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

April 24

Electronic banking

Can anyone explain why electronic payments/deposits/etc aren't faster? If I pay for something with my debit card, it takes at least a day for the money to be withdrawn from my account. Longer on weekends. If I pay a bill through my bank's e-pay, it again takes days to show as an actual withdrawal. For instance, I confirmed a payment on Friday and, although it shows on the bill pay page as being done on the 22nd, the money is still not out of my account and won't be until Monday. Why aren't these things more instant? Dismas|^(talk) 12:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

It's all a question of minimising costs. The technology is available to transfer funds electronically in much shorter timescales. Large inter-bank transactions are settled intra-day, and similar facilities are availale to retail customers if required - Western Union's "Money in Minutes" service is an example. However, processing and reconciling each payment message still has operational costs even though they are electronic. Therefore retail payments that are not time-critical are usually settled overnight because this allows lots of small transactions to be bulked up into a smaller number of inter-bank payments, thus reducing clearing costs. So the debit to your account does not appear until the beginning of the next business day - and, on a Friday, the next business day is the following Monday. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:49, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Originally, things had to be physically sent between banks, which caused delays. Banks are only just starting to make use of the fact that things can be done much faster now that it is all electronic. The UK has recently started using the Faster Payments Service, which allows transfers between banks in a matter of minutes rather than the 3 working days it used to take. --Tango (talk) 13:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I suppose it depends on the bank. My transactions through debit show up instantly. Mingmingla (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Banks make money holding your money. When your money is "in transit" for three days, that's three days' worth of overnight interest that goes into a bank's pocket. While your transfer amounts to a pittance, in aggregate we get billions annually. There are countries where transfers happen quickly, while the United States in particular has some notoriety in resisting modernization. 88.112.59.31 (talk) 16:50, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

While there is some truth in that, it isn't the full three days worth of interest they get. They only get the interest earned between the money leaving one account and arriving in the other. There is a delay before the money leaves the first account, and the sending still earnings interest during that time. Also, I think start earning interest on money received before it has been "cleared". (It's also worth pointing out that current accounts don't generally pay much interest.) --Tango (talk) 17:56, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I know that banks and systems vary, but when I make electronic payments in the UK, the money disappears from my account within seconds and usually appears in the recipients' accounts within two hours. Are American banks slower on average? Dbfirs 19:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I work "near" (meaning, not quite "in") the industry, and can offer a couple of suggestions -- which may or may not apply to your specific case. This is admittedly US-centric.

• Most interbank transfers actually run overnight, and only on business days. Daytime transfers cost extra, and are reserved for really urgent transactions.
• In the specific case you mention, last Friday was a bank holiday in some areas. Transactions submitted that day will probably not clear until Monday. If Easter Monday is also a holiday where you are, then Tuesday.

Yes, it is made to look as if the money "disappears" from your account instantly, but that's largely a trick -- it's the easiest way to "lock" the money, prevent it from being spent twice, without inventing another type of transaction. I'm sure it still doesn't move until overnight.

DaHorsesMouth (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It also depends on what you are doing... Sending an electronic payment should leave instantly, depending on your bank's security checks (the larger/more unusual your payment the more likely security checks are needed, and therefore the longer it will take to leave... A plain simple Bill Payment usually leaves instantly, as they tend to be smaller, to easily verifiable account details (can only be sent to same country), whereas an international payment can be of an unlimited amount, to account details which may look nothing like that country's account details, and thus requires further checks before being released... Debit Card transactions on the other hand take as long to debit as it takes the retailer to submit their banking to their bank, which is normally done at the end of their working day, and processed by their bank the following day. Hypothetically if the retailer never processed their card payments, the card payment could never be taken from your account - but that never happens! Hope that helps... gazhiley.co.uk 11:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ransom and other evil-doings...

Let me hijack this question with a related tangent. In the movies / TV / etc., it is often the case that the evil-doer demands someone transfer $X million dollars into an untraceable overseas account or something terrible will happen. A common example is kidnappers making ransom demands, but other examples also occur. Often we are shown the transfer being made and the evil-doer checking their account to see that that funds are received. Presumably the bad guy wouldn't want to relinquish his evil plans until he can be absolutely sure the money is in his account. However, as the original poster suggests, most transactions seem to take at least one (if not several) days to complete. So, if I were walk into my bank and tell them I wanted to transfer all of my money to an overseas account as soon as possible, how long would the transaction really take? Could they get it done immediately for an additional fee? Or is such a transaction always going to take at least a day to show up in the recipient's account? Dragons flight (talk) 12:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I suspect in most countries the answer is yes (I think someone already mentioned it is in the US). In fact I suspect in many cases it may not even be possible to transfer such large sums of money the slow way. Definitely in Malaysia I know there was a limit on GIRO transactions which I can't remember what (possibly RM250000) but was well under 1 million ringgit. RENTAS is used instead for large transfers which is a form of Real Time Gross Settlement‎ (the article has a list of RTGS for different countries). Of course most kidnappers in movies use Swiss or Carribean bank accounts anyway I think but I think it's likely international transfers can also have some sort of real-time or otherwise fast transfers. Nil Einne (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Our wire transfer article may be helpful to you. Essentially, some wire transfers provide immediate availability of funds, while others do not.

In real life, I don't think that the scenario you describe would work. The idea is to send the money through a dizzying and untraceable sequence of transfers, so that authorities can neither recover the money nor use it to trace and apprehend the recipient. This can work, if there is a lag time between initiating the transfers and the authorities' efforts to trace them. But in the scenario you describe, there just isn't time for very many transfers to be completed before authorities begin seeking to trace and recover them. John M Baker (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

As described above, for certain amounts of money (and fees, I'm sure) one can move large amounts of money immediately. The best bet would be to transfer the money to banks in several different countries - The authorities will trace them, of course; however, you could have the money long before they found you. The transfers can be instant - However, the paperwork and diplomatics required to retrieve information on a bank account from another country isn't, and that would be multiplied by however many countries that money travels through. By the time the find the final account, you can be living the high life in Rio De Janeiro. ^Avic_ennasis @ 16:12, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I would also like to add her that in response to your question, I would like to use part of that same question to answer it - "In the movies / TV " - lots of things happen in the movies / TV that aren't true... gazhiley.co.uk 11:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

1961 BEL AIR FACTORY 409 4 SPD BUBLE TOP

HOW CAN I FIND PRODUCTION NUMBERS FOR MY 1961 BEL AIR BUBBLE TOP WITH 409 AND 4SPD. THIS CAR HAS BODY SIDE MOLDING DELETE PKG. ANY INFO OR HELP APERICATED. THANKS GENE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.27.192 (talk) 12:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I think Chevrolet by the Numbers 1960-64, gives the breakdown (V6 -V8 etc) .http://www.amazon.com/Corvette-Numbers-Alan-Colvin/dp/0837602882 If you need spares it should come in use at some time – or until you can afford a newer car ;-) --Aspro (talk) 06:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

April 25

Introducing an adult to a child

In the US, it's rare for workers to refer to one another as "Mr. so-and-so" or "Ms. so-and so". People seem to address and refer to one another by first names. What is the norm when, say, you're introducing your daughter to a coworker or your boss? Do you introduce your coworker or boss as "Matt" or "Mr. Johnson" (assuming that the person's name is Matt Johnson)? I suppose when a child is very young you may want to teach her to address grown-ups properly and use a more formal address in an introduction. Assuming that you agree with that thinking, at what age do you think it's normal to introduce adults to a young person by first name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.98.127 (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

In the UK, the tradition was always to use Mr, Mrs etc for people older than the person you are introducing. This is gradually changing, and it depends on the context, but it would still be the norm here in northern UK for introducing an adult to children still at school. There is no rule on this. It's just whatever feels right to the people involved, and this will vary by country and situation. Dbfirs 07:26, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I would say that it depends on the age of the "child" and a number of other factors. As for references though... This Google Books page (starts on page 21) suggests that the child address the adult by Mr/Ms unless directed otherwise by the adult being introduced. Dismas|^(talk) 07:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Going back to my childhood back in the Stone Age, my parents' friends and the neighbours were "Aunty and Uncle" unless Mom and Dad didn't like them, then it was "Mr and Mrs". It came as a bit of a shock to me when, in later life I was researching my family history, to discover that most of the people I thought were related to me actually weren't! --TammyMoet (talk) 07:54, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the best approach is to address people however they want to be addressed, whatever age you are. (Within reason, of course - I'm not going to address anyone as "Your Grace" unless they really are a duke or archbishop!) Formality in Britain is certainly reducing. I volunteered in a primary school quite a bit last year and the children addressed me as "Tom" (at the decision of the headteacher - I had no strong feelings on the matter myself). --Tango (talk) 10:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It depends on age and a whole lot of unwritten and fuzzy social conventions. There's nothing incorrect about using a title, and it certainly won't be seen as unusual where there is a significant disparity in either age or authority. Your daughter can take her cues from the person she is addressing. Here's how it goes, in a nutshell:

• You: Matt, I'd like you to meet my daughter Jane. Jane, this is my supervisor/the head of the department/whatever, Matt Johnson.
• Jane: It's a pleasure to meet you, Mr. Johnson.
• Matt Johnson: Hello, Jane. Please, call me Matt.

Easy as pie. When in doubt, start respectful and work your way towards less formality. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Here in the U.S. it varies greatly by region as to the proper way in which children are supposed to address adults. When I grew up in New England, it was standard for adults to be addressed as "Mr. Lastname", "Miss Lastname", "Mrs. Firstname" or "Ms. Firstname" depending on the preference of the adult in question; usually Miss was reserved for unmarried women and Mrs. for married women. Here in North Carolina, the standard is "Mr. Firstname" and "Miss Firstname" for adults addressed by children, with Miss being used for both married and unmarried women of any age. Thus, while a 55-year old grandmother named Cathy Smith would be addressed as "Mrs. Smith" by a child in New England, the same woman would be called "Miss Cathy" by a child in North Carolina. --Jayron32 19:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

You: I'd like you to meet my daughter Jane. Jane, this is Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, Ireland and the British Dominions beyond the Seas Queen, Defender of the Faith, Duchess of Edinburgh, Countess of Merioneth, Baroness Greenwich, Duke of Lancaster, Lord of Mann, Duke of Normandy, Sovereign of the Most Honourable Order of the Garter, Sovereign of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Sovereign of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Sovereign of the Most Illustrious Order of Saint Patrick, Sovereign of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, Sovereign of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Sovereign of the Distinguished Service Order, Sovereign of the Imperial Service Order, Sovereign of the Most Exalted Order of the Star of India, Sovereign of the Most Eminent Order of the Indian Empire, Sovereign of the Order of British India, Sovereign of the Indian Order of Merit, Sovereign of the Order of Burma, Sovereign of the Royal Order of Victoria and Albert, Sovereign of the Royal Family Order of King Edward VII, Sovereign of the Order of Merit, Sovereign of the Order of the Companions of Honour, Sovereign of the Royal Victorian Order, Sovereign of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem. Jane, what do you say to the nice lady?

Jane: You're smaller than I thought.
Cuddlyable3 (talk) 19:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Lovely! Wanderer57 (talk) 20:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Where can one donate skin and fat tissue?

When it comes to donating organs, wouldn't there be any place where I can donate skin and fat tissue? After all, someone will need skin grafts somewhere, and fat tissue transplants after a burn injury.

So where is an agency that I can sell my skin and fat tissue to? Also, how much would I earn per ounce of skin and fat? --70.179.169.115 (talk) 07:28, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Sell? To my knowledge, in the US you can't sell body parts. And I would think that the same applies for most other countries as well. See, for instance, Human Tissue Act 2004. Dismas|^(talk) 07:36, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I just checked the scales and I'm 21 lbs overweight. My metabolism has apparently fallen precipitously so if I could donate 35 lbs. of my skin and fat, I'd be satisfied. I suppose I don't have to get paid to donate; I just would like to get rid of all this baggage, fast.

Of course I was told to go exercise, but I was also told that my body will get sadistic and lower my metabolism just to negate the effects of exercise. I want to shortcut this process by simply getting my excess removed. Thanks. --70.179.169.115 (talk) 08:54, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

You can pay for liposuction if you want. It won't be a good long term solution, though - you'll put the weight back on if you don't change your lifestyle. No-one else is going to want your fat or skin, though. Skin grafts are usually taken from other parts of the patients own body and I've never heard of fat transplants (a full-thickness skin graft may include some sub-cutaneous fat, I'm not sure, but I can't see why anyone would want to transplant fat itself). They are no shortcuts to weight loss. The only real route is to consume fewer calories than you burn, that is all there is to it. (It is advisable to consult a doctor prior to any major change in exercise or diet. Either can put significant strain on your body and you may have other conditions that could cause problems, so please don't take anything I have said as advice for your specific case.) --Tango (talk) 10:55, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I believe that small amounts of fat are transplanted, during cosmetic surgery, from other spots on the patient's body, to fill in under wrinkles. Using fat from somebody else would increase the risk of rejection and infection. StuRat (talk) 06:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Skin transplants from other people would also be problematic, because of the risk or rejection and infection. Burn patients already have a huge risk of infection, so administering the immunosuppressants needed to avoid rejection would likely cause infections to spread. StuRat (talk) 06:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Savory oatmeal

I got in an experimental mood tonight and decided to try something a little new for dinner. I set some water to boiling, and in a separate pan I sauteed some garlic and habaneros in butter, and then threw in some sliced brown mushrooms, and when they'd cooked a little bit I added red wine to the mushrooms and let them simmer. Then I put McCann's Irish Oatmeal (steel-cut, the five-minute stuff; I've never had the patience for the long-cook version), mixed with a bit of oat bran, into the water and let it thicken up good, roughly to the consistency of a fairly firm polenta. I mixed in the mushrooms and added some bits of sharp cheddar and let it sit for a couple minutes.

Not fooling myself that this is exactly health food, in spite of the potential cholesterol-lowering properties of the oats, but it was really quite good. Kind of like a risotto but much faster and easier to make.

So, question, I'm supposed to have a question. Is this a novel invention of mine, or is this some well-known dish? --Trovatore (talk) 07:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

While not being exactly "well-known", the use of oatmeal in savoury cooking is not new: it gets used to coat herrings, for example. I think it has been relatively ignored in the past because of its reputation as being quite coarse (in Scotland it feeds the people, and in England it feeds the horses - Dr. Johnson) and therefore not worthy of "proper cooking". Your recipe sounds quite yummy and I might give it a try! --TammyMoet (talk) 07:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Cool, let me know how it turns out. --Trovatore (talk) 08:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry. Why is this not healthy? Aside from the butter, which doesn't sound like much in the quantity you elude to, I don't see anything unhealthy about this dish. Dismas|^(talk) 07:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's kind of high-calorie, plus it's just carbs and fats, no phytochemicals to speak of except the soluble fiber. --Trovatore (talk) 07:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

An oat pilaf is a dish made with oats, broth/stock, vegetables, and herbs/spices. Here's a recipe from Quaker Oats.[1] Googling oat or oatmeal pilaf will give many others. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It being Anzac Day, I can't let this go without mentioning Anzac biscuits, which use lots of oats. Yum-oh. And really healthy too (apart from the sugar, the butter, the golden syrup ....). -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:26, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Porridge are usually a savory dish, as are many non-Oat porridges, listed in that article, including polenta and grits, corn (maize) based porridges familiar to the cuisines of Italy and the Southern U.S. respectively. --Jayron32 13:47, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Haggis also contains a lot of oatmeal. So I suppose the answer to your question is that there are many savoury dishes involving oats, though probably none exactly the same as the one you describe. 81.98.38.48 (talk) 14:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Food writer Mark Bittman has recently become a proponent of savory oatmeals (but specifically for breakfast). I'm not sure if he's ever done your combination, but he's talked about a number of variations, with the one he most often talks about is soy sauce and scallions. -- 174.31.219.218 (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I haven't seen it with oatmeal before, but grain risotto is a well known phenomona, as a Google search quickly reveals. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Italian for oat is avena, so my dish is an avenotto, which does turn up a fair number of hits. At least, that's what I'll call it if I serve it to company. Sounds a lot more exotic than porridge. --Trovatore (talk) 19:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I use oatmeal instead of stale bread or crumbs for making meatballs and the like, to generally appreciated results. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:28, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Ransom Money

This was inspired by a question above which was itself inspired by a question above.

So in films villains often demand money in return for hostages. This is sometimes requested in unmarked bills personally delivered, but also often to be transferred to a bank account for future use. My question is this: why can't the government just ask the bank to put the money in the account, and then remove it an hour later when the hostage taker has given up his hostages? Sure it would be cheating, but so what? Am I right and this is artistic license, or have I missed something? Prokhorovka (talk) 12:47, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It depends on the film. In general, the less-sloppy fictional kidnappers will ask that the money be wired to an account that is outside the jurisdiction where the kidnapping took place, and where whatever governments and police forces are involved won't be able to freeze the funds. Variations on this theme include immediate withdrawals or re-transfers of the ransom money as soon as it is paid, again to prevent the sort of problem you're asking about. And we can't forget that many fictional kidnappers will demand that the police not be involved (accompanied by dire threats); without such involvement it is very difficult to play games even with domestic wire transfers. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

True, but surely the world's banks could be convinced to agree to a global agreement about such things, what sort of objection would they raise? Prokhorovka (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, we're talking about real life here, rather than spy novels. However, I think the point is that shifty banks in the Bahamas and the Caymans (random examples) actually profit rather a lot from criminal money. Why would they enter into an agreement which would result in loss of business for them? ╟─TreasuryTag►presiding officer─╢ 14:36, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

... and modern savvy kidnappers will have already set up a series of accounts in various countries (preferably those not on good terms with that of the kidnap victim) and will use internet banking to move the money around within an hour of the deposit so as to make it almost impossible to trace where it ended up. It is only recently that the bankers in Switzerland have been persuaded to co-operate with international authorities to fight crime, and there are many countries where the banks are much less scrupulous than the Swiss. Dbfirs 17:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Why, Tag? Because banks, as everyone knows, have high morals and ethics and a deeply ingrained sense of social responsiblity, which govern all their activities. I am now heading for the bathroom to wash my mouth out for no particular reason, and may be some time ... -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The obvious and conspicuous evil and money-grubbing nature of banks notwithstanding, there are certainly at least a few legitimate reasons why all the world's banks don't have agreements in place to permit revocation of interbank transfers. In part, it is for the same reason that not all countries have mutual extradition treaties—country A doesn't always want to be involved in (or compelled to) enforce the laws of country B. (Suppose that a woman and her minor daughter flee an abusive husband in Saudi Arabia. Dad has arranged a marriage for the daughter, and Mom cannot get a divorce or legal custody. Mom wires money out of the country to herself, and seeks refugee status overseas with her daughter. Technically, she is now a kidnapper under Saudi law--can the Saudi bank revoke the transfer at the behest of the Saudi government or police services? If not, why would a bank in Saudi Arabia decide to respect another country's requests? It gets even messier when you consider the application of other criminal laws.)

Making large international interbank transfers revocable also has the potential for accidental or deliberate disaster. Suppose that large company (or a small country) transfers $100 million from accounts in Country A to Country B, then from Country B to Country C. The company then says, no, we didn't mean to make the first transfer, so we'll keep our $100 million in each of Countries A and C after all. Someone's left in the lurch. When it's one organization's accounts, it's possible untangle and trace back where the dollars are supposed to be coming from, but it gets very messy very quickly if there are multiple transactions among multiple parties. Somewhere in the middle, a bank fails.

In any event, even if such a system existed, it would still be susceptible to the sort of failure that Dbfirs suggests. If the first transaction is revocable, then the kidnapper will simply transfer the money to new accounts, or arrange to purchase negotiable goods, until there's no meaningful way to undo the transfer. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

What kind of Date trees are around the Falcon Place in Baghdad in Iraq?

Hint: On the computer,look at the beautful Falcon Place pictures. If I remember right, they show some of those trees. My son who is in the Navy, brought some seeds back home, but I know nothing about Date trees, and if they will grow in Kansas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.25.198 (talk) 15:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

date palms come in a few varieties, but I don't think any will be likely survive a Kansas Winter. It might be conceivable to grow them in a large pot, and take them inside over winter, but they may not get large enough to produce fruit. If you like palm trees, some varieties are hardy enough to survive in Kansas, see hardy palms.

SemanticMantis (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It might also be pertinent to consider whether those seeds might harbor some insidious species of microbe or bug which could decimate food production in your country. That may sound a little dramatic but the truth is that countless billions worth of damage has been and is still being caused by "innocent" transportation of species to countries where they don't belong. suggest checking out 'alien species' on wiki. It's no joke. Many imported food stuffs are irradiated fo import for that very reason.190.56.115.128 (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC) oops sorry semantis. don't know hoe I did that.190.56.115.128 (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

They need arid climates to produce fruit. Even if you managed to keep it alive through the winter, it would be next to impossible to produce any fruit. Also, I strongly agree w/above. A body of water near my home has been inundated with a foreign species of microbe that, when it excretes, promotes the growth of an invasive algae that is decimating native fish and plant species. To the point where local officials are spraying our water supply with toxic chemicals to control it. And all b/c someone dumped out their tropical fish tank bowl. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 23:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Surely the seeds of a date tree are dates (or at least the stones inside). Don't you import those into America? We get them here in the UK from all sorts of middle-eastern countries and we're all still alive! Alansplodge (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

What is an Auditor?

Is an auditor a person who has specifically trained and qualified and been recognized as an Auditor by some official body,

OR is an auditor simply someone employed or contracted to perform audits?

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

This probably varies from country to country, but in most places there is some form of industry body that handles auditing qualifications and recognition from it is required either legally or otherwise to perform them (as companies simply won't pay someone who isn't recognised by them, and the audit may not be accepted by others as valuable). Prokhorovka (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

An Auditor can be someone with formal qualifications (e.g. http://www.icaew.com/en/technical/audit-and-assurance/gain-audit-rights) or purely someone that is asked to perform audit work. The level of qualification/experience required will depend on the nature/level of the audit. E.g. I have performed 'internal' audits at a very low level but have no audit qualifications (I was merely an knowledgeable independent observer of processes). ny156uk (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)An auditor is someone who performs audits. In many jurisdictions, they may require licensing or certification in order to be a practicing auditor, but that makes auditing no different than most professions, including physician, lawyer, accountant, teacher, dentist, etc. etc. One thing that makes a "profession" different from a "job" is the existance of professional standards; and usually a body (private or government) that is charged with maintaining those standards among members of the profession. --Jayron32 16:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

To further confuse the matter, many counties in the United States have an elected auditor who may or may not have the appropriate professional credentials, above. That's what a staff is for, I imagine. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 16:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

By the way, we have all assumed (probably correctly) that you mean business auditing, not the more recent kind. If you did happen to mean the latter, then anyone can do it, so long as they have been trained by a high level Thetan and stick to the "Auditor's Code". Prokhorovka (talk) 16:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all. (Prokhorovka - our organization does not pay well enough to attract high level Thetans. Perhaps just as well.) Wanderer57 (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

In the first book of Dianetics that predates Scientology the term auditor "is used in dianetics to designate anyone skilled in the practice of dianetic therapy" (p.165 Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health 1950-1966)). At that time the only qualification was to have read the book. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 19:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

And then there are the Auditors of Reality. Bielle (talk) 21:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Domestic Appliance - Repair or Renew?

Hi, I am not asking for advice about the above - but I am interested to read any responses to my rationale for posing the question. I bought a new well reputed domestic dishwasher in the UK 18 months ago, and today, it failed, due to it not drawing in water, though the extraction pump seemed to be working hard. I cleaned the filters, checked the water pipe inlet wasn't blocked or kinked, but no joy. So I rang around a few local repair shops who all told me they would charge £60 call out fee, plus VAT (20% extra) plus any parts costs (plus any VAT on the parts). I calculated, perhaps suspiciously, that my repair was going to cost in excess of £120+, with no guarantee that the machine wouldn't suffer another breakdown in short order at similar punitive costs. So I ordered a new machine online, like for like model, delivery included, recycling included of the old machine, plus installation and packaging taken away, plus a 3 year comprehensive warranty, all for double my estimated repair cost to the existing machine. And now I am puzzled as to how the local appliance repair industry might be suffering due to like-minded customers being hostile to such punitively high call-out repair charges - for a dishwasher. I mean, waiting for a new dishwasher, or waiting for a repairman, is hardly life threatening is it? Are there any reference statistics to illustrate how local economies might suffer as a result of such practices? And surely, specialist trade associations must be alert to such damage in their sector(s). Thanks. 92.4.37.253 (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I had a repairman come to my house once, look at my refridgerator for five minutes and say "Buy a new one". I have since used this repairman for literally everything I can, since I know he's not trying to screw me, and I recommend him to all of my friends. By being good and honest, he's probably generated himself at least as much cash as being unscrupulous could. The solution is to find a good repairman and throw him as much business as possible. You can find a good repairman when he tells you to keep your money and buy a new appliance... --Jayron32 19:40, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Either that, or he's invented a new business model. Without having to get his hands dirty, order parts, or even know how your appliance works, he picks up sixty quid every time you call him out. (Maybe he just knows how to fix stoves and dishwashers; he gets to charge an arm and a leg to repair those, since he has the reputation for being 'good and honest'. Meanwhile, every time someone with a broken refrigerator calls, he gets a nice payout plus a bonus to his reputation. It's brilliant!) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

No, on the refridgerator call he charged me no money at all. I offered to throw $50 his way for the trouble of coming out, and he resolutely refused several times. He has since fixed items of mine for which it was economical to fix it, including once where he showed me how he fixed the problem, and said "Next time, just buy this part here, and put it in like this. Much cheaper than getting me to do it". His business model is being good and honest I appreciate that. I have also had auto mechanics and others that work on that model, and I continue to use them frequently because of that. The whole "honey vs. vinegar" standard for catching ants, I suppose. --Jayron32 21:20, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

(I was kidding, of course....) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:27, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

They probably all quoted about the same price. Therefor it does the local tradesman no harm at all since it maintains the pricing structure.190.56.108.137 (talk) 20:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure it does. If it no longer makes economic sense to have appliances repaired at the rates they charge, since ever cheaper Chinese-made appliances are now available, then repair shops will close down. This has happened to a great extent in the US. Unfortunately, this is ultimately bad for local economies as well as the environment. StuRat (talk) 06:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Why is his price unreasonable? You're trying to hire a skilled independent contractor. Figure it takes him fifteen or twenty minutes each way to get from his workshop to your house. He spends another ten or twenty minutes making sure you've got clean electricity, taking apart your appliance, checking it out, and putting it back together. Between your initial call and his visits, you're going to soak up at least another ten minutes or so in conversation, filling out paperwork, and processing your payment. Altogether, we're at between fifty and seventy minutes you've taken out of his day; that sixty quid for an hour's work.

Before you protest that that's an awful lot for a handy man, remember that he has to pay rent on his workshop and storefront; purchase, maintain, and insure his truck and tools; pay the apprentice who minds the store while he's on a service calls; and pay his accountant and the taxman before anything gets to his pocket. I would be stunned if the overhead didn't eat up at least half of that call-out fee. And if he is able to fix it, the pricing scheme you quoted suggests that he isn't going to charge you any extra for the labour when he completes the repair; it's a straight cost-plus quote.

You've just discovered that crappy, cheap consumer goods aren't worth repairing; this isn't news. His market isn't the people who bought the cheapest item from the store; it's the ones who bought the premium stainless-steel £500 dishwasher. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:27, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Which is kinda silly, since the £200 dishwasher and the £500 dishwasher are likely next to identical in terms of operating parts. The £500 dishwasher is just a £200 dishwasher with a £300 brushed steel plate on the front of it; people are thus paying the repairman to fix the dishwasher to preserve a piece of brushed steel. The owner of the £200 dishwasher gets dishes cleaned the same way, and when it goes belly up, doesn't feel the need to pay a premium to preserve a piece of decorative metal. --Jayron32 22:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

ALERT! ORIGINAL RESEARCH! I had a dishwasher which quit admitting water adequately. It was not clear that this was the problem, but dishes were dirty when the cycle was over. Checking on the Internet, I found advice that the fill valve was likely bad. I tested the solenoid controlled fill valve and found that its coil had not burned out, and that it opened to allow water through when line voltage was applied to its coil, but measured the flow of water and found that when it was energized it only allowed in a pint of water during a time it should have admitted many quarts (for the metric crowd: it was defective, but not grossly so). For $20 or so I purchased and installed a new valve and lived happily everafter with clean dishes. The internet is your friend, and fora can advise you on how to fix the dishwasher, range (hob), washing machine, or clothes dryer. Edison (talk) 00:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

In my experience, buying the parts for your own repair can be quite difficult. Manufacturers can be quite reluctant to sell to someone who is not in the business of repairing appliances. None the less, some years ago I did manage to repair my TV for £5 rather then a £60 + parts + VAT for a professional repairman. I concur though, many consumer appliances are so cheaply made, it is pretty much the same price to replace than pay for a repair. Astronaut (talk) 13:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Darn those cheaply made consumer "alliances" ! StuRat (talk) 06:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Corrected. Thanks. Astronaut (talk) 09:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I too repaired my dishwasher with a problem like this. Before it was repaired the work around was to open the door just after the pump had pumped out the dirty water and put in two saucepanfuls of hot water. The repair was a new valve, wich connected differently to the old one, but there were detailed instructions included on how to do this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Visiting London, UK during layover

I will be traveling to Lebanon from Canada, but will be making a 10 hour layover at Heathrow Airport in London, UK. I have never been to the UK before and don't have any immigration papers or visas; would I be able to leave the airport and visit the city and then come back and catch my connecting flight?

On a similar note, if my itinerary requires me to make a connection in Washington DC, where the plane arrives at the Reagan National Airport and my departure and connecting flight leaves from Dulles International, would I be able to leave the Reagan airport to catch my flight at the Dulles without any visas? If so, then hypothetically, what's stopping me from just missing my departure flight and just staying in America illegally? ThanksAcceptable (talk) 22:39, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the ins and outs of leaving the airport to tour with just a passport (which I assume you have some form of, or you wouldn't be able to get on an international flight), but as far as remaining in the U.S. illegally, the long term problem would be supporting yourself by finding a job and/or housing without some legitimate form of work Visa or proof of residency. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 22:47, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Your userpage says that you're Canadian, so this page and this page should be helpful. I don't think you'd need a visa to get into the U.S. Once you get in, there's really nothing stopping you from staying illegally (except the logistics of working and supporting yourself). I guess they figure that Canadians are usually pretty content with their own country. Qrsdogg (talk) 23:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It depends on your citizenship. Citizens of Canada as well as citizens of the Visa Waiver Program countries don't need a visa when entering the United States for short periods of time for tourism purposes. Individuals from other countries will need a transit (usually C-1) visa: [2].

Even if you don't require a visa to enter the United States, the customs and immigration folks can get very grumpy if you get caught lying about the purpose of your trip, and they can bar you from entering the country for an extended period of time.

The UK Border Agency offers this helpful page to aid you in determining whether or not you need a visa to enter or transit the UK. Again, if you're a Canadian citizen then you don't require a visa for brief tourism stays. I can't comment on how readily one can escape Heathrow for a short break. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:40, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I actually did leave Heathrow for a short tourism break during a 7ish hour layover once. I took a taxi but it's not that hard to get downtown from there on the London Underground I think. Taxis are much more expensive I think.

Oh, and you can probably expect the U.S. customs and immigration folks to be grumpy no matter what. There are some nice ones, but there sure are a lot of gruff ones in my experience. Also, after I got Arabic language stamps in my passport I noticed an increase in the scrutiny I got from Customs and Immigration whenever I re-enter the U.S. So be prepared for extra attention on your way back from Lebanon. Qrsdogg (talk) 23:56, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

A little off topic, but another thought I had is that you might want to consider renting a locker inside the flight terminal near your departure gate to store any unnecessary carry-on items. They're a bit pricey, but better than accidentally leaving a laptop in a NYC cab. And it'll save you a bit of hassle on the return through the security check. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 01:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the 10 hours in London, I'd have to ask which 10 hours? If you are arriving in the morning, it would make sense to travel into London to see the sights, but there isn't much point in turning up at 2 am and expecting much to be happening (or at least, much I'd recommend a tourist getting involved in). Personally, I'd suggest that if you are in the middle of a long trip, you may not feel over-inclined to cram in the usual tourist spots anyway, and might do better to just relax. Actually, if the weather is at all reasonable, you can do a bit of both. Windsor is conveniently close to Heathrow, so you could head there, grab an overpriced cup of coffee, and then wander along the riverbank for a bit (I'd go upstream, on the north bank - wear sensible shoes), after taking the obligatory photo of Her Majesty's over-ornate pile of masonry. You aren't exactly in the wilds of England (there aren't any, unless you travel a lot further), but it is pleasant enough apart from the aircraft noise. Much less stressful than the usual crowded tourist traps... AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I certainly wouldn't recommend a getting a taxi from Heathrow to central London. Just one way, it is likely to take around an hour (or more if you hit heavy traffic) and cost an eye-watering US$ 100 or more. The Tube may be 150 years old, hot, crowded and reportedly the most expensive in the world, but a one day travelcard is still very good value at 15 pounds and will get you almost everywhere you want to visit quicker than above-ground transportation. Astronaut (talk) 12:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The British Consul in Lebanon should be able to advise on whether you will be allowed to leave Heathrow Airport at all on your passport and visa. If you are allowed to get out, then I endorse what Andy says about not necessarily needing to get to central London. Other great places to visit, quite close to Heathrow, are Kew Gardens and Hampton Court. The gardens at Hampton Court are free to visit. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

IIRC, it cost me about £50 each way to take a Taxi from Heathrow to Trafalgar Square. Someone told me to take the Tube, but for some reason I really wanted to take a taxi. Qrsdogg (talk) 17:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Since you don't state your citizenship, I don't know whether you can leave any of the airports you mention without a visa. I think that if you are a Lebanese citizen, you would need a visa to leave any of those airports (other than on a return flight to Lebanon as a deportee). Regarding Heathrow airport, understand that it is a large airport located a fair distance from central London. Also understand that getting through security at Heathrow can be very time-consuming. So, if you leave the airport, you have to take into account, 1) the time to get from your gate to public transportation or a taxi stand, 2) waiting time for public transportation if you take it, 3) travel time by taxi or public transportation to your destination in Greater London or the nearby Home Counties, 4) travel time by taxi or public transportation from your destination back to the airport, 5) time to get from your taxi or public transportation to security, 6) time to get through security, and 7) time to get from security to your gate. Getting through security alone has taken me more than two hours. To be safe, you should allow three. Even if you travel by taxi, getting to central London can take more than an hour each way in traffic. This is why people are recommending destinations closer to the airport than central London. Then getting from security to your gate can take a good 20 minutes of quick walking depending on your terminal and gate. If you take a less expensive form of public transportation, such as the underground, allow 90 minutes from many parts of central London to the airport. If you know you will be near a stop on the Piccadilly line, which goes to the airport, you can allow just 80 minutes for your trip. Adding all of the travel time up with the security wait, you will need close to 6 hours to travel to and from central London and to get through security and to your gate. That would leave you 4 of your 10 hours to look around. Cutting your travel time and staying close to the airport would give you more time to look around and relax. Marco polo (talk) 15:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Re Heathrow: I did this last year on a six-hour layover, no problem at all as long as your passport lets you into Britain without a visa. There's Heathrow Express train which is quite fast (15-20 minutes to London Paddington), and last year at least they had a special offer of round trip ticket plus free Tube travelling in central London for a reasonable price. The Heathrow Airport web site has a recommendation for how long they think your layover should be to get into London, but as long as you are at Paddington station ready to return to the airport at least two-three hours before your flight leaves you should be fine. Jørgen (talk) 19:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

If you're travelling on a Canadian passport, then there's no problem about you being admitted to the UK for a touristic visit. If you're travelling on a Lebanese passport with a Canadian permanent resident permit, then you're subject to the TWOV (Transit Without Visa) rules and can be admitted to the UK for 24 hours subject to you having a confirmed ticket out of the country within those 24 hours and correct documentation for the next stage of your journey. Visiting central London is a bit of a tradeoff between journey time and price - there's the Heathrow Express train to Paddington station which takes about 20 minutes and, depending on how you buy your ticket, costs between £18 and £23 each way; the Heathrow Connect train to Paddington which takes about 30 minutes including some intermediate stops and costs around £10 each way; and the Underground which takes about 60 minutes to central London, but costs around £5 each way or £15 for a day pass (you may well need to buy a day pass for the Underground even if you use HE or HC anyway). Be sure to allow plenty of time to get through security when you return to Heathrow. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 23:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

If you want to see the tourist sites, I'd recommend going to Westminster Underground Station. The Houses of Parliament, Westminster Abbey, London Eye, Horse Guards, Trafalgar Square, National Gallery and Buckingham Palace are all within walking distance. If you're on the Underground from Heathrow, change at South Kensington onto the District or Circle Line. A couple of gems that tourists often miss are the Banqueting House with a wonderful painted ceiling by Peter Paul Ruebens, nearly opposite Horseguards and if you want a close-up picture of a Guardsman, walk around the back of St James's Palace into Pall Mall, - one stands on the pavement. If you'd rather go shopping, get out at Piccadilly Circus. Alansplodge (talk) 12:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

You could also take a boat tour down the Thames from Westminster (or start at the other end at the Tower). You get to see a lot of stuff, although unfortunately of course you can't really visit any of it while you're on the boat. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

April 26

Childcare teaching method

Returning from a Boy Scout meeting tonight, my stepson questioned my wife and I about how people learn to take care of their children. I advised that the best way was to learn by example (to which he replied with some sarcastic comments regarding my parenting skills). Anyway, I told him about my experience with Home Economics in high school, and how we had to carry around an egg in a basket for a week. If the egg was damaged upon its return to the teacher, our grade suffered accordingly. His Mom informed us that there are now life like dolls that actually cry and defecate, and that have sensors that detect when the "baby's" diaper is changed, when it's fed, how often it is held, etc. When returned, a computer can determine how well the doll was "cared for." This fascinated both my son and I. Is this for real? I checked the article on Childcare and searched for things like Childcare methods & Childcare education to no avail. I'd appreciate some assistance. (Personally, I can't help but think of Chucky.) Regards, Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 01:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Here is a website for one such doll. I'm not sure exactly how sophisticated these are. When I was in high school (~10 years ago), there were dolls that you had to "feed" by turning a key in its back when it cried periodically. The dolls seem to have gotten more complicated since then (?). Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:07, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Good gods! We are truly living in a different world than just 10 years ago. (The pic of the power cord coming out of its back is truly creepy.) I wonder if this is a form of childcare education, or birth control. I can't imagine how I would've cared for this thing in high school. (I remember some of the "smart" kids in my class hard-boiled their "baby eggs" to minimize damage...hoping the teacher wouldn't notice. Not sure if that fits under irony or not.) Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:18, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

My impression was that the primary purpose of having school kids "caring" for those dolls was to give them the message "Don't get pregnant!" (At least not yet.) As for learning about childcare, the traditional sources are surely mothers. And every generation seems to have its guide books on raising kids. Dr Spock was the guru when I was a baby. HiLo48 (talk) 02:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, then there's this and then that. I agree that caring for the robot baby is more effective as a precautionary method of child birth, than an actual teaching method for child care. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh yes, the obvious thing about those gurus and their books is that each generation's gurus contradict the previous generation's ones. It's amazing we survive at all! HiLo48 (talk) 02:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Many actually didn't survive, either because their parents were in denial about safety or because they believed that the old ways were always best "and we never did any of that and we were fine!!!". The ones who didn't survive aren't here to contest the point. Survivor bias is a well-known phenomenon. --NellieBly (talk) 03:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Hence the robot baby. We've come in a full circle :} Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 03:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

This all sounds like an excellent argument for home schooling.Phalcor (talk) 03:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if somebody will come up with a machine to "care for" the robot babies, and thus get a good grade for the students who buy them. StuRat (talk) 09:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I was looking for a half-remembered UK TV series that followed the adventures of some teens who had been given these contraptions. I only found this unfortunate event. Alansplodge (talk) 18:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Roth 401(k) vs. traditional IRA converted to Roth IRA

I'm 26 years old and a lawyer with an income of $170,000 plus a small bonus (probably will be about $10,000). Now that I'm getting my enormous student loans all paid off, I'm trying to get on top of my personal finances and start investing and saving for retirement (about 40 years from now?). (I don't have any dependents or a taste for nice things yet, so I might as well sock away a good chunk of my income.) Comparing all my options seems really complicated and is kind of overwhelming, and I'm hoping to get a bit of feedback here to see if I'm on the right track!

I've looked at some online calculators and seen that a Roth 401(k) beats a traditional 401(k) for me, so I've already taken the traditional 401(k) out of the running. (My employer does not do any 401(k) match, unfortunately, but does offer a Roth 401(k).) I am ineligible for a Roth IRA because of my income, but I can still do a traditional IRA. I also did some other online calculators and saw that for me doing the traditional to Roth conversion makes sense. Since I plan to contribute more than $5,000 (the IRA limit) toward my retirement savings, I'm going to enroll in my employer's 401(k) plan, which will make my IRA contributions non-deductible. I think this doesn't really matter though, because for me to do the conversion I have to pay taxes on my IRA contributions anyways. (Am I right about it not mattering?) Looking at the 401(k) IRA matrix, it seems like the Roth IRA is better than the Roth 401(k) in basically every way. Would the best strategy be to fully fund my traditional IRA first (preparing to convert to Roth as soon as I can), and then fund my Roth 401(k) as close to 16,500 as I can? Any other thoughts?? Thanks from a personal finance beginner!! Blueskysand (talk) 01:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

If you are making that kind of doe, you really need to consult a professional. Find someone who will provide you with references of ACTUAL customers in the same income level as you (at least, starting out at the same income level), and who are willing to communicate with you independently about WHY they were satisfied with his/her financial advice. If they are reluctant to do so, I'd continue searching. (A truly great financial adviser will have developed a strong enough relationship with his/her customers that this shouldn't be a problem). In the meantime, my non prof. advice is to sock away as you possibly can in traditional savings until you truly educate yourself on the best way to manage your money in a way that you are informed and comfortable in doing so. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:06, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

At this point, I don't really think I need to hire a financial adviser because my situation really isn't that complicated... (I don't have any big near-term savings goals, this money is just going to sit for 40 years, and I intend to invest in a lifecycle fund with a low expense ratio for minimal hassle.) I just need some general pointers about whether I've correctly characterized the advantages and disadvantages of these different treatments for tax purposes etc... Anyways, I think a normal savings account would be a pretty lousy choice for my money, especially considering the ridiculously low interest rates available now (~1% for "high-interest" online savings accounts), and then (if I waited too long) forfeiting my possible yearly contribution to my IRA and 401(k). Blueskysand (talk) 02:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's a risk/reward thing. If you feel comfortable taking financial advice from strangers on the Internet, then by all means... Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

And paying a financial planner would be better? Mr. Blueskysand has a good grasp on his finances, and a financial planner would probably be a waste of money for him. Buddy431 (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Like the mighty Quinn says. Do something safe and simple (CDs money market account etc.) until you get a thorough understanding of what your options are. Life has a way of coming up with surprises. Oops. that sounds like advise. Mustn't do that. please disregard previous statement.Phalcor (talk) 04:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

That's terrible advice (CDs are probably the worst investment you could make in a situation like this). Without commenting too much on the OPs specific situation, here's a good article on what to fund in what order, depending on your income: [3]. You look like you have a pretty good handle on this, and I would actually advise against a financial planner; any extra benefit they might be able to squeeze out of your savings will be more than offset by their fees. Buddy431 (talk) 17:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what the "CD" you're talking about is (it doesn't seem to be any of these). But for us to be advising an OP against getting professional advice and instead using their own brain seems contrary to the general principles we employ around here. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The third entry on the CD (disambiguation) page you cite is Certificate of deposit. You may want to read that article for more information. --Jayron32 19:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Jayron. I read it, and I stand by my comment. Individual editors' personal opinions of particular investment or financial management avenues should not dictate how we respond to questions. It's exactly the same principle as no legal advice or no medical advice - apart from "see a lawyer" or "see a doctor". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 23:58, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

You stand by your comment that you don't know what CD means in this context? Really? Even after I showed it to you, you still do not understand what "CD" the person is talking about? I'm perplexed, since its the only financial instrument with the abbreviation CD. What is hard to understand that the abbreviation CD means "Certificate of Deposit". How can it be made clearer? --Jayron32 00:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, how silly. The comment I stand by is "But for us to be advising an OP against getting professional advice and instead using their own brain seems contrary to the general principles we employ around here.". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 01:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh sorry. I never once disagreed with you on that statement. You said you didn't understand what a CD was. I directed you to the meaning. You're subsequent statement to my defintion was highly confusing then, as it made it appear as though you were somehow either disagreeing with, or still not understanding, what CD meant. --Jayron32 02:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see the problem now. You responded about the CD thing, which was useful, and I thanked you for it. You did not disagree with my other statement, true; but you did not comment on it at all, which I interpreted as indifference or even tacit disagreement, so I felt I needed to restate my position. (Not sure why I couldn't have seen it as tacit agreement, rather than tacit disagreement, but there you have it, the human mind in all its glorious unpredictability.) Ultimately, I read too much into the absence of any comment on your part. But I meant well. Tricky business, this communication stuff. I must do some more practice.  :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 03:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

'ts all good. --Jayron32 04:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Permission to use photograph

Hi,

I would very much like to use the photograph you publish of John Howard the great prison reformer for my PhD. Can you please advise me how I request this permission.

Kind regards,

Julia — Preceding unsigned comment added by J.tabreham (talk • contribs) 13:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

You dont say which John Howard or which image so it is difficult to give any guidance, but this page should give you some help - Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. MilborneOne (talk) 14:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Given the OP said it was John Howard (prison reformer), I suspect she is referring to this portrait, drawn c. 1789. It's probably in the public domain. However, some countries place 'creative expression' on the photographing/scanning of pictures (presumably in the skill of getting the colour balance/brightness/contrast correct). So as MilborneOne said, we need to know what country you live in. And the link zie provided is probably the best pace to ask for further advice. CS Miller (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Do be aware that the picture in question is one of the ones involved in the National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute, so if you are in the UK use of this picture may be problematical, though if you are in the US there would be no problem in you using the picture. The dispute has gone very quiet since late 2009, but we cannot assume that it has gone away. Here's an interesting blog discussion on the background to the case by a lawyer I slightly know - he did a presentation to the British national SF convention a few days ago on Lucasfilm v Ainsworth ("Stormtroopers in Court!") which is currently before the UK Supreme Court (original High Court case) Lucasfilm v Ainsworth: The Copyright is *not* strong in this one..., (appeal) Star Wars II: Ainsworth Strikes Back, (Supreme Court hearing) And it's going to be a Trilogy!, which just goes to show how entertaining (and expensive) copyright cases can get. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 23:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Catholics: eating meat during Lent and Holy Week

This may not be the correct site to ask the following, but I couldn't find the link to submit it:

During Lent season. I understand that we as catholics are to obstain from eating meat on Fridays. I also understand that during Holy Week (specially Holy Thursday, Friday, & Saturday) we are not to consume meat. Meat cannot be eaten until Sunday. Is this correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.124.20.212 (talk) 14:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I added a title to the OP's question. --- OtherDave (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The answer to the question depends on where you are in the world (I'm assuming you're talking about Roman Catholics). For example, the United States Conferences of Catholic Bishops says that Ash Wednesday and Good Friday are days of obligatory fasting and of abstinence from meat. ("Fasting" means one full meal, and two smaller ones meant not to equal another full meal.)

...If possible, the fast on Good Friday is continued until the Easter Vigil (on Holy Saturday night) as the "paschal fast"...

That makes it clear that fasting, not necessarily abstinence, is encouraged rather than required. The same site confirms that Fridays in Lent are obligatory days of complete abstinence(meaning abstinence from meat). You may also want to review this 1966 statement by the American bishops on penance and abstinence. --- OtherDave (talk) 15:03, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

There are some exceptions, though. When St. Patrick's Day falls on a Friday, for example, many bishops will waive the abstinence requirement. See [4]. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 15:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

This is surely a matter of personal behaviour and your desired level of commitment. i do not think that your God will regard you as a worse person for eating some meat during Holy Week. Richard Avery (talk) 15:52, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

That is so true, Richard. A long time after I resigned from the Catholic Club, I attended Mass one day just out of curiosity, to see what had changed. During the sermon, the priest was talking about sin, and how we should all be a little easier on ourselves. He said that many of the things we were all taught as children were grievous sins, were nothing of the kind. To his eternal credit, the priest said that we were never in danger of eternal hellfire, or even a slightly delayed entry into Heaven, for eating meat on a Friday or during Holy Week. As glad as I was to hear those words, they only confirmed the rightness of my decision to leave in the first place. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

As I understand the practice (which may be wrong) fasting is a devotional metaphor. Christ is spiritual sustenance (as in transubstantiation): he died on good friday and rose again on easter sunday; fasting for those days (avoiding physical sustenance) recalls losing and regaining that source of spiritual sustenance. No doubt historically (and probably in some monasteries to this day) this would be a full 3-day (water only) fast, but the symbolic idea is more important than the physical act, and accommodations are made. As with most things religious, it's best to keep the principle in mind and not sweat too much over the details. --Ludwigs2 17:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

It's a little-known fact that Jesus first words to Mary Magdelene on Sunday were, "You know, I haven't eaten in 3 days, and a bagel with cream cheese and lox would really hit the spot about now."

I would expect that the Catholic view on fasting is similar to the Jewish view: That fasting is not appropriate if it could result in physical harm to the faster (i.e. if they're old or infirm). The "greater sin" axiom would apply. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Andrew Marr

who has he been having it off with (apart from his missus?)

That information is part of a Gag order (super injunction), i'm sure there are rumours a plenty but the information that's been released (by an interview with Andrew Marr) is all that's (currently) allowed in the public domain. ny156uk (talk) 17:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, it's not covered by the Super-injunction anymore, only the gag order (regular injunction). With a super-injunction, people aren't even allowed to say that any sort of gag order exists. Now, the British papers are allowed to say that such a gag order exists (and they have been [5] [6], [7], [8]), but are still not allowed to give certain details (i.e. who he had the affair with). Previously, while the "super-injunction" was still in place, they weren't even allowed to report that there was any sort of legal proceedings going on at all. Buddy431 (talk) 21:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

All that is known is that it was a "fellow journalist" - [9]. Exxolon (talk) 19:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

However, the rumors generally agree that it was Alice Miles, [10], [11], [http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t453856/], etc. I'm not sure how much stock to put in these rumors - they all seem to link back to a single blog post from 2008 [12]. Buddy431 (talk) 21:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Who cares?--85.211.210.107 (talk) 06:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

All that matters here is that the OP cares enough to ask. The tabloids will assure you that few people will admit to caring, but it sells lots of newspapers. And there is nothing guaranteed to make people care more than a super-injunction.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

April 27

Help finding ISSN or OCLC number

I am trying to find the ISSN or OCLC number for a newspaper. I've searched WorldCat and the newspaper directory at the Library of Congress.

newspaper: The Source Weekly
company: Lay It Out, Inc.
founded:' 1997
location: Bend, Oregon
website: tsweekly.com
owner: Paul S Butler
publisher: Aaron Switzer
editor: Eric Flowers

Does anybody have any better searching tricks? Thanks for any help. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 08:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Email them at info@tsweekly.com and ask? --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I emailed, but no response so far, so I called and the person I spoke to had no idea what I was talking about. Any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 23:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Library of Congress don't seem to list it, however Trove at National Library of Australia does: http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/34145316 there seems to be no ISSN. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:19, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Bar trick

Last night my bar tender performed a magic trip for the group of people I was with. He had laid out 5 quarters on the bar top and asked one girl in our group to touch one quarter when he had his back turned/left the bar area/whenever he was not looking and he would predict which quarter she touched. She waited for him to leave the area and carefully touched the quarter of her choosing twice without moving the coin. Each time he correctly predicted which quarter she touched. How did he do this magic trick? --Endlessdan (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The first thing that pops to mind is that he had a conspirator. Dismas|^(talk) 13:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

An accomplice is the easiest way to perform this trick:

...Take 5 nickels and arrange them on the bar table in a box shape (one in each corner and one in the middle). Now tell your friend to buy a drink and get a napkin. Get your friend to sit next to you but pretend you don't know each other. Tell someone at the bar you can read their minds. Tell them to touch any nickel without you looking and you will tell them which one they touched. Here's the trick: when they touch a nickel your friend will move his cup to either a corner of his napkin or the center indicating which one of the nickels the mark touched.

A variation on the theme, from this page. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

bars have many mirrors; some bars even have one-way mirrors. bartenders and bar owners learn early on that drunk people need a lot surreptitious watching and get in the knack of watching without looking like they are doing so. --Ludwigs2 16:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Obama-Biden 2012?

Scandals or personal tragedy aside, what are the chances that Joe Biden will not be on the Democratic ticket in 2012? Skomorokh 13:49, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately our crystal ball is not functioning at the moment, so doing anything other than speculating wildly on this subject is currently beyond our abilities. Sorry. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Based on past history, it's rare for a president to change his vice president. List of United States Democratic Party presidential tickets and List of United States Republican Party presidential tickets provides historical data. Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940/44 was the last Democratic US president to have different VPs at consecutive elections; the last Republican was Benjamin Harrison in 1888/92 (Spiro Agnew resigned just after Richard Nixon was re-elected and was replaced by Gerald Ford, but Agnew was on the ticket both times Nixon was elected). --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

48.26% --Tango (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly, (to site a real statistic), Biden is being given 12-1 odds of being the Democratic presidential nominee [13]. I can't find anyone betting on the VP nominees. You can, however, bet on the presidential winner, both parties' presidential nominees, and which party will win. Buddy431 (talk) 02:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Scenarios under which Biden would not be on the ticket:

1) Obama doesn't run, and Biden decides not to run on his own (or does and is defeated) and isn't selected as VP by the winner of the Democratic primary. This could happen, say, if the economy collapses further.

2) Obama runs but loses in primary, and the winner doesn't pick Biden as VP candidate. Unlikely, since this only happens when there is a major split in a party (as between the Tea Party and traditional Republicans). Democrats are relatively united now, so would be likely to support the President if he runs, if only because the chances of winning the Presidency after bitter in-fighting would be almost zero.

3) Obama runs, but does not choose Biden as VP. If Biden were caught in some scandal, then this could happen.

4) Biden chooses not to run. Again, this could be due to a scandal, but health or personal reasons are also possible. StuRat (talk) 06:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Obama birth certificate: who was the doctor?

President Obama today released a certified copy of his original "long form" birth certificate, titled "Certificate of Live Birth" showing that he was born when and where he had always said, consistent with the earlier released "Certification of Live Birth" computer printout. One piece of information on the long form certificate is the doctor's name. It appears to be "David A. Smilan",(edited to add) but others read it as "David A. Sinclair" although the last name is not easy to read. This appears to be in conflict with Snopes which posted a January, 2009 statement by a teacher in Hawaii, (here is the original newspaper interview) who claimed to recall a 1961 conversation with the obstetrician who delivered Obama, whom she said was Dr. Rodney T. West, who died in February, 2008, age 98. She said she remembered West telling her on August 4, 1961 that "today" a baby named Barack Hussein Obama had been born to a mother named Stanley Ann Dunham and a father who was the first African student at the University of Hawaii. If Dr West was the obstetrician, why is Dr. SmilanSinclair (or whatever the scribble represents) the one to sign the birth certificate? Historical sources can be found for Dr. West, such as one saying that he was there providing medical aid during the Pearl Harbor attack, which events he wrote a book about. Was the lady's memory faulty about her connection to history, and did Snopes get fooled, or were there two doctors there? Did a "Dr. David A. SmilanSinclair" (or Smiljan, or Smilain or Smilai") leave any historical record in Honolulu? Edison (talk) 14:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Next round of the conspiracy? The name is hard to make out. The easiest explanation is that every non-trivial hospital will have multiple physicians on duty, and that any one of them (or always one designated for the job) signs the paperwork. "The marriage certificate is witnessed by Bob and Blanche, but I remember that Carol and Curtis claimed to have been at the wedding..." ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Not this Bob and Blanche, I trust. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, a half-remembered conversation from 50 years previous is not exactly what I would consider to be a definitive source. (Anyway, I would note how ridiculous it would be to forge a birth certificate with a fake doctor's name on it, especially when there are no doubt many real doctors who worked there who would be dead by now and not be able to protest if their name was misappropriated.) --Mr.98 (talk) 15:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Maybe that's what we are meant to think. Maybe it's a fiendish double bluff. Or triple bluff. Just like the moon landings ... Gandalf61 (talk) 15:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The account at Snopes was claimed to be very clearly remembered, not "half remembered." Additionally, the Snopes claims from the woman were widely trotted out for 2 years as "proof" of the Honolulu birth, with the doctor conveniently dead. I could find no mention of a "David A. Smilan" in Google Books, but I did find one source stating that in the late 1950's early 1960s the hospital delivered about 4000 babies per year, which sounds like it might have been a "teaching hospital." The form says "signature of attendant," resumably the physician actually in charge of the delivery. It is not a trivial matter, because there are many malpractice suits if there is anything "wrong with" a baby, and the doctor in charge is the one who would get hit with any malpractice suit. If Doctor A delivers a baby, Doctor B who wasn't there is very unlikely to take credit for it. I suppose that at a large hospital there might have been a senior doctor and a doctor who is an intern medical school graduate on his rotation through ob-gyn who does the "hands-on" baby catching and gets to sign the form. Edison (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm just saying, as a professional historian (one of the few times I will flash my badge around), all 50 year memories are half remembered. People's confidence in their own memory is not a substitute for evidence in a more tangible medium. --Mr.98 (talk) 21:19, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Maybe the Smilan guy will turn up, although he would likely be at least 70 by now and probably wouldn't remember the specifics anyway. The most interesting thing about this turn of events is how it's given a boost to The Donald's campaign (or whatever to call it at this stage). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:48, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

In the US, attending physician may actually refer to the supervising physician in charge of OBGYN at the time, regardless of whether he was personally involved with the delivery. One would need to know more about Hawaii's specific process to know who would generally sign the form. Dragons flight (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Anyone with access to a 1961 Hawaii Medical Directory? That might clarify the staff positions of the two positions mentioned in connection with the birth. Edison (talk) 16:27, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Some read it as "David A. Sinclair" (died 2003), who would have been about 39 in 1961, while Dr. West would have been 51. Edison (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I got a hunch you're right, as that name is turning up a lot now in google, in reference to this. And, predictably, the birthers have moved on to the claim that somehow Obama's father being African makes Obama ineligible. Despite the egg on their faces, they forge ahead. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Haven't they been saying that all the time anyway? They just didn't care as much before since he was obviously born in Kenya and/or Indonesia. Nil Einne (talk) 01:36, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Lol - I've been trying to decide whether this was a stupid move on Obama's part or a brilliantly Machiavellian one. Releasing his BC at this late date is just bound to make the conspiracy theorists go ape (e.g. "Why did it take so long - did he just need all that time to fabricate a solid background cover?") and revive the controversy. On the other hand, getting the conspiracy theorists to go ape will likely benefit Obama in the long run. Nothing better for a candidate than to look extremely sane and reasonable by comparison to his opponents' pet fanatics.

US Politics: a huge roller-coaster ride, where every car carries a nuclear missile, and no one is allowed to get off. funFunFUN! --Ludwigs2 16:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

My personal theory is that he did it, in part, to boost Trump's campaign and help create further division within the GOP (that theory makes the assumption that the Democrats were smart enough to think of that). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

@ Ludwigs2: I agree. If he was going to release the BC eventually anyway, why not do it earlier rather than later, and avoid all the bullshit we've had to endure? Since it's a formal constitutional requirement that the Pres be native-born and not just a citizen at the time of election, I've long wondered why it's never been necessary for presidential candidates to produce documentary proof that they're eligible to be elected, before even being permitted to run in the first place. Some joker who was born in Outer Mongolia (no offence to Outer Mongolians) could claim to have been a native-born American, get registered as a presidential candidate, and it seems the whole establishment would just have to take his word for it, until someone did a bit of digging and outed him. Nobody else is able to get away with just their word, when it comes to saying exactly when and where they were born, so why is such latitude extended to those who aspire to occupy the most powerful office in the world? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

It's never really been an issue before. Most of the time, Americans generally accept that someone is born where they say they were, and if anyone wants to check into it, there are publicly available documents (as there were in this case too, but whatever). And usually, someone would have had to deliberately lie about their place of birth for a long time before they considered running for president for a credible lie to be in place. There is of course, Chester A. Arthur, who did start to lie about his year of birth in the 1870s (to make himself look younger), and who may or may not have been born in Canada, but at the time of his presidency, nobody really cared that much (his opponents tried to drum up the foreign born aspect, but people really didn't think it mattered). It's only now that people are actually making much of a fuss about this requirement. There are several so called "birther bills" making their way through state houses [14], [15], so it's possible that in the future, more stringent proof of birth place will be required. Buddy431 (talk) 21:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Obama's case was also more of a fuss because if he were not born in the U.S. (a silly IF), he might not currently be a U.S. citizen at all. His mother fell into a category that might not have granted him immediate citizenship, and taking no affirmative action to claim it, might have made him a Indonesian citizen later (or perhaps a stateless person). 75.41.110.200 (talk) 22:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

@ Jack: that's a matter of history, really. Documented births didn't really get established in the US until the 20th century (it's doubtful that Washington, Lincoln, or either of the Roosevelts could have produced documentation of their US birth); presidents have typically come from upper social classes where questions about parentage and residency don't exist (Lincoln and Obama being obvious exceptions); and moreover the political concern is really that the president have a life-long allegiance to the US (i.e., we don't want someone raised in, say, France to emigrate and run for president, because he might be too sympathetic to the interests of France). The Founding Fathers lived in a world where people translocated slowly and infrequently, and could not have imagined a world where this would ever be an issue (I'll refrain from speculating on what the FF would think about the Birthers - that's a highly amusing but inappropriate line of thought). --Ludwigs2 22:07, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, but we've moved on somewhat since Lincoln and Washington. There's been significant public interest in the "native-born" question since at least as far back as 1964, when Barry Goldwater was running. Surely it would be a simple matter for there to be established a protocol/procedure whereby: (a) those wishing to run for president have to produce evidence that they meet all constitutional requirements (which include things other than the native-born thing), (b) that evidence be certified as satisfactory by someone like the Attorney-General (which doesn't necessarily mean it could never be challenged, but that it passes the prima facie tests), and (c) that evidence then be publicly available to all comers for all time. This should occur no later than the time of registration as a formal candidate, and certainly well before any voting occurs. After all, this isn't just the presidency of the local kindergarten we're talking about here. Someone wanting to join the army or the police force or the CIA/FBI would be subjected to a far more intrusive and searching examination of their background than any presidential candidate ever is. That just seems wrong in principle. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 22:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Jack, the whole thing is partisan silliness. You do realize that many of the people who are drum-beating about Obama's citizenship now are same people who advocated removing the citizenship requirement a few years back when they thought the Republicans might field Schwarzenegger as a presidential candidate? The only reason they didn't push that harder was because Arnie said he wouldn't run. What we need in this country is actual accountability for actual political actions, not acres of senseless maundering over where a presidential candidate was in the first 15 seconds of his life. I swear, our own government is reducing us to wage-slavery in order to pander to giant corporations, while all we do is babble on about meaningless criteria. pish AND tosh. --Ludwigs2 01:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I fully understand where the birthers are coming from, and I wouldn't give any of them the time of day. But it just seems to me that if you folk are going to have it enshrined in your constitution that the President must be native-born, then there should be some process, in the name of transparency, that assures everyone right up front that the person they may wish to vote for does indeed meet that requirement. It shouldn't be down to "I know the President was native-born because I read it in the newspaper, or my next door neighbour Bert told me, or I read it on Wikipedia, or I heard it on TV". One can come by lots of information in each of those ways that turns out to be 100% wrong. Why bother to have such a formal constitutional requirement if there's no proper way of ever checking that any of the candidates actually satisfies it? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The thing I don't understand about all this - When I went my first time to get my driver's license, I had to show my birth certificate to prove my citizenship. Same with my passport. (I would assume his Senate position in Illinois beforehand would also want at least some documentation on him, which may include proof of citizenship - I dunno for sure, though.) Obama, to my knowledge, has a license and a passport - did he get them the normal way, or what? And if he did, why is it so hard for birthers to accept that those people who reviewed the documents at that point in time found them to be official? As a side note, I did get my license and passport a good deal later than Obama, I believe - (Since he's almost 50 and could have received these at 16, whereas my license and passport I got ~ 10 years ago) - have requirements become more strict? ^Avic_ennasis @ 16:38, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

(sigh...) It's the same reason why important people have a special line at the airport where they don't get searched or scanned, why the very weathy get tax breaks and hand-outs while the very poor are told to be 'fiscally responsible', and why corporate crime generally goes unpunished despite the fact that they sometimes cause more misery than the collected crimes of all the inmates at a given prison. We live in a class-based society, and once you have entered into the 'right' class, you are assumed to be beyond reproach (and it is in fact considered an insult to suggest otherwise). I'm not approving or disapproving of that - that's just the way it is. --Ludwigs2 17:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Obama released the standard Hawaii birth certificate 3 years ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

And I would note the reason he didn't release this document earlier is because it's never provided (in Hawaii) to people. A special exception was made for Obama. Nil Einne (talk) 01:36, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I have to call BS on that. I have a Hawaii birth certificate and it has been in my possession for years. Googlemeister (talk) 13:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Is this normal practice in the US? I must admit I've never understood why the full certificate was never made available before - in the UK anyone can get an official copy of anyone's birth (or marriage, or death) certificate by locating the index details and making an application to the General Register Office with the fee of around £10, it's the standard method of doing genealogical research - I had a problem initially locating my father's birth certificate, but that was only because back in 1919 he was registered under the English version of his first names and he always used the Welsh versions during his life. I had to get a long-form copy of my own birth certificate when I first wanted a passport, as my parents had only got the short-form certificate when I was born. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 12:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It varies by State. In Ohio, while tracing my family history, I found out that you can request a copy of person's birth certificate, but only if you are related to that person. (I got one for my grandfather there.) In Pennsylvania, however, (IIRC) the only birth certificate you can get is your own. While this information/documents used to be available to the general public, its use in identity theft in recent years have caused some states to place tighter restrictions on getting certain documents. ^Avic_ennasis @ 16:38, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Nobody's mentioned the rather obvious reason why Obama's birth has been scrutinized while nobody else's ever has: he has dark skin, a funny name, and a father from Kenya. Staecker (talk) 12:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Nobody else's? Sure about that? Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 13:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Is there anything in this thread which is relevant to Wikipedia? (Asked rhetorically)68.122.51.169 (talk) 02:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Things don't have to be 'relevant to Wikipedia' to be allowed on the RD. Arguably parts of the first question at least were factual questions that could be or can now be answered by providing references even if there has been perhaps a little soapboxing and general discussion that followed. Nil Einne (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Read the original question, not remotely soapbox: If Doctor Smilan-scribble/Sinclair was the doctor who delivered him, per the official birth certificate, how was the Snopes' Doctor West also the doctor who delivered him? Tag team obstetrics? Edison (talk) 04:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Painted into a corner - literally

This cliche has been used numerous times on TV and in cartoons over the years. Has there ever been a documented case in which someone literally did this to themselves? What was the outcome? Hemoroid Agastordoff (talk) 15:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

What sort of documentation would you expect for such an eventuality? I'm sure people have done this - it's an easy mistake to make. The outcome will generally be footprints in the wet paint, and a requirement for some remedial work. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes, you just wait. I have "urethaned" myself onto an upstairs landing. My spouse tossed me a book and I read for a couple of hours. Bielle (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Your example actually answers the question, assuming the OP will accept "original research". I'm sure there are countless cases of doing housework and finding yourself "trapped" by the approach taken. Then you either wait for it to dry or you walk through it and fix it later. I googled [paint into a corner] and there's nothing about the origin that I can find, only about the meaning of it as a metaphor; and the google images that come up are either cartoons (where one is most likely to see it) or as an obviously staged photo. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

This reminds me of the story about the guy who built an airplane in his basement, where it remained. I always thought it was a joke, but check this out homemade airplane fills basement190.148.135.112 (talk) 18:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

There's a stock joke like that about boats. Airplanes is a new one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• During Mike Mulligan and His Steam Shovel the steam shovel Mary Ann is outmoded by diesel diggers and instead proves her worth by digging the town hall cellar in one day. She fails to dig a ramp to get out of the hole. So they build the building around her. Mike Mulligan gets a job as a janitor and Mary Ann becomes the boiler. However, in real life when the declining rate of profit outmodes an industrial sector the common result is the liquidation of the workforce and industry. YMMV. A related industrial joke to painting yourself into a corner is the game three men down a hole which is played with a confined space, a human need to rescue someone in trouble, and a heavy than air deadly gas. This appears to be a recent match with the usual result. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Some of the earliest railway steam locomotives were quite deliberately redeployed in a similar manner to Mary Ann (of which I had not previously heard). The first one of all known to have successfully run, Richard Trevithick's 1804 Pen-y-Darren locomotive, was primarily intended as a stationary engine and only temporarily converted to locomotive form, and the Stephensons' 1825 Locomotion was fortuitously preserved by being used as a stationary engine for 16 years after retirement from active service, before being restored, while Todd, Kitson & Laird's 1838 Lion spent no less than 59 years in a similar role. Thus also was preserved the boiler (only) of Foster, Rastrick and Company's 1828 Stourbridge Lion, the first loco to run (in 1829) in the USA. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.110.101 (talk) 13:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I was at a construction site for a grocry store where some moron had a crane erect the last outside wall with the crane still in the building. His supervisor was rather irritated. Googlemeister (talk) 13:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Marmion automobile

I have a photo (circa 1910?) of an automobile - a Marmion (sp?). Any information (including correct spelling)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisysmom02 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The Marmon Wasp was the first Indianapolis 500 winner, if that helps. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Not to be confused with the Mormon cricket. (Wink.) Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 13:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Here is a photo of a Marmon Model 32 from which the Wasp was developed. Alansplodge (talk) 17:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Why no drop-side trucks in the U.S.

Have found such trucks in every country but Argentina, U.S., Mexico and Canada, ranging in size from 1/4-tons to giant sixteen wheelers. Most are made by companies who also sell trucks here: Mercedes, Hyundai, Toyota, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.115.156 (talk) 18:43, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The US has drop-side trucks. They are not very common, but they are around. Googlemeister (talk) 20:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Holiday

Who decides on bank holidays? The UK have made a new one for this coming friday, who did that? Who has the athority? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.192.253 (talk) 18:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I would assume Parliament and ultimately it's their call, but it's possible they've delegated that to a department. Shadowjams (talk) 19:27, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

See [[bank holiday#Current practice]].—msh210℠ 19:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

That reference is a little vague, but after a little searching, I think it's fair to say that the decision is made by "the Crown", which in the UK apart from Scotland in effect means the Cabinet, led by the Prime Minister. The Scottish Government apparently gets to make a separate decision for Scotland. However, I am not British and my understanding of British constitutional matters is imperfect, so it would be good to have someone confirm. Marco polo (talk) 20:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, in practice it seems to be the members of the government (of the appropriate country) who make the decisions on bank holidays. This Friday's is a one-off and just follows the usual practice for a wedding of a probable future monarch. The government also seems to have the authority to make permanent changes, but they do so with care because they don't want to upset any part of the electorate. Dbfirs 21:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Slight correction to what I wrote above: Quote from Hansard (Lord Bassam of Brighton in reply to a question addressed to the UK government about bank holidays in the UK) "Bank and public holidays in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are the responsibility of the Department of Trade and Industry. Dates for Scotland are a matter for the Scottish Executive."[16]. Dbfirs 07:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

A colleague said today that he couldn't remember getting a day off for the Charles & Diana wedding. I was on holiday anyway so can't say either. Anyone know? Alansplodge (talk) 22:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes (OR), the Charles and Diana wedding day (29 July 1981) was a Bank Holiday. My daughter was born that day so I didn't need to take an extra day off work... (Her second baby arrived a couple of weeks ago - a couple of weeks too early to ensure a spooky coincidence.) AndrewWTaylor (talk) 00:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes - being a good republican, I went to the seaside for the day so I could avoid watching the thing (not as drastic as some others, who left the country for the day). If the weather's nice, I may do the same tomorrow. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Another colleague suggested that republicans should have to go to work tomorrow! Alansplodge (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Just as non-Christians should get no break over Christmas or Easter. It's an old and not very productive argument. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

On hygiene, and soap

I've long had a habit of showering (with soap and shampoo) at least once a day -- I just feel dirty if I don't, and hey, showers are nice. But I like to think that our bodies generally know what they're doing, and I started researching natural body oil and such our of curiosity. Everything I've found seems to conflict itself, and everybody seems certain you should either scrub yourself squeaky clean every single day, or only bother to bathe once a month, and not use any soap because it's just another product of the man. There's no in-between. I just want to smell nice, but not interfere with my body's natural workings.

I understand that hot water can cause problems, so I've been experimenting with warm to lukewarm water instead, and it does seem to make for softer hair and skin. I've also cut back scrubbing all over with soap to two days a week, and only using it daily on the places that need more frequent cleaning. Does this seem like a reasonable compromise of cleanliness and letting my body do its own thing? Well... More on the cleanliness side, I suppose. But it's progress. --184.166.126.17 (talk) 19:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

There is certainly a happy medium between "scrub yourself squeaky clean every single day" and "only bother to bathe once a month". It will differ for everyone. Most people like to wash daily, but strenuous scrubbing as if your body is covered by some vile poison is really not necessary. The body produces its own natural oils - for a good reason.

But you talk as if soap and shampoo are the only cleaning agents available. Commercially produced soap is notorious for skin irritations and other problems, due to its pH value. Sorbolene (what, still a red link) is neutral, just as effective, has no side effects, and leaves no horrible scum. There are legions of other body washes, but they typically dry out the skin even more quickly than soap does. I've been on this particular soap box (pun) since at least 2006. (Disclaimer: I do not hold any shares in sorbolene manufacturing companies.) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The first website I found to explain sorbolene says "Scientific testing has raised issues about the security of Sorbolene for regular use. Used too frequently it's been found to break down the natural barriers the skin produces to fight the effects of irritants." which seems a world away from Jack's "has no side effects". Neither of then RS, of course. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. I wonder which soap manufacturer funded that study. This was the exact radio program I heard back in 1997 that first got me thinking about saying goodbye to soap. That's 15 years now, and I can report that after I switched to sorbolene my skin immediately became a lot softer and smoother than it ever had been before. I'm not a Nazi about it, though. Sometimes I run out, or I'm out of town or whatever, and I revert to soap for a few days. Inevitably, my skin becomes rough and dry again. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 22:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. It seems clear that excess in any form tends to have negative effects. Your question triggered thoughts from long ago about the habit of skin exfoliation. see exfoliation (cosmetology) To much scrubbing going on. Yes a happy medium makes a lot of sense.190.148.133.64 (talk) 21:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

See, everyone is different. I have exceedingly oily skin. If I don't wash my face at least once a day (twice in the summer) it literally feels like I wiped margarine all over my face, and I end up with horrible break outs. However, washing with a mild acne soap does a really good job and keeping my face feeling clean. I have never had a problem with dry skin; my problems lean towards the other dimension. --Jayron32 01:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

This sound more like me -- for a while there, I was taking two showers a day and didn't have any problems with dry skin. I guess it's probably just a matter of whichever feels better to an individual person. --184.166.126.17 (talk) 02:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I found switching to a diet low on animal fats, and particularly trans-fats and saturated fats, reduces both oily skin and acne. StuRat (talk) 05:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Cola drinks and chocolate seem to exacerbate acne also. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

My motto: There's no such thing as too rich or too thin or too nice OR TOO CLEAN.  :) —This lousy T-shirt (talk) 02:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Not necessarily for kids. See hygiene hypothesis. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

April 28

Bumble bees

I have always been scared of bees. Since the weather is warming up (I am in DE), I have noticed , for the last several days, a large Bumble Bee that hangs right around the edge of my porch (where a chime and globe hang). Several times when I have let my dog out, the Bumble Bee comes to the door seemingly in a threatening manner till he/she moves back. Today I decided to go out myself to do some gardening work. The Bumble Bee was out in his area. I then decided to sit down in my chair and relax but always keeping an eye out for the bumble bee -----just in case! Well, I started watching it and became totally fascinated by it's behavior. First it seemed totally fascinated with that edge of my porch, like hanging out there. Then I noticed when other insects, large or small, flew by, it would go after it, then coming right back to the edge of the porch. I also noted that even when large birds flew by it seemed agitated and flew about but came right back to its position.

As I sat in my chair watching it, I was so fascinated with its behavior that I decided to spend more time outside. I named it Mr. Bumble (although it could be female). I found it very interesting that when I made small soft movements Mr. Bumble didnt move from his position. But when I took my arms and quickly moved them, Mr. Bumble would come right above my head to check me out.

Why am I writing this to you as you probably think I am crazy but I am now very interested in the Bumble Bee. I would like to find out if there is a food for Mr. Bumble that I can provide on the edge of the porch, other than flowers? If not what flowers should I plant that really help Mr. Bumble???

Now the last question is this? Will I be creating a problem with bees? This may be silly but wasps and other bees arent welcome. Does the Bumble Bee have priority over them? Also does the Bumble Bee get rid of mosquitos by shooing them off?

FIRST let me tell you that I certainly appreciate your website. It is great to have the availability of your information. I hope I havent taken total advantage of you all. I hope someone can give me some answers on this. AND I THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND INFORMATION YOU WILL SEND.

Marilyn Mitchell Seaford, DE

I am really confused. I just wanted to ask a question about Bumble Bees but there isnt anywhere for the question to go? Can someone help me?? thanks Marilyn Mitchell

As to the food question: google covers flowers well. A second site www.bumblebee.org provides information on a 30% suger 70% water mix whch can be used as a supplement. I very much doubt that you'll create problems by planting flowers favoured by bumble bees. I very much doubt there's any interaction at all between bumble bees and mosquitos. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Just try to avoid getting stung. I was stung by a bumblebee once and it really, really hurt quite a lot. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

You told us two important things. He's by himself and he's eyeing the wood in your porch. He's probably not a bumble bee but a carpenter bee click on the blue for more information.190.148.135.154 (talk) 02:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

You can easily see if It's a bumble or carpenter. A carpenter bee has a smoothe abdomen but a bumble bee has a hairy abdomen. If It's a carpenter, the male has no stinger even though he acts aggresive, but the female can sting you if she's molested. She will however drill small round holes (about the size of you little finger) in the wood of your porch, but no real damage. Bumble bees are much more aggresive and might sting.190.148.135.154 (talk) 03:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Not an answer but just to say I am really pleased for you that after taking the time to watch this bee your attitude has changed from one of anxiety and animosity to one of interest and benevolence, now if the rest of the world could follow your example... Richard Avery (talk) 07:42, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Here! here! Richard Avery.190.56.115.5 (talk) 08:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hear! Hear! as well. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bumble bee article make no mention of the kind of territorial behaviour the OP describes. Should it? Astronaut (talk) 14:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

My personal experience shows bumblebees are very territorial of their nest at least. Googlemeister (talk) 14:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It's pretty clear to me that this is a carpenter bee, not a bumble bee. The behavior described by the OP is exactly consistent with how a male carpenter bee behaves when patrolling/defending a suitable nesting site. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Mysterious Cities of Gold

I saw online that a few years ago they were planning to make new episodes, airing them starting in 2011, but I haven't been able to find anything more recent. Are they still going ahead with it, or is the project in "development hell"? --75.40.204.106 (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Not very informative, but we have similar info about a sequel at The Mysterious Cities of Gold. Dragons flight (talk) 04:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Proving one's sanity

Someone may know whether this story is true. Allegedly a hotel (perhaps in Las Vegas?) keeps a secret room prepared for drunk patrons. The unconscious drunk is placed in the room where he will wake up later. A hangover will not be his only worry because the room is constructed like an ordinary hotel room except that everything in it is upside down: the furniture and carpet are fixed to the ceiling. There are a typical TV, minibar and framed pictures, all upside down. The unsuspecting victim of this disorienting trick will wonder whether he is having an insane hallucination. How shall he prove his own sanity? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not finding anything on google. I wouldn't think any reputable hotel would do something like that, for fear of a lawsuit of some kind. I'm a funny idea, though. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Simple investigation should suffice. I would think the heavy-duty fasteners needed to hold up heavy objects like the bed, TV, and fridge would be hard to hide, and should be found easily. Other things will provide clues - for the bedsheets to remain in place on the bed, for example, they would have to be sown down (or up, I guess). I also agree with Bugs - no decent casino would do this. If a person did think they went crazy, they could sue the hotel for mental duress. Additionally, if the person is staying in your hotel, and getting drunk (possibly from your own hotel bar), why risk losing a paying customer? Surely at least a few people would cancel a two-week stay at a hotel that did this and go somewhere else, and then the business is out of that money. ^Avic_ennasis @ 17:02, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

One thing that every drunk learns (usually the hard way): gravity is very convincing. --Ludwigs2 17:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It is never possible for anybody to prove their own sanity, in any way that means anything. Looie496 (talk) 21:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

There was a story decades ago about an anonymous rich guy who had such a room built, to put his friends in when they fell asleep drunk at his parties, They woke up, thought they were on the "ceiling," and clung desparately to the light fixture. Hilarity ensued for the others watching through the 2-way mirror. All fiction. This might be derived from the Fred Astaire dance sequence wherein he dances up the walls and across the ceiling in a room which rotated, ironically in the timely "Royal Wedding" movie.Then see [17]Pity the cameramen! Edison (talk) 04:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Quite possibly the camera was fixed in place on the king-sized wheel and simply allowed to run. The Fred Astaire trick has been used a number of times. Two that come to mind are the gravity-defying lunar shuttle scene in 2001: A Space Odyssey and also a Lionel Richie video (consciously imitating Astaire) for "Dancing on the Ceiling". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The illusion would work best if the camera was rigidly attached to the room as it rotated, but the lights as well, otherwise one would see the room turning. The lighting effect would also be distracting, if the shadows moved while the room rotated. The upside down scenes in The Poseidon Adventure also are reminiscent of the room described by the OP. Edison (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Exactism in Japanese shopping - how come?

If I'm 2 pennies short, the cashier will take them from a nearby tray, or just say "close enough" and go through with the transaction.

But when I was 2 yen short in Japan, why did they demand the extra 2 yen in the same way that they'd demand an extra 2000 yen if that were to happen? This was when the Yen was worth less than today; when I was there, it hovered around 105 to $1.

Why didn't the Chitosepia department store have an extra-coin tray? Why couldn't they be "close enough?" Isn't this what would happen if Adrian Monk manned the cash register? --129.130.99.8 (talk) 10:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Local customs differ. In the UK, I've never seen an "extra coin tray" (unless you count the plate sometimes put by the cash desk for gratuities in restaurants/cafes) and only in a local store where you were a recognised regular might you hear "close enough" or "you can owe it to me". Your "exactism" is certainly the standard practice in all department stores here. Gandalf61 (talk) 11:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Same in Malaysia and I think New Zealand (although I rarely use cash and we don't even have 5 cents any more). In a similar vein, most people are going to expect exact change and not accept it being 'close enough. McDonalds in Malaysia did have boxes for their charity mostly filled by 1 cents for people who didn't want to bother with them but they obviously weren't designed to have the money taken out. Nil Einne (talk) 11:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

In the U.S., we have "take a penny, leave a penny". ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

When I lived in Kazakhstan about 10 years ago, the 1 Tenge coins (then about 150 Tenge to a dollar) were in short supply, and shopkeepers would typically give a box of wooden matches in place of 1 Tenge. Everybody had the same brand of matches, and everybody used them for this purpose, though I don't think that the matches would be taken by the shops as payment. Staecker (talk) 13:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

In the Eurozone, some countries no longer use the 1 and 2 cent coins. Certainly, stores in the Netherlands and Finland round up or down to the nearest 5 cents. However, if you pay by card, you are charged the exact amount. As for a "take a penny, leave a penny" tray, I have only ever seen these in the USA. I always though it was because most shelf prices in the USA are exclusive of sales tax leading to some odd total prices - so $6.99 becomes $7.16 at the checkout; while in most(?) other countries the shelf price is inclusive of sales tax so $6.99 stays $6.99 at the checkout. Astronaut (talk) 14:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The "take a penny, leave a penny" thing is a fairly recent development in the United States. I worked as a cashier in the U.S. during the early 1980s, and there was no such thing back then in the Northeast at least. The customer was expected to pay the exact amount (or more, in which case we would give change in pennies as needed). It is hard for me to remember when this developed. No doubt, it began in some region of the United States and spread. I think I remember seeing containers with pennies at cash registers for the first time in the early 1990s in California. Anyway, there is no reason to expect that other countries will have the same customs as the United States. Marco polo (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Canada has them (or had them, we love using our credit/debitcards here) and perhaps even earlier than the US if Marco polo is correct. I recall seeing them as a child at convenience stores in SW Ontario and that would have been in the early 80s. Matt Deres (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I've seen take a penny/leave a penny in gas/petrol stations in the UK, but it's rare. (If you're trying to buy ten pounds worth of fuel but go over the penny comes in useful.) --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

My first visit to Japan back in 2002, I made the mistake of trying to refuse the 3 yen change I was due. With insufficient grasp of the language to explain myself, I just dismissed the change with a wave of my hand and exited the convenience store. To my great embarrassment, the poor cashier came shuffling out after me in that uniquely Japanese young female employee way and insisted, on the side of the damn street, that I take my 3 yen. It was only then that I realized the extent of my cultural mistake. Every place is different, OP. Never forget that point! The Masked Booby (talk) 01:45, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

In Japan, it will depend on the shop and very often the individual employee whether you can get away with being a couple of yen short. I have been short a few times in Japan, and still managed to complete my shopping. However, TheMaskedBooby is correct, in that the Japanese will make sure you get every single yen of your change paid to you - to the extent of even following you onto the street - but this is the service. On a related note, my friend left his camera in a shop in Numazu, and we walked off to the station and onto the train. A shopkeeper came running onto the train to give him his camera back and the train left with the poor shopkeeper still on it with us. It's just the service. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

class war question

Hello, what would happen if the british middle class and the british working class were to actually fight against each other? What would happen and who would win? Jeremy Wordsworth (talk) 11:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Classes aren't in and of themselves organised for class warfare. You may wish to look at what happened during the British General Strike. Or Gramsci's concepts of wars of position and wars of manoeuvre. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The term class war is mainly used metaphorically these days. People use it to refer to legislation, strikes, and so on, rather than exchanges of artillery fire. I'm not sure which meaning you have in mind. Also, these days, it is much less clear than it was in our grandparents' day who exactly belongs to the working class and who belongs to the middle class. There are many different definitions of class about. So it's hard to know what the configurations of any "class war" would be. Finally, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so even if you defined your question more precisely, we wouldn't be able to offer predictions. Marco polo (talk) 15:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree with Marco polo's implication that this speculation has to be baseless. Social structure of the United Kingdom breaks out several specific classifications that distinguish the middle class and the working class. Our article Income in the United Kingdom shows how many taxpayers there are sorted by income. Bringing the two together, I'd say that if the two sides literally fought each other, the working class would win because of numbers; I don't think access to firearms would be much of an impediment, as many military servicemen and police officers are drawn from the working class, and some of those do have the keys to the lockboxes. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

What is your source for the claim that there are more working class people in the UK than middle class? The important thing for this question is how people self-identify, not some arbitrary income threshold, which you seem to be basing your claim on. This BBC News article from 2007 gives a figure of 57% identifying as working class. That's not anywhere near a big enough majority for numbers to be the determining factor. --Tango (talk) 22:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

• There are definitely more proletarians in the United Kingdom than there are Nomenklatura (New class members, technocrats, etc.). Andy Anderson in The Enemy is Middle Class (Pamphlet, ?Homocult publisher) makes a strong and suasive argument that the largest threat to the working class is the nomenklatura technocrats inflicting sociology, pedagogy, etc. on workers. However, Anderson doesn't clearly draw the difference between the "middle class" a cultural phenomena, and "nomenklatura" a relationship to production. There have long been "middle class" proletarians—postal telegraph operators, journalists, registrars-for-life doctors. Some have been markedly more militant in the cause for social control of production than right wing "working class" unions. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Symbol named after a person

Weierstrass p is a typographical symbol named after a person. Are there others? Staecker (talk) 12:44, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

There's the octothorpe. I know it's not a common term for #, but I do occasionally hear it 'in the wild'. I once read an account (possibly apocryphal) that an engineer ( at AT&T? ) named it the octothorpe because it had eight terminal ends, and the engineer liked Jim Thorpe. You might be able to verify/debunk this with some googling. SemanticMantis (talk) 13:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

This source confirms my memory, but it was at Bell labs. [18].SemanticMantis (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, if you interpret the typographic construction monolithically, the legendre symbol might count. SemanticMantis (talk) 13:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Guillemets, after Guillaume Le Bé. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 14:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Why stop at a single glyph ? Some people have a whole typeface named after them. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Kurt Vonnegut used to sign an asterisk after his name. [19] ^Avic_ennasis @ 17:11, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

That was probably an inside joke, since he used the asterisk as a plot device in at least 2 of his novels. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Costa Rican colón and Salvadoran colón were both named after Cristóbal Colón, and they have their own symbol:

--Antiquary (talk) 20:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Not sure if this counts, but The Love Symbol? Robinh (talk) 10:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Name of the oceans in the world

Everybody know that there are 4 oceans in the world.... I know only 2 names of oceans...That's everybody know... It's Pacific Ocean & Atlantic Ocean... So what's the name of the other's 2 ocean's name?????

Arctic Ocean and Indian Ocean. Some authorities also recognise the Southern Ocean as a separate entity. Roger (talk) 16:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

See also our article on oceans.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Some folks also divide the Atlantic and Pacific into North and South, thus identifying a modernized style of the ancient expression Seven Seas. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Also some people have been trying to add an Antarctic Ocean. Googlemeister (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps including Roger, just above... Matt Deres (talk) 13:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Identify this aircraft

Please help identify the type of aircraft in these photos: This photo shows the upper surface of the wing and this one shows the forward view from the cockpit. The images are from a film made in France at least twenty years ago. Roger (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Cockpit roof and single-engine make me think of the Piper PA-38 Tomahawk or the Beechcraft Skipper, however the wings seem a bit different to me. Perhaps the name of the film, or at least the topic would help? (Or more still-frame images?) ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:35, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I misstated the age of the images - they date from only 10 years ago, though the condition of the wing skin strongly indicates that the plane was already quite old at the time. The cockpit roof is also highly suggestive of a sliding canopy - which excludes the Tomahawk or Skipper. I suspect it's more likely to be a French type than American. The rest of the available information is in this forum discussion - [20]. Roger (talk) 19:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Doesnt appear to be very large certainly smaller than a tomahawk and gives the appearance of a single-seat, agree on the sliding canopy but the single piece windscreen might be a clue as it is not that common, but to what I am not sure of. Did think of an early Nord or Me 108 but they dont have a clear one piece windshield. MilborneOne (talk) 20:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I believe the forum got it - seems to be a Socata Rallye, specifically a Socata Rallye 235E-D Gabier. Cockpit and wings match, Company based in France, production time seems right, et cetera. ^Avic_ennasis @ 21:28, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

This 235E image [21] doesnt show the same cockpit! and the standy compass is supported by a full screen post. MilborneOne (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I stand corrected. :) Perhaps I'm not as handy with planes as I thought I was! ^Avic_ennasis @ 22:57, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

So we have a consensus that it is a Rallye but the variant is not known. BTW it seems the source is somebody's personal video recording, not a commercial movie. Roger (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Astronauts

In space, where there is no gravity/microgravity, how to astronauts weigh themselves? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaosandwalls (talk • contribs) 17:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

On the ISS the astronauts use a device called SLAMMD, which uses springs to exert a known force on the astronaut. The acceleration that force produces is directly proportional to the astronaut's mass. anonymous6494 17:44, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Where directly means inversely. —Tamfang (talk) 02:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Precisely. anonymous6494 03:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Nude beach in Toronto

I live in Toronto and I want to visit the nude beach at the island. Do you know how much it cost to pay for the ferry to get me to the island and how much it costs to pay go back? Thanks and sorry for not making sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.20.141 (talk) 17:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Although you don't mention which one of the Toronto Islands you mean, I assume you mean Hanlan's Point Beach. The fare (including return) for an adult would be $6.50. Hope this helps. ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:39, 24 Nisan 5771 / 28 April 2011 (UTC)

This time of year is probably still part of what might call the "off-season". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

yeeees... you might want to add the medical bills for some unpleasant forms of frostbite into that $6.50 figure. --Ludwigs2 21:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Guys, April in Toronto is not exactly Cremation of Sam McGee territory. Wunderground shows a high today of 50 F, with winds of 26 mph. Not ideal for nude-beaching, but the hardier sorts might do it. --Trovatore (talk) 21:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Probably a boon for those who enjoy seeing seriously erect nipples, although I can also think of some negative side effects on the part of the male viewers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

One doesn't talk about such things in nude-recreation circles. It's not supposed to be a strip show. By the way, the "hardier sorts" are almost exclusively male. --Trovatore (talk) 22:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

{{fact}} --Tango (talk) 22:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The negative side effects I was referring to have to do primarily with shrinkage... especially if you take a dip in the icy lake. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I've been to a number of nude beaches, both on purpose and on accident, in my day, and I can tell you it's not worth the fare. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

All that means is that you're not going to the right ones, a comment I will steadfastly refuse to clarify. --Ludwigs2 02:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

With apologies to Groucho Marx: "I wouldn't want to visit any nude beach that will accept me as a bather." -- 174.31.219.218 (talk) 05:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

No kidding. Anyone who's ever been in a locker room (which would be most of us) would know that the average citizen is not centerfold material. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Anyone who's ever been in a locker room would know that the average citizen of the same gender as themselves is not centerfold material. Most locker rooms (unless you're in a particularly liberal society) don't tell us much about the other gender, which is what we are usually more interested in. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Certainly. It's just that if most of us males look average at best, it's reasonable to assume that most females also look average at best. However, I'm not willing to say that there wouldn't be some elevated level of interest, in studying that situation, for scientific purposes of course. 0:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I am the same person who ask before and I have another question. How much do I have to pay for the parking at the ferry dock for the Hanlan's Point Beach? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.153.17 (talk) 15:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

April 29

How long is the Panamerican Highway?

Hi. In your article says it´s 40.000 Km long, but there are other sources (like [http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0837451.html this, based on The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2007, Columbia University Press.) who says it´s 25.000. So, my question is, what data is wrong? Thanks. Sorry if this is not the right place to ask, but your help system is a labyrint. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreateletrabajo (talk • contribs) 00:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Without lifting a finger to help you, or do any of my own research, my first reaction is "Hmmm, 25,000 miles equals 40,000 km." Might that be the issue? DaHorsesMouth (talk) 01:19, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Correct, good sir. :) 40 000 kilometers = 24 854.8477 miles. ^Avic_ennasis @ 02:14, 25 Nisan 5771 / 29 April 2011 (UTC)

But that is not the explanation. Pan-American Highway says "about 47,958 kilometres (29,800 mi) in total length". http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0837451.html says "c.16,000 mi (25,750 km) long". Without researching it, I notice the map in Pan-American Highway shows more than one route and includes "Unofficial Route". I guess it's not clearly defined what is considered part of the Pan-American Highway. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Considering the great circle distance from Prudhoe Bay to Ushuaia is 15,264 km according to this site, it seems the highway must do an awful lot of meandering to be nearly three times longer. Astronaut (talk) 15:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:BOOMERANG

If this is not the place I apologize and will accept suggestions for elsewhere. But I just got done reading through the day's WP:ANI board (for educational purposes, of course), and am curious about the term "boomerang," regarding filing an accusation that ultimately come back to the detriment of the accuser. Was this used in the same sense before WP? And also, what it the first instance in which this term was coined on WP? Thanks! Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Interesting history, that. Formerly, the essay was at Wikipedia:Plaxico, a reference to the unfortunate Plaxico Burress, who literally did shoot himself in the foot (or leg, whatever). There was much ado about the name; was it appropriate to reference a living person in such a disparaging way internally? See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Plaxico and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Plaxico (2nd nomination). The essay was deleted, but most of the content subsequently copied and pasted into the current essay (probably violating the copyright of those who wrote the original essay, but whatever). For your specific question, the term Boomerang effect does enjoy some modest use outside of Wikipedia, generally in a way synonymous with Unintended consequences (which is by far the more common term. Buddy431 (talk) 02:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the "Plaxico" thing pretty much came to a halt after he got sent to prison, as it wasn't so funny anymore. The "boomerang" is a better reference anyway, since it's better known outside the USA than Plaxico was/is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The term "blowback" also comes to mind, it's military and security jargon for "unintended consequences". Roger (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Longest Snake

What is the type and size of world's longest snake found ever ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.242.178.158 (talk) 09:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Please see longest snake record.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:59, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Infinitely long because it forms a full circle. (Solution here.) – b_jonas 10:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Description of all the "stuff" on Prince William's wedding day suit

Is there anywhere on the Internet that describes what all those things like the blue sash, the wings-thing on it, the award just below, the stars on the shoulders, and every other "thing" are and how they were earned, or if not earned, what's the story on them? 20.137.18.50 (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The blue sash and the star on his left torso are for the Order of the Garter, in which he is a Royal Knight Companion. (As a member of the royal family, he is a supernumerary member of the Order.) Our article on Prince William has what looks to be a fairly complete list of his titles, styles, and honours. The 'wing-thing' is the wings of the Royal Air Force, where he is a flight lieutenant. The medal on the sash is the Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee Medal. The red uniform tunic is the formal dress attire of a colonel of the Irish Guards, an honorary appointment: [22]. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:41, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Very interesting how one can simultaneously be a lieutenant in the air force and a colonel (even if honorary) in the army. 20.137.18.50 (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

He's not a lieutenant, he's a Flight Lieutenant. It's equivalent to a Captain in the British Army (which he also is, just to complicate matters!). --Tango (talk) 14:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Unhelpful and off-topic chatter.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The questioner seems to assume that Prince William has ever 'earned' anything. Huh. </rant> ╟─TreasuryTag►UK EYES ONLY─╢ 13:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC) I'm not watching the wedding, but I do hope his brother hasn't turned up in this --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

It must be embarassing to have a bunch of honorary "achievements" pinned all over him. Seems it would make a guy feel like a fraud. AAhh but not if you're a prince I suppose.190.56.105.199 (talk) 15:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I gather that he's going to return to his current job of search-and-rescue in the RAF, and I gather there's nothing fraudulent about that - especially including the high element of risk. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:04, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Good point!190.56.105.52 (talk) 16:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)