Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• 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.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

November 16

Fraudulent credit on my account

I have a credit on my recent two bank statements that is clearly fraudulent. It reads something like this ***** BILL PAYMENT 10/19 RESERVATION REWARD 800-7327031 CTUS RESERVAT . I know this is nonsense, because I am internet savvy (not stupid enough to sign up for something I don't want), and I work at a bank, so I am decently savvy with finances. As such, I know I did not actually sign up for this offer - they can not pull out the "he just didn't read the fine print" argument like they do with everyone else (I can think of only one possible exception: when I signed up for a one time deal citywide wifi, it may have been stuck in the fine print. I plan on checking thoroughly). I know how to get my money bank (i.e., Regulation E): what I want to know is if there is a way to report this kind of thing to the SEC or whoever, because my google search [1] clearly shows this has been occurring for a while without law enforcement intervention. My credit card appears to have its number taken and sold to these guys. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You mean a debit, right? Money taken out of your account? Contact your bank, they will have procedures you need to go through to report it. --Tango (talk) 00:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Correct. But I need to check old bank statements - if I have any more than 60 days old, I won't be able to get it back unless I call the company directly (google reveals they do so if pressed). Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You know, I have faint memories of this happening to me a couple of years ago. It turned out that it was a checkbox I had ticked when i bought some computer equipment online. They (unethically in my view) kept me on for a monthly charge to give me "access to future discounts" or some other garbage like that...

The SEC just regulates publicly traded securities. You would want a consumer group like perhaps [[2]] this one. Your other alternative would be to start up a small claims court case, and send them a letter letting them know (if you can find an address and/or legal company name). If it's a small amount, they'll likely offer a refund rather than flying in, or retaining a lawyer. NByz (talk) 00:13, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Many banks also have fraud-protection policies, and will not hold you accountable for fraudulent charges against your account. You should probably first contact you bank, and find out what can be done about the charge. I would recommend asking to discuss the matter in person at the bank, as the people who answer the phone lines are often harder to deal with, and its much easier to get things done in person. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Check your bank's fee information very carefully, though. I once had an erroneous debit charge on my account. It was for a small amount, but I instructed to bank to trace where it came from and remove it. And so they did. However, they charged me twice as much as the original debit had been in fees. When I complained they referred to a section in their fees policy for my account. According to that they had every right to charge that fee. (They did lose a customer because of it, though.)76.97.245.5 (talk) 06:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Why, historically, has America not crushed dissent and allowed great freedom?

I won't expand too much here, don't want question removed. What is the history and/or reason for Americas freedom vs almost every other country, regardless of risks? I'm Outta Here! (talk) 02:59, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

A few reasons:

1. Magna Carta. British based societies value individual freedoms far more than others. Even former African colonies follow this to some extent. Example: lots of governmental subdivisions allows more local freedom. Compare this with say, Cuba.
2. Most Americans are children of people fleeing old world. Puritans are only one example of many. Most of these people left Old World for American Dream and personal freedoms. Diversity requires toleration. Look at old world, from Catalonia, to China, to Persia. They all fight over small things. Americans had melting pot.
3. American history. US left Britain for sake of these freedoms. It's indoctrinated into us from young school age as result. I tend to think this is far less important than other reasons. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your defintion of "freedom" is, but the US is certainly not the only nation that enshrines notions of "freedom" in its constitution and laws - almost every nation founded since the Enlightenment is founded on such principles. There are plenty of countries in the world where "crushing dissent" is not the norm. You might also want to consider comparative incarceration rates before deciding the US is a uniquely "free" nation. FiggyBee (talk) 03:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

While the Enlightenment may have been the first modern expression of the ideal of individual freedom, it has been argued that it was also the beginning of the end of the substance, because it advocated a rational top-down legal system against the disorderly polycentric order that had developed since the late Middle Ages. It's easier for a single center to become corrupt and tyrannical than for a centreless system. —Tamfang (talk) 01:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Before we get too misty-eyed, it should be noted that America's history of free speech is not exactly unblemished. See the Alien and Sedition Acts, the Comstock laws, the Sedition Act of 1918, Red Scare, McCarthyism, COINTELPRO, etc. as examples where the ideal of free speech ran up against fears of political and cultural instability. When things get bad, "the gloves come off", as the outgoing administration liked to say, and then all sorts of things incompatible with what people usually consider core American values start happening behind closed doors. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

And let's not forget McCarthyism, a force that's still strong enough that a recent Presidential candidate thought merely invoking the "s" word could win him an election... (EC: you didn't, I see :P) FiggyBee (talk) 03:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

If you "crush dissent" then there is little "freedom" except to obey those in power. People who came to America often fled oppression, but oppressed others as soon as they were able, whether it was the Pilgrims, William Penn and the Quakers, or Roger Williams and the Baptists. The colonists in America also enslaved Africans and sought to exterminate Native Americans. Edison (talk) 05:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Edison, I suspect you read the post like I first did, as "Why has America not (both) crushed dissent and allowed great freedom", whereas I think the poster actually meant "Why has America (both) not crushed dissent and (also) allowed great freedom?" DJ Clayworth (talk) 22:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

See also American exceptionalism. The USA is by no means the only country to allow great freedom, despite your claim that "almost every other country" does not. You will find that while the USA is generally considered free, the more detailed indices show that it is not considered to be in the 14-strong group of "most free" nations, partly because its press freedom is only "satisfactory". On the Freedom of the Press rankings, the USA is ranked 36th. Gwinva (talk) 00:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Free speech of course is almost never absolute in any area. It is often dictated by political purposes. The Fairness Doctrine is one particularly sore spot among conservatives (and rightly so) as it appears to be aimed at right wing talk radio. Other times it is abridged for moral purposes: laws against child pornography, etc. But you already knew all this.

That said, no matter what any other country (or person within the US) claims, I firmly believe the US is at the top of countries with freedoms, even with things like the Patriot Act (you might note that as unpopular as it is, even many "free" countries like Sweden have stricter laws). Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Would you care to explain your reasons for that belief? In particular, would you care to explain your definition of "free"? Which country is the most free is going to depend very heavily on how you define freedom. --Tango (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Magog the Ogre, you mentioned the Puritans but I thought they left England because they found that society too tolerant? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Depends on how you define "tolerant". English society circa 1620 was more "tolerant" of certain social practices than perhaps the Puritans would have for themselves, but that wasn't what really drove them from England. It was that English society, and government policies, was also rather "intolerant" of the Puritans as a group, and actively drove them from the country. After the Hampton Court Conference and Richard Bancroft ascension to the Archbishopric of Canterbury, things got rather hot for the Puritans. Many of the famous Scrooby congregation, who would go on to found Plymouth colony, were imprisoned in Boston, Lincolnshire for a time, as one example. So again, like with the word "freedom", you have to be careful how you define "tolerant". Puritans were more strict than the rest of the CofE at the time, but they were also regularly and officially harrassed for their beliefs... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I would highly recommend the excellent Story of American Freedom (amazon link) by Eric Foner, which is a history of the concept of freedom throughout American history. An interesting account of how notions of freedom have changed over time and how these concepts have driven US political history. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

How many #1 hits did Johnny Cash, Elvis, and Moe Bandy have?

You might want to try the Entertainment Ref Desk for this question. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

So moved. BrainyBabe (talk) 10:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

How many things have been described as great fakes?

I am thinking here of two amusing literary examples: was it Oscar Wilde who referred to Debrett's Peerage as the greatest work of fiction in the English language? And a century later, Douglas Adams said much the same thing about the Greek ferry timetable. I'd like to collect more examples. Any ideas? BrainyBabe (talk) 11:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Milli Vanilli won awards for their music when they were actually lip synching. That type of thing? Dismas|^(talk) 14:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Never heard of them, but the article is revealing! BrainyBabe (talk) 16:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm still trying to find the Wilde. But this is from Dirk Gently, chapter 4:

"Well, what you have to understand, young lady, is that the Greeks, not content with dominating the culture of the Classical world, are also responsible for the greatest, some would say the only, work of true creative imagination produced this century as well. I refer of course to the Greek ferry timetables. A work of the sublimest fiction. Anyone who has travelled in the Aegean will confirm this. Hmm, yes. I think so." BrainyBabe (talk) 18:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Huh! I love Douglas Adam's writing - and ordinarily, I'd trust what he wrote with my life. But I travelled around the Greek islands using their "flying dolphin" hydrofoil services off and on through the 1980's and 90's - and I found them to be spectacularly reliable and invariably on-schedule. I strongly recommend that way of travel - and the Greek islands are the most amazing places to explore. SteveBaker (talk) 02:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The Turk? I'll add something else when it comes to mind. --Taraborn (talk) 23:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The Holy Roman Empire, which [Voltaire said to be "neither holy, nor Roman, nor Empire?" Edison (talk)

I would look through Category:Forgery, Category:Hoaxes and Category:Fraud for some ideas, and to kill this thread with (a misuse of) Godwin's law I will suggest the Hitler Diaries. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 05:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

In 2003, Shaun Greenhalgh and dad revealed but not before scamming art and musseum experts around the country. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Piltdown Man ? 86.53.80.11 (talk) 19:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

And its see also section: Archeoraptor. If you mean literary hoaxes, Australia's a breeding ground for them, from Ern Malley to The Hand That Signed the Paper. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Learning to play the Mandolin

I have never learned to read music - I have never played ANY kind of a musical instrument in my life (I am 61) - I am now retired, happy, and active - and for some inexplicable reason, I have the urge to play a musical instrument - not ANY musical instrument mind, but a mandolin. I don't own one - I don't know anyone who owns one - and I don't even know any local schools or teachers - not even a shop that stores them. So - 2 questions - first, how difficult (comparatively speaking) is it to learn to play reasonably well from scratch - and secondly, is there a name for such a mid-life compulsion/crisis. I know some folk go sailing around the world single-handed so I know I am not alone - but why?? 92.20.215.140 (talk) 16:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I taught myself to play the mandolin at age 50, mostly for playing chords. But then I already played the guitar. It took me 2 months. I'd say that the level of difficulty is about the same as the guitar. The mandolin has frets, so it's definitely a lot easier than playing the violin. It's more difficult to tune a mandolin than a guitar though, so I'd recommend investing in a suitable electronic tuner. I would expect any decent shop that sells guitars to also have mandolins. Can't answer your second question. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 22:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The website Mandolincafe may be of interest to you. Note that it includes an archive of (presumably legal) mp3 downloads, some of which are very good. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 22:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I don't see any reason why you can't learn. It can be harder for older people to learn new things, but many have tried and succeeded. Finding a teacher is difficult. The tuning is, if I recall correctly, the same as a violin. A violinist might be able to teach you something (finding notes, reading music), as would a guitarist (technique, music), but they will both have a little bit af trouble adapting. Between the two of them you could get the basics.

As to the last question, if you haven't read midlife crisis yet, it's a good idea (the article, not the crisis). In Australia, the phenomenon known as [grey nomad]]s is getting well known. Empty nest syndrome might also be a factor. Steewi (talk) 00:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

How difficult? It will take the rest of your life, so you need to start learning now. Is there a basis? Opportunity, desire... In Groundhog Day the character Phil Connors' life is repeating itself, forcing him to reevaluate. Among his solutions is to learn jazz piano and impress his friends, and yes, he gets the girl. ^<tinkle> Julia Rossi (talk) 03:03, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

As a pianist/guitarist/mandolinist/violinist, I'd say the mandolin is the easiest for the four to pick up. For chords, many common chords are two- or three-fingered, and bar chords are easier than on a guitar. For melodies, the consistent fifth interval between strings makes it easier for my brain to wrap itself around a pattern (as compared to the guitar's 4th-4th-4th-3rd-4th, which gets me every time). The only exception is that since there are only 4 strings, there is less flexibility in voicing chords, so more complex chords can be real excercises in dexterity. jeffjon (talk) 14:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Re the guitar/mandolin comparison: A trick that might be of interest to guitarists following this thread, is the following: If you take the four deepest strings of a guitar chord (provided the chord includes these strings, obviously), and mirror-image them, you get a mandolin chord. Example:

        Guitar               Mandolin
        G major              G major

Tuning: E A d g b e'         g d'a'e" 
Chord:  G B g d h g'         g d b'g"

        3 2 0 0 0 3          0 0 2 3
        ===========          =======
        | | | | | |          | | | |
        | o | | | |          | | o |
        o | | | | o          | | | o
        | | | | | |          | | | |

--NorwegianBlue ^talk 16:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The other issue with a Mandolin is that, unlike other similar instruments like a Guitar or Violin, it has absolutely NO sustain really to speak of. At a standard tempo, even an accoustic guitar has enough sustain to play individual notes. A mandolin is fairly limited in this regard, it is almost ALWAYS used as a rhythm instrument, and does require some rather fast right-hand strumming, usually 8th or 16th notes, to maintain a good sound. There are some mandolin players who are able to play a "tune" or "melody" on the mandolin, most famously Bill Monroe, but this basically requires lighting fast fret-work on the left hand. You still play it "full strum" with the right hand, and the melody is generally obtained by rapid chord-suspensions and the like. It is a fairly easy instrument to play competantly, but it can be quite hard to reach "the next level" as it were... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

In the mp3 section of Mandolin Café, you'll find many fine examples in various genres of the mandolin being used as the lead instrument, including Ludvig van Beethoven's sonatina for the mandolin. Not all of these require a virtuoso player. The lack of sustain is usually compensated for by using tremolo. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 18:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

True, but tremelo play is quite a difficult skill, given the extremely close spacing of the mandolin strings, and the relative speed and precision required to hit ONLY the strings you want, repeatedly, and at the correct rhythm and tempo. Its certainly more difficult than playing the same tune on a guitar, where you can hit each note once, and let it ring until the next note is needed... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, Louis McManus... Julia Rossi (talk) 08:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Volume of iPod vs Speaker volume

Suppose if I was to plug in an iPod Touch into a pair of computer speakers that have a rotating-knob volume control and suppose the volume units on the two units are interchangable. Is there any different, in terms of sound quality, if I turn my iPod volume to say, 40 volume units and my speaker to 60 volume units compared to if I turn my iPod to 60 volume units and speaker to 40 volume units? Acceptable (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

When I listen to my iPod in my car, I find I get much better quality if I turn up the car stereo's volume than the iPod volume. If I turn the iPod all the way up, I get clicky noises and distortions. Cars (and computers) are intended to make louder noise than iPods and can handle it better. Also, turning the iPod to top volume tends to deplete the battery faster. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 21:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

IPod source -> IPod Amplifier -> Speaker Amplifier -> Speakers. If there is interference, you'll want the IPod output as large as possible and turn the speaker amps down so that any pickup before the speaker amp is amplified the least. If on the other hand the IPod manages to overload the input stage of the speaker amp then you'lll get distortion and want to turn the Ipod down and the speaker up. -- SGBailey (talk) 21:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Simplest answer...Do a test. Listen to both setups, stick with the one you find sounds the best. Try it with some heavy music to maximise chance of distorsion/noise-issues, and try it with some stuff that has very delicate pieces to see if there's a difference there. Your ears are much better at decided what setup works best (for you) than the technical guide or specialist knowledge. There is no right answer unfortunately. Personally I don't enjoy my music to be boom-y or sound too bass-y (base-y?) but some people I know love it that way, so whilst some speakers are technically better, ultimately the most important thing is your preference. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Personally in my car I use Ipod on full volume, stereo on about the same level I have for my normal FM radio - gets a lovely sound no distortion at all... If I switch that and turn Ipod down and stereo up not only do I find I get too much bass sound that drowns out the other elements of the track, but I also get more interference from other parts of the car - ie if I've got anything charging through the cigarette lighter like a sat nav etc... But having the Ipod on full drain it within about 3-4 hours so I have to always carry an in-car charger with me for long journeys... As with the above post, it's gotta come down to personal preference at the end of the day... Gazhiley (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Listening to MP3's with high-end audio system

Would I notice a significant increase in audio quality if I am listening to 128-192 kbs MP3's on a Bose Wave Sounds System or some other high-end audio system compared to if I was listening to it on some decent $100 speakers? If not, what file types would I have to listen to in order to notice the increase in audio quality? Acceptable (talk) 17:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an audiophile, so I can't give you many specific details, but in my experience the answer is yes. It will sound significantly better on better hardware. However, if you compare it to the original, high-quality versions, the decrease in quality will become more obvious (in my experience, mp3s sounds better on good hardware than cds on crappy hardware, but cds on good hardware sounds better than mp3s on good hardware). If you want to have as good a quality as you can get, use either high-bitrate versions of mp3s (256 kbs and up), or lossless formats like Apple Lossless or FLAC (these will sound exactly like a cd, they contain identical data) 83.250.202.208 (talk) 12:41, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay vs Cuba

Hypothetically, suppose if Cuba wanted to re-claim the land that US Guantanamo Bay Naval Base is occupying, would they be able to do it? Assuming that Guantanamo Bay does not receive any external aid and must solely rely on their current resources and that Cuba can divert their entire military forces to attack the base. Acceptable (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

C'mon, you will never see this in print (except perhaps here) but Cuba relies on the RENT that the USA pays to Fidel and his cohorts. How else can Cuba afford to train all those doctors? And as to ATTACKING Guantanamo from either inside or outside the island??????? NEVER. The international community would NEVER stand for it. It ain't gonna happen in my lifetime. Fidel and his principles are more loved than John Lennon. But when he goes?? I guess a bit of internal strife - followed by a Cuban Disney World and all that goes with it - including a reality Fidel show. What a bloody shame awaits those lovely people in Cuba.92.20.215.140 (talk) 18:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Um, the reason you "will never see this in print" is because Cuba does not accept rent from the US, because it claims the lease in invalid. See our article on the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. They used to sell the US water but decided to stop doing that. I don't think Cuba gets any profit from having Guatanamo there, and I don't think it has anything at all to do with its medical system. If you're going to spout off about what you "never see in print" you might as well do the five seconds of research it takes to determine whether it is actually true or not, or whether it is just uninformed nonsense. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 20:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure, it would never happen, but it's an interesting hypothetical question. According to Cuba#Military, they have about 60,000 personnel. Guantanamo Bay has a population of about 8,500 according to [3], and those aren't all military (it includes dependants and contractors), so the Cubans have them massively outnumbered. Cuba's military is rather out of date now, though, I think - it hasn't really had an upgrade since the end of the Cold War. If the Cubans could get the help of the prisoners, then they might be able to pull it off - an attack from the outside timed to coincide with a massive prison revolt could work. Of course, if they actually tried it, the base would get very swift outside help from the rest of the US military and would surely win. --Tango (talk) 18:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why the Cubans couldn't take one measley base, assuming no reinforcements (as you stipulated). It's worth not underestimating the Cuban military—even aside from Bay of Pigs and all that, they've shown themselves to be much more sophisticated than the "omg Castro stooge" stereotype that the US has promulgated since their dictator lost out to another dictator in the Revolution. They have some outdated equipment but it doesn't take the most sophisticated equipment in a world to take over a base (it's another thing if you're talking about talking about jet-on-jet or jet-on-tank interactions, in which high tech can make a big difference).--98.217.8.46 (talk) 20:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd say the entire military forces of Cuba could take over Guantanamo, if for some bizarre reason, no support from outside US forces could be provided. The prisoners at GITMO wouldn't be much help, though, being only a few hundred. Note that the US has other military forces in a similar situation, such as those on the border with North Korea. However, the presence of "sacrificial troops" there ensures an immediate US response to any invasion. StuRat (talk) 20:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Could a larger force take a smaller force from a more powerful nation, which was unable to reinforce or resupply in a timely fashion? See Battle of the Little Bighorn . See Battle of Isandlwana. See Battle of Dien Bien Phu. Edison (talk) 01:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

See Falklands war ... Gandalf61 (talk) 13:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

That's a good example. Argentina easily took them over, but only until the British fleet arrived and took them back. That was quite a wasted effort on the part of Argentina, whose leadership was quickly dumped as a result.. StuRat (talk) 16:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Tactically it would probably be a cinch. Strategicly it would be beyond stupid. You don't beat up the little brother from the family with 12 kids if you're an only child. Sure, the Cuban military could probably massacre the American forces there. But an unprovoked attack on American forces would also likely not exactly go unnoticed. Its why the American people have always supported the Afghan War more than the Iraq War. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe some Cuban general who wants democracy in Cuba might order an invasion of GITMO, knowing it will immediately result in a US invasion, overthrow of the government, and US rebuilding. Since Cuba would likely lack the insurgency and ethnic/religious civil war of Iraq and Afghanistan, casualties would be light. StuRat (talk) 16:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

An international relations joe job??? I love it... ROFLMAO. That;s great... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

(Faked-identity conspiracy theories are way older than spam.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 03:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Telephone training

If you feel rather insecure talking on the phone, how could you train to be better at it? What are possible general information phones -excluding 911- I could call to get some practice? Mr.K. (talk) 18:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You could talk to people on skype. I found a number of google hits for message boards of people looking for other people to practice English, for example, which might be a low-stress situation for a native English speaker. Darkspots (talk) 18:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You could use the 'phone a friend' option. If you're willing to admit it to them, you can arrange with a friend to call them and just talk for a while as practice. Once you can talk casually, you could practice a more formal phone technique with them, as if you are talking in a business situation, giving information. Set up some role playing, where your friend is the secretary for a business and you need some information about the business (opening hours, making an appointment, availability of a product, etc.). Once you can do that comfortably, switch roles. A good friend could help you do it, even if you're just in the next room.

If you're worried about costs, you could use a set of two phones in the one house with an intercom system, so you can talk to someone in the next room, without being charged by the phone company. If you're having trouble that interferes heavily with the way you lead your life, you should ask your doctor about a therapist who can help you understand why you have the trouble and help you get over it improve your lifestyle. Steewi (talk) 01:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit in above line for non-offensive sounding sentence. Steewi (talk) 01:17, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Googling for "Telephone training" produced about 8.8 million hits(!) - but most seem to be for telephone call center operatives. You can go on one of those courses for a few hundred bucks - there seem to be many DVD's with self-help stuff. However, for 'telephone anxiety' (let's say), those things are unlikely to help you much. Googling "Telephone anxiety" got me 5.5 million hits(!) - the first few of which seemed very relevent. Our article on Social phobia discusses it briefly. SteveBaker (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I used to hate talking to strangers on the phone in a fairly irrational way. I got a job working on a political campaign and made hours and hours of cold calls. Got to talk to a lot of crazy characters, and now I have no phone issues. You could try volunteering/working for a political campaign next election season. Some politicians (e.g. Obama, to great effect) even post lists of phone numbers on websites and you can just call from your house. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

November 17

Disliking someone (not a request for medical advice)

Is it possible to become physically ill if you're around someone you dislike? Or even if you think about them? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 01:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Some sort of Evil eye?--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

No, someone who's put you through the wringer in the past, and now they're back. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 01:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure - that situation could put you under undue stress - and being stressed on a long-term basis can certainly make you sick. There are also all sorts of psychosomatic effects that could happen because of bad mental associations. Yes - definitely. SteveBaker (talk) 01:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Certainly happened to me.--212.139.78.231 (talk) 07:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. If you're around someone who've you really dislike (or have caused you pain in the past), your fight-or-flight response can kick in, raising your blood-pressure and heartbeat and doing all sorts of nasty things (see here for a list). These things can in turn cause other nasty effects.

It can be even worse if you suffer some sort of underlying syndrome, like PTSD or some sort of social phobia. Then the stress response can get totally out of hand and many ugly things can happen 83.250.202.208 (talk) 09:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Boy, I hope not. If it's not possible, then I'll just find someone I dislike to hang out with, and I'll never get sick again! --Trovatore (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

ROTFL - A true mathematician! Dmcq (talk) 09:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather be sick occasionally. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Various industry news

I'm having a bit of a hard time finding sources of industry news for ATVs, snowmobiles, and dirt bikes (off highway motorcycles). Is my best bet just going to every manufacturer and going through their press releases and news sections on their web sites? My intent is to collect these items in one place on the net, whether by reprinting if allowed or through links to the articles. Sort of a one stop shop type thing. Dismas|^(talk) 07:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Size of Wikipedia by main categories

Hi, I asked this question a long time ago. Is there data on how Wikipedia's size is distributed among the Main categories? I would love to know how the amount of articles compare between categories, and things like that. So has this info been compiled yet somewhere? Or, is there someplace I could talk at to propose such a thing to be done?? Thanks in advance, Kreachure (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

That would be interesting, I wonder how one could find it out, the category system in wikpedia isn't hierarchical. I'd like to see how much overlap there is and the main kinds of things that don't fit in properly. Dmcq (talk) 18:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Here's the cynic's answer. --Sean 13:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

There's way more Colbert than that. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

LOL! Actually, that's pretty much what I'm asking for, but hopefully the real thing won't look too similar to this... :P Kreachure (talk) 15:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Disinformation inserted by the CIA(!) lol... You can see the most visited pages here. This is exactly what you want - but only for featured articles. Here's an example from about a year ago... but for the French wikipedia. (And, while you're at it, a similar joke to the one above but also in French.) There's a little relevant stuff in this study (pdf), but it's from 2005. zafiroblue05 | Talk 08:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I love the most visited pages. Masturbation is more often visited than Shakespeare, Germany or Russia.--Lgriot (talk) 05:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Latin small letter reversed s?

Resolved

You can move this to language or computers, I wasn't sure which to put it under.

What is the code for the symbol that looks like a reversed lowercase s? I've found one for e and c but not for s. 199.67.16.60 (talk) 17:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean this: "ς"? In Unicode, it's ς. Tomdobb (talk) 18:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Not exactly, it would be a mirror image of s, like ɘ is the mirror of e, and ↄ is the mirror of c. 74.230.234.231 (talk) 19:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The reason you can't find it is that s is symmetrical! It looks the same backwards.... 94.27.195.51 (talk) 22:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Is it "ƨ", U+01A8? MTM (talk) 21:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

uh, ƨcratch that... 94.27.195.51 (talk) 22:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Latin Small Letter Tone Two See Zhuang language#Writing systems: This was the Latin-alphabet symbol used from 1957 to 1986 for tone 2 (low falling) in the Zhuang language. Unicode point 01A8 / 01A7 for lower/upper case. jnestorius^(talk) 23:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I would never have thought to look for a tone symbol, of all things. 199.67.16.60 (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The biggest point deficit overcome in NBA game?

What was the biggest point deficit overcome in NBA game? What teams played and when was it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.158.196.78 (talk) 20:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Typing Biggest comeback in NBA history into google returns the first result as one of our articles: NBA records. There, it notes that the largest comeback in a game was, and I quote, "The Milwaukee Bucks made the largest comeback in NBA history on November 25, 1977 vs. the Atlanta Hawks. The Bucks overcame a 29 point deficit with 8:43 remaining, finishing the game with a 35-4 run and a 117-115 win." However, the same article also notes that "The Utah Jazz made history on November 27, 1996 by overcoming a 34-point halftime deficit to beat the Denver Nuggets, 107-103" which would seem to qualify as also the largest comeback ever. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

2005 Toyota Corolla CRS

Okay. I'm looking to buy a car, and I really want to get a 2005 Toyota Corolla XRS. I live in Western NC, and I'm willing to travel a little ways to get it (Maybe 300 miles). However, I can't find one. No matter what. And it's killing me. I want a 6-speed manual transmission, and preferably with power windows/locks. Other than that, I could care less. Help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by EWHS (talk • x) 21:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried Ebay Motors ? StuRat (talk) 21:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Craigslist? --Blue387 (talk) 21:36, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Carmax will, for a fee, ship just about any car between any two stores... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I've shipped cars from one coast of the US to the other - it's typically about $600 and happens within days. You might also prefer to find one from somewhere like Texas, NewMexico, Nevada - where there is no rust! (Although - an '05 ought to be OK). Paying for a car without seeing it is a problem - there are escrow services that handle that kind of thing cleanly and safely - but you'll want to get LOTS of up-close photos from the seller - especially of places like the driver's doors where door dings can be - also of the seats and other places where minor damage might lurk. If you can find a garage close to the seller and have them do an independant examination of the car...make sure YOU pay for that! SteveBaker (talk) 01:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Inquiring (but not acquiring) minds want to know: why 2005? —Tamfang (talk) 01:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Is lotion necessary when using a tanning bed?

Is it necessary to use sun lotion when using a tanning bed? I don't mean the special "bronzers" that are referred to in the article, as they appear to be an optional extra with a special purpose of their own, but ordinary lotion to protect against burning, as is used on a beach. Or do people just go in without anything on their skin? Postlebury (talk) 13:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Follow the instructions you are given by the people running the salon. I would think putting sun cream on would defeat the object - it stops you tanning, not just burning. --Tango (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

People running salons generally have no idea what they're talking about, so I wouldn't take their word for much of anything. (I've seen dateline-style investigative reports of many salon owners recommending totally unsafe exposure levels, and all the ones I've interacted with aren't particularly up on skin safety.) If you care about your skin enough to use sunblock, you shouldn't be going in a tanning bed! I've never heard of anyone using sunblock when going in a tanning booth, and when I've been in a tanning booth I've never used any. (Wouldn't you rather just lay in the bed for a shorter time?) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

November 18

internet joke origin

In various places I've seen a joke/troll where someone posts to a helpboard with "I accidentally the whole thing!" (sic) Does anyone know if this is a reference to a particular origin (like a TV sketch)? AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 00:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

So far it is a thinly posted wannabe internet meme [4] but I'm sure this posting will help spread it. It would need to be far funnier to qualify as a joke. Edison (talk) 01:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not even original but just a re-take of the old Alka-Seltzer ad, "I can't believe I ate the whole thing!"? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 04:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Dramatica has a surprisingly useful explanation. Of course it is forbidden to link to it, but search for "I accidentally X". Adam Bishop (talk) 08:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

And suddenly I understand the perspective of authoritarian dictators who suppress freedom of speech :(. The reason we don't allow direct links to encyclopedia drammatica articles is because it would ruin our little project, wikipedia. Kind of like the reason China doesn't allow you to talk about what happened at Tiananman square. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.75.250 (talk) 18:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it's more to do with the amount of trolling that occurred with ED links. Certainly a lot of the articles are very useful and informative for this kind of thing, though - they're just not very encyclopedic in the classic sense of the word! ~ mazca ^t|c 18:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I know, understand, and agree with that reasoning. It's also exactly the same logic (ie based on the undesired result for the project) that China uses to crack down on people who talk about Tiananman square. I'm NOT talking about links on article pages: I'm talking about here at the reference desk or any other discussion (TALK) pages. It's EXACTLY the same as not allowing web sites to link to pictures of Tianman square. I mean, exactly the same. I don't disagree with it here at Wikipedia, I just have suddenly understood the reasoning that authoritarian dictators use, or authoritarian regimes like China, and it makes me feel very dirty. 79.122.75.250 (talk) 23:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I would never have thought to look something up in Encyclopaedia Dramatica. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 19:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it does indeed come from 4chan. ;)Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 01:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The dramatica article notes that most people are familiar with the "whole coke bottle." Indeed. You can see the (actually really funny) link here (a jpg). (See also here for the punchline.) zafiroblue05 | Talk 07:35, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

United States National Debt

United States is in debt about $10,617,806,584,635.27. I know that printing out more money from the federal reserve and handing it out in our country would decrease the power of the dollar. But why don't we just print out more money and give it to countries who we are in debt to? (Japan ($580 billion), China ($390 billon) and the United Kingdom ($320 bilion) Would the same problem of decreasing bang for the buck occur. Or would it be a different problem because it is overseas? This would at least reduce our debt by 1 trillion 290 billion. What are the problems with doing this and is this even legal/ethical? Thanks for any serious answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.126.152 (talk) 05:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Printing and internationally distributing a currency would have the same inflationary effect. More of a currency in circulation makes it relatively less valuable regardless of who holds it first. Inflation is like a tax on everyone else who holds money.NByz (talk) 06:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. This is an important principle of international markets, if you increase or decrease the price of a commodity anywhere, it affects the price everywhere else. In this case, the commodity is dollars. For another example, look at oil. The argument has been made that the US should drill more wells to lower US energy prices. However, since that oil goes on the international market, it would lower oil prices in China just as much as the US. StuRat (talk) 06:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

And it wouldn't lower prices by much at all if you check out Arctic Refuge drilling controversy Nil Einne (talk) 01:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Think of it in terms of demand and supply. If the supply of something (in this case US dollars) increases with the demand being unchanged, the value of the thing decreases. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 06:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Note as well that a large campaign to print money to get out of debt would likely depress the value of the U.S. dollar much further than simple dilution would predict. Currently, the U.S. dollar is widely seen, accepted, and employed as a reserve currency — a reliable store of value backed by a large, stable economy and a sound financial system.

Attempting to print its way out of debt would lead to a worldwide loss of confidence in the soundness of the U.S.' dollar, a flight to better-managed currencies like the euro, and a plummeting value of the U.S. dollar on international markets. Countries that have been actively propping up the value of the U.S. dollar (especially China and other Asian markets, who wish to see their export goods remain affordable to U.S. purchasers) would likely cease those activities, not wishing to see their investment squandered. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Which would reduce the extent to which people with to lend the US money, which would increase the cost of borrowing for the US, which would end up with them having more debt and printing more money and they would rapidly spiral into hyperinflation. --Tango (talk) 15:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

primates

it's common in statistics in both human and primates ,,,the clue is that it has to do with their limbs ..what's the answer..if anyone knows the answer please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.24.99.211 (talk) 06:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thumbs? 81.187.153.189 (talk) 07:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Digits? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Left handedness? --Sean 13:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Percentage of population that have solved the P vs. NP problem? 83.250.202.208 (talk) 21:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

They walk upright...sometimes? Adam Bishop (talk) 21:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest opposable thumbs or something to do with the dna/gene commonalities. --KizzyB (talk) 16:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Arm to leg length ratio comparisons? There is probably an official name for it. They're good for determining the habits of primates, i.e. arborial versus terrestrial... 152.16.15.23 (talk) 02:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm going with opposable thumbs. Tezkag72 (talk) 22:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Short fingers?

I want to learn a musical instrument just for the fun of it but my friend says my fingers are probably too small to play the piano or guitar. My index finger is about 6.5cm long (2.5"), my middle finger is 7cm (2.8") and my thumb is about 5.5cm (2.25"). I know having long fingers helps a lot with playing instruments but are short fingers really an impediment? --Candy-Panda (talk) 07:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe keyboard things require a wideish span between pinkie finger tip and thumb tip. Plenty of instruments may not (woodwind, percussion, brass). There's always the theremin among other things. I remember something about a musician who tried stretching their hands mechanically and ended up wrecking them, but can't think of the name. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it was Lizst :) 194.80.32.9 (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

It was Robert Schumann, in fact.--Diniz(talk) 22:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

My fingers are only about 1 - 2 mm longer than yours but I play the guitar without too much difficulty in that respect. The most I can stretch my fingers is from the 5th fret with my index to the 10th fret with my pinky but I haven't been hindered by my short fingers yet. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 07:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I have stubby fingers but I can play guitar well enough. You might not be able to play songs by people with long fingers, but you don't need long fingers to form all the basic chords. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The harmonica requires no great length of fingers. --Psud (talk) 09:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Alicia de Larrocha has tiny hands. Maybe she struggled with some of Rachmaninov's compositions (whose handspan was legendary), but it certainly didn't stop her from becoming an exquisite pianist. Michel Petrucciani, one of the greatest European jazz pianists ever, had to overcome all sorts of difficulties (though he never perceived them as such, and though, to be fair, his hands look normal-sized on pictures). Django Reinhardt came up with new fingerings, and continued to swing hard on his guitar, even after two of his left hand's fingers were paralyzed in a fire accident. There are plenty of examples. I recommend learning the instrument that appeals most to you, not the one that best fits your physical measurements. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Scriabin, who wrote the greatest piano music in history, had very small hands with a span of barely a ninth. That meant that he was unable to perform some of his own music, but from the accounts of people who heard him play and the piano roll recordings that exist, it's safe to say what he could play he played brilliantly. 194.171.56.13 (talk) 11:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Scriabin, who wrote the greatest piano music in history - hmmm, I think that's slightly debatable. Let's just say he wrote some great music. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll take some of the blame, for my weasely "one of the greatest ... ever". Soon after typing, I reconsidered this and thought yeah he's one of the greatest ever out of a pretty large set of greatest ever. I guess I was under the influence of listening to some clips on youtube while thinking about this question and Petrucciani's remarkable and far too short biography. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd second the guitar. I have very short, stubby fingers, and there are a few weird chords I have to work around (like, say, E2) but mostly you can work out most of the basic chords. The tuning of a guitar means that you can play 2 full octaves in a 5-fret space, even for my short fat fingers. You could also look into smaller stringed instruments, like Ukulele or Mandolin. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Playing keyboard instruments used to require long reach - but many modern electronic keyboards have keys that are considerably smaller than piano keys. It's just a matter of finding the right instrument. Also - how about a trombone - those things should be easy on the fingers! SteveBaker (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I 2nd the idea of getting an electronic keyboard. You can turn the disadvantage into an advantage by getting a smaller, less expensive keyboard. In particular, I'd expect models made in Asia (Yamaha, for example) would be designed for those with shorter fingers. If they are still too big, try a version designed for children. They may be the cheapest yet. StuRat (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore - with the ubiquity of the MIDI interface, you can take a relatively cheap keyboard who'se "feel" and spacing happen to suit you - and hook it up to an industrial-strength synthesiser bank full of hideously expensive professional gear. SteveBaker (talk) 19:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Gak! Maybe I'm a purist but I think playing electronic keyboards (even those with weighted keys) is an awful sensory experience, and I think almost all pianists agree with me. I wouldn't go this route!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Well... I think your just fine! My mom can play both and her finger hights are the same! -Warriorscourge (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Smaller hands are an advantage on some wind instruments, such as flute. --S.dedalus (talk) 22:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Long fingers can certainly be helpful for some instruments (I can stretch from the 5th to the 14th fret on a guitar, so things like bass come easy for me), but short fingers do not necessarily impair people. I know guitarists of all fingers lengths, and many have short, stubby fingers and can play circles around the big-handed ones. It's just a matter of practice and perseverance, and if you really work at it, there's no reason for smaller fingers to stop you from becoming a good (if not great) guitarist. --69.146.230.243 (talk) 03:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The Suzuki method somtimes uses instruments designed for very young people with hands much smaller than yours. Phil Burnstein (talk) 22:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

That's it, use the Suzuki method on a Yamaha keyboard. With that combo there's snow way you'll have any trouble. :-) StuRat (talk) 18:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)~~

This reminds me of watching some movie in which Jeff Goldblum played a pianist and noticing that, when shown in close-up, the pianist's hands looked like a child's compared to Goldblum's. —Tamfang (talk) 01:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like they used an oriental pianist. There must be some aspect of Chaos Theory which states that, if you fail to provide a physical description to casting when hiring a double, they will cast the person who least resembles your actor. StuRat (talk) 18:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

If you want something in the string family and are worried about reach you might also consider a Appalachian dulcimer. You can even build one yourself. They're portable, not everyone has one and you can put it on top of a piano to make it sound real grand. With an electric pick up you can even play in a band, just as you would with a guitar. The drawback is that you'd have to write your own riffs, because most of what's available for dulcimer is folk or country like. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 08:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

British ads: what do they mean?

If an ad for a room says "English speaking", do they mean "native speakers of English" or "fluent speakers of English"?

In an ad for a job, what is considered an "honours degree" (if you have a foreign degree)? Is that your first degree or only a degree with good grades? 80.58.205.37 (talk) 12:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

For the first question, 'English speaking' certainly does not mean 'native speakers of English'. It could mean 'fluent speakers' but more probably means 'speaks enough to get by'. As for your second question, where is the job precisely? In English universities, and honours degree is simply a non-terrible (but still potentially pretty bad; not 'good grades' by any means) first degree, while in the Scottish system, an honours degree requires a fourth year of study. Algebraist 12:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. The job is in an institute for further education. The description said: "You will need a Honours degree in Social sciences, Health Studies or a related subject". 80.58.205.37 (talk) 12:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

It's explained in British undergraduate degree classification, but if your degree is not from the UK it won't really apply, and you'll have to show if your qualifications are enough to be equivalent. The institute may be familiar with degrees frrom other countries and be able to give their opinion. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 12:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I have read that article, but it has no reference to recognition of foreign degrees. --80.58.205.37 (talk) 13:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

An honours degree is a 3 or four year undergraduate degree with any grade above a bare pass (in a nutshell). Just rephrasing what Algebraist said really. AlmostReadytoFly is correct in saying that if you don't have a UK degree you are going to have to have a way to show your degree is equivalent. dougweller (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. That would be enough to be considered as job applicant. What about "English speaker"? Are these people, who are offering the room, some sort of Londoner rednecks? Or they just want to come well along with their potential roomies?--80.58.205.37 (talk) 13:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

When considering degrees from outside the UK - it'll make a HUGE difference where you come from. Almost any full degree from a "real" US university will work - but a "granted in recognition of your life experiences" piece of order-by-mail "degree" is worthless - somewhere between those limits will be the "DeVry" type of degree. On the other hand, if you are from a country with less well known institutions - then there might be some issue. The answer is to call them up and ask - I'm sure you'll get a quick answer. As for the 'room' ad - I'm sure they just want to make sure that you speak English well enough to be understood. There is no reason to require a perfect accent and impeccable grammar - they just want to be sure they can interact with you reasonably. (Unless of course these are evil racists trying to find a reason not to rent their room to people whom they don't deem suitable for reasons that would be illegal were they to spell them out in detail!)... SteveBaker (talk) 13:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

In Canada, an honours degree is the four-year version of the basic undergraduate degree (i.e. Bachelor's), in contrast with the standard three-year program. Not to be confused in any way with graduating "with honours". I did the first and certainly didn't do the second... :-) Matt Deres (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

That's not correct for my university when I was there. An honours degree typically took 4 years and a general degree also typically took 4 years. There was a 3-year degree, called a pass degree, but I believe it was really intended as a fallback for people who tried the general program and couldn't quite pass all their courses. As well as requiring you to take more credits, the honours degree also required higher marks than the general degree, and for some courses you had to take a slightly harder version. --Anonymous, 00:02 UTC, November 19, 2008.

At the University of Victoria in Canada (I make the distinction from two posts above), a social sciences honours degree and regular degree are both 4 year degrees and require the same number of credits. An honours degree requires an additional "thesis" in each of the third and fourth years. In economics there are also two courses that are required that would only be optional in a regular BA.NByz (talk) 01:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I would think it far more likely that they are foreigners who only want to live with English speakers because they want to improve their English. Most British people are either left-liberal anti-racists, or live in fear of being subject to false accusations of racism by the rabid liberal-left, and would therefore never risk saying such a thing. Innocent foreigners from less PC countries might well say it though. Abberley2 (talk) 16:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Second oldest organization in the world

So, for completely inscrutable reasons, me and my mate were discussing what the oldest organization in the world was. Pretty quickly it became obvious that the Catholic Church wins, hands down. So, then, naturally, the question became: except for the Catholic Church, what's the oldest organization in the world? Is there one that even comes close? Any that crosses the millenium-mark?

(Organizations, for the purpose of this question, is loosely defined as some sort of centrally organized group of people who identify as part of it, with some sort of coherent structure. Like, "Islam" doesn't count, because it doesn't have a consistent structure or clearly defined leadership or hierarchy (unlike the Catholic church, which has a pope, with cardinals working for him, governing bishops, etc. etc. You can draw a chart, basically). It's just a bunch of people that believe in the same thing, not an organization per se. Also, no governments, royal lines of succession, semi-mythological organizations (I'm looking at you, Bavarian Illuminati!) or families. Think companies, clubs, sects, those sorts of things). 83.250.202.208 (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

It may not qualify, given your restrictions, but China can be traced back to the Bronze age (at which time the RC church and the papacy were still a way off). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that doesn't count. Countries aren't really "organizations", are they? 83.250.202.208 (talk) 19:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that China counts - but then you'd have to count the dynasties separately, and few of them lasted more than four hundred years, if I recall correctly. Jørgen (talk) 19:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The Chinese central state bureaucracy was established in the Qin dynasty in the late 3rd century or early 2nd century BC and continued in some form certainly till the 1911 revolution. I'm not sure if any of it survived that and the subsequent communist takeover to the present day. (There were certainly periods during that time in which the bureaucracy was in abeyance, when China had no central government, but new dynasties typically took over the old system, so I would say it was at least as continuous as the church in Rome.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maltelauridsbrigge (talk • contribs) 12:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

You can make the answer come out to be "The Catholic Church" if you constrain the 'rules' enough - but your constraints are pretty arbitary. The jewish faith has been around a lot longer - they have pretty consistent sets of laws and some sort of hierarchy. Excluding nations is pretty arbitary since the Catholics behaved much like a nation for most of their existence. (The "Holy Roman Empire"?!) SteveBaker (talk) 19:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

(PITA EC!) Hinayana Buddhism has a central belief in the words of the Buddha, who came 500 years before Christ. There may be many sects, but they all believe essentially the same thing, and I am sure you would be able to find a sect that goes right back to the Buddha himself, if you really looked.--ChokinBako (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

If we adhere to your rules (a bit loosely), I suggest that the "family" / "tribe" / "clan" far predates the RC Church. It would even predate our species and may not even have changed all that much from a pride of lions to the dysfunctional family of the Simpsons. It is, of course, not a "human made" cooperative entity, but neither is the RC Church, to believers. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The Holy Roman Empire wasn't a case of the Catholics behaving much like a nation. It was a case of a weird kind of monarchy pretending to be holy and Roman and an empire, none of which were true. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I think you guys are missing the point of the OP. There are certainly belief systems older than the Catholicism, but what about as an organizational structure? I think we get off task when we just name random stuff that is older than Catholicism, without focusing on the idea of an "organization". I would discount China because the modern China really bears no connection to the historical state as an "organization". If the oldest means "furthest continuous backwards from today", then modern China really only exists since the 1940's. No state in Europe is as old as the Catholic Church is either... And while families and tribes and clans are TYPES of organizational structures, this is about the specific organization, not merely the type of organization. Can we point to a tribe or clan with a coninuous unbroken organizational history dating as far back as the Catholic Church? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually the oldest organisation ever to exist is the roman kingdom/republic/empire. Rome was founded as a kingdom in ca. 800 BC, and the eastern half of the roman empire survived untill 1453 when it was conquered by the ottomans. That's over 2250 years. Hinduism can trace it roots back about 3,500 years, though that's not as organised as the catholic church or the romans were so I dunnno if it counts.--Patton123 20:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

(EC with Jayron) Earlier answers aside, I think your answer of the Catholic Church is a perfectly reasonable condition. There's more to an organization than a common goal or belief system; you need some kind of consistent bureaucratic framework, IMO. The Jewish faith has obviously been around a great deal longer, but has there been a central, bureaucratic body that provided some kind administration or something? I'm genuinely asking, but I don't think that's so. My first thought for second place would be Japanese royalty, which has continued in unbroken succession for more than a thousand years (at least back to AD 270 (Emperor Ōjin) and possibly back to 660 BC (Emperor Jimmu)). Perhaps they deserve first after all. Matt Deres (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

According to the history books of the bible the jews hae had some form of leader for msot of their history bar their time in egypt, between judges, kings and simple natural leaders.--Patton123 20:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, but countries (like the Roman Republic and the Roman and Byzantine Empires) are a different thing though! There's lost of countries that are dirt old (some version of "Sweden" has existed for at least 1900 years, and possibly way, way longer), but that's not the same thing. There's a bunch of land on Earth, it tends to get divied up and ruled by people, and when those people die, new people rule it instead. The borders grow and they shrink, but the nations themselves can live on for millenia without much effort. It's not the same thing. 83.250.202.208 (talk) 20:57, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

There has been a ruler in each occupied country I am familiar with, for as long as it has been continuously occupied. There have been numerous "regime changes." The history of the Roman Catholic Church is the history of the Papacy. Haven't there been similar externally imposed "regime changes " and internally imposed changes in the "form of government" in the papacy, so it is no more a "continuous organization" than the government of China was for longer periods? Symmachus in 502 took away the right of laymen to elect a Pope and restricted eligibility to higher clergy, a radical change in the form of government as dramatic as a change of dynasty in Egypt or China. In the 10th century the Pope was appointed by local Roman noble families, another drastic change equivalent to a change in the form of government in a country. In the 11th century Henry III took on himself the right to appoint the Pope, another change which should restart the clock. The clock should start again in the 14th century, when the Popes for 70 years did not reside in the see of which they were supposed to be Bishop, previously a definition of the Pope as Bishop of Rome, but in France. If the Roman Catholic Church's longevity is judged by the standards we would apply to Egypt or China, then it is 730 to 1406 1506 years old. Edison (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

In the Middle Ages when various different factions decided they could appoint their own popes, there was often more than one. The church has since legitimized some of them so it looks like there is an unbroken succession, but it was certainly not that clear at the time. "The Catholic Church" as we know it now really isn't any older than the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century, and you could probably argue it is less than 50 years old, after the Second Vatican Council. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh come on guys, it's the New World Order! -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^Talk _{Contributions} 22:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

After looking at this I would think that some of the construction trades may well be older than the CC. Though I couldn't be sure how much "organisation" they have/had. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 00:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

How about the Sri Lankan Sangha? The Sri Lanka article describes it as having a "largely unbroken lineage" since the 2nd century BCE. Is it an unbroken organizational structure? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 06:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

How about Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia, who ruled Ethiopia until 1974? He traced his lineage back to King Solomon. Seems as likely as the current Pope having an unbroken line of predecessors in one unvarying organization dating back to the apostle Peter. Edison (talk) 07:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

How about the Althing? This springs to my mind... --Ouro (blah blah) 11:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Other Christian Churches are at least as old as Rome. The Syriac Orthodox Church possibly dates back to Saint Peter; see the lists List of Patriarchs of Antioch and List of Syriac Orthodox Patriarchs of Antioch which form a chain from 37 AD; however it has moved from Antioch to Damascus, so it doesn't have the same fixed geographical focus as the Roman church. The Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria apparently dates back as an organised structure to 190 AD; the List of Coptic Orthodox Popes of Alexandria goes back to Mark the Evangelist in 43 AD, though the church presumably had no formal structure at that time. It seems to have persisted in Alexandria through all invasions, empires, and upheavals.--Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 13:03, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I would argue the Imperial House of Japan qualifies as an organization. Its founding was in 660 BC which would make it much older than any Christian organization. —D. Monack ^talk 03:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

If you are looking for non-political organizations, then this might fit your bill Incense Route. The specific organizations trading on that route have not been preserved by name, but I bet there were some. (dromedaries united?? ;-) Also the artisans that built things in Egypt weren't slaves as some thought. I assume they were organized in some fashion, since the workmen's village they dug up was grouped by trades. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 09:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

The Jewish priesthood ("Kehuna" - see Kohen) dates itself back to Aaron. It has some elements of being an "organisation" (rules, membership etc) but has had no governance since the institution of the High Priest fell into disuse. --Dweller (talk) 11:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Is it me?????????????

This year in June, I took my wife and my mother-in-law to Tenerife for 2 weeks in a wonderful hotel on a half-board basis. Yesterday, I contacted the Edinburgh based carrier for a quote for 2009 - same hotel - same weeks - same board basis - and discovered to my horror they have increased the pice by ----------40%. So I asked whether they were aware of the international credit crunch - the collapse of Excel and Zoom airlines - the British recession v Depression etc., etc. The operator thanked me for my call - and put the phone down. Today, I went shopping around all the competitors' branches and was SHOCKED to learn that all of their 2009 holidays had significantly increased in price over 2008. So - is it me??? Or are people spending their savings NOW as against waiting for them to collapse during some as yet unseen but feared crisis? 92.21.226.176 (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, as you said - collapse of airlines means less planes available to travel on means more demand means higher prices. Food costs have increased, fuel prices too. It all adds up. Add in soaring inflation rates... -mattbuck (Talk) 21:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

(editconflict) Despite current economic conditions, there are still many many people who have money to spend. A quick look at the article Tenerife suggests that it is a wonderful place for a vacation. (You were there - is it?)

I expect the chances are good to excellent that the tourist businesses of Tenerife know that they will still be able to attract guests, despite major rate hikes. Wanderer57 (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

And I'm informed that sterling has lost 25% of its value in the last few weeks. That sort of thing would tend to dent your ability to purchase a foreign holiday. I'm with the operator. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

You don't say, where you're from, or what currency the increase is in, but that could be a huge part of it. Imagine you're paying in pounds.

Let's assume that last year your vacation cost 1 pound and this year it cost 1.4 pounds.

That works out to 1.42euros then, 1.64euros now. That's only a 15% increase not a 40%.

(Assuming you bought the tickets on the 18th of November in each case. And assuming my math is right. )

APL (talk) 21:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the currency devaluation is likely to be the biggest chunk of this - but also, the strategy that a business takes when custom dips down is not NECESSARILY to drop prices. If their prices were already cut to the bone - then cutting them further means they're now losing money instead of making a profit. An alternative strategy is to put your prices UP on the grounds that loyal customers will come anyway - so the reduction in numbers of customers is outweighed by the profit per customer. This works especially well in service industries because they can shed a lot of unskilled workers and save money there too. So perhaps these people know their customers and have figured out that increasing their prices pushes their profits up - not down. SteveBaker (talk) 22:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

My biggest issue isn't with the resort's price but with your last sentence. What leads you to believe that A) people are spending their savings "NOW" just because a resort's price for 09 went up and B) the crisis is not "as yet unseen". Tell all the people who have lost their jobs and/or their homes in the last year that the crisis is unseen. Dismas|^(talk) 22:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh - I am so genuinely sorry - I hadn't realised that Wikipedia was so heavily populated by unemployed Wall Street Bankers (as were). I am in the UK - and do you know - despite the crash - I still have a choice - and do you know what else - I also have the cash? - I have decided therefore that I I I I I am in control - NOT the bankers or the travel agents - so do you know what? I am staying at home next year. And the USA - Spain - Greece - Australia - Cruises - and Israel - can all get stuffed. I shall be relaxing in my OWN country - God Bless Us All. 92.21.226.176 (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry we were unable to confirm your bias. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

We'll miss you here in the U.S. (though the Tenerife article tells me the U.S. does not include this vacationer's paradise). I don't think "the bankers" are in control (cf. Citigroup deciding it can get by with 50,000 fewer employees), and I know from working in the travel industry that the travel agents aren't, either.

Since I knew there'd be fewer cranky people there, I just checked airfares from New York to Tenerife. For a Dec. 2 departure, they ranged from $665 - $900 (which is a 35% swing). For a July 2009 trip, the range was from $1,422 - $1,763 (a 24% swing for that date, but essentially 100% higher than December). Why, I have no idea -- maybe Tenerife's more popular in July (supply and demand, not conspiracy). Maybe the airlines are pessimistic ("predictions are hard, especially about the future). Maybe the farther out people book, the likelier it is that they'll cancel (this is generally true for travel not dependent on a specific holiday like Christmas). --- OtherDave (talk) 04:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

If you buy plane tickets well in advance, you typically get them for a moderate price. If you buy them just a few days before the trip, the price is typically higher. However, if they can't fill all the seats, the price may plummet right before the flight. StuRat (talk) 15:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

It's totally cool if you want to want to blow off Les États-Unis, because the joint will still be full of Brits looking at price tags, saying "No, really?" and buying half the store. Maybe that'll be a third of the store now that the pound has dropped a little. God Bless the British Tourists, Darkspots (talk) 12:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

One thing no one's mentioned yet is the influence of the oil price. Many airlines buy fuel in bulk for their anticipated needs over the next few months and maybe even a year. Since your holiday last year, the oil price has risen to record highs and even though the oil price has since fallen again, the price the airlines paid for their fuel is still the older higher price. Astronaut (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

November 19

Professional Paper Stapling

What is the most professional way to staple pieces of paper? Should the staple run horizontally across the page, diagonally or vertically? Acceptable (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

This guy has given it some thought. -hydnjo talk 02:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Basically you want to anticipate what angle the reader will fold back the stapled pages along, and put the staple parallel to that fold. For me, a slight tilt off the page's vertical seems to work best -- like the 22.5° mentioned on the page cited above, or even less. I'm surprised the guy refers to the "classic 45°", though; most people I know put the staple horizontally, which is definitely inferior. --Anonymous, 05:59 UTC, November 19, 2008.

I personally think that a vertical staple looks the most professional. Darkspots (talk) 12:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I used to buy quantities of photocopiers for a large government department. The benefit of paying the extra cost of having automatic stapling devices fitted was enormous. In my experience ALL of them had the staple at the top left corner parallel with the long side of a sheet of A4. The OP asks for the most PROFESSIONAL way but maybe he meant to ask the most appealing way? If he would prefer the staple to lie across the top edge than my response above will not apply and I don't know if automatic staplers can be made to do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.76.60 (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

That guy seems to have bought into the Golden Mean myth. -- BenRG (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Being a fan of Ernie I just use paper clips, see youtube Have you ever looked at a paper clip? Staples just aren't the same :) Dmcq (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Has anyone ever touched anyone else with a tuxedo from the extended arm of an unbent coat hanger?

Let me explain. What I'm trying to ask here is if there's a scientific/ psychological organization out there that does seeminglessly pointless and or random/bizarre experiments? There would be a purpose to it. Despite my own pointless, porposeless life (see question), I've noticed some subtle things. One of those things is that -we dont really know exactly what happens until we do it! Take a pencil and drop it. But before you do, try to picture what will happen. Chances are you didnt see that funny bounce it took. Things often dont happen exactly as pictured. You may say this is pointless, but I say all knowledge is important. So what would happen if you touched someone from ten feet away with a tuxedo, and not necessarily with an extended hanger? How about that tuxedo dangling from the end of a pipe (both the plumbers kind and the kind you smoke from)? Or stapled to the end of a solidified extension cord from 20 feet away(unplugged of course)? With or without forewarning? What if it had a "Kick Me" sign on it? I doubt this has ever been tried. The point is,- we would learn something. Maybe practical, maybe not. What if you stared at a glass for 16 hours? By yourself? Or painted a box blue and asked people to guess what was in it? What if it was orange? Would there be a pattern to the guesses with different colors? How long would it take someone to ask if there's a chunk of concrete in a grocery store? Now grocery stores dont sell chunks of concrete, but if you had the patience to stand there and eavesdrop indefinitely, well...who knows?

Sorry I rambled on. Hopefully, you get the picture. I just think that there is value in ALL questions, and have more to say about this in a future post. But, for now could you please enlighten me to any experiments of this nature. It would be greatly appreciated, and I would find it endlessly fascinating.--Hey, I'm Just Curious (talk) 01:03, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Cost-benefit analysis. Given a finite supply of time and human labour, only a certain number of activities can be carried out. We tend to choose the ones most likely to offer some sort of valuable return on our investment of time, money, and effort.

You might be able to get some sort of grant as a conceptual artist, however. They're generally paid to waste time. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

An experiment usually benefits from having an hypothesis, an experimental group(s) and control group(s). More than zero degrees of freedom are useful in statistical analysis of experimental results. Some of the gambits you describe sound like vintage Social psychology experiments, like having someone stop at a redlight, then remain stationary when the light turned green, and seeing how long it was before the car immediately behind the experimenter honked, as a function of the sex/age of the drivers, the value of the car, and the socioeconomic status of the neighborhood, or having people stand at varying distances from the subject in an elevator, and recording whether they said anything or changed their position. Or having an experimenter sit outside the library crying and seeing whether people approached, or moved away. But even they went beyond "What would happen if....." Edison (talk) 07:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

There are television programs which set up strange situations and then record people's reactions. Candid Camera is one of the older ones. Such programs could be considered as "experiments" along the lines you are suggesting. Wanderer57 (talk) 06:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

We do experiments - mostly - not to find a specific answer to what happens to a very specific thing under very specific conditions. What we're trying to do is to find some underlying principle that covers a whole range of similar conditions. Hence (for example) we do not attempt to prove Newton's laws of motion by giving a push to every conceivable kind of object at every conceivable speed. A suitably representative sample is plenty. Once we've deduced the underlying principle - we don't need to do any of the infinite number of other possible experiments that will just produce results that will fit the same theory. Since one can only perform just so many experiments in a lifetime, it makes sense to maximise the chances of finding out something amazing and/or useful by carefully picking experiments that are likely to fall outside the range of existing theory. The experiments that you are proposing are of exceedingly low value because it is almost certain that they'll merely confirm what we already know. Obviously we're only "almost" certain - but rather than do some very obvious experiment in order to narrow that already-tiny sliver of doubt, it's much better to pick something 'big' and probe that instead. SteveBaker (talk) 19:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

For some similar experiments, you could try looking through the Ig Nobel Prizes Steewi (talk) 23:53, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to the Ig Nobel Prize. This sounds somewhat close to what I was getting at, but I dont think they take it far eneough. Laughing and thinking are two very important qualities to possess when trying to learn something, so I do give them credit for that. Same for shows such as Candid Camera and Trigger Happy TV. But, -they exist for entertainment purposes only. You can try to learn something if you're looking, but that's not thier stated purpose. Incidently, Trigger Happy TV is closer to the kind of ideas I have. But again, even that show's ideas weren't taken far eneough.I believe experiments should be done as extreme as possible. What we need here is scientific grain counters, if you will. Keep doing the mundane, boring, and cumbersome (but perplexly fascinating) and you'll eventually come up with something. For example, after Dom Jolly yelled into his giant cellphone, why not take people's blood pressure? Or see to what degree thier pupils dilated? How about asking if they had the sudden urge to go elsewhere? Not to avoid the scene, but to see if thier mind shifted into changing thier plans? "Why, I was going to go to my buddies house, but suddenly I have the urge to visit my crossdressing uncle..."

Did the weather change? Did they notice if certain colors around them seemed brighter? For that matter- did colors get brighter? There must be some sort of wavelenghth measurement you can take before and after of, let's say, the red fire hydrant sitting nearby. Did you say "spectrometer"? Why I happen to have one right here! Then check thier physiological reaction, to that!

Not all my experiments would involve people. Just most of them. People talk, have feelings, and are more fun to communicate with than the fire hydrant. In the absence of people, you could try for example, mixing toothpaste with Einsteinium. Or Lawrencium with fur? How about fur, Lawrencium, toothpaste and Einsteinium in a blender? Since Einsteium and Lawrencium are man made and break down quickly, you could replace them with Technetium and a stick of gum. Then try burning it (don't try this with hydrogen!). The results probably wouldn't be as exciting, but who knows, maybe you'd discover a cure for cancer? Doubtful, but has it ever been tried? What, exactly, would happen?--Hey, I'm Just Curious (talk) 18:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I want to own a real nuclear submarine.

Yes, a real one. Ideally ex-mil, don't much care whose. I don't mind if it doesn't have torpedoes or anything like that, since I'd be renovating it anyway. The questions I have are as follows: 1) Is it legal under any circumstances for a civilian to own a nuclear submarine? I assume i'd need to have a license to own and operate a research reactor? 2) Where would I legally purchase fuel for it? 3) Where do I buy a submarine anyway? Russia have any laying around? I don't mind a u-fix-it sub. 4) I want to know how to run a nuclear sub. Anyone have any manuals for them or something?

Help me achieve my Hagbard Celine fantasy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.158.193.46 (talk) 06:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Civilians are not allowed to purchase military equipments like submarine, nuclear submarine is out of question. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 06:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Any way to de-militarize it? Do we have standards for that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.158.193.46 (talk) 06:34, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Civilians are not allowed to have a private nuclear reactor either. Have you considered how much a submarine costs? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Any way the best way if you have a lot of money is to buy a company that makes submarines. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I've considered the cost and I have the cash. What if I formed a corporation to operate the reactor? Officially. Are there any other countries without such laws? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.158.193.46 (talk) 06:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I would disagree that it is illegal for 'civilians' to own a nuclear reactor. Some of the organisations that run nuclear reactors now are neither government nor military. However you do have to be a licensed operator, which involves a huge level of certification and monitoring. And lets not forget the amount of insurance you are going to have to carry to operate a civilian nuclear sub. And probably a whole raft of other regulations you are going to have to comply with.

Just out of interest, what are you planning on using this sub for? And if your name is Blofeld we don't want to know. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

It is incorrect to say "civilians are not allowed to have....." demilitarized military equipment. Civilians own military airplanes from past wars. They own former U.S. Navy patrol boats. Civilians own tanks, which have been "demilitarized" in some fashion, as by removing the machine guns and the breach block of the cannon. A sub would probably have to have the torpedo tubes welded shut, the deck guns removes, and any ballistic missile tubes removed or welded shut. The World War 1(obviously non-nuclear) "Nautilus" was turned over to civilians for a zany attempt to reach the North Pole in 1931 [5]. Licensing of the reactor would be an issue, as would be ownership and control of the fuel. A fading superpower such as the Former Soviet Union (Russia) welcomes foreign hard currency, and might lease a sub, complete with crew, if the price were right. You could be the Skipper and travel around the world like Captain Nemo. How many million do you have? Edison (talk) 07:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

You might want to bookmark this website. These guys sell off surplus equipment from the British armed forces. Ships, aircraft and submarines have come up for sale in the past although there don't appear to be any on the website at the moment. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 11:54, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

And of course, legality and illegalaity vary by country. I presume that most of the above assumes the US. The situation might be different if 66.158 is a wealthy,(say) Moldovan! -- SGBailey (talk) 14:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

who.is says he/she is from Tampa, Florida, US. 132.206.22.13 (talk) 19:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

We can't give legal advice anyway, so it's not really relevant to us what jurisdiction s/he is in. If this is serious, the services of a good lawyer to go through all the relevant laws and regulations will probably be much cheaper than the submarine itself. --Random832 (contribs) 19:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

First article on Wikipedia

No, not the first one created, temporally. I saw on the main page that there is, rather quaintly, an A-Z index of Wikipedia articles. However, it only starts at 0, whereas there have to be articles that start with various symbols: ', -, =, etc. (Also, the index doesn't exactly work... if you click on, say, CZ, when it finishes that category, it goes on to Ca, and not to Da.) So what would be the first article on Wikipedia? zafiroblue05 | Talk 07:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The first actual article is !!! (!! is a disambiguation page, ! is a redirect). FiggyBee (talk) 08:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I think that the articles are listed not in alphabetical order but in asciibetical (or possibly unicode-al) order. Hence "punctuation, digits, more punctation, upper case, more punctuation, lower case and then a few more punctuations". -- SGBailey (talk) 14:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

In that case, the first article alphabetically is, not surprisingly, A. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Distance

What is the distance between London and Granada and London and Sofia? Does anyone also know flight length times? Simply south (talk) 10:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

1600 and 2000km, respectively (assuming we're talking about London in England, Granada in Spain, and Sofia in Bulgaria). Flight times will (obviously) depend on the speed of the aircraft; a Boeing 737 cruises at around 800km/h. If you want to know actual schedules, check out the online booking services of some likely airlines. FiggyBee (talk) 11:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

But, of course, a plane doesn't always fly straight or at cruising speed, so the actual trip will take longer than simple division would indicate. This tends to be more of a factor for short trips, since a higher percentage of the time is spent in departure and landing patterns, which tend to be in different directions and lower speeds than the main haul. StuRat (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Checking some direct flights, I found one lasting 2:45 hours from London (STN) to Granada (GRX), and flights from London (LGW) to Sofia (SOF) lasting 5:05 - 5:15 hours. If you are willing to change planes, the upper end of flight duration is open, I guess. ---Sluzzelin talk 16:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The longer flight takes almost twice as long even though it's only 25% further ? I wonder why that would be the case. StuRat (talk) 02:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You didn't make the mistake of subtracting the arrival time from departure time did you? Such times will usually be listed in local time therefore you won't get an accurate duration if the time zones are different Nil Einne (talk) 10:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I didn't, no, but that's probably what Sluz did, and I used his times. So, if we subtract a couple hours from the longer trip to get 3:00 - 3:15 hours, and leave the shorter trip as is, then those times make sense. StuRat (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Usa free fall

Soapboxing removed. The RefDesk is for asking questions, not posting jingoistic rants. Matt Deres (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

PayPal

I paid for something on eBay through PayPal with my credit card, and eBay says the payment went through, but my credit account doesn't say anything has been added to it. How long does it normally take for PayPal stuff to go through?--Newitems! (talk) 19:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The bank that your credit card is issued from may only process transactions in "batches". I know that, for example, when I make a deposit to my bank, I get a friendly warning on the ATM screen that lets me know that the transaction may take 24 hours to be processed. There may be similar lags on the credit system as well... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I find that if I make a purchase on my bank debit card I can see it appear on my online banking statement within a few minutes. Purchases made on my credit card (same bank, same online banking interface) sometimes take a day or more to become visible. ~ mazca ^t|c 20:07, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Would person from Seloncourt France possibly be considered Swiss?

Okay, I've gotten some great feedback here (and even helped out some with an update) with mysteries surrounding genealogical research, so I have one other one for you.

One ancestor emigrated from Seloncourt, France. The confusing part is, he's listed as being from Switzerland in the 1880 and 1900 census. And, the place name is "Salcourt." Now, if he's just giving info a cnesus taker can mishear Selconcourt as Salcourt (if he has a thicker accent), but France as Switzerland?

In your article, i found some clues - it's only a few miles from the Swiss border; very few, in fact. It wasn't even considered part of France till reabsorbed a couple decades before he came. It was Lutheran, whereas I think of most of France as Catholic. Perhaps he didn't identify himself with France, but yet on his deth certificate, it says France because they want specifics there?

Thanks, the people on here are great.Somebody or his brother (talk) 20:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The modern boundaries of France were not fixed until the 1940's, post World War II, but our article on Seloncourt notes that it has been an integral part of France since 1793. However, the confusion may arise as there is also a Saicourt in Switzerland, so my best guess is that the "L" in Salcourt is really an "i" and he really WAS from switzerland. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The other option is that he lived in a rural area on the Swiss side of the border, but since there is no town on that side, and the only town he could identify with was "Seloncourt", but he still identified as definitely Swiss.

Or maybe he actually was born Swiss, but lived in Seloncourt. It was frequent to cross the border to live on the other side for the locals (especially since Switzerland citizen would not be considered spies, so the French wouldn't have a problem). I am also from the Swiss border, and the people crossing the border on a regular basis to live on either side is quite significant, they feel part of the same community. This was so in my youth long before Switzerland was thinking of joing the Schengen treaty. --Lgriot (talk) 06:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Your ancestor may have been 'from' both France and Switzerland - for instance, born in one and resident in the other, or even domiciled in both (at different times or at the same time). Generally speaking, in the 19th century there was less certainty in people's minds about nationality than there is now, especially in such border regions, and it's possible (indeed, likely) that this man never held a passport. He may have been able to be a Frenchman when it suited him and a Swiss at other times. Strawless (talk) 17:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Laundry at home - rinsing with cold or warm water

Dear RefDeskers, I come to you yet again for guidance on life's most important matters. It had so happened recently that I have obtained through purchase a top-loaded washing machine like the one shown here. This model, just for clarity, has a larger rotating drum for your washing and rinsing, and a smaller for spinning. Water has to be supplied from the shower or a hose, and is drained via another hose (we take water from the shower and empty the waste bath also to our shower).

Anyhow, today as I was doing the laundry (yes, I am that kind of boyfriend) we had a discussion whether one should use warm or cold water for rinsing. I am for using cold water, primarily because my old wardrobe-sized commie washing machine used cold water, and the missis is for using warmer water because it doesn't hurt the hands as much.

So, the question is - which one is better to rinse laundry, warm water (call it room temperature warm) or cold water (cold like tap cold). Thanks for your input, answers from specialists will be appreciated. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 21:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Better, what, for the clothes? Because better for your energy bill is rinsing and washing everything in cold. --Moni3 (talk) 21:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I wash all my laundry in cold water as it does a better job preventing bleeding, especially bright reds (yes, I throw my colors in with my whites). Useight (talk) 22:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

(EC with above) However, warm water better dissolves things than does cold water. This is both good and bad. It is good because dirt and soap will be rinsed away more effectively; it is bad because so won't dyes and other material from the clothes. Thus, using warm water makes your clothes cleaner on average, but also reduces the life of your clothes. Such is the trade-off, and the debate between which is "better" for your clothes is probably never ending... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

If you're willing to spend more for enzyme-based laundry soap, cold water will get your clothes as clean as traditional soap and warm water. --Carnildo (talk) 22:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't really care about my bills that much - my skin and comfort are more important. We use liquid detergent that can be used both for hand washing and machine washing, and I usually separate clothes as follows: socks+undies, t-shirts, pants, hoodies+sweaters, not by colours, because most of my stuff is usually black to begin with (althouth I used to split my clothes in two groups: black and colour)). From your answers so far I am almost willing to start rinsing my clothes with warmer water. Will wait for more though, so far thanks, friends! --Ouro (blah blah) 22:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• Just a comment - twin-tubs (which is what your type of washing machine is called in British English) are great, they clean much better than automatics. I didn't know one could still get them though. DuncanHill (talk) 23:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

They're a cheap and efficient way to do your laundry, and are readily available here. For ours we paid the equivalent of around EUR 90. --Ouro (blah blah) 06:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

€90? New? DuncanHill (talk) 22:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

TV adverts with mimed voices

I often see ads where a person is saying something, but it’s obviously, and I mean really obviously, not their own voice. More than that, often the voice is quite noticeably out of synch with the lip movement - not by a whole second or anything, but still enough to be noticeable. I see this most often with ads for women’s products (hair, beauty, etc). These days, with all the high-tech stuff they have, one would have thought that synchronising a person’s voice to another person’s mouth (or even their own mouth) would be a piece of cake. But no. I’ve often wondered what they hope to achieve by such shoddy production, or do they assume women wouldn’t notice, or if they do notice, they wouldn’t care? Does this happen in other countries, or is it merely a manifestion of the Australian "she'll be right, mate" attitude? I hope that doesn’t come across as a rant; I am genuinely intrigued. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:09, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

It is widespread in the Mother Country too. If I had asked the question it would certainly have come across as a rant! DuncanHill (talk) 23:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't noticed in the States. At least not in the Modern Era, as it were (defined as whenever it was that they started using CGI that you couldn't tell was CGI).

I've sometimes wondered what it would be like if you could take just an everyday commercial, chosen at random, and show it to audiences from 1975. I bet they'd be blown away, want to nominate it for all sorts of awards. Granted there were a few standouts from that era ("Ski Bandini Mountain!") but for the most part this is an arena in which we've made huge progress, for whatever that's worth. --Trovatore (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can remember 1975, almost everything was better than it is today. We didn't watch much ITV though, so I probably couldn't comment on the adverts. DuncanHill (talk) 01:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I'm shocked that marketing people think we're more convinced by a badly-dubbed Australian accent than an foreign (ie, American) accent, and even more shocked that they're right - if market research didn't show a benefit to dubbing, they wouldn't do it! FiggyBee (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

There is a Cheerios commercial with a British couple, which uses the actors' voices in Canada, but is extremely badly dubbed with American voices on American channels. It's really annoying. I guess they assume Americans won't buy hoity-toity British Cheerios? Adam Bishop (talk) 00:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I've noticed that one. I do remember that Mad Max was dubbed for American distribution (though Mel Gibson did his own dubbing) because the distributors claimed Americans couldn't understand the Australian accents. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 00:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

But at the same time they use actors with noticeable accents so they stand out, such as Frederik de Groot. And Arnold Strong's voice was dubbed in Hercules in New York because of his accent.

I'd always assumed it was because they were using the same video with the audio in different languages (sometimes the dubbing clearly isn't even the same words). I hadn't realised they did it just for accents, but I guess it make sense - you want people concentrating on the product, not the accent. --Tango (talk) 02:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Some very famous films were badly dubbed, and not for obvious reasons. Sergio Leone's "man with no name" trilogy of Spagetti Westerns, for example, were shot "silent" with all dialog added in post production. In The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, for example, the three main characters are all played by Americans (Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef, and Eli Wallach). However the dubbing was so bad, for Wallach in particular, that you'd swear it was another actor dubbing his lines. It wasn't; it was Wallach's own voice, but it was badly done. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:35, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I gather that was common practice in Italian cinema at the time. —Tamfang (talk) 02:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

It was practical for most films shot for the European market. It was assumed that most films would be done in multiple language versions (Italian, English, French, Spanish, German, etc.) and since none of those markets would likely dominate, it made little economic sense to film in any one particular language. In many films, the actors aren't even "speaking" the same language; they spoke their native languages (like one actor would deliver his lines in German and another in Italian, etc.), however since their lines aren't being recorded live, it made little difference. The cost of shooting "live sound" is quite high; since there were so many versions of the film being dubbed anyways, it made much more sense to just shoot silent and overdub later into all of the various languages as needed. When Leone brought the American actors like Eastwood and Van Cleef to Europe to shoot his Trilogy, they found his method of shooting silent and overdubbing later to be quite "weird" as most American films utilized live sound; and only did minor overdubbs later to correct errors. There was some tension over whether or not to use the actors themselves to do their own lines; Eastwood was particularly adamant in Fistful of Dollars, for example, that he do his own lines in the sound studio. This perplexed Leone, as given the standard methods for shooting films in Europe, it made little difference WHO spoke the lines. Eastwood was endulged however, as the films were planned for an American as well as European release, and he was a well known star in America; if it wasn't his voice it would have likely been noticed. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense, Tango. And yet, women's products ads in Australia are often the original US ad, with the original US voice. We have no difficulty in understanding them, because they're usually spoken in, if anything, an over-enunciated way like Leeza Gibbons does, but I do have some difficulty in understanding why an ad obviously created for the US market is used without any voice changes in other countries. The relatability angle appears to be less of an issue with women's products than with men's products. But other ads use home-grown actors and voices, but clearly sometimes the mouth and the voice are not from the same people. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe not all models are spokesmodels and need dubbing, is one suggestion. Does that mean the blonde saying Jepstar with her lips, actually is? I thhought I was seeing things. Then again, body parts aren't always their own either. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I've always figured they use the original voice if we're supposed to know who she is, and dub it if it's just an anonymous model, Jack. FiggyBee (talk) 07:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I have no issue with dubbing, if that's what they decide to do. It's just the lack of professionalism in the way they they do it that mystifies me. If Milli Vanilli had employed this standard, they would have been exposed on Day 1. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Re Milli Vanilli; it's much easier to mime to an existing soundtrack than to dub to existing vision. FiggyBee (talk) 09:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

In the UK it's common on a lot of adverts that are used across Europe - so the original advert may not have an English-speaker hence the different mouth shaping to the voice. I think this is done to reduce advertising costs for companies. I find it very annoying, but not as annoying as changing the name of Marathon chocolate bars to Snickers, or Jif cleaning products to Cif to appease a pan-European market!! --KizzyB (talk) 10:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

This is purely anecdotal, but some years ago I was speaking to a marketing manager for a large UK manufacturing company, specifically regarding the men's hair colouring product, Just for Men. There was a commercial running at the time which suffered from exactly this phenomenon - a clearly US advert badly re-dubbed to give the actors plummy English accents. Anyway, this marketing man claimed that this was a well used advertising technique. The advert is annoying, as already stated, and is therefore memorable. The product already appears successful in another country and when we see this badly executed re-hash of an existing advert we think: "Cheapskate advertisers couldn't be bothered to make a new ad, dang and blast 'em" - but we place the blame squarely on the ad men and tend to trust the product. Don't know what others will make of this, but it seemed to make sense at the time. This conversation was ten years ago and I still remember the name of the product. Anonymous Bob (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so you're saying they deliberately do it this way to make pernickety people like me notice them? In a perverse sort of way, that actually makes some sense. They have all the advantages of modern technology at their disposal, but they choose not to use them because seamless ads that would just wash over people with little chance of retention is the very thing they don't want. Well, obviously their dastardly plot is working. Trouble is, I'm never going to buy those products anyway. If I were in the market, I might be swayed by a more sophisticated way of making me notice them. But these bottom drawer tactics actually decrease whatever small chance I might have of buying the products. I hope you're reading this, marketers. -- JackofOz (talk) 13:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it's the difference between an ad designed to enhance desire for the product (increase the market size), and one designed to enhance product recognition (increase the market share). An annoying ad isn't going to make you want to dye your hair if you didn't want to already, but it *might* make you pick that brand out when you're standing in front of the hair dye display in the supermarket. FiggyBee (talk) 13:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I remember c.1996 watching an episode of Friends in Ireland. In the ad break, Jennifer Aniston came on advertising something (shampoo?) I found the American accent very jarring in the context, even though I'd just spent c.15 minutes listening to American accents. jnestorius^(talk) 14:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Is bad advertising the new "good" ?

It seems that the more annoying the ad, the better it does, in the case of badly dubbed ads, ads which don't even try to sell the product ("I'm a PC !"), and the headache producing "HEAD ON !" ads. So, would an ad featuring a dog defecating on the product be the most successful yet ? StuRat (talk) 02:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

In the age of information highway, i wonder if its really important to showcase the product as somehow the viewers know it whether its on tv or as a hoarding, its aabout the strategy of conveing with a touch of mystery that evokes curiosity of the viewers to know what is it really about man.Vikram79 (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC) I have written to companies before and said their ad was so bad, I wouldn't buy the product.I got form letter replies saying everyone else loved them.Still,I felt better for venting my spleen.hotclaws 19:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

November 20

American Expat Tax Refund upon Leaving the UK

I'm an American expat who has been living and working in the UK for several years. I shortly plan to leave the country and have heard that it is possible for non-UK citizens to get their income taxes refunded when they leave. However, I have not been able to find any useful information on the government tax website. Does anyone out there know if this is true? If so, where does one go to begin the refund process.

Thank you for any help,

--Wellington grey (talk) 07:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

It's complicated and you're not going to get a definitive answer to your particular circumstances from anyone on this desk. You really need to speak to an accountant. Get a recommendation if possible, or look one up in the Yellow Pages (they must hold a recognised accountancy qualification such as ICAEW or ACCA). The first thing you need to do is establish your residency status in the UK, which will determine your liability to tax. And in fact there is plenty of information on the HMRC website. Look at this page and this one for starters. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

It's certainly possible. I managed something similar when I moved from the UK to Canada, and it hinged on the different definitions of being 'resident' for tax purposes in the two countries. Unfortunately this time of year is not the best to do this, as the UK will almost certainly consider you have been 'resident' for this year if you are moving now. However I may be wrong, and things may have changed, and the US is different from Canada, so you should absolutely consult a tax accountant with international experience. And check it at both ends, as you might be able to persuade the US that you are not resident for a tax year. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Will my sister grow taller than me?

I'm 16 and my little sister is almost 13. I'm 5'6" and my sister is 5'3" and still growing. Our parents are average height, our mum is 5'4" and our dad is 5'10" and a half. I started puberty earlier than my sister and I was 5'3" by the time I was 11 and a half. The thing I noticed lately is that my sisters hips are level with mine, and I don't have short legs by any means. She has grown 3 inches in the past year, will she end up taller than I am? --124.254.77.148 (talk) 12:51, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Height is determined by a variety of things so it's not a set thing but i've heard that a good guide is: Take the average height of your parents and for a boy add 6-12cm and for a girl minus 6-12cm. Of course any such measurement is very crude and probably not that reliable. By the by I was about 5'7/8 when i was 16 and ended up at 6'2. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 13:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

There's no real way to tell. Growth patterns are of course genetic, but like the difference between "weather" and "climate", there is a big difference between genetic trends in families and the specific manifestation of those trends in isolated cases. At any point your sister may stop growing, or may grow right past you. As an anecdotal example; in the 8th grade I was the tallest person in my class, however I stopped growing at that age, and all my classmates passed me. My brother, on the other hand, was always shorter than I was at his age (i.e. he was shorter at 12 than I had been at 12, etc.) which continued until I went away to college. He grew 6 inches in one year, thus passing my height while I was away. Very disconcerting. Since he was 16 he has been taller than I am, and he really didn't stop growing until he was 18 or 19. Totally different growth patterns, though we both come from the same gene pool... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Same thing with me. As a child, I was always the tallest or second-tallest kid in my class, towering over both boys and girls. I also appeared older for my age because of it. Everyone thought for sure I would end up super-tall and well, I'm lucky to be over five feet. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 14:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

My experience was less dramatic - at school I was generally taller than most, but not exceptionally tall. I topped out at 6'2", which I think you'll agree is still taller than most but not exceptionally tall! Both me and my brother ended up exactly the same height but my parents were 5'10" and 5'6", so we gained a good four inches on my dad - perhaps due to better nutrition growing up. ~ mazca ^t|c 18:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Nutrition can certainly have a significant effect on height, it's true. --Tango (talk) 18:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

My friend's brother was shorter than almost all the kids in his class until he was 13, but now he's 5' 11" so... Tezkag72 (talk) 22:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed we can't be definitive about this. But there are some broad-brush averages that give some insight. According to Growth_spurt#Conclusion, boys finish gaining height at age 18 and girls at 15. So both you and your sister have two more years of growth. But girls go through this spurt in less time - so the rate they grow in that final spurt is faster so she stands a chance of catching you up. Conclusion: Probably, you'll probably stay ahead of her - but probably it'll probably be closer than it is right now...probably. SteveBaker (talk) 00:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Steve, I think the OP is a girl. Darkspots (talk) 01:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

They let girls in here? How are we gonna talk about — you know? —Tamfang (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Stuff? Darkspots (talk) 02:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I gained an inch or two after 18, if memory serves after thirty years. —Tamfang (talk) 02:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Bah! Every guy says that. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

With jailbait present? Eeuw! —Tamfang (talk) 04:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

You may have misread the question. The OP was asking about height not your waist. (Resisting the other jokes in deference to the OP) Nil Einne (talk) 10:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

If I meant my waist, I wouldna said "inch". —Tamfang (talk) 20:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Identify the sex of someone by their words

A comment from Darkspots above was interesting. I read the OPs question and based on no evidence assumed it was a boy asking the question. Yet Darkspots thought the OP was a girl. On re-reading I think Darkspot was right, I think the word 'hips' is what swung it for me on the second-read. Anyhoo on with my question - is it possible to decipher someone's sex based purely on reading, say, a paragraph of their writing? I'm not thinking about ones where they explicitly refer to their gender, but more like the above question where no firm reference is made either way. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That's what this site claims to do- it's worked very well on the samples I tested it with. 72.200.101.17 (talk) 09:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

If you're talking about the question I think you're talking about, I think the OP was female since the question makes more sense that way (everyone knows men are generally taller than women, so the OP would probably have mentioned that if they were male). I think from one paragraph of randomly chosen text, it's going to be very difficult. You can make an educated guess, but it's going to be very unreliable. With more text, it becomes easier, but it's still far from certain. There was a user on another site I used to frequent that I know was female (I was in regular email contact with her and knew her fairly well), but I would frequently forget that when reading what she wrote. There was something about her writing style that made it seem like she was male (this may have been partly intentional, she didn't like people on site knowing her gender [although it was far from a well kept secret], even to the extent of asking people to refer to her as "it" rather than "he" or "she"). I can't consciously say what it was about her writing, but there was definitely something. --Tango (talk) 10:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

She's a girl because she entered puberty earlier than her sister. Boys enter puberty later than girls. Our article on puberty gives very wide ranges of ages, but generally girls begin puberty at 11-12 and boys at 13-14, in western countries. Darkspots (talk) 10:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I would find it unusual for a boy to refer to his hips in any way at all. --Sean 13:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

OP here, I'm a girl which you probably would have guessed had I not forgotten to log in. Haha. But thank you all for your imput and sorry for confusing you. ;) --Candy-Panda (talk) 13:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying! --Tango (talk) 13:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Really? Just because men have smaller hips doesn't mean they won't occasionally have need to talk about them. --Tango (talk) 13:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Obviously not, but I don't think we'd use hips as a measuring device. For guys, I'd expect shoulders, eyes, and top of head heights to be used. Er, among other things. Women are (often) preoccupied with their hips because that's one of the measurements they need for buying clothes. A guy might complain about his waist getting too wide - or his gut - but he's largely indifferent to his hips. Matt Deres (talk) 14:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Measuring around your hips, no, but the OP was talking about the height of her hips (as a measure of leg length). The standard measure of a man's leg length is the inside leg, but you wouldn't use that to compare two people (you would need a tape measure), so comparing hips is a likely way to do it (you could compare waist heights, but hips are easier to find on some people!). --Tango (talk) 18:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I should have phrased that better. Men wouldn't think to measure things by their hips because it's not an anatomical landmark for them like it is for women, both in the literal sense that our hips don't flare out the same way and in the more figurative sense that women need to know their hip size for buying many kinds of clothes (for the same reason). The placement of hips is something men rarely have to keep in mind, so we wouldn't think to use it for anything else. It's kind of like how some men know what year and model of car every person they meet drives, while not being able to recall their names. Matt Deres (talk) 20:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That site is fun – except for once, it says I'm/my text is male. hahahahaha Julia Rossi (talk) 21:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

It also wrongly pegged me as male. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 22:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

November 21

Ornlu the Wolf

What is the story behind the recurring character Ornlu the Wolf in the Age of ____ series, or is he entirely original? (Ornlu appears in Age of Empires 2 in the first Ghengis Khan scenario, Age of Empires 2 Expansion in the Vinlandsaga scenario of the Conquerors campaigns and as a cameo (renamed "Son of Ornlu) in some scenario in the Montezuma campaign, and in Age of Mythology (or the expansion?) as both a hero unit derived from the Fenris Wolf Brood unit, and as the relic "Eye of Ornlu".) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.218.79 (talk) 00:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Given that a searches for "ornlu wolf" and "ornlu myth" get no likely looking hits in Google Books, it is probably original to the game (compare to say, a search for fenrir wolf). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

no belly button

kelly kurkova has nobelly button, how is this possible? where did her umbilical cord come out of? virgin birth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.145.61 (talk) 01:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I assume you mean Karolina Kurkova. There's an article on this here. It's probably the result of some surgery she had as a baby or child. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

See also Omphalos hypothesis, which discusses whether Adam (Bible), who the Bible says was not born, had a navel. Paintings showed Adam with a navel, implying a fictitious gestation during which he was nourished by the placenta of his nonexistent mother. Edison (talk) 07:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That is really funny! (I wanted to say lol) ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it's just covered by make-up for some bizarre reason. Only she knows for sure. APL (talk) 15:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

This link shows her with one... Dismas|^(talk) 16:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

According to the BBC article, one is sometimes added to her photos afterwards. --Tango (talk) 18:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps she was at sea in wartime and was injured by a navel destroyer. Edison (talk) 23:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hilarious, Eddy, hilarious. :) Crackthewhip775 (talk) 01:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Which Cypher is This?

I am trying to decode the following cypher, however, I do not know which cypher it it. Is there any way to find out? (Please check to see if it works out before answering.)

Esheo Aorht Disas Eomta

Keyword: Death

http://www.scioly.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=325&p=11390

Thanks in advance.

--Chaffers (Something | Something else) 03:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

For a start, is the keyword literally "death" or "death (don't ask)" Where did the cryptogram come from, since context might be helpful. A short text might have many different possible solutions, under various encryptions. Edison (talk) 05:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Your revised question shows it is from a "Science Olympiad" implying that a clever student should be able to come up with a convincing solution. Previous posts at the Science Olympiad imply a Playfair cipher. See Playfair cipher for hints on decoding.Do you suppose q was omitted, or I and J were placed in the same square? Does "Death" go in the top row, or somewhere else? Edison (talk) 23:50, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I already tried that, and it reveals gibberish. --Chaffers (Something | Something else) 12:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Cities with certain year-round temperture ranges & certain demagraphic characteristics.

Hi there,

I'm looking for a list of cities north of Georgia, east of Illinois & south of New York State! Cities where during the summer months, the annual temperture spends the fewest days in excess of 80 degrees. There should also be the fewest number of days when the humidity exceeds 65%! The winter months get the fewest days where the temper-drops below 35 degrees & the fewest snow days! Any city that makes the list should then be looked at from a demagraphic point of view! The city should have at least 20% Black population & middle-income Blacks are well represented!! Thanking you in advance for any information along these lines you can send my way! NE7p2w8L (talk) 03:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You can get the demographic info somewhere I am sure, but if you are looking for climate and weather info, the best site I know of is http://www.weatherunderground.com . And no, this guy has nothing to do with it. If you start with the climate info from that site, narrow down the cities to places that have a tolerable climate for your disposition, you could research a smaller list of cities for demographic data to your liking. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Based on your question, you appear to be a well-centered individual. However, be aware that some of the things you ask for exclude others. The only way to eliminate both the high and low temperature ranges would be to find a location on an island in a large body of water, or possibly on a coast with consistent on-shore winds. However, this would mean high humidity. There are relatively few communities which are both over 20% black and largely middle-class, as well, so that will be quite a limiting factor, too. StuRat (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there is anywhere on earth with annual temperatures over 80 degrees. Even with global warming such temperatures aren't expected. Rather fortunate since very little life can survive at that temperature Nil Einne (talk) 10:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I assume asker means 80 degrees Fahrenheit.Tomdobb (talk) 13:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

If you are looking for low summer temperatures and high winter temperatures combined with low humidity, you are looking on the wrong coast. Your ideal climate is essentially the climate of coastal central California. Though the parts of California that have black populations over 20% tend not to have large middle-income black populations. Still, some neighborhoods of Oakland, California, might fit the bill for you, such as Grand Lake or Rockridge. East of the Mississippi, there is really no place where humidity is often below 65%. In that part of the United States, any place that has few days below 35 degrees F and little snow is sure to have lots of summer (and spring and fall) days above 80 degrees F. Conversely, any place with few days above 80 degrees F is sure to have lots of winter (and early spring and late fall) days below 35 and lots of snow. To my knowledge, the part of the eastern United States with the most moderate temperatures would be the valleys surrounding the Great Smoky Mountains in North Carolina and Tennessee. This is probably the best you can do in the eastern United States. You might consider Asheville, North Carolina, although the black population is only 17%. Another reasonably prosperous city with a relatively moderate climate (but rather high humidity) and a black population in your range would be Louisville, Kentucky. Marco polo (talk) 04:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

indian Riddle

kill them of an Indian sacredness and supply a world sport with its tools..it's one of those conc riddles a pal of mine got from the net,anybody who can help me unravel it i would very much appreciate it..a-What are we killing and B.-What sport is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.220.225.253 (talk) 05:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

War or proselytising?Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 05:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Cows and soccer (soccer balls). CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't it be many sports? Quite a few have or have traditional had leather balls. Cricket might be more appropriate for India Nil Einne (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Soccer is the "world game" though, which is hinted at in the question. FiggyBee (talk) 10:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That depends who you are though. For some Indians, cricket might be the world game. And many Americans seem to think basketball or sometimes baseball is the world game. Perhaps a plurality or even a majority of people agree football is the world game, but that doesn't mean it's the only correct answer to the question Nil Einne (talk) 11:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Soccer is, to my understanding, the most widespread game played across the most number of professional leagues across the world. Of course that doesn't make it the 'world game' but if any sport could claim this fictional title then soccer would definitely be among the favourites. Cricket, on the other hand, appears to mostly be observed and played by current/former members of the British Empire, with little extra interest in other nations beyond this. Similarly Baseball's world-series is often ridiculued here in the UK for its lack of being a world-sport. That said both sports can probably claim widespread fans/plays. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 12:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

The article on cricket says that it's played in 100 countries, no source, and the article on association football says it's the most popular in the world, with sources. If you change the answer to cows (Cattle in religion) and football (American football, Canadian football, Australian football, Gaelic football and rugby football) then you do have pretty much a world sport. By the way, there is nothing in the question to indicate that the question refers to Indian sport. The only reason to use India in the question has to do with Hinduism and probably few would get the answer if Egypt or Greece had been used. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 14:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

So do I take it from all these responses that the phrase "The World Game" is not widely used outside Australia? Interesting. FiggyBee (talk) 15:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard it in the UK, for what that's worth. Algebraist 16:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the phrase it self has great currency but if you were to ask people in quite a number of countries what's the world's sport, football (as said below, in case this isn't obvious I mean soccer) would be the pick in many countries and by many people (some may just say, as me, that it's a dumb question), including sometimes in countries where it isn't the most popular sport. But I definitely don't think you'd get anything close to unamity on this, particular from a South Asian cricket fan (of which there are a lot) or American baseball/football fan. Or let me put this another way I grew up in Malaysia and watch the World Cup so I know how nuts people can be about football however I have spent enough time on ITN to know there are a lot of half good arguments you can make about the relative merits of various sports and I've also spent enough time in NZ to know how little attention football receives in parts of the world. And in case it isn't yet obvious I still call the sport football despite clear knowledge of the other pretenders to the throne. Nil Einne (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, using football generically doesn't complete the picture. Frankly Gaelic football and Australian football adds virtually nothing to the equation. Rugby adds a bit but even that not so much. (And I'm a rugby fan.) You really have to add cricket (to cover South Asia in particular) and perhaps baseball (for small parts of South America) if you want to approximate a truly world sport. (Even then your probably still missing Canada and perhaps some parts of Northern Europe.) And if you want to go so generic as to include football generically why not just ball games, since the vast majority of ball games use balls that have traditionally been leather? And whyever India was in there, which in the end is speculation even if it seems likely, the fact remains it was in there so you can use it to argue that cricket (or something else) would be a more appropriate answer. Ultimately I think this is a bit of a dumb riddle (as many are) since no one even uses real leather for most balls nowadays anyway. Besides the cow isn't sacred to all Indians. And you arguably need a goal post if you want to properly play football which you're not going to get from a cow. Nil Einne (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not denying that. However the fact remains, you can't IMHO claim one is the world game since if you do, you ignore the fact that football (and I'm referring to soccer here if that's not clear) is although very popular, clearly not the most popular sport by far in a number of key countries including India (a key one given its large population) and the USA (they do have a lot of influence in many areas). Indeed last time I looked while football seemed to be the most popular sport in China in terms of attention it received, ping pong had the highest participation and badminton and football were way up there on audience figures. In other words, while football has the most claim to be a world sport, you can't say it's the only one nor can you say it's definatively the world sport. Nil Einne (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Come on guys, it's just a stupid riddle ... why are we splitting hairs? Yours truly --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 16:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

A cricket ball is made from leather, which comes from cows - the sacred Indian animal - and this ball is a tool for the sport of cricket - a world sport. The answer is the cricket ball itself, not the game.

Except that a soccerball is made from leather as well, and is likely played in more varied parts of the world, giving it better claim to being a world sport. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Verifiability of authenticity of show

Hello. Please don't take this question as an attempt to start a discussion on whether a show is fake or genuine - it's just a question regarding whether it's POSSIBLE for a show to be fake. Ok here goes the question - I've read a lot of discussion about whether the show "The moment of truth" is genuine or is just fake with trained actors posing as participants. Now the show does seem unreal to me - why would anybody want to wash their diry linen in public for some money - risking their reputation and relationships. But my question is - wouldn't it be ILLEGAL for such a show to be fake - after all it amounts to perpetuating fraud against the viewers. And in case it is, would it be possible for such a large-scale thing to be kept under wraps? To rephrase, what I want to know is do those who allege the show to be fake have any logical foundation for the suspicions or is it just impossible. Thank you. --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 16:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Are you referring to The Moment of Truth (U.S. game show)? --LarryMac | Talk 16:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, sir. The article says nothing about the autheticity of the show. -ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 16:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I only asked the question and linked because there is also a British TV show with the same name. And a host of other items at Moment of Truth. You'd surely have been berated by some for not being specific. --LarryMac | Talk 18:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I've seen shorts of the show and always thought it a bit silly. I noticed this from the linked article. "Sometimes, a "surprise guest" - such as an ex-partner or a good friend - will come on the stage and ask a particularly difficult question". Also I seem to recall the questions have to be answered in front of a live studio audience and usually some guests. Polygraphy itself is an inexact science but as it's strongly dependent on emotions I would say it would be extremely difficult for someone to answer such questions under the conditions and be determined truthful. So whether or not the rest of the show is fake, just because the show says these people may not have been telling the truth doesn't mean they weren't. It's basically set up in a way people are unlikely to pass all questions IMHO. I've heard the claim made people have confessed to crimes on the show (don't think this was the US version, perhaps South American ones) and I presume there would have been investigations linked to these if they really happened. The other thing of course is that people are pre-selected for these shows, so they will only show the ones with 'juicy' secrets. If the worst thing you've done is vandalised the polygraph article to say 'Bush is gay' don't expect to be selected for the show. (And as I said polygraphy is an inexact science so isn't accepted in court and this one definitely wouldn't be, therefore the only risk you entail legally is if further evidence is uncovered.) In terms of the most generic question, most reality shows are partly bullshit. For example, in one shot here in NZ someone was badly burnt in a second take of a scene for a reality show. TV shows tend to have a lot of leeway on what they can do and claim even in countries outside the US where the are stricter guidelines. For example, Sensing Murder often makes it sound like they are uncovering startling new evidence yet last I heard, no crime has ever been solved based on information garned from any of these shows in any country (not surprisingly) Nil Einne (talk) 16:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually my question is whether it COULD all be one big setup - with the participants and the guests all being trained actors - is that plausible? --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 17:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Well if people have been investigated in South American for stuff they revealed on the show then no, at least not for the South American versions. I doubt it would be illegal though. However the show is popular enough that if it were completely fake it's likely someone would have uncovered that by now IMHO. This source also seems to suggest the show isn't fake [6]. But to put it a different way, why would you bother when you can easily find (and you can easily find, believe me) a lot of real people for the show? That's a whole load cheaper, you don't need to fluff around with script-writers, actors and all the jazz nor do you risk you show being destroyed when people find out. (Actually there may still be some but likely a lot less) Nil Einne (talk) 17:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok I guess that answers my questions - the participants are unlikely to be fake actors. Thank you, Nil Einne :-) --ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

It probably couldn't be fake in that way, where all the participants are actors (shills) following a script. There are other ways for it to be fake, though. If the participants are paid, they may very well make up or exaggerate stories to get on the show. Many people will do this just to get on TV, even if the coverage is all negative. StuRat (talk) 18:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed but I should point out this isn't solely about getting on TV. There is 'real' cash involved. As I said above, it's unlikely you will ever actually get the maximum prize but I presume quite a number of contestants (if that's the right word) walk with at least the 10k. Besides that if you're treating it as a game show and lying your ass off so you actually get on the show it'll make a good story the further you succeed in pulling it off. Nil Einne (talk) 09:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Anyone been to Anguilla?

When I asked to balance my trip to St. Martin with a few days in a quiet, secluded spot, my travel agent recommended Anguilla. This would save me from having to buy a $400 round-trip plane ticket to the Virgin Islands. (I had wanted to go to St. John.) Is Anguilla really tranquil and beautiful like St. John is? -- 192.206.151.130 (talk) 17:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You will find many people who have been to Anguilla, and probably some who live there, on this forum, where you might find helpful answers to your question. Marco polo (talk) 03:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Interview Questions

Hi, what are they looking for in the job interview when they ask, Why do you want to leave the present job?,how do you think you can add value to this position, if given?,what are your weaknesses and strengths?etc etc, and even negotiating salary? if anybody can unveil these mysterious venue's...any suggestions would be valuable.Vikram79 (talk) 17:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

As for why you want to leave your current job, I don't see why the truth isn't the best answer (unless you're being fired or something, then make up something fluffy). Strengths and weaknesses are (I think) pretty stupid/annoying/cliche questions for an interviewer to ask (but still do, of course), to which I usually answered something along the lines of "I'm always trying to improve my time management and organizational skills" or some other equally vague answer while hiding my derision for the question as much as possible. As for negotiating salary, it totally depends what situation you're in. If you have other offers or options that pay better than their offer, tell them that, I think they will usually appreciate candor. If you are effectively trying to "bluff them", I would be very careful, especially if it's for an entry level job or if you have been looking for a long time. Often a foot in the door and a boss that you aren't started on the wrong foot with are better than the possibility of a few more % per year. How you add value to the company is of course the meat of the interview, but ideally they know what you're going to be doing better than you and they should be the ones trying to answer that, based on how you describe your prior experience and attributes. If you know something about the job they'll be having you do, tell them that, your prior experience on the subject etc, being as specific and concrete as possible. I think references from former bosses/supervisors etc are usually very useful. Bragging about yourself is always difficult to pull off gracefully, having a letter filled with praise is much more straight forward. TastyCakes (talk) 18:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks tasty cakes, im getting somewhere thoughVikram79 (talk) 18:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Try to put a positive spin on the answers. The important thing is to have something to say and not be flabbergasted by the question. Why are you leaving your job - for career or personal development. Add value - find something you do well or some trait that is positive - i.e. "I have a keen eye for detail that would be useful in the production of your technically complex widgets". Strengths / weaknesses are often the same game, but make the "weakness" something that could potentially be admired, like "sometimes I lose sight of the big picture because I get very focused on my current project" and so forth. Negotiating salary is mostly a question of knowing what the skill or position averages in the economy and the location in question. If you've got a lot of experience then it is okay to push the envelope. If not, try for an average figure with a little plus and be ready to go lower. --W. B. Wilson (talk) 18:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

wikiHow has several articles about job interviews, such as http://www.wikihow.com/Answer-Tough-Questions-in-an-Interview --Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

One of the most important things to the interview is to carry yourself in a professional manner. Dress in a suit, speak in formal English, and carry yourself with tact and decorum. Given the fact that they have already seen your resume and/or your application for the job, they should know your qualifications. Interviews are time consuming expensive things, and they wouldn't schecule one if they weren't considering hiring you anyways! There's not a whole lot you can do in an interview to convince them that you are perfect for the job; however there's a LOT you could do that will make it look like it would be a mistake to hire you. Regardless of what specific questions they ask you, the ONLY thought on the mind of the interviewers is "Do I want to work with this person". If you show up in a tank top and flip-flops, mumble to yourself and stare at the walls, and sound generally uneducated in your interview you aren't going to get the job. The best thing you can do is to make a good impression by being proffesional in every aspect of your manner. Your specific answers to the question aren't really that important, its HOW you answer the questions; your confidence level, the way you comport yourself, the language you use. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

The "Dress in a suit" thing is tricky...the super-effective recruiting consultants who found me my last job (which was in the computer games business) said that I needed to dress very casually - this de-emphasised my age and the fact that I'd been working in the defense industry on very serious topics and made it look like I could behave younger and 'fit in' with the company culture (which - as you may imagine - is incredibly casual in the computer games biz.)...so while dressing "up" is a good idea in some circumstances, it's not a rock-solid rule. SteveBaker (talk) 03:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mr Wilson,you have a deep insight to this. but if you could elaborate in this topic at leisure,it would be wonderful.. thanks againVikram79 (talk) 19:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC) good enough Jayron..thanksVikram79 (talk) 19:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Remember that not only they have to decide if you are the right person for the job, but also you have to decide if this job is right for you. Very important! So prepare a couple of questions on issues that you want to discuss, and that show your interest in the company. Lova Falk (talk) 20:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Without knowing what you are interviewing for makes it a little harder to answer. When interviewing I expect different results from a teacher than from a janitor, even if the questions are similar. Listen to the question, be relevant and answer the question. Don't go off topic even if you think it's interesting. However, think about what relates to the question, and consider adding it if there is a valid relationship. As an example, I asked a young woman if she had ever worked with children and she said that she hadn't. I knew the person, she was the oldest child and had 4 younger brothers and sisters, all of them she had helped babysit. She had had various babysitting jobs as well. All of that counts in answering the question. If the interviewers are taking notes then don't talk so fast that they can't keep up. Don't spend 15-20 minutes answering one question. Know something about what the job entails. Depending on the job you may be expected to know a little or a lot. Someone applying for my job is not expected to know to much, which is why they come and job shadow for a couple of days to get an idea. However, someone being interviwed for a teacher or a janitor is expected to know something about what they are going to do. But remember, there may be someone from the human resources department who is not familar with the latest jargon, thus throwing around acronyms, with no explanation, is not always a good idea. Be friendy but remember you are not my best friend. I'm doing the interview, I make the jokes to get you to relax, which is what some of the questions may be for. And thus try to relax without being too casual about it. If the interviewers know what they are doing, and there is no guarantee that they do, they will make some allowance for the fact that you are nervous. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Is there a name for this style of light/light fitting?

Is there a name for this style of light/light fitting? It was called a safety light in a restaurant I worked in.hotclaws 19:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I would call that a "cage light":[7]. Fribbler (talk) 19:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

It's called an Oval Bulkhead Light Fitting. Used mainly in outdoor scenarious but also useful in sheds, garages, storerooms etc.92.22.181.106 (talk) 20:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Incarceration Limit / Life Imprisonment

According to Life imprisonment many countries have a maximum possible sentence, e.g. Norway - 21 years, Portugal - 25 years, Venezuela - 30 years, Spain - 40 years. Do these values given in the article indicate the maximum penalty per sentence or the absolute maximum amount of time one can be incarcerated? e.g. if you murdered two people in Venezuela would you get 30 years or 60 years imprisonment? --124.177.29.112 (talk) 22:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• Depends on whether the sentences run concurrently (A sentence of 3 years plus a sentence of 10 years = 10 years (the longest of the two sentences)) or consecutively (A sentence of 3 years plus a sentence of 10 years = 13 years (the total of the two sentences)- see Sentence (law). Judges sometimes have the power to set a minimum tariff too - a number of years you must serve before you can be considered for parole/release on license. Exxolon (talk) 02:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Ah, I think I get it now. So for instance in Venezuela, which has a maximum sentence of 30 years, it is still possible to serve longer than that in prison if the charges are consecutive, eh? --124.177.29.112 (talk) 04:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

November 22

Silkie Chickens

How noisy are silkie hens. I'd like to get one but I want to know if they would be to noisy. How far away can their clucking, crying and squwaking be heard.--Pufferfish4 (talk) 00:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

• Suggest you contact a poultry breeder. This ref [8] says they are "reasonably quiet". Exxolon (talk) 02:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Had a couple as a child, quiet, yes, not entirely mute. Still think of them as sweet, Julia Rossi (talk) 06:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

dating a singer sewing machine

I HAVE A SINGER TREADLE SEWING MACHINE WITH A NUMBER PLATE ON BASE OF MACHINE OF AA597705. LOOKING FOR A DATE OF MANUFACTURE AND MODEL NUMBER. I NEED SOME PARTS AND INFORMATION ON IT AND HAVE NO WAY OF FINDING THIS. I HAVE SEARCHED THE INTERNET WITH NO RESULTS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryjanequilting (talk • contribs) 04:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, you could try asking the sewing machine to someplace nonthreatening at first, like say out to a coffee shop or something. Maybe invite it out with some mutual friends; perhaps being in a larger group would be less threatening. Eventually, you may find that you and the sewing machine have some things in common, and a formal date may be coming. I'd recommend something simple like dinner and a movie. The weird "horseback rides on the beach" sort of stuff may come off as awkward, and may send the wrong signals to the sewing machine this early in the relationship. Oh, and you probably want to avoid SHOUTING ALL THE TIME, as this may make the sewing machine feel uncomfortable. Perhaps thats why you haven't been able to get a date. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I was very excited when I saw this question. Now I just feel like a third wheel. Maybe one day I'll find love.[[9]]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NByz (talk • contribs) 04:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The Essex looks hot! Julia Rossi (talk) 06:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The Singer site [10] says your machine was madein 1925 at Elizabeth , New Jersey, USA. A subpage there[11] says it dates from August 11, 1925, and suggests it is a Model 66. Check the nameplate for the exact model number. Manuals are available at [12], either for purchase of hardcopy or for free download of a PDF file. As a child I enjoyed playing with my an old treadle Singer, but never quite figured out how a sewing machine worked without having it pass a threaded needle back and forth through the fabric! Understanding chain stitch was (and is) beyond my spatial skills. Edison (talk) 04:45, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I managed a large clothing factory for many years and can explain in intricate and fascinating detail how a sewing machine works, whether lockstitch (the kind the OP has) or chainstitch - which are the 2 commonest types, but it would take too long. I did see an animation of the process on a website once but can't remember where. Oh, I know all about the overlocker and the coverstitcher too - but in all these machines, the needle stays firmly in the needle-bar whilst picking up a thread from its partner spool, bobbin, or looper beneath the machine-bed and forming a knot of one kind or another. But for pure joy, the machine I really favoured was the AMF Handstitching machine - YES - a hand-stitching machine. It had a needle with points at both ends and a long slot for the thread instead of an eye. As the needle went down through the cloth it would part company with the upper needle-bar and be grabbed by another below the machine-bed - and a great big revolving wheel would collect any unused thread and pull it through the cloth too - you see - it could only deal with a fixed-pre-cut length of thread in order to create its "saddle-stitch" effect which was mainly used for decorative edge-stitching such as around men's jackets etc. Oh the joy of it - and the clunk-clunk it made as the needle went up and down. Pure joy. Hope the OP gets his spares though. 92.8.219.255 (talk) 06:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

No need to explain sewing machine, Lockstitch or Chain stitch. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

For others no, but for me, yes. My query, is the sewing machine too old for you? Julia Rossi (talk) 11:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)