Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/M

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.

December 20

How many times has Wikipedia been edited?

I was hoping to discover how many times any Wikipedia page has been edited, since the inception of the encyclopedia. I found this page but the number seems ludicrously small considering there are over 5 million pages on the English Wikipedia alone. --Aabicus (talk) 04:52, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably not possible to get an entirely accurate count since I believe some of the early pre-wikipedia edits are still not accounted for, although their number is going to be well within the margin of probably a minute of edits or something. The number in the above page seems resonable to me. Per WP:Size of wikipedia, there are 41 million pages on en.wikipedia. En.wikipedia and to a much lesser extent commons predominantes among wikimedia project. I'm sure you can find some statistics somewhere but even if there are 8x the number of pages when you take into account all other projects (and this frankly seems too high), that's still only 328 million. That would give slightly under 10 edits per page on average. This may seem a little low, but remember for every George W. Bush with ~~400k~~46k edits (Wikipedia:Database reports/Pages with the most revisions), there's probably 100-1000 pages with maybe 2 edits. In fact, size of wikipedia gives an average of 21.08 revisions which is a little higher, but it wouldn't be surprising if other wikis have less average revisions or alternatively the total number of pages is wrong. Nil Einne (talk) 06:12, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW Special:Statistics has the number of edits for en.wikipedia. meta:List of Wikipedias while only covering wikipedias has 158 327 989 pages in total (including en) and 2 299 548 087 edits. meta:Wiktionary has 30 665 041 pages in wiktionary. So it doesn't seem my 328 million figure can be that far off. And actually I just found meta:List of Wikimedia projects by size which gives 292 156 773 pages for all wikimedia projects although the edit count is a little higher than the above counter. Nil Einne (talk) 06:20, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I never thought of the statistics like that. Thank you for your research into my question! --Aabicus (talk) 04:29, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strange that they give a number of 865,168,899 which is considerably more than the current value of the referenceID (755962507 for this edit). Has so much of the early edit history been lost? Prevalence 07:36, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. I'm assuming the way special statistics counts edits is including some stuff which don't get a revisionid somehow but I don't know how. Nil Einne (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Virtually none of the history is lost - see Wikipedia:Wikipedia's oldest articles. Everything from February 2002 onwards is preserved and many earlier edits have been reinstated. Most of the remaining revisions which are not present in the database are in the January to August 2001 period; these were found and are available as a text file. The number of these is insignificant compared with the current total. Warofdreams talk 17:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why never a herding dog in western films?

Good morning or good night from France, my dear "100 mouths Godess".
In Europe everybody taking care of cattle uses a herding dog, but in westerns I never see dogs. How can you explain this difference? Is it because using a horse makes dog useless?
I already asked this question on the French reference desk (called the Oracle) and I was explained that it's because in Europe we do intensive farming while at the time of westerns they did extensive one.
I thank you for your thinkings.--Jojodesbatignoles (talk) 11:00, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good question. The answer proposed cannot be the full story, because Australian farms ("stations") herd animals across huge distances, and yet that country has developed several species of herding dog. I wasn't aware that "sheepdog" covers two different types of animals; those that are Livestock guardian dogs lack the herding instinct. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 12:17, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fun fact, you can herd cattle with helicopters, robots, drones and remote controlled cars. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 19:51, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"In Europe everybody taking care of cattle uses a herding dog" - I'm very doubtful of that (at least in the UK, which is still technically part of Europe). I don't think I've ever seen cattle being herded with a dog (unlike sheep). Iapetus (talk) 13:21, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, an adult cow, much less a bull, might be a bit much for one dog to control. StuRat (talk) 17:37, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@StuRat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHjA5IriDmA (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 18:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wardog: see above. About six minutes in the dog gets kicked, and he basically ignores it. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 19:03, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to reply to Iapetus and StuRat, but that video says it all. That dog is worth thousands! Dogs are regularly used where I live (northern England) for beef cattle, and perhaps less commonly and certainly less aggressively for milk cows that are usually more placid, though I've seen over-eager dogs nip at cows' heels unnecessarily. A bull or a cow with a calf will attack and maybe injure an inexperienced dog. Dbfirs 19:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They did use bulldogs in the American West occasionally, mostly for tracking and catching strays. 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 03:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. You learn something new every day. I'd just never seen cattle being herded with dogs, despite living in relatively rural areas with quite a lot of cattle farms. Iapetus (talk) 11:10, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are westerns that feature a dog that herds sheep, like The Proud Rebel. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:44, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the OP. No doubt Iapetus, the UK is in Europe. I went many times to GB and I remember seeing very smart dogs directing sheep.
I made a generalisation from what I remember about my grand parent's farms, my uncle's farms and now my cousin's farm. It took place in France. In all these farms, dogs easily and peacefully directed cows and young animals. The dogs showed no fear ; on the contrary, if the cows were too slow, my cousin would just "call" his dog using its name (in fact I think the dog reacted according to the tone of my cousin voice) ; the result would came so quickly that I think that the cows understood what was asked to the dog.
Thank you for all your answers and videos.--Jojodesbatignoles (talk) 09:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Despite all evidence to the contrary (plate tectonics, distance, and historical, cultural, ethnic, and language links, etc.) those in the UK insist that they are not part of Europe, and withdrawal from the EU is only the latest form of this insistence. StuRat (talk) 16:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't paint all of us with the same brush, we're not all idiotic Breixters, and there's plenty of Brits who are perfectly aware that we're in Europe. 86.28.195.109 (talk) 23:26, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, Brexit was NOT about whether the UK is (or should be) part of Europe geographically, but whether it should sacrifice its own national interests to appease hostile nations like France and Germany -- so whether one voted for Brexit is NOT an indication whether that person thinks that the UK is not in Europe geographically! 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 03:25, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read France–United Kingdom relations and Anglo-French War. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 01:23, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All those wars were long before the American Civil War, and in wars last century the United Kingdom was defending European countries (Belgium and Poland respectively). Dbfirs 08:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now I remember seeing dogs helping men to deal with cows in the Pyrénées (mountains between France and Spain). I was a great help for them because it was at an altitude more less 2500 m, and some men were rather old.--Jojodesbatignoles (talk) 13:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 21

Plausible alternative explanation in criminal case

I have read that if a defendant in a criminal case can put forward a plausible alternative explanation of the facts, this could result in his being found not guilty. Is this correct, and if so could a user please give me the legal source or sources for this. Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 12:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is just another way of describing the "burden of proof (law)" in criminal trials. The prosecution has to convince the judge, or the jury, that the defendant is guilty "beyond reasonable doubt." If the defence can provide a plausible alternative explanation of the facts, that is just one way of casting doubt on the evidence. It would still be up to the judge or jury to decide whether to find the defendant guilty or not: they may not believe the alternative explanation, however, plausible it sounds to the defence. Wymspen (talk) 12:31, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Maybe start with reasonable doubt? Also, it may vary by legal jurisdiction. Dragons flight (talk) 12:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We do not offer legal advice.--WaltCip (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

General inquiries about the legal process do not constitute legal advice. StuRat (talk) 15:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Questions with answers that may vary based on jurisdiction which can lead to assumptions about validity of legal defenses can and does constitute legal advice.--WaltCip (talk) 13:48, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, just state what jurisdiction(s) the answer is for, or a general disclaimer that it may not apply to all jurisdictions. If you can't be sued for saying it, it's not legal or professional advice. StuRat (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

probably not a good thing to get into this debate, even if it weren't for BLP concerns

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Note that the reverse is not true. That is, a defendant is often found "not guilty" even when there is no plausible alternative. OJ Simpson comes to mind. StuRat (talk) 15:09, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the state failed to prove its case against OJ. A lot of the stuff you and I "knew" about the case was not entered into evidence, so the jury couldn't consider it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:20, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or fortunately, if what you think you know was wrong. --69.159.60.210 (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OJ Simpson is a bad example, because it's plausible that his son Jason committed the murders (see e.g. this article), though that never came up in the trial. A better example might be Jack Kevorkian's three acquittals, but I don't think it's relevant to this thread in any case. -- BenRG (talk) 01:22, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 22

Add a link

Hello! Do you think that the homepage http://goto.glocalnet.net/bcp/ is worth to be added under the Bible Code text. Most of the homepage contents can not be found elsewhere. Best Regards Lars Bobeck — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.21.224.148 (talk) 13:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The best place to ask this would be the Talk page for the Bible Code article. Wymspen (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to read the following book on line?

Is it possible to read on line the book "Facultatibus Partium Animalium" (Latin) that was printed in 1544? (A lot of such books are available on the internet because these books don't have copyrights) I'm looking for it and I don't find it 93.126.88.30 (talk) 19:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removed by poster. Blooteuth (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The book that I've asked about was written by Rāzī, Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Zakarīy (and printed in Basileae, 1544) rather than Galen. 03:46, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

WorldCat has 24 entries for this but all are physical books, not e-books. jnestorius^(talk) 17:04, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Razi's book is listed here which indicates a microfilm exists. Its introduction Abubetri Rhazae Maomethi, ob usum experientiamque multiplicem, et ob certissimas ex demonstrationibus logicis indicationes, ad omnes praeter naturam affectus, atque etiam propter remediorum uberrimam materiam, summi medici opera exquisitiora... roughly translates as: On account of the use and the many Abubetri Rhazae Mehmed, from demonstrations of logic and on account of the most certain indications, in addition to the nature of all the emotions, and also for the sake of remedies, the richest of the matter, the doctor works of the searchers of the Most High, to whom nothing is more useful to the act of the practical requirements is found, for they are deep at all, or of Hippocrates ambiguous or obscure, or Galen fusiora it with complete fidelity and great learning, he explains, and in the light of the physician of Toledo by Gerard of Cremona, and bringeth forth, Andreas Vesalius Bruxellensem, Albano Torino Vitodurano, latinitate given, and now for the first time compared with the very great zeal of the book, which was restored to the ancient of castigatissime, so that a medical candidates can be understood, the use of which nothing at all is of advantage to the wretched of mortals, against all these diseases, species, could be compared with a list of each of the books that are contained in this book, and she and eleven emblematical devices is indicated. Blooteuth (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I found three e-book links for that book: [1], [2] and [3]. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 19:34, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 23

I can't seem to find a page I opened not so recently

I've been trying to find a page that main topic is about certain high school clases or electives, which include street law, business administration and home economics, that help students learn skills for their everyday lives, so they can live independently. Please help, I would really appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YOSUE3699 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Life skills-based education or Life skills. Rmhermen (talk) 16:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The OP can check their browser's History list of sites visited. Blooteuth (talk) 16:38, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

sri sri ravishankar article has invalid refrences

Ravi_Shankar_(spiritual_leader) The article in the above link has invalid references. Under the LIFE section it states that Ravishankar has got a science degree from St.Joseph's college of Bangalore University with the citation numbers 13. The link pointed to by this citation is invalid or incorrect. I am new to wikipedia and don't know where to report this. That's why I am reporting it here. Sorry if I made a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.68.100.84 (talk) 11:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find a valid source? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At the top of each article, there is a "Talk" link. Click on that will show a page where you can raise any concerns you have about the contents of the article. I've taken the liberty of marking (I think the correct) link as a deadlink; this will mark the article as needing looked at. Editors who are good at finding & fixing deadlinks will (hopefully) look at it in a few weeks. LongHairedFop (talk) 12:32, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool. I was aware of this template but I didn't realise till you mentioned it that it collects all the deadlinks into a list which editors can work on. Thanks. 82.14.24.95 (talk) 13:33, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 24

eye of newt hoax?

The article Mustard seed contains an odd claim that it is called "eye of next". Is this true? It is repeated by lots sources, but I haven't seen a reliable one. Not sure if this is botany, linguistics, literature, or anthropology. Thanks for your help! HLHJ (talk) 03:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

newt, not next. Akld guy (talk) 08:12, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article[4] claims that several of the terms used the famous witch's brew are folk names for various type of herbs. Taken at face value, though, they all describe things that are very small: a newt's eye and a mustard seed are both pretty tiny. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:49, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Romanians in Afghan

Did the Romanian armed forces take part in any offensive (as opposed to defensive or non-combat) operations in the Great War on Terror, particularly in Afghanistan? 2601:646:8E01:7E0B:F88D:DE34:7772:8E5B (talk) 05:08, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hanukkah

Our article, in the infobox, states that this year Hanukkah goes from sunset on 24 December until nightfall on 1 January. Aren't sunset and nightfall the same? †dismas†|^(talk) 13:38, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Yes, they are the same.~~ ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As for why different terms are used, repeat after me: it makes it more readable than repeating the same word repeatedly which sound repetitive and is a practice you wouldn't want to repeat repeatedly. StuRat (talk) 14:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Not everyone defines nightfall as occurring at sunset ~~(though it probably means the same here)~~. See Twilight. Dbfirs 16:04, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This site[5] uses the term "nightfall" for the beginning of Hanukkah. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:08, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hebrew calendar goes into more detail on the subject. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:11, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That article makes it clear that the two are NOT the same. Sunset is the earliest point that the day can be said to have ended: the moment the sun is below the horizon. Nightfall, with the requirement to be able to see three stars of medium brightness is later, and is the point at which that there can be no doubt that the day has ended. Like many Jewish traditions, this is designed to ensure that no-one starts late or finishes early on an important day of religious observance. By starting at the earlier time, and finishing at the later, it becomes impossible to commit an inadvertent fault. Wymspen (talk) 19:16, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So how should the article say it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:44, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He appears to be saying that the article is correct, but that they are not identical as you assumed above, rather nightfall is a slightly later time than sunset. Dragons flight (talk) 20:36, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly - the article actually says "The beginning of each halachic day is based on the local time of sunset. The end of the Shabbat and other Jewish holidays is based on nightfall (Tzeth haKochabim) which occurs some amount of time, typically 42 to 72 minutes, after sunset." Wymspen (talk) 20:48, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, all. †dismas†|^(talk) 21:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Not so fast. The link I posted earlier, which at least appears to be written by Jews, says the new day begins at nightfall rather than sunset. So which is it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:46, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This site says "evening", which would correspond to "sunset" rather than "nightfall". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:55, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are kinda bad at telling when the sun is below the horizon. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/11/20/sunsets-are-quite-interesting/ (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Hebrew term in Jewish law for the time period between sunset and nightfall is bein hashmashot. Probably the closest English equivalent would be "twilight". In other words, we don't know which day the time period belongs to, so we need to be strict about it both ways. This applies by all Jewish festivals, and the Sabbath, not just Hannukah. The Sabbath, for example, begins at Friday sunset (since we need to assume the next day may begin at sunset), and ends Saturday nightfall (since the day may be deemed not to end until nightfall). Definitions of sunset are pretty consistent, but "nightfall" is the subject of disagreement amongst Jewish scholars. One view is that it depends on the emergence of "three stars" - in practice, when the sun is either 4.8, 6.2 or 7.1 degrees longitude below the horizon, according to various opinions about "how small the stars need to be"[6]. A more strict view is that of Rabbeinu Tam, who takes a different approach. He rules that nightfall is only 72 minutes after sunset (most hold actual minutes, a minority view his opinion as the longer 16.1 degrees below the horizon), which can be around half an hour later. The relevant Wikipedia article is Zmanim, which should help the OP with the concepts. I just spotted it now, or else I may not have needed to write this long explanation. Eliyohub (talk) 13:27, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 25

Geebung time service?

My grandfather (1902–1971) had a novel way of stating the time, especially when the clock chimed or when asked. He would say whatever time it was, with "Geebung" appended; example, "eight Geebung". I knew, even as a youngster, that Geebung was a place in Australia, but only recently did I try to find out where this came from. My grandfather lived in Auckland his entire life and was a keen radio listener and my thinking was that there might have been a time signal over the radio in the 1920s or 30s that originated from Geebung. However, search engine results for "Geebung time service" yield no useful results. Anyone able to shed light on this? Akld guy (talk) 04:14, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a guessing game, not a reference desk:198.134.93.254 (talk) 13:40, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gebungt is German for "begun". Is it possible that's what he was saying? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gebungt is not a German word. "begun" would be begonnen or angefangen. --Wrongfilter (talk) 09:36, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, it's gebongt that means "begun", according to Google Translate. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:13, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where google translate gets that from. gebongt can be used colloquially for okay or alright. With quite some stretching one might interpret it as "struck" (as in "the bell struck" or "the clock struck"), but I doubt that that it has anything to do with Akld's grandfather. --Wrongfilter (talk) 12:33, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If the term IS of Germanic origin it may be related to “Punkt”, a term which in the context of time means “on the dot” / “precise”. There has been some significant migration to NZ from Germany around the 1850s and your grandfather either may have had Germanic ancestry or may have heard the term in his childhood. Of course, this is mere speculation. Cookatoo, AKA --62.47.37.164 (talk) 13:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the placename "Geebung" is surely pronounced with a soft "g", in which case it would be a red herring. 86.185.150.23 (talk) 13:56, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Secret recipes

It is known for some companies such as Coca Cola and McDonald's that the recipes for their foods and beverages are secret and only a couple of people in the world know them.

1) How are these products manufactured and sold worldwide if no one knows the recipes?

2) Can't anyone take a product to a laboratory, make analysis of it, and figure out what it's made of and how?

--Qnowledge (talk) 13:36, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1) The manufacturer knows the recipes

2) The skill in cooking is not just getting the quantities right but how you combine the ingredients to get the unique flavour. 86.185.150.23 (talk) 13:45, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]