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.

September 27

whats the song's name for this video?

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMjQ5NTIyMjc2.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1CqIDE8YUk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peiday (talk • contribs) 04:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BE CAREFUL - Probably not work safe judging from the first 30 seconds. looks like spam and ready to toast! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.182.75 (talk) 13:24, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is this logo?

Hi, anyone knows what this logo is? http://www.pyramidci.com/favicon.ico or http://www.make-consulting.com/favicon.ico. I usually see this icon on the web but have no idea... Thank you in advance.-Capim Dourado (talk) 12:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a fairly common favicon, which probably means that it's the default favicon for whatever shared web host those two sites use, or maybe some kind of default website software. (Bluehost's favicon, for example, is another one you'll see liberally sprinkled on sites in the web.) In the case of the Pyramid site, the header of the HTML defines its own custom favicon as being located here. Pyramid seems to have a dedicated IP, but Make-Consulting shares a common server with some 50 other websites. I don't recognize what host the icon's you've posted corresponds with, myself. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:33, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plesk meltBanana 22:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all! --Capim Dourado (talk) 12:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minimum age for alcohol purchase in the US Virgin Islands

My understanding is that the reason all of the US states have a minimum drinking age of 21 is that the federal government would cut off highway funds if a state has a lower minimum age. Is that right? But I saw a store sign in the United States Virgin Islands today saying that it is illegal to purchase alcohol or tobacco if you are younger than 18. Is this the actual minimum for alcohol in the USVI? If so, how can the USVI have it below 21 -- does the USVI not get federal highway funds, or is there something in the federal law that makes the cutoff of funds only apply to the states and not the territories? Duoduoduo (talk) 17:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our articles Legal drinking age and National Minimum Drinking Age Act confirm the link between the minimum age you can legally buy and possess alcohol in public as 21, and the level of federal funding for roads. The latter article says: Under the Federal Aid Highway Act, a state with a minimum age below 21 would be subjected to a ten percent decrease in its annual federal highway apportionment. However, the articles explain that the minimum age for consuming alcohol varies from state to state, depending on where and with whom it is consumed. U.S. history of alcohol minimum purchase age by state ahows that the states with a previously lower purchase age have increased it, presumably to avoid the penalty, but confirms that Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands and Guam all have a minimum alcohol-buying age of 18, and says that Puerto Rico does so despite 10% highway funding penalty under Drinking Age Act, although this statement is not referenced. I cannot find confirmation as to whether or not the Virgin Islands are also subject to a 10% penalty - perhaps someone else can. - Ka renjc 17:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, while 23 USC 158, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, speaks of various funds appropriated under 23 USC 104, which would include funds appropriated to the benefit of the territories for roads, Section 158 speaks of the withholding of funds appropriated "to any State". If you consult the definitions section, 23 USC 101, "State" is defined as any of the fifty states, the District of Columbia, or Puerto Rico. Accordingly, there is no penalty to the non-listed territories if they do not raise the drinking age. Why that is, I could not tell you. Possibly negotiated. Text of Title 23--Wehwalt (talk) 18:12, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 28

Hamilton Alabama

OP currently blocked for making death threats; don't waste your time here

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

My name is Jamie Brown I am a graduate of Samford University and reside in Hamilton. I was suprised to find that all the information about my family had been edited out of the gambit of the Hamilton page. This is very disturbing how do I correct this misjustice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.120.39.135 (talk) 00:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking the requirement is that information in Wikipedia articles be verifiable using reputable published sources. If you are referring to A J Hamilton, Robert Lee Brown, and Jamie Lee Brown, no sources were cited to back up the information that was included about them. I don't know whether Jerry Dolyn Brown is also a member of your family, but you might note that his name is still there. (For ease of reference, the article is Hamilton, Alabama.) Looie496 (talk) 00:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note in particular that most or all of the sources [1] here were correctly removed. They were either not WP:RS (unpulished genelogies) or possibly primary sourced which need to be used with great care. Also articles should not be written from a first person POV, in fact it doesn't even make sense in a case like this, when you say 'he is my X', no one can be expected to know who's POV you're referring to. Nil Einne (talk) 01:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Position of ship's bridge

Are navy ships' bridges always in the middle and commercial ships' bridges always in the stern? If yes, why? Ptg93 (talk) 01:53, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not on aircraft carriers for obvious reasons. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:20, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cruise ships, they are up front.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:21, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WAG: they're in the center for naval ships for maximum protection, while for cargo ships, they want no obstructions around the hold. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:25, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most combat ships have large superstructures to support radars, uptakes and such, with the bridge at the front of that block. Naval ships' propulsion machinery is usually near the center of the ship for best protection and because it is bulkier in a naval vessel. Most cargo ships maximize hold space by consolidating the superstructure at the rear over the engine room. Specialized vessels like auto carriers have the bridge right at the front of the very large superstructure that extends all the way to the front of the ship. Function, not affiliation, is the main determinant. Acroterion (talk) 02:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional lake freighters on the Great Lakes (like the Edmund Fitzgerald) have the bridge in the front (bow) of the ship but newer ships are changing to the bridge in the stern pattern. Rmhermen (talk) 15:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See our article, Bridge (nautical), for the evolution of the bridge. Obviously, you get a better view of the bow of the ship if the bridge is somewhere in the forward part. If the funnels are in the mid-section of the ship, you want to be in front of those too, otherwise you can only see smoke. As Clarityfiend says, in some cargo ships like tankers and bulk carriers, the forward part of the ship is entirely taken-up by the holds with the engines and crew accommodation at the stern, so it makes sense to put the bridge there too. Note that some naval landing ships have stern bridges, where there is a requirement for a large hold space connected to bow doors. RFA Sir Galahad (1987) is an example, although the modern requirement for a large helicopter deck and the idea of a floating dock in the stern for smaller landing craft has resulted in forward bridges in many larger landing ships; the British Bay class landing ships for example. Alansplodge (talk) 22:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Manslaughter

Regarding the fact that 'manslaughter' is defined as 'killing a person unintentionally', why is the word very often connected to 'involuntary'? Would this not be tautological? Is there such a thing as 'voluntary manslaughter'? That would be 'murder'. What is the point in having the extra word? It's like saying 'a brown bear which is brown'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:46, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While murder is a word of the common language, manslaughter is almost exclusively a legal term, so it depends on the jurisdiction. In any case we have an article on voluntary manslaughter, which explains that it does not always mean there was no intent to kill, but that that intent was somehow mitigated, say by provocation or by imperfect self defense. --Trovatore (talk) 07:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Manslaughter covers it pretty well:

"Manslaughter is a legal term for the killing of a human being, in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder."
"Voluntary manslaughter occurs either when the defendant kills with malice aforethought (intention to kill or cause serious harm), but there are mitigating circumstances which reduce culpability, or when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm."
"Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention."

--Wikimedes (talk) 07:59, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that the definition "killing a person unintentionally" is wrong from the other direction too — my understanding is that if you kill a person by pure misadventure (accident), in a situation where you had exercised ordinary care and caution, this is ordinarily no crime at all, though you might still be sued for the tort of wrongful death. Obviously this is not intended as legal advice, and may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. --Trovatore (talk) 08:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Intent" is the top level of mens rea. Below that, you have "recklessness" and "negligence" (this is based on English law, but it is similar in a lot of jurisdictions). To be successfully sued for a tort, you need to be at least negligent. If you "exercised ordinary care and caution" then you haven't broken the law at all (with a few exceptions for strict liability offences, which I don't believe wrongful death is - there has to be something to make it wrongful, after all). The difference between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter is the level of mens rea required (murder always requires intent, although, not necessarily intent to kill - under English law, intent to commit grievous bodily harm is sufficient). --Tango (talk) 11:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In some jurisdictions, there is also "felony murder", which is distinct from normal garden variety murder in that if death occurs as the result of another felony, you can be charged with felony murder, even if there was no intent to cause any harm at all. --Jayron32 04:01, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

German-Belgian border oddity

What's going on with the border between Belgium and Germany here and here? If you zoom in, you can see that the white curvy line is actually a narrow tract of Belgian territory running through Germany - in effect, Mützenich and Berkhahns Kopf appear to be exclaves of Germany within Belgium (albeit separated from the rest of Germany by a few metres). It looks like the Belgian land might be an old road or an abandoned railway bed, but I can't find any mention of it either here or on the German Wikipedia. Is it just a mapping bug, or some interesting historical quirk? Smurrayinchester 08:01, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The latter, apparently. List_of_enclaves_and_exclaves#Enclaves_which_are_also_exclaves says: Germany also has a group of 5 enclaves created by the Vennbahn railway trackbed between the towns of Roetgen and Monschau (south of Aachen) that was granted Belgian sovereignty. - Ka renjc 08:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's a bit more information at Vennbahn, and also this site is quite helpful. - Ka renjc 09:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Smurrayinchester 17:33, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For further Belgian border funkiness, see Baarle-Hertog and Baarle-Nassau; two halves of the same village divided between Belgium and the Netherlands, with the border running, in some cases, right through the middle of houses and restaurants. There are even exclaves within exclaves. Apparently, restaurateurs use the border to their advantage - when it comes to closing time in one country, they simply shift the tables to the other side of the room and carry on selling. It seems Obelix was right - these Belgians are crazy. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 10:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Europe isn't the only place this happens. There's a town in Vermont/Quebec where the US-Canadian border runs right through the public library. thx1138 (talk) 18:54, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have to produce a passport or visa or even ID to move from the Fiction section to the Reference section? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Derby Line, Vermont and Stanstead,_Quebec#Rock_Island. It used to be a quaint oddity prior to 9/11/01. Then things became very complicated for the residents. I had been there pre-9/11 and it was a neat little oddity, but they got along. Now there are weird customs issues that the residents have to deal with on a daily basis. The library is the Haskell Free Library and Opera House. --Jayron32 00:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also of interest is Fort Montgomery, aka "Fort Blunder", which they had to move because the U.S. built it 3/4 of a mile into Canada. Oops. --Jayron32 00:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a similar blunder and its consequences, see Märket. —Tamfang (talk) 07:03, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soda cans 'G##G'

I grabbed the second-to-last can of Diet Coke out of a 12-pack and while opening, noticed that engraved in the top of the can, visible through the large circle of the pop-top, was 'G23G'. I looked at the remaining can, and it had 'G22G'. What are these numbers? 20.137.18.53 (talk) 15:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably a lot number. It's a little strange for two cans in the same pack to be from different lots, but I suppose it can happen (lots aren't necessarily always in multiples of 12, I guess). Alternatively, it could be some kind of competition code or free download code or something - see if any such thing is described on the can or the pack. --Tango (talk) 16:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to lean towards lot number as well. Either of the lid, the can, or the contents, I couldn't say. If I'm right, the lid is put on after the can is filled. Contest numbers for cans are normally on the bottom of the inside of the can. That way you have to at least buy the can before you have the numbers to enter into the contest. Dismas|^(talk) 01:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, I happened to be drinking a Coke (not Diet) and my lid has F411 with a slightly smaller G above the 4. I believe this is some kind of code for the material of the can itself (as opposed to the product inside); the lot code for that is stamped on the bottom: MA27138NE 21:16 1 (i.e. produced at 9:16 pm on May 27, with the remaining text being some code for the bottling plant and line. Matt Deres (talk) 03:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Coca-Cola Company#Bottlers would suggest that neither your nor the OP's Cokes were bottled by Coke, but rather by (probably different) independent bottling companies. Different companies will have different equipment and systems, so it's more likely that the OP's code will resemble that found on a locally bought mineral water or beer (bottled by same company, for the bottlers almost never make just Coke) than your Coke bottled in another territory. It would certainly help the OP if we could provide some idea of who that bottler might be, but I'm having little luck in finding decent territory maps for Coke bottlers. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 19:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 29

Rating an article

Hi,

I signed in to Wiki this morning but found it impossible to Rate an article. The choices are disabled. Can you tell me why the Rating box is there if no one can do a rating? Thanks,

Jeannie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmember (talk • contribs) 14:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to the Article Feedback system, it is currently undergoing major changes. The "rating" system is almost universally considered useless for purposes of improving articles, and is being replaced with a more informative type of feedback; but the process is not yet complete. Which article was this? Looie496 (talk) 16:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was a rating system? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah look at the underside of Peeta Mellark for example. You should get out and about a bit more! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been at the bottom of most (? all) articles I've accessed in the past (at least) 12 months or so, but I've never felt disposed to use the feature, hence my vagueness on the details. Where do you hang out, Bugs? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:23, 29 September 2012 (UTC) [reply]

It works for me. Do you see a "Rate this page" box at the bottom of Peeta Mellark? What happens if you hover your mouse over one of the stars? What if you click the star? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have JavaScript turned on? I have the rating feature but it's gone as soon as I disable JavaScript. A8875 (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go to My Preferences/Appearance and look at the last entry in advanced settings. You can turn the article feedback off. I suspect Bugs did that and forgot about it. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:12, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 30

Headquarters of Sun Orthodontix

Hi! I'm trying to find the address of the corporate headquarters of Sun Orthodontix (formerly Orthodontix LTD). Since it has the most offices in El Paso, I suspect the headquarters is there, but I am not sure.

For instance, the release of All Smiles Dental Centers at http://www.allsmilesdentalcenters.com/ASDPPress%20Release-Correctionv0227JUL12.pdf states "4901 LBJ Freeway, Suite 300 | Dallas, Texas 75244" - That is the kind of address I want to find for Sun Orthodontix.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 22:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 1

Aluminum versus stainless steel cookware

I'd like to buy a 40 quart stock pot, and see that stainless steel costs about twice as much. What are the advantages over aluminum that make it worth this investment ? StuRat (talk) 06:00, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently unlike aluminium cookware stainless steel does not react to acidic or alkaline foods that are cooked in it. Aluminium pans however supposedly conduct heat better. Here is a discussion. Chevy monte carlo 06:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some types of cooktop react badly with copper, aluminium etc, and stainless steel is the only realistic option. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 07:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning electric ranges, especially induction ? No worries here, I'm cooking with gas. StuRat (talk) 07:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We've always known that, Stu, but how do you make your dinner? :) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 07:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Here's what Alton Brown[2] has to say about it.A8875 (talk) 07:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but that brought up another Q. He said you want (sulfuric acid) anodized aluminum. The problem is, most pots for sale don't say it's that type. Can I just assume they all are ? StuRat (talk) 09:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think so. I had an aluminum pot that didn't appear anodized at all (look at the color in the video; you can see it's visibly different from bare metal). The instructions said to pre-treat it with oil and heat before cooking with it.

The pre-treatment, in my estimation, didn't really work — the pot was better after it wore off. Maybe I did it wrong. --Trovatore (talk) 09:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many users advise boiling water in them first for an hour, to oxidize the finish, in order to avoid a metallic taste. I take it this is only an issue in non-anodized aluminum ? StuRat (talk) 17:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I may have said this here before but here goes. Purely OR. In the early 1970s my aunt was admitted to Oswestry Orthopaedic Hospital with severely and acutely arthritic joints. After some tests were carried out, their advice was to get rid of every aluminium pot as the aluminium had accumulated in the joints causing an arthritic response. Every member of our family did just that and none of us have ever used aluminium pots since. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did your aunt's condition improve? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 11:40, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thank you. She didn't fully recover but the swellings diminished somewhat over time. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't some American restaurants and fast-food chains expand internationally?

This is the sequel to my previous question about household-name American restaurants that do not have any branches outside of the United States. This time, this is not a question of "what", it is a question of "why". Some of the restaurants mentioned in the previous question are quite prominent, notably Chick-fil-A, Bojangles' and White Castle (prominent in that Chick-fil-A has a bowl game named after it, Bojangles' has an arena named after it, and of course there's Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle), and due to the restaurants' popularity, it's quite surprising that they haven't expanded internationally. Why is this the case? I know all countries have chains that don't expand internationally, but the US is different in that those that do become extremely popular overseas. If Jollibee can have branches outside of the Philippines, why cant Chick-fil-A have branches in Canada? Is it a business decision, nationalist decision, religious decision, or a combination of those factors? If they expand even only into Canada it's likely they will do well anyway. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 07:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are additional costs and risks to operating overseas, so it may make sense to keep expanding into new markets in their home country, at least until that nation is completely saturated. There can also be other ways to expand. White Castle, for example, sells frozen sliders in grocery stores, for those who want to be sickened in the discomfort of their own home, where the toilet is always handy. :-) StuRat (talk) 07:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Canada is too liberal for Chik-fil-A? Seriously though, it's mostly due to economic concerns. If a company were to expand to Canada, they'd have to make sure their lawyers were familiar with Canadian law as well as US law. Or hire a Canadian firm to cover their butts in Canada. And there's not just liability to be concerned with there but also labor laws and host of other things. And then there's the accountants. You'll have another country to pay taxes to. You run into the same issue with having trained accountants. Then what about the food? Are you shipping the food to Canada or getting food from Canadian sources? If you're shipping it, there are taxes and customs to deal with. And if you're getting it from Canadian sources, then you have to establish an entirely new supply line. But let's say you do ship everything over the border and you own a burger chain. What happens when there's a mad cow scare in the US and Canada says that you can't import any beef? (hrm... Canada/US chains predominantly chicken outfits?) So there's a lot more to opening a store in another country than there is to opening one in another state. Dismas|^(talk) 07:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Canada's poultry marketing laws wouldn't allow a restaurant chain to import chicken at all - and our chicken is much more expensive than American chicken. Too, it's not just liberals that would run screaming from Chik-fil-A; I know a lot of staunch conservatives who wouldn't set a foot in the place and who would go so far as to hold protest marches if they tried to expand here. Add to that the higher wages here (and especially out West, where you just aren't going to get anyone at minimum wage), the fact that labour laws are provincial (so ten different jurisdictions) *and* the fact that fried chicken simply isn't that popular in most of the country and I don't think Chik-fil-A would have a chance. Many American chain restaurants have failed here specifically because head office stupidly thought Canada was USA Jr. --NellieBly (talk) 18:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to the above answers, note also that expansion is not always one sided, particularly when it comes to a chain which operates under a franchise model and expansion in to a smaller/less important and distant region. It may be a local (whether completely local or a semi foreign company but with extisting operations in that country) company is interested in opening some restaurant chain and so goes looking for an existing chain they can get the franchise rights of for their region (even if the chain doesn't operate under a franchise model in their local region, it's possible they may be be willing to expand in that way). Of course the owners of the brand will need to agree, but the point is that the issue may not just that the owners had no interest in expanding but that no other company has yet been interested in bringing the owners brand to their region. (Or to put it a different way, in some cases the reason why some restaurant is 'international' is because someone decided to bring the brand to their region.) And even when a company is interested in expanding and pushes for it, local laws or simply business reasons may mean they will need to find a partner or a local company to run the stores.

Incidentally, the idea that any US brand is going to succeed is obviously flawed. Both Wendy's and Carl's Jr operated in Malaysia in the more distant past but exited the market after they failed, they're back now but only on a small scale. A&W Restaurants are still in Malaysia but only on a small scale and I know of many restaurants of theirs which closed down because they failed. Burger King a relative late come is potentially more successful although it's perhaps unsurprisignly dwarfed by McDonald's. If you check out the pages you'll probably see mention of plenty of local operations of which failed. Of course these also highlight another issue, a local company is also going to consider what getting the rights actually offer them compared to just starting their own brand from scratch.

P.S. In fact according to our article White Castle is one of the examples of a failed expansion, including in Malaysia. Also Chick-fil-A is potentially one of the few examples where religious and politicals reasons may be a resonable factor as potentially the owners will want a partner which a similar religious and world view.

Nil Einne (talk) 08:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just also point out that those chains aren't even completely national. Chick-Fil-A is only heavily represented in the Bible belt; White Castle is mostly the midwest; and Bojangles is just the South and some of the Eastern seaboard. Not one of those chains has a significant presence in California, one of the biggest domestic markets. If for whatever reason they don't think the California market can stomach their wares, I'm not surprised they aren't thinking about Malaysia. (I'd never ever heard of Bojangles before this question, as a long-time American resident who has never really lived in the South.) --Mr.98 (talk) 12:58, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contrawise, there are California brands that aren't known outside of California, excepting perhaps being seen in TV shows (as California is home to much of the media industry). Ubiquitous west coast chains like In-and-Out Burger and Pinkberry are unknown in other parts of the country. As to why some regional brands stay regional, that's because of the additional cost incurred in expanding into a new area. One needs to remember that things like much of the food, the packaging, marketing materials, etc. have to be shipped, and there's an economy of scale. I'm sure Bojangles would like to tap into the California market; there's certainly a market there for southern fried chicken (c.f. Roscoe's House of Chicken and Waffles) but the cost of opening the first store there would be prohibitive: How do you supply one store with the materials if the nearest distribution centers are 3000 miles away? That's also a large part of why other regional brands DON'T end up in foreign countries: most U.S. brands probably want to saturate the entire U.S. first before spreading to other countries. Brands that haven't left a 10-state area aren't going to likely have the economic incentive to suddenly set up shop in Malaysia or Australa or Hungary or other such places. --Jayron32 13:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As to the point about In-and-Out Burger and Pinkberry, I've lived east of the Mississippi all my life and have only been to California once for a layover. If it hadn't have been for talk show hosts making remarks about In-and-Out, I'd have never heard of it. And I've never heard of Pinkberry until now. So establishing a brand in a foreign country would have a higher hurdle to jump. A Five Guys (article?) just opened up near me (if you call 35 minutes away "near") and I haven't tried it yet. But if an I-a-O opened as well, I'd go to the I-a-O first since I've heard of it and good things at that.

Also, local laws may be too restrictive for a new franchise to bother to open a store. Vermont, where I live, has very strict rules on signage. For example, billboards are illegal. Signs over a certain height are also restricted. And god forbid you want to light it up. When a McDonald's moved into a nearby town they initially wanted to put up their standard sign but found that they couldn't due to the laws. So their current sign (and entire storefront) is much less grandiose than any in other states. Dismas|^(talk) 16:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly, I had never heard of Pinkberry until one opened on the East Coast a few years ago, even though I'm from California originally. I must have missed their window. The In-and-Out vs. Five Guys is a matter of some dispute. I like to be a mediating force and say, guys, they're both pretty good. They're quite different tasting, though, and since one is never in a position to need to choose between them, why bother? As long as we all agree that both are better tasting and less pretentious than Shake Shack, then all is well as far as I am concerned. Shake Shack burgers taste like they have been steeped in beef broth, to my palette. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In In-n-Out burger's case, the problem was, for a long time, that they had only one distrubution plant, and as they do not freeze their patties for burgers, there was a practical limit to how far away they could go and remain within health codes. They now operate in Texas and Utah, having opened more plants, and I daresay they will expand further in time. To foreign countries, there are issues with a) suppliers, b) laws regarding foreign ownership, and c) finding adequate labor that is not going to let down the brand, which is also an issue with the suppliers. People expect consistency from fast food restaurants, for it to taste the same in Maine and California. I imagine you can redo the taste for foreign countries to some extent, so long as it isn't totally bad. I wasn't terribly impressed the time I went to a KFC in South Africa, but so it goes.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

West Bromwich

What is the origin of the name of the British town of West Bromwich? Has there once been an East Bromwich, also? Was the Bromwich originally somebody′s surname? --193.167.207.18 (talk) 08:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a read of our article West Bromwich, and come back if you need anything further. --TammyMoet (talk) 08:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, those things really were there! Added some headings to the article for highlighting the etymology. --193.167.207.18 (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toponymy is the usual heading for place-name origins in Wikipedia, but your version does the job. Alansplodge (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

why can't I see my edits

Today I did editing on the title"lingam" which refers to a symbol of devotion for all hindus. However my editing was removed, I want to know why? One more questions is the references quoted at the bottom of the article "Lingam".The references quoted there are of those authors who have nothing to do with the religion of Hindus.Is wikipedia's purpose of giving free information being distorted? Also religious topics should be dealt with more sensitiveness and Respect and references should only be quoted from the original texts,In case of lingam may be a reference from "shivpuran" will hold much relevance than from those who try to malign the religion and religious practices of Hinduism...my two cents

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandeeprajkoul (talk • contribs) 12:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit removed a section of text, including references, and gave no explanation for the removal because you did not leave an edit summary. The text was restored in this edit. All articles in this encyclopaedia, whether their subject-matter is religious or otherwise, must be written in an encyclopaedic tone and from a neutral point of view, supported by references to what Wikipedia defines as reliable sources. To find out how to reference a source correctly, so that others can consult and confirm the citation, please see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. - Ka renjc 12:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

French cuisine

Why did France develop such better cuisine than other countries? --168.7.228.189 (talk) 20:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Better" is a matter of taste and rather subjective. Have you read our article on French cuisine? It describes how the french were at the forefront of haute cuisine and the innovation of the brigade system influenced how kitchens were run, both helping to quickly spread the popularity of French food. Livewireo (talk) 20:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See also some of the responses to this archived question from 2011. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some factors:

A) Periods of starvation. This led to trying to eat different things you wouldn't try unless desperate. Most were horrid, a few were good.

B) Central location. Being near the center of Europe meant they had culinary influences from all sides.

C) Colonial culture. Colonies around the world brought in distant culinary influences.

D) A long period of monarchy. Kings and queens traditionally like to outshine one another, and one way to do so is with culinary excellence.

E) France lacks some of the more strict Puritan influences, which do not ascribe great value to the enjoyment of food. StuRat (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, not one of StuRat's suggestions stands up to any scrutiny at all. I shall try to start to pull together an answer, based on my reading of culinary history.

First, we must distinguish ordinary family cooking and haute cuisine. Only since the Second World War and the work of Elizabeth David have people valued ordinary French family cooking. So the real question is why haute cuisine developed in France and not elsewhere. This must be linked to the position of Paris in the 19th century as cultural capital of Europe. France also developed haute couture, impressionist painting, ballet and much more. Meanwhile, London was the economic capital of the world, and wealthy Londoners could afford to employ French chefs. But if you go back into previous centuries, there is little difference between English and French food. See Colin Spencer's history for the incredible variety of English ingredients in the Middle Ages and Early Modern times. Even back in the early 1600s the English had fads for Italian and then for French dishes, and also many exotic ingredients, but that only made their food more inventive and interesting. So the real divergence happens from the 19th century, when urbanisation impoverished the English diet in a way that it is only just recovering from now. For how American food got so bad see Revolution at the Table. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judith makes some valid points, but the roots of the issue may go back further. The English court and nobility had their eating habits badly disrupted by the English Civil War and the Commonwealth that followed it, when gluttony was a serious sin. Louis XIV made a point of cultivating all the arts to the highest degree possible; cooking was one of them.[3] James II would have liked to copy him but had no cash and was kicked out in the Glorious Revolution. He was replaced by William of Orange - a meat and two veg man if ever there was. Voltaire said "In England, there are sixty different religions and only one sauce." A century on and the French had their own revolution - all the chefs of the aristocrats were out of a job and opened restaurants for the citizens[4][5]. Alansplodge (talk) 22:26, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the division in elite eating goes back to C17 and C18, and I should have thought of the points you mention. Home cooking, especially in the countryside, was still diverse and excellent in both places, except in times of scarcity. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The English are really good at desserts and sweet snacks. I don't know that anyone disputes that. It's main dishes where most of the rest of the world finds typical English cuisine a bit dull. --Trovatore (talk) 03:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given the two answers above, I'll rest on the assertion that only Spanish cuisine, Italian cuisine, Thai cuisine, some Indian cuisine, and Chinese cuisine, all in the broad sense, and sushi, as opposed to certain dishes like pyrohy and scrapple, are worth mentioning outside their homelands, and that French cuisine is largely popular due to the worship of rude wait staff, and the fact that the British, whose language and cul ture dominate the world, have not a single native dish worth mention at all. μηδείς (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Indian" cuisine (including, but not limited to north Indian, Keralan, Goanese and Bengali), Iranian, Lebanese, Mexican and Vietnamese cuisines are among those cuisines highly regarded around the world. As an English dish, I would mention simnel cake, at least I find it usually gets eaten up. Parsnips fried with mace are nice too. As for French food, you only get rude waiters in posh places, whereas the nicest food is in the unpretentious local places and in homes. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you mention some Vietnamese reviewed as worth eating? My vietnamese friends and neighbors always cooked the most delicious Thai and Chinese. The Vietnamese soup I had at Vietnames restaurants at their recommendation was bland enough to kill. μηδείς (talk) 03:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The food critic at the Village Voice calls Vietnamese cuisine "one of the best on the globe", but they lament the lack of good Vietnamese food in NYC. Still, they list some of their favorite Vietnamese restaurants there. Maybe you could try one of those. Also, taste is subjective, so you may just not like it. It doesn't mean that it is generally bad. --Jayron32 04:20, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Cleese once explained to a TV talk show host that England never developed great cuisine because, "we had an empire to run, you see." Then there's the old adage, "If your guest is French, serve Italian; if your guest is Italian, serve French; and if your guest is English, boil anything." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All this British food bashing is a bit rich from a country that gave Easy Cheese to the world. Alansplodge (talk) 22:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sins of the children shall be visited on the fathers unto the third and fourth generation. μηδείς (talk) 03:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, well, it also gave the world barbecue, so it can be excused. --Jayron32 23:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which was probably also invented by the French. --Saddhiyama (talk) 23:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Carribean natives. But perfected in the southern U.S., broadly speaking. --Jayron32 23:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then you have Cajun cuisine, also influenced by the French, Tex-Mex cuisine, influenced by Mexico, and many other US foods influenced by other cultures (pizza adapted from Italy, hot dogs and hamburgers adapted from Germany, Chinese-American foods, etc.). There are also uniquely American foods (a Philly Cheesesteak ?). StuRat (talk) 23:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Reply to Jayron: Citation needed on that one. However, I am not quite sure why this turned to a thread about bashing English (or other countries) cooking in the first place when the subject is about the French cuisine. --Saddhiyama (talk) 23:19, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is cited in the article Barbecue (already linked) and in Barbacoa, the Taino style of cooking that is the direct ancestor of barbecue. It's also fairly easy to find, typing "history of barbecue" into google gives a treasure trove of refs, including here in Time Magazine, and all broadly confirm that Barbecue originated in the Carribean and was adapted into its modern form in the American South. --Jayron32 02:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Cleese is American??? Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 01:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For those who are unaware, John Cleese's surname was originally Cheese. μηδείς (talk) 03:45, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the OP: The French seems to have an incredibly varied cuisine, with a tradition of local dishes based mostly on local produce, and the traditions varies from each and every little village all across France, while in most other countries the variation seems mainly to be on a regional basis. I would think only Italy comes close to match this kind of local variation. Why this is so is indeed a very good question, and I will also eagerly await qualified answers to this one. --Saddhiyama (talk) 23:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Italians, the French cook so well because of Catherine de Medici, who imported Italian cooking to France. Before that, they ate nothing but boiled hen. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Just like Chekov said that baseball was "inwented by a little old lady from Leningrad." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone is confused by that joke, Bugs refers to Pavel Chekov, a character in the original Star Trek with a penchant for attributing too many contributions to Russia, not Anton Chekhov, a Russian writer who died before there was a Leningrad. StuRat (talk) 01:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC) [reply]

There's a very brief comment on French food at about 4:10 of this clip:[6] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2

Underlined words on the homepage (and elsewhere) leading to ads

What's with Wikipedia? Is it becoming so desparate that it has to rely on ads? Tonight I noticed words on the main page underlined. When I hovered the cursor over the word, it showed a link to an ad. Is this a new feature if is Wikipedia being "attacked?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.103.117 (talk) 04:30, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, its your computer. The "underlined words leading to ads" thing usually means you have some sort of spamware/spyware/malware installed on your computer that is doing it. You should probably get it checked out. --Jayron32 04:35, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, crap! Just my luck. I noticed the same thing on other websites I visited tonight. Thanks for the heads up. 99.250.103.117 (talk) 04:42, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oil lamp

1: can i put gasoline or rubbing alcohol in an oil lamp? if not, why not? 2: if answer to 1 is no, then does a gasoline lamp exist? 3: can i use any oil in one? 4: can i get oil meant specifically for one that is does not cause cancer or birth defects? 5: does some of the oil really cause cancer? 6: how can i make one more resistant to: wind, rain, and breaking of the glass? 7: can to much smoke and soot damage the lamp? thank you, 70.114.254.43 (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]