After watching [[The Hurt Locker]], I started wondering about the effectiveness of the bomb suits worn by EOD technicians in the US military. How effective are they at protecting the wearer against blasts? Are they bullet proof too? Can they, for example, protect the wearer against a claymore mine from 5 m away? [[User:Acceptable|Acceptable]] ([[User talk:Acceptable|talk]]) 09:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
After watching [[The Hurt Locker]], I started wondering about the effectiveness of the bomb suits worn by EOD technicians in the US military. How effective are they at protecting the wearer against blasts? Are they bullet proof too? Can they, for example, protect the wearer against a claymore mine from 5 m away? [[User:Acceptable|Acceptable]] ([[User talk:Acceptable|talk]]) 09:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
:They are highly effective against most effects of an explosion. They will protect the wearer from a large amount of heat, overpressure and fragments, and obviously their reistance to fragments includes bullets. Modern bomb suits will also protect the wearer from any chemical or biolical effects of bombs. However they have limits. I'm sure pretty much any cartridge above the standard full-power rifle cartridges would penetrate them (.50 BMG, .55 Kynoch, 14.5 mm etc would tear them to shreds). A shaped charge would defeat them as well. I'm sure some large, very high velocity fragments might well penetrate.--[[Special:Contributions/92.251.162.146|92.251.162.146]] ([[User talk:92.251.162.146|talk]]) 22:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
:They are highly effective against most effects of an explosion. They will protect the wearer from a large amount of heat, overpressure and fragments, and obviously their reistance to fragments includes bullets. Modern bomb suits will also protect the wearer from any chemical or biolical effects of bombs. However they have limits. I'm sure pretty much any cartridge above the standard full-power rifle cartridges would penetrate them (.50 BMG, .55 Kynoch, 14.5 mm etc would tear them to shreds). I'm sure some large, very high velocity fragments might well penetrate as well, along with shaped charges.--[[Special:Contributions/92.251.162.146|92.251.162.146]] ([[User talk:92.251.162.146|talk]]) 22:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
== Bullets ==
== Bullets ==
Revision as of 22:15, 21 February 2010
Welcome to the miscellaneous section of the Wikipedia reference desk.
The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
I live in California and I've gotten many rashes that I believe are caused by Poison Sumac. Also, all the Sumac plants I've gotten rashes from live in dry areas. However, the Wikipedia article (and most other sources) state that Poison Sumac only lives on the East coast and prefers wet, marshy areas. Is it just the article that is incorrect or am I mistaking some other plant for Poison Sumac? Could somebody who also lives on the West coast confirm that Poison Sumac does actually grow here? If it helps, I'll see if I can get a picture of one of the plants I think is Poison Sumac.--ChromeWire (talk) 00:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) I may have seen somewhere the claim that Toxicodendron species other than poison oak are occasionally found in California, but overwhelmingly the most important one is poison oak (which our article idiosyncratically names Western Poison-oak, a spelling you won't see many places other than here). Poison oak is a sumac; if it's a time of year (like now) that you can't usually see the "leaflets three", then I wouldn't be surprised if it looked a lot like poison sumac at the same time.
(ec) The chemical in poison sumac that causes a rash in most people is the same one found in poison ivy and poison oak. Apparently there is a variety of poison oak toward the west coast. I have no idea about poison sumac or poison ivy in that part of the country. And, as a standard Wikipedia disclaimer, we can't identify what's causing your rash. We can only confirm that certain plants that are known to cause rashes in some people are known to be present on the west coast. Falconusptc00:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure it's not poison oak. It looks pretty similar to the picture at the right but it's leaf is a little more taco shaped and has a more rounded tip. --ChromeWire (talk) 01:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am an avid hiker and used to live in California. I'm fairly sure there is no poison sumac there. But there is plenty of poison oak. Poison oak leaves come in all kinds of shapes. They generally have rounded edges, unlike poison sumac. In drier areas, the leaves do tend to curl into what you might call a taco shape. Though this is the rainy season in California, so I'd expect the leaves to be green and flatter at this time of year. If you are in an area that has not had much rain, though, the leaves could be a little curled up. This site has a couple of pictures of different types of poison oak. Marco polo (talk) 01:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I went hiking just the weekend before last — there weren't yet many leaves on the poison oak. However there were lots of little green buds, and it looked like it was getting ready to burst forth, so there might be by now. Here's a shot of it: . --Trovatore (talk) 03:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Disclaimer: I take no responsibility if it turns out that this is not poison oak. Please do not rely on a plant not being poison oak, just because it doesn't look like this. --Trovatore (talk) 03:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to page 136 of the Jepson Manual of Higher Plants of California (1993), which is the major complete flora for California, there is only one species of Toxicodendron found in the state: T. diversilobum (Western Poison Oak). None of the other species of Toxicodendron (vemix, rydbergii, radicans, and pubescens) found in the United States are found in California. Therefore, the plant that is causing your rashes is either Western Poison Oak, OR (as pointed out above) some other plant that you are personally sensitive to. The photographs in our article Toxicodendron diversilobum give a you a good idea of what it looks like. Also, as Trovatore points out above, it is deciduous and without leaves at this time of year; it will still cause rashes even when it is leafless.--Eriastrum (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Identity
I have been asked to identify myself, as in what my Ph.D. is in. It is in military/naval history from London University. I have published 8 books and variius peer-reviewed articles on the subject. You can also look me up on the net.
I was asked this quesiton at the head of an article, but the questioner did not identify him(her) self.
Might I suggest your self-identification would be most appropriate on the talk page of that article you referred to, not here. This is a Reference Desk, where we answer general questions, just like in a library. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is never any need to identify your self on Wikipedia, so don't do it unless you really want to for some reason. remember, as a wikipeida editor you are just presenting material available in sources; who you are as an individual is irrelevant. --Ludwigs201:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's one view. Personally I don't buy it. When I'm evaluating an editor's contributions, there are a couple of things I frequently want to know, to which his identity is not irrelevant. One is, is this person expert enough in the field to be able to deeply understand the source material, and therefore interpret it correctly in context? Another is, does this person have a strongly-held view on the merits of the question, that might color his interpretation and/or presentation? --Trovatore (talk) 02:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the problem is that identity is not in itself sufficient to trump reliable sourcing of articles. Being a PhD and well respected in a field is not enough to say "I don't have to provide sources for my writing because I am an expert". I am not saying that is what the OP is talking about, but having witnessed some conflicts at Wikipedia, that is most often the biggest problem. People believe that because they have personal knowledge about a subject, it absolves them from having to provide reliable sources to back up their writing. I agree that identity is not irrelevent, entirely, but we should also not place too much emphasis on identity. The primary concern is, and should always be, on faithfully representing the existing published knowledge which exists in reliable sources; and on avoiding original research or other unreferenced information in Wikipedia articles, even if the editor who writes that information is an expert or whatever. --Jayron3205:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I agree completely — I'm not suggesting that we let people add whatever they want to to articles based on credentials. That's not the point at all. My point is more that I don't completely trust editors who won't say anything about themselves. I don't know where they're coming from, what background (or agenda) they might have.
Your next point is going to be that I don't know that even if they do say who they are, and of course that's true. But I at least have a starting point. --Trovatore (talk) 07:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, of course, what else could it be? I am making an assertion about my own attitude, my own approach to evaluating the contributions of others. I am not making an assertion about the others per se.
However, first, it is an attitude I consider justified and encourage others to adopt. And second, I encourage those who have been reticent to let others know some basic facts about themselves, to be aware that this may come with a cost. --Trovatore (talk) 10:37, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's just that sometimes people say "I don't trust X", but mean "X is untrustworthy". It's meant to be some sort of criticism of X. I'm not saying that was your meaning, though. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, you can say you have a PhD. That doesn't prove anything. I can say I'm a man (I am), but let's see you prove it. This isn't to say that our OP isn't a PhD, it just means that people can say lots of things. It doesn't just doesn't advance their credibility. Aaronite (talk) 05:40, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're all missing the point. People without PhD's can understand and fruitfully contribute to any topic on wikipedia. any editor who doesn't understand a topic will rapidly expose the fact that s/he doesn't understand in discussion, through the misuse of concepts and the misapplication of sources. The only assessment you ned to make about any editor is that they are using sources appropriately, without misinformation or misrepresentation. Wikipedia is a tertiary source: we don't do peer review here, we don't engage in research, and we don't make novel conclusions about topics, so there is never any reason to be concerned about whether a given editor is qualified to do those things (which are the primary functions of a PhD). --Ludwigs216:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not missing the point. I don't entirely agree with your point. Oh, I certainly agree that you don't need a PhD to contribute to Wikipedia. One of the most brilliant mathematicians I know never got his PhD.
But it's too simple to say "well, we're just repeating what the sources say". Without expertise in the field, you can't accurately evaluate what the sources mean, and you can't reliably discern which ones are presenting well-accepted ideas, which ones are idiosyncratic, which ones are fringe or past the fringe. (Digression: unfortunately fringe has become pejorative, which it really shouldn't be — the high-risk-high-reward area of any discipline is always on the fringe. But sadly the word become a euphemism for crackpot, which makes it difficult to use in its proper sense.) --Trovatore (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's not entirely true, either, though. Librarians often have no specific expertise, but are expected to find and evaluate material for users. Aaronite (talk) 03:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that an editor may misuse a source out of ignorance. For that matter, they could do it because of bias, possibly unconscious bias, even if they are sufficiently knowledgeable to understand it correctly. If you suspect that this is the case - as I often do, and it often turns out that I'm right - a [need quotation to verify] tag is in order. But you don't have the right to remove an editor's contributions just b/c you don't know who he is; you have to recognize a sourced statement as a sourced statement. It is pretty absurd to say that you simply don't trust the knowledge of anyone anonymous on principle - especially when Wikipedia is 90% anonymous and it is part of the nature of the project. Such an attitude is more suitable for Citizendium. Judgements on the credibility of an editor are normally made based on their behaviour on Wikipedia, not based on their real-world identity. And 90% of the time in my experience, the problem is not ignorance but plain bias, which anyone can be guilty of.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 20:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm? Where did removing editors' contributions come in? I never said anything about that. Just the same, I think people should say who they are and where they're coming from. I'm not in favor of requiring it, but I do think they should do it, and I don't think they should expect to be taken quite as seriously if they don't. --Trovatore (talk) 04:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Solar Energy
I have heard that one of the sources of energy is solar energy. You can use solar energy for generating electricity, heating water, and cooking. But what about when it's at night or raining? What do you do about solar energy then?
Solar energy is best used in conjunction with means of storing excess energy during sunny times for use at times when it is not. If you generate electricty via solar power, you often generate lots of excess energy which can be simply wasted by letting it drift off as heat energy. However, lots of solutions to this have been proposed, and implemented to various degrees:
You can use solar power to generate hydrogen gas for use in fuel cells, see this device from Honda, that does exactly that.
You can use excess electrical power to pump water into a large resevoir; you can then release the water at night to run a hydroelectric plant.
Wind power can be used in conjunction with solar power to fill in some of the gaps, for example it is often windier when it is cloudy and raining.
No single energy resource is really a great idea in isolation, the idea is to develop a system using multiple systems which can introduce enough redundancy to smooth out the problems with each other. A hypothetical fully "green" energy system that was devoid of fossil fuels would require contributions from hydroelectric and solar power and wind power and fuel cells and nuclear power and biomass power to be successful. Solar is a necessary part of this equation, but it is not the ONLY part.--Jayron3205:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You missed one important method of storing energy from solar cells: batteries. Solar power is often used in places where other ways of getting electricity are not feasible (on satellites, sailboats, or remote weather stations, for example). In many cases, the small amount of electricity generated is easily stored in a chemical cell.
To minimize the problems from clouds, many commercial solar arrays are built in areas that are very sunny. For example, the Nellis Solar Power Plant is in the desert in Nevada. This still leaves the obvious downtime during the night, however. We recently had a post about a proposed system to put solar cells in space (where there are no clouds, and it's nearly always day), and beam the energy down to Earth. This obviously incurs other costs though. Buddy431 (talk) 06:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have a solar water heater on my roof. I have hot water 2-3 hours after sunrise. Unless I plan on showering during the middle of the night, I generally have hot water. On cloudly days it can take 4-5 hours (after sunrise) to get hot water, and I can also heat it electrically. Save monkey love 4 me (talk) 10:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You've kind of hit on what's really going on, which is convenience. People have gotten used to being able to do what they want, e.g. showering anytime of the day or night as needed. Having to plan things around restrictions like that is something a lot of folks just plain don't want to do. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 10:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Solar panels do generate electricity when it's raining - after all, you can still see, so there must still be light. They generate less, of course. --Tango (talk) 13:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
menstrual period
This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page. —Akrabbimtalk06:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis or prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page. —Akrabbimtalk06:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)--~~~~[reply]
Does any one know what year Fr.Chris Riley became a priest? Also I read somewhere what kind of priest he became but I forgot so could you answer that too. Thanks 220.233.83.26 (talk) 07:06, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am investigating whether desalination application in the developing world would be profitable if the water produced was used to make crops that produced biofuels. So I am looking to know how many cubic metres of water would be required to produce a hectare of rapeseed crop grown annually in the developing world to add to my calculations to see if this option was economically viable. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.113.181 (talk) 13:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I found a review for a book that says that rapeseed needs about 80-240 mm of water in a growing season. Over a hectare (10,000 sq. m), that's 800-2400 cubic meters of water. Of course, if you're really planning on growing this in the desert (where there's truly no rain), you're going to have other problems in addition to water. But it appears that some people anyway do believe that it's viable to make bio-fuels with rapeseed in developing areas. The book in question looks like it might be right up your alley ("Sustainable Production of Seed Oils: Rapeseed-Mustard Technology" ISBN81-8321-118-6), so if you're really interested in learning about growing rapeseed in developing countries, it might be worth the $85 to buy it. The key search term for google when looking for this type of thing seems to be "oil seeds" or "oilseeds" along with a term like "biofuel". Buddy431 (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) It takes 14 kilowatt-hours of energy to produce 1,000 gallons of desalinated seawater. You can make 100 gallons of biodiesel from an acre of Rapeseed - which would produce about 3800 kilowatt-hours of energy. However, the biofuel conversion plant will consume about 33% of the power it produces - so we're down to maybe 2800 kw-hr per acre. So - the question is: How many gallons of water does it take to grow an acre of rapeseed? 200,000 gallons would be the break-even point. I've been unable to find how much irrigation water rapeseed needs - and it's going to depend on the weather and a bunch of other factors. I did find that grass requires 1" of water per week in an average climate (whatever that means). That's 32,000 gallons per week per acre. So if you have to irrigate for more than 6 weeks - you'll need more energy to desalinate the water than you'll get from the biodiesel.
This is an exceedingly rough calculation with many assumptions - but it definitely indicates that you can't win this way. I'd also be concerned that the desalination plant produces water that's actually still fairly salty - good enough for human consumption - but if you irrigated with it year after year, the salt content in the soil would build up over the years to the point where your crop can't grow in it anyway. SteveBaker (talk) 21:44, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rapeseed requires a relatively little amount of water; that's one of the reasons that it is touted as a possible source of biofuel in developing areas. With my numbers (800-2400 cubic meters per hectare, with 2.471 acres per hectare, 227 gallons per cubic meter, gives I think 75,000-220,000 gallons per acre per season), and assuming Steve's math is basically right, it's at least conceivable that it's viable to water the crop with water obtained solely from desalinization. You're going to need fertilizer, though, if you're growing it in marginal land, which adds more costs, and I agree that soil depletion and salt buildup need to be considered. Buddy431 (talk) 22:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mouthwashes without alcohol or chlorhexidine, available in UK
According to the article here, http://www.australianprescriber.com/magazine/32/6/162/4/ using an alcohol-based mouthwash increases your chance of oral etc cancer by five to nine times. Regularly using mouthwashes with chlorhexidine may also be harmful according to both the linked article and the Wikipedia article.
I was using the alcohol-free variant of the brand "Dentalux" sold at Lidl UK, but I see it includes chlorhexidine digluconate. Does anyone know the brand name and/or UK retailer of a mouthwash that contains neither alcohol nor chlorhexidine please? Thanks 89.243.72.5 (talk) 15:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not an answer, but a suggestion. Mouthwashes marketed for children are less likely to contain alcohol, so it may be worth reading the labels of some of those next time you are out shopping. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to ask at your local chemist's. DuncanHill (talk) 15:40, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is our recession over yet? The list say the economial black this time last from December 2007 to December 2009 it seem it just end. Until how long will the economy grow again and everyone to have a good amount of jobs again? Is unemployment still rising or is it dropping? how much is US deficit right now, still rising or it is starting to fall now--209.129.85.4 (talk) 17:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there anything in particular that the link article and references doesn't answer? "By July 2009, a growing number of economists believed that the recession may have ended. This view was bolstered with the initial estimate of a 3.5% rise in the GDP (Q3 09). As is often the case at the end of a recession, unemployment is still rising.[51] The National Bureau of Economic Research will not make this official determination for some time." We obviously can't offer personal predicitions on the RD Nil Einne (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Offtopic argument collapsed about whether the original poster thought we were all Americans, and how offended non-Americans should be by such statements.
Uhhhh... no, the context made "our" entirely relevant to the U.S. recession, further supplemented by the fact that a major plurality of those who use the English Wikipedia are from the U.S.--WaltCip (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd look for context clues and ask for clarification, as any rational person would... perhaps working with the initial assumption that the writer of the question is talking about the Queen of England, In this case, context was provided in the section's blue-link.--WaltCip (talk) 22:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This also could mean that OP only wanted feedback from fellow Americans in the same boat - assumably because they would be the most informed. I am sure the OP did not mean to offend by assuming the citizenship of all his readers. --69.241.97.178 (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down, folks! Remember that English does not use distinguish between inclusive and exclusive uses of words like "our" and "ours": they mean "mine and someone else's -- maybe that's you, maybe someone else, maybe both, whatever makes sense". From the context, what makes sense is "our" = "US". Now maybe someone would like to provide a source that addresses the question? --Anonymous, 23:44 UTC, February 16, 2010, in our calender.
We can all deduce that the OP was referring to the US, but to spell it out, the problem was that the OP was being rather rude to non-Americans, presumably unwittingly. 89.242.101.230 (talk) 00:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He wasn't being rude. I think you should calm down a bit here. He's also asked questions before indicating he was from the US, if you must know. Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would be surprised if there was any public information about that, since freight elevators are not normally offered for public use. However, if anyone is willing to tell you why, it would likely be the station management. --Anonymous, 23:46 UTC, February 16, 2010.
Freight elevators, being intended for freight, are not necessarily rated for (public) passenger use. As most customers of the train station aren't hauling freight, I would guess they are locked to prevent the general public from using them, as a safety consideration. Anyone who *is* hauling freight would likely be a train station employee, and thus have access to a key. -- 174.21.247.23 (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Or it's possible that the OP did use it, and is asking why it was necessary to ask for help. --Anonymous, 02:25 UTC, February 20/10.
Can a contractor get a letter stating they have employment
PERTH WA. Can a contractor get a letter from an employee stating they have a job to go back to if they are taking time off for health reasons. My Team manager at my place of employment, i am a Teledealer, said i could take a minimum of two months then contact the recruitment manager when i was ready to go back to work and i would have to sit a test on what i recalled and train up on areas i needed retraining in. I'm required to give the letter to Centrelink to help with my claim for sickness benefit. After contacting the recruitment manager early to request they supply me with what i required, i was informed that they didn't think they could give me a letter confirming i had employment to go back to, as i was a contractor not an employee. Emjeejt (talk) 21:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your contract would be your only promise of a job to return to. If your contract doesn't guaratee you will have a job when you return, you have no guarantee. Of course you can ask for such a letter promising a job for you when you return, but make sure you ask for the letter from someone who has the authority to honour the agreement. And there's no good reason that an employer would give you such a letter. I think there's a legal aid organisation in your state, they may be able to give you more advice. But in short - I'm pretty sure you can't demand a letter stating you have a guaranteed job to return to. --203.202.43.54 (talk) 01:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's a valid question, given that the OP's question is rather vague. One could argue that the best age is fairly young, like early 20s, so the mother has enough energy to keep up with the kids. I've also known women that were 40ish, and that energy level just compounds the fact that bearing children at that age is a lot tougher on the body than it is at 20. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 21:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bugs and Tagishsimon are right: you are being too vague; do you mean the point of maximum fertility, or at the point of being able to provide best for the child's upbringing, or what? (And our answer will probably be wrong for any individual person, by the way; there is not going to be a single right answer that applies to everyone.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have searched the internet to no avail. I found a 1938 Daisy Mfg. Co. Red Ryder coin or medalion. I was wondering if this was an emblem on a Red Ryder BB gun or was there a "coin" included when a purchase of the BB gun was made? Is there any value in this coin? Is it a collector's item? Thanks for your help.98.117.126.247 (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is one for sale on eBay - the claim there is that this was mounted on the stock of the gun. It has a "Buy It Now" price of $45 - and two people made offers at less than that - so that's probably the upper limit on what it's likely to be worth. One thing I noticed in surfing around was that there are reproductions of the 1938 gun on sale even today - so it might be very tough to know whether you have an actual 1938 medallion or one that was made last week. On the other hand, adverts for the modern reproductions don't show a medallion like that. SteveBaker (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
converter
I have picture of pages of book. I want to convert this picture into ms word format .when I do it with use of converter it sipmly added as picture in ms word page , I also want to change the word -
I want fully convert jpeg or pdf or tif file into ms word fomat.
there is any converter which do this tusk together or indivisually?Supriyochowdhury (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all. I've been going through my old photos and uploading to Panoramio. The latest batch I'm going through is from my February 2005 trip to New York City. There's one photo I can't figure out where it was taken: [3]. I do know, however, it was taken en route from the United Nations to either the Museum of Modern Art or the Whitney Museum. I don't know what camera I used (it wasn't mine), but it's helpfully focused on the car door and not the outside. Would be grateful if any NYC people could help. Cheers. matt (talk) 23:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like you know a couple of possible routes. Have you tried Google maps "satellite" view to see if any green canopies show up on what would be the left side of the route? I wouldn't be surprised if there's even a street view that could enable you to isolate this exact spot. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 23:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I'm doing that at the moment. As I was travelling in a limousine, it also wouldn't surprise me if the driver took an unusual route or extended it somewhat, so I figured I was best off asking as well as checking myself! :) matt (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's really fuzzy, but the street sign on the light pole looks to me like one for a numbered east-west street, which would mean that you were on a one-way avenue heading north—almost certainly First, Third, or Madison—somewhere between 42nd and 74th streets if you were going to the Whitney, or between 42nd and 53rd if you were going to MOMA. I could be wrong, though. Deor (talk) 00:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but FDR Drive is on the east edge of Manhattan. If you're driving north, why would a sign direct you west if you're trying to get to FDR Drive? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Did everyone miss the inscription on the building? I Googled on "Love they neighbor" and "inscription" and this page was the first hit. It shows what is clearly the same building and says (in a slightly muddled way) that it is on Fifth Avenue. Now add "fifth" as a third search term and the first hit, this page, says it's 838 Fifth Avenue, on the southeast corner with 65th Street. So the photo is looking south and FDR Drive would indeed be reached by turning left. --Anonymous, 10:32 UTC, February 17, 2010.
Wow. You win the prize on this one. Google Street View verifies – 838 Fifth Avenue, photo was taken at the junction with E65th. I'm seriously impressed. And I imagine I was travelling from the Whitney to the MOMA (having already gone from the UN to the Whitney) – can't for the life of me find my itinerary... matt (talk) 11:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
February 17
Crossword confusion
Tonight I did a crossword and there was a clue that I didn't understand. The clue was Pre-coll. catchall and the answer is elhi. Can someone tell me what this means? What is the "coll" being referred to? If I knew that, then maybe I'd know what elhi refers to. Dismas|(talk)02:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"elhi" is US jargon for "Elementary and High School". "coll." is an abbreviation for "college"; note the the x-word convention that says an abbreviation in the clue suggests an abbreviation in the answer. PhGustaf (talk) 02:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I knew about the use of abbreviations in clues and answers but without knowing that coll meant college in this instance, I was at a loss. Not that I would have gotten it though since I've never run across the abbrev. "Elhi" before. Dismas|(talk)03:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There is undoubtedly a tiny place somewhere near where one of Mr Shortz's authors (he edits more than writes crossword puzzles, I believe) once lived that uses some very obscure definitions. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to this site[4] the 'ramp' is the walkway or catwalk used by models to display new clothing from fashion houses. The term appears to be used largely in the Indian sub-continent. Thus a ramp girl would be a model who walks the ramp. Of course there may be another colloquial or 'street' meaning of which I am unaware. Richard Avery (talk) 08:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're far from the first person to be excited by the prospect. (See [6], [7], and many others. Possibly NSFW.) The first time I remember MattelTM getting their pants in a twist about this was maybe 1997. PhGustaf (talk) 04:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
China's Foreign Policy
As per your references I noted that China has maintained very good relations with all it's neighbouring countries ,then why it is that china even after entering into peaceful pact with the then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru it entered a war with India ia 1962.Is it not it's foreign policy is corrupt......!!!!!!!!!!1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.230.3 (talk) 04:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Back up a step, DJ Clayworth. The OP states very clearly, “that China has maintained very good relations with all it’s neighbouring countries,” which is not part of our article on Chinese foreign policy. So, when I say “[a]ctually, our article says nothing of the kind,” you might want to look at the cited article before spouting off about whether China and India had a month-long border skirmish 47 years ago. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Generally yes, but I'd like to have a nickel for every time I've seen it done wrong, including your unindented first comment above. And a dime for every time I've commented on it and been told "it happens, don't sweat it". —Tamfang (talk) 17:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. One suggests ignorance and a willingness to learn (although potentially a willingness to learn creepy things). The other is creepy women-as-objects-to-fuck behaviour. 86.182.38.255 (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Be yourself, be light-hearted/fun to be around, put yourself in situations where you'll meet the opposite se, engage in your hobby or interest in a social-manner (e.g. if you like photography join a local group). Be keen but don' be desperate. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Being kind and nice yet having high status too, good earner, slim, fit. Friendly, informal, sense of humour. Being popular with other women. Do not be an egoist. Be attentive to other people, especially the group the girl is in. I read somewhere recently that women prefer men who have a feminine side rather than being totally masculine, not sure how true that is. 89.240.100.129 (talk) 14:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Depends on the woman. But most women are attracted to a man who is confident but not arrogant. And the stronger the woman is, the stronger the man needs to be. Most women don't like men that are "weak". The ones that do, are to be avoided. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 14:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First, get the assumption out of your mind that all girls are attracted by the same thing - they're not. Second, since the answer to the question is not clear cut, you are basically asking for opinions. Third, we don't even know your motive or your personality. If you're looking for a long-term relationship, you should provide more details about the type of person that you are, your hobbies, your interests, etc.. If not, then the above advice probably will help you.--WaltCip (talk) 15:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oy. the obvious (and difficult) answer is to not try. Trying to 'attract' women will usually come off as desperate or vain, which few people (make or female) find attractive. If you're looking to get laid, make yourself into something with cultural currency (get money, be stylish, be handsome, athletic or muscular, become a philosophical rebel or a more conventional leader); if you're looking for a relationship, be yourself, and be comfortable with who you are (because when you're comfortable with who you are it radiates honestly, trustworthiness, and other qualities that women will want to see before they'll even consider taking you seriously as a relationship). mostly, relax and be confident. it's the hardest easy thing in the wold. --Ludwigs216:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. "To thine own self be true". Respect yourself, respect others, and especially show respect to the women you would like to have a closer relationship with. Be kind. Be aware of your weaknesses, and work to overcome them. Be proud of your strengths, and use them to help the world around you. I could go on. BrainyBabe (talk) 16:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, loads, although many editors seem oddly unaware of this. Honestly, the two links I provided contain some of the best advice I've seen for a guy who needs to ask this question: this is why I linked them. 86.182.38.255 (talk) 18:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I'm any expert in the art of attracting girls per se, but a couple of people have mentioned having money. Just having money. As if it were enough for a girl to know that you have money to make you instantly attractive to them. That is extremely demeaning to women, making them out to be a race of golddiggers. It's what you do, or could potentially do, with your money that might make some difference. But you can still attract women even if you're living hand to mouth and have very little left over after you've paid the bills. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 18:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, the question was "how do I attract a girl", it wasn't "how do I attract MOST girls" or "what is the thing that most girls look for". Having a lot of money means you are almost 100% certain to attract at least a single female. Same with being extremely attractive, or extremely powerful. Does this mean all women are golddiggers/shallow? Of course not. But if you're suggesting that absolutely none of them are, well then that's just silly. Chris M. (talk) 21:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But then, how do these girls become aware you have money? Do you walk into a bar with a sign on your head "I have plenty of money", and wait for them to flock to you? Why hasn't anyone ever tried this before? -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 22:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
JackofOz, "having money attracts women" isn't any more or less demeaning to women than "looking good (strong, handsome) attracts women". Both are statements that women are attracted to fit men -- money being taken as an indicator of one's fitness in modern society. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 04:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not so much "having money" as it is about being financially stable. The divorce courts are littered with ne'er-do-wells who can't hold a job and may otherwise be unstable. Women in general like men who are strong and stable. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 04:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Jemy, will having asked with exaggerated punctuation !!!!! a bunch of strangers about how to manipulate the feelings of a target female to your advantage, and signing yourself "cool007" three times, be the sort of mature behaviour that you will be proud of if a female gets to know you intimately? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The question could also be, What kind of a man do I want to be? That may sound sexist, or reeking of machismo, but I think the bottom line is that girls or women are attracted to masculinity. I am not addressing the question of other types of sexual attraction; I am just addressing the question of attraction between male and female. Getting back to what I was saying, I think the most efficient route to addressing your question is to inquire of yourself as to what type of masculinity you would most like to be the embodiment of. I think this is going to be an intangible thing. But nobody is a "cookie-cutter" person (like everybody else). I think a male needs to take his masculinity seriously, in all its subtleties. To some this comes naturally. But for others a lot of thought is involved. Obviously this is not a thought process alone. How one acts is a large part of how one expresses oneself. If finding a good relationship is important, mindfulness of the quality of your own masculinity within that relationship is important. I think that the bottom line is that the only currency you have that matters is your masculine personality — but that can be defined any way. Bus stop (talk) 04:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It would help to be somewhere where a) girls are, and b) where they may be looking for partners. So join a dance or art class for example - men may be in the minority there and in demand. Or do some evening classes / night school or join a club of some kind. Joining an online dating site would help put you in touch with girls looking for partners. Going the masculine route of just socialising with other men is not going to introduce you to many girls. 89.243.151.96 (talk) 13:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personally,I'm always intrigued as to how I have not yet managed to attract a female when I am hard-working,clean-living,of good moral conduct(apart from a propensity to whizz down supermarket aisles on a trolley yelling Yee-hah),and yet on watching Judge Judy and similar, Cletus the Yokel who has several children by various women,paying nothing to them and whose main activities are either illegal or drunken has three or four ladies fighting over him.
I'm assuming you want some sort of a relationship and not just physical action-if that's your scene,then the clubs on a Friday or Saturday night would be a good place to start.Come round our town's harbour on a Friday night and there are many young ladies staggering around who would happily be attracted to you.They won't remember your name or any details about you the next morning though...
I'd look at the interests you have and follow them.If you're a quiet bookish stamp-collector,then it's unlikely that you'll find your dream girl at the Metal Thrash Night.Evening classes is a good idea- you're more likely to find someone of your type if you share a common interest.i.e I do drama and writing because I'm creative-chances are the other people there will be creative types.Plus,you have a guaranteed topic of conversation to break the ice,even if it's just 'I liked your story'.
Let them find out more about you-this comes up quite naturally-your background(eg born in New Zealand,moved to England when little,lived with mum/dad/sis,had cats/fish/deranged hamster),what sort of hobbies you enjoy(for instance F1 racing/drama/linedance/collecting cool souvenirs)and see if any of those spark something.
Be yourself-girls will appreciate you if you're honest,warm and genuinely interested.Are there any girls at work or uni that you are friendly with?Sometimes that's the best way to start-chatting to them,smiling,asking how their day went,lamenting the awfulness of the boss/lecturer with them.
Being slightly eccentrically fun can be good,worryingly creepy is not.If they like what they see,you can move it up a bit (you seem nice-would you like to come for a coffee with me.)If it doesn't progress to romance,you'll have a really good female friend which is a super thing to have gained.
And don't forget,we have some delightful wikipettes(or should that be Wikipedettes?)here who are charming and friendly,happy to help with advice and not too likely to bite you(unless you so desire).
I'm sure if you are genuine and pleasant,they will notice and maybe venture over to the Talk page to just say hi or leave a nice message :) I'm hoping so anyway. Here endeth the lesson Lemon martini (talk) 03:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As opposed to a Wikipet of the Month which is entirely different-wikipets are small cute things you keep that snuggle up on your lap,keep your feet warm at night and like being stroked whereas a Wikipette is... hmmm maybe not so different Lemon martini (talk) 18:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone, just wondering, I have a plug socket with no on/off switch (Which I assume must mean that there's always power running through it). When I plug something in sometimes there's a 'flash' of electricity coming out from between the socket and plug ends. I just was wondering why it sometimes does this and whether it's dangerous for me, the plug or the appliance.
Thanks for any answers. Chevymontecarlo (talk) 09:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know exactly what causes it, but as long as you don't touch the spark and your hands aren't wet, you're cool. Hell, I plug appliances with wet or damp hands all the time, sometimes I even get a little shock, and nothing happens to me, lol. But I don't recommend anyone else doing that. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 09:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sparks like that mostly happen if you're plugging in an appliance that draws a heavy current and it's already switched on. When the resistance through the appliance is low, the electricity can jump across a very small gap between the plug pin and the socket contact, creating a spark. This is especially likely if the current was already flowing, which can happen if the pin touches the contact and then moves back a little, as it might due to the uneven motion of your hands.
The only problem this is likely to create, I think, is that the spark overheats the metal (both the plug and the socket), which can damage its surface. Then you may get a poor contact when you use the plug and/or the socket thereafter, which can lead to overheating or poor performance of what you're plugging in. I suppose it could even become a fire hazard. --Anonymous, 10:43 UTC, February 17, 2010.
The arcing/sparking problem definitely seems to me to be something that happens with US-style plugs and particularly with laptop chargers. Even without the laptop plugged in to the charger, I can't plug in the charger to the mains without a spark. --Phil Holmes (talk) 15:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know any sparking would be within the socket box, and particularly with not-old plugs which have prongs which are only metal at the end, you would not be able to touch a live surface at any time even when putting the plug in. The plug sockets always have a switch as well. 78.146.206.38 (talk) 23:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had an electric grill that did that. Terrible design since there was literally no on-off switch, and a large heating element draws a lot of current. My experience with that device is that such sparks are not good as the electrical system on that grill wound up tripping my circuit breaker and frying the electric lines in the grill itself. Googlemeister (talk) 14:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the GM EV1 that was only available for lease for 4 years and only in 6 towns in the U.S.? Perhaps the ads were carefully targeted for their limited audience. Rmhermen (talk) 18:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can compare some creepy(?) EV1 ads (1)(2)(3) with an ad that is quite informative (4) (all videos). There may have been resistance within GM to the impact of the new electric car on their existing investment, dealer network and marketing that led to its unclear profiling and short life. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)corrected EV1[reply]
New Bike
I'm looking to purchase a new bicycle. I've bought one in the past but it was a cheap piece of crap and it was worthless in a year. I'm looking for a bike I can use basically just to ride 1/4-1/2 mile to a busstop and back every day. There isn't a side-walk or bike lane on this road so I'm going to be going with traffic so I want to make sure I can keep up a respectable pace without an excessive amount of effort. This isn't going to be going through dirt or anything like that if that matters. Basically I'm looking for an idea of exactly what I need for the what I want to accomplish, and also I'm looking for some suggestions of brands or locations to buy such a bike. I'd love to spend no more then $200 if that's at all possible. Thanks! Chris M. (talk) 17:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you plan to ride on pavement and the pavement is not too rough, I recommend a road bike and not a mountain bike or even a hybrid. You can go faster on a road bike with the same amount of effort, since they don't have fat tires creating friction and resistance. If you really can't spend more than $200, then you may need to consider a used bike. Try to find a reputable bike store that doesn't sell stolen bikes. The staff at a good bike store will be able to offer advice on the best models for your needs. If you want a new bike that is well built and fast, I think you will need to spend at least $400-$500. Marco polo (talk) 17:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The way you say it was "worthless in a year" might suggest that you don't spend much time maintaing your bike; ride quality really shouldn't deteriorate that rapidly. My town bike was bought almost ten years ago for less than £120 but thanks to regular oiling, careful gear changing and keeping the tyres in good nick it rides as well as the day it came out of the shop. I've seen student bikes that were shiny-new in October but are rusted up by the start of January because people don't look after them — they must be really tough to get moving.
I'd definitely recommend avoiding knobbly mountain bike tyres, since these will slow you down significantly. It might be worth going for a fairly solid second-hand bike with hub gears if you don't mind sacrificing a little speed, since these are much less prone than derailleur gears to physical damage, wear through usage, going out of index etc etc. My university bike is an old £40 shopper thing with a three-speed Sturmey-Archer dynohub, which provides lighting (admittedly only while I'm moving) as well as gearing. All it needs is oil on the chain every month, a couple of drops in the hub and pumping up the tyres when they go a little soft. An old bike that's in good nick might be more cost-effective than a brand new one for what you want to do.
It was a <$100 bike from Target though, so I don't think it was entirely my fault. But I think you are right that I did not maintain it as well as I should have, and intend to with this new bike. Thanks for the great advice though, and using this bike is an attempt to avoid doing a car payment or getting a used car, when I can do bike + public transport instead. I suppose I just don't have an idea of what bikes actually cost. But I appreciate the help and suggestions. Chris M. (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, a bike that cheap probably wouldn't be too solid to start with — and I apologise for the accidental insinuation that you deliberately neglect your bike; it wasn't intended. I don't drive, biking anywhere within about five miles of my home (or the 13 to my grandmother's house) and train and bike wherever feasible for anything further afield. If you have a library nearby, a good book to read on cycling in general is Richard's Bicycle Book (any version) by Richard Ballantine. It's a useful read for a introduction to bikes, accessories etc, so probably worth taking out on loan. It also includes a (if I recall correctly) balanced chapter on whether to wear a helmet or not. Personally I don't, but it's massive flamebait so I shan't go into why here. Happy cycling! Brammers (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon my interfering response but if you're short of cash and you need to ask this basic advice, and you don't sound too "up" on maintaining a bike, and are going to have to oil the gears and chain and hub and keep the bike clean, might I respectfully suggest that all of that expense and effort to bike just a quarter to half a mile twice a day may not actually be worth it. And by the time you have purchased a thief proof lock and a tyre pump and lights and batteries and a puncture repair outfit and a crash helmet (essential) and insect mask and gloves, you will probably spend twice your bike budget. And what about the time and inconvenience of unlocking the bike and locking it up every time you park it? Doesn't seem worth it to me when a nice brisk 10 minute stroll will get you where you want to go twice each day. The most you would have to spend in that circumstance would be on an umbrella. But I repeat - forgive my intrusion - maybe pedestrians aren't allowed to walk to your bus stop. Good luck. I shall now await the flak.92.30.75.11 (talk) 19:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I find the extent of my bike accessories to probably be a pump and a lock. I hardly think an insect mask and gloves are even remotely useful for what amounts to a relatively minor use. Locking and unlocking is a minute or so (max) affair each, and only happen once a day, hardly a problem there. It's possible my estimate on distance is a little off but a walk would definitely take longer then 10 minutes. Also, the aforementioned lack of sidewalks makes walking to the stop a seriously bad idea under less-then perfect conditions (like if there's mud). I appreciate the comments though :).
I agree bikes with hub gears would be better than deraullier gears. Unfortunately hub gears are harder to find. But, if its only 1/4 to 1/2 a mile why don't you walk? It should take between five and ten minutes. I'm curious what happens to the bike when you get to the bus stop. For such a short distance any bike will do. The first time I read it I thought you had written 14 miles. 78.146.206.38 (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, my estimate was off. I realized I have no real concept of distance. I checked yesterday and it's 2.1 miles. The buses here (Charlotte, NC, US) have bike racks on the front so it rides with me to downtown and I have a place I can lock it up there at work.Chris M. (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the guy is saying there is no sidewalk (pavement in UK lingo), so he'd have to walk either in a dangerous and busy street or through people's muddy lawns (UK: gardens). (There are areas like this in the United States.) Also, he thinks it would take more than 10 minutes to walk, so it is probably really more than half a mile. Considering all of this, I can see why he might want to take a bike. However, the point about mud raises an issue: Leaving your bike out in the rain repeatedly will damage it. During my days of bicycle commuting, I walked and took transit on days when heavy rain was expected. If walking really wasn't an option, I'd try to find some kind of plastic covering to shield the bike while it is locked outdoors on rainy days. Marco polo (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, no pavement/sidewalk on the way there. and it's 2.1 miles, my mistake. And the bike won't be in the rain at work, or at home, so it's less of an issue. Chris M. (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It may actually be half a mile and he may be misestimating the walking time. I've found that many people who don't walk regularly will often greatly overestimate the amount of time that walking takes. As if they've subconsciously accepted the idea that you need a vehicle to get anywhere. APL (talk) 16:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1/4 to 1/2 mile? that's a 10 minute walk (less at a brisk pace). save the money, make the walk; less hassle and better exercise over that distance anyway. --Ludwigs203:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
People here are recommending $400 and $500 bikes - but you have to ask whether such a beast would indeed last 4 to 5 times longer than a $100 bike under similar conditions and maintainance regimen? I strongly suspect not. SteveBaker (talk) 03:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldnt the greater danger be of having the bicycle stolen rather than it wearing out? You'd be better off with a cheaper bike. Although the cheaper adult bikes can be physically small in my experience. A better bike would encourage the OP to do recreational cycling and get some exercise. 89.243.151.96 (talk) 12:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A suburb with no sidewalk/pavements must be terribly isolating for children. Not only would they find it difficult to go and see their friends and play and explore, but they have no opportunities for exercise. So poor social skills and obesity. 89.243.151.96 (talk) 13:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do not, do not, do NOT buy a bicycle from Target or (God forbid) Walmart. In the cycling community, what they sell in the "Bikes" sections are often referred to as "BSOs," or Bicycle-Shaped Objects. The problem you've had may very well be the bike you bought. In any case, though, paying two hundred dollars to avoid walking less than a mile a day sounds a little odd to me. AlexHOUSE (talk) 19:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on a moment...let's think carefully about that. Suppose our OP gets paid for working overtime at (let's say) $12 an hour. Saving even 5 minutes morning and evening would allow our questioner to work an extra 10 minutes each day without affecting leisure time - earning $2.00 per day in the process. A $200 bike would pay for itself in just 100 working days - about 5 months. If (s)he earns $24 an hour and saves 10 minutes morning and evening and buys a $100 piece of junk - then it pays for itself in a little under 3 weeks. SteveBaker (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, lots of additional comments. This road is a more major road and there aren't a lot of houses on it, there are a lot of side roads into little neighborhoods with their own sidewalks (like mine). I'm not worried about theft because it will be in a secure location at both ends. the closest stop to me is 2.1 miles away, but after that there is some sidewalk, and a busstop every quarter mile at least. But a lot of people do park and ride things to save gas, and some do just walk on the grass I suppose. And I know I gave a crappy estimate before, but it's really 2.1 miles, not a half mile, sorry! :) Chris M. (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If there is a good bike shop in town, ask the owner about used bikes. Or, post a want ad near the local high school. Saving a bundle on the purchase price by buying something used seems like one solution to your problem. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I bike for a mile and back every day and the bike cost around $150. It needed a lock, and eventually needed fixing but it is still usable. ~AH1(TCU)01:07, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a little bicycle primer: there are two main types of bikes: road bikes, which are made to go fast and have skinny, smooth-ish tires which are about 27" in diameter; and mountain bikes, which are made to ride on unpacked dirt and have fat, knobby tires which are usually 26" in diameter (hybrid bikes strike a balance between the two, but they're pretty trendy currently so there's a lot of junk out there). Road bikes were big in the '70s and into the '80s, and mountain bikes were big in the '90s and continue to be popular because they're perceived to be more comfortable to ride for short distances. When you're riding on pavement, though, all those knobby tires do is create friction and make it harder to pedal the bike.
Since you know you'll be riding on pavement and you want to cover ground quickly and easily, what you want is a road bike (or a "touring bike", which is essentially the same thing). Well, you're in luck. People are constantly selling decent road bikes from the '70s and '80s for rock bottom prices. You can probably find one at a yard sale or on craigslist for $50 or less. Bike stores will often take bikes like that, fix them up, and sell them as "commuter bikes" for $400+. These bikes are steel-framed, meaning they're fairly heavy and not nearly as light and fast as today's racing bikes, but they're sturdy, absorb shock fairly well, and are perfect for taking you a few miles to the bus stop at 18mph. They're certainly better than the junk they sell at big box stores.
My suggestion would be to find one of these yard sale bikes and take it for a spin. Listen and feel for clunking sounds coming from the bottom bracket, which is the mechanism that connects the pedals together. As long as the bottom bracket is fine, the bike isn't rusted through, and the ride feels good, the bike is probably fundamentally ok. Now look at the tires. If they're popped or threadbare, you should be able to replace them, the inner tubes, and the tape which lines the wheel rim for $50-70. Hate the seat? You can probably find one you like for $15-30. Are the brake pads worn down? New ones can be had for $5-10. Grip tape for the handlebars will be <$5, a new chain will be $5-10 if the current one is slack or rusty, and new brake and shifter cables should be about $5 a pair if those are rusty. You can find plenty of tutorials online for how to change all that stuff, and the only equipment you'll need is an adjustable wrench or two, plus a chain tool ($5-10) if you need to swap the chain and some tire levers ($4) for the tires. It's even easy to swap out the handlebars if you want a different style than the one that comes on the bike. If you buy a fixed-up older bike from a store, all of this will have been done for you, but you'll pay a premium for it. The most cost-effective tactic, in my experience, is to buy a sturdy older bike, fix what needs fixin', and then fix other stuff as it breaks. You'll learn as you go, and basic bicycle maintenance is certainly not rocket science. Being able to perform basic maintenance like patching a tire and adjusting brakes will pay off in the long run. As a side note, always, always, always oil your moving parts, especially when they get wet, and give your bike a good cleaning a few times a year. That'll prevent a lot of problems before they start. Also, if you don't have a bike pump with a pressure gauge, get one. Keeping your tires at the right air pressure will deter flats and keep you moving fast. - Fullobeans (talk) 04:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good info. The only caveat I'd have is that while a skinny/smooth tyred street bike is undoubtedly way faster and smoother than a mountain bike or a BMX bike or something - the tyres are much more prone to getting punctured. If your are cycling over distances that you could comfortably walk - then getting an occasional flat isn't a disaster, you can walk home and fix it at your leisure. But if you're biking several miles then this can be a major pain (especially if it makes you late for work) and you might want to consider those chunky, knobbly tyres just because they are less prone to getting punctured. SteveBaker (talk) 18:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One way to minimize flats on road bikes it to use some "Slime" inside the inner tube, a product that includes some Kevlar good & tends to make small punctures self-heal. - Jmabel | Talk18:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Evolution
How is it that there can be such a widespread debate in the USA concerning weather or not evolution should and could be taught in scvhools and weather or not it is correct? Do they not follow a curiculum that states Teacher need to teach XYZ. I really dont understand this, if a teacher choosed to teach his pupils that 1 + 1 = 7 this would be wrong. so how cabn teachers and schools decide to teach what they like or what they personally beleive. And does teaching intelligenmt design not go against the seperation of schools and religion in such that I was told that one was not allowed to pray in American schools for this reason. Please explain this to me. PS, I have read the articles associated with the subject but they fail to address these questions in my opinion. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.172.58.82 (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One complication is that the USA does not have a nationwide curriculum. The curriculum is set, usually, at the school district level; there are a lot of these; this page says there were 14,841 school districts as of 1997. Policy for the school district is usually set by the school board. There's one school board for each district. A few of these thousands of school boards are full of creationists, some of whom are bent on, as our Intelligent Design articles state, promoting Christianity in the schools, and destroying atheism; some of these people see evolution as an atheist evil trick to turn people away from Jesus Christ, and therefore they are bound to fight this trend. Certain school boards have therefore introduced creationism (with its new name, "intelligent design") into their curriculum, and/or have mandated that the teacher stress to the students that evolution is speculative and unproven. As you imply, there is a separation of church and state in the US, and these controversies are around public schools (in the US, "public school" means government-financed). In 1968, the US Supreme Court struck down a state law forbidding the teaching of evolution, in Epperson v. Arkansas, and it wasn't until Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) that the teaching of creationism in US public schools was actually declared unconstitutional — the reason being, this advocates a particular religion, which is not something that any government in the US is allowed to do, because of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Anyway, many of these creationists also fight the separation of church and state itself on an ongoing basis; they think proselytizing is more important, so the separation is unimportant to them. Kansas evolution hearings and Intelligent design in politics are relevant articles. As a side note, few people in the US care if a US private school — most are owned and run by churches — teaches that evolution is false, despite the laws that require private schools to provide a thorough education for their clients. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Those same creationists also argue that mandating the teaching of evolution violates the separation of church and state as well, as it is similarly advocating the particular religions that don't have a problem with it. —Akrabbimtalk19:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited my paragraph above to mention the two SCOTUS court cases, and removed "government-run" from my brief definition of public schools, because a technically correct explanation would be too wordy and probably beyond my comprehension. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While there is no national curriculum, there may be state curricula that mandate the teaching of one thing or another. That's what led to the above-mentioned controversy over state science standards in Kansas. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What's worse is that large school districts can push the textbook publishers to write books to fit their curriculum - but small school districts pretty much have to take what they can get. So this is by no means a reasonable process! SteveBaker (talk) 03:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is "such a widespread debate" not because teachers are overly autonomous but, on the contrary, because state policy is centralized by its nature. (I use 'state' in the broad sense, rather than 'member of the USA'.) If there were no state schools, it would not be an issue; children would go to the schools whose teachings best approximate what the parents want them to learn. But taxpayers naturally are concerned about what is done in their name and with their money; and when a tax-supported entity has a stated mission to indoctrinate all the children, the parents also are naturally concerned about what is done with their children. So, as you say, an official curriculum is adopted at some level – and it inevitably offends some faction with a legitimate interest. —Tamfang (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to respectfully take issue with the OP's contention that prayer is not allowed in US public schools. Anyone can pray at any time anywhere. What's not allowed as unconstitutional are group prayers initiated by a school official.Chief41074 (talk) 17:17, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're absolutely right. It's the coercive nature of group prayers that's unconstitutional. I think they make an exception for the Pledge of Allegiance, as that's not really a "prayer". Individuals (silently) praying would be just fine - and I would guess there's plenty of that going on at Final Exam time. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 14:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The movie is about a girl who is with this guy who used to be amish and he went back to his amish community to visit. and he was drving in his car with his younger brother and wrecked the car and his brother flew from the car and lived but his brother didnt. Now the girl of the guy that died had to marry his younger brother who was like 13. And she got him to run away from the Amish community. Does anyone know what movie im talking about and know the name??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myra10193 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[8] has some movies and TV shows in some ways involving Amish people none of which sound like the above description. [9] has something similar including some which I don't think were in the earlier link and I checked out some of those but didn't notice anything similar. Amish#Portrayal in popular entertainment also lists stuff besides moviews and TV series. You may want to look more carefully since I didn't look that well. Nil Einne (talk) 19:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds a good candidate. I was wondering if the OP remembered wrongly and the movie didn't concern the Amish but some other isolated community and did a quick search but didn't find anythign Nil Einne (talk) 12:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Airline seat width history
Following the recent flurry of coverage regarding Kevin Smith's ejection from a Southwest flight and ensuing ranting, I've seen a few people on message boards say matter-of-factly (and of course without a reliable source) that airline seats are narrower than they once were. Is this true? 71.161.59.15 (talk) 22:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article seems to have some information on the subject (more specifically, about the number of seats crammed into aircraft of the same size, and how this figure has changed over time, but it's obviously related!). ╟─TreasuryTag►CANUKUS─╢22:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Narrower seems unlikely; on most aircraft (including the Boeing 737s that comprise Southwest's fleet) there's not a lot of leeway for width. What does vary (and has generally become more compact) is seat pitch, the distance between seats in the front-to-back direction. That hurts tall guys more than fat guys, though. Note that there is width variance between different types of planes, but this argument is a complete non-starter when it comes to Southwest. — Lomn23:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pitch is a function of how the airline chose to set up the seats. Airline seats are bolted to track(s) on the floor (and, in some models, along the outboard wall) - the track looks like this. Seats can be positioned to a granularity of about an inch. New airliners are almost always furnished by the maker to the specification of the airine buying the aircraft. It's not uncommon for buyers of second-hand airliners (such as charter companies) to replace the first class seats with regular ones, and to tighten the pitch so they can put in a few more rows. There isn't very much an airline can do about width; economy in 737s is a standard 3+3 layout, and always has been. The isle width is fixed, so they just divide up the remaining space. There's no way they could cram in a seventh seat, and running 2+3 would be such a huge revenue hit that a normal airline isn't going to do that, except for a few higher-priced rows. So really 737 seats in economy are the same size they've always been (the article TreasuryTag found notes that 737's competitor, Airbus' A319/A320 is a few inches wider, giving every ass an extra inch or so). The seats might feel narrower, however - if the pitch is small, people are more likely to want to sit with their knees apart. And there's clearly been a move, over the last couple of decades, toward budget shorthaul airlines that pitch tight because they know you'll only be there an hour or two. cf this terrifying (and possibly true?) photo. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk01:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OR obviously: I disagree; I think in the way old days, plenty of highly successful businessmen were massive in size, mainly because they could afford to eat. It's just that they had no reason to fly. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies12:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The 737 is probably a poor example due to it's size but for larger aircraft there usually is some leeway in how many seats go into a row of the economy class. For example, the Boeing 777 can fit 9 or 10 in the economy class, 9 is by far the most common (usually 3-3-3 o 2-5-2 I think) but a few do fit 10 (3-4-3 I think). Some have suggested 9 as a theoretical possibility for the A340 which usually fits 8 although from a quick search I didn't find anyone actually name an airline confirmed to use such a config. Somehowever do do it with the A330 apparently (3-3-3 instead of the normal 2-4-2). There may be similar examples on other large aircraft although do note that these configs may not be through the entire aircraft and from what I can tell they're generally quite rare even when they do exist. [10][11][12][13][14]. Some of the refs have some mention of specific seat widths as well. Nil Einne (talk) 12:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no doubt that seat width has not significantly changed within the use of a single airplane model. Perhaps I should have stated my question more clearly. I was wondering if the width of an airplane seat from the 50s, for example, was wider than they are these days. -the OP 20.137.18.50 (talk) 13:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That seems reasonable on the surface (when jet travel was a real luxury), but again, that's not really the issue that's being discussed. The 737 has been in service for forty-two years. It's based on the fuselage (thus having the same width and 3-3 seating plan) of the 707, which entered service in 1958. "Seats narrower than they used to be" is only barely more interesting than "I walked uphill to school both ways". "These days" encompasses a much larger stretch of time than you'd think at first glance. — Lomn15:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Following up with data: the de Havilland Comet, the first jet airliner, was indeed more spacious. It had a fuselage width of 117 inches, and the early models seated at most a 2-2 plan (the very early ones list some 36-passenger models, so those were probably even less). That's 29 inches per person (though naturally, seat width is less -- there's the frame, the aisle, etc, but I think those can be generalized out for comparison). However, the latter models went to 5-across, for 23 inches per person. The Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8, both introduced in 1958 and ushering in modern jet airliner service, were 6 across and 148" and 147" wide, respectively. That's 25 inches per person, both wider than the late-model (i.e. modern-capacity) Comets. Those numbers have not significantly changed in the 50 years since. Mass-market commercial air travel has always had the same seat width. — Lomn15:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I recall at least some standard jets that were 2 + 3. I can also recall 1970s ads for Continental, "The Proud Bird with the Golden Tail", which said, "Pride took a seat out." I wonder which model jet that was? I would have thought it was a 737, but it's been awhile since I've flown on a 2 + 3; all the planes I've been on in recent years were 3 + 3. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 17:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly there are still 2-3 jets; Delta's flying the MD-88 with them right now. The MD-88 is also a narrower aircraft than the 737 and many others. It's 26 inches per person -- slightly wider, but within normal variances. If anything, you need to narrow the per-person estimates of the smaller planes more to get to your actual width, as fuselage curvature becomes more significant. The ERJ-145, for instance, is 90 inches wide in a 1-2 configuration (30 inches per person! More than the early Comet!) and I can vouch that they're certainly not giving you Lay-z-boys in those. — Lomn17:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not historical, but here's current data for seat widths (and pitches, and lots of other stuff): seatguru.com The de facto standard for US-based airlines is 17"-18" actual width. Only one aircraft (Delta's extremely tiny prop plane) goes below 17", only one type of plane (the aforementioned Embraers) goes over (and only to 18.25"). — Lomn17:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wider seats do exist. I flew a few times on a private jet fitted out with large leather armchairs facing across the cabin. All very James Bond, but not usually available to the general public. It was pretty weird taking off with my back to the window. Astronaut (talk) 02:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Need I point out that this is a highly American-centric discussion? Asian airlines have narrower seats in economy class than do European or American airlines, but there is also (IMHO) more width in business and first class. DOR (HK) (talk) 03:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[citation needed]? Some of the refs I provided included Asian airlines, e.g. [15]. I don't see any evidence Asian airlines are particularly abnormal. Also since they're using the same commercial aeroplanes it's not entirely clear why their seats are going to be a lot narrower unless they're fitting more seats which is something we've already discussed. The budget airlines may use the narrow configs/more seats, e.g. AirAsia uses the 3-3-3 I mentioned above in their A330s [16] but then so do some budget airlines in Europe and the US. The more high end airlines appear to generally use the more standard configs. Nil Einne (talk) 12:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any malware free sites that I could use to download public domain music (probably mp3's)? I assume that the restriction on downloadable music files only affect copyrighted material.--121.54.2.188 (talk) 02:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note that there is a difference between public domain (no copyright) and copyleft (copyrighted but under terms that encourage downloading, circulating, and re-use). You will probably find more copyleft music than public domain music. There is a lot of Creative Commons-licensed music out there. It is not public domain—depending on the license, there are some restrictions on what you can do with it—but it is all freely downloadable. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One place I can think of that has a large directory of public domain or Creative Commons licensed music is [Hexagon.cc]. There should be a link to the "Creative Commons" group on the front page (otherwise you can search for it, I suppose), which only includes music/movies/other files that are free and legal to download. It is a torrent site, though, so you'll need a Bittorrent client of some kind. (and remember that not everything on the site is in the public domain or legal to download; only the stuff under the Creative Commons group is more or less guaranteed to be legal to download) 24.247.163.175 (talk) 00:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If I remember correctly, it is illegal to download copyrighted music in the US but not elsewhere. If it's not illegal, then LimeWire or a similar software could be used to download copyrighted files, but we will not give any legal advice on this matter. ~AH1(TCU)01:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Err, what? You don't remember correctly (and are, in essence, giving fairly bad legal advice!). There are some questions about the laws of a few, specific countries, but in general, downloading copyrighted music is almost surely going to be seen as a violation of intellectual property laws. Even in these few countries it is likely just a matter of time before either their courts or lawmakers change the laws around. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What you're probably feeling outside is a greater difference in temperature; the hot tub isn't necessarily warmer, but your body thinks it is because you're going to 38 °C (100 °F) from 5 °C (41 °F), rather than from 21 °C (70 °F). Xenon54 / talk / 02:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another possible factor is how much heat you lose through the part of your skin that's not underwater. If more skin is exposed, you feel cooler, so the depth of the water has an effect. If the air is cooler or less humid, you lose more heat and again feel cooler. --Anonymous, 05:08 UTC, February 18, 2010.
or we could go with the practical solution - where is the temperature gauge located on each? the outdoor tub will have a greater differential in temperature between the heating element and the distal surface (since the open, colder air will allow for quicker evaporation and quicker cooling) and so its entirely possible that the outdoor tub is actually hotter if the temperature regulator is set in the colder part of the tub - the tub will be maintaining 100° at it's coldest region. --Ludwigs222:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
List of Japanese battles may be useful for further references. I would personally suggest this book: "Secrets of the Samurai: A Survey of the Martial Arts of Feudal Japan'" (9780785810735): Oscar Ratti, Adele Westbrook, Publisher: Charles E. Tuttle and Company Inc. See it here at books.google.com. Although a general "Survey of the Martial Arts of Feudal Japan", the close connection between martial arts and warfare in Japan means it covers a lot of history, Samurai weaponry, armour etc.220.101.28.25 (talk) 16:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have a scan paper of a book , by a software I convert it into a ms-word but in ms word some mistake like spelling mistake , change some word occur . There is any software by which I can chek this where is the mistake is occur.Supriyochowdhury (talk) 14:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Microsoft Word has a built-in spelling and grammar checker which may help. However you should be aware that it only checks that the word exists, not that it is correct. So if your reader software read "rate" as "rat" then the spellchecker won't catch it. Better checkers are available, put reading the document is the only reliable way. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you try scanning the same words printed on a piece of paper but with the font OCR A Extended, which should be available in notepad on a Windows machine. That font was specifically designed to be machine readable. If you do this and it suddenly works without the spelling errors, then you know that the problem was with your converter program being able to read the font of your original document. If you get the same spelling errors, then that leaves the problem that the converter program might have a bug. Sorry I don't have any software suggestions per your request. 20.137.18.50 (talk) 14:51, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is often a poor scan (your brain is much better at recognising the text than any computer); a better scan can avoid many OCR errors. Some tips for improving the result are: scan at the highest resolution you can; make sure the document glass on your scanner is entirely clean; put a sheet of black paper behind the scan to minimise the transmission of light reflected off the back of the scanner shining back through the paper (so you get a ghost of the text on the reverse surface of the page); make sure the scanning software is using a loss-less image format (like TIFF), or if it must use JPEG make it use the least (ideally no) compression; experiment with contrast settings in the scan software (the OCR program should be able to do this itself, but some don't do a good job). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk14:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OCR is a difficult problem and it's far from 100% solved. Many OCR programs proudly proclaim "99% accuracy!" - which means that in a typical page of text, there are going to be a dozen errors. Many (if not all) of them use a spell-checker dictionary to help them to get better answers - so it's highly likely that the errors they make will pass a spell check with 100% success. SteveBaker (talk) 17:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
finding a hotel
Hello, I am looking to spend a weekend away in a hotel, I have two european eagle owls, which I am very devoted to and they never leave my side, they are what I would call my greatest friends. The thing is as they have been brought up around humans they believe themselves to be human and sometimes consider other people to be a threat to me as they are teritorial. If you have ever been attacked by an eagle owl you will know that it is not something you forget! Is it best to try and find a hotel where I can stay with my owls, or to bring them in under wraps and leave a do not disturb sign on the door, I cannot leave the owls and I must make this visit. Perpetualmotionlemus (talk) 17:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Saying where you want to go would be helpful. I would also suggest that you check on the legal situation of keeping birds of prey in the place you want to go to. It may be illegal. No hotel is going to welcome them without prior arrangements. I would suggest contacting a small hotel or B&B in the place you want to go to and explain your situation. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think you'd find it difficult or impossible to find a hotel that would take them. I suggest leaving them in their cage (assuming they've got one) and asking someone to feed and water them while you are away. Or sleep in the car with them. I'm curious what you do when you go shopping or have other interactions with strangers away from home. 89.242.89.218 (talk) 15:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bugs, I wish you would stop complaining about IPs and "drive bys". Just stop it. We IP users are not all trolls. Some people with usernames occasionally edit under an IP. This is not against any Wikipedia guideline or policy. Knock it off, please. 24.120.166.97 (talk) 20:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you'll put aside your righteous indignation for a second and think logically, note that the OP said the owls "never leave his side". Assuming he works for a living, how likely is it that his company would be tolerant of an employee bringing wild animals to work? Not very. This is almost certainly a "joke" question. But whether a joke or sincere, you can't deny it paints a funny mental picture. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 17:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No mention of IP editing was made, and I too am very suspicious of a question with a bizarre premise which is a named editor's first and only contribution. AGF or not, a little Occam's razor goes a long way. --LarryMac | Talk14:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't a "do not disturb sign" sign for when you are in the room? Won't the hotel cleaning service expect a moment to come in to tidy up? Bus stop (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How the cleaners respond varies from one hotel to the next. IMHO, "Do not disturb" should mean "do not disturb" (don't knock on the door), so it shouldn't matter whether anyone is in there or not—it's none of their business. There's been times that I've needed a hotel to sleep in all day when working nights, and cleaners who insist on knocking at 11:00 am "to make sure" are annoying. Similarly, my wife has left crated dogs in hotel rooms (as permitted by hotel policy) and put the sign up so that the cleaners don't knock or come in, agitating the dogs. -- Coneslayer (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's no way you should sneak the owls in. If they were discovered, the proprietor may be within their rights to call Animal Control and have them captured and destroyed. This would be an extreme reaction, but a panicky maid with an exaggerated story would be bad news for you. The idea above of contacting a bed and breakfast seems like a good one to me; they would probably be a lot more accommodating than a hotel that has to abide by a bunch of corporate rules, or a motel that's accustomed to occasional guests who trash the rooms. 24.120.166.97 (talk) 20:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the question is sincere, then calling ahead is the obvious course to take. Some establishments will allow pets, and if they don't, sneaking them in would put those "beloved" animals at great risk of being confiscated. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 18:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since you ask Baseball I (and the owls) work for a small airport, the owls keep pigeons and other birds away from the runways where they are a nuisance and can be sucked into the engines of planes. DJ Clayworth I am going to Manchester in the UK. I have called a few B&B and one of them sounded like they might be ok with the owls as long as I am with them at all times and take meals in my rooms. Thank you for all your help Perpetualmotionlemus (talk) 14:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since you're a professional owl handler (falconer? strigider?), Perpetualmotionlemus, you are probably already aware if there are (as DJ Clayworth mentioned above) any legal restrictions that might affect your importing owls (even temporarily) into and out of the UK. In case you're not, however, this [19] page of a UK Government website site might be helpful. Note that European Union and International (e.g. CITES) rules potentially also apply. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You'd be better trying a camp site, with a tent. Even if this involves driving a few miles into Manchester. If you are from outside the UK then you would have a lot of zealously enforced regulations about importing or exporting animals to deal with, possibly including long periods of quarantine. In your situation I would pay an avery or whatever to look after them while you are away. You may feel attached to your owls, but they probably couldnt care less about you. 92.29.57.43 (talk) 00:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
job
I'm a student.I want earn some money for helping my family and to carry on my study.There is any job on computer (om line or off line ).please give me the link which in not fake.Supriyochowdhury (talk) 18:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It depends where you live, but many countries/continents have a healthy IT recruitment sector. In my experience, the jobs advertised on the websites of major recruitment businesses are never "fake". However, as a student - presumably with no (or very little) experience in information technology - you will find the vast majority of potential employers have a need for at least some months relevant experience for even the most graduate/junior roles.
One thing to note: I don't know what it is like in your country, but here in the UK I would never expect to pay a recruitment company to find me a job (I suspect it is actually illegal). Recruitment companies get paid by the employer to find suitable candidates. If they ask you for money, it creates a potential conflict of interest where they could put forward only the candidates that paid the most rather then the best suited for the job. I think that if they do ask you for money, they are much more likely to be scamming you.
Alternatively, like Edison says above, tech support via telephone might be a good place to start and easier to find work as a student. Or, perhaps you could place an advert (eg. in the local newspaper) offering PC support services to people in your community. Astronaut (talk) 02:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to guess from your user name that you are from India or maybe Bangladesh. Most of us on the Reference Desk live in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, or Australia, where the job market may be very different from India's (or Bangladesh's). You say that you are a student. Most universities in the United States have offices that help students find employment. Have you tried talking to someone at your university or college whose job it is to help students find jobs? They would surely have a better idea how you can find work than any of us on the Reference Desk. That said, I have just had an idea that may be totally useless, but I will share it anyway, in case it is some help. When I was traveling in India, I found that there are Internet shops with computers in every town and in every part of every city. Surely all of these Internet shops need technical support. You could offer your services, at a low rate (at first) to some of these shops in your area. The best way to do that would be to have some business cards made, dress sharply, and visit these Internet shops in person. You will want to speak to the owner or manager in person, and come back again if he (or she) isn't in when you stop by. If they try you and are happy with your work, they could become references who could attest to your experience and the quality of your work if you wanted to apply for a steadier position at a business process outsourcing firm. Marco polo (talk) 02:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Think what you are good at - there are quite a few things one can do from home to earn money - graphics, web page design, proofreading, searching the internet for information... I once actually found a website where people post orders and you can give your price estimate on how much you would want for the task, but I can't find it right now...
First, please don't type in ALL CAPS. It is perceived as shouting and is considered rude.
Second, agreed, it's annoying when pages don't exist. But sometimes that is how it is.
Third, there is no single Wikipedia contact, so I'm not sure what the point of putting it on a contact list would be. It isn't one person writing these—it is an army of volunteers who write, edit, haggle, delete, etc. everything you read on here. There isn't one point of contact. --Mr.98 (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For things to exist, they have to pass a lot of rules...WP:NOTE and WP:SOURCE should get you started. A lot of things aren't notable or don't have enough sources (the two go hand in hand; sources make something notable), so they get deleted. Vimescarrot (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually becoming rather unusual for a "notable" subject to not have an article. Often you need to search for it - or to try a different set of words or capitalisation. However, if an article doesn't exist - and you think it should, you can suggest it at: Wikipedia:Articles for creation. The volunteers there may be able to help you to start the article - providing the subject is sufficiently notable and that "references" can be found about it...and if not, they will usually patiently explain why we don't have an article. SteveBaker (talk) 20:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On it being unusual for notable subjects to not have an article: I dunno. If you are interested in esoteric but notable subjects it is easy to find articles that do not yet exist. For example, I am interested in the early history and exploration of the Pacific Northwest. On this topic there are a number of notable people who have no Wikipedia page, such as James Hanna, Nathaniel Portlock, Frances Barkley, Juan Pantoja y Arriaga, and so on. I've also noticed we have no page on the great Spanish hydrographer, cartographer, and admiral, Vincente Tofino de San Miguel. Just a few examples here. But I regularly come across articles that could and should exist, but don't. Also, it is interesting how if you look at the page Trafalgar order of battle and casualties you find that every British ship and captain involved has a page, and every French ship has a page, but only some captain do, and almost every Spanish ship and captain do not. I suspect there is some lesson there about how English wikipedia editors choose what to write about. Pfly (talk) 11:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We do have a portrait of Nathaniel Portlock to get you started!
People certainly do choose to write about what interests them the most - which introduces a certain systemic bias. We are a volunteer group - and if nobody happens to be interested in a particular topic, then probably no article will ever be written on that topic. There is no "overseerer of all human knowledge" who's job it is to tell people what needs to be written about. That's why we have really detailed articles about every single railway station in Japan - but nothing whatever about Nathaniel Portlock. There are a bunch of Japanese railway 'nuts' who are incredibly productive in churning out articles - but (evidently) nobody here who cares very much about 18th century navigators. But also it's a matter of finding verifiable/referenceable data about them - and for Spanish sea captains, that's going to be difficult for predominantly English-speaking editors who would probably need to glean information from books written in Spanish that are not to be found in British, American or Australian public libraries.
If you are interested in this subject area - then I strongly suggest you start writing some of these articles yourself. Join your local library - find books on the subject - learn what you can (and note those books for use as references in your articles). From what I could see, at least some of the people you mention meet the Wikipedia WP:PEOPLE notability standards and they certainly should have articles. You might also go to the "Talk:" pages of some of the biographies of other people from that era and ask there for people to help you put these new articles together.
A little detective-work reveals a lot about these articles. For example:
While Nathaniel Portlock doesn't have an article, Joseph Ellison Portlock (who was his son) does. Why is that? Well, we can look at the "history" tab for that article and see who wrote it. It seems that the first version was contributed by User:DanielCD in 2005 - who got it (along with about 100,000 other articles) from the Encyclopædia Britannica, Eleventh Edition (which - being out of copyright - was typed almost entirely into Wikipedia without changes). So the reason we have an article about Joseph - but not Nathaniel is most likely that the Britannica simply didn't write one. Hardly any changes to Joseph's article have been made since then - probably because there are no editors here who care very much about that specific topic.
Another place to go to get help with biographical stuff is Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography. There are a lot of experienced Wikipedia editors who support that project - and I'm sure you'd get a lot of practical support from them if you wanted to write something. The way people become "experts" in a field of study is that they transition from being merely "interested" in it and reading avidly about it - to becoming an active contributor. It sounds very much like (with a bit of prodding) you could become that person. I sincerely hope so - because plugging important gaps in Wikipedia's coverage is a vital part of what we do here.
Yep. Not everyone realizes these things. I think the original poster's questions/comments were addressed (you can request an article, write it yourself, etc). As for me, I'm slolwy doing just the things you say, and am already the kind of editor you hope I could become! Nathaniel Portlock doesn't exist yet (and I didn't know we had a picture, heh, thanks), but James Colnett does now, so does Ignacio de Arteaga y Bazán, Descubierta and Atrevida, Imperial Eagle, La Princesa, etc. Slow work. I've yet to have to dig into Spanish sources, which I couldn't read anyway. But for the Descubierta and Atrevida I might ask some Spanish WP editors to help--knowing that there is info in Spanish that I simply cannot find in English. Pfly (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Great! Another thing you might try would be to look into the Spanish language Wikipedia - if they have articles on these people already, then at Wikipedia:Translation and Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English you might find people who would be prepared to translate the salient details and leave you to turn it into pretty English, set up categories and info boxes, find illustrations and such. You could have a shot at some of the online translation services too. At the very least, a Spanish article might have references for you to follow. Another idea is to search other Wikipedia articles for information. Nathaniel Portlock is mentioned in half a dozen articles. If you go into those articles and put linking brackets around his name, so he shows up as a redlink - then sometimes that provokes people who "own" those articles to create at least a stub for the referenced name - but also you'll find references in those related documents that will probably lead you to more information about your subject. SteveBaker (talk) 20:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, already there again. :-) I'm actually in the process of writing up a question for a couple Spanish Wikipedia editors who have worked on pages that mention info I would like to know more about. I'll have to try to keep the wording simple and use machine translation tools (eg, Google translate), and perhaps ask a few people for advice. Unfortunately the Spanish Wikipedia is often not well referenced--the pages with info I'm interested in have no sources listed. So I'll just ask the main editors of them. And yep, I redlink things a lot--but often on esoteric topics that probably few people read and fewer care to edit. If nothing else they remind me to someday make a page! Pfly (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Amazon 'shopping basket'
I sign in to Amazon, save a number of books to my "shopping basket", then sign out and delete all cookies. When I sign in again the next day, will the items still be in my shopping basket, or will they have disapeared? I am using Amazon.co.uk. Thanks 92.24.96.55 (talk) 22:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Amazon stores its "shopping cart" information on its server, not in your cookies. So yes, they will be there. (They might not be saved in your "Items to buy now" cart but your "items to buy later" cart, but if you click on the basket, you should be able to see them.) --Mr.98 (talk) 22:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(It's been a while since I bought from Amazon.) Putting something in your shopping basket is only the first step towards buying it. After you click Buy Now and supply your credit card details I think Amazon gives you an order reference number that you can use to check the progress of your order. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your "official" receipt is mailed inside the box of product. In addition, you will also get an email confirmation when your item ships. You can also view all the billing and shipping information (including subtotals, taxes, gift certificates applied and other stuff you'd expect to see on a receipt) on the website, under "Your Account". I've never purchased an item to be sent as a gift; I don't know how that works specifically as you'd likely not want a filled out receipt sent to your gift recipient. Matt Deres (talk) 13:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
February 19
Where is the offense?
Why is Sarah Palin so offended? The portrait of a Down person going to a date and saying - "“My dad’s an accountant, and my mom is the former governor of Alaska,” is not exactly disparaging or demeaning or whatever. I even think it was breaking some prejudices about Down's syndrome, depicting them as pretty normal people. --ProteanEd (talk) 15:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when Sarah Palin was running for the VP candidacy, Trig was made a primary media story and Palin received a lot of scrutiny for it. I believe there was also a rumor going around that Trig was not Palin's child. I wouldn't exactly call her offended. Of course, she'd be frustrated; it's her child and the media was ARGUABLY being rather overzealous (as opposed to the Obama administration saying that the kids were "off-limits"). Naturally, it doesn't excuse any of her other political shortcomings.--WaltCip (talk) 16:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not offended? Sarah Palin said the screenwriters were "cruel, cold-hearted people" and daughter Bristol said the writers were "heartless jerks." --ProteanEd (talk) 16:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
let's see: Family Guy did something crass; Sarah Palin got offended... and yeah, the sun rose this morning. so what else is new? --Ludwigs217:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The interesting question is, did they actually do something crass? I haven't yet seen the episode, so I can't comment, but descriptions I've heard do not sound crass. They actually sound like a positive appearance of a character with Down's, something very rare on TV. Much like Joe is pretty much the only current, full-time character with a physical disability in a mainstream programme, and he is something other than an inspiration for others. Or like the Cleveland show is unusual in having a black family as the main family in a mainstream show. 86.182.38.255 (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No. The episode in question is Extra Large Medium, which aired a little while ago. Our article details some of the brou-haha. Personally, I thought the Down Syndrome thing was no more viciously done than many of their other jokes, and probably lighter than most. The girl in question at first seems to be nice and happy (a stereotypical "Downy", I guess), but turns into a complete bitch after Chris gets to know her better. In a way, I think it's similar to their treatment of Joe (the wheelchair cop), which, while still no-holds barred, manages to provide the perspective that just because someone has a label doesn't mean they don't also have a personality of their own. In between the jabs and put-downs, you end up noticing that Ellen (the DS girl) is a person. Matt Deres (talk) 23:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC) added word so my post makes sense now...Matt Deres (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Though of course the entire point of Family Guy is to be crass. (And arguably the entire point of Sarah Palin is to be mock-offended whenever it gives her a chance to be in the daily news cycle.) --Mr.98 (talk) 16:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how old your daughter is, but I was told in school that a comma looks too much like a decimal point. As for the spacing, it's so that it's easier to tell how many zeroes there are after a number, making identification easier. Library Seraph (talk) 17:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am surprised that the article does not mention the underscore "_" which can be used as a thousands separator in some computer programming languages. It can be used in perl, "$population = 6_803_800_000", but I don't know how many languages share this. 58.147.58.28 (talk) 01:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, in some countries a comma is used as a "decimal point". In some, a period is used as a thousand separator. To avoid confusion whether 1,956 is almost two thousand or is slightly less than two, a number of people now recommend using a space instead of printable punctuation to separate thousand groupings. -- 174.21.247.23 (talk) 17:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I've ever seen a space as a thousands separator in handwritten numbers. Feels like you'd need handwriting that's a good deal neater than mine to prevent it from just being confusing. APL (talk) 22:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was taught the spacing method a quarter century (!) ago, in Ontario, Canada. Our teacher told us that spacing thousands was the "metric" way of doing it and using commas was an "American" thing (insert melodramatic organ music as we gasped in horror at our collective brush with treason). Matt Deres (talk) 03:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Call your daughter's teacher and tell him/her to stop teaching ivory-tower bullcrap that will just have to be unlearned later in the real world. --Nricardo (talk) 04:15, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
When I worked in France, the client specified our system produce invoices with a comma character for the decimal separator (normal for much of Europe but not the UK) and a space character for the thousands separator (maybe specific to France). Does your daughter recieve her education in a different country from where you went to school? Astronaut (talk) 05:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
British school textbooks have used the space as a thousands separator for at least thirty years, but (older) teachers would never mark the comma as "wrong", we would just explain that it might be confusing to the French! Dbfirs09:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I used to work for an international insurance company; one of my colleagues mistook the three decimal places that go after sums in Egyptian pounds and inflated an already large claim figure by a factor of a thousand. It set a few alarm bells ringing. Alansplodge (talk) 00:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We used to have an article, I think it was called "10:08" but in a dark day for Wikipedia, it was deleted. I don't know how to locate the AfD discussion, but I am pretty sure it's been linked here before. --LarryMac | Talk20:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
breaking my own rules about RD contributions It's really too bad that the article was deleted. It was my introduction to Wikipedia - i.e. the first thing I ever read here. And as we can see, it is something the people want to know about, indeed it's a piece of the "knowledge disseminated around the globe". Perhaps it only "deserves" to be a part of the Watch article, but as hard as it may be to establish verifiability, the fact that timepieces in advertisements are set to (approximately) 10:10 is not a myth. I even recall seeing an ad for a digital, talking, Mickey Mouse alarm clock that showed a display of 10:10, but a speech balloon showing Mickey saying "It's 8:30, time to get up!" Maybe I'll make a project out of getting an article re-established. --LarryMac | Talk16:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the case of a traditional clock with hour and minute hands, it should be obvious why they use 10:08 (or sometimes 8:18) - it looks nice. Setting it that way on a digital clock seems kind of funny, but it's probably better than having it flashing midnight. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 17:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I really think there would be value in such an article - but for it not to be immediately demolished by AfD requires two changes: Firstly, it must be really well referenced. The last comment in the AfD suggested some links (this, this, this, this, and this) - but none of them look really authoritative to me. Secondly, the title needs to be changed. The problem is that 10:08 could be almost anything - and also that 10:08 isn't the only time they use 01:52 is another one. I think that if you could 'sandbox' an article together with those two things fixed, it could survive an AfD - particularly given that it's such a FAQ here on the reference desk (demonstrating that people do indeed notice this "fact" and come and ask why it is). SteveBaker (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do the police make jokes when making arrests?
In a Donald Duck comic I just read, two policemen (Detective Casey and another detective whose English name I don't know) arrest a gang of money counterfeiters in their secret hideout. When they enter the hideout, Detective Casey says to the gang: "Hello, excuse me, but would you happen to know the penalty for having a sack full of counterfeit money?" The other detective continues: "When I last checked it this morning, it was three to six years of prison without parole." Now does this happen in real life? When the police arrest criminals, do they ever make jokes, or are they always strictly business and deliver the exact same lines ("You're under arrest. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you." or something), in the exact same words? JIP | Talk21:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I once met a Welsh policeman who claimed that when he caught his first ever criminal, he used the words, "You're knicked son!". By the time it got to court, the phrase had become "I'm arresting you on suspicion of theft..." Alansplodge (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having an eerie sense of deja-vu. Didn't you tell this exact same story about a half a year ago? :) Anyway, if we're exchanging anecdotes, there was a case some ten or so years ago here in Slovenia - two cops were chasing a petty thief (a grown man, mind you), he ran to his house, and the police decided to surround the house and wait for backup before going in. While they were waiting, the guy reappeared, dressed head to toe as a ninja and in all seriousness started throwing plastic shurikens at them. I think it'd take nerves of steel not to poke jokes at a guy like that while arresting him :) TomorrowTime (talk) 13:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They're human. As such, in the absence of compelling evidence, I expect them to behave like other humans. Thus, some will crack jokes. While police in the US need to provide a Miranda warning to anyone they plan to question, there's no prohibition whatsoever against saying other stuff, too. — Lomn22:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that is just not true; there are probably local prohibitions almost everywhere against humiliating people and robbing them of their dignity. This presumably would be punished by a slap on the wrist against the officer, or some other discipline, rather than letting an arrested person go free, of course. 63.164.47.229 (talk) 22:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt there are many laws against making jokes during an arrest, but I expect almost all police forces expect their officers to behave in a professional manner. How much that expectation is enforced will undoubtedly vary from force to force. --Tango (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In general, my very few encounters with police have found them to very courteous and professional. Regardless, if I were ever arrested, I'd rather they made fun of me than to beat me to the ground with their batons. As far as a slap on the wrist is concerned, in court you've got the perp grousing to the judge that the cops made fun of him. How likely is the judge to put much credence on such a claim? ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 17:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather they do neither (see false choice), and although it may not be a very compelling defense, but it's not completely impossible. The whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing means you cannot completely ignore what the defendant says (and you certainly can't discount it solely on the basis of him being charged with a crime). While it doesn't materially affect the facts of the case, a particularly convincing defense attorney may be able to argue that the irreverent nature of the police at the time of the arrest is indicative of them not being serious in other, more substantive, matters regarding the case, or that their willingness to crack jokes at the defendant's expense is indicative of them not being serious about protecting the rights of the accused in other manners. (Basically, if you are unprofessional during the arrest, where *else* have you been unprofessional.) It's a long shot, and may only work one time out of ten thousand, but that 1/10,000 chance means that there really isn't any reason to risk it, and so the police force may have official rules to discourage it. -- 174.21.247.23 (talk) 18:01, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are other obvious risks. For example if the defendent confenses or tells stuff to the police they may later say they were just joiking, in the same spirit that the police were. Suffice to say, there are reasons why the police should generally be resonably professional in the way they deal with people. Nil Einne (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I remember seeing a cop show where a guy was caught after stealing a car, anyway he started scolding the cops saying "why aren't you out catching murderers" etc, the cops all started laughing and being sarcastic with him ("yeah we shouldn't have wasted out time", "what's a murderer?" etc).--92.251.162.146 (talk) 21:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Does the fact that a girl knows that as a result of contraception and abortion being freely available mean that Bateman's principle does not really apply so much in humans and that she can have sex with as many guys as she likes and enjoy it?--I want to feel like a girl (talk) 13:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think for these arguments sex with contraception or sex with an intention to abort any pregnancies doesn't count as sex. Bateman's principle clearly only applies to sex that can result in a child. The existence of contraception does, therefore, mean that women can enjoy sex without the usual arguments applying. --Tango (talk) 13:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the idea needs to be applied carefully. Essentially worry-free sex is a relatively new phenomenon while Bateman's Principle refers to the past billion years or so of females "getting stuck" with the pregnancy and child rearing. While women can be consciously aware of their new options and enjoy them, there is likely a lot of "built in" hesitance. It's a little like the fact that we no longer need to consume fats, sugars, and salt as often as possible; our conscious knowledge of that tends to be overwhelmed by a deep-seated need to ahead and dig in. The enjoyment of the physical sensation obviously works differently in both cases, though. Matt Deres (talk) 14:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, most women are (and if not should be) aware that (i) the various methods of contraception are variously less than 100% effective; and (ii) even where legally available, abortion in some circumstances may be less than easy to obtain, may carry a non-negligable degree of risk to their health, may cause conflict with relatives and other community members, and can be an emotionally painful experience. Such awareness will probably affect their attitudes. [Disclaimer: I'm not trying to assert any moral/ethical position on these matters.] 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"The pill" may well be the most effective form of contraception available, but a woman's physiology may mean that she will get pregnant whether or not she takes the pill according to schedule. Similarly, STDs should mean that women take heed and use barrier methods of contraception regardless of whether they use the Pill or not. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the image is on the wiki-commons a syntax something like [[image:FILENAME|50px]] or [[file:FILENAME.jpg|20px]] will display it. The "50px" determines it's size, you may need to experiment to get it right. Use the "Show preview" button to see how it appears. Example Otherwise if it is on Flikr or a similar photo sharing website then a URL/ web address or link is all that is needed. (Updated my post)220.101.28.25 (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You will need to upload it to a photosharing site and link to it here. Alternately, you might try going to Tineye, comparing your file there and seeing if your picture is already out there on the web somewhere. Obviously that's not likely if someone's sent you his holiday snaps, but it might work if it's some joke picture or something that's been emailed around a lot. Matt Deres (talk) 15:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what do you want to know? The Snopes picture gives you all kinds of information on it. Worth1000 is a photoshopping site that fakes pictures for fun. The picture of the giant skeleton is from that Worth1000 site. Your second link has dozens of pictures on it. Could you perhaps trim down this list into something remotely reasonable, do just a wee bit of research on your own, and then let us know what exactly it is you'd like help with? Matt Deres (talk) 15:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty much all of the pictures you are referring to are fakes. Using software tools such as Photoshop or The GIMP (which you can download for free) and with a certain amount of artistic and technical skill, it is possible to produce any picture of anything your mind can imagine. The process generally involves blending together parts of different pictures, adjusting lighting and tweaking the 'grain' of the image - and the results can often be impossible to distinguish from reality. So before you believe that a mermaid was found washed up during the tsunami - consider the source of the photo. Was this taken by a photojournalist with a reputation for producing reliable and truthful images - or did it just pop up on the Internet, seemingly from nowhere? If the latter - then it's vastly more likely to be a fake than not. SteveBaker (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah - it's incredible how people fell for that. They didn't even do a double-exposure to make them translucent or anything - just cut-out paper drawings stuck into the foreground of the scene. The idea that a photograph could be anything other than the complete truth is a concept that's having a hard time dying! SteveBaker (talk) 04:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This question concerns the concept of Right turn on red (in the United States). The general idea is this: if it is safe to do so, the driver may turn right on red (after he comes to a complete stop and if no other sign prohibits the turn). Now, sometimes, a sign will specifically be posted that says "No Right Turn on Red" (or similar). My question is why? What is the purpose of specifically preventing and/or prohibiting right on red turns at certain intersections? Especially since the driver is (otherwise) allowed to turn only when it is safe for him to do so. Any insights? Thanks. (64.252.68.102 (talk) 16:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]
From this blog - "As stated, the primary reasons for restricting a right turn are driver and pedestrian safety. There may be roadway or vision obstructions that are not readily apparent to drivers or there may be a need for a protected pedestrian phase." Granted, a blog is not typically a reliable source, this one appears to be written by a police department representative. --LarryMac | Talk16:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just anecdotal evidence here : You often see it at 'complicated' intersections (ie: anything other than a normal four-way stop) where it might not be immediately obvious which way a car is coming. (Or when.)APL (talk) 16:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's for safety, for example if it's hard to see the oncoming traffic (a "blind corner"). In that case, the department in charge of that kind of thing has decided that there are no conditions under which a right on red is sufficiently "safe" to allow it, even if the driver might think otherwise. Likewise with the "left turn on red" which can arise when one-way streets intersect. In some ways it's like the "No U Turn" signs. Typically U Turns are OK if done safely, but sometimes they are explicitly forbidden due to conditions. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 17:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not so in all jurisdiction. In British Columbia for example, U-turns are forbidden unless specifically marked at all controlled intersections (traffic lights, etc.) You can only do them legally in uncontrolled intersections.24.83.112.118 (talk) 20:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OR here, but I've also seen this occasionally ("rarely" is probably a better term) to prevent cars from turning right onto a particularly crowded or busy road. Presumably it's rare because the right-on-red rules don't obstruct traffic much on the busy road. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In Southern California, the no turn on red tends to be for one of two reasons. Either the perpendicular traffic flow is unusually fast and/or partially obstructed from view from the person turning right. Thus its difficult to determine whether it is safe to turn. Secondly, no turn on red signs are often found around schools, presumably to better safeguard children as they cross the road. These often have time limits on them, though, so no turns are permitted only during the week and around school hours. Rockpocket20:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rant Insight follows. The rule is stupid. If the intersection is difficult then having an extra sign with English text that drivers have to read and understand in real time which takes time, especially if English is not your natural reading language, just adds to the hazard. This does not happen in Europe where road signs are icons independant of language. How would you like your PC desktop icons taken away and replaced by wordy text? (Picture of an ape shaking head goes here.) Furthermore the idea that a driver must come to a complete stop before doing the turn is unreal. If you do that in heavy traffic the driver behind you, who knows the area and probably thinks this is a communist plot, honks angrily. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here in Ontario, and presumably some or all other Canadian provinces, "no right on red" is now in fact a pictographic sign. It consists of an icon of a red traffic light, and beside it a standard "no right turn" icon, all on a white background. I have an opinion about this, but this forum is not the place for opinions. --Anonymous, 05:45 UTC, February 21, 2010.
Sorry that you live in such a rude area. I have been behind people who sat through entire green lights and no one has honked at them. But the sign in question has four words and is read while your car is stopped at a red light. That isn't a major burden I don't think. But how do you make an image of a conditional like this? 75.41.110.200 (talk) 23:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since the light is red, you're supposed to come to a complete stop whether you're turning or not, so the horn by the trailing driver is rude and unwarranted. The wordless sign is an arrow with a 90-degree bend in it and a red circle-slash superimposed. Just as the no-U-turn is an inverted U with that red circle-slash superimposed. That's how it is in the USA, anyway. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 23:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here in Texas, they say "NO RIGHT ON RED" - no arrows or anything. Sadly, they put them in places where car headlights can't shine on them and where you'd have to stick your head out of the window to read them while actually stopped at the light. So it's easy to mess up. SteveBaker (talk) 04:26, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the need for reading all the words isn't always there; many signs have certain shapes and color schemes which are supposed to be universal; of course, I'm not sure if this sign is one, since I haveen't the vision to drive, so I've never seen one (unlike the more common "stop," "railaroad, etc., which you often see just in pictures)209.244.187.155 (talk) 23:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to make sure you understand: You have a red light, so you would normally be stopped anyway. The first sign pictured in the Right turn on red article is unusual and wordy: The article text and image caption explain that in New York City, turning right at a red light is prohibited by default, unless a sign allows it. In most places I'm familiar with, a right turn at a red light is allowed by default (after a complete stop, and when safe to turn), unless a sign prohibits it. Preform a Google Image search for no turn on red to see what these signs look like. --70.254.86.111 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC).[reply]
As a point of fact, the cities of Montreal (and maybe some suburbs) and New York (city only, 5 boroughs) are now the only places the US and Canada where right-on-red is prohibited except where specifically authorized. --Anonymous, 05:45 UTC, February 21, 2010.
Can you source that please --Anon? Webmasters two years ago in Ottawa were still warning about crossing the bridge.[23][24] You're making a pretty broad claim here and I might expensively drive my car through it some day if I believe in you now. :) Franamax (talk) 07:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another place where right-on-red may be prohibited (other than getting in the way off cross-traffic from cars) is where any cross-traffic might be impeded or endangered. For example if a designated bicycle lane crosses in front of you, you need to be stopped 'til you get the right of way because you will be watching for cars when you pull out to turn and will miss the cyclist until they hit your driver door. Franamax (talk) 07:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've always heard too that right turns on red aren't allowed in Manhattan, but I've never driven myself on that island so I have no personal experience. I don't think what a cabbie does is a good reference to what the traffic laws actually are. Shadowjams (talk) 07:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As an ex-cabbie, I take exception to that remark. :) Cabbies are more likely to be aware of the road rules than almost anyone else, because they're more likely to be pulled over for some perceived breach than almost anyone else. True, there's a difference between knowing what the law is and knowing what you can get away with, but still .... -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question on book sales
How many copies of Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe have been sold? What is the criteria for a book to be called a "best seller"? Thanks. JPatterson (talk) 21:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With respect "What are the criteria?" or "What is the criterion?" I would suggest that something like the the top 100 selling books at any one time could be regarded as best sellers. But there are multiple categories - fiction hard-back, fiction paper-back, non-fiction hardback, non-fiction paperback. I spite of that there are several lists produced by UK broadsheet newspaper literary supplements which record the current sales of book numbers which include the top 20 or 50 best sellers in these 4 categories. How 'best seller' can be meaningless within these wider descriptions is difficult to see. "Darwin's Black Box"? - No idea. It's been around for a few years and probably nowadays sells in lower numbers after its initial launch. This[26]site claims it is ranked 2,323 in overall sales from Amazon. I reckon that is a pretty high number. Richard Avery (talk) 23:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Though logical, this definition is undermined by the many books which are described by their publishers, often on their own covers, as "bestsellers" on or before their day of publication. Speaking as a former professional bookseller, it was and probably still is a commonplace in the book trade that any book can become a bestseller if the publisher decides to pay enough for an advertising campaign to make it one, and "bestseller" is almost regarded as a genre in itself. Since a significant proportion of the book-buying public decide to buy a book because it is described as a bestseller, calling it one is an important factor in subsequently making it one in sales terms. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm - sadly the so-called "ideacenter" site seem to have slipped a decimal point in reading the Amazon sales rank. They claim 2,323 - but Amazon say 23,812. Well, anyone can make a mistake - right? Oh - wait...two mistakes. They overstated the sales rank of "Of Pandas and People" by a factor of ten too. Draw your own conclusions about the reliability of that web site - you can probably guess my opinion. SteveBaker (talk) 04:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, you miss my point, Dismas. They call it a best-seller, in the hope of people thinking "Ooh, it's very popular, so I'd better get a copy and see what all the fuss is about". But they give it this "best-seller" label before a single copy has been sold, and, by definition, before they know whether it will actually sell very well or not. It's a blatant attempt to mislead people. If it were not intended to influence people, what would be the point of using this strategy? If it were not the case that a lot of people fall for this misleading ploy, why would they continue doing it? That's why I ask where the authorities are when you really need them. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 04:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to [27] a sales rank of around 20k means that the book is selling a couple of dozen copies a week. The highest selling books on Amazon sell around 70,000 copies a week. No, this book is currently anything but a "best seller". However, it may have shifted a bunch of copies when it was first published - that kind of historical data is hard to get. SteveBaker (talk) 04:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a citeable reference, but what I've read is that bestseller lists are based on how many copies of the books are sold to bookstores. So it is indeed possible for a book to achieve bestseller status before publication. It is meaningless as a measure of the book's quality, just as "opening weekend gross" figures for movies are no measure of the movie's quality.
--Anonymous, 05:50 UTC, February 21, 2010.
The term bestseller by itself, as others have noted, isn't particularly meaningful. Often, however, there will be reference to a specific bestseller list; by far the best-known and most influential in North American markets is probably The New York Times Best Seller list. A New York Times Best Seller will have been in the top 15 best-selling hardcover nonfiction books (or top 20 paperbacks) for at least one week, sometime between the date of publication and the present day. I can't find easy, free access to historical NYT list data, so I can't check this case. Note that the Times doesn't actually track the total number of retail sales of a book — their numbers are based on a sampling of brick & mortar booksellers and wholesalers, with their exact algorithm shrouded in secrecy. There have been reported cases of manipulation of the Times list, even then. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Curiously if you put 'How to build a Ballista' into Google you will get 87,500 hits [28]. That would have taken less time than posting the question. Be careful where you point it, you might have someone's eye out. Richard Avery (talk) 23:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Offhand, I recall that some ballistae and similar mechanisms used twisted ropes: that is, two or more taut parallel cords or ropes had a lever inserted perpendicularly between them which was then rotated around to twist the ropes together; designs of ballistae you will likely find will doubtless include details. Others designs utilised counterweights and levers, and might be simpler to construct. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Modern makers of siege engines (like for punkin chunkin competitions) sometimes use bungee cord or surgical tubing (which is fantastically elastic) as an alternative to rope. Same principle - modern materials. SteveBaker (talk) 03:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note that when you are putting things under high levels of tension, there are more dangers than just popping it off in the wrong direction. If the structure itself is not strong enough to support the tension, you can get bad and potentially dangerous results. Just be careful if you are going to mix and match materials... --Mr.98 (talk) 16:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
February 21
Double Snap "Clap"
What is it called when you double snap your fingers (snap once with the fingers in each hand in succession), then "clap" an open fist into the palm of the hand? I always do this and I'd love to know if it ever had a name. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies01:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
English Names
MilitaryOld
What are the english words (CA/US/UK/AU) for these frames/mounts/cradles carried on the tail to strip on bigger things, with no basket or container?
I called them "pack frames" back in the 60s, and I could find a reference if I could find one of my old Colin Fletcher books. I would call the German gadget in the first reference a "model-airplane carrier". PhGustaf (talk) 19:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Effectiveness of a Bomb Suit
After watching The Hurt Locker, I started wondering about the effectiveness of the bomb suits worn by EOD technicians in the US military. How effective are they at protecting the wearer against blasts? Are they bullet proof too? Can they, for example, protect the wearer against a claymore mine from 5 m away? Acceptable (talk) 09:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are highly effective against most effects of an explosion. They will protect the wearer from a large amount of heat, overpressure and fragments, and obviously their reistance to fragments includes bullets. Modern bomb suits will also protect the wearer from any chemical or biolical effects of bombs. However they have limits. I'm sure pretty much any cartridge above the standard full-power rifle cartridges would penetrate them (.50 BMG, .55 Kynoch, 14.5 mm etc would tear them to shreds). I'm sure some large, very high velocity fragments might well penetrate as well, along with shaped charges.--92.251.162.146 (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What is the net worth of the satellite phone market in India, approximately?
What does the sales come up to including government and civilian subscribers? Who are the current providers of network and handsets and what is the future of the demand?
What are the new technologies in that field that will make the product more user friendly and popular? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.183.13.91 (talk) 15:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I and my friend Sammy are trying to breed mice to sell but, we don't know if our mice are pregnant or not.
So far it's the day after we think they mated. not much is different with the female. Then comes the question: How long does it take for them to mate? We think it doesn't take long. So we thought they mated for about a minute or two but, we aren't sure. So we want to know how you can tell if mice are pregnant and, how long it take for them to mate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skittywolf (talk • contribs) 15:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It only takes them a few seconds (as with most animals). Don't worry; if you're sure you've got a male and female you'll soon have lots of baby mice.--Shantavira|feed me16:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that the mothers eat the babies if they get stressed out, probably not. Species that reproduce frequently and in large litters generally invest less in the individual young. --Mr.98 (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Experienced laboratory technicians who work with mice can tell exactly which of the female mice have been mated with. Here are a few references to get you going: Mouse#Reproduction and Mating_plug. Incidentally, you may want to familiarize yourself with the local regulations on commercial rodent breeding. --- Medical geneticist (talk) 17:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure you can make money selling these baby mice? When I was a kid, my sister and I were given pet mice - my parents thought they would avoid the problem of vast numbers of baby mice by carefully getting us two females. Sadly, both were (evidently) pregnant when they bought them from the pet store - so we soon had TWO litters of teeny-tiny mice to deal with. As soon as they were weaned, we tried to sell them to the pet store - but they wouldn't take them - not even for $0.00 because (they said) they couldn't be sure that they'd be disease-free and all of that stuff. In the end, we had to find homes for all of them with friends and such like. So be 100% sure you have someplace that'll buy these mice before you do this! Remember, if a pet store needs baby mice to sell, they have a REALLY cheap way to make them! SteveBaker (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gravy powder that I've bought here in the UK has lots of salt in it. Is it possible to buy a low-salt or salt-free vegetarian version please? Vegetarian gravy powder is easy to buy in supermarkets such as Sainsbury's, even though its not promoted as being vegetarian.
Tesco's do one for meat-eaters, but I don't know about a veggie one. Making gravy is easier if you eat meat, as you stir cornflour into the fat left from roasting a joint or bird, add the stock from cooking the vegetables and cook for a minute. I suppose vegetarian gravy is basically a white sauce made with vegetable stock. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would presume you could use a conventional vegetarian gravy recipe: [29],[30] or [31] for example (Our Gravy article offers some other suggestions) - and then maybe you could very gently dry it to make a powder that you could reconstitute. I suspect that real gravy granules are made by freeze-drying or vacuum dried or something fancy and industrial like that which would be hard to replicate at home. But if you're going to make the stuff yourself, why not just make a larger batch and freeze it in an ice-cube tray to make a bunch of handy "gravy-cubes" that you could keep in the freezer and zap with a microwave when you need them? That would keep the flavor and vitamins and stuff much better than drying it out and reconstituting it - and with a reduced salt load, it should freeze pretty good. I guess though, looking at those three vegetarian recipes I linked to, all three use large amounts of soy sauce - which is pretty salty stuff already. But you could at least avoid adding more. SteveBaker (talk) 18:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Name a well paid and routine job
By well paid I mean €35,000-€50,000
By routine I mean fairly stable working hours, eg 9-5, no getting up in the middle of the night
Resolved
Otherwise if it is on Flikr or a similar photo sharing website then a URL/ web address or link is all that is needed. (Updated my post)220.101.28.25 (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
![[5]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tramp_Stamp_Barbie.jpg){kind=link}
