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

October 1

Aluminum versus stainless steel cookware

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oddly enough, that describes my condition after the wife hit me over the head with one. :( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Whose wife? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:45, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I heard that aluminium cookware was maybe implicated in Alzheimer's disease, but now read that "... a possible link with aluminium seems increasingly unlikely". Astronaut (talk) 14:37, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The thing is, that as the aluminum article says, it is the most abundant metal in the earth's crust, and there is a lot of aluminum in the dirt we all swallow a lot of as kids, probably much more entering our system that whatever we get from aluminum cookware. Except for cases of massive overdoses of aluminum antacids or such, aluminum depositing in brains or joints is probably a result of a disease, not an example of normal aluminum exposure causing buildup which causes disease. Which may or may not mean that going on an aluminum-free lifestyle can interrupt the further progress of the disease of which aluminum buildup is one symptom.Gzuckier (talk) 06:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The one thing I am concerned about is when I torch an aluminum pot and inhale the aluminum vapors. So, just to be safe, I bought a 30 quart stainless steel stock pot, with glass lid and steamer basket, for $40. Not bad ! StuRat (talk) 06:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, all. StuRat (talk) 04:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Out of all the chains mentioned so far, I haven't heard of any of them; and that's despite my extensive travel within the USA. No all chain restaurants go international, or maybe they are not quite the household names you imagine they are. Have you heard of Little Chef or Wimpy, or the French chain Flunch? Astronaut (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Of course, I now notice that the last two have quite extensive interests outside their home countries. Astronaut (talk) 14:31, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

OR: When franchise fast-food brand owners – these aren’t cooks, they’re corporations – decide to expand overseas, one of the key concerns is brand integrity. It is easy to lose your reputation in the very valuable home market through mistakes made abroad. So, you want top quality management that cares more for the brand than the near-term profits, and under the franchise model, that can be hard to guarantee.

One option is to own your own stores overseas, which gets into the labor and materials supply issues raised above. They aren’t insurmountable, just unfamiliar to most of the domestic franchisees and their regular suppliers. You want fries with that? They’d better be the right kind of potatoes, properly prepared and kept in strict conditions of temperature and cleanliness.

Further, profit margins on domestic franchises are based on a well-known set of assumptions about property prices, labor and other financial inputs. Overseas, the model may not work, which is why Starbucks didn’t enter the Hong Kong market for a long time (property was too expensive for their expected cut of the profits).DOR (HK) (talk) 09:56, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

West Bromwich

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

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

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

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

Not sure about East Bromwich, but there is a West Bromwich East.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:45, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

And there is a Castle Bromwich. Astronaut (talk) 13:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh well, if you're collecting Bromwiches, try Little Bromwich! --TammyMoet (talk) 13:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

There was a Wessex, a Sussex, and an Essex, but the county of Nossex pretty much dwindled into oblivion, due to population issues. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:16, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

And Middlesex got moved to Thailand. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:19, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

why can't I see my edits

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

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

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

French cuisine

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

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

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

Some factors:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Judith makes some valid points, but the roots of the issue may go back further. The English court and nobility had their eating habits badly disrupted by the English Civil War and the Commonwealth that followed it, when gluttony was a serious sin. Louis XIV made a point of cultivating all the arts to the highest degree possible; cooking was one of them.[2] James II would have liked to copy him but had no cash and was kicked out in the Glorious Revolution. He was replaced by William of Orange - a meat and two veg man if ever there was. Voltaire said "In England, there are sixty different religions and only one sauce." A century on and the French had their own revolution - all the chefs of the aristocrats were out of a job and opened restaurants for the citizens[3][4]. Alansplodge (talk) 22:26, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Obscure line from The Blues Brothers movie: "Did you bring me my Cheez Whiz, boy?" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

His father changed it in 1915, 24 years before John was born. But yes, the family's surname was originally Cheese. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

So the Monty Python Cheese Shop sketch was somewhat autobiographical (at least of the family). StuRat (talk) 17:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Only to the same extent that if George Bush (take your pick) went behind a bush to take a leak, he'd be pissing on a member of his family. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that Bush is Welsh?Gzuckier (talk) 06:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that Cassia fistula grows down where the moon is small? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Of course, if Leningrad still exists by that name in the Star Trek universe, that rather implies that the Eugenics Wars of the late 20th century prevented the collapse of the Soviet Union - which might go some way to explaining why all-American Captain Kirk lives in a world without money, works as a representative of a vast state which is constantly seeking to absorb sufficiently advanced neighbouring civilisations, and regards capitalists like Harry Mudd as pretty much nothing but trouble. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Amazing that they can travel at speeds approaching the speed of light, boldly go where no man has gone before yada yada, but still can't properly romanise Russian names. Pavel's surname should be spelt Chekhov, just like Anton's, because they're identical in Russian. Admittedtly, "kh" is not a great approximation for the sound of the consonant represented by the Russian letter х, and in some romanisation systems "h" is used (Chehov). Either "kh" or "h", but never "k" alone. That's reserved for к. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 12:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

There's a very brief comment on French food at about 4:10 of this clip:[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

There's a very brief comment on French food somewhere in this thread, I believe, but I can't locate it now... Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:22, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

One can also point to the percieved bias of the Michelin Guide, which started out only rating French restaurants and only within the last decade began rating restaurants outside of Europe. I would also like to ask the OP what he or she thinks makes French food better than food from other countries. Livewireo (talk) 16:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

To attempt a serious answer, I watched a cooking show with a French chef on PBS who said the four secrets of good food are butter, table sugar, table salt, and black pepper. This would have been in the nineties, and I can't remember who it was. To that list I would add olive oil, garlic, wine and roux. μηδείς (talk) 17:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Also with a view to a serious answer, for the OP and Saddhiyama. Social anthropology of peasant societies distinguishes "high" and "low" traditions. Many traces of this distinction remain in France. The "high" tradition is that of haute cuisine, and the history of that is known - Alansplodge mentioned some of the key moments in its emergence. I introduced the comparison with England because this is a common theme in discussion of French food, also it was the popularity of French chefs in wealthy 19th century England that helped establish the high reputation of French high cooking worldwide. Saddhiyama, when you say: "The French seems to have an incredibly varied cuisine, with a tradition of local dishes based mostly on local produce, and the traditions varies from each and every little village all across France," you are really talking about the "low" tradition of everyday food. That tradition got its worldwide reputation after the Second World War. Italian spaghetti and tomato dishes, garlic, cheap red wine, all came in as part of the same fad for the authentic food of the Mediterranean poor. In France itself there was a gradual rediscovery of everyday food. I think it's Elizabeth David who describes how a late 19th century Parisian chef, originally from the Midi, adapts a dish to be smart enough for a restaurant menu, replacing the olive oil with butter, removing the garlic, laying it out in an ornate design. By the 1970s, people had rediscovered the original and were proud to use the authentic olive oil instead of the inauthentic butter. Nowadays, I think there is considerable crossflow between high and low traditions, and also there is fusion food and openness to other countries' foodways. That all combines to make French people consciously proud of their food traditions. The defence of the long(ish) lunchbreak and rejection of what the French food sociologist Claude Fischler calls aperiodic eating comes into it too. Then the question is: how did France retain its "low" food traditions in this way? I think, mainly because urbanisation came late to France. I'm sure that every part of Europe once had the local variety that you mention - the French call it cuisine du terroir. It was lost in some places because of urbanisation and then because of industrialisation of agriculture and food processing. But it can be, and is being regained, through the local food movement, farmers' markets, and a general rejection of junk food. Would be interested to read any reactions to this, as it is mainly speculative, though based on some reading. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC) *

That's interesting enough to deserve a star, can you provide bluelinks from the net for those WP redlinks? I am fascinated. μηδείς (talk) 20:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I think Judith raises some very salient points on the distinction between "high" and "low" cuisine, a theme that shows up often in the arts (the difference between "high" culture, created for the tastes of the aristocracy and upper classes, and "low" culture, for the people living in squalor in the rest of the country). Just to add some credence to Judith's excellent (if slightly OR) analysis is to compare two common French dishes: Lobster Thermidor and Bouillabaisse. They're both French seafood dishes, but the similarities end there. The former is French High Cuisine writ large: Created in Paris for Parisian restaurant culture, use of "classic" restaurant techniques, cream sauces, butter, expensive liquors, etc. The latter is a peasant fish stew, highly local in nature, simple in technique and ingredients. It is the opposite of Haute Cuisine: throw a bunch of stuff in a pot and cook it. One could probably find dozens of contrasting examples from various parts of France. So, when trying to decide what one means by the "reputation of French cuisine", one first must answer the question "Which French cuisine?" --Jayron32 20:20, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

De gustibus non est disputandum, or as some might say, chacun a son gout. But this article provides a cautionary tale for those like the OP, who are well advised to abstain from the cuisine of the French, no matter how much better they are.John Z (talk) 11:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't say French cuisine is better than other countries. I've travelled to 35 different countries, myself, including France (four times on business (unfortunately, because Air France messed up every single time - they even couldn't find my PLANE) and once as a kid for an exchange trip), and to be honest, the only interesting thing I had in France was garlic snails. Sashimi and sushi are much more palatable, as well as most food made in Sichuan, China. Bangers & Mash with a bit of gravy from the UK is also good. Same with out good old roasted Sunday dinner. Anything made in Korea is lovely and spicy, and if you go to Nepal, just eat the curry slowly. German sausages are really good, and so are Hungarian ones. The British have the best beer (not too light and fizzy) and the Germans have the best Schnapps. French wine might be considered the best, but I don't care about wine. Spain makes decent Paella, and Italy is good with Lasagne. Pizza was invented in America, apparently. Hungary has decent gulyas, which varies from town to town, and you can make it as spicy or un-spicy as you want. I like to grill chicken breast on skewers with spring onions, and put that on a salad with a bed of rice, then coat it in chilli sauce, minced garlic, and black pepper. The whole world has good food. This is why they eat it. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

October 2

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

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

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

Oh, crap! Just my luck. I noticed the same thing on other websites I visited tonight. Thanks for the heads up. 99.250.103.117 (talk) 04:42, 2 October 2012 (UTC) i like "spyware search and destroy". and may be able to confirm the presence of malware by booting in safe mode, and them going to Wikipedia. 70.114.254.43 (talk) 04:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I occasionally get laptops brought to me at work that are exhibiting this behavior. (not my job to support them but oh well) It's often caused by a add-on in Firefox (my company's default browser) and disabling the add-on stops it. I've forgotten the name of the add-on that I see but just look for anything that looks suspect. Dismas|^(talk) 05:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Try running each of CCleaner, Advanced SystemCare, Wise Disk Cleaner, SUPERAntiSpyware Free Edition, Malwarebytes Anti-Malware. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:37, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

See WP:RFAQ#ADS. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

oil lamp

1: can i put gasoline or rubbing alcohol in an oil lamp? if not, why not?

2: if answer to 1 is no, then does a gasoline lamp exist?

3: can i use any oil in one?

4: can i get oil meant specifically for one that is does not cause cancer or birth defects?

5: does some of the oil really cause cancer?

6: how can i make one more resistant to: wind, rain, and breaking of the glass?

7: can to much smoke and soot damage the lamp?

thank you, 70.114.254.43 (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

1) No, this sounds dangerous. Alcohol and gasoline, being more volatile, can combust more easily without a wick. This allows for escaping vapors to explode if they reach the proper proportion in the air, and then encounter the flame. This might happen when you first light it, for example. Rubbing alcohol also makes a dim blue flame, not giving off much light and easy to miss in daylight, so both ineffective at lighting and dangerous. StuRat (talk) 05:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

2) It would need to be completely sealed when not in use, to prevent vapors from escaping. Coleman apparently made some of these. StuRat (talk) 05:02, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

3) Well, some oils will work better than others. Some will create lots of soot, for example. StuRat (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

4&5) You can get oils that don't cause those problems when unburnt, yes. However, if you inhale enough soot, that's going to increase your risks of lung cancer, no matter what oil produced it. Soot is most commonly produced when the lamp was just turned on or off and the temperature is just below that needed for complete combustion. Lighting it outside, and waiting 'til it burns clean to bring it inside, then taking it back outside when you turn it off, would reduce your exposure significantly. StuRat (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

6) A Coleman lantern does a decent job of this, as they are designed to be used when camping, in wind, rain, etc. StuRat (talk) 05:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

7) Not so much damage it as make it useless. If the glass is covered with a layer of soot, it won't give off much light. StuRat (talk) 05:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I should also comment that, while using fuel to provide light was mostly obsolete since the spread of electricity, recent improvements in electrical lighting, like LED flashlights, is making this usage even more obsolete, considering the inherent risk of lamps using flammable liquids. You may now be able to get more total light from a battery-powered flashlight than the same weight of fuel plus lantern. However, if you want the oil lamp to provide heat, that's a place where it still beats batteries. StuRat (talk) 05:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

There's the Argand lamp, the clockwork Carcel lamp, and the kerosene lamp. Whale oil was once popular, then colza oil, then kerosene. I'm confident that you can use colza oil (vegetable oil closely allied to that used in cooking) in the Argand lamp and the Carcel lamp, and I'm willing to guess that kerosene (aka paraffin) might be suitable for use in a kerosene lamp, but I'm unsure about other combinations.  Card Zero  (talk) 16:55, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I've never heard of colza oil before - it definitely appears to be the same as Canola oil, and arguably the same as Rapeseed oil - time for an article merge, perhaps? AlexTiefling (talk) 16:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

That link at the bottom of the article to toxic oil syndrome might be important. I'm guessing that there's a lamp oil variety (OK, "industrial", unlikely to be for lighting) and a cooking oil variety, and the cooking variety might work reasonably well in lamps but the lamp kind definitely isn't good for eating, unless you enjoy lung diseases.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:27, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

on number 7, can you wipe the soot off easily? 70.114.254.43 (talk) 07:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

It may be oily and therefore require detergent to remove. StuRat (talk) 07:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Usually, the soot burns off once the lamp reaches the best heat/light ratio. Bielle (talk) 17:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Burns off what, the wick ? I was talking abut the inside of the glass. StuRat (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Soot is basically evaporated (rather than burned) carbon deposits, i.e. chemically the same stuff as coal. Once the correct oxygen ratio is achieved, soot will burn as well as any other carbon fuel, as anyone who has ever had a creosote chimney fire will attest to. That is, you can burn soot off easier than you can clean it off something like glass. --Jayron32 21:30, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm skeptical that the inside of the glass would reach combustion temperature. StuRat (talk) 21:34, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

It will with a little help. --Jayron32 21:35, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

No need to be skeptical; I've done it. It has been a few years, but I recall the lamp chimneys getting all sooted up as the wick burned high. Turn the wick down carefully and the lower flame can be used to burn off the soot from the chimney, though not perfectly. The chimney still have to be cleaned, but it can be used in the meantime. Our article on kerosene lamps speaks to this very point: "Like flat- and round-wick lamps, they can be adjusted for brightness; if set too high the lamp chimney and the mantle become covered with soot. A lamp set too high will burn off its soot harmlessly if quickly turned down, but if not caught soon enough a "runaway lamp" condition can result." I've had three "run-aways" at the same time in a wooden cottage on an island in the north woods of Quebec; scary moments getting them all smoothly under control. You have to pay attention while they are burning. I also clean the soot off the glass front of my wood stove by bringing the logs forward and letting the flames burn off the black. It works for some of the soot. Bielle (talk) 21:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I've inherited several kerosene and oil lamps, which I've never used. You've convinced me to stick with flashlights. StuRat (talk) 23:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

They are useful when all the batteries are dead. That doesn't happen as often as it used to. The last time anyone in the family used oil lamps was for 11 days after the 1988 Quebec Ice Storm. They were very important, along with a wood-burning fireplace big enough to hold a grill. You do have to watch the lamps all the time, though, and never leave them in a room unattended. Bielle (talk) 00:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

During the Northeast blackout of 2003 I used candles, but not the kerosene or oil lamps. Ironically, I put the tops from my hurricane lamps over the candles, to make them safer: [6]. StuRat (talk) 04:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Heh, during one blackout (during heavy snow) I made do with some old adulterated olive oil, a match, and a soda bottle cap in a small bowl. But eventually I solubilized the soda bottle cap... Wnt (talk) 03:00, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I bet the smell of olive oil made you hungry. :-) StuRat (talk) 19:22, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Child of the Earth

for the record, I have no idea what this thing sounds like. --Jayron32 23:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

a solifuge, "sun fleer" of the chelicerata

Is a child of the earth an insect or spider? I don't want to look it up because I've been told they look pretty disturbing. Thanks. 67.42.60.175 (talk) 21:42, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Insect. Jerusalem cricket. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, are they called Jerusalem crickets? How bad are they? Should I click that link? 67.42.60.175 (talk) 21:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a reddish grasshopper. Is in fact related to grasshoppers. The head is a bit bigger. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Alright thanks, I'd heard that they look like fetuses and that they make a crying noise.67.0.185.43 (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, it looks more like a cricket, and it makes cricket noises. --Jayron32 22:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

They look like any human fetus that might have six legs, antennae, and stripes on its abdomen. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure? I'd been told they look like a fetus with scorpion claws and that they cry like a baby.67.0.185.43 (talk) 23:08, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that's completly different than I thought. I've even caught some of those things. Are there other insects known as children of the earth though? I've had multiple people describe them as I did.67.0.185.43 (talk) 23:25, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Some folks have overactive imaginations. The only bug I've seen to cry in a human voice was in the original version of The Fly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Googling the subject suggests there's an arachnid of some kind that's sometimes called by that name. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I've seen some pictures of camel spiders which resemble, in coloration, giant Jerusalem crickets. Now, those are critters you wouldn't want to wake up next to after a night of heavy drinking... --Jayron32 03:28, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

But solifuges aren't anywhere close to jerusalem crickets taxonomically, and neither is in anyway a threat to humans. μηδείς (talk) 03:33, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Of course not on both counts. That doesn't mean that someone wouldn't confuse one with the other if they had a similar appearance. --Jayron32 03:34, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I have posted a pic of the latter. Neither looks like a starfish, a clam, or a bluejay. μηδείς (talk) 03:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, you've posted a pic of one. That's sorta like posting a picture of a Lemur and claiming that it looks nothing like a Gorilla, despite both being primates. this search turns up several examples which, based on coloration and shape, could be mistaken for Jerusalem crickets, including this guy and this one too. --Jayron32 03:45, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, Jay. They still look distinct to me, but I guess "degree of similarity" is a personal opinion. One of my friends tried to raise a couple of these fellas he found outside, one of each gender. They chowed down galleria larvae quite happily (it was kind of shocking, actually, how quickly they could devour them whole). But they never did mate, and the male never sang that I heard. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:24, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I guess I can kind of see the child-face resemblance in photos like this, but it still strikes me as kind of a stretch. Give it a nose and it has a passing relationship with a skull, but just in passing. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's not nearly as good as these pics from the Theridion grallator. --Jayron32 13:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

October 3

Why do Koreans eat dog meat?

--168.7.232.215 (talk) 03:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Why do Americans eat cow meat? HiLo48 (talk) 03:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

For the same reason the French eat frog meat. Because they enjoy doing so. See dog meat (and not forgetting hot dog).--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I recall a New York Times article about some animal rights group (PETA? I don't know) demanding some kind of sanctions against South Korea for permitting dogs to be butchered. They interviewed a dog butcher for his reaction to the outcry, and he defended the practice, saying, "We only kill the ugly ones." Apparently a cute and well-bred dog is worth more as a pet than meat. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Us Brits eat rabbits. The Japanese (and Dutch) eat horses. The Japanese eat dolphins and whales. We are a meat eating species. We eat meat, whether it looks cute or not. And why not - most other predators do, so why should we be an exception? It's not often a shark or a tiger or a crocodile smiles at a baby boy (or a puppy) and thinks, "Oh, too cute to eat." They just attack and eat the thing. On a personal note, I ate dog in China (not Korea), and it was not bad. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Did it taste like chicken? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Funnily enough, it did. It's a white meat. And it smelled like a dog, which sort of put me off, but was helped a little bit by the copious amount of chilli sauce. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The consumption of horse meat is actually quite widespread. Twitchiness about it seems to be limited largely to the English-speaking world—though it has made inroads there too, among chefs and (now) foodies who have brought it in from other cultures' and countries' cuisines and traditions. (Anglos have also managed to quite readily get over their sense of taboo when faced with high prices or a shortages of other meats; horse meat was widely consumed in the U.S. and the UK during World War I and the Great Depression.) Given that these same countries have no qualms about other ungulate meats, including beef and venison, drawing a line at horse seems rather arbitrary. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Dog meat was commonly consumed by native Americans it seems. Francis Parkman partakes in this in The Oregon Trail. --Xuxl (talk) 14:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The taboo in the UK could go back to pre-history and veneration of the horse. The article on Epona suggests she would be too late to be the source, but it could be a continuation of an earlier goddess or totem. Also, the changes the Romans made to the cult of Epona might not have been so effective in the UK as elsewhere in the Empire. Today, Italians eat a lot of horse meat even though the cult was widespread in the Roman Empire.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.131.110.106 (talk • contribs)

I am currently reading Undaunted Courage. One of the early chapters states that one of the native tribes was happy to eat dog meat, but surprised (or appalled or disgusted - I can't remember the exact wording) that the Corps of Discovery were willing to eat horse meat. Certainly, Lewis tried dog meat and then got quite a taste for it. More info in the Dog meat article. Astronaut (talk) 16:20, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Regarding eating horse meat in the UK, I am reliably informed (by my late mother) that there used to be specialist horse meat butchers in England before World War 2. After tea I'll see if I can find a reference for you. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's a couple, including a picture. [7] [8]. Incidentally, there was outrage and letters to the paper about the donkey sausage sold on a stall at the continental market in my local town a few years ago. No sympathy for the poor processed wild boars in the next basket, though. - Karenjc 18:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The human consumption of horse meat in the UK seems to have started during the war, as in the first reference, which isn't surprising given the food rationing because horse meat wasn't rationed. I found an article which mentions that horse meat was sold pre-war for dog food. "...the horse-meat shop, which previously had sold its products only for dogs, now bore a notice on some of its joints occasionally, 'Fit for Human Consumption'" http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/92/a1110592.shtml

All predators eat meat, by definition. If we stopped killing and eating animals, we would no longer be predators. Moral (or other) objections to eating animals, or certain kinds of animals, can't just be swept away by pointing out that other species eat meat too, as plenty of other species routinely practise cannibalism, rape, and infanticide, which are almost universally considered morally objectionable by humans. According to dog meat, eating of dogs in Korea goes back to the neolithic era at least, so it is unlikely that anyone knows how the practice started, though it is not unique to Korea - dogs are apparently commonly eaten in parts of the Arctic, Africa, India, Indonesia, the Philippines and China, as well as in some Native American tribes, and historically in Japan, Polynesia and the Aztec Empire. Dogs have also often been eaten in other places during sieges or other crises. 130.88.73.65 (talk) 14:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

It's not so much a question of when the practice started in each culture, as when it stopped (became taboo). Presumably starving cavemen ate just about any meat they could get their hands on (with a possible exception for cannibalism, due to the likelihood of spreading disease). However, when dogs became more valuable for other purposes, like guarding livestock, then eating them no longer made sense. Technically you could still eat the useless ones, but when something becomes taboo, it's often only a rough approximation of what should really be avoided. A similar example is how unrelated kids raised together develop the incest taboo toward each other, even though there is no genetic risk, if they were to reproduce. StuRat (talk) 19:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

What starving cavemen are we thinking about? Palaeolithic hominids? Or Neolithic modern humans? Itsmejudith (talk) 19:57, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

No need to make a distinction. Neither are likely to have had a reliable enough food supply that they could afford to be picky about what they ate. StuRat (talk) 20:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I can agree. The Scots eat deep-fried Mars Bars. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Check out Dog meat consumption in South Korea. Shadowjams (talk) 04:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Sub discussion moved to talk page here Shadowjams (talk) 04:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Regarding horse meat... Would people really slaughter a young, healthy horse for food (barring desparate circumstances)? Or would they be more likely to slaughter an old, worn-out horse whose meat might well be tough and unsavory? As in this Billy Murray recording from ca. 1905.[9] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:44, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

If they were into horse meat, as many civilised societies have been and continue to be, why would they limit themselves to old, tough meat? We don't do that when it comes to sheep meat (yearling lamb --> veal --> mutton), chicken (spring chicken --> old boilers), beef or any other meat. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:14, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Horses and dogs have been important for surviving and thriving, at least in the pioneer days, so it stands to reason that we wouldn't slaughter them unless they had become useless otherwise. In contrast, I'm not so sure that pulling your plow with sheep or having chickens shepherding your livestock would really work out all that well. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:00, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Horse meat in Japan is generally served as sashimi, which is raw, and generally very soft. The age of the horse is not written on it so you can never be sure how old it was, but it's fairly soft, as far as meat goes when compared with fish. Lovely with a bit of soy sauce, garlic, and ginger. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:57, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps the real question is not why other countries eat these various sorts of meat, but why are Americans and some other Western countries so intolerant? I mean, it's next to impossible to find mutton here except in a very large city. I only happened across horse once, and ostrich is very rare (though delicious, and not that much more expensive than steak). God knows what they'd do to someone with dog. I don't understand why people here put up with only having beef-pork-chicken-turkey period, and that's despite living here. The theory of capitalism is that somebody would have opened a market with 31 flavors of meat, like they did with ice cream half a century ago. Wnt (talk) 08:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Intolerant?! Just when I removed my chastising of this ridiculous tangent to the RD:talk, you bring it right back again. Who's intolerant here? The OP because they asked about a cultural culinary practice? A few people jumped onto the first response and thought it was a moral judgment about diet. EVEN IF IT WAS, you want to talk about intolerant, try getting a burger in India, or a pork chop in Riyadh. The west doesn't typically imprison people for dietary violations these days (and before anybody mentions it, I've read a recent New Yorker article about raw milk [and other foods] in California, and how they're prosecuting some of them; I think laws that protect children from unpasteurized milk are fine; if adults want to risk diarrhea or worse, that's up to them). This kind of statement has no business on the RD when the question actually asked here is answered with a SINGLE ARTICLE THAT WE HAVE.

This has got to be a shining example of the worst of the reference desk I've seen in a long time, and not because anything outrageous has been said by anybody, but because this kind of opinion bating is just par anymore around here. Shadowjams (talk) 12:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, as if the anonymous IP will ever read that article. We all know it's a troll, so we are having fun, and at the same time giving factual information. Come on, calm down. We are all doing this for free. The only one who gets paid from this is His Majesty Jimmy. Just relax. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 13:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I had Ox's penis in China. There is no limit to what people will eat (or serve in restaurants). KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Did that taste like chicken? Did you drench it in chili sauce? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

No, it was in some sort of milky creamy soupy thingy. It was just like hard jelly, with no taste of its own. Pretty pointless meal, to be honest. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

If you object to the plain white coloring, perhaps spotted dick would be more to your liking ? StuRat (talk) 05:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I will tell you now, it was very easy to spot. It was so big, even people in passing planes could spot it. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Um... --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 00:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

W.C. Fields, in one of his movies, eating at a lunch counter, says to the waitress: "I didn't complain about the steak... I just said I didn't see that old horse you used to have tethered out back." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:18, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

During the Korean War they pretty much ate anything thats how bad it used to be. Marketdiamond (talk) 14:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Hands while Praying

Why do people put their hands together when praying?--85.211.199.83 (talk) 06:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

There can be lots of types of hand gestures while praying, and lots of different reasons for adopting them, it depends greatly on the religious traditions of the person praying. Wikipedia has an article titled prayer that covers many traditions. As a Christian myself, speaking only for myself and no one else, I do so, along with bowing my head, as an act of subservience and reverence. I also don't always do so. If you want some broader answers than can be found in Wikipedia, I typed "folding hands while praying" into Google for you, and there's a wide variety of perspectives on the practice. See here. --Jayron32 06:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

It keeps you from playing with yourself while praying, and God's not a big fan of that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.79.94.5 (talk) 07:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

See Añjali Mudrā. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:14, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Clearly this reference is related but it raises a further question, how did this yoga gesture find its way into Christian practice. It may have been the same way that we have a widespread image of Jesus Christ, by old master painters. I can recall a number of pictures by El Greco which exhibits this praying gesture of the hands. If he came from Greece there is a possibility that he may have encountered practitioners of yoga and he noted the reverential gestures. (faulty memory, i was thinking of Tears of St. Peter, but it's not the same gesture) It would be interesting to know what is the earliest recorded painting showing this praying pose. Hmm, how long has a praying mantis been called thus. Richard Avery (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

A little more ferreting discovers Giotto's Legend of St Francis which clearly shows some monks in the hands-closed praying posture. This was painted pre-1337 so this has been around for some time. Another possibility may be related to the swearing of allegiance by closing the hands of the lower order within the hands of the lord, monarch, bishop or pope. Richard Avery (talk) 13:49, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Eastern traditions call this position gassho or Namaste. I would suggest that it predates Christianity. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

This article on a Catholic website, "The Meaning of Praying Hands", suggests that it is derived from a now discarded Jewish custom, although it does mention the Buddhist and Hindu traditions too. Another Christian custom of raising the palms upwards in prayer is called Orans - our article says; "Until the 9th century, the posture (orans) was sometimes adopted by entire congregations while celebrating the Eucharist. By the 12th century, however, the joining of hands began to replace the orans posture as the preferred position for prayer." I'm not sure how a Hindu custom would come to be adopted by medieval Europeans, so I suspect that it is just a coincidence. Alansplodge (talk) 20:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

When I was a catholic kid years ago (I'm Buddhist now), it was explained to us that the hands are pointing to heaven, and we had to cross our thumbs to remember the crucifiction. This is how it was explained to us. I have never seen this practice at all in Japanese Buddhism, except for lay people (who actually know nothing about Buddhism, because for lay people it's all mixed up with Shamanism and Shinto, and a desire to get a random imaginary spirit to come and help, while they don't realise the basics of Buddhism, and that is that you help yourself - no prayer is necessary. You just do it). KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• The origin is as an act of submission - the hands are (were) placed together so that they can be bound by the would-be captor. Slightly longer explanation (and a broken reference link) in the third entry here. The symbolism is still widely culturally understood, for example the video game Civilization III, in some of its variants, uses an icon of hands together (but fingers clenched rather than straight) to denote the practice of enslavement. The fingers-clenched/interleaved variant, and occasionally the fingers-straight variant, can be seen in plenty of (older?) film representations of people begging for mercy, and I also saw the former used by children "begging" for things in the second half of the twentieth century. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:17, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

It is done in Japan before eating a meal, whilst saying 'itadakimasu', which means 'I am receiving this', so basically giving thanks to the person who provided it. In South Asian countries it is done as a greeting, to show respect. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:10, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Shaking hands in Victorian England

I was reading a play script yesterday (The Woman in White, adapted by Constance Cox from the novel by Wilkie Collins) and a stage direction struck me as anachronistic; but my attempts to find anything to confirm or refute my thought have so far drawn a blank. The play is set in 1861 (not quite sure why, when the novel was published in 1859).

The stage direction is "Laura and Gilmore shake hands".

There are two things about this which struck me as odd. The first is that Laura and Gilmore know each other - Gilmore is her uncle's solicitor. Now I know from my own experience that fifty years ago people in Britain did not shake hands with people they already knew: Americans and other foreigners did this, but for us shaking hands was something you did only on first meeting. I don't know what the custom was a hundred and fifty years ago, but it doesn't strike me as right. Secondly, while I've no doubt that men shook hands then, I'm not convinced that gentlemen shook hands with ladies. I'm more ready to be contradicted on this one, though. Does anybody have a resource which throws light on these questions? --ColinFine (talk) 08:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Cassells Household Guide (c. 1880s) says that "the term 'shaking hands' is inappropriate; the mode of salutation consisting of gentle pressure and very slight movement from the wrist." However, it goes on to say that this does occur between ladies and gentlemen, with the proviso that "except of the greatest intimacy, the gentleman is not the first to offer his hand: unless he be the superior of the lady in age and station, he waits till she makes the advance." Clarityfiend (talk) 09:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Clarityfiend. That disposes of my second doubt, which was in any case weaker than the first. I wonder if anybody will come up with any information about the first. --ColinFine (talk) 13:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm. Cassells talks of introductions several times, and never mentions shaking hands in that context. It begins to look as if the custom was the opposite of what I remember from 50 years ago: that you did not shake hands on first acquantance but only on meeting again. But it is not clear. --ColinFine (talk) 13:56, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure that the premise of your question is correct. I distinctly remember, almost exactly 50 years ago, shaking hands with my grandfather whenever we met and parted. He was born in 1882, and as a former ship's captain in the merchant service, would have had a reasonable knowledge of etiquette. In fact, my father (b.1918) always gets up and shakes my hand whenever I visit - he's not one for all this hugging nonsense. I'm not an expert on these things, but I would imagine that the conclusion of an agreeable meeting with your solicitor would be an appropriate moment for a handshake, to show that business had been completed in an amicable way. Alansplodge (talk) 17:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Quotes from the novel The Woman in White. Laura's half-sister greets the family solicitor Gilmore when he arrives to discuss the marriage settlement thus: "Miss Halcombe ... advanced to shake hands with an old gentleman ... Mr. Gilmore had arrived." Laura gives Hartright her hand "with the frank, innocent good-will of happier days" at that evening's supper. At bedtime Hartright "could not trust myself to look at her when I took her hand" and, after a few words "[H]er voice failed her, her hand closed gently round mine - then dropped it suddenly." On Hartright's last morning at Limmeridge, he holds out his hand to bid the women farewell and "Miss Halcome, who was nearest to me, took it"; two minutes later: "She caught me by both hands - she pressed them with the strong, steady grasp of a man". Again, moments later, he's holding out his hand to Laura, who takes it (although admittedly he kisses hers rather than shaking it this time). I also recall that in Sense and Sensibility, written half a century earlier, Austen has Marianne shaking hands with the dastardly Willoughby, who has broken her sister's heart, at a key moment of parting and forgiveness. It does appear that there were circumstances back then under which a woman and a man who had previously met could respectably shake, or at least clasp, hands when meeting or parting. - Karenjc 18:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I shake hands with people I know all the time, and I'm pretty sure that's not a new thing. I believe the traditional etiquette was that you shouldn't shake hands with someone unless you had been introduced to them, but once you have been introduced you then shake hands on any subsequent meeting. --Tango (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I can see where ColinFine is coming from; on meeting an acquaintance in the street a raised hat might have been more appropriate than a handshake, which might have seemed a bit over-enthusiastic. But a handshake might fit the bill for a close relative or someone that you hadn't seen for a while. Alansplodge (talk) 20:34, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

In the novel, Walter and Laura shake hands a lot ("we shook hands at night and morning"). The book isn't about a typical Victorian situation or family, and Collins certainly wasn't a typical Victorian writer. Zoonoses (talk) 06:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone, and especially Karenjc for a clear answer. I'm very surprised at what Alansplodge and Tango say, but I haven't any corroboration for my very clear memory (of how "foreign" I thought it for people to shake hands with those they already knew). --ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Might just be a regional thing. Alansplodge (talk) 21:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

Fabric arts

I just found entries about "Polstitches" on the internet that seem to be about a variation of cross stitch, for which there is an article in Wikipedia, that is followed by an entry: "Related stitches and forms of embroidery". Would Polstitches fit into that category also, and what exactly are polstitches? 108.83.111.49 (talk) 23:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

"Polstitches" appears to be the name of a company that sells cross-stitch sewing kits. All references I can find point back to them. So I don't think the word describes a variation of cross stitch, merely a vendor. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

October 4

Mineral Rights

How dose a property ower find out if they have mineral rights on their property. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.83.193 (talk) 00:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain that a similar question was asked a few months back. I'll see if I can find it in the archives - unless you beat me to it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:14, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

First off, this would be country specific - different countries treat property ownership differently. But assuming you're talking about the US, mineral rights will likely be spelled out in the title to the property. This may be a bit tricky to interpret, as depending on jurisdiction, there may or may not be the assumption that the mineral rights pass along with the property. (So a title that doesn't explicitly mention mineral rights might mean different things state to state.) Another option is to look at the deeds for the property, and see if/how mineral rights have been transferred - especially useful if you can look at the chain of ownership back to the original land grant. All of this is made easier by contacting the local land registry - for a fee, they should be able to assist a person in tracking down property rights. Though be advised that different states have different land registration systems (see Recording (real estate), Torrens title, Deeds registration, etc.). If you really need to know, it's probably best to talk to a local lawyer who does real estate transactions. (They likely have a flat fee for doing a title search.) -- 205.175.124.30 (talk) 00:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Not just country specific, in the U.S. it's state specific. For example, mineral rights [and oil and gas] are a discrete section of the Texas Bar Exam. It's a huge area of law. Classic common law held that the land owner owned mineral rights below their parcel, however that's an incredibly simplistic answer in light of all the variation, case law, etc. Some states actually have recording laws for mineral leases, if I remember right. Only way a land owner can really know is to consult a lawyer. Shadowjams (talk) 03:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

slang

anybody know what "uber" means? also, i was reading a blog post. the person said "i'm gonna sit around with friends this Halloween and talk about historical events on oct 31st, goo history!" what does the last part mean? thank you, 70.114.254.43 (talk) 06:17, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing but I reckon oober is a re-spelling of Über. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I assume the 2nd part is a misspelling of "Go history !", which is a cheer for history, meaning they are a fan. StuRat (talk) 06:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

i meant "uber". sorry. 70.114.254.43 (talk) 07:00, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

'Uber' means 'over' or 'higher' in German, so generally it is used by gamers, at least, to mean 'really good', or 'extreme'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

In German, it's "über" with an umlaut. Famous usages are Nietzsche's Übermensch (quite literally "superhuman") and "Deutschland, Deutschland über alles", the first stanza of the old German national anthem. Contrast the Nazi Untermensch. "Uber" without the umlaut is somewhat analogous to a reverse Heavy Metal Umlaut. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:17, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Of course, but on Anglophone keyboards, there is no umlaut, unless you press ALT+220 on your numpad with numlock enabled. Most people can't be bothered with that (or plainly just don't know what the 'dots' represent), so don't do it. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I use a US keyboard on a PC under Red Hat Linux and produce Umlauts without Numlock or the keypad. And I use a US keyboard on a Mac and produce Umlauts even though my MacBook does not even have a keypad (or Numlock). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:43, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I use a Hungarian keyboard on a Dell Win7 lappie, which has a u-umlaut key on it, in fact two of them (one is actually a double acute accent), so ner-ner-nee-ner-ner :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Another method is to keep a file handy which already has common diacriticals, so you can just copy-and-paste:

áÁ éÉ íÍ óÓ úÚ ñÑ ¡¿ - àÀ çÇ èÈ - â êÊ îÎ ôÔ ûÛ - äÄ öÖ ß üÜ

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Or on MS Word, you can go to "Insert Symbol" and select the letter with diacritic that you need from the "Normal text" font. Alansplodge (talk) 21:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

"I meant "uber". Sorry. "Uber" is the same thing as "über". You native English speakers just aren't used to that in the rest of the world, accent and umlaut marks are actually used. Thus, "uber" is just a form of "über" that is easier to type on English/American keyboards that can't be used to type a "ü" letter. (I can't type one on my keyboard with a single keypress either, I have to use - what, the shock - two keypresses: first to type the umlaut mark, then to type the "u". I don't know how I'm going to be able to put up with this.) JIP | Talk 18:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what all this blather about umlauts is about. The very first respondent here did spell the word with the umlaut. I must remember to send him a barnstar.-- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I got the impression that the OP thought "uber" and "über" meant different things. JIP | Talk 03:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

This confusion was caused when the OP changed their original spelling of "oober" to "uber" and also apologized for the misspelling, leading those new to the thread to wonder what they meant, since the "oober" had been excised, and draw the false conclusion that they were overly umlaut-conscious. StuRat (talk) 06:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Well it was obvious to me after some mometary confusion (but I never thought umlauts were at issue) from reading the early part of the thread (JoO clearly noted the misspelling) having never seen the original post, but I do agree the OP's modification and failure to clearly specify they had done so was a recipe for confusion. Nil Einne (talk) 06:19, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Use Urban Dictionary if you ever need to know slang. 65.95.21.169 (talk) 13:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Or the Ürban Dictionary. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

An uber is someone who ubes. —Tamfang (talk) 19:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Cheers, Tamfang. I might spend the weekend 'ubing', then. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:12, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Similarly, and with the same etymology,[10] an over is one who oves, and a super is one who supes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:49, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

thanks all. 70.114.254.43 (talk) 22:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Can I just say I love you guys?!! If I was in a situation where I was allowed to Laugh out Loud without it being noticed I was on here instead of working, I would... I love the humour on this desk - makes me realise that I'm not the only one with my particular sense of humour... Keep up the good work - a barnstar to you all! gazhiley 11:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey! This is a serious place. No laughing aloud allowed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:49, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, a noisy noise annoys an oyster. Keep it in your shell, mate. We'll tell no-one. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Not even Herman's Hermits. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:48, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Plumbling

Imagine there is a plug (5cms thick) with a diameter of 20cms stuck somewhere down a horizontal pipe of diameter 22cms and that the pipe is about 60ft long and accessible from both ends, but the pipe is not quite straight such that the plug cannot be seen nor pushed out with a long enough stick, and there is a 5cm T-shaped piece of metal on one end of the plug. How would someone, like a professional plumber, get that plug out of there? (It went down the pipe originally due to water pressure - but continued attempts to use water pressure to shoot it all the way through have failed). Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.21.169 (talk) 13:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

With a Plumber's snake. --Jayron32 13:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The snake could reach it, but removing such a plug might be more difficult than your typical clump of hair. We weren't told what the plug is made out of, so dissolving it with chemicals might work, depending on the material. If all else fails, a plumber might cut through the pipe with a torch, remove the plug, and weld it back together. (Some type of a video borescope with an attached micro-drill would be the ideal solution, but I doubt if many plumbers have the attached drill part.) StuRat (talk) 05:20, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Articles Understandability

I was just wondering why so many of wikipedia's articles are so hard to understand. Examples are Equity (finance), Complex number and even Quantum mechanics? I cannot understand much in these articles. Could they perhaps be written more simply, as on simple english wikipedia? 92.0.121.34 (talk) 18:34, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable

and Category:Wikipedia articles that are too technical.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 35#Easy as pi?.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

There are introductions to some articles that are extremely complex (Introduction to quantum mechanics, for example). You can see a list at Category:Introduction articles. Unfortuantly, this does not encompass all of the technical articles on Wikipedia. Livewireo (talk) 20:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

burning stuff

how long will oil last in an oil lamp (at one Candela)? also, I'm gonna try to make some incense for a friend for Christmas, any ideas on how to go about it? and can one ask about five questions in a row on here? thank you, 70.114.254.43 (talk) 23:01, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

On the last question:

• It's OK to ask a short series of related questions in the same thread.
• If they're unrelated questions, make them separate threads, each with its own header.
• There's no formal limit as to how many questions one person can ask. But if you were to post 100 questions at the same time or over the course of a day, we might suspect your bona fides. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

got it, thanks. 70.114.254.43 (talk) 23:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

1. No idea but I'm thinking that it would depend on what you were burning.
2. Google "making homemade incense". There are a number of how-tos on the Internet and likely a few books.
3. There was one person who would post questions because they thought that if we didn't have questions to answer, we didn't have anything else to do. That's not true. We answer questions because we're generally helpful people with some knowledge about various things. We're just volunteers. If we're not answering something, we're off doing something else. Dismas|^(talk) 05:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

October 5

Info on Credit Suisse in both World Wars

I am not sure if this is the right place, but I was hoping someone might have a better resource than I to find information about Credit Suisse in the early 1900s.

Around the 1980s, sources become abundant and much of the company's early history I've taken from "The History of a Bank" a book commissioned by Credit Suisse. The book is balanced and detailed, but I noted previously how Switzerland's neutrality culture influenced how it portrayed soldiers of war being forced into Swiss territory in the 1870 Franco-Prussian war (an "incursion" apparently).

As such, I don't trust it as the best source regarding Swiss' business operations with Germany and other Axis forces during both world wars. Especially knowing that many Jewish organizations and individuals took issue with Swiss banks giving their assets over to German authorities. For something so politically charged, I would prefer more independent sources.

So I'm looking for better sources especially around how both world wars influenced Credit Suisse and their response to the political situation. As a major bank from a country renown for isolationism, it's a particularly interesting topic. Corporate 03:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

looking for a water park

I'm trying to fide a place I.have seen advertised recently, a 'Savannah beach water park' apparently within a nature reserve and possibly still being built, but the ads had little information. I need a website address, contact email, something like that; but so.far my searches have turned up nothing. Hoping you can help.

82.132.244.24 (talk) 11:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Your IP address geolocates to the UK. Is the park you're looking for in the UK? - Karenjc 11:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, it was on the internet so it could be anywhere.for all I know, it may not exist at all and have just been the coursework of an advertising student. Sorry. 82.132.244.36 (talk) 11:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Maybe helpful, maybe not ... I put "savannah beach" into Google maps and got this map showing Tybee Island, Georgia. Astronaut (talk) 12:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the "Water park with nature preserve", the thing that sprang to mind for me was Six Flags Great Adventure in New Jersey, which has on the same property a water park (Six Flags Hurricane Harbor) and a drive-through Safari (Safari Off Road Adventure), which is under renovations. I believe they are changing it from a "drive your own car", which it has been for many years, to a "ride in one of our vans", similar to Kilimanjaro Safaris in Disney's Animal Kingdom park. --Jayron32 12:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Tybee Island does have a "nature preserve" but there was no water park when I lived there--and I cannot find one now. There is nothing at Great Adventure related to a beach or Savannah, and if they had a nature preserve it would feature snapping turtles and chipmunks. μηδείς (talk) 21:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Except that Great Adventure has animals of the African Savanna, and is advertised as such. --Jayron32 23:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

A nature preserve is a preserve of the local wildlife, not the commercial display of animals that would die without year-round human care, a difference of which I am sure we are aware, and one I didn't think it necessary to mention. μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Or is your point that the word savanna would come up in a search? If so, then yes for great adventure, but not "beach", and "Savannah Beach" is a real place. μηδείς (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Over-the-counter painkillers in Europe

I just heard second-hand that it is hard to get low-level painkillers in Europe (and particularly Luxembourg) that could be simply bought over-the-counter in the US. Is it hard to get naproxen in Europe? Ibuprofen? Acetaminophen? Aspirin? Duoduoduo (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't know about naproxen, have never come across it, although our article says it is now licensed in the UK for period pains. The other three are definitely available over the counter in the UK and in France. Ibuprofen is much more expensive in French pharmacies than in the UK, where both branded and generic forms are available in supermarkets. I always go for the generic as it is guaranteed identical to the branded product, and half the price. Acetaminophen is usually known as paracetamol. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Quick tip: generic is absolutely NOT "guaranteed" identical to the branded product. Absolutely untrue. The active ingredient must be identical, but the non-active ingredients may be wildly different. By "non-active" they don't mean "benign and safe for everyone under every circumstance". Been there, done that, got the $400 ambulance bill. --NellieBly (talk) 14:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

In the Netherlands aspirin, paracetamol, ibuprofen are freely available. Don't know if there is a limit. According to the Dutch Article Naproxen is available over-the-counter in 220 or 550 mg tablet form. The paracetamol-codeine is prescription only, I think. Jarkeld (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

In terms of expense, the generic 200mg ipuprofen tablets I bought yesterday cost me £0.40 for a pack of sixteen. Coated ones, too - I think that the uncoated ones can come in at less than 2p/tablet sometimes. Hard to imagine them being much cheaper! Andrew Gray (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I was about to say I bought Ibuprofen yesterday at a generic supermarket where every little helps, and it was 36p for 16 coated tablets. They do however limit you to two boxes of each type of tablet. gazhiley 16:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

In the UK co-codamol is available without a prescription (it's in that category where the pharmacist herself has to look at you and verify that you're not all pale and twitchy). Tylenol#Products says "all forms of Tylenol with codeine require a prescription in the US". So in that case the UK is more permissive than the US. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 16:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

http://luxembourg.angloinfo.com/forum/viewtopic/201/0/ibuprofen-where-to-buyhow-to-get This link says ibuprofen is available over the counter in Luxembourg. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Here in the UK, a piece of debatably effective suicide-prevention legislation makes it impossible to purchase more than 2 packets of most painkillers in a single purchase. A few months ago, a branch of Boots stopped me buying two packets of ibuprofen together, because my purchase also included a tube of topical ibuprofen gel. Even though the gel cannot feasibly be ingested, they stood by the rules, and I had to put one packet of pills back. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Unsure if the Netherlands has such a rule, but if so it's not very effective. We tend to get a few TS-patients per month with an aspirin and/or paracetamol overdose. Jarkeld (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

TS? Tourette syndrome, perhaps? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I 'spect it means 'tempted suicide ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 00:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

TS stands for "tentamen suicidii" Jarkeld (talk) 01:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It seems to be virtually unknown in the anglosphere. It gets a mention at Failed suicide attempt, but otherwise nothing much in English. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

That happened to me several times in the UK too, but you can just go back and keep buying more. Nothing like that ever happened in France though, I could buy as much as I wanted. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Naproxen is prescription only in the UK, whereas diclofenac can be bought over the counter. Ibuprofen can be bought OTC up to 400mg per tablet, and in combination with codeine. I also asked a question on Science desk recently about the availability of ketamine in the UK, and it's hospital prescription only: I asked because a US friend of mine recommended it to me for pain relief, and I was only familiar with its veterinary usage. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Aspririn, Ibuprofen, and Paracetamol are all available without a prescription in Germany. However, most proper drugs (as opposed to homoeopathic water and low-dose plant-extracts) in Germany can only be bought in a pharmacy, run by a trained pharmacist. As a result, you won't find them in a supermarket, and they are quite a bit more expensive than in the US. But prices are by no means prohibitive - single-digit Euros for the typical pack of 20 or so. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

An anecdote has just occurred to me that may be worth posting, and I'll see if I can find a news story related to it. A friend of mine was refused entry to Greece because she had co-codamol tablets in her bag, which are illegal in Greece. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Actually just googling "co-codamol in Greece" brought up a lot of forum posts regarding this. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

See also Codeine#Greece; "Codeine is classed as an illegal drug in Greece, and individuals possessing it could conceivably be arrested, even if they were legitimately prescribed it in another country.". Alansplodge (talk) 00:52, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

• To give a reverse example, noscapine, an active ingredient of the various non-Papaver somniferum poppies used to make lower grades of 'opium' in ancient times, is locked up as "prescription" in the U.S. and Canada, but apparently over-the-counter in many parts of the world. [11] (I reference this only in regard to the legal status; I haven't evaluated the other claims) It's an antitussive, not an analgesic, but apparently antiinflammatory in nature ... in any case, would be useful to some people. Wnt (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Constitutional rights in unincorporated territories of the US

Our article Insular cases says

From 1901 to 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court in a series of opinions known as the Insular Cases held that the Constitution extended ex proprio vigore to the territories. However, the Court in these cases also established the doctrine of territorial incorporation. Under the same, the Constitution applied fully only in incorporated territories such as Alaska and Hawaii, whereas it applied only partially in the new unincorporated territories of Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines.

And today American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands and the United States Virgin Islands are also in the category of unincorporated territories.

I read somewhere, but I just can't remember where, that the insular cases distinguished between "fundamental" constitutional rights and non-fundamental constitutional rights, the former automatically applying even in the territories but the latter not applying there (unless by act of Congress). I also think I read that Congress has extended by law all constitutional rights to the unincorporated territories. My questions are:

1. Is there a Wikipedia page that discusses the above in some depth?

2. Am I right that some, but not all, constitutional rights are "fundamental" and automatically apply in the unincorporated territories?

3. Am I right that Congress has by law extended all constitutional rights to the unincorporated territories?

4. What is the legal theory under which we can distinguish fundamental versus non-fundamental constitutional rights, and what is the legal theory that one set of rights automatically applies in the unincorporated territories and the other does not, even though the constitution is silent on territories? Duoduoduo (talk) 19:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

5. Is there a specific enumeration of which constitutional rights are in each category? Duoduoduo (talk) 21:13, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Different rights are stated in different ways, such as the states and the congress not being allowed to do certain things, certain things being unconditionally forbidden, the rights of the people to do certain things not being infringible. The right to bear arms "being necessary to the security of a free State" could presumably be limited in recently acquired territories. The analysis here is mine, but the text is the Constitution itself. μηδείς (talk) 16:41, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but as far as I can see that doesn't answer any of my questions, which have to do with the Insular Cases and the interpretation that they have actually received, at the time they came out or subsequently. Duoduoduo (talk) 22:11, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

No, it does not provide a concrete case. I have simply pointed out that rights which adhere to the states (Amendment 10) or which are expressed in terms of the states (amendment 2) do not necessarily apply to citizens of territories which are not states, and who are direct subjects of the federal government. μηδείς (talk) 00:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

This may be of limited utility, depending on how much time/effort you're willing to expend on the question, but it appears that there is a book published by the U.S. government's General Accounting Office that addresses this very issue: http://books.google.com/books/about/U_S_Insular_Areas.html?id=0QYNAAAAIAAJ There is a pdf available online right now that appears to be the book in full: http://www.jarvisisland.info/pdf/US_insular_areas.pdf From a (very) brief skim of some of the contents, it looks to me as though the status of these rights (and, therefore, the answers to your questions) are a bit of guesswork right now for many territories. I'm not sure if this has to do with differing text in each territory's Organic Acts, or differing circumstances of their acquisition, or simply murkiness on the part of the courts. Anyway, it looks to me like this might provide answers, if you have the patience for it. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 02:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

(I have a fair amount of information about this, but I need to sign off and go to sleep now. I'll try to return to this thread in the next couple of days. If I forget, feel free to poke me.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Israeli soldier's head gear

Can someone tell me the purpose of the head gear of the soldier on the left in this photo from the CBC website? Bielle (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

WARNING: VIRUS. i downloaded the picture, and oped it it windows photo viewer. it open about 20 instances of it labeled "free fire screen saver", all instances said the picture was to big or corrupt. they closed with ease. 70.114.254.43 (talk) 22:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I just checked the link. It opens on a CBC webpage. You don't need to download the image to see it; it is already open. I have no idea what 70.114.254.43 did, but it wasn't just to click on the link. Bielle (talk) 22:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The virus is undoubtedly an unrelated issue particular to your computer, not with the CBC. As for the original question, the mitznefet is camouflage intended to disrupt the silhouette of a helmet. — Lomn 22:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Lomn. It certainly succeeds in doing that. Bielle (talk) 22:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

We even have an article (with picture): Mitznefet (Israeli military). ---Sluzzelin talk 23:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

October 6

DH staying in to play defense

In, well, not actually baseball, but the adulterated version of it that they play in the American League, I understand that there's a peculiar little rule involving the designated hitter. You can, if you like, let your DH take over for one of your other players in the defensive half you of your inning. However, if you do, then you no longer have access to the DH rule, and your pitcher has to hit for himself for the rest of the game (or more precisely, I guess, it's the same rules as in normal baseball, where you can hit for the pitcher if you like but then he has to come out of the game).

My question is, how often does this actually happen? Has anyone here actually seen it? --Trovatore (talk) 02:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Did you read Designated_hitter#Forfeiting_the_right_to_a_DH? You may be surprised what you can learn in Wikipedia. --Jayron32 03:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Interference, Jayron. Bugs is up. --Trovatore (talk) 03:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Huh? --Jayron32 03:56, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing he's saying you beat me to the answer. Meanwhile, I'm waiting for someone to ask what the story was on that botched "infield fly" call. Regarding the DH, let's just say I've never found it entertaining to watch the pitcher come to bat and strike out. Maybe it's because I remember a Cubs pitcher named Bob Buhl, a fair pitcher on a near-worthless team, but who went through an entire season as a Cubs starter and never got even one lousy hit. Baseball fever! Catch it! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:14, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I root for an American League team, and even I don't like the DH. I also don't like watching a short stop come up all the time and strike out. If a player can't play baseball, they can't play baseball. But how is the DH for a pitcher different from just having two full platoons: put a bunch of light hitting fielders out on defense, and replace them all with beefed up steroid junkies at bat. Why not? Because baseball isn't football. Players should be complete players, and if they aren't, they shouldn't get the promotion outta Toledo or Durham. There are plenty of pitchers who can hit quite well, and there are plenty of great fielders who can't hit for shit, so why do we grant the pitcher special status? I'm not sure I understand that. --Jayron32 05:19, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

One reason would be to simply keep the pitcher off the basepaths. Decades ago, in certain leagues, they used to allow a courtesy runner for the occasions when a pitcher would get on base. I know what you mean about good-field, no-hit regulars, though. A couple of generations ago the Cardinals had a shortstop named Dal Maxvill, who was kept around strictly for his fielding, because he couldn't bat his way out of a paper bag. Bob Gibson was a much better hitter. Players like Maxvill could have another label: "Designated Strikeout". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Ron Herbel. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 02:32, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Hank Aguirre would be another one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Some of us of mature years still see the mere existence of designated hitters as an adulteration of baseball. HiLo48 (talk) 04:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Iran and hyperinflation

If Iran is in danger of hyperinflation, what are the drawbacks of pegging their currency to a foreign currency, or just outright adopting a foreign currency, or (lastly) forgoing a fiat currency altogether (e.g., precious medals)? Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

That only works if you have reserves or the ability to actually exchange the one for the other. There's a reason they call it fiat currency. (You can't just unfiat it by fiat.) μηδείς (talk) 03:29, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Hyperinflation - not just old-fashioned 100%/yr Latin American inflation - is always a result of supply problems, of war, of debts that need to be paid in a foreign currency or precious metals that the country cannot obtain enough of, e.g. reparations as in Germany. In Iran, afaik, it is mainly the result of the sanctions; there is a dollar peg (usually a bad idea), but they are having trouble maintaining it. The unfiating of fiat is when the state has enough power to run a strong tax system, lacking this contributes to inflation of course. Hyperinflation is a symptom of bad problems, not a cause.John Z (talk) 04:32, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

The sanctions may be a limit on revenue, but the $10 billion they have given Syria recently in aid is the source of the inflation. See various. μηδείς (talk) 16:33, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Um none of the results seem to attribute the inflation to the $10 billion aide. In fact any of the sources from your search (I didn't move past page one) which do give a cause seem to attribute it to the sanctions. Considering Iran's GDP was $482.445 billion in 2011, it's perhaps not surprising that the sources you provided, while often criticising or questioning the $10 billion aide given Iran's current economic climate (and other factors), don't attribute hyperinflation to it. Nil Einne (talk) 23:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Um, inflation comes from government spending via printing extra money. Mere economic contraction by itself never causes inflation, only an inflated money supply does. The relevant figure is not estimated GDP, but change in the money supply due to government spending. Sanctions themselves can't cause infolation unless the government prints extra money to spend "revenue" it doesn't have. How much did the government spend versus actual revenue in the year prior to the recent $10 billion transfer to Syria, and how much are they spending in regards to actual revenue now? Government spending is not a constant of nature, one can't pretend it exists in a vacuum of will, regardless of revenue. μηδείς (talk) 23:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

The point is, given the size of the Iranian GDP, it's ludicrious to suggest that giving US$10 billion (which is a small percentage of the GDP) to Syria is the sole cause of hyperinflation as you suggested was support by the sources, but is in fact supported by none of them (which don't even mention it as a cause or at least not directly). While you're correct that to some extent the government's budget is the figure that matters more, ultimately since there is generally a strong correlation between the governments budget and GDP, it's a decent figure to use and given how ludicrious your suggestion was, I didn't feel the need to find better sources. But as it turns out, it was in the news very recently [12] and it was USD$$453 billion at the official exchange rate. While as this entire thread illustrates, the official exchange rate is not particularly reliable, since it's entirely unclear in what form the aide came from, it remains an acceptable measure particularly given the magnitude of the figures involved. Incidentally, whether or not you want to consider the sanctions (which likely lead to a massive fall in revenue effectively forcing the goverment to either massively cut spending (and risk the deleterious effects which would potentially be worse then hyperinflation) or print money to keep spending at a resonable level) as a contributing factor to the hyperinflation; is largely a matter of semantics. And of course as has been explained to you before we prefer reliable sources some of which do that. Of course plenty of people do question some aspects of Iranian government spending, including the aide to Syria particularly considering their current problems, something which I acknowledged in my first post. This is quite different from suggesting the aide to Syria is the sole cause of the inflation. Nil Einne (talk) 15:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

The causes of inflation are far more complicated than you seem to believe... printing money can cause inflation (although it doesn't always), but there are plenty of other things that can cause it too. --Tango (talk) 01:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

They should peg their currency to Fiat's, like this beauty: [13]. :-) StuRat (talk) 04:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

What, like a huge influx of gold compared to other economic growth when you are already on a hard currency? Iran is hardly flush with newfound gold wealth. You, and I, and even their citizens are quite aware that as their actual revenues fall the government is printing money to prop up themselves and now Syria. That is very simple. μηδείς (talk) 01:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I understand that hyperinflation crops up when there are underlying problems, but my question is why pegging the value to a foreign currency or adapting a foreign currency can't fix the problem. Seems to have worked in Zimbabwe. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 05:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Say they peg it to the Euro. People lack faith in their own currency, so want to trade it in for Euros. The Iranian government then has to come up with billions of Euros. How do they do that ? If they had something of value (like oil), they could conceivably trade that for billion of Euros. But this would take a long time, and even longer with sanctions applied. In the meantime, people unable to trade in their Iranian currency still would lack faith in it. I suppose Iran could make their currency directly exchangeable for crude oil, but that's not exactly easy for people to store at home, and isn't useful in small quantities. If they had sufficient refinery capacity, they could make it exchangeable for gasoline, which at least people could use directly. StuRat (talk) 06:00, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that there is very little foreign currency entering Iran. Usually, you get foreign currency by exporting goods and services, which you are then paid for in foreign currency (or people buy your currency with foreign currency and then pay you with your currency, but the end result is the same). The sanctions are preventing Iran from exporting, so there is a shortage of hard currency in the country. That is driving up exchange rates (simply supply and demand - shortages drive up prices). Since Iran is dependant on imports (as most countries are), high exchange rates cause high prices for imported goods, which drives up prices of everything else - that's inflation. --Tango (talk) 19:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

• The cause of hyperinflation is very simple, and always the same: a government that can't pay its bills from the revenue it receives pays its bills by printing money. The disadvantage of tying the currency to a fixed standard is that the Iranian government would no longer be able to pay its bills at all. Looie496 (talk) 00:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, but that can happen either way. At some point, hyperinflation will make people unwilling to sell anything for payments in worthless paper. And, based on Medeis' link below: [14], it seems we've already hit that point: "Because of the rial's dismal state, even the bazaar closed its gates — the same bazaar that actually supports the conservative Iranian leadership and is considered one of the regime's strongholds. 'We have no choice but to close our shops,' said one vendor to a foreign reporter. 'We prefer not to sell anything than to lose money.'". StuRat (talk) 05:02, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

@ Nil above, first off, a point of order. Your condescending comment in your edit summary that you had to insert your response above Tango's because of something I did is bollocks. With the exception of StuRat's joke, everyone of those comments was in order by time and indented under the one it was responding to. The only randomly placed one is yours. In any case am responding at the bottom of the page so as not to compound your action. Second, hyperinflation is not a word I have used once, so telling me that I am wrong to attribute Iranian hyperinflation to the ten billion printed to give to Syria is also based on something imagined. To the matter itself, of course the added $10 billion is just one additional factor adding to the Iranian governments already historically inflationary spending policy. But it is not of so little consequence as you imply. The inflationary effect of just the $10 billion would be calculated not against GDP, but against money supply. On that topic, according to our article Central_Bank_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran#Key_statistics, Iranian M1 in 2001 was valued at $71 Billion, presumably in US dollars. This source citing Bloomberg shows that the Iranian money supply (in some unspecified and presumably Iranian unit) has about septupled since 2000, which, if it doesn't correspond to a septupling in the value of the GDP over that time, indicates 600% inflation during the same period, which corresponds neatly with the just under 20% average annual inflation during Ahmedinejad's era. That is, the annual inflation corresponds almost exactly to the government's printing money. Unfortunately that chart doesn't give the money supply's value in US dollars, so we can't calculate exactly what effect the $10 billion will have on inflation above the current rate. But if the current actual US dollar value of their M1 is the same $71 billion (although I suspect it's probably less), then (71+10)/81=1.14, adding an additional 14% to the inflation, doubling the recent average rate in one fell swoop. And indeed, this interesting article suggests inflation is well above double the historical average.μηδείς (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Identify signature/autograph

Whose?

I was looking through some pretty old notepads this morning and came across one with an autograph I received sometime more than 7 years ago. I have absolutely zero idea who's autograph this is...would anyone be able to shed some light on this? Thanks, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

"Dream Big! Dream Often! Dreams do come true!" is attributed to a certain Dorothy here. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 13:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Zil...? Zib...? —Tamfang (talk) 17:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

It does look a bit like "Zib". I thought the first part may be "Dan". Apparently, there are plenty of people called Dan Zibel. Alansplodge (talk) 23:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I thought it might be Diane something. There's a Diane Dike who's associated with the "Dreams do come true" mantra. If I try not too hard, I can read the sig as "Diane Dike". -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 00:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

My first impression was Diane Zi#l(/d/b)##, with "Diane" only apparently having four letters at most and strangely lacking a dotted i. It seems far too flowery to be a straight man's signature. D#### Zi(#)l(/d/b)#(#) seems about the best we can guess. Jack's guess of Diane Dike seems good on other grounds. Surely all this will prompt some sort of memory or at least spacio-temporal context. I.e., this wasn't signed in the south of France in 1987, was it? μηδείς (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I've found an autograph by Diane Dike - the 3rd photo here. It's sorta vaguely similar, but still different enough for me to discount her as the one in the OP's photo. Back to the drawing board. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Dan Zadra? Seems to be a person who writes things like that. 88.112.36.91 (talk) 09:09, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Is the blatantly sexist/homophobic commentary really necessary? Anyway, initially the first name looked like "Drew" to me, but now I'm not sure. Maybe Dean or Dion or Dina? Hopefully it isn't just an old friend or teacher or something... 81.98.43.107 (talk) 10:09, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I modified my comment, didn't mean to offend. μηδείς (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I think we have to assume there's an "i" in the second name, so Zadra seems out, and probably not an "i" in the first name, so Dina seems out as well. μηδείς (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, this seems to be struggling...having thought really hard about it, my best guess as to where I got it would have been a golf tournament at Prairie Dunes, either the Women's Open or the Senior Open...I can't say with 100% certainty that that's where I got it though. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 19:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's a list of contestants at the 2002 Women's Open.

Here's the 2006 Senior Open player list. μηδείς (talk) 20:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Mushrooms

Living in Southeast Ohio, Have seen numerous sizes,shapes & colors of mushrooms....on lawn...Just curious about them....AM NOT picking & eating...just info. on them...even some that are pinkish/red on top...beautiful to look at..another looks like a stingray,even the color...& it is huge,flat on top...shaped like a stingray...the pinkish/red 1 is almost heart shaped w/some sort of tentacles coming from under the head....as I said beautiful to look at.......will be mowing them as soon as weather dries up some....TY.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.189.168.138 (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, this google search turns up some promissing websites to help you identify your mushrooms --Jayron32 23:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Pinkish red, large, with dangly bits? You may want to look at fly agaric, or related Amanita species. Mushroom ID is hard, you may also be interested in googling a mushroom identification key for your region. SemanticMantis (talk) 01:09, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

October 7

Resource management act in India

Is resource management act ruled in India? If yes, give detail information about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.1.87 (talk) 10:40, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I can't find any evidence of an Indian Act of Parliament called the "Resource Management Act" or similar. If that's not what you're asking about, could you please explain a little more clearly what you want to know? - Karenjc 13:49, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

NB I added a header to your question. - Karenjc 13:57, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Resource that allows map overlays?

Is there any online resource which would allow me to choose two random geographical areas, say France and Texas, or Israel and New Jersey, and overlay their maps or compare them side to side in the same scale? I can draw a pretty good map of the world freehand from memory, but I can't visually compare the sizes of any two arbitrary areas in my head. μηδείς (talk) 20:55, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

"Same size" isn't as trivial as you might think, on maps of a spherical surface, as you have different projections with different distortions. So, you can't even get all 1 km lines on a single map to be the same size, much less on two maps. StuRat (talk) 21:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

And, rather than overlay them, why not just place two maps at the same scale next to each other ? Sounds a lot easier. StuRat (talk) 21:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Reread me, I did say side to side. And any system based on the same globe should have the same scale and projection. I am not just looking for maps, I could do that myself with a googling. I want one uniform system that allows me to place any two areas next to or over each other. μηδείς (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, that's not what wikt:overlay normally means. I'm not sure what you want which you can't get just by opening two browser windows, containing two Google maps, at the same scale, in the two adjacent windows. StuRat (talk) 21:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Here you go, in case you are not sure what English words mean in English: http://www.tipmedia.org/graphics/Israel-NewJersey.jpg μηδείς (talk) 21:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what an overlay is. Apparently you don't know what "side to side" means. StuRat (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, like I said, I want a resource that provides two such maps for me. Asking google images or maps for such maps will be extremely time consuming and hit and miss, unless you know of some way of setting google maps for scale that I don't. I have to assume someone has come across some mapping website that allows one easily to compare to such locations arbitrarily, even if you, haven't. μηδείς (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

It took me about a dozen clicks and typing in the names "Israel" and "New Jersey" to get them side-by-side, showing the sizes to be about the same. They came up at the same scale initially. If they hadn't, just clicking on the + and - would alter the zoom level until the numbers on the scale match. I can't see any specialized software being much faster. StuRat (talk) 21:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you actually trying to answer my question, StuRat? A dozen clicks which cannot be repeated for another comparison don't strike me as helpful. Perhaps such a resource as I am looking for doesn't exist. But whatever the case, your answers have been entirely off point and unhelpful. Why not try editting an article, in stead of answering some ref desk question you have no answer for? μηδείς (talk) 21:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

My point is that there's unlikely to be such a software product, as there's little need or demand for it. You might as well ask for software designed to draw two triangles next to each, with identical dimensions, but in different colors. Why would anyone write such a program ? I could be wrong, but don't hold your breath. StuRat (talk) 22:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I am sure you have heard of the fallacy of trying to prove a negative. μηδείς (talk) 22:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

The pictures aren't really pretty on this one and they aren't side-to-side but it gives you an idea. AlexiusHoratius 22:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC) *

Yes, that is exactly the sort of thing I am looking for. I would not be averse to a more detailed system. I will try it out, thanks! μηδείς (talk) 22:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, an actual overlay (not side-by-side), which does require a special program. StuRat (talk) 22:29, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

That's great, Alexius. Not exactly arbitrary, since there is a list, but it covers what I was looking for. A star for you. μηδείς (talk) 22:34, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Excellent Alexius, a response in the spirit even if not to the literal question posed. I'm glad someone gets it. hydnjo (talk) 00:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

He did answer the question as literally posed. The section title is not the question, nor is it supposed to be, per the quidelines at the top of the page. μηδείς (talk) 01:18, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

After having looked at the link, I'd like to point out that Vermont is not a major exporter of vermouth. Or have any special relation to calendars. Why else would the creators of the site call Vermont, Vermonth? Dismas|^(talk) 00:57, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Stu, I don't really see what your issue is. Yes, the title clearly say "overlay" but the question further refines the idea and asks specifically for "overlay... or compare them side to side" (emphasis mine of course). And Medeis, using Google Maps, I have a scale in the lower left of the map that states what scale objects are. This is what, I think, Stu was trying to get at. Pull up two browser windows with one map each and zoom each so that the scale on each is the same. Dismas|^(talk) 00:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that was my point (I should add that there are a limited number of distinct scales, so you can't get two maps at almost the same scale). There was some confusion above over whether we were talking about overlays or side-by-side maps, but it's all figured out now. StuRat (talk) 00:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I am quite familiar with google maps, and if it has a "compare" function someone can still point that out. Any confusion here has been in one mind only, not collective. μηδείς (talk) 01:18, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I think the issue here is that whenever StuRat doesn't know something, he likes to try and make it seem like it's the OP's problem or misunderstanding, not his. He's apparently incapable to refrain from posting in such situations, and he makes sure that his horses are good and dead before he moves on. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:21, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree with 98 but think that some of this belongs at talk. hydnjo (talk) 02:55, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

This one is a kind of Google Maps mashup kinda version of this idea: http://overlapmaps.com/ Pfly (talk) 06:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Chinese food

Why is it that Chinese food isn't as good as food from surrounding countries (e.g. Japanese, Vietnamese, Indian)? --168.7.239.5 (talk) 21:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Here you need to distinguish what is meant be "Chinese food". Within China, there are many types, like Cantonese cuisine, Szechuan cuisine, Hunan cuisine, Mongolian cuisine, etc., all of which are healthier than Chinese-American cuisine (and presumably the equivalent in Europe). Chinese food, due to the larger population of China, made it's way into Western diets sooner, back in the bad old days when people liked a stick of butter with their meals. So, the originally healthy Chinese food was adapted to fit in, with more meat and grease and salt, and fewer veggies. Those other foods entered the Western diet later, and largely avoided this fate. StuRat (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I had an interesting experience once of going to a Chinese restaurant, in the US, with a Chinese person. He tossed the menu aside, saying "That's just for Americans", talked to the waiter in Chinese, and then had a much healthier meal brought out than anything you find on the menu. Presumably, as Americans are looking for healthier foods these days, more Chinese restaurants will offer authentic Chinese foods, while preserving the greasy foods for those who prefer them. I go to a Chinese buffet which has both, including things like seaweed, which probably wouldn't appeal to the average American. StuRat (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

The question is personal opinion, and calls for opinions in response. It is not appropriate for the Ref Desk. Bielle (talk) 21:33, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, you took "good" to mean "tasty", which is opinion, while I interpreted it as "healthy", which is quantifiable. StuRat (talk) 21:37, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Bielle. But I am not surprised that Mister "I have never seen a question I could not respond to" has responded to it. μηδείς (talk) 21:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

If that is true, StuRat, then perhaps you need to quantify it and/or the OP needs to say in what way one is healthier than the other. Your first paragraph is opinion even if its theme is about "healthy" and there is no mention in the question about American food. Bielle (talk) 21:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Stu's answer was right. Chinese food is good - depending on where you go, and what your tastes are. I have had some great Chinese meals in the UK, and conversely, some terrible ones in China. The food is made specially for the locals of the country the restaurant is based in. It would make bad business sense to make it to the taste of people thousands of miles away. If you don't like it, don't eat it. It just depends on what you want. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Also note that the authentic Chinese diet heavy in veggies and rice and light in meat wasn't entirely by choice, economics also played a role. Now, as their economic situation is improving, they are moving more towards a Western diet, and their health is beginning to be affected, accordingly. We may even hit a point where the Western diet is healthier than the Chinese diet, similar to how the percentage of smokers is higher in some third world nations. Affluence eventually brings with it health-consciousness, but not immediately. StuRat (talk) 21:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

And now we continue with opinions. (And, you will no doubt be pleased to read, that is my last comment here on personal opinions that do not even address the OP's personal-opinion question.) Bielle (talk) 22:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Gotta agree here. There's no such thing as a single food item, let alone an entire national cuisine, that is "good" or "healthy" in all circumstances, for all people, at all times, without regard to exactly what specific foods are chosen, how much of them are eaten, how often, combined with what else, or many other factors. The OP's question makes an assumption ("Chinese food isn't as good as food from surrounding countries") that cannot possibly be confirmed, and doesn't even have any meaning. It should not have been answered; clarification should have been sought. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:38, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

In the case of some national cuisines being healthier than others, it most certainly can be proven, by comparing the typical diet in one nation with another. Yes, it's possible to find something healthy or unhealthy in each, but that's why we go with the average for such comparisons. If you decide you can't reach any conclusion because of overlapping outliers, then you'd rarely reach any conclusion at all. StuRat (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

But it's the so-called outliers that are the norm for so many people. The Western diet can be extremely healthy, or extremely unhealthy, or anywhere in between, depending on exactly what choices are made. In cities at least, we have access to almost every major food item on God's earth, yet there's still an already massive obesity and diabetes problem that just gets worse and worse, and which cannot be attributed solely to sedentary life styles. What is the "average Western diet"? What is the "average Chinese/Japanese/Vietnamese/Indian diet"? These are absurd concepts, and get more and more absurd as we become more and more exposed to external foods that most of us had never even heard of before they became fashionable. There are recommended diets put out by food authorities, but obviously very few people actually pay them any heed.

Elsewhere you're having trouble understanding what "This product will make your computer go 100% faster" means, but you have no trouble accepting with only a slight modification a far vaguer sentence like "Chinese food isn't as good as food from surrounding countries". I don't get that. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

There's no problem determining what the average US, American, or Chinese diet is. Just determine the average number of calories, fat grams, saturated fat grams, trans fat grams, etc., down to as much level of detail as is desired. Indeed, to try to explain health trends in populations without considering the average diet for that group is bound to be unsuccessful. If we find a certain disease is more prevalent in a certain population, looking at what that population eats, for both deficiencies and overabundance, is key to isolating the problem. StuRat (talk) 00:32, 8 October 2012 (UTC)