Miscellaneous desk
< April 27	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 29 >

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.

April 28

Obscure San Francisco landmark

At the very west end of Golden Gate Park in San Francisco is this place called Beach Chalet. The building is historical. Before the place became a restaurant, it used to have a bar run by Veterans of Foreign Wars. Shouldn't there be an article on the Beach Chalet?72.229.136.18 (talk) 01:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the building notable? Just having been a bar and then a restaurant doesn't seem very notable or "historic" to me. Has it been cited in some sort of reputable source for its architecture? Dismas|^(talk) 03:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Architectural Heritage Society had this Beach Chalet; ... major contributions made by construction workers during the depression-era New Deal program in the building of the city. ... view mural, mosaics, and wood carvings. and from somewhere else ... Conservation work on the WPA murals, woodwork and mosaics has been completed at the Beach Chalet, a San Francisco landmark located on Highway 1 across from Ocean Beach. The Beach Chalet is under San Francisco Parks and Recreation Department jurisdiction. Conservation, carried out under contract with the San Francisco Arts Commission, was supervised by Anne Rosenthal (murals) and Genevieve Baird (woodwork and mosaics) Sounds like it's a landmark, don't know if that's enough. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_California and maybe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places can probably tell you more. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are school bus drivers blue collar workers?

Are school bus drivers blue collar workers? I know they don't perform manual work like digging but take the school-age kids to school. Jet (talk) 03:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This would say they are: http://www.santarosa.k12.fl.us/plans/hrpm/0607hrpm.pdf

EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT PERSONNEL SERVICES The Santa Rosa County School Board blue collar employees are represented by the Southern Council of Industrial Workers, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO. THE SOUTHERN COUNCIL REPRESENTS: Food Service Workers Custodians Mechanics Maintenance Workers Bus Drivers Bus Assistants That may not be universally true. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A blue-collar worker does manual work – compare the office environment of a white-collar worker. Julia Rossi (talk) 05:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember that both of these are arbitrary terms and not necessarily clearly defined. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

quilling

i wanted 2 know if there is any site which shares ebooks on quilling for free? it is very costly 2 buy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.162.73 (talk) 09:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mean quilling the paper craft? Www.mypaperquilling.com is a site with links to other resources. SaundersW (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fake personality

<moved to entertainment desk Julia Rossi (talk) 11:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)>[reply]

thats were my question whentMakey melly (talk) 13:05, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Letter square problem

I have the following letter square

R J N Y K
G E P U B 
M Q F T S
O A H C V
X L D W Z

And I have the following problems.

1. What letter comes just above the letter just after H?

I have my answer as T

2. What letter comes just before the letter just above A?

My answer is M, im not sure if im right though

3. What letter is midway between G and B?

My answer is P and I think it's right

4. What letter comes between the letter just below A and the letter just above C?

I have my answer as C

5. What letter comes just above the letter that comes just before the letter just below S?

From my reasoning it looks like its T?

6. What letter comes between the letter between R and M and the letter between F and D?

Is it Q it looks like it is?

7. What letter comes just before the letter just above the letter between Q and T?

This 1 looks like its E, but I'm not sure

8. What letter comes just after the letter that comes just above the letter before the letter just above F?

It looks as if it could be P, but again I'm not sure

9. What letter comes just above the letter which comes just after the letter which comes between the letter just above F and the letter just below M?

Is this letter F, I'm not sure though its getting pretty confusing

10. What letter comes just below the letter which comes between the letter just after the letter just above G and the letter just before the letter just below B?

I think this 1 is U but I really dont have that much of a clue

Thanks for the help and sorry to post so many questions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.171.129.74 (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find working backwards from the end of each question helps. I got the same answers exept for the following. 4=H, 8=N, 9=P, and 10=F. Though I could be wrong. Fribbler (talk) 15:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got the same corrections Fribbler. What exactly is it you would like help with? Adam (Manors) 15:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with those above with the corrections. It's likely a homework worksheet he was assigned at school. Useight (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd check my User:Hadseys userpage Useight, you'd find I'm 17, and am not doing any A Levels that relate to this. Given also that I gave my own opinions its not like you did my homework for me is it. Therefore even if it was a h/wk question it wouldn't matter because I provided evidence I tried to do them myself, as stated on the reference desk guidelines, so what you're getting at I have no idea

I'm not getting at anything in particular, just making conversation. Manors asked, "What exactly is it you would like help with?" I tried to give a likely answer. I'm not insinuating anything, no need to get defensive. Useight (talk) 23:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, there was no need for you to answer a question directed to me. You casting aspursions and not giving an answer to a question you couldnt know the answer to is in my view ample grounds for me to "get defensive"; which in fact I wasn't doing, I was merely explaining the situation --Hadseys 09:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that "before" and "after" assume the left-to-right, top-to-bottom reading direction of European languages (like English). I guess that might be fair given the alphabet, but it's not the least ambiguous way to state a problem. --Prestidigitator (talk) 19:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry thats how the problem was worded, i think its intentionally ambiguous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.6.191 (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious

Has anyone ever survived being sucked (i.e. touching the funnel cloud itself) into a tornado? I doubt someone would make it through something like that, but people have survived under insane conditions before, so it might be possible. --162.39.93.10 (talk) 17:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To me it happened just once, but one uncle of mine from the south survived three times. 217.168.1.93 (talk) 17:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an account of one person describing the inside of the funnel. It sounds like the tornado passed over this guy, rather than him having been sucking into it. I've heard of other instances, but this was the only reference I could find right now. --LarryMac | Talk 17:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(That was me, I forgot to log in). So, I guess it's more than possible for someone to survive a tornado. I'll have to check out your link, Larry. Thanks, everyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapphire Flame (talk • contribs) 18:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It helps if you have something or someone cushion the fall. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So all those stories I read in Ripley's Believe it or not about a school bus being picked up by a tornado and the bus was put down on the ground with no hurt, was a lie. Or a Chinese man who was carried by a tornado four miles away from his home were lies as well. -.-

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 05:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

They weren't necessarily "lies", CR. That presupposes Ripley knew they were fake stories but published them anyway. He got his stuff from the pre-internet version of the internet - books, magazines etc that contained anecdotes, stories, lists of trivia and alleged facts. He didn't use the filtering mechanisms we use here on Wikipedia, so any published claim that suited his particular bent was fair game. In an ideal world, he would have had a caveat on each one of his items to the effect that they were not necessarily true, merely published elsewhere. But he did use the title "Believe it or Not", which is not the same as "These Items are Facts", so I think it can be argued he never claimed they were factual. On the other hand he certainly profited from millions of people believing they were factual. Whether that amounts to lying is a moot point. -- JackofOz (talk) 11:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are lies. Cause when I was a kid my teacher, my father, and my mother told me that they were real stories. I have been living in a lie of thinking that could actually work, but its not true. I have been fooled. Cardinal Raven (talk) 00:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

The point I was making was that there's a big difference between a lie and an untruth. A lie is where the speaker/writer knows it's not true but says it anyway; untruths include lies, but they also include statements that the speaker/writer believes to be true, but they're actually not true. While all lies are untruths, not all untruths are lies. -- JackofOz (talk) 16:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Digital camera, good snapshots

Is it possible to make good snapshots with a digital camera? Some like Magnum Photos.217.168.1.93 (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the camera. A great many (if not most) professionals have moved to DSLRs. — Lomn 17:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is 100% yes. A good read is here (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm) and the links from it. An important factor to remember is that viewing-distance is hugely important to be considered when printing larger-images, and also that the most important point of a photo is the subject the photographer chooses to photograph. Don't confuse this to mean there aren't quality-differences between cameras - there are. They exist in things such as - the options available to you, the performance of the camera over a wide-range of scenarios (such as low-light, too much light, moving subjects etc, wide contrasting colours etc.) all these will alter camera to camera. Not earth-shattering differences, but important ones if you are looking to 'sell' or perhaps even just 'display' your shots in places where they'll get more than a passing glance. ny156uk (talk) 22:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answers. So far is clear that the resolution of a digital camera is good enough for a good picture. But there is still a question open. I know that a traditional SLR camera reacts instantly if I decide to take a picture and push the button. Are digital cameras also so fast? 217.168.1.93 (talk) 23:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the impression of the reduced response of digital camera stems from the consumer point-and-shoot models, which takes a second or two to autofocus before being able to take the shot. A digital SLR will allow you to snap a picture just as quickly as a film SLR; autofocus lenses will have an option of being able to take the autofocus off. If you choose to do so (manually focus the camera), a DSLR will immediately take the picture upon depression of the shutter. However, if you decide to leave the autofocus on, you will have to press the shutter half-way to allow the lens and camera to autofocus, then press it down fully to take the picture. With a DSLR and any half-decent lens, this process should still, nonetheless, be extremely quick and roughly identical to a film SLR. Acceptable (talk) 02:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look at shutter lag for a bit more on what Acceptable is mentioning. Essentially older digital-cameras did have a problem with it, and some lower quality digital-cameras have a larger lag. If you have a specific camera in mind the site www.dpreview.com is extremely detailed and has a lot of information. ny156uk (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doing discreetly head shots

What is the best way to do a head shot without asking for permission in advance and without being perceived?217.168.1.93 (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The usual way is to have a very powerful scope on your rifle so you can stay far enough away to not be noticed. --Sean 19:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or a telephoto lens on your camera. Warofdreams talk 19:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rather interesting that the first response assumed shooting, whilst it was the second that was photography. Wonder which the questioner was wondering about, and also whether there's anything we could read into (socially speaking) about the potentially different take from each respondent. ny156uk (talk) 22:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's no original observation to point out that much of the metaphors and even terms of photography have been taken from hunting. --69.110.41.71 (talk) 07:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And the correct assumption is the latter, the subject is photography (at least based on the previous question asked by that IP). Useight (talk) 23:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was thinking about shoting pictures not people. Anyway the questions had some hint: 'asking for permission' makes sense in the case of a picture. I suppose the first repondent just wanted to point out that ambiguous sentences can be misunderstood. 217.168.1.93 (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ducking and a good lawyer. If you're spotted you're likely to get whapped and if your photo is spotted (later) you're likely to get sued. Why not ask permission first? --Lisa4edit (talk) 23:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because if I ask permission first people don't look natural anymore. 217.168.1.93 (talk) 00:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't ask permission right before, ask if "in general" it would be o.k. to take their picture. Also, show them the picture afterward and offer to delete it if they are unhappy with it. That builds trust and they become less conscious of having you around with a camera. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 03:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It also helps if you yell "BOOM, HEADSHOT!"--Dlo2012 (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Headshot is a nearly ubiquitous term in video games these days, shooting was the first impression I got as well Mad031683 (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Paintball strategy

What are some ways to do well in piantball? БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 20:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Easy! Shoot people. Don't get shot. Maybe capture a flag or two. Paragon12321 (talk) 20:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well obviously i ment go a lil deeper then that though. БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 20:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use cover, practice sound tactics. Maybe a tactical shooter type videogame would be good practice, altho in my experience paintball guns are horribly inaccurate compared to any kind of real gun. Friday (talk) 20:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Walk in your enemy's shoes and see what would put them at a disadvantage (sun in their eyes?) and where they would look when. The following pages might get you some ideas Distraction Feint Camouflage Ambush and Principles of War. If you'd like some background reading Sun Tzu The Art of War is still the definitive book on combat from what I know. And to think I'm a pacifist :-)--Lisa4edit (talk) 23:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's the kind of arena with lots of simple barriers or fences, aim to flank people. Otherwise everyone's just sitting behind their opposing lines, popping off hundreds of rounds that never hit anything. Get up the edge of the field, and you'll find yourself in a position where you can fire on someone from the side instead of in front - they're not expecting it, and they have no cover there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.153.189 (talk) 07:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Situational awareness is the key. Don't worry about details like aiming and running fast. Just keep your eyes and ears open, be calm, and wait. Vranak (talk) 17:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The best advice I ever got in regards to paintball is stop being afraid to get hit. You never get anywhere if you don't take risks. Also work with your team, have them shoot at the other team to get them to duck down, then you advance and cover them from there. Mad031683 (talk) 21:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Build a Trebuchet and launch buckets of paint... Ilikefood (talk) 15:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity of Orange and Apple juice

In North America, why is the fruit juice market predominantly dominated by orange and apple juice? Why is watermelon juice almost non-existent? Acceptable (talk) 22:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because oranges and apples are 'every-day' fruits and watermelons are more 'exotic' to the culture of North America in general. For instance apples can be grown just about anywhere in North America whereas I doubt watermelon can, oranges tend to require more sun (as I understand it) but still a sizeable portion of North America can grow it. Also add in that orange and apple are very much the top flavoured fresh-juices in the western-world and you probably have reasons based on economy of scale, learned-desires (maybe we learn to want orange as it's cultural normal in our society) and other things. ny156uk (talk) 22:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never thought of watermelon as exotic; it's a stereotypical fixture at any summer picnic or cookout. I would think it either is not cost-effective to mass produce juice, or it does not lend itself to juicing at all. After all, we don't see cantaloupe, casaba or honeydew juice either. --LarryMac | Talk 15:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Australia has lots and lots of pineapple juice (YUM! pineapple covered donuts too), but there seems to be almost none in the U.S. :-( --Prestidigitator (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like Pomegranate juice, I love peach juice, lemonade is real good, I love kiwi juice, and pineapple juice. I was kinda sad that Cali had so little juice offers for me. It feels good to be back home. Cardinal Raven (talk) 05:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Isn't kiwi juice blood? Boomshanka (talk) 05:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops. Kiwi the fruit made into juice.Cardinal Raven (talk) 05:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Watermelon juice? Watermelon is practically juice already. Vranak (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of a couple of reasons, some of which have already been touched on. For one thing, watermelons are, well, mostly water - not a lot of nutrition or even flavour, so two of the really big draws ("tastes great!", "good for you!") wouldn't apply. Watermelons are bulky and take up a lot of real estate to grow, making them difficult to process and proportionately expensive to grow. Drop a case of apples or oranges and a couple might get squished beyond use, but otherwise the whole case could still get juiced - drop a watermelon and it's no good to anyone except the bugs. Apples and oranges have relatively little waste mass on them; a company processing watermelons for juice would have a considerable amount of waste to get rid of. As far as only apples and oranges getting used, I see plenty of lemonade stands in the summer. The local mega-mart has mango, pomegranate, lime, grapefruit, grape, and plenty of other options available. Matt Deres (talk) 17:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because when you make juice out of watermelons, they might suck your juices in revenge. :)--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well as someone stated above Watermelon juice isn't really juice its...water.Cardinal Raven (talk) 00:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Shave or not to shave

In porn movies almost all woman are shaved between the legs, but in real life almost none who I met were like that. Is there some sort of reliable statistics about these group of woman? And what about men? 217.168.1.93 (talk) 23:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thats weird to me as Almost every girl in my middle school is shaved downtown. So i really don't have any idea how that is. Maybey its changing cultures.БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 00:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you don't know almost every girl in your middle school. 217.168.1.93 (talk) 00:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they didn't have any hair there to begin with...--124.254.77.148 (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, can't find any statistics on pubic hair shaving. Interesting question, though. In my opinion, the porn industry would suggest a higher rate of 'genital trimming' than actually exists. Especially for men. I presume that it is for complete visualisation of genitalia in their films that porn directors/producers insist on this, whereas in real life its down to personal preference. Fribbler (talk) 00:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant actually that in the porn industry people are completely shaved not just trimmed. In real life people are perhaps trimmed but seldom shaved. right? 217.168.0.126 (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original research here.... Almost every one of the women that I've had the pleasure of viewing naked was completely shaved. A few of the strippers that I knew in college (dated two, so I hung out with a number of them) were trimmed but by and large, the majority were shaved. I would guess it's mostly a cultural thing. I'm in the U.S. Dismas|^(talk) 03:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well an ob-gyn was quoted as saying that about 75% of the women in their 20's she treats go bare in Cosmo. They also said that reported pubic lice cases are dropping. It just seems like it has become more acceptable in the last few years, and I think some women feel prudish if they don't.SunshineStateOfMind (talk) 03:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see a variety of woman. Some with pubic hair and others with not. I think its the woman preference whether she has hair or not. There shouldn't be anything wrong with wanting to make your body look good just as long as you respect your body and don't let anyone mistreat your body.Cardinal Raven (talk) 05:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Shaving would seem to go with the overall general aesthetic of un-reality that is a porn flick. Although somewhere I read of women in ancient Greece preparing to welcome home their men by plucking all that away. ewwch, Julia Rossi (talk) 08:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the question is not only about shaved woman, but also men. 217.168.4.83 (talk) 00:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The artist Spencer Tunick has made his name by getting thousands of volunteers to go naked for a mass photo shoot, taking over the streets of a city. He has done this in many countries and for some years, so using his photos and videos to study the incidence of pubic shaving introduces two variables, time and location (national culture). The individuals who volunteer for these projects -- for no money, and at the risk of chill or sunburn or both -- are, I think it is fair to say, less inhibited about the public display of their bodies than the average citizen. Have a look and draw your own conclusion, or, for the brave person taking the right sort of class, propose this analysis as a research project. And tell us your findings!

Another point: the removal of the body hair that appears at puberty can be perceived as wishing to revert to the hairless state of childhood; it should not be automatically equated with an adult desire to display. BrainyBabe (talk) 16:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't heard about men shaving there much, but have heard of men trimming a couple of centimetres off so that the penis doesn't get tangled when in a hurry to urinate.Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 12:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ewww! You have to shave the hairs away otherwise they get smelly and sticky. Mine are all tangled and become impossibles to wash if I don't shave them away.Makey melly (talk) 12:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed BB. Neotanus tendencies in sexual images. Brrr. 130.88.140.11 (talk) 15:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]