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.

October 4

Fluff

Is it legal to burn your fluff with a blowtorch?. Also what precautions must one take? !149.254.235.11 (talk) 00:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What type of fluff? Like marshmallow fluff? If so this may be helpful.--Jayron 32 01:20, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep it in a silo, don't burn it as soon as you get it, or you might explode. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:08, October 4, 2017 (UTC)

The ip geolocates to the UK, where fluff may be a polite euphemism for flatulence, as it is in NZ. Akld guy (talk) 02:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, you might explode. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:33, October 4, 2017 (UTC)

The user could try it and see how it works out. And whether he reports back or not, we'll know. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:35, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Exploding isn't always fatal. And curious online fluff torchers aren't always male. But yeah, they're pretty safe bets. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:24, October 4, 2017 (UTC)

I 'geolocate' to the UK as well and never in my 7 decades have I heard anybody refer to a fart as fluff. Trump, yes, but not fluff. Richard Avery (talk) 08:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

reference. I've heard several elderly ladies use the term that way. Akld guy (talk) 09:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was one of the standard term used in my family during my childhood (at least, in my presence): "pump" was also commonly used (which amusingly clashed with the term for a gymnasium shoe used in certain areas (e.g. Yorkshire) but not others (e.g. Kent)). That was, of course, half a century ago. On the other hand, I never heard "trump" being used in this context until the election campaign of the current POTUS. I suspect these and other terms are highly dependent on region and family culture: I wonder if anyone has included them in a linguistic study of regional vocabularies? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.217.210.199 (talk) 16:09, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard fluff used here in northern England in that sense, but the OED has "A puff; a quick, short blast, a whiff; a slight explosion. lit. and fig." as Scottish and northern English dialect, and I assume this is the source of the usage. Dbfirs 13:01, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about belly button fluff then I wouldn't recommend burning it. http://gawker.com/5672240/this-is-officially-the-largest-collection-of-belly-button-lint-in-the-world (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 21:02, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe bumfluff is more likely: "(Australia, Britain, New Zealand, derogatory) The first, sparse beard growth of an adolescent. [from late 19th c.]". Again, blowtorch removal is not recommended. Alansplodge (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not even going to mention the film industry here. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:10, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is that an intentional mentioning something you're not going to mention? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll never look at a Fluffernutter the same way again. StuRat (talk) 17:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Good Lord, do people really eat those things? Alansplodge (talk) 21:22, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Only if they're true professionals, luvvie. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:03, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Très drôle! Alansplodge (talk) 22:31, 5 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Backwoods Farm near Barnard, Vermont

Where is the farm located? It is known because of Carl Zuckmayer who lived there in the 1940s. The article on Barnard, Vermont mentions the farmhouse built in 1783 and gives [1] as reference. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 11:37, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might try contacting the Barnard historical society. They seem to know, but their website[2] describes it as "Route 12, at the top of the ledge-cut leading down toward South Barnard". Looking at Google Maps it's not clear to me where that is.

If that fails, the people at Twin Farms resort[3] may be able to help you. That resort was hisotically connected to Zuckmayer's social circle.

ApLundell (talk) 17:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 5

Best GU10 bulb

"GU10" is the mechanical definition of a lamp having a 2-pin twist-lock mount, also referred to as IEC 60061-1 (7004-121). The OP's task lamp may be a balanced arm type. Here are reviews of some bulb types. Be sure to heed this warning: *a man working at a desk in a confined space with only the light from a low-wattage lamp will nurture furtive ideas and produce degenerate programme material.*- BBC guideline in 1949. Blooteuth (talk) 22:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The environment is a room with little natural light and one 15 W LED bulb as a main light. I would like a GU10 bulb for a task lamp that is suited to reading small black-and-white text---colour rendition is not terribly important in itself. Whilst, as aforementioned, there is little natural light anyway, sometimes there is almost none as I work late at night. Given what I have said, what would be most suitable? If the question is presently unanswerable, what additional information is relevant? I am not terribly fussed about efficiency as ergonomic considerations when working take precedence over energy saving (for me, anyway, I do get eyestrain from using poor-quality lighting).--Leon (talk) 19:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although "colour rendition is not terribly important", for reading, CCT (correlated color temperature) towards the warm end of the spectrum (around 2500K~3500K) is less stressful on the eyes (e.g.: 7000K CCT can lead to eye fatigue). (More info here) — 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 22:12, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is that physiological or psychological? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:17, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blue light gives you higher resolution, due to the shorter wavelength (think precision instrument) but it also impedes sleeping. Windows 10 actually has a display setting that lets you tint the screen blue during the day, and red at night, or during which hours you choose. I dim the house lights and tint the screen red about an hour before bedtime. At that point I either magnify the text or use reading glasses for printed material. Scientific American.μηδείς (talk) 00:28, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reference Medeis/μηδείς just gave does not support her claim that "Blue light gives you higher resolution", and in fact there are almost no blue cones at the center of the fovea. The maximum density of blue cones occurs in a ring about the fovea. Consequently, the maximum acuity for blue light is lower than that of other colors and occurs approximately 1° off center from the high-visual-acuity fovea.^[1] Also see Filling-in of the foveal blue scotoma (Vision Research journal 2001 Oct; 41(23): 2961–2967. ). --Guy Macon (talk) 01:28, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks. Unfortunately I took neurology in the late 80's, then said eff it, and finished my biology major with a specialization in botany. Never studied the eye as a whole after Bio 102. In any case, the remainder is recently well-documented. μηδείς (talk) 01:58, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Curcio, C. A.; Allen, K. A.; Sloan, K. R.; Lerea, C. L.; Hurley, J. B.; Klock, I. B.; Milam, A. H. (1991). "Distribution and morphology of human cone photoreceptors stained with anti-blue opsin". The Journal of Comparative Neurology. 312 (4): 610–624. doi:10.1002/cne.903120411. PMID 1722224.

If I get a round tuit I'll try to find sources; for now, see (maybe): Scotopic vision & Purkinje effect & Kruithof curve ...at any rate, further discussion not related to the OP's query is better done over at the science desk -- That being said, "warmer" colors (lower levels of green/blue light) have less stimulation of photoreceptors (specifically, rods). 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 02:14, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@μηδείς: do you use, or have you tried f.lux? 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 06:16, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The functionality built into Windows 10 has the same effect you see at the f.lux article. What the actual app is called, I know not. But in effect, yes, I use at least an analog of f.lux. For table lamps I use incandescent bulbs set on dimmer switches only. (I have looked for grey or brown bulbs, but have had trouble finding any.) For overhead/room lamps I always use non-dimmable bulbs, since the whole purpose of those lamps is to illuminate the entire room as well as possible.

I miss the Giuliani Administration, because at least back then you could call the local precinct and have the sunlight, temperature, or local weather changed to something more reasonable. Bloomberg's "green" reforms were a disaster. μηδείς (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which reminds me of a joke: I phoned my local precinct; I said, "I want to report a nuisance caller", he said "not you again". —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 21:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which reminds me of this one: "Is this the complaints department ?" ... "Yes it is, and let me start by saying that you have a horrid toupee, your shirt doesn't match your pants, you have bad breath, and your shoes are cheap. Will you be needing any more today ?" StuRat (talk) 22:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Did you come in here for an argument? --47.138.160.139 (talk) 20:36, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, what about halogen vs LED? At the moment I have a 35 W halogen bulb there (a) because the lamp came with it, and (b) because they're alleged to give very "white" light. But I'm not sure if it's really ideal?

The remarks about colour temperature suggest that a warm white bulb would be most suitable. Is there any downside to buying cheap LED bulbs vs more expensive, branded ones?--Leon (talk) 07:57, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The equivalent brightness (lumens) to a 35 W halogen for a LED is about 7 W. Considering how long they last, even a semi-cheap LED costs less in the long run. I personally prefer brand-names (mostly for the reliability the electronic circuits), many are much cheaper than they used to be, . Another thing to consider is dimmable vs non-dimmable; for dimmable, cheap LEDs tend to buzz or hum. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 08:26, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Colour temperature preference IMO depends a lot on what you are used to than people give credit for. Most people in European ('Western') countries, including of course North America and NZ+Australia seem to prefer warmer lights often in the 3500K or lowwer for home usage, especially in relaxing settings (e.g. the living room, reading). But there seems to be a preference for higher colour temperatures in parts of East and South East Asia (not sure about South Asia). [4] (not the best ref, but I'm lazy to dig up another one mostly because it's not a particularly strong or important claim). This could be genetic (see e.g. [5] [6], but I strongly suspect cultural issues. Fluorescent lights tended to be associated with offices etc until the widespread availability of CFLs in most European places whereas they seemed more common in homes in parts of East and South East Asia. And early fluorescent lights (and even early CFLs) tended to be cooler.

Note that despite the common descriptions of the colours, there's no strong evidence I'm aware of that having warmer lights actually increases thermal comfort in cooler environments. See e.g. this [7] which found 4000K generally resulted in higher ratings of thermal comfort than 2700K or 6200K. Personally I find even 4000K is a little too yellow in most situations.

In other words, in terms of pure preference terms, I don't think we have enough information and personally I'd go much more by what sort of colour temperature you generally prefer than by what random people tell you you should prefer.

However outside of preference, as indicated above there is increasing evidence that too much blue light at night probably has a negative effect on circadian rhythms and associated negative effects on sleeping, health etc and this is something which most likely be seen in all populations (but maybe within a population there could be fair variation on how strong this effect is). That said, I'm not aware of strong evidence for negative or positive effects of colour temperature on eye strain among worldwide populations, this and the sources above strike me again as the sort of thing based largely on anecdotal claims and personal or group preferences and also situations such as computer displays which may not carry over in to room illumination.

Nil Einne (talk) 13:34, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I recall from a class called something like 'Engineering Application of Color Theory' that rods are only stimulated by light in the green-blue range (i.e. cool); and reducing stimulation reduces "eye strain" (more accurately, perhaps: "brain strain").^{[citation needed]} This study seems to suggest that under certain conditions, pupillary response is also affected by color luminance: [8] 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:1DF7:C3BD:258E:E025 (talk) 21:23, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As for the halogen versus LED debate, I'd recommend LED, unless it's cold in that room and you would actually appreciate the extra heat the halogen lamp will put out. 15W is very little, and I'd want as much light as I could get at that wattage, which would mean an LED. This site claims this LED version uses 86% less energy and lasts 20 times as long as a 50W halogen: [9]. StuRat (talk) 23:49, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 11

Are any remains of the planes from September eleventh 2001 still around anywhere — Preceding unsigned comment added by SparkyHelper (talk • contribs) 22:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. μηδείς (talk) 23:49, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Engines and landing gears were found several blocks away. I don't see why they'd destroy them. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:15, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Gear" in that sense is not a count noun (like cogs) but singular in form, like machinery. μηδείς (talk) 00:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You know what grinds my gears? How mechanics study mechanics to work on mechanics. We need to take back "grease monkey", for clarity's sake. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:27, October 6, 2017 (UTC)

Did computers study computers to work on computers? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:40, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The aircraft parts were sorted into shipping containers - New York had containers at Freshkills landfill to store plane parts. Parts of the PA plane were acquired by the National Museum of American History [10]. Rmhermen (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. The planes were holograms; the "parts" were planted by invisible stealth helicopters. The "real" planes are ... uhm, ... (I forget) 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:65A7:28DA:7F79:4E50 (talk) 01:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit. Everyone knows holographic jet fuel can't melt steel beams. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 08:31, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them (including the landing gear mentioned above, as well as a fuselage panel from the Pentagon plane) are on exhibit at the 9/11 Museum in New York (been there, saw it myself). 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:D403:68F1:A297:C74A (talk) 01:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fuselage panel can be seen here: [11] but the landing gear are not among the "on display" images. Rmhermen (talk) 01:48, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 6

Entrenched provisions

How exactly does one write an entrenched clause into Federal law? (Bonus points if the clause is entrenched throughout the Congressional debate process, so they can take it or leave it but cannot easily amend it.) 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:D403:68F1:A297:C74A (talk) 01:31, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't we just been through this? Except for the fact that the Constitution is the "supreme law of the land" it is not legislation in the normal sense. The constitution is not a set of laws, but a charter of limited powers granted to or denied to the various states, congress and so forth, as wel as setting relations between the branches and the means to change the charter. What most people think of as "laws" are matters at the state level, except for a very few issues that involve matters like war, treason, the military code, and crimes crossing state lines--and NONE of those is entrenched. μηδείς (talk) 01:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so the answer is, there's no way to do this? Thanks for the bad news! 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:D403:68F1:A297:C74A (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, since the constitution is a framework which authorizes, limits, and governs federal law, the constitution itself would have to mention the power to write entrenched laws, but it doesn't. The rule of thumb is that the states or people can do anything not forbidden them (9th & 10th amendments) and the federal government may only exercise its enumerated powers. μηδείς (talk) 15:59, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, since per Article Five of the United States Constitution allows the Constitution to be amended, it is impossible to entrench any clause, since any change by amendment can be repealed by another. There's really nothing any government can do to prevent future governments from doing whatever they want given sufficient political will.--Jayron 32 03:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what I meant by "the means to change the charter" in my original answe, but a specific reference to the Fifth Article is a good idea. μηδείς (talk)

Even moreso, if the political will is strong enough, there's nothing really stopping the powers from just throwing it all in the trash and starting over again. I cannot think of a modern state that hasn't done that at LEAST once in it's history, sometimes violently, sometimes peacefully. But it happens often enough. The rules only exist as long as they are useful. If they aren't useful, make new rules.--Jayron 32 20:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article V of the Constitution states 'and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.23.25.64 (talk) 01:56, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, this issue just came up within the last week or two, by 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:EDA1:6DA2:2F4C:8E0A (talk · contribs) so possibly the same guy (see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2017 September 25) and you've given the answer (again). The other part of it was about importation of slaves or some such, which had a built-in deadline, and due to the anti-slavery amendment, is totally obsolete. Even Article V has the "escape clause", so to speak, that a state could voluntarily give up its equal suffrage in the Senate, although that would be a ridiculous thing to do. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:11, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I'm the same person with the same problem -- I'm drafting a bill to protect freedom of expression online, but I'm afraid that the corrupt congresscritters, simply by adding a few extra clauses to one section and/or removing certain crucial words from other sections, can turn it into a law which doesn't actually do anything at all (and, under pressure from tech companies, may do precisely that). So I reckon that there's no way to hinder this in the bill itself, and my best bet would be to find a congresscritter who's principled enough to withdraw the bill if this happens. 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:0:0:0:EA04 (talk) 08:20, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trying to write a state, or federal law? If it's a federal law...well...good luck! State constitutions may differ by allowing referenda. μηδείς (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is the maximum density a full pickup bed can hold still increasing?

Two models can hold water to the brim now. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so, since engines are becoming ever more powerful while remaining just as compact, and transmissions are also constantly improving (just for comparison, some of the higher-end pickup trucks of today can carry as much cargo as a deuce-and-a-half from the WW2 era). 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:D403:68F1:A297:C74A (talk) 08:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They can tow much more than they can carry, engine power doesn't seem to be the limiting factor. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Engine torque and gear ratios matter, too, especially to get everything moving initially. And going uphill requires far more "oompf" than level ground. (Going downhill may not even require that the engine be running, just that the transmission is in neutral.) StuRat (talk) 16:45, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When I drove trucks in the military, I used lower gears when going downhill to force it to slow down without using brakes. Putting it in neutral would mean that I'd have to brake and risk having the load go sideways. I'm sure good truck drivers can brake without any concern, but my training was "press the green button to turn it on." 209.149.113.5 (talk) 17:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just meant that it's possible, not advisable, to go downhill without running the engine. Losing power steering and power brakes would be other good reasons to avoid it. StuRat (talk) 17:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The tires, suspension, and strength of the bed itself will also matter. And, if you were to try to drive a pick-up with the bed filled with water (presuming a cover to prevent it from sloshing out), I would expect the sloshing to make it difficult to drive. StuRat (talk) 16:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is why doubling the amount of rear wheels greatly increases the rated payload capacity. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a "dually". StuRat (talk) 16:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why use a pickup? Make a Jacruzzi Andy Dingley (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UK traffic law - bus lane and emergency vehicles

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, NOR SHOULD IT BE TAKEN FOR SUCH (The Ref Desks are a Daytime Talk Show. μηδείς (talk) 21:53, 8 October 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I have asked a number of people this question and not found the definitive answer. If you are driving along next to a bus lane and an emergency vehicle is coming up behind you with lights or sirens should you

Pull over into the bus lane and stop to let it pass.
Pull over into the bus lane and keep going, allowing it to overtake.
Keep going in your lane so that the emergency vehicle can take the bus lane and undertake
Stop in your lane so that the emergency vehicle can pass in the bus lane.

I would go with option 1 (and have done), as this makes it clear to the emergency vehicle what you are doing, gives the most space, and seems safest. A number of people have said that this would be illegal and if you were caught by an enforcement camera you'd be fined. They tend to see 3 or 4 as the best answer. One friend said 2, reasoning that emergency drivers are used to overtaking so there would be no need to stop. I am assuming that the road is pretty empty, if there was a line of cars I would do what all the others did to give the emergency vehicle a clear run in whichever lane was free. One of the more bizarre answers was that you could move into the bus lane for the police but not fire or ambulance - because emergency police lights would count as being directed to enter the bus lane by a police officer. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Why you could be fined for letting an emergency vehicle past which quotes the chief executive of GEM Motoring Assist: "The key thing is that blue light drivers have certain exemptions from rules of the road which the rest of us don’t. That’s why it’s much better for us to let emergency drivers find their way around us. Leave the bus lanes and red traffic lights to them". On that basis, the option 3 above is correct. Alansplodge (talk) 13:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that's an interesting (if worrying) article. In future I'll just keep driving along at the same speed. -- Q Chris (talk) 15:31, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is that not an offence in British driving law, then? --69.159.60.147 (talk) 21:10, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, the advice in the Highway Code is to: "take appropriate action to let it [the emergency vehicle] pass, while complying with all traffic signs". [12] In this case, the signs will say that it is forbidden for cars to enter the bus lane and forbidden to exceed the speed limit, so the emergency vehicle will either have to stay behind or find a way round you. Alansplodge (talk) 23:01, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Compare the equivalent section here in Ontario. (In practice most drivers won't actually stop if they can leave a lane clear for the emergency vehicle to pass them, but they're supposed to.) --69.159.60.147 (talk) 04:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3 or 4. NEVER do something illegal yourself (go into a bus lane, through a red light), no matter what type of emergency vehicle is behind you. It might feel like the right thing to do at the time, but you'll end up with three points on your license and an increase in your car insurance. Unless you have the time/effort to challenge the local authority your caught in. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:03, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There was a case in Brighton last year. The council fined a driver, on appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal the fine was overturned. Story here. DuncanHill (talk) 15:36, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is covered by the Highway Code, apparently [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. The New Zealand equivalent is apparently the "Road Code" [18]. Some jurisdictions have specific laws [19], [20]. America uses the acronym SIREN [http://www.idrivesafely.com/driving-resources/how-to/emergency-vehicles]. 92.8.220.234 (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another reason for 3 (besides being the safe answer as you're not breaking one law to follow another) is that bus lanes are usually underused and the emergency vehicle is probably going to be coming on that lane already, and it's obviously not a good idea to pull over right into its path. 78.0.249.123 (talk) 04:32, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with Option 5: None of the above. But specifically, move to the far left or right of your lane, allowing the emergency vehicle enough space to get through. If you were travelling on a one-lane road, that's what you'd do, and there'd be plenty of space. The rules are written without assuming the number of lanes is greater than 1, or that there's a bus lane adjacent. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:08, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I 'spect roads are a bit wider in Australia than here; there generally isn't room for two vehicles in one lane. Alansplodge (talk) 11:49, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a general principle in US and other law that if the circumstances are such that following the law will cause more harm to the public good than not following the law, then the law is unenforceable in those circumstances. See Necessity (criminal law). For example, breaking into a house is a crime, but if you only did so because someone was dying and you desperately needed to find a phone, then the act of breaking into the house should not be criminal. Personally, I would say that the minor crime of entering a bus lane in order to allow an emergency vehicle to pass, ought to qualify. Of course, local jurisdictions may be inclined to fight you on that and arguing the point in court would likely to be both expensive and time consuming. Dragons flight (talk) 08:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just two minutes ago as I was crossing a junction with two lanes of traffic in either direction separated by a pedestrian island I saw an ambulance support vehicle in the outside lane with siren blaring. The light changed to red and the driver immediately turned the siren off. The leading vehicles nosed out into the junction - there was no prospect of them going any further because the cross traffic was on the main London/Cambridge trunk road. There were two vehicles in each lane behind the stop line ahead of the ambulance. The second vehicle on the inside lane drove onto the pavement and then back onto the road. As I left nobody was doing anything, which was probably the safest thing to do. 92.8.220.234 (talk) 12:51, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency vehicles are now trained to turn their sirens off in traffic light queues, so as not to encourage other drivers to jump the lights. The source for this is a friend who trains St John Ambulance "blue light" drivers. Alansplodge (talk) 20:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just encountered that situation today. I was parked at the front on the line, when a fire truck joined the back of the line, with lights and sirens blaring. They cut out the sirens when they got there, but left the lights on. I then crossed the intersection, when the light turned green, and pulled aside. It seemed to work, as the fire truck got through.

But as for legal necessity, too often the real reason for fines is "revenue enhancement", not punishing offenders. With that in mind, they want to charge a fine whenever they can get away with it, not when somebody does something dangerous. Hence speed traps, etc. The massive conflict of interest in allowing them to collect money from those they convict ultimately leads to the same type of abuses seen under Judge Roy Bean. StuRat (talk) 23:31, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In contrast to the above, what I'd expect here (Ontario) is that when an emergency vehicle approaches an intersection with the traffic light red and its own lights and siren on, traffic approaching the intersection from all four directions stops and the emergency vehicle crosses to the left (wrong) side of the road. If the traffic light is still red when it reaches the intersection it's required to stop for a moment. After stopping or if the light has turned green, it proceeds in any of the three possible directions, crossing back to the right now that it's passed the stopped traffic going in that direction. I live near a fire station and some traffic lights and I see this sort of thing fairly frequently. Of course, it would be more difficult if there was a barrier between opposing directions of traffic, or if the streets were one-way, etc. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 02:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was on a divided highway, making crossing into oncoming traffic lanes impossible. StuRat (talk) 02:34, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 8

How to propose change in general statistics page

The page https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org has just changed its content. It now seems to confuse deletion of sandbox with reverted edits (29% of my edits were not deleted!). Where do I propose a change in this statistic? Jzsj (talk) 05:39, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) for starters. Alansplodge (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 9

coastal cannon

Fortification of Poggio Rasu (Caprera, Sardinia). Probably a part of unidentified coastal cannon from the late 1800's (?) - Which cannon was that? Thanks! Etan J. Tal^(talk) 14:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, but it could also be a gun mount, for something like the Gatling gun, with the mount being similar to this modern one: [21]. StuRat (talk) 15:46, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maxim gun and Gatling gun seem to be 'too small' for this pivot and were not in use by the Italians anyway. Etan J. Tal^(talk) 15:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It may have been a Howitzer as these were very common for the time period, especially in coastal batteries. Howitzers are a sort of hybrid between a cannon and a mortar, with an intermediate length barrel for higher muzzel velocities than a mortar, but which are still used for veritcal (mortar-like) trajectories rather than more horizontal cannon-like trajectories. --Jayron 32 16:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is on the landward side, it's probably a Swivel gun.--Ykraps (talk) 16:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Swivel guns were in use much earlier and their range is much too short for coastal fortification. Etan J. Tal^(talk) 16:32, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be a good source, where it states: "The cannons of Poggio Rasu Superiore, especially, were positioned to defend the Eastern side." (emphasis mine). The question still remains: what kind of cannon? Would "Big" suffice? 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:29AF:8B75:2D37:5BB4 (talk) 20:50, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My question is 'Which sort of cannons'? In all the websites which I have searched there is no mentioning of the exact type of cannon which was in use in this specific fortification or in the many others on Caprera island. Etan J. Tal^(talk) 21:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This emplacement is for a large gun such as a Parrott rifle or one of its successors. The ring was connected to the front of the carriage. The gun sat on the carriage and recoiled back along the carriage. The gun was aimed in azimuth by moving the back of the carriage along the semicircular tracks that can be seen in the picture. We cannot tell from the picture alone exactly how the carriage was designed. There were many variations. -Arch dude (talk) 22:09, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice the wheels under the carriage rails. The wheels carry the back of the rails along the circular track. -Arch dude (talk) 22:17, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would help to have an indication of scale. What's the diameter of the cylindrical vertical hole in the center ? StuRat (talk) 22:30, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regretfully I did not measure this. I estimate it is about 4" in diameter, but I may be wrong... Etan J. Tal^(talk) 22:58, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This site - http://www.sardegnafortificata.it/jkrasu.htm - indicates that there were 4 Krupp 280mm guns, and 2 Hotchkiss 57mm cannon (which I think was a version of the five barrelled revolving cannon) - see Hotchkiss gun for further links. Looking at the aerial photos of the fort, there is a large four gun battery in the upper fort, which would presumably have held the Krupp coastal guns, and a smaller two gun battery in the lower fort, which appears to show the semi-circular pattern in the original photo. That lower fort battery controls the road access to the fort on the landward site, so would be the logical position for rapid fire smaller weapons. Wymspen (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Restraining order

Can a suspect in a criminal case take out a restraining order against the detective investigating him/her, and would such an order actually have legal force? (This is NOT legal advice -- this is a fact-check for a work of fiction!) 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:0:0:0:EA04 (talk) 12:19, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[Curcio1991-1] Curcio, C. A.; Allen, K. A.; Sloan, K. R.; Lerea, C. L.; Hurley, J. B.; Klock, I. B.; Milam, A. H. (1991). "Distribution and morphology of human cone photoreceptors stained with anti-blue opsin". The Journal of Comparative Neurology. 312 (4): 610–624. doi:10.1002/cne.903120411. PMID 1722224.

[1]