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

December 18

Wikipedia and plagiarism

I'm not sure if this would be more suited to the helpdesk, but hopefully someone can help or point me in the right direction. As a undergraduate student, we're always lectured on plagiarism and correct referencing. Without starting a debate on citing Wikipedia, what would happen if (for instance) I wrote an article on Wikipedia, and also used this in an essay I was writing (word-for-word). Obviously, it was me that wrote it in the first place, and this can be proven through the page history - but how does the licensing work in terms of my writing? As soon as it is published, does it become a collaborative effort regardless of the contribution, and as such would constitute plagiarism if my essay was found to be an exact copy?

I hope this is clear - a friend and I have discussed this at length over many a beer and I thought I'd better get a proper answer! [ cycle~ ] (talk), 01:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

If you are the sole author of the article text, then there's no legal issue and plagiarism does not arise. You have licensed your text to wikipedia through the GFDL but you retain the ability to use it yourself without hindrance. You cannot plagiarise your own work. As soon as the article is edited by another person, it becomes more difficult ... if you copy it in toto at this point, you should follow the GFDL licence despite being the author of 99% of the content, and you are now plagiarising though to a minimal extent (or to the extent to which the article has been changed by others). --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually it IS possible to plagiaries oneself under strict academic ethics conventions! See Plagiarism#Self-plagiarism. However the article points out that: “As compared to plagiarism, self-plagiarism is not yet very well-regulated. Some universities and editorial boards choose to not regulate it at all; those consider the term self-plagiarism oxymoronic since a person cannot be accused of stealing from themselves.” However to be safe and ethical you should certainly site any previous use of your own text, if only to avoid confusion. --S.dedalus (talk) 02:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, the idea of citing sources is to avoid ambiguity. In any writing, either a) The ideas in the writing are completely unique to that particular work or b) they are paraphrased from somewhere else. If it is case b, even if that somewhere else is your own prior but seperate work, it is good form to cite that work. Again, it removes ambiguity over the source of the information (i.e. is this new information or did this come from somewhere else). --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Ask your professor/teacher; he/she may or may not be willing to accept something "self-plagiarized." · AndonicO ^Engage. 03:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I've occasionally improved articles as I've had to write something on that topic. When I do I always send the prof a note that I'm using it as an opportunity to fix/clean up the Wikipedia article. That way there's no misunderstanding. I've never had any complaint from anyone about this. In general, talk to the professor and see what they say. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

At the risk of bringing up an old and over-discussed topic, the self-plagiarism is part of the reason why many teachers and professors don't like the notion of citing WP in class. As an undergraduate, you're generally expected to base your work on refereed sources and the results of experiments. As WP is not explicity peer-reviewed, and often edited by undergraduates like yourself, they won't consider it a reliable source. Your professor would likely not mark you down for plagiarism, but rather for relying on imperfect sources. If you wrote the article, you probably (we hope) sourced the information from another academic source. You should be citing them in your work.

On the other hand, if what you're worried about is the wording (i.e. you wrote the essay and then added portions of it to WP), then yes, it is potentially a source of embarrassment. A good option would be to not update the page until your essay has been marked. If your professor brings it up, the history of the article and proof of your user-name would clear up the issue. Still, it's probably best to reword your work if you're writing an essay on a topic you've written about on WP. It saves embarrassment on one hand, and on the other, the writing style between WP and an essay will likely differ because of the direct topic you're addressing in your essay and the generalist nature of WP articles. Steewi (talk) 01:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't mean this to sound sexist

I don't know if it's just me (I'm female, by the way), but has anyone ever noticed that when they deal with a woman who's in an authoritative position or has the job of dealing with customers on a daily basis, they tend to be bitchier than their male counterparts? Especially when dealing with other women? I go to a Burger King where there's this particular girl who's incredibly rude and inconsiderate to not just me, but all of her female customers, yet she's practically flirtatious with her male customers. Someone I know had their dad pulled over by a female cop and when she asked for his number and he refused, she got all haughty with him and gave a him ticket he did not deserve (trying to get him on a date was the primary reason he got pulled over). And I could go on about the unfair treatment I've mainly gotten from other women. On TV, you see similar situations. What's up with that? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 02:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

No, I haven’t noticed that. Perhaps that’s because I’m male, and they’re always too busy flirting with me to be rude. ;) I suppose people are always a bit more inclined to be polite to members of the attractive sex. However this whole issue could easily be an observation based on a few unfortunate personal experiences. The sample size is not very large. Another example of why Wikipedia does not allow OR. --S.dedalus (talk) 03:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

"Someone I know had their dad pulled over by a female cop and when she asked for his number and he refused, she got all haughty with him and gave a him ticket he did not deserve (trying to get him on a date was the primary reason he got pulled over)" I'm sorry, but I don't believe this story. Besides the fact that she was completely risking her job, How did she decide she wanted to date the guy? He must have had some really clever bumper stickers. APL (talk) 03:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

In the United States at least any policeman would certainly know that such a ticket would be easily dismissed in Traffic court anyway. --S.dedalus (talk) 03:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

You may not believe it, but it's true. And a policeman (or woman) can (and have) given undeserving tickets to drivers for minor violations they never committed based on vindictiveness. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 04:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I think there is evidence that suggests that some high-power women exhibit masculine/predominantly male behaviours - behaviours that, due to our cultural/social expectations, seem inappropriate when displayed by a woman but are 'normal' when displayed by a man. What we expect from a person plays an important role in how we react to their actions. I have worked under 4 female bosses and 2 male - each time my manager has been professional, consistent and what I would consider fair. Like S.dedalus I don't believe the ticket reason - I appreciate that tickets have been given for very little reason - I just think that story sounds like it's been exaggerated by whomever told you. Have you ever in your life driven behind/infront of a car and seen someone and decided "I want to date them"? It's just not realistic - yeah if you were madly in love with someone you might risk your job, but no you don't risk your job over someone you've just seen in a car and thought 'wow they're hot', it just doesn't sound real - I don't disbelieve you were told this, just it doesn't sound realistc. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 08:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Working the in film industry you meet a lot of female production managers and producers, and the thing about the film industry is that it can be extremely stressful and extremely fast-paced, and can teach anybody how tobe come a total asshole. Basically what I think is happening in your examples (and what happens in the film industry and the police industry) is that over time these women are trained to be very assertive and very bossy (in many cases they have to be), in fact many of them have been bossed around by assholes in the past and they start to long for their revenge, so much so that when they finally make it into a managerial position and they see people who are now below them (like they used to be) they will enjoy the opportunity to finally boss them around .. almost like how some children grow up to be their parents. Then, I can consider that either these women relate to men more so they are nicer to them, or because they see their "old" selves in other women they take out that revenge thing and boss them around. In any case I haven't really noticed them being 'nicer' to men - I just see them as being very bossy, highly strung, and very assertive.

Your stereotypical bossy female cop I believe is based on this behaviour - they are in an environment where all their seniors are behaving in this 'bossy' 'bitchy' way (in many cases because they have to) and so they adopt this behaviour and pass it on to the general public.

I hope that offered some insight, even though much of this is just opinion. Rfwoolf (talk) 14:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Compton Mackenzie once wrote: "Women do not find it difficult nowadays to behave like men, but they often find it extremely difficult to behave like gentlemen". And he died in 1972. Of course, in the business world, his apophthegm applies equally to men as to women. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There is a good reason that the term "catty" refers near exclusively to women. Men have their own issues of course. I find a verse in the Bible to be a perfect architype of the sexes: it goes something like let your women not be gossips, and let your men not brawl. Women act catty, men just kick the snot out of each other. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm with 194 here. One possibility is you just think their bitchier because you're used to bossy men but not so used to bossy women. From my (limited) experience, people (both men and women) often call a woman a bitch when her behaviour is hardly that bad and yet are far less likely to call a man with similar behavior any names. Indeed these men are sometimes held in reasonably high esteem... Nil Einne (talk) 12:37, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm female and work at a KFC and I noticed that the female managers tend to be a lot more bossy and critical of me than the male managers. Infact the only managers who ever tell me I'm doing a good job have been mostly the men. --124.254.77.148 (talk) 02:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Helwan (Beretta '51 Brigadier) Pistol Cocking trouble

I'm having a hard time pulling the slide on a Helwan pistol. I can do so, but it does take some effort, and I normally have to pull the slide back and forth a few millimeters repeatedly before I can pull it back all the way. DOes anyone have any idea what the problem is? I'm having no problem removing the slide and breaking down the pistol at all. It hasn't been fired in a while. Thanks, bye. --AtTheAbyss (talk) 05:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Cleaning and lubrication? The Beretta M 1951 article might tell you more. Astronaut (talk) 11:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Manual v/s Motorized Treadmill

Hi

What are the pros and cons for Manual and Motorized Treadmills and which is suitable for home use.

Thanks 59.165.151.149 (talk) 09:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Manual treadmills are cheaper, they provide a small amount of resistance which is similar to running up a slight incline when they are level, and they take up less space, those are the only pros I can think of. Motorized treadmills are slightly more dangerous, since they don't stop when you do, but a manual treadmill isn't going to stop instantaneously. With a manual treadmill you have to keep your hands on the front of the machine to push against the friction in the belt. I used to sell treadmills and no one was ever happy with the manuals, they're difficult to get started and uncomfortable once you get going, also they are almost invariably made cheaply, make sure its maximum weight capacity is sufficient, they felt like they were going to rattle to pieces when I (at about 180 pounds or 80 kilos) even jogged slowly on them. Either of them is suitable for home use, motorized versions range from $100 versions that can fold up and fit in a closet to industrial strength gym versions. Don't get seduced by all the bells and whistles on the top of the line versions, most people never use these features. The best advice I can give is to go to a store and try them out and buy the cheapest one that doesn't feel like its going to shake apart when you use it.-- Mad031683 (talk) 17:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, what's wrong with just jogging in place ? StuRat (talk) 17:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Why do you want to go into solitary isolation and do penal punishment? Do something social instead with some exercise thrown in. Like walking or dance or rowing or, well practically anything is better than developing muscles but turning your mind into mush with boredom. You've only one life. Dmcq (talk) 08:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

"Endorphin rush without leaving the house" would be my answer! Plenty of people find meditative value in solitary exercise, as well. To each their own. --Fullobeans (talk) 09:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Not all parts of the world have pleasant weather all year long. APL (talk) 04:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Motorbike and Side-car...current

Do any of the big bike manufacturers offer for sale (brand new) motorbike and side-cars? I guess probably not but you never know. I don't want one, just interested in whether they still exist - i've seen lots on tv over the years but never once in real-life. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:08, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Scratch that I should've looked at side-car, sorry. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Common cold

Removed request for medical advice and excessive original research/medical advice. See discussion page. -- kainaw™ 20:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

St.paul

1. in which language did st.paul write letters . 2.st.paul was arrested and brought in front of three chakravarthy's. what are the names of those chakravarthy's ? anybody can please help me to find these answers . i will be very grateful to them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.242.163 (talk) 15:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried our Saint Paul article? Under the "Writings" heading, we find the sentence "The letters are written in Koine Greek". However, I am not familiar with the word chakravarthy. -Andrew c ^[talk] 16:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Assuming "chakravarthy" means some kind of official, the article explains that Paul dealt with several Roman officials. They include an cohort commander in Jerusalem (Claudius Lysias), the procurator of Judea (M. Antonius Felix), and his successor (Porcius Festus). (See Acts, chapters 22 - 24) --- OtherDave (talk) 17:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Chakravarti is a term used in Indian religions for the ideal monarch and literally means one who rolls (or rolls with) the wheel (of truth). I have never come across the term outside of that context.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Geolocate on the IP: INDIA, DELHI. That may explain your problem, Shantavira. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

About any possible harm of Iron supplements tablets

Some local press reports stated that Ferrous sulfate tablets or capsules that a piece of magnet can attract is extremely harmful. Is there any truth in it? Do such tablets or capsules get attracted by magnet? Or, does such magnetic attraction show poor composites and resultant harm? 59.91.253.101 (talk) 16:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

The more common problems are listed in that article. As for magnetic attraction, it would only be an issue if you just took a tablet before going near an extremely powerful magnetic field, such as the one used in an MRI machine. Do they have a precaution against this ? StuRat (talk) 17:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Magnetic attraction could indicate a higher amount of iron in the capsule than is expected. If the news reports where in the context of a recall on the supplements then this could be a test to determine if you have the bad pills. Too much ferrous sulfate can cause iron poisoning so this may be the danger they are referring to. Just guessing... -- Mad031683 (talk) 18:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Too much iron may cause you to get overwrought. ;-) 86.4.182.202 (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

You're a bit rusty at puns. :-) StuRat (talk) 18:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

IMO it seems that it would be very easy for people to confuse "danger of magnets" with "danger of magnetic material". a typical case is when a child swallows several small magnets: these can attach to each other across loops of intestine, and without surgery can perforate the intestine

st.paul

st.paul was arrested and brought in front of three empire's. what are the names of those empire's ? anybody can please help me to find these answers . i will be very grateful to them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.251.252 (talk) 16:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I gave a partial answer to your earlier question, above. You now seem to be asking about three emperors, though, not simply local officials. As a Roman citizen, Paul had a right to appeal to Caesar, who was the only "real" emperor in the Roman world. However, the word "emperor" comes from the Latin imperator, which also had the sense of "commander" or "giver of orders." So a local governor could be seen as a kind of commander, but not an emperor in the modern political sense. --- OtherDave (talk) 17:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

See Book of Acts. He stood before Felix, Festus, and, um, I don't know any others offhand; you could try reading a few chapters of Acts. Unfortunately, the above mentioned book ended before the story was really finished: he was imprisoned at that point. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This question was asked a third time below. I answered it there in detail. IN brief, Paul is tried after his arrest on four (not 3) seperate occasions, and the officiants were High Priest Ananias of the Sanhedrin, two local Roman governors (Felix and Festus), and King Agrippa II of the Jews. He asks to be transfered to Rome for a trial before Caesar. He is sent to Rome for that purpose, but there is no reliable evidence, in the bible or anywhere else, what happens to Paul after arriving in Rome. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

What is the purpose of apartment doormen (e.g. NYC)?

Are apartment doormen an affectation of affluence, an excuse to jack up rents, or do they actually fulfill some need of which I am unaware? Or is there some other explanation for their existence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomerpdx (talk • contribs) 20:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Read Doorman (profession). Secret ^account 20:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

They could be helpful if your arms are full, but automatic doors can work there, too. They could also serve a security function in that the doorman keeps track of people who enter and exit, and maybe those who carry out a wide-screen TV with a chunk of the wall still attached. StuRat (talk) 00:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

1) Yes, an expression of affluence

2) Added convenience (though the amount is small; think butlering)

3) Provides affluent with a sense of safety. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

They screen visitors and accept packages and deliveries such as dry cleaning. They call up to announce visitors. They screen delivery people and prevent them from putting menus under the door. They function as both security and convenience. And yes they add a great deal to the value of an apartment, about 10 to 15%. Here is an article with some of the negatives: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/09/realestate/09doorman.html

As I recall, in Sex and the City, Samantha managed to find yet another use for the door man. As they put it on their web site, she "gets to know the door man better": [1]. :-) StuRat (talk) 19:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Britain is an island, and people on the internet mock me for being from a little island

See on internet forums, people, like Americans, and continental Europeans... they can stand by on their big continents and laugh at people in Britain for being on an island. "A little island. A little, pathetic island where you and all your ancestors have lived quite happily for hundreds of years." Seriously, these are the kind of comments they make. And they say stuff like 'Britfag' as well. I don't know if they're just trolling but it does make me feel ashamed to be on such a little island. Like other people in the UK don't think there's anything wrong with being from an island, but I do, and it makes me feel bad every day. Can you help? I mean, seriously, do normal native British people not realise how sheltered they are for being on an island and speaking their English language? I've only started thinking about it because of these people, and it's really got to me.

So no matter where I try to go in Europe or America or wherever, I won't be able to speak another language because they don't teach you it in school to any great extent so you never master it, and I'll always be a 'Britfag' to them. This island has nothing to offer. I don't know why people migrate here. F**king little island, with all its stupid history, institutions, and bureaucracy. I'll never be as good as those on the continents. Most of the world's population lives on continents. I wish I did. I seem to have the opposite of Islomania and I need help.--Nubile Servant (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, just remember that bit about "lived quite happily for hundreds of years", being an island has its advantages, as we discover whenever little corporals from the continent get big ideas. DuncanHill (talk) 20:59, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

It also has its disadvantages. An island is easier to turn into a police state. I'm not going to go into my ideas about how in some ways if the Axis Powers had won WWII the world would be a better place, because I know that's too controversial, Godwin's Law et al. I mean although the Nazis were intent on committing mass genocide, at least they had standards of discipline and knew how to counter base, cowardly human vices which are rife in Britain making it the laughing stock of Europe and possibly the world.--Nubile Servant (talk) 21:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Interestingly, the vast majority of americans either believe america IS an island, or think it would be better off as one. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

In such moments of depression, remind yourself of what Shakespeare has Gaunt say in King Richard II (Act 2, Scene 1) about England specifically and the island generally:

This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,

This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,

This other Eden, demi-paradise,

This fortress built by Nature for herself

Against infection and the hand of war,

This happy breed of men, this little world,

This precious stone set in the silver sea,

Which serves it in the office of a wall

Or as a moat defensive to a house,

Against the envy of less happier lands ...

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England

This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings

Feared by their breed, and famous by their birth

Renowned for their deeds as far from home

For Christian service and true chivalry

As the sepulchre in stubborn Jewry

Of the world's ransom, blessed Mary's Son:

This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land

Dear for her reputation throughout the world ....

And then, ask the critics if they have anyone to compare with Shakespeare (whoever he was). By the way, which language were they using to make these criticisms? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but I can't like England that much, because I'm Scottish. My feelings about Scotland are more positive than those about England or Britain as a whole... but still, 'little f**king island'... can just hear them now. Seriously, what is there to like about the weather, length of days in winter, architecture, culture (all native British local cultures were hijacked by mass media such as the BBC in the early 20th century and replaced with Estuary English), food (the native food is so bad, that the British have to borrow from other cuisines all the time)... hell, looks of the women... here?--Nubile Servant (talk) 21:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

They're using English because it's the only language I can speak. But I wonder just quite how terribly backwards speakers of other languages consider the UK to be, really.-Nubile Servant (talk) 21:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you really dislike it that much, migrate elsewhere. If that's not possible, "if you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with". Honestly, those who mock others because their country is relatively small reveal only the smallness of their own minds, and what you do is ignore them and rise above it. Simply decide you're going to be as unaffected by their puerile criticisms as you would be by an ant crossing your path. You're a Scot, after all. That speaks for itself; and if you don't think so, take some history lessons. (It's a pity you're not English, though; because I would have trotted out Cecil Rhodes' quote: "You, sir, are an Englishman, and have therefore won first prize in the Lottery of Life". But since you're not, I won't.) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Scottish history has been romanticised by films like Braveheart, but that has little to do with the reality of it. I gather that Scotland was originally populated by such peoples as the Picts. When the Romans invaded Britain for the first time, the population was not Germanicised - indeed, the native Britons from before that may have more in common, according to genetic studies, with such groups as the Basques. Their heritage, in turn, would have been mixed with that of the Anglo-Saxon and Viking invaders. But I'm kinda committed to staying here for the moment due to life circumstances, although I would like to go to a different country and possibly live there permanently, but I'm too young in life to really make that decision yet, and you know I have got to find a career first, which I will do... but it's not easy. Honestly, nowhere in Britain appeals to me; that's the problem. Not even really anywhere in the English-speaking world does, yet I don't speak any other languages.--Nubile Servant (talk) 22:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

So, what this boils down to is: You find it hard to like much about your country; anonymous dickheads on the internet criticise your country, which you get hooked into; you can't move anywhere else at the moment; you're stuck in a place you don't like very much. Apart from the advice I've already provided, which was about learning to accept what you cannot change, did you have any other question, or was this just an excuse for a whinge no matter what anybody here has to say?-- JackofOz (talk) 22:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and no as well. But thanks for your time.--Nubile Servant (talk) 22:40, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

This borders on original research, but not all island-dwelling people feel bad about where they dwell (nor do all continent-dwelling people feel that great about it). People from Cape Breton, for example, are renowned (or notorious) for their feelings about a small part of Nova Scotia -- and their forerunners had fond thoughts of Eigg, Barra, and Na t-Eilean Sgithenach, too.

Another thing to keep in mind: wherever you go, there you are -- and some folks will love the place (I knew people who thought Hobart, Indiana was just a smidge shy of Shangra-La) and others who long to escape.

And, as George Bowering wrote:

nobody

belongs anywhere

even the

Rocky Mountains

are still

moving

--- OtherDave (talk) 22:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Among islands Manhattan, too, has its fans. —Tamfang (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

(outdent oh no!) Well, I (an American) like the British because of the accent. Although I will admit that nothing else catches my interest... (Little Britain may be the one stirring up all these anti-Brit feelings) flaminglawyer^c 23:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There is, on this fine internet, a class of person known as the Ignorant, Needlessly Belligerent Twat Whose Opinions Are Many And Never Worth Listening To. A person of this type is capable of causing great hurt, anger, and self-doubt if we are caught unawares by him. Fortunately, he has a demonstrated tendency to identify himself unequivocally by using words like "britfag" in conversation. Ignore these people. There are plenty of reasons to like Britain, and Scotland, but it'll be impossible for you not to overlook them so long as you're feeling so incredibly negative. You'd be better off traveling. Travel has a tendency to make people appreciate things about their home that they've always taken for granted. In rarer cases, it makes people realize there are places in the world they'd much rather be, and they leave home never to return. Fortunately, as a native English-speaker, you should have no trouble finding information on the internet about places to travel to. You can even browse the 2,664,476 articles written in Provincial Islandspeak on this very encyclopedia in search of some leads. It's always handy to learn snippets of other languages while you travel, but you'll find yourself able to eke by, in most places, due to there being at least one English speaker in every crowd. In fact, in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, people may actively seek out conversation with you. Antarctica may employ you, thanks to the large presence of British scientists there. Americans and Canadians will sleep with you, reliably, because of your accent. Europe will thank you for not stumbling around with a rugby team all night singing drunkenly at the top of your lungs. And Australia... well, don't go there, it's just some dumb island. But your options are many, and your currency is like gold. You may even find employment teaching English abroad due to the inexplicable international fascination with this backward tongue. You'll be hard pressed, though, to find a place without its own stupid history, institutions, and bureaucracy, but perhaps you'll find you can more readily forgive other nations their foolishness. Just avoid telling any cash-strapped people from cash-strapped nations that they sure are lucky they're not from Britain, as they are unlikely to take you seriously from then on. Also probably avoid using Nazis as smalltalk, since the merits of German National Socialism are, by definition, not of interest to the vast majority of people in the world. Suffice to say, the trains would be running on time, but I would be dead twelve times over, and therefore incapable of offering responses on the reference desk. Fin. --Fullobeans (talk) 23:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, out of the 6 women I've slept with, 4 were Scottish, 1 American and 1 from continental Europe. So I guess it does work out after all. As for employment and actually living the life elsewhere, I dunno. I want to do it but I'm bound to what I'm doing at the moment for a few years at least...-Nubile Servant (talk) 23:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Australia is not an island but a continental land mass. That's why Greenland is the world's largest island, and not Australia. So there. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I was taught in kiddiegarden that Australia is both the world's largest island and its smallest continent. (For us there's no such thing as "Oceania", you know -- Indonesia is part of Asia from the American perspective, and New Zealand is not part of any continent, not that we give NZ much thought, but if we did we'd say it's not part of any continent.) --Trovatore (talk) 00:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

If ever you fancy giving NZ some thought, then bear in mind that it is on the Zealandia continent. Australia is, indeed, its own continent. Australasia and Oceania are geo-political regions. Gwinva (talk) 00:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Continental land mass? Poppycock! Clearly Australia is surrounded by water, whereas the rest of the continents are surrounded by... uh... magic continental ectoplasm. Actually I, too, was taught this largest island/smallest continent business. I would rob a small child of her textbooks to see if this information has been revised, but the likelihood of the Quincy Public Schools having bought new textbooks in the past twenty years seems slim. --Fullobeans (talk) 00:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Er...the UK is hardly a "little" country. In terms of area it might not be incredibly large but throw these facts back. Permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Nuclear power. Fifth largest economy in the world. 60 million people (3xAustralia, 20% of USA or pop of California&Texas combined.) 3rd largest military budget in world. We ruled the largest empire the world has EVER seen - etc etc. Exxolon (talk) 02:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, bub, the Roman Empire trumps yours by far (with known-world inflation considered). flaminglawyer^c 02:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The sun set every day on the Roman Empire, at its peak of power, but it never set on the British Empire at its peak(discounting "known-world inflation." Did the Romans know, as their predecessors the Greeks did, that the world was a globe?) Edison (talk) 05:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I think that most people in civilised times have known, or strongly suspected, the world is a globe. It's only the official dogma that said otherwise, and ordinary people were wise to not gainsay it publicly. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Quote:

My feelings about Scotland are more positive than those about England or Britain as a whole... but still, 'little f**king island'... can just hear them now. Seriously, what is there to like about the weather, length of days in winter, architecture, culture (all native British local cultures were hijacked by mass media such as the BBC in the early 20th century and replaced with Estuary English), food (the native food is so bad, that the British have to borrow from other cuisines all the time)... hell, looks of the women... here?

Nobody says "f**king". They say "fucking". People who pepper their speech with "fucking" when they don't have copulation in mind are unimaginative and dull. Seriously, what there is to like about, say, architecture is plentiful; it's a building in your native Scotland that has a pineapple roof. The ideas that (1) "all native British local cultures" were hijacked by the mass media, (2) "all native British local cultures" were replaced by Estuary English, (3) the BBC was promoting Estuary English in the first half of the C20, etc. etc. -- Constrained to be polite here about the views of others, I'll merely say that your views are, uh, stunningly different from my own (and, I think, from the facts). Anyway, if you want to learn a foreign language, then learn a foreign language: those who want to do this can easily find ways of doing it (and those who don't really want to can easily find excuses for not doing it). Tama1988 (talk) 09:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Britain wasn't always an island. It was attatched to France until about 10,000 years ago, when the post-ice age melting caused sea level rise and flooding. See also geology of Britain. Also, if you could say that any landmass surrounded by water on all sides is an island, then all the continents are islands. In fact, what makes the difference between an island and a continent? A continental shelf? If so, Britain has one, it's called the North Sea, but it's attached to mainland Europe. You could also say that Greenland is a subcontinent, although it's mostly just a low-lying landmass under a huge chunk of ice. Same for Antarctica, in fact, if not for the ice, most of Antarctica would be below sea level. The British Isles are among the largest islands on Earth. Lots of places are inhabited islands, for example Montreal is the second-largest French-speaking city (actually, most people there are bilingual) in the world, and it's on an island. If you are upset you're on an island, find out why you're on an island, how it was made, and how you got there. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

World's fastest Indian

In the movie, The World's Fastest Indian, starred by Anthony Hopkins, Why is he called an Indian even though he hails from New Zealand?- § —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.227.88.91 (talk) 21:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

It refers to his bike, a 1920s Indian, if I'm understanding Burt Munro correctly. See also Indian (motorcycle). I would presume, fwiw, that Rakesh Sharma is in fact the world's fastest Indian. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Freaking etiquette

What is the proper etiquette for freaking? There are always those times when you have a significant other to dance with, and there are always a few people on the dance floor who are likewise spoken for (though it’s sometimes hard to tell). In all other cases how should one handle the situation without awkwardness? (I’m trying to find something a little bit more sophisticated than “get drunk” here. :) Thanks everyone, --S.dedalus (talk) 22:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There is no real etiquette for that. It's kinda the same situation as mosh pits - you don't start it, it just happens. flaminglawyer^c 22:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Moshing has it's own ettiquette though - basically don't drag anyone in against their will and if someone goes down, pick them up. Exxolon (talk) 01:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course. We don't want another Black Friday trampling every time there's a decent concert... flaminglawyer^c 02:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

There’s etiquette for everything. I wonder what Judith Martin would say about this question. :) --S.dedalus (talk) 23:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

From your link Miss Manners says, "if you behave in a way that offends the people you're trying to deal with, they will stop dealing with you...There are plenty of people who say, 'We don't care about etiquette, but we can't stand the way so-and-so behaves, and we don't want him around!' Etiquette doesn't have the great sanctions that the law has. But the main sanction we do have is in not dealing with these people and isolating them because their behavior is unbearable." She supposes you will soon find out. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

December 19

How to delete the Main Page

I'd like to put the Main Page up for speedy deletion (as a blatant self-reference in the article space), but for some strange reason I can't add a tag to it. Whatever can I do?

This is a sincere question, please don't delete my hard work. 86.141.236.169 (talk) 00:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Not possible - only administrators can edit protected pages such as the main page.--Nubile Servant (talk) 00:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

But the point you make is fair. Arguably it should be at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Main_Page ... and verily, it turns out that it is. I'm not sure I understand what's happening beneath the surface; which is the real page, which is the alias? --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

It's been done: Read all about it here: [2]. Also see WP:AAAARGH and WP:DDMP for more info. Toodles! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

One of the pillars of Wikipedia is: "Break all rules" (with the subtext: "Break all rules when there is a really good reason") - the front page is utterly unique - we're allowed to break rules for one page out of 2.8 million if it's expedient - and it most certainly IS expedient. So we can happily break the 'avoid self-references' rule - and you stand ZERO chance of getting it deleted on those grounds. Stop the ridiculous Wikilawyering - and help to build an encyclopedia, OK? SteveBaker (talk) 01:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

• Being in the wrong namespace does not warrant deletion. The better choice would be to suggest a move, but based on the existing previous discussion I firmly believe such a move would not succeed. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Turn off your computer and you delete the page. Ir's only a question of degree, after all the page will still be on the wikipedia disk whatever you do even if you stop it being shown to some other people for a while. It all depends on what you mean by delete. More interestingly if you put in index.html you get the article Webserver directory index rather than the main page! That really is self-reference. And is it really the only notable main page or should it have disambiguation? Dmcq (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The Main Pages of the German and Spanish Wikipedia were recently moved to the Wikipedia-namespace. --94.79.143.154 (talk) 00:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Why does Greyhound have a monopoly?

What prevents coach companies other than Greyhound Canada from running a direct route between Toronto and Peterborough, Ontario? NeonMerlin 00:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Uh, I don't know that anything does... uh, okay, wait. Bad answer. I'll rephrase that: I'm completely ignorant of the subject, but what leads you to believe that something prevents other coach companies from doing so? I mean, other than the fact that if there already is a direct route between the two cities, it might be very difficult to compete with them, and no company has felt like risking the investment. I believe that's typically the main reason why a certain company takes care of a certain route exclusively. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 01:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Upon further thought: it's also possible that Greyhound gets some kind of a government subsidy for running that route, so a new company without that benefit would have an even harder time competing with them -- but that's certainly a situation that could be rectified once the subsidy agreement expires. That would be an opportunity for other companies to try to get those nice fat government checks. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 01:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

If it was only a matter of a particular route - they probably could compete - but the HUGE thing Greyhound have going for them is that you can go from anywhere to anywhere else - changing busses at their bus stations - with a standard end-to-end ticketting. So it's not a matter of starting up against Greyhound on one route - they'd kill you - you'd have to set up a few hundred bus stations and maybe a thousand busses. That's a hard thing to do. SteveBaker (talk) 01:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

But there are other bus companies that do compete with Greyhound with a much smaller range of destinations (in the U.S. at least). It helps to have an unusual business model: Megabus. Rmhermen (talk) 01:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

True true. A good example of how one-route bus lines can be a great success is the Chinatown bus from Boston to New York. If you can keep your costs down, it's pretty easy to compete against Greyhound, because they have a lot of overhead and appear to price gouge a bit when they're the only game in town. I'm pretty sure I used to pay around $40 for Greyhound one-way, and the trip took 6-9 hours due to constant stops along the way. Then along came a few upstart, single-route bus companies and shook up the whole scene. Now Greyhound offers semi-regular nonstop Boston-New York service for $15, and has its own bargain bus line to further compete with the Chinatown buses. There've been similar developments between other cities in the northeastern US. The catch is that these routes are extremely heavily trafficked year round; nobody's going to start a Pittsfield-New York bus line, because it simply wouldn't pay off. I suspect Peterborough may be in a similar predicament. Other bus companies do appear to be expanding their business, though, so you may have more options someday soon. --Fullobeans (talk) 06:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

In Alberta we have the Red Arrow between Calgary, Edmonton and Fort McMurray, I'm not even sure if greyhound competes with them on that route... TastyCakes (talk) 16:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I've never taken the bus to Peterborough, but do you sometimes ride a Coach Canada bus? According to that article their headquarters are in Peterborough. Both Coach and Greyhound operate from the Toronto Bus Terminal, so Greyhound doesn't really have a monopoly (other companies operate there too but I can't remember which ones at the moment). But if Greyhound does run the only route to Peterborough, well maybe it's because there is no way, or no need, to improve on what they do. (Aside from the occasional beheading, does anyone ever have any complaints about Greyhound?) Adam Bishop (talk) 09:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Here in New England, Peter Pan Bus Lines does a good amount of business. They're more common than Greyhound. But even so, it gets a lot of that business from a partnership with Greyhound. APL (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused by the nature of the Peter Pan/Greyhound relationship. I was under the impression that Greyhound had bought out Peter Pan but kept the logo etc, but the Wikipedia articles for the respective companies make it sound like they have some independence from one another. At the very least, Peter Pan seems to operate as an auxiliary service for Greyhound, selling its tickets through Greyhound, carrying Greyhound customers, and sometimes staffed by Greyhound personnel.--Fullobeans (talk) 17:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Possibly related: here's a bizarre case where a government-subsidized bus company in Ontario managed to shut down a "competing" service where you could arrange over the Web to carpool with others going the same way. Link: [3] --Sean 16:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Girls on Cam4

I enjoy watching the girls on Cam4 (I'm not going to link to the site, and it's NSFW of course), but I often wonder if they are really live on cam as they appear to be. It seems at least possible that what we are actually watching is a video, although I can't see why anyone would bother to put up a video of a girl on cam. The website doesn't seem to have much advertising, so it's not as though they are trying to generate traffic. The girls do sometimes chat live to the visitors, but of course that's no proof that they are really on cam at the same time. Every once in a while someone asks a girl to do something like blow him a kiss to prove that it's live. I've never actually seen the girls do something like that which would prove it, but maybe they are too busy taking their clothes off to notice. Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on this either way? --Bluegrouper (talk) 08:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, actually cam4 seems to be a NSFW version of blogtv (with a considerably more mature audience, of course). I've seen women on cam4 chatting elsewhere and respond to my commands, so absolutely. Though the few I've seen on there (only 1 or 2 really) did seem pretty unresponsive to talking. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

It could easily be a video that has loops/cuts based on reading what is input. I seem to recall some sort of chicken-man-thing online that did pretty much everything you asked it to and my understanding was that it interperated your text and had pre-recorded the things you'd ask so that would 'launch' that segment of video. I suspect the cams you mention are the same. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

You're talking about The Subservient Chicken. OK, so it might be possible, but why would the Cam4 people bother to do it? --Bluegrouper (talk) 09:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I would imagine that such trickery would be immediately detectable unless someone spent an unrealistically great deal of time on pre-recording. I mean, once the user sees the same clip twice, that's pretty much it for the illusion, and the whole point of something like this is that there's a real person at the other end. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 09:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Because it will be infinitely cheaper to hire a model for the day and film a handful of these videos that can then be edited together to be recycled time and again. The cost of that in comparison to having a model acting live for x hours a day is going to be notable. I'd be surprised if the majority of them weren't similar to the subservient chicken (that's the one I meant - cheers), it shouldn't require an amazing bit of programming - you scan input text for things that suggest kiss/smile/wave/take-off item X and you play the relevant scene. If you have spent a bit of time in the editing suite you can have 30 different scenarios for the same action - it shouldn't take long to film, and it shouldn't be that difficult a task to cut together either. Maybe i'm just cynical about the setup though? 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

But why bother doing it in the first place? As I said in my original question, the site is free and there are no advertisements. FWIW I'm with Magog the Ogre – it seems pretty genuine to me. --Bluegrouper (talk) 10:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Because that way you build a 'program' once that can have the footage of any number of models input in, and it will work as expected. You only pay for new models to film a new series of inter-weavable scenes when you need new content, rather than having to pay models for every single live-session that is being shown.

In compariosn how easy is it to get X models to strip for a non-paying audience, live with enough regular feeds to cover maybe 10 hours per day over a selection of models? It wouldn't be as easy to notice as you'd expect, and it would be cheaper than real-live models. It'd take initial costs to set-up but once done your costs would be much cheaper, whereas the actually-live setup would have consistent costs for regular shows. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

No ads? Are we talking about the same cam4 here? Because the one I just found from Google has a shitload of ads. Maybe you should link to the site so we can make sure were on the same page Nil Einne (talk) 12:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Information regarding admission in Class V from Class IV

Please inform me about the procedure of admission in clas V from Class IV in the same school under West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susise (talk • contribs) 09:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This is quite a specific inquiry, so you would get the most accurate and complete information only by contacting the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education directly. A partial answer is likely to be inadequate and possibly misleading, thus of little or no value. -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:25, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

St.Paul

Dear sir, i didn't get the perfect answer of my previous question .Can anybody help me to get the perfect answer. The question is - St.paul was arrested and brought in front of three emperor's. what are the names of those emperor's ? Also mention the chapter that is ,in which book the answer is located. THANKYOU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.253.176 (talk) 11:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Paul's arrest is described in Acts 21:17-36. A crowd of Jews from Asia Minor grabbed him and dragged him out of the city, beating him to near death. The Roman authorities, interested in keeping the peace, intervened and stopped the beating. They then arrested Paul for disturbing the peace. The rest of Acts (Chapters 22-28) is about Pauls various trials. Paul is tried before the Sanhedrin in Acts 23, high priest Ananias presided. IN Acts 24, he is transferred to Caeserea, which was the Roman administrative capital, and tried before Felix. He leaves Paul to rot in jail for two years. Paul gets a new trial from Festus in Acts 25. Festus takes him before the local Judean king, Agrippa II since he consideres the matter a Jewish one; and that he can find no charges to file against him. Paul demands that he get a trial in Rome, and thus screws himself (or helps his own ministry, depending on your perspective); both Agrippa and Festus were ready to drop all charges, but never ruled since Paul's appeal meant that they could make no decision. Acts 26 describes the journey to Rome; Paul is escorted by a centurion of the Imperial Regiment named Julius, they are shipwrecked on Malta, and later makes it to Rome, where he lives at least 2 years under house arrest, and wrote at least one epistle (PHilipians). No actual record of what happened to Paul in Rome exists, whether or not he was tried before caesar, or executed, or anything. Some apocryphal accounts say he was eventually released and went on to preach in Iberia, other accounts say that he was executed for treason, still others say he died of natural causes while under house arrest in Rome. Its just that there is no textual evidence in the Bible itself, nor any other source, that reliably reports what happens to Paul after the end of Acts. There ya go, that's the full story of Paul's arrest and trials. You can read Acts 22-28 yourself and decide who meets your criteria. Paul had 4 reported trials, not 3 as you imply, and you can pick (Ananais, Felix, Festus, or Agrippa) which officiant qualifies for your question. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Since we don't really know when Paul died, maybe he was tried during the Year of the Four Emperors? (I know, probably not.) Adam Bishop (talk) 17:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Not a bad guess. It is likely that Paul's time in Rome would have been during the late 60s - early 70s. Eusebius claims that Paul died at the hands of Nero, who persecuted the Christians during his reign.[4] and several other early sources back this up; however Eusebius writes some 230-240 years after the event. Though we don't have the writing directly, Eusebius cites Origen who predates him by some 80 years, closer, but still some time after the event. Tertullian, writing probably twenty years earlier still, apparently claims that Paul had been beheaded by the sword, which would have been consistant with the execution afforded to Roman Citizens (which Paul, almost unique among the early apostles, was). We have no accounts of his death by anyone who would have been a contemporary of Paul. There is of course Acts of the Apostles (written by Luke), which ends with him under house arrest in Rome for at least 2 years. Clement, who was a contemporary of Paul, writing around 96 AD in his First Epistle to the Corinthians chapter 5, v 9[5] only notes that Paul "had borne his testimony before the rulers, so he departed from the world and went unto the holy place, having been found a notable pattern of patient endurance." So maybe the "rulers" means Nero, and that Paul died after a trial in front of Nero? However, earlier in v 8, notes that Paul had "reached the farthest bounds of the West", perhaps an allusion to a missionary Journey in Iberia (which would BE the farthest bounds of the West), which was of course where Paul was heading after his stop over in Rome, see Romans 15:24, where he clearly indicates this was his plan. So there you go; the only extra-biblical source by someone who may have lived at the same time as Paul indicates that he may have completed the trip to Iberia (though this is unclear); reports of his execution under Nero don't start to show up until some 150 years later. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

United States Army united seeked by emblem identification

Which unit is the soldier at the right (Guantanamo) from (unit emblem on chest)? Thanks, --77.4.125.39 (talk) 13:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

IT is VERY hard to see in the picture, but it looks like there is a piano keyboard at the top, so I guessed that it might be an insignia of one of the U.S. Army bands. Here is a list of them. It very well may be something entirely different, there are hundreds of these sorts of insignia patches in the U.S. military, and the picture is kinda fuzzy anyways... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

As a note, the caption suggests that this isn't a US Army insignia: Navy guards of the Joint Task Force, attached to the Navy Expeditionary Guard Battalion, provide a variety of reading material from religious books to leisure magazines at Camp 6. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 15:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

@Angus Lepper: Thank! Shame on me. Internet research at first sight failed though... Doesn't the Navy Expeditionary Guard Battalion have website? ---16:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.4.125.39 (talk)

And if it were a Soldier (now capitalized BTW), that would not be a unit insignia; see Shoulder Sleeve Insignia (United States Army). --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Since when has soldier been capitalized? DuncanHill (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Since 2003, apparently. Looks like a case of keeping up with the Joneses to me. --Sean 17:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh good grief. DuncanHill (talk) 17:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

So from now on should we capitalize Wikipedia Editors, so they get all the respect they deserve? Edison (talk) 18:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

No. We writers don't take our marching orders from Gen. Schoomaker. Let him have his little empire where he can proclaim and decree all he likes, but the rest of the world - particularly lexicographers - should be deaf to his request. They record actual usage, not what one person would like to become actual usage. I suppose if I were employed on the good general's staff, I'd have to meekly comply. But outside of that, he can get nicked. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The patch being asked about is the Navy Master-at-Arms badge in patch form, not a unit emblem. (I.e., it identifies a position, not a location.) Here is a google'd image of the metal version that's easier to see/identify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.225.27 (talk) 23:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

More info available about MA's at: Master_at_arms —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.225.27 (talk) 23:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

1/2 Carat Diamong Ring for $600, should I get it?

I am looking to buy an engagement ring, and my girlfriend and I recently walked into Whitehall Jewelers (which is going out of business and liquidating everything) We found a diamond solitaire ring in white gold and she really liked it. It was a size 7 so it would have to be sized down. The associate said that they would give us a coupon that we could use to go to a jeweler to have it sized for a cheaper price. The ring looked really nice and I was wondering If I should get it or not (sale ends in 11 days). 1) Since they are closing I won't get a warranty on the ring, but is a warranty for a diamond ring really necessary? 2)Does Whitehall give GIA, AGSL or other certification that shows the color, clarity etc. with their rings? Any Advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.126.152 (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Most reputable jewlers should allow you to get an independent appraisal; and many jewlers will sell you service contracts on any jewlery, even stuff you don't buy from them (though you may have to pay an annual fee to maintain the service contract). Check with the jewler where you plan to get the resizing done, and see if you can work out a deal with them. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that dumping your intended and proposing to a fat-fingered girl is out ? :-) StuRat (talk) 01:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Note that decreasing the size of a ring is far easier than increasing it, as you don't have to match the material and get the new piece to bond with the old. StuRat (talk) 01:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

But still, a ring can only be resized about 3 sizes either way before you have to redo the setting. Steewi (talk) 01:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Cards

In Hearts and other similar card games where four people are dealt 13 cards, what are the chances of having all four cards in one pip value? 124.180.116.201 (talk) 23:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This would be a good Q for the Math Desk. Do you mean the chances of a specific player being dealt 4-of-a-kind, or of any of the 4 players being dealt 4-of-a-kind ? StuRat (talk) 01:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Or to put it another way, which "all four cards" do you mean?

If you're asking about the chance of every player being dealt one ace, every player being dealt one king, etc., all at once (so everyone's hand contains one ace, one king, and so on), then that's very small: it's 4!^13/(52!/(13!^4)) or 1 chance in 61,204,166,001.13+.

--Anonymous, 01:55 UTC, December 20/08.

No, I didn't mean that. I meant if one person had every card in one pip value - for example, all 2's. 124.180.116.201 (talk) 04:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Use Combinatorics to solve this. The total number of possible 13-card hands from a 52 card deck is 52!/(13!*(52-13)!) which is 635,013,559,600. That's the denominator of our fraction. There are 13 possible 4 of a kinds, assuming the other 9 cards left in the hand can be random, that means that there are 52!/(9!*(52-9)!) = 3,679,075,400 was to have a SPECIFIC 4 of a kind (like, lets say, 4 deuces) or 13* that number for ANY 4 of a kind; which gives us 47,827,980,200. That's the numerator of our fraction. Thus the odds are about 7.53% chance of SOMEONE getting a 4 of a kind in a 13 card deal, which comes out to roughly a 3 out of 40 chance, or roughly once in every 13 hands or so. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Wait... that;s the odds per hand, not per deal. SInce there are 4 hands in every deal, the odds are 4 times that, meaning that there is a 30% chance that SOMEONE will get a 4 of a kind on any given deal, or that it will happen roughly once every third deal that someone will get a 4 of a kind of any sort. That feels better. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Aren't you missing a small contribution for the cases where you got 4 duces AND 4 jacks (say) and the cases where you got 4 aces, 4 kings and 4 queens (for example). SteveBaker (talk) 06:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

You can't just multiply probabilities by number of events like that. If you could, then two independent events, like coin flips, with a 50% probability, like heads, would multiply by two to guarantee a 100% chance that you would get a head with two coin flips. If they were truly independent events, then the formula would be 1-(1-0.0753)⁴, or 26.9%. That still seems a bit high, though, so I suspect that the 7.53% was high, too. Note that whether you have 4-of-a-kind isn't totally independent of whether other players have 4-of-a-kind, though, as any of them having it means there's one less way you can get it. StuRat (talk) 17:55, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Tossing a coin has a 0.5 prob of a head - the probability of getting two heads on two coins is 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25. The probability of getting at least one head in two tosses is 0.5 for getting a head on the first toss and an 0.5 chance for having to make the second toss which has an 0.5 probability of success so now you have an 0.5 chance of succeeding on the first toss and a COMBINED 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25 chance of both needing to make the second toss and it coming up heads...now you can add those two chances to get an 0.75 (75%) chance of getting at least one head in two tosses. I have no clue where you pulled 26.9% from (?!?) but it's certainly not right. We can check my math by simply listing all possible outcomes - there are four ways for two coins to come up (2 heads, 2 tails, tail and head, and fourthly, head and tail) since three of those four cases has at least one heads, the odds are 3 in 4 or 0.75. Had there been a third toss, the probability of having to make the third toss is only 0.25 - and the probability of it coming up heads is still 0.5 so a third toss adds an 0.125 chance of getting at least one head. So the total probability is 0.875...no matter how many tosses you make, it'll never quite reach a certainty of getting at least one head - but it'll get arbitarily close.

SteveBaker (talk) 20:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood me entirely, Steve. The coin toss was merely an example to Jayron32 to show that you can't just add the probabilities of independent events to get the total probability. And yes, the chances of getting any heads after two coin tosses is 1-(1-0.5)² = 75%. The 26.9% had nothing to do with coins, that's back to the original card question. If one accepts Jayron's assertion that the probability of any one player getting 4-of-a-kind in a 13 card random draw is 7.53%, and if one assumes the probability of each of 4 players of drawing a 4-of-a-kind to be independent events, then the probability that at least one will draw a 4-of-a-kind is 1-(1-0.0753)⁴ or 26.9%. I then went on to say that I doubt if either assumption is correct. StuRat (talk) 15:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Does that apply when they're thrown consecutively, or only when they're thrown simultaneously, Steve? Or maybe it doesn't make any difference. (My maths is crap these days.) -- JackofOz (talk) 00:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. Algebraist 00:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Jayron's numbers are a little off, the total number of hands is correct, but the number of specific 4 of a kinds should be 48!/(9!*(48-9)!) = 1,677,106,640 because 4 cards are already chosen. This makes the number of hands with at least one 4 of a kind of any value 21,802,386,320. So your odds for any single hand are about 3.43% and 13%(using sturat's equation) on any four hands. -- Mad031683 (talk) 00:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually that's still too high, since it double and triple counts hands with multiple 4 of a kinds. I think the correct total is 21,632,831,792 hands with at least one four of a kind, but its a tiny difference, 3.40% instead of 3.43% and 12.9% chance of one coming up in any single deal.-- Mad031683 (talk) 01:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I've seen it mentioned on bridge(cards) pages as a freaky thing when every player gets a complete suit,so maybe looking up those might help.^{(Hypnosadist)} 14:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Online repository for porn mag stories

Does anyone know of somewhere online where you can read porn stories like in the 'letters' section of porn mags? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.111.99.97 (talk) 23:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This is probably the largest repository of written smut... well, anywhere, though they're not quite written in the same style as the letters sections to those glorious pillars of civilization. Matt Deres (talk) 01:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Is the newsgroup alt.sex.stories(.moderated) still alive? —Tamfang (talk) 20:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

December 20

regional demographics

Greetings. I am searching for data on the number of ethnic groups in multiple regions, for example: How many ethnicities are represented / can be found in: Los Angeles, Miami, NY, London, etc. I have looked on the US census but have not found thorough / complete lists. Thank-you, Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.158.143 (talk) 03:58, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid the answer to your question is basically going to be "all of them." No, there probably aren't any Hi-Merima people wandering around New York, but it's almost certain that every European group is represented, along with most Native American tribes and at least one (usually more) ethnic group from every country in the world. That's quite a list, and it's impossible to compile in full because so many people are of mixed ancestry and don't know their family history (and that's assuming that you could, somehow, survey every person in New York). Cities like New York, London, and Los Angeles are not only huge, they're also immigration hubs and population magnets, so they'll inevitably have a diverse populace. You might find it easier—and more interesting—to look up information on randomly selected small cities, since they sometimes have unexpected concentrations of specific ethnic groups, and it's quite interesting to look at immigration patterns on a small scale. --Fullobeans (talk) 06:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

So my mother is terminally ill

My mother is possibly terminally ill with cancer. She might die within a few years. If so, that'll make my father a widower. This is quite uncommon, isn't it? I mean, it's more common for the man to die first, but out of my parents, it's almost certain my mother'll die first, yet they're still married and they're about the same age as each other. Is this the case? Please, tell me.-Nubile Servant (talk) 04:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

See List of countries by life expectancy and find where you live. In the more affluent parts of the world, the women outlive the men on average. In poorer countries, the gap is smaller, and in some cases, the men actually outlive the women. This is usally due to the inherent difficulties in child birth; in countries with poor medical care MANY more women die in child birth than in countries with good medical care. Incidentally, there was a time in the not-too-distant past when worldwide men, on average, were expected to outlive women. For example, in research I dug up while working on the article Plymouth Colony, historian John Demos quotes statistics showing that men usually outlived women in 17th century New England. Men there lived, on average 7 years longer than women (in modern USA, that number is about flipped, with the women outliving the men by 7 years) and women only had a 70% chance of seeing their 50th birthday. Men had an 85% chance of reaching the same age. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict, because I always get distracted before clicking "Save page") Apparently the life expectancy in Scotland is 75 for men, 80 for women. That's not too much of a difference, especially compared to extreme cases like Russia, which has a life expectancy of 59 for men and 73 for women. Worldwide, the five-year disparity seems to be fairly average (see: List of countries by life expectancy), and suggests that women have a slight tendency to outlive men, but not by much. Some families have a history of gender-specific disease, though, which will cause the life expectancy of someone in that lineage to differ from the national average. There are also local cultural factors which can come into play ("All the women in my neighborhood hang out smoking menthols at the bingo hall", "All the men in my town work in coal mines, shoot meth, and play Russian roulette on Tuesdays after work"). But here's some original research: the US has the same male/female life expectancy as Scotland, and I know quite a few men who've outlived their wives (though not in my family), and quite a few women who've outlived their husbands. I also know quite a few women who've beaten cancer, so here's hoping we can add your mom to the list. I'm sorry she's sick—that's never easy—and I wish you both luck. --Fullobeans (talk) 05:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

One thing to remember when talking life expectancies is that there also tends to be an age gap between couples. On average, the male tends to be older then the female. For examples the Age at first marriage shows a nearly 2 year gap in the US and slightly over 2 years in the UK. Obviously we're talking about averages here. If a 50 year old woman marries a 30 year old man, it's hardly surprising if the woman dies first. Nil Einne (talk) 12:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

As a quick way of getting some statistics, I just downloaded the raw data file for the biographies section of the Internet Movie Database. It lists marriage data for many of the people in the database. Of these marriages, 12,177 are listed as being ended by "his death" and 4,630 by "her death".

However, this may be unrepresentative of the statistics for people in general for several reasons. First, marriages in show business may really be different. Second, I expect the database contains more men than women, and the reason for termination of a marriage is more likely to be known if it is the death of the person who the database entry belongs to. Another source of error is that if both spouses happen to be in the database, their marriage will be counted twice unless one of the entries happens to be incomplete.

Incidentally, the number of marriages shown as terminated by divorce is 22,274. --Anonymous, 07:09 UTC, December 20/08.

St.Paul

After the baptism of St.Paul given by anania ,which city did st. paul go first?THANK YOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.252.237 (talk) 12:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Paul says only that he went to "Arabia" for three years. Presumably he means Arabia Petraea (as opposed to Arabia Deserta or Arabia Felix, so I'd assume he went to Petra. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, in Acts 9:19-30 it describes Paul's first days after baptism. It states that he spent some time in Damascus (which is where Ananais lived and baptized him) preaching in the synagogues. The Jews in Damsacus ran him out of town, whereupon he went to Jerusalem; however the Christians there feared him(since like, a week before, he had been having them tortured and executed!), and threatened to run him out of town. Barnabas stood up for him, and sponsored him. From there he went to Caesarea and then on to Tarsus. There have been a LOT of questions lately about Paul, most of this stuff can be looked up in the Bible. I tend to use this one online: Biblegateway. Its fully searchable, and you could just, you know, read Acts (which is about 2/3 about Paul anyways) or any other book you wish... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I was reading the Wiki article which points to Galatians. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

It has long been noted that Acts of the Apostles' statements about Paul often contradict his own in the epistles. Luke may be the better - and more dramatic - writer, but Paul is the more reliable. For instance, Luke tells the Road to Damascus story three times in Acts, but with contradictions between versions. Paul never mentions such an event. B00P (talk) 09:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, Galatians. Well in there, it does say he went to Arabia first. Well, regardless, the answers are quite findable in the Bible. You could just look it up... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Minefield → Shiretoko

<moved to RD/C> flaminglawyer^c 22:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

It's nice to put a link when we do that. --Milkbreath (talk) 16:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

December 21

Is there such a thing as a bus/train hybrid?

I couldn't have been the first one to think of this. Imagine the time saved- Take road to crossing, jump on tracks, beeline to next town, take backroad shortcut, hop on tracks again. Town billboard touts Time saved. Trus to New York city! Faster than Amtrak. At Trus,- we earn your trust!.--THE WORLD'S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk) 00:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

See Dual-mode bus, Trolleybus, and Tram. The first is probably exactly what you are talking about, but Trams (which run on city streets, often between traffic lanes) could be thought of as a hybrid bus/train, as could a Trolleybus, which is like a Tram, but not tied to tracks. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

No, Jayron, a dual-mode bus does not mean it can run on tracks. This question is asking about a road-rail bus. As you see at that link, they have been tried, but not with any success. The engineering requirements for a good bus and a good train are just too different. (Similarly with road vehicles that turn into boats or into airplanes. Okay, DUKWs have found a niche role as tour vehicles, but it's a very limited niche.) --Anonymous, 03:34 UTC, December 21, 2008.

In Adelaide they have a bus which leaves the road and goes onto its own guided trackway, its called the O-Bahn Busway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.239.250 (talk) 04:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

• Again, this does not run on railway tracks. --Anon, 21:51 UTC, December 21, 2008.

The one I know is developed by Hokkaido Railway Company in Japan. They are working toward the practical use. Watch this. Oda Mari (talk) 07:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

It might work in fairly isolated communities where trains are infrequent, but on more tightly controlled lines it would never work. However, making a bus and a train can work - for instance the British Rail Class 143 is built on a bus chassis. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

goats milk

waht would cause yeast in goats milk and how can i fix the problem —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.180.71 (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeast is floating around in the air all around you; it will alight on foods, and if it finds a friendly medium it will grow and multiply all on its own. You could perhaps pasteurize it... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

And any particular goat teat may have a yeast infection. If so, I suggest not drinking such milk until the goat is treated and healthy. I don't know that the yeast itself would be a prob, though, it's opportunistic infections that worry me. StuRat (talk) 14:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Infections of goat mammaries are noticeably smelly and painful. Udderly disgusting. Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 11:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Where did the word "gozangas" and another crude term originate?

What is the origin of the phrases "wham bam, thank you maam" and "gozangas"? As in "Hey, checkowtdat brawd wit da big gozangas!" and "with him, it's wham, bam, thank you maam!" These sound kind of silly and raunchy at the same time so I suspect one of those old WWII type burlesque shows.Sunburned Baby (talk) 03:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

And since we're on the subject, does anyone know where the word "broad" came from?Sunburned Baby (talk) 17:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a bastardized version of either congas or maracas. The second phrase sounds a bit "Island pidgin". WWII seems a bit too far back IMHO. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 08:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

To me, WWII doesn't seem far enough back for "Wham, bam, thank you ma'am"; I'd be surprised if it weren't older than that. (Why, didn't the twelfth-century women refer to Maimonides as "Rambam, thank you ma'am"? ;-)) Deor (talk) 00:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I suppose I'll have to take that back (the skepticism, not the parenthetical joke); the OP's guess of a WWII origin may well be correct, at least according to the dictionary cited in this posting. Deor (talk) 05:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and this book dates gazongas—note the spelling, which seems to be much more common than yours—to 1978, although this one dates it to the 1960s. As this one points out, it seems to be one in an extensive series of terms that ultimately derive from bosom. Deor (talk) 06:13, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

St.Paul

How many times St.Paul tell about his conversion in the Book of Acts ? THANKYOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.252.237 (talk) 06:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

This is the FIFTH "St.Paul" question in the last few days! Maybe it's time to stop and read the book? SteveBaker (talk) 06:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Excuse sir , i have read the book —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.252.237 (talk) 06:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you just count how many times then? Adam Bishop (talk) 07:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

As I said in answer to your previous question, the Road to Damascus story appears three times in Acts, once when it happens, and twice more when Paul tells about it. The details are different each time. Paul, himself, never wrote about any such experience in the epistles. B00P (talk) 09:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

That would be because the Bible is a rambling incoherent mess...as is obvious to anyone who attempts to actually read it from cover to cover as I once did. It does not appear to contain historical truth - so you're really just asking what was in the minds of the original authors and of the hundreds of subsequent amenders and tinkerers with the book. SteveBaker (talk) 22:09, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

It rambles because its written by several dozen authors over the course of a thousand years. Go to your library, take 70 random books off of a few shelves, and read them all. You don't expect a consistant narrative there, do ya? The Bible was compiled to be in roughly chronological order, but there is not the expectation for it to be a cohesive story. Outside of the Pentateuch (which is likely written by dozens of authors and compiled over hundreds of years itself) each individual book is rather coherant and self-consistant. Even in the Pentatauch, there are coherant stories that have a beginning, middle, and end, but they don't quite match up to the beginnings and ends of the books. Remember, the Bible is not a story, its an Anthology. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

If you pick 70 random books on different topics - sure you get a mess. But if you take 70 random books on Quantum Theory - or 70 books about the Watergate Affair - then I expect a fairly consistent story with a reasonable degree of correlation on the basic facts. The bible can't even get straight such rather fundamental things as the 10 Commandments! You'd really think that the one time God told the world what the actual RULES were - carved them on actual stone tablets - that the people who wrote about it afterwards would have taken just the teensiest bit of effort to get the wording straight. But no - there are at least three different versions (wildly different actually) of such a fundamental mission statement - not just different wording - totally different commandments! If the book (as it and it's proponents claim) is 'The One True Book' - then it is indeed a horrible mess - even on very basic factual matters.

At any rate - for our OP, when you've read all three versions of the story about the Road to Damazcus - you've read all there is to be said on the matter. The inconsistencies are...inconsistancies...and that's because this is mostly a work of fiction written by a bunch of different people with different agenda's to push. If you've read it from cover to cover without preconceptions (as I have) then such 'enlightenment' as you're likely to get (zero, IMHO) has already been gotten - and asking a bunch of people on the Internet for more information is a road to nowhere because they have no sources of information that you don't already have in that book. It's like asking what happened to Harry Potter on his 50th birthday - if J.K.Rowling didn't write about it then that information does not and cannot ever exist. Worse still, the authors of the Bible have all been dead for a very long time...and what they wrote has been messed about with considerably since then (evidence the number of different versions of the Bible over the years). SteveBaker (talk) 15:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

"The inconsistencies are...inconsistancies..." - very good, Steve. I don't know if that was intentional or not, but I might turn it into a handy quote ("At the end of the day, inconsistencies are just that - inconsistancies"). Thanks. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Surprisingly - that one was intentional! Too many people see an inconsistancy and imagine something deeper going on - building huge wobbly conspiracy theories (or even entire religions) on something that was just an author making a mistake in a work of fiction. Just head out to any Star Trek convention and you'll be amazed at the amount of time spent trying to see deeper meaning in outright inconsistancy on the part of an author. SteveBaker (talk) 22:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Help

The battleship in the forground of the picture File:USS Iowa (BB-61) Preps.jpg is in fact Indiana and not Iowa. How do I fix this without getting reverted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.26.179 (talk) 07:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Start by providing a source for your claim. Algebraist 08:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Its an observational thing, you need to look carefully at the bridge designs for both classes for the difference to show. Additionally, the text of the image caption suggests that the battleship Iowa is in fact in the background and not the foreground. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.26.179 (talk) 08:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I take it the Indiana is meant to be in the background (captioned left to right), and here navy archives[6] state the same as the description in the file, "The Indiana (BB-58) & Iowa (BB-61) underway" then goes on to describe the Iowa. Do you have information to contradict this? It would help to have references or information that supports your view. Just saying "observation" is vague. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

No, Indiana is meant to be in the foreground, Iowa is supposed to be in the background. The description of the Iowa would be impossible to make from the location of the photographer: the paint scheme which is discussed can only be seen on the background ship, not the foreground, thus the caption in the Iowa article is incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.72.221.167 (talk) 03:21, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I take it then, that you feel the navy has the wrong ship on their Iowa page. Will you take your concerns to the talk page of the USS Iowa (BB-61) article? Julia Rossi (talk) 06:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

St.Paul

In the first missionary journey of st.paul who were the two fellow workers with him? I got one fellow worker that is barnabas but i didn't get the other. I read the bible but i couldn't find the other . Please help me . THANKYOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.253.102 (talk) 10:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Titus ((Galatians 2:1–10). Available in the article, Saint Paul. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.250.113 (talk) 11:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

About the second visit, not the first. This is not my thing, so read the article, especially that table with loads of links for you to follow. I stop short after command+F "Barnabas and" – Julia Rossi (talk) 11:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

i think it is not titus , it may be john mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.241.214 (talk) 15:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Why would the person post if she didn't think she was right? And, if you think it was John Mark, why are you asking us who it was?

Now, I'll admit to having a degree so I am probably further along with my memory, but John Mark accompanied them on one journey, and he got cold feet and went AWOL. This caused a split between Paul and Barnabas, the latter thinking that they could still use him. (And, later, in his last days, Paul includes Mark in those he wants to see, as he is "profitable for the ministry," so apparently the lad did grow up quite a bit later.)

Reasoning logically, Paul made 2 with Barnabas, and 2 with Silas, IIRC. Okay, so John Mark could only have fled on one of those, because the split was right after that. Therefore, it was Titus on the first, John Mark on the second. And, Silas on the 3rd and 4th.Somebody or his brother (talk) 17:24, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Look - this is the SIXTH "St Paul" question this week. All of the information that exists about this person (who in all likelyhood is fictional anyway) exists in the pages of one book. Our OP claims to have read that book. That being the case - he/she is now in possession of all of the information there is to be had on the subject. If there are any remaining questions - then they cannot be answered because they are entirely in the minds of some long-dead authors. We are edging into the realms of 'trolling' here. SteveBaker (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Somebodyorhisbrother, for righting my wrong. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Download Music of Blue - All Rise

I can't Download the Music of Blue - All Rise. everybody asks money to download the song. can anybody say me the site from where i can dowload the song Blue - All Rise. THANKYOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.241.214 (talk) 14:21, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, buddy, their music is copyrighted. That means that if you want it, you'll have to pony up. (but your best "illegal" chance is torrents or similar) flaminglawyer^c 14:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Daily Wages

equality among men and women in daily wages —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.241.214 (talk) 15:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like you're trying to use a search engine. The refdesk is staffed by real people... But as to your answer, please see the article occupational sexism. flaminglawyer^c 16:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Odd recurrent music in online features

<moved to WP:RD/E>

It's nice to put a link to the section. --Milkbreath (talk) 20:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Mind relaxation techniques

well I am a 22 year old working in a reputed software concern. I am working nearly 15-18 hours daily. I would kindly request you to give me some suggestions on how can manage my time and some mind relaxation techniques. I would be very much pleased if you provide me with simple actions which I can add up in the routine life which will make me feel relaxed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.227.68.5 (talk) 18:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Did you read the article about meditation? The first line says: "Meditation is a mental discipline by which one attempts to get beyond the conditioned, "thinking" mind into a deeper state of relaxation or awareness." However, personally I would say to you: work less. Not being able to relax properly is a sign that you're working too much. Lova Falk (talk) 20:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, 15-18 hour working days are dangerous to your mental/physical health. How many days are you working a week? Are there no regulations for your working hours? Exxolon (talk) 20:36, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at our articles burnout (psychology) and stress management. There is also a fascinating bit on stress balls, which, to quote the article "are presented to employees ... as gifts". Mind you, you may prefer to squeeze your own in an emergency, unless, of course, it were to be a software concern. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:42, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Let me tell you something - I've been a software engineer and a team leader since before you were born and I take my job very seriously. I've worked in - (and run) many projects with horrible deadlines and a need to work 'crunch time'. Once you start working more than about 70 hours per week, within just a couple of days you'll be so unproductive (making mistakes - failing to notice things that are important) that you'll actually get your work done in a shorter time if you work fewer hours. I've seen this happen too many times. You can productively work 60 hours a week for several months - and you can productively push it up to 70 hours a week for a few weeks. But over 70 hours a week - or continuous 'crunch' over too many weeks is not doing either you OR your job function any good at all. If you utterly have to do this - a short nap (20 minutes maybe) works wonders. A caring employer may be able to set aside a quiet room with sofa's and such to let employees do this whenever they need to - it really helps when you are pushing it out over 60 hours a week. SteveBaker (talk) 22:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Rudd needs to read this. He seems to have gotten by on 3 hours a sleep a night over the past year, which works out to a 147-hour week (mind you, he has a lot of problems to contend with, many of them legacies of the previous government) but also expects his staff to be there at any hour of the day, which is why a stack of them have become burnt out and quit [7]. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

As a programmer who has worked many 80+ hour weeks, I've found one technique that radically improved my productivity: staying out of the office during normal working hours. If I was at work 9-5, I'd be called into meetings, asked to help other workers, then waste more time by being bitched out by the boss for not meeting my deadlines. I would spend weekends and evenings at work, but was at home during the 9-5 period (or maybe 7-7 period, to allow for early birds and people who stay late). When you present this to the bosses as the only way to finish the project on time, they become remarkably agreeable, all of a sudden.

As for stress relief, I liked to walk around the building to work off stress. I tried to time it when my program was running a test or something like that, and also would get something from the vending machines during the walk, so I had an "excuse" if asked why I was walking around.

I'm also prone to getting finger cramps, so I would occasionally shake my hands with my fingers flailing about wildly (is there a name for this exercise ?). This really helped. StuRat (talk) 04:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

When your hands start to crap out on you - it's definitely time to stop. I've suffered all sorts of repetitive strain problems after 35 years of keyboard pounding. Learning to manage that is vitally important if you still want to be using a keyboard 20 years from now. SteveBaker (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow! That must be what modern slavery is like. Most of my working life I've rarely exceeded 50 hours in a week, usually managing to keep it to 40-45 hours - and I've usually managed to make my deadlines, though on a few occasions it has gone wrong (eg. very late arrival of requirements specs after weeks of asking) and I have had to do some extra hours or work a couple of weekends. What the OP (and StuRat) needs to ask himself is: "what the worst that would happen if I went home now and picked this up tomorrow?". In most cases they will find the answer is nothing; the work will still get sone and the deadline will still be achieved. A couple of hints: Don't provide (or be forced into accepting) unrealistic estimates based on you working a 80-hour week. If the deadline is too tight or you are going seriously off target, tell the project manager or your boss as soon as you can. Astronaut (talk) 14:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I have blown off some crazy overtime assignments. For example, I was asked to work over the holiday season 1999 checking for Y2K bugs, but found out this company planned to lay me off soon after. I called in sick, instead. Alas, they didn't have any Y2K bugs, what a shame. StuRat (talk) 01:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Crazy overtime (aka 'Death march' and 'Crunch time') is endemic to some parts of the computer software business. Computer games companies are particularly bad at this. There is an utter-utter-drop-dead date to get computer games done in...if you don't get it done in time for Xmas - your sales will either be a tiny fraction of what they would otherwise be - or you have to delay release for an entire year - which will cause horrible liquidity problems for your company AND risk your game being 'trumped' by some other product in the meantime. What makes this worse is the open-ended nature of a computer game. They are NEVER "done" - we always could have made the game a little better if only we'd had more 'polish' time...another level...more easter eggs...more variety in the AI behavior of the bad guys...nicer graphics...more objects that react under game-physics...another sound effect. There is always SOMETHING that you could do. So sadly - for a few months at the end of pretty much every game project, you go into crazy crunch-time - 60 to 70 hour weeks (hopefully no more unless you have very dumb management). It doesn't matter how well you planned coming up to the deadline because the game is never, ever finished. So the pressure to put in just a few more hours to get that fancy last-minute effect in there is unrelenting and hard to resist. What's amazing is that the games business doesn't pay overtime...people do this mostly because of the love of the project and the peer pressure of not letting down your buddies. People will quite voluntarily put in more hours that would ever be demanded of them - and it often takes forceful pressure from team leaders to limit what people will do. When they get tired they make mistakes that cost more hours to fix - before you know it, each hour worked late at night takes more than an hour to fix up the following morning.

But over 70 hours is just plain stupid - and doing it for longer than a few weeks is also just plain stupid. A few games companies are starting to realise this and while we all know that long crunch hours just prior to a release is well worth it in terms of review scores and sales success - the resulting 'burn-out' of your best people isn't worth it in the longer term.

SteveBaker (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

As I suggested above, part of the problem is poor estimating. Many times I've been asked "how long will it take" and I used to say "I'll have it done this evening" (or "Friday", or some other guess) without giving too much thought to it. It then turns out to be trickier than I thought and end up staying late to meet that unrealistic dealine. The trouble with this approach is that I'm giving the project manager what I think he wants to hear, not a realistic estimate. For future projects, that project manager comes to see us software engineers as miracle workers and estimates according to past history... and we get a project doomed to be late from the start. Now, I try to as vague as possible, have a good look first to see what is involved, and if I'm really pressed for an estimate I give myself lots of contingency to get the job done comfortably. If I finish up early, I look like the genius I am and I get to go home early; and if it turns out to be a difficult task, I don't get management breathing down my neck a week later. Astronaut (talk) 18:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes - that's a classic problem. I know I can't do time-estimation to save my life. Nowadays I take a good hard look at what I honestly think it'll take - and double it. Only recently (in my previous job) did I discover that my boss was privately doubling what I told HIM - and still it sometimes took longer than it should. My best advice is to have short 'sprints' with well defined goals and to split the task into sprint-sized chunks. Treat the end of each sprint as a deadline - and work hard to meet each one. If the work doesn't fit the time available (and it never does) then the 'crunch' happens in little bits at the end of each sprint rather than piling up at the end. We use 3 week sprints - and you might find yourself working late a few nights at the end of every sprint - but when the last sprint is done - we're DONE...except that we won't be - for the reasons I outlined above. No computer game (and precious few computer programs of ANY kind) are ever "Finished". SteveBaker (talk) 22:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Income of felons/nonfelons controlled for other demographics?

I can understand that released felons as a group have substantially lower income than non-felons, but are there any comparative income data controlling for other demographic factors? (e.g. education, age, race, sex, etc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomerpdx (talk • contribs) 22:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

December 22

Chicago vs Salt Lake City

Is Chicago's numbering system for its streets anything similar to the one Salt Lake City has? 75.169.197.68 (talk) 01:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Many cities use a numbering system of some sort for its streets, but Salt Lake City (and indeed most of Utah) takes the cake as far as maddening adherance to the grid. Chicago's is pretty regular as well, but not exactly so. The numbers on Chicago streets ONLY apply to the east-west streets on the South Side (and some on the southside are named, and their "numbers" are skipped, like Roosevelt, Cermak, and Garfield) while all of the north-south streets and all of the streets north of Madison Street are named, and not numbered, meaning you have to "memorize" the name-number correlation. See Streets and highways of Chicago which has an explanation of the system in Chicago. I lived there for 2 years, and I have to say it was a GREAT system, by far the easiest major city in the U.S. to navigate. I personally find the Utah system confusing (for example, confusing the addresses between 1500 North 2100 West Street and 2100 North 1500 West Street and 1500 West 2100 North Street and... you get the idea) and would prefer a system which was a little easier to keep track of... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I've lived in Salt Lake for eleven years and personally I find its numbering system to be quite easy. Using your example, the first address (1500 N 2100 West) is fifteen blocks north of the north-south line of the city, and then on a street that is twenty-one blocks west of the east-west line, while the second address is located on a totally different street (1500 West) and that location is twenty-one blocks north of the line on that street (if that makes any sense). If someone tells me to go to a house on 11400 S 2000 East I know exactly where that is. However, saying you live on a house that's on 2150 East 3000 South certainly does not have its appeal :) and sometimes addresses like 100 West North Temple are just plain confusing. But one gets used to it - 75.169.197.68 (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

My brain tends to confuse the numbers easier. Its easier to know that, for example, 2400 W Roosevelt means the corner of Roosvelt and Western, because its only got the one number in it. Even like 2400 W 23rd Street (corner of Western and 23rd Street, or one block south of Cermak on Western) is easier to keep track of because it uses a Cardinal number for the address and an Ordinal number for the street name. Having both the address and street name to be part of the same class of words makes it hard for me to parse. I suppose I would have gotten used to it had I lived there, but in general I find the system somewhat confusing. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Credit music to The Incredibles

What time signature is the music played during the ending credits of The Incredibles in? (you can listen to it on the Amazon page) 72.200.101.17 (talk) 02:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

It's all over the place. I heard 5/4 and 6/8, I believe, and maybe 4/4, too. Dynamic piece, and a great movie, dahlink. --Milkbreath (talk) 11:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Can't remember it, and the link is not working, but it's possible it is in a mixed meter (okay, try Time_signature#Mixed_meters). That could be why people can't agree on the time signature. -- 128.104.112.113 (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The link worked for me. Under the "Incredibles" logo on the left is a link "Listen to Samples". "The Incredits" is the one. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Movies in the Great Depression

This is brief: Who could afford movie tickets during the Great Depression?

Thank as always.

Always Cardinal Raven (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven

Considering they likely cost a dime or so, probably most people. This article: [8] reports that a couple could get two movie tickets for $0.30, or $0.20 for a matinee. even that was affordable to most people. The first $1.00 movie ticket wasn't recorded until the 1960's: see [9]). Also see [10] where it notes that by the end of the 1930s, 80 million tickets were sold annually. The answer is obviously "a lot of people". Its pretty useless to speculate that "there is no way they could have afforded it" when the evidence is already clear that they did afford it. Also, remember that, in the 1930s, there were less things to spend money on. Consider that today you spend money monthly on cable TV, internet, sattelite radio, i-tunes subscriptions, NetFlix, land-line phones, cell phones, as well as buying the devices to use those, such as video game systems, computers, Televison sets, DVD players, CD players, MP3 players, etc. etc. In 1935, you had a) A phonograph b) a radio and c) the movies. And that was literally IT. So, the entertainment budget went a lot farther, since you didn't have a multitude of different media to spend it on. A dollar a month could get you all the movies you needed to see and then some... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

See that is what I expected, just had to make sure. Another question certain movies that come from 1930s and what not. If you ever watched them it appears the actors are talking really fast for a normal human being. Was this because they had a time limit of when to get their lines in? Why did they speak so fast? Thank you again. Its always appreciated.

Always Cardinal Raven (talk) 03:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven

There was a certain "rapid banter" that was quite common for a few decades (Catherine Hepburn was one offender). Still, some people, like comedians Robin Williams and Dennis Miller, do the same thing today. I would like to sic them on each other and see which one explodes first. StuRat (talk) 03:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Howard Hawks, in particular, is known for the rapid, overlapping dialogue in his films, with His Girl Friday being the locus classicus. Deor (talk) 04:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Its also not confined to Hawks, or indeed to films of the 1940s. More modern directors who used similar techniques include Robert Altman, noted for such use of dialogue in MASH (1970), and Whit Stillman, who was famous for his "talky" films of the 1990's, including Metropolitan (1990) and Barcelona (1994). --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The Gilmore Girls also did that. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The frame rate might have been different. Movie cameras from that era might have run at between 15 and 20 frames per second, but playing them back on modern equipment at 24 or 25 frames per second makes everying seem faster. In a dialogue scene, it would seem like rapid banter. Astronaut (talk) 13:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

This may be the case with movies from the silent era, but by the time of the talkies, the frame rate had been standardised at 24fps. (The WP article I've linked to references silent-film historian Kevin Brownlow as the source for this statement). Valiantis (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Remember that the $1 movie ticket in the 1960's translates to a $7 movie ticket today - because inflation has pushed down the value of money by a factor of 7 over that same period. It's hard to track inflation through the depression - but it's highly likely that the dime it cost for a movie ticket back then would be more like a dollar today. You'd have to be REALLY badly off not to be able to afford $1 in present-value money. There is evidence that distractions like TV, movies, computer games and such actually do better in times of financial crisis than they do in boom times because they are amongst the cheapest forms of entertainment - and people need (more than ever, actually) a way to take their minds off the daily grind and spend a couple of hours zoned out in a comfy chair with popcorn.

Another reason why it would have been popular in the 1930's would be that this was the only way for most people to see news footage - newsreel theatres did boom business because it was the only way to SEE the larger events of the world - and for people who probably didn't even own a radio, it was the only way to hear it either.

SteveBaker (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

SteveBaker (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

People had to have some relief from the staggering harshness of the depression. Some would take their main squeeze to a honky tonk, others to a movie, spending the price of a filling meal to have some joy in a stark world. Some sacrifice might have been involved. They skip a meal, or walk 3 miles to save bus fare, or put pieces of cardboard in the worn out shoes instead of having them half-soled. Edison (talk) 02:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Japanese Criminal Tattoos

Ive searched far and wide and can't seem to find any specifics on the tattooing of criminals in Edo period Japan. I only know that different markings or particularly bands were given for certain crimes committed. Bokukei or bokkei is the term thats used for the punishment by tattoos, but I can't seem to find any information regarding exactly which tattoos were given for which crimes. Ive only ever come across a book that showed an old illustration with various markings, but I couldnt translate any of the wording. Mugen, a protagonist in the Samurai Champloo anime is a good example. He has blue bands around his wrists and ankles, but other than him, I know no examples of reference. I've tried contacting traditional japanese tattoo websites for information, but have never received replies. plz halp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.106.51 (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe following threads from our Yakuza article will help. Irezumi has a bit of info, but no examples. [Criminal punishment in Edo-period Japan] only mentions tattoos for prisoners. This site [11] had following info: The original punitive markings on criminals, usually in the form of rings around the wrists, or lines down the arm, were called Geishin. another source [12] had this, aparently from a different period: First offenses were marked with a line across the forehead. A second crime was marked by adding an arch. A third offense was marked by another line. Together these marks formed the Japanese character for "dog". It appears this was the original "Three strikes, you're out" law. For googling it would help if you got in touch with s.o. who can read Japanese. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Link #13 is a past version of our article tattoo. As for the letter 'dog' in Japanese, the stroke order is 「一」「ナ」「大」「犬」. It has four strokes. Tattoos as criminal punishment started in the middle of Edo period. A man named Hanbei was the first criminal who received the punishment. It was May 11, 1720. Where the tattoos were marked was different from place to place. The dog letter was used in Hiroshima and when the criminal committed the 5th crime, it meant death. Horizontal line/s on forehead was used in Tokushima. X mark/s on forehead in Hizen. And band/s on arm, mostly on the left arm, was used in many places for theft. See this. Oda Mari (talk)10:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

The irezumiwaku link is precisely what I'm talking about! Would a translation of that even be possible? The reference is perfect except that I cant determinine what any of the tattoos mean. thank you for the help.

@oda mari Our Irezumi article says that tatooing criminals began in the Kofun period but doesn't cite any references. Since you have such detailed info maybe you should add that to the article. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

As for the linked image, almost all words are place names. The top line from l to r: 京都/Kyoto, 人足寄場/Ninsokuyoseba/vagrant camp,？代/unreadable, 甲府/Kofu, 江戸（割増？）/Edo (additional tattoo?), 江戸/Edo. The second line: 大阪/Osaka, 伏見/Fushimi, 長崎/Nagasaki, 奈良/Nara, 駿河/Suruga, 堺/Sakai. The bottom line: 長州/Choshu, 筑後/Chikugo, 紀州/Kishu, 非人/hinin, 日光/Nikko, 佐渡/Sado. I wrote the fifth time means death, but some sites say it was the fourth and this one was sentenced death after his second arrest. Oda Mari (talk) 14:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

School teachers

Why is that either 1 or 2 of 100 techer of physics know how to derive why like charges or poles(magnetics) repel and unlike attract but say like repel and unlike attract —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.126.39 (talk) 06:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you have sources for that statistic? Dismas|^(talk) 08:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

To respond to the OP. The answer to "Why do opposite charges attract and like charges repel?" is not that complicated, and that your physics teacher has not explained it satisfactorily is probably because the real answer itself is so simple that it seems like an unsatisfactory answer. The real answer is "Because that's the way it works". Let me expand a bit on that, but its not any more complicated. The reality is, there are two fundemental Electric charges, and these charges either attract or repel one another. If we look at the atom, and look at say a proton and an electron, we can observe that protons will repel other protons, and attract electrons. Likewise electrons repel other electrons, and attract protons. This is an observation, and it is upon observation that all scientific thought is based. Now, the property of that attraction is called "electric charge" and, given that there appears to be two fundemental and complementary ways that charge works (i.e. the charge that attracts electrons and repels protons VERSUS the charge that attracts protons and repels electrons), we could call them anything we want, black and white, Peter and Stewie, A and B, whatever, but + and - has the advantage of also being mathematically useful in the sense that we can quantify this property called "electric charge" and then do real, useful math. By convention (and somewhat randomly) a proton's charge is called "positive" and an electron's charge is called "negative" and then all other item's charge is compared to these two; i.e. if it behaves like a proton does it is +, if it behaves like an electron it is -. Other articles that you may find interesting if you want to explore the nature of electric charge are probably electromagnetism, elementary charge, and quantum mechanics. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I read the OP's question/missive/whatever differently. The way I read it was "Why is it that so few physics teachers know even the most basic of material?" I got a sense of frustration from the OP, not curiosity. Dismas|^(talk) 01:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

It's a basic problem in the educational system. The ideal physics teacher would have a degree in physics and a degree in teaching. But someone with two decent degrees can get a job doing some sort of technological thing for about twice what a teacher earns. Hence quite a few high school physics teachers don't have a degree in the subject and learned what they needed to learn in order to teach the curriculum but not much more. There are exceptions - people who do it for the love of it despite the poor pay - but from what I've seen as a parent, they are not in the majority. Personally - I'd love to be a teacher - but I can't afford it and (rightly or wrongly) I believe that the constraints of having to teach to the curriculum and deal with standardized testing would drive me nuts. My kid is now in college - he went to a 'magnet' school (The School of Science and Engineering in Dallas, Texas) which has been in the top ten rated high schools in the whole of the USA (public or private) and which is renowned for it's strength in teaching science and technology - and STILL the science teaching was (mostly) terrible. It's unlikely that was due to them being able to get good people because what dedicated science teacher wouldn't want to work for one of the best high schools in the country? So the problem must be with the curriculum or the 'teach the test' approach that's being forced down the throats of competent teachers. But that excuse doesn't cover the OP's complaint - which (I'm sure) is due to underqualified teachers - which in turn has got to be due to pay and working practices causing well-qualified people to be turned away. SteveBaker (talk) 13:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I would disagree with that assessment. I have a Bachelor's of Science degree in Chemistry from a top-10 ACS ranked chemistry school (University of Delaware) and a Master's of Education degree, and I am a teacher, and could not imagine doing anything else, even for some more money. Nearly every science teacher I have worked with has had a degree, or equivalent, in the subject area they taught in. In the 6 years I was an active classroom teacher (I am on somewhat of a sabatical right now), every physics teacher I worked alongside had a degree in either Physics or Physics education. The greater problem is that there is a somewhat unrealistic expectation that everyone needs to know everything. Many students are placed in classes which they have no use or aptitude for, and yet we have to teach all of them. If, as a high school chemistry teacher, I didn't get to teach my students how to work with the Schroedinger equation or we never got to work with the Wittig reaction it wasn't because I was a bad teacher; there is a limited number of days to teach the curriculum, and by necessity there is some material we just can't cover in 135 contact hours. So when a Physics teacher doesn't take an hour out of his class to explain all of quantum mechanics to answer one student's question about electromagnetism, its not because he couldn't answer the question. Its because he's got all 135 hours filled with OTHER material that he has to teach first. You want science to be a more effective for these students? Introduce more levels into classes, and get students into the correct level, so that students who would benefit from it can move at a faster pace, and students who don't have the aptitude can move at a slower pace and work on the most important stuff only, so we can be sure they really get it. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

What does she want?

OK, I've got a question. I've been out with this girl 3 times. The first date was dinner. We hit it off pretty good, kept talking long after dinner was finished. At the end of the date, she gave me a hug. She e-mailed me the next day to say thanks. The next date was on my hour long lunch break. At the end of the date, she gave me a hug. Usually, I'm used to a kiss on the first or second date. Thought it was strange, but whatever. Yesterday was our third date. I took her to see the symphony. At the end of the date, I was expecting at least a kiss. Anyway, it was just a hug. I think she's into me but I can't tell if it is as a friend or more. She's going through a divorce which isn't finalized, so maybe she just wants to take things slowly. She has said things about wanting to see me in the future. For example, on the second date, she said she wanted to watch me play softball. On the third date - well, this takes a bit of explaining. I'm a musician who's recorded 3 demo albums, plus a Christmas album which I won't let her listen to because it's pretty bad (it was recording in a week and I used my family as singers) and she said that she wanted to hear it. I said no. And then she said she would hear it eventually, even if it's not until spring. Anyway, the thing that really got me was as she was leaving, she said that the holidays were coming up (which I understand), so "keep in touch". What the fuck does that mean? "Keep in touch"? I have no freaking clue what she wants. 67.184.14.87 (talk) 12:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

EDIT: She has three children. I'm 37, she's 33. (I'm the OP on a different computer.) 216.239.234.196 (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

She wants security and children. --Milkbreath (talk) 12:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

EDIT: She wants to inspire love. --Milkbreath (talk) 16:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I'd interpret that as 'phone me over Christmas and have a chat about whatever people talk about on phones once they've got past the "how you doin'?" and "what you been up to?" stage of the conversation'. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 13:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess it's also possible that the divorce situation means she has to be extra careful about not showing herself up as being the cause of the divorce - or risk losing her kids if her ex- makes nasty accusations about her going out partying all the time. Perhaps she's wondering why you don't kiss her? A peck on the cheek ought to be OK during one of those goodbye hugs. She's got to be under all kinds of stress right now. I think she's taking it slow for all kinds of very obvious reasons. I would try to help her out with that - keep in contact - phone often enough to keep things rolling but not so often as to appear "needy" (the last thing she needs is "needy"!) - invite her on low-pressure dates (lunch is good) - make it a regular thing (so she has it to look forward too when times are tough). And for chrissakes - she's 100% right about the Xmas album. On your very next date - put a copy of that crappy Xmas album inside a $20 portable CD player (don't forget the batteries!), gift-wrap the whole thing with a big bow on the top - give it to her and make her listen to it there and then! Tell her that she was right and that now she owes you the low-down on her worst screwup. If you can't laugh over your screwups with her - it's already over. SteveBaker (talk) 14:29, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Have you asked her what she wants? --Moni3 (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

That's always a good idea. The phrase "So how does that make YOU feel?" is one of the most useful in the English language when making conversation with women. While she tells you, you can go back to wondering how much better she'd look if that top button were to inadvertently come undone. SteveBaker (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I know that was a joke but I should point out actually listening is sometimes more important then asking Nil Einne (talk) 17:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Really?! Oh - crap. SteveBaker (talk) 22:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Knowing ladies well,and have had the same done to me,they are complicated,change their minds in a blink of an eye,keep in touch means just that,then you also might never hear from her again,it also sounds as if she wants time,and would probably like to keep you just as a friend for now,to see you when she wants.If you want more,you might want to seek another lady or just contiunually waste your time and money on dates with a woman that won"t even give you a kiss good night. Fluter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 15:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

After your next date, go to kiss her first. But be prepared for any eventuality from a longer kiss and more, to a slap and a "I never want to see you again". Crude, but at least you'll know where you stand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.155.166 (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for everyone's response. I think at this point I'm inclined to believe that she wants to take things slowly because she's still going through the divorce. 216.239.234.196 (talk) 19:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

My experience: if you're looking for anything beyond a casual physical relationship, a 2 or 3 year post-divorce No Fly Zone will serve you well. --Sean 20:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Non-Profit and Not For Profit

I was under the impression that any organization/person could establish a Non-Profit Company, but only the government could establish a Not-For-Profit company.

However, I have been told that non-profit and not-for-profit are synonymous and have no difference.

What is the difference between Non-Profit and Not-For Profit?

130.221.224.7 (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)December22, 2008

It may differ from country to country. I used to work for a not-for-profit organisation, but their survival (and my bonus) actually depended on them making handsome profits. Not-for-profit in Australia means a company whose primary goal (officially, at least) is something other than profit, but they're not precluded from making profits. Non-profit means any profits they do make, after taking care of admin expenses, planned expansion etc etc, have to be disposed of and can't be retained for investment etc - not sure how this is done. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

According to non-profit organization, the terms are synonymous. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 02:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

In the UK the two terms mean the same thing. The main distinction is between "not for profit" and "profit" in the description of the way business is carried out. A "not for profit" business in the UK is a slight misnomer, as JackofOz pointed out these organisations still have to demonstrate a surplus in their transactions, and they have to demonstrate solvency. What the term actually should be is "non-profit distributing" as they are not able to distribute their profits to third parties such as shareholders. Profits should be retained as reserves after paying staff, taxes and administration costs, and if the organisation is a charity in England and Wales, the Charity Commission has guidelines on the amount of reserves which should be maintained. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Choosing your USAF aircraft

Hello. Is it possible that: when you enlist in the Air Force, that you can choose (or at least request) to fly an airplane of your choice?--DocDeel516 ^discuss 19:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Recruiters are big on allowing people to request things, and will even promise things orally, but, if you read what you actually sign, they can do whatever they want with you, and probably will. StuRat (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

It should also be VERY clearly stated that only a very tiny percentage of people who join the USAF will ever get to fly a plane. To put some numbers on this (data taken from our USAF article: The USAF has 328,000 personnel on active duty (plus a bunch of reserves and such like) - and it has 5,800 aircraft - of which 1,700 are actually air national guard, reserve units, etc. So - bottom line is that there are a third of a million guys out there who all joined the USAF with the dream of flying a plane (why else?) and about 4,000 planes for them to fly. Of those - many are big boring transport planes - and of the rest, aircraft are being replaced with pilotless drones and transports flown by civilians as fast as they can make the transition. So your odds of being able to fly a plane AT ALL is only about one in 75 - and the odds are getting worse - not better. Getting to fly the precise kind of plane (fighter, helicopter, ground attack, transport) has got to be lower than that - and your chances of getting to fly a particular kind of plane is very low indeed. Please don't take the word of a recruiter. If they won't give it to you in writing - assume it's not true. SteveBaker (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

How about going through flight school first, THAN joining up? Even better, go to college (if you haven’t already) and flight school first. As a fully qualified pilot already you would have a much greater chance of flying than all the thousands of kids than join right out of high school and end up polishing bird poop off the windscreens. Contrary to popular belief, the US armed forces are very interested in hiring well educated slightly older candidates, and because such recruits are in short supply they often end up in higher ranking, better paid positions. --S.dedalus (talk) 23:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but I believe all pilots in the USAF, perhaps with the exception of some helicopter pilot, must be officers and hence, hold at least a bachelor's degree. Acceptable (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

SteveBaker's calculations depend on each plane only having one pilot so no co-pilots or rotating crews (I don't know if that is completely true). But also I would expect pilots to stay in the service longer than some more "lowly" occupations so that the number of grounded serviceman to pilots to be much higher. Any government statistics out there? Rmhermen (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Some aircraft types would rotate pilots - and transports planes often have two pilots - but mostly not. If you're a fighter pilot they even paint your name on the plane. SteveBaker (talk) 02:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Attaining US Residency as a student

I am going to the USA for university and am currently a Canadian citizen. First, do I need some sort of student Visa? Can I qualify for US permanent residency as a student? If so, how many years do i have to study in the US for? Hustle (talk) 22:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I am also a Canadian and went to a US school. You need an I-20, which as I understand it is not an actual visa but for all practical purposes the equivalent of one. I believe I got all the information I needed from the school, or else they directed me to the American consulate. It wasn't a particularly big deal, especially compared to the visas required for some of my classmates (from India, Iran etc). The I-20 requires the school registrar to confirm you're enrolled and that you can support your studies financially, necessary in part because the I-20 does not entitle you to work off campus. You have to get the I-20 re-signed each year by the registrar people, if you try to go through and it has expired they can hold you up at the airport while they check to see if you're really enrolled (I made this mistake at the beginning of my second year there, luckily I got to the airport early. Another lesson learned: keep your SEVIS receipt). I believe you have a 3 or 6 month grace period after your I-20 expires before you are officially persona non-grata and quite deportable. I also think it's likely that studying in the states makes it easier to attain permanent residency, but I didn't apply for that so I wouldn't know fo rsure. I suspect having an employer lined up after your graduation is the critical part of that process. TastyCakes (talk) 22:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Some Variable terrestrial measurements

Could someone provide me with some variable terrestrial measurements, ex: atmospheric pressure, distance from Sun, temperature, wind speed, humidity, ceiling, etc... The stranger the better. Thanks! Acceptable (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Albedo, surface magnetic field strength, Environmental radioactivity, Biomass distribution, habitat quality, rheological behavior, crust thickness organic content of soil just for starters. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 01:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Magnetic declination is a favorite of mine: the variation of the compass needle from true north. It varies by location as well as over time at the same location. Old surveys were done by magnetic compass, and ewhen the declination varies several degrees in several decades, a new magnetic compass survey may put your house on the neighbour's farm. Edison (talk) 02:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Global warming of course. -hydnjo talk 04:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Duration of a day (compare UT1 and UTC). Daylight hours (by season). -- SGBailey (talk) 09:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Even the strength of Earth's gravity changes depending on where you are on the planet. Raven4x4x (talk) 13:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah - forget diets - just weigh yourself at the top or Mount Everest and you'll be 0.3% lighter! SteveBaker (talk) 16:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but taking all your clothes off first to get a true reading could be painful. StuRat (talk)

Also see Earth for some astronomical data on our planet. StuRat (talk) 16:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

December 23

snorkel monster

Once I was listining to the radio, and they said someting about a one footed snorkel monster. What's all this about?Warriorscourge (talk) 04:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Without some context such as what radio program you were listening to or where the station is or something like that, all we could do is give a rough guess. This is the first Ghit for "one footed snorkel monster". Dismas|^(talk) 04:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a relative of the Purple People Eater. Edison (talk) 04:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

It could be a "one-foot" (length) "snorkel" (long tube) "monster"... kinda like "Willy the One-Eyed Wonder Worm"... aka, its a slang term for a penis... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:48, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, well, the radio thing was KXNT, and they said it was being attacked by a UFO. I now, sounds pretty made up.-Warriorscourge (talk) 00:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Town layouts

Why are US towns & cities laid out in blocks? A simplistic answer of "it makes things easy/regular" is all very well, but what about nature / slopes / rivers? Who says regular is good anyway? No British town has regular blocks and even Milton Keynes where the roads are gridded have bending windy (as in wind a clock not blowing air) roads within the gridsquares. There is an obvious difference in viewpoint between the two countries. I was wondering what the rationale for the difference might be. -- SGBailey (talk) 09:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

A look at Grid plan suggest that this design/city-planning idea has existed for a very long time. I suspect that sometimes nature dictates how a city can be designed, but sometimes the city can be 'planned' in a simple grid format quite easily. There is a section on 'benefits' Grid_plan#Benefits_and_criticisms. It would probably be worthwhile also reading Street hierarchy. I suspect a large reason is because the expansion of British cities wasn't 'planned' or at least not designed in the same way as in the US - whose cities are (mostly) much younger than in the UK. Additionally there'll be 'cultural' economics at play. In the UK a grid-network might not be associated with wealth/high-value and so the money that can be made selling houses on a grid-network estate is perhaps less than the meandering/bendy setup we are used to here in Britain. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

While not all U.S. towns and cities laid out in rectangular blocks, two factors at work are:

• The Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which anticipated creating several states in the region near the Great Lakes, and
• The Land Ordinance of 1785, which provided a very rectangular system for surveying the land in those states.

My tongue-in-cheek explanation is that George Washington, a former surveyor who grew up in Virginia where it's apparently illegal for roads to meet at right angles, had a hand in this. You can see the effects clearly across the Midwest. Given the regular pattern for larger units like townships (six miles square)and sections (one mile square), it was easy to organize settlements along existing property boundaries. For example, Eight Mile Road, the northern boundary of Detroit, is also known as Base Line Road because it serves as a reference point for land surveys throughout Michigan's lower peninsula. But even Eight Mile varies from its "correct" path because of a stream.

I'd add that many suburbs developed in the past 30 years or so feature curving streets, cul-de-sacs, and other non-grid arrangements. As a developer in the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington DC pointed out, in residential neighborhoods strict grids don't offer all that pleasing a view to the eye; curving streets offer greater interest and help modify the visual impact of roadways. --- OtherDave (talk) 12:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

In Victorian times in the UK, 'grid iron' layouts were popular - hence the rows of 'Coronation Street' style Victorian terraced housing in many towns and cities. Glasgow city centre is also built on a grid plan. 62.25.96.244 (talk) 12:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

The hey-day of the "grid-plan" in the U.S. was probably 1750-1900. Cities which came into their own in during that time period (Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia) display quite regular grid patterns. Cities which are older (notably Boston) than that have some rather, um, "un-gridy" streets, as anyone who has tried to navigate Boston can attest. However, parts of Boston that WERE built in that time period (like Back Bay), DO show a grid layout. Grids work best for horse-and-buggy economy; with the advent of the car in the 20th cenrutry, Grids fell out of favor for the street hierarchy system and for zoning, which keeps residential, commercial, and industrial parts of a city seperate. This is all friendlier to cars by better controlling traffic flow onto a smaller number of "major" roads, and keeping high-speed traffic out of residential areas. Cities which saw their development in the 20th century, like Atlanta, Houston, and my current city, Raleigh, North Carolina ascribe to the urban sprawl method of development, and not the old "grid plan". --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Except that New York City is six years older than Boston... Rmhermen (talk) 14:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Absolute age of the city means little. The New Amsterdam of the Dutch has little remnant at all in the modern city of New York. New Amsterdam of the Dutch time period was laid out according to the Castello Plan, and aside from about half a dozen streets south of Wall Street (which at the time was the northern limit of New Amsterdam). So you could say that, for a little tiny plot of Manhattan, around the battery, there is no grid plan. However, the vast majority of the city was laid out much later, and most of the expansion of New York happened much later. Most of modern New York was laid out in a series of plans known as the Commissioners' plans. Everything north of 14th street was plotted out at that time, and most of the streets south of 14th street had been laid out in . Also see File:Grid 1811.jpg for a map of the New York city plan as it existed in the 1807 Commissioners' plan, an early draft of the final version that was passed in 1811, and which (except for Central Park) is still in place today. This article: History of New York City transportation is a helpful read as well.

The city of Boston never had a unified grid street plan, and it was mostly laid out in the 1630s and 1640s. According to our article on Boston transportation, most of the streets were laid out to follow the shorelines of the Shawmut Peninsula upon which Boston was first built. The local geography which was mostly hills, swamps, and brackish estuaries, which left little room for a real grid pattern. The "gridded" parts of Boston date to around the same time as the "gridded" parts of Manhattan; its just that by that time, there was far greater part of the Boston area settled and covered with streets already than there was in Manhattan. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I would think the most obvious factor is that British city centers date to the Middle Ages, before they had the kind of surveying equipment and urban planning they had in the 19th century. I read once that New York considered straying from the rectangular grid system in the 19th century but stuck with it because it was easier to sell real estate in squares rather than oblong shapes. Note that nowadays, straight lines are very rare in North American residential developments, since curvy streets apparently give people the sense of exclusivity and higher property values. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep - according to Bernard Cornwell (an author of fiction, but an impeccably-researched one and in this instance writing a factual article) the layout and even many of the property boundaries in Winchester date from King Alfred's time - well over a thousand years ago. PeteVerdon (talk) 01:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but why is it felt to be a good idea? Grid plan suggests it reduces boundary arguuments and minimises road lengths. Modern British developments appear to be deliberatly curvy and non-griddy. -- SGBailey (talk) 00:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The Manhattan grid has three advantages.

1. As each block is the same size, the buying, selling, and trading of real estate was greatly simplified in the era of the city's expansion northward.
2. As the plan was uncomplicated and straightforward, one could plan for future construction years before the work actually began. You could build with confidence that the rest of the city would expand to meet you. For example, the Dakota apartment building on Central Park West was built in lonely splendor a mile from where most construction was occuring, and thus, at less expense. In a few years, the plots around it filled in.
3. Thw city was, and is, host to many immigrants for whom English is not their native language. By laying out the streets in a regular grid, and numbering them, the city became instantly accessible to many who would, otherwise, have been completely lost.

B00P (talk) 04:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Modern British developments are definitely, as you say, non-gridded in almost all cases. A deviant of the road hierarchy system is in common use - Motorways for intercity traffic, dual carriageway A roads linking the former to the city centre (usually a ring road), single carriageway A roads radiating through the various districts, unclassified through roads serving individual estates and then cul de sacs off those roads that contain houses or industrial units. If you're building a town/city from scrach then a grid plan may be a good idea (ie Milton Keynes) but in existing urban areas which are not gridded then any developments have to fit in with whatever is around them.

Unlike US cities, UK towns/cities and even villages tend to have one of several different designs -

- Radial - All the main roads go out from a central point at whatever angle heads towards the road's destination (a lot of that is thanks to the Romans)

- Linear - The settlement has developed alongside a river, canal, railway or road and so tends to be longer than it is wide. 62.249.220.179 (talk) 00:23, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there are lots of American cities, expecially in mountain areas, which follow that linear pattern. C.f. Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania and Charleston, West Virginia; where the cities are indeed quite long and narrow, as you note, following a river course. And the radial pattern you note, well that's essentially how urban sprawl works, see Atlanta, Georgia. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I live in Boston (and love its non-griddiness), but as Jayron suggests, Boston is not the only U.S. city that is free of the oppressive order and monotonous sightlines of the grid. Citywide grids are really the exception rather than the rule east of the Mississippi and south of the Great Lakes drainage (except for Florida). Even in New York City, it is really only Midtown and Upper Manhattan that have a unified grid. Other parts of the city, such as most of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx, have a more organic street pattern. Maybe it is just that the parts of the United States most likely to be visited by foreign tourists tend to have citywide grids. Marco polo (talk) 01:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Brooklyn is more griddy than not, though there are several grids, not one throughout. (I used to live in Yonkers. I don't think there was a straight street in the entire city.) --Nricardo (talk) 01:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Use of the Theodolite for surveying probably facilitated grid designs. Property lines defined by natural elements like rivers, hills etc. tend to be rather unreliable. While today's advanced surveying methods make same size lots with curvy property lines possible, in former days straight lines on a map, transferred to the actual plot, would have been easiest to get each buyer the exact acerage they paid for. The disputed border between Georgia and Tennessee shows that such transfer was not always successful. (Rumor has it that the surveyors didn't fancy meeting the local native American population and surveyed a bit farther south.) As for Atlanta: The roads were designed along former cow-paths; and the cows were drunk! ;-) 76.97.245.5 (talk) 04:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think that the reason for grid streets and parcels in the US circa 18-19th century had less to do with it being easier to sell the parcels and more to do with keeping surveying costs low. In those days there were vast amounts of land in America in the hands of people wishing to subdivide and sell, and not nearly enough skilled surveyers to fill the demand. Thus surveying work was costly. Grids are easier and quicker for even novice surveyors to plat out. There's more to the history of US street grids than just that, but the cost and time savings were likely a major factor. Pfly (talk) 10:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Why is cracking the knuckles/neck associated with toughness?

I do this all the time and I'm not particularly tough or manly! So what's the reason? 99.245.92.47 (talk) 13:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Because tough muscular people find it a convenient way of drawing attention to their physique? By the way I have a colleague who is super skinny and he cracks his neck all the time. ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 14:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Because it says: "I'm so tough that I don't expect to live long enough for the tendon damage I'm causing to myself to become a problem." SteveBaker (talk) 16:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I think the biggest reason of all is that cracking nuckles is intimately tied in to the image of a man getting in to a fight. You know, imagine a big, tough guy, getting ready to fight someone. He jumps around and hits some air to warm up his muscles, he cracks his knuckles and puts up his dukes. That sequence has been in like a gazillion movies, thus forever associating that action with masculinity. Belisarius (talk) 23:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Or preparing to play concert piano? Julia Rossi (talk) 03:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Watch it, bub. I find playing concert piano to be very manly. Perhaps that's because I do play the piano... Or the fact that the name for a piano player is pianist... flaminglawyer^c 04:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

No-one doubts the masculinity involved in fingering away at a 88-key bench, but why a caricature that pianists first crack their knuckles? ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 05:09, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it's because someone who doesn't crack their knuckles or neck whould assume that it's painful, and therefore assume that anyone voluntarily inflicting pain upon themselves is a hardass.--AtTheAbyss (talk) 05:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

My man takes too long to orgasm.

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page.

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis or prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page. --~~~~

You should encourage your partner to speak to his physician or other expert about any concerns he might have; you might also ask if you can come along to participate in at least part of the discussion. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:11, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I was did not mean to ask for doctor's advice, just some ideas and links to things to read. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.240.66 (talk) 17:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

You should perhaps, then, start with Human sexuality and follow some links from there. The only advice I can give is rather general, and to note that "different" is not always "wrong", and just because one person has a different method of participating in sexual activity does not always mean that such methods are "wrong". However, as noted, if you have a concern, please talk to your partner, and then consider contacting a professional who specializes in these issues. If there is one "wrong" thing, it is going to the internet to seek advice from random strangers!!! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess that "This question has been removed." doesn't apply to answers ;) -hydnjo talk 02:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Kippah keptah on the headah

How the heck do Jews keep them from flying off their noggins? Clarityfiend (talk) 21:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

• They're held on with the horns. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:48, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

• They must be thoroughly attached to them. StuRat (talk) 01:34, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The heads up in Comb says they're held on with combs and google says combs or clips. Julia Rossi (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

But what if you're bald? BrainyBabe (talk) 14:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Spirit gum works. Staples, too. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

You know what's really sad, is that I bet the standard belief in the Middle Ages was that the kippah/yarmukle existed to cover up those devil's horns. And there are bound to be some who believe it today. We mock ignorance at our peril. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

That's a good question actually...there were laws decreeing that Jews must dress differently from Christians but I don't remember ever reading about yarmulkes. They are often depicted wearing a judenhut though, maybe that is the same idea. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

• Ahem* The short answer is: a bobby pin, or two bobby pins.

The longer answer is: Conservative Jews don't wear them full-time (usually) and hence don't have to worry about them flying off during a basketball game. Synagogue, and other religious rituals which require a kippah aren't usually particularly hectic or head-shaking.

To be perfectly frank, go to a religious jewish wedding, watch the men dance for about 10 minutes, and you'll see kippot soaring in all directions.151.203.23.82 (talk) 00:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Printing custom postage stamps

Is there a company that will print custom-designed, gummed postage stamps? I don't want internet generated US postage, I don't even want "real postage", I just want to design my own postage stamps and have them printed. Whenever I do online searches I get rubber stamps, real postage to print and use, etc, That's not what I want. I know that the USPS prints it's own postage and doubt they would print my custom stamps. Any ideas? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.6.82 (talk) 21:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

When I was in Australia I found a company that made up some proper postage stamps that had a photo of me on them. It was a gimmick for tourists, like 'send a postcard home with your own holiday snap on it'. But I'm afraid that's all the info I can give.91.111.99.97 (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm betting that now that you can get actual postgae with a picture of your stupid cat on it, you're flirting with a charge of counterfeiting to make something that looks like a stamp. I googled my ass off just now and got no farther than you did. --Milkbreath (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

These[13] people claim to. Oh, I see, you want ones that aren't actually for posting letters, just for putting them on hand-delivered envelopes, etc. Steewi (talk) 00:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

[14]This is what 91.111 was talking about. You get the normal stamp, but on an adjoining stamp (with a perforation between them) you get your custom stamp (usually a photo of a person, but it doesn't seem to be restricted to that). Steewi (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't you do it yourself with a color printer and some special paper with either lickable glue or pull off tape on one side ? I bet hobby stores sell this. Cutting them into stamp sized portions would require a paper cutter or just some scissors, unless you want fancy edges. You'd need a special device to cut those. StuRat (talk) 01:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I have a guillotine attachment that'll put fake perforation tearing down the edge of a sheet of paper. [15] - that would let you print the stamps out yourself. There is still the matter of adhesive. SteveBaker (talk) 02:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

As for adhesive, see this. Oda Mari (talk) 15:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Scandalous politicians

I was reading Todd Alcott's analysis of The Dark Knight and he compares what would happen to the people of Gotham's morale of finding out Harvey Dent is Two-Face to people's reactions to a "gay-bashing senator elicit[ing] sex in airport mens' rooms, or your law-and-order governor gets caught soliciting prostitutes". Who are these politicians? Alientraveller (talk) 22:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Larry Craig and Eliot Spitzer Belisarius (talk) 22:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

"Belisarius" isn't part of "Eliot Spitzer," just in case there's any confusion... · AndonicO ^Engage. 04:38, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

December 24

Moxie's

Moxie's has 3 "front" positions: Server, Expeditor and which other one?96.53.149.117 (talk) 01:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Money collector? -hydnjo talk 02:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Conan's last show

According to nbc.com, you're allowed a maximum of two tickets per request. Do you have to ask for those two tickets in your email or is it a default amount when they select your request? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 06:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Why take the chance ? I'd ask explicitly. StuRat (talk) 08:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

julius caesar

bring out the differences between portia and caliphurnia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.50.206 (talk) 15:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Portia ? Caliphurnia ? The similarity is that neither did their homework. The difference is that neither ever lived in Caliphornia.

Portia has about 20 lines, Calpurnia maybe twice as many. This [16] and this [17] site gives you nothing but their lines / clues.--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 16:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Although when you do do your homework about Julius, you should divide it into sections. You're sure to get a C. --- OtherDave (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

You might also get a better grade if you spelled the names of the characters correctly. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 20:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Theoretical Physicist

Hello. Since I want to become a Theoretical Physics doctorate, I better ask this question now: Where might a theoretical physicist be able to get a job, besides the universities? Merry Christmas to everyone at Wikipedia!--DocDeel516 ^discuss 20:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

At a science magazine (Throw in a couple of writing or journalism classes.) United States Department of Defense if you are in the US. Any government agency dealing with statistics and prognosis. (Quantum theory is being applied to economics sometimes.[18]) Theoretical physics concerns many areas of physics many of those have applications "in the real world" so it would depend on your specific background what companies or agencies would have use for your knowledge. If all else fails you can always become a contractor, write a book or become a motivational speaker. A lot depends on your personality, ability to network and how well you can sell yourself. o<:-)76.97.245.5 (talk) 23:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Mostly what a degree proves is that you are a smart person who can learn - and a post-graduate degree shows that you can think independently and produce original work. This opens the doors to many jobs that are totally unrelated to Physics. I heard a few years ago that stock trading companies were seeking physicists and software engineers because they were better at the kinds of thinking needed than people with more traditional degrees in economics or business. But if your heart is set on actually working as a theoretical physicist as well as studying for the qualification - then you're almost certainly going to wind up in academia. Almost everyone else wants some kind of result that either makes money or kills people...and that's more Applied Physics than Theoretical Physics. SteveBaker (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

There are likely to be jobs in the energy industry, broadly defined, including solar and wind power and "smart" electric grids. Edison (talk) 05:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

It used to be the case that a sure-fire job for theoretical physics could be found on Wall Street (they looovve number crunchers with unusual backgrounds) though I doubt that is the case at the moment. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 21:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Defensive Driving

Hello. I often see papers that urge you to "Drive defensively". What does this mean? (I am asking because I don't have a driver's license!)--DocDeel516 ^discuss 20:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

As in most cases, we have an article. It's not a great article, but the gist is "anticipating dangerous situations, despite adverse conditions or the mistakes of others." --LarryMac | Talk 20:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I would add to that definition that it implies that one must not only be defensive about it, but also remember to actually do some driving, instead of going so slowly you become a hazard yourself.

It also implies that, to be prepared, you should be focused on the situation; this is why my state, plus others, have passed laws regulating what passengers teens are allowed to have in their cars, to avoid the problem of a bunch of teens having so much fun that the driver is distracted by his or her friends.209.244.30.221 (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

It would also usually be understood to include driving in a way that doesn't scare the bejeezus out of other drivers. Just because you know you can fit into that gap between the truck and the SUV doesn't mean that everyone else does and has the same trust in your driving abilities. Causing other parties to have to break hard because they anticipate running into you or speed up to prevent you from breathing up their exhaust pipe is usually considered opposite to defensive driving. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

At heart it means assuming that at any instant, any other driver may do something completely wrong. So instead of assuming that (for example) someone will definitely turn left because they have their left turn signal on - you have to consider the consequences should they not do so - and make sure that you have time to stop - or a space to safely move into. As the name implies, it's a matter of being defensive. In the UK (at least) you can actually take 'Defensive Driving' courses - which (assuming you pass) will get you a reduction in the cost of car insurance (I think I got 15% off...but that was a while ago). SteveBaker (talk) 01:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

And then there are the people who take defensive driving to mean "defending their patch of the road". And they will defend that patch of road fiercely... ;) --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

You can find hundreds of sites related to defensive driving, which makes me suspect that in the U.S., some states now require a course that calls itself by that name. What SteveBaker said above is true (I remember my driver's ed teacher saying, "You never have the right of way; you can only yield the right of way," an excellent philosophy for not getting broadsided. There are also some advanced-defensive-driving schools that have things like skidpads (to let you safely practice panicky stops on a wet road). As for other drivers, it's good to keep in mind that 50% of them are below average. --- OtherDave (talk) 02:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

As everyone knows "the best defense is a good offense". With that in mind, I practice offensive driving and run everyone else off the road (before they get a chance to cause me to get in an accident). :-) StuRat (talk) 04:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Per Stu's suggestion, see the W.C. Fields film "If I Had A Million" starting at 1:30 in the clip. He (edited to clarify: Fields' character Rollo, not our StuRat) hires cars and drivers to follow him and run off the road anyone whose driving annoys him. Quote: "Perhaps you'll move over next time, you road hog!" Edison (talk) 05:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

December 25

indians born in the US

can anyone tell me where i can get a list of famous indians who were born in the US? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.128.178 (talk) 07:04, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

See List of Indian Americans

Please search before asking next time. Rachmaninov Khan (talk) 09:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

You might make clear whether you mean Americans whose families came from India (as I think you do), or Native Americans, who often refer to themselves as Indians. --- OtherDave (talk) 15:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Random letters

I randomly typed letters into the google search box (they turned out to be skdjfkds) and it came up with search results[19] instead of the expected reject notice. Do these letters actually mean something? Julia Rossi (talk) 10:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

If you look at result ~3, it apears to be a sort of lore ipsum. Or 1000 monkeys at 1000 typewriters? BrainyBabe (talk) 11:31, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

and what are the chances? One monkey on a keyboard, hehe. Julia Rossi (talk) 11:34, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

This is ye olde magick word (orally transmitted from the Dreamtime to the tribal elders) which is known to turn unsuspecting humans into supersonic wombats. Due to the ensuing atmospheric friction, of course, the wombats turn into magnificent balls of celestial fire.

I dimly remember reading about a case where three wise men from the Orient mistook the illuminating critter for a comet and - oh well, I seem to have forgotten the rest. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 12:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the location of those letters on the keyboard, it's probably not as random as you think. Those are closely-clustered letters around the areas your hands traditionally rest on a keyboard, and probably more likely than most to be randomly mashed when typing 'random letters'. There are a lot of people typing gibberish on the internet. ~ mazca ^t|c 13:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, these "asdfjkl;" combinations are not random. If you google a more systematic "random" combination of the keys on which your fingers rest, you get even more hits: 115,000 for asdfjkl (left to right), 13,200 for alskdjf (alternating hands, inward bound). Even when including your pinkies and expanding these patterns to eight letters (and using the German keyboard layout, because it has an "ö" instead of a semicolon, which I don't know how to google), you still get 7,250 hits for asdfjklö and 279 for aösldkfj.

I used to occasionally play trivia quizzes online (in an IRC format not connected to WP), and one of the participants always let off her steam when someone else got the answer first by typing something like "asjdfksl" or "jsdkfjsffjl" or even "jasdlfkjalskdjaslkdfja;lskjalsj;dfalsd;flaljskdlkjf" (these are my random attempts), it came to be one of her pet-signatures, and we even greeted her with "asjdfkj!" when she entered the quiz room.

It would be interesting to see a statistical evaluation of a "type some random letters as fast as you can" test, but I found nothing. ---Sluzzelin talk 14:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well I still found nothing worth linking here, but I did learn that the "asdfjkl;" keys lie on the home row and are called home keys, and that asdf is "often used as a metasyntactic variable". ---Sluzzelin talk 14:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

There are well over a billion web sites and over 30 billion individual web pages on the Internet - and Google also indexes things like usenet postings, forum systems, wiki's and such - so the total is likely to be quite a bit higher than that. Even for a short, completely random sequence, the odds are pretty good of finding it somewhere. As others have said - the less random your sequence, the higher the odds of it happening to be out there...and something you just type quickly and without special thought is MUCH more likely than a truly random sequence. So I don't think you should read anything special into that. SteveBaker (talk) 15:06, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Toilet seat

Why is it that women complain about men not putting down the toilet seat? Is it that it is just good manners to put it down yourself so that the next person doesn't have to, is it because the woman might not look before sitting down, or is it something else that I am missing? Thanks Crack in the road (talk) 15:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Not surprisingly, there is some information under toilet seat including a link to an economic efficiency study.

(In my world you don't need to put down the seat, because it's already down. You shouldn't be using a private toilet from the standing position. If you believe you're a straight-shooter, I recommend considering how the height of drop influences the ballistics of a splash and you can try the standing position while wearing shorts and registering wether your bare legs feel anything prickly during the process. Now think about the floor and walls ...) ---Sluzzelin talk 15:43, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I have never really understood the complaint. The idea seems to be that it's somehow wrong for someone to have to put the toilet seat down, but a non-issue that someone else has to lift it up. And in any case, to hear people tell it, it's as if this was a Herculean effort that takes a great toll on the poor individual forced to change the position of the toilet seat. (I did check out the the article, and the idea that having the seat down somehow makes the bathroom more aesthetically pleasing, for example, strikes me as pretty ludicrous. Hygienic reasons also strike me as irrelevant -- I mean, if people were constantly getting sick because of this, that would be different, but I don't believe this to be the case, at all. You should be cleaning the toilet and the area around it on a regular basis anyway. I mean, if you miss, you clean up after yourself, right? And if you don't, you're a dick, but that's got nothing to do with the position of the toilet seat.)

I'd say the whole thing has a lot more to do with psychology -- the need to establish control over your environment, things like that -- than anything else. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 16:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

To bring a (possibly biased) woman's perspective to the issue: Women need the seat down 100% of the time. Men, as far as I know, need it up when urinating and down when defecating. Therefore, it spends more time down than up and that's what its default position should be. That, and most women tend to be more squeamish about touching bacteria-riddled objects with their hands than most men, and would prefer not to be the ones moving it back to what should be its default position anyway. (Of course, this "logic" ignores the fact that things like telephones and doorknobs are likely to be just as germy as toilet seats... On that note, please bear in mind that not all of the above is necessarily my personal opinion, just some general observations.) Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 00:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't care if it's up or down; I wouldn't touch it either way. SN0WKITT3N 00:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

But you DO touch it! With your A*** (unless you are percher)--GreenSpigot (talk) 02:32, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

One possible explanation might be that in my experience women are generally more houseproud than men and a lowered toilet seat could look neater when your mother comes to visit :-) However, when I find the seat down I have no problem raising the seat, so why can't women simply lower the seat without making such an issue about it? Astronaut (talk) 01:19, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

My solution would be (in a house with 1 woman, 1 man): If you are a man, leave it down. If you are a woman, leave it up. ie leave it as you would expect to find it if you were the other person. --GreenSpigot (talk) 02:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Hosting an Annual Party

Hi, can anyone help me with few tips , as i have been chosen randomly to host as an announcer, for the annual official party to be held shortly this month ,it is mailly for rewarding the employees for the year. i am nervous and do not want to let go it as well as i have never done this before, can anyone help me ovwercome this nervousness and suggest few tips,your answers will be treasured. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.36.6 (talk) 16:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

1. Write out what you intend to say (almost word-for-word) and then
2. recite your remarks in front of a friend or a family member several times and then
3. when it's showtime, pretend that you're in "practice" mode and then,
4. break a leg! hydnjo talk 16:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Lucid Dreams

I've been talking with my friends on the internets (well, not friends as such, more acquaintances) about lucid dreams. Many of us have extreme desires for a certain celebrity and it was suggested by someone about three weeks ago that we try lucid dreaming for this. I've looked at a few online guides, done the reality check and dream recall stuff but I still haven't had one. I know lucid dreaming isn't something you can do overnight, but what advice is there for this? Any good links or books to read? SN0WKITT3N 22:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh crap I just realized what an awful unintentional pun there is in that :/ SN0WKITT3N 23:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Overnight Pun, what pun? hydnjo talk 00:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

December 26

A Captain the Head of Guinea?

How did a Captain, a mere junior military officer, become the interim head of state of Guinea during the 2008 Guinean coup d'état? Why not a General? Acceptable (talk) 00:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

It's possible he's just a figurehead - the public face of the coup while the generals remain as the "power behind the throne". Exxolon (talk) 00:44, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Subtitles

Why do subtitles sometimes show words that are already on the screen? For example, when the words "Joanne Buck: Director" are on the screen, why are they also in subtitles? 60.230.124.64 (talk) 02:47, 26 December 2008 (UTC)