Miscellaneous desk
< March 19	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 21 >

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 20

Contest Officials

When a company like McDonalds, Coca-cola, or Hershey has a contest so the first person to find the right cap or send in 1000 wrappers so they win $10,000 or something like that, who officiates them? There has to be some means of checking to see if they actually give out the prizes to the winners, or if there is even a winning golden ticket in a wonka bar (the real one). 134.126.192.188 (talk) 00:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you should ask. In the summer of 2001, McDonald's played a major role in an FBI sting operation, as the independent company that ran the games was ripping everyone off.[1] The government does take an interest in the outcomes of sweepstakes in order to reduce or prevent fraud, but to what extent I don't know. In this particular case, they figured out what was going on, and set up that summer's game as a trap for the thieves. Once the conspirators were arrested, McDonald's had a special giveaway offer to their customers nationwide. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One thing they sometimes do that seems like a scam is to keep all the unclaimed prizes, especially if they make it difficult to determine if you're a winner. One such sweepstakes required that you come in to the store to check your number against the winning numbers listed. But what percentage of the people who are mailed the sweepstakes tickets will actually do that ? StuRat (talk) 18:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to call ^{[citation needed]} on you here, Stu. In the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, contest operators are very strictly overseen and must give away everything they say they're giving away.[2] If the situation isn't similar in the USA, colour me surprised. FiggyBee (talk) 12:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here you are: [3]. This is a sweepstakes sponsored in Iowa with the administrator in Michigan, which, at the bottom of section 5, says that they will have 5 alternate drawings, then keep any unawarded prizes after that. Here's another sweepstakes out of Florida with that same rule but which adds that "Unclaimed Second Prizes will not be awarded", again at the bottom of section 5: [4]. StuRat (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) FiggyBee (talk) 14:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Creating electronic device

I've done some stuff on digital and analogue electronics in my uni course, and want to try some of it out for myself. What I'm doing is building a really simple circuit around a 555 timer that will blink an infrared LED to repeatedly trigger my camera after a given period (set using a pot) has passed. Question: the stuff I've done in courses has been using breadboards or larger components and croc clips; how should I connect and secure (since this is an actual device I'll use 'in the field') all the components together? I have a soldering iron kicking around somewhere, but was thinking about putting it some sort of plastic backing? 94.168.184.16 (talk) 01:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a local electronics store that caters to experimenters, like Fry's Electronics? They'll usually have small plastic and/or metal boxes you can use for your gadget, along with perforated board stock to mount your electronics on. A good way to solve a problem like this is to wander around the store and see what looks interesting — often your use for something won't be what the manufacturer intended, but that's part of the fun. This is much easier in a B&M store than on the internet. PhGustaf (talk) 01:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot: If you want to keep an electronic gadget for a while, solder it together. Perforated boards make this easy; they'ss be right next to the little boxes. PhGustaf (talk) 01:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, Maplin is the place to go for small electrical components suitable for building your small hobbyist electronic gadgets. They publish a useful mail-order catalog if you're too lazy to visit a store (or live too far away), and they have an online business too. I can't say if their service is now as good as I remember, I've not ordered anything for years. As for constructing youre circuit, you could design your own PCB, etch it and mount the components, but I always though that was too much like hard work when you could solder your components onto pre-made stripboard, using a drill-bit to remove the copper strip where you needed the track to stop. Astronaut (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Astronaut, strip board is the easiest way to go about this project. --Aspro (talk) 12:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, folks :-) 94.168.184.16 (talk) 13:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a stack of perf-boards that are actually wired up just like a solderless breadboard. (Similar to a strip board, but with a gap down the middle, and rails on the sides.) I've forgotten where I got them. It may have been Radioshack.

And some people swear by these Rectangle Wired Perf Boards. APL (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I'm going to make a fairly simple circuit, I sometimes use a solderless breadboard to get it working (it's easy to plug and unplug components to experiment or if you make mistakes) then I either solder together the circuit on stripboard. Stripboard is better when the circuit is simple and/or uses large amounts of power. However, for complicated circuits, the effort to figure out how to route the signals around on the stripboard traces gets complicated and horribly error-prone.

So for more complex stuff, I use Wirewrap construction on perforated board that has no copper at all. Wirewrap is vastly better when there are a crazily large number of interconnections and the voltages and currents are small - as is typically the case with computer circuits and such like. I've built wirewrapped gadgets with over a thousand interconnects on a fairly small board - that's utterly impossible with stripboard or even with commercial one or two layer PCB's. Wirewrap is also good for prototyping because it's easy to undo connections when you realize that you made a boo-boo. Wirewrap is also more suited for working at home with the family because there are no noxious solder fumes. I have an electric wirewrap gun - they are pretty expensive - but I picked mine up for $5 from a company that was going out of business...but you can use a manual wirewrap tool instead and those are pretty cheap. Wirewrap is good enough that it has been used in commercial production environments and is more reliable than hand-soldered boards - especially if the person doing the soldering is not skilled in the technique.

Many of the things I make are a mixture of wirewrap and soldered construction because (as I said) you can't really transfer large amounts of power through those skinny wirewrap wires. I tend to solder power and ground wires first - then wirewrap the signal wires afterwards.

Making your own circuit boards is interesting, and the end result looks really professional - but it's an awful lot of hassle and needs messy chemicals - and you can't make complicated things that way without ending up with gigantic circuit boards.

Most of the things I make end up being computer-controlled in some manner - and I use the Arduino system for that. This allows me to start working with a $26 computer board that I can just plug into a USB port on my PC to download and debug software - then I'll buy a stand-alone Arduino computer chip for $5 to install on my finished board for the sake of compactness and cheapness - and the $26 Arduino goes back on the shelf ready for the next project. It's easy to wirewrap to the pins on the Arduino board while debugging - then move those connections to the dedicated computer chip when I'm ready to switch over to that.

SteveBaker (talk) 19:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For a weeny teeny project like this, I think that 94.168.184.16 would be better of just sticking to strip board. Wire wrap will require the extra expense of wire wrap IC sockets, wire, tools, etc. Also, I found that students made an utter mess of their first attempt ( and their second, third... ). Better to find someone who can show you how to solder properly. Does the project look like this .. [5]? Uhmm, Yummy!--Aspro (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Amazing Adventures Of Spider-man Ride at Universal Studios

Hi someone type that Bill Fagerbakke played the voice of Hydro-Man and Dee Bradley Baker played the voice of Electro I would like to know if they's true or not thanks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandrade77 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well you typed the bit about Dee Bradley Baker. Why don't you tell us?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably because he doesn't know? I don't know if IMDB pages actually have this sort of information. Dee was credited for Electro in a video game on his page. Bill has no mention of hydro-man on his page. So that doesn't really tell us anything. Vimescarrot (talk) 09:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe S. was referring to this edit. --Sean 13:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC) I not sure if he did I think he did that's why I type his name in there and I heard Electro's voice on the Spider-man Ride from youtube I could be him but I would like to find out for sure if anybody knows plese confirm it.[reply]

How many beds at Rouge Valley Centenary?

I'm trying to write an article on a local hospital, Rouge Valley Centenary. I would like to know how many beds the hospital has, but all the information I can find on this topic gives a figure I know to be outdated -- many sources say 366, but this dates from 2004 or earlier, and the hospital has undergone expansion since then. Can anyone find me a reliable source indicating the current number of beds at this hospital? If I can't find anything, I could call them and ask myself, but a phone call is not really a reliable source. --✶♏✶ 08:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point. From looking at their site, I think it is likely that other info may also be difficult to find citations for. Now that it has amalgamated with Rouge Valley Health System it will be easier to not think of the Centenary as a separate entity. Instead, include it and its history ( and the other hospital building and clinics) as part of the bigger corporate body of Rouge Valley Health System on that article page. This is because the Rouge Valley Health System management will justify their inflated salaries by forever changing things around between different sites ( I’m not kidding). If you try and maintain separate articles it will become nigh on impossible, because official publications will tend to give information by speciality, with the identity of which physical building(s) often not being mentioned at all. Leave the bed issue to one side for now, as the more important aspects are not size but scope and nature of the services offered at the Centenary location and the other sites. With it all contained within one article, I expect that it will also be easier to see then what other information is lacking. Perhaps then, it will be time to email the RVHS Director of Public Affairs and Community Relations to ask for citable sources. --Aspro (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I want to separate the articles is that the two hospitals have very different histories, and there is enough pre-amalgamation history to write about that I think in the end it would amount to two different articles. (I'm mostly going on old newspaper sources and stuff; you can see the page in my user subspace to take a look at what I've assembled so far.) Maybe I'm a little biased because I was born there :) Anyway, I guess that's not really important. Thanks for the input. If you're from around here or know some stuff about it, I hope you'll contribute to this topic. --✶♏✶ 06:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Depiction of doctors

In cartoons and popular art from the middle of the twentieth century to about the 1970s, doctors are always depicted as wearing, in addition to a stethoscope, a large circular mirror on their heads. My question is: did doctors actually wear mirrors like this, and what were they used for? And, why did they stop using them? 87.194.239.235 (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on head mirror which answers most of your questions. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I had a look at the mirror article, but it wasn't mentioned there. 87.194.239.235 (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can still get them, so presumably some doctors still prefer them to pocket flashlights. APL (talk) 17:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would expect them to be used in places which lack electricity or a supply of batteries. StuRat (talk) 18:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The advantage to the head mirror was that it was a hands-free device. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at head mirror, as Sluzzelin suggested, it answers your question about what the mirrors were used for. They were very widely used in the twentieth century and probably earlier. They fell into disuse with the arrival of battery operated head lamps, and nowadays the wide use of fibre-optic viewing devices. Richard Avery (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The doctor I saw as a young man certainly used one. It is a reflector which concentrates the light from some lamp with its parabolic shape, and by looking through the hole in the center he could see a brightly illuminated throat, nasal passage or ear. It provides superior illumination to a handheld penlight, by being coaxial with the eye's line of sight. Edison (talk) 00:49, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When to Change Transmission Oil?

My 2008 Ford Focus owners manual says that you should change the transmission fluid in an automatic transmission at 97K miles. The manual doesn't say anything about a manual transmission. Any ideas on when I should change it's fluid? 174.20.74.135 (talk) 21:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a legit car? Your dealership should be the ones to advise you about this.--Aspro (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Err. Remember me? I bought a car off you last week! I need to change the transmission fluid but I can’t find when in the manual.

Dealership: Just look on Wikipedia! I have, but it doesn't say.

Dealership: Well what do you expect me to do about it ? I just sold you the car!

--Aspro (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Click and Clack say [6] "Manual: Most manufacturers recommend that manual transmission fluid be changed every 30,000 to 60,000 miles. Under heavy-duty use, some manufacturers suggest changing transmission fluid every 15,000 miles.". SteveBaker (talk) 00:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And, as you may know, on the R53 MINI Cooper S, the manual transmission fluid is said by the manufacturer to be a "lifetime" fluid. I assume this means that when the fluid gives out, your transmission's lifetime is over. I replaced mine at 50,000 miles or so. -- Coneslayer (talk) 03:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - you're right. They claim that on the manual gearbox, the transmission fluid is sealed for life...and it's really quite hard to replace the stuff. I make a point of replacing the entire MINI before that happens! The extended warranty is more expensive than the depreciation of the car over the life of the factory warranty - so it's cheaper to sell your MINI before it hits 40k and buy a shiney new one. I'm now on my 4th MINI and so far that rule has worked out in my favor every time! Of course with cars that depreciate more quickly, have shorter warranties or don't have to be repaired at outrageous BMW labor rates - this is a really bad idea! SteveBaker (talk) 11:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if SteveBaker keeps the 4 boxes they came in. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few years ago, a friend of mine saw one of the early Scion xB's parked next to my MINI and remarked: "Hey! There's the box your MINI came in!"...right as the owner walked past. We got a nasty look for that one! SteveBaker (talk) 03:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One the R53 (mine's a 2006) changing the manual transmission oil is pretty simple—essentially the same as my old Civics. Remove fill bolt, remove drain bolt, allow to drain, replace drain bolt, use a funnel and tube to fill to level of fill bolt, replace fill bolt. If you can change the engine oil, you can change the tranny oil. Maybe it's changed for the 2007+. -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]