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

April 28

American churches and skin color

I am perplexed at the fact that this US poll and many similar diagrams separate Protestant religious denominations into a skin color issue. But it rarely happens to any other religious groups. For example you usually don't hear "black jew" or "black catholic" or "hispanic mormon". But Protestants get separated by colour. Why is that? Jartgina (talk) 07:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

There are Black Muslims, though. StuRat (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

The data come from the "Public Religion Research Institute" so it is probably done that way to emphasis a particular point of view or stance. MilborneOne (talk) 07:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

There aren't a lot of Black Jews (in America), for one thing. —Tamfang (talk) 08:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

That will be news to Sammy Davis, Jr. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 16:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Under no reasonable definition is the number "one" considered "a lot" --Jayron32 17:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

What's the opposite of news? I think that's what it would be to Mr Davis. —Tamfang (talk) 07:41, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

If I'm reading this right, there are only 3 million Catholics of African descent in the US out of the 21 million Catholics in the Caribbean and North America. So, again, a fairly small percentage. Our own article says that Black Catholics account for only 4% of the Catholic population. Dismas|^(talk) 09:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

3 million 21millionths is 14%, which is quite significant. DuncanHill (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Many of the African-American Catholics in the United States are in the Archdiocese of Baltimore and the Archdiocese of Washington, which are in historic Maryland, and are descended from slaves who took the Catholic religion of their Maryland Catholic masters. I haven't checked the ethnic statistics for the Archdiocese of New Orleans, the other archdiocese that had a significant number of Catholic planters. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

But that diagram you cite did seperate Catholic in to a Hispanic Catholic and white Catholic. I presume white theoretically means non Hispanic white. As for black, either they are actually in the white (so it's really non Hispanic, mostly white), or they don't show up due to being too small a percentage. Nil Einne (talk) 12:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

See also this PEW survey that shows that 78% of African Americans are protestants. Even with 40,000 interviewees, the PRRI surevey that the Huffington Post article is based upon would have too few "black jews" or "hispanic mormon" for statistically meaningful results. And black catholics are probably covered by the "other non-white catholic" category in the data. Abecedare (talk) 12:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

You're right on the last point, somehow I missed that multiple times (even though I saw it when noting the minimal variance and disagreement with the official Catholic position but still didn't realise my mistake). Nil Einne (talk) 12:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

It is frankly tough to spot in the Huffington Post graphic. The categorization is much easier to follow and understand in the table on the PRRI page. Abecedare (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

• The issue dates back to the civil war and segregation. Read, for example, Southern Baptist Convention. (I'll repeat my anecdote, when my white cousin got his black girlfriend pregnant, they decided to marry. There was some trepidation in telling my grandmother, but she was not at all alarmed, and her response was, "As long as the baby comes out Catholic.") μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Babies don't come out Catholic. They become Catholic a few months later if the parents make that decision. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Then how do you explain the papal seal? μηδείς (talk) 17:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

What is the question about the papal seal? The seal is broken when the pope dies, and a new one created when the next pope is elected, and the pope wasn't born Catholic either, only baptized Catholic shortly after birth. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

That's why they smack the baby's behind, to bring out the patterns on the cheeks saying imprimatur and nihil obstat. If the nurse doesn't find those, they may look for witch marks. μηδείς (talk) 18:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Seals eat fish every day of the week, not just Fridays. Mustn't be catholic then. --Jayron32 17:49, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

There is no rule against any Catholic eating fish seven days a week. There is only a former rule against eating meat on Friday, and a current rule against eating meat on Fridays in Lent. However, the seals are not Catholic unless they were either baptized Catholic or baptized non-Catholic and confirmed Catholic. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:53, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

The issue actually dates back farther than the U.S. Civil War. See our article Black church. African Americans founded their own churches as early as the 18th century, basically in response to white racism. According to this study a majority of African Americans belonged to "historically black churches" as recently as 2009. Marco polo (talk) 17:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

As Medeis implied, several Protestant denominations split prior to the American Civil War. The Methodists, in particular, had a Northern majority in the general conference, which forbid the ownership of slaves. The Southern Methodists then split, and remained separate until the mid-twentieth century. The Presbyterians similarly split. The Episcopalians did not have this issue, because they had a Southern majority, since the Southern colonies were historically Anglican while the Northern colonies were historically one or another denomination of Protestant (and Maryland was historically Catholic). Robert McClenon (talk) 17:31, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Medeis hits the nail square on the head. In the North, church congregations tended to be more integrated, so groups like the American Baptist Churches USA, the Northern split of the Baptist church, have more integrated congregations; Martin Luther King Jr., for example, got his theological training at Crozer Theological Seminary, historically associated with the Northern Baptists; many white ministers also got their training there, such integration would have been unheard of in the south. In the South, however, blacks were systemically excluded from white churches and white seminaries, so parallel African-American denominations developed alongside the White ones, for example the National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc. is the historically African-American Baptist convention parallel to the historically white Southern Baptist Convention, or the African Methodist Episcopal Church and African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church grew up in parallel to the United Methodist Church. The vast bulk of black Americans are Protestants, and since the U.S. society was segregated for so many years, religious life was as well. It didn't magically become less so when civil rights legislation was passed, traditions still hold, so while today there is more integration than in the past, more is a relative term, and in religious life, where people attend the churches and denominations of their parents (mostly), segregation remains the norm for protestants in the U.S. Whether or not this situation is ideal or desirable is a different question, but it undoubtedly is a fact that U.S. protestant churches are still segregated, and understanding why is important to understanding American history and culture. Also, it's important to note that church segregation still exists in the North, but many of these predominantly single race churches are often due to southern blacks moving back north and taking their denominations with them. See, for example, Great Migration (African American)--Jayron32 17:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I would qualify Jayron32's use of the phrase "church segregation" by noting that very few churches practice any sort of official race-based exclusionary policy, and the word "segregation" can be controversial in this situation. However, Jayron32 and other editors are right that denominations, and churches within denominations, mostly reflect history. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

No meaningful denomination practices prejudicial discrimination today. That doesn't mean that there does not exist segregation. The word segregation means separation and one cannot walk into 3-4 random churches in the southern U.S. in supposedly racially diverse areas, and then not declare that the races are separated within their churches. Clearly, denominations are still segregated. Probably to almost a person, the leadership thereof wishes it were not so. But that doesn't mean that we pretend that the churches themselves show good racial mixing. They don't. That's a fact, Jack. Now, that may not be because the churches have any official policy of exclusion; there are historical reasons why they are still segregated today. That reason is not "There is racially prejudiced policies today". The reason is "There were racially prejudiced policies in the past, and that has carried down to influence the current situation." But one cannot say the churches themselves are fully integrated. Anyone who actually looks would not describe the situation that way. --Jayron32 14:12, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• This case in Ohio was rather unexpected news at the time. I was trying to find out if the pastor was fired or the congregation split. (I seem to remember there was some later fallout.) In any case, it was an interesting take-away that Baptists have tiny, but dynamic souls. μηδείς (talk) 17:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

L'affaire Grégory

See fr:Affaire Grégory. I'm surprised that there seems to be no article on the English Wikipedia about this celebrated French murder case. There's just a brief mention of the case at Vologne#Grégory Villemin. Am I missing something? --Viennese Waltz 09:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

A brief summary of the case can be found in our article List of unsolved deaths, section 1980s, but no article in its own right, no. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

You're allowed to remedy that problem. You don't even need out permission, and no one here will stop you from doing so. --Jayron32 17:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

There is a procedure for requesting translation of an article. I don't happen to know the details, but the Help Desk would be a good way to ask. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Could I mix a gin and tonic in this glass?

For some reason or other that I forgot, I have a couple of children's party lemonade glasses. They are cylindrical, like Collins glasses, about 16 cm tall and 5.5 cm in diameter. They are clear but have pictures of pink and light blue balloons on them. Could this kind of glass be suitable for mixing a gin and tonic? JIP | Talk 20:05, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Luckfully we not only have several WP articles on your glasses, there are at least a dozen peer reviewed studies. Could you please ask a question we can answer with references? 20:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

If you have small kids there's a risk they might think that it's a kids drink. As far as mixing, you could stir it, of course, with an iced tea spoon. As for shaking it, that would require covering the top. You might be able to do this with your palm, although I'd expect some leakage, so do it over the sink. Also wash your hands first, obviously, as this isn't very sanitary, and after, as they will be messy. StuRat (talk) 20:14, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I was hoping the shape and dimensions of the glasses would be enough to be able to speculate whether mixing a gin and tonic in one would be a good idea. After all, what else is there to glasses than their shape and dimensions? If I had just said "I have some children's party lemonade glasses" no one would have been able to answer my question as no one would know what kind of glasses exactly they are. And I don't have any children. That the glasses are intended for children doesn't mean they have to be used by them. I don't even remember where I got them from. JIP | Talk 20:49, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, tall thin glasses are quite good for stirring, and the small opening will slow the evaporation of the alcohol and other volatile compounds. Wine tasters (and I imagine gin-tasters, as well), have all sorts of "rules" for which shape glass is required for which purpose, but I think that's a mixture of legit reasons (like those I gave) and a lot of silly "tradition", not based on anything. StuRat (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I drink gins and tonic all the time. I am drinking two right now. All that matters is the proportion and the lime wedge. Truly, can you be morse specific as to the actual question for which you want references? μηδείς (talk) 21:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Even if they aren't morse specific, we can still dash off a quick answer without dotting all of our i's. :-) StuRat (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

My question is not "is it physically possible to mix a gin and tonic in this glass?" but rather "is it a good idea?". I've only seen pictures of gins and tonic (or gin and tonics?) in highball glasses about cubical in dimensions. I don't have any such glasses. What I want to ask is that would it be acceptable by tradition, and would it make any difference in the actual taste. JIP | Talk 21:20, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Acceptable according to tradition, no. Taste the same, pretty much yes. StuRat (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Argh. We make them in 16 ounce glass tumblers, two shots of gin, four shots of tonic, a lime wedge, and 3-6 pieces of ice. Anyone who says the container shape matters is a weirdo an elitist. μηδείς (talk) 21:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree in part. Glass shape does influence the taste of alcoholic drinks, mostly because taste is mainly smell, and different glasses concentrate the evaporation from the drink in different ways. However, anyone who says that there is one, and only one, correct glass for each drink is IMO a snob. Especially in highballs, where you might not be searching for the finer nuances of bouquet most any glass will do (still IMO). The glasses you describe seem to be very much like a highball glass (apart from the balloons), so yes, I think it's a good idea to use them for a gin and tonic. Sjö (talk) 11:58, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

It's never a good idea to shake a G&T, or any other cocktail with a large proportion of carbonated drinks. A G&T doesn't even strictly needs to be stirred: it can be built over ice quite satisfactorily. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Spoons? Shaking?? Lime??? Good lord, just put the ice in the glass, add the gin, a slice of lemon (never lime, unless you want people to think you're the kind of idiot who wants to be hip but never shall be), and top up with tonic. The glass should be cylindrical, and the ones JIP describes sound fine. DuncanHill (talk) 12:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

You seem to be British. Lime is normal in the US, it is not seen as anything special. People do use lemons if they don't have or feel like going out for limes. You can even drink it without the citrus. μηδείς (talk) 16:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I want to experience an authentic gin tonic as it was first invented by the British in India in the late 19th century. I'm otherwise all set, but I'm all confused here whether to use lemons or limes. Being neither British or American, I have no personal experience of tradition to rely on. JIP | Talk 20:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

This recipe for the original Indian gin & tonic specifies equal parts gin and tonic, with a lime slice. You'll also want to make sure the tonic water has quinine. In the US it sold sold with and without, the latter usually called seltzer. μηδείς (talk) 20:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, so I will use equal parts of gin and tonic, and lime. I only know of one brand of tonic available in Finland, Schweppes Indian Tonic. At least the website of the Carlsberg brewery, which has a licence for Schweppes products in Finland, says the tonic has quinine, or at least quinine flavour. JIP | Talk 20:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

The article Medeis linked to does not say include a slice of anything in what was drunk in India, nor does it say what proportions were used. You might want a chota peg or a burra peg, so adjust the proportions according to how hard a day you've had. I have to say - a classic G&T never, ever has lime. Lime in a G&T is a modern innovation (in my experience no earlier than the very late 1990s), and was introduced by the sort of bars that think throwing the bottles around and taking five minutes to serve you a drink a real barman could do in seconds is cool, and then charge you extra for the inconvenience. Schweppes is the best tonic (but don't use the slimline version, it tastes appalling). Put a decent measure of gin in, add about half of one of those tiny bottles of tonic, taste it, and add more tonic if you want. There would never have been fixed proportions in India of old. DuncanHill (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

The second sentence of the article I linked to says "Put some ice in a glass, pour one part gin, add another part tonic water, finish with a slice of lime, and you have a refreshing drink to counter the heat" and lime is mentioned again at the end, as is quinine and India throughout. And frankly you are off your rocker if you think that limes only found their way into the drink in the 1990's; With Kitchener to Khartoum (1898) mentions gin and soda and lime juice and bitters (i.e., cinchona bark, whose main active ingredient is quinine). I am sure I don't have to mention to our British friends that Kitchener wasn't an American barkeeper in a Manhattan speakeasy called the Khartoum. μηδείς (talk) 01:45, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

But the article does not say that that was how it was drunk in the Raj. "Gin and soda and lime juice and bitters" is not a gin and tonic! The taste of bitters and the taste of tonic are utterly different, as any fule kno. And With Kitchener to Khartum (which I have open in front of me as I type) does not mention gin and tonic at all. DuncanHill (talk) 11:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

When you get to the point of denying the plain meaning of words and blaming the lime in a gin and tonic (i.e., and soda with bitters) on the soft-porn movie Coyote Ugly you've gone beyond the sober into the hysterical, in both sense of that word. I am quite sure JIP has enough information at this point to satisfy himself. μηδείς (talk) 17:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I've never seen Coyote Ugly, and have never blamed anything on it (indeed, I'm pretty sure I've never mentioned it before in any conversation either on- or off-line. I haven't denied the plain meaning of any words. DuncanHill (talk) 17:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand the argument here. This is getting way beyond my original question now. I'm going to make a gin tonic with gin, tonic, lime and ice, and that's it. JIP | Talk 19:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Helping in Nepal

How do I contact a humanitarian organization that works in Nepal, in this time after the earthquake? I am a psychologist living in Italy, I speak Portuguese, Italian and English. I am ready to start as a volunteer. --CasaPazza (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, humanitarian organizations with websites would probably have some sort of contact information somewhere on it. This article lists a few of the more reputable ones. Most of Nepal speaks Nepali, though. Are you planning on acting in a capacity other than psychologist? Handing out supplies, some second language teaching (not the highest priority right now), or just helping move rubble and bodies would be possible without knowing the local language, but I'm not sure what else is possible without speaking the local language. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I understand the impulse, but you have to consider the fact that local authorities will be dealing with crowd control, and the truth expressed by too many cooks spoil the pot. After the towers colapsed on 9/11 I had a very strong impulse to walk downtown, but realized by the time I got their I would end up as a hindrance, not a help. You might contact the International Committee of the Red Cross or another better charity if others here can recommend one. μηδείς (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Nepal is a different situation, though. They have a largely disfunctional government and many working age men work outside the nation, leaving them short on labor to do repairs. They could use some temporary workers, working for a reputable aide organization, to help out. However, if they just join now, the training period may mean they will no longer be needed in Nepal once they are ready to go, but there will always be other places that need help. (My brother is an electrician, and goes to various disaster areas to help restore electricity, such as New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.) StuRat (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Nepal has an unemployment rate of >40% (that's the reason persons go abroad to find work), so I really doubt they are short of labor although there may be a short-term need for specialized skills, such as doctors, engineers, heavy-machinery operators, persons specifically trained in search and rescue operations etc. The usual informed advice though is to stay home and send money (not goods!). Abecedare (talk) 22:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe that 40% must include Nepalese who are abroad looking for work. The NPR program I listened to, where they talked with an aid organizer, said that a shortage of particularly young, male workers in Nepal would be a problem. You might think those working abroad could simply go home, but many can't, because of contracts, lack of ability to pay for travel home, or because those at home need their remittances to survive. StuRat (talk) 22:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Link please? Abecedare (talk) 22:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Jumping on to the same question, two Nepali co-workers at my workplace have started a donation pool to help the earthquake victims. I figure once the pool has been completed, they will send the money to humanitarian organisations helping the victims. The earthquake wasn't my fault, there's nothing I could have done to stop it, it wasn't even the work of humans in the first place, and I only first heard of it on Wikipedia. But still it's such a large disaster that I'm considering donating about 5 to 10 €. Hopefully that should be enough for my part. JIP | Talk 21:32, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Medecins sans Frontieres may be the organisation for you. Check them out, at least. Save the Children and Oxfam are other large charities (international, although UK-based) that could give you some signposts as to where to apply. Don't go straight out there in case your presence is counterproductive. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

April 29

Tectonic plates

Western Europe and the East Coast of the U.S. are not near the edge of the plate tectonics. Does that explain why house prices are somewhat high there? Because they are unlikely to crumble? Are houses nearer to tectonic plates generally cheaper? Jartgina (talk) 01:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I think your reasoning is flawed for a couple different reasons. First, not only are there expensive homes but also very poor neighborhoods. New York City is an example of this. Second, house prices are based on so very many things that, if anyone even considered plate tectonics, this would be only one consideration amongst many. And finally, Western Europe and the Eastern US are littered with port cities which would supply large land masses. There's a lot of wealth there which has a tendency to raise land prices. Dismas|^(talk) 01:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Beware of anyone attempting to sell you a split-level house in San Franscisco. :-) StuRat (talk) 02:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Someone should mention that most of Italy is an earthquake zone (see: List of earthquakes in Italy). There are other parts of Europe that are also earthquake-prone. In contrast, there are very few earthquakes in sub-Saharan Africa, but I don't see housing prices going through the roof (so to speak) there. --Xuxl (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• No: Los Angeles, San Francisco, Japan. μηδείς (talk) 02:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• As Dismas said, housing prices are effected by too many factors for plate tectonics to "explain" the high prices of real-estate in (parts) or Western Europe and Eastern USA; and Medeis has pointed out some obvious exceptions to the proposed "rule". That said, earthquake risk does have some effect:

• This paper about land prices in Tokyo finds, "the price of the riskiest areas is discounted against that of the safest by around 8%"
• This paper did a similar analysis for San Francisco Bay area and found that people paid 3.7% more for houses outside the risk-area.
• Interestingly, recent earthquakes in the area make people more aware of and sensitive to the risk, for example the above paper shows that housing prices fell in Bay area by 2% following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake quake, although this effect soon wears-off (yay, forgetfulness! :) )

Abecedare (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I would expect that recent earthquakes would also affect values in that people would be afraid houses in those zones had hidden damage. StuRat (talk) 03:06, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Oil field

Is it plausible that an oil field twice the size of Ghawar Field can be discovered? What about a gas field twice the size of South Pas? Jartgina (talk) 02:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't know the answer. However, if you're asking because a spam email has told you about an "investment opportunity" then I'd save your money. --88.108.229.196 (talk) 07:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Plausible, in that it could happen, just extremely unlikely. A very underexplored area (and there's few of those around these days) such as the Arctic is the most likely location for supergiant discoveries. Mikenorton (talk) 08:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

But the Amazon is very unexplored isn't it? Jartgina (talk) 19:12, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, these days it isn't inaccessible. Personal speculation – it's possible that various oil companies have explored some, most or all of the Amazon basin for evidence of oil deposits, but such explorations would likely be effectively secret since (a) they might not have formal permission from the governments of the countries involved and (b) they would want to avoid tipping off their commercial rivals. Is there a Petrogeologist in the house? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:07, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but oil prospecting isn't about finding some random point on the surface of the earth and drilling a hole to see if there's oil down there. Rather, they look at the surrounding geology and only drill in places where oil is likely to be found. So if the amazon is indeed unexplored to the degree you imagine - then perhaps that's because they already looked at the geology using aerial photography and satellite imagery and decided there was nothing useful to be found there. Our article on Hydrocarbon exploration says that you can get information from gravitational and magnetic information (which can be done from orbit). However, I doubt your premise...a Google search using "oil and gas exploration in the amazon" turns up a LOT of information about people who are aggressively doing just that. THIS IMAGE suggests that a large portion of the Amazon has either already been explored and is in the production phase. SteveBaker (talk) 13:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Portable Royal

What is the value of my Royal portable with case Serial # CD-2353 43 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.57.92.230 (talk) 03:56, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Probably around $80 to $100.

These are not particularly rare - and although typewriters are almost completely obsolete, people tend to hang on to them...and the good ones last for a very long time, so the popular kinds are easy to find. The Royal Portable is a classic of its kind - but it was insanely popular - so there are a LOT of them out there.

Looking at what people are selling them for on eBay kinda gives you an upper limit on "value" - but remember that they might not be selling at the asked price, so the value might be less. But if there are more than one or two on sale at around the same price, the value can't reasonably be more than that. A quick search turns up perhaps one to two hundred Royal portables on sale on the USA eBay right now...some Royal portable typewriters are on offer at "Buy it now" prices of $29.99...most are up around $60...some 1930's era models are on offer at $150 - which seems to be the most that people pay for mass-produced typewriters.

This web page says that your serial number of "CD" followed by six digits is a 1943 "Companion" model. Those seem to be selling on eBay for around $100 in various states of condition (stuck keys, chipped paint, worn keys or case and missing or dried out ribbon are all negatives). But, as I said, that's the ASKING price...what they are actually selling for could easily be less...and the ones that are actually up for auction seem to have zero bidders - so the real price is perhaps much less. Maybe if yours is in utterly pristine condition, you might get a little more. SteveBaker (talk) 05:10, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

You can go to 'completed listings' and find out what they actually sold for. --Viennese Waltz 05:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe that a Portable Royal is currently produced in Viennese Waltz´s capital city of London. The makers seem to be Middleton & Windsor. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Unless you're desperate for money, you should hang onto it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Why? On what basis are you saying that? It's unlikely that other owners will throw their typewriters into the trash - because they are probably worth $100. These machines are unlikely to get a lot of use, so solid machines like this one probably won't wear out or break for centuries to come. A typewriter left in it's case at the back of someones closet will remain in pretty much the same condition it's in now.

Hence the number and quality of these machines is likely to stay the same for a very long time. Judging by the lack of bids for them on eBay, there is not a strong demand for them - and I doubt that the number of fanatical typewriter collectors will increase significantly over the coming decades. The number of hold-outs who still like to type on a real typewriter rather than use a word-processing program will undoubtedly decrease over time as those people die off.

So it seems like supply will be more or less flat and demand will probably decline slightly - which suggests that prices will, at best, be flat for the forseeable future. The only reason not to sell it is if you rather like having it around. If it's worth more than $100 to you as an ornament or a conversation piece - then keep it, but otherwise, it's taking up space that could be occupied by something you actually need that costs $100. SteveBaker (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

It's always good to have a low-tech backup for contingency. That's assuming it's a manual. If it's electric, that limits your options. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

But without all of the infrastructure that went around with typewriters (fresh ribbons, carbon paper, white-out, a pool of typists in a nearby office, a tolerance for fixed-pitch fonts, a nice fat dictionary sitting on your desk), this is going to become increasingly difficult...and as time goes on, people will become more and more dependent on the ability to edit and polish their work. In the era of typewriters, you'd make notes about what you were going to write - organize your thoughts - outline like crazy. When you had it all in order, you'd type out a good copy. These days, we're encouraged to get our thoughts into the computer at the outset - then cut, paste, polish until the work is finished. Furthermore, a finished work has to DO something - you want to email it, post it online, Tweet, Facebook or Google+ it. It is increasingly difficult to live with typewriter - and it just isn't a "backup" anymore. At any rate, to return to our OP's dilemma - I don't think enough people will agree with you on the absolute necessity of owning a typewriter as a "backup" to make a dent in the price of a 1940's machine. Maybe just keep a pencil or two in a drawer someplace. It's ridiculous to claim that prices will increase beyond inflation without any evidence - because logic says not. SteveBaker (talk) 02:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Franchise Start-up

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am looking to open a branch of a local food and drink franchise, but am not clear on how the pricing for doing so would work, how much I would need to put in up front, what they offer and when. As this affects how long I will need to save up for, it is something I need to have clear now, but yet their website is vague on the issue. From the look of things, they seem to be asking me to pick any amount to offer, or possibly to request from them (the phrasing is unclear on this point), and judge my request based on that, which is less than ideal, and until I have more information to go on, cannot even begin to plan, or even decide whether to go through with this or not. Since their website is also somewhat lacking contact information, aside from the standard application form, I will need to ask others that may know their way around the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.231.154 (talk) 10:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC) Sorry I don't have an actual answer but you really need to contact the franchiser. All major franchisers will have processes to help people open franchises. They should be able to give specifics when they have specifics from you, which will certainly differ by state and country and probably will by size and location of what you are intending to open. -- Q Chris (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC) Start here: Franchising and specifically Franchising#Fees_and_contract_arrangement. The franchisor would expect you to have a Business_plan (not the greatest article) as well as done Market_research. From this you should know how much you need for premises, salaries and wages, stock, utilities, etc. and what sort of income you can expect to generate. If you have a viable plan the franchisor will be more inclined to hear you out. It's important to note that any assistance (financial, training, branding, advertizing, etc.) you receive will have to be paid back. Obviously the more of your own money you have up front the better. 196.213.35.146 (talk) 13:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC) 82.132.231.154, please do be aware that Wikipedia cannot give you legal advice. Please see Note: Legal or medical advice is prohibited and Wikipedia's legal disclaimer. Thank you. --Shirt58 (talk) 13:50, 29 April 2015 (UTC) You do, however, need legal advice. Franchise contracts are negotiable, although stronger franchisors, such as McDonald's, will give franchisees little leeway. Franchisors that are not in such a strong position tend to be more flexible. You should talk to a lawyer who is experienced with franchise contracts. John M Baker (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2015 (UTC) Them not being able or willing to give you clear info on the price is a red flag. Most businesses are quite happy to help you give them money (it's after you pay the money where they lose interest in you). But a business which won't even help you at this stage can't be expected to help you later, either. I'd look for another company. StuRat (talk) 21:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC) There are other things to consider too...some franchises will dictate prices - there were horrendous outcries a couple of years ago when McDonalds did a "Back to the 1960's" promotion where the prices went back to what they were in 1960 and the franchisees simply had to suck it up and make less profit for a while - they were furious at having this offer imposed upon them. Other franchises have small print that requires you to buy things like napkins, soda straws and paper cups from them - often at prices far higher than the going rate for plain or white or brown napkins or the free or steeply discounted cups obtained from the soda manufacturers with their logo on them. You'll want to know whether they are allowed to jack the prices of those products up whenever they feel like it - or suddenly dictate a design change that requires you do discard whatever stocks of those things you have. There are a large number of possibly unreasonable demands they may be empowered to impose upon you in the name of maintaining the brand image. Another question is about no-compete clauses...a local Subway sandwich store near us was always packed with customers at lunchtimes...until a big WalMart opened up about 100 yards away with a Subway store right inside by the entrance. Their customer volume collapsed literally overnight and now they are competing against an identical product being sold in a more convenient location and at prices they aren't contractually allowed to beat. That's an almost untenable position. So, are there rules about the franchiser offering new outlets within some specified distance of yours? Are there limits on the prices they can charge you for supplies? Must you offer every cut-price deal they advertise? That's just scratching the surface. You should be armed with a TON of carefully thought-through questions before you start talking to them. You really need to do your homework if you intend to go into this. Could you possibly try to meet with someone else who owns and operates a franchise from that same company? That might be the best way to understand what the sticking points are. SteveBaker (talk) 01:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC) However, note that to the customer, it's genuinely annoying having every site of a franchise chain have different prices, menu items, sizes of the items, etc. They feel incredibly ripped-off if they get half the food at twice the price at one location, and as the franchise owner, you can expect endless complaints and little repeat business. Also, the company offering the franchise probably doesn't want their franchisees to go out of business, although it is possible to have a chain that makes it's money solely from selling franchises and then driving them out of business, but I wouldn't expect such a predatory strategy to last long. I'd suggest looking at the failure rate and average profitability of other franchisees in the chain, preferably not taking the word of the company trying to sell you the franchises. Talking to other owners of that franchise to see how they have been treated is also a good idea. StuRat (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC) I've already mentioned that the Ref Desk is not for legal advice. I will tell you something for free, in the way of an anecdote: when I was at law school, and we started on this topic in contract law, the lecturer said: There's a saying that "whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad", but for our purposes that should be "whom the gods would destroy, they first give bad franchise opportunities". Can someone hat this please?--Shirt58 (talk) 05:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC) And fix it if I did this wrong? --Shirt58 (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Bluetooth Car Stereo Problem

For reference: When I rented a car a few months ago, I paired the stereo to my phone. It loaded the music library on my phone and the stereo would play music from my phone whenever I started the engine and the stereo started up.

So... I bought a bluetooth stereo for my car. It is all hooked up. However, I cannot play music FROM the stereo. I can make all sounds from my phone echo through the stereo. I can play music on the phone and hear it through the stereo. However, I cannot simply sit in the car, start the engine, and start listening to the music. I have to take my phone out, start playing the music on the phone, and then hear it.

I asked the sales guy about it. He said that bluetooth doesn't work that way. You have to play the music by using the phone and you hear it on the stereo. I asked on StackExchange. They assumed that I was lying because there is no way that a stereo could tell a phone to start playing music. I know that it can work because it did work in the rental.

Related: When I plug in my phone to my computer using a USB cable, it asks me to choose a connection mode. One mode lets me search through the files using the computer. Another mode requires me to select files on the phone and "throw" them to the computer. Another mode makes a window on the computer (as long as I have the software running) that makes the phone look like a desktop device. So, I figure that I have somehow set my phone's bluetooth to "only play the audio from the phone, but don't let the other device control the phone" mode. I can't figure out where in the cryptic settings screens to find this setting and fix it.

So... other than repeating the sales guy and StackExchange and telling me that I'm lying about how it worked before, does anyone have any suggestions for making this work the way it did before? 209.149.115.179 (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

External Bluetooth devices can indeed control phones, even the cheap bluetooth speakers often have this facility, but it is possible that it is not implemented in the player that you bought. Does the car player control the volume and "next track" functions? Have you checked the specifications? Dbfirs 14:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Some car stereos have built-in "apps" that allow you to control the music player - these are usually for iPhone devices. My car stereo has a Pandora "app" through Android that allows me to switch stations, like or dislike songs, etc. When I play music directly through the phone's music app, I need to start the app on the phone myself. I also have to start Pandora on my phone if it's not already running. You may want to check the manual for compatibility with your phone. Justin15w (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I thought I might need an app (I didn't when I used the rental - it just worked). I read the instructions for the radio, searched the Kenwood website, and all I find is that they have apps to make USB connected phones work with the radio controls. It states that BT connected phones should just work - but for me, it doesn't. I also found out that by default the BT connection will only use the front speakers. I had to go into radio settings to make it use all four speakers. 209.149.115.179 (talk) 19:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Formating an English Address

I need help with formatting an english adress to which i need to order a set of books. I am not english myself, so i may not be familar with the adressing scheme. The adress is formated in the following way.

Mr. XY

1A The Road

Something, Suite 2222

Village, Middlesex

TW1 1DG

I now have to fill it into the following fields:

Postcode - This is "TW1 1DG"

Building Name - "Something, Suite 2222"

Building number - "1A"

Adress - "The Road"

Town/City - Seems to be "Village"

County - "Middlesex"

Is this somehow right? I don't exactly know where i am supposed to put the suite number. Adivce would be greatly appreciated. --193.170.229.238 (talk) 15:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I would put the suite number in the Building Name field (most online address forms are rubbish for people who live in flats). And yes, "Village" in the Town field. DuncanHill (talk) 15:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree with DuncanHill, but I'd add that the specific location in the building should come before the address of it. English addresses go from most specific to least, so we start with the person's name and end with the county, followed by postcode, which is a Jonny-come-lately, there to help machines. --Dweller (talk) 16:11, 29 April 2015 (UTC) Ooh look, a redlink. --Dweller (talk) 16:11, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

So, the address would be:

Mr. XY

Suite 2222, Something

1A The Road

Village, Middlesex

TW1 1DG

Note that I've also reversed the order of the room number and building name. and the redlink is now blue --Dweller (talk) 16:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Actually "Mr." is an Americanism. It should be "Mr" without a full-stop. The Americans seem to think there are more letters after the "r" that are being abbreviated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.44.170.143 (talk) 14:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd agree with Dweller, but add that the town and the county normally go on separate lines, with the town in capitals -

Mr. XY

Suite 2222, Something

1A The Road

VILLAGE

Middlesex

TW1 1DG

And yes, as noted below the county is no longer required by the Royal Mail, but most online address forms shew little regard for post office preferred formats. DuncanHill (talk) 17:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: The postal service does not require most of this data; it's usually possible to route a letter correctly using only building number (and everything more specific than that) plus postcode. Obviously the road and the name of the town are helpful. Postal regions don't align well with counties, and there is no requirement to put a county on a letter. The county of Middlesex has not existed for 50 years; its use in postal addresses is an affectation. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Though Middlesex was a postal county until 1996, and some businesses still include postal counties in their addresses. Marco polo (talk) 17:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Royal Mail's postcode finder will give you a list of valid (and correctly formatted) addresses for a given postcode. The list for TW1 1DG gives a mixture of plain street numbers (presumably residential addresses) and company names & addresses. Spooky coincidence: I used to deliver letters to that very street when working on the Christmas post from the Twickenham sorting office many years ago. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

(ec)That's right. You only need to etch your door number and postcode on valuables. But these counties still exist. Even after the 1964 reorganisation there were still telephone directories for Outer London: South - East Essex, Outer London: North - East Kent and Middlesex. Here's one for you: does MCC signify the Marylebone Cricket Club or the Middlesex County Cricket Club? And yes, Essex still play at Ilford. ~~

Common mistake. MCC and MCCC. The confusion is made worse by the fact that MCCC are tenants of the MCC. --Dweller (talk) 13:01, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

• Think DuncanHill has got the format right (except forgetting to add UNITED KINGDOM in caps). There are a lot of Business Centres in that part of Twickenham, thus a lot of suites. This may be the Access Business Center at 1A Rugby Road. In which case that would be the building address. You also need to add UNITED KINgDOM. Yet the OP asks about filling 'fields'. This sounds like its in an Business Centre so the fields would be something like:
  

Postcode - TW1 1DG

Building Name - leave blank (unless you know its the Access Business Center), (there is only one BS at 1A)

Building number - Suite 2222

Address – 1A Rugby Road

Town/City - Twickenham

County - "Middlesex"

UNITED KINGDOM (in caps)

To be doubly sure: Email 'them' to say your ordering from abroad and need to know what their ruddy address is! --Aspro (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Or even email the shipping company asking them why the hell they can't accept addresses in post office format! He knows their address, it's the sodding shippers who don't know how addresses work. DuncanHill (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Falsehoods programmers believe about addresses. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 23:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

To clarify, whatever else you do always make sure that the postcode is by itself on the last line of the address. 156.61.250.250 (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I note the OP is posting from Austria. I would guess (although I don't know) that in that case the last two lines of the address would read

TW1 1DG

UNITED KINGDOM

156.61.250.250 (talk) 11:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

The reason why the first 'entry' field is the post code, is because some sites try and make it easier by then displaying a drop-down menu of all the streets in that post code, so that all you have to do is click on the right street and all the other fields get automatically filled in for you -without anymore typing. Fine, 'if' the site happens to have on its database all that info for that country. This one obviously doesn't. On saving the field address window -its proper address format should then appear as if by magic. The post code and country should then appear last. Try it. Watch to see and make sure that it does not commit you to confirming your order before this however. It should only ask that later but I haven't used this site so I don't know about this one. If they do want confirmation of order first and before the address, then do as Duncan suggest and email them with some feed back saying that their site is not fit for purpose when ordering from overseas. Might mention to, that it has been queried on Wikipedia. --Aspro (talk) 13:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

April 30

Where online can I stream the documentary Let me die a woman?

I'm curious. Bluestarcanada (talk) 01:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Have you attempted searching on YouTube? The complete 1:15:32 documentary is available there as an age-restricted video (due to nudity). -- 01:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

This will give you some options. --Jayron32 01:50, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Russian gold rubles

Can someone tell me how much eighteen million gold rubles would be in both US dollar and euro? This is for an article. If these are out of date tsarist rubles, I need to know the amount they would have been worth when they were currency, not their value today. --Steverci (talk) 01:57, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

According to our article Russian rouble "On 17 December 1885, a new standard was adopted which did not change the silver ruble but reduced the gold content to 1.161 grams, pegging the gold ruble to the French franc at a rate of 1 ruble = 4 francs. This rate was revised in 1897 to 1 ruble = 2⅔ francs (0.774 grams gold). The ruble was worth about .50 USD in 1914." DuncanHill (talk) 13:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Yahoo adverts

Do yahoo adverts target you based on your search engine interests, or are the adverts totally random? Freidnless lnoner (talk) 12:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I would be shocked if they were random. Yahoo likely either A) stores a HTTP cookie on your system which knows what you search for and what your preferences are or B) keeps a record on their servers which are checked before loading an ad specific for you. Dismas|^(talk) 12:26, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

When I get an ad at yahoo, I usually see a little "why is this ad here?" tab. Follow that and it gives info. μηδείς (talk) 21:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Printing material

I sometimes wish to print a section of a Wikipedia article without printing the whole article. Is it possible to pre-view a printable version so one could select the page or pages one is interested in printing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.237.140.176 (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

It would depend on your browser. Internet Explorer has a Print Preview function; Chrome appears to offer a preview as part of the printing process.--Phil Holmes (talk) 14:51, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

You could also do a screen capture (such as using the Print Screen keyboard key) then paste into something like Microsoft Paint, remove anything you don't want and/or crop it, then print. The disadvantage of this method is that it only allows you to print one screen's worth at a time, which frequently isn't enough, requiring you to repeat the process many times. The higher the resolution is set on your screen, the more you can get per screen capture. StuRat (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

• Click on "printable version" on the left of the screen, highlight the part you want to print and then simply print the selection. Copy pasting the selection into a word processing software (like MS-Word) should work too.--TMCk (talk) 21:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Checkboxes

I'm seeing little checkboxes on page histories now. Have they always been there and I never noticed them before? Or is this a recent innovation? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:24, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

It's new - evidently you can now edit the tags of individual revisions and such. SteveBaker (talk) 19:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

By "tags" do you mean "citation needed" and such as that? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Tags. I just found this out by playing with the feature. If you want to, go to your userpage history, click a checkbox, and click on the button at the top right of the page. Dismas|^(talk) 21:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't think I would use this. I wonder if it's possible to disable it? I don't see it in my "Preferences". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Admins have had those boxes for years (for viewing deleted revisions). They are ugly. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 04:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Are the rest of us now stuck with them? Should I ask this question at the Village Pump? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I wondered when I would ever use them and after thinking about it, can't think of why I would. So, if you don't ask there, I probably will be in the coming days. Dismas|^(talk) 13:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I've asked, here.[1] If that was the wrong place to ask, I'm assuming they'll tell me so. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

There has already been some discussion about it here: [2] Does that coding look like it would work? And where should it be placed? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:22, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I already asked at the right place, which is here, and they gave me a little piece of code similar to the one on the village pump which works fine. --Viennese Waltz 18:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't have a "global css" page. Where can I find out how to create one? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

They probably mean User:Baseball Bugs/common.css. Dismas|^(talk) 19:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

The boxes have been removed for non-admins (and lost an option for admins who always had the boxes) but for the record, global css is meta:Special:MyPage/global.css, linked at "Shared CSS/JavaScript for all wikis" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. common.css only has effect on the local wiki. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

This disappeared from my page histories an hour or two ago. I checked my code subpages and they haven't been touched (thought maybe someone was "helping me out"). Have you checked your page histories lately? ―Mandruss ☎ 18:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I can't see/find it in my 15" monitor screen; could be my browser... -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 18:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I am no longer seeing it. Evidently they listened to the complaints at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Resolved

May 1

Finding an identical picture

Can anyone help me find this picture without all the publication additions? Just the original photo in this quality. --Steverci (talk) 22:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you try TinEye ? StuRat (talk) 22:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

It would help if you explained what you want this image for and where on Wikipedia you intend to use it – otherwise we are not interested.--Aspro (talk) 23:13, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Our ability and willingness to answer Q's should not be based on it helping Wikipedia, only helping the OP. StuRat (talk) 00:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Tried searching the image URL in Tin Eye, just got the same thing. It's a picture of Aram Manukian. The same picture is already on commons and used on his page, however this magazine picture is of much higher quality. --Steverci (talk) 23:41, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

That's the best I could find.--TMCk (talk) 00:11, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

In addition to Tin Eye, I'd suggest it's worth trying Google reverse image search, and probably Bing too, if you haven't already. Also since you have the commons variant, try that too. Nil Einne (talk) 05:49, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I had a quick look in Google and Tin Eye and didn't find anything that interesting except that for some reason the wikipedia article is using a poor variant of that image. We have Commons:File:Aram_Manukian.jpg which while not anywhere as good as the magazine image, is somewhat better than the one used in the wikipedia article. Edit: Forgot to mention, didn't try Bing because I can't seem to find their Image Match any more. Nil Einne (talk) 06:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Or were using. I've changed the en.wikipedia article to use the better version that already exists. Feel free to change to an even better version if you find one. Also someone may want to inform the other users once this is done. Actually, it'll probably be okay to simply replace the jpg version with a better version if you find one, unless the original uploader really feels they want the version they uploaded, but they seemed to have replace it before, so probably not. The gif version probably shouldn't be replaced, since I don't think it's ideal to use either a gif (even if it is grayscale so theoretically you shouldn't be losing that much) or to give a jpg a gif extension (does the software even allow that?). Potentially it could be deleted, but I don't know the common rules on these sort of things. In the interim, I've added the other version to each of the images. Nil Einne (talk) 06:19, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes, we deliberately lower the resolution of images in order to be able to claim 'fair use' under the copyright laws (not using a higher quality image than we strictly need is one of those provisions). Since this is an image of a magazine cover - it seems likely that this was the reason and Nil Einne should double-check whether the cover is recent enough to be in copyright before uploading a high-res version. SteveBaker (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I'm not planning to upload everything, and never intended to suggest I was.

Both existing images are on commons, so obviously not claimed to be used under the NFCC. The documentation on both versions of image is fairly poor, and they claim different licences despite obviously being the same image. Normally this would be concerning. However I didn't investigate further, or mention it before now, as the person died in 1919, so the image must have been created then or before.

This doesn't completely eliminate all copyright concerns, in particular if the image was unpublished before I think 1977, it could still be copyrighted (see Commons:Help:Public domain). Still I suspected the chance it will be a problem is not that high so didn't think it worth mentioning (I'm normally quite a sticklet for copyright concerns, but this just seemed one case not worth worrying about).

In any case, if it is a problem, the images should be removed from commons, appropriately tagged as NFCC, and downgraded from the 1,050 × 1,496 version which has existed on commons for over 1.5 years now (really 2+ years if you consider the older variants). Uploading a newer version isn't going to help the situation in that case, but it isn't going to make things much worse than the existing situation either.

Now as for the magazine cover, I don't think anyone is suggesting it be uploaded. That said, while the cover itself may be copyrighted, the image it depicts is most likely not as with the other images we already have.

If someone were to modify it to remove the copyrighted elements from the magazine so it only depict the original older image, then it would it would likely be perfectly usable without copyright concern, even on commons, since commons, as per the WMFs stated view, has rejected any copyright claims of simple reproductions of public domain 2D art work (as per US law) regardless of whether other countries may allow copyright of such images. Although I would recommend anyone investigate further that this would be okay, before they try this.

The exceptions I'm aware of would be if this isn't a simple reproduction (i.e. beyond the magazine elements, there were additional creative elements to the magazines version of the image e.g. there was a creative rather than faithful restoration of the image). And of course, if we are mistaken about the image being in the public domain in the US.

P.S. I was actually considering mentioning someone may want to investigate the true source and history of the image. This should hopefully put to rest any copyright concerns. More importantly IMO in this case, it may make it easier to find better versions of this image, perhaps from offline sources. Unfortunately I didn't in the end and this confusion arose.

An alternative which may not help find a better version, but will probably (again I'd check with others first before going to the effort if it's for this reason) resolve copyright concerns, would be to find evidence of it having been published before 1978. To be clear, I don't think you have to find the source, the first publication, or any real info about it, simply that it was published before then.

Nil Einne (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually upon further consideration, the images probably should be deleted point blank and not used anywhere any more if they are copyrighted, rather than being uploaded to wikipedia, tagged as NFCC and reduced in resolution. I suspect it will fail the irreplacable test considering there person appears to have been significant enough in their life that, even with it being the relatively early age of photograph, there's surely some surviving photograph or good likeness potrait of him that isn't copyrighted (i.e. anything published during his lifetimeo or a long while after). Nil Einne (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2

Music in elevators

In Captain America: The Winter Soldier:

Captain America and Nick Fury were in an elevator:

An unghappy Captain America: You know, they used to play music.

Nick Fury: Yeah. My grandfather operated one of these things for 40 years.

How did they play music in an elevator in the early 1940s? I mean before the invention of transistors and power-saving electronics.

Did they use a radio which could be very large back then?

Did they use a vinyl player? I guess the mechanical player occupies too much space in the elevator and they probably do not operate very well in a moving and vibrating environment.-- Toytoy (talk) 05:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

No music was played when his grandfather worked there. The two periods were at different times.
Sleigh (talk) 05:44, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

According to History of elevator music, that unspeakable horror was first inflicted on an unsuspecting humanity in 1922. This article states the "original mode of conveyance ... was wired wireless, radio transmitted not through the air but through power lines", which jibes with the history section of Muzak (brand). Clarityfiend (talk) 06:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

As for the space required by the electronics in the pre-transistor era, the equipment could have been on the roof instead of inside the car. The page Fiend cites doesn't say, though. --174.88.134.161 (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

That elevator music article says: "Several popular music stars unsuccessfully tried to buy Muzak Holdings with the sole goal of shutting them down."

Yes, that muzak company must be a branch of Hydra. They should have wiped out its inventor before it was invented. -- Toytoy (talk) 15:58, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

First, Muzak is just a music distribution company. They provide a lot more than elevator music. For example, the Moe's restaurant chain has their music supplied by Muzak (the playlist is classic rock featuring deceased musicians). Second, the custom-recorded music for Muzak is where many musicians work while trying to make a break in the music industry. Examples: Bruce Pavitt, Mark Arm, Tad Doyle, and Kim Thayil. Muzak provided the Seattle grunge scene a paycheck during the day so they could make their own music at night. I know it is cool to hate Muzak, but you have to force yourself to remain ignorant to continue hating them. I don't like being ignorant. 75.139.70.50 (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Great, now I have the "Where's My Elephant? theme running through my head. Thanks a lot. μηδείς (talk) 20:45, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Christian mythology

In Christian mythology, when a bird dies and goes to heaven does it get a set of angel wings in addition to its regular pair of wings? 186.249.176.250 (talk) 11:16, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Christianity does not teach that dead humans, or any other dead creatures, become angels. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

There is also some debate about whether animals go to heaven. Matt Deres (talk) 11:22, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

This should answer the OP sufficiently and provide many different perspectives on the question. Also, as noted, nowhere in Christian theology does it say that people become angels. Angel#Christianity covers the Christian beliefs about what angels are: they are not the souls of the dead, they are messengers of God; the word Angel derives from words meaning "messenger" or "courier". --Jayron32 14:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

To be fair to the OP, they didn't actually ask about when people become angels, they asked about getting angel wings. It's a fairly widespread trope in modern times to depict people in heaven with halos, wings, robes, and a harp. Since the line between "real" Christianity and fake is in the eye of the beholder, I would suggest to the OP that birds can get angel wings in heaven if s/he really wants them to. Matt Deres (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Given birds already have wings, they get a pair of arms, and a skateboard. I should have thought that rather obvious. μηδείς (talk) 16:59, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Lol -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

No, there is no such thing as 'halo' or 'wings', its just a made up story like 'demon' with 'horns' and 'tail', like Matt Deres stated 'can get angel wings in heaven if s/he really wants them to.' I think Christians/Michelangelo came up with the idea first, not sure, the article Jayron stated might give the answer to this. -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Restatement

First, as previous posters have noted, angels are not humans who have gone to heaven. Angels are the result of a separate earlier act of creation. While the best known description of the creation of angels and then of humans is by Milton in Paradise Lost, this concept is not new to Milton, because it is referred to by Dante. (Milton described it so masterfully that no one until Tolkien tried to improve on it.) The material world and the humans in it were created separately from and after angels.

Second, Christian scripture is silent on the question of whether non-humans have immortal souls and can go to heaven. Some Christians stubbornly insist that only humans have immortal souls and go to heaven, but that isn't based on Christian scripture. God can do what He will do.

Third, all vertebrates are tetrapod in this world. There are no hexapod vertebrates in this world. It just doesn't happen that way. Birds, like bats and large winged reptiles, have paid the price of the ability to fly by transforming their arms or forelegs into wings. (Grasshoppers and beetles, with an arthropod body plan supporting a variable number of appendages, did not have to pay that price. The vertebrate body plan provides a variable number of vertebrae and four limbs. That is just how it is.) God can, of course, improve on or change the vertebrate body plan in the next world, and give wings to humans, and horses, if there are horses in the next world. As Medeis has noted, what birds would want is probably the arms that they lost one hundred million years ago by transforming them into wings. (They don't need forelegs, because, like humans, they are adapted to a bipedal gait. Humans have arms and legs and could use wings. Birds have wings and legs and could use arms.)

Fourth, I don't know where Medeis got the skateboard from. The skateboard isn't as obvious as she says it is. The arms are.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Just one minor correction. Where "angels" come from is an open question in Christianity (and probably Judaism, though I don't know as much about that), since the Bible makes no mention, one way or the other, when angels were created. The description of creation itself, in Genesis 1, does not mention angels, so we don't know when they were created, presumably Genesis is not exhaustive in its descriptions, because it doesn't say when angels were created, and yet their existence is noted in many places throughout the bible. The could have been created in an earlier creation (which is not mentioned at all) or they could have been created in the same creation that created everything else (which is also not mentioned at all). Since it isn't discussed, it's an unanswerable question from the perspective of Christian theology. Many theologians and authors and others (including the aforementioned Messrs. Milton and Alighieri) have speculated on the nature of Angels, but insofar as the Bible (and only the Bible is the inspired word of God, if the Bible doesn't explain it explicitly, it can't be resolved within Christian scripture. Many can come to what appear to be logical conclusions from Scripture, but such "logical" conclusions arrived at by different people all thinking rationally often contradict each other, so withing Christianity, there's no way to resolve the issue. Of course, once one steps outside of Christian dogma, the issue becomes moot. From the perspective of a non-Christian, it's all fiction anyways, so there's no need for seeking a right answer either. --Jayron32 03:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I thought Medis is a he? -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Russell.mo (talk • contribs)

Why would you default to assuming everyone who's gender you didn't know was a "he". Male is not the default, you know... --Jayron32 20:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The user name is spelt "medeis" and "he" is the default animate pronoun, which does not bother me. μηδείς (talk) 20:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Whether it does or doesn't bother you doesn't actually answer the question of which pronoun is correct... Just sayin'. Those are different issues. And there's a real problem with assuming the default is male, as though female was somehow aberrant. --Jayron32 03:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I've seen evidence to the contrary, though nothing conclusive. —Tamfang (talk) 23:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Another way to put it is that the OP's premise and assumptions have absolutely no biblical basis. It has somewhat of a cultural basis, though. I've sometimes thought that if any non-human animal "goes to heaven", then they all do: Based on the idea that animals are without sin. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I think the idea don't imply if the same kind kills each other for benifits during living, what does occur in the animal world. resembling your idea with predators (lions, humans) and the same kind killers. -- Mr. Prophet (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Animals do what they do. There is no such concept as morality in he animal world. That concept applies strictly to humans. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

To throw a couple of scriptural references into the mix - on animals, Isaiah 11:6-8 (which _doesn't_ say "the lion will lie down with the lamb", although everyone thinks it does) and Isaiah 43:19-21 ("The beasts of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls"). On angels, Matthew 22:30 ("In the resurrection, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven" - note "as the angels"). Tevildo (talk) 19:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Matthew 22:30 is also important for one other reason: it indicates that under basic Christian theology, earthly relationships are irrelevant for the purpose of our happiness in heaven. That is, you may really love your wife here on Earth, and she may bring you lots of happiness, but when you get to heaven, your happiness will not come from that relationship and thus, there's no need to worry about that relationship in heaven. By extension, it's not hard to think that if who your wife was makes no difference, then who your pet was would also make no difference; the argument that God would make a place in heaven for your pets because they brought you joy on Earth seems fairly unconvincing considering that. Which is not to say that pets will or will not be in heaven, explicitly, but if we're looking for evidence we can extrapolate from, that passage at least makes us think "we aren't asking the right questions, if we're asking that question", from the point of view of Christian theology. --Jayron32 21:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Is there some place with list of non software synths with midi tuning standard support?

Is there some place with list of non software synths (that has keyboard) with midi tuning standard support?

My googlefu is failing.179.197.137.145 (talk) 14:33, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Like Ed

Hi there!
At school the whole class got from the english teacher a mission to accomplish like Ed Kennedy, the main character of the book I am the Messenger. I got the mission build. What could I do? It must be done at the latest on Sunday and send a photograph of the place where I will do the mission to the teacher on Monday. I also need to send him a little description of what I exactly will have done.
Thank you for your help!
Calviin 19 (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

You seriously cannot think of anything at all that you could possibly build? This is why there is a disclaimer on the reference desk stating that we do not do your homework. 75.139.70.50 (talk) 23:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

May 3

allen lacy

I need an introduction to Allen Lacy, an American expert on gardening, thank you.