Miscellaneous desk
< March 23	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 25 >

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.

March 24

Reverse Phone Lookup

I know they exist but if you want a full report you need to pay money. Are there any of these sites that offer complete data free? --Melab±1 ☎ 01:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what phone network? Algebraist 01:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple phone networks like [1]. --Melab±1 ☎ 00:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hectare as a measurement of land

When discussing property (as opposed to geography) the common unit for land area in U.S. customary units is the acre. What is the commonly usage term(s) when describing property/land area in the metric system? The acre article indicates that hectare is commonly used and that statement is confirmed by the Hectare article. However, I'm interested to know if meters-squared or kilometers-squared are also commonly used to describe property. The reason I'm asking is that I've noticed that Lightbot (talk · contribs) routinely add metric conversions in articles that contain acre units, but it seems to prefer m² or km² conversions.

This is an informal survey, so anybody who thinks about land in metric feel free to respond. Thank you. -- Tcncv (talk) 01:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hectare is the common unit for the area of agricultural lands. Meters-squared are commonly used for smaller properties. Kilometers squared are used in the case of very large areas like cities. --Omidinist (talk) 04:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, meters squared are an SI unit and it's common to provide a conversion to a commonly known unit for units people are generally unfamiliar with. Meters are commonly converted to feet and vice verse in articles too to give people with other preferences about units the chance to understand the article.- Mgm|^(talk) 09:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with MacGyver. I've lived in metric my whole life and wouldn't know a hectare if one came over to nibble my bum. I use m² or km², or even square feet when I deal with older folks. Matt Deres (talk) 13:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I've been generally living in metric all my life too, and generally m² or km² seem most natural. Hectares are fine and all, I just get the feeling they were kind of arbitrarily decided on because they're broadly comparable in size to the existing acre unit. Using the SI m² or km² is to be preferred I think, although hectares do seem popular agriculturally. ~ mazca ^t|c 13:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? A hectare is not comparable to an acre: it's about 2.47 acres. And it IS metric: it's the term for 10,000m². Thinking in hectares IS thinking in m²: it's just used for large parcels of land, so you can chop off some of those 0000's. Like using tonne instead of 1,000kg. Gwinva (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hectares are very much the norm in Canada for agricultural land (though acres are frequently used too). I suspect it's a desire to have a unit of measurement that isn't too different from the acre that used to be used. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here in Alberta, I often hear people describe large patches of land in terms of number of sections, which are each a square mile, or quarter sections etc. This is particularly the case in the province's oil industry since most of the leases companies buy are defined by survey numbers using this system. I know this isn't metric, it's a carry over from a system laid out long before metrification in the 1970s, but as with using square feet to describe house areas or pounds to describe weight, it is widely used here. TastyCakes (talk) 14:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget the are used in Indonesia, French-, Portuguese-, Slovakian-, Czech-, Polish-, Dutch- and German-speaking countries—to measure real estate. In Australia we use square meters, but in the past (1960s) it was perches and roods. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Germany are is used only in historical documents. They use hectare in agriculture and sq meters [2]/ sq kilometers everywhere else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.245.5 (talk) 14:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do the Aussies use square meters for really large areas of land, such as sheep stations, or is sq km used there? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the responses so far. I'd like to pose the question a different way: if you are a resident of the UK, Canada, or Australia (or some other predominantly metric, English speaking country), you look in the real estate section of the Sunday newspaper, and find an advertisement for a new upscale development with spacious lots – would you more likely see the lot size stated as 15,000 square-metres, 1.5 hectares, 160,000 square-feet, or 4 acres? If you saw a farm for sale, would it more likely be listed as 1.5 square-kilometres, 150 hectares, 1,500,000 square-metres, or 375 acres? -- Tcncv (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia farms and bushfires are measured in hectares, but residential realestate will be in square meters. Internal house sizes may still even now be written as squares an old imperial unit of 100 square feet. FOr a large sheep station they may compare it with the size of a smaller country or state, such as bigger than Belgium or Texas. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While the largest cattle station is just larger than Belgium, the largest sheep station is only one third that size - and 1/66 the size of Texas. Maybe stations were bigger in the past? Rmhermen (talk) 02:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak for agricultural areas, but in Canada, residences and industrial areas are typically measured in square feet these days. I'm 35 and folks even a few years older than me still use imperial measurements almost exclusively for distance and area, so home sellers are wise to use the old ways. As the population changes, that will gradually also change. The folks presiding over companies and stores are often 5-10 years older than me, so it also makes sense for builders and resellers to use imperial. The change there is happening from within, as many designers are my age or younger and design their buildings in mm (yes, mm, not m or cm) and simply convert the drawings to whatever works best for the prospective buyers. Matt Deres (talk) 12:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the UK, people will often use sq feet for the area of apartments, sq yards for the area of their garden, acres for the area of a farm and sq miles for the area of the county. However, the local council and the government agencies will officially record the area of buildings and small plots of land in sq metres, the area of farms in hectares, and larger areas in sq km (often with imperial conversions also shown). Sometimes it's all jumbled up with the planning application saying "the new shopping centre will be 64,000 m² (690,000 sq ft)" and the newspaper reporting the "the new shopping centre will cover 16 acres"; and yet when I've looked for a new apartment I've struggled to find anything telling me how many sq metres it is (this is despite the room dimensions being in both metric and imperial, they only list the floor area in sq feet!). The road to metrication has proven to be long and difficult :-) Astronaut (talk) 13:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Alberta (or my part of it, anyway), we generally measure houses in square feet, but I've seen land out in the country described in both acres and hectares. Hectares is more likely to be seen in an official capacity though, whereas acres is more likely in casual conversation. A non-farm property in the country is called an acreage, so that says something right there. Square kilometres I don't really hear for land in the country but I have heard it in the context of the size of a city, or for a park or whatever in a city. Linear distances, though, are almost always in kilometres. (Unless you're old, maybe, but I don't really talk to a lot of middle-aged or older people =P So I almost always hear kilometres.) Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 21:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester

I was wondering if this a joint title or are they two seperate titles. Should the two always be used together ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.79.196 (talk) 11:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These are separate titles. Cheshire is in England (and Chester is its city). In the past the Earl of Chester held the Welsh border, and in many ways his power matched that of the King.90.0.129.130 (talk) 11:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)DT[reply]

They are separate titles but are traditionally created together. The Earl of Chester is an unusual Earldom in that it isn't hereditary (neither is Prince of Wales) - it ceases to exist if the holder dies. This doesn't usually make any difference because it is given to the heir apparent and when they become monarch the title "merges with the crown" and ceases to exist anyway. It does matter when the Prince of Wales dies before the monarch - the titles have to be recreated for the old Prince's son, rather than being automatically inherited. --Tango (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lets do this again

it's diet enhances it's defence mechanism. what is it and what is it's defence mechanism. it's a question i need assistance to...first clue is that it's a bird and it oozes out something posonous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.49.78.238 (talk) 17:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly related to the Hooded Pitohui? --Onorem ♠Dil 17:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah. I'd have just told the questioner to google "poisonous bird" (as in, teach a man to fish.) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fulmar? --TammyMoet (talk) 18:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with fulmars: "Nesting birds and chicks can eject an evil smelling stomach oil up to 2 m, which repels unwanted visitors. It will matt the plumage of avian predators, and can lead to their death." I'm sure there are other answers; e.g. all foods provide energy that a creature can use to defend itself, so it's not a well worded question. There are other animals whose diet enhances their defence mechanism, e.g. poisonous (as opposed to venomous) snakes.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to say a dragon. If it didn't eat fire diamonds it couldn't breath fire. 13:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.121.141.34 (talk)

Was this a riddle? How did you all get to a bird? The first part of the riddle says "It's diet enhances, it's defence mechanism". I was thinking of some kind of dietary supplement which is taken as a defence mechanism...? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"How did you all get to a bird"? Well, it's usually best, when considering answers to Reference Desk questions, to read the entire question. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could be a vulture, they puke on enemies and their rancid meat diet probably makes the defense more effective. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Italian parliament

--Domyinik (talk) 19:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)First at all, hello everyone. I am an Italian wikipedian. For case, I went to the english article about our country, Italy of course. In the right of the page, there is a useful chart (I don't know if it is the right meaning of our word "tabella"). In this chart, you can see a wrong thing: you have writed (I know it is irregular, simply I don't remeber the past :( ) that we italians have got an upper parliament chamber and a lower one, respectively Senato and Camera dei Deputati. WRONG! In Italy there is the perfect bicameralism. In fact, any room has more powerful than the other. You can easly see it watching our page about "Bicameralismo Perfetto" (see in Italian Wikipedia). I have already done an insertion in discussion page, but no one has listened to me. What I have to do? Thank you for answer. Oh, and, by the way, may you tell me if my english seems good?[reply]

Your English is understandable, which is good enough for me! (We call those charts "infoboxes", but that's just on Wikipedia, I guess the English for "tabella" would be "table". The past tense for "write" is "written".) You seem to have removed your comment from the discussion page - I suggest you put it back, someone may take a while to respond, but hopefully they will eventually (maybe sooner now you've mentioned it here). It's always good if you can provide a reference - something in English ideally, although it's not strictly necessary (perhaps the Italian Wikipedia article has some good references?). It is a little difficult to fix, actually, because the infobox template assumes there is an upper and lower house - someone will have to edit the template... --Tango (talk) 19:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(E/CThe "tabella" uses an infobox system that doesn't really allow for two equal houses. You're right that they are considered equal; but this slight inaccuracy doesn't really change much as far as viewers of Italy go (they can always click the links). Someone else can play around with not using the upper_ and lower_house parameters if they want under WP:BB. Your English is pretty understandable, about normal for a second language. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 19:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your kind answers. Now, I will put again my insertion on the discussion page. --Domyinik (talk) 21:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Game Maker Help!!!

Moved to computing desk

British improv game show/trains.

I probably read about this on WP at some point. Perhaps a radio program, that was a mock game show and asked questions about getting from one train station to another, but all the responses were made up.

I'm sure my memory isn't totally correct. Like it was a segment on a show? 205.206.170.1 (talk) 19:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this is what you're looking for. A hilarious regular segment of the excellent show I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue, whose presenter sadly died recently... anyone know what's going to happen with it, btw? ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 20:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) 205.206.170.1 (talk) 20:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some information about future programmes, [3] Thank God, I can't imagine Radio 4 without ISIHAC, but there will never be a replacement for Humph and his 'naivety'. Richard Avery (talk) 20:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - this sounds a lot like Mornington Crescent. The main objective of the game is to be the the first player to say "Mornington Crescent"...unless there is an objection on the grounds of elliptical shunting...which there often will be if the huffing rule has been waived - but that rule has been widely misinterpreted since the 1948 World Series fell into disarray following a debatable reverse-play call by the Polish team following a cryptic move to Earls Court via Bank (I think it was Bank...can anyone confirm that?). Anyway - so long as you reach MC by the Northern parallel, you'll score double points under-the-line. Of course if we're talking about the Dollis Hill rule - then all bets are off...well - except for bets made in the currency of the previous year's World Series - which brings us full circle to the Earls Court/Bank debacle of '48. You see how that all works out? SteveBaker (talk) 03:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't Bank, it was Monument, and as the travolator had yet to be constructed the connection between the drain and the District Line was held to be in nip. Of course everyone was playing MacTaggart's interpretation in those days which tended to bring the whole game to a grinding halt - and usually between Liverpool Street and Bromley-by-Bow. Sam Blacketer (talk) 09:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is a dab link; the direct one is Mornington Crescent (game). You may also care to read about the BBC Radio 4 presenter Humphrey Littleton, who recently died, and British humour, which nonetheless continues. A quick search will show you there are many versions of the MC rules, but my favourite is Ciphergoth's "There are no rules". BrainyBabe (talk) 07:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is something deeply appropriate about Mornington Crescent being a dab link. What BrainyBabe has neglected to consider is the play in last year's eastern European regional trials of the Wikipedia-variant rules. In a pivotal game - with all of the Jubilee line open above the bar - an inexperienced player from the youthful Estonian FaceBook team attempted to volley across the Georgian Baker Street play - using Green Park then Victoria(!!!) (yes, crazy - I know) and thought thereby to slide a homer into "Mornington Crescent" - he delivers the two fateful words and walks away from the table to cheers from his teammates, thinking he's sealed the championship. But then...the crusty Georgian team-captain merely coughs politely and calmly - at barely more than a whisper - delivers the classic retort: "Mornington Crescent (street)" - and the crowd goes wild! The Estonians were forced to slink home in disgrace - shaking their heads, muttering "^{[citation needed]}, ^{[citation needed]}"...Ah - certainly Mornington Crescent at it's best. SteveBaker (talk) 01:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be better off checking out Humphrey Lyttleton - the Littleton guy seems to have been less popular than the late sainted Humph (and probably less fun at parties). Ka renjc 19:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Karenjc! I blush in shame! I see that Samantha is beckoning me towards a strategically placed cupboard, where I shall retire to get out of the limelight. Do knock before you open the door. BrainyBabe (talk) 01:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Rabab"/Rubab

were can i find a "rabab" on the web for $200 or less? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.124.175 (talk) 20:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rhubarb? To grow your own, e.g. here [4]. In a jar try [5] Otherwise try the frozen section at your local farmer's market for a bag of cut stalks or here[6]. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 23:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rebab right? A google search found 3 places selling them for less than US$60. Don't know where you are but eBay might not be a bad idea. 161.222.160.8 (talk) 23:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or a rubab is something different again.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:33, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the standard United States Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance unit comprised of?

Specifically, when a recon team is deployed behind enemy lines what is the usual amount of people in any one team and what is the command structure in such a team?

Also what would one expect a team to copnsist of, i.e. mainly privates with a captain or lieutenant as a leader?

What would this team be known as e.g. a squad/unit or fireteam?

Thank you very much 86.168.186.53 (talk) 21:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article on everything man, everything. Check out United States Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance 161.222.160.8 (talk) 23:14, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

grumble comprise is not a fancy synonym for compose grumble grumble —Tamfang (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

USA World Champions??

Haha! I just can't help laughing. If USA is so "good" at certain sports such as baseball, basketball and hockey (and call themselves World Champions in their own country) - why can't they win things like 2009 World Baseball Classic and numerous other Olympics and World Championship events? Sandman30s (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You probably want to read this part of the World Series article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You probably also want to read the Ref Desk header: "The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions... Do not start a debate; please seek an internet forum instead." There may be an interesting query somewhere there - in fact, we are already talking about the World Baseball Classic over here - but starting your question with "Haha!" isn't really the best wat to find it. - Eron^Talk 22:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)There is a dicussion elsewhere on the desks that will address why the US does not perform well at the WBC, same argumnets apply to the Olympics. For basketball I refer you to Olympic_basketball#Medal_table. For hockey... who ever said Americans were good at hockey? The best just come to play here because the National Hockey League is where the highest level of competition has been. Oh, almost forgot, All-time Olympic Games medal table. 161.222.160.8 (talk) 22:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, US athletes were punished by Olympic rules that prohibited professional athletes from competing, as more athletes in the US were disqualified as "professionals" than in just about any other country. StuRat (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The World Baseball Classic doesn't really sample the best baseball players from the US (though it does from most of the other participating countries). This is because Major League franchises that have their star players on $100 million contracts are hardly going to offer them up to play during spring training, and the players themselves are rarely willing to risk the contracts by forcing the issue. If the US team coach really had the freedom to select who he wanted, then its likely that the US would win. Rockpocket 01:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surely this applies to all the other countries whose best players play in the US Major League? Algebraist 01:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't apply to Japan and Korea, by and large, as those countries have very strict contracts which prevent their players from moving to the Major Leagues until many years into their careers, possibly beyond their prime. That's why you never see 24 year old Japanese players in the MLB. It does apply, of course, to Latin countries like the Dominican Republic or Puerto Rico (okay, not a separate country exactly, but treated as such in the WBC), and there's no way to know whether the US is really better than the Dominicans when they play each other in the WBC because of all the players that don't participate. Here's an interesting link along those lines - which show, by the way, that even if the best players did play, the US would still probably not win - except instead of losing to Asian countries, they'd lose to Latin countries. There are scads of amazing players from Latin America who didn't play in the WBC - just start with Albert Pujols, probably the best player in the majors today. zafiroblue05 | Talk 05:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks for the links ;) And to the person who posted the Olympics medals table - that was not what I was asking... Sandman30s (talk) 09:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't what you were asking, but your assumption that the US doesn't "win things like...numerous other Olympics" is wrong, and that poster added the table to show you that. StuRat (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]