Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Wikipedia Reference Desk covering the topic of miscellaneous.

Welcome to the miscellaneous reference desk.
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

  • Provide a short header that gives the general topic of the question.
  • Type ~~~~ (four tildes) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Post your question to only one desk.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. We'll answer here within a few days.
  • 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.

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:
Help desk
Village pump
Help manual

May 29[edit]

What are these shoes?[edit]

How do you name these shoes? Or what keywords could you use to research more about then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks like a standard Derby shoe to me. --Viennese Waltz 09:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
"Derby shoe" does not output any relevant results at Might it be that it has a different name in the UK? -- (talk) 10:53, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
You didn't ask where to buy them, you asked what they were called. "Derby shoe" is a generic descriptor for that type of shoe, not a brand name. [1] gives Oxfords and Derbys as a category name from which you can start your browsing. --Viennese Waltz 11:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
They look like industrial or military boots to me, rather like this. Alansplodge (talk) 16:56, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I call them dress shoes.
Sleigh (talk) 16:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Why doesn't the US engage in currency manipulation ?[edit]

Other nations, like China, manage to keep their currency artificially low, relative to the US dollar, to make their exports cheaper and their imports more expensive. Complaints about this are just ignored. So, why can't the US do the same ? StuRat (talk) 14:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

That would be against the first principle in their Manifest destiny. --Askedonty (talk) 14:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Assumes facts not in evidence, Stu. --Trovatore (talk) 15:02, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
To be less coy, of course the US does engage in currency manipulation. Heck, that's half the Federal Reserve's job. Maybe the point is, there are people who benefit from a strong home currency and people who benefit from a weak one, and maybe the political balance is more in favor of the first party in the US than it is in some countries. But both sides have their day. --Trovatore (talk) 15:06, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The US actually has been weakening its currency quite strenuously, by setting interest rates very low and by means of the policy called quantitative easing. China has suffered pretty seriously from its efforts to keep up. In principle the US could weaken its currency even more, but the costs would probably outweigh the benefits -- weakening a currency has a strong inflationary effect. Looie496 (talk) 15:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Why would low interest rates drive down the value of the currency ? I would think that would make people want to borrow that currency, increasing demand for it, and thus the value. StuRat (talk) 16:00, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Low interest rates lower the savings rate (because the low interest discourages keeping money in banks) and encourages borrowing (because it's cheap to get loans, so people are more likely to do so). Both of those factors increase the money in circulation. By the simple laws of supply and demand, more money in circulation is greater money supply, which in turn means that money is worth less. QED. --Jayron32 16:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
But a low interest rate also implies a low inflation rate, and that's a good environment for saving money. High interest and high inflation rates are bad for savers, because the government taxes the entire interest amount, not the interest less the rate of inflation. Better then to invest in something that will hold it's value, such as real estate, if you have enough cash to do so without borrowing. StuRat (talk) 16:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Low interest rates might possibly be correlated with low inflation, but for the opposite reason that you're thinking. Lowering interest rates, by a central bank, means increasing the money supply, which is inflationary. --Trovatore (talk) 17:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
If the money is not worth buying buying will not be cheap. You are counting on foreign buyers. --Askedonty (talk) 16:15, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
That first sentence makes no sense to me. StuRat (talk) 16:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I was refering to ancient times when money was weak and you couldn't buy. Anyway borrowing is not making money more valuable inside the country. It affects the interest rates, if they are not regulated. --Askedonty (talk) 16:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Do China and other nations who do currency manipulation in a big way have very bad inflation ? StuRat (talk) 16:00, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
It all depends on what you mean by 'manipulation'. The US dollar, Euro, British pound, Japanese yen, and many other currencies are freely exchangeable. Exchange rates are set by the market. Any 'manipulation' is done by monetary policy (in individual countries, typically in coordination with fiscal policy), such as the setting of interest rates. The Chinese yuan is not freely exchangeable; its exchange rate is set by China. Also, while often nations (or unions of nations) want to keep their currency low in order to make exports cheap and imports dear, there are sometimes reasons why that may not be the best policy. While China is not having hyperinflation, it is having inflation. An American, European, or Japanese might reasonably ask: "Inflation? What's that?" Robert McClenon (talk) 16:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
StuRat, I don't think anyone has cleared up a couple of your misconceptions. What matters is the real interest rate, that is, the nominal interest rate minus inflation. If interest rates are higher than inflation, there is a positive real interest rate. If interest rates are lower than inflation, there is a negative real interest rate. Savers and investors tend to avoid putting their money where it will earn a negative real interest rate. The United States has had a negative real interest rate for the better part of 7 years now. You suggested that by attracting borrowers, low interest rates would tend to drive up a currency's exchange value. The opposite is true. You can borrow in a currency without buying any of it. In fact, low interest rates do attract borrowers, who borrow dollars and then sell them to purchase a currency in which they can earn a higher rate of return. This is known as the carry trade. In this way, low real interest rates drive down the value of a currency. Marco polo (talk) 18:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, but don't forget the effect of taxes. If you put your money in a bank and get 10% interest, and there's an 8% inflation rate, that might sound like you gain 2% per year, but if you pay 40% taxes on that 10%, that's 4% in taxes, leaving you with -2% after taxes. Zero interest and zero inflation is better than that. StuRat (talk) 15:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

First premise: US the doesn’t manipulate the currency. Every time someone in the White House, Treasury or Fed “talks down” (up) the dollar, that’s manipulation.

Second premise: China keeps its currency artificially low. If this claim wasn’t just ignorant US politicians seeking to avoid having to do anything that might help improve the US economy, it no longer is the case. See:

Third premise: The US dollar is strong. Not so. Over the past decade, the dollar (measured by the broad trade-weighted index) rose 22.9% from trough to peak, roughly the same as its decline in the decade prior to that. The index is back to where it was (within a point or two) in 1998.

Fourth premise: Interest rates are low to hold down the value of the dollar vis-à-vis other currencies. In fact, interest rates are at historic lows for an extraordinarily long time because of weak demand, not the strong dollar.

Fifth premise: If China artificially depresses its currency, it must have high inflation. In the past 10 years, inflation has averaged 3%, and deflation occurred about 1/4 of the time. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:16, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Race and violence in the US and UK[edit]

Are blacks in the USA and / or UK more predisposed to violence? Are there any "unbiased studies that link blacks to violent activity. Assuming this is true, what explanations are there to explain this difference in behaviour compared to other races. If the anecdotes such as poverty, hardship and poor upbringing are discounted, would the baseline be any different?

Or, is it considered too difficult (or controversial) to compile this sort of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:00, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

You mention poverty, but your use of the word "anecdotes" appears to be intending to dismiss it as an explanatory factor. I don't know about the UK, but the correlation between race and income in the US is established, and the correlation between low income and social disorganization in the US is established. Partial correlation as a statistical technique is needed even to try to identify causation under these circumstances. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:06, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I tried to tread carefully here, and 'anecdote' was the best I can do. If going along the anecdotes line, we could say Chinese or Jewish immigrants who started off very poor are not seen as outwardly violent (no equivalent open gang culture, bloods, cribs, ghettos, gansta culture to name a few)

Reasons for the above are not entirely clear if we just say stuff like just poverty / low income.18:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC) (talk)

Gangs in America are a mixed bunch. Gangs in the UK are mostly white, then South Asian. Some black. Different general behaviours and attitudes on either side. I think you mean Crips, not cribs. Anecdotally, the biggest bully at my first elementary school was a huge Jewish girl. No lie. But I don't hold it against her people. Even she's mellowed out, last I saw her.
I think being young, rather than black or poor, lends a bigger hand. Raging hormones, easily manipulated, desire to fit in, narrow perspective on the value of life, plenty of energy. Here's a more professional Ontario view. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:51, May 29, 2015 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the pointer and not knee-jerk accusing and implying that I'm an overt racist. And probably a member of the KKK as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Try not to hold it against all Wikipedians. We do get quite a few racist trolls here, like anywhere else on the Internet, so it's not surprising that some of our spider senses tingle when questions like these come up. If you are a racist, your phrasing isn't nearly as overt or disruptive as the ones that clearly don't want an answer. Even racist baby murderers can ask questions here, so long as they're not trying to soapbox, troll or get free legal advice. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:32, May 30, 2015 (UTC)
The IP has been blocked. Try not to hold it against the blocking admin. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
No problem. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:39, May 30, 2015 (UTC)
  • The OP IP is a known sock who's been blocked by User talk:JzG for his disruptive behavior. Rather than just close this I am simply giving a more neutral name, which steps on no one's answers. μηδείς (talk) 04:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
For a question specifically about one race, it's also a vague title. Like replacing "US" in the currency manipulation question with "country" or "these shoes" with "this footwear". Wordier than the old one, too. But if we're copyediting other people's words, I'll decapitalize "violence". InedibleHulk (talk) 05:39, May 30, 2015 (UTC)

Lowest level for top-level club[edit]

Of the 65 clubs that have competed in England's top level of football (First Division from 1888 to 1992, Premier League since then), what is the lowest tier that any of them ever competed in, either before or after their entry into the top level? Thank you.    → Michael J    21:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

It's a bit difficult to pinpoint due to the changes to the steps over the years but I think Wigan Athletic A.F.C., Grimsby Town F.C. and Oxford United F.C. have a shot. Wigan went from (what is now) steps 7-8 up to the Step 1. Grimsby and Oxford have gone down to Step 5 from Step 1. The problem is that the pyramid is ever changing and some leagues have moved up and down the tiers over the years. Also we have to decide whether we look for natural progression up/down or those teams that were playing in a regional league before election to the old Third Division North/South after the Football League's formation or whether they were late joiners to the Leagues (see also English football league system and History of the English non-League football system). With Wigan, it's uncertain as they played in the Cheshire County League (now the North West Counties Football League at step 9-10) and the Lancashire Combination before joining the Northern Premier League (Now Steps 7-8). But before 1979, the NPL was at step 5 as the Football Conference was yet to be formed and the pyramid didn't exist. Teams moved between any of the collective non-league combinations as they saw fit and requested membership to the recognised amatuer Northern/Southern/Isthmian leagues if they felt they were good enough. Because there was no real pyramid, I can't determine what step (if any) the county leagues would have been at the time. Maybe @ChrisTheDude: may have a better idea. Nanonic (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Nanonic that it's tricky to determine this due to the changes in the league structure over the years. I think Wimbledon F.C. possibly have a shot too, having played in the Athenian League which fed into the Isthmian League at (what is now) level 7-8. BbBrock (talk) 10:59, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Agreed, this question is almost impossible to answer, because there has really only been an official pyramid of non-League football in the last 25 years - prior to that certain leagues were considered to be of a better standard than others by fans/writers but this was purely informal and not defined in any official way. Glossop North End fell as low as the Manchester League, which in the present day is level 11, but this probably doesn't reflect its standing at the time..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I've just seen that AFC Bournemouth began life in the Bournemouth and District Junior League. That must be the most minor league which any top-flight team played in, but there's literally no way to define what level it would have been in 1899......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:34, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
OK thanks all! I guess if it were an easy question, I could have found the answer myself.    → Michael J    21:44, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

May 30[edit]

Origins of Profiterole[edit]

Yes all, there is a disturbance in the Force at Profiterole! Some IP editors have been (over the last year or more) swapping it back and forth between Italian and French origins. This seems to have been going on since at least April 2014. Apparently it was invented by "Chef Popelini that worked for Catherine De Medici from TUscany". Anybody know the 'Truth'? 220 of Borg 05:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Reminds me of the long-running debate about the origin of the Pavlova - New Zealand or Australia? Anyway, the "truth" (whatever that is) is less important at WP than what can be verified from reliable sources. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries]
Likewise. Perhaps invented is the wrong word. 'Popularized' is probable better, as the chances that nobody up to then, had not mixed these ingredient together to create a profiterole is laughable. It is like saying that John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich invented the sandwich when all he's household did was give the name sandwich to two slices of bread with a filling. Hardly new in even the 1600's -long before he was born.--Aspro (talk) 16:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
As noted above. Find a reliable source. Cite it. If different stories are told by different reliable sources, cite them all. --Jayron32 16:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Note that for food recipes, it's not that unlikely that two people will come up with a similar recipe at about the same time, independently. This is because there are maybe a billion people in the world creating new recipes (I'm one of them). If a billion people were working on inventions in any other field, you'd expect lots of duplicate inventions there, too. StuRat (talk) 19:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh dear, I was hoping for some reliable sources! Face-wink.svg The bit I quoted seems to be in the vein of verbal history or "urban legend" sourced on the page to a blog. So I will likely remove it, if I can't find a reliable source for it. 220 of Borg 01:47, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
The picture at top right of the article don't look like any profiterole I've ever seen. More of a choux bun to my mind. DuncanHill (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Ah-ha, I thought, Larousse Gastronomique will have the definitive answer. Which it... doesn't. It says nothing about the origin of the pastry itself, but does note that "the name comes from the word profit and originally meant a small gratuity or gift." (2009 edition, page 836) Presumably the French word profit. Doesn't look like an Italian diminutive ending. --Shirt58 (talk) 05:02, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
@Shirt58: Do you have: Juillet, Claude (1998). Classic Patisserie: An A–Z Handbook. Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 0-7506-3815-X? That's used as a source on Choux pastry. 220 of Borg 05:56, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
No, I'm afraid not. (I have very few cookery-related books, as generally I don't use recipes. I've never used Larousse Gastronomique for cooking, I just browse it for enjoyment. And in case I might come across something that doesn't have a Wikipedia article. Face-smile.svg)--Shirt58 (talk) 07:07, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, there's an 'important' question I never asked answered! Très bien! Face-wink.svg (Apparently 'Manchette' means 'cuff') 220 of Borg 13:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @DuncanHill: Good point. Does this, Cream Puff, look closer? It's used on List of pastries. 220 of Borg 05:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Well - a bit more, but either that's a tiny plate or it's a huge profiterole. And I'd expect a profiterole not to gape. DuncanHill (talk) 10:28, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
De gustibus non est disputandum, a profiterole is a globe-shaped pâte à choux filled with some sort of creme filling. The exact type of cream filling and method of putting it inside the globe are not specified, except by pedants who like to make themselves seem superior by claiming their method of making them is the only true way to make them. --Jayron32 00:05, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
A small such ball, according to OED and every baker's, supermarket, and restaurant I've ever seen offering profiteroles for sale. If it's big enough that you'd sell singly then it's a choux bun, or an elephant's foot, or something like that. DuncanHill (talk) 12:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

James Earl Jones tour of "Mice and Men,"[edit]

While I was at Purdue doing graduate study, sometime in the period from 1964 to 1968, I saw James Earl Jones and his father, Robert Earl Jones, give a very moving performance of "Of Mice and Men" in an auditorium on the Purdue campus. I see no reference to such a tour in any of the information in Wickipedia (, (,)and other links. It would be interesting to see such information in an article.

Also, I am not sure if this is the correct venue for asking this question. I had a great deal of difficulty finding a place to make this comment. It would be nice to have clearer information as to how to do this and other things. There are so many links that it is hard to find the appropriate link. Please clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

That would be the Entertainment Desk. StuRat (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
No, the Ent. Desk is for asking entertainment related general knowledge questions. In order to point out issues with a particular article, the information should be put on the talk page for the article in question. So pointing out something that is missing from James Earl Jones should go on Talk:James Earl Jones. Dismas|(talk) 22:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I assume they want us to confirm, with sources, the details of the performance. Once that info is provided, then it would be time to change the article, either directly, or by leaving the info on the talk page for others to do the update. StuRat (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
No, you are wrong and Dismas is correct. The searching out of sourced information on this topic should have been conducted on the talk page of the article. --Viennese Waltz 07:37, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
A performance at a university is rarely considered important enough to single out in an article, even if it does involve his parent ("Darth, I am your father"). Clarityfiend (talk) 23:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Not important enough for it's own article, certainly, but a mention of it in the James Earl Jones article would make sense, if it can be confirmed, that is. StuRat (talk) 02:02, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
The performance was reported in The Kokomo Tribune. If someone thinks it should be added to the article, go ahead and do so. John M Baker (talk) 17:31, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

May 31[edit]

USA emergency service response[edit]

Why is it that in the USA, emergency services will respond to other emergency services calls. For example a police unit might respond to an ambulance call or a ambulance unit might respond to a fire call, if they are nearest to the incident. In the UK, it never happens. Only the emergency service that was called will respond and they call other services if necessary. (talk) 22:54, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

When you call 911, the dispatcher decides what services are likely to be needed based on your description of the incident and dispatches them all. Most places do not have separate emergency phone numbers for different services. Additionally in some locations first responders are multiply trained. In my town every fireman is a trained paramedic and a couple are trained reserve police on the SWAT team. In some cities all police are firefighters. Rmhermen (talk) 23:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
In the UK it definately does happen for medical emergencies, a lot of rural Fire Stations are first responders to calls in places an ambulance can't get to in the 8 minute target for a Category A emergency. See for example Warwickshire's scheme. Nanonic (talk) 23:11, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
See also this response from the US city of Red Wing, Minnesota. Nanonic (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Police may respond to a fire call for a few reasons: A) Direct traffic, B) give first aid (CPR, etc) if the officer is trained, C) Calm the residents of the structure who are wondering "When is help going to come?", etc.
Ambulances may respond to a fire for things like smoke inhalation or other more serious injuries.
Police may respond to ambulance calls for, again, first aid, traffic control, etc.
The police can often respond the quickest since there are already officers in vehicles out patrolling whereas the fire trucks and ambulances have to come from whatever garage they are in. Dismas|(talk) 23:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I was born in England and my mother was taken to hospital in a police car because there was no ambulances available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Indeed police seem to deliver quite a few babies! 220 of Borg 05:41, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Makes a huge amount of sense to me to send whichever service is immediately available/closest. I think Dismas & Rmhermen have already said a lot of what I say here. In a lot of 'emergency' situations, the police would likely be required (or at least very helpful) in addition to the fire brigade /ambulance requested. First aid training is required even for security guard licensing in New South Wales, Australia, and I am quite sure it is required for police applicants here too.
  • I came across a situation where police were called to a nearby domestic violence incident, and an ambulance also arrived. I was told it was then standard practice to send medical aid (ambulance) as well to domestic violence calls.
  • There is also the fact that a lot of 911 or 000 calls are fake calls, so sending the nearest 'emergency responder' of whatever type, means that the veracity of the incident can be confirmed quicker.
  • I also recall watching an American TV series in the 1970s(? I can't remember the name! Emergency ?) where the 'firies' seemed to be very involved in providing treatment to injured persons. That may not be a realistic portrayal of course. I had an idea that US firies are often also trained paramedics, as Rmhermen mentions above. 220 of Borg 05:41, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Nota bene* And the TV show I was thinking of was Emergency!. - 220 of Borg 05:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Is "firies" the Australian word for "fire fighters"? Dismas|(talk) 05:48, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
As an Australian, with no particular language expertise, I believe it is a common colloquialism, at least in Sydney, New South Wales. Ambulance personnel are commonly called 'ambos'. 220 of Borg 05:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@Dismas: Source: "Firies" and Keep your hands off our ambos!", which is about ambos being subjected to assault while trying to help people, another reason why police go to injury type emergencies. Australian Slang may be useful for future reference. 220 of Borg 09:05, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@220 of Borg: Thanks heaps! Dismas|(talk) 09:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

June 1[edit]

Pre Spanish Colonial written characters, that predate Tagalog [Filipino Language], by a Millenia.[edit]

Hello. I wish specific factual information, on the pre Spanish Colonization written characters, of the pre Tagalog [Filipino Language] characters in use about 1000 AD or earlier. Thanks. LI FU RAN, Ph.D. (talk) 05:05, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

We have a whole article (with a few further references at the bottom) dedicated to that topic at Baybayin.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 05:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
There is also Buhid alphabet, Hanunó'o alphabet, Tagbanwa alphabet, Kulitan alphabet. However none of these scripts (including Baybayin) date to 1000 AD. They are estimated by some to have originated in the mid-to-late 13th century, at the earliest, although a much later date is probable. The oldest known writing in the Philippines is in the Old Javanese or Kawi script which dates to the time period you are asking about.[2] You may also find this to be of interest: Indic Scripts of Insular Southeast Asia: Changing Structures and Functions--William Thweatt TalkContribs 06:37, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Circumnavigation of the Europe-Asia-Africa land mass[edit]

We don't often think of it in this way, but Europe-Asia-Africa is one contiguous land mass - the Suez Canal aside. My questions are:

  • Does this land mass have a name? Eurasica, perhaps?
  • Has anyone ever circumnavigated it? If so, who was the first?

Thank you. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 07:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Old World (one possibility) also links to the clunky-sounding Afro-Eurasia, which in turn provides the equally vile Eurafrasia. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:50, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. That led me to Vega Expedition. Those people had the basic idea, but they cheated and left out Africa. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 08:25, 1 June 2015 (UTC)