Miscellaneous desk
< July 11	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 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.

July 12

western movies

would you be showing western movies on wednesdays as brfore? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.78.113 (talk) 12:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.9 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the unidentified subject of your question. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:32, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't confuse the requester. Hipocrite (talk) 15:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Why don't we? I'm sure we could find room for WP:Theatre.Collect your tickets for this week's special offering from my sandbox.Popcorn is available-a small donation on my userpage will get a nice big tub.Please don't put your feet on the seats and enjoy this week's special guns-and-horses-and-sheriffs-shooting-baddies trilogy. Lemon martini (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cities far from water

Are there any big cities which are far away from any form of surface water (oceans, seas, lakes, rivers, etc.)? 92.80.31.46 (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Riyadh. Zoonoses (talk) 21:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico City often comes up in quizzes as the answer to the largest city that is not on a river or by the sea, but it is built on an island in a lake. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 21:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So it's not really an answer to the question, then? Although surface water could mean temporary water which you get in Riyadh, or artificial lakes which you get in e.g. Las Vegas, and even cities built on rivers may get their drinking water from far away, so it's not the easiest question to answer. --Colapeninsula (talk) 23:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I headed it off at the pass in case anyone was thinking of suggesting it. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 23:40, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ürümqi in China is apparently listed by Guinness World Records as the furthest from any coastline at 2,500 kilometres (1,600 mi) from the sea. A quick look at the map doesn't show any obvious rivers or lakes, although there are reservoirs and what look like canals - both presumably man-made. There doesn't seem to be a record of the furthest city from any form of water, since a city would require water for people to actually live there. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, the only mention of water in that article is "... especially in the vicinity of Urumchi, where there was fertile, well-watered land and few people ...". -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 23:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urumqi is not situated on a major river or lake in an absolute sense but it is criss-crossed by a number of waterways which makes it remarkably wet for the region where it is situated (as Jack noted above). The best known of them is probably the Urumqi River, which was a natural river (that influenced the citing of the original Qing Dynasty garrison that became Urumqu) which has in the last century or so been significantly engineered so that the central section passing through the city is now more like a man-made canal than a natural waterway. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urumqi - like most other populated places in the region - exists thanks to the nearby range of the Tian Shan mountains (Bogda Shan is a particularly high section of it). Even though the mountains are in the middle of the desert, there is some precipitation on top of the mountains, which means glaciers, which in its turn means lots of comparatively short glacier-fed rivers. Thus if you look at the map of Xinjiang you see bands of oases stretching along the foothills of most major mountain ranges, with the deserts between them. Most of those rivers are fairly short, and disappear in the desert (or even earlier, as water is taken away for irrigation). Only rarely the water is allowed to feed a lake (such as Chaiwopu Lake nearby). -- Vmenkov (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Johannesburg page says it is "the world's largest city not situated on a river, lake, or coastline". It isn't all that far from the Orange River though. Apparently it gets some of its water from the Vaal River. Still, big cities that are not on a river or coastline are rare, and at almost 4 million people, Johannesburg is a very big example. Pfly (talk) 03:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chec your map again, Johannesburg is a lot closer to the Vaal than the Orange rivers - but it is in fact situated on a watershed. Roger (talk) 09:09, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I didn't mean to imply that Johannesburg was closer to the Orange than the Vaal. I mentioned the Orange first because, if I understand right, it is the main river in the region and the Vaal is a tributary. But I was wrong in guessing Johannesburg was between the Orange and Vaal. I see now it is north of the Vaal. By "situated on a watershed" I'm guessing you're using "watershed" in the drainage divide rather than the drainage basin sense. That "watershed" means almost opposite things in different parts of the world is unfortunate. Now I wonder, if Johannesburg is on a divide/watershed, between which rivers/basins? The Vaal and Limpopo River and/or Olifants River? (eyeballing with this map, [1]) Pfly (talk) 09:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although I see that Riyadh is even bigger, with a metro population approaching 7 million, so I think Johannesburg's claim doesn't hold water (ha). There are no rivers or streams in Riyadh. Wadi Hanifa is basically a dry valley. Originally there was a decent supply of water from underground. Today Riyadh pipes desalinated water in from the Persian Gulf, hundreds of kilometres away. Pfly (talk) 03:53, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently some small lakes are appearing south of Riyadh, from treated sewage water if I understand it correctly, and the area is becoming "a popular destination for recreational activities such as fishing and picnicking". Thanks for all the answers (I'm the OP)! I guess we humans love our water. 92.80.25.145 (talk) 08:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember school lessons correctly the claim about Johannesburg is that it was the largest city that is not on a coast or navigable river or lake - the largest city without a port/harbour/pier/facility for shipping of some kind. When did Riyadh's population overtake Johannesburg? There are in fact a few small rivers in/near Johannesburg but except when they're in flood they are no more than knee-deep - "navigable" only by canoe! Roger (talk) 09:22, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A bit closer to home (my home anyway) Birmingham (with over a million inhabitants) must count as a big city, and being on the Birmingham Plateau we have only small brooks and streams (and canals for transportation). We have to pinch all our drinking (and canal) water from Wales.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:55, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But you have this: [2], which looks really cool. A Venice of the North sort of feel :D 92.80.25.145 (talk) 09:21, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haha way to polish a turd! Amazing what a sunset does for the look of a place... gazhiley 16:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC) [reply]

On a historical note, the ancient city of Petra may be of interest. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 84.21.143.150 (talk) 11:39, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's impossible to have a city far away from any form of surface water. But if you are willing to exclude channelized rivers and arroyos (intermittent rivers), then most people in the American Southwest live far from natural, constantly flowing water. --M@rēino 17:37, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed. The history of Los Angeles, California is based on the conflicts surrounding bringing water into Los Angeles. There just isn't enough water in Southern California to support a sizable population, and the story of how they got that water there is really facinating. The building of the Los Angeles Aqueduct and of its champion William Mulholland is one of the most politically contentious events in American history. One of my favorite films of all time, Roman Polanski's film Chinatown uses it as its central plot point. --Jayron32 19:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]