Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 November 4
Miscellaneous desk | ||
---|---|---|
< November 3 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 5 > |
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. |
November 4
[edit]1876 litho
[edit]This is not a question but a comment. There is an image of an 1876 lithograph in today's opening screen with an erroneous annotation that it contains the then 48 states. The US did not have 48 states in 1876. I didn't look up the dates, but AZ and NM were added in 1912, and if I remember my US history correctly, the Dakotas were admitted in the late 1880s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.126.88.213 (talk) 00:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- The annotation states clearly that the seals of the 48 states and territories are depicted. Algebraist 00:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- I assumed it included the 48 states except Hawaii and Alaska (or their territorial predecessors), but I note it gets a total of 48 by having a single "Dacota Ter.(not North and South Dakota), and makes up for the decrease by including the District of Columbia. DC was not a state and not a territory, so the previous statement and the text on the main page are incorrect. Edison (talk) 05:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Territorial evolution of the United States may be helpful. -- SGBailey (talk) 10:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- I fixed it. It now says "the then-47 states and territories as well as the District of Columbia" Edison (talk) 15:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Territorial evolution of the United States may be helpful. -- SGBailey (talk) 10:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- I assumed it included the 48 states except Hawaii and Alaska (or their territorial predecessors), but I note it gets a total of 48 by having a single "Dacota Ter.(not North and South Dakota), and makes up for the decrease by including the District of Columbia. DC was not a state and not a territory, so the previous statement and the text on the main page are incorrect. Edison (talk) 05:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Shining shoes
[edit]Does anyone know how to shine shoes easily? Can shoes be made reflective with little effort? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 13:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- In my experience it's not a process that you should try and shortcut. Here's what I do: buy two shoe cleaning brushes, one for adding the polish and one for shining, and some proper shoe polish. Write P and S on the backs of the brushes so they don't get mixed up. Use the P one to apply the polish evenly to the surface of the shoe (I assume we're talking leather here). Then briskly brush the shoe all over with the S brush until you get a really nice shine. There is no better way of getting your shoes to look shiny, and it's good for the leather too. --Richardrj talk email 14:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Shoe polish and a soft brush (there will be instructions on the polish). They should be available in any shoe shop and probably lots of less specialist shops as well. How easy it is will depend on what the shoes are made of - make sure you get the right polish. --Tango (talk) 14:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- If hollywood movies are anything to go buy...a bit of spit and an old rag is all you need...Patent leather is the key to sucess - shiny goodness all the way to the bank. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 14:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Allow me to recommend the WikiHow articles http://www.wikihow.com/Shine-Shoes and http://www.wikihow.com/Give-Your-Boots-That-Military-Mirror-Shine .--Shantavira|feed me 14:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Military tricks involve using a lighter to heat the leather (without burning), applying polish, then buffing. --Moni3 (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Kiwi Parade Gloss polish listed on google. Julia Rossi (talk) 21:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Military tricks involve using a lighter to heat the leather (without burning), applying polish, then buffing. --Moni3 (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've always understood that this excessive shining is called 'bulling' your shoes or boots, perhaps derived from the bulls*** found in military serice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.187.55 (talk) 22:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- "Bulling" in the army involves putting the polish onto the leather with firm pressure of the back of a spoon to smooth out the texture of the leather, then rubbing in the polish with a cloth and a bit of spit; hence 'Spit and Polish'. Good way to spend the evenings when you could not afford even the NAFFI food!--212.139.78.231 (talk) 07:20, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Nothing shines shoes with as little effort as paying a shoeshiner. Plasticup T/C 22:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- They sell quick-drying, no-buffing shoe shine, you know -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- Any person or organisation that judges people by the refractive index of their footware really needs to find a better criteria. SteveBaker (talk) 01:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- <nails on chalkboard> Or a better business models? Or a better dictionaries? --Trovatore (talk) 02:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Why bring Cinderella into this? —Tamfang (talk) 16:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Help finding books that are no longer published (search engines)
[edit]Hello, I am looking for some books that are no longer being published. So far I found this website (booksandcollectibles.com.au) the best way to find the books I was looking for. The only problem is that it is an Australian website, concentrating on Australian used book shops. Does anyone know of any similar UK based websites? Thanks, --217.227.103.181 (talk) 14:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
In Germany there is ZVAB and they also have a lot of foreign booksellers. pretty easy to find--Radh (talk) 17:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)