Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

November 17

Are the Wikipedians really serious about Userboxitis?

Are the Wikipedians really serious about Userboxitis, and what's so bad about them? I absolutely love Userboxes. Every one of them cracks me up with a smile on my face, and I wish I can use every single one of them on my Wiki user page. SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 02:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The correct plural is Userboxen. If you forget this world-shatteringly important fact one more time, we may have to inform the Wikipedia Secret Police and increase your coffee intake.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 07:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

1, 2, 3...This userbox is a test. Please tell this user if you don't see it.

HiLo48 (talk) 07:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Excellent. To give you an idea how old that basic joke is, at minimum, here's the second verse of the World War I song, "It's a Long Way to Tipperary": Paddy wrote a letter to his Irish Molly-o / Saying, should you not receive it, write and let me know / If I make mistakes in spelling, Molly dear, said he / Remember, it's the pen that's bad - don't lay the blame on me! That second part also sounds very familiar somehow. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

This is a question better suited for Wikipedia:Help Desk or Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) or anywhere else. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

What we really need is a userbox that says 'this user suffers from userboxitis'... Lemon martini (talk) 13:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

about ways of donation

I am a Chinese user without a credit card or a paypal account. I wonder if it's possible to add Alipay as a means of donation. This would greatly facilitate would-be Chinese donors. Thank you.

BTW about Alipay: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alipay#Alipay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.88.2.55 (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

There are other methods of donation, including wire transfer and Moneybookers. See this page. Wikipedia:Contact us/Donations has more info, and you can contact donate@wikimedia.org with questions. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

And, of course, thank you for your interest in donating to keep Wikipedia running! Your support is appreciated. --Tango (talk) 01:10, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Diet Coke and Mentos

Just read the article, and was wondering what would happen if someone ingested Mentos shortly after drinking diet coke. Will they explode? Will the acid in their stomach neutralise the reaction? Also, is diet coke the only thing that works, or will normal coke do the trick too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.177.168.168 (talk) 09:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

You'd probably vomit violently. I don't suppose you would explode - the plastic coke bottles don't. In any case I wouldn't try it. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Or probably not. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The article and references say that normal Coke produces a smaller reaction; they suspect aspartame in Diet Coke is partly responsible. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:13, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

If you search YouTube for mentos+coke+mouth there are plenty of people doing this but they all seem to have the sense not to drink the coke before eating the mentos.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Coca-Cola claim you're safe to drink diet Coke and eat Mentos.To quote them:

Q. Can this same reaction occur if I eat Mentos and drink Diet Coke or Coke Zero at the same time?

A. No. Chewing the candy destroys its surface which is needed for the carbon dioxide bubbles to form.

Q. Will anything happen if I just swallow Mentos and then consume Diet Coke or Coke Zero?

A. No. The level of carbon dioxide and pressure generated in a 2 liter bottle of beverage is far greater than what can be produced in the stomach.

--Colapeninsula (talk) 14:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Snopes.com says it won't make you explode or kill you but it can still be rather unpleasant to consume mentos and diet soda; they suggest that the mixture will re-emerge from your mouth and cite YouTube videos as evidence.[1] --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Verifying material in an entry on myself

The wiki entry on me – Brian Sibley – has a warning printed that the personal information may not be verified as no citations are given. How can I personally verify the correctness of information in the entry for readers?

Brian Sibley <EMAIL REMOVED> — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianSibley (talk • contribs) 14:03, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email this address.

All information on Wikipedia must come from reliable sources (e.g. newspaper articles, books), and should include a reference specifying the source. You can verify personal information by inserting references pointing to reliable sources that give the information in the article. See Wikipedia:Verifiability for what counts as a reliable source, and Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for how to add references. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:11, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the article Brian Sibley, there is a lot of biographical information that doesn't have any sources referenced. This information in theory shouldn't be included unless it has been published in a reliable source (generally something that has been professionally edited in whatever media, or produced by a reputable publishing house, TV channel, or a website acknowledged as a good source of information, not something from a blog, wiki, fanpage, etc). It should be possible to find sources for some of this - e.g. there's a quote from the Daily Telegraph that must be traceable to an edition of the paper or its website, and IMDb or the BBC website may be suitable sources for information on works he has written (some IMDb material like biographies and trivia are crap written by random people and not trustworthy, but IMDb is commmonly used for filmographies). However, I'm not sure if suitable published sources exist for many of the details Sibley's life (unless there is a newspaper or magazine profile somewhere). None of the material looks controversial, so I don't think it should be removed, but it would be nice to have some more references. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

And finally, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before editing the Wikipedia page about yourself: you should avoid making major changes or writing anything controversial. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

In case it's not obvious, Brian (and we regular Wikipedians may sometimes be guilty of forgetting to spell this out), you have identified yourself in your message as the Brian Sibley in question, and you very probably are, but we cannot be certain of that, and cases of malicious impersonation do occur - impersonation is very easy on the internet. For that reason we have to restrict ourselves to already-published sources which would have been challenged on their publication if erroneous, and which anyone can refer to as a check. We also have to make it a general rule to avoid self-published sources (e.g. your own website if you have one, or your personal communications to us or third parties) because some people may be motivated to misrepresent themselves, and because such sources are difficult or impossible for others to check. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.145 (talk) 16:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, your mug-shot was scanned in... Can you remember who the photographer was?--Aspro (talk) 17:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Rare phenomenon

i was watching pirates of the carribean (at world's end) earlier and there is a scene in there where they discuss a natural phenomenon where a green light will shoot out from the sea to the sky, they say it is so rare that almost all men live out their lives not seeing the green light, so im am wondering, is there any natural phenomenon similar to this one that is so rare only a few people witnessed? im thinking of auroras.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arah18 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The phenomenon discussed in the movie is this: Green_flash thx1138 (talk) 18:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

More generally, there are a number of rare meteorological or atmospheric phenomena that most people have never seen, including various kinds of upper-atmospheric lightning (sprites, elves, blue jets, blue starters) and cloud phenomena like glories and Brocken spectres. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 18:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Similar but not rare is the Naga fireballs. The article also links to St. Elmo's fire and Will-o'-the-wisp far more rare. --Aspro (talk) 18:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

"Wheels of Poseidon", [2] has been seen by few people. Note: The WP article Wheels of Poseidon makes sound as if it requires a ship – which it doesn't. The plankton can self generate the effect on their own on a large scale.--Aspro (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Interesting guys, thanks. But is there any phenomenon that is almost considered as legendary for its rarity? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arah18 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Ball lightning seems to fit - it's still still unknown what it is, if anything, since witness reports vary widely. There may be some phenomena in the "see also" section with a similar status.  Card Zero  (talk) 19:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

You could check out some of the pages at Category:Atmospheric optical phenomena and related categories. The first thought I had was glories, Heiligenschein, and aureoles, but they are not that uncommon. Apparently the Kern arc is "extremely rare", with only six reported sightings, according to our page. Some natural phenomena are not rare but very hard to see, so few people have, like Gegenschein. The Fata Morgana mirage is rare and has a nice legend to go along with it (perhaps answering your second question to some degree). Also, I think the glory phenomenon (and perhaps related ones) played a role in the depiction of saints with aureola around their heads. Pfly (talk) 20:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

If you're into this sort of thing, I might recommend a book called Handbook of Unusual Phenomena by William Corliss. It has a lot of odd stuff in it, much of which must be confused balderdash, but it all has some sort of documentation behind it (even if the documentation in question may itself be based on confused balderdash). It's available quite cheap used. It's entertaining at the very least. --Mr.98 (talk) 21:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Another good book on natural light and color phenomena (not all "unusual" phenomena, but some, and all described in great detail) is Light and Color in the Outdoors by Marcel Minnaert. In fact, I paged through it after seeing this thread. Likely not as cheap as the Corliss book though. I found a used copy. Pfly (talk) 22:37, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The Green Flash is pretty legendary, before it was photographed a lot of people didn't believe it existed. Except it unusual conditions, it's all but impossible to see. APL (talk) 03:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Akiza!

Where did Akiza go,when she left 5Ds? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.17.131 (talk) 19:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

That's pretty vague again, Tailsman67. >_> Sergecross73 msg me 19:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Seems that Akiza#Akiza_Izinski answers this question. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I mean,where does she live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.17.131 (talk) 20:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

She doesn't live. She's a fictional character. If the show didn't explain where she left for, how would we know? Beeblebrox (talk) 01:19, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Danmit.:( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.17.131 (talk) 04:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

CC and BCC

There are three windows in my Gmail account. A normal one (To) where I get to type in the addresses with commas, a CC window, and a BCC window. CC is for carbon copy, which means sending the same email to different people. Since I can already do that in the first window, with those commas, why has Gmail kept a separate CC window? Also, BCC forwards the same mail to different people, only now, they can't see who the other recipients of the mail are. So supposing I type one person's address in the first To window, and the other addresses in the BCC box, do the BCC recipients get to see the name of the person in the To box? 110.225.185.76 (talk) 20:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Right they'd be able to see the people in the "To" "CC" and "From" fields. I don't really understand the point the "CC" field myself. Hot Stop talk-contribs 20:11, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

"CC" is meant to be just for people to have a copy of the mail and not do anything with it, while "To" is for somebody to reply or action. If you get a "CC" it is just for interest and you dont need to reply or do anything. MilborneOne (talk) 20:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, it depends on the usage of it. Some people may want a reply. Anyway, CC is just for aesthetics. It doesn't functionally mean anything different than "To". BCC actually does something different. --Mr.98 (talk) 21:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's just for aesthetics. If I CC someone on an email, it's essentially telling them why they are included on the email. That would be "I'm sending this for your own info but I don't expect a reply from you." It's communicating without having to spell out in the email "Hey John, this is for your info only. Don't feel the need to reply." Dismas|^(talk) 22:07, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the problem is that some people use CC when they should, logically, be using the "To" line, and also misuse it when, for privacy, they should be using BCC. I wouldn't expect a reply if I received only a carbon copy. I have collected lots of e-mail addresses from people who pass on their whole address book in CC, though I have no intention of mis-using these. Dbfirs 22:30, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

To summarise points from several of the above answers and also to clear up some possible confusions, the following is what I was taught in a formal Business Administration course leading to an RSA Certificate, and also subsequently in IT Diploma courses given (mandatorily) to new recruits at two different global multinational firm I subsequently joined. (The courses all predated the creation of Gmail, but I'd be very surprised if Gmail's usages differ.)

The 'To:' field is for the recipient or recipients who are expected to take action on or need the information in the contents of the e-mail; they can see all of the other To and CC recipients.

The 'CC:' (from Carbon Copy) field is for further recipients who are not expected to take action on or use the contents, but whom you wish to be aware that the e-mail was sent; they also can see all of the other To and CC recipients.

The 'BCC:' (from Blind Carbon Copy) field is for people whom you want to receive the e-mail without the To or CC recipients knowing about it; a BCC recipient can see all of the To and CC recipients but not any other BCC recipients, but the To and CC recipients cannot see any of the BCC recipients. Hope that helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.145 (talk) 01:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

That explains it well, and it also raises an example that may not have been covered in a recent discussion about old-fashioned terms that are still used (such as "dialing" on the phone). "Carbon Copy" comes from a time when typists literally used carbon paper for making multiple copies. The need for carbon paper in that context pretty much disappeared as the xerox and the PC gained wide usage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Do they even make carbon paper anymore? I suggest most younguns would never have seen any of it, much less used it -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC).

Indeed they do. According to the description it's mainly used for making hand-written receipts. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:57, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

... and it's still supplied in some bank paying-in books (the ones with a customer copy rather than a small counterfoil). Dbfirs 12:27, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

November 18

when i am (legally) a finder?

if i 'find' somewhere a wallet, take it to look into it, and then replace it just where i 'found' it returning to my own buisness - am i legally a finder (with duty to report what i found)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.174.123.87 (talk) 02:05, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Consider that your fingerprints are now on the wallet.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

This topic is not about suspect, proof or forensics - i just want to know the definition of what is 'finding misplaced property' in english or american law - that's all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.174.123.87 (talk) 19:50, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

• We cannot offer legal advice. Please see the legal disclaimer. Contact a lawyer. Quintessential British Gentleman (talk) 02:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

However, don't forget the old concept, findus keepus losus weepus. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:44, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

So, this internet censorship thingy...

If, heaven forbid, it is passed, would Wikipedia be a possible victim of this draconian legislation? 76.64.237.223 (talk) 07:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

You mean the Stop Online Piracy Act? The answer is yes: here is a blog post from Jay Walsh of Wikimedia. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

With any luck, that would be the death knell of the "anyone can edit" principle. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I think it important that everyone who poses or reads a question here should be trusted to reach their own decisions about it without being overridden by a censor. In this way responders can give an OP the benefit of a diversity of knowledge, references and opinions and our answers that are in the archive can be referenced with no fuss whenever a similar question arises. Incidentally, I think a response like "That's a silly question because <reason>" can be tolerated but a response like "You are this idiot (because I say so)" is unacceptable. Those here who want ref. desk material censored should know that censorship has these side effects: chilling effect and forbidden fruit effect. The chilling effect may give the censor a pleasurable impression of serving a wider good but in reality nobody will ever know how much human creativity it has smothered. The forbidden fruit effect can be a recent signal to every apprentice troll that they can stampede the ref. deskers simply by posting a question about an enema. (rewritten version of a post that was suppressed by a block on 28.09.2011). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Francisco_Blake_Mora

Sorry to put this here, but I have been away for a while and can't remember how to raise something I've spotted in an article... I looked at the headings above expecting to see a "talk" link, but could not see one... Perhaps someone here can point me in the right direction...

I was just reading about the sad death of Mr Mora, and spotted a few innacuracies in the article...

Several times through the section about his death, and the following section about controversies the article seems to be confused as to what was being flown in both this crash and the co-incidental crash 3 years ago to the day of the previous man to hold the same job as Mr Mora...

In the last main paragraph of the "Death" section it states : "The death of Blake Mora is the second loss in this position during the Calderón presidency, the first one being Juan Camilo Mouriño, who died in a plane crash in 2008"

Then in the "Controversy" section it says : "Before Blake Mora, Juan Camilo Mouriño, who was also head of the Interior, was killed in a helicopter accident on November 4, 2008"

The further in the same section, at the start of the following paragraph, it reads : "Moreover, the death of Blake Mora and the seven others in a plane crash "

How do I raise this to be corrected? Thanks...

But, but, you can edit the article yourself if you believe there are inaccuracies! Above the article title at Francisco Blake Mora are links: Article, discussion, edit this page, history, move, watch. Can You see them? --Ouro (blah blah) 07:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

The "Discussion" tab gets you into what we otherwise refer to as "Talk". I sympathise fully with the OP. When I was a newby here, this confused the hell out of me. Synonyms are alright in their place, but I still don't understand why the page called [[Talk:<whatever>]] is not accessed by a "Talk" tab rather than a "Discussion" tab. Or alternatively, why what you do get is not called [[Discussion:<whatever>]]. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:15, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Originally it was Talk. Well, actually you manually created a link to a subpage called /Talk by typing that at the end of the text of the article. Except that some people prefered /Discussion and typed that in or they wanted to avoid a topic being discussed on /Talk and created a second subpage with /Discussion. Then we got away from subpages and also got separated spaces for articles, talk, user page, policy, etc. where talk went on talk pages by a "Discuss this page" link at the bottom of page (outside of the article text). I remember debate about naming the current tab Talk or Discuss and I think some skins or styles can change it. Rmhermen (talk) 03:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 11:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

how to connect hd freeview box to dvd recorder and tv

howto connect a hd freview box to dvd recorder and tv . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.59.136 (talk) 10:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Use an HD cable?

We are going to need more details about the setup and devices you have if you want more help. --Lgriot (talk) 11:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

This seems a bit tricky. The DVD recorder probably can't record HD. You may have to connect the HD box's HD output (DVI/HTMI/component) to the TV, but a non-HD output from the HD box to to the DVD Recorder (what inputs does the DVD recorder take?). This may or may not be possible, as some boxes require you to select which output you want and won't output 2 signals on different lines. You'll then connect both the HD box and the DVD recorder to different inputs of the TV (HD box probably to TV's HDMI/DVI, or if that's not possible to component; DVD recorder to whatever it outputs). You probably can't do it like an old-school VCR (aerial to VCR to TV). This is why people buy HD boxes with integrated hard-disk based video recorders. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:59, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

The OP geolocates to the UK so presumably they are talking about Freeview (UK). If your TV is reasonably new, it is probably equipped with HDMI, SCART and component connections. The DVD recorder probably has SCART and component connectors and maybe an HDMI output (if it supports high def upscaling). I suggest you connect the Freeview box to the TV with a HDMI cable to get best live-TV watching. Assuming the Freeview box also has SCART output (and I've not seen one that doesn't), connect that to the DVD-recorder so you can record off the Freeview box. If the Freeview box has component outputs you might get a better quality than with SCART. The thing you almost certainly cannot do is connect the Freeview box to your DVD-recorder using HDMI and then record anything. When it comes to connecting the DVD-recorder to the TV for playback, a HDMI cable is best if your recorder supports it; otherwise a SCART or component connection will do. Astronaut (talk) 17:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Besides Asurion, who else insures lost cellphones?

For my Xperia Play, I signed on for Best Buy's Black Tie insurance for it. When I lost my phone for one week, I inquired about replacements, and they say they "only insure damaged and defective" phones. Thankfully, a good Samaritan found my phone and returned it to a front desk. Asurion would be the one who insures lost phones. When I called them, they said that I could only get on Asurion within 30 days because they "wouldn't make any money" otherwise, and nobody there gives exceptions.

If Asurion is a monopoly, they deserve an antitrust lawsuit like what happened to AT&T and Microsoft.

However, I've never heard of monopoly court proceedings against Asurion, so there must be another insurance provider who covers lost phones. Nobody at Asurion, Best Buy, or Verizon knew, but of course nobody can know absolutely everything.

Do you know what they don't know? Any insurance provider, at all, that covers phones that are lost anywhere (at least anywhere in the US?) Thanks. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 11:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

In the UK it's usually possible to cover this sort of loss under a standard household contents policy. (I don't know the US/Asurion situation, but surely it hardly counts as a 'monopoly' if one company chooses to offer a particular product or service and others don't.) AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Simply being a monopoly isn't illegal. Anyone may offer a unique service without fear of anti-trust lawsuits. Antitrust laws are for when you abuse your monopoly status in certain specific ways.

What do you mean "Within 30 days"? Obviously, you can't sign up for insurance after your phone is already missing. Or do you mean that they only insure new phones? APL (talk) 03:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth Verizon Wireless offers "Total Equipment Protection Plans" those plans cover loss and theft, but they're expensive and have rather large deductibles. APL (talk) 03:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Press "Ctrl+F" on that page and type "Asurion." --70.179.174.101 (talk) 23:57, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

First off, you can insure practically anything in the U.S. but it'll cost you. (See you home insurance policy). But for the love of god, read what you are doing. I had an employee sign up for dental insurance with the specific goal of getting some needed bridge work done. She had the work done, then freaked out when the insurance wouldn't cover it. The clause said she must have the insurance for at least 90 days before such work would be covered. I tried explaining to her that insurance companies had those restrictions so people wouldn't just sign up before medical procedure...but you would've thought I was in the 1% out to ruin her and her family. Long story short, don't loose you cell phone. It's valuable. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I did say that some good Samaritan turned it in a week later. I have it here now. What do you mean by Home Insurance? It's renters' insurance for me. Will it cover my phone when lost outside of my apartment? --70.179.174.101 (talk) 19:23, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Renters insurance is one of several sub-categories of Home insurance. In some places (such as the UK) it's common to have one insurance policy for the building itself, and another for the contents, i.e. your furniture and other possessions, the more expensive of which may need to be specifically listed in the policy. Some policies cover damage, loss or theft of specified possessions even when they occur outside the home, others may not, but all such details should be explicitly stated in the policy documents. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.78.12 (talk) 21:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

clouds

can clouds form in the dark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.55.39 (talk) 13:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but they're more difficult to see. In London on a cloudy night, the sky has an orange tinge, which is the reflected light from all the street lamps. See our article on Clouds. Alansplodge (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I suspect that they mainly form at night, when the lower temperatures cause the water vapor which evaporated during the warmer day to condense to form water droplets. StuRat (talk) 15:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Dogs in Afghanistan

As far as I understand it, Muslims consider dogs to be unclean or some such thing. And Afghanistan is 99% Muslim. And I often see stories about American servicemen adopting dogs who were brought to the States from Afghanistan. So where are all these dogs coming from? If they're stray, I wouldn't expect them to be friendly enough to come up to the servicemen to begin with. Dismas|^(talk) 19:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Does the article Islam and dogs answer your questions? From that article, it does not seem to imply that every single Muslim has a monolithic opinion of dogs as creatures to be avoided at all costs. Indeed, I would expect that any grouping of 1 billion people would have varying opinions on just about any matter, so while I understand that some Muslim groups are opposed to keeping dogs as pets, I wouldn't anticipate that no Muslims anywhere would, nor would I expect every Muslim-majority country to be dog-free. --Jayron32 19:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Have you seen many stray dogs, Dismas? I was a child in the United States before there were leash laws, and there were a lot more stray dogs roaming around, maybe because people did not call Animal Control anytime they saw a loose animal. My family adopted a couple. Most dogs, including stray dogs, are attracted to people, though if they've been mistreated they will be wary at first. If you feed a stray dog and show it any kindness, it will not want to be separated from you. I'm guessing that these dogs wandered over to an American army base and quickly found new masters. Marco polo (talk) 20:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

There's a big diff between a dog born and raised wild and one that had an owner previously. The dogs which were born wild aren't likely to make good pets. This is especially true if they've been wild for many generations, and have lost the tameness which was previously bred into them. StuRat (talk) 21:13, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

That may be true, but I also think it would depend on the age of the dog. A mature wild dog is going to have a hard time learning to behave as a tame dog, but a puppy or immature dog, especially one that has been separated from his mother, is more likely to be trainable. Marco polo (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

The article stray dogs is maybe what you are searching for. Take a look at it, specially the part differentiating between feral and wild dogs. Quest09 (talk) 00:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Could they be pariah dogs? We don't list Afghanistan as one of the countries where they are found, but we do list neighbouring (and Muslim) Pakistan. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

What insect is this?

A friend of mine sent me this photo. He was shocked at the size and oddity of it (part of his shoe is in the photo for size comparison). Really large insects aren't typically found in inner cities in California. Any ideas as to what it is? 76.14.142.96 (talk) 21:47, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Jerusalem cricket. Marco polo (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I've heard of those but never have seen one. 76.14.142.96 (talk) 22:03, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Man, if you want to see some big bugs come to south Mississippi in the fall just before it starts getting cold and rainy. Everything comes out of the woodwork, quite literally! Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:47, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Including Gnurrs? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.197 90.193.78.12 (talk) 18:08, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

November 19

Small letters

Is there any where in wikipedia where i can find a collection of puns and jokes from ref desk? i find it amusing to read those, and im sorry im not sure if this is the right place to ask MahAdik _usap 01:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Some editors keep their own personal selections. Maybe one will happen along and give you a link.

Btw, what does "small letters" have to do with what you're asking about? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:30, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I always see jokes and puns in small letters, im just trying to be creative. ;-) MahAdik _usap 01:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

<small> tags produce small letters. Jokes are usually between these tags. Dbfirs 08:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I started using small text after I was asked to minimize my puns. :-) StuRat (talk) 17:53, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

You can also put small in braces and it will come out slightly smaller, except it won't allow links from within. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I haven't used small braces since I was in short pants. :-) StuRat (talk) 05:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Back in the old days, there used to be pages called Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense, containing assorted silliness from all over Wikipedia. But that got killed. You can still find copies of it, the top google hit I find is bjaodn.org. 88.112.59.31 (talk) 11:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia still has these pages at Wikipedia:BJAODN.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Here are a few of mine: User_talk:StuRat#Puns_and_jokes. The Darwin one was my fave, but has since descended. StuRat (talk) 17:48, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah, a natural selection! Edison (talk) 05:00, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

What is the male:female ratio on Wikipedia?

This seems like a dumb question to ask, but what is the male:female (male-to-female) ratio on Wikipedia? I know it is unimportant, but I have a funny feeling there are more males than females here (yes, I do take a sneak-peek at userpages and userboxes out of curiosity). Or is it my perception? SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 01:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It's quite true, and there was a bit of a media fuss about it earlier this year. See, for example, this piece in the New York Times, which says that less than 15% of Wikipedia contributors are women, and consequently topics of interest to women are covered less thoroughly than topics of interest to men. Since editing Wikipedia is an entirely voluntary activity, it's hard to know what might be done to change that. --Nicknack009 (talk) 01:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Not that anything need or should be done about it. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, depending on the problem, there can be things which can and should be done. If the problem is only that it is an activity which interests men more than women, then obviously you might look at that and say it is the way of things. If it is because the wiki is often an unpleasant place for women, because of unthinking comments and jokes by certain contributors that make it feel hostile and unwelcoming to women (I have certainly witnessed many unthinkingly sexist comments, or comments that assume a default male audience, although these are less common and less tolerated than they used to be), then we can and should do something about it. Many people do. If it is because female contributors feel unsafe, because they experience stalking and hounding by creeps who latch onto women when they see them, often crossing over into real life stuff, then we can and should do something about that. We should also bear in mind that this will suppress the apparent proportion of women, because a lot of women will not admit to their gender.

This is largely coming up as a talking point precisely because most of the internet is no longer like this. 5 to 10 years ago, most of the internet was a fairly hostile place for women, and women overwhelmingly used neutral or male identities to avoid the negative side of things, even joining in with pretty unpleasant misogyny to avoid being targetted themselves, because they wanted to join in with other aspects of communities. Over the last 5 years, at least, there has been a significant change in perceptions. Part of this has been that enough women are now online that once one comes out, enough others join them that it counteracts a lot of the previously kneejerk reactions. Part of this is that female-friendly communities developed online, which have led to women no longer assuming that they have to hide their gender online: these communities have grown users who expect to be able to contribute confidently as women online, and they carry that into other communities. And these combine to change expectations, so that the culture changes across the internet and people generally expect different things.

I would guess that this has unfortunately changed at a time when Wikipedia has actually become less welcoming to new and casual editors, meaning it has both taken a smaller share of the newly confident female internet users, while becoming more harsh towards 'outgroup' contributors. Established users mostly come from the old culture, long before the general change, and (worse) many of the contributors who bought into many of the old wiki ideals (who objected to the Protecting of pages, who objected to the widespread use of semi-Protect, who objected to the restrictions on un-signed-in editors, who objected to personalities affecting rating of edits and judging of behaviour) have disproportionately left as the project evolved, when they might be expected to be the most tolerant of 'outgroup' editors. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 12:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It is important and is almost central to the way Wikipedia is constructed. The New York Times article strikes at the heart of the problem - and it is a problem. I also wonder whether women are more likely to attract unconstructive attention by having a name like bubblygirl246 instead of trident 3452324.

I am male by the way! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.171.89.20 (talk) 14:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Well nobody's perfect. (source). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

A bit of "IMO" here but popular sports have the same problem of a gender gap. We don't seem to have an article of Women in sports or Gender gap in sports but I imagine if someone figured out the "sports problem" it would also address the gender problem at large regarding the Internet. I have my own opinions why WP has a lack of female editors and what we could do about it, but this isn't the place for that discussion. Cheers! :) Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the sports issue and the Internet issue are related at all. They're two totally different issues — the fact that the Internet is co-ed and sports are not is a huge, huge, huge difference, aside from the fact that sports are public (in the sense that you must self-identify to participate) and Internet usage is relatively private (in the sense that individuals are harder to identify). Anyway, the issue isn't whether women use the Internet — they do. They just are underrepresented in specific communities on the Internet. It's a very different set of issues. --Mr.98 (talk) 04:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

It may be that the overall diversity of subjects is not affected but the importance that subjects are given is, the New York Times article suggests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.169.132.117 (talk) 07:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Asking for gender ratios is not a dumb question, here or in many other places from the boardroom to demographics. Sue Gardner, the chief exec of the Wikimedia Foundation, has written about the issue of systemic bias, particularly with regards to women. Here's a relevant entry on her blog. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that article reminded me how I found the Reference Desks, why I haven't signed in for years, and why I no longer contribute substantial text or reworkings to articles, like I used to. We did used to have attempts at social networking and friending, as well as spaces to chat generally about our experiences editing. All deleted in the move towards We Are Respectable. But it would take a lot to get past the great tiredness I feel at the thought of the conflict and fighting involved whenever I consider making a substantial edit, and I don't think I'm alone in that. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Water billing in Ireland

How does it work right now? I've read that they don't even have water counters and are pissed off for having to pay from now on. So, can Irish people simply leave the tap running and still pay the same? Quest09 (talk) 01:53, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

You can do that in most of Canada. You pay a flat rate for municipal water, and you use what you use. (Hot water is different because you have to pay the cost of heating it.) Where I live, out in the country, we have wells hooked up to the house, for which there is no charge, except that keeping the wells and the piping in good condition is our responsibility, as would be the drilling costs if we needed a new one. Bielle (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Here's an article on the controversy in Northern Ireland at the moment. Bielle (talk) 03:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, so in these places, it's theoretically possible to attach a generator to your tap and get energy for free too? Quest09 (talk) 14:37, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

"A generator to your tap"? I know little about science, but have never heard of a generator fuelled by tap water. (Niagara Falls, yes, but not tap water.) The only limits I know for water use occur in times of water restrictions (watering ban or, in the UK, hosepipe ban). This happens rarely in eastern and western Canada, but drought sometimes affects the central regions. Bielle (talk) 15:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't mean it's technically impossible to build one, however. Out of curiosity, I did the back-of-the-envelope calculation for how much power might be available from the tap. Water supply talks about a typical residential pressure of 4-5 bar (60-70 psi), which corresponds to 40 or 50 meters (150 feet) of hydrostatic head. If we assume that we can get 20 liters per minute from the tap still under that pressure (which is probably a generous assumption) the amount of energy available there is 150 watts, or 3.6 kWh per day. So depending on the efficiency of your generator and electricity rates in your area, you'll be able to harvest between ten and thirty cents' worth of electricity per day, while wasting thirty thousand liters of water. And that dribble of energy is 'free' only if one assumes no cost to the equipment required to generate and store it. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I was not suggesting that people indeed do it. Just asking is it's theoretically possible. Obviously, you can do better than just one tap. You get the idea: if water is completely free, you'll end up using it for any imaginable purpose at any possible amount without thinking about those thousand liters of water. Quest09 (talk) 16:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It's actually not 'obvious' that you can do (much) better than just one tap—there is a limit to the amount that a standard municipal water connection will supply to a given household, based on the diameter of the supply pipe and pressure characteristics of the municipal water supply. The pressure you see at the tap (or taps) decreases as the flow rate increases, and there is an absolute limit to the amount of water you can draw per minute through a supply pipe of a given diameter. There's a reason why your shower gets so uncomfortable after someone flushes the toilet.

Also, even in areas with completely unmetered usage, it is likely that the utility company will eventually notice that a home is drawing tens or hundreds of times more water than it should. There will definitely be restrictions and regulations regarding permissible uses of unmetered water, and I expect that home hydroelectric generation would probably fall afoul of those rules. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

In England and Wales where water is normally unmetered in various areas, the water companies have the right to force you to use a meter if you use lots of water for a swimming pool, running a garden sprinkler, or other purposes.[3] If you run a business you're also billed differently. It's not much different from other "unmetered"/"unlimited" services like unlimited internet, unlimited phone calls, etc: there's a combination of technical restrictions and contractual fair usage restrictions. --Colapeninsula (talk) 19:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

One is reminded of the "prosecutions for water wastage" endured by that unfortunate Irishman De Selby: "At one hearing it was shown that he had used 9,000 gallons in one day and on another occasion almost 80,000 gallons in the course of a week. The word 'used' in this context is the important one. The local officials, having checked the volume of water entering the house daily from the street connection, had sufficient curiosity to watch the outlet sewer and made the astonishing discovery that none of the vast quantity of water drawn in ever left the house." Deor (talk) 00:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, here's a little snippet of personal knowledge that can't be sourced: Living in an apartment complex the head maintenance man (who also lived there) and I became friendly. He told me to run my clothes & dish washers on cold water b/c the meter only monitored the hot water line. Everything else was just based on an average, largely depending on how many people you reported living in the unit. Following his advice, my water bill decreased dramatically. My neighbors did not believe me until we followed the water lines and realized there was only a single meter reporting for the entire building, with a second meter that ran back to the hot water heater in each unit. Also, I one time left my outdoor water hose (for the plants, etc) on accidentally for three days before it was noticed, and my bill was still the same (despite flooding a good part of the commons lawn), so I think there is probably something to what you are saying. Quinn ^{✩ STARRY NIGHT} 02:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Gadgets driven by tap water:

• In a British school chemistry lab I have seen simple suction pumps that one attaches to a water tap (US: faucet). They have no moving parts and are somehow driven by water flowing through them to waste.

• There is a device for squeezing water out of clothes that consists of a metal cylinder with a rubber balloon inside. Water fed from a tap through a hose to the balloon causes it to swell and press clothes against the inside wall of the cylinder.

• I have a shower head that lights up when the water flows. It's sealed but I assume it contains a tiny turbine generator of enough power to light a few LED's whose colour shows the water temperature. It's impressive if you shower in the dark. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

In regions where this sort of thing is legal, there exist water driven sump pumps. Presumably on the theory that power failures are common, but water failures are not. 76.127.236.202 (talk) 10:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

J J Kent Inc.

I have been trying for months, including asking the British Library, If there is such a publication, beside that found on the www, called, 'PRECIOUS STONES IN THE EARLIER AND LATER BREASTPLATE' by J. J. Kent. Especially Volume 9. All I get is "J.J. Kent is closed for business.". I simply wish to purchase the complete work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LenBee (talk • contribs) 21:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Err , it looks as though Vol 1 to 11 is only available to be read/copied from online? [4]--Aspro (talk) 17:01, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

sacred music during the Middle Ages - instruments or not?

Hello.

I'm a student at the Lemmensinstitute for Arts and Science in Leuven, Belgium. Since I study the Flemish bagpipe I'm doing some research about the use of (bourdon)instruments with plainchant in medieval churchmusic. Very little is known about this subject and therefore I'd like to ask you kindly for your help. Does anyone happen to have a bit more information on this subject?

On Wikipedia, in the article called "Hymn", I read the following:

"Music and accompaniment In ancient and medieval times, stringed instruments such as the harp, lyre and lute were used with psalms and hymns. ..."

This suggests that indeed there were instruments being used in church. I also found an article that says Hildegard von Bingen (not on Wikipedia) composed sacred music with instrumental accompaniment. Also Boethius accompanied his chants with instruments, so says another article.

However, these articles don't mention anything more about it, nor do they refer to the source of this information...

Can someone help me on this one? Thank you.

˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deedontree (talk • contribs) 21:59, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea, but we do have an article on Hildegard of Bingen, including a discography. --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

PS: Sorry, I may have misunderstood your parenthetical comment "(not on WP)". --Incognito.ergo.possum (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I found this essay called Musical Instruments in Medieval Psalm Commentaries and Psalters. As you say, very little seems to be known for certain. Alansplodge (talk) 00:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

It is known for certain that cathedrals had organs as early as the 9th century. During the high and late middle ages (Gothic period) all of the more important churches had organs. However, according to the German Wikipedia's article on church music, other instruments were hardly ever used in churches at that time. Marco polo (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

If you do a Google search on "illustrated manuscripts with instruments" you will find many references. Here is one you might like to pursue. Here's another one. Hope these help and you can find more with the Google search. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

One possibility to consider is that masses and other liturgies performed for a lay public might have been treated restrictively, while liturgies and less formal performances in an ecclesiastical or monastic environment might have been treated more liberally. I am pointing this out because the depiction of instruments on a composition by a monastic such as Hildegard von Bingen doesn't necessarily show that such instruments were used in churches during public rites. (On the other hand, I am no expert, and for all I know they were used.) Marco polo (talk) 18:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

While that is possible, and one cannot necessarily extrapolate back from current behaviour, that is the opposite of what I would expect based on current practice in the Catholic Church. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 11:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The essay I linked to above says that the evidence that exists is a) plenty of illustrations of instruments being used in worship and b) plenty of tracts from senior clergt explaining why instruments shouldn't be used in worship. What conclusions can be drawn from this can only be conjecture. Alansplodge (talk) 13:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The reason for my speculation is that in medieval times, monastic communities and clerics posted to major cathedral churches formed a privileged, elite, and sophisticated class. In such a context, it would not be surprising if one set of practices applied to liturgies performed for the masses — particularly in rural parish churches which would not have had the funds for an organ, much less instrumentalists — while another set of practices applied to liturgies performed within a privileged, wealthy ecclesiastical community. If this was the case, I suppose it wouldn't be surprising if lay aristocrats also sometimes enjoyed instrumental accompaniments to liturgies in their private chapels. The present-day context is of course very different. The Catholic Church, under attack from Protestants and secularists since the time of the Reformation, has in modern times tried to improve its image by reducing the privileges enjoyed by "insiders" and trying to cultivate an attitude of service toward the lay congregation (disservices to the congregation's vulnerable youth notwithstanding). Marco polo (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

November 20

Ski-Doo Rotax Engines

What is the Skidoo Rotax 800 H.O.? What is the Skidoo Rotax 800R Powertek? What is the Skidoo Rotx 800 H.O. DMP?

What is the differences between the three Skidoo Rotax engines provided above? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.11.82.215 (talk) 05:12, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

These are Austrian 2-stroke engines for snowmobiles. Here is the manufacturer's website. Wikipedia has historical information at Bombardier Recreational Products#Development of the small snowmobile. This site has Ski-Doo engine tuning information. If you can translate German then willkommen in unserer Welt unt wir haben ein kontaktadresse. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 01:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Meta meta meta question

What proportion of questions that people ask on the Wikipedia Reference Desk are answered correctly? And which of the separate Reference Desks on Wikipedia have the highest "success rate"? Harley Spleet (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

There's likely no way to answer your question for two reasons. 1) I doubt that anyone has ever kept such statistics and more importantly 2) How do you judge a "correct answer". It may be possible to figure out (if someone was dedicated enough) which questions went entirely unanswered, but what makes an answer "correct"? --Jayron32 19:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Another meta reply: First determine how many questions asked can be answered correctly? How many have a single correct answer? Does it count as 'correct' to provide links that partially answer the question? For actual answerable questions I bet the science and math desks have a better record of correct replies than humanities and, especially, miscellaneous. And yes, correct, that is my opinion. Pfly (talk) 20:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

In my own observational experience, the likelihood of getting an eventual correct, or at least "reasonable", answer is fairly high. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The proportion is less than 100% and will remain so. There will be a finite probability of receiving responses that are disinformative as long as the desks are open to the whole Internet population of anonymous unqualified users with no requirements to provide reliable references for what they say, to show any previous aptitude for encyclopedia contribution, or to correct errors in own posts when they become apparent. The desk with the best quality of answers is the Mathematics desk because of its limited and objective scope. It is more helpful to give questions an informative title that does not repeat the term "question". Cuddlyable3 (talk) 01:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I fixed your link, Cuddlyable3. WP:RDM is the Miscellaneous desk; the Mathematics desk is at WP:RDMA. --Theurgist (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Theurgist for that help. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

One question farther down is whether angels exist or not. There is no possible "correct" answer to a question like that... beyond saying "there is no possible correct answer." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:33, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There will be a finite probability of receiving responses that are disinformative as long as the answers are provided by anybody more fallible than God. I've heard that even at regular library reference desks, people are sometimes directed to the wrong shelf. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Hence To err is human to forgive is divine - said Alexander Pope. Is it forgiveable blasphemy to claim one is always wrong or is that just a paradoxical flight from responsibility? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There was an academic study done on this very question a couple of years ago. In keeping with the results, I can't be bothered to find a link. --Sean 16:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Not just one study, but 87 studies:[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

What insurance covers braces/Invisaligns?

I hope to get it sometime before getting said braces.

Failing that, what is the cheapest place in America (or preferably Kansas) where I can get them? How much will they cost, and do they have a monthly payment plan for the entire duration I wear said braces/Invisaligns? Thanks. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 19:25, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

You should ask your insurance provider. The answer will depend on some specific things that if you don't know we certainly can't either. Shadowjams (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The general answer is dental insurance (which is separate from medical insurance), but not all plans carry orthodontic options, and not all orthodontic options will probably cover Invisalign. Whether you are buying it on the open market, or subscribing to a group plan (through your employer, or your parents' employer if you are under whatever the cutoff age is in your state) will affect the cost and options. If you are getting your medical insurance through your employer, check with your human resources representative. As for the price of the orthodontics, you'd do better to call up the offices of orthodontists in your local area and ask them, than to ask on here. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

These days it often cheaper for a US citizen to forgo insurance premiums and fly aboard for their dental treatment. --Aspro (talk) 22:43, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I assume you meant "abroad". Is it actually possible for a U.S. citizen, for example, to get the benefits of the socialized medicine of a European country, for example? If so, in the long run wouldn't that tend to raised the cost, i.e. the taxes, of the citizens of that country? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

You're touch typing is obliviously butter than mine. Bee that as it may. The benefit these other countries with socialized medicine can enjoy by treating their US cousins, is that they get offered jaw-dropping-opportunities to put their money into Gold Plated US investments, in such like companies as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which spring to mind. Then there are all those banking investments - oh the list can go on-and-on--Aspro (talk) 00:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

WHAAOI. --ColinFine (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Not necessarily a good one though, that article is a mess with stuff like "Although some think it is a good idea to simply go to the country as a tourist and find a dentist there, rather than to find dentists on the Internet, you take a great risk just walking into a clinic having done no research" and "One other important consideration is location. If you go all the way to India or Singapore or Argentina for a dental procedure, and something goes wrong, it is a long way to go to have to return and get them to fix it.". BTW, I think the OP is well aware of dental tourism, at least when it comes to India, I guess for some reason they decided against the idea, perhaps concern over getting adjustments done locally. Nil Einne (talk) 10:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

A bit more Googling; apparently the average cost of Invisalign, uninsured, is around $5000, but can be as low as $3500 and as high as $8000 depending on where you are.[6] As for insurance, there are many, many, many different dental insurance plans available to you, assuming you are looking for the open market and are not doing it through your employer. You will really need to do some research on them. The good news is that dental insurance is a lot cheaper than most other insurance — premiums are often around $15-30 a month, which is not so bad if you are using it. The bad news is that often insurance providers pay for only a portion of orthodontics, so it could still cost you several thousand dollars out of pocket. But the exact details will determine on the plan you have. I would start with any options available to you through your employer, and branch out from there. If you Google "dental insurance kansas" you'll find lots of sites with lists of potential providers. Approach is methodically, especially since you have one major goal in mind. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Does dental insurance commonly exclude pre-existing conditions? Like for example squint teeth needing orthodontic work? It doesn't seem a good business model to insure people who have bad teeth. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, pre-existing conditions are usually not covered. It also seems to be a common exclusion on new dental insurance policies that unless you can produce dental records that show you have visited a dentist within the last 12 months (which would, presumably, identify any pre-existing conditions) then any treatment arising from your first check-up under the policy is not covered. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

(EC with above) I had the same thoughts. Obviously if you're using your parents plan then this likely doesn't apply. Or if your dental insurance comes from university or work then I guess it's possible they've negotiated something like this under the assumption the risk balances out overall for the workplace. Similarly if your local jurisdiction has legal requirements which require dental insurers to insure people. But in cases where it's purely commercial, it does seem to me it would be difficult to find one where it's that easy to get more out of the insurance then you put in. Meaning where you can join, pay $15-$30 a month and within a month or two get them to put in say $1000 for your braces (which from some research seems a commonly quoted figure for those who offer coverage for braces) and when you don't need braces anymore, say in 2 years time, quit if you don't feel the coverage is worth it. It would seem likely anyone who wanted braces and had a bit of sense and time would be doing this. I guess they could hope enough people will stay to make this worthwhile or it's too complicated to try to exclude these cases, but it does seem surprising to me. While not relevant to the OP, this UK one excludes pre-existing conditions for the first 2 years [7]. Some refs suggest there is commonly a waiting period [8] [9] possibly 1-2 years in the US. There may still be an advantage for insurance. E.g. I've seen some sites which mention you can get specific coverage for braces, I presume these are in case something goes wrong or your case turns out to be unusually expensive, in other words, if everything goes fine you'll probably end up paying more (since as most insurance, you pool the risk) which may be worth considering. Nil Einne (talk) 10:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

November 21

Angels

Do angels exist? Is there any proof of their presence on earth?95.176.214.169 (talk) 00:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

No, and no.

Well, they might exist, but there is certainly no proof in the scientific sense. HiLo48 (talk) 00:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

They may well exist, but there is no scientific proof of their existence. It is a matter of faith. Edison (talk) 01:33, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

First select your type of angel. The Australian band of them definitely exists and Wikipedia says unequivocally that this book about angels is non-fiction. The article Angel describes the kinds of divine angels that are said to exist (but all the descriptions cannot be right so logically some or all are nonsense). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As HiLo suggests, it is not possible to say definitively whether they exist or not, and any "proof" comes from faith, not physical evidence. An angel is supposed to be a "messenger from God", so there's no reason it would take only one form. It might take a form that makes sense to a particular culture. One can argue that angels are manifested through other humans. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Bugs, I thought for sure you believed in angels. — Michael J 07:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

As came up in a recent architectural theory lecture I attended, Kant argues that since we cannot even be certain of the nature of the world outside of ourselves, when it comes to things that we cannot sense at all, cannot see or smell or feel or even begin to understand, there is no way we could prove anything one way or another, and that therefore even trying to decide based on no evidence is a waste of time and effort. 148.197.81.179 (talk) 07:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

By 'eck, that sounds like a good description of dark matter/dark energy... --TammyMoet (talk) 13:12, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Except that those two (completely unconnected) things are attempted explanations for phenomena that we have observed, insofar (as per Kant) that we can observe anything. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.149 (talk) 16:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The Biblical Jacob was called יִשְׂרָאֵל Yisra`el, meaning "one that struggled with the divine angel" and Rembrandt snapped the clinch. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

While the bible does describe the fight between Jacob and the angel, the name "Israel" does not mention the word "angel", but rather God. Our article on Jacob contains several different possible meanings of the name, but none of them include the word "angel". While authorities argue over the meaning of the prefix "Isra"/"Yisrae", the suffix "el" is unambiguosly "God". An angel is "malach" in Hebrew. --Dweller (talk) 20:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Gregory the Great said England was the land 'not of Angles, but of Angels'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• Those of my religion exist and intervene constantly for the benefit of people of my religion. Those of your religion (for we have differing religions) do not exist, and are either misapprehensions of demons and monsters, fairies and youkai, due to your lack of the fundamental religious virtue common to people of my religion allowing you to see these beings correctly; or, are in fact, delusions of a diseased mind as people not of my religion are more commonly mentally ill than people of my religion. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Well you would say that wouldn't you. For interest, what do you call your religion of such exclusive fundamental virtue and what does it say about respecting other people? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Can you name the music in this video?

starts in 06:40 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4YQnACGpJs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ofplef (talk • contribs) 01:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The choral music at 7:00 is Land of Hope and Glory sung to one of the Pomp and Circumstance Marches by Edward Elgar, probably recorded at a The Proms#Last Night of the Proms concert at the Albert Hall, London. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 02:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. You can see the whole thing here, conducted by David Robertson (an American chap, but we won't hold that against him). Alansplodge (talk) 11:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Scientists murdered by Christians

Galileo, Darwin, etc. were persecuted by the church but not killed. Were there any scientists who were actually killed by the church? The only one I remember is Hypatia. --70.250.212.95 (talk) 02:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

You first need to define the words "scientist" and "murdered" and "by". --Jayron32 04:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

And "the Church"? What Jayron means is that it is difficult to answer the question because "the church" does not usually go around murdering anyone, including scientists, and before relatively recently (the past few hundred years), there were no "scientists" in the modern understanding of the word. Darwin and Galileo for example are certainly scientists, but Hypatia was more of a philosopher...and in any case she wasn't killed by "the church", she was killed by a mob for reasons that had little to do with being a scientist. Galileo was persecuted not specifically for being a scientist, but because he was kind of a jerk to people who didn't immediately believe him (the Pope especially). Darwin was never persecuted at all, although some members of the church disagreed with him (and this was quite a different church than the one that existed in Galileo's day, which itself was much different than the one in Hypatia's time). However, to give a simpler answer, you would probably be interested in reading about Giordano Bruno. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thomas More was a social scientist killed by the Church of England, depending on your definitions (he's a martyr to Catholics, so his death was more to do with church politics). I suspect there's quite a few who were killed for taking sides in conflicts with a religious dimension, such as Lazare Carnot, physicist and leader of the rationalist French Revolution, who was executed following the restoration of France's Catholic monarchy in 1815, but like most distinguished victims of the executioner, from Jesus onwards, he was actually executed by the state not the church. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

List of people executed by the Holy See may be relevant, but the only people I would describe as scientists are Bruno and the poisoner Giulia Tofana. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Giordano Bruno is basically the only case of a major scientist executed by the Church because of his scientific beliefs/teachings. The idea that the Church held a huge, murderous power over scientists is a bit overblown. Darwin was not personally persecuted by the Church and lived a quite comfortable life with the exception of his recurring illness. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Except that, as the article points out, many see him as being executed for his religious beliefs, not his scientific ones. Rmhermen (talk) 15:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but in his case they were pretty intertwined. But it's a general point that Inquisition persecution was never about just one thing — Galileo's house arrest was as much about politics as it was about the particular positions he took. --Mr.98 (talk) 03:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(EC) Though that raises the question of the changes in definitions (by the Church) between then and now of the divisions (or not) between the proper spheres of enquiry of religion and (what we now call) science. The possible existence of other inhabited worlds, for example, was then considered (by the Church prosecuters, who clearly had the whip hand) a religious question, while today most would concede it to the scientific realm. On a more general point, "history is written by the winners" and the Church as prosecutor in this and other cases (just as other Establishments, such as the rulers of Athens who condemned Socrates) clearly long had the advantage in controlling what was recorded for posterity. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.149 (talk) 16:46, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Could you give us a reference for anyone who was ever prosecuted by anybody for suggesting "the possible existence of other inhabited worlds"? It seems a bit unlikely. Alansplodge (talk) 17:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

That was (though I couched it in modern terms) one of the charges against Giordano Bruno, to whose already mentioned case I was referring in the first part of my response. When I broadened to make a more general point, I was not intending to assert that other individuals had also been prosecuted by the Church for exactly the same offense, though it would not surprise me to learn that other more obscure figures had, or had been threatened with prosecution to silence them, or had self-censored for fear of it. Please note that I am not trying to promote an "Ooh wasn't the Church horrible" message. Different times were different to ours, and one can be interested in that without trying to impose contemporary sensibilities on them. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.40 (talk) 21:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

From the article, the full list of charges was holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith and speaking against it and its ministers; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith about the Trinity, divinity of Christ, and Incarnation; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith pertaining to Jesus as Christ; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith regarding the virginity of Mary, mother of Jesus; holding opinions contrary to the Catholic faith about both Transubstantiation and Mass; claiming the existence of a plurality of worlds and their eternity; believing in metempsychosis and in the transmigration of the human soul into brutes, and dealing in magics and divination. Even with changing boundaries between science and religion, these are primarily theological charges. Many of these charges individually would have been sufficient for a sentence of death after conviction. Rmhermen (talk) 00:14, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

And to continue cutting and pasting from the article that we've all read where you left off:

"In these grim circumstances Bruno continued his Venetian defensive strategy, which consisted in bowing to the Church's dogmatic teachings, while trying to preserve the basis of his philosophy. In particular Bruno held firm to his belief in the plurality of worlds, although he was admonished to abandon it." [My italics].

I'm not suggesting the last was the only charge, merely that it is one that, in today's terms, is relevant to the scientific theme of the OP's question, and (unlike some of the others) was upheld and led to his execution. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.40 (talk) 03:11, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

In the UK at least, the scientific community in the 17th to 19th centuries was well populated with Anglican clergymen. A comfortable income, few duties and a university education meant that they were well placed to persue their interests in botany, geology, entomology, astronomy and so on. An example that springs to mind is the Reverend Nevil Maskelyne. A European example of an ecclesiastical scientist is Gregor Mendel. Alansplodge (talk) 16:43, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

See Christian pacifism.

—Wavelength (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

In the 14th century the inquisitor Nicolau Aymerich persecuted followers of Ramon Lull. Lull wrote on a number of topics, including maths. I don't know if that amounted to any prosecutions or executions, or even whether anyone could find out at this late date. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The general problem, I think, is that, whenever large-scale persecution of nonstandard world views was in place, it was difficult for "scientists" even to rise to prominence without being shot down.

The concept of "science" only emerged when persecution by the Church was on the decline. It was born in late 1600's in England, partly due to tolerant attitudes of the young Church of England at that time. There's only a handful of individuals that we might consider true "scientists" who lived before that time - Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo.

The famous Spanish Inquisition was very active in 16th and 17th century and executed at least 1400 people between 1540 and 1740. Going through the list of Spanish scientists, I only see a few names dating from that period, and at least one of them, Michael Servetus, was executed by the Inquisition. In the List of alchemists, I don't see any notable alchemists to come out of 16th to 17th century Spain either. --Itinerant1 (talk) 00:36, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

To anticipate diversionary quibbles, Servetus was actually tried and condemned by, and executed on the orders of, the Protestant Geneva Council, although the French Inquisition had already condemned him and wanted to extradite him for execution anyway, and he was condemned for heretical theological views rather than any scientific teachings. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.40 (talk) 03:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Good point, I've missed that part when skimming the article. So the number of known prominent scientists executed by the Spanish Inquisition goes back down to zero. In any event, any promising alchemist or scientist born in Renaissance-age Spain probably had a good chance of attracting attention and potentially becoming one of the 1400 before he could make it into textbooks. --Itinerant1 (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

"The concept of "science" only emerged when persecution by the Church was on the decline." This is nonsense. There was plenty of systematic inquiry during the Middle Ages, most of it funded by the Church. This is a common-enough misconception that we even have an entry in it on the List of common misconceptions (see point #3 under Ancient to early modern). The idea that there were no scientists before Copernicus is patently ridiculous. Copernicus did not get the idea, the means, or the training to study astronomy out of nothing! He comes out of a rich tradition of Church-sponsored study of the heavens. The omission is clear when one goes from Copernicus, Kepler, to Galileo without mentioning someone like Christoph Clavius, who was the biggest Church-sponsored guy in between, and whose textbooks would have been mandatory reading for folks like Galileo. Clavius "rose to power" just fine, and was no stooge or dummy. (So not-a-stooge was he that he eventually conceded that Galileo's observations must be true, and a Ptolemaic model could not hold. Which is why the idea that Galileo was persecuted for opposing the Ptolemaic model is false — the Church had by that point already adopted the Tychonic system, which was at that point observationally identical to a Copernican one.) It is true that your average science textbook doesn't teach any scientists before then, but there were scads of people investigating the world, some more systematic than others, some more wrong than others. But do not mistake the textbook narrative of the history of science (the endless upward movement towards truth!) for the reality of it. What happened in the "Scientific Revolution" is less that science was born than science became connected with government and commerce, which put it on a pretty different path than it had been on before. I am no great defender of the Church (I'm not religious), but the idea that they were going around all during the Middle Ages and squashing anyone who dared to look at the sky (or other phenomena) is nonsense, and the idea that the entire idea of studying the world just suddenly came into the heads of a few random people is also nonsense. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:30, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The early modern with the least epicycles and the most observed predicted phenomena wins. But our article on the Tychonic system implies that was Tycho. And he did "win" if we consider the sociology of science reception. Until new observed phenomena appeared. Fifelfoo (talk) 21:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say that there were no scientists before Copernicus, did I? I said that scientists were very rare. And indeed they were. With regard to Copernicus, you say "he comes out of a rich tradition of Church-sponsored study of the heavens." And yet he was still working off the Ptolemaic system, dating 1500 years before his time. The only advances in 1500 years were incremental improvements in numbers and properties of epicycles, mostly made by Islamic astrologers.

By the way, Copernican system is observationally equivalent to Ptolemaic, differences are mostly mathematical and ideological, and Tychonic system is a partial ideological regression back to Ptolemy. The first system that is observationally different from any of those (which also happens to describe planetary motion with more accuracy and fewer free parameters than Ptolemaic/Copernican) is the Keplerian model.

Edit: I stand corrected here, there is a difference with regards to phases of Mercury and Venus. There is no difference with regards to motion of planets.--Itinerant1 (talk) 23:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

But here's a better way to illustrate my point. Count all world-class European scientists you know who were alive in 1500. I can come up with Copernicus, Leonardo, Paracelsus, Agricola, and maybe a couple of less important alchemists.

Now count all world-class scientists who were alive in 1700. Just in Britain, we have Newton, Hooke, Wren, Locke, Stirling, Flamsteed, Halley, Taylor, Maclaurin ... On the continent, the scientific revolution took off a bit later, but we still have Leibniz, five different Bernoullis, Cassini, and de l'Hôpital. --Itinerant1 (talk) 23:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

UFOs

From 1960 to 1972 I worked for CBS News in Philadelphia, at WCAU-TV. Channel 10. During that time I recall some respected source saying that the most nearly credible reports of UFO sightings was a cluster of sightings near a Soviet city that was a "closed" city for security reasons, sightings said to have been reported by hundreds of people. I do not recall the name of the city, but I see no mention of that incident. Do the authors of your page have any information about that? Donald Barnhouse [removed email address before they see it] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.36.209.48 (talk) 07:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I removed your email address as we do not reply by email. I'm not sure which page you are referring to. Do you mean our article on closed city?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I suspect he means our UFO article. Alansplodge (talk) 10:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The area around Astrakhan, particularly Kapustin Yar, was popular for UFO sightings (according to the article Kapustin Yar and a wide range of websites of uncertain credibility). This area was a centre of Soviet space research, so there were doubtless lots of strange lights in the sky. There's not much about the UFOs on Wikipedia - maybe there's a shortage of reliable sources of information. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There is a book dated 1968 that catalogues almost 200 eyewitness reports of UFOs in the Soviet Union. Reports are all over the place, but there is what looks like a cluster of about 30 sightings in July to October 1967, in the region of Donetsk, Lugansk and Rostov-na-Donu. The center of the triangle formed by these three cities is about 300 miles west of Kapustin Yar. In addition, there are about 10 reports in the vicinity of Kapustin Yar, and a few further south. Reports are not consistent with space launches, but could make sense if there was research into experimental aircraft going on nearby. As far as I can tell, there were no known closed cities in Donetsk/Lugansk area. --Itinerant1 (talk) 06:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Odd pop culture question.

MC Frontalot's 'Critical Hit' is a satire of a bunch of rappers, I am sure, but not being familiar with the genre, I don't know which ones. Which real rap songs typify the artistic form that Frontalot is ripping off? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I assume you are talking about the video and not the song itself? The song lyrics don't stand out to me as being an homage to any form in particular, either in content or delivery. His video doesn't seem to have much by way of reference to rappers, but other pop culture characters, like David Bowie (the Aladdin Sane garb), Paris Hilton (the green "sex tape"), and David Carradine (the erotic asphyxiation bit), among others which I was not familiar with. My take on it, anyway; I didn't think the rapping sounded like an homage to anything I've heard, and I do consider myself fairly familiar with hip hop trends... --Mr.98 (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I'm talking about the genre of rap song about how cool he is and how great his life is? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 (talk) 21:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

My interpretation is that it's just a common form of DJ boasting that has been done in hip hop since its inception. The earliest hit hip-hop song, "Rapper's Delight", is basically nothing but boasting. My limited understanding is that this is in part because of the influence of rap battles, in which two (or more) MCs explain why they are the best, and their opponent is, well, not. Anyway, I don't think Frontalot is referencing anything specific — it's a very common trope in rap. What makes Frontalot different of course is that he does it in reference to D&D terminology, which is unusual in rap. --Mr.98 (talk) 03:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

But not entirely unusual in nerdcore, which is the very genre that he is said to epitomize, in spite of its limited scope.--WaltCip (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

November 22

highest number of blood donor

what is the highest or maximum number of blood donor in a single blood donation camp,in world till nowHalka fulka (talk) 01:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Possibly one in Mumbai, India on 25 April 2010. 25,065 donated blood over 12 hours. See [10]. Not sure if it has been surpassed since then. --Jayron32 01:29, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Prostrate Cancer

No, this is not a medical question, but I wonder if there are statistics which show that male porn stars have a lower incidence of this problem, (as I presume that they have more sexual activity than most of us), since I have seen a claim that the greater this activity the lesser chance of getting this cancer.--85.211.153.242 (talk) 07:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

No idea of the answer. Just being a spelling pedant. It should be Prostate, with only one r. HiLo48 (talk) 07:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Interesting question. After 3 minutes in Google Scholar, I don't see any studies of porn stars, but I see a meta-analysis study dated 2002 that reports a 20% increase in the risk of prostate cancer for an increase in sexual activity by 3 times a week, a 20% increase per 20 lifetime sexual partners, and a 130% increase if you were ever infected with syphilis.

On the other hand, I just saw an article recently that claimed that residents of Okinawa are 7 times less likely (age adjusted) to die of prostate cancer than Americans. That was attributed to high-vegetable, low-meat Okinawa Diet. (I also saw a documentary movie claiming an even greater reduction, but I haven't had time to check that claim.) That might be an easier way to avoid dying from prostate cancer (among other things) than becoming a porn star.

I've seen so many medical studies (often contradicting each other) that I tend to take them with a grain of salt. But a 7x difference in mortality rates is usually an indicator that something significant is going on.--Itinerant1 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Okinawans, Sardinians, and Seventh-Day Adventists from Loma Linda tend to live the longest, apparently. 80.122.178.68 (talk) 10:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know about Sardinians. Mormons in Utah tend to live at least 5 years longer, on average, than typical for Americans. I don't think it's been fully explained.--Itinerant1 (talk) 11:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

A grain of salt will reduce cramp pains.--85.211.153.242 (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

"Red Indian"/ American Indian Names

Why do Red Indian names always go like "Stands with a fist", "Howls at the moon", "Kicks with his feet"?? The names are in their language, right? So why would anyone translate the meanings of those names into English while referring to those people? Even (real) Indian names have meanings in the corresponding languages, but I don't see anyone translating them literally while writing them in English... 223.190.239.230 (talk) 13:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

One look at Sitting Bull's Indian name, for example, might give a clue why the names are translated. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The term "Red Indian" is mildly offensive; depending on the context "American Indian" is less so, and "Native American" (US) or "First Nations" (Canada) are more accepted terms for pre-Columbian residents of North America; the least offensive thing is to refer to people by their individual nations of which they are decendent (Oneida, Cherokee, etc.). The naming system you note, where Native American names are translated into English, is not as prevalent as the Hollywood Movies would have you believe. The practice is not entirely unknown (Ben Nighthorse Campbell, William Least Heat-Moon, etc.) however there are many Native Americans who are known either by European names (Jim Thorpe, Graham Greene) or by names in their own native languages (Pocahontas, Sacagawea, Massasoit, Cochise). I'm not entirely certain of why the translation occurs; my suspicion is because many of their names may have been difficult for Europeans to properly pronounce. --Jayron32 13:50, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(ec)

For starters, they aren't always. Sometimes they are known by our best mangled pronunciation in our language: Chief Seattle for Si'ahl, (pronunciation: [ˈsiʔaːɬ] or [ˈsiʔaːtɬʼ]; Tecumseh for Tekoomsē, also known as Tecumtha or Tekamthi, whose article describes the sign which occurred after his birth that his name derived from. Native American names were often describing a sign or significant event so the meaning was the important thing to convey (some of the sounds of the Native languages are very difficult for Europeans as well). Names may be acquired at birth, after an adulthood ceremony, or after a significant life event. This page comments on modern trends of having an Indian name and a Christian (everyday name). Compounds of European names are also common like Leonard Crow Dog, or Luther Standing Bear (originally Ota Kte meaning Plenty Kill but renamed at residential school). Rmhermen (talk) 14:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The answer is really simple: "That white guy asked for my name. He doesn't know the words I use, so if I tell him, he won't understand. Yesterday, he asked what I call a crow, and then he tried to say it and it sounded like a monkey was trying to talk. I don't want that to happen to my name. So I need to tell him using the words he uses." Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

on that explanation. If you are inventing your own explanation, please indicate so... --Jayron32 14:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I mean, you have presented an answer to the OPs question as an authoritative answer, but have done so without any indication where that answer came from. If the answer comes from a Wikipedia article, please link it. If it has come from another online source, please link that. If it comes from something you read or saw on a TV show, please indicate where. If it is merely some speculation you have, please indicate that as well. --Jayron32 14:30, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh. OK. Personal knowledge. Now try to say Tłʼízíłání... ;) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Jayron, as Seb az86556 is active on the Navajo Wikipedia, this is apparently his or her own personal explanation for what s/he him/herself does. Marco polo (talk) 14:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I pronounce it Many Goats, of course (I think from quick google search). If someone could sort out this line in the Allen Dale June article, it would be nice: ..."born for Tłʼízíłání, and his father was named Yéʼii Dineʼé, born for Tachíiʼnii." born into? born of the? what is the meaning here? Rmhermen (talk) 14:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

born into/born of (nilį́igo)=first clan, born for (yáshchíín)=father's clan. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 14:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(outdent) Pocahontas whose real "secret" name was Matoax or Matoika or Matoaka but who was called Amonute as an adult until she became Rebecca Rolfe is a good example of some of the complexities. There is also the explanation of the common addressing of elders as "Grandfather" as that their sacred names are too special to use as a mere form of address. Rmhermen (talk) 14:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's possible to generalize about Native American names. There is at least as much cultural diversity among the indigenous peoples of North America as there is among indigenous peoples of a similarly sized region in the Old World (therefore greater diversity than among the peoples of Europe). Each ethnic group has its own practices, and individuals may vary in their practices. Marco polo (talk) 14:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I've read something on this topic, but can't remember at the moment what it was--will try to remember. Meanwhile, the practice of using English words for Native American names (whether rough translations of their native names or wholly new names) goes way back, but so does the use of native names, even long, hard to pronounce names (though often "Anglicized" to some degree).

Not all Native American names could be translated--depending on the culture. Personal names in the Pacific Northwest, for example, typically did not have a specific meaning. For example, Chief Seattle ("Si'ahl"), as far as I know, doesn't mean anything in particular in Duwamish; nor does the name of his relative, Chief Kitsap; nor Chief Leschi; nor Maquinna or Wickaninnish of earlier times farther north. As far as I know these names mean as little in their languages as Jayden does in English (whatever original meaning there might be is non-obvious to most people).

There is also a long history of natives acquiring and using English names (or French, Spain, etc) for various reasons (especially converting to Christianity and being given a Christian name, and as a result of intermarriage). (as an aside, I'm fond of the Christianized names of two Native Alaskan saints, Peter the Aleut and Herman of Alaska)

I used to think the use of names like "Red Cloud" only became common in the 19th century and mainly for the Plains Indians, but there are numerous earlier examples, like Handsome Lake and his half-brother Cornplanter, yet a contemporary Seneca was called Sayenqueraghta; also Cornstalk and fellow Shawnee Blue Jacket. Red Jacket was known as Otetiani among the Seneca, but later given a new name, Sagoyewatha. As with the Iroquois, there was a wide variety of name-types among the Cherokee. The first example that comes to mind is Attakullakulla and his son, known as Dragging Canoe in English (though I doubt he or any of his "Chickamauga" followers would have used anything but his Cherokee name). Anyway, I will try to find the source I am thinking of...maybe coffee will help my brain. I suspect the more well-known (or stereotyped) style like Rain-in-the-Face, White Man Runs Him, and One Who Walks With the Stars is remembered so well because the Lakota and other Plains Indians were among the last to be subjugated and among the most romanticized since the end of the Indian Wars. By that time, the mid-to-late 1800s, practice went both ways too--Custer was called "Yellow Hair" by some of his native enemies. Pfly (talk) 18:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I just have to cite the example of Young Man Afraid Of His Horses, which, according to the article, is a translation of his real name. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:27, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

You beat me to it, I was going to post that, although the article doesn't jibe with what I have read, in that the Sioux word for horse was their word for "big dog" and the real meaning of his name was "His enemies even fear his camp dogs". The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Angela Merkel's mudra

Why is Angela Merkel often doing a kind of mudra? (search for Angela Merkel superglue to see it). I don't see any German politician doing anything similar... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.8.74.46 (talk) 14:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

It's obviously just a personal habit or mannerism. Lots of people have physical habits like that. Hers has attracted attention because she is in the spotlight a lot and because a lot of people (especially in places like Greece) dislike her and therefore want to ridicule her. Marco polo (talk) 14:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, why is she still doing it, if people is laughing at it? 88.8.74.46 (talk) 16:05, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Why does Bill Clinton point with his thumb if people mock it? Perhaps it doesn't bother her. People have lots of mannerisms, and famous people with characteristic mannerisms see those mannerisms show up in caricatures of them. It doesn't mean they care... --Jayron32 17:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

In her hakina mudra (Sanscrit) or "that which brings joy" position, Merkel's five fingers represent the elements of the cosmos. The tip of the thumb represents the center of the fire element The tip of the index finger is the center for the air element. The tip of the middle finger is the center for the sky element. The tip of the ring finger is the center for the earth element. And finally, the tip of the little finger is the center for the water element. Angela needs the mudra's calming effect when she warns that Europe could be living through its 'toughest hour since World War Two'. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

what does this mean

Hello, have received this text and I do not know what they could mean! Can anyone help me?

It's dem, veed deur bebyffeet, uh, hoommeeggburds 'n meelky veys, doooohhhh, It's dem, hurde-a yuoor sea shells, doooohhhh, Bloo oooot de-a beeg veeck, It's dem, it's dem, it's dem,

Nu nut yuoor beetemins, doooohhhh, oor peelloo oor muneecle-a, uh uh uh, dees oone's dgoost reeteuoosness helff fooll 'n lugeecel meunveboohll remute-a ebsuluut, 'n noohehe-a t' gu, boot oonerd 'n uperd, clesp croons gruoond de-a heert, uh, let trunsmeesshoon cummess, hellu, guudbye-a derk, Reel i vundeh is dees ell meteheeel, Dees cun't be-a heee, de-a leete-a is tuu dooll De-a furss teeme-a i spuke-a moost hebe-a beee

it duesn't luuk leeke-a un ice-a scoolptoore-a... oor dues it, dooh...uh...? iff i reel peyeed ettenshoon teeme-a voodd mube-a festeh 'n festeh, lundscepes 'n stetes ooff netoore-a voodd gellup 'n seenk beff'e-a me-a, uh uh uh, 'teel ell ves steell 'n un oorcheed ne-a instunt, uh, oone-a reech vheete-a boorsteegg oorcheed stuud in chunnels 'n de-a reebehs deep beloo beooty, greemece-a, uh uh uh, flee-a, uh uh uh, suools dun't neeed shelteh, neteebe-a veboohll smehts redeeetigg druoogh shune-a, uh uh uh, vhet's scereed smell seete-a, a sveemmigg preezm's grey cure-a vheech oone-a veell iheck a deffeenishoon f' sheeh bleess 'n set its sembeless seessere-a 'n oobboohjeck veed preede-a doon gently beff'e-a a glube-a ooff dgooje-a 'n grooje-a in oopee f'oom...i deenk... nu oone-a, uh uh uh,hoondreds ooff duoosunds ooff chetteheegg seelbeh feceed munkeys screech und feend dem fesceenetigg, elduoogh noohehe-a t' be-a fuoond oon de-a peheephehy ooff, uh uh uh uh uh, sume-a geneheshoon, hooh i'm nut femeelier veed zee, dooh uhh, tehm,

bueelid tu a creck, heppy noo, uh uh uh uh uh uh, vhu'll be-a burd in hund, uh uh uh uh, i'be-a beee mooteeletid tryeegg, teecheegg myselff preffehess, techneeke-a 'n ecceptebeeltiby, it seems yuoor sun is ooff cunsoomed, uh uh uh uh, bueelid tu a creck, vhet du yuoo meun dehe's nu ooer, dooh...uh...? ell de-a reshoons, dooh...uh...? suoond de-a elerm, dehe-a moost be-a a stooevey, a dreep, bure-a, uh uh uh, a creck 'n a treeckle-a, uh uh uh, suun de-a hooll gedeheed its budy, und dey ell droon t' meet veed a green, steeck 'n hunkehcheeeff, uh uh uh uh uh, emeed zee, uh uh uh, flooeboohreegg doost ooff zee, irrr, crussrueds, doooohhhh, dun't peteh oooot oon me-a noodroost yuoor feest intu zee, IRRRR, soonset, uh,

textoore-a veedin zee, uh uh uh, fuutpreents 'n un ind etup zee, uh, zee veend, uh uh uh uh, i feel leeffleeke-a...sumedeegg sumedeegg t' crevl oon, soonleet smell, a vree beneed zee, IRRRR, sueel presess beyund vells, doooohhhh, ert is ibehyvhehe-a, uh uh uh, i reffoose-a t' knoo vhehe-a, uh uh uh, i vundeh t' knoo vhehe-a ert is, doooohhhh, ibehyvhehe-a i vundeh t' knoo vhehe-a ert is, doooohhhh, ibehyvhehe-a i vundeh...

next teeme-a i'm bured, uh uh uh uh, de-a mun's gueegg doon i'll st'p oon unyune's broonbeg 'n loonch...vhee dey're-a nut luukeegg. it's nut eckooel bed rep, i dgoost dun't feel it, uh, dehe-a i seeed it. Um de hur de hur de hur. Cloddy Hans (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks like someone trying to spell a heavy central continental European accent. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 15:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

(ec)I can't tell all of it, but much of it is understandable if you read it aloud, for example "it duesn't luuk leeke-a un ice-a scoolptoore-a" would be "it doesn't look like an ice sculpture"--Jac16888 ^Talk 15:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

http://www.allthelyrics.com/lyrics/dose_one_boom_bip/its_them-lyrics-1249180.html Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 15:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

That's pretty impressive dude!!! Richard Avery (talk) 18:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

This looks like it's a piece of text that has been run through the Dialectizer, many times, each with a different dialect. It's too heavily dialected for me to make sense of it right now, I would have to take more time to take a closer look at it. JIP | Talk 18:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it looks someone already figured out what it means. JIP | Talk 18:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Tapir in da house

Malayan tapir

Would a Malayan tapir be able to get into a normal house (say a 1870's terrace), ascend the stairs onto the first floor, and then, at a later point, descend the steps to the ground floor and leave the house again without any damage to the tapir or house? Harley Spleet (talk) 21:24, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure, if the door is open and the stairs aren't too steep -- see the picture. Looie496 (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if the OP is considering having one as a pet.

And I wonder if they would make good pets or if they would be trouble. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the OP woke up in the night and found a tapir in his/her room and (s)he is trying to work out if it was real or a dream Richard Avery (talk) 08:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Military mail and supply lines

Are the supply lines delivering military mail to war zones typically kept separate from those that are of enough strategic importance to potentially be targets of an attack (e.g. those carrying food or munitions), at least in the case of high-value insured mail? NeonMerlin 21:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know: military orders, intelligence information and post etc., are sent to together by the fasted possible route and means of transport (i.e. often by air). So I suppose they are kept separate in that sense. --Aspro (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

what to do when new family throw away valuble documents that eventually mean changing everything we ever knew of?

and also we are never told the truth about it and have to make educated guesses about absolutely everything even who we really are! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bombdiggydeathstar (talk • contribs) 00:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• You may be interested in archive local history and family history. It is actually quite surprising how many trustworthy document sequences survive—in particular governments regularly hold series of documents on people in relation to tax, military service, births deaths and marriages, and similar document sets. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what "new family" refers to in the title of this section. Bus stop (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I would guess that means the family which adopted the OP, who then disposed of the birth-parent records. StuRat (talk) 05:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

And following on from that assumption... Depending on where you live and/or where you were born, you might have the right to see your birth-parent records once you reach a certain age (often 18 years old). Astronaut (talk) 05:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Glowing mammals

Are there any mammals that glow? 58.109.24.198 (talk) 02:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

There has been at least one mammal that has been made to glow (apparently now there are a few other species that have been treated in the same way). I'm not sure there are any naturally glowing mammals, though. --Mr.98 (talk) 02:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

There are none mentioned in our list of bioluminescent organisms. The closest thing to bioluminescence some mammals have developed naturally might be tapetum lucidum. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:17, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

It's said that horses sweat, gentlemen perspire and ladies glow. Ladies are mammals. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

First female head of state of an African country

The main page today says Ellen Johnson Sirleaf is the "...first democratically elected female head of state of an African country". Was there an earlier female head of state of an African country (obviously, not democratically elected)? Astronaut (talk) 05:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Cleopatra? Rmhermen (talk) 05:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

And Nefertiti may have ruled quite a bit earlier than that (whether she ruled alone is open for debate). StuRat (talk) 05:42, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I meant in the modern political sense rather than ancient royalty. Though don't restrict it just to the title of "president" either. Astronaut (talk) 05:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

If you count Madagascar as African (and the 19th century as not ancient), Queen Ranavalona I was quite well known. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.65 (talk) 05:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)