Miscellaneous desk
< December 11	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 13 >

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.

December 12

English accents

Why are English accents only cool for like a few minutes and then they get a little annoying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.141.172 (talk) 04:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The English don't have accents (at least, they don't around here. Northerners talk a bit funny). Foreigners have accents... AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone has an accent, just like everyone speaks a dialect. --Trovatore (talk) 04:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably we all tend to find the accents of others fascinating at first, then slightly annoying. It applies to English people hearing American accents, and to accents from other regions of our own respective countries. It's probably just a natural reflex prejudice against people who speak differently, but it is usually easy to overcome, and we normally come to accept the "foreign" accent as part of the variety of life. Dbfirs 08:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Familiarity breeds contempt. Ginger Conspiracy (talk) 10:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What IS really annoying is the way that Hollywood - and especially the Disney empire - connects an English accent with villainy. Take the Lion King as an example. All the nice lions have American accents except the wicked uncle who is apparently English. Most Disney features are the same. Makes no sense and is a teeny bit offensive. Alansplodge (talk) 11:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only upper-class English accents, I think. I don't offhand recall, for example, any use of a Cockney accent in that way. It's probably more a bit of cheap populism than an anti-Brit thing per se. --Trovatore (talk) 00:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a quite interesting essay on that point here. Apparently one of the reasons is that an English accent is seen as "sophisticated", so that's all right then. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Thomas was the original villain to my mind. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:19, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He was only a villain in American films IIRC. Alansplodge (talk) 13:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In fairness, Zazu in the Lion King also had an English accent. He was a little prissy, sure, but not a villain. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 00:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does remind me of an amusing Christmas when we watched two animated 'Christian' films, one from the UK and one from the US. In the US film, most characters had American accents, and the 'baddies' had RP British accents. In the UK one, most characters had UK accents, and the devil had a General American accent! 86.161.208.185 (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The unspoken subtext of these things is that the character with the different accent is not "one of us", but must have come from somewhere else to have such an accent. It's xenophobia writ large. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You've got to be taught To hate and fear, You've got to be taught From year to year, It's got to be drummed In your dear little ear You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught to be afraid Of people whose eyes are oddly made, And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade, You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late, Before you are six or seven or eight, To hate all the people your relatives hate, You've got to be carefully taught! 92.30.235.250 (talk) 11:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a beautiful song. Unfortunately it's probably not true. --Trovatore (talk) 21:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

THAT is offensive.Artjo (talk) 12:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed that this is satire. That is, they want you to do the exact opposite of what they say. StuRat (talk) 22:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it? Kittybrewster ☎ 12:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was rather good. Where does it come from? Alansplodge (talk) 13:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:06, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant. Another quote for my user page. I'd never realised that South Pacific was a communist plot... AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably for the same reason that US teenager lingo is like you know awesome for like a few minutes and then it's like a downer, like. Take the trouble to learn more than the one language TV feeds you and your tolerance for other accents may improve. You may even consider whether your accent is like so cool. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's an incredibly inaccurate rendition of any way that any teenager has ever talked. Do you ever have any knowledge whatsoever of dialects that you make fun of, or do you just make it all up in your head? You've done this before, and it was old the first time. --Trovatore (talk) 21:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like I really feel that was so quiche. Bus stop (talk) 21:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is Charlotte Green sounding like an American. Bus stop (talk) 21:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is? Are you sure you linked to the right clip? Corvus cornix_talk 22:38, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I think that Cuddlyable was spot on about teenage lingo. Maybe not every teenager talks that way, but a whole lot of them do. I work with such a person. With her, when it's not "like", it's "I'm like" or "s/he's like". I once counted 15 "likes" in one sentence. I also once asked her if she was aware of just how extremely over-often she uses the word "like" in every sentence she ever utters, and how repeatedly she tells everyone what she's like - but she had no idea what I was talking about. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:42, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

None of them would use the final "like". That was purely gratuitous and offensive. Without that it was perhaps barely plausible.

This example was not quite as bad as the previous one to which I alluded, but even two cases of this constitute a pattern of unacceptable behavior by Cuddlyable. I think he should apologize. --Trovatore (talk) 22:46, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, come on, Trovatore, that's a bit of an over-reaction, don't you think. A little exaggeration helps make a point, and that's all that was. It was neither "incredibly inaccurate" nor "offensive". Conflating what Cuddlyable wrote in this thread with what he wrote in some unnamed earlier thread has all the hallmarks of marshalling evidence to use against Cuddlyable - and if that doesn't constitute a personal attack, I don't know what would. Personal attacks are outlawed around here; slight exaggerations aren't. Perspective, please.-- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trovatore, it looks to me like you are looking for any excuse to be offended. StuRat (talk) 22:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before this totally devolves into Lord of the Flies, can I point out that the OP was blocked for disruptive editing, and it may make sense to consider the question trolling? Cheers. Haus^Talk 22:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replying to the OP, there's no such thing as "an English accent". Taking England alone (ie not other parts of the kingdom), you'll find Cockneys sound completely different from those who speak Geordie, Scouse or Brummie. Or RP. We do sound very, very different from one another. Check out the Sheffield accents in The Full Monty, versus the Estuary English accents in Made in Dagenham. --Dweller (talk) 13:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We do have accents that sound similar to foriegners, except perhaps the most extreme ones. In the same way American accents sound similar to us, except perhaps the extreme southern accent. I understand Americans have trouble distinguishing between an English or Australian (or New Zealand) accent. 92.28.247.44 (talk) 15:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101128114243AAcwVKg has a discussion on American vs British Accents in Star Wars. Moreover, it is not just American/British in animated films. A common trick of type-casting a cartoon caracter is using African-American accent to some degree, which is typically a quite condescending move. --Soman (talk) 14:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But even an "African-American accent" is not only one thing—there are many such accents. And "type-casting" is almost inevitable—the commonly recognizable stereotype is useful for portraying the character that you wish to portray. It would be as difficult to for instance find a voice that was not a cliche for a person of some particular social background. Bus stop (talk) 15:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, do you enjoy it when British and Irish women use the F-word a lot? :-D 206.130.174.43 (talk) 19:17, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

deals.com

Who owns Deals.com and where are they located? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.111.150 (talk) 16:51, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From their About us page, which contains all the terms and conditions fine print, they note

These Terms will be governed by the laws of the state of Texas, U.S.A., without regard to its conflicts of law provisions. You and Deals.com agree to submit to the personal and exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located within Travis Country, Texas.

I suspect, therefore, that they are located somewhere within Travis County, Texas (near Austin). Their whois info is concealed behind a registry service, so I can't get an address from there. It looks like they're deliberately avoiding revealing any physical address information. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deals.com LLC, Suite 700, 515 S. Congress Avenue, Austin, TX 78704. You just have to look hard enough. Marnanel (talk) 21:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, any business that doesn't list their street address on their web site sounds like a "fly-by-night operation", and I'd avoid doing business with them. StuRat (talk) 21:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

stargutschein.de

Who owns stargutschein.de and where are they located? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.111.150 (talk) 16:51, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From their Impress page, which contains all the terms and conditions fine print, they note

I suspect, therefore, that they are located somewhere within Erfurt, Thüringen (Germany). Their whois info is concealed behind a registry service, so I can't get an address from there. It looks like they're deliberately avoiding revealing any physical address information. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BigClick GmbH & Co.KG, Allerheiligenstrasse 1, 99084 Erfurt, Germany. You just have to look hard enough. Marnanel (talk) 21:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FAA website

why does FAA Flight Delay Information show Minneapolis in green (normal traffic/conditions) even when the airport was closed and now even as their are multiple hour delays? I have a reference question (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to be the current status. The airport just seems to be dealing with the snow better than the Metrodome. ;) If you click on the (still green) button next to "MSP" on that map, you get a pop-up which includes "Delays by Destination" which is currently showing 2 to 6 hour delays depending on destination. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fix TV

My TV is making a loud, uneven whirring noise when I turn it on. It is slightly reminiscent of a tornado siren, very low. At random intervals it will make a higher such noise. When it makes the higher noise the screen flickers in different colors. Sometimes this is so bad that it doesn't work at all, the screen just stays dark. When it does work there is a quieter, steady noise that nonetheless was not there when I bought the TV. I have a Toshiba-52HM95-02. What might the problem be, and how can I fix it?　Ｔｈａｎｋｓ．　24.92.70.160 (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you are a qualified TV repair technician, don't try. You risk damage to yourself, and to the TV. Note that some types of television can retain a dangerous static charge even after being disconnected for some time. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Toshiba 52HM95 is a 52 in. HDTV DLP TV. It has had an exceptional number of complaints[1] [2] about breakdowns and costly repairs. Here is the owner's manual. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a normal problem with the color wheel on what sounds like pretty much a disposable TV. StuRat (talk) 08:41, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this TV like 30-40 years old (such was common with old TVs)? Here's a few things Google told me:
High pitched whine or squeal from TV with no other symptoms
Forums: Television Hardware: High pitch noise coming from my TV
Why has my TV developed an annoying high pitched whine? How can I make it stop?
206.130.174.43 (talk) 19:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

52 in. HDTV DLP TVs did not exist 30 years ago. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:24, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the color wheel is reminiscent of much earlier TV's, such as the mechanical television. StuRat (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Street names in Germany

When I last was in Munich in summer 2008, I found it interesting how many of the streets were either named after actual people or first names of people. It was a bit difficult to come across a street named after an inanimate thing. Is this common in Germany, or in central Europe in general? JIP | Talk 20:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes or yes. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:38, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is much less common in the UK of course, but an area of Liverpool (UK) is called "The Holy Land" because the streets are named after biblical characters. Dbfirs 21:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I grew up near the Poets Estate (Hitchin), which also qualifies. Marnanel (talk) 22:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of the places in Europe i've been i've noticed it as popular in France and Spain, don't recall it being that popular in Italy, and whilst there are some here in the Uk it's certainly less common than the places i've mentioned. ny156uk (talk) 23:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's that uncommon in the UK for streets to be named after people: it's just not always obvious it's the case. My street (in Cambridge) is named after an architect; others nearby are named after poets, or various local worthies of the past. What is notable in some parts of Europe is they way streets are much more obviously named after people. Here we might have a Churchill Street, but the French would have (say) Rue du Générale de Gaulle (both genuine examples according to Google Maps). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or indeed royalty: I used to live on Elizabeth Way. Something that always amused me about the map of Cambridge is that it contains a Victoria Road, a Victoria Street, and a Victoria Avenue, all reasonably close together and none connecting.(Map.) How Americans who say things like "Meet me on Victoria" manage in Cambridge, I don't know. Marnanel (talk) 14:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne takes a different approach - four of its main longitudinal streets in the city centre are famously named, in order, King Street, William Street, Queen Street, Elizabeth Street - apparently and together named for William III and Elizabeth I respectively.

Most of the other streets in the city centre are also named after people - see Hoddle Grid for details. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane is similar - they have Albert, Edward, George, Elizabeth and Queen streets in their CBD. I think all Australian metropolises and many smaller places show an obvious deference to royalty. Even my little town of only 5,000 people has streets or parks named King, Queen, Princess, Duke, Knight, Empire, Charles, George, Edward, Henry, Kent, Mary, Victoria, and Mafeking. (They're a very conservative lot there.) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're on the topic, and it's a good story: In 1674, one of the several people named George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham gave a plot of land in the City of Westminster to the local authority for building dwelling houses. The land came with the condition that all the streets had to bear his name. Therefore, the following streets were built: Villiers Street, George Court, Duke Street, Buckingham Street, and (I swear) Of Alley. Of Alley has since been renamed "York Place", but the sign still says "formerly Of Alley".[3] Marnanel (talk) 15:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brisbane also has the wonderfully-named Rode Road (named after a Mr Rode, I was told by a local). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That Rode's pronounced "roe-dee", which rather spoils the visual effect. Camberwell in Melbourne has a road called Through Road, which is true to its word. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, my source didn't mention that. But roe-dee road is still nicey nice. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okey-dokey. All righty, then. Toodle pip. Ta ta. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Are there any streets in Germany still named after Adolf Hitler? --84.61.182.248 (talk) 19:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. --Soman (talk) 23:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too much data!

I've been "advised" by my spouse that some kind of eReader is expected for Christmas :-). Since there's less than two weeks left until then, and I probably have to allow for shipping, I suppose I'd better get hopping.

I've read our article on Comparison of e-book readers, which provides a great deal of information -- most of which is useless to me, as I can't grok what's important and what's not. (I think, for example, that being able to read 12 different formats is not going to be a primary decision point.)

So, I ask for technical assistance. How important, or not, are some of the following:

eInk vs. backlighting. People seem to love one and hate the other, without a middle ground. What are the "real" tradeoffs here?
WiFi vs. 3G vs <other>. I presume that with nothing, you cable your reader to your computer and load it that way; with WiFi, you still have to be within reach of a network to load new content; and with 3G you're using somebody's cellular network, which sounds potentially expensive. Right?
OS: Does this really have any bearing on anything?
Touchscreen: OK, I get that you have to have some way to turn the pages. With a touchscreen, you have to tap or swipe the screen; is that inconvenient because it takes a second hand? Without one, can you still turn pages with the same hand that's holding the reader?
Anything else I should be considering?

Thanks. I know that this kind of question deviates from Reference Desk guidelines, but I sure could use your advice anyway! DaHorsesMouth (talk) 22:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my mind the big huge deal is eink verses a conventional screen. All those other concerns are secondary. Personally, I love the eInk because it looks so much like paper that the first time I saw one I thought it was a fake stick-on screen. (Until I hit the "next page" button and my mind was blown.) Since I look at computer screens all day, I'm much happier to spend my reading time looking at something that looks like paper.

But ... many people don't care that it looks like paper. Many people would rather have color, fast refresh times, animations, back-lighting, all the amenities afforded by modern conventional computer screens. (Big deal : Reading in bed? eInk will require a book light.)

APL (talk) 22:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But to address you other points, 3g verse wifi isn't a huge deal. It's mostly just how you buy books and periodicals. Both the Amazon Kindle and (I think) the Nook offer this service for free, so you do not pay for the connectivity. (However, general purpose web-browsing is severely limited.) If you don't get the 3G you can only get books when you're within range of free wifi. To me, this isn't a big deal either way. (and you can always buy books by tethering with a computer.) I suppose if you do a lot of traveling (within the USA) and you intend to read newspapers and magazines on the device, I guess 3G would be a big deal. If you're going to use it mostly at home, or mostly for books then I, personally, wouldn't worry about it.

I'm not sure I've used an ereader that used a touch screen for page-turning. Kindle and Nook both have buttons along the edges for page-turning. (My biggest complaint with my 1st generation Kindle is that I sometimes hit the button by accident.)

Operating system doesn't really matter. ... unless you wife isn't looking for eInk, in which case you might consider getting her an iPad if that's in your price range. (There is book-reader software for iPad that makes it compatible with Kindle and the rest.) APL (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) While not such a big deal, eInk is likely to have a battery life advantage if you're just turning page occasionally like when reading a book. I've seen an eInk reader but never used one but I believe 1-2 weeks isn't uncommon even for resonable usage. Of course you do need external lighting of some sort. There is a lot of hype about the Pixel Qi screens which are supposed to be able to do both in a fashion [4] but I've never seen one personally and I don't believe they're available in commercial products yet only as DIY screens. I suggest you look at an e-ink reader in particular if you've never seen one I presume shops in the US? must have them on display since I've seen them in NZ and I'm pretty sure you can also see them in Malaysia Nil Einne (talk) 22:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

e-Ink will give you more battery life, a more "paper"-like view of the page, and for many people tends to be more comfortable with reading for longer stretches (for me the primary advantage is that you don't have the extra weight of the LCD assembly... I can read comfortably on both). I do find that if you get an LCD eBook reader, you will want an IPS display (usually this is advertised) or something similarly high quality. As far as formats go, you will want to keep in mind the following: the kindle can only get books from Amazon's store (yes you can sideload, but I've found it to be more difficult than other eBook readers). The nook can get books from Barnes & Noble's store as well as almost every other store that sells eBooks (PDF or ePub with no DRM or Adobe Digital Editions DRM which has become somewhat of a standard among eBook stores). The Sony eBook readers can get books from all but the Kindle store and Nook store. Almost all eBook readers except the kindle can also check out books from your local library using their overdrive catalog (assuming your library has this set up, it's free to use!). As far as buttons versus touchscreen... well located buttons on the side are great on e-ink displays while swiping is great on LCD displays. It really has more to do with the responsiveness of the screen than the actual method of page turning. If you want the best choice of sources to get your books from, you will want to avoid the kindle. The best hardware (for the best price) I've come across, however, is the kindle. If you can get a chance, try out the various readers at the stores to find what you think is best. 206.131.39.6 (talk) 18:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recently played the same game and ended up buying an Amazon Kindle, but that's only going to be germane to you if she's okay with getting her present in the new year - mine took three weeks to get here (though I'm not complaining as the estimated time for delivery was three months at the time of purchase). In order: 1, eInk lets you use it longer without recharging; backlight lets you read in the dark. eInk is also, so far as I know, only available in shades of grey, while something like an iPad is obviously a lot more colourful - and expensive. OR: when you turn off the wireless on the Kindle, the battery lasts a long time. I actually don't mind reading stuff from a computer monitor, but I must admit that my Kindle is much easier to read for extended periods - if your wife doesn't like staring at a monitor, you know which to pick, right? 2, Any book reader will come with some kind of connection to your computer; don't worry about Wi-Fi vs. 3G. OR: (and I'm honestly not trying to plug these guys but...) the Amazon Kindle connects to the internet via their own cellular system which costs nothing - you can download books and read Wikipedia for free. 3, No. 4, I have no experience with a touchscreen like that. 5, You may want to consider what book formats are readable and how many books are available. For example, the Kindle natively reads their own proprietary filetype, MOBI books, and PDFs and has a free conversion service for DOCs, HTML, and other filetypes. That was a concern for me because it means that any webpage can be converted to an eBook. One thing I've noticed with many eBooks out there is that they are rife with typos and formatting errors. If your book is in HTML or something else directly editable, re-formatting is a snap - not so with closed filetypes. Whichever you choose, consider checking out a place like Project Gutenberg before falling for the "Comes with 100 free eBooks!" gimmick you sometimes see. They're just the public domain titles you can get for free from Gutenberg anyway - consider them shovelware. If you want to learn more about the Kindle, you can ask at my talk page; I'm afraid I'm going to run afoul of our wp:spam rules if I keep going like this :-) Matt Deres (talk) 02:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]