Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

January 29

Blogs

Hi there, As a new contributor not able to negotiate all the links, it is much easier for me to ask a direct question. Already have a 'static blog' on Word press which I add to as material becomes available. Any readers may make comments but I'm not in a position to answer them, nor do I seek to have the blog edited. Comments are invited and if they show that the observations need editing, then I will do so. Would this type of blog be suitable to export to Wikipedia, and would be in a format that I could continually add to, and edit myself? Hamish84Hamish84 (talk) 05:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

No, it would not be suitable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia only allows content that has been sourced to reliable second and third party references. We do not allow original research. Dismas|^(talk) 05:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

January 30

Qu'Appelle River origin?

The Qu'Appelle River originates at Lake Diefenbaker in Saskatchewan now, but I've been wondering where the headwaters of the river were before the construction of the dams that hold back Diefenbaker. From some information I dug up I'm suspecting that the Qu'Appelle might have been fed by the South Saskatchewan River during high water in the spring and summer, and dried up altogether in the fall, but that seems a little unlikely. I haven't found anything else on the Qu'Appelle though, so I'd be glad for any information regarding this Shann_ºn 00:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannnica tends to confirm my suspicion, after examining Google aerial images, that the headwaters of the Qu'Appelle were near but not at the south bend of the South Saskatchewan River. According to Google Maps, the banks of the South Saskatchewan are more than 20 meters lower than those of the Qu'Appelle immediately below Diefenbaker Lake. So it would have taken a VERY substantial spring flood for the S. Saskatchewan to overflow into the Qu'Appelle before the dam was built. In fact, 20 meters suggests something more like a glacial melt water flood than anything likely to have happened in historical times. So I don't think that the two drainages were linked before the reservoir was built. On the other hand, aerial images show several brooks converging in the direction of the Qu'Appelle just below the present-day dam. During an exceptionally dry summer, maybe the upper course of the Qu'Appelle would have dried up, but I think that it was more likely a perennial stream, albeit a smaller stream than today's river. Marco polo (talk) 02:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

As I understand the literature, the Qu'Appelle valley was formed by water from the South Saskatchewan during a period when the normal drainage was blocked by glaciers. Once the normal course was unblocked, the Qu'Appelle was left with very low volume, fed mainly by groundwater, and often dried up in the summer. So the answer, apparently, is that it really doesn't have any significant headwaters. Ref: http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/quappelle_valley.html Looie496 (talk) 03:03, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Project management

why is project management getting more attention lattley — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.223.141.83 (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I've given your inquiry a separate heading, but, in all honesty, this is asking for an opinion, for which the Reference Desk is not a good place. If you could be so kind as to rephrase your question and/or be more specific, maybe then we could be of some assistance. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 12:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

This article discusses reasons for a growing interest in project management in the IT sector. Speaking anecdotally based on my own experience outside the IT sector, interest in project management has grown as a result of the growing scale of outsourcing. As more and more pieces of projects are outsourced or performed offsite, managing the project and the many different players becomes more complicated. What used to be handled largely by set procedures, in-house communications, and relationships now needs to be managed more actively and formally. Also, the present corporate environment places a much higher value on cost savings and efficiencies than the environment of 5 years ago. Promoters of project management advertise that their techniques will bring greater efficiency, and this is attractive to executives. Marco polo (talk) 18:42, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

volcano

sir, what is the largest volcano in the world.Mpchero (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

What do you mean by "largest"? Volcanic Seven Summits says Ojos del Salado in South America is the highest above sealevel. Mauna Loa in Hawaii is the largest in volume and area covered. For largest eruption, see list of largest volcanic eruptions. Another mountaineering measure is prominence: see List of peaks by prominence (not all of those are volcanoes). --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The problem is in how you define "volcano". Popular perception usually restricts it to that of discrete mountains (which can themselves be only a part of a larger volcanic hotspot below). But accurately defined, a volcano is "an opening, or rupture, in a planet's surface or crust, which allows hot magma, volcanic ash and gases to escape from below the surface." And that includes geological features which may not have readily identifiable aboveground features like supervolcanoes (including Yellowstone and Lake Toba).

If you measure the geological formations produced by supervolcanoes, they are arguably far larger than even Mauna Loa. For example, the Ontong Java Plateau (including Manihiki Plateau and Hikurangi Plateau which have since broken off) is a large igneous province resulting from supervolcanic activity that covers approximately 2,000,000 km² (770,000 sq mi) - that's 1% of the Earth's surface area, about the same size as Alaska. Supervolcanoes are theorized to have been the cause of mass extinction events in Earth's history, including a genetic bottleneck in modern human populations resulting from the eruption of Lake Toba around 70,000 years ago.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 16:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

You could also argue that mid-ocean ridges are a type of volcano, in which case they are certainly the largest. If you want to extend your search outside of the Earth world, then Olympus Mons dwarfs any 'mountain' form volcanoes around here. SmartSE (talk) 18:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

longest college student

Some time ago I came across an article here profiling someone who had apparently been attending college since September 1994. The article said he had dozens of degrees and was something of a local celebrity (I think the college was in Wisconsin but I'm not sure). I don't remember the guys name and the article may have been deleted. Does anyone know who I'm talking about? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AddThreeAndFive (talk • contribs) 20:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

See the Wikipedia article titled Perpetual student, and the specific student of which you are thinking is Johnny Lechner, of which Wikipedia also has an article. --Jayron32 23:14, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't see it there, but I've heard tales of a student who received a full scholarship to a major university for undergrad, but the terms of the scholarship were such that he could continue receiving it year after year forever as long as he got good grades. So he chose to just keep being a student until the university eventually recognized the issue and figured out a way to stop paying him. My recollection of the version I heard is that he lasted 11 years in undergrad without having to pay anything to the school (and it would have ended at least a decade ago). Of course the wisdom if actually doing such things is questionable. Dragons flight (talk) 06:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

"I've heard tales of" does not bode well for reliability. This is close one of the subplots of Roger Zelazny's novel Doorways in the Sand, though the source of the money is a legacy rather than a scholarship. --ColinFine (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

This sort of thing crops up fairly frequently in fiction - other examples are Victor Tugelbend from Terry Pratchett's Discworld series, and Richard Grimsdyke from Doctor in the House 59.108.42.46 (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Since Robert Wadlow attended college, surely he must be the longest college student. :-) StuRat (talk) 07:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Johnny Lechner is the guy I was thinking of; I just forgot his last name. Thanks! AddThreeAndFive (talk) 21:46, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Information

<personal information redacted> Dear sirs I live in Hamburg, Germany and searching for a CD/DVD Duplication Machine to buy. I should be grateful if you would tell me which Company manufactures such a machine and the address to contact them. Thank you for your services.

Yours truly Bernard King — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.59.175.107 (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

It would be easiest for you to go to an electronics shop in town and ask them. I've also removed your personal information for your privacy --Saalstin (talk) 23:08, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Googling DVD Duplication Machine brings up a good list of manufacturers and distributors. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

And, in case you don't already know, a PC with on CD/DVD reader and another that can write to CD/DVD can also be used to make copies, with the proper software. StuRat (talk) 04:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

... or even just one PC that can both read and write (though that takes longer), but I assumed that the OP was looking for a machine that makes fast multiple copies. I suppose this could be done by linking multiple PCs? Dbfirs 08:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

January 31

Where can i find more info on one of the amendments in the EMTALA page?

Im looking for this paticular amendment: "Hospitals and related services cannot receive a judgment against the patient in court filings made more than 36 months after the date the patient was discharged, or the last partial payment the patient made to the hospital, contractor, or agent. After that period, the patient may not be threatened with legal action if payment is not made, and may not be denied future outpatient services from the same company/agency that a patient is able to pay" I cant find any info any where on the web for this except on Wikipedia?? Where did this come from? Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altoids2012 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Which Wikipedia article did you get this from? RudolfRed (talk) 05:54, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

It's in Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, the fifth one down in the Amendments section. --Ouro (blah blah) 06:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Icelandic places of interest, List of signed

Saint John's Arms, 'cloverleaf', or 'Command' symbol

Travelling in Iceland not too long ago, I discovered that 'places of interest' (tourist attractions, natural wonders, cultural venues, heritage sites, etc.) were often marked on maps and highway signs with a 'cloverleaf' symbol: ⌘. I've since learned that we have an article on Saint John's Arms which names this symbol, and it is apparently used throughout Scandinavia for similar purposes. (There's even a Unicode code point: PLACE OF INTEREST SIGN U+2318.)

While the Icelandic highway signs often named the site/sight, they didn't always—this link shows a photo of a 'generic' destination sign. (Of course, I don't speak Icelandic, and I certainly don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of all Icelandic attractions, so even the fully-labelled signs aren't necessarily illuminating.) I've found that these little Easter eggs greatly improved my visits; while driving the Ring Road I would pull off whenever I saw one of these signs and had a few minutes to kill. Sometimes I'd get a beautiful waterfall, sometimes a cave, sometimes a ruin, sometimes a hot spring. Once or twice I was entirely unable to find any item of natural or cultural significance. It was a delightfully serendipitous way to travel.

So my question is this—is there an exhaustive list of all these marked sites? I'm wondering if the Icelandic tourism ministry manages the awarding of the symbol somehow, or if the Icelandic highway department keeps a list of signs they need to maintain. Though I didn't mind the random discovery aspect of my last couple of trips, sometimes it's nice to be able to plan a little bit ahead (or to know that a given ⌘ will require a couple of hours of hiking). If I fail here, I shall have to bother the Icelanders directly. TenOfAllTrades(talk)

I don't know if it has a listing for every sign, or if each place with a listing has a corresponding sign, but this seems to be a pretty comprehensive list of places of interest in Iceland. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 17:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

That's not a bad looking list, certainly, though it's too bad we can't confirm a 1:1 correspondence with the signage. (I'm also hoping that there might be a detailed map somewhere....) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll let you know if I see anything. Sadly my Icelandic's not up to much... - Cucumber Mike (talk) 23:03, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

February 1

Has Ireland Abandoned the Euro?

This BBC article has confused me. €50,000 (£42,000) on sweets? Billions on a house? I'm still getting paid in Euro from an agent in Ireland. What is this article trying to tell me? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 03:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Its not that spectacular. Old banknotes are routinely shredded and recycled. There's an article at ehow dot com, you can access it through this google seach (spam filter won't let the ehow domain thru) this explains it a bit. Basically, when a bank gets a note that has too much wear on it, they exchange it one-for-one with the central bank for a new note. There's no currency inflation, just replacing an old bill with a new one. The old bills are then shredded. The U.S. government gives shredded money away as souvenirs (its worthless paper, some of it is likely recycled or burned or something like that), so likely the subject of the article was able to acquire a shitload of old, shredded bills and simply used it like fiberboard to build a house. No big whoop. --Jayron32 03:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

From time to time when I was little (less now, for some reason), I used to see those souvenir glass jars full of such shredded money and fantasize about somehow putting it back together like a puzzle and spending the money. Ha. Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 18:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, I can understand the house thing - I read the article a few times again after asking this question. But why can't the old lady exchange her 50,000 for 50,000 newer notes? The Euro's not even been around pretty long anyway. In the UK when we have a changeover of currency (new notes versus old notes - not the old stuff with pounds ,shillings ,and pence) we've always had a period of time where old notes and new notes can all be used at the same time, to a certain extent, whereafter we can exchange the old ones for new ones at the banks, within a certain period. The article makes no sense to me. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The old lady doesn't have 50,000 euros in notes, what she has is a brick made from pulped and compressed old notes. The article states that clearly. She's making a joke, noting that 50,000 euros in old notes were pulped to make the brick. The relevent quote is "The money, which forms a pulped brick of shredded notes, is part of an art installation - and home - built by unemployed Dublin-based artist Frank Buckley" in the 4th paragraph (bold mine). It's just a brick made from compressed bits of shredded paper. The source of the shredded paper is old Euro banknotes which were shredded by the central bank in the manner I describe above. It wasn't old money she had lying around that was made worthless because she forgot to cash it in, its just a fiberboard brick made from recycled paper. --Jayron32 04:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe this is where I am misunderstanding, then. A 'brick' of notes in Liverpool slang (Irish/British) means a 'wad of notes'. Not an actual brick that can be used to build a house - notes that can be used to buy things. I see now. Thanks. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 04:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

All coins and notes of the Irish Free State are redeemable for their euro equivalent at the Central Bank in Dublin, any weekday morning. The Bank of England will redeem any of its notes, generally on the spot, though if they were the sort counterfeited during WWII, they will take it for authentication and send you the proceeds by post, if any.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

It's entirely possible that the "brick" of notes is a visual play on words. It also occurs to me that the bills don't really look very finely shredded. For a few bucks you can buy a bag of about 10,000 American dollars at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing in DC, ground to a size not much larger than powder. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

It is also possible to do this with bills that are not shredded, you just need a bit of hyperinflation like in the Weimar Republic to get pictures like these. Von Restorff (talk) 05:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

For sure. And it's even worse when it's the razzbucknik. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Frank Stewart's bridge column

Today (well, Tuesday) Frank Stewart presented a hand in which North held:

 S K3
 H JT84
 D A42
 C Q963

South opened the bidding with one notrump, West passed, and North responded three notrump, which Stewart notated with an exclamation point.

Why, exactly? North has ten HCP and a balanced hand. Slam is out of the question and you definitely want to be in game, unless you're playing weak notrumps 12-14 or something, which looking at the South hand shows is not the case. If you're playing 15-17 notrumps then you might only have 25 HCP between you, but to me 15-17 for one notrump suggests a style where you don't mind being at game with 25 HCP.

I suppose you might futz around with Stayman if you think the doubleton might be worth an extra trick at Hearts, but that will also give the opponents more info, so surely this is anyway a judgment call.

Any idea why Stewart thought this bid was so remarkable? --Trovatore (talk) 10:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know the answer, but the column in question can be seen here. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

My bridge is a bit rusty, but that's the whole purpose of the Stayman convention: to find the heart fit. By not using it, North landed his partner in an inferior contract that could be defeated. Giving the defenders information is a secondary consideration. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

It's true that as the cards actually lie, four hearts is icy, whereas three notrump can be defeated by precise defense. But there's no way to know that looking at the North cards, even after South shows his hearts in response to the two-club Stayman bid. Remember that the major-suit contract requires an extra trick for game, and while the doubleton looks good for a ruffer in dummy, there's no guarantee you'll be able to use it (and the defenders may be able to score a ruff or two of their own — as the cards lie they can't be stopped from getting one club ruff, although it's not entirely clear to me whether it's instead of a club trick they'd otherwise have taken). --Trovatore (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Phillip Adler states, "It is drummed into beginners that if they find an eight-card fit in a major, that suit should be trumps. And most of the time, it will be the right move. Sometimes, of course, three no-trump will make when four of the major would fail, but that is a rarity."[1] Stayman was a very popular convention way back when, and I'm guessing it still is, for just this reason. South could easily have no stopper in spades, and by not using Stayman, North would actually be encouraging West to lead a major through his king. Now if they were playing matchpoints, and NS were behind and needed to make up ground, I could see them zigging where everyone else was zagging, but that's not the case here. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I normally think in matchpoints, which admittedly may be the wrong key in which to read newspaper columns. So what I'm thinking is "there's a good chance I'll take the same number of tricks in NT as in hearts, in which case the extra ten points will be worth a lot of matchpoints" (assuming both contracts make). --Trovatore (talk) 21:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Given that, the ! may be a typo for ?, ie a bad bid. --Dweller (talk) 12:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

That's chess, not bridge. Stewart seems to use the bang for a bid he thinks is unusual in some way. --Trovatore (talk) 20:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

What to see on a visit to England?

A colleague from Costa Rica is visiting England for a week or two, I believe on his first visit to Europe. He's interested to know what he should really see while he's here. I'm struggling to think what the "can't miss" attractions are. One thought I've had thus far is that personally I wouldn't recommend really old and relatively unimpressive (physically) monuments like (for example) Stonehenge.

He's likely to be based mainly in the south-east, but might travel further afield - perhaps not into Scotland or Wales though. He's said he does plan to visit a castle, or perhaps several castles. I suppose he ought to visit a cathedral?

Searching old Reference Desk archives I've found this advice about places to visit in Kent, and also another thread about places to visit for a holiday with interesting walks (Windsor was suggested). I'm going to suggest HMS Belfast if he's interested in military matters of that era, and indeed other the other branches of the Imperial War Museum. Another colleague also mentioned Chatham Historic Dockyard.

What else? 87.115.94.82 (talk) 20:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

What is he most interested in? Art, science, culture, women, history, nature, etc. ?--Aspro (talk) 20:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Quite possibly all of the above, but he has at least expressed interest in history and culture (including architecture). 87.115.94.82 (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps a trip to York? Plenty of things to see there, the whole city is practically one big monument, and there is York Castle and York Minster for your castle and cathedral requirement--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

If he's interested in history, I recommend the Museum of London, one of the best history museums I've seen. There is of course a lot right in London, including obviously the Tower. Marco polo (talk) 00:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

If he's in the south-east, I suggest he spends a day in Brighton. Not much history there, but the beach and the shopping are excellent and the Royal Pavilion is a must. For castles, not far from there is the wonderful Bodiam Castle. --Viennese Waltz 00:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Aspro, I have to ask: If his primary interest, selected from your list, is women, what would ye be suggestin' to him then? --DaHorsesMouth (talk) 01:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The best part of Britain is the amazing green countryside. It's great to drive around on those ridiculous narrow curvy roads. But if it's a rainy day, and you know there will be one, my favorite indoor attraction that I've been to in the UK is the British Library. The permanent exhibition is incredible: the Lindisfarne Gospels, a Gutenberg Bible, the sole surviving Anglo-Saxon manuscript of Beowulf, the original handwritten lyrics to "A Hard Day's Night," etc. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Cricket at Lords. HiLo48 (talk) 08:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Oxford, Cambridge and Bath are all cities with masses of great architecture and historic interest, and are all within easy range of the south east. Either Oxford or Bath could be tied in to a tour round the Cotswolds, and if he's in Bath he might want to visit Bristol as well. Re castles, bear in mind that the biggest ones are where there was the greatest need for them - so, where there was a threat of invasion (like Dover), or where there was hostility between the English and the Welsh or Scots (so, Chepstow, for example - close to Bristol, but remember the bridge toll!) For quite different slants on "England", try Devon or Cornwall. There is obviously masses of information available on sites like this, this, and this. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Castles: Bodiam is beautiful, but it wasn't necessarily built as a serious defensive unit (Historians differ). The Tower of London, similarly is part castle, part palace. My top tip for a serious castle in England would be Warwick Castle. But if your friend is prepared to go a bit further, Edward I's castles of North Wales are IMHO among the finest in the world: take your pick from my favourites (POV!) Caernarfon Castle or Conwy Castle. The group of them have been recognised as a World Heritage Site. Which leads me on to this NPOV answer: there are just 28 World Heritage Sites in the UK and your friend could do worse than have a look at the list and the "tentative list" (ie candidate sites) just below it. --Dweller (talk) 11:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

PS A visit to Lord's cricket ground is, I agree, a brilliant view into the minds of the British and a wonderful idea. This brilliant recent article by an American sports editor encapsulates his first experience of cricket. Unfortunately, the season doesn't begin until late March, with Lord's hosting its first (four-day) match of the year starting on April 12. Your friend could, however, soak up some of the history and culture of the place, by having tea in the famous Long room. --Dweller (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Without wishing to be rude, I doubt whether more than 5% of English males - and virtually no females, Scots or Welsh, who are also British - would consider such a day to be anything other than the ultimate in a day wasted in utter tedium. And I like cricket (sometimes)! Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

True, it's a long way from Wales or Scotland to get to Lord's. But on my last visit there, I saw quite a lot of "females", most of whom seemed to be enjoying wasting the day (actually it was night). --Dweller (talk) 11:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I hear good things about Windsor Castle and Leeds Castle, each is do-able as an easy daytrip from London but both may be a bit too much of a commercial tourist trap (and Leeds castle is nowhere near Leeds, but is in fact in Kent). However, there are plenty of things to see in London itself: Tower of London, Hampton Court Palace, Buckingham Palace (not really a castle but the residence of the Royal family), Palace of Westminster (again not a castle but the seat of government). Then there are various churches and cathedrals, and museums for pretty much everything (art, science, history, etc.) Astronaut (talk) 12:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Again, if your friend loves castles, it's worth bearing in mind that Leeds Castle is a most misleadingly named place. Not only, as Astronaut says, is it hundreds of miles from Leeds, it's not really a castle. What you see today is a stately home/folly built mostly in the nineteenth century, on the site of a former castle, made to look a little like a castle. So, not in Leeds and not a castle... but it is very pretty. --Dweller (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

As a tourist in London, the highlight for me was probably the British Museum. And as a person living in a place with no subway, I can say that you must have him ride the Tube everywhere; it would be the envy of my city. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

We Londoners are forever moaning about The Tube - it always comes as a suprise when people from abroad are impressed by it. Apparently, the first trains were American, so it's not all our doing. P.S. The most stunning London sight that tourists routinely walk right past is The Banqueting House, Whitehall. Greenwich is well worth a trip too, with the Old Royal Naval College, National Maritime Museum, Royal Observatory, Greenwich and the Cutty Sark all next to each other and it's one of those World Hertage thingummies. Alansplodge (talk) 21:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Was just about to suggest Greenwich. Tunbridge Wells is beautiful and historic, worth following the town trail.Itsmejudith (talk) 21:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

If the weather is fairly good, it might be interesting to spend a morning or afternoon visiting one of the white horses (like the Uffington White Horse) or stone circles that you can actually walk around and touch: this would also generally involve seeing some of the countryside, and could incorporate a visit to a nearby pub for lunch. Visiting Avebury would be a good choice if he's interested in this sort of thing: it's kind of weird how much it's just part of the landscape, everywhere. If you visit it, most people have a drink or meal in the Red Lion pub in the village, which (last time I visited, anyway) is well aware that being traditionally English is a draw for tourists. 86.166.41.126 (talk) 21:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

We had a question last October about things to do and see in London, which suggested some ideas not already mentioned in this thread. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

7.62x54R

have old case of above cal. bullets have yellow tip what are they ????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.148.134 (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I googled [7.62x54r ammo yellow tips] and quite a few references came up. The tip color appears to have something to do with the specific contents of the bullet. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Our 7.62×54mmR article has a table of different Russian varieties - none has a yellow tip. However, the image at the top right has the caption "...Hungarian silver/yellow-tip, mild steel core, heavy ball...". This page has a more detailed table; all-yellow tipped rounds are shown with "YT". They are Hungary 1951, Czechoslovakia 1953 and Bulgaria 1955, all Heavy Ball, Lead Core. Also the Hungary 1970 and 1975, silver over yellow tip are Heavy Ball, Steel Core. Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

silly phone question

I find myself in the awkward situation of needing to buy new mooney for my mobile phone after it seems to have run out, trouble is, though, this is not somethin I have done before and I have no idea where I would go to do this. the phone is on the virgin network, so I looked in tesco, thinking they might do it, and it seems they have only money available for a couple of other networks and not mine. So, anyone know what would be the quickest and easiest way of fixing this? Would it be possible to do it online tonight?

148.197.81.179 (talk) 22:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The virgin mobile website maybe, you'd probably need to register an account, or maybe do it through your phone, either using its internet if it has it (the home page probably has a "my account" link) or through the top-up phone number. Also a lot of cash machines have a phone top-up option, maybe try your nearest one?

Looks like you can do it online, check this link [2]. inb4 "which country are you talking about?", it's obviously the UK. --Viennese Waltz 23:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Well that's nice of them, I need to either access my phone's own internet, which it doesn't have, or use my pasword, which I don't have one of either, silly plan inventing all these new rules just to stop people with old phones from using them any more. 148.197.81.179 (talk) 23:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I seem to recall from my time on Virgin PAYG that if you call 789 from the phone in question, you can top up by card instantly --Saalstin (talk) 23:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Exactly so. That's one of the options given on the page I linked to above. --Viennese Waltz 23:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

You can buy a voucher at the checkout of many places such as supermarkets (including Tesco). No (phone or bank) account, internet access, or password is required, just text the number on the voucher to 789111 or call 789. This is described at the top of the page Viennese Waltz provided the link for. Astronaut (talk) 10:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2

Soccer riots/stampedes versus American football riots/stampedes

I read from time to time of tragic incidents at soccer ("football") matches, wherein the gates open and people die in a stampede, or there is a riot and people die in stampedes, or walls collapse and cause mass deaths. A 1980 article said ",,it has become almost customary in Great Britain for soccer fans to riot." A recent example of an international soccer riot is 70 people killed recently in Egypt in a soccer stampede. Yet I do not recall a riot or stampede causing multiple deaths at an American football match. I suppose there have been US riots after victories or defeats in various sports, but not with the large numbers of deaths. Is the difference best explained by different layouts of the stadiums, assigned seat ticket sales versus just tickets to enter the stadium, differences in crowd control, differences in alcohol consumption, obsolete and crumbling facilities, a perception of corrupt officiating, ethnic/nationalistic hatred or what? US college or professional football stadiums I've seen are mostly reinforced concrete. Seating is usually by assigned seats. Are soccer stadiums often cheap high walls of cinder blocks which can be pushed over by crowds? Is a ticket just a permit to stampede in and try for a good vantage point? This is not just one incident. Google News archive shows up to 500 killed in Peru in a soccer riot in 1964, , 41 killed in a soccer riot in Turkey in 1967, 38 killed when Liverpool supporters rioted before a game started in 1985 in Belgium and a wall collapsed, 8 killed in rioting after a soccer match in Ghana in 1987, 94 fans crushed or trampled to death in Britain in a soccer match in 1989, 40 killed in a soccer riot in South Africa in 1991, 83 kiled in a soccer stampede in Guatemala in 1996, 7 killed in a stampede during a riot" at a Congo soccer game in 2001, following a stampede in South Africa during a soccer game which killed 43, and [100 more killed in Ghana in a soccer stampede in 2001. There are many more listing of multiple deaths during rioting or stampedes incident to soccer matches. Edison (talk) 02:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

It is probably less assigned seats and more no recent history of serious violence at sporting events. Combine with that, teams are likely to lift the season ticket rights of offenders. We do not have separated seating, fans of both teams sit together, and usually nothing happens worse than glares and snide comments. At some events, the visiting supporters may be a majority.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Do soccer fans ever get a ticket entitling them to "Section 10, row 11, seat 4" or just "permit to stampede toward a good seat?" Edison (talk) 02:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The tragic events do seem to occur in places with terraces.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

We do have riots after a team wins or loses a championship, like the ones in Vancouver last year after the Stanley Cup (which, unfortunately, might be the last time they ever allow thousands of people to watch a sporting event on big screens on the street). We also have sporadic incidents of violence at sporting events, just as you would have anywhere where you have thousands of people, mostly male, and lots of alcohol. Think of the guy who got pummeled almost to death at a baseball game in California last year. What we don't have in North America is the hooligan culture they have in some other countries. Hooliganism is like a combination of street gangs and hard-core sports fans. Like imagine if the Crips were big Dodgers fans, and the Angels came up from Orange County and their fans, the Bloods, came along. Then a Dodger gets beaned by a pitch and pretty soon all hell breaks loose. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Less likely in American football, maybe because it's too cold to riot in early February. Rioters prefer agreeable weather. Unfortunately, segments of the soccer fancy seem to have turned rioting into a fine art, known as 'Ooliganism. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:55, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, well that doesn't explain why there's not a lot of baseball hooliganism, though. The only case I can really think of is the Giants fan who got brain-injured at Dodger Stadium last year. Come to think of it, the other explanation I've heard (violence on the field in American football sates the appetite, so the fans don't feel as much need for violence in the stands) also doesn't seem to fit baseball. Seems likely to be just the way the fan culture has evolved. --Trovatore (talk) 10:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

There were a spate of baseball riots in the 1970s as a result of events like Disco Demolition Night and Ten Cent Beer Night, but I think better alcohol control has generally seen off the worst of that. I wonder if the length of the games plays a part - if you're going to a game like ice hockey or association football, where games last 60-90 minutes, the match is the high-point of your day and emotions will naturally run high. This creates a very different culture to a hours- or days-long game like cricket or baseball, where the game isn't just the high-point of your day - it is your day. You can't afford to be on your feet yelling for a whole baseball game unless you're really drunk - you'll just tire yourself out otherwise. Smurrayinchester 11:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The situation in Peru took place as a result of policemen throwing those smoke bombs (or whatever they are called) on the angry crowd, and then the crowd getting stuck inside the stadium as a result of the gates being locked (so several choked or got trampled to death). As such, this matter had nothing to do with hooliganism.

Association football is played worldwide and is the main sport activity of several countries. It's only logical that, given the greater prevalence of this sport, more accidents will take place in association football stadiums. By contrast, even Rugby has a greater following and practice in the world than American Football.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 06:31, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

There's an idiotic tradition in soccer of fans taking flares to games, and using them stupidly. It's a major reason I won't go to games. That was part of the problem in Port Said. Another problem seems to be very long periods without scoring. That just seems to build up the tension in some fans beyond breaking point. HiLo48 (talk) 08:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know a lot of those examples, but the 94 deaths (ultimately 96) in 1989 is the Hillsborough disaster, which happened as a direct result of countermeasures taken against hooliganism. Basically, to stop both pitch invasions and fights between rival firms, massive wire fences were built around the terraces. At the time terraces were mostly standing room only - basically concrete steps with iron railings you could lean on - and this meant that the grounds could get away with letting in far more than they were supposed to. The match had kicked off despite a lot of supporters still being outside, and the police decided to let people in through a gate that didn't have any turnstiles, while the stewards failed to direct fans to the empty areas. This meant that people started rushing through, and people at the front of the terrace were crushed against the wire fence, which also made it hard to escape. Without proper communication between grounds staff, no-one realised until it was too late.

As a result of that disaster, the Taylor report recommended that football stadia be converted to 100% seated, and the wire fences be taken down (nowadays you generally see rows of policemen between the sets of fans instead). There hasn't been a repeat of the disaster in the UK, nor (as far as I know) in any of the other stadiums worldwide which have similarly banned standing (UEFA categories 2-4).

As an aside, blaming the Hillsborough disaster on hooliganism is a massive faux pas in the UK (particularly Liverpool), after The Sun (and a few other papers, plus some MPs) falsely claimed that the disaster had been caused by rioting Liverpool fans who, they said, subsequently attacked police and urinated on the dead - despite the fact that all the dead were Liverpool fans, and the fans helped rather than hindered the paramedics. Unsurprisingly, circulation of The Sun on Merseyside plummeted from half a million to a couple of thousand. Smurrayinchester 10:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

How could ALL the dead be Liverpool fans? Was there nobody there supporting the other team? HiLo48 (talk) 10:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Certainly, but only Liverpool fans were sold tickets to that area of the stadium. This was a neutral-site game, as is customary for FA Cup semi-finals (nowadays, they are held at Wembley). The Nottingham Forest fans were elsewhere.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, obviously if you're worried about hooliganism the last thing you'll want to do is put opposing fans in the same area. Liverpool fans would have been completely separate from Notts fans at every point of the game - different gates, different stands, different toilets. Edit If you watch footage of Old Firm games, the fans are even kept separate on their way to and from the stadium, with lines of police all along the access roads to the grounds. Smurrayinchester 11:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Stampedes kill people when the crowd is moving and spooked by something. At Hillsborough, it was cheers from the crowd that prompted an inrush, just as the crowd had surged forwards, as is common when standing. (An extraordinary thing to experience, I can vouch for) The Second Ibrox disaster was caused by fans leaving the game early in disgust, trying to turn round and re-enter the ground when the roars of the crowd told them something significant had happened. In non-sporting terms, the various stampedes at Mecca have been caused by the pilgrims getting spooked and panicking. Where you don't get this combination of large numbers moving and being spooked, you won't get a stampede. As Wehwalt says, since legislation forcing all-seater stadia, there haven't been stampede disasters in the UK. You can peruse Category:Human stampedes if you're interested in learning about more examples. --Dweller (talk) 11:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

And it is well worth noting that the most notable stampede I can think of in the US in the last half century, 1979 The Who concert disaster involved factors such as Dweller rightly points out.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Soccer is a much more violent and a much less organized game than baseball or American football. A lot of physical contact, no protective gear, and essentially no equipment required to play, you just need a ball and a piece of flat ground. No sophisticated point-counting, no firm rules to follow (only a few, like the off-side rule, which can be easily ignored), you can play without a referee. It tends to attract fans correspondingly. In many countries, street gangs declare allegiance to one or the other soccer club and then spend their free time seeking and beating up members of other gangs wearing colors of rival clubs.

The two games that might come close to soccer in these aspects are ice hockey and basketball. You don't see ice hockey riots as often, mostly because, like Bugs says, it's hard to riot in subzero temperatures. Still happens though, weather permitting (read about Vancouver riots in June 2011). Basketball fans riot from time to time too.--Itinerant1 (talk) 13:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

In the UK, wearing colours marks you as a fan. Members of Football firms apparently ignore fans - it's only the other firms that they attack. However, most stampede deaths in the UK - and from what I've seen elsewhere - have not been the result of violence. --Dweller (talk) 13:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

As Dweller mentioned, stampedes are more of a matter of crowd behaviour in reaction to something which spooks them (or another reason which means they feel they need to get somewhere fast through a fairly restricted area) then anything else. Our stampede article mentions this. Dweller mention examples involving the Hajj, but religious pilgrimages in general are a common cause, e.g. a number in India involving Hindu (and occasional Muslim) pligrams which are mentioned in our stampede article. There's also the very deadly 2005 Baghdad bridge stampede and the Phnom Penh stampede.

Speaking of the US, from both the stampede article and its own article, some of the deaths in the The Station nightclub fire resulted from the stampede. And that happened 4 days after the 2003 E2 nightclub stampede.

Of violence in sport, we do have a List of violent spectator incidents in sports although as with many wikipedia articles it's has a fair dose of WP:RECENTISM and to a less extent bias towards incidents involving developed countries. And of cricket, there was the Sydney Riot of 1879 although it didn't result in any deaths. There are some problems in cricket, particularly India vs Pakistan games although the worse problems tend to be amongst people after the games and directed at their own players. In baseball, I believe there are occasionally minor fights involving either players or spectators in Taiwan [3] and South Korea and even a few largish pitch invasions, e.g. [4].

As a bit of an out there example, I also distinctly remember the behaviour of the Indonesian fans in the 1994 Thomas Cup final which seriously intimidated the Malaysian players [5] and resulted in the cancellation of the remaining 2 matches (Indonesia had already won but as evidence by Thomas Cup [6], at the time all matches were played even those not which were rendered moot by the victory.) Indonesia did have a bit of a history with fan behavioural problems at badminton, as evidence by 1964 Thomas Cup (involving Denmark) and 1967 Thomas Cup (involving Malaysia). Although Malaysian-Indonesia relations are often a bit strained for various reasons and the 1967 match was not long after the Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation. And after the fiasco of laser use during the 2010 AFF Suzuki Cup, it's not like there aren't serious problems with some Malaysian fans. (There's an obvious comparison between the 2010 events and the 1964 and 1967 events in that both involved apparent attempts to temporarily blind or at last distract players during key moments.) BTW, Dweller's link to Football hooliganism (via football firm) may be of interest when it comes to football.

I don't know if I'd agree with Itinerant1 on 'violence'. In many ways, rugby (union) is 'more violent' (on field) then football even if protective gear is used and it has a lot more rules. In particular, a minor brawl among players in football will often results in players being red carded, with the potential for further fines and sanctions to follow. Yet in rugby such 'handbag stuff' will often simply result in the ref warning the players to cut it out in the first instance.

Simplicity is even more important than violence. Here in the U.S., neither baseball nor football seem to attract many street gangs. One reason, I think, is complexity. In both games, you need a man of authority to referee, a nerd to track the state of the game (is it 4th down or still 3rd?), and a nerd to keep score. Neither nerds nor men of authority are popular among criminally-inclined youths.

Consequently, baseball and football fans attending major games are older and more level-headed. Median age of a Super Bowl attendee, is, I think, around 40. By contrast, median age of a victim of the Hillsborough disaster was 21. I can't find data about the recent Egyptian stampede, but I would expect the median age to be in low twenties or even high teens too.--Itinerant1 (talk) 20:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

And of course, minor contact in football in a professional game tends to result in the dreaded simulation (Association football), with the player acting as if they've been shot until the referee either penalises the other player or it's clear they're not going to and then the player gets up and carries on like normal. You wouldn't catch many rugby players dead acting that way, even if they felt some minor but genuine pain. (In ice hockey of course they seemed to have refined fighting among players into a bizzare semi-sanctioned art form.) Yet you don't see the level of problems in rugby involving hooliganism that you see in football, and I don't think it's just because of the number of players and games or limited interest in developing countries. Often times, you don't even need to seperate the fans. (Of course, you do get some problems e.g. [7].)

As Dweller also mentioned, if you've ever been in a crowd surge you may know how scary it can feel. (I was in Auckland 'party central' during the opening of the Rugby World Cup 2011. Because I got there a bit late (about 2PM?), the waterfront area was already closed according to signs, so I didn't try to get in. At some stage they started to let in small groups (still advertising it was closed) so I joined the que. They stopped all movement a bit before the opening ceremony and started to allow people in againt after it finished, but before the game which resulted in an initial surge. They were able to slow things down by repeated warnings to the crowd that they're stop all entries, but particularly as I was very near the front of the surge by that stage and trying to slow down as instructed, it was not a pleasant experience. Fortunately no one suffered major injuries AFAIK and I believe those who had continue to try to push thru were barred from entering for at least a while. Ironically I did later suffer a fairly painful scuffed/cut lower leg from being kicked by a dancing drunk during the bands after the game, who didn't even notice he'd kicked me.

Nil Einne (talk) 18:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if there's much more to add to this discussion, but to add to something BaseballBugs said, it would be hard for the kind of lowlifes who make up hooligan groups to even get into American sports events, simply because it's too expensive. It's hard to get a ticket to an NFL game for less than $50, and that doesn't include parking, food and beer, all of which are at crazy jacked-up prices. For alumni to get season tickets to some NCAA football programs, you have to donate thousands of dollars to the university. On the other hand, you could go to soccer games in Eastern Europe for a few euros when I was there. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Football in the UK is also very expensive. I just looked at the website for Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C., a club with something of a reputation for hooligan fans, and in the lower reaches of the top league in England. A cheap seat for a forthcoming game against another low ranking team is £39.50. You can assume that each of the following would increase that price: a) a better seat b) against better opposition c) at the home ground of a top team d) in London. People give up a substantial part of their income to watch football live and on satellite TV, home and away, including travelling across the continent. --Dweller (talk) 10:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Sports in the US is also very expensive. I recall going to school in the early Eighties in Philadelphia and the most expensive ticket for a 76ers game was $11. Quite good student tickets for the Flyers were $4. I remember they made tickets available to students to see an off session of the women's tennis tournament for $1 and going to see Billie Jean King. Today, there are very few tickets for a popular team in any sport running much under $20 and most considerably more. But the fan culture is different. A thought: perhaps it is because football is all-consuming in so many nations. In the US, we have a choice of major sports. So if the Jets lose, the fan looks ahead to how the Knicks are doing and possibly root for the Giants in the playoffs. Bugs can tell you better than me that there was a time when baseball fans were far more passionate and even today's Cubs fans, say, would have been considered wimps. I would date the change to about the 1920s. Additionally, we have less at stake in American sports as there is no relegation.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to all for the input. Some observations of points that were made: The incidents likely have a variety of root causes. Low ticket prices mean more youthful exuberance, and less funding for large numbers of crowd control police and security guards, as well as less funding for reinforced concrete walls which do not collapse. Poor crowd control practices (chokepoints and fences) offer more chance of crushing incidents. Lack of assigned seating may enhance revenue by allowing more tickets per square meter of stadium footprint, and encourage rushing in to get a vantage point. In US college stadiums this past season, entrants were searched at some facilities and almost nothing could be carried in, not even cameras, binoculars, water bottles, or womens' purses, more for fear of terrorism than for fear of hooliganism, whereas in some third world events spectators brought weapons such as large knives. Edison (talk) 01:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Football stadiums are for football-games; if we want to riot and beat up on innocent people, we join the military and go to Iraq or Afghanistan. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 10:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Finding a person with a first name, birthday, and [most recent] city

How hard would it be to find someone with the above information? --Melab±1 ☎ 02:33, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

With only that information, impossible unless the city was really tiny, to the point where you could just ask someone in that city, "Hey, do you know Brian? About 25 years old?" Otherwise, only knowing a first name, birthdate, and place of residence would be really difficult, if not impossible. --Jayron32 02:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

In a city the size of Toronto? --Melab±1 ☎ 02:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Depends on the first name (Mary vs. Hortense, for example) and maybe also on how much you're willing to pay a detective, along with providing further context details that you probably don't want to bring up in this public forum. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

With just that info there are likely to be many matches, so many that most web searches would refuse to do such a search. If you know the age in addition to the birthday, that would help. StuRat (talk) 03:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Toronto has a population of about 2.5 million so around 6,850 citizens on average will share the same birthday. If the person's name is 'Brian', you'll have problems, but if it is 'Leonides' you might be in with a chance. Then again, if the city was Hanoi, even with a population of 6.5 million, finding a 'Brian' with a particular birthday might be relatively easy. Basically, you aren't giving us enough information to answer the question. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with the people above. There are a ton of publicly available records (see e.g. voter file, not to mention business registries if they've founded a company, property tax rolls if they're available, etc), and firstname/dob/city is a pretty decent amount of information (especially if you have a year in the birthday, or even a range of years). Even in a large city, having all this info could nail it down to a small list of people, and once you have a small list, you could dig up more info about each person on the list that would exclude more and more people. It would be a project, but totally doable. The real trick would be getting access to the records you need, but that's what private investigators are for. Meelar (talk) 06:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The above answers assume that the person is not deliberately trying to avoid being found. If the person uses aliases, doesn't register to vote, always ticks the "do not include on the public register" boxes, etc. it could be much harder. If the person has assistance of the authorities in hiding (witness protection, police officer working under cover) then it could be too difficult for even the best private investigator - and reputable ones would cease looking if they ever discovered the situation. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

No such public voter database exist in Canada AFAIK. I don't go through the hassle of preregistering for elections. I just walk in with two pieces of ID on election day.99.245.35.136 (talk) 14:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Lucky you. That wouldn't work in Australia. We're required by law to register on the electoral roll; then those who are registered to vote are required by law to vote. But if you fail to do the first thing, you can't do the second thing, not even if you turn up at the polling place with 10 forms of ID and 20 character referees. That's because the law sets a date when the rolls are closed, and nobody has the power to make changes until after the election. You can't be charged with failing to vote if you never registered to vote in the first place. But you can be charged with failing to register. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

So, let's say the day before the election you're involved in an auto accident and you're unconscious in the ICU for 3 days. Once you regain consciousness, what are they going to do? Arrest you for having failed to vote? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

They'll probably ask you why you failed to vote, and when satisfied you had a valid reason (perhaps with evidence to demonstate you're telling the truth), let it be. Or perhaps they'll automatically send you a fine, but give instructions on how you can challenge it if you think you have a valid reason for not voting. And even if they don't accept your reason, you can take it to court and be virtually asured of victory. [8] And why do you expect the person will be arrested? I'm pretty sure the only possible punishment is a fine, Electoral system of Australia says as much. Sure if you repeatedly fail to pay the fine perhaps you'll eventually be arrested, but that'll surely be for failing to pay fines (the same as is possible with many fines like speeding or even parking tickets) rather then for not voting. Nil Einne (talk) 03:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Correct. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

In NZ, you can enrol to vote normally up to a day before the election although if you enroll too late you'll have to make a special declaration vote. Enrollment is compolsury but rarely enforced, voting is not. [9] [10] Also while an unpublished list does exist, there needs to be a possible threat to you or your family before you can be on it [11]. The information on Canada is correct, see [12]. How a register does exist, it's just not necessary to be on it to vote. Nil Einne (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Even if voter databases don't exist, there are probably private companies that maintain and compile this sort of information. I know they exist in the US (see e.g. Infogroup, although that article is in a sorry state) and I'd imagine there's a Canadian equivalent as well. Meelar (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The answer is different depending on which country you're talking about. In Sweden you can use ratsit.se to do pretty much what you describe, although you'd have better luck if you knew the surname. But with just the information you have I would expect that for someone living in a low-population area you could find them quite easily. In Stockholm you might be able to narrow it down to 2 or 3 possibilities. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 16:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

You may want to clarify whether you mean birthday without the year or birthdate including the year since it sounds like people are taking you to mean different things. Nil Einne (talk) 19:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The month, day, and year. --Melab±1 ☎ 22:17, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

In Norway, tax paying information on an indivudual level used to be publicly and easily available. Online sites went to great lengths to make the income and financial status of your neighbours, bosses etc. available to you (and vice versa). The sites are still around, but they were last updated 2009. Here is one such page [13]. If I enter only my first name and the municipality in which I live, I get 163 hits. I'm listed as number 16 on the first return page. If I sort the list by birth year, there are only two matching persons (strictly, only one - yours truly - the other person had a double given name). Background info: My first name is used approximately by 8000 Norwegian men as their only given name, and in double names by another 10000 Norwegians. source. My municipality has a population of about 14,000. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 22:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

By what right does anyone besides your employer and the tax collector need to know what your income level is? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:07, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

The people who run the census and any other compulsory surveys that ask for income levels probably have a right to know. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Government agencies acting in an official capacity, sure. But what business is it of my neighbors how much I paid in taxes last year? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Executive bathrooms

Does corporate America still believe in the Executive bathroom, such as those featured in Trading Places and Simpson and Delilah? Astronaut (talk) 12:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it is more a more an expression than anything else. Perhaps some high executives have private washrooms attached to their office. But a locked-off facility for those of a certain rank at a company seems someting out of the Fifties. Especially since today you would need two of them. If you want an analogous experience, try the rest rooms of a high-end Vegas casino.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I've seen some. They're usually not particularly lavish, but they allow the CEO or senior executive to do their business and wash up without needing to come out of the office and face people who may be waiting for an appointment. Top executives usually have very tight schedules, and often need to make sure their appearance is fine before any public event. You wouldn't want them to have to walk halfway across the floor to do this - unless they want to. Since they serve only one person (or one plus a couple of very close assistants, it's not necessary to have both a male and female washroom). --Xuxl (talk) 14:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd think private washrooms (one for each executive) would be better than shared executive washrooms. This doesn't sound like much of an expense, to me, relative to the multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses such executives get these days. I've also thought that all washrooms should be private. That is, instead of one room with multiple stalls and sinks, make each stall/sink combo into a separate room, so you don't have to hear and smell other people using the toilet. (They could have a timer that leaves a "just used" sign on the door to each, until the fan has had a chance to clear the air.) StuRat (talk) 17:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I've designed a number of private potties, usually for someone at the CEO or president level, or for a small private client who's just particular and willing to spend the money. As noted above, it gives the VIP some privacy and keeps them from being sidetracked on the trip to the shared toilet, and is a minor mark of status. While it used to be that you could make such a toilet rather small, nowadays with universal handicapped access, individual toilets are much less efficient in their use of space than shared toilets, in which the maneuvering space can be shared between the fixtures. By the time you get a 5' turning circle in the private room, deal with the door swing, etc., you get something you could play half-court basketball in. Acroterion (talk) 21:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

So, even if the current executive isn't handicapped, you must give them a handicapped toilet anyway ? StuRat (talk) 03:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

In the United States, under the current DoJ interpretation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (which is civil rights legislation, not a building code, by the way), all new toilets in non-residential structures (and a proportion of toilets in certain residential buildings) must comply with the ADA design requirements. There are a few minor loopholes for issues of technical infeasibility, lack of an accessible pathway, and historic structures, but those are out of the ordinary. With outswinging doors, a minimum size for a single-occupant room is about 6.5' x 7.5'. With an inswinging door, which can't overlap the turning circle, you get something even bigger. Acroterion (talk) 04:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Are you absolutely sure about that? Most of the new buildings I've seen have a minimum of one handicapped toilet per floor, but not all toilets are handicap accessible. The handicapped have my full support, but making every single toilet handicap accessible seems a bit excessive. This site [14] seems to agree with me: "Provide for at least one handicapped-accessible toilet on each floor." 99.245.35.136 (talk) 05:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

A simple search for 'accessible toilet united states' finds [15] which says:

If toilet facilities are provided on a site, then each such public or common use toilet facility shall comply with 4.22. If bathing facilities are provided on a site, then each such public or common use bathing facility shall comply with 4.23. For single user portable toilet or bathing units clustered at a single location, at least five percent but no less than one toilet unit or bathing unit complying with 4.22 or 4.23 shall be installed at each cluster whenever typical inaccessible units are provided. Accessible units shall be identified by the International Symbol of Accessibility.

So it seems the OP is correct. I'm not sure why this differs from your experience, perhaps the DOJ doesn't bother to enforce their intepretation much so many don't follow it. (I presume you're referring to toilets in non-residential buildings since the OP already mentioned there's a difference with residential buildings although this isn't that clear to me from the regulations.)

Nil Einne (talk) 10:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

OP here. Seems this thread has been sidetracked into a discussion about a CEO only toilet connected to his office, and the relevant building codes. I was thinking more in terms of a shared bathroom set aside for senior executives for which being given "the key to the executive bathroom" was seen as a status symbol. Astronaut (talk) 10:41, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Txortena

While researching another question, I found my way to this blog about berets. Apparently, the little stalk in the middle of a traditional beret is called a "txortena" (sounds a bit Basque to me). I thought it might be an interesting addition to our Beret page, but can't find a reference. Can anyone help? Alansplodge (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Not exactly a reference, but I found this [16] which says that a destemmer (machine for removing stalks from grapes in winemaking) is called "txortena kentzeko makina" in Basque, confirming that the word is Basque, and suggesting that it could mean stem/stalk. I then tried Google translate, which confirms that kentzeko means remove and txortena means stems. Plural, curiously. I skimmed our Basque grammar article, which seems to indicate that Basque plurals usually end in "k". A google image search for "txortena" returns a lot of berets, and the articles that contain the images agree that the stalk/wick/fuse is called a "txortena". I didn't find any reliable sources, though. Maybe the question would get better answers at the Language desk? Someone there might have a Basque dictionary which gives the translation in the beret context directly. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

La gran enciclopedia vasca agrees that it is called a txortena, although it puts the word in guillemets, presumably to indicate that this is not a naturalised word in Spanish. Warofdreams talk 23:24, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Mortgage brokers NZ

Were there mortgage brokers in nelson new zealand in 1978? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.98.52.62 (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

February 3

Historical US news and world report civil engineering rankings

Where can I find old US News and World Report undergraduate civil engineering rankings? Waseekla (talk) 00:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

According to College_and_university_rankings: "The QS rankings are published in the United States by US News & World Report as the "World's Best Universities."

After searching the QS site I found the following links:

2011: [17]

2010: [18]

2009: [19]

2008: [20]

2007: [21]

2006: [22]

2005: [23]

Unfortunately the civil engineering specific ranking shows up as 404 for 2005-2011. I suggest you try the internet wayback machine. Best of luck on your search. 99.245.35.136 (talk) 02:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Balloons on the backs of Japanese cavalry

Not entirely sure where to ask this - but what are the balloons on the back of the Japanese cavalry in Shogun 2? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 00:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

horo, according to this site [24] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meerkatakreem (talk • contribs) 03:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yup - we have an article: Horo (cloak). As to whether they actually offered any protection against arrows, as is sometimes claimed, seems questionable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, it might work once anyway, as it might slow down the arrow sufficiently to render it non-fatal. The framework would have helped it retain its air pocket. And I'm sure it was much lighter than armor. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedians by rank

Since Wikipedia 11 years old, the senior most Wikipedians are Master Editor IV. Is there any way to know how many Master Editor IVs or other senior editors are there in wikipedia? --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 08:30, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

One place to check is Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. I think there's a similar list by number of articles. And there's a program somewhere that will give a current count for any specific editor. [Or there was. It appears to be no longer available.] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the link --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 11:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

That's only half the equation. You need high edits and long service for those. Very few editors have both. In fact Master Editor III seems to be the highest in use (and by only one editor.) 75.41.110.200 (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

days of the week

where did the day of the week get there names? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinna66 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

This article explains it pretty well: Names_of_the_days_of_the_week.99.245.35.136 (talk) 09:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Star Wars = Schizophrenia?

Has Wikipedia or any reader of the article pertaining to Star Wars (the Movie) correlated it to Schizophrenia? Seems to me after careful reviewing of all six episodes that the entire movie is an innuendo for the mental illness. Anakin Skywalker was a youth who in his twenties turns to the Dark Side by manipulation. Schizophrenia in young people generally comes on in the early twenties with a perception they have "Special Powers and Abilities" that normal humans cannot have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.125.125 (talk) 10:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source to back up what seems to be your own original research? Astronaut (talk) 12:30, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

website

hi! i would like to ask what are the website of the shopping malls in china & the website of the shopping centres in hong kong? thanks! have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.145.123.4 (talk) 11:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you searched google? --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 11:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Removed practically duplicate query. Also email addresses should not be put into Wikipedia. Please read the instructions at the top of the page. Dmcq (talk) 12:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC)