Miscellaneous desk
< August 9	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 11 >

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.

August 10

Biggest Bridge

I was just wondering what the biggest bridge in the world was.--67.84.12.248 14:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if by biggest you mean longest see List of bridges by length. Jon513 14:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also see List of notable bridges for superlative bridges in various dimensions. --Sean 15:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also see List of longest suspension bridge spans --Anonymous, August 13, 2007, 23:56 (UTC).

Chernobyl Birth Defects

I saw a story on 60 Minutes about the Chernobyl disaster a long time ago, and it was talking about birth defects due to the disaster. It showed images across the screen, and one was of a human fetus with a fish-like tail instead of legs. It looked like something out of a freak show and they did not go into detail about it at all, which I found odd. Does anyone have any information on this and if it is real, and if possible, could you link me to this image? Thanks a lot. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 03:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is a rare birth defect known as Sirenomelia. Maybe that's what you're thinking of? Macnas 03:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, but I really don't think so. This honestly just looked like a fish tail. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 04:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"You may also want to read (http://www.atomicinsights.com/apr96/effects.html) as well as a lot more about Chernobyl. The scientific evidence to suggest that birth defects had/have increased for those exposed isn't really there. There is a lot of wildly wrong information detailed about the effects of Chernboyl. ~~

Well, in the case of Chernobyl there are big disputations between the WHO's estimates of things and those local to the countries affected. Adriana Petryna's book Life Exposed has good coverage of this. As far as I could tell the data was fairly ambiguous in this case. Additionally with radioactive issues the effects can be very hard to see in only a few decades time; the health effects of the Castle Bravo test were not significantly visible in the affected populations until two decades later (see Project 4.1). --24.147.86.187 16:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I remember seeing that same piece on 60 Minutes, except it wasn't about Chernobyl, it was about Semipalatinsk, which is a town downwind of the main Soviet nuclear test site in Kazakhstan. Hopefully that will point you in the right direction. (24.114.255.83 21:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The ABC's of MBE's, DSO's etc.

Is there a rule regarding the order in which these British honors are supposed to follow the recipient's name? If one is awarded a bar to a DSO, is that supposed to be indicated? Clarityfiend 06:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You do indicate the bar (see, for example, Guy Gibson, first one that came to my mind).

As for the order, Commonwealth Realms orders and decorations indicates the order of wear for honors. VC always goes first, then KCMG, and so on. Neil ム 08:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GCE A LEVEL MARKING

in cambridge international examinations DOES aNY1 HAve any idea of HOW much marks or % makes up for an A(a) grade in ALEvel mathss ? i have been given a B(b) , about which i think i deserve better than that and what is the procedure of raw marks , conversions , and dividing boundaries between B , C , D grades?

i need help from any1 who has a very sound knowledge of examining or examination body

It varies every year, depending on how many people achieved an A grade the year before. If you are unhappy with your grade, you can request a remarking, but you will need to do so fairly quickly if you want it relooked at before clearing finishes. Neil ム 08:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget that when remarked there is the possiblity of being downgraded as well as upgraded. Basically you are asking the to re-examine the paper and they may feel it was marked to leniently by the first examiner. Lanfear's Bane

BUT WHAT IS THE MEANING( & EXPLANATION) OF

"" a review of the marking of externally-assessed components including a full clerical re-check"

THIS IS what examiners say will do , if i request an exam grade enquiry

can any1 plz HELP

Some A Levels are partly assessed "internally" (ie by the instution you study in). A remark means all of the "externally" assessed parts (ie the bits marked by the examining board) are reviewed. I presume the clerical re-check is that someone checks that the sums add up and that you didn't miss out on a better grade because of a simple mistake in adding up. --Dweller 14:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I recall you need 80% or greater overall to get an A grade. Tomgreeny 01:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boxing fouls

What is the status of a kicking foul in a boxing bout?Is it a serious foul?08:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)Ecclesiasticalparanoid

From Boxing#Rules:

In general, boxers are prohibited from hitting below the belt, holding, tripping, pushing, biting, spitting or wrestling. They also are prohibited from kicking... Violations of these rules may be ruled "fouls" by the referee, who may issue warnings, deduct points, or disqualify an offending boxer, causing an automatic loss, depending on the seriousness and intentionality of the foul. An intentional foul that causes injury that prevents a fight from continuing usually causes the boxer who committed it to be disqualified. A fighter who suffers an accidental low-blow may be given up to five minutes to recover, after which they may be ruled knocked out if they are unable to continue. Accidental fouls that cause injury ending a bout may lead to a "no decision" result, or else cause the fight to go to a decision if enough rounds (typically four or more, or at least three in a four-round fight) have passed.

From that it seems that intent/impact will aid a subjective decision. So a full-throttle kick in the unmentionables will be treated differently than a weak flick at the leg of someone looking to take a dive. Hope that's helpful. --Dweller 12:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was nine years ago and Becks deserved to go off ... let it lie! (nb, not English) Neil ム 13:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to feeling that we've been robbed on the footie pitch, the English are not the only ones who have got a long memory! --Dweller 14:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but we have more grudges to hold :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amputation

I've looked through the articles on bleeding, amputation, battle medecine and many more. However, i have not been able to answer a query i have. I was considering a person who has their leg (from below the knee) cut off. They will obviously die from massive bloodloss unless immedeate medical treatment is given. What is this treatment? Cuban Cigar 11:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How has the leg been removed and how long between removal and medical intervention? I ask the former because some kinds of accident can stem or stop bleeding (byheat cauterising etc), --Dweller 11:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The leg was cut off with a sharp object (sword cleaver) and medical intervention is immedeate. I was told that byheat cauterising doesn't work with such a large wound because it will stop blood flow and cause necrosis.Cuban Cigar 12:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I wasn't clear... I meant that the accident itself may have helped stem bloodflow (I read an account of an injury caused by a large, sharp rock, that sliced off a body part and sealed the wound temporarily in one action). A sword cleaver (whatever that is!) doesn't sound like it'll do much good, lol. --Dweller 12:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See emergency bleeding control for some treatment options. If a leg has been cleanly severed by a sharp object, it is unlikely that the major blood vessels will be crushed or cauterized. Applying pressure or a tourniquet to reduce the loss of blood until additional medical care can be delivered is a possible strategy. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 12:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It this 'additional medical care' that i'm looking for-what is it exactly? Cuban Cigar 12:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The victim will need to be treated for Shock. A blood transfusion will be a likely need, with other fluids too. Something to numb the pain would be good. As would something to prevent infection, but that's a slightly longer term worry, but gangrene is a real danger, not just tetanus. Oh - and a method for properly stopping the blood flow, replacing the tourniquet, possibly requiring a "better" amputation. I'm probably missing stuff out - this is based on years of watching Casualty - I doubt if it'd get me through an emergency medicine viva. --Dweller 12:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Err... are you looking for stitching the blood vessels shut? Gzuckier 15:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of the immediate effects of an amputation is often that the artery, no longer being stretched, will snap back up inside the limb a small amount. It can sometimes (not always) constrict for a minute or two, stemming immediate blood flow, but then it relaxes and true arterial bleeding begins. I always carried a couple of hemostats in my aid bag. One to reach in, find the artery and pull it out, and the other to clamp across the artery to stem the flow of blood. I was going to suggest googling "emergency treatment amputation" but it is amazing how general and vague some of those pages are. You might want to find a military medic handbook for specifics. 152.16.188.107 00:22, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Lube

What colour are the uniforms at Mr. Lube? Also, what percentage of their Canadian locations are unionized? Neon Merlin 14:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click on "Mr Lube" on this page: [1] there is a training video for Mr Lube employees. It shows them wearing all-black uniforms with yellow name tags. No idea on unionisation though. SteveBaker 16:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shortest sporting event

Tried searching in all sorts of places for this without any luck.What would be the world's shortest sporting event(in terms of time)? Drag racing I would imagine is over in 20 seconds,the 100m comes in at under 10 seconds.IIRC correctly the Scotland v Estonia game in 1996 lasted 2 or 3 seconds.Roderick Plumpton caught the Snitch in 2 1/2 seconds in 1921(although I think he may be eliminated on the grounds he is imaginary)Any other contenders for a definite answer for this category? Lemon martini 14:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The scope of your question seems to be undefined. If you are including fictional sporting events, there's no end to the possibilities. I could make one up right now. You also need to define a "sporting event" and also recognize that not all sporting events are timed or recorded for time. If I had to guess, I'm sure some boxing matches or sumo wrestling matches can be extremely short. Leebo ^T/C 14:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're looking for shortest typical time, I think you may have been onto something with the drag racing suggestion. But 20 seconds for a quarter mile run is ridiculously long. Even a slow street car will almost always be quicker than that. A top fuel dragster will run under 5 seconds on a good run. Friday (talk) 14:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it depends on when you define the start and finish of an 'event' - drag racing events take all evening - each dragster takes multiple runs and the scores are added up at the end. But a single race is over in a very short period. If you define 'event' as the time between start and end of one 'round' (as you are for drag racing) - then I'd imagine target shooting would be the quickest. Between pulling the trigger and the bullet striking the target would be a tiny fraction of a second. That seems unfair because the shooter sits there for a while before pulling the trigger - but is that really any different from your drag racer revving his engine, getting his tyres warm, etc? SteveBaker 16:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some boxing matches have ended with one punch. That might be a very short while. Judo and other martial arts can end about as soon as they begin if one opponent is much more skilled. Dog races are reputed to be over pretty quickly, but I've never seen one. Arm wrestling (wrist wrestling) can be over almost immediately if the opponents are mismatched. Edison 16:12, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good fencing can be incredibly quick Plasticup 17:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose of triple jump in ancient Greece

All of the athletic (track and field) sports in the Olympics have a seemingly purposeful value in the battlefields of ancient Greece. For example, the running events teaches the athlete to run away or towards opponent, high jump could be used to jump over a wall, shotput and javelin could train the athlete to launch a projectile at an enemy, long jump can be used to jump over a river, etc... But what battle-related skill does triple jump train? Acceptable 16:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are your assertions about the purpose of the other events speculation or is there documentation that the events had such purposes outside of competition? For instance, the javelin throw is more about distance than accuracy, so its usefulness in training soldiers to hit a target would be limited. Basically, I'm just curious about whether there is actually precedent for a militaristic purpose in the events or not. Leebo ^T/C 17:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's just my speculation. Acceptable 17:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Greek games (like the Panathenaia and the Pythian Games) also had dancing and singing competitions, and male beauty contests, which are also not very useful on the battlefield. The military-esque contests were part of the games not because they had any intrinsic military value, but because that is what the Greeks did in the Iliad, at the funeral games of Patroclus. What I mean is, someone did not sit down and invent the games as a way of training for the military; it was just a very ancient tradition that this is what Greeks do for fun. Of course, in the Iliad, the games are supposed to have military value, and that fact was certainly not lost on Greeks who participated in the historical games; for many of them, athletic and military training went hand-in-hand anyway. Adam Bishop 17:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The unsourced tag seems a bit much... lol Kuronue 18:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has since been removed, both because it was a tad excessive and because it places the page in article-related categories. Leebo ^T/C 19:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are..

so many Wikipedia editors absolutely ridiculous? Seriously, I just came from checking in on the guideline for a policy I'd been helping edit a month or two ago to find that the current argument is about how often the talk page should be archived! "400kbs is insane for a talk page" "you archived a debate still in progress! You must be part of the cabal!!" "You're trying to crash Safari 1.0!". My god. At least you reference desk chaps are reasonable Kuronue 19:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At risk of criticism, I'd like to point out the advice at the top of the page which says "Do not start debates or post diatribes." This isn't really a subject that can be answered well or one that will result in positive discussion. Leebo ^T/C 19:12, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose one reason would be our policy of consensus. We Wikipedians are a diverse bunch and this can make understanding all points of view a long and arduous process. However painful this process may be it is often necessary to achieve consensus. I’m not sure whether I can give a more specific answer than that. Plasticup ^T/C 19:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)Many Wikipedia editors are teenagers, meaning they have lots of free time to learn and understand the policies and rules here. In the real world, they are not able to exercise much influence or power, so they turn to Wikipedia, where they have all the knowledge and are able to affect decisions, or even make the decisions independently. When all these people turn in to compete for power, we get the effect you describe, where all editors are making seemingly ridiculous argument. On each level, every editor has a point: 400kbs really is a large page, and you really shouldn't archive away active discussion. However, each user wants to flash their knowledge and force their own solution.

I agree that the reference desk regulars have a calmer, more informative attitude. This is because the reference desk needs no Wikipedia knowledge (short of knowing wikimarkup, basic rules) to be useful. Therefore, there is not a great conflict of users trying to exact policy or the like. HYENASTE 19:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Reasonable, you say? Have you looked at the archives of Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/guidelines? Even this rarified atmosphere of intellectual curiosity gets pervaded by moments of ridiculousness. Rockpocket 21:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just when you thought you were safe someone goes and takes offence - this is the rule - not the exception -especially when archiving talk pages. Also not only are some editors teenagers - some are even younger (see http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/12_year_olds_invading_the_internet for further insight).87.102.74.130 21:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kuronue, you might be interested in reading WP:OWB. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sluzz. I was mostly hoping for witty replies to make me smile after having to wade through that horrid fight, rather than trying to start a debate, sorry, Leebo. Kuronue 23:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I just let the bots do it. Since they check the timestamps, provided people properly sign they usually won't archive an 'active debate'. And it also allows you to easily try out a time limit until you get something that works well. Start with e.g. 1 month and if you find the talk page is still 400 kb, reduce it until you get something that achieves a resonable balance. The only disadvantage is because of the way they work they do archive out of order which can mean things could get confusing in the archives in some instances (e.g. if someone says refer to the discussion above but the discussion above end up below in the archives). There might be archive bots that only archive in order nowadays but obviously that means you have to make sure you move down discussions posted to the top and it also makes the archiving less efficient Nil Einne 01:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aikido

Is it necessary to have some foundation in other Martial Arts forms before learning Aikido?

No, but it would help. You ought to familiarize yourself with the practice before beginning. It is more than just a fighting style; it is a way of life including philosophy and religious beliefs. Plasticup ^T/C 02:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Out of all the martial arts, it is supposedly one of the more difficult to master. More then other martial arts it relies on focus and quick reflexes, which are things much harder to train then strength and flexibility. Vespine 04:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spartan Hoplites

Does the movie 300 provide a historically accurate depictions of ancient Greek Spartan Hoplites? Did the Spartans truly fight without a breastplate? Acceptable 20:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You would be on very shaky ground to regard any aspect of that movie as anything but fun popcorn entertainment. Our page on hoplites indicates (along with some historical depictions) that they wore bronze breastplates. --Sean 20:20, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hoplites were in fact known for their armor. Plasticup ^T/C 02:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Praetorian Cohorts vs Spartans

If a group of elite ancient Roman Praetorian Cohorts were to fight a numerically equal group of elite ancient Greek Spartan Hoplites, with no other supporting units for either side, who would usually win? Acceptable 20:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Romans. The Macedonians had already rendered rendered hoplites obsolete at the Battle of Chaeronea (338 BC), and the Macedonian phalanx was in turn rendered obsolete at the Battle of Cynoscephalae, the Battle of Thermopylae (191 BC), and the Battle of Pydna. There's no way a hoplite army would have defeated the Roman system. Adam Bishop 21:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about one-on-one? Would a Praetorian Cohort soldier generally have the edge over a Spartan Hoplite? Acceptable 00:04, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's possible to answer that, especially since both sides were trained to fight as a group. I suppose an individual Roman with a gladius would be evenly matched with an individual Spartan carrying a xiphos. It also depends on the time period. The Roman army was originally made up of conscripts and volunteers, while Spartans were always professional soldiers trained from birth, but by the time Rome conquered Greece, Rome had a professional army too. (I guess I would bet on the Spartan being more berserk than the Roman one-on-one, though...) Adam Bishop 04:26, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know too much about the subject, but I thought that the Romans were so successful because they had 'industrialised' warfare. This is illustrated quite nicely by the attitude of the soldier Pullo in the tv series 'Rome', who regards killing people (when commissioned!) as just a job, sort of like a day at the office. That the Romans were so successful because of this suggests that others before them did not have this attitude towards warfare. Or were the Spartans really the Romans of their day and did the Romans re-invent the strategy or copy it from them? DirkvdM 07:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with Adam Bishop's assessments. His references to the major battles between the Romans and the Macedonians are right on the mark. However, these battles were conducted between two armies, with different tactics and different auxiliaries in action. They do not represent the conditions of a battle between between a cohortal legion versus a phalanx of equal strength. Therefore, it was the Greek way of fighting that proved unequal to the task of besting the Roman Legion system. I propose that no battle formation can get the best of a phalanx in a head to head skirmish. May be a slight exception could be made for the manipular legion system of early Roman Republic. These legions would be consisting of velites (the youngest section of Roman soldiers lightly armed with projectiles) Hastati (heavier infantry with similar armament to the stereotypical Roman soldier) Principes (the epitome of a Roman soldier) and Triarii. The last one is none other than a group of hoplites. In this system the first two rows with their pila (sing. pilum; a javelin designed to disarm an opponent of his shield) would fight to disrupt the phalanx, whereas the principes would deliver the killing blow. If all does not go according to plan, the roman army would "fall back to the triarii" (a roman proverb) who would secure a stalemate at least until the rest of the army can be reassembled. Finally we must distinguish the Praetorian guard as an elite but ultimately non-fighting force. These would serve as the Emperors' bodyguards and would rarely see action if at all. Moreover, these would be armed in the fashion of cohortal legions, where the armaments of all soldiers are identical (i.e. no four part early roman system). When this elite group of roman soldiers would face the Spartans in a head on fight, they would lose. For no pre-modern group of soldiers, save perhaps a band of heavily armed medieval knights, can survive a head on battle with a phalanx. Sorry to butt in :)

Poetry

Trying to identify a 2nd world war-time poem:

Come paint the dawn with dainty elephants

It appears in Dispersal Point and Other Air Poems by John Pudney, published 1942. I think the poem may be Dispersal Point but I can't tell from the Google Books search. (page 10. It continues: "//To graze upon the pastures of the sky,//..." iames 22:44, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge is power

I am midway through highschool about to be a junior and fist half didn't care about grades or education. Now I do see importance of education, but still see a school system with a horrible education to offer. How should I go about teaching myself at home? (Interested in enginnering, computers, writing, business, and the chinese language)

If taught education has one failure, it's that it (by necessity) separates the stuff you learn from its application. So you'll hear students saying "why do I need to know calculus - it's useless", and the same for economics, for foreign languages ("why learn Spanish? All the Spanish people I know speak english!"), physics, for writing and debate and public speaking. I think that just deciding to study these things at home (sitting at home reading a textbook) isn't going to be any better, and frankly isn't going to be any fun (it is your time off, after all). So I'd say do something, hands on and practical. Examples:

You want to learn Chinese? If there's a large Chinese community in your location then volunteer at the Chinese old-people's home (they always want some energetic person to do stuff with the eldsters. You won't find better teachers than them, for free.
You want to learn about business - start your own. If you can fix computers or wire up DVD players or build IKEA furniture then do that. If you know a bunch of addled parents with no social life and a bunch of responsible teens looking for babysitter jobs, setup a little referral service.
You want to learn about science - build a rocket, or an airplane, or a model car (from scratch ideally). Make the fuel, make the vehicle, make the controls. Wire up the controller, write the software that runs it, figure out the equation for its flight. See how far it goes (the first time it'll nosedive or stall, but the second will be better, and so on).

The bizarre thing (I guess, from your perspective) is that all the stuff you get at school that makes you squirm is the same stuff that other people love. If you use learning for an immediate goal you get caught in a positive reenforcement loop - everything you learn helps you do something new the next day, which creates a need for further knowledge, etc. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't say where you are, but one thing you could do is look for a homeschooling support group. It sounds like you want one with an unschooling or other self-directed learning philosopy; stay away from religious-based homeschooling groups, since they're based on school-at-home philosophies. --Carnildo 22:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may well be the teacher(s) as much (or more) than the subject(s). Some can make the most interesting topic as dull as ditchwater. Suggest you prospect for classes run by teachers with an ability to teach. They are rare!86.219.163.19 13:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)petitmichel[reply]

To me, the internet is best teacher out there. --Candy-Panda 15:22, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]