Miscellaneous desk
< May 8	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 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.

May 9

Roman Polanski judge decision

Where can I find Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza's full 11 page order about Roman Polanski being required to return to California for sentencing. The order is from January I think.

Thanks.

EdwinHJ | Talk 01:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can find the minutes of the 1977 Grand Jury proceedings [1], but not the order issued on 22nd January 2010. If it were available to the public, I would expect it to be on The Smoking Gun. Googling around, I really don't think it's publically available. 86.180.48.37 (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably a public record like almost all other US court proceedings. The Smoking Gun is not exactly the pinnacle of journalistic excellence and you shouldn't expect it to ... do anything. Googling around, I saw that an AP site appeared to have a copy of the court order, but it's on their FTP site and you need an AP account to get to it. The court itself presumably has it in a publicly available filing if you want to schlep over to the courthouse itself and ask for a copy (which is what the AP did to get theirs). Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore the second line to our curiously phrased article; TSG is as reliable as any other collection of journalists - take that for what you will. Their site has many documents relating to Polanski, such as this, this, this, and this, so I'm also puzzled why they wouldn't have the more recent stuff. Nothing is showing up in my searches of Google or Google news either; I'm starting to think it simply hasn't been released. Matt Deres (talk) 18:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recording Sleep Talking

So it turns out I talk in my sleep, and I've been told that I say some pretty funny stuff. I want to know what it is that i say, so I'm looking for a method to record myself. I don't want to take up a ton of memory on my computer or a recording device so do you guys know of any way to get an audio recorder (like my Zoom H2, either alone or hooked up to my mac) to be triggered by noise---or perhaps a way to deal with a potentially 10 hour long audio file? Thanks for the help. 169.229.76.114 (talk) 06:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no real reason why you couldn't use a PC to record ten hours' worth of sound - it'll only be 6 Gigs even if recorded in CD quality. You could then load it into Audacity or similar and look for periods of sound. --Phil Holmes (talk) 09:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google for a “Voice Activated Recorder” and take your pick. Ask around your friends, because many recorders have this option already so that you can you use them for dictation. I notice our article Somniloquy has no audio file giving an example yet. How about uploading any of the most embarrassing sound-bites :-) --Aspro (talk) 10:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I actually recorded myself a few times a while back. I used to talk a lot in my sleep, I don't any more, but it was to show me how strong a snorer I am. I actually used my Zen Stone, which made quite a low-quality recording, but was by far the easier choice as I didn't want to lug the PC upstairs to where we sleep just to record myself. Came out good, recorded about seven hours of material before the battery died. Makes for freaky listening material. --Ouro (blah blah) 05:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-mother's day?

Has there ever been an attempt to celebrate those women who aren't mothers (through choice or chance) with a special day? --TammyMoet (talk) 11:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article Childfree, the National Alliance for Optional Parenthood has designated August 1 as Non-Parents' Day. I guess that falls under "attempt", yes? There is also, separately, the International Women's Day, which doesn't have motherhood as a prerequisite. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool thanks! --TammyMoet (talk) 12:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about men who aren't fathers? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

International Men's Day is November 19. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay... So who gives what to whom on Non-Parents' Day?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why the premise that there is anything to give to non-parents on Non-Parents Day? And is this day to celebrate non-parents who could be parents or any non-parent? Seems entirely ridiculous to me...sort of like wishing everyone a very happy unbirthday. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The clincher would be whether Hallmark issues greeting cards for any or all of those non-parent dates. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Halmark will have its work cut out for it if it's going to make "Thanks for doing your part to reduce human overpopulation!" look good on a card. APL (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On one Father's Day I saw a card which read "Thank you for not being a father". Nobody says "Thank you for not being a mother"! --TammyMoet (talk) 19:36, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's because there is a difference between "thank you for not irresponsibly spreading your sperm around to random women and then not taking the proper responsibility when she get's pregnant" is quite different than "thank you for not getting duped by that asshole who made you believe he really loved you when he knocked you up, and then split when he learned you were pregnant". --Jayron32 03:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are quite different, but only if you make the rather patronising assumption that single mothers become so because they were "duped by an asshole", and that there's no such thing as a (potentially) bad mother. FiggyBee (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A more cynical way of phrasing it would be, "Thank you for not extending your genetic line into the gene pool." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In general celebrating something negative, for example, celebrating not being something, is an extremely bad idea. Surely there are other things about yourself that you could celebrate? You don't earn praise for not being a mother, it's just living life, wheras parenting is extremely difficult and imo deserves celebration. Celebrate the many greats things about you. I get hte impression (maybe wrongly but I still get it) that you somehow feel intimidated by mothers because you aren't one. Don't be, it's your choice not be a mother, and you're better off. Kids take a lot of effort, even though you will be extremely proud of them. I don't intend to have children, and I don't think that really warrants celebration. It's nothing really. However I climbed 4 mountains today, and I think that does warrant celebration.--92.251.166.171 (talk) 18:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Ortona

I served in the irish regiment of toronto during the second world war in Italy. my brother was killed and I was wounded. Where can I find a summary of this fight in Ortona This I believe was in 1944. My name is Robert Himpfen. My brothers name was Sgt Richard Himpfen. 216.221.94.5 (talk) 15:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have something about the Battle of Ortona (December 20, 1943 to December 28, 1943) The are a number of external links to other website at the bottom of the artical --Aspro (talk) 15:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Truck?

Sorry for this kind of question but I want to know the opinions of Wikipedians, not the overall population.

Is the Nissan Pathfinder considered a truck, or at least more a truck than a car? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Nissan Pathfinder is an SUV. They are legally classified as "light trucks" in the United States, and "cars" elsewhere. FiggyBee (talk) 15:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basically it depends on the area. For example, in some countries what would be called an 'estate car' could be called a 'station wagon' elsewhere. I would call it a SUV personally, but in Britain it's generally called a car. Chevymontecarlo. 05:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would call it a car. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a car in British terminology (not that you see many over here - we're not fond of such ridiculously large cars). --Tango (talk) 01:45, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can I come and live in your country, Tango? Here in Australia they've become a dime a dozen. Even suburban dwellers who work in city offices and never see a blade of grass except what's on their front garden, and wouldn't know a country road if it hit them in the face, drive these beasts, in most cases for no other or better reason than because their peers do. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the taxman is the only one who considers SUVs trucks. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I recall correctly, it's actually the industry that wants this classification, because it exempts them from the CAFE standards, or maybe puts them in a different piece of it or something, so that they don't have to get averaged in with ordinary cars, which would then have to be much more efficient to satisfy the rule. I also vaguely seem to remember that this is being changed. Maybe the article I linked will have more. --Trovatore (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name of person, location of house

About 10 years ago a gentlemen came to Webster County Ms. and dismantled an old historic log house. The woman that sold the house to him died a few years ago and her family does not know the name of the man. It is thought that he took the logs to Pickens County Ala. and restored it. My great, Great grandfather . Judge John Snow, built the house in the early 1800's and I would love to be able to find it and photograph it. If I have the wrong website for such information and research, would you be able to steer me in the right direction to find something. Mary John Hicks (email address removed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.248.177.138 (talk) 17:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many counties and municipalities have "Historical societies" which actually keep track of these sorts of things. You may want to try to look for a "Webster County Historical Society" or a "Pickens County Historical Society" or some similar names, which may have records and/or photographs of old structures like this. --Jayron32 03:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

family

According to my Grand Uncle's daughter, my Grand Uncle went to the Yucatan, along with another doctor. While there, there was a mine explosion. Both went to help and there was another explosion. Both were killed.

Dr. W.F. Melchers and Dr. Ernest Gilstrap - died 1907

How can I get any information on them?

Thank you for your time.

Kathy <email address removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.244.105.55 (talk) 20:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried ancestry.com? 24.189.90.68 (talk) 00:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For those who are searching: Kathy evidently asked this question (without result) on the "Yucatan Journeys" web site where she gave a little more information: "Hello, In July 1907, my Grand Uncle - Dr. Wilhelm Ferdinand Melchers and Dr. Ernest Gilstrap, were in the Yucatan. There was a mine explosion and both were killed. They did not send the bodies home. How might I find out where this was and if they ended up in a cemetery. Supposedly, the people erected a monument to them. Thank you - Kathy". She also tried Genealogy.com's forums where she told more information. Every little helps Kathy! The more you can tell us, the greater the chance we have to pull off an amazing find!! SteveBaker (talk) 01:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kathy's posts are on a wide range of forums - all over the internet! You've certainly been doing your homework! I wonder if we stand any chance of doing better?

One thing that stands out for me is that several people who live in the Yukutan have answered this query by saying that there are no mines in the area - so how could there be such a disaster? One respondent said:[2] "Maybe a quarry disaster. I mean, that could be possible. But there are no mines. There isn’t anything to mine for in the thick limestone. There are caves farther south on the peninsula, but again, there’s nothing inside but limestone, maybe sandstone or something similar. If you dig down more than 20-30′, you’ll hit water. All the quarries are always filling up with water and get abandoned when their size makes it impractical to pump out any more. With the peninsula having once been an ancient seabed, there really isn’t the variety of metals, minerals, or igneous rock found in mountainous areas. Just limestone formed by the calcium carbonate of bazillions of ancient plankton, sea creatures, etc. If there were some mining disaster, it would be interesting to know about. Anything is possible. From the many histories we’ve read, there was no mention of mining being a part of the economy."

So if it wasn't a "mine explosion" - then you evidently have some bad information. We have to ask ourselves what parts of the story are likely to be incorrect. It's possible that these two people died in some iniquitous manner - and the "mine story" is a coverup? Maybe there is just some confusion about where it happened - or maybe it wasn't a mine but...well, who knows? SteveBaker (talk) 01:47, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - unfortunately family stories of this type are not always true. My mother was told by her father that her mother was irish. When I researched the genealogy it turned out that all her family back to before 1800 came from Kings Lynn - a town on the East of England, and about as far from Ireland as you can get in the UK. --Phil Holmes (talk) 09:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Frankfurt Airport

The article Frankfurt Airport claims Frankfurt Airport is by far the busiest airport in Germany, and the third busiest airport in Europe. Why is this? I'd expect Berlin Tegel Airport to be the busiest airport in Germany, with Berlin having over five times as many people as Frankfurt am Main. I've never been to Frankfurt am Main, although I've been to Germany at least ten times, with most of those times including Berlin, so I don't have personal experience. Can anyone explain what makes Frankfurt am Main so special? JIP | Talk 21:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin, until quite recently, was in the middle of the GDR. As a location for a hub, this would have been useless. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite recently? The GDR was disestablished almost 20 years ago.... Kingsfold (talk) 13:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To expand slightly on Cookatoo's response; there are two ways for an airport to become busy. The first is for a lot of people to want to arrive there, and the second is for a lot of people to need to pass through. Frankfurt is the hub of operations for Lufthansa, which means that a lot of Lufthansa and codeshared Star Alliance flights (and passengers) will change planes there, as will passengers who need to link into those airlines' networks. While Frankfurt is a pleasant city, you're probably quite right that fewer people are interested in it as a destination compared to Berlin.

A similar phenomenon can be observed with other large airlines and airports. While I doubt that many people are much interested in visiting Minnesota, about 30% more people pass through Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport than go through New York's LaGuardia Airport — this is because Minneapolis is a hub for Delta. (See List of airports in the United States by passengers boarded.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with your point, but the New York/Minneapolis example is unfair in that it ignores New York's busier airport. --Sean 19:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, see Airline hub. --Anonymous, 02:04 UTC, May 10, 2010.

You also have to define "busiest". In terms of planes taking off and landing, Memphis International Airport is one of the busiest airports in the world, though the vast majority of those planes have no people on them. --Jayron32 03:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pilotless drones? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By "people," Jayron most likely meant passengers. Kingsfold (talk) 13:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, pilots are people too! Googlemeister (talk) 14:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^{[citation needed]} --Jayron32 21:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From Pilot: "Pilot, an aviator, person who flies an aircraft". Ditto in aviator "An aviator is a person who flies or travels via aircraft for pleasure or as a profession. ... The term is often applied to pilots" From person "Persons - In contemporary global thought, once humans are born, personhood is considered automatic via Legal fiction created by a Birth certificate." Nil Einne (talk) 00:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Frankfurt has always been trading/traveling hub of Germany. And while Frankfurt may not be big population-wise, it is center of second largest metropolitan area of Germany, according to our Frankfurt article. Seams like good enough reason to me. Also, just by checking Frankfurt Airport article you can see that when it was built (1936), it was second largest airport in Germany behind.... you guessed it, Tempelhof Airport in Berlin. But because of Cold War arrangements of occupational zones, when West Germany invested money in modern airport, they couldn't invest into Tempelhof Airport in Berlin (let me remind you, Berlin was split in 2, but Allied side was encircled by Soviet occupational zone, it was an "island" of allied influence) so logical choice was second biggest one, and biggest one they had access to: Frankfurt. And once you build multi-million mark/euro/dollar project like one of busiest airports in the world, its not really child's play to move it to Berlin, so Frankfurt remains biggest one. Oh, and Lufthans HQ is there.--Melmann^(talk) 15:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that it is fair to say that Frankfurt has always been the trading/traveling hub of Germany. It has certainly been one of the top five hubs, but Hamburg, Cologne, and Berlin could have claimed the top spot at various points over the past 500 years or so. Between about 1870 and 1944, Berlin was the undisputed economic and commercial center of Germany, as well as its capital. After World War II and the Soviet occupation and encirclement of Berlin, most of Germany's big banks moved their headquarters to Frankfurt, which had always been an important banking center. Frankfurt's role as Germany's financial capital and its geographic position near the center of West Germany undoubtedly led Lufthansa to make Frankfurt its hub by the late 1950s. Its central location meant that it could offer very short connecting flights or train connections within a few hours to any other Germany city, whereas a hub in Cologne or Hamburg would have meant longer flights or very long rail journeys (especially before the introduction of high-speed trains) to cities in southern Germany. Also, according to this list of the largest 100 firms in Germany, 10 of these firms are headquartered in the Frankfurt/Rhine-Main metropolitan area, whereas only 2 are headquartered in Berlin. Since business travel accounts for a large share of passenger loads, Frankfurt is clearly more important in this regard. Marco polo (talk) 19:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I never claimed it was only or biggest trading hub, but as you pointed out its central position must have been very advantageous during the times of of slow transport methods. Even now it is priceless to be 1 or 2 hour away from any part of Germany, imagine back then, it was was between a day of travel and two, three days (not actual figures, I am not familiar with exact distances involved). But even if it wasn't that important, core of my reasoning still stands.--Melmann^(talk) 00:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]