Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/M

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

March 3

Address

What Is The Address Of Mont Tremblant.173.178.93.250 (talk) 01:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that mountains have street addresses as such, but this[www.tremblantmountain.com] appears to be the official website. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You So Much Kid. I Hope That Helps Me. It Is What This Page Is For Helping.173.178.93.250 (talk) 02:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, Pop. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on the village gives the postal code, and I'm sure they will be able to deliver mail to the mountain! Dbfirs 08:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DBfirs . I Am Not A |Company That Deliver Mail To Mont Tremblant. I Am Curious Because For Homework. There Is A Lot Of Homework THese Days. 173.178.93.250 (talk) 01:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Presumably the address you needed was that of the "village" and associated conurbation, so my link should have helped, along with the website linked by BB. Dbfirs 21:38, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question Answer Website

Does anybody know a question answer website. If you do know one can you tell me. Thank you. It is because i have a lot of homework these days and i need answers to my questions.173.178.93.250 (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:List of online reference desks.—Wavelength (talk) 03:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You WaveLength. I Found That Page Helpful. I Will Use The Websites Later When I Need To. Thank You.173.178.93.250 (talk) 03:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You probably want to ask your teacher if you're having problems, that way you can get pointers to try and help you solve the problems yourself rather than copying answers given to you by someone else. Chevy monte carlo 19:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I Know You Can Do That . You Can Ask Your Teacher But Teacher Will Not Give Free Answer To A Student Like That. Not Saying You Have To Pay Money Just Using It As A Expression.HeheheHeHeHeH .173.178.93.250 (talk) 00:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)__[reply]

Transporting Horses

How do you transport a horse round the world? For example, with the Olympic Games, transporting a horse from Australia to UK or vice versa must be a heck of a job. Is it done by boat? Plane? Are there special vehicles for the transport? I've always been slightly curious about the idea. Worm^TT 11:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Racehorse transportation available internationally--Aspro (talk) 12:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting article on this topic. Dalliance (talk) 13:48, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. So, it looks like they are flown (something that surprises me) - but it's a rather expensive process. Interesting articles there though. Any more for any more? Worm^TT 13:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Transporting horses to Australia (and quarantining them) for the Olympics was such a job that it wasn't done. The 1956 Melbourne Olympics had equestrian events held in Stockholm! Rmhermen (talk) 17:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if they fly Business Class, or "Coach"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's how they took Australian horses to World War I, and here's some information about horse transport today. Also, we have a page called Horse transports in the Middle Ages. Alansplodge (talk) 18:35, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was no such problem for the Sydney 2000 Games, though. But not because our quarantine laws have been relaxed in the meantime; if anything, they're even more stringent now. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 18:52, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would imagine a lot of the cost and issue with transporting horses is reducing the stress of the animal, although I would imagine drugs or laxatives would help. Chevy monte carlo 19:27, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the guy who has to clean out the plane at the end would prefer you not give the horses laxatives. Googlemeister (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here in Europe, the least stressful, cheapest and most convenient way to distribute horses must be to turn them into sausages first (although the fate for a German horse is often the würst).--Aspro (talk) 19:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean, "würst"? It's spelled "wurst" (or actually "Wurst" if you keep with the German grammar rule of capitalising all nouns). JIP | Talk 18:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for your help, turns out that horses transported by plane (an idea I thought was inconceivable) is actually not as uncommon as I thought. Worm^TT 08:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And so are elephants (photo. And cetaceans (photo). Here's a LLoyds article on insurance risk of transporting large animals, including race horses [1]. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:44, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In a recent tragedy, a group of elephants were flying over the American southwest, and the pilot made the mistake of announcing that the Grand Canyon could be seen through the windows on the right side of the plane. I'm sure you can guess what happened next. :'( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All we actually see on those photos are boxes... JIP | Talk 19:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And no trunk. Probably in the cargo hold already. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CSX claim

A while back I heard a commercial, I think for CSX. The claim was that they could move a ton of freight some incredible distance, over 400 miles, on one gallon of fuel. Is there any data to back up this claim? Hemoroid Agastordoff (talk) 19:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Fuel efficiency in transportation#Trains. Rmhermen (talk) 19:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And think about this, if a long haul truck is loaded with 30 tons of cargo and gets 6 mpg, they can claim to move 1 ton of freight 180 miles on one gallon of fuel. Googlemeister (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And then trains have some advantages over trucks, in that they avoid stop-and-go traffic, and generally go over relatively level ground along relatively strait routes, and don't need enough acceleration to enter a busy highway. But, of course, they neglect to mention the fuel disadvantages, namely that trucks are still needed, at both ends, unless the source and destination happen to be right at a train depot. Then there's also the fuel needed to move the cargo between trains and trucks. If you just put the cargo on one truck and ship it all the way, you don't need to waste that fuel. StuRat (talk) 03:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, though, the fuel disadvantages StuRat discusses are outweighed by the fuel advantage of hauling heavy freight by train. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That depends. If you need to haul a truckload of parts from one location to another, both distant from train depots, with a nice road between them, the truck may very well be more fuel efficient. StuRat (talk) 23:09, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And that depends on the distances involved. If I have to haul a big load of something from Montreal to Calgary, there is no way that truck delivery could ever be as efficient as rail delivery. The six kilometres between the shop and the depot isn't going to come close to compensating for the savings made over the 2,000 or so km rail trip. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 00:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I meant if the locations are "both distant from train depots, relative to their distance from each other". StuRat (talk) 00:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

US constitutional law question

The article "Flag desecration" says

The United States Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), and reaffirmed in U.S. v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990), has ruled that due to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, it is unconstitutional for a government (whether federal, state, or municipality) to prohibit the desecration of a flag[...].

Really? I mean, I haven't read those cases, but I thought that the First Amendment applies only to the federal government, and that it's the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause that bars states and municipalities from restricting free speech and the like.—msh210℠ 19:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're being a little hypertechnically correct, I think. A sort of phrase seen often in Supreme Court rulings is "...because of the First Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment." Everyone knows that it's the First that is preventing flag desecration banning in the US, and if you talk about it actually being the Fourteenth, well, you're being as pedantic as all of us here on the Reference Desk. Incorporation of the Bill of Rights is relevant but you seem to know about this already. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The theory, in general, would be that state governments cannot deny rights that the federal government grants. Flag-burning as a protest is considered protected speech at the federal level, and states cannot override that protected speech. The only solution for this [non-]problem is to pass a constitutional amendment authorizing the Congress to ban flag burning as a protest. The reason I state it that way is that burning the flag ceremonially is in fact the proper way to dispose of a flag, as per the flag code. Attempts at banning flag-burning pertain specifically to trying to stifle protests - and that's why the Supreme Court has struck down such attempts in the past. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The original poster obviously knows all that because of his discussion of the Fourteenth Amendment, and you have your first sentence backwards; the federal government does not "grant" rights in the US. Rights are held by the people, unless they decide via law or constitutional change to reserve those rights to a government at some level. The federal and state governments do not "grant" rights to the people; the US is not a monarchy. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The US is not an anarchy, either. Until the Bill of Rights came along, there were no constitutional guarantees of the citizens' basic rights. I might have better said that the Bill of Rights "protects" the rights rather than "granting" them, in keeping with the spirit of the 14th amendment. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I could also argue that because the Constitution and all the laws are a result of the will of the people, the people in effect "grant themselves" the rights enumerated therein. If the people decide (goddess help us) that the flag is a holy relic to be protected from vandalism, then they (or we) will amend the constitution accordingly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IP law question

I've noticed in the past few years that more and more companies seem to be using other companies to own their intellectual property. For example, Kraft food products now say on their labels "distributed by Kraft Foods North America" (or some such) but "copyright Kraft Holdings" (or some such). Toys R Us uses "Geoffrey Inc." or something as its copyright and trademark holder. Etc. Did something change (or become more prevalent) in the past few years to make this a more common practice, and what was it?—msh210℠ 19:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The use of a well-known brand name is marketable in its own right, especially by corporations expanding into new territories, and the actual owners are careful not to allow their brand name to be infringed or genericised (this happened to "hoover"). As a result, the names of luxury car marques such as Lamborghini and Ferrari are seen on up-market goods that have no connection to car manufacturing. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although that is all true, it's not relevant to the original poster's question about a phenomenon that I've noticed, also. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And, why would companies not want that their product name gets genericised? That seems as an advantage to me, since people will see your product as the most typical product in its class. 212.169.188.228 (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also see this as an advantage, although every IP lawyer runs around frothing at the mouth at the idea that their clients' (and prospective clients') trademarks might be genericized. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's only an advantage if you forget that genericization means that your competitors can use your trade name for their (possibly substandard, possibly even dangerous) products. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 20:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't forget. I still think it's an advantage. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a more basic question may be appropriate first: Why do they do it? Why have a separate company to own intellectual property?—msh210℠ 23:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Googling for "intellectual property holding company" pulls up some informative looking documents including this law firm's article on the subject. According to that site: "Over the last decade or so, many businesses generating significant revenue from intellectual property such as patents, copyrights, trade names and marks, software and know-how (the IP Assets) have organized intellectual property holding companies (IPHCs) to reduce federal and state taxes while separating valuable IP Assets from other corporate liabilities. Recently, states have started to aggressively challenge this tactic. However, substantial state and federal tax savings can still be realized if IPHCs are organized and operated correctly." --- Medical geneticist (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's kind of what I suspected was going on. If I were a gigantic company, I'd want my various income sources spread out into different units, so that if one does better or worse any given year, I could consolidate the holdings for tax purposes in a more rational way than you can if they are all in one big entity. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, okay, thanks, I guess that makes sense. Perhaps also for liability (if the company loses a huge lawsuit, at least it doesn't lose its intellectual property, as it doesn't own it, or something like that)? That was my (lay) thought. In any event, my initial question — what changed recently — remains to be answered. Any takers?—msh210℠ 07:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well the text from a ref MG showed right above does say "while separating valuable IP Assets from other corporate liabilities".... Nil Einne (talk) 10:07, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for speculating, but all that changed might be "somebody finally thought up the idea". Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:09, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all.—msh210℠ 20:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 4

275 gallon oil tank for home heating

I am looking for the weight (empty) of a 275 gallon heating oil tank: the kind usually found in the basement of a home. The dimensions being 28" wide, 45" tall and 60" long. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.82.254 (talk) 02:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The missing dimension is the thickness. We'd also need to know the material. Is it steel ? If yours is the same as this one, it weighs 280 lbs, empty: [2]. StuRat (talk) 02:48, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to this link the standard tanks weigh roughly 280 lbs empty (and close to 2000 lbs fully loaded). that's a single-walled steel tank. double-walled tanks might be somewhat heavier, and there may be more modern plastic or composite tanks that are somewhat lighter, but this should work for a ballpark. --Ludwigs2 03:39, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Catholicism

Is Catholicism Related A Bit Like Christianity. Because If It Is That Would Be Weird. Answer As Soon As Possible.173.178.93.250 (talk) 03:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC) I Mean Like Is Catholicism A Form Of Christianity.173.178.93.250 (talk) 03:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Roman Catholic Church is a denomination of Christianity. A big honkin' one, at that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Catholicism is one of the primary branches of Christianity. Other major branches include the Orthodox Church and Protestantism. Note that while outside observers will almost universally classify all these as "Christian", the sects themselves may not recognize the other members as such. — Lomn 03:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably more than just a denomination. In any case, the OP's question was triggered by his assertion that Catholicism is not a form of Christianity,[3] but he backed off from that and said he would check. I'm totally stumped as to why anyone would think that Catholicism is not Christianity. It is, in fact, the largest Christian branch or denomination in the world. Roughly half the world's Christians are Catholic. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well Hi I Am The Person WHo Asked The Question In First Place . I Did Not Ask The Question To Depaert An Argument. I Just Wanted To Know. I Am A Kid. I Am About Twelve Year Old.173.178.93.250 (talk) 22:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well You See I Do Not Know A Lot. I AM Still Studying Religion . Here In My School. I Just Needed Help.173.178.93.250 (talk) 22:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)__ __[reply]

There's a several-hundred-year history of suspicion, fear, misinformation, and active hostility between Catholics and Protestants, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that the same is true between Catholics and the Eastern church. I'm far from "totally stumped" regarding how people conclude that "they" are not "like us". — Lomn 03:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was raised Protestant, and there was no shortage of questions about how the Roman Catholic Church distorted Biblical teachings. But at no time was it ever suggested they weren't Christian. I mean, come on, that's silly. Their symbol is Jesus hanging on the cross, having "died for our sins". That in-your-face symbol must be what fooled everyone. They're really Zen Buddhists. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The more frequently heard expression from one Christian about another of a different label is "He's not a real Christian." "Real" means "Us". Although when there is a need to emphasise how strong Christianity is, it seems everyone gets counted. HiLo48 (talk) 03:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a different story. Almost every branch thinks it's the "right" version of Christianity. But they don't deny that the others are Christian, just that, "they've got it wrong." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience it's quite common for Chinese people to believe Catholicism and Christianity are two separate things. I've had more than a few students inform me of the 5 major world religions: Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Catholicism, and Christianity. There's a disconnect somewhere in the sparse bit of education they get on the subject. The Masked Booby (talk) 04:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who's mis-educating them? The Catholics? Or the Protestants? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I assume The State or popular culture, though I have no proof. Certainly not the (few) believers on either side. The Masked Booby (talk) 06:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's history. Protestantism and Catholicism were introduced into China by different missionaries and for a long time the Catholics emphasised that they were "Catholics" whereas Protestants were happy to identify themselves as generic "Christians". The Chinese have always had a syncretist view towards religion, so just because both "Christianity" and "Caholicism" shared some of the same "deities" (from the Chinese perspective) in the persons of Jesus, God and Mary, for example, did not, to a Chinese perspective, prove that they were the same religion. Afterall, they also had many differences in philosophy (incluidng, but not limited to, beliefs surrounding the Pope) and in other "deities" - for example the many Catholic saints who are not "worshipped" by Protestants.

The Catholics called their religion, in Chinese, Tianzhu Jiao - "the Religion of the Lord of Heaven", and when referring to God in Chinese the Catholic church in China has usually used the term Tianzhu. By contrast, the general term for Christianity, Jidu Jiao - "the Religion of Christ", has usually been used to refer to Protestant denominations, partly because their identity is largely defined negatively as "not Catholic".

To give a comparison, the traditional view of Catholicism and Protestant Christianity as two separate but related religions is probably akin to the ancient Chinese view of Jews and Muslims in China - they also shared many similarities, such as their single, main, deity, some but not all of their prophets, practices such as with respect to pork, but they differed in some respects as well, such as (most obviously) the colour of their headgear. As a result, Jewish and Muslim Chinese were, in ancient times, conceptualised as part of the same ethnicity, the Hui. The Jews were often known as the "blue-hatted hui-hui" to identify them from the Muslim Hui. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating! Thank you for sharing! The Masked Booby (talk) 11:27, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jehovah's Witnesses use Christendom to differentiate Christians from True Christians. Schyler! (one language) 04:02, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JW's have a reputation for weirdness. But they're still Christian. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Yes Really . I Am Sure Real My |Friend Would Not Be Happy With What You Said Here BaseBall Bug . And You Should Not Be Talking BaseBall Bug. Though I Bow To You The Fact You Helped Me On Some Stuff. 173.178.93.250 (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sort of. Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and things like Christian Science could all be lumped together as not really Christian except in a very loose historical sense. Especially from the viewpoint of Catholicism or one of the more mainstream versions of Protestantism. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a slippery slope. Those groups all claim to follow the teachings of Jesus and the Bible, ergo they are Christian, whether mainstream churches "recognize" them or not. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as Wikipedia is concerned, at least, Christian denominations are listed at Category:Christian denominations. They include the Roman Catholic Church and its sub-categories. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 08:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing to bear in mind is that historically, the Protestant churches all have their roots in the Roman Catholic Church. See Protestant Reformation. Any non-Christians reading this might think that we are all at each others throats. In England, the mainstream denominations in each area regularly meet together in a "local council of churches" and hold joint services in each other's buildings. See Ecumenism. Alansplodge (talk) 09:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...while still believing those others have got it wrong ;-) HiLo48 (talk) 11:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We'd prefer to say "have a different tradition". Let's be nice to each other now. Alansplodge (talk) 01:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since there are multiple christian denominations that have varying degrees of compatibility in their doctrines, and they have no universally acknowledged living leader, it is a wonder how any individual can claim to represent, speak for or apologize for "all christians", since there is no general agreement on how such authority can exist. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:44, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the section title for easier reference. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of this ignores the fact that catholic is used by almost all Christian groups to mean "universal" in reference to a single "church" established two milennia ago (see Apostles' Creed). The Pope is not just head of the Roman Catholic Church, but also head of a host of other "Catholic" and "Orthodox" churches as well (some of which have married clergy,etc.) The Church of England and others which adhere to Apostolic succession (the WP article errs - the Methodists are scions of the Anglican Church, the Moravians also are in joint communion etc. Similarly others such as the Presbyterian Church in [4] acknowledge it. Apostolicity (note the redirect) represents a direct line to the beliefs of the Apostles in the view of other Protestant groups) also are "catholic" directly, amazingly enough. It is fair to say that "apostolic succession" is key to saying whether a church (or sect, if you prefer) adheres to the principle of a continuous line in the Church. This is not a simple topic. Collect (talk) 12:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How does the article err with respect to Methodism? Even though Methodism started out as a group within the Anglican church, Methodists don't even have bishops in many parts of the world, and in the parts where they do, the bishops are simply senior clergy; there's no attempt to keep an apostolic succession going from bishop to bishop. I don't see how you can claim that the Methodist churches are or claim to be within the apostolic succession. Marnanel (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See articles about Methodism. It was initially an Anglican group. There are now additional "Methodist" groups, but I was referring to the main one which still has Bishops etc. The WP article (not an RS, but representing a claim backed by RS) says "In light of Wesley's episcopal consecration, the Methodist Church can lay a claim on apostolic succession, as understood in the traditional sense." Collect (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just as an aside, when I was in high school, I was amazed in one class I was in that a huge number of the low-income students there did not know that Catholicism was a form of Christianity, or what it was about at all (whereas they sort of knew what Judaism was). This was in California. I'm not really sure what accounts for that level of ignorance, but it was rampant. I suspect there are just not as many Catholics around where I was from, or they were a lot less prominent. (In the Northeast, Catholicism is a Big Thing, and half of the houses where I live have Bathtub Madonnas in front of their houses. I never, ever, saw such a thing in California in all my years I lived there. Incidentally, I'm surprised we only have one, grainy image in our article. I could provide much better ones just by walking around the neighborhood... maybe I will this summer, when the snow has all melted.) So I don't think ignorance on this point is completely limited to other countries. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For information about identifying true Christianity, see http://www.multilingualbible.com/john/13-34.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/john/13-35.htm and http://www.multilingualbible.com/matthew/7-13.htm through verse 23. (Which professed Christians refuse to fight against their spiritual brothers in international conflicts?)

—Wavelength (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have known Roman Catholics who were taught that Presbyterians were not Christians. :) Collect (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quakers. (Even granted your premise that loving your neighbour precludes employment as a soldier.) Marnanel (talk) 17:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which persons claiming to be Christians are fulfilling the Great Commission? If you had hired a babysitter to babysit your children, would you be grateful to return home and see her washing the windows but not babysitting your children? Likewise, is Jesus grateful to see professed Christians building hospitals and performing other humanitarian works but not following his instructions by teaching the things that he taught?

—Wavelength (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus also taught His disciples to take care of other people. I'm sure He would be quite pleased to see hospitals and humanitarian works being done in His name. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps those people "claiming to be Christians" have read, for instance, Matthew 25: 31-46, and have the impression that in feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, and visiting the imprisoned, they are in fact doing things that Jesus encouraged them to do. One might ask whether there's any value in saying "Go in peace, keep warm, eat well" to someone who lacks clothing or food if you don't do anything to clothe or feed them. I couldn't say for sure, though, any more than I could say for sure what Jesus would or would not be grateful for. --- OtherDave (talk) 19:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus told His disciples that when they helped "the least of these my brethren", it was the same as if they were helping Him. That message seems clear enough. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, helping others is good, but he didn't tell them they had to believe the others had the right religion. HiLo48 (talk) 21:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like hungry children crying to a negligent babysitter, many people are "crying" to be fed spiritually. See http://www.multilingualbible.com/matthew/9-36.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/john/21-15.htm to verse 17; http://www.multilingualbible.com/matthew/4-4.htm; and http://www.multilingualbible.com/amos/8-11.htm.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this google search link works,[5] it should take you to a Peanuts cartoon that seems to fit. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go: List of Christian denominations by number of members indicates 1.2 billion Catholics in the world, and a quick calculation indicates that's at least 50 percent of the overall. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:04, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And that brings us back to "What is a Catholic?" (Or Christian) The figures in Wikipedia for my country, Australia, come from the national census, which delivers a figure ten TIMES greater than the number who attend church most weeks. It's all very unclear. HiLo48 (talk) 01:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be an issue only if one had a pre-conceived notion that being a Christian was supposed to imply weekly church attendance. To my knowledge, the only church that requires that on pain of sin is the Catholic Church. They may represent the largest denomination, but they are still only 1 of a multitude of Christian denominations. Also, adhering to the tenets of a particular faith does not guarantee perfection; how many Christians profess to be law-abiding yet consistently fail to indicate when pulling out of a kerb or when changing lanes? Or give some lame white lie when asked for a donation to a charity? The just man sins seventy times seven every day, but is still a just man. You don't stop being a Christian - if that's your thing - even if you become a raving rapist or murderer, let alone just not going to church every Sundsay. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 02:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The true figure, for both Catholics and Christians, would be somewhere between the church attendance figures and the census figures. But it is an issue, because governments, other bodies, religious leaders and politicians use the census for planning purposes, and religious and political point scoring. Because religion is such a personal issue, we have no idea at all of the true adherence to various religious faiths. HiLo48 (talk) 02:37, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the right answer is whatever the answer is to, "What religion do you identify with?" My answer is Christianity, even though I'm not a churchgoer and a lot of folks think I'm an agnostic or an atheist. But it's what I identify with where religion is concerned. I expect a lot of non-participants identify with something that way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:55, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.multilingualbible.com/hebrews/10-24.htm and http://www.multilingualbible.com/hebrews/10-25.htm on meeting for worship.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Followup note

The IP OP here is a troll, and also a sock. Just FYI. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And both now blocked. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you call a person who knows a troll is trolling and grabs the opportunity of the troll's post to declare their alleged religious identfication? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 14:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another good question could be, What do you call someone who thought a question was posted in good faith, only to be informed by another user that it was indeed trolling, and then had to wipe some egg from its face? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to be ashamed of, though. It was a good question, and one that, as a Catholic, I've had to deal with too many times to count. Aaronite (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Smooth Fox Terrier

I have read all that you have on your site but was unable to find the average or sustainable weight for a female Smooth Fox Terrier.I mhave a young spayed femail and wouldf like to know what I should look for not to have her over weight.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.71.188 (talk) 05:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See this. Oda Mari (talk) 07:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And for info on how to tell if a dog is under/overweight, see here. Dismas|^(talk) 01:14, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reservehandverfahren

Hello, does anyone know how I fidn out about this cipher and how it worked, same as articles on Playfair cipher make clear? THanks. 122.174.100.234 (talk) 06:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finding pine mushrooms to eat

In Michigan, where might one find the edible mushrooms Lactarius deliciosus and Lactarius sanguifluus to forage or, more preferably, purchase? —Cheng ✍ 07:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the grocery store doesn't have any then your best bet would be to look up local specialty food stores(organic stores/asian cuisine stores/etc) to see if they have any. If your local organic produce store doesn't have them then you can ask them where you can find them and they can probably point you in the right direction.AerobicFox (talk) 07:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you intend to forage for them (implied by asking "where might one find . . .") and you are not an experienced mycologist, make sure that you hook up with area experts before setting out in the woods to pick your 'shrooms as there are some very deadly varieties that regularly kill the ignorant. Siddartha Gautama (aka, The Buddha) and the King of the Elephants (from Babar the Elephant) both died of mushroom poisoning. The wikipedia article on Tricholoma magnivelare (the Pine mushroom) states that "Serious poisonings have resulted from confusion of this mushroom with Amanita smithiana".--Quartermaster (talk) 14:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quartermaster, you are talkig about a different "pine mushroom". The OP asked about one that grows in a different region and looks nothing like A. smithiana. This is a good illustration of why you shouldn't use common names when dealing with potentially deadly subjects. Pine mushrooms grow among pine trees as our articles point out. Michigan has lots of those. Michigan Mushroom Hunters Club may be able to help you. Rmhermen (talk) 21:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the illumination and clarification. I obviously went by the title of the posted request without paying particular attention to the body. In any case, I think we both still agree that when foraging, if you are not experienced (and I am NOT but have foraged with those who are) you should try to connect with the local experts. --Quartermaster (talk) 14:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Converting videos to MTS

How do I convert MP4 videos to MTS free on Mac? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.143 (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LIC MONEY PLUS

what is the present growth rate of insurance policy LIC MONEY PLUS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.96.217 (talk) 20:15, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the fund's NAV as of yesterday, along with the repurchase and sale value of units, are given here on LIC's own website, if that helps at all. Ka renjc 22:15, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Super Bowl 21

In Super Bowl 21, the New York Giants wore a patch on the front of their jersies and I want to know what was the patch and why was it worn. No team had ever done that before.drv 74.226.69.231 (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it reads "SPIDER 43" in memory of Carl "Spider" Lockhart, a former Giant who had died in 1986. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pocket TVs in the UK

Many years ago in the UK it used to be possible to buy TVs with tiny CRTs that would fit into a large pocket - one of the Sinclair products I think.

Is it possible to buy a pocket tv nowadays - in other words a very small portable tv? Thanks 92.24.182.238 (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The switch to digital TV appears to had made these less useful, at least in the US. The reason is that the tiny antenna isn't likely to get very good reception, especially if you're out camping in the woods. Unlike with analog TV, which just gets a bit of snow with poor reception, digital TV is utterly useless with poor reception.

On the plus side, a small LCD TV would weigh less, take up less room, and last longer than a CRT, with a given set of batteries. StuRat (talk) 23:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can watch TV on mobile phones now, so I guess that soft of counts. --Tango (talk) 23:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tango, I will try to go soft on you while pointing out that you need to sort out your spelling. :-) StuRat (talk) 23:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]

My spelling is fine; it's my typing that leaves a lot to be desired! --Tango (talk) 18:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reminds me of the immortal words of Milkbreath: My spelling is better than my orthography would indicate. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 22:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]

There are a variety of DVB-H and DVB-T handheld TV's available to purchase online from Amazon and specialists (such as [6]) and in the High Street at specialist shops like Maplin. These typically have a 3.5" screen. A lot of users on forums etc report low signal strength, manufacturers advise that reception quality will increase when the Digital Switchover completes and the transmitters switch to full power. Nanonic (talk) 01:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't believe it, it didn't happen in the US. Digital TV reception is still poor, long after the switchover completed here. StuRat (talk) 07:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One obviously doesn't preclude the other... Nil Einne (talk) 09:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, there was some speculation that cable and satellite TV companies wanted to ensure that broadcast free TV reception was poor, thus making their products more valuable, and therefore influenced politicians to pass laws resulting in poor reception. StuRat (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the north of Scotland, where I am, digital reception definitely got worse after switchover. Although the power increased, they altered some transmission protocol to squeeze in extra channels and HDTV. Thincat (talk) 10:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the video/audio quality got worse or the reception got worse? Nil Einne (talk) 21:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The picture (and sound) break-up is worse. It was extremely disappointing after we'd been led to believe that removing analogue would improve the digital reception. When the picture is there the quality is the same so far as I can tell.Thincat (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here in an isolated area of northern UK, we have no terrestrial TV signal at all now that the transmitters have gone digital, so my pocket TV is totally useless. Does anyone want one? I suppose the future of pocket TV is mobile phone reception via the internet over phone transmitters, but they don't have the necessary bandwidth round here. Dbfirs 21:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you really giving it away? I would like it :) 82.43.92.41 (talk) 21:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't used it for years. I'll look for it, but it will soon become useless in most of the UK. Dbfirs 10:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thank you so much! 82.43.92.41 (talk) 16:11, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Janet Templeton background

Does anybody have any information about Charlie Sheen's mother, Janet Templeton? In an interview today, he said that she was Jewish, but "nobody knows anything about her father". Templeton isn't likely a Jewish name, did she take somebody else's last name, or is her mother Jewish? Corvus cornix_talk 22:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Templeton is indeed not a common Jewish name: it usually derives from Templeton in Ayrshire, Scotland. Google tells me that Janet Estevez/Sheen is a devout and devoted Roman Catholic. Whether she has Jewish ancestry I don't know. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 23:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is Charlie Sheen a reliable source regarding the ancestry of Charlie Sheen? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 16:50, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he's a reliable source for anything at this point in time. Corvus cornix_talk 21:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except maybe as a poster child for self-destructive behavior. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I find many references to this alleged "fact" in google, but all of them seem to be merely quoting Charlie Sheen. I can't find anything that pre-dates Charlie's recent problems and would theoretically have more of the ring of truth. Supposedly, Martin Sheen adopted his stage name as a combination of an acquaintance with the surname Martin, and a reference to Fulton J. Sheen. The ultimate irony in Charlie deciding that he's of Jewish extraction is that "sheeny" is an old-fashioned but highly derogatory term for a Jew. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 5

Do you need to focus a telescopic sight?

When using a rifle with say, a 10X, telescopic sight, do you need to focus the scope like you would on a pair of binoculars or camera lens? Or does the scope have unlimited depth of field? Acceptable (talk) 06:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a deer hunter, I have not come across a scope that requires "focusin". There are those where subtle adjustments can be made, but not to the degree of binoculars or a telescope. Alignment is the biggest issue. -- David Able 06:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt if a hunter would focus the scope, so he can count the deer's whiskers, when he really wants to shoot. StuRat (talk) 07:21, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As this is Wikipedia we have an article on Telescopic sight's that you might like to read.--Aspro (talk) 16:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't specifically know, but it seems likely to me that a telescopic sight will be focused at "infinity", so that objects far away will be in good focus but objects nearby will be blurred. Looie496 (talk) 17:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing like that has an unlimited depth of field, as far as I know, but if everything you are interested in is beyond the hyperfocal distance then you can just keep the sight focused at infinity and everything will be in focus. I'm not sure what the hyperfocal distance for a typical telescopic sight is, but since 1) the sights are very small, 2) the distances involved are very large (otherwise you wouldn't bother with a telescopic sight) and 3) the acceptable amount of blur is quite high (you don't need to be able to see the object clearly, you just need to be able to see where it is in order to aim at it), it wouldn't surprise me at all if focusing at infinity worked fine the vast majority of the time. --Tango (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note the focus control on this telescopic sight. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that that 'focus' control pictured is a diopter adjustment that allows the user to compensate for his own vision defects and obtain a sharp view of the targeting reticle; it has nothing to do with focusing on targets at different distances. (The system is fixed focus at infinity, and the reticle is in one of the image planes.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake in this article

Hi,

In this page (Washington's Birthday) it is written the Presidents Day is related to Washington's birthday but in the little table on the right, it's written it's related to Lincoln's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.153.189 (talk) 08:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to Snopes,[7] it's Washington. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the article is mistaken. It's saying it's "related to" Lincoln's birthday, not that it commemorates Lincoln's birthday. It actually commemorates Washington's. The article explains it all in fine detail. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:16, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. It just means that Washington's birthday is a bit like Lincoln's birthday, which is perfectly true. They are both birthdays of famous US presidents that are public holidays (at least in some states, in the case of Lincoln's). --Tango (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Washington day and Lincoln day are now celebrated as one combined holiday known as Presidents Day which takes place on Washington's birthday since it clearly could not take place on both of their birthdays.AerobicFox (talk) 05:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Not really. President's Day is an unofficial term. The 3-day holiday is officially the Washington's Birthday holiday. Some states have chosen to throw Lincoln's birthday in with it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Women skiers with facepaint

I was watching the on-going skiing world championship at my coworker's home, and there was a women's skiing event going on. I noticed that a couple of the skiers had the middle part of their faces (the nose and the part of the face around it) painted in a pastel colour, such as light blue or pink. What does this mean? Why do they do this? Is it a weird women's fashion thing or does it actually mean something? JIP | Talk 18:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heavier sunscreens are often opaque, and many are coloured - some brands don't come uncoloured. I have seen both men and women wearing them. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 18:37, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, it's probably sunblock. You see cricketers wearing it quite often too. --Tango (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As well as lifeguards. Dismas|^(talk) 10:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://zinka.com/ This stuff was big with skiers in the 80s, it might be making a comeback.129.128.216.107 (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this photo? (Somewhere in Utah)

Anyone know where this rock formation in Utah is? Photo says Arches, but I think it's mislabeled. --CGPGrey (talk) 21:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google images turned this up. Looks like the middle formation in the picture on this page: [8] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And this.[9] The rock formations are called the Courthouse Towers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's also visible in the background of this picture. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nice one Bugs, why use one edit when three will do. Caesar's Daddy (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Increases the edit count! --Quartermaster (talk) 23:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Something I'd never do, myself. --Quartermaster (talk) 23:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right. My initial response answered the question, and the other two responses provided more information as I found out more about it and became more interested in it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 6

US Shooting team ammo

Dear Wikipedia,

I have 2 boxes of Remington 12 guage shotgun shells. They are 2 3/4, #8 shot. They come in a blue/green box. They are from the US Shooting Team. I got them in the mid 1980's in Colorado Springs. I can't seem to find any information on them anywheres. I'm looking to find more information on the value and the history of them. Any help you could provide would be great. Thanks!!

<e-mail address redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.240.145.94 (talk) 02:50, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was passing through a major US airport once and saw an Eastern European shooting team picking up their checked luggage at the baggage carousel. There were rifles and shotguns aplenty, along with many cartons labelled "10,000 rounds of X calibre ammunition." The implication is that there were countless boxes of shells such as you have. ~~Another implication is that if that "former Commie satellite" team had included terrorists, they could easily have captured the airport and perhaps the city.~~ Edison (talk) 03:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your final 15 words apply whether they are Commies, Republicans or Australians, etc. HiLo48 (talk) 05:10, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edison, your comment is completely off-topic.Sjö (talk) 08:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edison was merely trying to illuminate. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The last part (about terrorists) was OT. The first part wasn't. Clearly the rarity of something has a resonable effect on the value. It doesn't definitively answer the question (amongst other things it's possible the US shooting team had less ammo) but it's relevent enough that it's a useful and normal answer on the RD, particularly when the OP has said 'I'm looking to find more information' and 'any help you could provide would be great' suggesting they would welcome incomplete non definitive answers which nevertheless provide more information about what they're wondering (the value and history of the shells). Nil Einne (talk) 10:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OT? More informative than any other post in the thread as to the commonness of "shooting team " branded ammo. I noted that one Eastern Block team had many tens of thousands of rounds such as the OP described, in a visit to one city. Many cartons, each with 10,000 rounds. This makes me believe that "US Shooting Team" ammo boxes are in no way scarce, and thus not something that has huge value. For the present price of an item check Sotheby's auctions, and if it is not valuable enough for them, check EBay. Relevancy? Having made an informative contribution, I took the liberty of noting the irony of desperate fear that someone in an airport might have a fingernail clipper or box cutter, while foreign nationalists picked up rifles, shotguns, and thousands of rounds of ammo at the baggage pickup, providing them with orders of magnitude more firepower than all the security forces at the airport, or perhaps in the city. Maybe the latter part should have been in small script with a smiley face to satisfy those who are crabby. :<) I struck the latter part of my initial post, which seems to have rubbed someone the wrong way for whatever reason. Edison (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. Sjö (talk) 10:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some Google searching shows Winchester has supplied the US shotgun shooting team with ammo since at least 1999. The team thus got free (or cheap) ammo of "competition" grade while the company got useful product exposure. This article indicates that Remington had ties to the US shooting team in the early 1980's: [10]. I found a 1988 article which said "Nobody shoots any U.S. ammo, the quality is so poor," and that all US shooting team members that year used English or West German ammo. The article said lots of left over equipment from the Olympics was being sold as surplus. Edison (talk)

flags and names

Is there a website where I can get a country's flag inside the name of another country like for example Bangladeshi flag inside Qatar's name either in English or Arabic meaning the name Qatar is written in English but the Bangladeshi is inserted inside the name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.41.58 (talk) 04:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems unlikely: why would anybody create such a website? But there are strange things on the web so maybe. --ColinFine (talk) 10:00, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "inside the name"? Do you want the name written in a circle? You can make something like that yourself very easily. The "Word Art" feature in MS Word will do it, as will equivalent features in other word processors. YOu can then put the flag in the middle. I agree with Colin, though, it doesn't sound like something someone would make a website specifically for. --Tango (talk) 22:04, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

usage of plastic bags

I have completely reduced the use of plastic bags and curtailed consumption of paper/electricity and petrol by conscious efforts. However,my attempts to persuade my colleagues to follow has failed. They tell me that an individual cannot make a difference.Where do I go from here? Sumalsn (talk) 05:38, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remind them that "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." HiLo48 (talk) 05:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't want to hear that the OP discarded them in the trash. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:53, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Show them a picture of the Grand Canyon, and remind them that one drop of water started that. "Constant dripping wears away stones" as we say in the UK. Or "many a mickle makes a muckle" in the North of Britain. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:10, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ask them if they throw away pennies, or whatever the smallest denomination of your local currency happens to be. If they say, "No, I collect them in a jar and then cash them in", you have an example that is more relevant to their lives than the Grand Canyon or ancient platitudes. Either way though, if you keep pushing them on it, you might end up with fewer friends and thus fewer friends that you need to worry about. Dismas|^(talk) 10:15, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It might make more sense to seek out those who already conserve, and form a group that leads by example. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is "completely reduce"? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the context I took it to mean either "eliminated" or "reduced to the minimum possible". Re the latter: some stores used to (and may still) insist on putting one's purchase into one of their logo'd plastic (or paper) bags "for security reasons", which meant "so our security staff don't think you've just shoplifted it"; some local councils (in the UK) require particular issued or purchased plastic sacks be used for refuse collections. Sumalsn may have had such or other instances of unavoidable use in mind; perhaps he will elucidate. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OP seems to be of Indian nationality. As such it is possible that "completely reduced" is simply one of the numerous phrases of Indian English which seem odd to speakers of UK / US / Down Under... English. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a question : does reducing your Petrol consumption make a difference? If I wanted to play devil's advocate, I could say that the oil companies are extracting oil as fast as they can, and 100% of it is consumed. With cars selling like hotcakes in developing nations (especially China), Does it matter if you burn it or someone else does? APL (talk) 18:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Erm, the point here being not that we should do whatever the heck we like, but that it's increasingly clear that we're going to burn all of our planet's oil reserves that can realistically be extracted. Whatever horrible consequences that has may be inevitable. In that case, you may be better off brow-beating your colleagues about things that have a more local effect. Such as proper disposal of used batteries, florescent bulbs, etc. Or other local issues.) APL (talk) 18:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oil companies do not extract all they can. OPEC has policies for controlling production and the price of oil. Petrol consumption in US affects US pollution more than petrol consumption in China. My petrol consumption affects my disposable income. Yes, that matters. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gabbart

Are these craft related to the "gabares", shallow-draught cargo boats used on the River Dordogne and tributaries in France in 18th and 19th centuries (and still used in tourist sailings)?81.132.197.113 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:56, 6 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

The article is Gabbert, for those who might be wondering. --ColinFine (talk) 10:01, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Though that redirects to Gabbart, Colin :-) ! 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:44, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does now. It didn't before I moved it. --ColinFine (talk) 23:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OED (s.v. "Gabbart") says "Etymology: < French gabarre (now spelt gabare)", so it would appear that the answer is Yes. --ColinFine (talk) 10:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link to the article! It's certainly not a common US English term and helped me understand what to OP was referring to. Dismas|^(talk) 10:17, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the French Wikipedia article and here is a website about them. Alansplodge (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 7

Big in Oman?

"For all of these reasons, the two most accessed sites right now in the Middle East are al jeezera [sic] and Wikipedia." Source

Is this true? Al-Jazeera I'd be inclined to believe, but I never heard Wikipedia mentioned as a key or even popular information source for those in the Arab world oriented towards the ongoing insurgence. Any leads appreciated. 83.70.254.18 (talk) 00:03, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is reputed to be an objective source of information and has the feature of being continuously updated. I checked when the following pages were last edited:

Libya 1 hour ago, Gaddafi 30 minutes ago, Egypt 4-1/2 hours ago, and Mubarak 5 hours ago. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:47, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All well and good, but I'm not interested in how objective or frequently updated Wikipedia is; I'm interested in credible indicators that show the extent to which it is considered important or popular in the Middle East. Thanks, 83.70.254.18 (talk) 19:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The number of "hits" per given time period could be a good indicator, but is there any public information on that for wikipedia and/or other websites? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I wouldn't put a {{sic}} tag on "al jeezera". All transliterations from Arabic to Latin are approximations, there is no 100% correct. --Soman (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The English Language Version of Al Jazeera has a specific and uniform spelling that they identify themselves by. I think that, out of respect for the network, we should probably consider that the most correct transliteration. Buddy431 (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google Trends for Oman on the sites aljazeera.net, ar.wikipedia.org, and en.wikipedia.org shows aljazeera.net (the Arabic portal) in the lead only since late January (data not yet available apparently for Feb/Mar).

You might also be interested in The Most Popular Knowledge sharing App Per Country. WikiDao ☯ 20:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Document my life

Hi. Suppose I wanted to document my background (name, birthdate, job, weight, etc) and any trivial but provable details about my life that are even remotely quantifiable (including all my purchases of what I bought and how much I spent, all my travel, all my doctor's/dentist's/optometrist's/etc visits, everything I checked out from the library, etc) for a year in an organized spreadsheet form. Again, I only want things that can be verified and are about no more trivial or detailed than things like purchases (so not, for example, "I was happy", "I walked down the driveway to get the mail", "I got up at 6:00", or Wikipedia edits etc). Approximately how much computer memory (measured in (whatever)-bytes) would this take? Don't get too hung up on what exactly does and does not qualify for inclusion, I'm just looking for a very rough (but educated!) estimate. I thought about asking thsi on the computers desk but I decided this question isn't really about computers since I don't really intend to do it, computers are just the vehicle that I use to get my point across. Thanks. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 02:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I supose, if done in Microsoft Excel, it would be around 900kb to 3mb. Which is not very much, compared to the memory a computer has. However, this could greatly vary, depending on how old you were when you create it, how much you have done, if you moved alot, or had other details that changed frequently. Sumsum2010·T·C·Review me! 05:03, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For a related project, see the Feltron reports, where a guy actually did something like this. For your purpose, say you use 50 characters for a "record", including date, place and what you did? That's 50 bytes uncompressed. Then twenty events per day? That's one kilobyte per day. At 365 days a year, this is 365 kb. Of course, a spreadsheet will add some overhead, but still, "a relatively insignificant amount of data by modern computer standards" seems to be the answer. Jørgen (talk) 12:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a simple way to calculate this: log it for a day or a week, and then multiply. This is going to be far more reliable than asking strangers who don't understand what you want to do. Without knowing even if you have to buy your own food or pay your own bills, there's no way we can take anything but the wildest guess. If you live in an African village the answer will be very different than if you are a businessperson who travels regularly. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:47, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The human limit to the amount of information one could collect in a year and type into a computer in real spare time must be about the same for everybody. Business travel is relatively uneventful with long waits for flights. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully all of the location information would be automated with services like Foursquare tracking you, and if you made 100% of your purchases with a credit card or debit card, that's a lot more stuff that doesn't need to be manually typed in. But, yes, the typing in sounds pretty horrible. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:25, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

find a friend

A friend come to Kenya in 1979, A security with United Nation name. Tony Green. State in Guyana. Please help me find him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.122.166.242 (talk) 04:51, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Email address removed 27.32.104.185 (talk) 05:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reading your question to say "I'm looking for somebody named Tony Green, from Guyana, who worked as a security guard for the UN in Kenya in 1979". Do you know his age or anything else about him ? Unfortunately, that's a common English name (although perhaps not in Guyana), so a general search would give us many hits. If that's all you have, then it would be necessary to follow up with the UN directly, and perhaps they could give you more on where he was from (an address or city). However, I don't know if they give that info out to just anybody, and they may not keep records that old. Also, since that's 32 years ago, there's a fair chance he's dead, by now (depending on his age at the time). StuRat (talk) 19:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He might also be related to the infamous politician, Hamilton Green. StuRat (talk) 19:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Town Like Alice

Can you tell me the word count of the novel please? <;;e-mail address removed to prevent spam> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.203.202 (talk) 11:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can only estimate 359 pages x (average words per page). But it appears that you can download the book and then use Review - Word Count in Microsoft Word to get the answer. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:22, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is that link kosher? I can't work out the attitude to copyright of that site, and I'm not sure that A Town Like Alice is out of copyright either. --Viennese Waltz 14:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The author died 51 years ago, so it will depend on the copyright laws of the OP's jurisdiction. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 15:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Publishing just the word count of a novel would be Fair use. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

... but downloading the text to do the counting would probably be illegal because the work was first published outside the USA and Canada, and most other countries (including the UK and Australia) now have a 70-year rule which would include all the works of Nevil Shute. I suppose that if you delete the text from all storage media immediately after counting, and don't pass it on to anyone else, then you are extremely unlikely to be prosecuted, but, technically, I doubt whether the procedure can be within the US "fair use" rule. Dbfirs 17:48, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you download it to your PC and do nothing with it except count the words, who's going to arrst you? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the torrent index link. We do not assist copyright violations here on the Reference Desk. If Cuddlyable3 wanted to download the novel and do a word count and claim it's fair use, I cannot stop him or her; but we don't post torrent links or torrent index links here. Please direct further commentary about this to the discussion page, where I started a new thread. Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A "photocopier" in my wallet. Is there a practical solution?

At the library there are old books, academic journals and magazines that, unfortunately, are not for loan. Often it is not convenient to sit down and read it all on the spot. (I may just not be well rested nor focused enough, at the time, to take in the information. Or there may be too much text (400 pages or more)).
Therefore I would really like to have a "photocopier" in my wallet, so that I could read the texts and study the information graphics later, at home, instead. B-)
Q: Is there any convenient solution, a tiny (flat) digital camera or a tiny handheld scanner, that will render readability close enough to that of an Image scanner to be practically useful?
--Seren-dipper (talk) 13:55, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are tiny handheld scanners; I've never used one myself, though, and have always been dubious about their quality (I would imagine it requires a very steady hand, and you wouldn't know until afterwards if you did a good job or not). I have, however, found that small digital cameras can be used to good effect, provided that you get in the habit of being able to judge how much light is necessary (not a lot, but it must be even — contrasts, like shadows or bright parts, screw it up more than having low light) and holding the camera at a consistent angle. I use an old Canon Powershot Digital Elph for photographing documents and sometimes book pages. Unlike some cameras (and I checked this out at a camera store before I bought it), its focal length works just fine at the distance needed to photograph documents (e.g. 10 inches or so). The resulting photos can be fed into Acrobat Pro (though I usually run a Photoshop macro on them first, to enhance the contrast a bit), turned into a PDF, and OCRized with remarkable accuracy, even if the pages are curved. It's not as good as a real document scanner — there's no simple way to render it as just "black and white," and so the files are quite large, but if you are just doing this for your own usage, it works pretty well. The speed is much faster than a scanner — I can take one photo ever second or so, now that I'm used to doing it. (A large part of the research component of my "real job" involves photographing documents for my own use.) This is just my own experience; there may be better ways. What I like about this method (and I have tried a few others, like lugging around a small flatbed scanner), though, is that it is very quick, very easy, very small, very easy to verify it worked correctly (since the photo is immediately on the camera, so if I screw it up, it's usually obvious), and "accurate enough" for what I need it for. The camera I use isn't small enough for a wallet, but it is small enough for a jacket pocket. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Documents were photographed all the time during WWII and the Cold War, see Subminiature photography. The most famous example of such a camera would be the Minox. A quick skim of the latter article suggests that Minox cameras are still available. --Viennese Waltz 14:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The webcam incorporated in my laptop has limited resolution (e.g. Acer "Crystal Eye" resolves 640x480) but is handy for copying book pages because its fixed focus is about right, it can be adjusted for contrast, brightness and sharpness, results are immediately visible, and a huge number of images can be stored. With some effort at tiling partial images together, I can copy a sheet of newspaper. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have used a conventional small digital camera to succesfully photograph hundreds of books and documents in a similar situation as the one mentioned by the OP. Once you get the hang of it, you will even be able to photograph them faster than a photocopier or handscanner would be able to, and in excellent quality. --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:10, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

iPhone cameras are sufficiently good that at least one bank uses images of checks for depositing into one's bank account. Collect (talk) 16:15, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that it is advisable to use a camera with anti-blur and especially anti-shake technology for this, since the camera would have to be handheld and the lighting conditions may not always be optimal. I don't have an iPhone, so I don't know if it has these features. --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In most library conditions I think you are fine without anti-blur and anti-shake. I've never had trouble with mine, anyway. Adequate light for reading is usually adequate light for quick photographs. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The anti-shake function does come in handy after taking 300 pictures in a row without using a tripod, though. Then the old arms are not as steady as they were at the beginning of the session. --Saddhiyama (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose arms do vary! --Mr.98 (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a Canon LiDE scanner that fits into a laptop bag and is USB powered that I have used it to copy research material. If you use a camera, there are tripods and copy stands available. I have a nice Manfrotto tripod with a long joystick head that rotates down 90° for overhead photos.[11] I have been considering the Gorillapod for more portable use.[12] ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 16:32, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've used a LiDE scanner for a long time (so long, though, that it might be a bad comparison to whatever is currently on the market — I think I bought mine in 2002 or 2003, for about $50 I think it is a LiDE 20.). The one I've used is "OK." They are very light (they use LCDs as their illuminating lamp), though mine is a little large to carry around comfortably in a standard laptop bag. (And of course, you have to carry the laptop around as well.) The time it takes to scan is the same as a regular flat bed — so they're not very quick. The quality of mine is not as good as a regular flatbed if you are trying to scan at anything higher than 300 dpi.

As for tripods, etc.: if you are looking for something quick and dirty, you don't, in my experience, really need to use a tripod. If you get the hang of doing it without a tripod (how to hold the camera consistently each time), it is much faster — again, about a second per photo, with almost no setup time between shots (other than turning the page). What I like about "freehanding" it is that I don't have to try and worry about whether the document is correctly aligned; I just change the camera based on the document. This is especially handy if you have documents of different sizes, or, god forbid, documents that have reflective tape on them (which can be very hard to photograph, but is only a problem one finds in an archive, not a library). Obviously if you need your copies to be print ready or something like that, the scanner or tripod works better. But if your primary concern is smallness of size and speed, then doing it by hand with a digital camera is ideal. When I do research at various archives, I notice a lot of people with what I would consider to be over-fancy setups for their document photographs. If you are doing it just for your own usage, I don't think all that apparatus is necessary. I prioritize speed over most anything else, because the most I can photograph in the least amount of time, the less time I have to spend in an awful archive reading room. :-) --Mr.98 (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of scanners that have a tiny, pocket-able form factor. this one for example is like a pen that you drag sideways across a page and it goes into the device's internal storage. APL (talk) 20:53, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but, 1. are those fast, and 2. are they any good? The reviews I've read imply that they are both slow to use (slower than a camera, anyway) and that the quality is really quite poor, and of course you can't see what you've got until after you've done all the work (so if your pages came out bad, you don't know until it is too late). I've never used one, though. They cost as much as a pretty good digital camera. This review implies that the ones you linked to are better than most, but even they have pretty crippling flaws — it takes 20 seconds per page to scan at 300 dpi, and even then you don't know if you have a good scan until you put it on a computer. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:23, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. It'd be infuriating to not know if you'd scanned something properly. Too bad, I like the idea of those scanners because they were described by Asimov in The Dying Night. APL (talk) 02:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of great advice here on how to violate copyright laws. Must be something different about A Town Called Alice discussion above . . . or, not. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does photocopying library books constitute a breach of copyright, if it is done simply for personal use? I'm no expert, but I don't think it is in the United States. Pfly (talk) 09:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made note that the OP specifically stated it was "old" books. I can only assume that he meant "old" in the sense that their copyright was expired, and it would thus not be a copyright breach to copy them. All the books I have copied in this way has been more than two centuries old. --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photocopying reasonable portions of publications for personal use is likely to be kosher; photocopying entire books much less so. See fair use for more background. Duplicating an entire book almost certainly runs afoul of the 'amount and substantiality' test. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are copying articles for your own use outside of a library, that generally falls under fair use. The mere act of photographing or scanning books does not itself imply copyright violation at all. Hence the fact that most libraries have photocopiers in them. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that fair use is not recognised in all countries. Although I would assume most countries would allow photocopying of parts of newer books for personal use. I am more doubtful whether copying or photgraphing complete books would be allowed in countries that does not accept fair use. --Saddhiyama (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed and as ToAT has said, it's not clear that even countries with fair use allow copying whole books for private use outside the library except in special circumstances. In fact it's not that uncommon for libraries to actually have signs warning people about their local laws regarding copyright according to [13] this happens in the US (where they do have fair use) as well. That website also mentions

Copying a complete work from the library collection is prohibited unless the work is not available at a "fair price." This is generally the case when the work is out of print and used copies are not available at a reasonable price. If a work, located within the library's collection, is available at a reasonable price, the library may reproduce one article or other contribution to a copyrighted collection or periodical issue, or a small part of any other copyrighted work, for example, a chapter from a book.

Although this is referring to cases when the library makes the copies, there's no indication I see it will be different if the person is making the copies themself and in fact from other things the ref says, it sounds unlikely. (I'm not sure if this has ever been tested in law but I've never seen any indication even from fair use advocates that copying entire works for private use is likely to be considered fair use in itself and in fact I would say this seems unlikely.)

Nil Einne (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From a practical point of view, the risk of running into legal jeopardy because you (an individual) have made a copy of some magazine articles on a library photocopier (or copied it with a camera) is essentially nonexistent. In any case, the fair use question is entirely separate from the "how could I copy" question. And yes, libraries post big warning signs around, because they, like everyone else in the United States, are deeply wedded to a CYA approach to copyright threats, thanks to the longstanding efforts of an over-litiguous media industry. Making personal copies of selections from library books for your own, personal research purposes, is generally considered fair use in most US legal contexts. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No one was talking about legal jeopardy but following the law. And yes some people do like to follow the law, even if they aren't at legal risk. Similarly, no one has denied that copying parts of a book for your personal use often okay in the US. However since some of the answers appear to suggest copying entire books (or at least a very substanial part) and even the question seems to suggest this could be a possibility, the issue of whether copying entire (or a substanial part of) books which are under copyright, is usually okay is relevant here. And the evidence from actual sources suggests it's not in many circumstances in the US. I'm okay with people providing help here, since it's resonable to AGF that they are not likely be copying enough to be a concern or the books may be out of copyright (although the question doesn't offer enough info for us to conclude they are and I myself when reading the question yesterday before anyone had replied decided not to help mostly because I was uncertain that what the OP was intending to do was legally ok). But I'm also okay with people reminding others that they may want to make sure what they're doing is legally okay (although decided not to mention the issue myself before it was brought up).

The point of the signs, whatever you may think of them, is to make it clear that even the libraries themselves acknowledge that the existance of photocopiers in the library doesn't mean you are permitted to copy anything and everything you want, whatever the libraries reasons for having the signs may be. I would repeat what I said earlier, that no one has ever suggested or came close to implying that you are not allowed to copy anything in a library. While Dor's statement in itself may be ambigious, in the context of the question it's resonable to presume that they were aware of what was being discussed and came to the conclusion it may violate copyright law (even if other's don't agree with that). And they were therefore not trying to suggest that you are not permitted to copy anything in the library anywhere in the world and the photocopiers are just there for drunken staff parties even in Saudi Arabia.

P.S. I admit when I originally replied, I was under the assumption that the original question had strongly implied the OP wished to copy an entire book or close to that so both my replies partly reflect the assumption that the thing of main relevence here was whether copying an entire (or close enough) book in copyright was likely to be okay. Re-reading it I realise it's more ambigious, so the issue of whether copying articles and small parts of individual books is more relevent then I thought. I apologise for any confusion and offence caused because of this. Even so, I still feel it's important to emphasise the point that there's no evidence copying entire (or close to) books in copyright is usually okay and in fact evidence exists to the contrary.

Nil Einne (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

name that movie

What is the name of the movie about Earth blowing up meteors that at the end of the movie, Nasa learns that the meteors are actually an attack on the Earth by a faraway alien race. First there's one meteor/asteroid that is nuked. Then days later theres another, so it's nuked. And another and another. At the very end of the movie (possibly a made-for-tv movie) the screen is filled with meteros entering Earth's atmosphere with the Earth defenseless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.73.249 (talk) 17:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't sound familiar, but we have Category:Impact events in fiction. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 20:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the upcoming film Battle: Los Angeles? Corvus cornix_talk 20:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds a little bit like This Island Earth, except the doomed planet is Metaluna. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I actually have vague memories of such a movie. The only difference between my memory and the description (well I'm not sure if it's NASA) is that the first asteroid/comet? wasn't actually intended to attack earth but rather just some sort of scouting or even friendly gesture (possibly it wasn't actually going to hit earth) but the aliens weren't happy with its destruction. I don't think it was ever explained why the aliens didn't think an asteroid would come across as a threat but that's movies for you. But I searched quite hard earlier (before anyone replied but since I didn't come up with anything didn't reply at first) and Starship Troopers (film) was the best I could come up with and the premise isn't that similar. And I did look in Asteroid impact avoidance and Asteroids in fiction. Searching is not helped by wacky conspirary sites which think aliens have already sent asteroids/comets and sites discussing aliens fossils etc on asteroids. In my case I don't think the movie was that old, perhaps 90s-2000s may be even 80s or at a stretch 70s but I doubter older than that. Of course perhaps I'm remembering wrong or thinking of a game or book or something. (I did find one or two books but their plot was different.) Nil Einne (talk) 22:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Footfall features 1 or 2 asteroids guided at Earth as weapons; but I had assumed the original poster was indeed referring to Battle: Los Angeles, a movie none of us has yet seen. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell from the IMDb viewer comments, It looks like Nil Einne (and maybe the OP) is thinking of Without Warning (1994). Clarityfiend (talk) 23:42, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, we have an article: Without Warning (1994 film). Clarityfiend (talk) 23:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 8

Durability of jeans

Which jeans are likely to be most durable?

I buy and wear jeans at least partly out of force of habit. And I originally developed this habit at least partly because they were durable. (This was a long time before "civilization" developed wacky notions such as brand new ripped-up jeans or a "healthy" market in used jeans.)

Me, I still buy jeans that look new, when I can find them. Yes, worn jeans have a certain charm, but quite aside from the damage to the environment and waste of resources in their manufacture, I want jeans that have their lifespan ahead.

Recently, most black jeans (my favorite color) seem to have been faded to at least some extent. And they seem to wear out quickly. Oh, 99% by area is good enough; but creases develop and intensify in the, ahem, most vital area under the crotch, and pretty soon these threaten to have me arrested for indecent exposure. Of course there are solutions -- see for example www.ehow.com/how_6471274_patch-holes-crotch-jeans.html (blacklisted domain name) -- but I'm lazy, and so into the trash they go.

I don't know how credible the guide to durability http://ezinearticles.com/?How-to-Judge-Jean-Durability-and-Quality-Before-You-Buy&id=4295178 (blacklisted domain name) is, but it somehow sounds convincing. Trouble is, it refers to terms such as "ringspun" and "slub" that it says are explained on the web -- but that when googled bring up lots of trade adverts.

Fashion be damned, does anyone know of a guide to durability that is intelligible to people who don't happen to be in the rag trade?

Or even -- sacriligious notion coming up! -- is there any alternative to jeans that are as durable in reality as jeans are in myth?

(And lastly, for comic relief, an apparently serious "durability test" lasting just 20 days. No, not months, days.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:28, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite happy with my Carhartt pants which are made of denim, so I guess you could call them "jeans". Dismas|^(talk) 03:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about Samurai Jeans or Ironheart? Their jeans are made of 21oz denim. But I think the denim is heavy and hard, and the jeans are uncomfortable. If I remember correctly, most jeans are made of 12 to 14oz denim. Oda Mari (talk) 06:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! I hadn't heard of Carhartt; I'll investigate. Mari, the pricing of those Japanese companies is just too ridiculous. (the star, at 63,000 yen.) I do like the only label I saw, though: "ESSENTIAL OF U.S.A. CLOTHING". -- Hoary (talk) 12:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure you like the color, because they'll last the rest of your life. --Sean 14:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also enjoy squeezing the last penny of value out of things I've bought. In my long experience of wearing jeans, they wear out first between the legs, and then eventually the front of the thigh rips open too. Although often the zip breaks, making them unusable despite still having a lot of wear left in them. There are three or four things you can do regarding durability. 1) if you have a choice and all other things being equal, choose the heavier weight denim. The jeans will feel heavier than jeans with thin denim, although starch is often used by manufacturers to make the fasbric feel thicker than it actually is. 2) A loose baggy fit makes the jeans last longer. They wear out between the legs less. They are not under tension so worn fabric is less likely to rip open, and the same areas of fabric do not keep rubbing against each other and wear out. The zip is not being pulled apart all the time so is less likely to break. 3) Buy button-flys rather than a zip, if available. 4) Most importantly, buy cheap jeans. Twenty pairs of cheap jeans at £2 each will last many times longer than one brand-name pair at £40. This may be ruled out on environmental or anti-sweatshop grounds. 5) When washing, turn the jeans inside-out so that the colour does not fade so much. Unless you like faded jeans. 92.15.0.66 (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two quid a pair? 92.15.0.66, are you perhaps on a time-warp from 1961? (Are you typing on one of these?) The ones I'm wearing now cost me 15 quid or so. (Incidentally, xe.com tells me that 63,000 yen is 472 quid.) No really, I'm interested. And your other ideas are very interesting, and plausible. Yes, I'll buy looser jeans next time. -- Hoary (talk) 12:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can sometimes find jeans for £2 in discount shops in cheaper areas. I've got several pairs. 92.15.0.66 (talk) 15:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also only buy new-looking jeans. I have trouble accepting the pre-worn concept. I am confident that they will get worn out in due order. I accept that as part of the life-cycle of the product, and I am in no rush to circumvent or obviate several wash cycles. Bus stop (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re fading: one can buy special detergents designed for blacks/colours at major supermarkets, which contain less bleach (and may have other differences). I try to use them for black items and special T-shirts I don't want to fade. Whether you can use them, Hoary, depends on your laundery arrangements, I guess. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:49, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts:

1) Pre-faded jeans do have one advantage, that you don't get color transfer onto other clothes the first few times you wash them (although this can actually be a plus if you wash them with old jeans of the same color, and hence refresh their color a bit).

2) Jean makers often seem to make the mistake of thinking that more rigidity will make them last longer, when it's often more flexible materials that last longer. I particularly notice that right next to the seams, where the fabric goes from thick to thin, is where they wear out first. They need a system similar to that used on electrical power cord plugs, where the thickness is gradually reduced, to avoid the concentration of forces where thickness is quickly reduced.

3) Another spot where they can wear out is a location where they rub against something. This happens for me on the cuffs at the bottom, where they rub against my shoes as I walk. This can also happen in the thighs, especially if you are a bit overweight, or in the seat, if you move around a lot while seated. Patches can help here, if you don't mind the look.

4) Don't wear jeans inside, but wear something cheaper, like jogging pants, so they will take the wear instead.

5) Implement a hierarchy, where the newest jeans are suitable for going out (to casual places, obviously), next they are OK for activities like gardening, then finally maybe only good for wearing when painting or using chemicals which might destroy good clothes.

6) Washing less often, without bleach, will also help them to last longer.

7) As for longer lasting pants, I suspect that a good pair of leather pants would last longer. However, they also cost more, so they might be more expensive, overall. StuRat (talk) 19:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The stiffness of some new jeans is due the starch in them, put there to make the denim seem more heavyweight. After washing it will disapear and the jeans will be flexible. 92.24.191.116 (talk) 00:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the cheapest jeans, I forgot to add that you can buy very cheap jeans at Tesco supermarket UK. The cheapest ones cost three or four pounds each. The practice of some motorcyclists used to be to put worn out jeans on over new jeans, so that they wore layers of jeans with the most threadbare on the outside, but I don't think people do that any more. 92.15.20.212 (talk) 21:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Covered wagon v.s. Conestoga wagon

What's the difference between Covered wagon & Conestoga wagon? I read the articles, but got confused. --Merry Rabbit 08:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Conestoga wagon, as the article notes, is a particular type of covered wagon; "covered wagon" is a generic term. Think of "Dodge Ram crew-cab" versus "pickup truck." --- OtherDave (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question about pregnancy removed

The Wikipedia reference desk is not an appropriate venue to discuss specific medical diagnosis, or to obtain recommendations for the treatment of medical conditions. Please discuss this with your doctor. --- Medical geneticist (talk) 17:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Poppadoms with indian foods...

Im just starting to try some quasi-Indian foods (we all know that lots of "international" foods aren't made the way they are in their country of origin, but flavoured so the local population will enjoy the taste). Anyway, i want to try Poppadoms, and even looked at the article to see what particular things they would work with, but the article doesn't seem clear, and seems to suggest that maybe they can be used with any Indian food. I have things such as Bombay potatoes, pindi chana ("chick peas curry"), madras lentils, dal palak, and spinach with cottage cheese and sauce.

Do Poppadoms taste best with any particular dish, or are they rather versatile? what would you suggest is best? Thanks!

137.81.116.186 (talk) 19:43, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although some poppadoms are strongly flavoured most are fairly neutral tasting as so go with most things, just beware snappage, I prefer lime pickle or any of those indian pickles, damn i'm hungry now. meltBanana 21:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the UK poppadoms are commonly served as pre-starter with Lime pickle, Onion salad, Mango chutney and something else that's red-coloured that I can't remember the name of right now. ny156uk (talk) 21:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Usually raita in my experience (not red-coloured though). Poppadums are like a giant unflavoured thinner version of tortilla chips really - they go with whatever you want to dip them into. And lager. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, now the only thing im worried about is the "snappage" MeltBanana talks about... perhaps ill just spoon some of whatever i have onto the poppadom..... :P 137.81.46.231 (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

rhino poaching

im trying to find the population of rhinos that are left in south africa after the poaching. per province. specifically the white- and blackrhino. im doing a school task on it and all im getting on googel is the rate of poaching. please help!Shadowmf (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't found the data you're seeking, but the Rhino Resource Center website looks promising. Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 9

When did Prince William start going bald?

He has a pretty good bald spot going at the crown of his head.76.27.175.80 (talk) 01:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]