretty much every editor an immediatist of some degree? Does the immediatist expect the entire article to be "featured article"-quality before it ever hits a Wikipedia page, and therefore dislike collaboratism? Skittleys (talk) 04:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

If you haven't read it yet, you may find Conflicting Wikipedia philosophies#Eventualism vs. immediatism useful. --Shaggorama (talk) 06:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't have to do with everyday editing. It has to do with egregious examples of crap or lack of content—whether it should be kept and built upon, or just gotten rid of until someone decides to do it right. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 12:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sunflowers

I have a few sunflower plants growing in the backyard. It is common knowledge that sunflower seeds are edible and very popular all over the world, but I want to know if the rest of the plant can be eaten as well. Our article doesn't really address this question and neither do the other sites I have visited. I know it sounds a bit silly, but it started out as a joke when I told someone I was going to eat the plants...and now I am wondering if I really can? thanks and cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 19:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Not knowing a thing about sunflowers, may I offer up the little heuristic that if something is not commonly eaten, even though it is readily available and there are no, say, moral reasons against eating it, then it is probably either inedible or simply not that tasty. There are no doubt exceptions to this approach, but it's probably basically accurate. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Sunflowers are milled to make animal feeds for cattle and poultry. Don't know 'bout you, but that doesn't whet my appetite. Fribbler (talk) 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

So is corn. You don't like corn either? Cuz I have a plate of hot cornbread slathered in butter that says you love it ;) 161.222.160.8 (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Point taken. :-) What I meant was that the only sign of consumption of whole sunflowers I could find was as animal feed. Fribbler (talk) 23:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, the corn grown for cattle is not the same thing that we eat. Feed corn (aka dent corn) is mostly tasteless and starchy. Matt Deres (talk) 10:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Jerusalem artichokes are a species of sunflower grown for their edible tubers. Corvus cornix_talk 23:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I've heard people using sunflower petals in salads, and in fact I found at least one recipe that mentions it. I also seem to recall someone talking about using young sunflower leaves in salad, but I can't find any recipes that mention doing so, so I may be wrong. Oh, and from what I understand, sunflower tea has also been used to treat diarrhea, but most of the links I found with reference to that are with alternative medicine enthusiasts, so perhaps you want to take that with a grain of salt. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 00:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Way to strawman. -LambaJan (talk) 13:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I expressed myself badly, I apologize. Let me clarify: I didn't meant to doubt that it's used as a tea (I'm sure it is; I've heard it mentioned a bunch of times), or that it works as a diarrhea treatment. What I meant is that the links I could find for it during my admittedly short Google search are from message boards and comparable sites where people who appear to be very enthusiastic laymen share their experiences or beliefs. In general, I don't consider sources like this particularly trustworthy unless I happen to have enough knowledge about the topic at hand to evaluate them. (The key word here was not so much "alternative medicine" as "enthusiasts"; it's a little like wondering whether Star Trek is any good and checking a Star Trek fansite to find out. I tend to take that kind of information with certain reservations.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 16:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. The scientists in this field are particularly victimized by quacks, and guilt-by-association and strawman attacks. I agree with your position about enthusiasts. -LambaJan (talk) 20:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all of the responses. I'll probably just stick to eating the seeds unless I have too many drafts in the backyard one evening and decide to make myself a sunny salad. :-) cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Article: Alien War

I have Googled the matter about the Andromedan aliens comming to Earth to throw out other aliens. Here is what I've found:

• [6]
• [7]
• [8]
• [9]
• [10]
• [11]
• [12]
• [13]
• [14]
• [15]
• [16]

There is more of these that describe the Amdromedan aliens, the alleged enemy aliens, such as the reptile aliens, aka, "the lizards" "Dracs", the Greys as well. Can someone with more experience create a article on this matter? I have "Googled" the Andromedan aliens, the other aliens, and this and related matters is what I've found. For some reason, IPs cannot create articles at all.

Summarily, this indicates that a alleged alien race, who is extremely powerful militarily has told the (alleged) other aliens to leave Earth and the Sol star system voluntarily or involuntarily, they are leaving. However, the lizards and their allies are'nt leaving at all, since they have claimed Earth as their own, so this means that there will be war. It means that "Earth humanity" will be caught in a war and there is nowhere to run to. UFO Casebook.com , Re.: SEARCH: Alien Races/ Alien Species has claimed that the lizards have a warship disguised as a asteroid that is already here (See Cruithne Talk, Re.: UFO rumors), or is on the way here. Rumor also has it that 2012 is when these aliens arrive here.65.173.105.27 (talk) 20:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

None of those sources are going to pass the Wikipedia regulations on Wikipedia:Reliable sources. You are wasting your time if you think that you are going to get Wikipedia articles written on the so-called "Alien war". It's not the sort of thing that's appropriate for Wikipedia, whether you think it is true or not. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 20:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Time to return to base I think [17] Richard Avery (talk) 21:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

IPs cannot create articles but aliens can. We have a long entry on such an alien creating the universe, but He has been blocked indefinitely for vandalising the article on atheism. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

He was also blocked for page blanking, edit warring, Biting Newcomers and harassing other editors... Fribbler (talk) 22:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, good old psychoceramica. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 23:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah the Robertson Panel guidelines are still enforced. Kidding aside, I have 1,000s of these that I have found while Googling. Do these pass WP muster?65.173.105.27 (talk) 23:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, not as sources on something factual, they won't. An article on the phenomenon of people believing this kind of stuff might be a different story -- but then, we already have articles on topics like ufology, UFO conspiracy theory, reptilian humanoids and all sorts of crazy ooga booga crap. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 00:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, right, it doesn't matter if its really true or not. Wikipedia is not about being "correct". It's about being "reliable." None of the sources about this sort of thing, at least judging from your many listed ones above, comes anywhere close to being "reliable sources" by Wikipedia standards. There are other places on the internet for this sort of thing—Wikipedia is just not one of them. If it ends up on CNN tomorrow, though, you can happily be the first one to add it to an article. Until then... best not. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds familiar. And also this. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

trawler nets

could anyone tell me what the diablo shaped net at the front of fishing boats are called and for what purpose. thanksBimbopat (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anything on diablo that relates to a shape. What kind of fishing boat? Are they not fishing nets? Any chance you can show us an image? Rmhermen (talk) 21:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean shaped like a diabolo? What size are the boats and nets? Could they be lobster pots? Gwinva (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

And which country. I'm thinking we might be talking about some sort of netting buffer on either side of the pointy end of the bow, but I can't find a photo of said thing on flickr yet. A pointer to a photo would be invaluable. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you referring to this? --Anon 12:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.244.88.141 (talk)

no picture to download but type in trawlers in bridlinton in google then click on boatman.fotopic.net there is a picture of a trawler called NOVANTAE showing the diablo net if that helps.thanksBimbopat (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Here is a link to the Novantae picture. I don't know what the black hourglass/diabolo shaped object is, but someone else might. Gwinva (talk) 22:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I've emailed the owner of the NOVANTAE ([18] ... who knew?) and live in hope that he checks his email. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It looks too small to be a net but I am not sure what it is - or even if if it intended to go in the water at all. It may be some sort of guard for the cables on that part of this boat. Rmhermen (talk) 16:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

According to the U.S. Naval Institute (bold emphasis mine): "Engaged in Fishing. This isn't your neighbor in his Grady-White with a Penn reel in hand. This is a working vessel, trawling lines or nets. The light sequence depends on whether they are fishing or trawling. The shape is constant – two inverted cones, tip to tip. If she is fishing, the light sequence is red-over-white (red over white; we be fishin' tonight). If she is trawling, the light sequence is green-over-white (green over white; we be shrimpin' tonight)." --Anon 19:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.112.151.103 (talk)

Yup, it'll be a day-shape to show that the boat has nets in the water and you should keep clear. In theory, it should only be displayed while actually fishing, but I've never seen a fishing boat bother with running it up and down, rendering the whole thing rather pointless. It used to be (maybe is still?) a legitimate alternative to display "a basket" in the rigging, which explains the occasional plastic crate suspended aloft. 81.187.153.189 (talk) 08:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Skipper Paul of the NOVANTAE got back to me and confirmed the same "it is a sign to say we are a fishing vessel and we are fishing". --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

thanks for all your help in solving this question92.17.68.31 (talk) 20:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Burned stained steel pot

Does Bar Keeper's Friend really work? Are there similar products out there? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imagine Reason (talk • contribs) 23:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It's just a polish isn't it? Brasso/Silvo spring to mind, but I'm sure your local DIY store would have advice. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 08:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

(Brasso/silvo are for brass/copper/silver I wouldn't recommend for steel - could get expensive)

The answer is yes (probably) - but what did you do? you've got a (stainless steel?) pot and food burnt in in? now you want to clean it?

Here's the steps I'd do

1 Clean as normal - get as much as you can off.

2 Try soaking in water (adding biological washing powder or just detergent) see if that helps any more.

3 Pot still dirty/burnt looking - try some steel cleaner eg what you mentioned, you could also try pure elbow grease and wire wool..87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it concerns a burned pot, and no, it's way too badly burned for elbow grease. I'lll have to try some commercial products--seems a waste to throw out the pots for one bad burn. Imagine Reason (talk) 13:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Bar Keeper's Friend works well for me on stainless steel cookware, particularly for flat, brownish or black "staining". BKF is also good for enameled cast iron. Another good product is Dawn Power Dissolver, which you spray onto stuck-on bits (without water) and leave for a while. I mostly use that for burned bits that have a perceptible thickness. -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume it's black carbon burnt on stuff? if so you could also try many other oven cleaners.. (make sure it says ok for stainless steel.. not all do

Maybe have someone sandblast it, or use fine crocus cloth/emery cloth/sandpaper on it. After soaking, scrubbing, and scouring with steel wool and cleanser, why not just live with the discoloration? What difference does it make? Edison (talk) 19:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It has been my impression that burned area on a stainless steel pot catalyzes further burning or other bad reactions when cooking. Having said that, almost any stainless steel pot can be restored to reasonable operating condition using abrasives, starting with mild ones like BKF/Bon Ami and moving up the scale as necessary to crocus cloth, emery cloth, sand paper, sand blasters, Dremel Mototools ;-), and the like, and then back down the scale to restore a reasonable polish to the surface. Or you could just loan it to a friend who lives in the desert and they could hang it up outside their tent for a few years worth of sandstorms...

Atlant (talk) 20:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Before you buy any expensive proprietary products, try Baking soda. Sprinkle liberally over the burnt areas, and cover with a little water (or mix to a paste with some water first). Leave for a while (eg overnight). You can also try boiling with baking soda. Then get to work witha pot scrubber. (I've also heard that vinegar can help after the baking soda.) Gwinva (talk) 20:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

July 10

Gas prices

Why are Americans complaining about "high gas prices" when their gas is just 40% of the price of petrol in the UK? I just paid £1.22/litre (over $9/US gallon) compared to the $3.90/US gallon mentioned a few questions above. Astronaut (talk) 00:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Most likely because they are not accustomed to the sudden rise in gas prices. $3.90/US gallon is high for them compared to what they enjoyed previously. Acceptable (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, much of the price difference is due to higher taxation in the UK. So for your £1.22, you're not just getting a litre of gasopetroline, you're getting the government services that those taxes pay for. -- Coneslayer (talk) 00:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that most US cities are not set up in ways that conserve gas. How far in the UK do you have to go to get your groceries? How far to work? How far to schools? The US has had cheap gas for decades; most US cities are oriented around the idea that you drive everywhere and you'll drive relatively far. One of the main problems with the US's dependence on cheap gas is that everything falls apart in the economy if the price goes up much, because we've set up our infrastructure around the idea of cheap gas. Our biggest housing booms are in distant suburbs, some 5-10 miles away from everything else. Couple that with large, inefficient vehicles, almost no reasonable public transportation in most cities, and high gas means something for people in the US that it probably doesn't mean in the UK or Europe in general. My mom used to commute 35 miles each way to work, in her own car. That's not sustainable unless the gas is cheap. In the US equation, gas was always the cheap aspect, things like location the high aspect. So we spread out. Too far. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I was reading an article in the New York Times a few weeks back that compared the gas mileage and weekly usage of the Ford Focus (The Uk's best selling car) and the Ford F-150 (America's best selling car). Amazingly, despite the disparity in the price of gas at the pump between the two countries, the average Briton driving a Focus will pay less per week on gas, than the average American driving a F-150. So even though US gas still seems relatively cheap to a Brit, when you compare the gas-guzzling vehicles and the large distances needed to be driven, it becomes a different story. Of course one could ask quite why millions of Americans bought a F-150 monster truck simply to sit in a traffic jam every morning.... Rockpocket 01:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The IP above said "Keep in mind that most US cities are not set up in ways that conserve gas." This is true. When we lived in Atlanta, we were 25 miles (40 km) from my wife's work (one way). Now we are 11 miles from her work (17+ km). The nearest grocery store is 5 miles (8 km) away. (In fact, all shopping and doctors, etc, are at least 5 miles away. The nearest drug store is probably 8 miles away.) There are people we know that live 70 miles (113 km) away from their work, one way. Bubba73 (talk), 02:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

And Americans driving everywhere is completely true, as well. I live maybe a mile from my college campus and I drive there and back twice a day. Then I drive to work and back, which is about 8 miles each way. There's a bus stop within one block of my apartment and the bus would drop me off almost exactly where I needed to be for school or work. But I still drive. Useight (talk) 03:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

An appropriate graph

Eleven of the states in the United States are individually larger in area[19] than the entire United Kingdom [20]. The relatively low population density means greater miles to travel to work or to shopping. The lower population density of the U.S., 80 per square mile compared to 637 per square mile in the U.K., means less mass transit available, necessitating automobiles. Edison (talk) 03:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Another one — notice that Australia has comparable density to the US yet is in a totally different category of gas consumption.

I want to emphasize that it doesn't have to mean that. It only means that because we are used to cheap gas and have been used to it for decades, a few hiccups of energy crises notwithstanding. If travel costs were more expensive, it would put more economic incentive on having things not be out in the middle of nowhere. For example, the big chains that really make the money are the ones that go out where land is reeeeeally cheap, and build a giant warehouse, and then people from all around drive over there. That makes economic sense as long as gas is cheap. If gas is expensive, then that offsets the number of people who go out there, which then offsets the benefits to all that cheap land. I'm just saying: it's not inevitable that somewhere as large as the US has to be all about gasoline. Personally I think that if the gas prices continue to stay high over the long term, we'll end up with, in the end, a much more sustainable society that is not so contingent on the price of oil (and some cars with better MPG, at the very least). The Saudis think that too—and are afraid of the idea of a US not dependent on their oil. (I of course say this in the luxury of someone who currently lives in a pretty densely populated area with great public transportation and easy options for quickly and cheaply renting cars when they are needed, e.g. Zipcar).

You don't have to build a sprawling metropolis—for the last, I don't know, forty years, the US has been doing its development horizontally, rather than vertically. We build out, not up, or even over in many cases (how many totally dead strip malls and commerce centers are in your town? and how often do they just go out somewhere new to build something new? that's urban sprawl, plain and simple). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 04:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Quote from above he big chains that really make the money are the ones that go out where land is reeeeeally cheap - that is probably true. When WalMart opened here many years ago, they were pretty far out of town. Probably out of the city limits too, where the taxes are cheaper. I wondered why they put it on that road with nothing on it. Now just about everything is in that area, and and it is 5-8 miles for me and most other people. Bubba73 (talk), 04:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, there is the Field of Dreams theory: "if you build it, they will come". If you build anything with sufficient attractive value, other busineses and housing will spring up around it, so even if it was initially out in the middle of nowhere, it won't remain so for long. StuRat (talk) 14:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

A comment on public transportation in the US: it is often dangerous and filthy with limited routes, and therefore only used by those have no choice. This is because politicians, rather than viewing it as a benefit to all, view it as a "safety net", for those who can't afford to buy a car. Then there is GM, which bought up public transportation throughout the US and then destroyed it, so people would need to buy their cars. StuRat (talk) 14:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Filthy? Sure. Limited routes? Oh yeah. Dangerous? Not so much, in my experience in a number of different regions. I mean, maybe in some really nasty parts of cities is it as dangerous as the city around it, but the metro is usually a pretty safe zone. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

If you have to travel very late at night or very early in the morning it may be or at least seem fairly dangerous I guess depending on how far the bus stop/train station is from your house. Of course an interesting thing is that in most countries including I suspect the US, the actual journey is potentially safer since the bus/train is probably less likely to have an accident and you're less likely to die or be badly injured in any accident. Nil Einne (talk) 18:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

General Motors wasn't the one destroying public transportation -- that was Ford and Chrysler. GM made buses, so they bought up public transportation systems and converted them to use buses. --Carnildo (talk) 22:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That was just a ruse. GM ripped out the old, efficient, non-polluting public transportation systems, like the electric trolley in Detroit, and replaced them with diesel buses belching black smoke, with more limited routes and fewer stops, in order to "convince" people that public transportation wasn't for them and they all needed to go out and buy GM cars, which were far more profitable for them than buses. StuRat (talk) 04:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

an interesting discussion on npr the other morning; gasoline is one of the few things you purchase which you sit and watch the money get essentially extracted from you right before your eyes, penny by penny. thus, people tend to obsess more over the cost than is proportional, then go in and buy a bottle of water or cup of coffee which is not only more expensive per unit volume,but ridiculously so, without thinking about it; will drive halfway across town to save $1 on a tankful of gasoline; etc. Gzuckier (talk) 14:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

True. I've often thought other things should work that way, too, like your phone having a price readout that grows per minute spent talking. As far as I know, however, none of them do that, although some do have minutes-used displays (because if the price was shown like that consumers would cut back). StuRat (talk) 15:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Gas is also the only product whose price is displayed in foot-high numerals on every major intersection. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Banking in Turkey

Good Morning

can you give me the address of all HSBC bank branches in Turkey? can you advice which is the currency most used in turkey? which bank is most avaialble in Tureky??

thanks for oyur help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.139.47.41 (talk) 07:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Good morning, We can't give you a list of all Turkish HSBC branches, but you can look here for your nearest branch. Turkey uses the New Turkish Lira (YTL). AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 08:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Picture

I remember seeing a picture of someone with their head in a toilet and the caption "don't stop your curiosity," underneath. But where can I find this picture on the internet? 208.76.245.162 (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Here. - Eron^Talk 14:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

What did people with Asperger's Syndrome do before the Internet?

I have noticed a number of people on various groups who have mentioned that they likely have Asperger's Syndrome, and my hunch is there are at least twice that number who frequent the boards I'm on.

Now, obviously, there are varying levels of it - especially since it's a spectrum condition. Some people may have very specific interests but can manage - maybe even with little trouble - to maintain a normal daily lifestyle.

The ones I'm asking about are those who do have more trouble, and prefer the online world with no external body language and such to take into account. When engrossed in their interests, what did they do? Were libraries frequented a lot more?Did they simply make more effort to interact, and just get worn out from it easier?

I have never been the kind to say 'get a life" to someone; in fact, i felt very pained to see it on the Star Trek baords in the early '90s. But, it saddens me more now to know there were bullies out there saying that, when in fact some of the ones so totally engrossed in it may well have been so because of Asperger's Syndrome, though certainly not all. It's just that now, Aspies can really spend hours engrossed in any interest. But, what did they do before that?209.244.30.221 (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Crosswords, jigsaw puzzles, stamp collecting, trainspotting... Itsmejudith (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Crosswords, check

Jigsaw puzzles, check

Stamp collection, check

Internet forums, check... uh oh... Plasticup ^T/C 16:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

But then again, far fewer people had Asperger's Syndrome before the internet. Recury (talk) 16:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Take self-reported claims of this sort with a grain of salt. Surely some of them do have Aspergers but, for a variety of reasons, people find it attractive to claim they have this disorder.--droptone (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Self-diagnosis is a big problem in this case. The criteria, when applied outside of a clinical setting, are quite vague. Have a look at the DSM criteria in Diagnosis of Asperger syndrome and take criterion 2: "Stereotyped behaviour". From a non-psychiatric point-of-view, it would seem that doing something alot would qualify, but in psychiatric terms the word Stereotype means very unusual repetitive behaviours such as constantly standing up and sitting down. This is why these syndromes are best diagnosed by professionals and not internet forums. Fribbler (talk) 18:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Narrow shoes

My wife has very narrow feet(4A). It difficult to find this size shoe. We have tried searching the internet with little success. Ant suggestions?129.112.109.251 (talk) 16:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, what search terms have you tried? Simply searching for Narrow Shoes for Women brings up lots of promising looking links. [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] Just to link a few... Dismas|^(talk) 16:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

• My personal recommendation would be Zappos.com (one of Dismas' links); they're real fast, real responsive, and real good about returns. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

• Another way to go is just to get some padding, or wear thick socks. Obviously, this will work better with some types of shoes, like sneakers, than others, like formals. StuRat (talk) 04:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yet another option to consider is custom-made shoes. You might try http://www.otabo.com/ . They have a location in Arlington, TX. This is not an endorsement as I've never used them. --D. Monack | talk 16:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ref. an earlier question on Genetics and Obesity.

The responses to that earlier question were extremely erudite and informative, and I have no challenge to anything said therein. But it occurred to me to question whether there existed any non-toxic, digestible compound, whether food or drink, that could possibly add more than its own weight to the recipient's weight, once digested. Conversely, might there be a non-toxic, non-corrosive substance that could safely accelerate the body's ability to process food and drink, beyond the substance itself, thus causing desired weight loss? 92.21.72.20 (talk) 16:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I know a substance that is non-toxic, non-corrosive and accelerates the rate of digestion. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^{Talk to me} _{The mess I've made} 22:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Ward Character Assassination

A series of recent attacks has been posted on various sites by a cult adhering to Gnostic Cathar beliefs. Some time ago Dr. Ward aired an expose on television about such cults and also wrote an online article about them. These attacks are their response. They are attempting to link various online bloggers as one blogger whom they accuse as being Dr. Ward. They have attempted to link Dr. Ward with a certain "Manuel" which does not even believe the same doctrine as Dr. Ward. Manuel has been banned from several blogging sites , however, according to his overseers as well as he himself, Dr. Ward has never been banned from ANY web site or blog whatsoever. Manuel allegedly has some personal and professional problems while Dr. Wards reputation is impeccable. The cult attacking him advocates homosexuality, reincarnation, and various other new age beliefs. They are hiding behind generic, untracable names such as the recent BlazzinPaddles. I am Dr. Chuck Wilson, which has been quoted in the Oneness Pentecostal article, and have written much on Pentecostal history. I have personally met with Dr. Ward on occasions and am well acquainted with his overseers. The Wiki editor who recently took on the name of BlazzinSaddles put a write up in his talk page about Dr. Ward. He published his full name, address, IP address, and several personal details about him. This page falsley connected him with these various other bloggers. False accusations have been made against Dr. Ward. His character was intensly marred. The author of these false accusations has written these false accusations on other web sites and ANYTHING at all referring to Dr. Ward is deleted. Dr. Ward is somewhat of a subculture hero in certain Pentecostal ranks and this is sure to ignite an outrage. What do you suggest? Is Wikipedia legally accountable?Chuwils (talk) 18:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't find the links right now, but several courts have ruled that the Wikimedia Foundation is not responsible for the content of wikipedia.org and implied that the responsibility lies with the editor. Thus the harsh wording of WP:BIO. Plasticup ^T/C 19:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

This sounds like some kind of a personal and/or religious argument between two people, this Manuel (whom I don't know, have never heard of and, frankly, don't much care about) and Dr. Ward (ditto). You certainly don't sound like an impartial observer here. It is my experience that on the internet, things like this often involve a lot of posturing and talk of legal trouble for either party or both of them, as well as other people for good measure, and more often than not, nothing comes of it. Generally speaking, though (and not related to this particular instance on any level other than the most generic), this is how society works: if someone commits an actual crime, such as defamation, it's a matter for the police. A person can call them up and report it, and they'll investigate it. Since you specifically mention Wikipedia, I would expect it to cooperate with any actual official investigation into a crime, just like any other organization. Anything beyond that is, frankly, just talk until someone actually makes a move. I could go into this in more detail than that, but that would constitute actual legal advice, which we aren't supposed to give here. Talk to a lawyer. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 19:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

See WP:BLP , a Wikipedia policy which requires that any controversial statements about living persons which are not reliable sourced must be removed, and may be removed by any editor without falling under the WP:3RR penalties for edit warring. There is a BLP noticeboard where a complaint may be made. I cannot find any user named BlazzinPaddles, so a link is helpful (copy and paste the URL at the top of the page where the problem is, after clicking on the "history" tab). Apparently you meant User:Blazinpaddles. That user has blanked his page, but the problem edits are still there in the edit history [26]Ordinary admins cannot remove this. You could use the Wikipedia:OTRS system to request that "oversight" remove all trace of it. You should complain at the Administrator's noticeboard when problems require the assistance of administrators, not here.Edison (talk) 19:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please read WP:BLP (BLP stands for 'biographies of living persons') to see that biographies are taken seriously, and that there is a mechanism to deal with incorrect, defamatory, or other harmful content.

Please go to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard to report what you have said. Also mention the breach of privacy there. In other words follow the advice of Edison above.87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thumb work Method in Management

This does not explain what exactly Thumb method was, please explain in simple and understood terms. thank you. Sir,

F.W. Taylor's scientific management replaced the rule of thumb work methods with methods based on a scientific study of the tasks.

So my question is What is Thumb Work method adapted in pre-scientific management principles by Taylor ?.

Awaiting your reply

Mathew Philip ETA STAR Group Dubai.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.209.117.23 (talk) 20:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Email redacted. See Rule of thumb. It means that work was arranged without the sort of quantifiable measurements which were a feature of Taylor's method, and instead based on the best suppositions that the management could come up with. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) A rule of thumb is an idiomatic phrase to refer to a general principle which can be broadly applied, but is not a specific rule or application for specific issues. Without knowing anything about the company, we cannot speculate on what general rules they might have used. It is quite possible that they were unwritten rules. (We removed your email address since we do not respond by email, and its presence here on this page might attract spam.) Gwinva (talk) 20:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The Frederick Winslow Taylor article should be helpful. Rmhermen (talk) 20:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It just means that Taylor's approach was to make management systematic, whereas before it was unsystematic, or ad hoc. It's the difference between me saying, "Oh, let's just do it how it feels like it should be done" and saying "Let's measure everything very carefully and find the most optimal, perfect way of doing it, based on our observations." The latter would be more like what Taylor was doing. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 04:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Dogfight

I wonder why a battle between airplanes is called a dogfight? It doesn't seem to do anything with dogs. Whenever I hear the word, I usually think of those money matches where owners pit their dogs to fight in the arena. 210.4.122.42 (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's where the word comes from. The word was transferred to any scrap or disturbance, and then to the small air combats, which (in a way) resemble dog fights. (The OED confirms this etymology.) Gwinva (talk) 21:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

edit conflict: :Considering that another name is furball I think that animals savagely fighting is the image intended. Rmhermen (talk) 21:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

(unreliable memory referencing a book I read long ago "Iron Men with Wooden Wings", an history book written to entertain rather than teach and thus perhaps a bit light on research)

I have read that dogFIGHT is not the original term. Early airplanes were first armed with unreliable guns with little ammo. Pilots soon learned that they had too much going on to navigate, fly, aim the gun, and shoot, so they eliminated one job by fixing the gun facing forward. Just point your plane at the enemy, and shoot. However, he is also moving, so he won't stay in front of you unless you are directly behind him and facing him. Thus, the best chance of a kill is to get directly behind him and as close as you can before firing.

If you have ever seen a male dog (always interested in mating) trying to get into position behind a female dog trying to avoid being mated, you can imagine what the first combat pilots called what they were doing before the newspapers cleaned it up for the public. "Uh, let's just call it dogfighting, okay?" -66.55.10.178 (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Persian porn

Is there a porn site where Persian ladies liberate themselves sexually? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.54.33 (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Rule 34 suggests yes. anonymous6494 00:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It is considered to be a rule of the internet (rule 34, to be precise) that there is porn of everything, no exceptions. Plasticup ^T/C 02:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Google is your best bet for finding it (if you turn off safe search). It might cost, but that would depend on your own budget. I am on a work account, so I will not do the search myself. Steewi (talk) 03:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

July 11

Patents

What does it mean when a land or mine patent is outdated, do they still have rights to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.158.156 (talk) 01:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Mining Patents are sales aggreements, so I don't see how they can become "outdated". In what context did you see that? Do you have a link? Fribbler (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I was looking up a mine at the Asseossors office and the man couldn't find it, he concluded that the patent was outdated. If a patent or land agreement was from the 1930's could it still be active or considered private property, could the patent run out after a certain date? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.241.20 (talk) 23:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Seat belts in Military helicopters

When soldiers are flying in Blackhawk helicopters with the doors open, are they usually wearing seat belts or some other forms of seat restraints? Although I've never flown in one, it seems to me that when the helicopter banks or turns, the soldiers inside are susceptible to falling out if unrestrained. Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 04:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure they're obliged to wear seatbelts unless they are about to jump. I wonder what makes you think otherwise.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about Blackhawks specifically, but in a British RAF Chinook anyone in a seat will be wearing a seatbelt, but if the ramp is open then the loadmaster will wear a "monkey harness" to move around. Basically, a big belt with a long strap fixed back inside the cabin. It (used to be?) fairly common for people wearing a monkey harness to sit on the edge of the ramp with their legs dangling over the edge, just for fun. 81.187.153.189 (talk) 08:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Just Responses

RE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008_July_5#Couldn.27t_get_a_answer_on_Humanities_or_Entertainment

To Julia, No I didn't try the language desk.

To LambaJan, Yes, you would think that if all the songs in the entire genre are in the same key would be significant enough to be in the article, but unfortunately, some articles are terrible, and they don't list information like that, for whatever reason. Maybe because the contributors of the article did not bother to include information (like the aforementioned information) for their racist agenda, who knows.68.148.164.166 (talk) 06:28, 11 July 2008 (UTC)68.148.164.166 (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The reason could well be that it's not true. Chinese music is unlikely to all fit exactly to one western scale, even within one genre. You could try reading up on Chinese musicology, hopefully from a more comprehensive source than our article. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be much easier on everyone if you would post your responses at the relevant open discussions. It's not necessary to make a new section for this or post responses to talk pages. In fact it's confusing because it leaves a lot of people not knowing what is going on in the conversation. It's like having a conversation with ten people in five different rooms at the same time. I just got to this section now after having already responded to my talk page, the still open original question and the new one on the language desk, now I finally understand why that one is there. I gave a more comprehensive answer there, you might find it interesting. -LambaJan (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

iq question

our teacher asked us this question and we have to think of the answer in 2 days... so... puleeez help a car with three windows and very much similar looking ends (so we can't distinguish which is the head and tail)is on a bridge. in which direction is the car moving: left or right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.248.203 (talk) 10:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Taking your question literally (and using the very, very limited amount of information you provided), here's some of the answers I came up with:

• Look at which direction the wheels are turning.
• Look at the direction the driver inside the car is facing (assuming he is actually looking, and not driving blindly!)
• If it's night, you can probably distinguish the headlights from the taillights.

If you give us more information about the problem, we can give you better answers. Remember, however, we will not answer homework questions for you. « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 11:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's my attempt at interpreting the question. Left and right are Relative directions. So if the car is moving, you need to consider which direction the car is moving relative to the car. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, what kind of car has three windows? I certainly haven't seen one; maybe that's a clue. « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 12:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

• Look at which side of the road the car is on. If it's on the near side of the bridge, and people in your country drive on the right, it's probably going to your right. 81.174.226.229 (talk) 13:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the car's not moving at all? Anyway, I think you either remembered the question wrong or are recounting it to us wrong. As it is, it is not a coherent or answerable question in the form you've given it. At best it is a poor quality riddle. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Left. It's not a car, it's a bus. Matt Deres (talk) 15:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

That, mr Deres, depends entirely on if the bridge is located in a country where traffic is on the right or left hand side of the road. What Matt refers to is the following: If the vehicle is indeed a bus, its direction can be deduced from where its doors are, since a drawing of a bus usually has doors only on the side close to the kerb. /Kriko (talk) 17:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I've never come across a car that moves left or right. All the ones I know move forward (and occasionally backward). --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's relative to itself. Relative to an observer, it can indeed move to the left or to the right. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Colin. If it moves left or right, it'll fall off the bridge. More analytically, though... *three* windows? That's surely a clue. If it's identical front and back, either it has only one window somewhere on one of its sides (or the roof), or it has no windows at front or back! If any of those are the case, then this is the sort of logic problem where you have to question exactly what kind of "car" (or maybe "bridge") this actually is - it doesn't sound like a roadworthy automobile, anyway. Cablecar? Subway car? Grutness...wha? 12:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Jack, that is relative to itself. And where in the original problem does it say anything about an observer? --ColinFine (talk) 22:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't. But given that a normal vehicle can't move left or right relative to itself or its driver, maybe it's implicit in the question that it's framed from the perspective of an observer. In fact, not just any observer, but one standing in a particular place. An observer standing on the opposite side of the vehicle would see it going left while the first observer would see it going right (or vice-versa). So it's either a poorly framed question, or we've not yet divined its true meaning. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, maybe. And maybe the lack of mention of an observer is the trick in the question. --ColinFine (talk) 10:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Glass

I was told that glass is a liquid, because, if one looks at glass in very ancient windows, like in cathedrals it is thicker at the bottom than at the top, this is because it flows very slowly. So what I would like to know is A, is glass a liquid? B, at what speed does a liquid need to flow to be considered a liquid and/or C, what is the substance betwwen liquid and solid? Sludge? Mud? Goo? Thanks people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 10:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The first part (A) is dealt with here: Glass#Behavior of antique glass. Fribbler (talk) 11:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

oops edit conflict. Its a myth see for example [27]. Mhicaoidh (talk) 11:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, and thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Nothing to be sorry about! As to C, there are all sorts of suggestions (try googling between liquid solid) but not much consensus because it very much depends on conditions (atmosphere, temperature, pressure to say the least). Try State of matter and Phase (matter). And eek! heres the answer to B Viscosity of amorphous materials. Mhicaoidh (talk) 11:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Finding out the legitemacy of a foreign Travel Agency

I would like to know if "AKWABATOURSof ACCRA/GHANA is a scam or not69.3.198.187 (talk) 10:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

That name turned up no results in Google, which is a bad sign, West Africa or not. You might find this site a bit useful. I can understand (from personal experience) why you might want to deal with a travel agency in West Africa, but you might consider just forgoing that and taking care of things yourself. I guess it depends on your situation but Ghana Airways is reasonably professional and the consulate isn't too bad. Unless you know how to heckle you'll probably get gouged by the hotel (but a travel agency won't necessarily change that). Just make sure you pay upfront and tell them you don't want any room service and you're not taking anything from the fridge or cupboard so they might as well remove that stuff before you get there. The common scam is they remove a couple of bottles of liquor or whatever's there right when you're checking out and say you drank it and they charge you for it. That's why they'll fight you a bit when you insist on paying upfront. Just hold your ground and when they say no say you'll go somewhere else and turn around and start walking away. They'll most likely call you back and make a deal that's more in your favor. As a matter of fact, do that for everything. Get a friend who knows the prices and be content to pay a little bit more not anywhere near what they originally offer you -for anything. Walk away, there's always someone else selling the same thing and they know it. They nearly always call you back. -LambaJan (talk) 15:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) A google search for "akwaaba tours" (notice the spelling and space) showed up 649 hits.

Akwaaba Tours appear to be a tour operator specialising in trips to Ghana - official sites http://akwaabatours.com/ and http://akwaabaonline.com/. They are based in Maastrict, Netherlands (the second site has their address in Maastrict and phone number). If you read dutch, there are lots of links to them from various dutch online travel agents, but I couldn't find any independant reviews (good or bad). What makes you think it might be a scam?

Incidentally, they're not to be confused with http://www.akwaabatours.org/ who run tours of the Underground Railroad from Rochester, NY.

Astronaut (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Not to make fun of an innocent typo, LambaJan, but I cracked right up at the idea of heckling the guys at the hotel instead of haggling with them. "Your hotel sucks!" "Sir, please, just sign the guest register." "That's what your mom said! Woo!" -- Captain Disdain (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

lol! actually it looks like I got those words mixed up for real, so thanks. -LambaJan (talk) 01:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

solids and liquids

At what speed must a substance flow to be considered a liquid and/or what is the substance between solid and liquid? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:19, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a question of speed, really. A good indicator that something is a liquid is if it tends to form an even surface when at rest. Another good definition is in our article on the subject, "a liquid's shape is confined to, not determined by, the container it fills." You may want to check out our article on states of matter. Some liquids are denser than others and thus move more slowly; in theory, you could have a liquid so dense that you couldn't really perceive any movement with the naked eye when it started to flow, but it would still be a liquid, not a solid. If, for example, you were to put a "chunk" of it into a bucket, it would would eventually result in it spreading itself evenly across the bottom. By comparison, a rock or a steel rod will never do this. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 11:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Also check out pitch drop experiment. --Sean 14:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

You may also find this bit from our glass article interesting. Matt Deres (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

ex wheelchair motors

Have two old wheelchair motors. They are dark blue in colour. Can find no markings on the cases. Motors at right angles to drive , wheels attached. Need to know voltage, or how to test for voltage.Kweery (talk) 11:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Apply DC from a power supply, adjust voltage until it's roughly at its normal speed? --antilived^{T | C | G} 11:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

..starting with a low voltage of course. DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

If the motors are permanent magnet ones with brushes (almost certain they would be) then you can spin the wheels at max. operating speed and check the voltage at the wires. That voltage is pretty much the max. voltage to use. For fun, connect the wires of one motor to the other, then spin one wheel and see the other spin. Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 04:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Given that there's a "right angle drive", there may well be a worm drive involved and it will not be possible to turn the motors by trying to turn the wheel shafts. Me, I'd guess that the motors run on 12V since the wheelchair probably used one standard 12V battery. 24V is also a possibility.

Atlant (talk) 18:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Arab street hookers dress

In the porn site, the models were wearing arab attire, where my wife can get those? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.34 (talk) 15:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm familiar with that web site. You might want to start here.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Or if you're looking for something more modest, you may wish to purchase an abaya (see picture) for your spouse.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you mean this? http://www.xxxsheila.com/gallery.php 87.102.86.73 (talk) 23:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Jesse Jackson's "nuts" comment

Recently, Jesse Jackson publicly expressed the desire to cut Barack Obama's nuts off. I am looking for an uncensored video or audio clip of this statement. Does such a clip exist anywhere online, or is the bleeped O'Reilly footage the only clip available?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I was under the impression that Fox News was not releasing the uneditted tapes. Plasticup ^T/C 17:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes the clip apparently came from a comment Jesse Jackson made to another guest while waiting to be interviewed for Fox & Friends so Fox likely have copyright of and also complete control of the recordings Nil Einne (talk) 17:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I wasn't clear whether this clip made its premiere on The O'Reilly Factor in its censored form or whether it was originally a "slip-up" on live TV. Clearly, the former is the case.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 18:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

They actually held the tape for two days before first airing it. They said that they needed time to determine whether the language was too strong for their viewers, but they were obviously just trying to stretch the little story and hype up their star sex offender. Plasticup ^T/C 18:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Red Light Bulb

I have a red light bulb that has been around for many years..at least thirty, perhaps even more since I don't know where it really came from. It still works! I used it at my previous place of residence for the last eight years as my general lighting in the room where I used my desktop computer and it got anywhere from one to six (maybe more)hours of use every day. Then there was the occasional all nighter as well. Now at my new place it is used in another room and still going strong. The bulb is similiar to a hot dog in shape, but slightly thicker and slightly shorter. Probably 4-5 inches in length. Some of the red coloring has worn off. Does anyone have any idea what kind of bulb this is? I can try to post a picture of it this weekend if needed. thanks and cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I too had a red bulb that never broke.. (mine was normal shape) - does it have a clear red coating on it - my guess is that the bulb runs not as hot as normal bulbs and so lasts longer, or that it seems that it's lasted ages because the bulb is special. As I recall the bulbs originate from 'flame effect' electric fires..87.102.86.73 (talk) 22:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

When you say 'hot dog shaped' does it have electric contacts at both ends, or just one?87.102.86.73 (talk) 22:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

does this look similar http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230268527648 ? 87.102.86.73 (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

what about this http://images.google.co.uk/images?um=1&hl=en&q=fireglow+striplight ? 87.102.86.73 (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

or this http://www.lightbulbsdirect.com/page/001/PROD/HolLandscape/901R ? 87.102.86.73 (talk) 22:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

See Light bulb#Voltage, light_output, and lifetime. Basically lightbulbs can last for ages if you run it at less than its rated power. Your light bulb probably has some irregularity that introduced a resistance in series to the filament, reducing its effective power and greatly prolonging its life. --antilived^{T | C | G} 06:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Come back when it gets as old as this one, Centennial Light, and we'll right an article about it. Rmhermen (talk) 14:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I have a yellow light bulb (regular shape) that's been in regular use for at least 20 years. It was the porch light at a rental we moved into in 1988 - I switched it out for a white bulb and used it in my bedroom for the soft warm glow it gave. I don't know how old it was when I got it - the house was built in 1936. But some of the yellow film on the outside is peeling off. Shuttlebug (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response...the bulb looks nothing like the photos that were suggested, however, I took a couple shots and hope to post a link soon. Shuttlebug has a close story, as this bulb is in the bedroom now as well. And cool thing to bring up the Centennial Light, amazing.... more to come.cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 23:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

i used to have one of those large globe bulbs, which i snitched off the wall in my college dorm around 1970 and god knows how old it was then; used it on and off, mostly on, until about a year ago when a friend (@#$@@%!!) dropped it. it wasn't labelled as longlife or with 130 volts or anything like that. but i've also purchased a few other bulbs of that design and they are in general longer lived than regular size; i imagine they're designed that way, i can't see why it would be an effect of the size.Gzuckier (talk) 20:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

art therapy

If somebody could help me; i m looking for the significations of colours, to help the interprate a drawing picture of somebody. i m working in a therapy house and i have a project that could help uor clients.Thank you. Marie-Eve —Preceding unsigned comment added by Me n80 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Uh, not to sound like a jerk or anything, but honestly, I'm kind of scared by the concept of someone who's actually working with people in a therapeutic capacity asking how to go about doing so on the Wikipedia Reference Desk. In any case, this is a pretty clear-cut case of someone asking for medical advice, which we're not supposed to give. (I also removed your e-mail address per the Ref Desk guidelines, which you can find at the very top of this page.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 21:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Color psychology and its links might help. 190.190.224.115 (talk) 01:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Have no fears CD, art therapy never caused any harm to any one - never caused much good either. Richard Avery (talk) 06:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

This is probably true. Still... -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with seeking information on the Internet, Wikipedia included, to expand and extend your own knowledge; everyone here is doing that in some way. It's questionable, though, whether information gathered in this manner is valid and reputable enough as a basis for you to design a treatment program. As you're working in some capacity in a "therapy house," you'd do well to consult the higher-educated members of the staff, as well as the institutions where you and they have received professional training, to investigate this topic before applying it to people in need of treatment or help. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

auto trader

does ny 1 have any complaints about auto trader i have placed about 25 ads of these 8 have been not very good .they may have no phone no ,wrong pic ,incorrect details or may not be published at all,they phone for payment of ads not placed ,promise to give a bigger ad for free next issue for mistakes made then ask for payment .are there no competeters to take these modern day dick turpins on ≤≥±± —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.243.120 (talk) 21:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Their main competitors are local newspapers and web sites like ebay. -LambaJan (talk) 01:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

craigslist. Gzuckier (talk) 20:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

How much does the bar weigh

I want to know how much my bar weighs for weightlifting. I don't know where I got it, as it's my dad's bar anyways. Either way, I measured it, and found the length to be 5 feet 6 inches long, or 66 centimeters long. The circumference is about 3.5 inches. I don't know what the material it is that the bar is made of. I know it has two round things to close the weights so they don't move, and a silver tube in the middle of it. The ends of the bar are black. I need to know how much that bar actually weighs.76.212.131.226 (talk) 21:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Use a scale. 40lbs is a common weight, as I recall, but maybe there's some variation. Friday (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Per Friday. You can use a bathroom scale (if you have one) to get a rough idea—just weigh yourself, then weigh yourself while you're holding the bar, and take the difference. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I weighed it and found it was only 5 pounds. Is this normal for a bar?76.212.131.226 (talk) 22:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. A few Kg is about right for a modern alloy bar (in this case 2 kilos). I was suprised to hear 17kg (40 pounds) above. Thats very heavy for a modern bar, you are meant to be able to discount the weight of the bar when calculating the total weight lifted. Fribbler (talk) 22:51, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The standard weight for a free-weight bar, of the type used for bench press, is 45 lbs, counting the collars. If you leave the collars off (as I do, because I often lift when there's no one around, so I want to be able to dump the weights if I happen to get stuck), it's obviously a little less -- I did the weigh-myself-with-and-without thing and came up with about 40 lbs. --Trovatore (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The steel bars (i.e. the expensive ones) are heavy, but the aluminium ones such as the one I have (cheap) are light. And I'm sure the OP's bar could be of the latter variety and be a few kilos at most Fribbler (talk) 23:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

There's also hollow steel tubular ones that way less than the solid 40kg or whatever.. without pictures we're stuck?87.102.86.73 (talk) 00:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

How the hell can it possibly be both 5'6" and 66cm long? 66cm is just a little over two feet in length. Matt Deres (talk) 16:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to take a wild stab and suggest that he meant 66 inches there (exactly equal to 5'6"). I suspect that he did the conversion to inches but didn't get around to the second step of converting inches to centimeters (about 168 cm) for the metric part of our readership. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

July 12

proverb

can you tell me about the proverb Practise makes man perfect in about 100 words —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.52.26 (talk) 02:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The proverb is usualy stated as simply "Practice makes perfect". Googleing that give me this [28]. APL (talk) 04:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think these are equivalent, and perhaps that's the point. For one, I've only heard "Practice makes perfect" as the familiar adage. The act of "practicing," I've always understood in the sense cited by APL, indicates repeating an action as the route to "perfecting" its performance. This is not identical to making the person perfect per se. The high utility of practice relates to a Latin proverb, Repetitio mater studiorum est – "Repetition [e.g. rote memorization] is the mother of study." In this context, it supports that particular form of pedagogy. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

If you practice writing 100 word essays you'll surely reach a level of perfection that is above desiring the help of the reference desk. -LambaJan (talk) 20:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

iq question, once more, this time, i remember it exactly

a 1970's looking car is on a bridge with similar looking ends. this is the sideways view, so, i can't see any headlights or tailights. there's nothing more in the diagram.also, it's a small diagram, so there's no diagram of the driver. (there are cars with three windows, like toyota innova)

well, my friend noticed that the left side of the car(our left side) is a little nearer to the ground than the right side, as if passengers were sitting there. so he concluded that the driver was on the right side and so the car was moving to the right.

did this help you? is there any other answer?

i know the diagram is very uninformative... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.248.231 (talk) 02:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

How would you know if the car wasn't moving in reverse? Again, I don't see this as being a very well-posed question. It's certainly got nothing to do with IQ. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure your teacher wants you to work this out on your own and not ask internet strangers to help. Regardless, this sounds like the sort of puzzle that depends on noticing some small detail on the diagram, without seeing it we'd just be guessing. APL (talk) 04:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The car is not moving.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

As regards the puzzle's exact wording here, are you quite sure it's "car" - and restricted to the sense of a conventional passenger vehicle... or might it be some form of commercial vehicle? You see, I'm familiar with a version of the puzzle, and interpreting the configuration of visible features along with comparable features that can be imputed for the unseen side, is the key to its solution. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

N.B. For a similar comment, see what Grutness responded (later) to your earlier posting, "iq question". -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if you've misremembered the question and it was supposed to be a bus, not a car. A bus will have a door on the pavement/sidewalk side, so if you know which country the bus is designed for and which side of the road they drive on, you can tell very easily which end is the front. - 79.71.249.109 (talk) 11:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Fresca Healthy?

Is Fresca soft drink really as healthy as it is marketed to be? On the nutrional label on the back, it claims to have 0 calories, 0 sugar, almost 0 everything- very much like water. Is Fresca as harmless as water? Acceptable (talk) 03:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not healthy. It has an artificial sweetener, which is bad for you, and lots of acid, which is bad for your teeth. I'd stick with water with a few drops of lemon juice for flavor. Or you might want to actually get some vitamins and minerals from your drink by going with fruit juice or milk. StuRat (talk) 04:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Stu, do you realize that your links don't support your claims and that you prescription for avoiding acid in your drink is to add acid to your drink? And that you didn't mention the medical claims against fruit juice (far tougher on the teeth, etc.) Rmhermen (talk) 14:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a matter of degree. A few drops of lemon juice adds far less acid than you find in any soda. And the links I provided bring up the medical conerns on both counts, listing both arguments for and against. StuRat (talk) 05:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It may also depend on how you feel about glycerol ester of wood rosin and brominated vegetable oil.

Atlant (talk) 18:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

As a slight aside, sucralose could totally kick aspartame's ass in a bar fight. Current scientific evidence seems to side with it being safe, though there are possibly immune reactions at 750 mg/kg bw/day (for an average human, that's 5000 Splenda packets per day). Long-term studies to check for possibly accumulative effects would still be helpful though. 24.76.161.28 (talk) 02:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I once drank a couple cans of that stuff after having quite a few cold beers...I woke up feeling like spiders were crawling all over me. I stay away from it. cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 23:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I will stay away from any artificial sweetener until they have 30 years of safe usage under their belt, as it seems to take about that long for the long-term consequences of things like trans-fats to become widely known. I see no reason to take any chances with any nasty chemicals until then. Meanwhile, I'll either stick with sugar or use stevia, a natural sweetener that does have over 30 years of safe usage under it's belt (in Japan and elsewhere). StuRat (talk) 05:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

My ancestors lived well for many millenia drinking H₂O. Artificial colors, sweeteners, flavors, and carbonation provide no benefit in achieving optimal hydration. Edison (talk) 05:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

They also lived 'well' for many millenia without antibiotics. Not saying that drinking water is a bad thing, or that drinking fizzy sweet liquids is good, but that's not really a relevant point. What things provide benefits for optimal hydration vary from circumstance to circumstance; if you had diarrhoea, plain water would not provide optimal hydration. Sorry for wandering off the point... Blah. 79.66.54.186 (talk) 17:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

also, excessive consumption of phosphate, as in carbonated soft drinks, leads to weak bones (being composed of calcium phosphate you need to keep the two ions balanced in intake for optimal bone formation).

as for artificial sweeteners in general, the question is not which is best, but just why? aside from diabetics and tooth decay, there has never been any demonstration that artificial sweeteners, particularly in soft drinks, have any appreciable improvement over sugar sweetened soft drinks. they just released the results of yet another similar study not that long ago. and that's just the publicly funded studies; you can assume the sweetener and soft drink companies are running these studies privately all the time trying to get some kind of marketing handle, and if they did you'd hear about it. it's not as paradoxical as one might think; it's not like you spend your day pouring soft drinks and carbohydrates down your throat as much as you can get your hands on, so altering the amount available affects your intake. in fact your hunger and thirst are under the control of a lot of things, but very definitely including your body set points for weight, blood sugar, etc. and it's not too surprising that an extra teaspoon of sugar at one part of the day will mean you intake a teaspoon less at another point; and if you replace that teaspoon with artificial sweetener, then you get that missing teaspoon somewhere else. some of the studies of artificial sweetener have quantified this effect, seeing subjects unconsciously increasing their food intake to maintain the same total caloric uptake when sugar is replaced on a double blind basis, totally unconsciously. the ugly side is that when the sugar is returned on a double blind basis, replacing the artifical sweetener, the total volume intake remains the same, and the calories go up, higher than they were to start with, completely unknown to the subject. again, it's not completely surprising that there should be an asymmetry in appetite modification, given that for a billion years or so our ancestors (back to the bacteria) were in danger of starving most of the time. so, your body doesn't like it when it's deprived of calories and tries to replace them, but when a few more are supplied, it doesn't feel the need to alter behavior to avoid them.Gzuckier (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Brain drops keep falling from my head...

A few days ago there was a Palestinian terrorist who drove a tractor into a crowd of Israelis, and this was covered on BBC News. The shocking part, to us poor innocent Americans, is that they showed somebody shoot him in the head with his brains splattering out. Is this sort of thing usual for BBC News ? StuRat (talk) 04:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall seeing that on the BBC coverage for the UK. The BBC usually edits out all the scenes that it considers unsuitable for viewing on the part of the public. I guess it's all part of the nanny state ethos that is so prevalent over here. On the other hand we have all seen - many times - the clip of JFK losing some of his brains in the Zapruder film. Perhaps that has some sort of historical interest that overrides the censor. On another tack it strikes us here in the UK as odd that gruesome scenes as you describe are shown with freedom in the US but the slightest hint of nipples, nates or nudity are censored with disproportional rigour. (nice headline btw) Richard Avery (talk) 06:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Now I'm in need of a translation for Americans...what are "nates" ? StuRat (talk) 13:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

medical term for buttocks, used for euphony. Richard Avery (talk) 13:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know whether this is still the case, but around the late 1980s I (expat American) was told that scripted television programming (i.e. not documentary or newscasts) in the UK included explicit representations of physical violence unacceptable to US audiences. For example, in a fistfight the American TV viewer would see the swing and hear the impact but not view the punch connecting, let alone the aftermath gore, which would be routine for the UK audience. I don't know whether this held for "foreign films" broadcast on network TV at that time before cable and satellite. (And btw, a "nicer headline" would have stopped after the word "falling"...!) -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I get the impression that TV is censored much more in the US than in the UK. The US seems to censor everything except bloody violence - sex is avoided at all costs, profanity is bleeped out (even in adult shows) and even T-shirt slogans are covered up with fuzziness (why is that BTW?). In the UK, particularly after the 9pm watershed, I am never surprised to see sex or bloody violence, or hear profanity in the UK. The exception would appear to be in UK news broadcasts where I have almost never seen blood and gore where it involves real people in real-life situation. I believe this is done to protect the privacy of real people and their realtives. UK news even goes as far as showing out of focus pictures or filming people's feet. Astronaut (talk) 12:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I think T-shirt slogans are blurred because of copyright issues. The T-shirt maker could argue in court that people watched the TV show because of the witty saying on the T-shirt, and that they should therefore be compensated. StuRat (talk) 13:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about the man driving a bulldozer into a bus. The footage of the man being shot was shown on BBC News, but only during the 10pm bulletin. The editor has blogged about the decision here and the BBC have responded to the complaints they received here (they say that "on reflection, we felt that the pictures featured on Wednesday's News at Ten did not strike the right editorial balance between the demands of accuracy and the potential impact on the programme's audience"). — Matt Eason ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 13:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

In the US, there is a distinction between fictional violence and real violence. In fictional violence just about anything goes (with the possible exception of child murders), whereas real violence is heavily self-censored, with murders or violent assaults rarely shown. And, of course, it also depends on the media. Much more violence is acceptable in a movie rated for adults than on TV rated for kids. I suspect, based on the comments above, that BBC News doesn't show real violence against allies (like the Israelis who were killed), but does show it aginst enemies (such as Palestinian terrorists). StuRat (talk) 12:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I would dispute StuRat's suspicion of a pro-allies bias to BBC news coverage. In this case, it strikes me as obvious that they had footage of the Palastinian's death but did not have footage of the earlier Israeli deaths because their correspondant wasn't there at that time - the editor's blog supports that view. However, the BBC does attract criticism from some quarters for a supposed bias against Israel. I really do not subscribe to that view, and find the coverage by BBC news to be as balanced as the best in he world; even if that means it does not glorify the actions of off-duty Israeli soldiers. Astronaut (talk) 15:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Why, Astronaut, do you suppose that the BBC's failure to broadcast footage of the killing and wreckage spree that preceded the shooting can be explained by the nonavailability of any such material? It's all the more likely that it was available, given that the events unfolded in broad daylight on a weekday in a populous city, in close proximity to the Israel Broadcasting Authority's headquarters, and were possibly filmed by bystanders as well. If we're into speculating, how likely is it that Israelis, public or private, would refuse to make photos available to foreign media that show a possible terror attack in progress? Even if such footage had to pass Israeli military or police censorship, the value of broadcast coverage would probably expedite that process. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The editor's blog says: "The incident happened near the BBC's bureau and our correspondent immediately ran to the scene. He caught on camera the man being shot dead." Yes, they could have sought to obtain other footage as well, but if they did it is not mentioned in the blog. It's not a bad assumption to make. Astronaut (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of anti-Israel bias in BBC news reportage (if it purports to be objective, which perhaps it does not?) generally center upon a disproportionate presence/absence of context and content in coverage and background of actions by Israeli forces vs. those of the Palestinians and related Arab bodies. The "actions of off-duty Israeli soldiers." in this incident and the recent Mercaz HaRav Yeshiva massacre, are similar if not identical to those which might be taken in such circumstances — i.e. hot pursuit of a rampaging murderer still armed and dangerous — by an off-duty policeman in one of your Western countries. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I was just pointing out that in my experience, the BBC news coverage is usually free of bias. If you feel the BBC's coverage was biased, I would be interested in your opinion on where/how the coverage was biased. Astronaut (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you judge its being usually bias-free based on your experience of comparing its coverage of this particular issue to that of other media outlets, biased or otherwise? As for me, I'll re-state as above: my being aware of allegations of bias in BBC reporting, the nature of which involves selectively withholding information that would cast Palestinians or Arabs in an unfavorable and Israelis in a favorable or sympathetic light, in the context of the ongoing internecine and cross-border conflict. While I myself have only minimal exposure to foreign news coverage, I'm personally resigned to what I consider the impossibility of those media's presenting a balanced picture in these circumstances that are overdetermined and far from zero-sum. "In war, it isn't a matter of who's right, but who's left..." -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

However you'll also find there is the opposite, allegations of bias in BBC reporting involving witholding information that would cast Israelis in an unfavourable light and Palestinians or Arabs in an unfavourable & sympathetic light. As well as allegations that the overall presentation and assumptions made, and words used are biased towards Israeli and against Palestinians and Arabs. (My personal opinion which I will not discuss any further is that the BBC is better then most American media but is far from perfect and definitely biased towards the Western view which in general favours Israel more then the Palestinians and other Arabs. One needs to watch and read other sources, e.g. Al Jazeera, that are not necessarily less biased but do provide a different context and think for yourself to get a more complete picture. I would agree with DJ that it's inherently impossible for any media to be free from bias. Some of course, e.g. Fox News, don't even seem to try. ) Nil Einne (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

If you find BBC news biased DONT watch BBC News 24.. which approaches 'north korean' like approval of all british actions.. or maybe that's what you have been watching.. Maybe having to read the news 24hrs a day gets boring, and the readers like to add a little emphasis - just for fun?87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes - it's unusual, practically exceptional. However images of dead bodies are shown on UK tv, for some reason foreign dead are acceptable to show, british dead not? (end of rant).87.102.86.73 (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC) There is usually a warning before eg "some viewers may find the following distressing.."87.102.86.73 (talk) 20:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I watched a segment on CNN last night about pilots of remote aircraft flying missions in Iraq from their computers in the US. They showed a clip of 4-5 people being blown up - killed, right in front of you - and then the guy talks about how he likes to go to Taco Bell for lunch. Talk about distasteful. They didn't even acknowledge that human beings had just been killed. Meanwhile pictures of an American soldier in shackles is preceded by a dramatic "some viewers may be disturbed by this footage" warning. Plasticup ^T/C 14:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

English accents in star wars?

Why do all the "bad guys" (those that are human) in the Star Wars movies (the empire) all speak with stilted English accents? Are they all from england? And why does Dark Vader pick up an English accent when he turns evil, as Hayden Christensen never had an English accent as Anakin? Or is Darth Vader faking an English accent (a la Madonna) to fit in? That has always bugged me. Homotlfqa83 (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Darth Vader doesn't have (or fake) an English accent, though, and Madonna was raised by parents who spoke French and Italian. You're right about the other Star Wars villains, though. I think it's to make them sound stuffy and formal to American audiences, emphasizing the staunch, militaristic feeling of the Empire. --Masamage ♫ 06:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the internal shots in the first movie were all shot at Elstree Studios in London, so they probably just used local actors. I'm not a big star wars fan though so I could be wrong.Iiidonkeyiii (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I hate to burst the bubble but English accents were obviously not used to identify the bad guys in Star Wars. To prove that I need say only two words - Alec Guiness. Likewise Ewan MacGregor, who deliberately gave young Obi-Wan English accent and speech patterns "aware that he was going to grow up to be Alec Guiness". DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

There was a while when British actors were used as the bad guys in a lot of US movies. It became a bit of a running joke, in fact - see [[29]]. I think its justb another example of the cultural stereotype where the "old empire" is always seen as being disreputable by the "new empire" (the US thinks the Brits are shady, just as the Brits thought the French were, and so on back to disparaging comments made by the Romans about the Greeks). And no, Darth Vader's accent doesn't in any way sound British, nor does it sound like he's faking one...and neither does Madonna. Grutness...wha? 12:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I heard it was because hollywood likes to give the bad guys a different accent so the audiencies can easily tell them from the good guys. At first it was non-english accents (often enemies of the US - German or Russian), but then they latched on to idea that British actors were much more available and spoke english anyway so they didn't need a voice coach, and it made it easier for the audience to understand them.

As for Star Wars, there would have been a lot of British extras, but the main characters were still played by their regular actors. I'm not sure about the putting-on of accents, but of the principle bad guys, Palpatine was played by Ian McDiarmid (British), Grand Moff Tarkin was played by Peter Cushing (British), Count Dooku was played by Christopher Lee (British), and Darth Vader was played by David Prowse (British, but voiced by American actor James Earl Jones) then by Hayden Christensen (Canadian). However, several of the good guys were also played by British actors: Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alec Guinness and Ewan McGregor) Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson), C-3PO and R2-D2 (Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker respectively). Astronaut (talk) 12:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Liam Neeson is Irish. Malcolm XIV (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think a more glaring example than starwars is Scar in the lion king. How is it that only one lion in the whole pride has an english accent, and he happens to be the bad lion? I will say that "english villains" tend to be clever and devious, which I suppose is something like a compliment. TastyCakes (talk) 16:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Americans like to think of themselves as loose, informal, cocky, Wild West gunslingers. They see sophistication and ornateness as being associated with being effeminate. They see the British as very effeminate compared to them, concerned with tea and peace rather than rustling cattle. A sophisticated enemy with a British accent is actually effeminate despite being evil—effeminate bad guys are a big thing for Americans. (It goes without saying that these visions of themselves and of others are wholly fabricated, part of a deep national mythos. Unfortunately that mythos often translates into policy—note the ridiculous notion held by a great deal of Americans that they need to have handguns in case the US government "gets too big for its britches," when it is clear that a few yokels with 9mm pistols would not have a snowball's chance in hell to overthrow a totalitarian state, and the US government has no fear of internal revolution no matter what.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe it is because (I believe they had said this on a special) that either most actors on the original Star Wars were English except for the main characters and most of it was filmed in a studio somewhere in England so that was why they used mostly English actors. In fact, though he is Scottish, Ewan McGregor's uncle played in one or more of the films, so they probably stuck with local actors from that side of the ocean to play the other roles and Darth Vader was either English and forgot to hide his accent after a while or being in those surroundings rubbed off on him, maybe like Madonna. Take that how you will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.241.20 (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't put too much stock in the location for accents. Films are filmed all over the place and don't reflect that in the accents of the actors. Actors often have very different "natural" accents than their "screen" ones. (I was particularly shocked to see a clip of Jamie Bamber talking informally off-camera. I had totally bought into his "American" accent in Battlestar Gallactica; and to see that he is actually British was horrifying, weird.) Rest assured, if they didn't want British accents, they wouldn't have had them. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Very true. British actors (with the exception of Sean Connery) can usually do pretty good imitations of foreign accents - consider the actor once regarded as the epitome of playing "upper class twit" characters, Hugh Laurie. If they hand't wanted British accents for the roles, they wouldn't have had them. Grutness...wha? 00:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

If you watch some of the original footage they filmed for the first film (God, I'm a geek), you'll hear a lot of the extras speaking with various British accents. These were dubbed over for the actual film, including Aunt Beru and the beings in the cantina. So it was definitely a choice. Incidentally, on some of that footage you can also hear Chewbacca speaking lines of dialogue, before the roars are dubbed in! 79.66.67.219 (talk) 02:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

This is entirely based on personal research (well, watching too many movies) but as far as I can tell the tendency of Hollywood to use bad guys with British accents entirely stems from Alan Rickman's performance in Die Hard. Anyone able to contradict that (with obvious exceptions of cases where the bad guys had to be Brits, like Revolutionary War movies). DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Clearly that is not the case, since Star Wars (1977) came out some time before Die Hard (1988). It dates back much further than that.

For example, if you watch Spartacus (1960), the noble, heroic gladiators and slaves all have American accents, whereas their effete, corrupt, villainous and tyrannical Roman overlords are all played with English accents. Similarly, in Ben-Hur (1959), the noble, heroic Hebrews all have American accents, whereas their effete, corrupt, villainous and tyrannical Roman overlords are all - surprise! - played with English accents. At its most ridiculous, in The Adventures of Robin Hood (1953), the noble, heroic Englishmen all have American accents (even though Robin himself is played by a Tasmanian), whereas their Norman overlords, being effete, corrupt, villainous and tyrannical, are naturally played with English accents.

What this really boils down to is the ridiculous self-aggrandising United States creation myth, specifically the "heroic rebels versus decadent imperialist overlords" schtick which is drummed into every American schoolchild from the First Grade on. In point of fact, both sides in what you laughably call the "Revolutionary War" would have spoken with pretty much the same accent, given how recently many of the participants had moved to the colonies and given that many of the Loyalists were colonials themselves. Of course, that doesn't stop Hollywood painting the British as sneering, brutish proto-Nazis... Malcolm XIV (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

i think at some level there's kind of a homophobic subtext; i don't want to make too much of that, but i don't know how else to call it; the "effete" sissy who speaks prissily. see also the german accents of lots of bad guys. Gzuckier (talk) 20:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

jet aircrafts

i need a list of top ten jet aircraft(used in defense purpose) with their speed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.11.44.213 (talk) 19:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Some names for you: Mig-31 'Foxhound', Mig-25 'Foxbat' and SR-71 Blackbird (which was a spy plane, but military - I'm not sure how strictly you're taking 'defense' to be defined). These are the fastest three that I'm aware of, all in the region of Mach 3 (although the Foxbat's structural integrity was extremely poor at such speeds). Are you including experimental aircraft such as the XB-70 Valkyrie? Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 20:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you meant top 10 by use? or by effectivness? or by speed (see above) ???87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

• 1. X-15, Mach 6.72, 354,200 feet
• 2. SR-71 Blackbird, (YF-12) Mach 3.2+ 85,000+ feet
• 3. MiG-25R Foxbat-B, Mach 3.2 123,524 feet
• 3. X-2, Mach 3.2 126,200 feet
• 4. XB-70 Valkyrie, Mach 3.1 77,350 feet
• 5. MiG-31 Foxhound, Mach 2.83 67,600 feet
• 6. MiG-25 Foxbat, (Ye-155) Mach 2.8 118,900 feet
• 7. F-15 Eagle, Mach 2.5 60,000 feet
• 7. F-111 Aardvark, Mach 2.5 60,000+ feet
• 8. X-1, Mach 2.435 90,440 feet
• 9. Su-24 Fencer, Mach 2.4 57,400 feet
• 10. Tu-144 Charger, Mach 2.35 59,055 feet
• 10. MiG-23 Flogger, Mach 2.35 60,700 feet
• 10. Su-27 Flanker, Mach 2.35 59,055 feet
• 11. F-14A Tomcat Mach 2.34 58,000+ feet
• 12. F-106 Delta Dart Mach 2.31 57,000 feet
• 13. IAI Kfir Mach 2.3 75,000 feet
• 13. English Electric Lightning Mach 2.3 60,000 feet
• 13. MiG-29 Fulcrum Mach 2.3 59,060 feet
• 13. F-107 Ultra Sabre Mach 2.3 48,000 feet
• 14. Tornado ADV Mach 2.2 69,997 feet
• 14. F-4 Phantom Mach 2.2 62,250 feet
• 14. Mirage 2000 Mach 2.2 59,055 feet
• 14. F-104 Starfighter Mach 2.2 58,000 feet
• (120,800 feet NF-104A)
• 14. B-58 Hustler Mach 2.2 64,800 feet
• 15. F-105 Thunderchief Mach 2.1 52,000 feet
• 15. A-5 Vigilante Mach 2.1 52,100 feet

24.118.228.239 (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Although as the Mach number article points out, the mach number coincides with different speeds depending on altitude and atmospheric temperature. The higher the altitude, the slower (in miles/hr) a particular mach number is. TastyCakes (talk) 15:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Geographical Details

I was trying to find out details of an area in San Bernardino County called Old Woman Mountains, I wanted to find geographical descriptions and details and a map about this place, where could I go to find this information? I also had a few other places to look up so is there a web site that gives these details about certain land areas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.241.20 (talk) 23:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You can search at the US Geological Survey's Geographic Names Information System: [30]. This will also link you to various maps which include the name. Rmhermen (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Or you may be able to find Wikipedia articles on places such as Old Woman Mountains. Just use the search box. Marco polo (talk) 01:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

July 13

Fly identification

Please identify the type of fly in this photo. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 00:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an entomologist but I looked around and am reasonably certain that it's call a Face Fly (Musca Autumnalis). There are apparently several flies that are similar in appearance to the House Fly and this is one of them. I made up my own mind about it because it's the one that looks to me to be most similar to your picture and it's also the one that's by a camel's eye, which fits the m.o. because the tendency to pester livestock eyes is how it got it's name. See for yourself whether I'm right or it's another one. I'm glad they put that site together. -LambaJan (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Where did you take the photo? Astronaut (talk) 05:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

How can I "bulletproof" my mind?

How do I lock it so no one gets in there? An intellectual island with the mental weaponry of a nuclear viper! How do I get to know everything and ALWAYS be right? Is there a CIA type school out there that teaches the mental skills necessary to adapt to this chaotic, dangerous world?--Dr. Carefree (talk) 01:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, for the first question, some people swear by these. Good luck with that. - Eron^Talk 02:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I sincerely question your carefree credentials. Vipers do not carry weapons. Nobody knows everything. Nobody is always right. If you don't want anyone in your mind then be careful about what you say so that you only let on what you intend to let on and maintain a sense of justice in evaluating the things people say to you so that you can fairly judge the merit or lack thereof in their arguments. I'm unaware of any such school but if you value your mind stay away from the US military. They don't value your mind, they value their agenda. They are the borg, not the jedi. -LambaJan (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Be like Sherlock Holmes—know what is relevant to your world, and know that well. And know what you don't know much about—everyone has blind spots, and knowing where they are counts for a lot. You'll never "always be right". We're all wrong sometimes. Being right is easy—almost everyone thinks they are right. Knowing and admitting when you are wrong, and making good on it—that's actually the hardest part. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 02:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

By "know everything" are you asking us how you can become omnipotent? Last I checked we weren't the Q Continuum... 24.76.161.28 (talk) 02:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There are people...that walk around. And they know. It radiates from thier presence. Once you meet someone like this, you'll never forget it. I aspire to achieve intellectual undark enlightenment.--Dr. Carefree (talk) 02:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

They are full of crap, and are simply lying with confidence. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Right. You don't know what they know and what they don't know. They exude charisma, confidence. That's not the same ting as knowing things. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

A Kevlar helmet? Astronaut (talk) 23:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What you request is very difficult. On the one hand, your mind might possess God's Truth, and be absolutely correct in its beliefs. On the other, you might be wrong and deluded, and people are only trying to relieve you of brainwashing you have received. If you adopt the philosophy"My mind is made up. Do not attempt to confuse me with facts" then no amount of reasoning and scientific demonstration should be able to change your beliefs. That is not a good outcome in many such cases. Edison (talk) 05:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Spend enough time on Wikipedia and you will soon know everything. That's how I did it. Plasticup ^T/C 12:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This reminds me of Socrates, particularly Plasticup's comment above. Just watch the History Channel for three years and you'll get it. Don't talk unless it's academic; even if you're of average intelligence, it'll work. ;) · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Become a religious fundamentalist. You will think you know everything and are always right. You will be totally immune from influence by logic, competing ideas or compassion. Take lessons from this guy. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Terry Pratchett creates a character called Vorbis, an ambitious, intelligent, utterly self-assured fundamentalist described as having a mind "like a steel ball" (ie nothing gets in, nothing gets out). When Vorbis actually encounters the god in whose name his every action is performed, the god (who happens to be trapped in the form of a small and rather shabby tortoise, for reasons it is not necessary to go into here), reacts with horror:

"Him! ... Kill him! ... Find something sharp! ... Push him overboard! ... Look at his mind!" -- Karenjc 18:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

first of all you have to have a researchy/skepticy kind of mindset. when somebody tells you something don't take it at face value. additionally, be curious. read everything you can. back of a cereal box at breakfast. evaluate the validity of all this evidence you have accumulated with regard to the conclusions you have reached; there are things you are absolutely sure about, things you don't have any clue about, and things in between to various degrees. don't upgrade your conclusions; if you've seen something somewhere on the internet that says something, don't put it in the same category as something which you have seen proved many times by sources usually taken as reliable and is taken as fact by 99.99% of humanity. now: when you are in a discussion don't bring up one of the maybe things as a "for sure". but when you do bring up a "for sure" thing, you will have no doubt. when bringing up something that you're not sure about or have no clue about, make it quite clear that you're not staking your reputation on it. on the other hand, don't make it a big point when you bring up something you are sure about. eventually people (including you) will realize that when you make just a flat statement about something, it is reliable. also: the best way to prevail in a discussion/argument is to be on the correct side. don't find yourself defending the undefendable or arguing something silly just to save face. if you do find yourself proved to be on the wrong side, admit it ASAP. if necessary, apologize. don't get annoyed at somebody who just taught you something, even if he/she is a sore winner. again, people (including you) will get used to you being reliable. of course, not all arguments have a factual basis at bottom; politics, religion, etc. but usually you get involved in subarguments about who did what at what date or such, and you want to be the person who can state it with authority and, if necessary, when challenged dig up the reliable source you got that from; you don't want to be the guy who's stuck with "i saw on the internet or tv or somewhere that some guy said something like this......" and not only can't back it up, isn't even 100% sure it's correct. Gzuckier (talk) 20:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

n-alarm fire

I've often heard, almost exclusively in American contexts, references to 'three-alarm' fires or the like. What exactly are the 'alarms' referred to, and what is the significance of the number that means it needs to be specified? Does it mean the number of different fire stations whose services are summoned? Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 13:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe that's literally how many times they ring the alarm at a given fire station, and measures the severity of the fire and the type of response needed, with 1 alarm being the least severe and 5 alarms being the most severe (although this might vary by location). There would be a tendency for those on the high end to require additional fire stations to respond, but it's not directly related to the number of alarms. Other factors, like how near the next fire station is to the fire and the capabilities of their own station, will also play into if other stations are called. StuRat (talk) 13:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks! :-) Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 14:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not the ringing of the alarm - have you ever heard an alarm ringing at a fire station? It's the same as an alarm at any other building, like during a fire drill at school, just one long continuous ringing. The number refers to the number and type of trucks they send, which probably come from two or more fire stations (although "two alarm" does not necessarily mean only two stations sent trucks). Here is an example from Toronto, which goes up to seven. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It varies by jurisdiction; each fire department will have its own internal definitions. A particular 'alarm' level is linked to the mobilization of a particular quantity of men and materiel to the fire site. There's a good – and readably short – answer here, it also includes historical context for the term. For the New York Fire Department, a two-alarm response includes 25 vehicles and 106 firefighters. In Washington DC (info here) a two-alarm response involves ten fire engines, four ladder trucks, assorted ancillary rescue and support vehicles, and about 110 firefighters.

Other communities (particularly smaller ones) are apt to define a smaller response for a given 'alarm' level, allowing them to more precisely allocate their resources in response to a fire. Obviously, the number of fire stations from which equipment or men are drawn is correlated with, but is not necessarily equal to, the number of 'alarms' at a fire. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

One more note—we seem to have an article on multiple-alarm fire, but it needs some work. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the wealth of information, and to TenOfAllTrades for the friendly message alerting me to the further replies. It was mostly a curiosity question, but the history was interesting to know. So, even if it's not necessarily set in stone, I get the idea. Cheers! Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 17:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

In a bit of a rush, so I just scanned through the responses. A similar question was asked a few months back. You might try a search of the archives for other responses. Dismas|^(talk) 00:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In Chicago, I understand they use the term "box" rather than "alarm." The idea is that if a highly combustible highrise building occupied by a huge number of people and which is the headquarters of several major businesses catches fire, sending one fire engine with 4 firefighters would be inadequate, The fire requirs multiple ladder trucks, multiple pumpers, multiple search and rescue teams, multiple paramedic squads, etc. In the country, is an isolated cabin catches fire, one truck and four firefighters can save the foundation and prevent the spread of the fire into a general conflagration. Common sense. In large cities, there may be pre-planned responses dictating how many engines, supervisors, etc. are sent for a fire in specified structures, such as the World Trade Center, the Sears Tower or other towering infernos. In rural areas (and some cities) "mutual response" is a strategy by which fire engines and crews from neighoring towns respond to large fires in any one town. The neighboring engines may help in fighting the fire, or they may just pull into the vacant fire station and be prepared to respond to the next fire. In the 1871 Chicago fire engines from other towns were dispatched to Chicago by express train to assist(not covered in the article). Edison (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

My understanding was that "n" meant the number of stations responding to the fire, so a 2-alarm fire means that the fire captain has called another station to send more crews, and 3-alarm means that everyone is getting involved. By my logic, one-alarm is handled by the first station, two-alarm is when a call goes out for more help; three-alarm is when the call goes out that we've got a big problem here. I'll defer to the actual example links given though. Franamax (talk) 10:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

but i will bet a silk pajama there isn't any 3-l llama Gzuckier (talk) 19:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

No IQ commercials

What is it with these commercials, and what is the most idiotic commercial around?! They're getting worse.65.173.105.27 (talk) 21:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

What commercials are you talking about, on what network in what country, and do you have a factual question about them? The reference desk is not a place for debates; that's what most of the rest of the internet is for. Algebraist 22:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

You name the network, etc. they're there. Burger King has some really idiotic ones, so does some insurance companies. I'm not trying to start a debate.65.173.105.27 (talk) 04:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I would nominate most U.S political commercials, and most commercials for medical "remedies" which do not even make claims of effectiveness, but just say where to apply the remedy, along with testimonials from persons who claim to have used the remedy with amazing effects. Edison (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I name the BBC's TV, which has no commercials at all. Will you at least admit what country you're in? Algebraist 09:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

WHOIS says the IP's from the US. But I don't see an answerable question here unless someone's done some sort of test to determine the most "idiotic commercial". Here's a google search for "dumbest commercial" - hope that helps. Perhaps if you gave us an example of a commercial you find silly, we might be able to help. Note that the purpose of adverts is to sell products, not to be clever. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I find it idiotic when commercials try to connect two unconnected statements as though they are an article. "We all want to protect our children, that's why I buy XXX soap powder".

those snickers "feasting" commercials are kind of silly, but I love them. and in fact they have raised my frequency of snickers purchases, if anyone from the company is reading this. Gzuckier (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Help!

My maroon clownfish was eating a bunch of air bubbles and now she is floating to the top and struggling to stay down! What should I do?--76.176.124.169 (talk) 23:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you burp a fish ? I'd guess that the air will pass out of one end of the fish or the other. If she's eating bubbles that come from the airator, you may need to isolate her from it somehow, say with a divider with holes too small for her to pass through. StuRat (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that “eating” bubbles isn’t the cause of this problem. Sometimes fish get gas, especially if their diet is not optimal. Try to feed the fish some brine shrimp, this often acts as a laxative for fish. Then optimize your fishes diet. --S.dedalus (talk) 05:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

July 14

Ink anti-theft things

Does anyone know how I can get one of these off of clothes? My sister bought something and they forgot to take it off- any way to remove it without going back to the store? And is there a real name for these (do we have an article on them?) 70.162.28.222 (talk) 00:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This was asked a couple months ago by someone who claimed to have bought something in another country and didn't discover the tag until they got it home. You might try searching the archives for the answer. Dismas|^(talk) 00:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's the link to the old thread. They're called benefit denial tags. Your best bet is taking it back to the store (with receipt). Or you can mess with power tools and screwdrivers and run the risk of screwing it up. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The article is at Electronic article surveillance. Security tag redirects there. My advice is go back to the store. If it's a chain store (presumably it is) then any stores in that chain will help you, providing you have a receipt. Also consider the fact that if this has happened to your sister before, she may well be a shoplifter. Neıl ☄ 13:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

battlefield 1942

I recently installed Battlefield 1942 on my computer. The game runs fine, but my mouse is unresponsive when I try to play, like I cant move it. Im running it on windows vista, if that helps. Has anyone else had this problem or know how to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.121.45 (talk) 04:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about that game specifically, but many games have an Options panel where you can select to use either the mouse or keyboard or other controls. StuRat (talk) 04:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It might be better to ask on the computing desk. --S.dedalus (talk) 05:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Make sure the mouse is compatible with the game. If it's an old PS2 one, rather than a USB one, this may be why. You may need to update your mouse drivers, also. Finally, go into the game settings and turn the mouse sensitivity up. Neıl ☄ 13:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

PS/2 or USB shouldn't matter, because both gets abstracted to a HID device by the OS anyway. Did you alt-tab out before or does it happen when you initially start the game? Can you see your normal Windows cursor? --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Rifle in picture

I was reading this article and notice that the on the left, there is some sort of rifle that I can't identify. What is it? Is it some sort of prop for the show? Perhaps it's a real rifle used by the prop people? And where can I get more information about it? I oddly like the design of it. --Blue387 (talk) 05:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if it was based on a real weapon, but considering it shot phaser beams, I'm pretty sure it was just a prop. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.49 (talk)

If I remember correctly, it did not fire phaser beams but used regular ammunition. I think it is a real firearm. --Blue387 (talk) 08:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This website might interest you - according to them, it's a Muzzelite MZ14 -- Ferkelparade π 08:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh! Sorry, I was thinking of a different episode. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Really weird blog

Can anyone give me a clue about who the author of this blog is and what he is doing ? [31]. 69.157.227.80 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably thinks he's count of St.Germain Count of St. Germain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 12:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Also see book of solomon key of solomon First key of solomon second key of solomon as well as the first and second book of adam and eve all of your other apochryphil (spelling) biblical connons, and my personal favorite book of enoch hope that helps, if these dont link anywhere, fiddle with em a bit they all have articles under some or other name much as the first link above concerning me, um, er let just say St. Germain, or the Wandering Jew—Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Any of that related to The Book of the Goetia of Solomon the King and the things mentioned there? 79.66.54.186 (talk) 17:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

yes, directly related. pretty cool stuff if you have the time and patience to perform those spells, and they can keep you alive for millenia, but i feel i should also add that this crowley version is a bit rubbish, these things need to be followed to the letter, exaclty, so no quote unquote clean up is required, just get the originals manuscripts, which can be done online, and then all those angels and demons mentioned in your weird blog OQ can be at your beck and call to serve your every desire. but, be careful what you wish for. etenal life, or to wander the earth for all eternity can be rather tiresome. Enoch for instance wandered from biblical/atlantian times through christs first comeing, through the st gerain days and is now a regular on wiki adding spots of carnel knowlege here and there, but still i cant spell lolwandering jew86.18.33.2 (talk) 20:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)wandering jew, aka Zionist aka st. germain aka enoch

Flies

How high do flies fly.--88.109.14.109 (talk) 06:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This site supports my idea that flys fly only as high as they need to. There's no reason for a fly to fly high just to get high. They're in search of food and mates. Those two things aren't found very high up. Dismas|^(talk) 08:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

As Dismas above said, flies will only fly as high as they need to, and in my experience this is usually no higher than the average height of a house. However, consider a tall apartment block or skyscraper; they fly will most likely have come in at grown level and worked it's way up, but if it goes out the window then it will have a long way down. To answer the question of "how high can flies fly" then I would say they would probably keep going upwards until they run out of energy and die, or when the atmosphere becomes too thin for they to breath (acutely flies and other insects don't breath but exchange gases through a system called vertebrate trachea), which ever comes first. Hope I've been helpful, as I plan to be around for a good long while. Myther moth (talk) 08:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume you actually meant invertebrate trachea, seeing as that's what flies, being invertebrates, have. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please see sentence structureand dont end them with a have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 16:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please to be more pleasant and not try to enforce your personal grammar rules where irrelevant. kthnx. 79.66.54.186 (talk) 17:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Now, now boys, please behave!--88.109.14.109 (talk) 17:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Assumptions assumptions... 79.66.54.186 (talk) 23:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I can think of two other factors limiting the max height a fly could attain: reduced lift due to thinner air, and freezing up due to low air temps aloft. I would expect them to run out of energy or freeze up well before they reached that height normally, but let's say one is released from a high altitude balloon all warmed up, full of energy, and properly depressurized. In that case the lack of lift due to the thin air may come into play before it freezes. StuRat (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Overflow

If everyone flushed their toilets at the same time, would the sewers explode? What would happen? Ceeping kalm (talk) 08:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nothing, a toilet flush is minor. However if it rained a lot, thats a different story. All recent sewers (last 50 years) are designed to accomodate future growth, don't take stormwater and havent reached full capacity. Older sewers are "combined" with stormwater disposal and feed into harbours or rivers generally. A long period of heavy rain causes overflow and pollution problems. Mhicaoidh (talk) 10:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Pressure varies only with hydraulic head, so flushing all the toilets at once probably wouldn't increase the sewer pressure enough to burst the pipes underground. Instead, all the pipes would drain more slowly as the "backlog" drained away. An interesting case would be a very tall apartment building - if they were the last to flush, the water would stand in the downpipe waiting to drain, the pressure head might burst the thinner drainpipe within the building (but they probably design for that); and if the apartment at the top was the last to flush, the toilets on the lower floors might get a little backflow. Water tends to go to the easiest path, it won't bother trying to burst a pipe when it can just overflow onto the bathroom floor. Franamax (talk) 10:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Which is why all buildings have a gully trap or similar device outside to vent internal or sewer overflows to the outside world rather than the lowest apartments shower or bath. Mhicaoidh (talk) 11:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This sort of thing actually happens during large sporting events. When the Super Bowl breaks for halftime, and between the sets at Wimbledon, the water pressure in major cities drops as millions of viewers simultaneously take the opportunity to relieve themselves. Plasticup ^T/C 12:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Citation needed. --LarryMac | Talk 12:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Here. Seems to be more of a sewerage issue. Fribbler (talk) 13:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll see your article and raise you an admitted "legend". --LarryMac | Talk 13:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

O.k. I fold [32]. Fribbler (talk) 13:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, not exactly the type of "pot" I wanted to win :-) --LarryMac | Talk 14:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, a bit of a bum deal. Fribbler (talk) 14:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The quality of puns on the reference desk has really "bottomed out". Plasticup ^T/C 14:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

As has the professionalism of its volunteers (see comments directly above for example). Ceeping kalm (talk) 15:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"Professional volunteers" is almost a tautology. Don't let bad puns drive you round the U-bend. Neıl ☄ 17:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In the TV series The West Point Story (TV series) there was an episode in which a cadet had said in an engineering class that the waterhammer or pressure transient from simultaneous toilet flushing could rupture the sewer. His professor said he was wrong. In the end, a practical demonstration showed he was right. Fiction, but still, an expresion of the belief. As for "modern sewers:" is there a town somewhere which has removed all the hundred year old sewers? Edison (talk) 19:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

job center

Hi, my friend once told me that if you go to the job center they have to find a job for you that is within your area of experience, and that if for example I said I was an astronaut or gallows attendant, they will be unlikely to find me a job and they'll have to put me on the doll. Is this true? If it is some suggestions of obscure jobs would be excellent as I have no desire to work. Many thanks. Myther moth (talk) 08:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It kind of depends on which country you're in, for starters. (The words "job center" and and "the dole" lead me to believe that you're probably British, but...) In any case -- and this is probably going to be the case all over the world -- if you're going to lie, there are often ways of whether what you say is true. (It is literally possible to check the identity of just about every astronaut in the world, for example, and if you don't happen to be one of them, well, so much for that.) In most cases, you would probably be expected to provide some proof of prior employment or training as an astronaut or a gallows attendant, or whatever you claim to be. I doubt any country in the world has a system where they just take your word for being the president of Paraguay and then shrug and start paying you when they can't get you that exact super-specific job. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 09:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Try telling them that you're a treacle bender and that you trained with Andy Capp. Seriously, they start off with suggesting jobs in your area of expertise but can quite quickly move on to trying to convince you that the cleaning job they have been trying to fill is the career opportunity of your lifetime. Itsmejudith (talk) 10:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's rubbish - they try to find you a job within your area of expertise, yes, but if you turn everything down because it's "not your area of expertise", then you will be asked to go on training in something else (plastering, typing, IT, join the army, whatever). Turn that down as well, and you stop receiving JSA (Job Seekers Allowance = the dole). Which is quite right, as people who refuse work for no reason and just want to leech off the state are useless parasites. Neıl ☄ 13:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I suggest that the best thing to do is take job interviews, but subtly undermine them. I knew someone who used to put Unionism and Left-Wing Politics in his interests on application forms to put off prospective employers. You could also fill in the form really badly, with a lot of mispellings, tea stains, etc. Some other suggestions to avoid getting a job:- Be VERY VERY interested in holidays and sick pay if you manage to get an interview. Try leering at the interviewer, and use subtle sexual innuendo in your answers. Dress like you slept in a gutter for the last 3 weeks. Keep a sweaty, stinky shirt to wear for interviews so they think that you have BO. Get horribly offended at an innocent comment made by the interviewer and justify it by claiming that they are "prejudiced" against you. However, being on the dole isn't that much fun, according to the people I know who are on it, and they'll end up trying to get you on training courses and so on eventually. Why not try to find a job that you enjoy (or at least can stand)? It beats living on benefits!195.27.12.230 (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It is my understanding that if they believe you deliberately failed a job interview they can stop your benefits. Quite right too. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In my very recent experience, you can only get Job Seekers Allowance for 6 months, then they'll kick you off that benefit onto something (anything) else to make the figures look better for the Department of Work and Pensions. During the first 3 months on JSA, they let me restrict my job search to one thing I was qualified to do - you still have to come into the Job Centre once every 2 weeks to sign and they expect you to bring evidence of your job search in a log book. They then have you in for an interview where they ask you what else you might be able to do and you're expected to expand your search to at least 3 job titles. At the same time they put you on weekly signing for 6 weeks and still want to see the log of your job hunting efforts each visit. After that you go back to the fortnightly signing. I was promised some help with training - but only after I'd been signing-on for 6 months and would be classed as "long-term unemployed". I never did find out if that happens because I landed a job. TBH, it's a whole lot of hassle to go through for £57 a week (compare that to the ~£200 a week you would get for a full-time job at minimum-wage and you'll see it's not going to be easy to survive long-term), but they do keep your National Insurance payments up to date for you and it made me a little more enthusiastic in looking for a job. Astronaut (talk) 15:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Royal Marriage

I wish to read about Royal Marriage however, I wish to read about the institution, inbreeding, and uspurperism, not some card game, any advice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 11:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Royal family gives some useful links to specific examples

perhaps List of family trees may also be usefull as well.

Inbreeding#Royalty_and_nobility is particularily helpful.

usurperism? we have List of usurpers. 87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to re-redirect you to the humanties page where I imagine you should get better answers..

please see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Royal Marriage.87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Identify this book

I read a book sometime back, that was written by a Japanese woman staying in USA. It was about a little girl and her extremely optimistic elder sister, and how they faced life in an alien country. The elder sister dies at the end of the book, and the title of the book was most probably something like Kiri-kiri. Can anyone give me more information about this book?? 117.194.227.50 (talk) 13:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Retirement

In the US, let's say you're eligible to retire and receive some sort of pension or retirement benefit (not a 401k). If you retire and start receiving this benefit, are you allowed to take another job? This is just a hypothetical question not a request for professional advice. If it matters the specific situation I'm interested in involves a US federal government employee in the CSRS retirement plan. ike9898 (talk) 14:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

With Social Security you can. See here. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 17:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it really depends on a lot of details about the pension. My mother gets a pension from the state government but they hire her as a contractor now and then (and pay her more than she used to make at the job). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 19:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

numberplates

When were numberplates introduced into England and when were they made compulsory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceeping kalm (talk • contribs) 15:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

According to Vehicle registration plates of the United Kingdom, "The Motor Car Act 1903, which came into force on 1 January 1904, required all motor vehicles to be entered on to the Government's vehicle register, and to carry number plates." --LarryMac | Talk 15:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles

Did The Beatles pull a PR stunt back in the sixties by suggesting that McCartney was dead and buried under Strawberry Fields? Moancical (talk) 15:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

See Paul is dead for info on the legend. Fribbler (talk) 15:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Moancical (talk) 15:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

commercial airliner designs

why... do american (and european?) airliners all have low wing designs, and russian airliners apparently all have high wing? Gzuckier (talk) 15:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I once flew on a Tupolev Tu-154 (though it might have been a Tupolev Tu-134 or an Ilyushin Il-86) to Bulgaria and it was of a low-wing design. Astronaut (talk) 16:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty high-wing American/European airliners. See BAe 146, Bombardier Dash 8, ATR 72 and so on. Equally, there are low-wing Russian designs: Tupolev Tu-334, Tupolev Tu-134, Tupolev Tu-154 and so on (from other manufacturers, too: Ilyushin Il-114).

She's as sweet as Tupolev honey... sorry. anyway, what's the difference between the two designs? i imagine on a little Cessna vs a piper, it's a matter of pilot visibility up or down, but on an airliner? Gzuckier (talk) 19:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

A high wing is more stable. A low wing allows easier mounting of the undercarriage (lighter, less costly), better survival in a forced landing (wings help absorb the impact) and full headroom through the fuselage (a high wing means you have to duck under the mounting). That's what I gather anyway. Here's some reading: [33][34]. Franamax (talk) 20:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Low wing is easier on maintenence, high wing reduces the chance of engine damage due to loose articles on the ground and allows the fuselage to come closer to the ground. The latter is why you'll see a lot of military cargo with high-wing. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Low-wing design has a high ground effect on landing, which means it's less accurate and more complicated to land, which means an increased minimum runway length. But it also consolidates the two most stressed components of the plane: the wings and the landing gear. Instead of 2 points to strengthen there's now 1 point, which means a lighter, easier to design and manufacture plane. High-wing design has a lower landing runway length requirement so it has better STOL performance, but the landing gear stowing system means there'll be a hole in the fuselage, or have a bump outside the fuselage which increases the drag. If the engine is attached below the wing a high-wing design also reduces damage to the engine by surface rocks and things like that, something quite important for planes operating on improvised runways. A high-wing plane also has a lower fuselage floor, which makes load and unloading cargo much easier than low-wing planes. --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

location of Winfield Alberta vs Winfield, British Columbia, Canada

When I clicked on the link for information on Winfield Alberta (52 57'52.57'N 114 25' 45.72" W) it comes up with information about Winfield, BC (50 01' 45.28N 119 24' 16.58"W) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.193.82.252 (talk) 15:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Where did you see a link for Winfield, AB? We don't seem to have an article, the Winfield disambiguation page only shows the BC entry as far as Canadian locations. It is listed on Hamlets_of_Alberta, but as a redlink. I checked the list of articles on the "what links here" for Winfield, BC and didn't see anything that looked incorrect. And a site-specific Google search didn't really show anything. if there's a bad link somewhere, we'd like to fix it, but you'll have to give us a starting point. --LarryMac | Talk 16:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I fixed the coordinates in the template in the Winfield, British Columbia article, which were actually the coordinates for Winfield, Alberta (about which, as you said, we don't have an article). Deor (talk) 16:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Reversi

Hello. What is the largest number of possible moves on anyone's turn at anytime for Reversi? For example, dark has four legal moves on its first turn. Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 18:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, anyone can make only one move per turn. If you talk about move possibilities, I'd say sixteen. (not so sure about this, but all situations I've come up with have this number of possibilities). Admiral Norton ^(talk) 00:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Learn different accents online

Does anyone know where I can go on the internet to learn how to speak English in different accents? I'm American and I would like to know how to speak with a British accent or an Austrialian one.... --Anthonygiroux (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

How about this? Fribbler (talk) 19:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You might also want to use an online text-to-voice synthesizer which handles different accents, like this one which features US, UK, and Indian English accents: [35]. StuRat (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Listen to BBC radio programmes on line.There are many different accents there.hotclaws 21:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The Magneto (band) of today

What is Magneto doing this day and age? Ericthebrainiac (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

According to the article... Nothing since 1996. Dismas|^(talk) 20:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

dc lawnmower motors

having taken apart two different makes of electric lawnmower over the weekend, 110 volt plugin not rechargable; both are DC with a big bridge rectifier mounted on the motor. why in the world?Gzuckier (talk) 20:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

(why not the science desk?)

What did you expect?

AC asynchronous (ie electromagnetic stator and rotor with slip rings for stator and communtator for rotor) : probably a bit buzzy/hummy?

AC synchronous (induction) - in a word NO. (not a good idea can run backwards)?

? why does the DC one have a rectifier??? in case you plug in the battery the wrong way?

I give up; what's the answer? 87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

History of restaurant term "cover"

Hi there

I know a "cover" in restaurant terminology refers to a single place setting or person.

However, I am keen to ascertain the history of this term - I have seen a reference to it in "Dubrovsky" by Alexander Pushkin (published circa 1830) so I know it dates from at least then.

Hope you can help and thanks for your time!

Cheers Anne —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.31.81 (talk) 22:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like it might be related to the OED's meaning 7, 'The utensils laid for each person's use at table; the plate, napkin, knife, fork, spoon, etc.' They have quotes back to 1612 for that. Algebraist 22:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If you hadn't mentioned the use in Russian, I would simply have assumed that the English term is borrowed from the French "couvert". But perhaps the Russian term also comes from the French? Itsmejudith (talk) 22:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This is definitely not used in Russian. I think they says something along the lines of занятие. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 23:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the OP means that the term was translated from the presumably-original Russian to English, the term being discussed being used in the latter. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 23:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This article: The Server's Lexicon: Preliminary Inquiries into Current Restaurant Jargon, Michael Adams,American Speech, Vol. 73, No. 1(Spring, 1998), pp. 57-83, Published by: Duke University Press says it comes from the French "couvert" per Judiths answer. Websters says the same. Mhicaoidh (talk) 00:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Wounded bluebird

Greetings from the center of Hurricane Bertha. Apparently my internet connection still works, so I'll pose you a question. I just picked up a wounded bluebird. Its wings flap fine, but the poor thing can't fly. He is in a little bucket right now so that nothing gets at him. What can/should I do with it? Plasticup ^T/C 23:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep it alive as long as you can, then when things are in order again there, take it to a vet.65.173.105.27 (talk) 00:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If it's the Eastern bluebird (which is native to Florida, so at least close to you in Bermuda), they eat bugs, so go collect a few from the garden when the weather clears. They also eat fruit, especially berries, so give it some fruit, too. You might want to put the bird in something more secure than a bucket, in case it tries to fly and ends up flopping around the house. Perhaps an upside-down laundry basket might work, if the mesh is tight enough (you might need to stuff towels in the handle openings). I'm sure it would also appreciate a bowl of water for drinking and bathing. Put some newspapers under it to make clean-up easier. StuRat (talk) 03:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Moral Question

You are driving on a roadway, and you find a perfectly preserved UFO. It is HEAVILY ARMED (With powerful "assault/demolition phaser-like" weapons, same with the "disruptor" weapons, powerful assault/demolition energy and particle weapons and antimatter weapons, weapons replication tech to create more antimatter weapons), well shielded from any attack from all Earth weapons, some alien weapons, can go across the galaxy in seconds, like you see in Star Trek or Star Wars, has excellent living quarters, a highly advanced and powerful computer core, a regenerative power source, so it never runs out of power at all, is "telepathically" (bio-linked really) set to operate for you only.

What would you do with it? Conquer Earth? Enforce peace on a race of beings that cannot comprehend peace at all? Other? This is NOT a debate at all. Just a moral question65.173.105.27 (talk) 23:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. --antilived^{T | C | G} 00:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

From my extensive experience watching The Twilight Zone, I'd say "run far away". This ship is tuned specifically for you? There's obviously a catch there somewhere. --Trovatore (talk) 00:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Would you step in it and claim the ship or, as this person said, run like hell?65.173.105.27 (talk) 00:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

So, you're having moral doubts about the new toy you picked up while driving on Route 50, ain't that right, 65? I'd suggest you package it nicely and give it over to U.S. Navy and, of course, address it to "Admiral Norton". Just kidding! What you do in this situation has to do with who you are. If you're honest, you'd give it up and send it to the authorities or just bury it somewhere down the road. If you tend to exploit things or use the for your own interest, you'd take it and have fun. It's an example of a social dilemma. Of course, since I already own this thingy, I'm on Mars right now and there are no roadways up here, so no dilemma for me. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 00:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If you're honest you'll give it to the authorities???? Please say you're joking. I'd trust myself with it before I'd entrust it to the State. (Any State.) --Trovatore (talk) 00:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Have it shipped to Cheyenne Mountain - but first write your name on the moon. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

But don't drop the cutting tool, right? --Trovatore (talk) 00:59, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

July 15

accents

so, if american girls find french, english, and pretty much any accent attractive in a guy, do girls in other countries find american accents sexy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.121.45 (talk) 02:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well if we're going with stereotypes with a bit of truth to them, then how could they; Americans are (mostly) monolingual.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Rockport

Is Rockport generally considered as an upscale brand in North America? 99.240.177.206 (talk) 04:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)