Miscellaneous desk
< June 4	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 6 >

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.

June 5

Work Space

How do I create a work space? I've seen other editors with them and I'd to be able to do the same. Thank you! DVMt (talk) 00:11, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean like a "sandbox"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DVMt, it's easy. Just create the URL and then edit it. It will start as a redlink, and once you've edited it, then it turns blue. You can create any variation of this format you want, just by giving the page a title you'll recognize, such as the topic: User:DVMt/Sample. Just click the "create this page" tab at the top of that page and start editing. Of course you will first want to change the URL to something which you really want. -- Brangifer (talk) 03:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Brangifer. I figured it was something minor, yet technical.

I also suggest you make links to those pages on you home page, lest you forget the exact names. StuRat (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Using the "What links here" function also works. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Using it where ? It only works on your home page or talk page if you happen to have a link from the subpages to there. And there are so many other links to my home page and talk page that the list is too huge to sort through. StuRat (talk) 14:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you create a sub-page of your user page, it is automatically linked to your user page. So, if you've ever lost the name of a certain sub-page, it will appear in the list of hits when you click "What links here" from your user page. This is a resource additional to your wise suggestion, not in place of it. Unless one doesn't like keeping one's own lists and prefers to let the system do it for one. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]}

That seems to be work, but it's pretty tedious to deal with, as the hundreds of entries seem to be in random order. Much easier to just create a link on one's user page or talk page. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:22, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Read my last 2 sentences. The order is not random, but sorted by date of creation. I certainly agree that an alphabetic list would be FAR more useful, and I wonder why our gnominious gnomes haven't got that sorted yet. But a list in even random order is sometimes of great value, compared with no list at all. Control-F works fine, page by page. It doesn't take long. Nowhere nearly as long as it would take to type up a few sentences explaining why it's impractical. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"gnominious gnomes" - must be a gnotability thing? - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 06:16, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a link named "Subpages" at the bottom of each user's contributions page that leads to a list of all subpages of the user page. Deor (talk) 19:32, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's much easier. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:55, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Deor. After 10.5 years here, one might think I'd have become aware of that by now. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The cost of low value coins

Australia abolished its one and two cent coins many years ago. In the news today we had a step towards our five cent coins disappearing with our mint declaring that it was costing six cents to manufacture each five cent coin. I reckon they'll be gone with two years.

But what about the rest of the world? How do countries justify keeping coins of much smaller face value in circulation? HiLo48 (talk) 09:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The UK still has 1p and 2p coins though they have been made of copper-plated steel for more than twenty years instead of expensive bronze. Some people still collect the pre-1993 coins because their scrap value is perhaps 50% more than the face value (depending on copper prices), but melting them down is illegal, of course. The Royal Mint has no current plans to stop minting "copper" (plated) coins (and certainly not before 2017 at the earliest), because of the British public's fears that prices will be rounded up. Some people (younger than me) just throw them away! There is an e-petition here but it's received only five signatures so far. Dbfirs 13:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(OT)Same fears here in South Africa. Consumers thought that the shops would round everthing up - i.e. every product on the shelf would have a price ending in 5 or 0. That did not happen. The shops round off the total amount of your purchases in favour of the customer. In effect, the store can only lose a maximum of 9c on a whole basket or shopping trolley of goods. 196.214.78.114 (talk) 14:03, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We tossed 1c, 2c in 2002 and recently 5c pieces. See South_African_rand. I believe in our case it was market driven and not by the South_African_Reserve_Bank. Inflation made them practically worthless. Shops reprogrammed cash registers to round off to the nearest 5c and now 10c. Since there is really nothing you can buy with 5c (not even a parking meter accepts 10c), it fell out of use and subsequently it stopped being minted. It is still however legal tender. 196.214.78.114 (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why keep low-denomination coins? Mostly for the same reason that certain countries (*cough*) are so resolutely stuck on retaining low-denomination banknotes—habit and tradition. Penny debate in the United States touches on the major arguments, but the arguments against elimination tend not to be very robust. The large number of other countries that have eliminated their 'pennies' (or coins with approximately the same purchasing power), including South Africa, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Denmark, New Zealand, etc. have not suffered a descent into anarchy or collapse of their middle class. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Canada is no more collapsed anyway. When we decided to drop the one cent piece there were the usual fears, but they seem to have amounted to nothing. I think what really helped is that such a large percentage of financial transactions don't involve physical currency at all (interac, credit cards, etc.) or are formulated in such a way as to practically exclude the penny anyway (vending machines, toll booths, etc.). Of course, Canada still loves its coins and has both one and two dollar coins in wide circulation. Rumours of a five dollar coin routinely surface as well. Matt Deres (talk) 16:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It helps to that the suggested rounding principles were so widely publicized. Many retailers even posted charts on how they round right at the till. Some people thought that retailers would rig the prices to always round up, but that's pretty much impossible with taxes and buying of multiple units. In the end, one would generally come out even and not lose any money upon rounding. Mingmingla (talk) 01:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction being that the one- and two-dollar coins permitted the elimination of the equivalently-denominated paper banknotes. By replacing the less-durable notes with more-durable coins, the Canadian mint again saved money over the long-term. (Meanwhile, the U.S. seems to have gotten as far as minting dollar coins, but for some reason lacks the...gumption to do away with the paper notes—thereby creating the worst of all possible worlds for themselves.) Of course, the Canadians were far from the first. The Australians did away with their penny – and their little two-cent coin – in 1992, and they've had two-dollar coins since 1988 (Coins of the Australian dollar). They were also the first to introduce polymer banknotes, which makes their notes quite a bit more durable. The Swiss, meanwhile, have been using 5-franc coins in regular circulation for decades (worth about 5 U.S. dollars). TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Countries that have done away with coins altogether

My ex recently visited our son who lives in Útila, Honduras. She told me they have only banknotes there, no coins anymore. I accepted her story at face value (*pun*), until I checked Honduran lempira and discovered that 4 coins are still in circulation there.

Are there any countries that actually now use notes exclusively? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC) [reply]

I was after a simple factual answer, thanks; not polemics

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

That seems foolish, to me, as coins have many advantages. They last much longer, usually aren't profitable to counterfeit, don't blow away in the wind (say if you leave them as a tip on a table at an outdoor cafe), are easier for the blind to identify, and work better in vending machines, parking meters, etc. The logical thing to do, as we eliminate low denomination coins, is to switch low denomination bills to coins. In the US we had coins up to $20 denominations in the past, so I don't see why we couldn't bring back those. Canada seems headed in this direction, with the loonie and toonie. StuRat (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't rely on the low-profit - this is certainly true for some smaller coins, which cost more than their face value in metal alone, but higher-denomination coins can and will be forged. In the UK, it's estimated that 3% (and possibly as high as 5%) of all one-pound coins are fakes, often surprisingly low-quality ones, due to the combination of a high face value and relatively simple design. The one-euro, of similar value, has a much lower forgery rate due in part to a more complex bimetallic design.

As the US coin has a similarly simple design and is still reasonably valuable, I wouldn't be surprised were it to start being forged... assuming, of course, the unlikely event of enough dollar coins going into broad circulation that you could actually spend your forgeries ;-) Andrew Gray (talk) 20:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnamese dong and Indonesian rupiah come to mind. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:19, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually read those articles, you'd find that both these still use coins. Henry ^Flower 19:32, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I visited Italy in 1976, coins were scarce for some reason and small change was almost always in the form of notes issued by credit unions and the like. —Tamfang (talk) 08:13, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, the stories are legion about tourists receiving Italian change in the form of sweets or fruit. -- Jack of Oz

^{[pleasantries]} 19:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the answer must be: No countries use notes exclusively. Thanks for thinking about it. -- Jack of Oz

^{[pleasantries]} 09:26, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

According to Belarusian ruble, Belarus has never had coins circulating, although it does produce coins aimed at collectors. Warofdreams talk 21:02, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is the ability to pronounce the alveolar trill genetic?

Some people say that many can't (learn to) pronounce the alveolar trill because they don't have the right genetics. Some other say that there is no such condition. The question is: is there any widespread organic defect that makes this consonant impossible to pronounce? If one or more exist, is any genetic? Czech is Cyrillized (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:19, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The last sentence of the lead of Alveolar trill says: "People with ankyloglossia may find it exceptionally difficult to articulate this consonant due to the limited mobility of their tongues." Two sources are referenced. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:08, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ObPersonal: Though without ankyloglossia, I haven't managed to acquire the ability in 57 years, even though my Mother can and does use it, it's common in the UK, I actively tried to learn it during French lessons at school, and I lived from 19–26 in Scotland where it's ubiquitous: I have to substitute an uvular "growl".

I wonder if, like other aspects of language, it has to be learned by a certain age, after which it becomes unattainable. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can trill an R, with some difficulty depending on how flexible my tongue is or how dry my mouth is. It's a matter of holding the tongue the right way and making it vibrate against the front of the roof of the mouth while exhaling. Maybe easier for some than others. But I would think it can be learned, with the right training. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:36, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would think so, but, from my layman's perspective, it seems very hard to teach someone something like that. For example, when kids are learning to whistle, you can talk and demonstrate the whole thing all you want, but it doesn't seem to make much difference; at some point they just "get it". But maybe some people just can't ever get it. I know adults who cannot whistle, for example. Matt Deres (talk) 19:52, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personal anecdote that people may or may not be interested in: I was able to whistle until I had jaw surgery which removed a couple millimeters of jawbone to correct an underbite. The surgery dramatically improved my looks and my bite, but I became unable to whistle. I was previously able to whistle quite well. I've tried and tried and can't seem to do it. I have no issues with speech and my voice didn't change, but the anatomy just doesn't line up quite right to whistle. My kid teases me about it all the time. She can whistle just fine! Bali88 (talk) 00:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone get this flash game to work?

http://www.mofunzone.com/games/arise_2.html When I try to play it I get a blank white screen that just sits there endlessly. Help? 98.27.250.16 (talk) 22:58, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Same result here. Note that the web site is labelled "beta" in the upper, left corner. So, it's not a big surprise if their beta test games don't work. StuRat (talk) 05:22, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Zen-inspired game. You stare at the screen and a game emerges from your imagination (yeah, that's it). Chanting is optional. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"only when you no longer seek the game, will the game then appear." StuRat (talk) 19:54, 7 June 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Or maybe no game emerges. Or anything else. See, it's all about the journey, not the destination. Embrace the opportunities for self-actualisation and self-enrichment while on the path to ... wherever it is you eventually arrive at ... if you ever do arrive anywhere, that is. The message is "Joy through Boredom". :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC) [reply]

If you right-click and select "Play", it takes you to the game. Be careful; it is incredibly scary. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 01:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lawn prohibition

The following paragraph is an excerpt from The New Yorker.

Over time, the fact that anyone could keep up a lawn was successfully, though not altogether logically, translated into the notion that everyone ought to. Many communities around the country adopted "weed laws" mandating that all yards be maintained to a certain uniform standard. Such laws are, for the most part, still on the books. Homeowners who, for one reason or another, don’t toe the line have found themselves receiving citations and fines and, in some (admittedly unusual) cases, wrangling with the police. Just last summer, a seventy-year-old widow from Orem, Utah, was led in handcuffs to a holding cell, after letting her grass go brown. She became a celebrity in the blogosphere, where she was known as the Lawn Lady.

Turf War : The New Yorker (July 21, 2008)

Has there ever been legislation in the reverse direction, that is to say, has there ever been a prohibition anywhere against maintaining a lawn in the manner that has become conventional in most parts of North America?
—Wavelength (talk) 23:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Legally enforceable water restrictions in times of drought in Australia have led to people with beautiful lawns at such times being seen as something akin to criminals. HiLo48 (talk) 23:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And as noted in Drought in the United States, local laws can restrict water usage during times of shortages, i.e. no watering of lawns, no washing of cars, etc. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:20, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In my region, there's a permanent bylaw restricting lawn watering between May 31 to September 30. We could be inches from flooding and still not be able to break out the sprinkler except on one day a week. Matt Deres (talk) 02:43, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has there ever been a prohibition anywhere against having a lawn of non-native grass? Has there ever been a prohibition anywhere against using a fossil-fuel-powered lawn mower?
—Wavelength (talk) 02:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(US perspective here.) If you are in a "designated wetland area", then there are restrictions on what you can do as far as replacing the native species of plants with your own.

On lawn mowers, I believe their use is sometimes banned on high pollution days, such as "ozone action days". Anti-noise ordinances also restrict which hours they can be used. StuRat (talk) 05:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Las Vegas restricts turf lawns to 1/4 or 1/2 of landscaping and the water department gives rebates for xeriscaping. 75.41.109.190 (talk) 15:09, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on front yards includes a section about local ordinances (in the US in particular) preventing residents from doing certain things with their yards. That might include links to some useful articles for you. St★lwart¹¹¹ 00:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your replies.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:38, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A few years ago, for environmental reasons, first the city of Toronto, then the whole province of Ontario banned the use of "cosmetic pesticides". I always thought the pests that the word "pesticide" referred to had to be from the animal kingdom, but what this was about was chemical weedkillers. --69.158.92.137 (talk) 02:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pesticide is kind of a generic term, probably used more often in reference to critters. But for clarity, the more specific terms would be herbicide vs. insecticide. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:00, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the idea was to include both of those. Rodenticides should also count as pesticides, but are not likely to be used on lawns, at least not around here. --69.158.92.137 (talk) 21:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The OP may be interested in Xeriscaping. --Jayron32 04:25, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]