Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

November 11

Is there a dye or high lift I can use on my medium brown hair to make blond without damaging or bleach?

My hair is a really dull brown and I want to dye it blond without damaging it. I dyed it previously blond and black in this photo 2 years ago and it was horrible. It felt like straw https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152122055804804&set=a.10152122055789804.1073741826.708099803&type=1&theater The color has grown out. But how do I dye it again without it feeling like straw? Venustar84 (talk) 03:18, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Without bleach, you may be able to fade it in sunlight. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

This is important: all methods to permanently color hair cause damage to the hair. This is because the Cuticle_(hair) doesn't have color or accept it well, and the cuticle must be damaged to allow permanent coloring agents in to the hair cortex. The idea is to minimize the damage, not completely prevent it. Generally, lightening causes more damage than darkening. Here are some links to techniques that claim to lighten with relatively less damage. [1] [2] [3] [4]. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

There's the option of henna (I haven't tried it) which seems to improve hair quality, just it doesn't come in blonde. I have a friend who used black henna (without the intent to go Goth), which worked wonderfully. There are wash-on rinses, but that just basically gives you red or purple highlights, and it won't lighten your hair color. Think of a professional paint job. First they sand off the old paint (bleach) then they put a primer and then the final color. Professional jobs going to blonde from a darker shade always begin with bleaching. This is a case where, if you want a good job, the advice and employment of a respected professional is the best option. μηδείς (talk) 21:02, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Professionals have access to preparations unavailable to the general public, or so they say. Some have studied and qualified as coloring specialists, though this might be through commercial product manufacturers. Otherwise to achieve a fashion effect, you might consider keeping your natural color and going for a custom hairstyle that includes colored accessories. And if you wait long enough, your hair will go gray/white, which is likely to be lighter than the original you're trying to lighten artificially.-- Deborahjay (talk) 07:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Funny, DJ, I did think of saying "once you've gone grey..." Unfortunately, or fortunately, most people don't go grey prematurely. The professional is a much better idea than, say, an illness that keeps you in the hospital 6 months and requires major surgeries. If you see people with good die jobs, ask them if they'll recommend their stylist. μηδείς (talk) 18:07, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

23andMe-like service?

I was originally going to get Ancestry DNA, but then I found information on the kind of report that 23andMe used to provide[5] (with the health info and genetic traits analysis in addition to the ancestry stuff), and now $99 for just ethnicity and familial relations information seems really disappointing. Are there any companies that provide the kind of comprehensive genetic report that 23andMe used to before the FDA made them quit? Thanks, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 23:29, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

it's doubtful, but I won't claim a categorical negative. I'll just suggest you consider phrenology, which was all the rave when they figured out parts of the brain Phineas Gage affected parts of the psyche. μηδείς (talk) 00:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Please explain the relationship between the pseudoscience of phrenology and genomics. The FDA didn't stop 23andMe because it was fraudulent or in any way unscientific; just the opposite: the FDA stopped 23andMe because the FDA contends that the program providing information about one's genome in conjunction with advising about potential health risks is tantamount to a medical device and thus under FDA jurisdiction. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:43, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Promethease is an online service which will accept your genetic data from 23andme or Ancestry and give an output of the medical implications, similar to that once available from 23andme, for a $5 fee. See http://dna-explained.com/2013/12/30/promethease-genetic-health-information-alternative/ That said, few medical conditions are predicted accurately and causitively just from your genome: the billions of CATG basepairs. It is rarely as simple as Mendelian inheritance. Many physical traits, such as height, or conditions such as schizophrenia, are controlled by literally thousands of genes, with each having a tiny positive or negative effect. All you get are that the probability of your developing some condition is slightly higher or lower than average if you have one version or another of some gene. The epigenome is not analyzed by 23andme or Ancestry. See Epigenetics. Methylation, for instance is a process which controls the expression of genes. Edison (talk) 21:10, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

• Hain't no one seen GATTACA? μηδείς (talk) 04:02, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but it's a work of fiction...it has no relevance here. SteveBaker (talk) 22:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

The point of GATTACA is perfectly valid. But if you want a dry-eyed account from today's news, here's a "source". The overall point is 1, that genes interact in very complex ways, see for instance, incomplete penetrance, expressivity, and pleiotropy. And 2, the environment and choice are just as big a factor. If you have good genes for muscle building, but never get out of a chair, or if you are lactose intolerant, but never eat dairy products you won't build muscle of have gas from milk, even if your genes would indicate that. In analogy, genes, environment and choice have joint and several liability in how one's life turns out. The only place where a genetic analysis is useful at this point is one for morbid or lethal traits with complete penetrance. I.e., a gene that kills or disables 100% of those who carry it. Most people with such genes will either already be sick or know the gene runs in the family. The rest is chicanery. μηδείς (talk) 04:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

My wife and I both used 23andMe before the FDA stepped in. The health advice was interesting but not earth shattering. It actually did tell me I was lactose intolerant, a fact I was already very confident of after many bad dairy experiences. Even before 23andMe, I had started using lactase pills before most dairy meals, and more than once regretted it if I forgot those pills. So not a shocking finding, but consistent with what I already believed to be true. My wife got a similar genetic confirmation though I won't say for what. The profiles didn't tell us anything with high confidence that we didn't already know. Though they did suggest that we might be at higher risk for certain conditions, which might cause us to be more cautious if we ever develop the associated symptoms, though it hasn't happened yet and even with a elevated risk probably still won't ever happen. Altogether, I thought it an interesting product and worth the expense, but it didn't reveal anything amazing. Actually, I think we derived more insights from the genealogy portion rather than the health portion, though in part that is because my wife has a complicated ancestry that spans three continents within only a couple of generations and it helped us to figure out some things (and figure out some additional questions that needed asking of our living relatives). Dragons flight (talk) 05:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

November 12

Barefooting--Bioelectric factors

I am not trying to edit or correct an error, only to point out an omission. In what I read about not wearing shoes or what "earthing" means in the field of electronics: Somewhere on WIKI there should be a treatment of the popular trend of going shoeless or "grounding" one's own body by electrical devices, e.g., when sleeping, for health or performance reasons. There is a new book called Earthing (2010), numerous utube videos, and even an article in a scientific journal on public health about the benefits of allowing people to reestablish contact with the earth's plentiful supply of electrons. Books have a considerable lag time in coming out with new information. Shouldn't online sources such as WIKI be faster?

That sure sounds like a whole steaming pile of pseudoscientific bullshit. Statements like: "the earth's plentiful supply of electrons" really screams "this person understands absolutely nothing about electricity". The number of electrons is tied to the chemistry of the atoms - and that is precisely the same in the human body as in the rest of the planet. I don't know where you found out about this - but, trust me, it's bullshit.

Here on the reference desk, we've come to understand that if there is a YouTube video about some scientific-sounding subject, that makes it significantly less likely to be true...not more! YouTube is the beloved playground of fakers, quacks, fraudsters and idiots.

Could you please give us a reference to this "article in a scientific journal" - it would be interesting to see where that is.

As for reporting about it on Wikipedia...we are an encyclopedia, we have very specific rules about how we report "fringe theories" and it's quite unlikely that there will be an article about it until/unless it's a much more well-known phenomena.

SteveBaker (talk) 05:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

The authors of the book seem to be Clint Ober, Stephen Sinatra M.D. and Martin Zucker. See the article on Stephen Sinatra for a mention of his fringe theory. For the scientific facts, see Ground (electricity). The fact that the fringe theory has not seen mention in serious scientific publications during the last two years suggests that most scientists regard it as pseudoscience. We do have a mention of "Earthing" in our article on List of topics characterized as pseudoscience, so there is no omission in Wikipedia. Dbfirs 08:37, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

That doesn't surprise me. A lot of nonsense is put out by a lot of crazy, misguided or money-grabbing people with few moral scruples. Since going barefoot sounds kinda neat and compelling to a lot of "back to nature" people - it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that someone can make money by writing a book about it, because those new-age hippy types are into all of the other bullshit theories like crystal healing, indigo children, astrology and so forth.

Even supposing it were true that there were health benefits to being in electrical equilibrium with the planet...you can earth yourself by touching something metal that's connected to ground...the faucet in your bathroom, would work very well...or the metal casing of any electrical appliance with a three pin plug. Either of those will ground you much more efficiently than walking in bare feet in dirt. But writing a book that says that you should go around obsessively touching faucets and toasters at every opportunity wouldn't catch the attention of the kind of people who buy those kinds of bullshit books...even though this approach offers the benefits of not cutting your foot every time you step on a sharp rock or burning your soles on the sidewalk on a hot summer day and getting frostbite in winter! SteveBaker (talk) 16:02, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

All very true, but it's worth noting that Americans have somewhat limited access to electrical appliances with three pin plugs! So they need to touch faucets more often maybe, or avoid wearing clothing made of synthetic materials :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:37, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

I'd bet that most people have refrigerators, ovens, dishwashers, washing machines and dryers with metal casings and three pin plugs...but whatever. The point is that going barefoot isn't the best way to discharge static electrical charge...and you can get yourself charged up to 100,000 volts with a Van De Graaf generator with little or not harm. So discharging yourself regularly is neither necessary, nor difficult without resorting to bare feet. SteveBaker (talk) 21:35, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Why did wikipedia decide to protest against SOPA?

Why did wikipedia protest against SOPA? Doesn't that go against the policy of NPOV?Whereismylunch (talk) 06:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

NPOV is about the neutrality of Wikipedia articles. Are you saying that Stop Online Piracy Act is not neutral? I haven't read it. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 06:44, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia organized a blackout against SOPA for 24 hours one time to protest against SOPA. Why did wikipedia do this if there is a policy about NPOV?Isn't it making a political statement?Whereismylunch (talk) 07:37, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

As I said, NPOV is about the neutrality of articles, and only that. It does not preclude Wikipedia (or the Wikimedia Foundation) as an organization from taking a political stance on any issue it wishes to. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 07:46, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Read all about it at Wikipedia:SOPA initiative. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Out-of-place debate, per instructions at the top of this page

What they actually violated is the rule against "disrupting Wikipedia to make a point." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Luckily, we have WP:IAR. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC) "Luckily" we have a guy named Wales who does what he wants regardless of any rules. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:34, 12 November 2014 (UTC) As a wise man said, those who chose to disrupt Wikipedia by shutting it down to influence legislation adopted a new policy: "ignore all pillars." Edison (talk) 20:58, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Right. I'd like to see some evidence that Congress cares one iota about what Wikipedia does. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:53, 12 November 2014 (UTC) I reckon there'd be quite a few members of Congress unhappy with some of our content. HiLo48 (talk) 02:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC) Congress members care what voters do and a lot of them contacted their representatives. See e.g. [6][7]. Whether you are for or against SOPA and Wikipedia's blackout, it probably did contribute significantly to the shelving of SOPA two days later. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:24, 13 November 2014 (UTC) SOPA codifies into law the idea that the internet can and should be censored by the US government. That would be the death-knell for free dissemination of information here. When countries like China and Cuba censor the web, it's bad because it prevents their residents from reading our content - and denies us the content that they might produce. That's bad, but it's their choice - and they can always overthrow their government if they don't like it. But if the home of Wikipedia (the majority of our servers are in Florida) started doing it - we'd be applying those sorts of constraints to the entire world on the say-so of just the people living in the USA - and that's not fair to mankind in general. Now, protesting this does indeed violate some of our internal rules (as Bugs points out - we were disrupting Wikipedia to make a point) - but then we have other rules (like WP:CENSOR) that say that we must not permit censorship of our content. In the end, we had a conflict of our internal rules - and fortunately we have another guiding principle Wikipedia:Ignore all rules - which says "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it"...and after some serious consensus-forming !votes, that's exactly what we did. SteveBaker (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Rendering it uneditable obviously improved Wikipedia. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC) The intent of SOPA was to prevent people from violating copyrights. I expect the loudest complainers were the ones who don't believe in copyrights. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Drinking the Kool-Aid a lot? Even assuming the claim, see law of unintended consequences. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Shutting down Wikipedia was one of the stupidest things that's happened here, and that's going some. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:52, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Very simply, the blackout happened because it had 10-1 community support, see Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative#Tallies. μηδείς (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Yes, every active wikipedian posted a comment there. The hysterical arguments against SOPA remind me of the hysterical arguments against gun control. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:00, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Bugs, given that I heard about this on the nightly news before I heard about it here, you can't exactly say it wasn't well advertised. The problem is one of due process and prior restraint. We don't allow the government to act first and prove after, especially in civil matters. The internet is no different in essence from talking on the phone, which is protected by the First Amendment. The only difference is that one does one's talking digitally. Some very monied interests like Disney co. lobbied to greatly extend what are supposed to be copyright protections limited in time and scope, because Mickey Mouse and so forth were about to enter the public domain. Consider the absurdity that a copyrighted work on Kindle is usually the same price as a paper copy. That's insane, given it's in the cloud, can be erased by Amazon, and is sold with infinitesimal cost in overhead and material resources. Until the monied interests adjust to the new reality, the law will simply be seen as acting on behalf of the monopolies, not in the public interest. Look at the copyright law of the United States, especially the laws of 1790 following the Founders' intent, and those of 1976 and 1998 based on lobbying by studios about to lose copyright on early talking and color movies. Until 1962, copyright lasted 28 years, and could be renewed for another 28, for a total of 56 years. Now it is 120 years, or life plus 70! Consider whether we should have Homeland Security monitoring US citizens and without a warrant and seizing property without a trial so that Mickey Mouse stays out of the public domain. I don't intend to comment further, as I don't want to continue debate. μηδείς (talk) 23:28, 12 November 2014 (UTC) Please, this is not a debate forum. The questions have been answered by Mandruss and Graeme Bartlett: NPOV only applies to articles, and the reasons will be found on the page Graeme linked to. Can we hat this now? --174.88.134.249 (talk) 05:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC) Happy to do that. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 05:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC) The term "community" should be used very loosely there. The "vote" took place on a long holiday without warning and ended abruptly when users learned that it was happening. Any attempts to make note of those circumstances in the SOPA initiative article are quickly eradicated. The so-called "community support" was nice for Wales but wasn't required - he was going to do it anyway. This is par for the course. It will be interesting to see what happens after Flow is imposed upon the "community". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:36, 14 November 2014 (UTC) Don't criticize Jimmy. You just might end up like this guy. I am too lowly of a peon to be on Wales' radar. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:46, 14 November 2014 (UTC) I've lowered the hat to cover unsigned remarks and reworded my link to the tally stats. μηδείς (talk) 22:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

• The blackout had 10-1 support, among the over 1,000 who commented, see Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative#Tallies. μηδείς (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

About observer country of SAARC

In the article of SAARC , I found some observer countries like USA ,japan,china etc.What will be their role for SAARC?Are they observing activities,policies of SAARC or any other??Diwas Sawid (talk) 12:20, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

http://saarc-sec.org/Cooperation-with-Observers/13/ may help. Dalliance (talk) 13:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

en.M.wikipedia.org

I was referred to a page with the url en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Józef_Warszewicz. (note the M)

It is the same content as en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Józef_Warszewicz but has a different format and is without a talk page. Please, what does the "m" signify and what is the status of pages in en.m.wikipedia.org?

Thanks, 19:28, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

C7nel (talk) 19:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

It's the mobile site, i.e. designed for handheld devices (e.g. phones) and similar. No talk pages, and I guess the format is different (simplified) in some ways as well. I'm fairly sure that the content is based on what is in English Wikipedia already - so, different site but same content. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

You can access the talk pages, and all the other sections, by entering the correct URL. There's no link to talk: at the top of each article thought. CS Miller (talk) 19:49, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

There is a link at the very bottom of the "m" pages that allow you to go to the "desktop" version. No need to type any URLs. Mingmingla (talk) 00:48, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

This will however mean you get the desktop version of the talk page, unless you switch to desktop, click on the talk page link then switch to mobile. Nil Einne (talk) 13:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Most mobile devices give you the option to request the desktop site too...and that works for all sites, not just Wikipedia. On Android, it's in the top-right menu of the browser...I forget where it is on iPhone/iPad. SteveBaker (talk) 03:12, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

This describes how to get it on Safari on iOS8 [8]. The functionality is not available on earlier versions of iOS in Safari, but may be available in third party browsers like Chrome. Nil Einne (talk) 13:51, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I use css for my websites to make them work properly on mobile automatically. My main grouse is about facilities for handling transmission speed and image quality. The speed of smartphones and the quality of their screens is making that less of a worry though. Dmcq (talk) 11:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

November 13

Need Help Finding a Article

I think that I previously read an article back from 2008 which talked about how one woman and previously, this woman's mother, continuously played music on some instrument (maybe a piano; I don't remember exactly) at their church for 120 years (from 1888 to 2008; I think that this woman's mother was a child back in 1888 when she began playing music on this instrument).

Can someone here please see if he or she can find this article? I seriously hope that I remembered the information which was written in this article correctly, but I probably read it so long ago that I can't be 100% sure in regards to this.

Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 08:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Try searching Wikipedia with those key words: piano, church, 1888 etc. maybe something will pop up. Uhlan ^talk 08:55, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

My thought exactly. So I tried various combinations of church, mother, daughter, piano, organ, 1888, 2008, "120 years", and "very remarkable". I got nothing. "Music" is one of the things listed for the Entertainment Reference Desk (go figure), so you might try there instead—and I doubt that would be considered cross-posting since I suggested it. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 09:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it is Old First Church in Middletown Township, New Jersey. Evelyn Hartmann and her mother Sarah Starke played the organ between 1888 and 2008.[9][10] Still looking for your article. Hack (talk) 09:11, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Nice work, Hack. If there's no Wikipedia article, there should be. Far less notable things than that have made it in, and stayed in. The requisite RS support should be a piece of cake. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 09:16, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

There is a mention of that Old First Church in Upper Meeting House of the Baptist Church of Middletown, however it is a different church from the subject of the article. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 09:28, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Don't have access but there is a journal article on the church - Scharfenberger, Gerald; Baugher, Sherene (2007). "The Separation of Church and Site: Old First Church, Middletown, New Jersey". Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology. 23: 35–60. Hack (talk) 12:33, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

November 14

WPA project completed in 1939

Am searching for information on a particular project that WPA conducted in 1939, at the General Vallejo Home, located at 363 Third St. West, in Sonoma, California, 95476. This address is presently a Ca. State Park, but I am sure the work was done for the Sonoma Valley Irrigation and Water Company. Both the WPA(Works Progress Administration) and the Sonoma Valley Irrigation and Water Co. no longer exist. Any information on this project would be extremely helpful in the restoration of an historical site.

Thank you, Lynn Luzzi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.186.100.251 (talk) 00:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Heya Lynn, I did find This database of New Deal era projects at the Roosevelt Library's website. It may give you a start for your research. --Jayron32 01:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

There's a brief description of the WPA restoration of the house in 1936–1938 (which doesn't seem to be quite what you're asking about) here. I only mention it because it gives a reference to a 1976 MA thesis by Paulene Goddard called "The Impact of the Works Projects Administration (WPA) in Sonoma County", which might be worth tracking down. If after all the 1936–1938 restoration is interesting to you then you might also try to find some kind of government document or book called “Accomplishments of the Works Progress Administration – Northern California (1935-1938).” Works Progress Administration, San Francisco, CA, 1938, which I find cited here and there. --Antiquary (talk) 10:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Turning up late for formal dinner

Hi!

This weekend I am going on a conference with a formal dinner on Saturday evening. However, I have an important appointment elsewhere that I booked long before this conference. This means that I will most likely turn up at the hotel about an hour after the formal dinner had started. I wonder what it is acceptable to do in such a situation, whether I should ask for a seat to be reserved and turn up in the middle of the dinner, or if I should stay in my hotel room until the dinner is over?

Thanks in advance for your replies :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.150.37.142 (talk) 07:22, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

In my case it would depend how hungry I was. Seriously though, this is clearly a request for opinions, something we should reject. So, sorry, no help coming from me. HiLo48 (talk) 07:33, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Taking this question in good faith and not making references to careless double booking, arriving an hour late for a formal dinner will cause problems for you, the other guests and the kitchen (who should not reasonably be expected to hold a meal in table condition for an hour). In this situation you should make an apology to the host and join the dinner after the consumption of the final course. Richard Avery (talk) 07:44, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I would suggest asking the organisers how they would like you to handle it. They may give Richard's suggestion, but they may be willing to make some special provision for you. --ColinFine (talk) 12:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Quite. The organisers or host may (almost certainly) have found themselves in a similar situation before and thus understand the issue with previously made plans. A good host would (I hope) announce to the assembly right from the start, that a Mr X will be arriving mid course due to prior engagements. Thus you will not arrive 'late' but at the earliest opportunity. You host will (should) understand and reassure you that they would be glad of your attendance even if miss the silly speeches and hors d'oeuvre. On your arrival the other guest will be more inclined to say Oh good you made it. This should suffice for most occasions, other than one's wedding anniversary.--Aspro (talk) 15:14, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I disagree with the previous two posters, and agree with Richard Avery. Turning up partway through a formal dinner is pointless – the whole point of such an event is that those who attend do so from start to finish. In fact I would go further than Richard and say that you shouldn't turn up at all to the dinner, even after the consumption of the final course. Either stay in your hotel room (as you suggest) or, better, go somewhere else for dinner on your own. --Viennese Waltz 16:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

• Sources that support not arriving at all (4): This source and this one (both admittedly old) generally supports Viennese Waltz's position: either arrive on time or not at all. This source, when read in the light of the first one, generally supports the idea that only the guest of honor is allowed to be late. This source, on arriving late to a formal dinner says only one thing: "Don't."
• Sources that support arriving late (3): This one supports contacting the host(/ess). This source says that the guest should apologize to the host upon arriving late and ask to be started from the current course (rather than from the beginning). It's supported (really repeated) by this source.

The sources that support arriving late are ultimately derived from Emily Post, so it's really possible to argue that only one source supports arriving late. These sources are concerned with England and America, however. I can't really guess what the standard is in Norway. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

In England, turning up late is the done thing, at least in the sense that it is sometimes done. But then again, I've also once seen someone turn up to a black tie dinner wearing jeans and a shirt and apologetically proceed to partake of the meal (they'd not noticed the dress code, apparently). So anything goes really! As others have said, you will be served starting with dessert if that's the stage the meal has reached when you arrive, unless it's otherwise convenient for the serving staff. (Given how these things proceed though, you might be there in time for the main course.)

If the meal is not at a venue using circular tables, then the advantage of your early apology (and request for permission) to the host(ess), is that your initial absence won't leave anyone short of a conversation partner, as you can be seated in the place of least honour, i.e. furthest from the host/high table/whatever. (This also reduces the embarassment of wandering past all the guests while they're eating.)

I don't imagine anyone will be offended or think it is bad manners. Personally I would be in two minds about attending a dinner in these circumstances, unless it was one I especially wanted to attend. (Next month I'm turning up to an event over an hour later than I normally would, the delay is unavoidable and I want to be there and am somewhat in demand although certainly not the guest of honour.)

The London Evening Standard had something the other week about really important and really busy people turning up to dinners and giving the opening speech and then leaving without eating anything, apparently also the done thing now. I think a previous topic at this refdesk, or else a media source (my memory is poor) had mention of how in some continental European country the populace are shocked at anyone eating any food, even a cheese sandwich, without using knife and fork - so expectations do vary a lot. At a rather less formal "banquet" in the USA for high school students and their parents (also my introduction to the great enthusiasm at such events for drinking iced tea in huge quantities - I'd never tasted it before), cold desserts were laid out on the tables in advance, and I was somewhat surprised when mein host got bored during the opening speeches and ate his dessert a few courses too early. OK I'm out of anecdotes now. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

This depends hugely on what is the done thing in your field. In my field (academic, mathematics), nobody would bat an eyelid. The organisers would find it quite odd if I contacted them beforehand. Academics are busy people and usually have plenty of other things to do and for many of my colleagues things like finishing of a paper and continuing an interesting mathematical discussion would rate much higher than a social function. Turn up whenever. If you are on the guest list, there will be a place at a table for you somewhere. The kitchen will do their best to give you food, depending on how this is organised you may have missed a course or two of course, so don't expect that you still get the whole meal. I have been to formal dinners where there is at least an hour of other entertainment before people even take seats. Some are buffets where it doesn't really matter when you arrive. But then Mathematicians are a bunch of anarchists anyhow, other fields may make more fuss about social conventions. 86.175.169.103 (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

There is only one right answer, and that is that you need to contact the organizers of the gathering and get their opinion. Far worse than being late would be not communicating that fact when you know about it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• I agree with Bugs 100%. Except if you are the mayor of NYC, Bill de Blasio, you can even have your aids call to ask that a ceremonial bell ringing to mark the deaths of Flight 587 be delayed because you were a little groggy when you woke:

  “They asked us to delay the moment of silence to wait until the mayor got there,” Miriam Estrella said. It was an explosive charge about the mayor’s failure to show up on time for a memorial service commemorating the 13th anniversary of the crash of the American Airlines flight. Estrella, who lost five family members in the crash, refused. She rang the bell starting the moment of silence at precisely 9:16 a.m., the exact moment of the crash. “They kept telling us, ‘Wait, he’s coming. He’s coming,’ and I said, no, we’re not waiting. We’re not going to wait for him for a moment of silence. It happened at a certain time. That’s the time that we have to toll the bells,” Estrella said.

  Source: New Yorkers Blast Mayor After He Offers A Litany Of Excuses For His Tardiness. μηδείς (talk) 06:42, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • "*sigh* --Onorem (talk) 06:59, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• fart*? Is there some reason we're reporting bodily functions here? μηδείς (talk) 01:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

No, that is certainly not the right answer. Asking the organizers what to do risks putting them in a difficult position. They would prefer you not to turn up at all rather than turn up late, but they don't want to offend you by saying so. So they say, "By all means, turn up whenever!" and this gives you a licence to do the wrong thing. Stay away altogether, it's the only polite thing to do. --Viennese Waltz 08:43, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• Thinks this boils down to: If one is invited to an Barack Obama dinner or a Queen Elisabeth II banquet at Buckingham Palaces, complete with a wine list that would probably buy one an apartment in lower Manhattan. Then one is is the position to have ones staff to cancel all ones other engagements. But for the OP's point. Most peoples job spec does not include, being seen and reported in the press by attending formal functions. Most people are not politicians, diplomats and captains of defence industries for whom attending 'formal function' is a major part of their job and sod anything else. Instead, most guests may have real responsibilities that come first (or their country may fall behind in international economic competition) they can't delegate their problems to whole departments (which do the real work.) If a host is so out of touch with the real world, then what point is there, in going to one of their functions in the first place and so by perhaps, getting tainted by their ignorance? If the host would like the OP to attend and the OP would like to attend -then that is all that is important. Not the views of a few, who pontificate some silly made up protocol that maintains a position of one-upmanship. One does not invite a guest in order to have them Kowtow to you but because you value their presence. So do not invite me to any of your functions! I don't want to know.--Aspro (talk) 01:11, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Clearly this is a matter of opinion, and therefore out of place at RD. The very first reply was correct, and everyone else disregarded that correct assessment, ignoring the statement at the top, "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." I'm not sure what Richard Avery's reference to "good faith" was about; the correct assessment had nothing to do with the OP's good faith. Please. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 08:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

For an academic conference, at least in computer science, being late for the conference dinner is no big deal. Informing the local organisers may be a nice touch, but may also fizzle to no effect, depending on the particular people. Academics are not usually formal people, so their concept of "formal dinner" is "3+ courses, wine, and mostly eat with utensils, not fingers". It's not exactly like a dinner with the Queen - at the very first conference dinner I went to, one of the older professors showed up in surplus camouflage pants cut off at the knees, a khaki-green army shirt with rolled-up sleeves, combat boots, and carrying a large canvas backpack. He made good conversation (on parallel symbolic computation, of course ;-), so he was popular. If it's a private party, excuse yourself to the host and find out their preferences. If you need to preach on the appropriateness of answers, do so on the talk page. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't see it that way. There is nothing ambiguous about the instructions at the top of the page, or here, so this is not "preaching" and there is no requirement to seek consensus in talk. I'm hatting this; if someone feels justified in reverting that, then we can go to WP:VPP and discuss whether that guideline is important enough to be observed even when the majority present feel inclined to ignore it. My feeling is that the Reference Desk is more important than that. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 09:23, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Unhatted by Stephan Schulz; hope to see you there. If the community wants it this way, so it shall be. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 10:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

If you google the subject, you will see that the right thing to do is to communicate with the organizers. That's a matter of courtesy and respect. If you have enough respect for the organizers to communicate to them that you're going to be X minutes late, then you're good. They might say yes and they might say no, but they'll appreciate it either way. If not, then you shouldn't go. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:42, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Link to the VPP discussion, for your convenience. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 11:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

holocaust marker for tomb stones

I heard I can buy a something that says "Holocaust Survivor" for my dad's tomb stone. Is this correct? Where can I read about this and what is the cost? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:ce29:59b9:2140:65a7:1740:19ea (talk • contribs)

If he is deceased or has bought a plot, contact the cemetery. They will both know who you should contact, and will advise if adding such a marker is allowed--certain types of additional displays are not allowed in many cemeteries--an option is having the text added to the engraving on the stone itself. μηδείς (talk) 19:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I assume you are a US resident based on your IP address. I suggest you also check state law for your area. Some areas no longer allow standing headstones. This article shows a bronze adornment to a gravestone that might interest you. μηδείς (talk) 01:17, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

What Violin piece is being played in this youtube video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0a6aie7pjk Venustar84 (talk) 22:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

You can often identify music by opening up two browsers, one with the music, such as the youtube clip, and the other at the website Midomi. Get the music cued up and the play it loud enough so that your built in mike picks it up and click on the identify music button. Midomi is pretty accurate, you can even hum the music into it if you can stay in tune. I have done it to identify classical music. μηδείς (talk) 01:21, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

youtube comments identify the music: It's Beethoven Violin Sonata No. 5 "Frühlingssonate" or "Spring Sonata" . . . wonder why Midomi requires you to download an app to use it? Raquel Baranow (talk) 01:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

It didn't require that of me, presumably my high-end laptop already had the necessary driver. There are several websites that do this, midomi was recommended me on the entertainment desk, and has worked the three times I've used it, twice humming and once playing a youtube video in a separate browser. μηδείς (talk) 03:47, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

November 15

RC watch with no controls

I'm after a radio-controlled watch with no crown and no buttons, that adjusts itself in line with time signals only. Does such a watch exist? If not, is there one with but a single button to tell the watch to synchronize with some time signal?--Leon (talk) 14:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

You might find something suitable from La Crosse Technology, see here [11]. Some seem to have very few buttons, not sure if any have zero buttons. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:07, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Or perhaps there might be one with a hidden panel, so that no buttons are visible unless it is pried open. Would that be acceptable ? StuRat (talk) 23:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

It would!--Leon (talk) 14:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I think this one works like that: [12]. StuRat (talk) 15:42, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Picture in Manila, Philippines

Does anyone know, where exactly in Manila this pic was taken? 112.198.90.141 (talk) 14:19, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

How much energy to instantly stop helicopter rotor blades?

I saw a video on YouTube showcasing an invention for a table saw that would instantaneously stop the saw once the blades detected that it made contact with a human finger. This saw used some kind of destructive arrestor mechanism that instantly stopped the saw from spinning, somewhat destroying the saw and table in the process.

How difficult would it be to employ a similar mechanism for a helicopter's main rotor blades? Let's use a UH-60 Blackhawk for example, how much energy would it take to instantly stop the main rotor blade from spinning while it was spinning at max speed? Acceptable (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

This is not the trivia desk. You'd need to provide mass distribution specs for the blades for anyone to do any sort of calculation. There's no such thing as instantaneous stopping. Anything that did so very quickly would make your blades chip and shatter. There's simply no way any system is going to prevent decapitation once a blade has struck someone's forehead. μηδείς (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

That is not an attempt at a referenced answer. Rmhermen (talk) 20:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Nor is your tendentious response, Rmhermen. I am telling the OP that his question can't be answered as stated, that he has some ideas wrong and has not given us enough information to provide an answer. Then he would be asking us to do highly speculative equations based on other unspecified assumptions. Dragon's flight below has said exactly what I said, and it's not our place to suggest various helicopter models to the OP, African or European. μηδείς (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Since they gave us the model of chopper, all that info is out there somewhere, if anyone cares to look it up. Perhaps you don't want to (I don't either), but there's nothing wrong with them asking. And if they said we could pick whatever model chopper we wanted, that would be fine, too. StuRat (talk) 23:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

This gives 5×10⁵ J for the rotational energy in a small helicopter. As Medeis said, there is no such thing as instantly, so you would have to say how fast you want it to be, though I have trouble imagining any fast stop process that doesn't tear the blades apart and create lots of shrapnel. Dragons flight (talk) 20:11, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

how much energy would it take to instantly stop...? The answer is none, or rather a negative amount, ie, in principle it would be possible to build a device that stops the rotor blades and converts their kinetic energy into useful work (see, regenerative brake). Now there are certainly engineering questions about how quickly the blades can be stopped without damage; how efficient such a energy recovery device can be; etc but I wanted to correct the apparent premise behind your question that "the greater the energy of rotation, the greater the energy needed to stop it". Abecedare (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Note that if you used some type of brakes affixed to the helicopter, that the helicopter itself would then start to spin (unless it was anchored to the ground at the time). So, you'd need to actually reverse spin the blades a bit, relative to the chopper, to ensure that they stopped moving forward, relative to the ground. StuRat (talk) 22:56, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about the energy requirement, but flying your helicopter into a hard object (like a building or cliff) tends to stop the blades pretty quickly. Of course, it destroys the helicopter so it is not much use after. Astronaut (talk) 16:07, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

November 16

Anatomy in "In the Realms of the Unreal"

Has anything explained why Henry Darger gave all the girls male genitalia in In the Realms of the Unreal? 68.111.134.253 (talk) 11:14, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

According to our article (Henry Darger), "Darger biographer Jim Elledge speculates that this represents a reflection of Darger's own childhood issues with gender identity and homosexuality." I don't think any answer can be more than speculation, as Darger was, shall we say, eccentric, and didn't give his own reasons for this particular aspect of his art. Tevildo (talk) 12:08, 16 November 2014 (UTC)