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

June 24

Petraeus Still Commander of CENTCOM?

Will General David Petraeus still remain as the commander of CENTCOM if he is confirmed at Gen. Stanely McChrystal's replacement? If so, will he be working two jobs at once? Acceptable (talk) 00:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

This source indicates that he will be replaced as commander of CENTCOM if he is confirmed as commanding officer in Afghanistan. Marco polo (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Then wouldn't this mean that Petraeus is being demoted? Acceptable (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Not strictly; his rank shouldn't change (so technically, no demotion). However, it might be perceived as a less-prestigious posting (an unofficial demotion). I suspect that "less prestigious" is offset considerably by "personally requested by the President" and "being a favorite of the President, likely to get another top billing in the future". — Lomn 21:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, but per Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chairman is considered the high-ranking military officer in the US military, while the Vice-Chairman is considered the second-highest ranking officer. If the Chairman was to be "demoted" to Vice-Chairman, then his rank does change per the article even though his rank in terms of like General, Colonel, Captain, etc... does not change. Applying that to this situation, wouldn't this mean that Patraeus is also being reduced to a lower "rank"? Acceptable (talk) 23:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

What's happening to McChrystal, BTW? Will they give him another post, or is he now required to retire, or even just flat separated from the military? If he's retiring, does he get to do so as a four-star? --Trovatore (talk) 23:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I've heard no mention of a court-martial, so I guess he can retire in the usual fashion. --Tango (talk) 05:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

4-star Generals require a specific post to retain their job, AFAIK. There are no "4 star generals at large". So its likely he's out of a job, as far as the Army is concerned. Also, according to General (United States), even if he stays in the Army, he loses a star, "Four-star grades go hand-in-hand with the positions of office they are linked to, so these ranks are temporary. Officers may only achieve four-star grade if they are appointed to positions of office that require the officer to hold such a rank.[9] Their rank expires with the expiration of their term of office, which is usually set by statute.[9]" He's not going to be destitute, however, there are lots of job prospects for a former 4-star general, even one who was "defrocked" in the manner that McChrystal was. There are private military schools that need comandants, think tanks that need consultants, that sort of thing. --Jayron32 05:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

He will also get a very good pension, I imagine. --Tango (talk) 05:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Might Gen. McChrystal be placed in charge of Camp Swampy until he decides to actually retire from active military service? Edison (talk) 05:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Streaming world cup NZ vs Paraguay

Hi all,

The (stupid stupid stupid!) country I'm living in isn't showing this match on TV (I think). Does anyone know where and how I can watch it for free? Thanks heaps!

Adam —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaadddaaammm (talk • contribs) 07:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI the country is Germany. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 07:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You could try this site, not sure what restrictions it has though. Let me know if it works for you, I'd be interested. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 07:53, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Nope, Germany's not on their list: "2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™ video content on the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) streaming video portal may only be viewed in certain EBU territories as noted below:

Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia And Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Kazakstan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Turkey and Ukraine.

As we cannot confirm that you are accessing this service from within these territories we regret that you will be unable to view the content." Aaadddaaammm (talk) 09:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

If your in Germany it's either on ZDF or ZDF infokanal, a live stream should be on the ZDF Mediathek 194.39.218.10 (talk) 09:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Sweet! Thanks 194.39.218.10! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 09:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You can also try CBC's live streams. I'm not sure if they are blocked outside of Canada, but I know their radio content isn't. Cbc.ca -> Sports -> Fifa World Cup. Vranak (talk) 17:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Car badging – Mazda, Kia, Ford

Could anyone familiar with the subject look at the talk page Talk:Badge engineering#Ford Fiesta? and clarify the car models correlation? --CiaPan (talk) 09:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Please explain a little more. I don't understand. Do you want someone to identify the cars? I'm not sure. Chevymontecarlo 16:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

FIFA jackets

Why non-playing players, who sit on the bench, wear jackets with FIFA caption during the current WC? Can't they wear for example their national team colors? 83.31.91.87 (talk) 16:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure they're wearing their kit under the FIFA tops. As to why, see brand and marketing. Zunaid 18:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Does FIFA need to advert itself? 83.31.99.51 (talk) 19:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I believe it's to help the officials make sure there is only the correct number of players on the pitch. I seem to remember that during a recent cricket international match, one side played with 12 on the pitch for part of an over. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It's more likely to be to indicate who is a legal substitute and entitled to enter the game. If the eligible players have been pre-screened and identified beforehand, there is no need to do another check before they enter the game. Too many men on the pitch is an extremely rare occurrence in football, but accidentally letting an ineligible player on the pitch has happened a number of times. Measures that make it less likely are understandable, particularly in a tournament as important as the World Cup. --Xuxl (talk) 20:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with TammyMoet - as an amateur footballer of many-years it is extremely irritating when subs hang around in their kits without a jacket over their top. It is very difficult to tell whether or not they are 'on' or not when they're stood by the sidelines and you're playing a ball from one side of the pitch to the other. It will certainly help make it clearer who is currently 'playing' and who isn't. I suppose it'd help in terms of legal subs but doubt that having a jacket is necessarily any type of worthwhile security (if you can fool the officials into switching a registered sub to another non-registered sub I doubt you'll struggle to get hold of the necessary jacket). ny156uk (talk) 14:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Sheikh Khalifa bin Sultan Al Nahyan

Under the picture of Sheikh Khalifa bin Sultan Al Nahyan it says "Liverpool Football Club Owner". Is this true? No press reports link them to a takeover. And nothing has been mentioned by the club as well. Is this information accurate? Has the takeover been done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.246.189.43 (talk) 16:18, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I have removed mention from the article (which you seem to be one of the ones adding). Until a reliable source is reporting it, it should not be in the article. In future, discuss it in the article talk page or use WP:BLP/N and if no source is provide and you have doubts about the information in a BLP feel free to remove it on sight Nil Einne (talk) 17:15, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Criminal Record and a Job

Talking to a friend of mine who was applying for a job in an airport, customer service, when she was filling out the online application she was faced with a couple of routine questions such as are you over 18? Do you speak English? Are you available for a face to face interview? Then the big one do you have a criminal record? She answered yes to all and on the the next page of the online application she was told that she wasn't eleigible for the job. I can only assume it was because of her conviction. So how can it be fair that her application for this job can not be processed for a motoring conviction she got 22 years ago. At no time was she able to explain her conviction is this standard practice for people with convicions? Thanks Mo ainm~Talk 16:21, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

A lot will depend on what country your friend is in. In the UK there are provisions for some convictions to become "spent" (Rehabilitation of Offenders Act), but there are exceptions to this. Also, in the UK a traffic offence may not count as a criminal conviction. Your friend should consult her trade union, a Citizens' Advice Bureau or similar, or an employment rights service. DuncanHill (talk) 16:28, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It was in Ireland, what I find strange is that just by answering yes she couldn't even proceed with the application, I told her she should have lied I would have for a very minor offence 20 odd years ago. Mo ainm~Talk 16:32, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You haven't told us what the "motoring conviction" was, exactly — was she cited for speeding 10 kph over the limit, or did she run down 20 pedestrians at a zebra crossing whilst drunk? — but if it was indeed minor then she needs to determine whether the offence counts as a "crime", and whether the police would indeed answer "yes" if asked whether she has a "criminal record". Can she call the local police and ask to see her own criminal record? Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It was driving without a licence or insurance in her brothers car. Mo ainm~Talk 16:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

As a motoring offence, that's one of the more serious, and would likely not be an "exempted" crime. (The harsh side of me says, "If you don't want the time, don't do the crime!") ╟─TreasuryTag►UK EYES ONLY─╢ 17:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

The principle behind having convictions become spent after a certain amount of time is that people who have already done the time shouldn't have the crime held against them indefinitely. --Tango (talk) 17:15, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I did know that, actually... ╟─TreasuryTag►secretariat─╢ 17:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

That probably does qualify as a criminal offence. Did she have to go to court? What was the sentence? I've been looking for an Irish equivalent to the British Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and can't find out - there is a proposed bill for one in 2007, which suggests there isn't one currently (the bill doesn't seem to have passed). In the UK, the question will always say "Do you have any criminal convictions that have not been spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974?" - does the question on this website say anything similar? --Tango (talk) 17:14, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It is odd that they would reject someone just because they have a criminal record. Usually they would want to know what the offence was and when it happened. The security requirements to work in an airport are very high, for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean the mere existence of a criminal record should disqualify you. It is possible she was ineligible for some other reason - lacking the necessary qualifications or something. I would suggest she ask the employer for clarification. --Tango (talk) 17:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It was certainly the conviction here is a link to the questions she was asked click next and you will see them, she replied yes to them all, I just did it myself and answered no to the conviction and I was allowed to procede to the next step where if I answer yes it won't allow me. It then states that "Yours answers to the questions listed suggest that you don’t currently meet the current requirements necessary for consideration." "These criteria are in accordance with the National Civil Aviation Programme 2004 and are required of all staff working in Terminal Buildings." Mo ainm~Talk 17:22, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You are right, they are automatically rejecting anyone with any criminal convictions. That's odd... Once again, I suggest contacting the employer. --Tango (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Even more oddly, Google can't find anything called "National Civil Aviation Programme 2004". [1] (the results shown there are without the quotes, since it couldn't find any results with the quotes). --Tango (talk) 18:15, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It is NOT possible that they checked her criminal record while applying online. 83.31.91.87 (talk) 18:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course not. You don't even have to give your name by this point in the application process. --Tango (talk) 18:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Most motoring offenses in the USA (at least) are not "Criminal" offenses - they are civil. That being the case, one should not mention them when asked about strictly criminal stuff. Stealing a car is criminal - driving one at 80mph in a 70 limit isn't. SteveBaker (talk) 23:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

In the UK, people occasionally come up with the phrase "civil offence", which is pseudo-legal nonsense. Do you have a reference for its being meaningful in the US? --ColinFine (talk) 23:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Here is Michigan's Traffic and Nontraffic Civil Infraction Matters Another site with further explanation (in the What is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony? section: [2] 75.41.110.200 (talk) 03:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The OP says this was driving without a license or insurance, which I think probably is a criminal offence in most countries. --Tango (talk) 23:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand this might seem harsh, but my understanding is that places like airports and maybe embassies have a zero tolerance policy regarding that sort of thing because of their special jurisdiction. it's not like just going for a job on the high street. This is a requirement regardless whether you're in customer service or customs security, or a toilet cleaner, you're employed by the airport so you have to pass the checks, it's like a "security clearance".. I don't have a reference for that, that's just my understanding. Vespine (talk) 04:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's true, but it the mere existence of a criminal record doesn't usually preclude you getting security clearance. Here is the FAQ on MI5's careers website saying you can get a job with MI5 even with criminal convictions: [3]. --Tango (talk) 05:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

cooking chicken

If you want chicken breast cubes, is it better to cube the chicken before cooking, or to cook the chicken and then cube it? Googlemeister (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It will be faster if you cube then cook, as cooking generally goes faster with a higher surface area to mass ratio. Whether that's "better" is more subjective, though for my money, it's absolutely better. Cubed first means more tasty brown bits on the surface of the meat. — Lomn 21:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

The only advantage of cubing afterwards I can imagine is that the chicken might be easier to cut. Handling uncooked chicken isn't pleasant to some, so there'd be less of that. Vimescarrot (talk) 22:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Good point. I usually put the chicken in the freezer for a bit before I cube it to aid the process. — Lomn 23:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It depends on what you want. Cooking cubes of raw chicken will result in pieces of cooked meat that only very vaguely resemble cubes; the corners will all be rounded but not necessarily in a uniform way, and the whole piece will have shrunk, but again, not necessarily in a uniform way. This may not bother you if all you want is something roughly cubical. Cutting cubes from a larger piece of cooked chicken will give you nice uniform cubes of cooked chicken, but they may not be as caramelised and tasty as smaller pieces cooked separately. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Cooking a chicken whole will give juicier and more tasty meat, as the skin and fat will saturate the meat with flavour. Chicken cubes would mainly consist of the meat alone, which can have a tendency to go dry and with little taste. --Saddhiyama (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Well I decided to conduct an experiment with a blind study (I knew which were which so it wasn't double blind). I asked my 2 house guests which they preferred and they both liked the pre-cooked cutting better then the post cooked. It also cooked like 3x faster. Good enough for me. Googlemeister (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

How many mountain bikes could I fit in a Citroen Berlingo van?

Just seen one of these vans in the newspaper at a good price, but not sure if it is long or high enough inside. I need to carry two fully assembled adult mountain bikes, ready to ride. Help please? :-) 86.143.231.213 (talk) 23:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

This brochure gives the internal dimensions of various Berlingo models. Bikes can also be carried on an external frame. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) I found another site] with a review that gives the dimensions, and I should be okay. Still, if anyone reading this owns a Berlingo then please comment! 86.143.231.213 (talk) 01:44, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

If you take them apart then you will be able to fit many more in. --Ouro (blah blah) 06:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

You could also put the bikes on the roof. There you would be able to get at least 2 on the roof I should think. Thule is a company that produces racks for vehicle roofs. Chevymontecarlo - alt 12:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Is it roofs or rooves? :D Chevymontecarlo 16:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Either, apparently, though I've never heard anyone say, or seen anyone write, "rooves" - as noted, it's uncommon and usually considered incorrect. Vimescarrot (talk) 16:28, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I was taught (in northern UK many years ago) that the plural was rooves ( - the older British plural), but this is one of the few bits of my education that I rejected almost immediately in favour of the more modern roofs. Is it true that rooves is still the standard plural in New Zealand? Dbfirs 16:54, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

No idea, but you might want to ask at WP:RD/L. Chevymontecarlo 14:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Loaf - loaves. Calf - calves. Elf - elves. Perhaps Vimescarrot would like to declare all these English plurals that follow the pattern of -f changing to -ves as "considered incorrect" while at this noble crusade to demolish the consensus of English dictionaries and centuries of English speakers. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

"consensus of English dictionaries" - maybe British English ones. American Heritage, Merriam-Webster and Random House all say roofs, with no mention of rooves at all. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 19:12, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The questioner Chevymontecarlo is from Loughborough, in the UK. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:53, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The difference between loaf, roof and elf is that I've never seen roof pluralised as rooves, and indeed was taught that was wrong (by the sound of it, I'm not the only person in the UK to have been taught that either). Besides, I was only quoting the Wiktionary article. Vimescarrot (talk) 18:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm from the North of England, and I say both 'roof' and 'rooves', though, admittedly, a distinction is upheld depending on when I am saying it and to whom. Vimescarrot's original answer of 'either [is correct]' still stands in my opinion. The questioner's whereabouts are irrelevant, as (s)he did not ask which was appropriate in his/her particular town, nor did he/she specify any place, in fact. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 18:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Hoofs and hooves... Bus stop (talk) 18:57, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Spoofs and spooves? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:27, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Beef and beeves? Reef and reeves? Fief and fieves? Fife and fives? Going off in various huvves? Tough and tuvves? Rough and ruvves? Enuvves! -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I was also taught to use "rooves" (in south east UK) and winced when I saw that some proles had named their house "The Roofs". 92.28.242.168 (talk) 21:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Jim and Keanu see nothing wrong with reeves and nor do their many relatives. This film plot summary has the text "While rescuing the crew of the ship "Julliete", wrecked on the reeves by the First Mate Mathias Widgeon, Loxi falls in love.... @KägeTorä a questioner's whereabouts are relevant if the answer depends on their location (as in the question What time is it?). Telling a person in England that omissions in upstart US dictionaries should constrict their mother tongue is an impertinence comparable to misrepresenting what Wikitionary really says about rooves. Only a thief would steal the word rooves that is good enough for Dickens, Shakespeare and the BBC[4] - STOP THIEVES! Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:19, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Thing is, Cuddlyable, Vimescarrot didn't say that. He said both 'roof' and 'rooves' were OK. He then went onto say that he had never heard 'rooves', and that it was usually considered incorrect. Not one of these statements even implies that 'rooves' is actually incorrect, whether in the US or here. By the way, Vimescarrot is a Brit, too. Furthermore, not only are Dickens and Shakespeare written in a form of English that has since been updated many a time, <soapbox> one look at anything of what the BBC writes on the internet makes me ashamed to have it regarded as our national flagship news agency, with spelling errors, grammatical errors, and pure laziness on the part of editors who seem to think that merely changing a few words in a sentence without making sure the rest fits with it to make it make any sense is good enough for us. They could certainly learn a thing or two from us </soapbox>. Oh, and, sorry, I forgot the 'small' tags in my last post. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 03:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Volume

Cuddlyable found a good link giving dimensions for varieties of the Berlingo. I noticed, however, that a lot of car websites and magazines give the loading space dimensions in form of volume (cubic meters). Why? It is less information than giving height, width, and depth. To me it's a useless number, as I'd be more interested in being able to load bulky objects than as many egg cartons as possible. Anyone know why this number (volume) is considered useful? ---

It is certainly less useful than height, width, and depth. It is a "quick comparison" value, that is sometimes useful when looking at different cars. It allows you to rule some out quickly, and then look at the further details in depth for a few. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Have fitted 3 mountain bikes into a Berlingo Multispace. The new Berlingo seems to be a bit bigger. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:48, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

June 25

Ordering portraits of Thai kings

Can you please help? I am interested in purchasing pictures of all the 9 kings of Thailand, are you able to provide me with a quote? Kings 1 through to king 9 (I need all of them) approx size around 900mm x 900

1. Your quote can be for images so long as the images can be made very big (good Pixels for hanging on wall)

2. or paintings approx size around 900mm x 900

3. or prints

4. or posters

Please get back to me ASAP

Kind Regards

Anthony Cox (email address removed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.142.45 (talk) 00:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Anthony, you could enquire here http://www.oilpaintings2order.com/. This is a Thai business where you can commission any oil painting you like. Or just google something like thai+king+portrait for other sites. 86.143.231.213 (talk) 02:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, we're an encyclopedia, not an art dealer. Dismas|^(talk) 02:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I removed your email address to eliminate the possibility of spam to you. Feel free to check back here periodically to view updated answers to your question.24.150.18.30 (talk) 02:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

You're probably better off asking elsewhere. Wikipedia isn't the best place for this, but you may find some good links. Chevymontecarlo - alt 12:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

There are some pictures in the article List of Thai Monarchs. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I'm rubbish at art, but will happily produce the pictures for you for, say, £430,000. Deal? --Dweller (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Health Fructose

Hi I suffer from Fructose Malabsorbtion (Basically this means that I cannot eat anything where the fructose level is higher than the glucose level) eg most fruits, onions, wheat, honey etc. I just need to know whether the fructose level is higher than the glucose level in Turmeric. Are you able to help?

Thanks Ian

I'm sorry we can't give medical advice.--178.167.218.35 (talk) 14:16, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

We can't answer medical questions but I think you may be misunderstanding your dietary needs...and that means that you REALLY need to talk to a qualified medical professional about your diet.

Surely it is not the case that glucose has to be higher than fructose in every individual ingredient of the food you eat? That makes zero sense - most foods contain a mixture of all sorts of ingredients - some of which are high in fructose and others which are high in glucose - your body isn't going to attempt to digest each ingredient individually! It can only be that averaged over a particular meal the glucose level must exceed the fructose. Otherwise there would be almost no foods that you could tolerate. You certainly shouldn't take dietary advice from me, or anyone else here - but if you think about this logically, if the only requirement were that glucose must exceed fructose then eating a couple of spoonfuls of glucose with a piece of fruit would covers that dietary balance requirement and they wouldn't be telling you to avoid fruit - but instead to take a couple of these handy glucose pills with each meal! Since (I presume) they aren't telling you that - you must therefore have misunderstood the advice you've been given. That's a potentially serious matter - and you really, really need to go back to your doctor and get this clarified.

As to your particular question here, it's probably impossible to know the relative amounts of fructose and glucose in turmeric (I very much doubt anyone has analysed it that carefully) - but since it's a spice and probably constitute way less than 1% of the meal that contains it, unless you're planning on eating a delicious bowl of pure Tumeric for lunch (please don't!), it's unlikely that the answer matters to you. What matters is the average balance in the total meal - of which normal amounts of tumeric is an utterly negligable contributor.

Since you do seem to have a deep misunderstanding of how you need to eat to remain healthy - I strongly recommend you talk to your doctor about this - and possibly to a medically qualified dietician who can prepare diet plans for you and explain to you how 'trace ingredients' like Tumeric will affect you. Above all, don't take health advice from random people on the Internet (like me, for example!).

SteveBaker (talk) 14:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Good advice. Fructose malabsorption is worth a look. Turmeric (or its primary ingredient, curcumin) does seem to have a relationship to fructose issues (for example, it slows down the conversion of sorbitol to fructose in the body.) But, yeah, talk to your doctor -- it sounds like you've gotten some misinformation or at least are confused baout the information you've gotten. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 17:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

What exactly is a Gendarmerie?

Ok I've been reading hte wikipedia article but it's not very good and I still don't understand what a Gendarmerie is. Basically, how do they differ in equipment nad role from a normal police force? Thanks!--178.167.218.35 (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Per the definition in the lede, gendarmerie are a military body charged with police duties, as contrasted with standard civilian police forces. The definition does not concern itself with a distinction in equipment or role from standard police (as noted in the definition, the role is the same). That said, individual countries may draw a distinction, but conceptually none exists. Note that in the US the Posse Comitatus Act effectively prohibits a gendarmerie except for the U.S. Coast Guard. — Lomn 14:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes I read that but what is the difference between military and civilian? What's the difference then in role and equipment between the French Gendarmerie an d French national police?--178.167.218.35 (talk) 14:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The difference between military and civilian control of the police is where the authority rests. The US has decided that civilian authority over the military means that the military shouldn't be enforcing civilian law. There was a recent case, for example, where an Army officer in Alabama was disciplined for providing police services at the request of local law enforcement after a mass shooting left civilian personnel undermanned.[5] It was absolutely a humanitarian gesture, but in the US, The Military Does Not Act As Police (the above linked Posse Comitatus Act explains why). Many other democracies have decided that a balance can be struck, and thus you get (among others) the French Gendarmerie Nationale. In some places, it's a convenient fiction to suggest the rule of law, much as how you see "democratic republic" occasionally affixed to some unlikely countries. As for specifics of how France divides up their policing responsibilities, see National Gendarmerie and National Police (France). — Lomn 14:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

That National Police article was useful, thanks, it had a link to [6] which pretty much explained what I was looking for.--178.167.215.72 (talk) 15:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The national police force of Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, in French is la Gendarmerie Royale du Canada. As the gendarmerie article notes, they are not considered "military." --- OtherDave (talk) 18:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The Republican Guard, which is the part of the Gendarmerie responsible for Paris, provides ceremonial guards, military bands and drill displays in a similar way to the Brigade of Guards in London. They have in the past been sent abroad for combat duty, most recently in the First Indochina War. The Gendarmerie Mobile provide specialised riot squads, although the Police Nationale have a branch with a similar role called the CRS. Alansplodge (talk) 23:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

In Italy, you have the civilian polizia and the military carabinieri (I think the word means soldiers armed with carbines). They do, as far as I can tell, exactly the same thing. Sometimes wind up stepping on each other's toes; I remember one story of a dispute between two parties, where one called the polizia and the other called the carabinieri.

Now, I'm not necessarily saying this is a bad thing. I'm all for competition, and not so keen on unified state authority. Maybe this would be a good discordian model to copy. But I doubt that was the original idea. --Trovatore (talk) 19:57, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course the name may have different meanings in different countries. In Poland, for example, Żandarmeria Wojskowa (Military Gendarmerie) carries out policing duties only within the Armed Forces, like the Military Police Corps in the U.S., and doesn't interfere with the civilian Policja. — Kpalion^(talk) 13:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Kissing

Why do people kiss? What is the evolutionary/reproductive advantage in kissing? What is its origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.149.7 (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I assume that you've already read Kiss#Nature and history of the kiss and Kiss#Biology and evolution? ╟─TreasuryTag►ballotbox─╢ 17:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

It certainly helps develop and sustain close personal relationships, which may prove profitable. Dogs like to hunt in packs, and humans may often do better in collaboration with one another. Kissing is certainly a token of goodwill and fellowship. It helps build trust, caring, and so on. Vranak (talk) 17:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Should I make a layover in Atlanta or Paris?

I'm flying from Salt Lake City to Dusseldorf and I have the choice of making a connecting flight in Atlanta or Paris. I'm somewhat familiar with how Hartsfield Airport works but I've never been to Charles de Gaulle, so I'm wondering if any of these two airports has an advantage over the other (especially since I'll be dealing with customs in either Paris or Dusseldorf, depending on where I make my connection). Thanks. 71.213.57.196 (talk) 19:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Would you potentially have to do customs in both Charles de Gaulle and Dusseldorf? If so, Atlanta would be the logical option for me, as the trip from Salt Lake City would not require customs in Atlanta. All else being equal, I'd go for France, just because I'm a curious person and have never been to France. Falconus^{p t c} 22:44, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Flying via Paris would involve a shorter flying time, because a routing from SLC to Germany would be much longer (in miles or km) via ATL. If you fly through Paris, you will pass through immigration in Paris, and you and your carry-on bag will pass through customs, but unless you have something to declare, you will probably not actually be stopped for a check. (The "nothing to declare" walkway operates on an honor system, with occasional spot checks if you look suspicious.) You will not have to go through immigration again in Düsseldorf, but your checked bag will need to pass through customs there. Unlike the United States, the Schengen area countries do not require you to collect your checked bags at point of entry to go through customs before checking them again. So your bag will be checked straight through to Düsseldorf. (Again if you have nothing to declare, you will probably just sail through without a stop.) In my experience, immigration in Paris are no big deal. They may just glance at your passport, hand it back to you, and wave you through. They are much less picky (at least with US passport holders who are white and look more or less professional) than US Immigration and Customs. That said, in my experience, ATL is a more efficient airport than CDG. Even though there is more volume at ATL, it moves more smoothly, and it is easier to move around the airport from one gate to another. My last flight from CDG involved checking in at the main terminal, then a longish walk to a bus station, then a wait for a bus, then a bus ride to another terminal, a wait there, then a second bus from the second terminal to the actual plane, which was parked out on the asphalt with a mobile stairway leading to the cabin. If you are transfering at CDG, you might want to make sure that both flights will be in the same terminal or be sure to have a couple of hours between flights. Marco polo (talk) 00:48, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I've never been to Atlanta but have travelled many times in/out of Charles De Gaulle. If your flight from Salt Lake City arrives at CDG Terminal 2 but your flight to Dusseldorf leaves from CDG Terminal 1, the two terminals are about a mile apart. However, the terminals are connected by a shuttle train, the CDGVAL, which takes 8 minutes and is a big improvement on the old shuttle bus. The Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport article lists which airline uses which terminal. The airport's official site should be able to help your further. Astronaut (talk) 01:16, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Atlanta is somewhat simpler to find your way around, but CDG is a much more impressive architecture. It's a wash. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 01:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Wonderful! This is exactly the type of information I was seeking. Kudos to you guys! And yes, I do agree U.S. customs are very thorough (LAX was a nightmare). Looks like I'll be choosing Atlanta just because this is my first time venturing outside the country on my own and I want to make things a little easier. As an added benefit, I have an hour more to make my connection in Atlanta than I would in Paris. Again, many thanks! 71.213.57.196 (talk) 02:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

One other consideration: French Air Traffic Controllers, Airport Staff, etc, etc, not infrequently go on strike, resulting in the cancellation of flights passing through France, and indeed Heikki Kovalainen had this very week to drive 900 miles overnight to get to the European Grand Prix in Valencia in time for Friday morning practice because of such a strike. You would be wise to monitor the news for possible impending events of this nature, and might consider the Atlanta option in the light of this. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 10:41, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Dog breed identification

I saw someone with a dog on a leash here in Vienna, and it kinda looked like a big bad wolf. It was a large dog, with a long coat and a color like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MountainCur.jpg. Its paws where white and really large, and he had light-colored eyes and a mean look on its face. Now that I'm reading what I wrote it kinda sounds like trolling, but it really isn't, I was just trying to be funny. Thanks in advance! Rimush (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

How big? How long? How much like that one? I think that coat color is called brindle, but it's less distinct on long-haired dogs (the article has an example). I suggest it might have been a lurcher, see the third image on that page (the dog called "Bubbles"). Or (perhaps too obvious) a husky? The first image in Alaskan Husky seems like the dog you describe, unless the parameters (size, paw size, coat length) are not extreme enough. 213.122.5.82 (talk) 20:20, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Or perhaps a malamute; they can get pretty big and both look and sound pretty wolf-ish. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The lurcher and the Alaskan Husky look skinny, this dog was rather heavy-set. And I don't think it was a malamute or a Siberian Husky, I know what those look like. It had a bigger head, and it was also taller and longer than a Siberian Husky - it also had a longer coat, but not too long. It didn't look like a wolf in the husky sense, it looked like a wolf in that it looked like a wild animal, not like a normal dog. Rimush (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

To rule out the obvious enormous dog, Irish Wolfhound? 213.122.5.82 (talk) 21:56, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Too skinny, and "my" dog might not be that tall, but close. It was a really unusual dog, I haven't seen one like it before. Rimush (talk) 22:04, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

What was the snout like - long, short, droopy? A huge stocky dog is the english mastiff, which can be long-haired and scary-looking. 213.122.5.82 (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

This picture - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mastif_angielski_pregowany_768.jpg - comes close, but I think it was some sort of cross between a mastiff and something else, because it didn't have the typical snout/face. Rimush (talk) 22:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Checking out other kinds of mastiff, I found Anatolian Shepherd Dog, which has a more wolfish snout. The one in the second picture has an ominous glint in its eye, and "might not yet be full size". Getting towards skinnier dogs again, though. I think I'll stop guessing now in case a dog expert comes along and tells you exactly what it was... 213.122.5.82 (talk) 22:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I looked at that one too, also looks similar (except the color is off). Anyway, thanks for your efforts :D Rimush (talk) 22:28, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Although only you know exactly what the animal you saw looked like, have you considered the possibility that it was actually a wolf? Although in most (all?) jurisdictions it is illegal to own and keep pure-bred wolves as if they were pet dogs (which are, of course, domesticated wolves), in some it is legal to keep wolf-dog crosses if one has the necessary paperwork declaring the animal's (mixed) descent, and these papers are sometimes, shall we say, mis-issued.

An acquaintance who runs a zoo in the UK and is a carnivore expert has related how he met a visitor from Canada in, I think, Plymouth (Devon, UK) walking on a lead what he immediately recognised as a wolf. In conversation, the owner admitted to him that the animal was indeed a pure wolf for which he had obtained "wolf dog" papers in some way. Although an individual wolf can be tamed (my acquaintance said), it will be comfortable only with its owner (who must function as its pack leader), uncomfortable though controllable (by its owner) amongst other people, and will ignore "other" dogs.

NB: our article on Domestication is, in my opinion, misleading in suggesting that the words 'domesticating' and 'taming' are synonyms: I would contend that the former implies physical and mental modification of a population through captive breeding and artificial selection, and the latter only the training of an individual, normally wild, animal to associate with humans. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:17, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I did consider that it might be a wolf, although it looked a bit stocky for a wolf (maybe they overfed it), even if only because it looked like a wild animal that just now came out of the woods. Rimush (talk) 10:11, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Dutch Shepherd Dog? See the image here too. Oda Mari (talk) 15:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I think it was indeed a Dutch Shepherd, and a big fat one at that :P Rimush (talk) 19:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

You could refer your question to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs.—Wavelength (talk) 16:01, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

June 26

Genealogy

Hi, I've searched for months and I'm stick. Is there a way to connect a person to another person??????? Example - I've traced my tree back Isaac Robinson (1768-1833). I AM VERY SURE that there is a connection with the following:- Christopher Robinson/Priest/died for Treason in 1598, Henry Robinson/Bishop/(1553-1616), John Robinson/Mayflower organizer/(1575-1625). I can't understand where they came from OR went to. Thanks for any advice you can give me. Once again, Thank You, Cathy Robinson Fitzpatrick.Limeycat (talk) 14:11, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

There are websites that will help you do this. Search "genealogy" on Google. Ancestry.com is one that's widely advertised, but I don't know what it's like. Exploding Boy (talk) 14:25, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Some websites like that are free, but many make you pay a subscription. With these paid sites you can access certain records available online. Ancestry.com is a paid site, I think. There's usually a monthly subscription to use sites like that, although as I've said already there are free ones out there. I have no idea what any of them are like, as I've never used them. Chevymontecarlo 14:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm puzzled how you can be VERY SURE that there is a connection to two people who died well over a century before the earliest ancestor you've traced, unless you've got some documents that establish the relationship. --ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree. It might be just a coincidence. Chevymontecarlo - alt 09:08, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree, the OP is doing it backwards. You find evidence, then you work out what you can be sure of. You don't start from a position of being sure of something and try to justify it. Robinson is a very common name, so you need far more than just the name to even suspect a close relationship. --Tango (talk) 13:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

no moon ?? new moon?

Why do we call a night without moon a new moon day? Shouldn't it be called no moon day? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myownid420 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Have you read our new moon article? It discusses the origin of the phrase. However, "new moon day" is a phrase that I don't think has much common use. — Lomn 17:32, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

It should be noted, however, that during a new moon, the moon itself is in the sky almost entirely during the "daytime". A new moon should rise at about 6:00 AM and set at about 6:00 PM (with variances due to local time zones). This is because of the geometry involved in the phases of the moon. I agree, however, that the phrase itself is not in common use. --Jayron32 17:38, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

My grandmother used to turn round three times when she saw a new moon. Kittybrewster ☎ 19:26, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Have they unscrewed her yet?--SigmundColin (talk) 22:00, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The ref desk has just sunk to a new low. Talk about unscrewing one's grandmother. I blush at the very idea! -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:57, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

What else would you expect from Elsie? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:01, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Schema for doing as much quality work as possible

I have a lot of deskwork and paperwork that will take weeks or months to do. I'd like to get through it as soon as possible. It is not routine, so I've got to stay alert and motivated as well. I am not an employee so can work how and when I like.

What would be the best scheme for doing the greatest amount of quality work? Working non-stop would rapidly lead to tireness and loss of motivation, so clearly work needs to be alternated with breaks. What routine should there be for breaks, and what should I do within those breaks? Would taking one or more days off each week pay back in greater efficiency on the other days? Thanks 92.15.5.103 (talk) 20:12, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Everything depends on your lifestyle, actually. Do you prefer working earlier in the day or later? Are you an early bird? Do you have a family? Will there be factors which will hinder you periodically?

For me, I'm an early riser, and even though I work from home and can do it when I please, I endeavour to get up early (of my own accord - even before 7 am) because I prefer to start early than to work late into the night. When I have to deal with large amounts of work to a deadline that's fairly loose but still impending, I try to divide the stuff into fairly equal larger chunks, and afterwards break these up to get the idea of the daily workload I need to complete. Then, in the beginning, I usually try to do the daily workload +10/20% extra if possible, to have an edge for the upcoming parts of the work in case I stumble upon unforeseen difficulties. I try to plan in a small break every hour (like five minutes to brew fresh tea, a sandwich) and larger breaks every three hours (a walk, a larger meal). You have to work out practically what's best for you. Just here to help. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I like to get up early as well, and for breaks I take about 15 minutes every hour. I go cycling, read the paper or catch up on podcast episodes. I think that taking maybe half a day off a week as well as the weekend would be a good plan, but it's up to you. Chevymontecarlo - alt 09:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

"Half a day off a week as well as the weekend"!!!! That's hardly working. 92.28.242.168 (talk) 21:49, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

A trick they seem to teach in every school/college/&c is to take a short break about once an hour whilst working for a long time, apparently it helps to maintain concentration. As well, Bucky had some interesting ideas about sleeping for a few minutes whenever he felt tired, or once every six hours, apparently managing to get by on two hours a day, leaving twentytwo for his work. 80.47.203.9 (talk) 17:15, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

On a Tim Russert interview show several years ago, Phil Rizzuto commented that Joe DiMaggio used to occasionally take what Phil called a "power nap" in a corner of the dugout. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:50, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm asking about the best stategy for working solidly for many weeks or months, not just a couple of days here and there. 92.15.1.65 (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, which is why it is especially important that you take regular breaks, and give yourself time off. That will make the work you do higher quality, and you'll have less of a tendency to slow down during your work sessions. If you need to work solidly for weeks or months, you need regular days off to maintain that. Honestly, taking a few minutes off every hour, and a couple of days off a week, will lead to more work done in the long run. As will ensuring you get enough sleep. Motivation is much easier if you decide beforehand (and stick to) a set amount of work (maybe 45-50 minutes) followed by a set break (10-15 minutes). If you try to just work straight through for days on end, you will burn out and produce very little work for the time you're investing. It is inefficient to avoid time off. 86.164.57.20 (talk) 15:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thats mostly repeating what the OP said in the 2nd paragraph. 92.29.119.46 (talk) 21:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Children's book

Looking for a childrens book I had as a child in the 1960s. Was about a boy with hair made up of/or colours of the rainbow. I think it had some pop ups. Poss titles I have tried are boy with the rainbow hair/rainbow boy - no luck. Writing from UK81.157.87.26 (talk) 20:44, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Struwwelpeter. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:19, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Bicycling up a hill

So, I'd love to commute to work on a bicycle. After all, I only live three miles from work, which would be a pretty simple ride. Problem is, I live on top of a hill. My question is threefold:

• Where can I look to find the specific grades of streets in Cincinnati, Ohio, USA? I tried some googling, but my google-fu proved inadequate to the purpose
• At what grade would we consider a street to be (a)a brisk bit of exercise (b) pretty darn tough (c) stupid to try to bicycle
• How much difference would it make if I bought an electric bicycle? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:12, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Easy answer: Just try it once! How hard it is depends very much on how fast you go and how good your bicycle is. For me, 15% is about where it stops being fun. I'm fbf, and have two rather decent bikes. A good indicator for me is hearth rate...up to 150 bpm im ok, 160 is uncomfortable, and at 165 I drop off the bike. Any good E-Bike will make the hill essentially irrelevant, but it will also reduce the training effect. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 23:25, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm doubtful of that. I've seen people on electric bikes having to pedal furiously to drag the heavy bike up a hill. Going uphill is going to exhaust the batteries pretty quick. 92.29.114.87 (talk) 10:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• • (ec) Don't know offhand.
  • For me, it starts to get noticeably difficult at maybe 7% or so, but I can do that for miles if I want to, which I often do. I can pull off 20% for very short distances, maybe in the hundreds of yards at most.
  • Don't get an electric bike. That's just cheating; might as well drive. Well, not quite; I suppose it's gentler on the planet than a car. But it doesn't do you any more good. --Trovatore (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

If you feel that you're beginning to slow down whilst climbing the hill, even when you're in the lowest gear and pedalling hard, then the hill's too steep! I think an electric bike is good in a city environment, for example after a green light to give you a burst of speed to get you started. Using the electric motor all the time is pointless though. Chevymontecarlo - alt 09:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

If you feel that you're slowing down, it's too steep? What kind of lazy advice is that? If it doesn't slow you down, it's not a hill. If you can climb it faster than about 5 mph (on a sustained basis), go look for a steeper hill.

Climbing is the soul of cycling, and it's supposed to be hard. --Trovatore (talk) 09:18, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Re electric bikes: I was thinking about a Pedelec which augments pedalling - the engine does not take over. Modern ones in Europe are barely recognisable as such - they are useful bicycles to begin with. If that makes you cycle, it's better than commuting by car. Wether augmented or not, exercise in fresh air is so much better than sitting in a tin can ;-). But yes, nearly every 3 mile distance is also reasonable to commute with a plain bicycle. As for "the soul of bicycling" - if you cycle to get somewhere, as opposed to cycling for the fun of it, issues like breath and sweat do play a certain role... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:48, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I used to work at a startup about eight miles from my home (but not much elevation change), and I would bike in trying to maintain a moving average of 16 mph (stretch goal; managed it sometimes — this was on a mountain bike as I hadn't bought my cyclo-cross at that time). I took a change of clothes in my backpack. It did take about half an hour to cool down enough to really focus on my work. --Trovatore (talk) 09:53, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, besides which: The original poster says he lives on a hill. So the climbing part would be going home; presumably he can be as sweaty as he likes when he gets there. --Trovatore (talk) 10:01, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I used to get around San Francisco by bicycle. As you probably know, it is a hilly city. My strategy was to use a topographic map and plan routes that avoided steep grades up hills. San Francisco is built on a grid, so this often involved taking a street that ascended a flank of the hill rather than ascending directly to the summit. At some point, often a little past the summit, I would turn uphill perpendicularly to ascend across another flank of the hill. Eventually, using this method, you reach a point where the hill levels out and you can make a direct approach to the summit without ascending too steeply. Another suggestion would be to get a mountain bike with very low gears. If you are bicycling in a hilly area, whether on a mountain bike or a road bike, you definitely need to know how to shift down to deal with uphills. Marco polo (talk) 01:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

If the exercise enthusiasts are quite finished, I’d like to thank the original poster for his decision to find an alternative to automotive travel. As such, an electric bike is entirely appropriate and the views of those who cannot conceive of a bicycle as simply a means of transportation may be ignored. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

And I'm sure we'd all like to thank DOR for her interjection :P 86.164.57.20 (talk) 22:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Electric bikes are a waste of money, do not buy one. They are heavier so more effort to pedal up hill, even if assisted. Riding an ordinary bike will soon make you fit enough not to need or want an electric bike. Electric bikes have problems with the batteries needing replacing after a while. You can get off and walk uphill, which is what I do, but using a low gear will work too. I prefer hub gears. 92.15.1.65 (talk) 13:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

This site mashes up google maps and a topographic map. --Sean 16:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Sean! Using that, assuming I'm reading it correctly, I can see that the hill is probably too steep for me at my current fitness level, or at any fitness level I'm likely to reach in the foreseeable future, so if I want to be environmentally friendlier, a non-motor-assisted bicycle is probably out. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

If you choose a low enough gear, then you can get up almost any hill with the same effort as going along the flat, although slowly. Riding the bike will soon make you fit. Electric bikes still require peddling uphill, so you are not any better off. 92.24.188.76 (talk) 19:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments, but I am afraid I find it difficult to believe that bicycling up a steep hill takes the same amount of effort as bicycling on flat road, or that an electric bike takes more effort than a non-electric one. I hate to doubt you, but those ideas seem so contrary to what my own experiences and reason tell me that I'm afraid I am not able to believe you without a good source that backs you up. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 20:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I suggest buying borrowing or hiring a bike and trying it. You could do it just one day a week, for example, to work your way into it. You says its downhill to work - that suggests that you will be able to freewheel all or most of the way there. You can use the bike for other trips also - you may find it liberating. I enjoy cycling in the countryside, but you may live in a different situation. It is true that cycling up a hill in low gear requires no more effort than cycling up the flat - but you move very slowly. You would have to do exactly the same thing with an electric bike, but you've got the much greater weight of the electric bike as well. I tend to get off my bike and walk up very steep hills. You will soon get more fit - possibly something you will not expect if you are not acustomed to exercise. 92.24.183.139 (talk) 10:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

[unindent] New set of questions: are you already in Cincinnati? And if not, are you very familiar with the city? Neighborhoods such as Hartwell (wow, what a messy article!) are far flatter than Clifton. Another thing you must consider is the paving material — if I remember rightly, there are some brick streets in the city, and steeply sloping brick streets are significantly harder to ride than steeply sloping asphalt streets; when I tried riding around in Freedom, Pennsylvania (northwest of Pittsburgh), I found it far easier to walk and push my bicycle, due to the uneven state of the bricks. Nyttend (talk) 17:36, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the bit about choosing a low enough gear is true: if you're going up a decently steep hill but have a granny gear, you can move with very little effort. The catch is that you're going to be moving extremely slowly; if you don't have too far to go, you might be able to move faster by walking and pushing your bicycle than you could by pedalling in granny gear. Nyttend (talk) 17:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

"I can see that the hill is probably too steep for me at my current fitness level, or at any fitness level I'm likely to reach in the foreseeable future" The easiest and most pleasant way to raise your fitness level is to get on a bike. A virtuous circle. In any case you were not aware of low gears or just getting off and wal;king up hills. 92.29.114.87 (talk) 10:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

June 27

Gundam video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFh4ZeTThtM

Gundam 00 opening 4: Anyone would want to tell me why this video was flipped and is there a way to flip the video back to normal after I download it? I haven't done the latter yet but the video quality is really nice. 64.75.158.194 (talk) 00:22, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Presumably you noticed that one of the comments of the video claimed they have to flip the video or it gets removed. No idea if that's true, or why that would make the video less likely to be removed, but that's the claim. Comet Tuttle (talk) 03:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Copyright laws are very iffy things. I assume that flipping the video upside down lends some "creativity" to the video that lends it some legal property or another, though I am not sure what. You could turn your monitor upside down when you watch it. ^Avicenna_sis @ 07:49, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The video is flipped left/right not up/down. Watch it in a mirror. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

While this is not legal advice and I'm not a lawyer, the chance simply flipping the video would do anything about the copyright status is close to none barring additional claims (for example if you are claiming the flipped version is better or proves that the creators are working with the devil or whatever and use a short portion to demonstrate this then you could potentially make a fair use claim). The reason why it may benefit here is I'm guessing Youtube or others have automatic copyvio detecting tools which aren't yet designed to detect such videos. As an example a few days ago I did a search for the controversial US non goal (can't remember why since I have a recording), most of the ones seemed deleted but I hit upon one which had been recorded off a TV or monitor with a camera. The quality was shit but at a random guess this probably was one of the reasons I could see it, it couldn't be automatically detected. Nil Einne (talk) 10:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Copyright is such a problem, isn't it? But if that is so, why are there so many videos of opening and ending scenes, and even entire episodes, of various anime shows all over Youtube? They don't seem to be affected by copyright in any way. Also, I can't watch this video on a mirror all the time (mostly because I don't have a mirror the size of my monitor). Is there some program that can flip flash videos around while playing them? 64.75.158.193 (talk) 10:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Youtube generally only uses the big guns for shows and music that the copyright holder is actively chasing them about. If the copyright holder does little to defend their copyright, either because they don't want to or are unaware, and nobody else reports the violation, Youtube doesn't really care. So this means that, in practice, if you look up a show that isn't currently a source of income for someone, because it isn't on air or out on DVD or whatever, chances are you'll find it. Whereas if someone is looking to release it on DVD, they will generally look it up and chase the hosted versions down. Anime is a bit weird because the Japanese model for making money from it is a bit different to the American and European models: the money isn't in selling the actual show, but in selling associated merchandise and toys. This makes it not as worthwhile chasing down pirate copies of the show itself. And short clips are usually left up, because they aren't a way for people to watch a show outside profitable streams, and can serve as viral marketing. Particularly credit sequences. 86.164.57.20 (talk) 22:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Article/Short Composition Wanted By Today

27 June 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.3.7 (talk) 07:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC) I want a short article on the topic- "Importance Of Adult Education" by today in 150 words, as i have to submit it tomorrow. It should be of school standard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.3.7 (talk) 07:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our policy here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. ^Avicenna_sis @ 07:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Search Wikipedia. There are many articles on here, and there's probably articles about Adult education. Chevymontecarlo - alt 09:09, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Adult education. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll start for you.

There are plenty of people who don't study when they are young and instead transparently try and get others to do their home work for them at the last minute without even offering any payment and even though the header clearly warns them they can expect no such help. While far from a perfect solution, adult education can help teach such people to function independently and help them better their lives when they begin to realise the mistakes of their youth as they encounter their many limitations in adulthood. Clearly the benefits aren't just to the individual as the people who use adult education may becomes productive members of society instead of relying on welfare or crime to support them.

Nil Einne (talk) 10:50, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The above is just 30 words short of the target. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Please help me find

It was an animated show about a boy and his St. Bernard dog, the dog was abused and pulled a cart, it was a dutch show, the boy at obe stage lost his ability to speak, this was due to trauma he had experiences. The boy was an orphan. This show was aired in south africa in the early 90's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.16.154 (talk) 11:12, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

You might want to ask at WP:RD/E. Chevymontecarlo 16:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps A Dog of Flanders. Rmhermen (talk) 23:21, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

This one? Oda Mari (talk) 15:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Cheren

http://pokebeach.com/news/0610/black-white-character-cheren.jpg

Where does the name Cheren come from? The only things I could find were a village in Eritrea (which is now named Keren, anyway) and Cherenkov radiation, neither of which seems to fit.

Also, is Cheren male or female? Pokébeach outright says that Cheren is female, but when I looked at their forums, it seems that people can't decide. --75.25.103.109 (talk) 11:18, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Subsidies and discrimination

In some countries, many actually, there are laws against discrimination based on age. However, in the same countries, you also get subsidies or tax breaks, for hiring young people. Crazy, isn't it?--Quest09 (talk) 12:50, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what question you are asking. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is crazy. As crazy as many other regulations. Mr.K. (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

No, it is rational. The reasons that employers are reluctant to employ very young or very old workers are different. Politicians may use laws and/or financial incentives to improve either case. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:23, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

In more details: Laws against discrimination exist to correct a social imbalance between two groups of people. Such laws come in two types: laws that prevent a type of action (sort of "negative" laws) and laws that require a type of action ("positive" laws, like affirmative action). The first is to prevent present or future discrimination, the second is to correct the social/political/economic imbalances created by past discrimination. These are not, as some conservative-minded people will have you believe, incompatable ideas. One might say "if we can't discriminate by age at all, then we can't give benefits to people based on age". The other point of view is "if people of certain ages have been denied access to avenues of power, then removing those barriers doesn't magically give them access. We also need to temporarily provide easier routes to power until such time as there is no statistical difference between people based on age". The same is true for any discrimination based on any other trait. --Jayron32 22:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

In regard to affirmative action and such, one former manager of mine said, "There's no law requiring you to hire an idiot." In short, regardless of race, they still have to be able to do the job. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

That is the standard argument for affirmative action, but it doesn't make sense to take affirmative action in favour of young people. They can't have been discriminated against in the past since they've only just entered the world of work. --Tango (talk) 22:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

That sounds more like a European situation, where oldsters have tended to be favored, hanging onto their jobs, theoretically keeping younger ones out of the market. In America, it's the opposite situation, i.e. they want to dump oldies and hire younger and "more innovative" (and particularly cheaper) labor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:48, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

@Tango. I think they can. A class of people may have been discriminated against, albeit they had different faces. Kittybrewster ☎ 22:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

They would have to demonstrate that companies tend to favor older workers when it comes to hiring practices. Seems like that would be hard to do. Certainly in the U.S., companies are much more interested in hiring them younger. But maybe it's the opposite in Europe? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:54, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

You can't take affirmative action in favour of different people that now occupy a previously discriminated against class. That's just creates an inequality in the opposite direction, it doesn't remove inequality. --Tango (talk) 23:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

If that's the case, then it doesn't need affirmative action (which is a short term intervention to correct an inequality that has resulted from past discrimination), it needs enforcement of anti-discrimination legislation. --Tango (talk) 23:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

[7] may provide some clues as to some of the issues and why governments tend to feel high youth unemployement is a problem. Bear in mind that quite a few European countries may have high minimum wages and/or many union agreements preventing very low wages being offered to youth so any direct financial benefit may be small. Also when we refer to youth here people usually think about 25 or so and under. I'm a bit surprised if American companies really prefer a fairly or completely inexperienced 22 year old to an experienced 35 year old with okay references/employement history if their wages are similar but I don't know how things are in the US.

In any case, while there may be some age discrimination component I suspect other factors also play a big role so enforcing anti-discrimination legislation won't be that effective. In NZ there's a related thing were companies may reject someone for 'no NZ experience' many feel that these claims are often just as much an excuse for discriminating against Asian immigrants but there's of course nothing illegal about rejecting someone for no NZ experience, I don't know whether you can reject someone if the experience is say in India but accept someone with experience in the UK but it may be possible if you can argue that the job market in the UK is far closer to what you expect. And of course proving discrimination is difficult anyway, it's commonly claimed that companies in Europe as well as here in NZ and also I think Australia that companies will discriminate against people with a non European sounding name and there have even been some tests where identical CVs we sent in but with a different name which seemed to show this in action.

A perhaps key issue is that I suspect from the governments POV they believe they are improving opportunities for all by helping companies to grow, people who can make important contibutions in the future including start businesses of their own get off their feet, better directing the work force (e.g. those with experience etc to go to jobs more fitting their skills rather then taking up jobs which less experience people could do if the company weren't so relucant to hire them) etc etc rather then damaging the prospects of older workers (by which I mean people in say 35-55 range) by offering incentives for hiring youth. Growing the pie as politicians like to say. Note whether these actually work is besides my point which isn't to argue in favour or against such policies. There are other alternatives (e.g. the UK appearently has incentives to hire the long term unemployed whatever the age).

Nil Einne (talk) 09:54, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

If there are benefits paid to the employer as an incentive to selectively hire young people, while at the same time there are laws against selectively hiring young people, that would indeed seem to be crazy, and to be incitement to commit a crime. I suppose there are no such benefits in countries with the anti-ageism law... or are there? 213.122.14.1 (talk) 10:11, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Dragoon Mountains of Arizona

Where did the Dragoon Mountains get their name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zilchll (talk • contribs) 14:01, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article on the Dragoon Mountains does not say, but there is likely some connection to the Dragoons, a type of early-modern military unit that was a hybrid of an infantry and a cavalry unit. --Jayron32 14:06, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Any tree?

I'm asking this question to the natives of New York: Can you see a tree there? --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 15:37, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

You don't need to be in New York (I assume you mean New York City) to see the trees there. Go to Google Maps and use the Satellite view. You can see many trees. Also, see Central Park. --- Medical geneticist (talk) 15:45, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Just look at the article on New York City. There are trees in the very first picture on the page. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. However, I thought I knew, but now I know that rose trees never grow, in New York City. --M@rēino 16:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Ginko biloba

I've emailed the NYC Parks Dept with no response -- I've noticed that many institutions of higher learning in NYC possess Ginko biloba trees on the street by the main entrance (Pace University, Columbia University (Morningside), Fashion Institute of Technology, Yeshiva University. Could anyone comment on this finding? I've seen Ginkos around Manhattan as well (3rd Ave) but I wonder if they were planted in clusters for some education-related significance. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:05, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

They are very interesting from a taxonomic point of view, though I suppose you already know that. A school might like to have one just because they're so interesting. (I've been to several other colleges that seem to have a token Ginko in prominent locations.) Staecker (talk) 22:36, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

[OR] When I lived in Cambridge I got to know trees around the city, and on the Downing Site there was a building with a ginkgo trained in espalier, all round the windows. I was just looking for it on Google street view, but I've been the length of Tennis Court Road and I can't find it. --ColinFine (talk) 20:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

• Several cities cultivate Ginkgo trees because they are extremely hardy under city conditions. I suspect it's hardiness, and not a symbolic association with education, that explains their prevalence. (Unfortunately, the best source that I can find right now glosses over the advantages and focuses on their main drawback -- their rancid seed pods.[8])--M@rēino 16:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

pie-baking

When I was a youth in the 40's, my mother used to bake pies called "TOO-chays" (don't know how it was spelled), a custard-like pie (no upper crust), usually with red or black rasberries or cherries, depending on season. She had a recipe, but of course it's lost. Would anyone recognize that pie-type, and even better, would anyone have a recipe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjofrochester (talk • contribs) 20:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, the only pie I can think of which is pronounced like that is Tourtière, which in Quebec French or New England French (a dialect I grew up hearing) is pronounced something like "TOOCH-ee-aye". However a Tourtière is usually a meat pie, not a fruit pie. It is not inconceivable that the term is applied to other types of pies which arrived via other cultures. What is the background or cultural context of the Pie or your mother who made it? --Jayron32 22:28, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Custard tart

An open-topped pie is properly called a "tart"...perhaps in this case a "custard tart". Custard tarts topped with fruit are a reasonably common thing - and as you can see from the photo at right, they can be topped with seasonal berries. SteveBaker (talk) 02:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

What country/region was your mother from? Falconus^{p t c} 04:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

June 28

Global Warming

Have Bjørn Lomborg, Penn Jillette, and Teller heard about Al Gore's documentary film An Inconvenient Truth? Have they heard about his book An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It? Have they watched the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth? Have they read the book An Inconvenient Truth? Do they own a copy of a DVD of the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth? Do they own a copy of the book An Inconvenient Truth?

If so, then what do they think about them? What do they think about the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth? What do they think about the book An Inconvenient Truth? How did they react and respond to them? If not, then what would they think about them? What would they think about the documentary film An Inconvenient Truth? What would they think about the book An Inconvenient Truth? How would they react and respond to them?

Do they know why Al Gore made the documentary film and wrote the book? What do they think about why Al Gore made the documentary film and wrote the book? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.60.151 (talk) 09:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Do they know what the title means? Do they know why Al Gore called and decided to call them by the title? What do they think about the title? What do they think about what the title means? What do they think about why Al Gore called and decided to call them by the title?

Do they know that Al Gore is an environmentalist? What do they think about him? How much did Penn Jillette and Teller vote for Al Gore in the 1992, 1996, and 2000 United States presidential elections? Who did they vote for in the 2000 United States presidential election, George Bush or Al Gore? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.60.151 (talk) 7:39 pm, Today (UTC+12)

Season 1, episode 13 of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! deals specifically with environmentalism. And while it was broadcast three years before An Inconvenient Truth was released, I have no doubt that Penn & Teller are aware of Al Gore and the film/book. I'd say that over 95% of the educated public of the US is familiar with or at least aware of the film. As for their political views, both Penn and Teller are libertarians. Dismas|^(talk) 08:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, in episode 6 of season 6 "Penn and Teller look at the climate change debate and question Al Gore's motives."[9] So yes, they know about Al Gore and feel that he is an "Egregiously Pushy Asshole". Dismas|^(talk) 08:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Bjørn Lomborg is clearly well aware of Al Gore and his documentary; this article notes a debate at which Lomborg challenged Gore directly. Warofdreams talk 08:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the same question from the science desk, please don't cross post particularly when it is mostly OT anyway. In addition either sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ or don't remove the signature when others add it Nil Einne (talk) 08:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Will I get a criminal record??

Hi , Ive never been pulled up by the police for any infraction before and am scared/curious as to what happens now.

I was recently stopped By police with a group of friends for drinking in public in an alcohol free zone. I am 17 and had never encountered the police before and was scared/in shock. At first I gave a fake name - then realised that that was a stupid idea and quickly told the truth.

A) Does any of This go on a Criminal Record? B) If it does , does it go on a juvenille record and not be held against me once I am over 18? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.78.92.3 (talk) 08:56, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

It probably depends on where in the world you are. In Germany, I'm fairly certain that nothing as trivial as that will go onto a permanent criminal record. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 11:50, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I would be almost certain it's the same story in the UK as well. Chevymontecarlo - alt 12:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Chevy. It would only go on a record in UK if you had been prosecuted and found guilty by a court. Kittybrewster ☎ 12:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Not so, cautions, reprimands and final warnings will go on record in the UK, and juvenile offences are still part of your record after you turn 18 in the UK. The OP should consult a lawyer if he is concerned. DuncanHill (talk) 12:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't seem to be the whole story. First according to Police caution, cautions aren't issued to people 17 years and under so if the OP were in the UK then it seems if our article is reliable they can't have been issued a 'caution' as such so cautions are irrelevant. According to Reprimand (UK law), reprimands do go on the record but only stay past 18 if they were issued more recently then 5 years ago in which case they stay for 5 years. This would mean the reprimand should be gone by the time they turn 23. I'm not entirely sure if it stays on the record as such after 5 years, but I presume it's almost never disclosed (if it is then the situation is rather odd compared to that for adults which seem unlikely to me).

While cautions aren't particularly relevant, according to our article supported by [10] while they do stay on the record permanently, depending on the type of caution you don't have to disclose you've had a caution if asked either from the moment one is issued or 3 months later unless it's a case when the post (i.e. why they're asking if you have had a caution) is exempt from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. It does normally stay on the record permanently but depending on the type of offence, the reason for the check and the length of time it may not even be disclosed when someone does a background check.

Of course since the OP doesn't seem to be in the UK none of this seems to be relevant but anyway... Nil Einne (talk) 08:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Assuming you are in New South Wales, where your IP address is based, These links [11] [12] [13] might be helpful. My understanding (and this is not to be taken as legal advice) is that the police may give a caution for underage possession. The Police caution article says that cautions do go on the criminal record under English law, but NSW law may differ (for one thing, the article also states that cautions are only given to adults under English law).

I'm sorry this isn't the answer to your question, but it might help you understand the issues. It would help you if you know whether you have been given a caution. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 13:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't shouldn't do legal advice for legal/ethical reasons. Ask a lawyer. I wish you the best of luck. Falconus^{p t c} 16:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest asking the police. I don't think we have sufficient information to answer this question, but the police will know if they gave a formal caution or not. I don't see any need to consult a lawyer. --Tango (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Alien?

Are these pics of an alien ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 09:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I highly doubt it, good sir. That creature is most likely a heavily mutated common animal or one that has suffered a rare disease of some sort. It is also possible that it has been photoshopped in such ways, or if I may say it, an outright plastic fake. 64.75.158.193 (talk) 11:23, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

There are enough sad things that can go wrong in fetal development that there's no need to cry 'alien' or 'monster' when we see one of them. I found a discussion of some of the possibilities among the folks at Snopes- they don't have anything more than the picture, just like us, but personally, I found the 'holoprosencephalic calf' theory the most plausible. One of them asked a Thai person, who said that the pictured ceremony isn't praying to the dead animal, but praying for its spirit, since the early death of an animal is unlucky for the community. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

There are some pretty obvious "photoshopping" artifacts in two of those pictures - and the perspective in the two photos doesn't match the scale of the "body"...so it's pretty safe to say that it's a fake. SteveBaker (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Who makes this range of sauces

There's a range of "traditional" English sauces marketed under the brand "Geo Watkins" (short for George) - the range includes Mushroom Sauce, Anchovy Sauce, Brown Sauce, etc. Here is a link to an example on Ocado.

Who produces these? I can find no information on the company behind them. Anyone? Bobby P Chambers (talk) 11:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

A quick search finds File:Mushroom ketchup.jpg (and later [14]) which says G. Costa & Co. Ltd. with an address which I guess from another quick search is [15] who appear to have a part of a label which looks similar to the Geo Watkins sort of labels but doesn't provide any info or links for that specific brand. I don't know much about the brand, so it's possible different people have different rights, I would look more carefully at a bottle next time you see one (on all labels), it seems unlikely to me they won't have manufacturer info since I suspect it's required by law in the UK Nil Einne (talk) 11:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

The link provided by Bobby shews the manufacturer as G Costa and Company Ltd, which is the compnay linked at www.gcosta.co.uk, and is part of Associated British Foods, also known as AB Foods. DuncanHill (talk) 12:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

See also under "2003" on this Associated British Foods webpage [16]. DuncanHill (talk) 12:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, that was a bit dumb of me! Thank you very much! Bobby P Chambers (talk) 12:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

This site used to be very good for this kind of question. Unfortunately it now seems to be very out of date.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

do indian ppl wipe themself with there hand?

hi pls my name is stan and i am new to the rferenc desk thx. okay my question is about i heard indian people wipe ther bottom with there hand even today in the modern era. i thought this was just a racist sterotype but my indian friend says this is true. is there an wikipedia article about indian bathroom hygein i would like to read about this because it is a bit hard for me to believe, thanks you.--69.114.214.58 (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Cecil Adams touched on this in part 3 of this 1986 column, though it isn't a statistical survey. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Having traveled in India, away from the tourist hotels with their Western toilets, I can explain how most Indians handle this aspect of personal hygiene. In an Indian squat toilet, there is a place to squat and a hole, lined with porcelain and leading to a sewer, or just a hole in the floor leading to a cesspit. In the same room is at least a pail of water with a dipper and a bar of soap and usually a towel. Where running water exists, there will be a sink. You do not really wipe yourself. You rinse yourself off. You are supposed to do it fairly thoroughly, using your left hand and pouring from the dipper (so as not to contaminate the pail of clean water by putting your hand into it). Then you carefully soap and rinse your left hand, dry off, and you're finished. Indians are VERY careful to use only their right hand for eating, shaking hands, offering cash as payment, and so on. To use your left hand for any of these purposes is considered offensive, for obvious reasons. In fact, the Indian use of soap and water is arguably more hygienic than our use of paper, which cannot provide the same kind of thorough cleaning. Some Indians view with disgust or distaste the Western habit of using only paper to wipe and then using the same hand for eating or shaking hands. Marco polo (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I've never been to India itself, but I have been to Indian quarters of other Asian countries, and my experience is that there is often a hole in the floor like you describe and then there is a tap with a short length of hose on it. You then use that hose, together with your left hand, to clean yourself and then clean your hand. --Tango (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

How could one wash the left hand with water and a bar of soap without transferring fecal bacteria to the right hand, and without transferring fecal bacteria to the next handler of the soap bar and the common towel? Soap is not self sterilizing. Great way to spread pathogens from person to person, such as Category:Intestinal infectious diseases. Wet wipes sound like a great alternative where a sink, running water, roller towels/paper towels/electric hand dryers are not available. For those who can afford them, carrying a pocket pack with you sounds like a good idea. Edison (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Edison, I've fixed your link to the category. In future use [[:category:whatever]] rather than [[category:whatever]]. Without the leading colon you add the category to the page, with it, you link to the category. I noticed the error because I saw the misc ref desk was suddenly an infectious disease! --203.22.236.14 (talk) 10:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC) (psud when I remember to log in)

(Snort!) Thanks! Wikipedia has untold subtleties of formatting and coding.Edison (talk) 16:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm having a golden run on the RefDesks lately, what with questions on Engineering, the World Cup, South Africa and now Indian culture. It is true, probably less so in modern times. Typically you'd use water and the left hand. And yes, it sounds disgusting to me too. I've seen those bum-washer pipes (a parallel of the French bidet) not only in India but in the middle East as well at the airports and in hotels. In our home (I'm from Cape Town) we've got the best of both worlds, toilet paper and the washer although this isn't typical, most people would simply have a jug for water. (Note in Cape Town this is not an Indian thing per se but more a Muslim thing. I'd point you to istinja but it's been on Request Articles for more than a year). I can't understand how you'd feel clean without using water. We also had a squat toilet for my grandmother when we built the house although she never ended up using it, preferring the western style seated toilets instead. Zunaid 20:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

In response to Edison, I think one is supposed to make an effort to keep the right hand away from this whole process. Certainly, there is a chance (all right, a near certainty) of transmission of microbia between people in Indian public toilets. However, the same is true in Western toilets, when you think about things like flush toilets (dispersion of aerosol droplets), flush handles, toilet paper dispensers, faucet (tap) knobs, soap dispensers, paper towel dispensers, blow dryers (aerial transmission), and door handles. Marco polo (talk) 20:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

When I lived in university residence, there were a few south Asian Muslims, who kept a watering can in the bathroom for this sort of thing. (It did not occur to me that a watering can would be used for that, but there were also no flowers anywhere nearby, so I figured it out eventually, heh.) Adam Bishop (talk) 21:02, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

What you appear to be talking about is not an Indian thing, but rather a Muslim thing. See Islamic hygienical jurisprudence. Friday (talk) 21:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

This system may be common in the Muslim world, but it is definitely widespread across Hindu India as well. I recall a toilet with this system at a Hindu temple. I don't know in which culture this set of practices originated, but the extent to which Muslims have adopted Indian cultural practices (such as their system of numerals) is underappreciated. Marco polo (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe there is something I'm missing but.. can someone explain a bit more? I don't get the mechanics of how you would take a bucket of water with your right hand behind your back, and pour it to hit the right "spot" while washing with your left hand, using soap, etc. without making an ungodly mess! do you have to get naked to use the bathroom or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.218.50.226 (talk) 22:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

No. You use the dipper to take water from the pail. You pour water from the dipper into your left hand and splash it into the areas that need cleaning and repeat as needed, following up with soap and another dipper full of water. You don't use a ton of water or soap. I was a little messy at it but managed to keep my clothes dry. I think it gets easier with practice, like most things. Marco polo (talk) 22:50, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok... that sound better 8') —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.218.50.226 (talk) 22:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

In addition this is probably easier with a squat toilet then a sitting one. Nil Einne (talk) 22:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

We await your inventions, till then, apna hath jagannath(my hand my lord) :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.36.6 (talk) 12:19, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

See Anal cleansing and Health faucet. -- 58.147.53.253 (talk) 12:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Ice in Middle Ages

I have read that during reign of Akbar the mogul emperor they used ice in this and that beverages or recipes ! Of course they had no refrigeration, how the hell did they made it ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I can offer a general description though without knowing the specifics of the place and time you ask. Ice is "mined" from where and when it occurs naturally (cold zones and seasons) and is then kept insulated with such readily available substances as straw, possibly in underground chambers. -- Deborahjay (talk) 22:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

See Ice#Ice harvesting. --Anonymous, 22:35 UTC, June 28, 2010.

That was the standard procedure until refrigeration was invented. The original refrigerators were insulated boxes. You would buy ice from vendors and you would store it in the designated spot in the refrigerator. Hence the terms "ice man" and "ice box". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Some ice boxes even had openings to the outside of your house so the ice man could replace the ice without coming inside. They were clever designs. --Tango (talk) 22:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

The chambers in questions are ice houses. (Linked to from the Anonymous' article, admittedly, but I can pretend to be adding something to the answer!) --Tango (talk) 22:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

After the Battle of Hattin, Saladin offered his noble christian captives, who had suffered appallingly from thirst in the lead-up to the catastrophic defeat, rose-water, iced with the snows of Mount Hermon. Well, most of his noble captives. He made one notable exception when the tea trolley came round. --Dweller (talk) 14:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

June 29

Nintendo DS game repair

Is there any way that a Nintendo DS game card which has been rusted can be repaired? If so, how, and which organizations would do it? 99.251.239.89 (talk) 01:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I am having trouble picturing where and how a DS card could rust being made mostly of plastic with only a few gold plated contacts exposed. neither of those things normally rust, if you somehow managed to damage the connectors bad enough to reove the gold plating then the card is beyond repair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.165.2 (talk) 04:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's the gold-plated connectors that are rusted. At least I think it's rust - although it does appear to be partially green.--99.251.239.89 (talk) 12:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Copper oxidises to become greenish. See patina. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

. . or even verdigris 86.4.183.90 (talk) 14:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

File:DS-card.jpg

I think you can fix it. The connectors on things like small circuit boards are always made of copper - and in some applications they are then flashed with a super-thin layer of gold to improve the connection between circuit board and whatever you plug it into. Looking at the picture of a Metroid cartridge over on the right here, it doesn't look to me like they are gold plated. But even if they were, it would be very likely that the gold would wear off of an NDS cartridge after a lot of insert/extract cycles. But that's not enough to stop it working - copper-on-copper connections are still perfectly OK so long as they are clean. In this case, either there was no gold there in the first place - or it's all worn off - and that's enough to expose the underlying copper - which has then corroded ("rust" isn't quite the normal word...but yes, corroded copper is green - so that's definitely what you're seeing). You should be able to get the thing to work again by lightly scraping, or sand-papering the green stuff off of the copper until it's bright and shiney again. Don't over-do it though because if you wear right through the copper, you've permenantly wrecked the thing beyond reasonable repair.

If you do get it working again, you might consider buying some spray-on "contact cleaner" from an electronics store (Fry's stock it if you live in the USA) and give your cartridges a very light squirt once in a while. Don't over-do it though - one very quick squirt is plenty. It helps to remove corrosion - stops it re-corroding in the future - and lubricates them so the cartridge will slide in and out more smoothly - and thus wear less. You can also get contact cleaner 'pencils' - which get rid of the corrosion - but don't confer the other benefits.

SteveBaker (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Court Art

In some film court scences we see people sitting in court rooms drawing what they see, i.e. the judge, juries, lawyers etc. Why is that ? Is it because they don't allow camera there ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 08:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yup, exactly so. See Courtroom sketch, not that it adds much. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Just go to Google News and you'll see examples of this. For instance, this story from the Washington Post. Dismas|^(talk) 09:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's because they don't allow filming or photography in some courts. Chevymontecarlo 15:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Al Gore's awareness of various people and their work

Has Al Gore heard about Bjørn Lomborg? Has he heard about Penn & Teller? Has he heard about Penn Jillette? Has he heard about Teller? Has he heard about The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World? Has he heard about Penn & Teller: Bullshit!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.60.151 (talk) 7:57 pm, Yesterday (UTC+12)

This question was originally added to the science desk but I removed it as it seemed to be a shorter duplicate of the question above. However the OP has informed me I was mistaken as it's asking about Al Gore having heard of these people rather then them hearing of Al Gore so I apologise to the OP and am adding it back. As it concerns whether someone has heard of other people and their work, it is largely off-topic to the science desk so moved it here adding it to the bottom due to the length of time since I removed it Nil Einne (talk) 09:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

As per responses to your earlier question, Al Gore is clearly aware of Bjørn Lomborg as Bjørn Lomborg challenged Al Gore directly. I haven't listened to that source, but even if the topic of his book never came up it seems unlike Al Gore isn't aware of it, in fact I would say it's unlikely Al Gore isn't aware of most prominent sceptics. Nil Einne (talk) 09:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Has Al Gore ever been challenged by Bjorn Lomborg in a mask? Would it be illegal for Bjorn Lomborg to challenge Al Gore in a mask? Has Al Gore heard of Penn and Teller wearing masks?Has Al Gore heard of Penn and Teller doing anything illegal?Has Al Gore heard of Penn and Teller doing anything illegal in a mask? ;) *chortle chortle* Lemon martini (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I think you may be confusing Penn and Teller with the Masked Magician. Now, is Al Gore aware of him? Warofdreams talk 14:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

want to know

Why do the people who live amongst limelight and glitter (like models/actors),have a lot of fun, outgoing,outspoken and so on,with all the wealth and desires would one fine day be depressed and comit suicide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.140.188 (talk) 12:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Before delving into philosophical possibilities (of which I'm sure there are many), we should first ask: do models/actors suffer depression or commit suicide at a rate significantly greater than the population at large? Or do we just hear about it more? — Lomn 13:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Lomn's question should really be, do models/actors suffer depression at the same rate as the population at large? Given the factors outlined by the OP, one would naturally expect these people to commit suicide less than the norm, not at the norm. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 13:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

A separate and related question would be whether the people involved in such a profession self-select themselves. I seem to recall Drew Pinsky performing a study which suggested that a significantly higher percentage of "celebrities" are pathological narcissists. Obviously there's a correlation/causation question there—do they become narcissists because they are celebrities, or are narcissists driven to be celebrities? If the latter, it could easily be a self-selection sort of thing, a factor of who is driven into the profession more than what the profession does to one. (And of course, in practice, these things are probably complementary.) --Mr.98 (talk) 14:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

It's worth remembering these problems don't generally happen overnight. For most people, celebrities or not the problems tend to develop gradually over a long time frame. They don't just suddenly "one fine day be depressed and comit suicide". I also think it's a fallacy to presume people are less likely to be depressed because they are wealthy and among all the limelight and glitter. Particularly since we are seemingly talking about the extreme end of wealth etc vs everyone else rather then the very poor who can barely survive vs those who have enough to live a resonably comfortable live or whatever. Many studies and plenty of anecdotal evidence suggests things are far from so clear cut and really I'm hardly surprised (in other words, IMHO if you think about it carefully, no I don't think one would naturally expect those people to commit suicide less). Nil Einne (talk) 15:10, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Our Epidemiology of suicide article, in the section Social factors and suicide, claims, "Suicide levels are highest among the retired, unemployed, impoverished, divorced, the childless, urbanites, empty nesters, and other people who live alone", and says poverty contributes to suicide risk, though all these statements are unreferenced in the article. As to the direct question of why wealthy and seemingly happy people kill themselves, people despair because of many, many things; a lack of wealth is just one of them; and everyone has an inner life that others don't get to see — outwardly happy people may be despairing inside, too. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

bankrupcy

I am part owner in 1 week of timeshare, must I divulge this information and if so, before I start proceeding with the bankrupcy what can I do to protect te other party that holds title with me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.60.68 (talk) 15:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

We do not offer legal advice, beyond advising that you consult a lawyer. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Your lawyer will need to check your ownership documents to find out the exact terms on which the share is held. Dbfirs 21:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Whipped Cream

Context: I've noticed that American recipes online for whipped cream always specify adding sugar and vanilla. To my British eyes, this is surprising, since to me whipped cream is an unsweetened, unflavoured thing. For a while, the only squirty cream you could buy was sweetened, but for years now even that is available unsweetened, and it seems to sell well. So, my question is...

Question: Why are all these recipes sweetened and flavoured? My theories are:

a) That there is a cultural difference, such that Americans expect something called whipped cream to be sweetened and flavoured.

b) That, because these are recipes, the writers feel a need to include more than one ingredient. This seems unlikely, since some of these were instructions for people who had no idea how to whip cream.

c) That there is some different property of American cream, perhaps the lower fat content, which makes it more necessary to sweeten it for stability. The higher fat content of British double cream (which seems to be the main cream used for whipping these days) made me wonder this. But seems unlikely because British whipping cream (though less available than it once was) has a similar fat content to American whipping cream, and doesn't need sugar to whip up.

Does anyone have any insight as to the likelihood of these theories, or pertinent knowledge of the American cream industry? 86.164.57.20 (talk) 16:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm an American, and my first response to your question was, "Ew! English whipped cream isn't sweet?" This makes me think that (a) is probably one possible answer to your question. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Americans generally have a sweeter tooth than Brits. I remember having some coleslaw on an American Airlines flight that was so sweet it took me a few mouthfuls before I was sure it really was coleslaw and wasn't a desert. --Tango (talk) 16:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Whipped Cream is usually used, at least within my family (I'm American) as a topping for dessert, or in some other dessert/sweet recipes. I don't have a clue what unsweetened whipped cream would taste like. Kind of like how I can't imagine unsweetened ice cream. What is unsweetened whipped cream used for in the UK? Falconus^{p t c} 16:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Seems like an unreferenced generalization. If Brits have less of a sweet tooth than Americans, does it follow that they have less tooth decay? A reference says tooth decay in Britain was less during WW2 when less sugar was available, but is higher now than in African countries where sugar (and presumably dental care) are in short supply. Another reference says that tooth decay was much more common after the 1400's when sugar became more available in Europe, and that when Brits ate less than 10kg of sugar per year in the 1820's, tooth decay was still uncommon, but by the early 20th century when consumption was up to 40kg per person tooth decay was "rampant." That ref says folks in the US also eat 40kg per person per year. What do official sources say about actual amounts of sugar and other caloric sweetners in the US versus the UK? Edison (talk) 16:40, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, it's an unreferenced generalisation. Anyone that has eaten food in both countries will be able to confirm it, though. --Tango (talk) 16:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The stereotype I'm familiar with is that the Americans have way more sugar and salt in their food than the Brits; but this sugar company's stats page has a nice per capita consumption graph showing that EU consumption is about 34 kg/year, while in the US it's a "mere" 30 kg/year. This isn't an absolute proof, because of artificial sweeteners, and it unfortunately blends the entire EU into one big swamp of sugar consumption; but it may mean the two aren't much different. And, hey, Australia, geez, you're at 45 kg/year, and I think I want to move to Brazil, which is at around 58 kg/year. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

And saturated fat as well. 92.29.119.46 (talk) 21:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

In the UK, sweetened whipped cream is called creme chantilly (and in France, I guess). TammyMoet (talk) 17:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Depends where in the UK you are. Have you ever gone shopping in northern Ireland? During the summer of 1995, when I lived there, the larger stores would typically have an entire aisle of biscuits. Wherever we went, there were always tons of sugary foods offered. Nyttend (talk) 17:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, there is plenty of sugary food and drink in the UK, just as there is in the US. The US tends to add sugar to things Brits wouldn't, though. Whipped cream, coleslaw, salad, etc.. --Tango (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

You don't put sugar in your coleslaw, either? You do at least put it in your iced tea, don't you? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Eeeeewwww! :P Nope, no sugar in my whipped cream, or my coleslaw. I use whipped cream on cakes, in trifle, Pavlova, to make fruit fool, Eton mess, etc. In the last two, there'll be some sweetening if the fruit isn't sweet enough, but it's unsweetened in other contexts. It tastes of cream :) I gather from this blog] that the taste of cream might be considered more desirable on this side of the Atlantic, since it is apparently far more common to add it to sweet food over here.

And some people certainly do add sugar to their tea in Britain, but they wouldn't drink it cold! 86.164.57.20 (talk) 18:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and I forgot to say: short of a cream expert, this looks answered. So, thanks all! 86.164.57.20 (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

It's actually quite easy to get through the week with no sprinkling of sugar on food, so sugar in beverages, and minimal consumption of sugary cookies or desserts, without replacing them by equivalent amounts of artificial sweeteners. Just don't keep the stuff in the house, for starters. To the list of things that Americans sweeten that need no sugar to taste good I would add barbecue. A TV show about competitive barbecuing in the US included ridicule by one contestant of Japanese origin who noted that judges commented his sauce was not sweet enough. He said that it was surprising that judges wanted the meat basically coated with candy or sugar syrup. I tried adding up how many grams of sugar are found in milk, bread, unsweetened cereal, packaged turkey, cheese and vegetables, and one wcould easily consume 10 kg of "sugars" a year without consuming cookies, candy, sweetened beverages, sweetened coleslaw, or other foods with added sugar. Just one small apple a day would total 5.4 kg per year of sugar. One raw carrot a day would total 1.8 kg sugar /year. Four slices whole whole bread a day would total 1.5 kg sugar/year. 240ml or 8 oz skim milk a day would total 4.4 kg sugar/year. So far we are up to 13.1 kg of sugar per year on an "unsweetened" starvation diet. A normal "unsweetened" diet would have several times this. Edison (talk) 18:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

For the record, real BBQ does not need sauce, especially a sweet one. I don't know what those so called judges were smoking, but I bet it wasn't ribs. Googlemeister (talk) 19:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm a Brit who's spent the last 17 years in the USA. I can confirm that Americans do habitually sweeten their whipped cream - and we Brit's generally do not. It's mostly a matter of what you're used to though. I'm continually disappointed that something like a chocolate eclair (which to my taste is plenty sweet enough without sweetening the cream) ends up being so crazily over-sweetened as to be almost inedible...but then I heard from an American friend of mine who spent a couple of years in the UK having precisely the reverse reaction - buying chocolate eclairs in the UK and being horribly disappointed that they seemed so bland. I guess it's what you're used to. I've noticed similar things with custard also...British custard tastes deliciously vanilla-ish, US custard tastes of sugar and not much else - they have to mix an even stronger flavor (cinnamon, for example) to actually make it taste of anything. Dialling down the overpowering flavors is (IMHO) the best way to get the most from the more subtle/delicate flavors in food. As for the overall sugar consumption in the two countries, it seems possible to me that the British eat desserts and such more frequently than the Americans do - but with less sugar per serving - which may well account for the relative similarities in the overall sugar consumption when averaged over a year. SteveBaker (talk) 19:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of British food in general, but I do have to admit that they do nice desserts. Scones with clotted cream and strawberries. Trifle. Trifle with lots of hooch. And pretty good coffee to go with it. --Trovatore (talk) 20:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about British custard, but I love the custard they had in Australia. Much better then what we get in the US. Googlemeister (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, don't know because I don't really like custard. To me anything with egg in it should be salty, not sweet. There are custard-like things that I much enjoy, such as panna cotta; I don't know whether the Brits have any equivalent. --Trovatore (talk) 20:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

As an American, the thought of sugar in coleslaw is revolting. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm also an American, and agree with the last three words in your sentence; no modification necessary. Basically I don't like raw cabbage in any form. Cooked or fermented it's OK, though nothing I'd go out of my way for. --Trovatore (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I think that it might be more a European/US than just a UK/US thing. At least we do not usually add sugar to whipped cream here in Denmark either, and I do not remember tasting sugared whipped cream in any other of the European countries that I have visited. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Here in northern England it is not unusual to have sweetened whipped cream, though it is becoming less common. Perhaps we share a sweeter tooth with our friends in the USA? Dbfirs 20:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Can I have a Nobel Prize for pointing out the link between sugery food and obesity? And America really is like a Homer Simpson cartoon? 92.29.119.46 (talk) 21:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Are our friends dogs at risk?

We have a couple of very good friends who we spend a lot of time with socially. They are keen dog lovers, and have a large number of pugs, of whom they are very proud (and very protective!). On one of our recent visits, we were having a barbeque in the garden. There's nothing like a hamburger slathered in mustard on a sunny afternoon, as well as plenty of Heineken! But I digress - the point of the question is that I saw what looks to me like an eagle owl roosting in the trees around our friends garden. I pointed it out to my friend's wife, and she showed little concern. "He's been up there a few days", she said. Now what we were wondering was - could an owl like that make off with one of our friends pugs? I'd hate to see one of the little scamps disappearing into an eagle owl's nest. All the best, Artie and Wanda (talk) 19:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC) I fixed the wikilink to the pugs. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:17, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Judging by your British written accent, I assume you are talking about the Eurasian Eagle-owl, which seems to be the only eagle-owl resident in Europe (apparently including Britain). Our article suggests that they are very capable of killing an animal the size of a pug, though the pug would be too heavy for them to lift off the ground. Instead, they would consume the poor dog on the ground. However, I think the owl would be unlikely to attack if people were out with the dogs, unless the garden is quite large and the dogs wandered away from the people. The real danger would be leaving the dogs out unattended. Marco polo (talk) 19:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The owl is more interested in scraps and easy prey such as mice, rats, rabbits and other birds than in taking on a boisterous dog. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:28, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm curious how you recognized a supposed British "written accent". Rimush (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I would guess he picked up on the words keen, slather, and scamp, which are rarely used non-ironically left of the Pond. --Trovatore (talk) 20:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

"Garden" for "yard", as well. --Sean 21:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

LOL, I was using "keen" and "slather" a lot. Guess I should stop. "scamp" seemed weird to me too, and I hadn't noticed the garden/yard thing. Rimush (talk) 21:36, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

JFK in Dallas 22.11.1963

English is not my mother tongue, so I hope that somebody could help me with the next text.

The Warren Commission Report says this about the route of JFK in Dallas:

"From Houston Street, which forms the base of the triangle, three streets--Commerce, Main, and Elm--trisect the plaza, converging at the apex of the triangle to form a triple underpass beneath a multiple railroad bridge almost 500 feet from Houston Street. Elm Street, the northernmost of the three, after intersecting Houston curves in a southwesterly arc through the underpass and leads into an access road, which branches off to the right and is used by traffic going to the Stemmons Freeway and the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike.

The Elm Street approach to the Stemmons Freeway is necessary in order to avoid the traffic hazards which would otherwise exist if right turns were permitted from both Main and Elm into the freeway. To create this traffic pattern, a concrete barrier between Main and Elm Streets presents an obstacle to a right turn from Main across Elm to the access road to Stemmons Freeway and the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike. This concrete barrier extends far enough beyond the access road to make it impracticable for vehicles to turn right from Main directly to the access road. A sign located on this barrier instructs Main Street traffic not to make any turns. In conformity with these arrangements, traffic proceeding west on Main is directed to turn right at Houston in order to reach the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike, which has the same access road from Elm Street as does the Stemmons Freeway."

I would like to know, would it have been technically possible to JFK to drive straight on Main Street after crossing Houston Street, go under the railroad bridge and then turn right to an access road that goes to the Stemmons Freeway.

It would be nice to have an answer to the next question too:

Lee Harvey Oswald was shot by Jack Ruby in the Dallas Police Headquarters in Main Street. They took him by an ambulance to the Parkland Memorial Hospital - the same hospital where also JFK died. It is very possible that they drove with dying Oswald by the Stemmons Freeway. So did the ambulance driver drove the fastest and straight way from Main to the Stemmons or had he drove like JFK and make a curve (Main>Houston>Elm>Stemmons)? 85.156.62.17 (talk) 20:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)