Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 April 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Miscellaneous desk
< April 2 << Mar | April | May >> April 4 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 3[edit]

What should I do[edit]

What should I do if I feel like doing vandalism for fun —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The user did not explain what he meant by vandalism on Wikipedia or by real life.

The following responds reply to vandalism on Wikipedia[edit]

Play in the sandbox. And thanks for asking. :) You can also register an account and screw around with your own user page (within reason). --Masamage 01:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
You really have your choices. Obviously, the only thing that can prevent you from not wanting to vandalize (persay, articles), is if the consequence of vandalizing in value is greater than your happiness of vandalizing. Suppose you were to be arrested and locked up in jail for vandalizing. Then clearly your happiness of doing it is not worth it. But if all you get is a warning (like on 1st offense), then clearly you won't mind that. Or even mind a 72 hour time out from Wikipedia. And so and so forth. Neal (talk) 01:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC).
(Are you trying to talk him into vandalizing articles Neal? lol) One thing you could do when you have the erg to vandalize articles would be to post silly questions on, say, the Miscellaneous Reference Desk. Many people seem to find that helps. . . --S.dedalus (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
You might be interested to read vandalism and Wikipedia:The motivation of a vandal.--Shantavira|feed me 09:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The following responds reply to vandalism in real life[edit]

Most people are assuming he wants to vandalize Wikipedia. Perhaps he wants to spraypaint his name on the local water-tower or train station. (Hint : Don't use your real name.) Obviously the correct answer to this question is "Find something else to do." or something along those lines, but that's boring. I've always liked the technique used to place the Toynbee Plaques into road surfaces. There's room for some creative vandalism there. APL (talk) 13:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I second APL's remarks. As long as you're creative, keep things safe, and remember to make the world better rather than worse, some "vandalism" can actually improve people's lives and the public sphere. See here for some fun examples (this one in particular is pure harmless fun, but still vandalism). --Sean 13:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Recognize the urge for what it is, a natural reaction by a person with some gumption to the oppressive and sterile environment we've created in our quest for comfort, entertainment, and safety. Use the energy of the urge to make yourself a little money and enhance your reputation in a way that will make females find you desirable as a mate and males want to be like you (at the same time—no small feat). Altruistic risk-taking is one good way to go—combat photographer, rescue swimmer, firefighter, you get the idea. Art works, too, like sculpture or music, but it usually lacks the adrenaline part. Sport is the traditional outlet for male energies. If you just do petty crime your life will suck, and you'll end up having vandalized your own chances of having it good. --Milkbreath (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I hate to say it, but then there's Banksy – low-key, topical, workplace safe,long standing... and so creative. Julia Rossi (talk) 05:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
There's also sidewalk chalk. --Masamage 03:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

What's with these bits^ in italics/bold? does the Miscellaneous Desk have a narrator these days? --JoeTalkWork 14:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Gene Therapy[edit]

<moved to sci desk>

Your TV becomes trash:[edit]

Have you seen this link ?


According to this, in 2009, your TV becomes garbage. (talk) 02:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm new here, but I've found out that I just got issued a tainted IP No.#. One other thing, Why is the discussion page locked down? (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi new here, maybe you could get help on the Help desk (help with using wikipedia) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
No, you only need something that can decode ATSC (a set-top box or something) in order to watch terrestrial TV (the analogue turn-off date doesn't affect cable TV). --antilivedT | C | G 05:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Only TVs that use only bunny ears (getting over-the-air reception) will stop working. If you have DirectTV or Dish 500 or something, you'll be fine. Useight (talk) 06:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"New here", yeah right. Your breathless posting style and leading octets put the lie to that. In any event, the DTV transition is not something that appeared out of nowhere, it has been planned for several years and various organizations are being quite pro-active in getting the word out. In addition, while older televisions by themselves will not receive DTV broadcasts, the FCC has a generous coupon program to make the cost of purchasing a converter box almost nil. Unfortunately, talk radio won't disappear anytime soon. --LarryMac | Talk 13:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Always assume good intent. (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The currently-existing non-digital TVs will work just fine if they're connected to a cable TV provider. Only those who have to rely on rabbit ears or external anntenas will have problems, and the government coupon program (two coupons per household) will allow the purchase of a receiver to be hooked up to your TV which will allow even those TVs to receive digital broadcasts. Corvus cornixtalk 17:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


Is it true that some people have an opposite reaction to caffeine? I.e., Become tired instead of having renewed energy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Corollary: my dad swears coffee puts him to sleep rather than keeps him awake. Sandman30s (talk) 13:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I know many people who get sleepy from caffiene. It doesn't affect me either way (aside from withdrawal) because I drink so damn much of it. (talk) 15:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

politically incorrect?[edit]

Okay i recenlty read a thesis that was entitled ' the election mathematics'.It went like this -in voting people tend to vote in a particular manner.They are called negative voters.That is they tend to not vote for their enemy rather than vote for their candidate.This means that in the case of obama and Hilarry,Lets say Obama wins.The democrats who voted for Hilarry would become split and some who hate obama would rather vote for Mccain rather than obama,not because they like Mccain but because they hate obama.And its either that or not vote.And in a close race as this one it would be fatal to anybody to try and share his votes.I have never been to the states and I just wanted to know from an American point of view whether such an arguement holds any water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It sounds like you are talking about Tactical voting, in this article there are many real world examples, some from the USA. -- Q Chris (talk) 12:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted that the other situation is that if someone unpopular within a party gets the nomination for the party, many people will simply not vote for anyone. But yet, often people are voting against someone more than they are voting for someone. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Rush Limbaugh has been encouraging his listeners to cross over and vote for Hillary Clinton, in the belief that she will be easier to defeat in the general election than Barack Obama would be. Corvus cornixtalk 17:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Remember the joke when Hillary was running for Senate? The opponent could win without anybody voting for him. (Honk if you hate Hilary?) Joey Lucas 20:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


what with this smsc numbers?I am in kenya i used an american centre number and my phone is sending free sms.I quickly reverted back.I just wanted to know how can someone be able to use a number outside his network and send free texts.Or just inform me on this whole smsc numbers thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but here is our article on it: Short message service center. Recury (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Going out to dinner with vegans[edit]

I have a dilemma. I want to go out for pizza for my 16th birthday in 4 months time and one of my friends is a vegetarian (which is easily fixed by getting vegetarian pizza) but one of my other friends is a vegan which means no dairy products either! What do I do? (She's not allergic to dairy or anything but she decided to be hardcore vegan cuz of the animals or something...) Do I get vegetarian pizza with no cheese or does pizza already have dairy products in the base? I could get her canneloni but that probably has cheese in it too... what do I feed my friend in this situation? --Candy-Panda (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It's likely just a phase she'll grow out of. This is months away, right? If you can't come up with anything, don't sweat it. Surely a hardcore vegan is already accustomed to having to bring their own food with them to many places, or she'll know what to order that fits her desires. Friday (talk) 14:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
[EC] I can think of a couple quick options. You could call the restaurant that you'd like to go to, and ask them if they serve a vegan pizza. I know there are several chains that have crust and sauce that aren't made with animal by-products, so one veggie without cheese would probably work. Even easier would be to just ask your friend what works for them. Let them know that you understand their dietary decisions, but you'd like to have yourself some delicious pizza on your birthday. Ask if they know of any pizza places in the area that might have something on the menu that they'd enjoy too. --OnoremDil 14:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
(another EC) I would call the pizza place in advance and ask them if they have anything on the menu that is suitable for vegans. If they say no, you could always decide to go to a different place, if it's really important to you that she comes to this meal. --Richardrj talk email 14:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice guys. :) I just looked up the pizza chain's website and perused the menu so I'll ask my friend how she feels about vegetable risotto or minestrone... --Candy-Panda (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

A great many restaurant foods with no obvious meat are not going to be vegan. Are you looking for food that really is vegan, or that you might be able to trick her into thinking are vegan? The latter is way easier than the former. If you really want vegan, there's probably no substitute for asking the waiter. Even then, you'll very frequently be served non-vegan stuff. Unless it's a place that specifically aims to please vegans, your options may be very limited. If she really is a vegan rather than just pretending or going through a phase, she'll know all this. Friday (talk) 14:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I sure hope she isn't going through a phase. If she doesn't know what she is doing she can easily suffer from horrible malnutrition. (talk) 16:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thats a good point there. I'm not sure how serious my friend is about her veganism but I'll email the chain to ask which foods have no meat, eggs or dairy. With all respect to my friend I really don't understand vegans... it just seems like so much more trouble than just being a vegetarian. --Candy-Panda (talk) 15:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't like Indian food personally, but Indian restaurants is an easy way to get around the vegan issue as they have ample supplies of vegetarian, non-dairy dishes. I have a friend who is vegetarian and lactose intolerant and that's what we have ended up doing a few times to accommodate. Asian restaurants work out pretty well as well; there are lots of vegan options available at decent Chinese restaurants. But it's very hard to get that in most Western food restaurants, as the use of both meat and milk is practically ubiquitous. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 15:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
If anything, I don't really understand vegetarians. There is nothing wrong with killing animals and eating them - this happens in nature all the time. If there is anything wrong, it is in the way the animals are treated in factory farms, as described in The Meatrix. If someone opposes that, they shouldn't use any animal products, not just meat. By the way, true veganism is not just meat, dairy and eggs, it's also honey, gelatin, a lot of other things, and of course non-edible products (not only leather and fur, but also wool, silk and others). Even tofu-based meat-replacement products are often non-vegan. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 16:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not a vegetarian at all, but your argument about eating animals is essentially using the naturalistic fallacy to apply towards ethics (if it happens in nature, it is right). This holds no real ethical weight—just because something is or is not done by other animals does not inform ethics, which attempts to be transcendent of simple corporal issues. In any case, there are other reasons to be vegetarian other than ethics. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 16:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I find that most resteraunts that aren't specifically focused on vegitarian or vegan menus usually have one or two options available, but even then, soups are usually made with a stock, which often has beef or chicken in it. I've worked at several resteraunts that put chicken stock in their plain rice. Anyways, unless she's totally hard core about it, a pizza without cheese should suffice. Most of the places around here don't use egg or milk in their dough. But yeah, you shouldn't worry about it, it's not like you're dragging them to the Keg or anything (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
While it's nice to be polite and supportive, your friend's dietary preferences are hardly your problem. --Sean 19:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not OK to try and "trick" a vegan into eating meat or dairy, and it's not always a phase people grow out of or a "to be or not to be hardcore" about it thing. From a vegan point of view I'll tell you that your friend is probably used to finding veggie friendly food on the menu, eating only a salad or some chips won't kill her so don't worry.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 19:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
As a dedicated meat-eater, I'd agree wholeheartedly with Yamanbaiia's comments. Introducing meat surreptitiously to a vegan's food won't kill her in the way that introducing peanuts surreptitiously could kill a person with a peanut allergy, but according to a vegan friend of mine it can cause vomiting, diarrhea, nausea, and stomach cramping. It's also a sign of a massive lack of respect for others' choices that is sometimes found in people who are overly impressed with their own intelligence. They often assume they know better than anyone else and especially more than the vegan, who is just being picky or going through a phase or looking for attention (which is ironic, given that sneaking meat into a vegan's meal is a textbook form of attention-seeking in itself - "look at me me me and how much smarter I am than you!").
Back to the OP's conundrum: your friend may choose to eat before she goes out with you instead of taking a chance on a restaurant she doesn't know and can't yet trust. You might think instead about ordering takeout, eating at home, and letting your friend bring her own food. That way everyone wins. --NellieBly (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
It's your birthday. You should go out to eat where you want without catering to all your friends' idiosyncrasies. Tell your vegan friend what restaurant you're going to ahead of time so they can prepare by checking the restaurant's menu or possibly bringing their own food. Also, beware: you may end up having to eat something nasty on your vegan friend's birthday. --D. Monack | talk 16:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It's nice to think of your friends!

A lot of pizza places have vegan dough and sauce and can make a pizza vegan by holding the cheese. I would recommend having your friend call to check on the ingredients though because it can be very confusing for someone who is not vegan to check an ingredient list.

Also, some vegans are more strict than others, for example on refined sugar.

You might want to ask your friend how they feel about refined sugar (or if they were aware of refined sugar being animal derived. ) Refined_sugar#Concerns_of_vegetarians_and_vegans

Little Caesars mentions vegan option on their website:

"For the Strict Vegetarian Diet (Vegan Diet) A strict vegetarian diet requires a little more planning for nutritional adequacy because it may require special conditions such as no animal by-products. Little Caesars' pizza crust is made with a quality, high-protein flour and contains no animal products or by-products. The sauce is made from crushed tomatoes and is seasoned with a special blend of herbs and spices - it also is made without animal by-products. This means that customers who are strict vegetarians can order a Little Caesars vegetable pizza, without cheese, and still fulfill their needs.

There are other items that can be special-ordered from our menu that are acceptable for a strict vegetarian diet. For example, Crazy Bread® can be ordered without Parmesan cheese along with an order of Crazy Sauce® on the side." [[1]]

Our local Mellow Mushroom has a "vegan" button on their register for making all the changes needed to make the calzones vegan. The calzones can be made easily vegan (minus cheese and minus parmesan cheese and minus any buttery spread) and plus tempeh if your friend likes it.

A site like this one, that I just ran across, may help also: [[2]]

but always good to check with the store to make sure that it has up to date information.

Bupobm (talk) 03:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Mysterious Symbol found on British Shopfronts[edit]

Hello. I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed this, but there is a set of symbols that appears on the signs of many shops in Britain (and maybe elsewhere?), the symbols don't appear to be from any specific alphabet, but roughly, it looks like "<^Y"... roughly. The types of shops that have these symbols don't seem to have anything in common. If anyone knows anything about these symbols, I'd really like to know. Thank you. Ninebucks (talk) 14:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Tell us more about these symbols. Are they on the door or the wall of the shop's sign? Are they plastic stickers or, err, lettering on the sign? Where have you seen them - give us some examples of shops. No bells ringing right now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Maybe a recycling symbol? (Image not posted by original questioner.)
This is the only thing that comes to mind... Dismas|(talk) 15:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it means they accept yen. JeanLatore (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

the sign shown means recycle —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I doubt it is the recycle sign, because the OP said that the symbols "don't appear to be from any specific alphabet", which means they look somewhat like writing, and not like arrows. (talk) 16:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It could be the logo of a company that these shops all deal with. Presumably you would recognize things like credit card symbols, but it could be a security company, say. If you could describe the symbol more precisely, or post a photo, or find a photo already online (for example, if it's on a well-known shop, you might use a Google Images search to find a photo of that shop), that might help a lot. --Anonymous, 21:00 UTC, April 3, 2008.

Googleing 'Recycle Signs' produces a vast number of alternative designs to illustrate recyling, and if I knew how to do it I would show the link, sorry about my ignorance!--Artjo (talk) 21:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Its not a recycling sign. And I don't think the symbols are designed to be viewed as advertisements, as they are always written fairly small, albeit always right at the top and in the middle. EDIT: I've just drawn the symbols, here they are: [3] Ninebucks (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Could it be some sort of Runic alphabet? Or a different font like Gaelic script? -- (talk) 22:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
You're going to have to post a photo, I'm afraid. That drawing doesn't tell me much. --Richardrj talk email 22:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Is this in one city? Maybe it's a builder's signature or something. Also, you uploaded over another image. Please be more careful in future. I reverted the image change, and changed your link. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
No, its not confined to one city, I've definitely seen the symbols in Birmingham, Lancaster and Leeds, but due to their inconspicuous nature, you really do need to look out for them, so they could be elsewhere as well. If, as it seems, I may need to go take a photo, in that case, it might be easier to just ask the shop keeper what their signs mean. If I don't report back, assume that I've uncovered some vast conspiracy and have been taken care of. Ninebucks (talk) 23:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at your picture, thinking the symbols looked terribly familiar but unable to find them in Runes. Then, I followed a link to Cirth! This may or may not help, but they do seem to be there O_o Skittle (talk) 00:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if it could possibly be the sign maker's logo. Seems unlikely; most customers wouldn't want their signs cluttered with someone else's logo. But not impossible. --Anonymous, 00:51 UTC, April 4, 2008.

It would be good if you do find the answer to share it with all of us as well90.9.83.53 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)DT

Maybe I've cracked it...if the OP is in Birmingham,Leeds or a similar big city,then many shops do have over their frontage something that looks like this:

           < Y /\             

These are the Arabic numbers 786 or alternatively the Roman numbers are sometimes used. It's used by Muslims and is the numerical equivalent of the opening phrase of the Koran(In the name of Allah the most high etc.)They are often painted over the door-it's unusual to see them carved. Lemon martini (talk) 12:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That could be it!! (talk) 23:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
If this could be confirmed (by, uh, someone asking a shop owner) I would count this as a minor triumph of the RefDesk. Perhaps it could be flagged up as such (where exactly I do not know). The benefits of several minds working together, etc. BrainyBabe (talk) 07:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


why do mens and womens buttons fasten the opposite ways —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I presume you saw that same article online that I saw a couple days ago. If I remember correctly, the article didn't have any good ideas except fashion or style. Useight (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I think this describes the situation well: [4]Keenan Pepper 16:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
What I've always been told is that it's because women in times past would have a maid who helped them dress and get into all those elaborate dresses and gowns. In order for the buttons to be the "right" way for the dressing maid, the buttons were switched from one side to the other. Don't have any sources for this though. Dismas|(talk) 16:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I posted a link to this article [5], which explains the situation and why it perseveres. However, our friend below saw fit to delete it while posting his question. Thanks a lot,! (talk) 16:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


If you want to get a picture photo shopped, but you don't know how to, is there a site you can go to to get a picture photoshopped?-- (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think you mean by "getting a picture photoshopped"? Photoshop is an image manipulation program ... you can do all sorts of things with it. --16:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
"Photoshopped" means "has been modified with an image manipulation program like Adobe Photoshop." It's not an automatic procedure; you have to learn how to use Photoshop (or GIMP, which is similar), and depending on what you want to do there are different specific things you need to learn (e.g., to switch heads in a portrait, you'd probably need to learn how to use the lasso tool, how to use layers, how to use layer masks, and probably how to use the clone tool). If you want to know what tasks would be involved in doing a specific type of manipulation, you can certainly ask on here, but I doubt anyone will just do the manipulations for you.
There are places on the internet where people often do "photoshopping" for fun (the forums of Something Awful or Worth1000, for example), but such people are, in my experience, not usually willing to photoshop "on demand". --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 16:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Depends on what you're looking for, and whether or not you're looking for a comercial service or someone willing to just do it fro free. There are certainly lots of photo retouching businesses on the internet. ( Google Search ) APL (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I know someone who is skillful at it. Restoring old photos, or damaged photos, or what? Edison (talk) 01:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Adobe have just announced Photoshop Express, a website where basic image manipulation would be possible. Check their website... Samilong (talk) 14:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


The late leader of the church of satan said that he chose his name while travelling in europe in the 1930's his name was Anton Conrad Lavey, what is the significance of this name, why not John or Bob. Where did he get it from. just curious as my name is the same and I have never met any one else called this. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It's Anton Szandor LaVey, not Conrad. As for why Anton, his original middle name was Stanton, so that probably had something to do with it. Szandor looks like a corruption/variation of the common Hungarian name Sándor (pronounced Shandor, I believe; the equivalent of Alexander in English), which could be a reference to Alexander the Great. Anton could also be a reference to Mark Antony (apparently Mark Antony invented the idea that Hercules had a son named Anton whom he descended from). But that is all just speculation on my part. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Probably not John because he didn't want to be associated with the bible. Bellum et Pax (talk) 19:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


This could possibly go on the math or science desk, but I couldn't decide which, so I'm putting it here on Miscellaneous. Now that the weather's nice, I want to get out of the gym and exersize in the park by doing pushups, cycling etc, and was wondering about how much of a percentage of body weight is actually being pushed up by a standard issue pushup (feet together hands below shoulders)or even with feet elevated up on a chair or rock (something so that my body is level with arms extended), which is how I usually do them. I know I'm doing much less than I usually do with a bench press, but am wondering how much less? (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Draw yourself a drawing of a simple Second-class lever. Your toes are the fulcrum. Your arms are the force pushing up. The force pushing down is your body's center of mass; it's probably located somewhere around your waist. Now work the math. Alternatively, put your palms on an ordinary bathroom scale as you do your push-ups (taking care that the scale doesn't slip out from under you). Read the scale. Compare the theoretical calculation and the practical measurement and you'll be able to determine exactly where your center of mass is actually located!
Atlant (talk) 16:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
hehe, a little above and below as well as around my waist ;) (talk) 16:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, well I additionally have a rather stupid question. Why is it I can't do half of as many 1-armed push ups than I can do with 2-armed push-ups? Someone whom can do 50 push-ups can't even do 1 1-handed push-ups, and I'm not sure why, besides "it just is." But someone that can do 100 consecutive push-ups seemingly can do some 1-handed push-ups. I wonder where the conversion lies. Neal (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC).

I can lift fifty pounds* ten times in a row. Why can't I lift a hundred pounds* just once? Same deal—a certain minimum absolute brute strength is required to perform each task. The amount of endurance in a particular task is only weakly correlated with one's absolute maximum strength in performing that task; there's no threshold number of 2-handed pushups that will guarantee a successful one-handed pushup.
* Numbers chosen solely for demonstration purposes. I'm not actually that weak. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Basically, you're making a correlation of lifting x pounds x times, to x pounds x times. Maybe you can come up with a formula to answer that question. My question was, well, if I can bench press 1 arm x pounds, then why not be able to bench press twice with 2 arms? Etc. Neal (talk) 19:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC).
I'd say it's because a one-handed pushup is a completely different form than a standard pushup, requiring the ability to balance differently and using different portions of the arm, shoulder and back muscles during the motion. At the very least, your upper arm is at a completely different angle to your shoulder. --LarryMac | Talk 19:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Related question. Do thumb (or fingers only) push-ups exists or is it all fiction?(okay I've only seen it in fiction) --Lenticel (talk) 23:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I've seen finger pushups, and I've attempted them myself. I can't quite hack it (or I couldn't fifty pounds and ten years ago; it would be harder still now), but it wasn't inconceivably hard; I just didn't have the forearm strength to hold my hands still. Thumb pushups seem a bit much, but if you have strong wrists and a light body, you could probably do it. Bruce Lee strikes me as the sort of guy who could do one-thumb pushups.  :) Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
"I'm only gonna use my [right] thumb. Left one's too powerful for you."
Atlant (talk) 12:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Officially , on Wikipedia a push up is a Press up. Edison (talk) 01:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Awww, Edison that's because he got in first! Before us push-up people.  ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
"Officially , on Wikipedia a push up is a Press up" Does that make it a press-up bra? =] Jayne Mansfield 21:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Grey Mao Suit[edit]

I'm looking to purchase a grey or blue Mao Suit. I'm looking for a more civillian style as opposed to Red Army Suits. Anyone know where to get them? They seem pretty rear.

Have you tried searching the term "Zhongshan suit"? That's what they're called most often in China, at least. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 20:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
This was asked before. You should check the archives. I'd do it for you but I don't have time just now... Dismas|(talk) 23:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, it was asked before. DAVID ŠENEK 18:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Wearing socks[edit]

Hey, so I still living at home because I have no cash to get my own place and I was talking to my father and some how the conversation came up, wearing socks to bed. He told me that wearing socks can cause athlets foot. Is this true or is he full of crap —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The article on Athletes foot has a load of information about precautions to take to avoid catching it; wearing socks to bed isn't mentioned, but it does say to change footwear (shoes and socks) regularly, especially after exercise. So, it could be a factor. Though, from personal experience, I used to wear my socks to bed when it was really cold, and I've never had athletes foot! Phileas (talk) 21:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

As a boy I often wore my socks to bed. I never developed athelete's foot or any other fungal infection, but it did make my feet smell hellish. I'd suggest that the less you wear to bed, the healthier it will be. Ninebucks (talk) 22:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Many men's socks are made either wholly or partially of nylon. Nylon socks don't cause athlete's foot, but they do provide a more hospitable environment for the various species of fungus that do, since they don't allow moisture to evaporate as easily as cotton or wool socks. Stick those nylon-clad feet under a heavy, warm polyester comforter and you give the fungi an even more comfortable home. So no, socks don't cause athlete's foot, but the wrong kind of sock can create a luxurious breeding ground for the condition. --NellieBly (talk) 03:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

AGF, NPA[edit]

What the hell happened to these? I have seen the scandal sheets online about "Insultpedia" myself, so I came to look into this matter. I know you have vandals and idiots, but to insult innocent users? Damn good way to drive people OFF wikipedia, and into a forum that is anti-wikipedia, such as Encyclopedia Dramatica and Uncyclopedia. I was requested to ask this at the behest of a innocent who was insulted for no reason. (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

AGP? NPA? What are these? -mattbuck (Talk) 23:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
You hope to have a constructive conversation without saying what you're talking about?? Showing us where an editor was insulted would be a good place to start. Friday (talk) 23:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I can't speak for the puerile simpletons people over at ED, but Uncyclopedia is not anti-Wikipedia; its a loving parody. And may I echo, what are you talking about? Ninebucks (talk) 23:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

AGF/NPA mean assume good faith and no personal attacks, but there's no other reference to go by as Friday noted. --jh51681 (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
They're still supposed to be in force. Looking at the Original Poster's contributions, I'm guessing this had to do with a content dispute in a tornado article. It seems the Original Poster's acquaintance added a storm warning s/he thought was important, but was reverted as a "vandal" or similar (correct me if I'm wrong).
If you feel you're treated badly, it's better to try to keep calm and take up the matter on the article talk page. The other editor may have been right to remove what you/he/she added, even if they were brusque or rude about it.
Some friction is bound to happen, editors are only human after all. I've yet to see a website where lots of people interact that didn't have personal attacks at some point. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 08:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
And of course some people take it as a personal insult when their edits are reverted, their articles deleted or their suggestions dismissed. You can't please all of the people all of the time. FiggyBee (talk) 12:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
And some posters believe that they can lambaste all other editors after a single editor has pissed them off, as if they themselves were not an editor, and as if all other editors shared the guilt. Obviously logic and common sense out of the window along with AGF & NPA. And who knew lambaste had an e? Certainly not I. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)