Miscellaneous desk
< March 3	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 5 >

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.

March 4

Titanic crew "kit"

Resolved

– 03:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I've been editing a few RMS Titanic related articles and have come across a few mentions of crew members' "kit" (which, of course they lost, apparently at their own expense). (E.g.: controversy regarding Sir Cosmo Duff-Gordon on Lifeboat 1) Since I am curious as to what exactly a "crew kit" entails, I assume other readers might as well, and thought I could add an {{efn}} for that. My research skills seem to be inadequate in this instance. ~Assistance with finding sourced answers will be appreciated! ~Eric _theInadequate: 71.20.250.51 (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a description of two different sailor's kits, ~~from around the same time period~~ from the 1860s [1]. Pretty much what you'd expect: jacket, towel etc. Perhaps a decent starting point. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I should be able to generalize a bit (uniforms, related clothing and accessories, -or something like that) which I already assumed to be the case, but wouldn't add without a source. ::The source also generally describes the contents of seamen's chests from 1908 and 1930. ~Eric _theThankful: 71.20.250.51 (talk) modified:21:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

City of Molalla Or Signs

I have noticed that the City has posted SERVICE VEHICLES ONLY on most side streets. Is this a advisory or restrictive sign?? They don't specify weigh restrictions or truck restrictions on most of the side streets that have these signs, but I have been told that the City would cite Me if I drove my MT log truck on these streets. What is the legal definition of these signs?? Then problem I have run into is parking my MT log truck at the Stagecoach Motel while in town. WestateCo WestateCo (talk) 02:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Law Cases

I am looking for Chinese court cases on civil law issues, particularly contract law cases. I am also looking for Internet articles on Chinese contract law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.141.115.253 (talk) 03:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with that. You'll find far more on Macao, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Chinese-speaking Singapore than mainland China. They're basically Portuguese, English, pre-Communist Chinese and English in that order. A sense of justice even somewhere the Chinese Communist Party is uninterested (football scores, employment in a foreign company, for example) still increase the same elsewhere. The Chinese Communist Party consider that a threat to their power. Whilst the Chinese justice industry is growing massively (2,600 lawyers work for Dacheng Law, see WP article on Largest Chinese law firms list), a Japanese or South Korean lawyer is still going to be unimpressed. Another measure is comparing Sundaresh Menon, Rai Hau-min and Hironobu Takesaki to Zhou Qiang (Singaporean, Taiwanese, Japanese and Chinese Chief Justices). The first three have good degrees and (varyingly) detailed legal backgrounds in their articles here. The Chinese Chief Justice has spent most of his career in the Chinese Communist Party. --92.25.228.93 (talk) 15:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Steps to the Cristo Rei of Dili in East Timor

The Cristo Rei of Dili is located at the top of a set of about 500 stairs. The stairs are very irregular in height and width. Consequently they are potentially very dangerous for users. Is there any background to design/construction of these steps that will explain why they are uneven? Other steps I've used in other parts of the world have been even and therefore relatively safe. Thanks, Garry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.42.88.2 (talk) 03:57, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Separation Standards in ATC

Can we apply track separation to an aircraft established on specified track within CONTROL airspace with another aircraft established on required track but in UNCONTROL airspace — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.26.127.143 (talk) 07:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do people like to scold vulgarities?

So I have heard enough of vulgarities, but I am curious to why some people use it in their daily life as normal language and that they do not know how to control?

Please link to my user page when you reply. Huang (talk ^{in public} _{in private} | contribs) 09:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Huang. There's a little information about this, but with some references you can follow, in Profanity#Research into swearing. --ColinFine (talk) 09:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine:

Thank you! Huang (talk ^{in public} _{in private} | contribs) 10:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neurologist Antonio Damasio noted that despite loss of language due to damages to the language areas of the brain, patients were still often managed to swear. "Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain". (I just added to article, thank you for the link, Colfine). It is something that many on brain damage wards can testify to. It seems hard to control in these cases, and perhaps it is also hard to control in normal life, since it does not appear to be exclusively under the control of the standard language centers. Star Lord - 星王 (talk) 11:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Uncontrollable swearing is also a common symptom of Tourette syndrome. Looie496 (talk) 14:34, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that it is common. It is a symptom of some people with Tourette's; but I don't know that it is all that common. Most people with Tourette's don't swear uncontrollably, but have other sorts of tics; the swearing thing is attention grabbing, so people tend to remember it, and thus falsely assume that "Tourette's = that weird disease that makes people swear all the time". It isn't really, except in a few memorable cases. The article you cited notes directly, in the lead "this symptom is present in only a small minority of people with Tourette's" --Jayron32 14:39, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

People simply like to scold. See the talk page. Why vulgarities would be something to scold is that as mentioned above, the brain treats them as something more primitive than abstract speech. Consider Fred Flintstone can mock curse by grumbling with /r/s and low vowels in a way that sounds like a dog growling, but you never hear mock cursing with tweets and lisping sounds. μηδείς (talk) 18:06, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In defence of people who swear - there is evidence that it can help to relieve stress - and in a famous Mythbuster's episode, they seem to have sucessfully (although not rigorously) shown that cursing aloud will allow a person to tolerate more pain than using mild language. This Scientific American article seems to back that up. So it does seem that saying things that are designed to shock others helps people in some situations. This is plenty enough reason for people to do it - and a very good reason for those other people not to scold them for doing it. However, it occurs to me that if the swearing did not produce the expected reaction in others, it might not work as stress/pain relief. SteveBaker (talk) 18:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I virtually always use some form of "fuck" when I hurt myself, but it seems automatic (alone or not). If there's any reasoning, it's quicker than I can follow. Because of that, I'm not sure if it helps the pain. But it makes sense. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, a native English speaker would not say 'to scold vulgarities' if what was meant was 'to use vulgarities'. Scolding vulgarities sounds like criticising their use - 'Jason! Don't use such foul language in front of Aunt Susie!'. AlexTiefling (talk) 19:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't make a generalization that the brain "treats them as something more primitive." Maybe there's something to that statement when trying to explain why those with certain neurological afflictions can swear (to explain that, maybe, a lifetime connecting the utterance of a sound with certain emotional expressions allows it to operate on a somewhat different level), but otherwise these are words! They have meanings and uses; they're tools for expression that sometimes communicate better than other words. People have trouble controlling their use when the words become part of their regular vocabulary (lots of people spend considerable time around people who don't care about appropriately used swearing). If you were used to using a certain vocabulary and then asked to alter it because certain words offend some people's sensibilities, then yes it may be difficult to control -- and not just for people with tourette's. Likewise if I requested you stop using the word "very" or "great" because it offends me, you might have some trouble controlling it, too. It takes considerable conditioning to be aware of communicative tools at your disposal while refraining from using them. ...Of course you could argue if there weren't people offended by swearing, at least some of the usefulness would cease. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BBC requires Flash

Is there no Law in the UK that requires the BBC to let people watch the videos without forcing them to install Adobe Flash to view a video (like this)? 78.35.207.52 (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a US American, I'm confused as to why there would be such a law in the UK. Adobe Flash is one of the most common pieces of video software available. Why would there be a law requiring something else? Dismas|^(talk) 11:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the issue. Apparently they're being forced to use Adobe Flash when they'd rather use something else. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:49, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no such law. --Viennese Waltz 11:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, no such law. Why would there be? It's just an annoying policy decision of the BBC, along with some other websites, but it's their website, so their choice. Dbfirs 12:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought, since the BBC is a public broadcaster they are required by law to make their programs accessible to all and not only to people that have installed Proprietary software, but seemingly this is not the case. 78.35.207.52 (talk) 12:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have to pay to use Adobe Flash Player where you live? Dbfirs 20:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can contact the BBC to make a complaint at this page. People there are far more likely to be able to provide answers to your questions and/or act on your request than anyone here. --Jayron32 13:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's no difference between installing Flash and using a web browser to access the site, or even in using a TV to access programmes broadcast by the BBC. Really. In order to access a broadcast from the BBC you have to have a TV and you have to have Freeview (or an equivalent service such as Sky). That's all. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And a TV License. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:46, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the OP is suspicious of Flash itself, as any TV of any brand or any browser is sufficient to access BBC program, but Flash is the only software allowed. If the OP is patient, HTML5 codecs will eventually replace Flash and it will no longer be an issue. Mingmingla (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC standard media player does support HTML5 video where available (e.g. on iOS), as does the new iPlayer. Did you try uninstalling Flash and trying? It does seem that Flash is still used by default in places (and some archived content may use not use the standard player). As [[2]] points out that development is ongoing. This being said, Flash video is still supported on more devices (e.g. IE8) -- to the point that not supporting Flash video would, in fact, be a bigger accessibility concern especially in some critical groups. As for legality, the OP may be referring to either to Equality Act 2010 or the BBC Charter, both of which have some force in law of course (not that anyone would be arrested). Clearly this is something being worked on, but any complaint to the link provided above would no doubt get a response, and the cost that Capita will charge to handle the complaint will go a long way to ensuring your license fee is spent. 92.28.77.132 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:09, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs of airplanes in flight

I saw this picture on the Internet today. See here: [3]. It made me wonder, how are such photos taken? Are they actually photos that are taken as they appear? How is this accomplished? Or is a photo taken of a plane, and then that photo is photo-shopped into a background of air and clouds? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They just fly alongside with another plane. One thing that's clear from this genre of photo is that there isn't much perspective forshortening of the airplane in the photo - which probably means that it was taken with a telephoto lens. That means that the plane doing the photography could be quite a long way away. Another clue is that very often the aircraft in the picture is in a somewhat nose-up attitude. That usually happens because they are flying very slowly - even though they are at cruise altitude. That suggests that a slower plane is doing the photography and struggling to keep up with the speed of the big passenger plane...which would make sense if they just hired a light aircraft to take the pictures from. SteveBaker (talk) 18:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sky-level photos and films of airplanes have been around for quite a few generations before photoshop was around. Some of the pictures could be fake, but it's like you said - you just send another plane up to take the picture or film. No mystery there. I suppose what would help is a third plane taking pictures of the first two. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is famously the most difficult in-air flight ever filmed. Yahoo!. μηδείς (talk) 19:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Просьба к Администрации

Уважаемая администрация Википедии, мы обращаемся к вам от имени жителей Украины с просьбой добавить в смайлы по ресурсу (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoji флаг Украины, так как там уже есть другие флаги, нам кажется это целесообразным. (хочеться использывать даный смайл в одной из социальных сетей, которая полбзуеться даный ресурс). Заранее спасибо. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Андрей Голляк (talk • contribs) 22:25, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This, as per Google Translate: "Request to the Administration: Dear administration Wikipedia, we are writing to you on behalf of residents of Ukraine to add emoticons on a resource (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoji flag of Ukraine, as already there are other flags, we think it appropriate. (wants MĀ danyj smile in one of the social networks that polbzuetsya danyj resource). thanks in advance." Not everything translates, but it's enough to get the idea. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) My browser translate tool renders this as "Dear administration Wikipedia, we are writing to you on behalf of residents of Ukraine to add emoticons on a resource (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoji flag of Ukraine, as already there are other flags, we think it appropriate. ( wants MĀ danyj smile in one of the social networks that polbzuetsya danyj resource). Thanks in advance".

I'm not sure what they're asking, but I think they want the Ukrainian flag added to the list of ten flags mentioned in Emoji#places. (In my browser, most of the Unicode characters in that article don't display anyway, so I don't know what is supposed to appear beside the countries mentioned). It's not clear to me whether there is any significance to the particular 10 countries listed there, but I'm guessing that they are just an arbitrary set chosen for the purpose of illustration; in which case the set I would not recommend adding any more countries. I may be misunderstanding, though. --ColinFine (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the OP wants us to add the emoji for Ukraine's flag to that article. It seems like a reasonable request if it exists and other nations' are listed. The request is in Russian with a few grammatical errors, maybe typo's polbzuyet'sja might perhaps be a typo for something like "to be published" I don't know what danyj is supposed to mean, but Дальний is Russian for distant. Wikipedia and only wikipedia has been loading extremely slow for me tonight and last night, and I can't view the unicode, so I hope someone like User:JackofOz or User:Любослов Езыкин can help. μηδείς (talk) 05:29, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe "полбзуеться даный ресурс" should be "пользуется данный ресурс", and the words in brackets mean "the given smile needs to be used in one of the social networks which the given resource uses". That's amazingly clunky, but I don't know enough of the context to render it any more fluently. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]