Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

Reference Desk

Science Mathematics Computing/IT Humanities Language Entertainment Miscellaneous Archives
How to ask a question Search first. It's quicker, because you can find the answer in our online encyclopedia instead of waiting for a volunteer to respond. Search Wikipedia using the searchbox. A web search could help too. Common questions about Wikipedia itself, such as how to cite Wikipedia and who owns Wikipedia, are answered in Wikipedia:FAQ.
Sign your question. Type ~~~~ at its end. Be specific. Explain your question in detail if necessary, addressing exactly what you'd like answered. For information that changes from country to country (or from state to state), such as legal, fiscal or institutional matters, please specify the jurisdiction you're interested in. Include both a title and a question. The title (top box) should specify the topic of your question. The complete details should be in the bottom box. Do your own homework. If you need help with a specific part or concept of your homework, feel free to ask, but please don't post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers. Be patient. Questions are answered by other users, and a user who can answer may not be reading the page immediately. A complete answer to your question may be developed over a period of up to seven days.	Do not include your e-mail address. Questions aren't normally answered by e-mail. Be aware that the content on Wikipedia is extensively copied to many websites; making your e-mail address public here may make it very public throughout the Internet. Edit your question for more discussion. Click the [edit] link on right side of its header line. Please do not start multiple sections about the same topic. Archived questions If you cannot find your question on the reference desks, please see the Archives. Unanswered questions If you find that your question has been archived before being answered, you may copy your question from the Archives into a new section on the reference desk. Do not request medical or legal advice. Ask a doctor or lawyer instead.
After reading the above, you may ask a new question by clicking here. Your question will be added at the bottom of the page.
How to answer a question Be thorough. Please provide as much of the answer as you are able to. Be concise, not terse. Please write in a clear and easily understood manner. Keep your answer within the scope of the question as stated.	Link to articles which may have further information relevant to the question. Be polite to users, especially ones new to Wikipedia. A little fun is fine, but don't be rude. The reference desk is not a soapbox. Please avoid debating about politics, religion, or other sensitive issues.

November 18

Industry Manufacturing Costs

Hi, I am wondering whether anyone would have some insight into where I could find industry averages of manufacturing costs - in specific for small appliances. For example, how much does it cost the average producer to make a blender - NOT how much do they sell it for, or how much does a retailer mark it up. I understand that many firms are sensitive with this kind of information, but I can't seem to find this data anywhere at all. Thanks for your help. --ManicLogic 01:59, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I'm trying to find PER UNIT costs. --ManicLogic 02:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

See incremental cost. It's a little complicated because it would vary by type of appliance, by manufacturer, and by how many the manufacturer makes during a given time period. (And then there are external costs and social costs.) You likely can't find the information you're looking for because it doesn't exist for the definition you give. -THB 05:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

What is the total number of films produced all over the world?

Thanks.

Since the beginning of film? So large I would have thought that it could not be quantified. Clio the Muse 02:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course it's quantifiable, provided you specify what films. Movie theatre films, direct to video, amateur films, commercials, art school projects, what else is there? DirkvdM 05:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

As of today, IMDB [1] lists 360,458 movies released theatrically, 56,526 made for TV, and 50,297 directly to video. Of course, this isn't complete and doesn't include most foreign films, but it does give an idea of the magnitude. Now if we could just get a good estimate for Bollywood... Clarityfiend 05:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Number of television sets in the world

What is the total number of television sets in the world?

How many grains of sand are there on a beach? Clio the Muse 03:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Back of the envelope calculation...about a billion. For you Brits, that's a thousand million. StuRat 05:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

And to us Dutch that's a miljard. A biljoen is a million million. DirkvdM 05:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

That seems a little low to me, especially considering that the question didn't specify working television sets. I'd say more like 5 or 10 billion. —Keenan Pepper 05:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I figured only about half of the world's population have a TV in their home, and most of those only have one per family. There are a few rich cultures with multiple TVs per family, but probably not enough to affect the numbers that much. I did not include broken TVs in dumps. StuRat 23:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

This is the one occasion where I cannot resist a small joke. A visitor to a natural history museum, admiring a triceratops fossil, turns to an attendant; Excuse me, how old is this? Sixty-three million years and six months. My goodness, how precise; how do you know that? It was sixty-three million years old when I started this job, and I've been here for six months. Following from this, I would say that the actual number of TV sets in the world is 5-or 10-billion and three, since you failed to count mine, including the broken one in the attic. Clio the Muse 08:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

“and for you brits…” was that an American giving the non-US version of something??? Thankyou! Now that shakes the stereotype!81.168.43.203 11:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Except that the UK uses the short scale now, and has done for the last 30 years at least. EdC 19:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Yep, billion is actually the same in the US and the UK (apparently since the 30's). I have run into plenty of people who think they are different here in the UK though, but when asked to write out the number give the same number Americans use: 1,000,000,000. Robovski 22:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, a thousand million is still correct, in any case, and might help those, like the Dutch, who use that other weird system. StuRat 22:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I think all people who speak anything other than English use "that weird system". It's another case of English being different from every other language. JIP | Talk 07:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Look at the article. Both systems are a bit weird. Which makes more sense - approaching 10¹² as 1,000 ^{1 + 3} and calling it trillion or approaching it as 1,000,000  ^2.0 and calling it billion? The base for all this is 1,000, so it would make more sense to use the 'short scale' succession, but starting it at 1,000 and caling that million. Then 10 ^{2 x 3} would be billion, etc. Btw, the 'short version of the long scale' makes sense in French up to a point; mille - million - milliard. After that, they seem to have run out of suffixes and started alternating with prefixes, which made it a bit messy. DirkvdM 07:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The 'European' system (or rather 'World except the UK, US, Brazil and some more' system, but actually the SI system) is called 'long scale' because of number-names like 'thousand million'. But does anyone ever use that (anymore)? The article seems to suggest that everyone in the 'long sclae' countries calls that 'milliard' or some variation of that. Which is just as short. So the naming is rather confusing. Is there no alternative for this?

Btw, there's another, related, confusion - the use of dots and commas as decimal separators and 'thousands separators' (what's that called?). In the Anglophone world, 1,000 means a thousand, but in much of the rest of the world it means '1', with a three decimal precision. DirkvdM 07:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

"Does anyone use that any more"? I'll have you know that Finns do, at least. If I say "miljardi", everyone understands it's 10^9. If I say "biljoona", everyone understands it's 10^12. And so on. I reckon it's the same way in Swedish and German too. I'd get funny looks from people if I kept insisting "biljoona" really meant 10^9. You have to stop thinking everyone in the world is a native English speaker. JIP | Talk 17:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I was talking about the 'long scale' in a literal sense, such as 'thousand million', which StuRat gave as a translation for the Brits. DirkvdM 07:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, then. I think no one uses that particular way in Finnish, Swedish or German, at least. We say "miljardi", not "tuhat miljoonaa". I originally used to extrapolate new terms "biljardi", "triljardi", "kvadriljardi" etc. for 10^15, 10^21, 10^27 etc. from "miljoona"/"miljardi" and use them, until my maths teacher in school told me that biljardi means billiards, not a number. JIP | Talk 12:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Ships, railway lines and aeroplanes

I need an answer to these questions, please.

• What is the total number of ships in the world?
• What is the total length of all the railway lines in all the world?
• What is the total number of aeroplanes in the world?

Thanks.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Meno25 (talk • contribs)

• The CIA World Factbook gives 1,115,205 total kilometers of railroad in the world. The other two may be unanswerable. (Although the Factbook lists 33,222 ships which are 1000 gross registered tons or over.)[2] Rmhermen 02:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Obtaining the number of Boings, Airbus and the like should not be a huge problem.

There are at least 312,000 aircraft world wide, including helicopters, according to [3]. Laïka 21:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I dont think there are any boings!. After all, when an aircraft crashes, it usually doesnt bounce! 8-)--Light current 22:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I have been blocked. It was for vandalism. I did not uderstand the guidlines. How do i apologize? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.225.104.31 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

um... u shouldn't have been able to post that last comment if you were blocked... Cbrown1023 02:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

He's switched to a new IP since he was blocked. To the anon, I'm not sure who you'd even apologise to. You can apologise to our benevolent leader if you like, or on the talk page of the page you vandalised, but really, vandalism is very easy for us to fix and it's not a big deal now that you've stopped. The best apology you could make would be to help us write some articles. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 02:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, there was nothing in that IP's block log. To the anon, you may or may not be blocked again depending on who reads this in the near future. Just become a productive member of the community, and I'm sure you will be welcomed. -- THL^CCD 06:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

They’re right when they say about writing a few articles, but if, for the principle, you still really want to apologise, you could go to the article you vandalised and view the history. If you weren’t logged in, you’ll be referred to by you IP address. After you, someone will probably have made another edit undoing what you did. The summary normally reads “revert” or just “rv”. You could apologise to that user, on their user talk if you really wanted to.81.168.43.203 11:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Searching for a music video

Hi, I'm searching for a dance music video that aired around 1995-99, with a redhead girl dancing before a blue background. I know it may sound a little goofy, but if by any chance someone finds out... --80.170.116.73 03:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Kate Pierson of the B-52s danced in front of a bunch of differnt color backgrounds if I remember right. Nowimnthing 18:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like you're a decade too early, here... =S Otherwise, it'd would help if we could get some more info, type of music, lyrics, etc... ? 惑乱 分からん 19:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Love Shack hit big 1990 and it was definitely still playing in '95 as well as some of their later hits. Maybe this will help List of redheads. Wow, we have everything...Nowimnthing 20:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The only thing I remember is that the girl had long curly hairs, a long straight dress and that she was dancing in some kind of corner consisting of plain blue walls. B-52s is definitely to soon and the music could be assimilate with Eurodance and the like. --213.103.91.176 03:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

geographic coordinates

I'm expanding a stub for Giffnock, Scotland, as per my suggestbot list. I'm a relatively new user, and I'm having a hard time getting the coordinates for Giffnock online.

I'm also having trouble with other parts of the infobox (from Wikiproject Scotland). Where can I find a source for Scotland' information, such as the lieutenancy for Giffnock (what's a lieutenancy? - oh nevermind). I'll probably find the stuff on my own - but if anyone has a speedy answer to this one as well, it would be much appreciated. The main thing is getting the coordinates.

Thanks!NinaEliza 05:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Have you considered asking this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland or the Wikipedia talk:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board? They should be able to give you better answers... Cbrown1023 05:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

NIna, a lieutenancy is an area, usually county size, subject to the authority of a lord-lieutenant, acting as the representative of the crown. In the past the function of the office was to raise loyal militia forces: now it has a purely ceremonial role. It is based on the older English office of the same name, though in the south Lord-Lieutenants had much more extensive legal powers. Clio the Muse 06:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Categorising a new Article

I can see how to put the marker for catogry but I cannot see how to add the catories. A popup would be extremly useful because: 1. It would be possible to see what options are available 2. It would avoid miss spelling. Also a popup to choose for other things shuch as links, photograps etc. I was going to add a photo but I did not like the terms. It appeared that there would be no limit such as using the face and putting it on to nude body etc. or using it to add to product endorsements.

It is obvious I am new to editing articles and I did not find the tutorial useful. Even the templates were not much use. Some sort of wizard should be added.

The article I tried to add was Huong Keenleyside. She has made such an affect in her own country that a national tv channel has produced a 30 minute documentary so she is worthy of an entry.

I am expecting a lot of criticism but I will accept that if it results in an acceptable article. Cheers Tom

• It's quite simple really. You add [[Category:Category name]] to the bottom of the article. If you want to know which are available, you can use the search function. Once you stick around for a while you'll develop a feeling of the categories you need. I'll see what I can do.- Mgm|^(talk) 10:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Note: Questions about Wikipedia belong on the help desk, not here. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• If you are aiming for a good article, you should add a references section in which you cite the sources you used to write this article. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hint for filling in the "Category name" parameter:
Take a look at an article on a subject very close to yours and see what categories it's in.
B00P 04:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo 64 game

What is the name of the Nintendo 64 game in which you have to prevent water from leaving the gameboard? It's a puzzle game --Shanedidona 13:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

It sounds similar to Pipe Dream, although I don't know about the N64. 惑乱 分からん 14:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

It might be "Wetrix". You drop earth to build mountains and valleys.  sʟυмɢυм • т • c  15:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. I played the game on a cell-phone once... 惑乱 分からん 15:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Mideastern terrorists

Why are almost all terrorists these days primarily from the Middle East? The Ayatollah 19:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

They're the ones who are getting the most press these days. Plus The IRA have given up (for now) 8-(--Light current 20:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

More generally, I'd say that most terrorism these days is from Muslim fundamentalists, including many who are neither Arab, nor from the Middle-East. The problem, as I see it, is a total lack of any tradition of peaceful resistance. If there had been a Muslim leader like Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr., then perhaps many of the complaints of the Muslim world (like the situation in Palestine) would have been solved by now, and much of the pointless violence would have been avoided. Instead, the Muslim world seems to be infected with madrassas which teach terrorism as the response to even very minor complaints, like school dress codes. StuRat 22:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

It's partly to due with media as well - the Basque group ETA are a nationalist/seperatist terrorist organization in Spain and are fairly active. Robovski 22:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't buy it as inaccurate portrayal by the media. Of course, any nation's media will tend to report on terrorist organizations which target them. ETA generally only targets Spain, although they also operate in the adjacent area of France. Furthermore, they haven't killed anyone for 3.5 years, and relatively few in recent years before that. Various Muslim terrorist orgs have, on the other hand, killed thousands of people, and target countries around the world, including, but not limited to, the US, Russia, India, the UK, Spain, France, Australia, many Middle-Eastern nations, Sudan, etc. So, those terrorists, being far more active and dangerous to those nations, tend to be reported more, as they should be. In general, I'd say that the only nations which haven't been targets for Muslim fundamentalist terrorists are those that don't contain Muslims and don't have any interaction with Muslims. StuRat 00:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You need to be careful with generalisations such as "from the Middle East". Of the four suicide bombers involved in the 7 July 2005 London bombings, three were born in England, and the fourth was born in Jamaica. Gandalf61 23:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

But where is the organisational chain of command in Islamic teaching, wherever it is taught? Please don't tell me that Allah communicates directly with every one of His people, or even that He communicates via his Mullahs, Imams, Sheiks etc., as if so, he would appear to be disseminating a different communique every single time. Who is the current leader of the Muslim religion who acts as the authorative voice of Qu'ranic interpretation? From where I stand, I see no such structure and I suspect the whole edifice of Muslim belief is built on blind faith and slavish obedience because there is no apparent freedom to express a question or a doubt or to challenge conflicting information. Look at the recent confusion over Muslim women wearing the veil. Every Muslim spokesperson who "pontificated" publicly on that controversy gave us a different interpretation. I think they make it up as they go. Sounds like an anarchic organisation to me. And it will all end in tears.

Who is the current leader of the Christian religion who acts as the authorative [sic] voice of Biblical interpretation? And don't say 'the Pope'. --ColinFine 06:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, fuck religion. In general.

StuRat, the fact that muslim terrorists have killed thousands is completely due to the 2001 attacks on the US (unless you count civil war as terrorism). There have been few other attacks since, in total killing maybe hundreds (although I've found getting any info on this to be very difficult).

As for that other remark. Most Europeans have a sizeable muslim population (per capita much larger than the US) and have dealings with muslim countries (no wonder - they've got all the oil), but few of them have seen terrorist attacks. And of course an important reason so many terrorists are muslims is that about a quarter of the world population is muslim. Until a few years ago, most terrorists were catholics, but I can't remember newspapers reporting about 'another catholic attack', despite the fact that religion was often at the core of it. In the Netherlands, the only terrorists were Moluccans, who wanted to separtate from Indonesia, largely because they are catholics, whereas Indonesia is predominantly muslim. So that was the other way around. But no-one ever focused on it. Yet when North Sumatra wants to separate from Indonesia, there is a focus on them being muslims, despite the fact that the rest of Indonesia also is. Weird! DirkvdM 08:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Not that most of the deaths being the result of a single event in any way makes it less of a threat, but I also don't think that's true. If you count the African embassy bombings, the Madrid train bombings, the London bombings, the Bali night club bombing, all the attacks on Israel, the attacks in Russia and Chechnya and Dagestan and Ossetia, the attacks in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Iraq, Egypt and various other attacks worldwide, you quickly get to thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of deaths by Muslim terrorists worldwide. StuRat 08:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

A quick total of just a few of the attacks shows the total is definitely in the thousands:

 191 Madrid trains
 365 Beslan school
 202 Bali night club
  52 London bombings
 257 African embassies
 162 Moscow theatre
  57 Istanbul bombings
  88 2005 Egypt bombings
  62 Luxor massacre
+270 Lockerbie, Scotland
---- -------------------
1706

StuRat 09:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Does less than 2000 qualify as 'thousands'? Ok, you say 'a few'. Is there a good overview somewhere of terrorist attacks? Wikipedia should have one. Still, a few thousand over a decade or so worldwide means a risk of one in ten million per person. There are quite a lot more serious risks to humanity. DirkvdM 07:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

And much of Europe has already been attacked by Muslim terrorists, including Spain, the UK, France, and the Netherlands (I most definitely consider the murder of Theo Van Gogh to be an example of Muslim terrorism, and apparently the Dutch courts agreed). Many more European nations have had their citizens attacked abroad by Muslim terrorists. StuRat 08:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Dutch courts have called this murder terrorism? Do you have a source for that? I haven't given it much attention because I considered it to be one idiot killing another over a series of insults. The fact that he made a bit of a circus of it and that the victim was somewhat known (although not to me) resulted in a lot of media attention, and that is indeed an essential part of terrorism, but in this case that lies not in the act itself, so the word terrorism does not seem appropriate to me. That would make any murder that gets a lot of media attention terrorism. Such as the murder of Pim Fortuin, but his murderer wasn't a muslim, so I suppose that is why that was not called terrorism. DirkvdM 07:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty obvious isn't it? It's because so much of our western society is based on the 'Christian God'; Britain's God save the Queen and America's in God we trust. If someone does 'evil' in the name of our God it couldn't possibly be, it must be because they are crazy and demented, after all 99.9% of Christians are good peaceful people. But if someone does 'evil' in the name of Allah, well, then it's quite easy to ignore the 99.9% of the peaceful Muslim community. It's classic us vs. them. Never mind that Allah and God are one and the same, bitterly ironic in a way isn't it? Vespine 22:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you are way off on 99.9%. In many areas where they ask if it's a good idea to murder Israeli or American citizens, the majority says yes. StuRat 08:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

StuRat - can you be more specific about your "many areas" ? Do you have any evidence to back up your assertion ? I think that in a potentially controversial thread such as this, it is better to avoid unsupported generalisations. Gandalf61 10:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I've answered this at a later post, where you asked for rather similar poll results. Also, why don't you object to the 99.9% figure, which totally lacks any supporting evidence ? Is it only OK to generalize in one direction ? StuRat 20:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Make that 'the vast majority' and it holds true in both cases. The agian, to use your reasoning the other way around (my favourite method), a majority of US citizens re-elected Bush, so they seem to agree with killing Iraqis. DirkvdM 07:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Something similar is that when a man sees another man cannot drive well it's because that guy can't drive, but when it's a woman it's because women can't drive. DirkvdM 07:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Poker chips

In the new Bond film, during the poker scene, at one point Bond appears to only have a big piles of $2,000,000 chips, yet in the next scene is able to place a blind of $50,000 (I think; certainly less than $2,000,000). I was wondering what you have to do in poker when you want to make a relatively small bet (such as placing one of the blinds), and all you have are very large denomination chips; do you take change out of the pot? Laïka 20:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

If the pot contains the amount of change sufficient to fulfill your bet, you do take change; otherwise, at any time, you trade your "million dollar blue value card" (in the case of bond) to another person (normally he who has the largest amount of smaller chips) for a bunch of smaller value chips equivalent to one million chips. Then you can place your bets. ChowderInopa 20:50, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, when making such large bets, it would be a simple matter to ask an employee of the casino to make change for you. I'd have to wonder, though, if such a tiny bet wouldn't be below the minimum bet for the table. StuRat 22:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Is there a house dealer or is the dealer a player? If there's a house dealer, you do not take change from the pot; you keep your fingers away from the pot, thank you very much. The dealer will make change for you, or a player will volunteer. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Whenever I've played poker, all the chips have had the same value, so I've never come against this problem before. Thanks! Laïka 18:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Since $50,000 is the amount of a blind, here's no issue with being below a minimum bet. For anyone reading this that may be unfamiliar with the concept, see Blind (poker). Dave6 05:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

no rain

this is a challenging question about name the only place that doesn't receive precipitation of rain and snow, only sunny and cloudy days?

according to this [4] some Northern desert regions of Chile have never recorded any precipitation. Nowimnthing 20:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

In a cave? Underwater? EdC 22:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The place in Chile actually did, in 1974. The Atacama Desert is only once recorded as having had rain once. Mind you, IIRC the South Pole receives neither rain nor snow. Also, if you want to think outside the square oblate spheroid, there are plenty of places you can probably think of elsewhere in the Solar System. Grutness...wha? 00:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure it doesn't snow at all in antarctica? A lot of wind moving through the area and tossing snow around counts as snowing in my book --froth^{T C} 05:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, only a deranged person would argue it doesn't snow in Antarctica. But Grutness was talking about the South Pole specifically, which is technically a single point. If it neither rains nor snows there, it must be a tiny oasis of rock surrounded by snow and ice. Maybe he can elucidate his comment. JackofOz 21:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Grutness was probably making reference to conditions created by atmoshpheric circulation, specifically the Polar cell which results in cold, dry air coming down at the pole. By the time air reaches the pole, all the moisture has been sucked out of it. That means that there is no moisture to precipitate in either liquid or solid form.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 22:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Basically, that's what I meant. Winds tend to blow north, away from the pole, (can't remember the name for this - katabatic wind?), and - as the article on the South Pole points out, precipitation is very low, with most of the snow at the pole driven there by wind. Much of internal Antarcticais often regarded as a desert for that reason. BUT there is still precipitation, albeit only about 25mm per year. To follow on from Jack's comment, yes of course it snows in Antarctica, but Antarctica is big enough to have many many weather patterns. It's roughly 50% larger than the United States, so thinking that I was referring to the whole continent is like thinking that winter weather conditions in Omaha and Los Angeles are the same. Back to the original question, I think I was on the right track - the answer may be the McMurdo Dry Valleys of Ross Dependency, Antarctica, which AFAIK have no rainfall or snow. Grutness...wha? 05:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Guitar Recording

I play guitar and want to start to be able to record stuff in my own house rather than having to go over to friends house's to record. I was wondering what equipment I would need. From my knowledge it seems that I need to have some sort of computer program and a mixer. Can you guys help me with this? RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 20:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Audacity is your friend. You need to have a microphone and you can record and even edit your recordings. There may be a plug out there that goes right from the guitar to the computer, I'm not sure however. schyler 20:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Depends on the quality you want. My friends used to turn out some decent tapes in the basement with a 4 track tape recorder, a small mixing board and mics. Newer (fairly cheap) mixing boards can burn right to cd and then you can do post production editing on any computer. Again software can run a range of prices. Nowimnthing 20:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

ins policies on passports

i am trying to find out the out if you have to have $12,000.00 in order to obtain a passport traveling from africa to u.s.a. or from africa to anywhere else? thank you for taking the time to read this question.

No. $12,000 is very high for some sort of temporary insurance. A country issuing a passport sets fees for it, and the country issuing a visa may charge for it, but no country charges fees that high. Some countries allow a sort of "investor" permanent residency, but they require investments much larger than $12,000. A lawyer could charge for services, but that sounds high for even a complicated immigration case. Smugglers might charge that much, as well as people who marry to enable a spouse to immigrate. -THB 21:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

after edit conflict

Umm you will probably need a visa as well as your Passport to travel from most African countries to the US (which could end up being a somewhat expensive process), but the only requirement for $12,000 I can think of would be shady dealings. Nowimnthing 21:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you can still get a fake passport for much less than that, even with all the new security, but it might be more in Africa than New York. -THB 21:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I would guess you're either dealing with a corrupt government official who wants a bribe, or it's just a scam (which may, or may not, actually provide you with what you need, but at an absurd price, in any case). StuRat 22:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Immigration officials in the country you are travelling can ask you to prove you can pay for your stay. They can be as arbitrary as they like I think. At least according to those Airport docu-soaps on TV in the UK they do. If you came in with a 12 month student visa, no return ticket and $200, the assumption is you will be working illegally. $12,000 doesn't seem unreasonable if you are claiming to be staying 6 months. 86.132.225.153 23:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Pre-modern races

Hi, this is the third time I'm asking this; either nobody understands this or nobody "has the guts" to answer this. I want to know in the early U.S., the order of racial superiority. The races recognized at the time were Black, Brown, Red, White, and Yellow. Please answer this. --209.122.217.12 23:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Propose delete racialist question. Agreement?--Light current 23:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

No.. --froth^{T C} 05:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I second the deletion of this. All this is is a trolling attempt. --Wooty Woot? contribs 23:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't be silly. It's a perfectly fair question. There have been all sorts of more or less crackpot anthropological theories advanced over the years; the questioner wonders what the "racial hierarchy" was thought to be in some "early US" belief. Obviously, given the nature of those inventing such hierarchies, white would be on top and black on the bottom; what was the shape of the middle? Does Wikipedia have an article about crackpot racial theories? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, don't delete it. That makes me, Jpgordon, the original poster, and the other responders (who we can assume, don't want their contributions deleted). StuRat 00:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. Watch this turn into a racist thread 8-(--Light current 23:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

We have lots of articles about crackpot racial theories (see Scientific racism for an overview of those which were purposed to have a scientific, i.e. anthropological, basis). --24.147.86.187 00:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Being of mixed race would confer a status between that of the two races, at the time. There would, however, be a social penalty, as neither race might accept such individuals. StuRat 23:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible that you've missed the point (race card warning light coming on prematurely?) - I think what the question means - at the time of the early US - which races had the most rights etc - clearly white at top, maybe next yellow (chinese) since they weren't slaves - the actual order I don't know...

• And in a white-dominated society the whites usually would recognize "mixing" as being only to the detriment of a "white" status (that is, black+white always meant that the result was white, see one-drop rule). as to how the races were "ordered" in the "early US" — it depends what you mean by "early US". I imagine you must mean at least by the 19th century because before then you really didn't have an issue of Asians as a "race" and the rhetoric for talking about American Indians wasn't one that was along "racial" lines so much as cultural. In any case by the late 19th century the different hierarchies would depend on who you asked; someone on the West Coast would have much stronger feelings about Asians than would someone in the South, and someone in the North East would usually not accept that there was one "white" race (they would separate out the Irish and the Eastern Europeans and the Jews as being white-skinned but essentially not "white"). So in the end I'm not sure what the question is supposed to be but as a historical question it is not easy to answer because it uses categories which weren't universal in the US at any of the times. I'm also pretty sure the 5-color racial scheme did not really become the dominant way of talking about race in the US until the interwar period (it goes back to at least Blumenbach, though his scheme had some big differences to what it became in the US; in the 18th century in the US race was talked about in an entirely different way). --24.147.86.187 00:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Good stab at an answer but I think you misunderstand "one drop"; white + black always yields black according to most racist arithmetic. You could generalize the racist view as "pure + other = impure = other". Also, the OP asks about early US. That would start at the inception of the US and go some arbitrary period from there that could be thought of a fairly homogeous in attitudes; I chose 50 years, perhaps it should be only 10 or 20 years if viewpoints generally changed in that period as one poster mentioned regarding the loss of rights of blacks. --Justanother 14:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not a question of "guts". Certainly different cultures at different times had different views on races and "racial superiority". The OP says he is interested in early US. That would be, IMO, perhaps the first 50 years following the Declaration of Independence, say late 1700's to early 1800's. Certainly the "colored" races; black, red, yellow; were considered inferior by many, if not most, white Americans. Didn't popular literature of the time forward these ideas? Even Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. My opinion, you cannot exploit a group of people unless you can justify to yourself that they are somehow inferior and thus, deserving of exploitation. Whites in the US exploited all the "colored" peoples. Perhaps someone can speak to his question as to what was the relative ordering of "inferiority" in the minds of the people of that day. Didn't they speak of the "noble red man" when they weren't killing him or driving him off his land? It is certainly a valid historical question. --Justanother 06:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

African-Americans had greater legal rights in the late 1700's than they did in the 1800's. The sad record in books of "slave law" show a stripping of rights by courts and legislatures of the southern states between the American Revolution and the Civil War. Slaves rights were striped away to be pretty much limited to what their masters granted them. Slaves were such by virtue of the slave status of the mother. A slave could be blond or red haired, white skinned and blue eyed, if the mother was a light skinned slave. The slave owners contributed to the lightening of the skin color of the slaves generation after generation. Rape of a female slave was not a crime. Edison 06:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

There is only one human race - Homo Sapiens Sapiens. And I don't regard it as superior to any other races or species or what have you. Although it is difficult not to be biased in favour of your own species/race/family/whathaveyou. See also race#Incongruities of racial classifications. DirkvdM 08:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Come on kids - is anybody actually going to answer this guys question. Giving an order of societal status (as percieved by whites at that time)

Thought I had figured out the question, I just don't have an answer. When did Chinese start coming over in quantity, esp. to build railroads? My guess as to the answer would be that many US people in that era would say white was on top, then red, then yellow, then black. I would think that "enlightened" people of the era might not make that distinction, especially in the case of red and yellow. Sorry, but many "enlightened" people still managed to support slavery of blacks so what does that say about those "luminaries"? But that is just a guess; an historian or buff can do better. There, guts enough for ya? --Justanother 14:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Early enough in the US there was only the Red Man,duh?!hotclaws**== 16:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

OP asked about US (United States), not North America or America. --Justanother 17:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Black & Brown

Were there brown AND black "races" in the early U.S.? How were they defined?

I must say that even though this type of question often appears to be "trolling", the concept of race is very interesting, from a historical, sociological, and anthropological persepectives. There is still a great deal of misunderstanding of the concept and I believe these questions should be answered, not deleted. -THB 17:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

If you want to ask a different question, then start a new thread, in stead of giving the troll the idea that he is being taken serious. DirkvdM 07:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Note this is becoming the answering of a question that wasn't asked. The question is not about the order of racial superiority as perceived by people at that time, let alone as perceived by the whites, but simply about the order of racial superiority, thus suggesting there was a racial superiority, and that's the trolling bit. Let me do some more politically correct trolling. Who did the Indians perceive as superior? Whites, blacks or Chinese? Or should I start a separate thead for that? :) DirkvdM 07:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, good point. Sometimes we "automatically" translate the trolling question to a non-trolling version; sometimes we refactor the question to make it non-trolling; other times we delete it as an obvious troll. Guess this one is ambiguous enough to have met the first case. Perhaps the OP will clarify his question for us. --Justanother 13:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am the OP, although I don't know what that stands for. I meant how whites thought of the racial hierarchy. As mentioned, I think it would top with whites and end with blacks, but I don't know which're in between.--216.164.197.227 00:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

November 19

F-14 vs F-15 vs F-16 vs F-18

The USA has lots of fighter jets, which of the four are the best for a) air-to-air atatck, b) air-to-surface attack? I'm pretty sure the F-15 is the best out of the four for air to air attack, if I am correct, why doesn't the US Navy use these instead of using F-14 or F-18s? Jamesino 01:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Landing on a carrier puts a lot of stress on a plane (see Arrestor cables). I suspect the F-15 just isn't structurally strong enough at those stress points. Clarityfiend 04:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Precisely; An F-15 simply cannot land on an aircraft carrier like an F-14 or F-18 can. —EdGl 01:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

An F14 is a modified F15. There are lots of differences though. The first is the "swing wing" which makes the wing straighter at slower speeds in order to lower the landing speed for a carrier landing. The swing wing also makes the wingspan smaller for storage on a carrier. The landing gear has been beefed up for carrier landings. It has a tail hook. Navy has a refueling arm while the Air Force uses boom and receiver behind the canopy. --Tbeatty 05:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

So if you have 4 clone pilots of equal skill level and you put each of them into a different jet, loaded with optimal missile payloads. Which one would most likely come out on top? Jamesino 23:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe the F-14 has a longer range and can fire more missiles simultaneously than the F-18, so in F-14 vs. F-18, the F-14 would know the F-18's location first, and be the first to fire a missle, and would destroy an F-18. Sorry for not including the other planes as I am less knowledgeable with those other aircraft. —EdGl 03:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Arranged marriage

How can I get an arranged marriage —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.200.39 (talk • contribs)

Die, then get reincarnated in a country which practices them. StuRat 01:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Or simpler yet, go to a country which practices them. Jamesino 01:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that would work, since the parents normally arrange the marriage. Thus, you would need to get adopted first. StuRat 01:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Plus, why would you want one in the first place? Are you sure you understand what an arranged marriage is? Cbrown1023 01:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe he wants a mail-order bride? --Justanother 06:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

If so, he should be very careful of the spelling, or he may just get a surprise package. :-) StuRat 07:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, listen to The Gift (song) first, so as to be aware of the potential risks involved. DirkvdM 08:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it's a she who wants to be the bride.  --Lambiam^Talk 14:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I personally prefer a deranged marriage. StuRat 17:12, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

"on-location"...

I remember reading somewhere (one of Dan Brown's novels maybe?) that often reporters will fake being on the scene of where the news is happening, and instead use a just use video of the place which they will stand in front of. My question is, does this really happen / how often does this happen? 68.231.151.161 01:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I think the novel you are referring to is Angels and Demons. Cbrown1023 01:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I imagine it's quite common, although, since they likely avoid actually saying they are there, it isn't really lying, the viewers just assume they are on-site. I saw one funny video where a reporter, in a boat on a street, is talking about the horrible flooding. Then some people walk by, showing it's only a couple inches of water. :-) StuRat 01:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this is really that common in broadcast journalism. It's too easy to spot a fake background. What less-scrupulous TV crews do do is say they are reporting live from a scene when the segment is actually not live. There was a famous print case of a guy (Jayson Blair) who, when assigned to cover a funeral in West Virginia or somewhere, stayed at home in Brooklyn and wrote a story based on fabricated and stolen quotes. -- Mwalcoff 02:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Many times I see rebroadcasts of live reports, where the word "LIVE" is still on the screen. This is particularly funny when you've seen the earlier boradcast as well..."Wow, this live interview is identical to the live one at 6, what are the chances of that ?". :-) StuRat 02:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

See Geraldo Rivera#War coverage controversies. He absolutely lied, I saw the original broadcast. -THB 18:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Jayson Blair reminds me of a Russian music critic (whose name escapes me but it wasn't Stasov) in the early part of the 20th century. He was due to critique a new work of Prokofiev, but since he despised Prokofiev's music he decided to miss the concert and make up a scathing criticism based on what he knew of Prokofiev's general style. He sent the critique off to the paper, unaware that the concert had been cancelled. He lost his job. JackofOz 21:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

As someone who works in television news, I will say that I have never seen this happen first-hand, at any of the stations I have worked at or by any of our competitors. Nor have I ever heard of a verifiable incidence of this. It just doesn't happen. Whenever you see one of our reporters live on the scene, he or she is indeed live and on the scene. In fact, we have strict guidelines posted admonishing us to always present our reports with the utmost accuracy. — Michael J 23:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Extreme Ops Location

In the movie "Extreme Ops" much of the action takes place in a hotel high in the mountains - if I remember correctly it is in Austria. (In the movie the hotel is still under construction, but I believe that it is in real life fully functional). Does anyone know the name / location of this hotel ? --Dr snoobab 04:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Caliber (guns)

I have always been puzzled by the terminology used when describing a gun's caliber. When I did National Service in Australia the weapons we used were the Lee Enfield 303 and the hand gun was a 45. What do those figures signify? A 9mm is self explanatory. Shotguns come in 12 gauge and I used to play around with a 410. Also in Wild West stories the hero (or Villain) would pull out his never-empty trusty 30/30. What does it all mean. Joe Blow58.104.113.211 04:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Joe Blow

45 caliber means that the bore is .45 inches in diameter. A 12 guage shotgun means that 12 lead spheres with diameters the same diameter of the bore would weigh 1 pound. --froth^{T C} 05:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The .30-30 mean a 0.3 inch diameter with 30 grains of powder in the cartridge. Rmhermen 05:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You can gauge the caliber of a gun collector based on his familiarity with those terms. (I apologize for that rather bore-ish comment, but I had to take a shot.) StuRat 07:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

We usually spell it "calibre" in Australia, but that's an entirely different issue.  :) JackofOz 21:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The 303 Enfield means 0.303 of an inch, or 7.7 mm. Most of the time if it sounds like a fraction it means 'of an inch', keeping in mind that the biggest calibre of personal firearm is 0.50 or 12.7mm. Vespine 22:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Dolly (Parton?) song question (refactored)

when i was 14 i heard a song by dolly and it had a line about i don't want to throw rice at her if you know what it is i would love to know. thank you --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bigmama654ply (talk • contribs) 05:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Here it is. I Don't Want To Throw Rice by Dolly Parton. --Justanother 06:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Serious Question

Are there any ways in which i can legally kill a man? - Paulie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.134.181 (talk • contribs)

It depends where you are and what the circumstances are. In some jurisdictions killing someone in self-defense is ok. JoshuaZ 06:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

We have a good article on this at Justifiable homicide. Dave6 06:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not provide legal advice. But, as a general observation, you could join a military force which is engaged in a war, or get a job as an executioner at a prison, or become a police officer and find a bad guy who refuses to lay down his weapon, or be an armed homeowner in certain jurisdictions and wait for a home invader, or be a licensed gun owner in certain U.S. states and wait until someone threatens your safety. All those categories reportedly kill people legally. Edison 07:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to say "join the army", but soldiers usually spend most of their time hanging around a base or something. Wars are pretty uncommon, contrary to what the news may suggest to you. And then when they do get sent to a war they rarely get a chance of killing someone. And then when they do, it is often from a distance and it may even be unclear who did the actual killing. Very frustrating! Joining the US army would probably increase your chances, but then you'd have to become a US citizen first. But then there's the question of who's legality you're speaking of. The Israeli army would also be a good choice. DirkvdM 08:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to be a U.S. citizen to join the U.S. Army. In fact, they sometimes award citizenship to those foreigners who die in the service. Rmhermen 17:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

LOL. A citizenship to die for. :) DirkvdM 07:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. You could become an executioner.--Light current 11:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You could also be a doctor in a nation that allows euthanasia ny156uk 13:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Or abortion ;D --froth^{T C} 18:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

However you want, if you're wearing a mask. (Just kidding) -- Sturgeonman 19:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

A foetus is not a "man", but he/she is (depending on your point of view) a human being. Also, killing someone in self-defence is not "legal". In most places it is still unlawful to kill someone in these circumstances and you will probably still be charged, but the court may accept your motives as a reasonable defence and acquit you. It's not just a case of you telling the police "I acted in self-defence" and them saying "Oh, ok, that's alright then. Have a nice day". JackofOz 21:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hm, I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think you're correct that it's unlawful to kill someone in justifiable self-defense or defense of another. If you're acquitted on grounds of self-defense, then what the jury has decided is that you acted lawfully (or at least that there's insufficient evidence that you didn't). And I think if the DA charges you, then it means he's not convinced that you were acting in self-defense; if the evidence is clear that you were, then I think you won't be charged. --Trovatore 22:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

If by "legally" you mean "not in violation of any law", you might want to go someplace where there are no laws (and people to kill). Currently, only Somalia comes to mind, although sharia might be the de facto legal code in most of it by now. I'm not sure about outer space, Antarctica etc., and I'm pretty sure that national penal laws can be enforced on the high seas. In any case, you might still be subject to traditional forms of non-judicial dispute resolution on the part of the local population. Sandstein 19:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

You could go to a region in which there are no laws, such as disputed zones somalia etc.

Hong Kong banknotes

Most Hong Kong banknotes are issued by banks instead of the government. Why? Is this an unique situation worldwide? Thanks. WP 09:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not unique. Several UK banks, based in Scotland and Northern Ireland, issue their own notes. Clio the Muse 09:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Coins

I am always told the head is the 'front' of the coin and the design is the reverse. Am I alone in thinking this is quite odd? In the UK the 'value' of the coin is therefore on the 'back' of the coin (if my understanding is correct).

No idea if this is the case is other countries, but it does seem strange to me to have the details of the coin's value on the back, not front (though obviously I appreciate that which is the front/back is irrelevant due to the nature of coins) ny156uk 13:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The front is usually called the "obverse". Coins are easily recognizable to users by the "head". You might think of the other information as the "fine print" which could go on the reverse. And it's not the case in all countries. -THB 17:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, the term heads and tail might have implied that the head is the front and the tail is the back, but this is just something that occured to me as I read the question. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

See Obverse and reverse. To clarify; in the UK, the Queen's head is always the Obverse/front/heads, while the other design, with the value and secondary symbol (portcullis, rampant lion, Britannia etc.) is always on the Reverse/back/tails. I agree with you on the slightly strange idea of the value being on the back; I've always thought of the Queen's head being on the back of the coin, as it has less useful information, but obviously some more bigheaded monarch somewhere down the line has said "No! My head must go on the front, not the back!". Laïka 19:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It makes some sense to me that their heads are on the heads side. What I'd like to know is why their tails are not on the tails side.  --Lambiam^Talk 20:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Talking about "heads and tails" makes obvious sense as long as someone's head actually appears on one side of the coin. Talking about "front and back" does not make sense, unless it is arbitrarily defined somewhere which side is the front and which is the back. It would have to be arbitrary because coins are inherently two-sided and neither side has any natural superiority over the other. That's why they don't use such terminology, preferring "obverse" and "reverse". JackofOz 21:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

"Front" and "back" are ambiguous terms, since they would refer to different sides of the coin whenever you turned it over. Edison 22:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Swan winter survival and feeding

A swan has recently appeared in a small pond near our house in Maine. No one has ever seen a swan anywhere near here. I don't know if it is a male or a female.

The pond will freeze over shortly, and we are concerned because that will eliminate the ability of the swan to dive for underwater plants, etc.

Most of the birds around this area have already migrated south, but this swan just stays here by him/her self. No mate has been seen.

What might we feed the swan, and what else might we do to aid in his/her making it through the winter?

Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.231.199.57 (talk • contribs) 13:27, 19 November 2006

• Contact a local bird charity,or I think America does have an Audubon Society which may help. .Sometimes a local vet will have a contact number for a swan recue or something like that.hotclaws**== 16:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • You can find your local Audubon branch here, if you are in Maine. They most likely can advise you of how to proceed.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 22:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

How recently? The swan could be regaining its strength for the last stretch. I also thought for a moment that maybe the swan 'knows' something you don't, like that it's going to be a warm winter and the pond won't freeze over. The Amsterdam canals rarely freeze over the last few years and the winter swan population seems to be growing. However, Maine may be further south than Amsterdam, but it doesn't benefit from the thermohaline circulation. The Maine article is a bit unclear about the temperatures. I've added a question to the talk page. Maybe you could help out with that, being a resident. DirkvdM 08:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

copyright / free licensing

I apologise firstly for being unsure as to where to file this, but my question is as follows.

I attempted to upload a picture which was taken by my boss, who co-owns a company (of two tea houses) called Tchai Ovna Ltd (I'm currently trying to work on the Wiki for the place) - my boss has given permissions for the image to be used explicity but he hasn't licesnsed or copyrighted it in any way; the photograph is of the exterior & entrance to the shop.

I'm not sure how I would go about licensing / fair use tagging it. I previously uploaded it as available to use on wikipedia as he said that would be fine, but that wasn't alright so I tried to edit the licensing to GFDL but I believe this is wrong also.

Basically, I'm wondering what I would list the image as; it's just a picture taken on a digital camera as far as I'm aware that holds no copyright other than intellectual. I don't have much of a clue about any of this. I'd also like to point out that if I have uploaded it under false copyright that it was not done intentionally or maliciously.

Thanks in advance to anyone who helps resolve this :)

-dannerz 13:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

This belongs on Wikipedia:Help desk; please try it there. Copyright is intellectual ownership; there is no other meaning to the term. He is the rights owner and you, as his agent, can upload the pic. But check the help desk. --Justanother 14:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Please also see WP:COMPANY and WP:AUTO. --Shantavira 14:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, before you expend a ton of effort; what makes his teahouses notable enough to put in an encyclopedia? See WP:Notability (and User:Uncle G/On notability) and WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages. --Justanother 14:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

British top fourty pop chart

Hello. I am trying out to find WHICH year both Eagle-Eye Cherry and The Cars were on the British top forty. Do you have any idea where to find this information? Much appreciated! 81.93.102.185 14:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

To myself: I think Vengaboys were on the top forty this year too... Could it be 1998? 81.93.102.185 14:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Try this site (http://www.everyhit.com/searchsec.php), it shows a top 40 hit for eagle eye cherry with Save Tonight in 1998. The last top 40 hit it finds for 'The Cars' is in August 1985, so it would seem that unless eagle eye cherry has been performing for a long time (his first album is 1997 according to his wikipedia page) then they look unlikely to have shared a year when they were both Top 40 artists. ny156uk 14:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Armed Rebellion in Tennesee USA

I once heard a story that a upriseing occured in Tenn. in the 1950s or 40s due to the populace being fed up with corrupt county officals. A county court house was taken over for a time, the state police or National guard had to be brought in to resolve the problems. The event was considered important to gun rights activist as an example of first amendment rights. It was also supposedly suppresed in the news media under request of federal officals. Anybody know about this? Thanks76.187.36.112 14:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Mr.Phil

Please see Battle of Athens. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

There was also the State of Franklin in the 1790's. Edison 23:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't suppressed. The rebellion was a front page story in the NY Times. lots of issues | leave me a message 23:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Gulf of mexico

What kind of houses are built around the gulf of mexico? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.217.100.115 (talk • contribs) .

Are you aware that the Gulf of Mexico is rather large and is bordered by Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Tamaulipas, Veracruz, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatán, Quintana Roo, and Cuba? Accordingly, you find all kinds of houses, ranging from sumptuous mansions to comfortable villas to working-class apartment buildings to one-room cabins to shanty-town dwellings, in a variety of architectural styles or lack thereof. Is there some specific aspect you're interested in?  --Lambiam^Talk 16:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I can only speak for Texas but normally, I see raised houses resting on columns near the beach. Not really sure what they're called, but I assume those are fairly common near the beach. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 19:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Favourites

How do I set up a list of favourite articles on Wiki please? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Papermaker (talk • contribs) .

Perhaps the easiest way would be to add them to your watchlist. That way you could check to see if there had been any changes in them. -THB 17:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

See Help:Watching pages. -- SCZenz 20:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Go to your user page, pick Edit, then add the names of the articles you like with two sets of square brackets around each. You might want to put them on separate lines with asterisks in front as bullets.

For example, do this:

*[[Flying Spaghetti Monster]]

*[[Invisible Pink Unicorn]]

To get this:

• Flying Spaghetti Monster

• Invisible Pink Unicorn

StuRat 05:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Note that you could also use the Favorites/Bookmarks option in your browser to store a list. StuRat 17:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Arranged Marriage

Seriously, how can I get an arranged marriage? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.164.192.129 (talk • contribs) .

This question was posted above. do not double post. Jon513 17:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

But above people were insulting and making jokes instead of answering the question.

You have to arrange for it. --Nelson Ricardo 18:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Arranged marriages only occur within certain groups. You have to be a member of one of those groups. Do you belong to one of those groups? Where do you live? You didn't give enough information, that's why people couldn't answer your question to your satisfaction. Give more information. -THB 19:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Giving this more thought, there are certain religious "cult" groups like the Moonies that you could join and then be required to enter an arranged marriage, but I don't recommend it. -THB 19:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Did you read Arranged marriage at all? Usually such marriages are arranged through the parents. Ask your family to arrange a marriage. For us to give a meaningful answer, we need to know, at the very least: (a) where you live; (b) what you are seeking in an arranged marriage, in particular, we need to understand why such is your preference; (c) what requirements you have with regard to your future spouse (gender, age, religion, ethnicity, abilities, ...); also, does s/he need to agree with you that democracy is horrible?; (d) what you or your family are bringing to the marriage.  --Lambiam^Talk 20:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

(Oops, I see THB already mentioned this) Arranged marriages are, by definition, arranged. Someone would have to arrange one for you and for your future wife. You might consider joining the "Moonies". I read some time ago that the Rev. Moon got all the singles together in an auditorium (hundreds of them), paired them up, married them, gave them some advice, and told them to make it work. That is what marriage is about anyway, making it work. --Justanother 22:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You might also consider getting your parents or a close friend to arrange it for you. I also remember that there are people who will find dates for you, in return for payment. They will get list of prospective dates, interview them, check them for compatibility with your personality and recommend one for you. Given that people will also arrange the wedding ceremony, all you are left with is the bit in the middle - persuading the other person they want to marry you. DJ Clayworth 18:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

jeans

where i can get pretty cheap jeans that fade from dark blue to whitish in the middle of the pant leg & have rips thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 162.83.250.230 (talk • contribs) .

A secondhand store. --Wooty Woot? contribs 18:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Stonewashed jeans comes to mind--Light current 19:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Why no article on this important subject? 8-(--Light current 23:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Good question. I started one. Dave6 04:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Go to Tesco, buy some Value jeans for a fiver, then cut with scissors and sandpaper. Laïka 19:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Look around these places. --hydnjo talk 20:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm distressed that people like those type of jeans, they must be on acid or otherwise stoned (sorry if I appear to be on a holey crusade here). StuRat 04:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The jeans article has this link.--Justanother 04:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm also bewildered why anybody thinks these garments are in any way attractive, but you don't have to be high to wear them. TV hosts (who don't usually appear to be pharmaceutically affected, but may well be) often wear them. Fashion is sometimes a cruel master. JackofOz 00:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry that no one else understood StuRat's reference to distressed, acid washed, and stone washed jeans, i.e. what this thread is referring to. I for one thought it was clever.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 00:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Why would you assume that we didn't get the joke? --Justanother 00:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I guess I read JackofOz's comment as too straight-faced. With no further commentary it seemed that it had been missed. Apparently I was wrong. I'll just go back to my Chinese homework. Wo.de Yingwen shuiping bugou gao, or maybe Chinese has just lessened it.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 01:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Straight-faced?? Me?? Never.  :) JackofOz 01:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Adding value to meetings and encouraging volunteers to attend

I am a graduate student working on a research project. I need to find articles or names of researchers who have written about adding value to meetings and encouraging volunteers to attend. If anyone can direct me in either of these areas, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you in advance. Deb —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpchristianson (talk • contribs)

Could you give a bit of context and clarification? What kind of meetings are these? Why should volunteers attend them at all? What would they be volunteering for, voluntarily attending the meeting? In many areas of the world you can attract any number of volunteers to attend the annual meeting of the Organization of Chartered Accountants if you just offer them a decent meal, but somehow I don't think that is what you have in mind. And what should we think of when you say "adding value" to a meeting. If the meeting has insufficient value, why have it at all?  --Lambiam^Talk 20:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I will go along with the idea of giving away free stuff to encourage attendance. Ideally you would do best to give them something with little or no intrinsic value, but which has a great deal of value to some people. For example, have everyone who attends get the chance to shake George Bush's hand (or just generally shake him). If you use this method, however, be sure to install metal detectors at all the doors. StuRat 04:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipoll

I had an idea: what if we create a "Wikipoll" project in which users can post polls and ask the Wikipedia public for their opinion? If a good idea and feasible, how would one go about creating it? -- Sturgeonman 19:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is devoted to the organization of facts and information from primary and secondary sources. We tend to avoid creating subpages where people argue their opinions, because this would not contribute to our mission. See also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. -- SCZenz 19:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Polls not a function of an encyclopedia--Light current 19:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I was going to suggest making something at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Coffee Lounge but it seems that it was recently deleted. Jon513 20:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Polls are evil! --hydnjo talk 20:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Jeez- I didn't know I that polls are such a sore subject.-- Sturgeonman 00:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It shouldn't be part of Wikipedia, I agree. However, there's no reason not to create a new wiki, named, say Wikipoll, for just that purpose. StuRat 04:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Precisely. I've been thinking the same thing. For example for films, as an alternative to imdb, with the more handy MediaWiki format, in which people can react to each other's posts. And without the ads, which are getting to be ever more annoying on imdb. One existing opinions-wiki is http://campaigns.wikia.com/wiki/Campaigns_Wikia, on politics. Another very handy one would be a site where one can discuss various products. This is something that would greatly improve the effectiveness of the free market system, which only functions well if people are properly informed, and one good source of information would be the experience of other users with products. DirkvdM 08:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Anyone can start his/her own Wiki! 8-)--Light current 08:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Democracy and capitalism

What are the main criticisms and drawbacks of democracy and capitalism ? (re-asking deleted question from anon contributor with more neutral tone) Gandalf61 19:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

One thing to note is that democracy and capitalism, though certainly related in the view of many, are technically separate ideas. Democracy is a political system, while capitalism is an economic system. -- SCZenz 20:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Capitalism is a politico-economical system. I'd go further and say democracy and capitalism cannot coexist, which I consider a major drawback of capitalism. I know some people believe that democracy cannot exist without capitalism, which then justifies intervention in other countries where an elected leader is not so enthusiastic about capitalism and globalization.  --Lambiam^Talk 20:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen Democracy#Criticism (more info in articles on specific variants of democracy) and Capitalism#Critics of capitalism? The latter is especially detailed. -- SCZenz 20:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Other articles you might find interesting are Comparative economic systems and Small is Beautiful. -THB 00:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Note that capitalism, or rather the free market system (something distinct, but that's probably what you were thinking of) is a form of democracy, using dollar voting. That's a stub, but a better discussion can be found on the talk page. However, that was original research, so I wan't allowed to put it in the article. (sob, sob) DirkvdM 08:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It might be democarcy, but it sure isn't equal... 惑乱 分からん 13:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No idea why anyone thinks capitalism cannot co-exist alongside democracy. Democracy is not a one-for-one vote on every aspect of life, or guaranteed equality throughout all of life. Capitalism is a much more difficult thing to define, it's apparently like a private-ownership economy and if so there is no reason this cannot co-exist with democracy. Whether capitalisam's outcome diminishes the role of government, or not, is questionable, but there is little to suggest it prevents democracy from existing. Indeed many would argue that free-markets provide a much more real version of consumer demands/requirements than government maintained markets. As always read more on both subjects, they are fascinating. ny156uk 18:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

On that subject, I would recommend the works of Friedrich Hayek, and in particular, Road to Serfdom. Hayek argues – rightly so, in my opinion – that political freedom and economic freedom cannot come about, to any substantial degree, without one another. Sandstein 19:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Hayek's argument has, to some extent, been superseded by new economic and political forms. At the time of writing he would have in mind the pure model of the 'command economy', typified by the old Soviet Union. However, developments in China have proved that economic freedom can indeed exist side-by-side with absence of the outward forms of political liberty. Clio the Muse 00:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Help

What does [H+] mean?--Rapier of Women 21:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It depends on the context. But in chemistry it could mean a Hydrogen atom with a +1 charge, which means it lost one of it's electron. Jamesino 21:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

This could also be a reference to the pH of something.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 21:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

No, it's not equal to the pH. The brackets denote concentration. In dilute solutions, pH = -log₁₀([H+]). —Keenan Pepper 22:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

H+ almost always means a proton. --Wooty Woot? contribs 22:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, since the most common isotope of hydrogen only contains one electron and one proton, H+ means it has lost one electron, leaving zero. In other words, only a single proton is left, which gives it a charge of +1. StuRat 04:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

As a conclusion, in chemistry, [H+] stands for hydrogen ion concentration. –mysid☎ 08:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Axe vs Tag

Which North American bodyspray lasts longer and/or have a more powerful scent: Axe Or Tag? Jamesino 21:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I would think 'Axe' would have a slightly sharper edge to it! But 'Tag' tends to hang around a bit longer 8-)--Light current 00:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea if they're longer-lasting, but why not try the Bod line? You can't go wrong with fragrances called "Rock Hard" and "Ripped Abs". User:Zoe|(talk) 03:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Haven't you seen the commercials? Tag causes nearby women to find you completely irresistible. It's a scientifically proven fact. Someoneinmyheadbutit'snotme 03:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Masking Tape

Does the adhesive of masking tape have moisture in it? --Proficient 22:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

When you say moisture, do you mean free water?--Light current 23:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I would say not. Otherwise it might be expected to dry out in a few days. It doesnt. 8-)--Light current 23:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The data sheets on the 3M Website state that masking tape uses rubber adhesive, rubber is not soluble in water, but there would be a solvent which could be considered wet or moist, but the rubber would already be disolved in it. If, for example, you stuck masking tape to tissue paper, I do not believe it would moisten the tissue. Vespine 00:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes its a bit of a sticky subject! --Light current 01:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It does, in fact "dry out", over time, and becomes brittle. However, as that takes years instead of hours, it must not be water which is evaporating, but something with a much lower volatility (tendency to evaporate). StuRat 04:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

That may also be the result of degradation of the polymer structure under influence of, in particular, ultraviolet radiation.  --Lambiam^Talk 08:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

November 20

football

What was the name of Jim Nance's younger brother, who played football at University of Buffalo in late 60s or early 70s?...thanx!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hooper49 (talk • contribs)

Given where buffalos live, I assume you mean American football, but that's just a guess. Please specify. DirkvdM 08:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Buffalos are from africa or asia, america has Bison, which they like to call buffalos. However the place Buffalo is the name of various places in the US. Philc _T^E_C^I 23:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Dirk, if you know who Jim Nance is and what the University of Buffalo is, you know which football he's talking about. If those names don't mean anything to you, you won't have the answer anyway. It's true that sometimes American users sometimes fail to be geographically specific, but there's no reason to be scornful of someone when it's not really relevant. -- Mwalcoff 01:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Suppose I were a football fan, then I'd waste time reading the question and trying to figure out what it is about, based on the title. Sorry about the buffalo-mistake. That was stupid. DirkvdM 07:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Dislike of nudity

Why is nudity such a social taboo throughout most of the world? What is it about the human body that people fundamentally don't like? I wear clothes like most other people because it's the social norm, clothes look good too, and it keeps me warm -- but, why are people so hostile towards eg nude images? --Lightspeaker 00:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The articles on nudity and indecent exposure explore that topic. I'm with you, I find it abhorrent that the so called conservatives find images of war and murder more socially acceptable then love and nudity. Vespine 00:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I notice that this is your first post ever as Lightspeaker. Please excuse me if I doubt the sincerity of your question. If you indeed have contributed to this project with a different identity (username) then please let us know so that we can make some judgment as to your sincerity. The nature of your question does not seek a factual answer so much as to encourage controversy. That kind of inquiry is not welcomed at this RD, we are doing our best to answer factual questions and not to encourage controversial dialogue. Get it? --hydnjo talk 00:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hardly a reason to discourage them from starting, and even though it could be a controversial subject, it does seem like a valid question. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 00:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It seems like every day someone is calling for deleting a question because it borders on trolling. I firmly believe they should only be deleted in extremely rare circumstances. The questioner might want anonymity and questions that seem to be trolling may have a genuine lack of knowledge behind them. -THB 00:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Fine. Please have a go at answering the question then. --hydnjo talk 00:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but although I realised this is a controversial subject (enough that I did get a different account), I did try to ask as best I could. I will try to rephrase the question more simply: what are the main reasons a majority of cultures throughout the world find nudity taboo, and what is it about nakedness they specifically dislike?

Is this more acceptable? Maybe I tried to explain myself too much before. Also, thanks for the links, the first one in particular had some pertinent stuff :) --Lightspeaker 01:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to us and I apologize for my harsh commentary above. I have no quarrel with legitimate inquiry. --hydnjo talk 01:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Probably because of its sexual connotations. Cbrown1023 01:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No, not at all. The question Why is nudity such a social taboo throughout most of the world? is a subject of debate and not a question that could be responded to with a factual reply. I agree that the debate would be fascinating and lengthy but such questions are in the category of debate rather than exactness or factualness. --hydnjo talk 01:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I was referring to his question, not your comment. Cbrown1023 01:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I wish to make it clear that User:Lightspeaker is of course not me! I would have chosen a completely different name from my own 8-)--Light current 01:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Why Lc! Why would you think that any newcomer with ...light... in its name would be thought to be you, no matter how clever or witty? --hydnjo talk 01:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Mystery shopper (I havent been spotted yet!) 8-)--Light current 01:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Possibly (guessing here) because the people in power are often fat old and ugly and so acquisition of fine clothes was prized over natural talents like attractive naked bodies. Perhaps when we are ruled by hollywood celebrities will will achieve naked utopia. meltBanana 01:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Some universal reasons:

• Because your level of sexual arousal becomes apparent, especially for males, if naked. It would be equivalent to saying "I'd like to have sex with your wife" or "I'd like to have sex with you" whenever your excitement to meet a husband and wife seems rather excessive.

• Because of hygiene concerns, especially diarrhea and menstruation.

Note that those reasons only concern covering the genitals and anus, they don't apply to toplessness, showing ankles, or anything else considered "nudity" for purely cultural reasons. Also, the first reason doesn't apply to young children, so public nudity in that age range (like baby butts) is sometimes considered more acceptable. Hygiene, of course, is a concern at any age (except menstruation). StuRat 04:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

"If God had meant for us to be nudists, we all would have been born buck naked." StuRat 04:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Haha:) I like it! Yes, you can explain your universal reason to the thousands of nudists that get by quite happily without clothes. Nudity as taboo is purely a phenomenon of society, it has nothing to do with hygiene or arousal, for one, male arousal is a result of the taboo, remove the taboo and the arousal is removed too, or do you think the Kalahari bushmen constantly walk around with erections because their women go about topless?Vespine 04:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No, the problem is that men, and especially teenage boys, get erections all the time. When they are hidden, it's not a problem, but when exposed, it creates a situation. For this reason, and for hygiene, adults almost always have their crotches covered, in all societies. As I said, those reason do NOT apply to toplessness, that is a purely social taboo. As for the hygiene issue, primitive societies with total nudism didn't know about how diseases spread, so didn't worry much about hygiene. As a result, they had much higher death rates, particularly among children. StuRat 04:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm thats interesting about the childrens death rates. IDKT. Do you have any refs?--Light current 01:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

My guess is that it is evolutionary and that one of the main things that separate humans from animals is their ability to refrain from sex and make mroe conscious decisions about reproduction. To that end, nudity works against that discipline and societies that didn't refrain died out through natural selection. Whence the social taboo is s surival mechanism. --Tbeatty 05:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree. Many other animals are amazingly picky about mates, even without clothes. StuRat 08:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't find that a very convincing explanation. In contexts where nudity is commonplace, it quickly ceases to be a sexual trigger. You may still be turned on by a person, of course, but she'd turn you on in a burqa, if all you ever saw were women in burqas. I remember someone (not an expert, maybe a sci-fi writer, but it was pretty convincing) arguing that clothing serves precisely the opposite purpose -- the fashion cycles of more- and less-revealing clothes, he claimed, had the precise scope of keeping sexual interest high by stimulating the imagination. --Trovatore 05:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No, I still don't agree, ok, granted the topless thing, but there are nudist societies where having or seeing an erection is obviously not the end of the world, THAT is also a social taboo. I really don't believe men cover their crotches to hide their erections, and I'm sure they also don't have massive hygiene problems with diarrhoea or menstruation, I do the laundry for myself and my partner and I can't remember ever having to wash blood or faeces from out underclothes.. ahem.. As to conscious decision about reproduction, well, that's arguable, but I really don't think nakedness has anything to do with that. Again, I cite evidence in the thousands of people who participate in nudist societies who manage not to spend the majority of their time copulating as you would suggest they would since they are shamelessly derobed a large amount of the time. Vespine 05:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The hygiene problem may be somewhat reduced by modern technology, but in primitive societies people had a harder time keeping clean (without toilet paper, running water, feminine hygiene products, etc.). With the exception of tampons, the other feminine hygiene products require wearing panties to keep them in place. Also note that sitting on an apparently clean bench another nude person sat on might be enough for you to pick up a parasite egg; it isn't necessary for there to be a big steaming pile or a bloody mess. StuRat 08:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I, for one, am surprised that religion hasn't been mentioned. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all (AFAIK) have taboos with regards to nudity and that covers most people on earth as far as religion goes. Dismas|^(talk) 07:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

But religion typically just reflects the social views of a culture, it rarely changes those views. StuRat 08:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I have no actual data, but it can start like this: people wore clothing for warmth. So after a while clothing became the normal state. And thus not wearing clothing became odd, with all the taboos you refer too.

I'll give you a modern example: shoes. In america if you walk barefoot, you will be looked at oddly. Why? Because most of the time people wear shoes, so not wearing them becomes taboo. So why is it not a universal taboo like clothing is? Because in some contexts (swimming, etc) it's normal to not wear shoes. The resulting taboo 'level' exactly matches how common it is to wear, or not wear shoes. In other countries (or in times past) going barefoot was normal, so no taboo resulted.

You can apply the same reasoning to wearing pajamas outside. Would you be comfortable with that in an office? It's not nudity, but most people would be embarassed, but in the proper context it's fine. In many bath houses in europe people sit nude in mixed company without being embarassed, yet would not dream of doing it in a different context.

Basically what I'm saying is that many taboos are the result of what's usual, and any variation from that eventually becomes taboo.

Ariel. 10:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm ok so its either (or a mix of) sex or social taboo then? Thanks for the info --Lightspeaker 23:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Male nudity will never be generally accepted until women can view a (male) erection without getting scared or offended! --Light current 23:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Also will not be accepted till women can view a man from behind when he bends over! 8-((--Light current 00:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Name of a game

There's a board game I know as fox and geese, but it is quite different to the game described in our article on the subject. Played on the white squares of a chess board, one player has four pieces which move as draughts pieces except that they cannot jump or become kings; the other has one piece which moves as a draughts "king" except that it also cannot jump. Starting from the first rank, the player with one piece (the "fox") attempts to reach the furthest rank. The other player attempts to use the four pieces (the "geese") to put the fox in a position where it is unable to move.

Does anyone else know this game, and if so, does it have another name? thanks, Warofdreams talk 00:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I think I played a variant of this game using a checkerboard and pieces, but I can't remember the name. bibliomaniac15 01:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The game is Fox and Hounds. The objective of the "Hounds" is to trap the Fox; the "Fox," obviously, is attempting to evade the Hounds and reach the other side of the board.

The game is "unfair" in that one side should always win. However, with proper play by the other side, it can be made very difficult. So much so, that I'm not going to tell you which side is which. B00P 07:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I've always known it as Fox and Geese too, but privately thought Fox and Hounds would be a better name... Is there likely to be a source we can use to provide a link from fox and geese to fox and hounds? Skittle 17:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't bother. I'll add a section to Fox games in a day or two. B00P 19:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I've seen the board game before, and I think it's called Hounds and Hare. NeonMerlin 20:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! If no-one else get there first, I'll try writing something on it. Warofdreams talk 04:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Have done so (incl Fox and Hounds redirect) as threatened promised. B00P 19:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Red turning blue

Moved to WP:HD#Red turning blue by hydnjo talk 03:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• Clearly a question about using WP and not a question for the RD. hydnjo talk 03:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
• Yes you are quite right! Mea culpa! Sorry!--Light current 03:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Glad you explained it, I was thinking it was about red US states (Republican) voting blue (Democrat) in the last election. StuRat 03:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

...and I was thinking it was something to do with acids, alkalis, and litmus paper! Grutness...wha? 05:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

...and I was thinking it was to do with Red vs. Blue! Skittle 17:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia and UAE country info articles contradict

UAE article says: Many churches are present in the UAE, as all other Muslim countries, being tolerant of other religions. Compare this with the Saudi Arabia view of christianity.

Dunno how to fix... Thought leave it with someone with more time then myself to sort out! Cheers

Saudi Arabia isn't in the UAE. --Wooty Woot? contribs 02:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You would be best to ask that on the talk pages of the articles. That way editors that are invested in those articles can address your concern or help you fix it. --Justanother 03:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The Middle East Portal might also be a good place to reconcile this. Anchoress 03:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I suspect the misunderstanding is that the governments are tolerant of other religions (as burning Christians alive likely wouldn't help them out in international relations). On the other hand, substantial portions of the population are dedicated to eradicating Christianity. Of course, many Sunni are also dedicated to eradicating the Shia and vice-versa, so this should be portrayed as a general attitude of religious intolerance, not just intolerance against Christianity. But, again, remember that most governments don't participate in overt oppression, but prefer to keep it as subtle as possible, at least until they get enough military and political power so they no longer have to worry about world opinion. StuRat 03:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

StuRat, you say that "substantial portions of the population (of Muslim countries) are dedicated to eradicating Christianity". Do you know this for a fact ? What evidence do you have for this assertion ? Gandalf61 11:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is a poll result from the US, where presumably more moderate Muslims live than in many Islamic nations [5]:

In answer to the question, "If you learned about a plot by Muslims to attack targets inside America, would you tell law enforcement authorities," 234 said yes, but 39 said no, and 34 were undecided.

StuRat 11:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Is that your only evidence for your assertion ? That poll states that it is non-scientific [6]; it sampled delegates at the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North Amrerica who visited a particular booth; and it has no questions about the attitude of Muslims to Christianity. How does a non-scientific poll of self-selected Muslim activists in the US allow you to draw widespread conclusions about the attitude of average people in different countries to a completely different question ? Gandalf61 12:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

No, that's just one of many polls. However, scientific polls are rare in the Muslim world. Here's a poll on firing rockets into Israel (so about murdering Jews, not Christians, but still the same general idea):

"Some 42.4% of the respondents rejected firing rockets at Israeli targets from the Gaza Strip, and nearly the same number said it damaged the Palestinian cause." (So, some 57.6% do not reject firing rockets at Israeli civilians.)

Do you have a poll that shows 99.9% of Muslims worldwide oppose terrorism ? StuRat 19:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

StuRat, if 42.4% of respondents to some poll reject a proposition you cannot conclude that 57.6% of respondents support the proposition - you don't tell us what other responses were available. Could there have been some "don't know"s, for example ? Since you don't give a source for your second poll, we cannot tell. In any case, this poll still does not back up your assertion that "substantial portions of the population (of Muslim countries) are dedicated to eradicating Christianity". As you do not seem to be able to support your extraordinary claim with evidence, I can only conclude that you do not have any. I have no problems with you putting forward your opinion that the majority of Muslims are dedicated to eradicating Christianity (even though I profoundly disagree with it), but please do not present it as if it were a fact. Gandalf61 20:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

crocodiles

Do crocodiles sneeze?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.117.179.3 (talk • contribs) .

This page concerns reptile sneezing and yawning, and as crocodiles are reptiles, I suppose they do sneeze as well. –mysid☎ 08:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you could ask one.martianlostinspace 16:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

If you don't speak crocodilish, just tickle one. –mysid☎ 17:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Crocodiles also sneeze right before they vomit. -THB 22:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Do you speak from personal experience (smile). Hope you were wearing rubber boots! --Justanother 01:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Moving forward with the Metric System

I have always wondered, why do Americans still use the non-metric (avoirdupois?) systems of measurement such as pounds and yards and miles, when the rest of the world has moved on to metric (grams and metres) a long time ago? It is surely easier to perform arithmetic using a decimal based system rather than any other? Why bother to remember how many yards in a mile? At the risk of controversy, surely the technological superpower of our world should move on from such colonialist quagmires? Sandman30s 09:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, that is probably the reason: only a superpower can afford to defy common sense, ignore the rest of the world and engage in colonialist quagmires. Skarioffszky 09:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You may be interested in reading metrication in the United States. It is not true to say that "the rest of the world moved on to metric a long time ago". e.g. you won't find any roadsigns in the UK marked in kilometres.--Shantavira 09:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

But all of the scientific community use metric (and everything else, miles is the only non metric unit we use, everythings in kilos, litres and metres otherwise, were definately not imperial). And it makes sense, it removes lots of nasty constants. Plus when NASA got lent some data for one of their probes they left in km, instead of converting to miles which they curiously do everything in, a crashed it into mars. So really its in their intrests aswell. Philc _T^E_C^I 22:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It's called social inertia. People tend to stick with what they are already doing. ☢ Ҡi∊ff⌇↯ 10:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It's kind of off the subject and I'll be accused of picking nits but most Americans who actually know how long a mile is, don't think of it in yards. We think of it as 5,280 ft. Dismas|^(talk) 10:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes "feet" - I should have said 'caveman quagmires' - has a better ring to it :) Sandman30s 11:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to get corrected on that 'rest of the world' statement - wanted to know which other backward countries there are - apparently this is rife in the "west" :) Sandman30s 11:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It might also be a matter of nationalistic pride. The USAns are obsessed with the idea of living in a free country, so they resist adaption of international standards for the sheer sake of resistance. "You will only take our miles and pounds away when you pry them from our cold, dead fingers". JIP | Talk 12:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

What? It has almost nothing to do with nationalism, and everything to do with the system Americans were raised in. Since our parents learned feet and ounces, from a young age we are socialized into feet and ounces. Although we learn the wonders of the metric system in school, we don't have an intuitive sense for the units. If you as someone raised in the American Standard how long a foot is, they have qualitative and quantitative answers to estimate it - our thumbs are "about an inch" to the first knuckle, a yard or 100 yards can be estimated by a football field, a quarter mile is the distance between two bus stops. Switching over to metric isn't as easy as changing the labels on products. Now the distance between bus stops is 0.402 kilometers? Our thumb is 2.54 centimeters to the first knuckle? The 49ers have the ball on 3rd and 9.144? This is why metrification is difficult. sthomson 16:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Those figures you give appear to have false precision. This might also be a factor why Americans are so reluctant to change to metric - they fear that when they do, they must start measuring everything with greater precision than they are used to. People will have to start carrying measuring tape to find how far a bus stop is from their home, and have to use a letter scale, an eyedropper and tweezers to get the correct ingredients for cooking a meal. This perceived fear is false, as no such increased precision is required or expected. (Perhaps this is also a result of the total lack of intuition about metric measurements.) I would state the measurements you gave above as "400 metres", "2.5 centimetres" and "9.1". Even though your maths teacher says 1 foot is 304.88 mm, you don't have to carry a measuring tape and a magnifying glass when measuring how far you walk. Instead, you can use an approximation that 1 foot is 30 cm. It's what we Europeans do. JIP | Talk 16:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. We in South Africa converted way back in 1961 along with our British currency, and people adapted quickly. Sure my parents still talk in the old way such as "I am 6 feet tall", but in other ways they have adapted, such as knowing a ruler is 30 cm or using a 5 metre measuring tape and never using the opposite side which shows inches. Using metric we have learned to either approximate ("I am about 1.8m tall") or use precision when needed. Now the only thing left is to convert time to use base 10 instead of 6... just kidding! Sandman30s 08:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right - my attempt at humor (by leaving in too many decimal places!) obscured the point I was trying to make, which is explained more clearly below. Thanks for responding! sthomson 17:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

That says a lot, as does the Metrication article. Good to know there is an effort, which like any change has a certain amount of resistance. Thanks people. Sandman30s 12:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Metrication is allegeldy not complete in three countries, the US, Liberia and Myanmar/Burma. I think Liberia and Myanmar also use some kind of imperial/avoirdupuis system, but the articles on the countries don't tell... 惑乱 分からん 14:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Liberia uses the American system. Myanmar uses its own system. Also, there are many countries where the government is totally metrified but the people still use whatever "old" system they used before metric came along. In some countries the level of metrication among the populace varies wildly from region to region. Quebec is much more metrified, for instance, than British Columbia. --Charlene 16:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Where can I find more info about the Myanmar system? 惑乱 分からん 17:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

And if you American-types ever go Metric (about the time when the British drive on God's side of the road), then don't get suckered into 'whole degree' Celsius thermostats! They stink! You're always too hot or too cold! --Zeizmic 18:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Who would wnat to drive on the right side of the road, it's wrong and wierd! Are all bus stops in America the same distance apart? How is that possible or practical? Englishnerd 18:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Many American cities are built on a grid plan with every road intersection spaced a certain number of yards from the previous one. The house numbering will go up by 100 within that distance. Strange to English eyes, but there we go. Marnanel 20:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC) (English living in the US)

Boy, the government really tried to force a conversion to metric in the 1970s and I was all for it. I still carry in my wallet a little plastic metric conversion card from the U.S. Department of Commerce that I got in 1976. And then one day they switched all the speed limit signs back to mph... -THB 22:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Did government give a reason why? Sandman30s 08:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

sthomson's post about being socialized into feet and ounces and not having an intuitive sense for the units etc, is true for any country that decides to change from one system to another. It does take a while for those alive during the transition to change their mind set. But hundreds of countries have changed without a negative impact on life. Australia did it in stages (currency 1966, weights and measures by the end of the 80s), and we didn't really blink an eyelid. The issue is that the USA is now lagging behind the rest of the world; they all did it and now the USA is out of step. JackofOz 23:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

So very true. Being from austria I naturally grew up with the metric system. Upon starting to play Warhammer 40k which only uses inches and feet I had a hard time measuring exact distances in the game with the hand and/or eye. However after a while playing I was able to measure 6" almost exactly with my eyesight and fingerspan. It is really just a matter of adaptation. Aetherfukz 00:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me give my two cents as an American. I use feet, pounds, ounces and degrees Fahrenheit. I learned the metric system in school. (in the early 80s, all the math word problems were in metric -- if Johnny has 9 kilograms of apples, etc.) I do not feel that my life suffers in one bit because I don't use the metric system. I know that metric has advantages in some ways, like how 1 liter of water is 1 kg., and of course I know all about the powers of 10 thing. When the metric system is used, such as for big bottles of soda or in science, I have no problem with it. But when I think about how far something is, I think of feet. When I think about how heavy it is, I think in pounds. This is how things have been measured my whole life, and in my parents' life, and their parents' life, and so on. Trying to change it would take a tremendous amount of effort and likely coercion, as we found in the 70s. So why should we do it? Because people in Malawi and Mozambique and Thailand use the metric system? Good for them. But that doesn't mean we should go along with them. We Americans are perfectly happy using the system we've used for 200 years, and unless you can show me that my life somehow suffers because of it, I don't plan on changing. -- Mwalcoff 00:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

You mention Malawi and Mozambique and Thailand, but failed to mention Mexico and Canada, or Japan, Germany, France, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Malaysia, Indonesia, China, India, Israel, Russia .......... If you lived in isolation from these countries, maybe it wouldn't matter a jot what they do. But you trade with these countries, you provide aid to them, you have diplomatic relations with them, and so on. You sometimes even invade them. There will inevitably come a time when staying with the imperial system just doesn't serve your interests any more. If you're going to have to bite the bullet before too long, why wait? Get it over and done with sooner rather than later. JackofOz 00:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, the military's been using metric for decades (they even have their own word for a kilometer -- a "klick"). Some consumer products, such as soda, are already measured in metric; more may be as globalization continues. But that's happening voluntarily. There's no reason to try to force people to use one system or the other. -- Mwalcoff 01:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

There is a reason to force people to use one system or another; it allows consumers to make reasonable comparisons between what people are offering, it avoids cheating and makes sure things are compatible with each other. That last point is probably a driving force in itself for people to choose to use a set system, but in the mean time you can get all sorts of confusion. The first is a simple principle of consumer protection; if I can use any system I want, I can tell you apples are 30p a pound, where 'pound' is in fact short for 'Skittle-pound' being equal to 12 ounces. Or I can sell you things in 'moog' measures, and you won't be able to work out if I'm selling cheaper than my competitor or not. Skittle 01:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to individual consumers, not companies. Obviously, there has to be a standard set of weights and measures for consumer protection. At the moment, consumer goods must show their contents in American measurements. Thus, a "2 liter" of soda will say "67.6 ounces" on it somewhere. This is to keep companies from taking advantage of consumers' ignorance of the metric system. (Several decades ago, a cigarette company advertised, "It's a millimeter longer than the others," not telling people a millimeter is 1-25th of an inch.) Eventually, the government will allow companies to use only metric. -- Mwalcoff 02:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

"Metrication"? Metrication is not an American English word. Try "metrification". Who says "metricate"? It's "metrify". User:Zoe|(talk) 03:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, "metrication" is correct. Wikipedia even has Category:Metrication. -THB 04:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Whether it is nationalism or a system in which you grew up, surely this is *against* independance and freedom. You celebrate 4 July with such fervour, yet this is for independance from British rule. So why still adopt the imperial British system of weights and measures? Scientists have adapted. Athletes have adapted. Americans should move forward with metrication as a symbol of globalization and willingness to be part of a world community. Sandman30s 08:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought the UK was making more progress in metrification than the USA? Or am I mistaken? JIP | Talk 08:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Uh, yes, possibly because of all the trade with the rest of the EU. 惑乱 分からん 13:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

At the farmer's market, I saw some nice apples so I bought a half bushel of them. That amounted to two 1 peck bags. The farmer grows them on his 640 acre farm, which is exactly one square mile. He planted a new varity of apples on a one acre plot of ground is exactly 160 poles square, where the pole is 16.5 feet, the length of an ox goad. His farm is one section of a 6 mile square township laid out as part of the Public Land Survey System which laid out most of the US other than the original colonies and some southern states, starting around 1800. In the plains states, where hills and mountains are not a problem, an aerial view shows roads laid out in a grid exactly 1 mile apart,[7] so it is easy to give directions (go 3 miles west, then 2 miles north, then it is the first place on the left). Edison 16:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Another factor is that the USA is a) REALLY REALLY big, land-area wise and b) somewhat governed by the preferences of individual states (b is often necessitated by a). The US government can say, "Hey guys, let's all switch to metric! Yay!" but a lot of the funding for this metrification is going to come from state and local budgets. Also, the administration on every level, from federal to local, changes on a regular basis. It may be important to Congress A that the US fall in line with our allies, but Congress B may be more isolationist, or more concerned with health care or foreign policy, so they will end support for metrification. Finally, I am an engineer who works in both metric and "standard" units. I really don't see the US's continued use of standard units to be that big of a problem. As the world becomes more "glo-local", the US will eventually fall in line. sthomson 17:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Why is it that converting between units is done so sloppily? I am always amazed when I look at a bottle of coke et cetera, and it say, per 100mL (theses are made up, please don't correct them!) 500Kcal; 103J, per 10 mL serving 50 Kcal; 9.7J, how does that work?! Eŋlishnerd(Suggestion?|wanna chat?) 21:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Who joked that some drug dealer got fined because he was selling weed by the ounce? Keria 22:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

As an American, I can convert easily (and, in fact, often catch myself thinking in metric), but I would hate to convert wholly. Basically, it's traditional - and we don't have THAT much 'technical' collaboration with other countries that change is needed. The Space Station works fine! Plus, it's quirkier and therefore more interesting. 24.167.64.167 23:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)Vultur

Law

"Law is a command in the hand of the mighty people in a state." If you agree, make a debate on it. If you disagree, explain?

When is it due? Skarioffszky 12:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You wiil need to define Law, Law in regard to a command and Law in regard to the state. You will need to define mighty people in the state. The question asked seems to be wether Law serves the "people" or if it is just a tool at the disposal of the "mighty people". Have a good time finding the arguments. The best way to go about would be to present your arguments for each side (serves the ppl vs. serves the mighty) then drawing your own nuanced conclusions Keria 13:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Do your own homework. We can help, but please don't give someone a whole question. For example, you could ask if your definition of "law" is correct, for example. Would here help? http://www.coursework4you.co.uk/ martianlostinspace 16:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

This question reminds me of a debate between Sir Thomas More and Will Roper, his son-in-law, in Robert Bolt's play, A Man for All Seasons. I'm having to pull this up from deep memory, so please forgive me for any misquotation.

ROPER. Now you give the Devil benefit of law!

MOORE. Yes, what would you do? Cut a road through the law to get to the Devil?

ROPER. Yes, I'd cut down every law in England.

MOORE. And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned on you, where would you hide, Roper, all the laws being flat? This country is planted with laws from coast to coast, man's laws, not God's; and if you cut them down, and you are just the man to do it, do you really think that you could stand upright in the wind that would blow then? Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety's sake. Clio the Muse 00:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place to "make debates". User:Zoe|(talk) 03:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not 'making debate', for the love of God. It's a quoted extract from a work of literature, relevant to the point under examination. If you are unable to understand this it would be best for your own self-esteem simply to remain silent. Clio the Muse 06:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Clio, if you look at the OP, Zoe is responding to her/his request to 'make a debate' on the topic. Please assume good faith of your fellow editors. Anchoress 06:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for that clarification, Anchoress. My apologies, Zoe, for the misunderstanding. In my own defence I should add I have seen some very poor quality editorial comments in the brief time I have been here. But on this occasion I am pleased to confess my error. Clio the Muse 07:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, if you look at the level of indents (correct in this case) you will see that Zoes comment is indeed addressed to the OP. Whereas mine and Anchoresss are addressed to you 8-)--Light current 06:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Shares

If I bought shares of a company in one country can I sell them in another thus not paying exchange fees? ps. I don't know much about how it actually works so please pardon my ignorance Keria 12:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

A share on a company is traded on a specific stock exchange; you can only buy and sell it at that exchange (and that exchange is located in only one county, and deals in only one currency). So no. A few companies are traded in multiple exchanges, but they issue different stock into those different markets, so you still have to go back to the same exchange to sell a given share. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 14:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course. That makes sense. Thank you. Keria 14:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Exchange fees are not your main concern - taxes are. You need to speak to an accountant before you do this. Also, not all stocks are publicly traded; privately traded stocks (those in companies not on the stock exchange - that covers ca. 99% of companies) may have their own rules. Some can be traded simply by signing a contract with a purchaser; others have to be redeemed by the company. Check with a lawyer. --Charlene 16:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you are, but in the U.S. many foreign companies trade as ADRs so it wouldn't work. -THB 21:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

1 Chronicles 21

_Why_ is it a sin to take a census of Israel? 64.198.112.210 17:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It has been discussed here and here. –mysid☎ 17:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaqi in his bible commentary (Exodus 30:12) explains based on earlier sources that it is forbidden to count the Jewish people individually and that they can only be counted by everyone giving a half-shekel and the counting the amount received. Jon513 17:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

As both methods will give the exact same result in the same number of steps, I do not know how one can be a sin and the other not. But then by using the Rabbi's method, the census taker ends up quite a lot richer. =) JIP | Talk 18:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The method was used for fund raising for public temple services. The advantage of not counting people directly is that you don't objectify people by assigning them a number. Jon513 19:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

But I bet there are poor people in Israel who don't have a half-shekel (however much or little that is in modern currency) to spare. NeonMerlin 20:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Half a shekel is about a dime. --Wooty Woot? contribs 00:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

One opinion in the Talmud is that it is illegal to literally count all the Israelites because the book of Hosea says "the number of the children of Israel was like the sands of the sea, which can’t be measured." In other words, the Bible says you can't count all the Israelites, so don't try. [8] -- Mwalcoff 00:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Then I think the past tense "was" is important, meaning the population exceeded the counting ability of the institutions of its day. It wasn't possible way back when, but it may be now. And even if you change that "was" to an "is," I think this is one of those types of statements in the Bible that can go out of date. NeonMerlin 01:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if this is relevant to current Israeli politics but Edwin Black makes the argument that without IBM census machines (and a previously-created German census) the Nazis would have had an impossible time trying to round up all of the Jews in Germany. I never thought to connect that with this sort of Talmudic approach before, myself, but I could see how one could make the connection. --24.147.86.187 01:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Specialized Programs

I am asked to find "Specialized Programs" for the university Cornell. Can anyone direct me to a site with a list of all the specialized programs of Cornell University? Thanks. Hustle 18:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Try this page where the second sentence reads "They provide a means for faculty and staff to share expensive, specialized research facilities and equipment". The link at the bottom leads to the lists. Seejyb 22:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

So what is a specialized program? Jamesino 23:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Website sisterhood

dmoz.org lists Wikipedia among its sister sites, but Wikipedia doesn't list dmoz, or any of the others dmoz claims, among its sisters. Am I to conclude that website sisterhood is non-commutative and non-transitive, or are Wikipedia and dmoz using different definitions of "sister site?" NeonMerlin 20:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It is easy to see how dmoz and WP differ. dmoz is owned by Netscape. Who owns WP ? (no cabal). -- DLL ^{.. T} 21:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Where "Netscape" means "Time Warner" these days. Marnanel 21:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you shoot us the link to the "sisterhood" claim so we know what you are refering to? --Justanother 00:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It appears on the inside pages of the directory, such as http://dmoz.org/Reference/. NeonMerlin 00:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, that is weird, isn't it? I don't see dmoz on Wikipedia:Sister projects. --Justanother 01:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Left This is funny; dmoz as the evil stepsister. --Justanother 01:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Run this search. Needs a bit of culling but it seems the sisterhood is one-sided and self-declared. --Justanother 01:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I guess under that logic you are my brother editor. Can I hold $20, bro? --Justanother 01:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Author/artist's share of book/CD sales

How much of the price of a book or CD typically goes to the author or artist, if it's published in the U.S. by a major publisher/label and I buy it in Canada? NeonMerlin 20:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

New or used? -THB 21:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It would depend on the contract negotiated, but royalties on books generally amount to about 8% of the cover price. That's what I get anyway! Clio the Muse 00:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

New. NeonMerlin 01:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Self-published books (vanity publisher) can pay much, much more. -THB 04:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hacksaw blade

Thank you to everyone for help with the hacksaw blades/cutting the metal sofa frame in half issue. It took a couple of hours, and I got a blister, but I now have two manageable halves instead of a giant metal frame. One of the oval pipes actually had a solid 5/8" rod inside of it. I can barely lift each half, but now they'll fit in the elevator. Thanks again. -THB 21:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

How are you going to put it back together? X [Mac Davis] (DESK|How's my driving?) 05:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It's scrap metal now! -THB 07:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. It looks like so-fa so good, but not much further! --Light current 05:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now a successful hacker. Putting a solid rod in the center of a tubular structural member does not make a lot of sense. It would have been stronger if heaver tubing had been used instead. Oh, well. Edison 15:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

General body info

What is the difference between high biological value protiens and low biological value protiens? I can't make any sense of our article on Biological Value, so I have no idea. Also, why exactly do the dietary requirements of male and femals differ? Is it something to do with body weight? And how it is normally seen that men are more active than women? Cheers. 81.131.60.129 23:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, this is new to me but after looking at the article: Apparently some proteins are better assimilated by the body than others, i.e. a greater percentage of some proteins is used by the body for cell building and repair vs. passing through the body and being excreted. The way they determine the BV is by looking at nitrogen; all proteins contain nitrogen so if you can track how much goes in vs how much comes out then you can figure how much of the protein was used by the body. I would not want to be the chemist. --Justanother 23:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. NeonMerlin 01:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Taxes

If I am an American citizen who filed taxes already for 2005 and recieved a refund from my w-2s. But because of a ss # error in a general contractor job. I never reported income on a 1099 for the wages paid. But then filled out a w-9 for the employer to give them the right ss #. How do I go about paying those taxes... Plain and simple. I didnt file for a general contracting job because they had the wrong social security number, but now the IRS has the right info. I am sure it is only a matter of time before I get a letter. Will they ever find out? How can I fix this problem and get them their money? Can I still write off any of it? And no... Going to the irs website is even more confusing! THANKS!

You should be able to file an amended return and pay any taxes due then wait and see if they assess interest and penalties. --Justanother 02:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Much better to go ahead and calculate and pay the interest so it won't keep accumulating at a high rate. They will definitely want the interest, at least. (This is on the Federal level. Although the IRS communicates things like this to states, some states are inconsistent with gettting their $$$.) -THB 04:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Consult a tax preparer, they can tell you what form to use. RJFJR 14:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It's a 1040X. See: IRS Topic 308:Amended Returns. -THB 15:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Assuming you really were a contractor under the IRS definitions, you may deduct or depreciate your expenses on 1040 Schedule C. (There are some options which could only be taken on an original return, or an amended return filed within 6 months of the original due date, but there aren't many.) You will also need to get a schedule SE (if your net income from the contracting job exceeds $400/0.9375 ~ $433), and fresh copies of all schedules which might be affected by changes in your gross, adjusted gross, or taxable income. You then file the resulted returns on a 1040X. If you live or work in a state which has a state income tax, you will also have to file the corresponding state returns. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 19:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

mountain range

what is the name of the mountain range that surrounds the valley of Las Vegas Nevada? thank you. Anne Wilson

Could be one of these! [9]--Light current 01:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The Spring Mountains are to the west. -THB 04:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Las Vegas is located in the Las Vegas Valley, a desert surrounded by the Spring Mountains and the Sierra Nevada.[10]  --Lambiam^Talk 08:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Second Life

What is it and can you kill people in it?

Second Life is a "privately owned, partly subscription-based 3-D virtual world". Unsure of second question. Jpeob 03:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe that you can die/be killed if your health bar goes low enough, but then you just respawn in your house. Skittle 03:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• Wonders about the homeless people...- Mgm|^(talk) 09:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

• • I think, like in the Wild West, everyone gets a plot of land when they start. It just isn't necessarily very nice. Skittle 15:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Editing a Wiki

Dear Sirs, I am enrolled in a graduate class at the University of SC in Columbia, SC. Our class has a "classwiki" with such information as the syllabus, assignments, notes, etc. One of my assignments for the semester was to reorganize the Class Wiki so that it would be easier to use and allow room for growth. There are several things I suggested doing to the page that I don't know if they are possible or not. They are as follows:

• Putting links in a two-column format. (I have looked and looked and tried to play around w/ doing this, but I can’t figure it out. Maybe it’s not possible?)
• I think adding some color would be good if possible. It looks a little dull. I know that doesn’t matter, but aesthetics are important up to a point right?
• How about a scrolling message bar at the top for important announcements, like our upcoming online meeting for example?

Thanks for any info you can give me.

Sincerely, Mary Catherine Carroll Lexington, SC

Well, this wiki can be coded in standard HTML in addition to its own markup language. Take some lessons in HTML and go from there. --Justanother 03:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Why do you assume that all of us here are "sirs"? User:Zoe|(talk) 03:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Everybody on the internet is assumed to be a man, silly. X [Mac Davis] (DESK|How's my driving?) 05:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog.  --Lambiam^Talk 08:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

As we in /b/ like to say, "there are no womenz on teh internets". --Wooty Woot? contribs 05:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Spelling. Probably meant to say Dears Curs 8-)--Light current 05:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

To try and answer your questions, for the first, see Help:Tables. Many articles here have columns in them, e.g. List of people in Playboy 2000-present. Color is possible using standard HTML markup. I'm not sure if there's any wiki code for colors. And depending on your wiki software, blinking or scrolling text may be disabled. I know it is here and thus I'm not sure how you would go about using it on your wiki. Dismas|^(talk) 06:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

A scrolling banner could be realized within the limits imposed here as an animated gif.  --Lambiam^Talk 08:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Animated GIFs are hard to update. In any case one should generally not use a scrolling banner — they are cheesy, hard to read, and generally ineffective at getting attention. With a Wiki it is better to use a box with a strong text color, like the one a user sees when they have messages on their talk page. --24.147.86.187 15:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The Nutcracker

How tall does the Christmas Tree grow in the Grand Rapids Ballet's version of "The Nutcracker"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.11.115.97 (talk • contribs) .

Ask them: contact info. -THB 15:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

November 21

Custom username styling in Wikipedia

I notice that in Talk pages such as this, some users have their usernames styled differently to others (eg using colours / borders / talk and contrib links etc) I've tried looking for information on how to do this but to no avail. Can someone point me to an article about how to do it? Sp0ng 12:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Check out WP:SIG and WP:SIGHELP. It also helps to look at the markup that other folk use. People copy from each other quite freely. --Shantavira 12:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Also look at Help:Wikitext examples for details of markup. Don't forget to ensure your user name remains clearly legible.--Shantavira 12:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

How do they do it?

Do they cut and paste their signature every time? -THB 15:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

No, you just paste the HTML code into the Signature field of your user profile, and check the Raw Signature box. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Nope. Although you should read the links too, the short answer is that it replaces our ~~~~ and is set in my preferences. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 15:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Aah, thanks. -THB 16:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Fashion Styling

It is strange to find that though Fashion Styling is a major course in Fashion institutes and it is major field in fashion industry it is no where mentioned in wikipedia, google or any such type of search engines. I would like to know about Fashion Styling - 1)Qualification 2)Requirement 3)Career/Future 4)Limitations 5)Problems in this field 6)Impact and more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mini jethwa (talk • contribs)

I don't know about no hits on google I found lots for both "Fashion Styling", and "Fashion Stylist" and there was an article on wikipedia but it has now gone [11] meltBanana 21:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Bomb

Rigoberto Alpizar

Is it actually illegal to shout bomb on an airplane or to shout fire in a crowded area or other such things? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.200.24 (talk • contribs)

Depending on where you live it can be. Such things can cause a panic which can cause bodily harm to others. See Shouting fire in a crowded theater, Imminent lawless action, and Solicitation. Weregerbil 16:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The last guy who shouted "bomb" on an airplane in Miami was instantly shot and killed. -THB 16:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Not instantly at all. Read the story. alteripse 17:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

"Conflicting reports put the number of shots between 3 and 6." People are so messed up under stress that they can't even remember that. X [Mac Davis] (DESK|How's my driving?) 17:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I only hope "shout" is the operative word there. I'd hate to ask a fellow passenger "so is it true we're not allowed to say 'bomb 'on this airplane?" only to be instantly killed by security forces. JIP | Talk 18:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Cost of current wars

According to USA Today, Iraq, Afghanistan and the war on terror have collectively cost $536 billion (and the Pentagon is asking for another $127 billion), compared to $3.6 trillion (adjusted for inflation) for all of World War II. How can these relatively short and small wars already cost 1/7 what was spent on a global war involving millions of Americans? Is it higher wages for volunteer vs. drafted soldiers? Expensive high tech weapons? Clarityfiend 17:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It's probably all the tech we're using. It's also funny that we're fighting a war that is looking for the least number of enemy casualties, so that costs more money to us. X [Mac Davis] (DESK|How's my driving?) 17:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Ummm .. do you perhaps mean "looking for the least number of civilian casualties" ? Gandalf61 17:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm assuming they adjusted for inflation? -THB 17:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

German cities were larger than Afghan villages. It costs more money to bomb them.Mr.K. 21:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)