Miscellaneous desk
< January 8	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 10 >

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.

January 9

Virgin

How can you tell if a girl is a virgin or not?--68.157.23.56 (talk) 00:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask her. There exists no other provable method. The hymen that seems to be the popular policy can be broken during the normal life of a young woman. ny156uk (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and "repaired" by a medical operation. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And may persist after copulation according to Gray's Anatomy. Cryo921 (talk) 02:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although if she has had kids then it is obvious she is not a virgin. Cryo921 (talk) 04:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless your name is Mary and your son's name is Jesus, at least some people believes so. --antilived^{T | C | G} 04:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of other gods and other religious figures who supposedly were born of a virgin birth, too. It's been a popular myth. See List of virgin births. MrRedact (talk) 06:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, Science could thwart even that simple test. APL (talk) 04:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hyman G. Rickover, on the other hand, was never broken. Edison (talk) 07:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it's not just "science". It does happen -- I think it's not even spectacularly rare -- that girls (more often teen girls than adult women, I suspect) get pregnant while they're still technically virgins. Depends on definitions, of course. --Trovatore (talk) 08:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asking her is a "provable method"? The human central nervous system is capable of deliberate discrepancies between internal data storage and externally output information. In other words, she can lie. And it's not at all unreasonable she would have had intercourse without knowing it (being drugged or unconscious, amnesia...). Better to stick to physical evidence if available. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 12:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brill answer, Meni. Gotta save this discrepancies quote somewhere. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. Might i suggest using notepad or microsoft word as a place to store it, that's what i use. Cryo921 (talk) 03:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious problem with that answer is the "if available" part. For almost every girl the OP might possibly be asking about, there doesn't exist a videotape of the girl having sex. MrRedact (talk) 16:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually for all we know there could. Never underestimate the perversion of humanity. Cryo921 (talk) 03:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you've had sex with her then you know she is not a virgin. Also if you have videotapes of her having sex or have seen her having sex. Cryo921 (talk) 13:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think the worry over virginity is often outmoded, sexist, and, frankly, can lead to very bad choices by artificially shrinking the available pool of mates. The fact is, their being a virgin or not is something that only is going to matter for a very brief amount of time, because presumably any mate you marry will soon not be a virgin. After that, you're stuck with the person, and if that's not a good match, well, you've got a long time to regret it ahead of you. Better to pick a good match for you, not worry about the virginity, and accept that any God worth obeying would understand that you were trying to go for the good long-term solution. In my totally non-theological opinion. --24.147.86.187 (talk) 15:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's possible to get pregnant without any means of artificial insemination or without having intercourse. If ejaculate gets on the vulva, without having sex, it's quite possible to get pregnant. --71.98.26.188 (talk) 00:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's what Trovatore said. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 09:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW the surgical operation to "repair" the hymen (the membrane that partially covers the opening to the vagina in some but not all virgins) is called hymen reconstruction surgery, colloquially referred to as a hymenoplasty, or very technically known as a hymenorrhaphy. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard that in the Old Testament of the Bible, if a man wants to marry a woman or a girl, there must be proof of her virginity. I wonder what this proof would be? Bowei Huang (talk) 05:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of that, and it doesn't make much sense to me. It is probably a myth. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 13:27, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bowei may be talking about Deuteronomy 22:13-21. If so, it doesn't say that exactly, though it's not any warmer or fuzzier. It deals with the procedure to be followed when a new husband claims that his bride was not a virgin. Short version: If he was lying, then he has to pay her father money and can never divorce her. But if he was telling the truth, they stone her to death.

Various translations available at http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/22-17.htm --Trovatore (talk) 22:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answering Bowei Huang, in earlier traditional western (European?) societies at least, it was blood on a sheet after the wedding night that "proved" it. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

War movie cliché

In old war films, when a soldier is killed, his comrades stick his rifle in the ground beside his grave and put his helmet on it. Did that actually happen (it seems rather wasteful)? Clarityfiend (talk) 06:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

War is wasteful enough as it is. --Ouro (blah blah) 08:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The terms for that symbol/practice that I'm familiar with are Battlefield Cross, Soldier's Cross or Fallen Soldier's Cross, but I finally found our article on it, which is rather sparse, under Fallen Soldier Battle Cross. Maybe someone could make some of those redirect there? As to your actual question: yes it did happen [1], though I can't definitively answer as to how often and under what circumstances it did so. Our article claims, unsourced, that the practice was a means of identifying the bodies of fallen soldiers. My understanding was that it served as kind of a makeshift grave when circumstances didn't permit the more traditional kind and as a way to, hopefully, link names to bodies in the future. I also remember reading an account from WWI, though I can't remember if it was fictional or not, describing the practice and including the detail that the rifle bolt of of the gun was removed so the weapon wouldn't be of any use to an enemy soldier happening upon it. Azi Like a Fox (talk) 10:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the redirects as you said, see here. Oh, interesting what you wrote, Azi. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and thanks Ouro. Probably should have figured out how to do it myself, but kind of busy night here at work :). Maybe when I have time I'll look for a good picture for the article, seems like it could use one. Azi Like a Fox (talk) 13:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably there should be downstyle redirects as well, "Fallen soldier's cross", "Battlefield cross", etc., and the article should be moved to have a downstyle title. Anonymous users aren't allowed to do that, so perhaps someone else will. --Anonymous, 01:20 UTC, January 10, 2008.

Picture here. Is it possible to tell from the picture if the bolt has been removed? Lanfear's Bane | t 14:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This would allow the possibility of the body removal teams actually transferring the body to a proper military cemetary, as opposed to it lying in the woods in a shallow grave and being eaten by animals, or carried as "Missing in Action/Prisoner of War" like thousands of Vietnam War dead. But it seems likely that the gun would be stolen by human scavengers. No bolt? Then find one in a rifle with a ruined barrel. Interchangeable parts and all that. Edison (talk) 17:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that the bolt has not been removed from the rifle in the photo. —Travis ^talk 18:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

paper pattern of dresses of america paris milan india

defination and comparison of paper patterns of dresses of america paris milan india —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arvindberry (talk • contribs) 06:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.72.146 (talk) 07:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vogue patterns publish high quality patterns from various design houses. I have notice that paper patterns published in the US tend to have a lot more pattern markings than French ones which were often not printed at all, just paper cut-outs. Paper patterns have changed a lot over time, however, and it would help if you could clarify what you are asking. SaundersW (talk) 11:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds a lot like it is some sort of question on a test or someones homework. Cryo921 (talk) 13:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds a lot like someone thinks they're using a search engine.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Travel to Volgograd

Anyone had the chance to visit the Motherland statue in Volgograd, Russia? What process do you need to follow —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roland stanton (talk • contribs) 09:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on where you're hailing from - get a visa, get a plane/train ticket, and you're off. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki convention

Once heard about a wiki covention where wikipedians can go to meet other wikipedians, is there such a thing and when and where is uit held? Will any of you be there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 13:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania William Avery (talk) 13:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi the link you might find useful is Wikipedia:Meetup – it's a good starting point. From there you will find your kind of distsrict and maybe find out who's going etc, Julia Rossi (talk) 10:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

limewire

WHY, on gods earth, when I put a search into limewire, no results appear? Thanks for any help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.200.138 (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are you searching for? Maybe it just isn't there? --Ouro (blah blah) 16:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firewall? Very old version? Searching in the right field? Spelling correctly? Could be many things. A little more detail and we might be able to help. Lanfear's Bane | t 16:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frostwire is better. :-) --71.98.26.188 (talk) 00:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you aren't allowing it enough time to connect to the server? EWHS (talk) 13:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure that you are connected to the internet and then try. If this doesn't work then restart your computer. It works for me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.106.248.77 (talk) 10:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Russia

If one seed the following link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Russian-regions.png

at the bottom right of russia is the only blue piece, an autonomous oblast according to the key. However it is just labeled Jewish. I wish to read more about this place, and any other relavent info please and thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 15:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Autonomous Oblast --Milkbreath (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

information about house sharing/room renting

Hi, I guess I'm looking for personal thoughts more than absolute fact, but if anyone can ref a website which answers my question then great.

I'm 38 and considering the option of getting a job in London. I currently live in Norfolk (UK), have my own house, wife, kids etc.

My plan would be simple: get a job which pays enough to carry on paying regular house bills (mortgage etc) and has enough left over so that I can rent a room in a house in london - hopefully fairly close to where I would be working.

when people advertise 'rooms to rent' (eg http://www.roombuddies.com) sometimes the bills cover 'phone' - would this include the actual phone calls? also, what about food. I have read of people who fight/steal food in fridges etc.

any advice/annecdotes gratefully recieved - as well as any potential flaws in my very simplistic plan.

thanks 83.104.131.135 (talk) 17:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your job would have to pay REALLY well if you wanted to be able to afford to support your family and rent a non-scummy room. London rental prices are ridiculously high.

Regarding your query about phone calls, I think it varies from landlord to landlord. When I was hunting for a place to live in London, the definitions of "inclusive" seemed to vary wildly. You just have to ask them when you speak to them.

And with food, it very much depends on the people you end up with. Yes, there's always the possibility that you will end up with a bunch of slobs who never do housework and steal your food, but you might also end up with clean, tidy people who respect your boundaries and are a pleasure to live with.

As you seem to be looking for somewhere only for weekdays, a good option (IMHO) would be to rent a room from someone who lives in the premises. A housemate is far more likely to respect your boundaries and take good care of the property if they own it and thus have a vested interest in the place. I found a nice place on moveflat.com. I'd try there. Good luck!86.137.88.172 (talk) 17:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks everyone (especially for moveflat.com). 83.104.131.135 (talk) 08:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was intrigued when I heard about Monday to Friday, which lets you rent a room in the landlord's house (ie therefore presumably a decent property) and go home at weekends. Also try craigslist. Also it may be worth contacting networks you are already a part of (union, church, pigeon racing association, etc.) and asking them to spread the word, or putting an ad in their newsletter. As for what "all mod cons" includes, yes, you just have to ask. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real Zombies!?

(Seeing as how this link has been used as spam, I'll just post the URL with anti-spamfilter munging, just remove the spaces) http : // zomgzombies . ytmnd . com / Is the news article shown here (within the link to YTMND) real??? If so, there is a strain of malaria that is 100% fatal and turns people into real-world zombies IN THE REAL WORLD and we're worrying about AIDS and West Nile Virus!??!?? 71.220.211.235 (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's fake - http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/zombies.asp . The link you posted crashed my browser too. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a side, would it help if you set Firefox to not run scripts on suspicious sites (using addons like Noscript? (assumes your browser supports noscript.) Kushal^t 02:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Might as well turn Javascript off for the Snopes link too, while you're at it. All they use it for is one of those silly, but annoying, anti copy/paste scripts.) APL (talk) 05:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This is a relief that there are not real zombies. And I'm sorry that the link crashed your browser, it ran fine on mine so I assumed that it wouldn't crash other browsers, like most links. 71.220.211.235 (talk) 00:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SYSTEM DYNAMICS FOR FRESHERS

SIR/MADAM I HAVE STARTED TO RESEARCH ON SYSTEM DYNAMICS, BUT I AM STILL LOOKING FOR SOME USEFUL LINKS WHICH COULD HELP FRESHERS IN THIS FEILD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.201.120 (talk) 18:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try System dynamics as a starting point by any chance yet?--TreeSmiler (talk) 00:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes i did and found only limited information on system dynamics i am specifically looking for some kind of e-book or links which could give much more informatiom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.201.120 (talk) 08:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Well I'll assume you followed up the links also; so you'll have to wait for someone else to point you in the right direction. Sorry I cant help you more ATM--TreeSmiler (talk) 02:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

see we dont know what sort of dynamics ur interested in by I found this on the web [2]--TreeSmiler (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Blaine

I just saw David Blaine perform a stunt on TV whereby he appears to use his hands to pull out the front teeth of a woman leaving apparent gaps in her smile (at which she is understandably horrifed), and then appears to spit / blow in her face thus restoring her 'missing' teeth. This stunt is performed in front of a crowd in a busy public area. How is such a stunt performed, given that the multitude of witnesses would have the potential to see through any weaknesses in the trick ? --196.207.47.60 (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to know how he does all of these tricks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.134.93 (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest the "teddy bear and green jersey joke" with the help of some bad actors and out of shot activity....but what do I know! Richard Avery (talk) 20:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh...that video was painful. --71.98.26.188 (talk) 01:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're all actors, as shown by the credits at the end. As for the teeth woman, I assume she was a stooge.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is not David Blaine in the video, you know. And the trick that the original poster is asking about does not sound like him, either. I smell spam and dirty socks. YouTube hits are worth money. --Milkbreath (talk) 12:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the david blaine in the video's beard is drawn on with a sharpie. hilarious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.134.93 (talk) 07:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sto-Rev Co. Productions

What was Sto-Rev Co. Productions like? The reason that I'm asking is because I want to know because I never saw what it was like on television before. Ericthebrainiac (talk) 20:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His Dark Materials -Meaning of the Title

Why did Philip Pullman, the author of the series His Dark Materials, called it "His Dark Materials"? What does the title mean? Who is the "he" in His Dark Materials? What are the "dark materials" in His Dark Materials? Why and how are they dark? Bowei Huang (talk) 23:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My money would be on it being a quote from Paradise Lost by John Milton, the famous English poet. Philip Pullman is something of a fan of Milton. DuncanHill (talk) 23:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is from Book II, verse 27, lines 898-899

"Into this wilde Abyss,
The Womb of nature and perhaps her Grave,
Of neither Sea, nor Shore, nor Air, nor Fire,
But all these in thir pregnant causes mixt
Confus'dly, and which thus must ever fight,
Unless th' Almighty Maker them ordain
His dark materials to create more Worlds,
Into this wilde Abyss the warie fiend
Stood on the brink of Hell and look'd a while,
Pondering his Voyage."

Hope this helps. DuncanHill (talk) 23:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely from Milton's Paradise Lost confirmed in an interview with Pullman on the Charlie Rose Show. The interview is viewable online with the mention coming just after 13 minutes into the segment. AUTiger » talk 00:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's also safe to say that "dark materials" also refers to a major theme throughout the later two-thirds of the trilogy. Please note: my Wikilink here may be a "spoiler" for you.

Atlant (talk) 13:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So you mean that the "he" in His Dark Materials is the Authority, God, and the dark materials are Dust? So the title "His Dark Materials" means "God's Dust"? But why? What does that mean? Why did he call it that? And what does this quote from Paradise Lost mean, and what is it talking about, anyway? Bowei Huang (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for Paradise Lost: "This wilde Abyss" is Chaos, out of which God the "Almighty Maker" created the world. The "wary Fiend" about to travel across Chaos to the earth, is Satan, fresh from the first great council of devils, which determined their course of action: to corrupt mankind. - Nunh-huh 12:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are the "Womb of nature" and "her Grave"? And what does this mean, "Unless th' Almighty Maker them ordain His dark materials to create more Worlds"? Bowei Huang (talk) 23:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Womb of nature" and "her Grave" are also Chaos: it's the stuff out of which Nature was formed, and what it will become. Chaos is a mixture of elements which "must ever fight" unless God gives them shape by using them to create new worlds. - Nunh-huh 01:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the connection between the band Rush and Objectivism?

I know there is a connection, but what exactly is it? MalwareSmarts (talk) 23:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, just looking at the pages Wikipedia has on its members, Neil Peart is apparently known to be a big fan of Ayn Rand and uses related themes in his lyrics. Note that I really don't know anything about the band other than the fact that I don't like their music. From what I can tell Manhattan Project (song) is one of the greatest music offenses ever created, but I know that there will be some who (incorrectly) disagree. --24.147.86.187 (talk) 02:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that one, but I like Freewill --Trovatore (talk) 02:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They also refused to perform at Live 8 because it did not fit their Randroid worldview... Adam Bishop (talk) 08:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many people object to listening to Rush? --WebHamster 13:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]