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

May 15

H.M.S. Osprey

Having spent two summers at the Naval Base as a Sea Cadet doing courses, I note that there is no mention in Wikepedia of the Prisoner of war cells for German fighter pilots that were on the bluff opposite the main gate. There were Nissan huts where we stayed, as well as other naval ratings. I remember going into the cells , which went many stories underground, but the lighting still worked so it was quite easy to see. There was also a large stone tablet at the top of the steps leading to the huts which was carved by the Luftwaffe Pilots who were held there as a mark of appreciation for the way they were treated. I can find no mention of these facilities in any reports of the early post war reports of the Base.

Regards, Bob Malcolm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.255.135.242 (talk) 03:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I assume that you are speaking of HMS Osprey, Portland. -- ToE 04:40, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

We can't add any information to an article without a valid reference to back it up. Usually, we can find something online but I have had a quick look at Google and can't see anything of use. I'm also wondering if a network of underground cells is more likely to be an old magazine rather than being purpose built for POWs? It seems to be rather an expensive way to accomodate those usually held in wooden huts. Portland was heavily fortified during the Victorian times - see Palmerston Forts, Portland. Alansplodge (talk) 13:08, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

It may help in searches to remember that the base at Portland was HMS Attack from 1941-46. DuncanHill (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

We have an article on the East Weare Battery, which was within the area controlled by the Navy. In our article for the nearby Verne High Angle Battery, there is a photograph of one of the magazine tunnels; the magazines at East Weare would be similar. I can't find anything to suggest that they were used by POWs though. Alansplodge (talk) 19:59, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Supereggs ?

This newspaper flyer ad for Eggland's Best eggs makes some outrageous claims:

"Compared to ordinary eggs, Eggland's Best eggs have 4 times the Vitamin D, more than double the Omega 3, 10 times the Vitamin E, and 25 percent less saturated fat. Plus, EBs are a good source of Vitamin B5 and Riboflavin, contain only 60 calories, and stay fresh longer."

Their website says they do this with "special feed", but I'm skeptical that this alone would make so much difference. So:

1) Is this all true ?

2) If so, how do they do it ? Do they soak the eggs in a vitamin bath ?

3) What makes them stay fresh longer ?

StuRat (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure of the specific claims, but the chickens are fed a highly supplemented diet. For a crude analogy, if you want your feces to be full of corn kernels there're two ways to go about it, one of which doesn't involve manually adding the kernels to the finished product. μηδείς (talk) 17:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

For vitamin D - probably true. This paper [1] demonstrates that feeding chickens diets high in vitamin D will cause the eggs laid by said chicken to have more vitamin D in the yolk. For vitamin E - also totally reasonable - this paper [2] reports finding on supplementing chicken diet with vitamin E and fish oil. It also mentions fatty acids increasing, but I don't really feel like reading the whole article. As for calories, a "regular" 50g egg has ~75 kcal, so they could easily get down to 60 calories by just selling slightly smaller eggs. Basically, "you are what you eat" applies to chickens too - if you pump them full of fatty acids and vitamins, their eggs will, to some extent, in some cases, also carry those substances. Research on chicken egg nutrition as a function of chicken diet is a huge field - plenty more like these refs can be easily found via google scholar. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Most of the nutrition claims are regulated by the FDA, so they can't just make them up (at least not legally). They don't identify the "ordinary eggs" that they used and they could have shopped around for eggs that would look bad in the comparison. Both eggs in the comparison weigh 50g, but some of the differences, such as lower fat and cholesterol, could be explained by the Eggland's Best eggs having slightly smaller yolks, or thicker/heavier shells since I think the shell is included in the weight. Thicker-shelled eggs also stay fresh longer, according to random Internet people. -- BenRG (talk) 06:50, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I heard somewhere that in the USA, eggs are frequently washed, to improve their appearance. However, washing also removes a naturally-present protective film from the egg, which reduces the eggs' shelf-life. I don't know how true this is, and if the eggs the OP mentions are unwashed. LongHairedFop (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I think they legally must wash them in the US. StuRat (talk) 13:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

My mother buys the brand, simply because they are usually the cheapest--she notices no difference in taste. The eggs are washed and stamped with a logo. μηδείς (talk) 17:27, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Egg washing is mandatory in the US and illegal in the EU. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 06:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Do they install little cameras over your kitchen sinks? μηδείς (talk) 21:54, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow, the very definition of trolling. Amazing. Pretend you're too stupid to understand that a comment referred to the business of selling, not using, eggs, and then make a stupid joke, hoping someone will respond with another stupid comment, thus rendering the reference desks even more unpleasant for people actually looking for real answers to real questions. Thanks! --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 02:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

No need. Big Brother arrived years ago, disguised as a multitude of Little Siblings, in the form of human beings who record almost every moment of their waking lives on their devices and post pictures and videos on Youtube and Facebook etc, just before complaining of too much government intrusion into their privacy. If the government issued the devices to all households and mandated that everyone use them on themselves and their social groups, that might be a legitimate complaint. But people choose to buy their own, and choose to make sure they're always at the cutting edge of new technology, and choose to make this a higher priority than feeding their children, and then choose to spill the guts of their lives all over the internet. Is there something wrong with this picture? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:16, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

You may be unaware Jpgordon that comments in small prints are considered asides, or in my case, humourous. Jack actually makes a point I didn't think of since I don't own a smart phone. Not a day goes by that there's not a story online about a criminal caught by a posting to facebook or the like. μηδείς (talk) 18:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Consolidate old user account with current account

How do I go about consolidating two user accounts? I previously edited under User:Jameyson72, contributing mainly on the Oxygen scavenger article. After that account fell into disuse, I forgot the login credentials and when I decided to start editing again, I simply created a new account. Is it possible to consolidate the two accounts? I'd really appreciate any help. Ormr2014 | Talk  21:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, I just read Deleting and merging accounts and see this isn't possible per Wikipedia policy. Ormr2014 | Talk  21:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

See also WP:CHU. You can put {{user previous account}} on your user page to identify the old account. (This sort of question would be better on the Help Desk, incidentally). Tevildo (talk) 21:26, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

May 16

What are the best universities ( USA, Canada, Europe, Australia & New Zealand) for a Masters degree in telecommunications engineering?

What are the best universities ( USA, Canada, Europe, Australia & New Zealand) for; (a) A research Masters degree; (b) A theory Masters degree; in telecommunications engineering? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karlcd (talk • contribs) 13:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

In the U.S., the best known school rankings are published by U.S. News and World Report. Telecommunications engineering is a subdiscipline of electrical engineering. Here is their rankings thereof. --Jayron32 20:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Maclean's runs the university ranking racket here. They'll give you a taste for free, but for that sort of detail, you'll have to buy the issue. Or subscribe to their website. Or find it "pirated" somewhere next year, after the proper owners have no use for it, and you have a fair use for it. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:46, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

We shouldn't be suggesting our clients become accessories (whether after, during or before the fact) to serious offences. If we can't even give legal advice, we certainly can't aid and abet law breaking. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Are you suggesting we protect them from crime? Because that costs extra. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:39, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

I'm suggesting we give suggestions that would not involve our clients in piracy, not even passively. If they want to do that, they can think of it themselves and they won't need our help. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I thought you were talking about the ranking racket. Amended. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:03, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

Question (How can I join this organization?)

Hi. How can I join this organization? (Sophie Concepcion (talk) 11:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC))

(Moved from Math Desk and title fixed.) StuRat (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

You already did, when you registered. But, you made a few mistakes in posting this Q:

1) You put it on the Math Ref Desk. I moved it to Miscellaneous.

2) Your title is meaningless, as every post here is a question. I added to it to make it useful.

3) You posted your Q at the top, in it's own section, when it belongs at the bottom, under that day's date. The "Ready? Ask a new question" button at the top takes care of this part for you.

I will post a link to this new location to your talk page, so you can find it. Oh, and Welcome Aboard ! StuRat (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

You may want to join a WikiProject, which helps coordinate the editing of articles in one subject-area. There's a list of them linked from that page, or it's here WikiProject Directory. ---- LongHairedFop (talk) 18:16, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Does a student who graduated from a lower-ranking school in a developing country be admitted to a graduate school in a western country?

Most colleges in developing countries are sub-par by western academic standards. In one developing country, for example, professors are not obliged by law or by their institutions to pursue a doctoral degree. Even worse, this country’s state colleges lack decent science and computer laboratories, affecting in turn the quality of learning experience. No doubt, higher institutions in improvised countries have much to invest in their facilities, research, and faculty.

Having said this, does a student who graduated from a lower-ranking university in a developing country have a chance to be admitted to a graduate school in a western country? Based on your experience, do graduate schools give much weight to the reputation of your undergraduate school? If your school is accredited in your country, will this help?

I've also read this article from New York Times. I wonder if graduate applicants who didn’t obtain a bachelor's degree from U.S. schools have no chance of getting admitted.Rja2015 (talk) 17:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible for someone from an impoverished country to attend a Western graduate school. And yes, the admissions departments do care what school you went to. I went to a top-tier US graduate school in science, and I would guess that about a fourth to a third of the students were foreign, though mostly from developed countries. Most US graduate schools require some form of standardized admissions test such as the Graduate Record Exam, LSAT, MCAT, etc. I've spoken in the past to people on the admissions committee of my school, and they said they give the greatest weight to admission scores, followed by letters of recommendation, and only then transcripts. I suspect that a student from a developing country who could show exceptional test scores and excellent letters of recommendation would not find it that hard to gain entry to a US graduate program. Of course, the difficulty is in obtaining sufficient knowledge and skill to earn exceptional scores despite a background that may lack much of the preparation that students from other countries had access to. There is no easy answer to that. So the short answer is, yes it is possible, but no it's not easy. Dragons flight (talk) 19:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Money can "grease the wheels", but the International Monetary Fund warned that may (in general) waste more time than it saves. It obviously isn't a great way to save money, either. Also illegal and unethical. But possible. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:23, May 16, 2015 (UTC)

• Quite a significant number of Pakistani and Bangladeshi taxi-drivers in New York City were Lawyers and Doctors back home. Since I didn't take names, I don't have a source, but I am sure it's available. I know a Cuban who worked as a medical doctor in the US. She did so by getting Spanish citizenship, and having her credits transferred to a Spanish University, then to the US. From what I have seen personally, though, most Cuban licenciaturas (bachelor) degrees would not rank as high an associates degree in a county college in the US.

Generalizing, however, doesn't work. My neighbor's son got his medical degree in St. Lucia very cheep, and as he passed whatever test was necessary he was admitted as an intern in the US, and now lives in a 72' yacht in NYC. This is the sort of thing where the OP, if he cares about his life, should contact a professional counselor, not random people on the internet. μηδείς (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

May 17

Official Goal of Wikipedia?

If I should be asking this somewhere else, please tell me.

Is there a stated official goal (or a mission statement) of Wikipedia?

Jimbo Wales had said in 2004, ″Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing.″ and ″Our goal has always been Britannica or better quality.″ But is this official? 76.176.28.235 (talk) 00:19, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

There is Wikipedia:Purpose. Dismas|^(talk) 00:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I had a long, stupid war over Wikipedia:Prime objective once. I don't think we'll be certain what Wikipedia was for till all the dust settles. We're apparently not even close to that. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:08, May 17, 2015 (UTC)

Typically, people finish a work (book, artwork, music, whatever) and only then discover what all their effort was for. If then. Since WP will never be finished, there's no need to know at this very early stage what we're all doing here. I'd rather not know anyway. Do drops of water in a raging river care about the river's purpose? All they know is that they're being dragged along by some huge external force over which they have no control, and they just sit back and enjoy the ride. I recommend it. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The constant battles over "notability" run counter to Wales' vision about the "sum of all human knowledge." The "notability" restriction must have come up later. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:43, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

"All human knowledge" would be absurdly large, if taken literally. What were you doing on 19 April 2003 (to pick a date at random)? I'm sure there's some obscure record somewhere, and that is part of "human knowledge", but does anyone want to know? Even you? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:21, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a difference between "all human knowledge" and "shit someone just made up". At Wikipedia, we need to assure that what we publish is the former and not the latter. WP:N is one of those standards that makes that distinction for us, by requiring that what we publish is trustworthy and verifiable. --Jayron32 03:53, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

And that automatically weeds out the information that is factually correct (such as what I had for dinner on my 37th birthday) from the stuff that is factually correct and noteworthy. Vast numbers of people know where JFK was on 22 November 1963, but very few know or care where he was on the same day in 1962. But if he happened do something notable on that earlier date, or even if some sleuth just needed to know where he was that day, it'll be available because every day of his presidency was recorded in detail. But nobody will ever publish my dinner menu for my 37th birthday, as there is an absence of interest in finding out, and an absence of any record to begin with. Hence, it will never appear in WP. But then, nobody in their right mind would ever expect it to, and that is the light in which Jimbo's talk of "all human knowledge" must be viewed. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:14, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

There is a lot of verifiable information that we haven't included though. For example, I routinely turn to Wikia when I want to dive into the details of fictional works. They often do a much more comprehensive job than we do. We also don't go in for directory type knowledge. No where on Wikipedia would you find a list of all bakeries in Zurich, despite the fact that business listings are easily verified from many official sources. There are far more things in the universe that are verifiable than are Wikipedia notable. Personally, I think that is often a shame because I tend towards a more inclusive mindset, but others don't always agree. Dragons flight (talk) 05:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, that's because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which is a very specific kind of reference work. It may be better to think of the two Jimbo galaxies, being Wikimedia (including Wikisource, Wikinews, Commons, and all the rest) and Wikia, as more comprehensively "all verifiable knowledge". Wikipedia itself is not "everything that anyone can verify, in a random blender, and spit out randomly". It is an encyclopedia that contains articles which are written to be both informative and engaging, and not merely random bits of unassociated facts, which we slam together merely because they are verifiable. There also needs to be a certain narrative within the articles, and should be well-written as such. I agree that Wikipedia does not contain every verifiable fact ever known, but I also don't think it should. There's an advantage to limiting the scope somewhat, quality and quantity are not necessarily identical. --Jayron32 06:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

If your definition of knowledge requires stuff of Wikia, I would suggest it's still insufficient. There are a number of wikis which aren't of wikia and are not likely to be for a variety of reasons. Even for stuff like TV shows, computer games, books and other fictional works the non wikia wikis are sometimes better than the wikias and probably will remain so for a long while due to having the people. It's impossible to predict the future, but I'm not sure that wikia provides sufficient advantage for them to take over everything, even if they have come to dominate in many areas. There are also all those wikis attached to websites and forums plus books and other documents (digital or not) plus audio, picture and video recordings which are not part of any wiki. And the websites and forums themselves provides knowledge that will probably never end up in any wiki unless AIs get good enough to do it automatically but in that case I'm not sure whether the wiki concept will continue anyway. Nil Einne (talk) 12:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

What you had for dinner that day is something that almost all of humanity don't know - it will not always be a part of human knowledge - it would be next to impossible to find solid references for it - so I really don't think it's a reasonable thing to record. Notability and verifiability are certainly tests we must care about.

But how about "How to change the exhaust system on a 2010 Mini Cooper?", or "How to install MineCraft under Linux using WINE?" (both things I've searched for online this week)? These are without doubt non-trivial pieces of human knowledge that ought to be considered both notable and verifiable. But "How To" guides are explicitly excluded by WP:NOT - so this kind of thing will never be a part of Wikipedia.

So clearly, Jimbo wasn't quite saying it right. What I think he may have intended to say was that these goals were a part of the Wikimedia Foundation goals...not just narrowly Wikipedia. WikiBooks/WikiSource/Wikiversity might well include information about how to change car exhaust systems or how to install various pieces of software. Those are all parts of the Wikimedia Foundation's collection of projects - but they are not a part of Wikipedia. SteveBaker (talk) 05:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Information is not knowledge. Perhaps that is the confusion here. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 06:41, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

If Wikipedia were restricted to "knowledge", it would get a lot smaller. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Ditto!--TMCk (talk) 21:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Wiktionary seems to disagree - there are a lot of entries for "knowledge" - but the relevant ones appear to be:

• The total of what is known; all information and products of learning.
• Something that can be known; a branch of learning; a piece of information; a science.

In both cases, "knowledge" is defined more broadly than information - the implication being that all information is knowledge - but perhaps there is knowledge that is other than information. If you are aware of some alternative definition that might apply here, then that would probably be quite illuminating. (Sources please!) SteveBaker (talk) 23:23, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I/we follow the philosophical approach where there is more to it. And never trust WP ;) --TMCk (talk) 03:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Dreams are knowledge that isn't information because they can't be shared or imparted. The information that shapes them (and the information it shapes) is drawn from what the dreamer knows, so even if you somehow copy and run it flawlessly in someone else's dome, what he would see from it isn't what you programmed. Memory errors would be common, and increasingly fatal.

It is known. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:50, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

All three previous posters are perfectly entitled to define their own meaning of the word "Knowledge" - but if you expect others to understand what the heck you're talking about, you need to use the dictionary definition...it's all about communication. The dictionary definition is a superset of 'information'. Knowledge might also include other things that aren't "information" - perhaps dreams or feelings or whatever TMCk is talking about are also knowledge - but if the goal of Wikipedia (or, as I'd maintain, the total of all WikiMedia Foundation projects) is to contain all human knowledge - then all information is a part of that. You may have some alternative definition of "knowledge" - but your definition isn't what matters here. Read the dictionary. SteveBaker (talk) 19:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Information we don't understand can't be known. So not knowledge, at least by Merriam-Webster's #2c and #2a definitions. If you're at least aware of whatever the heck we're talking about and have this info, you're knowledgable under #2d and #2b. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:45, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

I disagree that understanding is necessary for something to be knowledge. Consider (for example) the scientific result that: "the expansion of the universe is accelerating.". This is data, it's factual, it's information. However, we don't understand why it's accelerating. Are you claiming that the acceleration of the expansion of the universe is not knowledge? If we have the information - we know it - even if we don't understand it. 24.242.75.217 (talk) 17:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Like I said, half of the definition sees it your way. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:42, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

I think ultimately we try to make the "sum of all human knowledge" succinct because the reader's time is limited. The reader has other things to do. Bus stop (talk) 17:19, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

76 Street Station on the IND Fulton Street Line

Is there such a station east of Euclid Avenue? Whether there is or not, there should be an article about it. --46.115.12.226 (talk) 08:56, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

You want us to write an article about a station even if it doesn't exist? Our IND Fulton Street Line shows all the stations that exist, with articles for each. -- Finlay McWalterᚠTalk 09:03, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Are you thinking of the 80th Street station? It's western-most entrance is on 77th Street. LongHairedFop (talk) 09:19, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

No, I mean 76th Street Station, served from November 1948 to December 1948. It was east of Euclid Avenue under Pitkin Avenue. --176.2.45.41 (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Apparently there is an urban legend among New York subway fans to the effect that this station was built. Here's a New York Times piece about it from January 21, 2003, one of Randy Kennedy's columns about the subway that he was writing then. (Curiously, the column doesn't seem to be in Subwayland (ISBN 0-212-32434-0), the book that's a collection of the columns.) And here is an elaborate April Fool's joke pretending that the station actually existed and operated for the dates mentioned by the last poster. Does this make the urban legend notable enough to have an article about it? I say no, but opinions may vary.--174.88.135.200 (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The station is mentioned (along with the New York Times reference) in Euclid Avenue (IND Fulton Street Line)#East of the station. This might be a potential redirect target if an entire new article isn't appropriate. Tevildo (talk) 12:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Black Athletic Prowess

I just watched some female track running. The majority of the runners who passed the finishing line quickest were black. Why is this?

Does merely the colour of ones skin attribute to sporting potential. One rumour has it that former colonies such as Jamaica produce exceptional athletes due to its dark past. It is said that during the times of slavery, the plantation owners performed eugenics to breed the best labourers. Any truth in this at all as an explanation to the above? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.202.213.137 (talk) 16:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

If anything, you'd expect slave owners to want slaves that can't outrun them. Perhaps we should look at the reverse, why people who live closer to the poles are less adapted to running fast. For example, more fat would provide better insulation against the cold, but would also reduce sprinting speed. StuRat (talk) 16:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah, so there are fewer fat people (of any colour) nearer the equator Stu? I don't think so. What about the Ethiopian marathon runners they are not very fast but hell they can last. Richard Avery (talk) 16:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I was referring to the climate where each race's genes were historically selected, not necessarily where they live today, and this map seems to bear out my statement, with sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia showing a low incidence of obesity: [3]. However, where Europeans have colonized South Africa and South America, and Middle-Eastern people have colonized North Africa, the trend is reversed. StuRat (talk) 18:19, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

"What about the Ethiopian marathon runners they are not very fast but hell they can last."

Sounds like what my wife says about me.

Ooh, you little bragger youRichard Avery (talk) 18:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

In terms of performance in some sports, see Race and sports#"Black athletic superiority". There's zero evidence and it's fairly unlikely it has anything to do with skin colour per se. In fact, while certain black people may tend to do well in a number of sports, and there may be a genetic factor, I would suggest it wouldn't even be accurate to say the performance is correlated with skin colour per se. How many pygmies have you seen winning a marathon or a 100m race? As our article explains, it's actually more complicated then even that. For example, at first glance it seems to be mostly people of West African descent who are the best sprinters and Nilotic peoples who are the best at marathon running, but that's also a simplification (but does emphasise why simplying saying 'black people' is problematic). Nil Einne (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Skin colour is just one thing that comes with the race. By constantly calling these people black/Negro/coloured, it can seem like that's the main difference. But if you take the pigment out, you still have a person with a different body. That's how we know these albinos are black, despite being white.

Notwithstanding actual differences in muscle and bone, the skin itself does provide one illusory bonus: Muscle under dark skin has more clearly defined edges under bright lights, especially if shined up with oil. That's why Hulk Hogan stayed about as dark as (though oranger than) Butch Reed. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:28, May 17, 2015 (UTC)

This reminds me of a kids' show about racism that was on MuchMusic years ago...one kid explained "I'm not good at basketball because I'm black, I'm good at basketball because I practise." So the question really is, why is it important (culturally, personally, etc) for these athletes (Jamaican track stars, Ethiopian marathoners, or whoever else) to be good at these sports? Adam Bishop (talk) 18:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

A question like this is usually regarded as a racist inquiry. I'm surprised it's gotten this far without someone calling the OP on it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

That is a massive load of bollocks. There is a clear difference between people of (West-)African descent and Caucasians in athletics. Racism has nothing whatsoever to do with it, biology does. Different muscle compositions etc.... Fgf10 (talk) 20:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree, oddly, with Fgf10; the leg shape of typical Africans and Europeans is very different. Anyone who's dated interracially knows this, let alone those who pay attention to mixed-race athletics teams, etc. There's also a significant scientific literature on sprinting and long-distance running and ethnicity. Racism consists of assigning moral judgments collectively to genetics or physical characteristics, not of recognizing measurable physical truths. μηδείς (talk) 21:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The racist angle on this is the notion that athletic prowess comes "naturally" to blacks, while whites have to "work at it" to succeed. Hence the undertone of white superiority. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll accept that as racist if you mean [the notion that] individual blacks shouldn't get credit for their own athletic accomplishments while individual whites should. Effort is a moral concept. μηδείς (talk) 22:43, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

That's the core premise, yes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

OP, you don't tell us the proportion of black runners in the particular race you were watching. Are we to assume they were in the minority? If not, the results would hardly be surprising. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Even if all the contestants were black, if there were qualifying races with a mixture of races, and only blacks qualified, that would be quite a result in itself. StuRat (talk) 23:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

The question would be a bit silly (although we see a lot of that here) if it wasn't about an international elite event so I guess it was 2015 IAAF Diamond League#Shanghai, the second large athletics event this year. All main running events were between 11 and 13 UTC, 17 May. Results are at http://www.iaaf.org/results/diamond-league-meetings/2015/iaaf-diamond-league-shanghai-5647. Elite running is dominated by blacks for both men and women. Of West African descent for sprint and North or East African for long distance. Blacks do relatively poorly globally in most other sports but that may be due to most blacks living in countries with lousy access to sports equipment and facilities. You don't become Tiger Woods if you can never afford to play golf. Running doesn't require anything (not even shoes for many Africans), and many poor African and Caribbean countries do have systems to locate fast kids and give good training to the best. The very public success stories also mean that lots of kids train hard on their own and hope to be discovered as one of few chances to get out of poverty. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Speaking of relatively poor other sports, The Killer Bees used to put on masks and pull the old switcheroo on referees. Tonight, WWE Tag Team Champions The New Day (modern day jive soul bros) retained their belts by having their third man, who wasn't even in the match, do the same. But without a mask. The white ref simply couldn't tell two black men apart. Neither the white guy who rang the bell. Or the white ring announcer, who made it official. In 2015. In Baltimore. The crowd wasn't happy, but relatively so. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:08, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

@InedibleHulk:

The New Day was saved from speedy deletion by your humble narrator.

You do know that it's all all worked and even the supposedly shoot is probably worked shoot, yeah?

On second thoughts, shh, don't answer, don't break kayfabe

El diablo Tasmanico aka --Shirt58 (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Why I'm not affected by alcohol?

Hello,

I rarely drink alcoholic beverages, but when I do, it seems not to affect me at all - I don't feel dizzy, happy, sad, tired, uninhibited, etc. (albeit the largest amount I've ever drunk was about three glasses of wine). Are there any medical problems\conditions that are correlated with such a resistance to the alcohol's effect? (I thought that alcohol tolerance should exist only in heavy drinkers). Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.160.245.196 (talk) 20:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

We do not answer requests for medical advice. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

We can't give medical advice, like guessing at what's wrong with your system. But we can say it's hard to guess if there's anything wrong with it at all, given your admittedly scant testing. If you had three glasses of wine over a few hours, it's not strange to hear you weren't drunk. If you had them in a row, I'd expect at least dizziness. Then again, some wines are basically juice.

I say take three shots of any medium-strength liquor and call us back in the morning. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:40, May 17, 2015 (UTC)

No harm in pointing you to this little self-help guide. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:44, May 17, 2015 (UTC)

While I cannot comment as to the OP's health, simple explanations than a medical condition would be that either:

• anyone who has never had more than three glasses of unspecified wine ($5 wine cooler? $10 riesling? $50 brandy? what size glass?) over an unspecified period of time might not have consumed enough quickly enough to get drunk
• anyone who rarely drinks will not have enough experience with inebriation to fully be aware of their inebriation. Heck, there are some borderline alcoholics who will insist while slobbering and unable to stand will insist to the designated driver that "Ah'm naht drunk! Yooo are!"

Weight, gender, and time are huge factors. Heavier people have a higher tolerance, and women have about half of the enzymes that process alcohol then men of the same size. For example, I'm a male who is about 220 lbs (or 100 kg). I can down a bottle of Moscato d'Asti or Liebfraumilch alongside a two-hour meal and score better on sobriety tests that do not check my breath or blood. I once got my then-girlfriend and her friends (most about half my weight) "I need to sit down" drunk off a couple of small glasses of plum wine (and since one of them was a lesbian and the other viewed me as a brother, no, they weren't drunk off me). Ian.thomson (talk) 21:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

• The obvious answer is fraud on the part of the "wine" merchant, contact a lawyer. μηδείς (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Or contact Jorah Mormont. Less hassle. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:50, May 17, 2015 (UTC)

Question of condom study

I have a question of this study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4012254/#!po=97.9167 page 16 says that out of 26 pregnancies, only 5 were because of condom related reasons what do they mean by that? does that mean only five occurred despite being used the right way? It doesn't seem clear what the other 21 pregnancies were because of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whoami22 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Most pregnancies are because of sexual activity ... -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

In the "Discontinuation" section it says:

Furthermore, among all pregnancies, 19.23% (n = 5/26) were because of condom breakage, 11.11% (n = 3/26) were due to forgetting to use a condom, 50% (13/26) were because of incorrect condom use, and 19.23% (n = 5/26) were due to the spouses’ dislike of condom use and other reasons.

Rojomoke (talk) 23:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

"forgetting"?! Really?! That seems exceedingly unlikely. SteveBaker (talk) 23:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Erm, I guess you've never been drunk...? 131.251.254.154 (talk) 12:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Call me old-fashioned, but I still say that pregnancy is a result of sexual intercourse. What the above is about is unwanted pregnancy, which is a sub-set of all pregnancy. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Christians would tend to disagree, at least in one notable case. StuRat (talk) 01:39, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I think the context of the question and study is fairly well understood to everyone else. Except may be the OP, who seems to have great problems understanding anything but history has shown telling them doesn't seem to help. Nil Einne (talk) 12:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Soup Greens (Czech/Slovak Cuisine)

I have recipe from a Czechoslovak cookbook asking for "Soup Greens". I'm familiar with German Suppengrün, but is that the same thing in Czech/Slovak cooking? 73.149.42.231 (talk) 22:53, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you have the actual Slovak or a link, or can you give the title of the cookbook? μηδείς (talk) 23:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

"The Czechoslovak Cookbook". I doubt that's helpful; at no place in the cookbook does it say what soup greens are. It's a 40 year old cookbook, so a lot of recipes are a bit antiquated. 73.149.42.231 (talk) 01:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Suppengrün can vary regionally, from one cook to another, or by season. The key ingredients seem to be carrots, leeks or onions, celery root, and parsley. A cruciferous root such as rutabaga or kohlrabi seems to be preferred. Other ingredients are optional. This Czech recipe lists parsley root, parsley leaves, celery leaves, celery root, carrots, kohlrabi, onions, leeks, cauliflower, cabbage, and garlic. This meets the basic requirements for Suppengrün. Probably several of the ingredients in the Czech recipe are optional. Marco polo (talk) 14:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

We have an article about it, under the French name mirepoix, the article discusses a number of variations. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

May 18

Are there Wikipedians who...?

Has anyone here met any Wikipedians who believe in either both or one of the following two?:

1. The abundance of B-class articles does not make Wikipedia a great resource, even though they know that an average readers (including me) are not left wanting after reading one (which means the B-class serves its purpose for people except for, maybe, experts who wouldn't have researched the topic in the first place).

2. Anything outside the scope of Encyclopedia Britannica (or a ″traditional″ encyclopedia) is unencyclopedic.

76.176.28.235 (talk) 01:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The question as formulated is not appropriate for this Reference Desk. There would be no published sources detailing which Wikipedians have met which other Wikipedians, and what the latter may or not believe. This should go on some forum. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Which forum? 76.176.28.235 (talk) 03:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The help desk or teahouse, perhaps. Or maybe Wikipediocracy's. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:16, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There are 48,522,031 registered editors at Wikipedia, and that doesn't count those such as yourself who have chosen to contribute to the encyclopedia without registering an account. That about guarantees a level of diversity-of-opinion that one can guarantee that there is at least one of those people who believes anything. More broadly, if you want to read general reading which might interest you, see This page and This page and perhaps this page. You can find links from each of those to lead you more places where the general concept of what is, and is not, appropriate for inclusion at Wikipedia are discussed, and historical background to those opinions can be found. --Jayron32 01:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I asked this because I was appalled by the assumptions made on Wikipedia:Wikipedia is failing, which shows that there are those who believe so (at least in the previous decade). 76.176.28.235 (talk) 03:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Read the pages I linked for you for background. --Jayron32 03:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Also re-read the disclaimer at that page: This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints..

I suggest you discuss your concerns at that page's talk page. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Song Clip

Moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment § Song clip

 – ―Mandruss ☎ 08:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Is there any U.S. accrediting organization that has a comprehensive list of all the foreign colleges and universities that are recognized in the U.S.?

I'm particularly interested in the U.S. accredited schools in East Asia and South East Asia.Rja2015 (talk) 16:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The way to go about this is to contact the admissions office of the US school you are thinking of attending, and asking their criteria. μηδείς (talk) 17:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Not comprehensive, but: Lists_of_American_institutions_of_higher_education#Outside_of_the_US_and_its_territories 73.149.42.231 (talk) 18:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

It might help, Rja, if you'd clarify your interest. Do you want overseas branches of accredited American Universities? Do you want to know which overseas credits you can transfer to the US while in the middle of a bachelor's degree? Or do you want to know which undergraduate degrees from oversees will help you to apply to graduate school in the US? Be aware there is no official (beyond for purposes of accepting gov't funds) US accrediting agency. For example, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education is the accrediting agency for Cornell, Rutgers, Rowam Princeton, and New York University and many other schools, but it is a voluntary and non-governmental association. μηδείς (talk) 21:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Difference

Is there a difference between "futas", "trannys", "shemales" and "ladyboys" or are they all terms for the same thing? 117.163.109.209 (talk) 19:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You should read the Wikipedia article titled transgender, and then follow additional links from that article to further educate yourself on this concept. --Jayron32 19:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Referencing Wikipedia/using limited content from Wikipedia

MESSAGE:

We would like to reference a few articles we have seen on Wikipedia, on our newly created Web page for Highlander fans. We would also like to post a small amount of content about those articles (the information coming from the Wikipedia article), then place a link on our page beneath it to direct people to Wikipedia to read the whole article.

There are currently over 1000 regular contributes to Wikipedia. Is there a special individual from whom permission must be obtained to quote content from a site on Wikipedia? Are there any legal issues we should be aware of before proceeding to use (a small amount of) content form these articles and to assign a link back to Wikipedia to read the entire entry?174.25.208.72 (talk) 20:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

See WP:CW for our page on the subject. This sort of question might be better at the Help Desk. Tevildo (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You can even copy entire articles (or the entire encyclopedia). You can modify them, as well. All that's asked in return is that you acknowledge the article with a hyperlink and share any derivative works under a similar license. The "free" in "free encyclopedia" means more than not costing money. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:02, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

Greatest number of Dead in a Biker-Gang dispute

Can anyone give a source for a higher one-day [incident] death toll than ten for a US biker-gang shootout? The issue is currently being debated at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Waco_biker_gang_shooting and it is being asserted that this is a common occurrence in the US. I don't remember Altamont, but that was a few dead, one by stabbing, and not a shootout. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 21:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Following the references from this BBC article, and from our Outlaw motorcycle club article, the previous two largest incidents were the Milperra massacre (seven deaths, Australia) and the Shedden massacre (eight deaths, Canada, not a shootout). The previous largest US incident was the River Run Riot, with three deaths. Tevildo (talk) 21:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The Toronto Sun has a roundup, too. The Quebec Biker War takes the cake at 164, but that wasn't all in one go (and, unsurprisingly, not American). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:34, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks for the answers so far, the assertion that this was a regular thing seemed odd, since I am almost as old as Bilbo Baggins, and pay closer attention to the interweb and US News. μηδείς (talk) 22:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hard to avoid US news, wherever we are. Even if we used school shooting standards, this is still pretty huge. Domestic dispute murder-suicides seem to hit the ceiling at eight. I don't know what comparable street gang massacre Masem seems to believe in, but he's right that the kind of crap in the American district of the Middle East puts the homeland death tolls to shame. That's not a fair measuring stick for things like this. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:05, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

By American district of the Middle East, what do you mean? To me the American middle east means Pennsylvania. Does this have something to do with the US Government, like the Waco Massacre? Or with the Islamist Jihadi, Nidal Hasan? I thought the issue was biker gang violence, although I may not have known what I meant when I posted this. Assuming I did know what I meant, is there an American biker massacre of similar proportions? And if so, when? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 01:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Iraq, Afghanistan, sort of Yemen, sort of Syria. Masem was saying this was run-of-the-mill, by their standards. Within the continental US, this seems to be among the highest tolls for any shootout, and more certainly the highest single gang-related one. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:33, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

I had edit-conflicted with Tevildo and wanted to point out what Template:OutlawMotorcycleGroups lists under "Related events" (most of which have been mentioned by now), and that none of them seemed to include an event exceeding the recent death toll in Waco. Masem's point was a different one, which doesn't mean you don't have a strong argument, but that part needs to be discussed there, medeis, not here, as you well know. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Dunno about actual numbers of deaths - but some of the Mods and rockers biker fights in England in the 1960's and 70's had upwards of a thousand combatants armed with knives, bike chains and many other improvised weapons. These fights went on for days and the police were powerless to intervene in any significant manner. Oddly, I can't find any numbers for deaths and injuries - but the lack of guns probably saved a lot of lives. 24.242.75.217 (talk) 16:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Has anyone ever managed to kill someone with a bike chain? Seems like a lot of work. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:45, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Paul D. Jones, Groton, Massachusetts, January 28, 1996. That took some tracking down, but it _has_ happened. Tevildo (talk) 01:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Apparently, an undercover cop infiltrating a biker gang was killed by a chain, but that was on CSI. And there was Chain Letter, but neither of those were bike chains. You know something's rare when it doesn't even happen on TV. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

If you extend your search to include Garrotes, you'll find more hits. Certainly a bike chain can be used as a functional garrote. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true. Can wrap it around a fist, too. I was only thinking of the whipping. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:59, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

In any case, in Texas, anything designed or adapted for the purpose of causing "serious bodily injury" is a "deadly weapon". It doesn't have to have ever killed anyone. Doesn't even have to ever caused serious injury. So that covers every solid object. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:07, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Or no solid object that has another purpose at all, depending how you read it. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:13, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that last link is interesting stuff. Living in TX currently, I am actually pleased to see that there is legal precedent for an automobile being considered a deadly weapon. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Even when it doesn't kill or injure anyone, if it just happens to be there when you're arrested, it may be seized and auctioned off by the time you post bail.

And no, you don't get a cut of that. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:32, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

May 19

Provenance of a quote

I've seen the following quote attributed to Neil deGrasse Tyson but I can't find where/when he actually said it. Quite a few sources from Cracked and on down the reliable source ladder say he said it but again, I can't find anything more reliable. The quote is:

The problem in society is not kids not knowing science. The problem is adults not knowing science. They outnumber kids 5 to 1, they wield power, they write legislation. When you have scientifically illiterate adults, you have undermined the very fabric of what makes a nation wealthy and strong.

It's longer than 140 characters, so I'm guessing it's not from NdGT's Twitter account. So, is anyone's Google-fu better than mine? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 00:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Try Google, it takes you immediately to Wikiquote. μηδείς (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikiquote was the very first place I looked before Google. I searched through Tyson's entry there for the words "outnumber", "number", and "illiterate". When they weren't found, or were found but not in this quote, I went to Google. Dismas|^(talk) 01:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I saw this recently (ca. 17 May) on Facebook but a scroll-back failed to recover it. Possibly you may search or inquire on the following websites: Brain Pickings (Maria Popova) or IFLScience, both known to quote N. Tyson. -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it on FB recently too. When these things come across my feed, I sometimes go looking for the source of the quote. I also check Snopes for various claims that are posted too. Dismas|^(talk) 01:15, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

See this video. Abecedare (talk) 07:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

See YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDFgLS3sdpU "Neil deGrasse Tyson - Children Are Not The Problem" posted on 05.09.2011 by ttk1opc --CiaPan (talk) 07:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both for finding those videos. Dismas|^(talk) 01:15, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Resolved

Off-topic: He's putting across a rather strange point of view though - I mean, most of the population are taught whatever core science knowledge they'll ever have in school - so if kids knew science, then within a few decades, they'd grow up to be adults who'd know science. Teaching adults stuff is difficult because there is no way to force them to sit down and learn...but kids are a captive audience for the decade or so that we have them in the education system. Tyson has a conflict of interest here because he makes his money trying to educate adults through pop.sci TV shows. But because his shows don't teach fundamentals like Euclid's theorems, Newton's laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics or "The Scientific Method" - he's not making much of a dent in the problem. SteveBaker (talk) 06:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The Basement of Mom

Since when the whole living in the basement of 'mom' become such a big taboo and social no-no. Shouldn't mom's feel proud that their kids want to stick around and help, rather than disappear off into the boonies and general not give a crap about their families who busted a butt bringing them up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.182.206.48 (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

See freeloader. The issue is not "helping out around the house", the issue is "not earning one's own way and behaving like an adult". You can move out and still stop by to visit and help with chores. People live in mom's basement because they don't have a job and can't afford their own house. You know, like the one mom paid for. With her job. --Jayron32 12:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Your last two sentences are utter nonsense, and not suitable for the reference desk. Unless you accidentally left out the first part: "The negative and false stereotype is that people live in mom's basement..." ? SemanticMantis (talk) 17:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The stereotype wouldn't exist if it wasn't true often enough to have formed. It isn't that stereotypes are never true, so they are not false. It is that stereotypes are not exclusively true on a case-by-case basis. That there exist people who live at home for other reasons doesn't mean that no one has ever freeloaded off their parents because they were lazy. --Jayron32 17:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough. I wonder if you think the same thing about a phrase like "The Irish are lazy drunkards"? Would you type that here, or other related stereotypes, without at least explaining that it is a stereotype your are reporting, and not a statement of fact? I'd think not, but thanks for explaining, I won't derail further. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

No, because that's a bigoted thing to say. --Jayron32 18:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

[EC] The concept refers not to well-adjusted adults who for various valid reasons choose to remain or return to the parental home for a period*, but those who are unable to develop adult-level abilities to socialise with their peers (and perhaps marry) and/or work and/or get their own place, which is widely considered "normal" in recently affluent Western society. There are of course many perfectly well-adjusted people in similar arrangements to whom the stigmatization is not applied.

(*Personal disclosure: I myself returned (from a different country) to my parents' recently-acquired home for an 8-year spell in my late 20s, after they acquired one following retirement from an internationally peripatetic life. After 9 years I was able to buy my own home and move out. I'm also now in my late 50s, single and satisfied with that arrangement, so I have sympathy for those who are derided for not conforming to the aforementioned "cultural norms.")

The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 12:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The point is that you demonstrated ambition and moved on when you were able to. The stereotype, as Jayron notes, is of someone who's basically a lazy mooch. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:41, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

And who says that only people living with their mothers help them or care about them? I spend hours every week visiting and caring for my mother, although I support myself and don't live under her roof. 67.17.193.162 (talk) 14:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I wonder how many of us know a recent college grad? Or a high school graduate who can't even afford college? The job market in USA has been... different for them. I don't know what it's like in Iran, where your IP address geolocates to. It's also not clear where in the world you are interested in these social norms. Some relevant info and refs at Millennials#Peter_Pan_generation, as well as Extended_family#Recent_trend_in_the_United_States. Also related Underemployment, Secondary labor market, Working poor. We have e.g. Labor market of Japan but I can't find a similar article Labor market of Iran. Finally, it's worth pointing out that there are huge cultural differences here. In the USA, long term, multi-generational housing has not been as common in the late 20th century, compared to other parts of the world. My point is, this trend of young adults living with parents seems new and different in the USA (and some people will jump to conclusions and call them "freeloaders" or "lazy mooch]" simply by virtue of the living arrangement), but it would be totally normal for a Hindu_joint_family. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it used to be the norm for unmarried children to remain in the home, and perhaps even married children. Indeed, at one point an unmarried daughter living away from home would have been scandalous. As a result of free trade, the US middle class finds itself poorer now than in previous generations, as many of the jobs for new graduates are now done in China or India. Thus, the ability of new grads to move out of the home is greatly reduced. And, ultimately, if they can manage to save up money at whatever menial job they can get, so they afford to eventually buy a home rather than wasting that money on rent, this may be a good thing for them financially in the long run. StuRat (talk) 17:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The erosion of the American middle class has been purposeful. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

It depends if the basement has windows. Good lighting can make all the difference. Bus stop (talk) 17:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

• Back to answer the original question: The difference in cultural expectations regarding family size and extended families living at home is closely tied to an economic concept known as the demographic-economic paradox. I wish I could find a printed sources, but it's something that came up in a human geography class I took over 20 years ago, which discussed the issue. You can read the article in question, but the gist of the rationale for the paradox is thus. In pre-industrial societies, children are an asset, because children work for the family, and bring in an income from a young age. They work the family farm, they become apprentices in the family trade, etc. So, in pre-industrial societies, having as many children as possible makes economic sense. Also, having them live at home makes economic sense: they contribute to the family income, and the entire family is economically stronger for them. In a post-industrial society, children are an economic liability. They cost money to educate, they don't earn an income until long after they are a physiological adult; time or money spent "raising" children is money lost from family incomes. This standard explanation of the Demographic-economic paradox explains why in post-industrial societies, where per capita income is much higher, family size is still much smaller: people making individual, rational economic decisions find that children are expensive. In pre-industrial societies, they also make rational, economic decisions but with the opposite result because in their society, children make you money. In the U.S., the stereotype of the freeloading adult living in mom's basement comes in the socio-economic expectation that adults have a responsibility to be self-sufficient, so they are not a liability to their parents anymore. That societal expectation is driven by the economics of the western, post-industrial society and does not necessarily reflect the expectation in other cultures with different economic realities. But it all boils down to the socioeconomic background of the Demographic-economic paradox. The wikipedia article called Demographic transition covers this pretty well. --Jayron32 18:13, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
• Anybody who's ever lived in the attic during the summer knows why people live in the basement, Mom's or not. μηδείς (talk) 19:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

House port ?

I had an idea for something and want to know if anyone else has done it. The reason for this idea is that I often need to open a door or remove a window screen to snake a hose out the window (to drain the basement after flooding) or an electric cord (to run the electric leaf blower). The second problem can be solved by adding an electric outlet outside the house, but the hose is more difficult to solve. Just leaving a door or window screen open is bad, because we can get bees and such inside the house. I can tape the area up as an ad-hoc solution, but that's not very good for something I need to do regularly.

So, my idea is a circular "port" with a screw-on cover both inside and outside, and maybe a lever operated closing mechanism (like a camera has) to squeeze in on the hose or cord once it is in place. So, has anyone seen this solution, or another solution to this problem ? StuRat (talk) 19:48, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

This sounds a bit like something I've seen at the International Convention Centre, Birmingham. I can't find a photo, but if you go behind it and look up, high on the wall there are several circular metal doors about 20cm in diameter, which are secured with a 1/2 turn toggle. Inside there is a fabric "cuff" which closes around cables that are pushed through. There are also a series of hooks running the top. When I went on a tour, the guide said these were for TV broadcasts, so the cables can be run from the event inside to the van outside. I've only ever seen one TV broadcast from the ICC, but the designers were thinking ahead when it was built. --TrogWoolley (talk) 11:19, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Why not install an outside tap? Or, failing that, what about putting in a cat flap and running the hose through that? - Cucumber Mike (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

It sounds like you're trying to band-aid the issue instead of fixing the root problem. If your basement floods that often, why not fix the problem with the flooding? And instead of using a hose, have you looked into installing a sump pump? Dismas|^(talk) 00:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

That said, if you don't find a solution already on the market, you could use a hole saw to put a hole in the wall. Get a section of PVC pipe and put it in the hole and caulk around the pipe. Make sure the pipe sticks through the wall by about an inch on each side of the wall. Get two PVC pipe caps and put them on the pipe when not in use. If you're that concerned that even one bee not get in the house during the few minutes/hours that you'd have the caps off, you can pack an old towel around the hose when it's running through the pipe. In fact, keeping the towel in there 24/7 would probably help with any heating/cooling loss on every other day when you're not draining your basement. Dismas|^(talk) 00:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

There are parts of the US where people's basements flood regularly, and are required to flood, by law. They live on low spots on the sewer line, and are not allowed to put check valves in, as then the pressure would build up in the sewer after a heavy rain and damage the sewer. As absurd as it sounds, this is the case.

And we do use a sump pump, which pumps water out of the basement by hose. We obviously can't use the floor drain, as this applies when the floor drain is backed up. StuRat (talk) 04:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow...it's hard to imagine that! Anyway - I think I would install the same contraption that is use to vent a cooker hood - which is a 4" PVC pipe with a flap valve in it that closes when the cooker hood is not venting. In your case, that would enable you to poke something through it from the inside when you need to - and which would flap shut when you didn't. That said, there are probably better answers out there. What do other people in your area do? I bet there is some kind of local building code to cover this. SteveBaker (talk) 06:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Stanley Cup

When was the trophy called The Stanley Cup for the first time? In other words, what was the trophy officially named beforehand, if in any way? Splićanin (talk) 21:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The Hall of Fame writeup says its original name was to have been "Dominion Hockey Challenge Cup", but was designated Stanley Cup "immediately" upon its creation.[4] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Born at sea

What should one write on their passport if they were born on a cruiseship? The Atlantic? The Mediterranean? Justttt (talk) 23:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I'd imagine that sort of thing gets settled with the birth certificate people first. Then you just write what it says on there. No idea what that would be. Probably depends a lot on your parents. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:41, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Birth aboard aircraft and ships ―Mandruss ☎ 23:43, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I was just about to link that. I'll go with List of people born at sea instead. None are described as "Atlantean". InedibleHulk (talk) 23:44, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

James McGowen's parents were English. When they reached Australia, they already had an Australian baby. So it depends on your parents, and where they're headed, too. Unless things have changed somewhat in the last 160 years. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:52, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Women who are in late term are not usually allowed on cruise ships (or planes, for that matter), quite simply because they don't have the medical facilities to deal with a new-born. This also goes for epilepsy (which I have), and psychosis, schozophrenia, and a whole host of other conditions. People need to be assessed first. It would be very unlikely that a child would be born on a ship, and if it was, it would take the nationality of the parents, especially if it was in international waters. A child born in American territory usually gets granted American nationality automatically, but not so in Europe. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (もしもし！) 04:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

• It would also depend a lot on the nationality laws of the country in question. Jus soli is but one type of nationality law, most (perhaps all) countries also have a form of Jus sanguinis laws which grant nationality to children of their own nationals, regardless of the location of birth, especially where the parents are legal residents of the nation in question as well as citizens, and where the absence from the country is temporary or short-term. --Jayron32 09:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

This is the US government official guidance document on many, many scenarios for passport "Place of Birth". People born in international waters are to be listed as "At Sea". In some cases, people born on airplanes would in fact be listed as "In The Air". Dragons flight (talk) 10:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

May 20

Virginity taboo in the West

Why do western cultures often see being a virgin a taboo. To the point of using the term virgin as an insult. That is despite Christianity for which many western cultures originate advocating for centuries no sexual relationships before marriage. Even if that results in life long celibacy. In fact, Catholic priests (not sure about other denominations) prohibit any sexual activity at all (pre-pubescent boys, I know, I know but lets not get into that one bit OT)

And also, why does this term tend to be used against men more than women. Do other cultures have such stigma for virgins? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.218.237.191 (talk) 10:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Many teenagers cannot hold livable jobs, cannot drink or smoke, and cannot afford their own house or car, but sex is something that they have (some) access to, are often told to stay away from, and potentially the most fun of those marks of adulthood. That doesn't make it right (sexual activity and personal maturity are about as related as one's ability to ride a bike and one's hair style), but immature people (teens or adults) view adulthood in terms of the things they have (house, car, babies) rather than responsibilities they put up with (mortgage, car payments, whiny brats). In some ways, many people don't grow up after high school, they just adjust their "class schedule" in a way that resembles mature adulthood.

Hell, a lot of retail customers don't seem to have grown up since elementary school, they just throw the tantrums at the employees instead of their parents. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Where did you get the idea that virginity is a "taboo"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:25, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Repairing veneer on an electric guitar

I have an Epiphone Dot semi-hollow-bodied electric guitar - like this one. The top is laminated maple with a "vintage sunburst" finish - a graduated, transparent colour leaving the wood grain visible. While modifying the electronics, I was clumsy with a drill and knocked off a small piece of the finished veneer, about two centimetres by a centimetre and a half, but irregularly shaped, between the output jack and the tone knobs. It broke off in one piece and I was able to retrieve it and glue it back in place, but because of the way it broke there's a slight gap, only a couple of millimetres, between one edge of the broken piece and the rest of the veneer, through which you can see the unfinished wood, and there are visible cracks. Any suggestions on how to repair it a bit less obtrusively? --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Fortunately, such a repair is less likely to affect the sound than in an acoustic guitar. Unfortunately, I doubt if the repair can ever be made invisible. Replacing the entire veneer might be the only way. Or, if you have the money, you could replace the guitar, and just use this one for practice/backup. StuRat (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

It's got character now. People are paying good money to by brand-new, factory-fresh guitars that have been "artifically" aged.[5] You now own one that has legitimate aging on it. --Jayron32 16:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I think replacing the entire veneer might be a little drastic. If it was a solid, opaque colour I could just use wood filler and paint. As it is, I'll just have to resign myself to it having character. It's probably something nobody notices but me anyway.

Oh yes, the peculiar fashion for deliberately ruining perfectly good instruments. It's apparently called "relic'ing". Here's a service offering to put your guitar through not only physical but psychological abuse. --Nicknack009 (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Nothing as bad as Jimi Hendrix did to his, I hope. StuRat (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Best website to find new friends from other countries

Hi, I'm a philatelist who love to collect new stamps from different countries. Can anyone suggest some good online ways for finding new friends from other countries who are interested in philately other than facebook (which only allows to befriend people you know well)..??--Joseph 14:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe contact These people? --Jayron32 15:57, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

What about https://www.postcrossing.com/ ? -- Metrophil44 (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

How long was the IRT Third Avenue Line?

I wondered how long this line was, but I can't find the length in the article. -- Metrophil44 (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Using "accumulate" as a noun

Can we use "accumulate" as a noun? For example in a phrase like "shifting two years' worth of accumulate". I know the noun form of accumulate is accumulation, but I rather want something along the lines of precipitate (which can be used as both verb and noun, despite the existence of precipitation). Because accumulation tends to emphasise on the process of things getting accumulated rather than the things themselves. 202.153.41.162 (talk) 19:19, 20 May 2015 (UTC)