Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 September 26

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.

September 26

Fishfight

Which would win in a fight: a cat or a fish the size of a cat?

Depends - if it was fought on land, the cat wins. If in water, probably the fish. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Walking catfish are about 30 cm long, can breathe air, and can travel overland. They have a sting. When they first turned up as in invasive species in Florida there were anecdotal reports of them defeating cats in fights, but I could not find anything online reporting such an event. Edison (talk) 03:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

In ROTC, the cat would win, in athletics, the fish would win. GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Dog dental cleaning?

Recently we got a new dog in the Crypticfirefly household. (A two year old mutt from the shelter that looks like he has some beagle in him. Cute as heck. But I digress.)

When we took him to the vet, we were told that we should sign the dog up for a dental plan to have the dog's teeth cleaned just like what is done when a human goes to the dentist. I don't mind the expense if it is something the dog needs, but they will have to knock him out with anesthesia to do it. That sounds dangerous and potentially traumatic to me. Is this a typical practice? And for those who have had this done for their dogs, how did the dog take it? Crypticfirefly (talk) 02:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

We never take our dogs to the vet specifically for that - but if the dog needs anaesthesia for any other reason - we have them do whatever dental work is necessary. Dogs that are fed the right stuff SHOULDN'T need it. I don't think it's traumatic for the dog - a quick jab - then they wake up with cleaner teeth. I do believe it's potentially risky though - there is no such thing as 100% safe anaesthetic. SteveBaker (talk) 03:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Ahem. My mother has a dog that she's particularly crazy about. It's an 11-year-old mixture of german shepard dog and caucasian shepard dog. In recent years they take him occassionally to the vet just to have his teeth cleaned, and he's not getting any inappropriate food. It still is strange to me, because it seems dogs had taken care of their teeth without vets for the last few thousand years, why should they start now? Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 06:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

While I'm not suggesting you do it, it's worth bearing in mind that 1) Most domestic pets including dogs live far longer then their wild relatives did 2) The food you feed them now is likely to be quite a bit different from what they ate in the wild, or even 200 years ago (although this doesn't definitely mean it may make the problem worse in fact it could reduce the problem) 3) It's likely animals in the wild do in fact suffer from teeth problems and in some instances it contributes to their death Nil Einne (talk) 08:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Descaling and cleaning isn't needed if dogs have things to gnaw on - bones are good. That's the natural thing and it's worked well for both of our dogs. On the rare occasions they've been to the vet for something else, he's pronounced their teeth as "perfect". When you compare the lives of wild dogs (Wolves live around 10 years in the wild) to pets - it's easy to assume that old dogs will have bad teeth just like old humans do - because they've outlived their natural lives by maybe 5 years. But remember when a dog is 15 years old and about ready to head out to "doggie heaven", his teeth are the same age as a human at age maybe 20 (dogs lose their 'baby teeth' very early). People can EASILY live to the age of 20 without needing any dental treatment at all - especially if their diet is good. Dog teeth are pretty much made of the same stuff as human teeth - why wouldn't they last just as long? Dogs don't (ok - "shouldn't") have nasty stuff like sugar and acidic sodas in their diet. What the vet does is to "clean and de-scale" the dog's teeth - but that's what gnawing does - scraping the teeth against a chunk of bone scrapes the gunk off of them quite naturally. You can even buy synthetic bones that are designed specifically to clean your dog's teeth. SteveBaker (talk) 12:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a side question. Do you reckon humans would benefit from some similar gnawing Fribbler (talk) 13:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

We have pretty different teeth than dogs do. And we can brush our own teeth. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose brushing fulfils that role. Fribbler (talk) 15:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

General anesthesia is indeed routine for dental cleanings in dogs and cats. It's similar to your routine cleanings at the dentist, but dogs and cats aren't very good at the "open wide" thing and would be likely to bite the vet due to discomfort. That would obviously be bad for the vet, and also bad for the dog if there's pointy tools in his mouth. Wild animals don't "take care" of their teeth. They just die before the teeth give them problems, or die because the teeth give them problems. If you've ever had a bad toothache, I don't see why you would wish that on your dog. -- Coneslayer (talk) 11:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Note that there are also a number of specialty products that can help your dog's dental hygiene. Our dog loves the treats marketed under the name "Greenies" which accomplish the knawing bit in a safer way than actual bones (can't splinter), are not filling the way a bone is, and have stuff in them to make the dog's breath smell less doggy. But I think I'm in the same boat as SteveBaker here—I don't recall ever needing to knock the dog out to brush her teeth by itself, but occasionally when other things are being done they do that as well. But it might vary from vet to vet, dog to dog. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Putin invades US airspace?

In Sarah Palin's first unscripted interview she talked about Putin rearing his head and sending planes into Alaskan airspace. Has this ever happened? Has it happened in the last decade? Has it happened in her tenure as governor? I assumed that I would have heard of such an encroachment when it happened, but did I miss it? Plasticup ^T/C 02:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

This has something on Russian bombers at times coming closer to Alaskan airspace than they used to, although it doesn't look like they actually flew into Alaskan airspace. A google search shows a number of these incidents happening in the last few years in various places. I don't know that this is really that big a deal, though. I think this used to happen all the time during the Cold War. AlexiusHoratius 03:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I have seen no evidence that the Governor of Alaska directed the air force response to Russian plane approaching U.S. air space, or that she was even informed at the time it was happening. Edison (talk) 03:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Late flash:[1] Palin "received briefings" about Russian plane approaches to U.S. air space. No info yet on whether it was via hotline or if it was via an email on her Yahoo account after the fact. Edison (talk) 03:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah? She would know ya know - she can see Russia from her house. hydnjo talk 03:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, those articles are about Russian planes which stayed in Russian airspace, just near American airspace. From the way she said "incursions into US airspace" I thought that she meant the planes entered US airspace. Like, incursions and stuff. My mistake. Plasticup ^T/C 04:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear. I watched in horror as Blair convinced people that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and I think he even believed it himself. They thought Saddam had missiles ready to launch on Britain within the hour. You can see how paranoid the Russians can become about something like the missile tracking in Poland - and they actually have been invaded. It just doesn't seem possible to convince people using logic, you say something like how do you rate the chances he has WMDs?, and then you check the sites various people say have them and find nothing - that should reduce the chance you say he has them. Not so - they just say oh he must be even more crafty and deceitful than we thought. Dmcq (talk) 10:51, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think we must assume that Russia still has WMDs, as well as missiles and airplanes to deliver them. Edison (talk) 14:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope there aren't too many people who now think Russia is invading America like in Britain they though Saddam had missiles ready to launch on them. Just combine that with the number of American rapture nutters who think they should help God with his great task by ending the world. Dmcq (talk) 16:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think anyone in Britain (some MPs and newspaper proprietors excepted) actually believed Blair and Bush when they claimed that Iraq had such capabilities. DuncanHill (talk) 17:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

People had no reason not to believe it. In fact, there was very strong evidence that Iraq had WMDs, since the US had given them to it! I'm sure there were polls done at the time which would tell us for sure, but I expect plenty of people believed what they were told. --Tango (talk) 18:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, here is a poll from a month after the invasion saying 58% of people though we were right to invade. That doesn't necessarily mean they believed there were WMDs, they could have supported the war for other reasons, but it's still an interesting statistic. --Tango (talk) 18:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

A good number of Americans think that they did find WMDs in Iraq. There was some poll awhile back that asked people that and found that a huge number of people who got their information exclusively from Fox News were under this delusion among others (e.g. cooperation between Osama and Saddam, etc.). Anyway, I don't think anyone thinks Russia is going to invade the US anytime soon. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 22:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

John Howard sent Australian troops to Iraq. Questioned at the time about WMDs, he said that there was plenty of evidence that Saddam had WMDs, and that an invasion of Iraq could not have been justified without such evidence. In that interview, he specifically said that regime change per se would have been insufficient justification to go in, and he would never have sent the troops in on that basis alone. After the WMD evidence proved to be non-existent, and he even publicly acknowledged they were never there to begin with, that didn't phase him one little bit. Now, according to him, it was still the right decision, and would have been even if WMDs were never a factor. Go figure. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

In other words, he's a politician. --Tango (talk) 00:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Not any longer. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Apart from those Americans that think Russia has already invaded the US - namely the state of Georgia. --Tango (talk) 00:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Honestly I think that might be an improvement. ;-) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

job opportunity for technical cum management student

i have done Masters of Computer Application and currently working for a multinational IT company. simultaneouly i am pursuing MBA in correspondence. so please suggest me what type of jobs i can go for utilizing my both the skills.125.17.25.8 (talk) 04:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Cum management? Plasticup ^T/C 05:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Technical and management student is perhaps a more felicitous formulation. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe "cum" is Latin for "with" and is perfectly correct in that context. --Tango (talk) 15:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I can imagine several instances where the phrase technical cum management is perfectly correct, but so far as I know, ILM doesn't do any of the effects for porn movies. Matt Deres (talk) 19:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

How about technical writing. Great need for Manuals to be easy-to-follow, and most are not. Money in it OK.86.209.155.170 (talk) 16:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)DT

If I were you, I'd try to seek out Tech companies that are in the process of registering for an IPO. If the concept is strong enough that it both needs and justifies a ton of capital for expansion, chances are it would be a good move to get in on the ground floor. I would do some google searches for "IPO watching"-type websites (there aren't a lot of IPOs going on right now because of financial conditions; this just means that any that you do happen to find in the tech sector must be particularly good!) and once you find a couple, harass their HR departments.NByz (talk) 19:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Obviously you'd want to use your MBA and Comp. Sci. skills to assess how good the idea is... NByz (talk) 19:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Technical writing is certainly one possibility - but if you prefer creative writing, you could take a shot at the computer games business - we're always on the lookout for someone who can put together a decent plot, have characters that are deep and believable - yet also be someone with the computer skills necessary to interact with the art, design and software disciplines. SteveBaker (talk) 22:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

How to guide in Spanish

Does anybody know some how-to web-site (like about.com) in Spanish? Mr.K. (talk) 08:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Assuming you speak Spanish, you could ask at the Spanish reference desk. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 13:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

BOOKS

Hi everybody, Has anybody read the book, Diaries of doing time until the ICE MEN cometh? I understand Eugene o"neil had a similar book called Ice man. Fluter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 14:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

There is definately an Eugene O'Neill play called The Iceman Cometh. I don't really know what you're talking about, however. Redsolidarch (talk) 15:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redsolidarch (talk • contribs)

Lakeland Open

Does anyone know about the Lakeland Open - it is trying to be deleted and I wish it could be saved. Redsolidarch (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redsolidarch (talk • contribs)

The article in its present form is very sparse and includes no references. A search on Google comes up with a website (poorly designed) for the club but there is no mention there of an open golf tournament. IMO, unless the article is masively improved in the next couple of days it would be correct to delete it. If you care about the article, why not add (referenced) facts - such details of the club (EG where it is, when it was founded etc) and more particularly of the Open tournament (Eg when it is, what standard it is, who has won it each year). Should this all happen then it may be savable, but in that case it should probably be moved to a page with a fuller name than "Lakeland Open". -- SGBailey (talk) 20:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The second Stone Rat.

A while ago, I was informed that there was a Stone Rat to be found in Queens Park, Brighton. Intrigued, I looked it up on the internet, and found this reference to it here. Sure enough, there was the Stone Rat!

Now my friend informs me that there is a second stone rat in Queens Park. Is this true, or is he making it up? Bradley10 (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I've lived in Brighton for over ten years, and had never noticed that before! I have asked the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Brighton if they can shed any light on this. DuncanHill (talk) 16:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers Duncan - I was hoping that I would spot the stone rat of my own sharp eyedness, but had to resort to the internet to find him. Bradley10 (talk) 16:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I won't have time for a week or so (visiting family) but when I get back to Brighton I will go and have a look for myself. DuncanHill (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

When we've all had fun bumping into each other in Queens Park in search of the second stone rat, we could head for Chichester Cathedral to spot the wooden mice. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

What is the name of this item of dishware?

ok this is possibly a silly question with an obvious answer, but I'm wondering what the name is for those big, usually silver coloured, plate cover things stereotypically associated with high cuisine. Here's a stylised representation of one: [2] (it's the thing on top of the plate in his right hand). --Krsont (talk) 15:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

They call it a "Silver Dome Plate Cover" here, and a Silverware Service Dinner Plate Cover here... Bradley10 (talk) 16:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

thanks, I guess there isn't a specific word for it then other than just "plate cover". Kind of irritating but I'll get over it ;) --Krsont (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

We actually just had this question Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008_September_19#food_cover_name.3F. The names which were fronted were "dome plate", "Dome cover", "Domed serving tray" and "Cloche". -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 19:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow that's a weird coincidence. "Cloche" was more what I was looking for, some specific terminology like that. Although possibly it's only called that in French I guess? "domed serving tray" and the like is just too dull though ;) --Krsont (talk) 22:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Share prices and stock exchange etc.

Hey. Sorry, I'm a complete newbie to economics and don't understand many, if any thoroughly, of it's key concepts. We've all heard in the news that share prices in the banking sector are dropping. This led me to think, and I'm sorry for the amateur question because I'm sure it has a simple answer, who lowers and raises prices of stock? Wouldn't it save a whole load of problems to not lower prices of stock? Sorry again for the dumb question.

—Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 18:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

When people report stock prices, they report the price the stock last traded at. A trade happens when a buyer and a seller agree on a price. If buyers aren't willing to buy at the current price, sellers will have to agree to sell at a lower price if they want to sell and the price will go down (and similarly the other way around). There is no central body setting the prices, they are determined by buyers and sellers (there are market makers that play a role in the whole thing by acting as intermediaries between buyers and sellers and they will set prices, but they have to set the prices at levels were people are willing to trade, so they don't have much choice in the matter). --Tango (talk) 18:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Makes sense :) Cheers. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 18:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You can make a loose analogy with used cars. Cars don't have an intrinsic value; they're worth what someone will pay for them. The value of a car is affected by its age, the number of miles on the odometer, possibly the reputation of the make (like Honda) or the model (like Civic). The original Ford Mustang was not, mechanically, a very good car -- its price as a used car has a lot to do with the value that Baby Boomers see in it. And people can overreact to outside events -- e.g., they'll sell their nearly-new SUV at a huge loss so they can buy a more energy-efficient hybrid, even though between the loss on the SUV and the premium they have to pay for the hybrid, they won't actually break even before 2050. Markets tend to be efficient over the long term; in the short term, it's all a crapshoot. --- OtherDave (talk) 21:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Or to use a reasonably classic stock market quote - in the short-term the stock market is a voting machine, in the long term it is a weighing machine. ny156uk (talk) 14:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

And something else that is important to understand is that for every person who sells, there is another buying. So that qualifies the word "sell-off" a little bit in the sense that apparently there are people on the opposite side of trade who are "buying in" at that same price. If it would be really the case that everyone wants to sell and no one wants to buy the stock price would drop to zero; however before that happens there will at some point be a price at which some buyers will bite, and it will not go down to zero. Bokkeveltkamp (talk) 10:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Playing music in your car

Are there any restrictions on the volume at which you can play music in your car or the content of such music in the UK? --3uler (talk) 18:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Does this Police to seize cars playing loud music answer your question? I hate such people and feel like throwing stones at the cars. Dmcq (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Now, that's not very charitable, is it, Dmcq. A better plan is to wait till the driver's out of his car and a good safe distance away; explain to him that what you're about to do is merely a comment on his behaviour and not on him personally; that you love him unconditionally no matter what he does; and then napalm the car. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Stones? How primitive. Why don't you use something modern, such as noise-seeking cruise missiles? --Carnildo (talk) 23:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

An idea would be to train pigeons as pilots to bomb them, with the advantage of course that no actual extra hardware would be required. Dmcq (talk) 11:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Or if they're stupid enough to be playing from the radio, tune your FM transmitter to that same frequency and play something embarrassing/irritating... --antilived^{T | C | G} 03:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

At some point it would have to start counting as a "public performance" of the music - and that could get you in trouble in a variety of ways - starting from the need for you to pay for copyright licensing (like, for example, a radio station does) - and ending with laws limiting the volume of music at public concerts. But there are laws relating to preservation of law and order that would probably let them nail you just for being a pain in the neck. But I doubt there is a specific decibel level that would force you to cross those thresholds. SteveBaker (talk) 22:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

He could just put a sticker on the car saying "I'm an idiot". Has the same effect as a loud radio.--Artjo (talk) 06:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Casino laws

i am wanting to go on holiday with my family my son who is 19 asked about goin in a casino so my question is what is the legal gambling age in madeira —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.65.240 (talk) 20:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

According to the information on this site, casino gambling appears legal in mainland Portugal at 18. The only casino in Madeira appears to be Casino da Madeira in Funchal, part of a large new hotel and leisure complex. I can't find anything online to suggest their rules are any different, but much of the casino's own info is restricted or in Portuguese. The rules coverning this casino are here and contain the line "Noutros locais dos casinos que tenham acesso reservado a maiores de 18 anos poderão ser exploradas máquinas de jogo de fortuna ou azar e o Keno." I don't speak Portuguese, but this seems to imply that 18-year-olds and over are permitted to play. Perhaps a Portuguese speaker could confirm? Karenjc 21:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that strictly speaking it only says that you have to be 18 to be allowed to go into those areas, not necessarily that an 18-year-old is allowed to play. That an 18-year-old can play would seem like a reasonable, but not certain, inference. --Trovatore (talk) 22:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, the first ref definitely says that 18 is the "minimum gaming age", not the minimum entry age, so 18-year-olds must be permitted to gamble in Portugal itself. Whether there's any local ordinance in Madeira that overrides this I can't tell. Karenjc 18:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Please see our legal disclaimer GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Why are the bank failures all occurring at once?

Did anybody see this happening? A month before the failure of Lehman, did anyone predict that by the end of 2008, there would be record numbers of failures of this massive size? Lotsofissues (talk) 22:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It occurs to me that 2 towers fell in September 2001. The 7 years of bad luck is up, so 2 more pillars of the system had to go. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Rhodes Greece - Muslim Occupation 1522-1912 - yet no Islamicisation??

I have just returned from Rhodes, the largest island in the Dodecanese in the south Ageian, which is a fascinating place. The Old Town is just amazing with its bastions, city walls, gates, and narrow winding streets tightly packed with squares, fountains, shops, restaurants, churches, mosques, a synagogue, palaces, hotels - oh, I could go on and on. But whilst there, I read many tourist guides telling of the many occupations by the Menoans, Phoenecians, Romans, Venetians, Knights of St. John, Turks (1522), Italians and Germans (1912), until finally, in 1948, Rhodes was returned to the republic of Greece. But no-one, not even the locals I met, could explain how it was that between 1522 and 1912, nearly 400 years, the islanders had succeeded in avoiding becoming converted to Islam whilst under the rule of the Ottoman Turks. Is anyone here able to explain that strange phenomenon please? Thanks. 92.20.209.156 (talk) 23:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at Religion in the Ottoman Empire - the Ottoman Empire was comparatively tolerant of Christianity. DuncanHill (talk) 00:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

And assuming the inhabitants were considered dhimmis, it was far more valuable to tax them as non-Muslims than force them to convert. Even the Middle East was never totally Islamicized. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

A massive Population exchange between Greece and Turkey took place in 1923. So most Muslim residents of Rhodes would have been transferred out then, and new Greek-speaking people would have arrived. Itsmejudith (talk) 07:35, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

But according to our article Rhodes, it was Italian at the time, and avoided much of the events of the population transfer. DuncanHill (talk) 07:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

It's simple politics. If a ppl truly wants to resist against an invader there nothing as good as a diffrent religion, and the conquered ppl will fiercly cling to their own. If you study history you will notice this trend again and again. Let me give you a couple of examples: Poland, was always strongly catholic because the Russians are Orthodox and Prussia was Protestant. The Irish are fierce catholics because the English are Anglican. The Greek are Orthodox and the Turks Muslim. The Copts who are Christian while the Arabs are Muslim. Please notice that this is a trend and not an infalible rule. Flamarande (talk) 11:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)