Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:41, 13 January 2018

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/M

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

January 8

Khachaturian's Saber Dance: Muting the trumpets originally in the composition?

Please see this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMczfLNoGYQ&feature=youtu.be&t=95 At about 1 minute 35 secs the trumpeteers fix mutes on the bells. I wonder if the composer wrote it thus or is it the discretion of the conductor? --Remadevil (talk) 14:10, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The use of a mute is usually indicated in musical notation by the Italian direction con sordino ("with mute") and removed with the direction senza sordino ("without mute") or via sordino ("mute off"). There is no such notation on these orchestral scores [1] [2] yet this performance of the Sabre Dance has the trumpet muted from the start at 0:14. I conclude that the trumpet mutes are at the discretion of the conductor who will consider the hall acoustics and orchestra population which can vary. [3] SdrawkcaB99 (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you SdrawkcaB99. Your reply not only answered my question but was also much informative. thank you again. Remadevil (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are utility pants?

A search on Wikipedia doesn't turn up any results at first glance. 69.22.242.10 (talk) 23:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

these.--Jayron 32 23:22, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously that's not the answer I was looking for. 69.22.242.10 (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you didn't make it clear what kind of answer you were looking for, nor what prior knowledge you had when you asked the question, nor what context the terminology was used in to guide those helping you. --Jayron 32 11:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps underpants conforming to the utility clothing standards of the Second World War? See also CC41. DuncanHill (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no precise definition, but I think of contemporary utility pants as being very similar to Cargo pants or Tactical pants. They are a type of Workwear made of durable fabric with large pockets. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They are what Batman holds up with his Utility Belt. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The boy in the picture seems to just be wearing underwear and a t-shirt, not pants and a vest (utility or otherwise).OldTimeNESter (talk) 14:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If, like me, you had grown up in the UK in the 1950s, you would certainly have called those items pants (or underpants) and a vest. This is one of the classic differences between British and American English. Wymspen (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The term "drawers" instead of (under)pants was also used in the UK, as in my family up until the early 1960s. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.41.3 (talk) 16:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was certainly aware of the term "drawers" - but in my experience only girls wore them. Wymspen (talk) 13:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I called what I wore "drawers" up until around 9 years old, and I definitely wasn't a girl! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.2390.15} 90.200.41.3 (talk) 16:26, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He is wearing what are in Britain called pants and a vest. DuncanHill (talk) 14:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What's with that waistline? Is it an anti-onanistic prophylactic, or are British yutes subject to having their rib cages come loose? μηδείς (talk) 17:07, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waistlines were much higher in the 1940s, see 1940s Style Men’s Pants and Trousers "They also fit very high up on the waist reaching to bottom of the ribs." I strongly suspect that there was also a shortage of elastic, since our rubber plantations in Malaya had been overrun by the Japanese in early 1942. Alansplodge (talk) 10:59, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hence the warning "Girls who trip the light fantastic shouldn't wear cheap elastic". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waistlines were worn nearer the waist than the hips in those days. One advantage of a high waistline is that it keeps your belly warm. DuncanHill (talk) 14:37, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to do with every day handles, then? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC) .... "Winter draws on", as they say in the Caribbean... [reply]

I am sorry, but the crossed legs, the suggestive hand gestures, and the pained face? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medeis (talk • contribs)

Facepalm (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 03:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 9

Korean DMZ question

Why are the two men on the sides of this image partially staring at the corner of the building? Is it to both maintain eye contact with the building in the distance while also being able hide from possible attack easily? †dismas†|^(talk) 15:22, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Opposing North (DPRK) and South (ROK) Korean soldiers present defiant stances to each other across the DMZ. The DPRK are said to select exceptionally well fed troops for this duty. ROK soldiers adopt a modified taekwondo stance meant to appear intimidating and according to this video they hide part of the body behind a corner of the conference building to be less of a target to the North Koreans and to be able to signal quickly to counterparts if trouble arises. Experience of an ROK guard. SdrawkcaB99 (talk) 17:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

how to contact human rights of united nations

I’m a landed immigrant who got a Canadian citizenship in 2004. Started odd job permanently in 2010 when didn’t get a professional opportunity (a master degree in engineering from #1 university of Canada) in ten years due to employment discrimination against immigrants. Did more than 30 unthinkable hard/odd jobs for survival since 2000 but now they give us hard time in even menial jobs too. Tired of incessant discrimination and harassment. None of the appropriate department responded positively whenever a complaint was made. Sometimes they don’t even acknowledge. I don’t want to go into detail here but can someone help how to reach the Human Rights of United Nations regarding the stark human rights violation in Canada before I die in freezing temperature. Also can a Canadian (50+) with the above-mentioned situation who burnt his boat in the country of his origin seek asylum in the United States -Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.66.1.32 (talk) 18:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the contact information for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. --Jayron 32 19:12, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the UNHCR takes representation from the general public. Have you tried contacting an immigration lawyer to see if they can assist in your case? They might be willing to do pro-bono work for you. LongHairedFop (talk) 20:25, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not the UNHCR, but there are parts of the UN which can take individual complaints about human rights violations in certain circumstances, whether or not they're likely to be able to do anything about them. This page outlines them [4]. The OP did not ask about the UNHCR anyway, which note is the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees so while it does deal with human rights issues, it's not it's primary mission. (Note that the UNHCR does take complaints from the general public relating to their staff [5]). If you meant the UNHRC i.e. the United Nations Human Rights Council, then the claim isn't really true. This page outlines [6] in what circumstances and how they will deal with individual complaints. (It's supposed to be linked from the earlier page, but the link is broken.) Note that this isn't intended to suggest that it's the best option, or that the specific issue outlined is anything covered by any of the complaint procedures. Besides contacting a lawyer, you can ask at one of the US embassies or consulates in Canada to find out if you can seek asylum in the US [7]. Nil Einne (talk) 04:57, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're not going to get granted asylum for job discrimination. especially in these bizarro times and super duper especially from Canada. The traffic's more the other way.[8] Clarityfiend (talk) 05:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As with all legal advice questions, we should be very careful about commenting without knowing much of the individual circumstance. We do have a Asylum in the United States article and neither it or anything you've linked suggests it's literally impossible for someone from Canada to seek asylum in the US. The job thing may be masking the totality of the circumstances which would be considered by anyone competent advising. For example, the answer may very well differ depending on whether the OP is a Muslim Pakistani immigrant who's wife and daughters wear a niqab or a white blonde male Evangelical Christian Swede who keeps annoying people when he insists we need to kick out (if they're lucky) all these darkies (including those who were born in Canada 20 years before they came over from Sweden) and how he's sick of all these feminazis complaining whenever someone touches them and lamenting about these ridiculous restrictions on guns. (The Swede example may not seem that likely from the description, especially since a Swede would still likely be able to move to another country in the EU even if they've burnt their bridges in Sweden, but can't be completely ruled out.) Nil Einne (talk) 07:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing the point. Has anybody ever gotten asylum for job discrimination? Clarityfiend (talk) 10:24, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not the UNHCR, but there are parts of the UN which can take individual complaints about human rights violations in certain circumstances, whether or not they're likely to be able to do anything about them. This page outlines them [9]. The OP did not ask about the UNHCR anyway, which note is the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees so while it does deal with human rights issues, it's not it's primary mission. (Note that the UNHCR does take complaints from the general public relating to their staff [10]).

If you meant the UNHRC i.e. the United Nations Human Rights Council, then the claim isn't really true. This page outlines [11] in what circumstances and how they will deal with individual complaints. (It's supposed to be linked from the earlier page, but the link is broken.) One of the requirements is that "Domestic remedies have been exhausted, unless it appears that such remedies would be ineffective or unreasonably prolonged", which I suspect is fairly common for most UN complaint procedures.

And note that none of this is intended to suggest complaining to the UN is the best option, or that the specific issue outlined is anything covered by any of the complaint procedures.

Besides contacting a lawyer, you can ask at one of the US embassies or consulates in Canada to find out if you can seek asylum in the US [12]. Although very rare, it's not completely unheard of for someone from a developed country with a resonable reputation for human rights to successfully seek asylum in another such developed country. These articles discuss examples of the opposite direction, US citizens seeking asylum outside the US [13]. Note that many of the cases of US citizens seeking asylum in Canada seem to be children who are citizens along with their parents who are not per [14]. Again none of this is intended to comment on your chances in the specific case outlined, that's why you should contact the US authorities, a lawyer or look into the details yourself.

Nil Einne (talk) 05:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a quick aside for anyone confused by one of my comments above, the link on the OHCHR "Human Rights Bodies - Complaints Procedures" page to the HRC Complaint Procedure page has now been fixed. (I emailed the webmaster about it.) Nil Einne (talk) 03:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Any complaint to the UN can only be heard if all domestic means of seeking redress have been exhausted, e.g. the Canadian Human Rights Commission as well as provincial equivalent bodies. But this whole conversation is veering very close to legal advice. The OP should seek legal counsel. --Xuxl (talk) 14:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proving discrimination is always a difficult proposition. Claiming that everyone is biased against you can sound like an excuse for your unemployability. Canada's unemployment rate is currently rock bottom, which yields a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it will seem suspicious that anyone who wants a job is unemployed, but it also means that a huge portion of immigrants and refugees must have found jobs. Saying that Company X discriminated against you, even though they hired a bunch of other immigrants, would be a tough argument to make stand up in court. Matt Deres (talk) 17:22, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 11

US corporate executives in the 1950s versus now

I found this passage in Power Elite, a 1950s sociology book, on the contemporary corporate executive:

"Executive circles do not overlap very much with those of artistic or literary interest. Among them are those who resent reading a report or a letter longer than one page, such avoidance of words being rather general. They seem somehow suspicious of long-winded speeches, except when they are the speakers, and they do not, of course, have the time. They are very much of the age of the 'briefing,' of the digest, of the two- paragraph memo. Such reading as they do, they often delegate to others, who clip and summarize for them. They are talkers and listeners rather than readers or writers. They pick up much of what they know at the conference table and from friends in other fields."

This doesn't strike me as true now. Of course senior executives can't read everything but it does seem like executives spend a lot of their time now reading. Has the job of top corporate executive in the US changed in the last 60 years especially with regard to spending much more time reading? If there was this change, what caused it?

Muzzleflash (talk) 14:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One of my company's presidents, not too many years ago, said that he never wanted to see a given piece of paper more than once. And there's a reason a short intro to a more lengthy memo is still called an "executive summary". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Halfway between then and now, Ricardo Semler says in Maverick that rule in Semco was that no memo should be more than one page. --ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Planet Names

Searching for the names addressed to the planets [15] Could you help me please. 123.108.244.100 (talk) 16:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, are you asking us what the names of fictional planets are? The pseudoscientist Zecharia Sitchin wrote about a fictional outer planet within our solar system and called it Nibiru. See also the article Nibiru cataclysm, which is about a supposed impending disastrous encounter between Earth and a large astronomical object, Planet Nine, and Planet X. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Right, generally if someone believes in Nibiru you can safely ignore anything they say about astronomy. There was hypothesis that a planet or small star might've been in a huge orbit of 26 million years causing regular mass extinctions like the one 65 million years ago by perturbing comets but it's not very viable. And even if it was 65 minus any number of 26es is not anywhere near now and such a planet would be discovered by infrared space telescopes long before it came close. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested only in Exoplanets? If so, you may be interested in the article Exoplanet naming convention. The names assigned so far are an interesting bunch, including: AEgir, Amateru, Arion, Arkas, Brahe, Dagon, Dimidium, Draugr, Dulcinea, Fortitudo, Galileo, Harriot, Hypatia, Janssen, Lipperhey, Majriti, Meztli, Orbitar, Phobetor, Poltergeist, Quijote, Rocinante, Saffar, Samh, Smertrios, Sancho, Spe, Tadmor, Taphao Kaew, Taphao Thong and Thestias. Bus stop (talk) 17:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know its a hypothesis. I am just unable to find the names of the seven satellites illustrated with the nemisis star. Could you help me with this please. 119.30.47.59 (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the article Nemesis (hypothetical star) would have relevant information but I haven't read the article. Bus stop (talk) 17:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Top 1% in Top Gun

At the beginning of the movie Top Gun it is stated, that only the top 1% of all pilots are admitted to the Top Gun training programm.

This seems VERY selective to me, given that the average pilot would be from the top 1% of the general population (that is just my assumption).

So selecting the top 1% of the top 1% would be...VERY selective.

I am not sure, if you can objectively distinguish within the top 1%.

Modern IQ-Test fail to distinguish within the very high range, so i would guess this would be the case for fighter pilots too.

A quick google search showed me only references to the movie. Are there official sources that Top Gun only accepts the top 1% of fighter pilots? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.51.158.134 (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. It is a movie (fiction). The real TOPGUN, you know, the United States Navy Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program cannot afford to be that selective. It would give their opponents a huge advantage. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:08, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to this, there are roughly 10,000 Navy pilots in the U.S. currently. If it were the top 1%, that would mean roughly 100 pilots would be certified by the program. That seems reasonable. Furthermore, the U.S. Navy Website itself states directly that 1% of all Navy pilots take the program. So even today, the quote checks out. Officially, according to the U.S. Navy, they accept 1% of fighter pilots into the program in any given year. That would imply that if an average fighter pilot had an active tour of duty of 3 years, then about 30ish pilots per year in the program would give us the 1% number. I did find the smoking gun, as it were here. If you go to page 42 of that document, you see that the TOPGUN program takes 39 trainees every fiscal year (or at least was doing so 10-15 years ago, when that document was published). To a first approximation, that would mean that between 1-2% of active Navy pilots are TOPGUN trained at any one time. Certainly close enough for our purposes. The 1% number is essentially correct. --Jayron 32 03:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32: You are talking about between 1-2% of active Navy pilots but the OP mentioned top 1% of all pilots, top 1% of the general population, top 1% of fighter pilots... (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 04:06, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a mostly Fermi calculation here, so I'm not expecting accuracy within better than an order of magnitude, but according to Navy documentation, which I just cited, TOPGUN takes 39 Navy pilots per year. Since you prodded, I checked my initial assumption of 3 years active duty. I looked up the actual duty requirements of a Navy aviator, and it is 8 years active duty. Given that there are 10,000 active Navy pilots, 39 pilots per year over an 8 year span would imply 39*8 = 300ish pilots would be TOPGUN trained; however that would assume those pilots went to TOPGUN as a rookie. That seems unlikely, as the program only accepts seasoned, experienced pilots. It's not unreasonable to expect TOPGUN students to have 4-5 years of active flight experience under their belt, which would imply about 3-4 years left. 3*39 = 100ish and 4*39 = 150ish Navy pilots out of the 10,000ish active Navy pilots at any one time. If the OP wants to work out more scrupulous calculations, the data is in those sources: 39 TOPGUN students per class and 10,000 active Navy pilots. The "top 1%" quote is a reasonable rough approximation by any measure. But the raw numbers are there for you to work out. Its in the sources. --Jayron 32 04:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 12

How is congea pronounced?

Does 'ng' in Congea sound like the 'ng' in angle or ranging? --Remadevil (talk) 03:30, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Language ref. desk may offer a better answer but I note that the speaker here uses the soft 'ng' form as in ranging to pronounce congéia in Portuguese, similarly to the unrelated English verb congeal. SdrawkcaB99 (talk) 10:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, probably neither. According to Latin spelling and pronunciation the latin velar nasal, if it occured in classical Latin, only occurred in words words that had "gn" sounds in them originally; the pronuncication would have been similar to the Italian pronunciation in words like Bologna or Emilia-Romagna if I read that right. Given that, the Latin name of this genus is probably more properly pronounced "con-gay-uh" or "con-gee-ah" with a normal "n" sound and distinct "g". --Jayron 32 11:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The classification name is given as Roxburgh 1820 - so probably refers to William Roxburgh whose work was published posthumously in 1820. Given that he was British, it seems very likely that when he identified and named this species he would have pronounced it with a soft G. Wymspen (talk) 17:24, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scientists aren't classicists, so their pronunciation is going to have much more to do with the historical developments described at New Latin#Pronunciation than with classical Latin. That includes the regional developments, so there's no single standard from place to place -- but since we're on the English ref desk, ng as in ranging is the best answer. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 18:05, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a pronunciation guide for scientific names that may be helpful: [16]. To quote: Although scientific names are universal, their pronunciation may vary from region to region, especially between different countries. For example, European pronunciations are often different from those of most American botanists. There are no international agreements as to how scientific names should be pronounced. Very often, pronunciations are influenced by one’s native language. One should be flexible and adaptive with regard to pronunciations, as the overriding goal is communication. The rules cited in Figures 16.3 and 16.4 are recommended here. These generally use traditional English for pronunciation of diphthongs, vowels (long and short), and consonants and “reformed” academic pronunciation (based on classical Latin) for converting to syllables and for accenting. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 18:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there's another thing you can tie together from "scientists aren't classicists", "no single standard from place to place", and "one should be flexible and adaptive with regard to pronunciations, as the overriding goal is communication": Latin is a dead language and nobody is going to care about the way you pronounce a scientific name. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ship's stem (or stern?)

On p. 279 of this book, we have:

Down flashed the vessel’s bows whilst her stem stood up as though she were making her last plunge.

The m is a bit smudged, but I think it's pretty clearly an m rather than an rn.

I gather than ship's stem is, essentially the bows; so is there any way that the text could be correct, or is it a misprint? (The author was a noted sea author and former sailor, and can be trusted to know the difference). Thanks, Henry ^Flower 12:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Henry Flower: See Stem_(ship) and Stern. The article Bow (ship) says: "The forward part of the bow, usually on the ship's centreline, is called the stem. Traditionally, the stem was an upright timber or metal bar into which side planks or plates were joined.". (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 12:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for telling me what I've already told you I know. Henry ^Flower 12:55, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Henry Flower: Thanks for acting like a dick to someone who is trying to help you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 12:59, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zooming in on it, it's definitely "stem", and a few lines later he uses "stem" again. I don't understand how the stem could be rising while the bow is falling. It's almost like it's either a misprint or else the author used the wrong term. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He didn't write that it was rising. He wrote that the bow flashed down, whilst the stem stood up. So at that moment the bow was on its way down while the stem was still angled upwards (not horizontal). (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... so was the ship broken apart at that point? Dbfirs 13:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly but not necessarily. What the author writes can be true with a ship that is fully intact. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's an English idiom, somewhat antiquated, ""from stem to stern" which means "the entire length of". It can be used with ships, but also to refer to the full size of anything. --Jayron 32 14:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{{hat|Not relevent to answering the question --Jayron 32 16:32, 12 January 2018 (UTC)}}[reply]

Pretty sure that Henry won't be as impolite to you as he was to me.

Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others.

Administrators should strive to model appropriate standards of courtesy and civility to other editors and to one another. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 14:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, was my answer rude? Can you explain please? --Jayron 32 15:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, you were not rude. Henry was (see above). (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then why respond to me. If I wasn't rude to you, please do not involve me in such discussion. Your comment had no bearing on my statement. --Jayron 32 16:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now you are rude. See my comment dated 14:25, 12 January 2018. Those quotes are from Wikipedia:Administrators, which is policy. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The word stem is a typo. It's supposed to read stern. The "huge roller came rushing at her from right ahead. Up she soared..." What part of the boat was "up"? The bow was up. "The vast liquid mass swept past the sides..." This is saying that the swell which came at the boat passed the sides, after raising the bow, before later raising the stern. A boat has buoyancy. A boat floats. The response to a moving upswell of water is for a boat, or part of a boat, to rise. As this wave first encountered the front of the boat, that is the part that rose first. When the wave reached the rear of the boat, that part rose. The rear of the boat is the stern. The writer is telling us this key fact: the wave came from "right ahead", thus we know the sequence of rising and falling parts of the boat. And the ship is not "broken apart at that point". The ship is intact. But it is being tossed badly on roiling seas. Bus stop (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could be a typo/mistake, but we do not know for sure. I tried googling part of the sentence but I couldn't find any other sources. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do know for sure. The stem is not so distinct, positionally, from the bow. They would both rise and fall in unison. Bus stop (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, we do not know for sure. Both versions of the sentence could be correct, but it is probably more likely that it is a mistake. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When would they NOT rise and fall in unison? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even when they do the sentence could still be correct. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The idiom "from stem to stern" can mean "all the way from the front of a ship to the back".[17] (As already pointed out by Jayron.) Bus stop (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) See Jayron's comment dated 14:13, 12 January 2018 and my response to it. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very understandable typo because stem and stern look very similar. Bus stop (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Scanning "rn" as "m" is a very common scanning error, but the linked image definitely has "m". I suspect it's a printer's error. Is there any other edition of the book available? Only "stern" makes sense to me, since the "stem" is normally upright, but would be almost horizontal in the circumstances described. Dbfirs 16:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/may/01/scanner-ebook-arms-anus-optical-character-recognition (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Bus stop and Dbfirs. Henry ^Flower 16:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pleistocene pleasure. Bus stop (talk) 17:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

pdf download for old book

Can anyone find me a pdf download for "A booke of fishing with hooke & line, and of all other instruments thereunto belonging. Another of sundrie engines and trappes to take polcats, buzards, rattes, mice and all other kindes of vermine & beasts whatsoeuer, most profitable for all warriners, and such as delight in this kinde of sport and pastime" by author Leonard Mascall? It's a book written in the 16th century so (presumably) out of copyright. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1838:37:2C8:0:0:0:B574 (talk) 18:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is an html version here. If you can't find anything else, you can always "print" them to pdf; many computers allow you to output a printed document to a pdf instead of sending it to a printer directly, so you could click each chapter and output each to its own pdf, if nothing else turns up. --Jayron 32 18:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And here you should be able to get a copy in various formats, including pdf. --Jayron 32 18:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google Books has a scan of it here. --Jayron 32 18:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archive dot Org also has two copies of the book (I think they're different copies of the same edition, from different libraries), in multiple formats, including pdf. here and [here https://archive.org/details/bookeoffishingwi00mascrich]

ApLundell (talk) 19:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What was the Coca Cola before Coca Cola

Regular Coca Cola is the most popular single brand beverage in America, as well as almost everywhere else in the world. And as far as I'm aware, it has been for decades. What was the most popular before that, and was it also a consistent front-runner? 146.90.9.139 (talk) 22:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be able to deduce an answer in Soft drink, particularly the history section. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably hard to say. The rise of Coca-Cola is coincidental to the rise of the mass market. Before Coca-Cola, and other brands of other products that developed at the same time period, the concept of a single national brand (of anything, really) didn't exist. Depending on your perspective, Coca-Cola either invented the idea of a nationwide branded beverage, or was invented at a time (and presciently rode the wave) of a time when national brands could first develop. If there was any precursor, it may be Bass Ale, whose red triangle was one of the world's first trademark (and officially the UK's first registered trademark) as a singular mass-market brand drink. While Bass had exist for a century before, it didn't become an international mass market branded beer (arguably, one of the first brands to do so) until towards the end of the 19th century, only a few years before Coca Cola hit it big. But I still think that there really weren't any Coca Cola analogues before Coca-Cola. The concept of a national or world-wide brand just didn't exist before it came around. --Jayron 32 03:44, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 13

Nuclear weapons shipping

How were Little Boy and Fat Man shipped from the manufacturer to the air base in the Marianas where they were loaded aboard the bombers? (I mean specifically the details -- which railroads, which ships, even which trains/engines if possible.) I don't think this would still be classified after so many years, would it? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:E51F:ABFF:2AFA:A819 (talk) 03:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Famously, if you've ever seen the movie Jaws, you know that much of the essential parts of Little Boy were sent by boat on the USS Indianapolis. One of the key characters in Jaws, Robert Shaw's "Quint", had been a sailor on said ship and tells it's story right before the climax of the film. --Jayron 32 03:30, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 73: / Line 73: @@
 [[User:Muzzleflash|Muzzleflash]] ([[User talk:Muzzleflash|talk]]) 14:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
-:[[Donald Trump]], who is as stereotypical a "corporate executive" as any in the modern world, fits that exactly: [https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/americas-first-post-text-president/549794/ "Trump’s indifference to the printed word has been apparent for some time, the depth and implications of Trump’s strong preference for oral communication over the written word demand closer examination...He didn’t process information in any conventional sense...He didn’t read. He didn’t really even skim...Trump won’t read anything—not one-page memos, not the brief policy papers, nothing..."] from an article in The Atlantic which partially quotes others observations of Trump.  Take that as you will, but your quote from the 1950s is commensutate with the behavior of the most famous corporate executive in the world today.  --[[User:Jayron32|<span style="color:#009">Jayron</span>]][[User talk:Jayron32|<b style="color:#090">''32''</b>]] 14:59, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 :One of my company's presidents, not too many years ago, said that he never wanted to see a given piece of paper more than once. And there's a reason a short intro to a more lengthy memo is still called an "executive summary". ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 19:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)