Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2014 September 29

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.

September 29

Ryder Cup

I seem to remember a Ryder Cup where having already been won, the captains called in the remaining games and called them a draw. Can you tell me which one it was please? Thank you Michael Collins — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.74.79 (talk) 10:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You're probably thinking of the 1969 Ryder Cup, when "America's Jack Nicklaus conceded a missable putt to Britain's Tony Jacklin at the 18th hole in one of the most famous gestures of sportsmanship in all of sport." It's only ended in a tie on one other occasion, see 1989 Ryder Cup. --Viennese Waltz 10:20, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean at Brookline, where the USA team won and promptly celebrated so much the rest of the matches were abandoned? --TammyMoet (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You must be talking about the 1969 Ryder Cup. According to ESPN, this was when Nicklaus took his ball out of the hole, then picked up Tony Jacklin's marker, conceding a putt that is still talked about by many. This allowed the two major champions to tie the final match at Royal Birkdale in Southport, England, which meant the Ryder Cup would end in a 16-16 tie, the first draw in Ryder Cup history. <http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/rydercup04/news/story?id=1882137> Another source from rydercup.com says, "closest contest in Ryder Cup history, 17 of the 32 matches went down to the last hole. With the matches tied going into the last day, the British won five of the eight morning singles. But the U. S. roared back, winning four of the first six afternoon matches to even the score." <http://www.rydercup.com/2004/us/history/1969.html> I found it interesting to read that Nicklaus and Jacklin ended up collaborating together on a business agreement. Another source said, " As the years passed, Jacklin never forgot the noble gesture by his friend. In 2004, he and Nicklaus entered into a business agreement to collaborate on the design of The Concession Golf Club in Bradenton, Fla." <http://www.rydercup.com/usa/news/draw-dunes-reflects-1969-ryder-cup-drama> Mbrown16 (talk) 02:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Ship called "The Pirate"?

Has there ever been a real or fictional ship called The Pirate? This question is resisting my google-fu. --Trovatore (talk) 14:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

USS Pirate - Cucumber Mike (talk) 14:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Also this site lists a few (search by vessel name). --Viennese Waltz 14:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks much (both)! Anyone know any examples in fiction? This came to me in a dream and I'm trying to figure out if it's original. --Trovatore (talk) 14:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

There's almost nothing that's totally original. 2,000 years ago, Caesar was in a hurry, and commanded his slave, "Call me a chariot!" The slave said, "OK... You're a chariot." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure, fine, but not really my point. What I'm trying to figure out is whether my dream might have been influenced by some particular piece of fiction that I might have been exposed to. --Trovatore (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

It could be a manifestation of something you saw somewhere and then forgot. Or it could be something that your subconscious came up with for whatever reason. Dreams are usually a hodge-podge of stuff that you've experienced and/or thought about, while not necessarily directly resembling those things. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:33, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Bugs, do you have a citation for that Caesar joke? It seems really unlikely, partly because of the impertinence, but mostly because Latin is such a pedantic language. Whatever, I'd love it to be true - can you point me to where it comes from? My quick Googling reveals only one mention of it, about three years ago, on Wikipedia reference desks, by Baseball Bugs... uncited. --Dweller (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

The Romans only used chariots for racing and (rarely) for triumphal processions...so there is no possible way this could remotely be true...and I completely agree that Latin's more tight control of meaning would not permit the joke to work in that language anyway. So Bugs made it up to try to make a point...what's new? His point is complete B.S anyway - there are vast numbers of things in the world that are "totally original". 99% of what Bugs says here can safely be ignored. SteveBaker (talk) 15:00, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I didn't make it up, I quoted Henny Youngman. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Henny Youngman was a comedian. Presumably, you're quoting a joke a comedian made up. This is a Reference Desk and this is not the place to mislead people that what you're quoting is true. --Dweller (talk) 11:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

To editor Dweller: It was very obviously a joke, lighten up. DuncanHill (talk) 11:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

That it was a joke was obvious. It wasn't obvious that it wasn't a joke by Julius Caesar. That's all. --Dweller (talk) 11:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Not only was it obvious, I immediately thought Henny Youngman. μηδείς (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I guess it's Currum mihi clama for the first sense, Currum me clama for the second, though the latter sense of clamare is likely anachronistic. —Tamfang (talk) 07:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Thornton Jenkins Hains wrote the novel Mr. Trunnell, Mate of the Ship "Pirate". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, PH! --Trovatore (talk) 14:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Here's a reference, about 2000 years preceding Caesar's life, from Ecclesiastes: There's nothing new under the sun. --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

If you attribute Ecclesiastes to Solomon, it precedes Caesar by less tha nine centuries. Most scholars attribute it to the Hellenistic era, 330-180BC. μηδείς (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

That's another one of those "The Bible says it...so it must be true!" kind of things? Like in Leviticus 11:13-19 where it says that bats are birds? Or that you have to be careful not to eat four legged flying insects? Sorry, but no, the bible does not constitute a 'reference' for anything beyond that the bible says it. SteveBaker (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

It's undeniably the case that the Bible says the text that it says. Even the most fervent atheist could not deny it. I'm not sure what argument you're trying to start, but it's definitely a misplaced one. --Dweller (talk) 11:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

How to mention Wikipedia articles in a book?

Hi,

Can you please guide me in a step by step manner how to mention in a book (hard copy) that 'information's were collected from Wikipedia thereafter copied/modified/amended/rewritten words/sentences/paragraphs, combined with the story of the book to make it profound. If more information required in particular topic please view Wikipedia'...?

If I provide URLs of all the articles I mix and match and use, will it be okay? Do I need a time stamp in a book? What and how do I do?...

(Russell.mo (talk) 18:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC))

The way you cite something depends on what style guide you are following. We have an article Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia that covers many of the popular citation styles. What style a book uses is usually made by agreement between the author, editor and publisher. If those are all you, do whatever you want. Especially in fiction writing, citations are not usually formalized, but authors do sometimes have an acknowledgements section. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:46, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding timestamps for articles, there is a 'Cite this page' link for every article that explains how to cite that particular version (under 'Tools' in sidebar, left margin). —71.20.250.51 (talk) 22:28, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks guys.

I'm not sure whether a publisher will publish the book SemanticMantis as most of the information’s for the story of the book will be from Wikipedia’s articles to make it profound and so on. I might seek assistance from an editor who rewrites the complete story in their own words; it is unlikely that I will as I am in a financial difficulty. . I can't afford some of the things need to be done e.g., lawyer advises, editors and so on due to my financial situation. I might try to publish the book myself if the publishers reject and therefore I can try my best to save up for the publication…

My English speaking, writings and understandings is not very well either, it can just cover daily life living needs and necessities. I find it extremely difficult to understand Wikipedia articles though love reading them as it is the reason why my English (mostly writing) improved (according to personal acknowledgements), and planning to stay in communication with the Wikipedia volunteers to further develop my English writing and speaking knowledge. I have read through what you defined, I have also read through other documents such as 'copyrights terms and conditions' and so on. Problem is, I needed an example, what I didn't find in Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia, what I hoped 71.20.250.51 would’ve provided; there are information’s what cleared Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia article but I am not sure what to use or how to use…

Anyways, Last question, please view the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Cite&page=Hebrews&id=626847556, can you please advise me which one or what to use for a book? Also, if there are multiple articles, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrews, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shasu, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train, molested as aforementioned to satisfy my needs, how do I cite in a book, the articles as a whole?

I would be grateful if ColinFine could kindly view the links SemanticMantis provided, since he helped me earlier and due to being aware of the matter. Note: I didn’t seem to find anything in regards to Wikipedia’s ‘terms and conditions’ violation information… One thing I have realised i.e., I won’t have a ‘style’, it is going to be a book in a story mode, just like every other story book (hard copy) found in a bookshelf. Is it mandatory to follow a style guide? I’m assuming ‘not’ as it is nothing but a template.

In regards to ‘acknowledgements’ link article, I’m assuming it’s similar to ‘attribution’ from the WP:REUSE, and both this points to the images (and its text) and not for the texts in the article(s). Also it defines the URLs, the timestamp and so on required to collect from the 'Cite this page'. Am I right?

Oh, I forgot to mention, the story is based on a real life scenes and scenarios, and of afterlife, but sounds imaginative, disbelieving and bogus.

(Russell.mo (talk) 00:23, 30 September 2014 (UTC))

You should probably use https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hebrews&oldid=626847556 which links directly to the version of the page, or give the title and date/time of the last revision (use the history tab to get it). You can also use https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=626847556 with out the title= part, but that will break if the that revision is ever hidden. CS Miller (talk) 09:21, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Csmiller, I understand what you've stated, I hope you are aware of the Wikipedia's 'terms and conditions' information's, especially the WP:REUSE.

A special contributor 71.20.250.51 advised viewing/clicking 'Cite the page' from the 'Tools' section based on the left reading pane, the Wikipedia 'Logo' pane. To make things easier to understand, please click the following link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Cite&page=Hebrews&id=626847556.

The section:

Bibliographic details for "Hebrews":

• Page name: Hebrews
• Author: Wikipedia contributors
• Publisher: Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
• Date of last revision: 24 September 2014 02:41 UTC
• Date retrieved: 30 September 2014 18:48 UTC
• Permanent link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hebrews&oldid=626847556
• Primary contributors: Revision history statistics
• Page Version ID: 626847556

I'm assuming this will be sufficient, omitting the latter two highlighted, after reading your feedback. But a problem arises i.e., it will take up a lot of pages in a book in the end... The closest thing I could resemble in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Cite&page=Hebrews&id=626847556 from what you mentioned is the 'APA' Style section. I don't have a style/template, I am guessing that it doesn't matter what style I use to layout the contents in the book, as long as I cite Wikipedia appropriately using the 'APA' Style section information I'll be okay. Am I right? What do you suggest?

In regards to the 'view history' tab, looks messy, can you guide me please? What to do?

Anohter thing,

IMPORTANT NOTE: Most educators and professionals do not consider it appropriate to use tertiary sources such as encyclopedias as a sole source for any information—citing an encyclopedia as an important reference in footnotes or bibliographies may result in censure or a failing grade. Wikipedia articles should be used for background information, as a reference for correct terminology and search terms, and as a starting point for further research.

As with any community-built reference, there is a possibility for error in Wikipedia's content—please check your facts against multiple sources and read our disclaimers for more information.

Does the highlighted section of the 'Important note' apply to me with what I am doing?

The citation doesn't need to be as complete as above. The 'Cite this page' includes various citation styles that you could use, such as Chicago style:

• Wikipedia contributors, "Hebrews," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hebrews&oldid=626847556 (accessed September 30, 2014)

As long as you're consistent, any of the styles are fine. You could simply copy/paste as I did above (and added italics). — Regarding: "Does the highlighted section of the 'Important note' apply to me with what I am doing?" —That depends on what you're doing. For background in a fictional story, that would be fine in most cases. For any claim of historical accuracy (or an 'historical novel'), then, Wikipedia would be considered an inadequate source by most readers. But, for purely fictional fantasy, it would be okay.  —Eric, aka:71.20.250.51 (talk) 21:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm currently gathering information's from Wikipedia, learning at the same time. 1) I'll/might mix 'histories', 'ancient histories', 'mythologies' and 'religions' with the story; to make sense of the story, relating to quoted information's basically, or 2) put some of the information's in the foreground, in the middle as well as in the background. Issue with (1) Its a daunting process, time consuming, a risk that publishers might not care to see, regardless of however much I copy/modify/amend/delete bits and bobs. An introduction will be provided in the back cover for a reader to acknowledge the basics, just like every other story books do. There will be other information's provided in the foreground as well as in the background gathered from wikipedia, some might get involved with the story... All the information's collected and gathered i.e., words/sentences/paragraphs will/might be copied/modified/amended/deleted, rewritten to if possible to suit the books needs and necessities. Note: Wikipedia's information will make the story sound half real! - Another risk! Issue with point (2) the book (hard copy) won't sell, especially a publisher won't care to see even if I rewrite bits and bobs.

Do you understand what I'm trying to do Eric (71.20.250.51)? I have a feeling I didn't understand the foreground and the background statement. What do you both (you and Wikipedia) mean by 'background'? Mixing information with the story/essay and so on? Or keeping the information aside, as in give the readers an understanding before or after and so on?

(Russell.mo (talk) 05:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC))

I believe that I understand, more or less. As a counter-example, Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code comes to mind. In the novel's preface, he boldly claimed that all the information contained in the novel was factually accurate and based on thorough research, which he repeated in various interviews, etc. This resulted in substantial criticism (see: Criticism of The Da Vinci Code). Ironically, it is perfectly acceptable to make stuff up in a novel (a work of fiction). Of course, the publisher wasn't concerned about such controversy, that simply meant free publicity and more sales. Regarding "background" in fiction: my intent is essentially a description of the setting: a particular place at a particular time within a particular social environment, etc.; see: Exposition (narrative), Setting (narrative). This is distinct from backstory, which relates to prior events that might help explain a character's motivation, etc. A good novelist will do quite a bit of research in order to bring the reader into the world of the characters. For your situation, perhaps preface and acknowledgement sections are where you should explain your research and sources.   —Eric, aka:71.20.250.51 (talk) 19:07, 1 October 2014 (UTC) -Edit:21:11, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me Eric 71.20.250.51, it means a lot. A lot of things are clearer now.

I assume detailing 'Cite the page' information from Wikipedia is sufficient for 'acknowledgements' section, in the end? A sentence(s) or so along is not essential but can do some good...?

Preface is done but mixed with the Back cover information (all in one as introduction), now I'm thinking whether I should omit the thought of a back cover information. Do you think I can get a way with it? It took many days just to write the 'introduction', I spent day and night on it because my English is not as fancy as I thought it would've been, until I actually started writing the book. I also have understanding difficulty. Story is written as 'I' so far but now I have to reset as 'He', in the back-story style, narrator speaking. 'Setting' is something I have to look into, the story written so far is a big mess anyways, needs a lot of tidying up, a lot more work, plus Wikipedia's help. I am just annoyed that I have to do a lot of research, its wasting a lot of time. Name of the Book and a Logo is done.

(Russell.mo (talk) 22:03, 1 October 2014 (UTC))

There can be confusion regarding preface, foreword, introduction and acknowledgements; especially since there can be overlap. For one thing, a foreword is usually written by someone other than the author. The preface is where the author generally explains why and sometimes how the book was written or came into being, and sometimes the preface includes acknowledgments. Acknowledgements can be a separate section following the preface, or near the end (preceding bibliography, if applicable). This source might be helpful:

• Carol Saller. "Forewords, Prefaces, and Introductions: Where to Begin?". Lingua Franca. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

At this point it should be noted that this desk cannot and will not provide legal advice. We can, however, direct you to relevant information, such as: Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License and Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. That being said, one possible solution would be to add something general in the acknowledgements (after thanking your mother for her inspiration and your dog for being a good listener...) to the effect that you gratefully acknowledge Wikipedia contributors for their amazingly wonderful and tireless work on Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, especially for the articles in the following bibliography which provided endless hours of fascinating and informative reading while researching this book, blah, blah... —Followed by a bibliography with articles that you used. You should include language at the bottom such as mentioned in the CC BY-SA 3.0 link above. Regarding the back cover, that typically is written by the publisher and includes stuff to encourage the reader to buy the book, often including a mini-bio that makes the author irresistibly fascinating.   —Eric, aka:71.20.250.51 (talk) 00:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help and patience. I appreciate everything. Things became clearer, harder than expected, became a real hard work! I have the basic understanding for now… Please, kindly help me like the way you have so far, in the near future if possible. -- (Russell.mo (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2014 (UTC))

Thanks everyone! -- (Russell.mo (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2014 (UTC))

Are desktop home PCs (including its monitor, keyboard, computer case and mouse) exported in containers or a separate compartment in a cargo ship?

I am curious of desktop home PCs (e.g. a Samsung SyncMaster monitor). Are they exported to various customers around the world in containers or a separate compartment in a ship?

Please answer my question. --Kiel457 (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You asked a very similar question a couple of weeks ago, and the answer is the same as it was then. ""As of 2009, approximately 90% of non-bulk cargo worldwide is moved by containers stacked on transport ships." So yes, computers shipped in bulk are shipped in containers. Our article Containerization has more details on how and why this is. - Eron^Talk 22:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Having worked in both industries I can tell you exactly how they are transported - monitors (and peripheral equipment like mice and keyboards) are usually packaged in boxes. Though "package" or OEM items often come in simpler packaging, they are still generally packaged individually. From there they are palletised like any other freight, wrapped in plastic and then put into containers for shipping. That applies to internationally shipped items, of course. PCs may be constructed locally from internationally imported components, in which case the "shipping" is from the retail store to your house (on the back seat of your car, perhaps). St★lwart¹¹¹ 03:58, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

The monitor is packaged separately, as the size of the monitor is an option. Most PCs come with the keyboard and mouse in its box. CS Miller (talk) 09:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely - the pre-built ones (Dell, HP, etc) are built and then shipped. If you buy your PC from a shop that builds its own, the keyboard and mouse are options also. St★lwart¹¹¹ 23:04, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Hm. The last computer that I got bundled with a (discrete) keyboard was the Mac SE in 1989. —Tamfang (talk) 07:59, 3 October 2014 (UTC)