Miscellaneous desk
< April 5	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 7 >

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 6[edit]

ads problems[edit]

For some reasons my computer got some kind of virus i have no idea of. It seems to me that the virus only works on Wikipedia site. I tried to go to many other websites and none of them get affected by the virus. Only Wikipedia site got affected. Every time i go to Wikipedia, there is some kind of ads pop up (there is a little words down at the bottom says that ads are not from this site). I know for the fact that Wikipedia doesn't allow any ads. I think the virus must have somehow invaded Wikipedia on my computer. Does anyone know how to get rid of the ads on Wikipedia?65.128.167.101 (talk) 13:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This keeps coming up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Computing/2012_March_8#Google_ads says that when someone installed Adaware they stopped. So maybe installing Adaware will help you. Meanwhile, fellow editors, maybe we need to put something to this effect in a prominent position on the front page? --TammyMoet (talk) 13:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

and check this out too http://superuser.com/questions/376690/why-am-i-seeing-ads-on-websites-including-wikipedia Benyoch (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I use Adaware and I have no ads on WP. Personal Reasearch, but it's all I've got. Richard Avery (talk) 14:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The front page sounds too prominent to me. I recently created Wikipedia:FAQ/Readers#Why do I see commercial ads at Wikipedia?, but I didn't have much to go on. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

painting of five clowns[edit]

I have a painting of five clowns playing instruments, on a real canvas thats signed by Werner Levin. On the back is written Dec 15. and stamped Glendale, NY.

Please help me find who or whom this painting came from. Thanks Regards, Devon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.168.215 (talk) 13:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just taking a wild guess here - do you think it might possibly be by someone named Werner Levin? Roger (talk) 21:13, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking in google, and did not find anything. I wonder if the OP is mis-reading the name somehow? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:30, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I then googled [clowns playing instruments], and something came up that looked like stickers. Try googling that subject and see if anything looks familiar. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:37, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bundesstraße 224 in Gladbeck[edit]

Is the Bundesstraße 224 in Gladbeck a dual carriageway? --84.62.204.235 (talk) 14:05, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Parts of it are dual carriageway, as you can see here.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any parts of the Bundesstraße 224 in Gladbeck, which are single carriageway? --84.62.204.235 (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to the link I gave you and drag the map to upwards, you will see that the road becomes single carriageway a little further south.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What about section 1, paragraph 1, point 2, point d BFStrMG? --84.62.204.235 (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

phone calls[edit]

So, here's a nice challenge for you. I want to call my friend, I'm in england, he's in america. both our phones are blocked from making international calls to keep the bills down, but I found the skype-to-go service that redirects a local call to another country for a small fee, paid for out of my skype credit rather than my phone bill. seemed great, turns out he for some bizarre reason neither of us understand, has to pay to recieve my phone calls, and his phone is now out of credit, and for various reasons that might take a few days to fix, and besides I don't want to keep costing him money every time I want to talk.

So, is there any way of calling him from my phone such that he doesn't have to pay, doesn't use up his phone's limited internet time and can recieve the calls when out of credit?

79.66.96.58 (talk) 17:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about a prepaid telephone card, available at just about any store ? StuRat (talk) 17:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

and what do I do with it? wouldn't that still cost him the same as calling from skype? 79.66.103.209 (talk) 18:29, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You typically can use your home phone. First you call the number on the card, which will be in your nation, then type in an account number and PIN (written on the card), then dial your friend's number. The money for the call comes off the prepaid card, it doesn't go on your phone bill or his, so they should have no say in who you call. An exception is if he has a mobile phone (cell phone), since many of these do charge for all incoming calls. So, my suggestion is to find a pair of land-lines, one at each end. StuRat (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

but we're both on our mobiles, that's the problem, I don't even have a home phone, but I can call him easily enough from my mobile phone, I've already gotten around that, but he can't recieve calls on his, not without paying. 79.66.103.209 (talk) 18:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if his mobile phone company insists on billing him for all incoming calls, you have to use another phone. Does he have access to a land-line anywhere ? If so, arrange a time when you will call him on it. StuRat (talk) 19:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the United States, you have to pay for incoming mobile phone calls or pay a fee that includes X minutes of calling time each month. So your friend can't receive calls on his mobile phone for free. He could receive calls from your mobile at a U.S. land line for free, provided the monthly service fee for the land line was paid up. Marco polo (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

silly country :( 79.66.103.209 (talk) 19:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another option is to use Skype on your computer and on his. StuRat (talk) 19:19, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no internet time left, it comes from the same bill as his phone calls. 79.66.103.209 (talk) 19:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So lets see, your friend has an internet & phone service that relies on him having enough credit for both, AND charges to receive calls? Possibly time for your friend to hunt down a landline phone and call you or borrows a friend's PC to send you an instant message/SMS/email. I also suggest your friend finds himself a new service provider as soon as he can. Astronaut (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of third world hell-hole places do you people live in that the phone companies make you pay to receive calls?!?!? Here in South Africa no network ever does something like that - they just overcharge for outgoing calls and internet usage. (The bloodsucker scum charge per megabyte for internet! Flat rate "all you can eat" internet services are still a rare treat here.) Roger (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Search for references/citations[edit]

How can I get sources for citations in articles about Georgia State Routes? I have tried looking on Google, but that didn't help. If there are any other places I can search, that would be great. Now, keep in mind, that "fan-based" sites, such as Interstate-guide.com, are not allowed to be used for citations. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the Resource Exchange project : WP:LIB RudolfRed (talk) 00:01, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to determine race of human gametes?[edit]

Aside from going through the fertilization process and making a baby, is it possible to determine the race (White, Black, Asian, etc...) of human gametes via genetic sequencing or something? Acceptable (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat. However, just as some people appear to be of indeterminate race, you also get people who genetically are of indeterminate race. This is complicated by only looking at a few genes which determine race, not all of them. Then you get the crowd who insist that race is simply a social construct, with no basis in genetics, despite the existence of many diseases with clear racial differences, like Tay-Sachs disease and sickle-cell anemia. StuRat (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

StuRat is correct that genetic differences are not a social construct; however, our racial categories are a social construct. For example, based on genetics alone, you might have difficulty distinguishing a Moroccan from a Mauritanian, even though the first counts as "white" as race is constructed in the United States, whereas the second counts as "black." Also, the genetic difference between a "black" Mauritanian and a "black" Botswanan is much greater than the difference between a "black" Mauritanian and a "white" Moroccan. Our racial categories are based on a few superficial differences, such as skin color, rather than on genetic distance. Marco polo (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And Tay-Sachs/sickle-cell are not "racial" diseases. They are associated with certain genetic populations, and they bleed out over the social definitions of race quite easily. It is a terribly ignorant remark to equate those with social categories of race. And there no people who are not of "genetically indeterminate race" — the closest one comes to "race" in genetics are sequences which are more often present in some historical populations as opposed to others. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then all doctors are "terribly ignorant", because race is routinely considered when evaluating medical conditions. If you're a blue-eyed, straight-haired blond with skin so white it's pink, they aren't likely to check you for sickle-cell anemia. StuRat (talk) 00:41, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What? Never heard of Albino humans? --TammyMoet (talk) 08:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re-read my comments a few more times until you understand what they mean. "They are associated with certain genetic populations, and they bleed out over the social definitions of race quite easily." (Incidentally, I know of at least one person who is of "mixed race" — "white" mother, "black" father — whose genes have nonetheless created a blue-eyed, blond-haired, light-skinned phenotype. Genetics is complicated.) --Mr.98 (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but this person is quite unlikely to suffer from sickle-cell anemia, as that is a double recessive chromosome disease. They could be a carrier, though. StuRat (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on how much is known about the human genome. If it's known which sequences affect skin color, for example, then it would certainly be possible. One thing to consider, though, is that if the gamete donor is of mixed race, individual gametes might have significant differences between each other. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that skin color = race? This is terribly simple thinking, Bugs. And saying that "it depends on how much is known" is something of a dodge — the uncertainties at the moment for such things are huge, massive! Much less the idea of predicting ahead of time the wide variety of phenotypical outcomes based on pre-fertilized gametes. Even just knowing that data pre-fertilization seems unlikely to me — any kind of genetic sequencing done on a single egg and a single sperm is almost certainly going to be destructive. Basing is just on the DNA of the two parents will only give you probabilities depending on the Mendelian mixtures and all that. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's just one factor in race. And I'm not a microbiologist. But I know enough to know that all manner of physical characteristics are identifiable, or at least potentially identifiable, in DNA sequences. The OP asked if it was possible to tell the race, i.e. the physical characteristics associated with a race. And I say it depends on how "pure" the individual's genetics are. If he/she's from a long line of a particular race, there's a pretty good chance that fact would be identifiable from his/her DNA. If they're of mixed race, all bets are off. (That's where Gregor Mendel's discoveries come in.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, you are not only not just a microbiologist, you aren't even educated in basic genetic concepts. Nothing in your statement above is scientific whatsoever. There are no "pure" genetics. There are no "pure" races. You are using terms that were recognized as scientifically bunk by the 1920s. Your basic Anthropology 101 class in any modern university would explain this during the first week. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When I say "pure", I mean in the Mendelian sense. If you cross two organisms of the same race, you are likely to get offspring of the same race. If you cross two organisms of different races, the next generation will be of mixed race, and the generation after that will show variations, as with the Mendel 2x2 square. As far as "scientific bunk", it's curious that this "bunk" is how inbred and hybrid plants and animals are still developed... very successfully, at that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:17, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bunk. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you think Mendel's work is bunk, I don't know what to tell you. Next thing you'll be saying there's no such thing as DNA, either. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, it isn't that Mendel's work is Bunk, it's that race cannot be reduced to a single gene. There are people who live within several miles of each other in Africa whose genetic makeup is more different from each other than either may be from, say, someone from Italy, but they would both be described as the same "race". There are some very rough genetic components to race, but it isn't as simple as Mendel and his pea plants. Mendel's work isn't bunk, applying Mendel's work to racial genetics is. --Jayron32 02:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then the answer to the OP's question is, "Define 'race'." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:58, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. --Jayron32 03:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While not defining 'race', the OP did give examples, "White, Black, Asian, etc...", and the problems start with those names. There's a bunch of people here in Australia called Black by some, and they are probably more closely related to me with my European ancestry than to the people called Black in the USA. As for Asian, what that means varies dramatically across the globe. Here in Australia it means people with slanty eyes, from maybe China, Japan, Mongolia, Vietnam, Korea, etc. In the UK it means people from the Indian/Pakistani sub-continent. White seems to be the name given to themselves by the British folk who were busy labelling everybody else a few hundred years ago. HiLo48 (talk) 03:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Christians from the West are often surprised to see pictures and statues of Jesus and other religious figures depicted with slanty eyes. "But He wasn't Asian", they think. Except, He was. There is not a one-to-one correspondence between being Asian and having slanty eyes, but the area of Palestine/Israel belongs to the Middle East, which is part of Asia. Jesus was Asian. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 10:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that "Asian" has become a euphemism for "Oriental", which for some reason is now considered politically incorrect, even though it's much more precise. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That may be true in the US. In the UK, 'Asian' is more likely to mean 'with ancestors from the Indian subcontinent'. Considering the size of Asia, and the diversity of it's population, the suggestion that there is anything remotely resembling an Asian 'race' is exceptionally nutty. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Either usage is, of course, too broad to describe the actual area they're describing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:36, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(od) "Racial characteristics" are not determined by modern geographical boundaries, any more than, in modern times, languages used in a country are determined by national boundaries. Many in northern Italy speak French, and many in France speak Italian. Many in western Germany know French, many in eastern France can speak German, many in the Pyrenees region of France speak Spanish, and many in the Pyrenees region of Spain speak French, and so on and on. The idea that once a person comes from "Asia" that they must have "Asian genes" is absurd. Cheers. Collect (talk) 11:14, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Genetic genealogy and its various offshoots may be of some interest. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only in a much as (quite correctly) the word 'race' doesn't occur in it at all. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It talks about DNA, which is rather more exacting than generalized concepts such as "race". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:36, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DNA is physical substance. Race isn't. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The physical characteristics identified with races are physical substance. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding logo for Stevi B's[edit]

Hi,

Wood so one add a logo to the page Stevi B's Pizza & what is need for the page.

http://stevibsmi.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/SB_Logo_Cling_p.131103912.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indoorsoccer (talk • contribs) 20:30, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see somebody added the pic, but it's also now marked for deletion, as the article is just a stub. You might want to comment here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stevi_B's#Stevi_B.27s. StuRat (talk) 22:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Purpose of pyramids[edit]

I know of no evidence that the pyramids were built as tombs; no decoration, no inscription, no artifacts, no relics, no bodies, have ever been found inside a great pyramid. This at a time when tomb decoration was, and had been in use for other tombs. What were the pyramids for? 84.209.89.214 (talk) 23:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I always thought they were built as tourist attraction. XPPaul (talk) 00:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)"King Tut... he gave his life... for tourism." -- Steve Martin. I suggest the OP start by reading Great Pyramid of Giza and see where it takes him. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Great Pyramid of Giza which says: "The only object in the King's Chamber is a rectangular granite sarcophagus, one corner of which is broken." Pretty good evidence that it was a tomb, I'd say. Alansplodge (talk) 00:14, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Amongst the 'no evidence' is the sarcophagus found in the Great Pyramid of Giza. They were built as tombs. No serious Egyptologist has ever suggested otherwise, as far as I'm aware. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trying to say that I'm no serious Egyptologist? XPPaul (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair to the OP, there was no trace of any interment in the Great Pyramid's "sarcophagus", and although the assumption that this stone box was indeed intended for actual use as a sarcophagus is understandable given the prevailing paradigm, and may well be correct, it is just an assumption. The possibility remains that it might have been either a symbolic sarcophagus, or something else. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.239 (talk) 19:50, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OP should consult List of Egyptian pyramids and learn more about the many pyramids and their usage as tombs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:27, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pyramid power. Don't forget your razor blades. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Pharaohs built pyramids to raise money to pay for their huge and expensive tombs. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I dont read small font on these pages anymore - What's the point of it? To save paper or to reallyrritate readers? Benyoch (talk) 03:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The point is to show that this comment is not an answer to the question. For example, it might be a joke or a tangent discussion. StuRat (talk) 04:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]