Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.
Hey my mummy said you have rolled up the santa story becuase hes a troll. whats a troll? Katie (age 6) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.8.127 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 14 December 2006
In answer to your question Katie -- a troll is someone who posts things to the internet for the purpose of irritating other people. They ask questions, but aren't interested in the answers. They just want to see people get angry and confused.
thank you i was aksing how santa cud deliver to all the childern in the wirld at the ssame time. Katie age 6
Note -- I have been told that this question is a well-established troll. Even if this is the case, I will answer the question as well as I may, for anyone else who may be interested in the logistics of global gift delivery...
Short answer: it's best not to worry about such things. Santa is very very clever. How else would he know what you want for Christmas? :) Vranak18:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
we usuly writ to him at north pole. But mummy sais sum his nomes now work here so i thot i can say what i want here. i wud like a big big dolly Katie age 6
Santa's nomes may well read wikipedia but I'm sure Santa would prefer a letter from you to him at the North Pole in Lapland. You have to ask nicely otherwise he may forget you, the nicer you are the more likely you are to get what you ask him for. Its the personal touch that counts.AMX19:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Last night I accidentally put my cell phone through the washing machine. It's been about 24 hours and there's a ton of condensation inside the display. It doesn't turn on at all. Do phones usually recover after being washed? Is there anything I can do to fix it? I talked to someone today and they said dipping it in alcohol would dry it out. Is that a good idea or completely ridiculous? Thanks, Xcfrommars01:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
try going to a repair store or something. If the phone has flash memory, it should be fine, with a bit of drying, but if it has a hard drive, then its about time you invest in a new phone, but still, you should take it in to somewhere like radioshack and ask if they can do something about it. It might also have a warranty or something. As for the alcohol, that's a bad idea probably. Ilikefood01:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Take the battery out and let it dry. It may take a few days, but you should be patient. With the battery out, use a paper towel to sop up any moisture you can and clean the contacts for the battery. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Applying any kind of heat to speed drying would be a bad idea, but you can place the opened phone in the gentle stream of a fan or a hair dryer (on a cool setting), OR if you have a dryer rack in your dryer (for shoes), and a cool 'air' setting, you can put the phone (covered) on it and run the dryer on the 'air dry' setting. Anchoress01:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The paper towel might be a bad idea because if your fingers get wet, you could get zapped by the battery and that wouldn't be good, even if its not deadly, it may be painful. Best idea is to check the warranty. Ilikefood01:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At least this is better than a friend of mine, who was leaning over to fix a public toilet that was running full blast,,,, drop and whoosh! --Zeizmic03:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We should probably ask what type of detergent or bleach you used, as they might cause irreversible corrosion of the circuit board inside. StuRat04:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can tell you that dipping electronic devices in Alcohol isn't generally a good idea; I did that with a print head once to try and clean it, and ended up setting the printer on fire. CernenXanthineKatrena11:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Now listen to someone who has actually washed the inside of his TV set -- me! THe most important thing not to do is switch the phone on when its wet as this may cuase all sorts of unintended low resistance paths to appear. What you should do is:
remove the batties
shake out the excess water by hand or leave to drain on your draining board
if you have a hair dryer, gently try to blow the excess moisture out of the phone
then you need to put the phone in front of your dehumidifier output and leave it thre for at least 24 hrs (the dehumid must be on and pumping out dry air.) This will eventually remove every last drop of moisture from your phone.
replace batties, cross fingers arms and legs, then switch on! If it donrt work, its downt o the shop for a new one. But at least you tried! 8-) --Light current22:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So long as it was off before getting wet and you don't turn it on again untill you are 100% sure that it is TOTALLY dry you should get away with it.AMX
New York style "fresh pack" cucumber picles are made with no salt or just a little for flavoring, not for the actual pickling. Sweet pickles also have little or no salt but use sugar instead. See [1]. -THB02:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I could probably list eight or ten distinct ways of preserving food. You only really need to use one of them, unless you're planning on storing a foodstuff for many months. So, you can get away with pickling with just vinegar, or packing in sugar, or packing in salt, or coating in oil. The thing is, these unmoderated solutions don't have the best effect on taste, when you finally getting around to eating the pickles.
I'm hoping to find information on the 2007 Inaugural Ball following the inauguration of Phil Bredesen. It would be nice to know date, location, and how to get tickets/invited.
Most of the search results generated from the above link produce information unrelated to the inaugural -- or they refer to the previous inaugural ball. I've checked on "gubernatorial" as well, but no luck so far.
Eric Goldman said that wikipedia will fail in 4 years because of heave vandalism and spam. Bots alone can't revert vandalism forever. Do you think Wikipedia will survive in the next few years?--PrestonH05:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This seems like a request for an opinion/speculation. The reference desk is better suited towards finding answers that are a bit more... empirically based. Now, if, say 4 years from now you ask whether Wikipedia survived, we can help there. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 05:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Chairboy, the nature of the reference desk is such that speculative questions are quite common. As for your question, PrestonH, bots aren't the only things reverting vandalism; we have a whole task force of volunteer editors that focus on just that sort of thing: the Wikipedia Counter-Vandalism Unit. CernenXanthineKatrena12:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Developers are working on a new feature that allows editing while stable versions are shown. Vandalism is a lot less fun for the vandals when they can't see it show up immediately. - Mgm|(talk)12:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it will take a little more than four years for wikipedia to fail, although people are losing all of their trust in wikipedia after finding numerous pages that have a bunch of nonsense in it.
There seems to be the assumption that no new measures will be taken to combat vandals. There are numerous methods available, including automatic rollback of all of one person's changes, locking pages, restricting edits to registered users only, blocking or banning users, banning I/P addresses, etc. StuRat17:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder what is meant by "fail?" If my first impression is correct (that Wikipedia will be disbanded and cease to exist), the monument that has been put up is very far-reaching and deep-set. The fact that its very mainframe and existence has been set up and drawn from chaos into order by the sheer number of volunteers (as well as the fact that the very nature of Wikipedia is to allow these volunteers to easily contribute to it) practically ensures its eventual growth rather than decay. There are almost assuredly more conscientious editors than vandals, and the vandals that do exist, for the most part, don't stick around for long.
For these reasons, Wikipedia is quite similar to a reverse model of entropy, with all the loose bits of information eventually coming together in a neat structure, despite opposing efforts. 64.90.198.620:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment I can't see any reason for wikipedia to suddenly "fail" and I sincerly hope it never does, the great people out there who contribute and edit are far bigger in number than the scum who try to wreck it.
I am a great fan of wikipedia and I take my hat off to all the people who put a positive effort in towards it, long may it continue.AMX18:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Supposedly he was buried in Marrakesh but later exhumed and re-buried in Cordova but I can't find any detail on the exact location. I always think that the best way to pay homage to any writer is to read his works. meltBanana16:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
how are Watts' works on Christianity viewed by modern theologians and his contemporaries? Is he thought of as a rogue or a true apologetic?
This isn't a homework question, I've been reading Watts and I want to know how "reliable" his views on Christianity are with more established thinkers, especially those of the Church. I know he's been considered a rogue academic, and therefore I suspect he's been considered a rogue Christian theologian, but I want to read the where and how of it. I've deleted the last comment lest it prevent others from answering.
From the article, it doesn't seem too harmful, only a 30 minute high max when smoked? And in the 1990's researchers have conducted experiments in the USA with it? So is it comparitively safe?
The problem with drugs is not always physiological side-effects. A large part of drug-caused mortality and morbidity (i.e., injury, illness) is caused by accidents related to drug use, for example when people drive or go to work while under the influence of a drug. Drug-related crime is also a major problem. BenC711:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it's anything like Diethyltryptamine - don't expect a 'high' - expect to be lying on the floor with blue lips - feeling like you've just been really hit by a truck - they are hallucinogens - but don't expect it to be 'fun' like some speed or cannabis or shrooms - it isn't. As for safety - nobody ever died from eating shit - but how many repeat the experience...83.100.174.7011:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why not read the Dimethyltryptamine page twice? Expect a 'near death experience' - this includes feeling like death, also expect to hallucinate aliens (see machine elf for more info).
With very little regard to safety; in Washington state, there are very few enforcable (or enforced, for that matter) regulations surrounding the safety of construction cranes, and recently, one fell over in Bellevue, Washington and killed a man in his condo. CernenXanthineKatrena12:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The crane you see on top of a building probably lifted itself up to the roof. The main cable control mechanism can pull itself from the ground to the top, using a temporary structure at the top to support its weight. Then it can lift the rest up. It is generally self assembling (with humans of course to control it and bolt things together). That way no "UberCrane" is needed to lift and assemble the construction crane. Edison18:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey i was just looking at a page on Adam Smith and saw a line that said "i like boobies" it was graffiti, so i refreshed the page and it was gone. it just made me wonder: what is the wikipedia page that gets the most graffiti?
The thing is, about a third of Canadians are 'Liberal for life' -- they have never, and will never, vote for any party other than the Liberal Party. So, you can always expect there to be a significant amount of criticism (and vandalism) directed at a non-Liberal Prime Minister -- especially one who is very popular in Alberta. For some reason, the rest of Canada doesn't seem too fond of Alberta or Albertans. Could just be jealous of their oil and gas wealth, of course. :) Cheers. Vranak16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Being an Albertan who has lived in other provinces, I can state categorically that it's not envy of our wealth. It's the belief that we are greedy, culture-free troglodytes who want to force everyone in the country to be a conservative evangelical Christian at the point of our dear, dear guns while we blow up the CBC and replace it with anything American. In other words, they think we're stupid, selfish, heartless, hate-filled rednecks who worship the United States. --Charlene00:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the words, i loved that article about stephen harper. does wikipedia keep stats? say what articles get the most edits or how often the anti-vandalism bots have to act?
I read somewhere that if you melt all the gold in the world, it would fit in a volume the size of a tennis court. Now that is alarmingly rare, and shows as well the quantity of cheaper metals that are added to make jewellery. Now I wonder, why does man use gold as a yardstick for wealth? Gold is just pretty and 'rare' but there are elements that are more rare. Gold does not have intrinsic value. Sandman30s13:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
While the cost of gold is far above it's intrinsic value, I disagree that gold has no intrinsic value. It is highly resistant to corrosion, an excellent electrical conductor, and highly malleable. Those characteristics make it useful for electrical contacts, for example. If it were as cheap as iron, gold and gold alloys could be used widely, such as in wiring, "silverware", and for car body panels. Rust would then be a thing of the past. StuRat17:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I'm missing something but a tennis court doesn't have a volume, it's a two dimensional area. Or did you mean that the height of the net would provide the third dimension? Dismas|(talk)13:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. If you want to be technical the height varies, but the whole volume measurement is an approximation to give the layman an idea of the size. Sandman30s14:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I saw a program on, I believe, the Science Channel, saying that, if all the gold in the core of the earth (which they said makes up only 1% of all the materials there) were melted, the entire land mass of the world would be covered with gold almost a meter deep. I'm doubt that's the volume of a tennis court, but you do the math. ;-) | AndonicOTalk | Sign Here13:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think that Sandman was referring to the gold already mined on the surface, which is no doubt a minuscule fraction of the gold inaccessibly contained in Earth's core. Marco polo13:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article on gold says:
Gold in antiquity was relatively easy to obtain geologically; however, 75% of all gold ever produced has been extracted since 1910.[2] It has been estimated that all the gold in the world that has ever been refined would form a single cube 20 m (66 ft) on a side (8000 m³).
Silver is so common that a lot of the supply comes as a byproduct of mining for other metals such as gold and copper. -THB14:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I received an email from the World Servants. They respected woman - man parity and lived on prayers. Their abbey, Thelema, had just received a gift that had helped to clean the gold layers on the walls, floors and roofs … Down to the bin went the email. -- DLL .. T18:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Really? That's a pity, there is a lot that can be learnt about modern mythology and concerns through spam. Unfortunately I only get the same crap about V1arga. was Thelema abbey mentioned or was it only your elaboration? meltBanana19:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If an astronaut jumped out of a space ship in orbit, he would also be in orbit, and would circle round the earth rather than fall straight down. If he did find a way to fall straight down his parachute wouldn't work, because there is no atmosphere up there. When he did reach the atmosphere, the friction would burn him up. --Auximines09:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The 'easy' way to fall straight down would be to have a rocket firing sideways to reduce the circular orbital speed to zero (or, looking at it another way, to equalize the relative speeds of the top of the Earth's atmosphere and the astronaut). Then gravity would bring the astronaut straight down. Now add another rocket firing downwards, and you can slowly move downwards in complete safety. Unfortunately, this would require prodigious amounts of rocket fuel.
Extending the question, what I've never been clear on is how the Earth's atmosphere reacts to (a) the rotation of the Earth; and (b) the motion of the Earth through space. Does the atmosphere trail off behind the Earth as the Earth moves in its orbit around the Sun? Does the top of the atmosphere move at a different speed to the part of the atmosphere in contact with the Earth's surface? Carcharoth11:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are wrongly assuming that space exercises appreciable drag on the atmosphere. There is no reason for the upper atmosphere to be moving at a different speed due to drag. There are coriolis effects (see also [2]) and other meteorological factors but space drag is not one of them. --Justanother14:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well the only thing that would knock it back would be the solar winds which are deflected by the magnetosphere, so what would push it back? PhilcTECI22:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NASA studied possible emergency procedures for the astronauts to evacuate the shuttle in orbit in their spacesuit and come back to earth. I think the idea has been put on hold because of too many technical difficulties and of the feasability of integrating all the gear needed for a return to earth into the spacesuit. The main way to make the high speed transition into the atmosphere was with a huge balloon slowing down the astronaut and keeping him stable. I can't find the ref. on that though. Keria10:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I found these two articles: [3] and [4]. The first link is the system proposed after the Columbia disaster, the second (an astronautix entry on 'Rescue') looks at the history of such systems, and has some pretty pictures. For future reference, I found these with a Google search using the following separate terms: "nasa" "astronaut" "emergency" "reentry" "balloon". Carcharoth11:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We already have an article on one of these systems at MOOSE. Our material on the FIRST re-entry glider seems to be at Rogallo wing and Paresev. But that is only 2 of the 35 re-entry systems listed at the astronautix 'Rescue' page I linked above. Does anyone want to check out Wikipedia's coverage of the other re-entry systems? Carcharoth11:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Highly unlikely - the main problem is heating when re-entering the atmosphere. An astronaut in low Earth orbit is moving at 8 km/s (relative to the Earth), he needs to shed most of this speed in order to land safely. Also, if your astronaut is in a stable orbit you first need to reduce his speed enough so that the periapsis of his orbit is far enough inside the atmosphere to slow him down further - this will require rocket engines of some sort strapped to your astronaut. Once you've done that, the astronaut will re-enter the atmosphere at the above 8 km/s. Think of what happens to the Space Shuttle when it re-enters the atmosphere, it glows white-hot from the friction of re-entry - that kind of heat will reduce your astronaut to cinders in a few seconds. So you need to encase him in some kind of heat shielding, which will probably end up looking more like a miniature spacecraft than a space suit. Assuming you can survive the brutal heating, a multi-stage parachute (à la Project Excelsior, which you linked to) should get your astronaut down the rest of the way, assuming he hasn't spun out of control during re-entry. Bottom line: theoretically possible, very hard to do in practice.
<geek hat on>The Mandalorians used a tactic similar to this in planetary assaults, they would encase their soldiers in power armour, and drop them into the atmosphere of a planet from orbit, where, with the help of a Basilisk war droid, they would reduce their speed enough to be able to land near the target and attack it directly... </geek> — QuantumEleven11:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking, the 8km/s is the escape velocity needed to attain the orbital speed relative to the Earth's surface needed to avoid falling to Earth (ie. to instead fall in a parabola large enough to fall continuously around the Earth - which is another way of describing the process of orbiting the Earth). The heating when re-entering the atmosphere assumes that you re-enter at this speed. This orbital speed (I'm assuming it to be 8km/s) is only needed if want to orbit by free-falling around the Earth. As I said above, you can reduce this orbital speed relative to the Earth's surface by firing a rocket against the direction of your orbital movement, and you then naturally fall to Earth as the endpoint of your parabola falls below the horizon. But if you also fire a rocket straight downwards, you can hover in orbit at that point. Takes far too much energy to do in practice, as to reduce the orbital speed to zero you have to expend the same amount of energy used in take-off to attain this orbital speed in the first place. But once you've done this, then the "8km/s problem" vanishes, though you do need to have continuous upwards thrust equal to the weight of the spacecraft to hover at that position in orbit. Reduce the orbital speed relative to the Earth's surface to zero while maintaining this upwards thrust, then manouevre over a particular point on the Earth's surface, then remove the upwards thrust and watch the spacecraft fall downwards towards that point. Terminal velocity in the upper reaches of the atmosphere is quite high, so you might want to adjust things so that the craft doesn't burn up. Once the craft reaches the denser parts of the atmosphere, it will fall normally at terminal velocity until it hits the surface. I'm not sure how much effects winds and the Coriolis effect would have, but I suspect that because the object is not moving laterally relative to the Earth's surface below, the Coriolis effect would not apply. Carcharoth14:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The likelihood of an Astronaut (or anyone else for that matter) free-falling from anything above 20 meters, let alone 20 kilometers, and surviving the ordeal is vanishingly-small in my estimation. Vranak16:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that the atmosphere is vanishingly thin above the stratosphere. So if the space shuttle was in geosynchronous orbit and the astronaut pushed off with all of his might toward Earth, what's the difference between that and starting your descent a few miles lower, like in my link? Why would the astronaut burn up and not the guy going up in a balloon? --frothTC19:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're making a common mistake: that of mixing up "orbit" and "space". Space is an altitude (and an arbitrarily defined one at that). Orbit is a velocity (and for Earth it's a huge velocity). A guy in a balloon isn't moving w.r.t the atmosphere, so he only has his potential energy to lose on the way down, which is something his chute can comfortably handle. Someone in orbit is moving at around mach 35: he has a huge amount of kinetic energy too, and in order to get down to the ground (and be stationary wrt it when he gets there) he has to get rid of that too - that's a job way beyond any existing parachute/shuttlecock technology - only a heatshield is capable of handling the energies involved (using modern technologies).
This is all true, but you are talking about a stable orbit here. One where an object just orbits indefinitely without needing to burn any fuel to maintain the orbit. Have a look at orbit. It is entirely possible (if rather difficult) to expend fuel to hover at a point above a planet. If you start from that point, then re-entry becomes a lot easier. Most cases of re-entry assume that it is an orbiting object, rather than a hovering object, that is re-entering the atmosphere, and in most cases that is a correct assumption to make. But it is not the only possibility. Carcharoth01:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are right that in geostationary orbit you are not moving relative to the atmosphere. Have a look at the article. You will see that for the Earth, geostationary orbit is a long way out. The Space Shuttle and the ISS operate in near-Earth orbit, but the communications satellites are a lot further out. To move inwards from geostationary orbit, pushing downwards is not the best way. As you move downwards, you are not losing your tangential speed, and something will happen (not quite sure what - probably your circular orbit will become elliptical). The best way to move downwards is to push away from the direction you are travelling, ie. slow down your motion along the tangent of the orbital circle. Carcharoth01:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The heating effect on something (or someone) reentering the atmosphere from space is related to its kinetic energy. The Space Shuttle heated up so much because it was massive (heavy). Every square foot of wing had to dissipate the kinetic eneregy of a massive amount of ship and contents. After the breakup some computer equipment in nylon bags, some biological experiments, and even a videotape in a camcorder survived the latest Space Shuttle disaster because they were less massive relative to the surface area dissipating the heat. Please read the MOOSE article and the associated cites and Google it as well. The engineering calcs by GE showed that a small (1.8 meter diam) expanded foam cone would allow survival during reentry. Now consider that the retrorocket need not be as powerful as the engine that put the astronaut up there: it only has to reduce his velocity by about 1% to allow reentry. If the Shuttle is going about 17500 miles/hour, a retro rocket need only eliminate about 175 mph of the velocity, or about 256 feet/second (78 meters/sec). Then the relatively small ablative heat shield and finally a parachute does the rest. The total system, including astronaut, weighed 215kg. It would make as much sense to use the MOOSE system to reenter when a space shuttle was too damaged to reenter or a space station had to do an emergency evacuation and there was insuccifient reentry vehicle space as to use a rubber raft when you plane ditched or your ship sank in the middle of the ocean. An set of updated MOOSE devices could be shipped up to a stranded shuttle by a cargo rocket if they did not want to carry the extra 150kg or so of reentry device per crewmember. Edison19:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can you add funds to a non US paypal account using a credit card? How? I tried looking through the help pages but couldn't find a definite answer. Thanks. WP09:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you can, the same way you would use a credit card for a US account. I have a non-US PayPal account and add money to it using my credit card. — QuantumEleven11:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You would probably have to register the cc with them first. That is where they deposit two small amounts to the account and you tell them what the amounts were. --Justanother13:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the correct way of indicating the number"4" in Roman numerals is "IV", why are all clock faces having Roman numerals showing the number "4" as "IIII"?
That article has too many explanations; the first one is obviously right. Note that IX, not VIIII, is used opposite III. --Anon, December 15, 00:11 (UTC).
Note that it is clearly labeled. Anyway. My supervisor, a shop lead and I were having a bit of a discussion at work today about sex (God knows why my supervisor, a single adult middle aged male, an elderly woman who looks like the Crypt Keeper and myself were having this discussion, but it's a factory, anything's possible), and my supervisor asked me if it was possible to catch a cold from an act of oral intercourse. (He used more colorful language...) I told him no; not all bodily fluids are the same. He asserts that you can, while the lead (the woman) said, "See? I told you so. It's not possible." So...uh...I guess the question is, can you catch a cold from oral sex or not? CernenXanthineKatrena12:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My uninformed non-medical-professional opinion would be yes, because the cold virus is transmitted through the mucous membranes, which exist in the mouth, on the glans penis and the vulva/vagina. Anchoress12:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note is there any chance of having a Wikipedia:Reference desk/Bodilyfunctions and sexual behaviour(age restricted) section where people of like mind can discuss their diseases/unnatural bodily growths etc to there hearts contents... Not that I object... Maybe we could call it medical anatomy/human behaviour - there seems to be a lot of interest. Dr.Wikipedia.83.100.174.7012:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that cold viruses infect the respiratory system. Thus they would not infect reproductive organs. However, cold viruses are often transmitted via the hands of an infected person (who may frequently wipe or blow his or her nose). It is not unusual for hands to touch reproductive organs before or during sex. In this way, oral sex could contribute to transmission of the virus. That said, if an infected person washed his or her hands and genitals thoroughly with soap and water immediately prior to sex and kept hands away from face during sex, and if the sex did not involve kissing or other face-to-face contact, I think that it would be reasonably safe, from the point of view of cold transmission. Marco polo13:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See: Common cold. This type of virus is usually spread through droplets. If you're close enough to someone to have oral sex with them, you're close enough to inhale droplets. (Unless you hold your breath.) -THB13:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Without attempting a medical explanation, my inclination would be that contracting the common cold as a result of engaging in oral sex is an unlikely prospect. After all, people tend to only do that sort of thing if their partner is looking relatively clean, healthy, and not exhibiting signs of illness. Cheers -- Vranak00:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
83.100.174.70: Wikipedia is not censored for minors we have hundreds, possibly thousands of pages that society would deem "innapropriate" for minors. I'm a minor myself, and day after day revert sexually-based vandalism, or have to remove sexually-depicted images from Userpages etc.. We have no age-restricted material on Wikipedia, and I doubt that it will ever happen. A new desk is possible though :-) — Deon555talkdesk08:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I'm concerned, say you give a book voucher, it's like saying "I know you like books, but don't know exactly what you want or already have - so here is a voucher to go and buy one you'd like". It's just a bit more personal than cash as it shows you've considered what the person may like, where they may like to shop, and you've actually made the effort to go out and buy something for them instead of just pulling some cash out of your wallet. --jjron13:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not all gift certificates have expiry dates. Also, though I (and others) call book vouchers, vouchers, it seems that the precise meaning of voucher differs from that of gift certificate (a redirect to scrip). I'd never heard the term 'scrip' before. Thanks for linking to that. Carcharoth13:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The voucher article says "A voucher is a certificate which is worth a certain monetary value and which may only be spent for specific reasons or on specific goods". I'm not sure how that makes it an invalid term - certainly seems to cover gift certificates. It may vary in different places, but it's certainly a very commonly used term in Australia. --jjron13:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant this bit: "The term voucher is also a synonym for receipt, and is often used to refer to receipts used as evidence of, for example, the declaration that a service has been performed or that an expenditure has been made." - you are right though, voucher has two meanings. Carcharoth14:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can confirm that the travel industry issues vouchers. I think it is to do with the way the money circulates. You pay the travel agent. The travel agent books the hotel and gives you a voucher. You give the voucher to the hotel and stay there. The hotel sends the voucher to the travel agent (or scan it) and the hotel get their money from the travel agent. I think that is more like a coupon than a voucher. But though these processes of circulating money and paper substitutes are distinct, the terms used can sometimes be rather fluid and interchangeable. The linking with receipt might be a misunderstanding, as people might think the voucher is a receipt for the money they gave the travel agent. Carcharoth15:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of what we see is differences in usage between English-speaking countries along with the desire to WP:NOT a dictionary and to keep the usages together. It is possible that voucher should be WP:MERGED to scrip. --Justanother14:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
While I did know what scrip was I'd never heard of it used in reference to gift certificates before, as Carcharoth also said. Now I'm not sure where Carcharoth is from, but while there could be an argument for merging these articles, I'm not convinced that 'scrip' is the best or most widely used term. --jjron14:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, good point. I notice that there's also a Trading stamp article. Any others come to mind? And furthermore, trading stamp links to half a dozen different articles on different brands of trading stamps. There'd be quite a bit of work in merging all these successfully. --jjron15:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gift certs were originally sold at a discount, so there was a value in them. For example, a gift cert for $100 in merchandise might only cost $50. This $50 gain had the potential to offset the following losses:
Risk that the cert will not be redeemed at all, due to loss, expiration, or the recipient not caring to shop at that store.
Interest lost on the money during the period between purchase and redemption.
Risk that the cert won't exactly match the purchase amount, and either a portion of the cert will not be redeemed, or extra money beyond the value of the cert will be spent.
Risk that the recipient will buy unwanted items to "use up" the gift cert before it expires.
Extra cost of buying items at that store, likely not on sale, versus on sale and/or elsewhere.
Sale items were typically excluded.
Over time, however, retailers realized that people bought the gift certs more as a quick gift that doesn't require much thought, but doesn't seem as crude as cash. Thus, they reduced, then eliminated, the discount, added exclusions, shortened the period before expiration, and now have started to have them lose value, before expiration, as well. Thus, they no longer make financial sense. It's up to each purchaser to decide if the convenience of not having to put much thought or time into a purchase is worth the additional cost of a gift cert. StuRat15:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting. Do you have any sources so this can be put in articles? A timeline would be good as well. What sort of dates are you talking about here? Carcharoth15:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, but I'd like to see some refs. We used to get/give 'record vouchers' in the 80s, there was no discounting from the retailer. In fact, if I remember correctly, some stores in fact charged for them (like $1 above face value). Some probably still do. --jjron15:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a site where you can view some of the terms for certain gift certs, although it doesn't address the historic changes in gift certs: [5]. StuRat16:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There's actually a huge flaw in your 'historical' argument. If I was going to buy something from a store, why wouldn't I go in, buy myself a gif certificate, then redeem it for my purchase, automatically getting myself a 50% (or whatever it may be) discount? --jjron01:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
They could, and did. 50% would be the about the upper limit on discounts, with 10% or 20% being more typical. Places that gave a 50% discount had high normal prices and substantial, frequent sales (around 50%) most of the time, anyway. Since the gift certs excluded sales, they really didn't provide much savings over what you could get normally. Still, this "misuse" of gift certs may be one reason they stopped selling them at a discount. StuRat21:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another reason gift certs might be preferred over cash is to provide the giver with a degree of control. For example, giving gift certs for a clothes store might be a parent's way of getting their teens to buy new clothes, while still allowing them the autonomy to shop for themselves. StuRat15:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another reason is so that the receiver thinks of the giver when making the purchase, and associates the item purchased with the giver. Cash is far more likely to just go in with a lot of other cash. --jjron15:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Within a family or between close friends, the smartest and best gift certificates are those which are written out by the giver and included in a card. It could say "This gift certificate entitles (insert name of recipient) to the leather jacket of his choice, cost not to exceed $(Insert estimated price of nice jacket). This coupon expires (insert date not too far in the future, to get them to actually go and get it." If the giver knows the receiver wants a set of diamond earrings, a plasma TV, a speedboat, a new computer, a new celphone, an audio system, a PS3 which is almost unavailable but will be common as dirt in a couple of months, a telescope, plastic surgery, a remodeled kitchen or bathroom, a new car, or cosmetic dental work, this shows that the giver wants the recipient to actually get the thing, and soon, and guarantees the cost, but avoids the pitfalls of certificates which get eaten up by exhorbitant "maintenance fees" by the store, or arbitrary expiration dates, and it serves as a reminder to make sure they go ahead and splurge out of a common bank account, and it gets around the problem of it being sometimes impossible to know which size, color, model, features, appeal to another person. The doorman, mail carrier, or cleaning lady prefers cash. Edison16:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent suggestion. But why not take it further and make it a non-material gift cert like "entitles the bearer to one free foot massage" or "may be redeemed for one free gutter leaf removal service" ? StuRat16:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou for your thoughts. The best way would probably just to agree with the family that no one will buy presents. It would save a lot of money and time.--Codell[ Talk]22:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on not buying presents, but you can still give presents, just have them be homemade gifts. Remember, the best gifts come from the heart (although some people may be a bit touchy about getting an aorta for xmas). :-) StuRat21:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nine out of Ten Americans belive that One out of Ten americans Disagrees with the other nine
Why is this? For What reason do we have to always argue over pointless things? Why do we do this? Is it in human nature?
Catman50313:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC) Catman503[reply]
This is a very strange question - where did you hear "Nine out of Ten Americans belive that One out of Ten americans Disagrees with the other nine"? In any case, it's human nature to disagree, people have different views of the world. — QuantumEleven13:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why do people disagree?.. If we didn't we'd all be the same - like clones, not a very good answer, sorry. Also perhaps it's good to argue over trivia - we agree on the important things - don't like being chopped in to bits, like food, squirrels etc. - at least it encourages humane interactions.. Some people don't argue over pointless things, but they often lead quite quiet lives - see hermit or asceticism.83.100.174.7013:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not saying I agree, but wouldn't Wikipedia:Reference desk#Medicine or Wikipedia:Reference desk#Medical be a bit more succinct? --jjron15:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are obvious problems with anonymous persons of unknown qualification and motivation answering people's psychological and medical questions. Someone who died or was harmed by bad medical or mental health advice would likely have a cause of action against the anonymous adviser, and possibly against the Wikipedia Foundation. That is the reason for the disclaimer which people often forget to include in their response. In contrast, GoAskAlice.com [6] is an online Q & A service of healthcare professionals at Columbia University, which has a library of FAQs and which will answer questions about what could be causing the voices in a questioner's head or the soreness and oozing from their private parts. Better them than random volunteers at the Reference desk of Wikipedia. The instructions at the top of the Ref Desk page would be improved by links to such online or phone help lines for people with medical or psychological questions, and with links to suicide help lines, since sometimes people ask questions implying an intent to harm themselves or others. I have seen people here ask for the most painless way to commit suicide and the responders giving them serious or facetious suggestions, which is unacceptable. Edison16:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I read the archive - and think it was a good idea. I can give two extra reasons - 1. shorter desks will mean that the archiving is less often - I can't help thinking a few days before the question dissapears into the mists of the archives is not always a long enough time to get a good response. 2. More specialised desks may improve the overall quality of the responses, I've noticed more than once that people respond to questions that they are not really qualified to answer - ie giving an obviously wrong answer (not saying I never mess up or do this). Dividing the desks into departments (like at a university) seems like a good idea. For people who are a little confused there could be a reference desk:science general - and then their question could be directed to the more specialised place..I'd like to promote again the tree like structure proposed by person "freshoftheuk"83.100.174.7016:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think I would call such a Reference Desk 'Psychology and Personal Advice'. If you called it 'Counselling and Psychiatry', persons practicing those professions would likely frown upon it. Vranak16:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was really hoping it would not deal in advice but facts and theories..either as a medical subsection or as two subsections "biology" and "psychology" - the latter would leave the science desk as a 'physical sciences' question place.83.100.174.7016:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Experimental psychology is science, and belongs on the Science desk. Counseling could go on another desk, but unqualified, or possibly malicious (how many articles get vandalized each day?)people giving potentially harmful advice would create serious liability exposure. Edison15:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In a local hardware store, I've seen devices for sale which I would find quite handy: you plug three sets of composite cables into them, then plug the device into the composite cable ports on your TV. Would these degrade the signal at all? I've seen some for sale for $80, and some for $15 -- how big would the difference be, and why the massive difference in cost? I have four or five machines, all using composite cables, so something like this would be excellent -- but if it introduced flickering, blur, or any other flaws into the picture, I wouldn't want it. I'd appreciate someone enlightening me about these devices, and what they're actually called. Pesapluvo15:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a switching box -
a. these shouldn't be expensive at all - the $80 ones I would guess are a rip off unless they have other functions.
b. I wouldn't expect any noticable degredation of the signal (unless the thing is really badly made)
I think I know what you mean, one of my friends has one of these. Of course adding any complexities to the cabling can and will degrade the signal, but it's really not noticeable in general use. And it is convenient. The one my friend has has I think four inputs, and a switch to select between them. The biggest problem is with cables coming loose; I'm guessing it wasn't a very expensive one. I suppose the more you pay the better quality plugs, switches and internal wiring, but whether the difference is that significant ($15 to $80), who knows. Mind you, it could be worth the difference if you got that remote with it. --jjron15:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
16:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)16:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)~~== Mystique ==
Wedgie board is as mystical as the word itself. The word widgie does not even appear in English dictionary. Even the Wikipedia misses it out. Most people know its mystical powers as a means of communication with non-worldly presence. There are real life accounts of such phenomena (not just in movies).
Ouija Boards: Purportedly not to be played with. Apparently Ouija boards somehow act as "portals" to another dimension (the after-life, if you can believe in it). And spirits use these boards as a gateway into our world. Once the entity has entered our world, it is very hard to get rid of, and takes lots of cleansing or "exorcising". This is what most psychics and clairvoyants will tell you. Tini K16:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I recently saw a television show about the holocaust. It was filmed in Poland during the cold war. Many lay people were interviewed such as women and old people. They stated in a matter of fact way how the Nazi killed all the Jews, but left one boy alive to burn bodies, he was kept alive because he could sing well. They showed him, the only Jew left, standing infront of a church where many were gassed. Who was this man? Where in Poland did this take place? What was the name of the show?
Also, does wiki have any articles on Jews who survived the war, while remaining in Poland.
Thank you
Was it possibly part of Shoah that you saw? I haven't seen it for many years, but your description is reminiscent of parts, especially the "matter of fact"ness of the interviews, the church scene, the one kept alive. If I remember correctly (and I may not) many of those stories came from Treblinka. Antandrus (talk)16:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to clarify my request, I wanted to know about Jews who survived the war, in Poland but not in a camp or ghetto. Further more Shoah is the film I saw. It is one of the best things I have ever seen on tv, thank you for helping.
The individual in question was indeed featured in Claude Lanzmann's documentary, Shoah. The name of the boy was Shimon Srebrnik, who was transported from the ghetto at Lodz to the death camp at Chelmno. He was shot before the Nazis evacuated the camp, but managed to survive despite his wounds, one of only two people to emerge from what was a pure extermination facility. Some 350,000 people perished in the gas vans of Chelmno. Clio the Muse00:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not if you follow the conference agenda currently being discussed in Iran!!!!!!!!!!!!
After my Nana passed on, we were unable to find a recipe for a sweet honey drenched pastry she used to bake. She called them Castidads...does anyone know how to make them or what the true name for them is???
Thanks, DB
Maybe this helps: With the "honey drench", and being an Italian dish, and thinking "not Baklava", I'm guessing Nana made rice fritters, but Italian recipes give the name "Frittelle di riso". Possibly the traditional name you learned was derived from, or similar to Calas-tous-chauds (rice fritters)?"Calas" (the "L" not pronouced) by itself is a sort of rice fritter (and in Wikipedia). -- Seejyb22:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In case you wanted to know what the line bit of telephone line refers to, follow the link I provided. It is called a land line because the signal from most installed domestic telephones travels through cables either underground, or anchored to structures on the ground. This is as opposed to wireless signals that travel through the air. Of course, at any point in the journey, a signal may be travelling in a cable, through the air as electromagnetic waves, or being routed through places like a satellite. But the last parts of the journey to telephones integrated into the structure of a building, will be through a land line. Carcharoth17:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What this is probably getting at is that lots of devices like ordinary modems, fax machines, answering machines, and the like will all work with an "analog phone line" (also referred to as POTS, "Plain Old Telephone Service") but will be blown up if connected to certain "digital phone lines" (such as are used in businesses in Key telephone systems and PBXs). These digital lines often contain power supply lines as well as non-usable digital telephone data.
It's just a regular telephone line. They never used to need to specify that it was "analog" before we had digital phone lines, and they never used to need to specify a "land line" before wireless phones came into use. I suppose, in the future, if we have flying cars, our current cars will all need to be called "terrestrial cars" or some such thing. StuRat17:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to know more about Simon Srebnik.
I wish to know more about Franz Sachomel too.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.:-)
Please see what I have written above under the heading 'Nazi' above. Shimon Srebrnik was one of only two survivors of the extermination camp at Chelmno. He died in 2004. SS Unterscharführer Franz Suchomel served at Treblinka and Sobibor. He, too, was interviewed by Lanzmann in the making of Shoah. A google search under this name will give you all of the relevant details. Clio the Muse00:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Our local grocery store never seems to have everything done at all much less on schedule. One of the managers said it is because many of his stockers never show up which put an extra burden on those who do so then even the steady ones begin to not show up. I was wondering if an acceptable solution might be to set a "job price" for getting the store done by a certain time and then scheduling only enough people so that the "job price" would match the agreed upon wages and then pay those who show up the "bonus" created by those who do not show up as an incentive to not only show but to get the job done on time even though the store would be technically short handed? Adaptron18:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, that might do it. It certainly looks as if something in the supply/demand equation needs to change. --Tagishsimon(talk)
It sounds like we first need to determine the existing problem. That is, why exactly do steady workers stop showing up after a while ? One possibility is an extremely abusive boss. If that's the problem, get rid of him. Perhaps pay is just insufficient. If so, raise pay. Maybe they just injure themselves. If so, perhaps better equipment is needed. StuRat17:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good in theory, but it sounds like they can't find enough employees willing to do the job for the pay offered. So, if they fire those they have, they will be even more under-staffed than they are now. It's apparent to me that the pay needs to be raised. StuRat14:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
