Marco polo (talk | contribs) |
→Are Liam Fox and Adam Werritty having a gay relationship?: BLP violation |
||
Line 201: | Line 201: | ||
:Our article on [[nicotine#Psychoactive effects]] touches on possible (short-term) benefits to concentration and memory, along with a discussion of other psychological effects. [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades]]([[User_talk:TenOfAllTrades|talk]]) 14:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
:Our article on [[nicotine#Psychoactive effects]] touches on possible (short-term) benefits to concentration and memory, along with a discussion of other psychological effects. [[User:TenOfAllTrades|TenOfAllTrades]]([[User_talk:TenOfAllTrades|talk]]) 14:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Are Liam Fox and Adam Werritty having a gay relationship? == |
|||
Are Liam Fox and Adam Werritty having a gay relationship? A lot of newspaper reports seem to allude to this without saying so. -- [[User:Q Chris|Q Chris]] ([[User talk:Q Chris|talk]]) 08:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:If the newspapers aren't telling us, then we don't have a reliable source, so you're asking for pure speculation. We don't really do that here, especially on matters of [[WP:BLP| the personal lives of living persons]]. Wikipedia doesn't like being sued. [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 08:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm not sure but I think our privacy policy requires even this topic to be deleted. [[User:Dodger67|Roger]] ([[User talk:Dodger67|talk]]) 08:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::I don't think so, so long as this doesn't get out of hand. [[The First Post]] has [http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/85660,news-comment,news-politics,why-liam-fox-is-dogged-by-gay-insinuations- this article], for example. There's also [http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-134.html/ this] article from 5 years ago in [[Pink News]]. <span style="color:#3A3A3A">'''Grandiose''' </span><span style="color:gray">([[User:Grandiose|me]], [[User_talk:Grandiose|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Grandiose|contribs]]) </span> 08:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::"...asking for pure speculation" or asking just to raise the whole thing in a public forum which seeks to further insinuate what may or may not be true. Given the ability of the press to seek out the 'truth' then there would have been some substantial evidence by now. There are more important issues at stake here than their personal relationship. Ministerial judgement, national security, parliamentary probity, funding of Werrity's travel and so on. [[User:Richard Avery|Richard Avery]] ([[User talk:Richard Avery|talk]]) 10:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Agreed. The central question is whether and to what extent Fox has broken the [[Ministerial Code]]. The details of his personal relationship with Werritty are irrelevant. [[User:Gandalf61|Gandalf61]] ([[User talk:Gandalf61|talk]]) 10:24, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::: Yes, it's not where the [[Penis|dick]] goes but where the money went that's the legitimate concern here. --[[User:Elen of the Roads|Elen of the Roads]] ([[User talk:Elen of the Roads|talk]]) 16:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== How is prostitution defined, when it's illegal? == |
== How is prostitution defined, when it's illegal? == |
Revision as of 18:01, 11 October 2011
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Main page: Help searching Wikipedia
How can I get my question answered?
- Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
- Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
- Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
- Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
- Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
- Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.
How do I answer a question?
Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines
- The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
October 6
Chargeable interstate vs. non chargeable interstate
What is the difference between chargeable interstate. Because I-110 in California is chargeable interstate, I-710 is non-chargeable interstate. shows I-110 is add on the highway document system in 1979, does chargeable interstate mean the interstate is allow to be post once government approves it. Because common types of renumbering is dual signing, so in December 1978 I-110 was approve by FHWA, are they allow to do the renumber at 1979. What is non-chargeable interstate. I hear non-chargeable interstate means they aren't allow to sign as interstate unless it is fully upgrade and meets qualifications. I-710 Long Beach Freeway is that sitution.--69.229.6.251 (talk) 01:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- The construction of the Interstate Highway System was funded 90/10 with the states (the states paid 10% and the feds paid 90% of the costs of the building of the roads: see [1]). This funding covered the contruction of a specific 42,000-mile system of roads, these 42,000 miles are the "chargeable" roads in the system. States are allowed to build additional roads into the interstate system, which are numbered and signed as interstates, at their own cost, so long as those roads meet the Interstate Highway standards. These additional roads are funded 100% by the states, and so are considered "non-chargable" interstates. For the driver, there should be absolutely no distinction between them. The difference is just in how the roads were funded; either with federal funds as part of the initial 42000 mile system, or as a later addition to the system funded by the states. See Interstate_Highway_System#Chargeable_and_non-chargeable_Interstate_routes and this external link: [2] which explains the breakdown of chargable and non-chargable routes in California specifically. --Jayron32 02:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
seminar help
Hi As I would like to present seminar about wikipedia in my company, kindly provide me with neecessary documents or previous presentations in order to have a effective presentation and i need these documents/slides for power point presentation for reference. kindly send these to my mail ID. REMOVED — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.68.25 (talk) 11:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, you're not allowed to post email addresses here. All replies are made on the board.
- Perhaps you could tell in more detail what you would like the presentation to be about, and we can point you to relevant information. Wikipedia contains a lot of information on Wikipedia (e.g. history, criticism, benefits, policies, how people can be involved). --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
The Chicago Bears vs Tampa Bay Bucs match at Wembley Stadium is coming up and I've been noticing some publicity for it, notably a radio ad I've heard on Absolute Radio (other radio stations are available, and indeed, may be carrying the same ad).
In the course of the advert, it describes Tampa Bay as "the youngest and most dynamic team" in the NFL. Now, while I know that adverts don't carry the same restrictions as we do over WP:PEACOCK and therefore I'll ignore the "most dynamic" bit, they do have to comply with legal requirements to be truthful and I wondered what was meant by "youngest".
AFAIK, (and I don't know masses about American football - I prefer the type of "football" that's mostly played with feet) a number of franchises have been created in recent years and Tampa Bay have been around as long as I can remember. So either I'm wrong, or they're talking about something else.
So, what do they mean? The average age of the squad maybe?
Cheers in advance --Dweller (talk) 12:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- That would likely refer to the average age of the players, yes. If it was about the team as a franchise, they would probably say "newest", and there are a number of teams newer than the Bucs in any case. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Is it true? And if so, why would the marketers think that was an attractive aspect for fans? Smacks me as a bit desperate/random, even if true, like "most piratey", arrr? --Dweller (talk) 12:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Younger people tend to have more energy maybe? Rookies play harder to make themselves stand out in order to progress their career? Also, just to give you a heads up, Americans would call this contest a game, not a match. Googlemeister (talk) 13:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Interestingly, the advert, done in OTT American accents, calls it a "match-up". Which makes it sound like they're getting married. --Dweller (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, match-up is used some by the media (rarely by people who aren't on tv), but I have never heard them call it a plain match. Googlemeister (talk) 13:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Interestingly, the advert, done in OTT American accents, calls it a "match-up". Which makes it sound like they're getting married. --Dweller (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- A younger team connotes unpredictability, which might make for an exciting game; and if you go and see them now, there is always the chance that in 40 years when you are a graybeard you will be able to fondly and loudly reminisce about the time you saw Jack Smith play American Football before he became a star. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:56, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Younger people tend to have more energy maybe? Rookies play harder to make themselves stand out in order to progress their career? Also, just to give you a heads up, Americans would call this contest a game, not a match. Googlemeister (talk) 13:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Is it true? And if so, why would the marketers think that was an attractive aspect for fans? Smacks me as a bit desperate/random, even if true, like "most piratey", arrr? --Dweller (talk) 12:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- According to ESPN, which is generally considered the expert on this sort of research, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers do indeed currently have the youngest average player age in the NFL. In the NFL, as in most professional sports, younger players tend to be much faster and more agile. However, NFL football places a lot of emphasis on strength, which tends to peak mid-career, as well as tactical knowledge and emotional composure, which tend to peak near the end of one's career. In other words, younger teams tend to be fun to watch, because they'll go flying around the field looking amazing, and then screw it all up by doing something stupid. --M@rēino 14:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- The problem is that the Bucs are a mediocre team without any big-name stars, so in the absence of anything better to say, the advertisement makes them out to be an "up and coming" team. (I'm guessing the Bucs were picked for the game because of their owner's UK connections.) I find it interesting that British people will turn out in such numbers to watch games like San Francisco vs. Denver. I can't imagine a game between, say, Sunderland and West Bromwich Albion selling out the Meadowlands. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- They might, if there were only one soccer game per year in America. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I wouldn't call the Bucs a mediocre team. They are in first in their division, the NFC South, a division that also has the Atlanta Falcons, who have been decent for a few years, the New Orleans Saints, who won the Super Bowl two years ago, and have been a regular playoff team for some years, and the Carolina Panthers, who have the most exciting rookie player (Cam Newton) in some time. The NFC South may be one of the more competitive divisions in the League, the Bucs at 3-1 are doing quite well for themselves. They have a genuinely fun Quarterback to watch, Josh Freeman, who plays a LOT like Ben Rothlisberger, and their running back LeGarrette Blount is a great runner, the Bucs may be one of the only teams this year who has a reliable running game capable of closing out games at the end. They're young and unknown, and they get a few too many penalties, but the have the defense and running game that most of the league lacks this year. This may be their breakout year; I wouldn't be surprised if they went 10-6 this year, and 2012 is likely to be the year this team blows it up; if they can keep this young core of players together they stand to win the Division next year with 12 or 13 wins. The Bears also have a very good running back, Matt Forte, which is good because their QB Jay Cutler is a bit of an enigma. The Bucs-Bears game in London stands to be an excellent old-school football game with a focus on rushing over passing. As far as WHY the Bucs get to play in the UK this year, check out who their owner is. That will answer a LOT of questions for fans of UK (association) football... --Jayron32 23:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Beating Indianapolis and Minnesota doesn't count. And look at who they beat last year: the four teams in the NFC "Worst" division, Carolina twice, the Bengals, the Browns, the Redskins and a Saints team that had clinched a playoff spot and rested some starters. They lost every game they played against a good team that was really trying. Had Tampa played a schedule of average difficulty, they could just as easily have finished 6-10. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I am surprised you think the NFC South is more competitive then the NFC North, when the North has the only 2 undefeated teams, including last years Superbowl champ, Green Bay. Googlemeister (talk) 13:31, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- The North has, IMHO, only two teams capable of making the playoffs this year (GB and Detroit), and their last place team, Minnesota, may be the worst team in all of professional sports, worldwide. They are dreadful. So yes, comparing the top 2 teams from each Division, the North is better, but teams 3 & 4 from the South are better than teams 3 & 4 from the North. The NFC North has a better top end, but the South is more competitive top-to-bottom. --Jayron32 14:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Gotcha, you mean more competitive across the division, I was thinking more competitive to win the Superbowl. My bad. Googlemeister (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- The North has, IMHO, only two teams capable of making the playoffs this year (GB and Detroit), and their last place team, Minnesota, may be the worst team in all of professional sports, worldwide. They are dreadful. So yes, comparing the top 2 teams from each Division, the North is better, but teams 3 & 4 from the South are better than teams 3 & 4 from the North. The NFC North has a better top end, but the South is more competitive top-to-bottom. --Jayron32 14:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I am surprised you think the NFC South is more competitive then the NFC North, when the North has the only 2 undefeated teams, including last years Superbowl champ, Green Bay. Googlemeister (talk) 13:31, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Beating Indianapolis and Minnesota doesn't count. And look at who they beat last year: the four teams in the NFC "Worst" division, Carolina twice, the Bengals, the Browns, the Redskins and a Saints team that had clinched a playoff spot and rested some starters. They lost every game they played against a good team that was really trying. Had Tampa played a schedule of average difficulty, they could just as easily have finished 6-10. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- The problem is that the Bucs are a mediocre team without any big-name stars, so in the absence of anything better to say, the advertisement makes them out to be an "up and coming" team. (I'm guessing the Bucs were picked for the game because of their owner's UK connections.) I find it interesting that British people will turn out in such numbers to watch games like San Francisco vs. Denver. I can't imagine a game between, say, Sunderland and West Bromwich Albion selling out the Meadowlands. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
should these be in humanities?
is lobbying essentially bribing? what would happen if political parties were banned, and people were limited to one time in ofice? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.43.78.36 (talk) 13:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- For the first, see lobbying, if you have not yet done so. For the second, it's asking for opinion, which we do not provide, but I guess it would be a shake-up and thrusting that particular political system a few hundred years into the past. That's an unprofessional opinion of a layman. --Ouro (blah blah) 14:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Several countries do not have political parties: see List of countries without political parties, and others have one-party systems. Even without political parties, political factions tend to form. The article Term limit may also be of some interest to answering the final part of the question. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Lobbying is just advocating for a position. It doesn't involve any transfer of funds, so it cannot be bribery. Campaign contributions, however, which may be offered by lobbyists, could be seen as bribery in some cases. Marco polo (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Well, of course, a standard lobbyist position is, "Vote this way, or our PAC will spend $2 million against you in the next election." Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Lobbying is just advocating for a position. It doesn't involve any transfer of funds, so it cannot be bribery. Campaign contributions, however, which may be offered by lobbyists, could be seen as bribery in some cases. Marco polo (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, our term limit article is really brief and needs a lot of expansion. A standard argument given against term limits (by those who have been elected many times in a row, of course, along with their cronies) is that you end up with a bunch of non-"experts" in Parliament and/or Congress, who don't know the ins-and-outs of what makes good legislation and how to effectively negotiate legislation. The standard counterargument is that the above ignores the fact that in the US, at least, elected officials spend about 90% of their time on the phone talking to rich people in order to raise money to get elected next time; and their support staff are doing most of the work anyway; sounds like a net gain to me. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- In my experience, people are very much in favor of term limits for representatives from districts other than their own. That might be why we don't have a term limits amendment (except for the president). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- As for the oldies vs. the newbies, whether that's good or not depends on which side you take in the recent debt-ceiling crisis, in which the idealist newbies held America hostage for awhile. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, our term limit article is really brief and needs a lot of expansion. A standard argument given against term limits (by those who have been elected many times in a row, of course, along with their cronies) is that you end up with a bunch of non-"experts" in Parliament and/or Congress, who don't know the ins-and-outs of what makes good legislation and how to effectively negotiate legislation. The standard counterargument is that the above ignores the fact that in the US, at least, elected officials spend about 90% of their time on the phone talking to rich people in order to raise money to get elected next time; and their support staff are doing most of the work anyway; sounds like a net gain to me. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
- Arguments against term limits include (1) if a politician isn't standing for re-election what incentive do they have to do a good job? Standing for election keeps politicians honest, and we can always kick bad ones out after a single term (2) a politician approaching the end of a term limit may be a lame duck without the time to implement a long-term plan (3) more tenuously, rather than discouraging corruption it may encourage people to corrupt quicker. On the other hand, incumbency advantage (the tendency for incumbents to be re-elected - see incumbent for details) is one of the imbalances that can be cured by term limits. --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Given the above answers, I can't work out whether the primary task is to advise whether the Humanities desk is the proper place for questions like these, or to answer the 2 questions, or both. The header is supposed to encapsulate the main idea or main point of the post. So, fwiw, yes, this is the correct place for questions like these. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:34, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
October 7
Isn't the climber in the first picture in the article above, obviously taking too much risk? Quest09 (talk) 01:13, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- No. To an experienced rock climber, the boulder in File:Rockclimbing.JPG is about as hard to climb as a staircase. --Carnildo (talk) 01:28, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- (ec) "Too much" is a value judgement. We can't tell how high up he is (well, maybe Carnildo is more familiar with the place) , nor do we know how good a climber he is, nor how familiar he is with the climb he's doing. So we could only speculate. It's somewhat concerning that he's wearing trainers not rock shoes. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- The caption suggests the climber is bouldering, which is described as climbing rocks without ropes and other safety gear, but such climbs rarely go very high, and there may well be a bouldering mat out of view at the base of the rock in case he were to fall. --McDoobAU93 01:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- This activity might (depending on what is underneath the climber) be better described as scrambling. Bouldering suggests a) "a fall will not result in serious injury" and b) that it involves short technical challenges known as "problems". Difficult climbs without protection gear, above safe falling distance (our Bouldering article suggests 7 metres, my definition would be a bit lower), are usually described as soloing which is very risky unless you're very good. However, long climbs that are not difficult enough to need protection gear are called "scrambles". Alansplodge (talk) 23:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- On the subject of risk assesment and climbing, the words of Edward Whymper (1840-1911) are often quoted:
- "Climb if you will, but remember that courage and strength are nought without prudence, and that a momentary negligence may destroy the happiness of a lifetime. Do nothing in haste; look well to each step; and from the beginning think what may be the end." Alansplodge (talk) 23:19, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Did he go out with a bang? --Jayron32 04:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, but four of his chums did, on the way down from his first ascent of the Matterhorn in 1865. Alansplodge (talk) 23:30, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Did he go out with a bang? --Jayron32 04:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- This activity might (depending on what is underneath the climber) be better described as scrambling. Bouldering suggests a) "a fall will not result in serious injury" and b) that it involves short technical challenges known as "problems". Difficult climbs without protection gear, above safe falling distance (our Bouldering article suggests 7 metres, my definition would be a bit lower), are usually described as soloing which is very risky unless you're very good. However, long climbs that are not difficult enough to need protection gear are called "scrambles". Alansplodge (talk) 23:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- The caption suggests the climber is bouldering, which is described as climbing rocks without ropes and other safety gear, but such climbs rarely go very high, and there may well be a bouldering mat out of view at the base of the rock in case he were to fall. --McDoobAU93 01:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
University of Wales
Hello, I'm from India. This institute is offering a Post Graduate Diploma in Global Business Leadership which they claim is affiliated to University of Wales. I want to know whether University of Wales offer off-campus degree? --Eoeoeoe (talk) 13:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, they do. The University of Wales' official information about this programme is at [3]. However, the University of Wales has recently been in the British news with grave concerns expressed over the quality of its oversight processes - see, for example, [4]. Warofdreams talk 13:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- (ec) Yes, the University of Wales does offer off-campus degree courses, but be very careful. Only yesterday, the University's reputation was called into question after a BBC investigation revealed a scam involving off-campus degree courses. You could find yourself with a degree certificate which prospective employers might be reluctant to believe you actually worked for. Astronaut (talk) 13:25, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- News reports say the University of Wales is going to stop validating degrees from other institutions, although it's not clear exactly when this will take effect.[5] --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:49, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
baked French fries?
What do you call "French fries" that are baked instead of fried? I've heard them called "baked fries", which doesn't make good sense. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:26, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I call them "oven chips" because I'm in the UK. Itsmejudith (talk) 14:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I think they are called "oven fries" in the U.S. Marco polo (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm in the US. They do simulate being fried, but they aren't fried. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 15:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- That is my experience as well. Americans usually call them "fries" regardless of how they are cooked. Also agree that spraying with PAM (cooking oil) or a similar product is the best way to get anything resembling the actual fried version. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- If "French fries" aren't French, then why should they be fried ? StuRat (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- In the US, I would expect them to be called "baked French fries". My Google search for "baked french fries" just now yielded 532,000 hits, demonstrating the popularity of my expectation. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I think they are more commonly just called "French fries", or just "fries" of one kind or another, as in this packaging, [6]. I suspect it is a marketing thing. Any hint, such as the mention of the word "oven" or "baked", that they won't taste exactly like fried french fries, which of course they don't, would hurt sales. Pfly (talk) 23:56, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Do they sell them pre-fried and then frozen to be reheated in the oven ? If so, what do they call that version ? StuRat (talk) 00:13, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Oven fries? Why is this so difficult? μηδείς (talk) 02:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Why is it difficult to accept the unsourced word of an editor in amongst competing answers? That depends, really. Do you claim special access to The Truth? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 03:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Oven fries? Why is this so difficult? μηδείς (talk) 02:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- StuRat, I think most frozen fries intended to be oven baked at home are pre-fried to some extent. At least a quick googling seems to indicate such. And that's a good point about health-oriented buyers. I am thinking of just the mass marketed non-health stuff. The very idea of "healthy" french fries of any kind seems strange, but I'm sure they exist. Funny, this is one food topic that doesn't make me hungry. :-) Pfly (talk) 03:36, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, my Aussie friend, It has nothing to do with accepting the consensus of foreigners to tell me what exists in America. I am an American who has bought and eaten Oven Fries. They are indeed called Oven Fries. They are marketed as Oven Fries. Yes, they are also called "baked french fries" when an explanation is necessary, just as Fritos are described as corn chips. But the normal term is Oven Fries. I think that's more definitive than some auslander saying "apparently americans...." based on a google search listing recipes. (By the way, I get 244,000 hits for "oven fries" at Bing and 61,600 for "baked french fries". Google seems to have stopped doing strict searches for some reason.) Let's hear some Americans contradict me. I won't have a problem with that. μηδείς (talk) 03:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware the question was specifically about what they're called in the US. On re-reading, I'm still not aware of that. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 03:56, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, my Aussie friend, It has nothing to do with accepting the consensus of foreigners to tell me what exists in America. I am an American who has bought and eaten Oven Fries. They are indeed called Oven Fries. They are marketed as Oven Fries. Yes, they are also called "baked french fries" when an explanation is necessary, just as Fritos are described as corn chips. But the normal term is Oven Fries. I think that's more definitive than some auslander saying "apparently americans...." based on a google search listing recipes. (By the way, I get 244,000 hits for "oven fries" at Bing and 61,600 for "baked french fries". Google seems to have stopped doing strict searches for some reason.) Let's hear some Americans contradict me. I won't have a problem with that. μηδείς (talk) 03:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I am sure all those "in America" and "in the U.S" phrases above were inhelpful. Note that I have no stand on what they are called in Britain, other than that I think "oven chips" as suggested above sounds quite plausible. Note also that I am not of the opinion that Tofu Burgers originated in the quaint teutonic burg of Toefue.μηδείς (talk) 04:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Those are quotes from selected US-based answers. But the first 2 answers were from the UK, so what about them? There were no restrictions in the question, and surely it's the question that sort of matters around here. I'd be very surprised if different names didn't apply in different countries, so there wouldn't be one sole right answer. Much as you seem to want to make it solely about the US, it ain't, mate. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 04:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yup, I'm with the antipodean here. Stating that "the normal term is Oven Fries" is implying that being from the U.S. is normal - it isn't. Believing that being from the U.S. is normal may very well be normal for the U.S., but that doesn't make it true. In most parts of the world, Americans are exotic foreigners, with strange ways. Get used to it... AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Even within the US there may be striking regional differences. New England, fpr example, often uses quite different terms than the rest of the country. Pfly (talk) 08:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- The point was that they are called oven whatevers. Nowhere above did I (or anyone else) say they are called whatever fries, as opposed to whatever chips. I truly believe some sort of professional counseling would help you guys better with your apparent inferiority complex than attributing to me arguments that I haven't made. μηδείς (talk) 19:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Nobody has denied you have said they are called Oven Fries. You've said it twice, and I'm sure we heard you loud and clear both times. Trouble is, you saying it is so does not necessarily make it so for all places at all times. You got into hot water when you made the question only about the USA, though it never had any such territorial limitation. That argument was opposed, and you have not defended it. End of issue. Nowhere that I can see has any argument that you did not actually make been attributed to you. What was that you were saying about the need for professional counselling? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:50, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- The point was that they are called oven whatevers. Nowhere above did I (or anyone else) say they are called whatever fries, as opposed to whatever chips. I truly believe some sort of professional counseling would help you guys better with your apparent inferiority complex than attributing to me arguments that I haven't made. μηδείς (talk) 19:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Even within the US there may be striking regional differences. New England, fpr example, often uses quite different terms than the rest of the country. Pfly (talk) 08:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yup, I'm with the antipodean here. Stating that "the normal term is Oven Fries" is implying that being from the U.S. is normal - it isn't. Believing that being from the U.S. is normal may very well be normal for the U.S., but that doesn't make it true. In most parts of the world, Americans are exotic foreigners, with strange ways. Get used to it... AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Those are quotes from selected US-based answers. But the first 2 answers were from the UK, so what about them? There were no restrictions in the question, and surely it's the question that sort of matters around here. I'd be very surprised if different names didn't apply in different countries, so there wouldn't be one sole right answer. Much as you seem to want to make it solely about the US, it ain't, mate. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 04:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I am sure all those "in America" and "in the U.S" phrases above were inhelpful. Note that I have no stand on what they are called in Britain, other than that I think "oven chips" as suggested above sounds quite plausible. Note also that I am not of the opinion that Tofu Burgers originated in the quaint teutonic burg of Toefue.μηδείς (talk) 04:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't own either a deep-fat-fryer or a chip-pan so I buy Frozen-oven-chips and call them chips. Simples. I am English and my wife is Scottish, but our recent visitors from Canada (the non-French Bit) insisted they be called French-Fries, despite the source potatoes being extremely Scottish, never having visited France, the sprayed-on-oil being Spanish, and the oven in which they were cooked was Scandinavian. French-fries???????????????????? Nah. CHIPS Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 94.172.118.132 (talk) 15:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Anyone puzzled by the term "Simples" or wishing to get a better understanding of the weirdness that is our British sense of humour, may like to click on the surreal world that is Aleksandr Orlov (advertising). --Dweller (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't own either a deep-fat-fryer or a chip-pan so I buy Frozen-oven-chips and call them chips. Simples. I am English and my wife is Scottish, but our recent visitors from Canada (the non-French Bit) insisted they be called French-Fries, despite the source potatoes being extremely Scottish, never having visited France, the sprayed-on-oil being Spanish, and the oven in which they were cooked was Scandinavian. French-fries???????????????????? Nah. CHIPS Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 94.172.118.132 (talk) 15:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Two-pin plug in the UK
I bought an electric toothbrush a couple of days ago, and the plug on it is very similar to this. I am told the socket for this type of plug is common in bathrooms, but we haven't got one. Is it possible to just use a simple three point plug socket, or do I need an adapter? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:17, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- You need an adaptor for a shaver socket, very common. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:25, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Your toothbrush charger is expecting 220VAC, so you can either remove the 2-pin plug and wire the power lead into a conventional 13A 3-pin plug; or you can, as ItsMe says, get an adaptor which is in essence a 13A plug with a couple of holes in the top into which the 2-pin plug fits. Which is all to say, what's required is a physical form factor conversion, not an electrical conversion. (IIRC, you can force the 2-pin plug into a 3-pin socket, but that is not a good way to proceed; the two pins are very slightly closer together than the live & neutral in a 3-pin socket, and you need to get the internal cover to open which generaly requires sticking something into the earth socket ... all to be avoided.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Something like this. Not recommending this dealer in particular! You can probably find one in your nearest supermarket, DIY shop, independent hardware shop... Itsmejudith (talk) 16:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- It's far easier to buy an adapter than to re-wire a plug! --Tango (talk) 18:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- Your toothbrush charger is expecting 220VAC, so you can either remove the 2-pin plug and wire the power lead into a conventional 13A 3-pin plug; or you can, as ItsMe says, get an adaptor which is in essence a 13A plug with a couple of holes in the top into which the 2-pin plug fits. Which is all to say, what's required is a physical form factor conversion, not an electrical conversion. (IIRC, you can force the 2-pin plug into a 3-pin socket, but that is not a good way to proceed; the two pins are very slightly closer together than the live & neutral in a 3-pin socket, and you need to get the internal cover to open which generaly requires sticking something into the earth socket ... all to be avoided.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the ideas. I'll pop into the village tomorrow - we have a shop that sepecifically sells adapters, and I'll get the one that Judith mentioned (or something similar). Oddly, I used to have a few, because when I came back from Japan I brought computer equipment with me (for which I have since bought British plugs because I went to Korea to work, and just having adapters to fit adapters would have been silly), but they have disappeared. Cheers. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:23, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think those would have worked, anyway. Japan uses a different voltage to the UK, so those adapters would have converted the voltage too, which you probably don't need (although an electric toothbrush would probably work ok on any mains voltage). --Tango (talk) 10:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could take the cord with you and try it out before you buy an adaptor. It may look like something that will fit in a common UK bathroom shaver socket, but it might just as well be a european style plug. They look very similar, but the UK shaver plug has slightly fatter pins that are very slightly closer together than a european plug. You might find the AC power plugs and sockets article useful. Astronaut (talk) 18:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Our BS 1363 article about the wonderful British 3-pin plug, suggests that "Many bathrooms, particularly in hotels, have 2-pin standard "shaver sockets", which usually accommodate both European and US 2-pin plugs." Alansplodge (talk) 23:26, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could take the cord with you and try it out before you buy an adaptor. It may look like something that will fit in a common UK bathroom shaver socket, but it might just as well be a european style plug. They look very similar, but the UK shaver plug has slightly fatter pins that are very slightly closer together than a european plug. You might find the AC power plugs and sockets article useful. Astronaut (talk) 18:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
October 8
yamaha 125 tzr motorbike engine
how do you assemble the engine if it is stripped to the core or where will i be able to get a workshop manual for this specific bike. help is urgently needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pieter schuurman (talk • contribs) 07:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- There are some on eBay:[7]. Amazon should have some as well. Get the most comprehensive one you can.--Aspro (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
What kind of pet collars are popular in Europe and the United States?
What kind of pet collars are popular in Europe and the United States? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Summer zara (talk • contribs) 09:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would think a ("safe" unless you are actually interested in kinky sex) google image search on the terms "dog collar" and "cat collar" would be the best way to get your answer. μηδείς (talk) 10:52, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- In the US: For cats, they are usually cloth collars with "breakaway" rubber loops on them (that break if the cat gets stuck on something, so they can't get stuck or choke). I've never seen anything but those on cats. For dogs there is more variety because they are used for more than just identification. There is a standard cloth collar. There are varieties of metal "pinch" collars that work against tugging dogs. There are harnesses that hold them more around the shoulders. There are "gentle" harnesses which attach to the head somehow. I think that's all of the variety that I'm used to seeing. (I'm a "dog person" and live in an area where I see dozens of dogs being walked each day.) --Mr.98 (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- See also Dog collar. --Psud (talk) 13:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- I have five dogs and we have plenty of collars. What has been said is accurate and any additional info can surely be found by searching the web sites of any retailers such as PetsMart or PetCo. Dismas|(talk) 14:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Bridal Showers
I have been invited to a bridal shower. The invitation said it is a "show shower", and so the gifts should not be wrapped. What, exactly, is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.86.144.51 (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Did you read bridal shower? That seems to explain it pretty well.--Shantavira|feed me 15:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- "show shower", so no pressure then! Caesar's Daddy (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
internet acronyms
What is the longest phrase / sentence that you can write only using internet acronyms? Harley Spleet (talk) 15:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Acronyms are nearly all nouns, so I don't see how one could create a phrase or sentence using only acronyms.--Shantavira|feed me 15:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- My favorite from my days in Eve Online probably has the most letters - OMGWTFBBQ. You can add a LULZ at the end, but it becomes TL;DR FTL-- Obsidi♠n Soul 19:08, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
What are "internet acronyms" and how do they differ from normal acronyms? 82.43.90.142 (talk) 06:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps OP is referring to textspeak. I have a friend with whom I regularly correspond by text. We make up our own initialisms on the fly and can usually understand each other. Textspeak is not acronyms.--Shantavira|feed me 07:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
pre-mature ejaculation
how to prevent it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.128 (talk) 15:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Did you read premature ejaculation? We can't give you medical advice, but there are some suggestions in the article.--Shantavira|feed me 15:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Think of baseball, or England if you're closeted. Dualus (talk) 04:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Or, wait until you're mature (as opposed to trying it when you're pre-mature). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- It's probably better if you didn't chime in on everything bugs. Shadowjams (talk) 10:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- That's why I don't. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- It's probably better if you didn't chime in on everything bugs. Shadowjams (talk) 10:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
string theory
can anyone explain this in way average people like me would understand. im wondering why is this a candidate for TOE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.2 (talk) 15:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- My suggestion for easing your way into this is to read (or watch) Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, which, though it has some parts that make real scientists squirm (and the book is a little out of date), is a nice overview of why scientists like string theory in particular, and why they think it makes a nice candidate for a TOE, and also some of the major challenges that they have with regards to it. --Mr.98 (talk) 17:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- TOE? Would that be Theory of everything? Astronaut (talk) 17:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Undoubtedly. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:18, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- "String theory is often called the 'Theory of Everything' (TOE). However, since so far it makes no predictions observable by experiment, a better name might be the 'Theory of Everything Not Appearing in Laboratories' (TOENAIL)." — Warren Siegel
-- BenRG (talk) 06:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- "String theory is often called the 'Theory of Everything' (TOE). However, since so far it makes no predictions observable by experiment, a better name might be the 'Theory of Everything Not Appearing in Laboratories' (TOENAIL)." — Warren Siegel
- Undoubtedly. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:18, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- TOE? Would that be Theory of everything? Astronaut (talk) 17:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- The problem with string theory is, not even physicists understand it, so of course they can't really explain it to average people. That, naturally, won't stop people to write popular science books on it. – b_jonas 18:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- No human could ever possibly understand an omipotent and eternal being who created the universe out of nothing, but that sure hasn't stopped people talking and writing about God forever. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- But creating fantasy fiction is much easier than describing a ToE that, to be scientific, has to accord with observable (and by everyday standards quite weird) reality :-) . {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.142 (talk) 21:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- No human could ever possibly understand an omipotent and eternal being who created the universe out of nothing, but that sure hasn't stopped people talking and writing about God forever. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- If you get bored of high dimensional space, there is the possibility that the universe 2-D instead of 3-D which is well regarded and increasing in popularity especially in the U.K. Dualus (talk) 04:53, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Specification for Bell & Howell Micro Plus ?
This is a low-end hearing aid. I'd like to know the following:
1) What battery does it use ?
2) Is it a directional microphone ? If so, specifically what type (shotgun, cardioid, etc.)
I'd also be interested in seeing any reviews of the product (originating from anyone who isn't trying to sell it, of course). Thanks. StuRat (talk) 21:17, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Hat etiquette in 1935
Were men allowed to keep their hats on inside a courthouse in 1935 Alabama? I am asking because I am playing the role of Judge Taylor in the stage version of "To Kill A Mockingbird" and there is one actor who is wearing a hat and it just bothers me and seems like it would be considered disrespectful. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.46.18.178 (talk) 23:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Definitely not. The judge would have reacted as in My Cousin Vinny.μηδείς (talk) 23:29, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- Or for that matter, as he reacted in Disorder in the Court. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Here is a still from the 1962 film - only the ladies retain their hats. It was made less than 30 years after the book was written, but the story was told as a recollection of childhood memories, so must have been set a few years earlier than 1935. Alansplodge (talk) 23:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- The dude on the left is a time traveller from our day — he's answering his cell phone in court and getting away with it! Comet Tuttle (talk) 07:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Where does that happen? Last time I was in a courtroom, if a cell phone was even seen, the judge [8] confiscated it and it cost $20 to get it back. — Michael J 20:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- That's quite a trick to get a connection to a cell tower that won't be there for another few decades. Googlemeister (talk) 14:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Where does that happen? Last time I was in a courtroom, if a cell phone was even seen, the judge [8] confiscated it and it cost $20 to get it back. — Michael J 20:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- The dude on the left is a time traveller from our day — he's answering his cell phone in court and getting away with it! Comet Tuttle (talk) 07:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Men are not typically allowed to wear headgear, except religious headgear, in courtrooms even today... Neutralitytalk 00:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- A restriction on wearing a hat in the courtroom meets this standard. First, it is reasonably related to the maintenance of courtroom civility and respect for the judicial process. Judges have an obligation to maintain the dignity of judicial proceedings and to oversee courtrooms in a manner that promotes their integrity. Requiring litigants to remove their hats out of respect for this process is reasonably calculated to advance these valid interests. Similarly, it is appropriate for a court to expect litigants to appear in attire that is suitable to the dignity of a courtroom, rather than to show up in clothes they might have worn to a baseball game. The reasonable admonishment of litigants who wear casual or inappropriate attire promotes legitimate ends by reminding them that the judicial process deserves to be approached with respect.
- Footnote: The interests in courtroom order and decorum may also be outweighed by an individual’s right to wear a hat based upon the dictates of his or her religious practice. See, e.g., Tyson, 2004 WL 1837033, at 6 ("Accepted standards of courtroom etiquette do not necessarily prevail over an individual’s exercise of his religion, if the latter does not impact courtroom security or interfere in courtroom procedures."); Close-It Enterprises, Inc. v. Weinberger, 407 N.Y.S.2d 587, 588 (2d Dep’t 1978) (finding right of defendant to wear religious skullcap in courtroom). Of course, no such religious practice is implicated here.
- On this side of the pond, the judge doesn't go bareheaded either. Alansplodge (talk) 01:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I often wondered if anyone ever showed up in a US court wearing the formal UK court dress and got told off for disturbing court decorum. Googlemeister (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I imagine a US judge would assume you were doing it as some sort of gag. APL (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps it would help in an insanity plea. Googlemeister (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I imagine a US judge would assume you were doing it as some sort of gag. APL (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I often wondered if anyone ever showed up in a US court wearing the formal UK court dress and got told off for disturbing court decorum. Googlemeister (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- On this side of the pond, the judge doesn't go bareheaded either. Alansplodge (talk) 01:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
October 9
Hupp Motor Car Company
Did the Hupp Motor Car Company ever have a factory in Windsor ON. Canada? I saw a print in the TD Canada Trust branch in Windsor saying circa 1913.Is this true?Please reply to <email address removed> Thanks for your time and hopefully your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.177.43 (talk) 02:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I've remove the e-mail address from the post. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:08, 9 October 2011 (UTC)>
- Yes[9] Thincat (talk) 19:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Growth in the number of archaeologists in the Middle East and North Africa besides Israel and Egypt
So, my Human Cultural Beginnings professor was going over various sites of prehistoric hominin (apparently now the accepted term for hominid) finds and I noted that many of the sites were in Israel. She said that it was mostly because it has the heaviest concentration of archaeologists and many are not welcome in much of the rest of the Middle East and North Africa. She said that most people in other countries tend to desire career paths as things like engineers, but there is emerging a new trend of people becoming archaeologists in the countries other than the two up top.
So, I would like to know if there is possibly, idk, some sort of chart, graph or report on this showing the number of people graduating from institutions of higher learning with archaeological degrees (though I suspect the education systems vary from place to place with some possibly being based on the US system and others French or British). I suspect this would be in Arabic, a language I can niether read nor understand sadly. Though I could be wrong and it might be in English (though I'm not sure what to look for English-wise). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 05:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Just looking at the UK experience, we see that archaeology degrees have become more popular over the last few years (possibly due to Time Team). Here is an overview of undergraduate courses, while here explains that there is a rise in graduate jobs as archaeologists. By the way, I suspect that the reason for the heavy concentration of archaeologists in Israel is because of a preoccupation with "proving the Bible true" in our forebears. --TammyMoet (talk) 07:00, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hmmm, I think that Indy is the reason for many people in the US. What? Jobs? You mean archaeologists can actually get a job in the UK? What am I going after this silly Medical Degree then? :p Part of the reason; it also used to be that people in Israel wanted to find their past there, where they come from. There was also a Zionist ideal in it as well which has born fruit so far. When I think about it though, a lot of it is just digging, interpretation and not so much trying to prove the Bible true, but seeing how the stories in the Bible match up to the evidence. Some people also dig for things not covered by the Bible, but it's a bitch getting funding then. (Various science institutes: Sure, one of the largest Canaanite palaces is interesting, but where's this site talked about in the Bible at all? *NSF and other groups hand money to site about Joshua or w/e*), So I think it is also about being able to get funding. My dig directors are very honest btw, and have told about some less than honest people in other places that claim some Biblical association to get funding.
- You know, when I think it about it. Most of those countries are quite oppressive and might not release such stats normally; though that doesn't make sense. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 07:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding hominid vs. hominin, you might take a look at this page. Looie496 (talk) 13:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I consider it to be a big pain in the ass, so if no one minds I think I'll use hominid (it's still kinda correct, just a lot broader). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 21:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I suppose it depends on whether you mean Western archaeologists visiting sites in the Middle East, or Middle Eastern archaeologists visiting sites in their home countries. Considering the way some westerners are welcomed in the Middle East (see: [10] and [11] for archaeology related examples; and [12], [13], [14], [15] for more general examples) maybe only Israel and Egypt are considered safe enough for archaeological digs. Astronaut (talk) 14:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I was referring to home-grown archaeologists excavating in their own countries mostly. Syria has some digs, I know that much, but not atm given that someone there is being naughty. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 21:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- If you find interesting information, please see if you can add something to Archeology of Israel. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Like what? I do archaeology in Israel and would be happy to contribute. :) Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 21:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- The article has an ongoing tension. Should it be about "how archeology is done in Israel" or should it be about "what archeologists have found out about Israel". Have a read and see what you think. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Like what? I do archaeology in Israel and would be happy to contribute. :) Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 21:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- When I've time; I must currently spend most of my times focused on German and early hominid development (damn dirty non-apes). Wouldn't it be logical to have both method (even though I fucking hate archaeological theory except for post-post-processualism/neo-pragmatism or culture history) and finds? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 07:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Spare change
Why can't I use my spare change account that has money in it instead of buying facebook credits to buy credits in different games? Please help me I'm not sure who to contact or how to take care of this and I don't know how to get credits (they have me blocked due to my account being hacked in the spring of this year) so the only way I can buy credits for a game is through spare change however I can only find one game that allows me to use this site (Diligo slot game.) Sorry to take up your time, and thank you for any help you can provide for me.
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kendrakay458 (talk • contribs) 09:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I really haven't a clue what you are asking about, but if this is about paying for a Facebook game perhaps you should be asking at Facebook's user help, rather than here on the Wikipedia reference desk. Astronaut (talk) 13:36, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Each year, about how many of NYC’s tourists will actually leave Manhattan to see and go to the popular tourist destinations in the outer boroughs?
I’ve been told many times by New Yorkers that the majority of the NYC tourists go to Manhattan never leave the island except when they have to go back to the airport to go back to their homes, but out of the approximately 50 million tourists, who visit NYC every year now, how many of them are estimated to actually leave Manhattan to the outer boroughs to see and go to places like the Bronx Zoo, the New York Botanical Gardens in the Bronx, Flushing Meadow-Corona Park, Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, “The Hub” in the Bronx, Coney Island in Brooklyn, Prospect Park in Brooklyn, the Brooklyn Chinatown, and drive or walk across the Brooklyn Bridge from Manhattan to Brooklyn, and take the Staten Island Ferry from Manhattan to Staten Island, etc? I have not seen any official numbers, which I've been looking around for. Willminator (talk) 13:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know where you would get such figures since IDs like passports are not usually checked when visiting parks. How would statistics on tourist visitor numbers ever be collected? However, I have visited New York City a number of times as a (foreign) tourist and have crossed the harbour on the Statten Island Ferry and walked across the Brooklyn Bridge; though I admit both trips were for the purpose of taking photos of Manhattan rather then visiting a different borough. I also have a liking for local sporting events and on a future visit I would like to try to get tickets for a game at Yankee Stadium. Astronaut (talk) 13:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- You couldn't do a full census, sure, but you could get very accurate results by just asking a sample of people as they leave. It wouldn't surprise me if the relevant tourism board has done such surveys. --Tango (talk) 15:52, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Well, if some tourists guides and websites, and some New Yorkers say that the majority of NYC tourists only stay in Manhattan for tourism; then would that indicate that there would be an official annual count for that somewhere to back that claim up? Would there be a count somewhere that says how many tourists visit Manhattan each year vs. how many for each of the other boroughs? Willminator (talk) 20:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC) Edit: If the city can determine the number of annual tourist arrivals to the whole city (~50 million), then surely they can determine the number of tourist arrivals for each individual borough for tourism reasons only, but I can't find for some reason relevant tourism surveys about this matter, but there are plenty for the city as a whole though. Willminator (talk) 22:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- You couldn't do a full census, sure, but you could get very accurate results by just asking a sample of people as they leave. It wouldn't surprise me if the relevant tourism board has done such surveys. --Tango (talk) 15:52, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- The Brooklyn Bridge and the Staten Island Ferry are major tourist attractions in Manhattan, so some tourists, at least, would visit the ends of the line, which are in other boroughs. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I can't find a citation that has actual numbers in it, but New York is a popular destination for "Shopping Tourism". There are package tours specifically for this purpose. (Especially when the dollar is weak against the pound or euro.) If your trip's primary purpose is shopping, I suppose you'd stay in Manhattan. APL (talk) 04:13, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
So, if someone, a tourist guide or book, or some internet article positively claim that most tourists stay in Manhattan only for tourist reasons, would that mean that the claim is probably based on personal opinion than fact after all, and would it be right to question that claim unless the claimant can back it up with actual, official numbers? Willminator (talk) 01:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Many tourist destinations such a museums, parks, and the like will provide estimates for the number of visitors they get a year. Given a list of major destinations in the other boroughs, you can research these and compare them to major destinations in Manhattan. Obviously it won't tell you about whether tourists leave Manhattan for the specific purpose of visiting other borough sites, but if the Manhattan figures are generally much larger than the outside figures, then it would make a good circumstantial argument that most visitors are probably staying in Manhattan. Dragons flight (talk) 15:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Lights in fridges
Why do fridges have lights inside them? (And if there is a good reason for the light, why don't freezers have them?) 91.84.181.211 (talk) 19:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- To see the food. Frozen food is less likely to spill, in general, so there is less need for illumination. 64.134.157.164 (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- In my experience, freezers are either compartments at the top of a fridge that aren't big enough for anything to get lost it, have drawers that pull out so you can see what's in them using the light in your ceiling, or open at the top so, again, you can use the light in your ceiling. Fridges usually have shelves, which means things are usually in the shadow of the shelf above. I'm not really sure why fridges have shelves while freezers have drawers (and, of course, there are exceptions to both), but I guess it has something to do with the types of food you put in them. Food that goes in freezers tends to be square and easy to pack close and fill your freezer very full (which, incidentally, makes it more efficient since there isn't as much cold air to escape when you open the door). Food that goes in fridges tends to be odd shapes that wouldn't really work in drawers. Also, you get things out of fridges more often and drawers are much slower. --Tango (talk) 19:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- A freezer light would often be quite useful, and it seems odd they don't have them. Sometimes frozen food is wrapped in freezer paper with pencil writing identifying it, and it is a pain to take packages out to get enough light to see what the label says, or to view the contents of a clear plastic bag. Edison (talk) 20:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Many fridge-freezer units nowadays have lights in both compartments. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- A freezer light would often be quite useful, and it seems odd they don't have them. Sometimes frozen food is wrapped in freezer paper with pencil writing identifying it, and it is a pain to take packages out to get enough light to see what the label says, or to view the contents of a clear plastic bag. Edison (talk) 20:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Our GE freezer in NY has a light in it, but our one in Greenwich does not last I check (or maybe it does, but no one here remembers). I guess some have them and some do not. I think it has to do with how deep the freezer is. So that if you have one where the back doesn't go very far back there's no light whereas one that does go far back does have a light. Of course I could be completely wrong. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tishrei 5772 21:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- The light in our fridge burned out. We replaced it but it burned out again shortly after. Instead of going through bulbs every couple months or spending several hundred dollars on a new fridge, we've learned to live without it. So, I can tell you from years of experience that having a light is incredibly handy. When we open our fridge, our body is now in the open doorway and blocking most of the ambient light from the room. So it would be nice to have a light in there. Dismas|(talk) 02:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Another reason is that an incandescent light in the freezer might tend to implode, due to sudden changes in temperature, and might tend to thaw out nearby food, as well. Fluorescent lights don't work well at freezer temperatures. I'm not sure about LEDs. Do they work at such low temps ? If so, we may soon see them in freezers. StuRat (talk) 02:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- We've placed an adhesive backed, battery powered, LED light -- of the sort advertised as a closet light -- in our deep freeze. I was skeptical that the cold batteries would put out enough power, but it has been working fine. -- 110.49.225.244 (talk) 07:58, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
For experts in magic
is there a magic trick so secret and so good that no other magician is able to duplicate it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.1 (talk) 23:22, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Check out here (go down to #1). Apparently, this is a card trick known by exactly two people (the man who invented it, and the man he taught) and no one has figured out how they do it. --Jayron32 00:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
October 10
Articles that link to an image
I'm not sure the best place to ask about this. I went into the image of "Young Bekie" in Ballad#Classification. In the File links section it says No pages on the English Wikipedia link to this file. Shouldn't it say that Ballad links to it? SlightSmile 02:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hm, weird. But, you're right; allow me to point you to Wikipedia:Help desk. Comet Tuttle (talk) 02:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- While CT is right it's better to ask this question at the help desk, the reason it was happening is because the article was using a redirect rather then the file itself. The file was renamed in March this year [16] but the usage in the article was not changed. I have modified the article to use the new name [17] so it now shows up. Nil Einne (talk) 15:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Lack of beef hot dogs in Israel
So I have a simple question no Israeli has been able to answer for me as of yet. Why is it that there is not one beef hot dog in the whole State of Israel? I know the beef isn't very good oftentimes, but it's no reason to have only chicken and turkey dogs. So why are there no beef dogs there? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 07:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- See [18] ... there are kosher beef hot dogs in Israel it seems. Collect (talk) 08:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I was wondering about any beef hotdogs really regardless of whether they have kashrut certification. Kashrut certification's not as important as it used to be. What? There are? O_O Haven't seen those before, though I am familiar with the brand. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 15:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Careful, Collect, or you'll get your spelling of kosher "corrected" (scare quotes very much intended) by the OP. --Viennese Waltz 09:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- VW—SWMFP did not specify a kashrut status. Kashrut status was only introduced in a response. Kashrut status was not specified in the posted question. Obviously there is a difference between a kasher hot dog and a non-kasher hot dog, but this doesn't seem to be the essence of this question. Bus stop (talk) 11:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I mostly purchase Abele and Heymann's here which not only complies with the laws of kashrut, but is also certified glatt (something that Hebrew National lacks). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 15:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Actually, if I checked carefully enough, the source refers to kosher style hot dogs. But I guess, why quibble?Bus stop (talk) 12:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
The Tirat Tzvi sausages referred to in the chowhound source are made on Kibbutz Tirat Zvi and are widely available in Israel and in kosher shops in many other countries. --Dweller (talk) 12:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Widely available? How come I have never seen them anywhere in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, up north in Nahariyya or elsewhere? Believe me I liked hard for those three precious letters that make up the word for beef (בקר)and never had any luck. My Israeli girlfriend has not seen such frankfurters in Israel and none of my Israeli dig supervisors knew of them. Why, I wonder? O_O Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 15:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Look for the "Tiv" brand. Personally, I've not seen any Tiv sausages that'd satisfy anyone larger than Mrs Pepperpot, but I doubt I've seen the full range.--Dweller (talk) 16:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- How can you miss'em? They're so brightly packaged, lol. :p Well I will confess that I saw packaged hot dogs of some sort that, as you said, look tiny, and didn't say (עוף - chicken in this context or הוד - Turkey, technically Indian, but it's a long story (Hebrew term for turkey = תרנגול הודו - Indian Rooster)), but they were in a bologna container looking thing and I couldn't read what it said, so I assumed it just said lamb (which I do not know the word for). I don't get why chicken dogs are (apparently) so popular in Israel. I know that the beef is typically not so good in Israel, but still. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 16:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Another sausage, bologna, and its availability
So here's another sausage-related question. I have also had trouble finding bologna in Israel (by which I mean no luck). I will confess that I don't know the word for it in Hebrew and my gf does not. Is there bologna available in Israel? (Quick bit of advice: Looking up bologna and Israel or baloney and Israel on Google leads to flights between the Italian city as well as various anti-Israel things, respectively.) So is this noble fatty sausage available in the State of Israel? I do realise that it might also have a different name among Israelis (which I also don't know). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 16:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Oscar Mayer? Clarityfiend (talk) 22:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Ha, nope, they don't sell Oscar Meyer there afair. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 12 Tishrei 5772 23:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Are there no Italian specialty food stores? You could surely also order mail order, no? Is kosher substitue for normally pork items an industry there? It is funny, I almost never eat anything but kosher beef franks here in the US. Love Nathan's. μηδείς (talk) 04:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- You tend to get shops like that in places where there are lots of Italian expats, like America. I'm not sure there are too many Italians in Israel. The Jewish population of Italy today (never mind Israel) is just 45,000, according to our article. By comparison, the Italian-descent population of America is 17,800,000, according to this article. --Dweller (talk) 09:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Anyway, Bologna sausage, despite its name is an American thing, not really Italian at all. Bologna may be modeled after mortadella, which is Italian, but you won't find much bologna in Italy, and perhaps not in Israel either, since the proportion of Israel's population that originated in the United States is relatively small. If it is to be found, you might find it in stores catering to American-Israelis, if there are such stores. Marco polo (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
1906 NYT articles
Yes, they are online. However, the link changes every time for them; let's say from 1906 Florida hurricane, "104 Men Drowned on Florida Houseboat". The current link would be [19], but it'll change to another link later. Example page for a preview (not the PDF itself): [20]. I want a permanent link for it. Thanks! HurricaneFan25 14:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Email Martin Nisenholtz digitalsvp at nytimes dot com 67.6.175.132 (talk) 02:59, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
EU highe education funding
Is there a good source of information regarding the public funding of higher education in EU countries? I am particularly interested in knowing which countries provide public funding for masters course fees, I understand Denmark does for one, are there many? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.38.22 (talk) 15:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Just as a general suggestion, it may help if you clarify your question since I suspect it's more poorly phrased then you realise. I believe most EU countries provide some funding for universities and some of this will usually go towards making masters course fees lower. This includes places like the
UKEngland where there's usually a lot of concern about the rising cost of university includingI thinkpostgraduate study [21]. (In other words, the answer probably includes most EU countries which I admit isn't a great answer in itself.) However it sounds like what you're looking for is countries which fund the fees close to the entirety so there are no fees (or very little) for the person taking the course, at least if they're local students. Nil Einne (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2011 (UTC)- Yes, I mean countries where the public funding covers the entire cost of a taught masters course, so no money is paid to the institution of higher education by the enrolling student. Per EU regulations this grant is not dependant on the nationality of the student, as long as they are from an EU member state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.38.22 (talk) 19:49, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- There is an exception to the above, which is that English students have to pay additional fees in Scottish Universities. I understand that this is being challenged in the European courts, but the UK government believes that this is an internal UK funding matter -- Q Chris (talk) 09:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I mean countries where the public funding covers the entire cost of a taught masters course, so no money is paid to the institution of higher education by the enrolling student. Per EU regulations this grant is not dependant on the nationality of the student, as long as they are from an EU member state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.38.22 (talk) 19:49, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- This question have been asked before: [22]. Norway, though not an EU country, has free higher education, and I think this still applies to all foreigners (there has been some debate on this recently). Most higher education is in Norwegian, but there are some programs in English. If you are interested, the web page of the University of Oslo, the country's largest university, is probably as good a place as any to start looking. Jørgen (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- The OP has it right when he says "public funding". "Free" is not true, unless Norway is only taxing non-Norwegians. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Free 2.Obtainable without any payment. Example: The government provides free health care. ([23]). The point is that it is free at the point of use. Interestingly enough, you made the same pedantic point (which does not at all help in answering the question) in the previous discussion that I linked to. Jørgen (talk) 07:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- It's not a pedantic point, it's the point that those who think it's "free" are deluding themselves. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Free 2.Obtainable without any payment. Example: The government provides free health care. ([23]). The point is that it is free at the point of use. Interestingly enough, you made the same pedantic point (which does not at all help in answering the question) in the previous discussion that I linked to. Jørgen (talk) 07:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- The OP has it right when he says "public funding". "Free" is not true, unless Norway is only taxing non-Norwegians. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
October 11
call center agents
how much is the average income of a callcenter agent in the US? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.128 (talk) 00:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- That will vary wildly depending on the department, the company, and the industry. As an example, when I worked for CompanyA as a call center tech support agent, starting pay was 12/hr. The same call center's customer support department started at 9.50/hr, while sales started at 22/hr. When I went to CompanyB to do essentially the same tech support, they started at 28/hr. So, depending on what kind of answer you are looking for, some additional specifics might be useful. Avicennasis @ 00:57, 13 Tishrei 5772 / 00:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I never saw anything near most of those figures when I worked in a call center. I took a part time seasonal job in a call center that eventually became full time. I was paid somewhere in the neighborhood of $9-10/hour to start and didn't make too much more than that in my time there. I was doing sales of gifts and moved on to more customer service. Dismas|(talk) 01:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Pythagorean Theorem
Recently I have found something very interesting about the Pythagorean triples and I have no information whether similar studies already exist. I could not find information in Wikipedia, as well. Briefly this is the following:
Theorem “Pythagoras – 3D” (name given by me)
The sum of the volumes of the three cubes with edges equal to the sides of a triangle, where it’s side lengths are in ratio 3 : 4 : 5 is equal to the volume of a cube with edge equal to the semi perimeter of the triangle. a³ + b³ + c³ = p³, where p = ½ (a + b + c) Furthermore: All these triangles are straight angle triangles e. g.〖 a〗^2+b^2=c^2, as 3^2+4^2=5^2 and the Pythagorean equation can be written as: 3²k + 4²k = 5²k where k is any positive number. If √k is an integer √k = 1, 2, 3 … ∞, e.g. whole number, these all are straight angle triangles e.g. Pythagorean triangles measuring their sides with the integers of the first primitive Pythagorean triple (3, 4, 5) and its generated derivates. Similarly the above equation for cubes can be written as 3³k + 4³k + 5³k = 6³k where k is any positive number. If ³√k is an integer ³√k = 1, 2, 3 … ∞, e.g. a whole number, these cubes are all set of four cubes measuring their edges with integers (whole numbers), that are representing the first primitive Pythagorean triple (3, 4, 5) and its generated non primitive derivates, where the sum of the volumes of the three small cubes is equal to the volume of the largest one and there are no more such cubes, to represent other primitive or non primitive Pythagorean triples or any other combination of four natural numbers!
If k = 1, then 3³ + 4³ + 5³ = 6³!!!
Reverse Theorem
Any cube with edge length m can be divided in three cubes with edge lengths 3/6m; 4/6m and 5/6m e. g.
m³ = (3/6m) ³ + (4/6m) ³ + (5/6m) ³
If m is an integer, divisible by 6, the three small cubes are measuring their edges also with integers (whole numbers) that can be divided by 3, 4 and 5 accordingly. If m = ³√k, then the cubes equation can be written in the same form, as above: 6³k = 3³k + 4³k + 5³k.
If this is still not published by anybody I would like to publish it for discussion. Please tell me how! Regards. Michael Ivanov (talk) 07:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Are you aware we have a Mathematics Reference Desk here? I venture that the good folks there could tell you whether you've discovered something new or not, and if so, how to go about publishing it. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Sherlock Holmes and tobacco usage
Putting aside the cocaine for the moment, throughout the Sherlock Holmes stories, we find that Holmes is fond of attributing his powers of deduction to the time spent devoted to contemplation of the problem at hand while engaging in long smoking sessions with his pipe. Can anyone talk about the type of tobacco he smoked and what benefits it might have offered? I recall reading a few years back that researchers had found that tobacco consumption (possibly nicotine itself) conferred short-term cognitive benefits, probably in the area of attention. Finally, what difference, if any, would there be between the type of tobacco Holmes smoked then as opposed to the kind found today? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 07:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I realize this is unsourced and less than helpful, but I've long thought that smoking, especially taking a "smoke break" where one goes out to calmly smoke while staring off into space, can be vaguely akin to mediation. Not that I condone smoking or partake in it myself. But I've long watched others "take a break" and have a smoke, during which they pensively consider the larger implications of whatever they had been overly-focused upon. Pfly (talk) 07:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- As for what type Holmes smoked, go to this page and search for "black shag" for a description. Deor (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Our article on nicotine#Psychoactive effects touches on possible (short-term) benefits to concentration and memory, along with a discussion of other psychological effects. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
How is prostitution defined, when it's illegal?
Many activities of normal couples - like buying a gift, helping your partner find a job - could be construe as payment for sex, so how do some governments prohibit prostitution without interfering with behavior considered normal? Is there an obvious place to draw a line? Wikiweek (talk) 08:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- The fact that there is no "partnership" relationship between prostitute and client is probably significant - the "relationship" is purely sex for payment. Roger (talk) 08:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- In the UK, prosititution itself is not illegal; however: "a number of related activities, including soliciting in a public place, kerb crawling, owning a brothel, pimping and pandering, are crimes." (Prostitution in the UK) and these are presumably easier to tie down. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 08:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Houses towed by cows on QI?
Hi - did anyone see that episode? Largish buildings being dragged across meadows by teams of cows? Can anyone tell me where that's practiced? Ta Adambrowne666 (talk) 08:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Chiloe, in Chile - http://www.comedy.co.uk/guide/tv/qi/episodes/8/9/ . Pictures here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- And the towing is done by oxen. -- 110.49.225.244 (talk) 12:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Oxen being "Cows strapped to something for towing purposes" --Jayron32 12:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Not usually. Oxen: "Oxen are commonly castrated adult male cattle..." Cows are the ones that give milk. Rmhermen (talk) 13:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- See wether. EDIT - Bizarrely, I could have sworn my English teacher told me it referred to bulls. I shall leave this mistake here. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- "Cow" and "cows" are very commonly used as synonyms for "cattle" of all genders and gonad status regardless of such usage being pedantically incorrect. While, pedantically, the word "cow" only refers to a female cattle, many people use the term to refer to cattle and/or bovines in general. --Jayron32 13:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Nothing more pedantic about correcting someone on this then correcting someone who calls all humans, regardless of gender, women. Googlemeister (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- No, but people do often use the word "man" to refer to humanity in general, i.e. "mankind", etc. It is fairly common, linguisticly, to use one of the genders to also refer to the entire species, both male and female. This is not "wrong", it just is. --Jayron32 17:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Are there any women here? --Dweller (talk) 15:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Nothing more pedantic about correcting someone on this then correcting someone who calls all humans, regardless of gender, women. Googlemeister (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Not usually. Oxen: "Oxen are commonly castrated adult male cattle..." Cows are the ones that give milk. Rmhermen (talk) 13:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Oxen being "Cows strapped to something for towing purposes" --Jayron32 12:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- And the towing is done by oxen. -- 110.49.225.244 (talk) 12:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)