Miscellaneous desk
< December 7	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 9 >

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.

December 8

Regimental tie

Can one wear a Regimental tie without having serving in that particular regiment, or formation?What is the correct etiquette on wearing a military tie? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.180.142.128 (talk) 10:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can wear any tie you want, but members (and former members) of that regiment might be quite insulted if they were to see you wearing it and then found out you never served. But then again, if you avoid trying to pass yourself off as a former member of that regiment (perhaps at a regimental dinner), what is the likelihood of that happening? Astronaut (talk) 12:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP address suggests you are in New Delhi - do you want to know about the laws and etiquette in India, or elsewhere? I imagine some countries might have legal restrictions on this kind of thing, and etiquette will certainly vary from place to place. 81.98.43.107 (talk) 12:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Various sources, none particularly authoritative, suggest that anyone can wear a regimental-style tie as long as the stripes run in the opposite tradition from the British tradition (Brooks Brothers, who sell such ties). Tradition is diagonally down from wearer's left to right (see necktie); so it's ok to wear diagonally down from right to left. --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ObPersonal: Some years ago my father, an ex-regular and serving TA Warrant Officer of the Royal Army Pay Corps was using a motorway service station washroom and noticed the man at the next sink was wearing the RAPC's tie. He struck up a conversation assuming the man was a fellow Corps member, and after some confusion it emerged that the tie wearer had no connection to the RAPC and had chosen the tie, not realising it was that of any organisation, merely because he liked the design: he was extremely embarrassed and said he would berate his tailor for selling a regimental tie to him. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.22 (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That was most illuminating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.177.97.46 (talk) 11:50, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

up in the air

in the movie, what is the line 'Anyone who ever built an empire or changed the world sat where you're sitting right now' referring to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arah18 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a particular reference to anything. I think it's just supposed to be the most Tony Robbins-like, up-beat spin their corporate psychologist could think up for what, for most of those on the receiving end, sure feels like a disaster. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 18:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the context of the phrase, but on its own, it means to me "Anybody who has ever made important changes in the world has been where you are right now", or to phrase it another way, "you are sitting now [in the seat?] where anybody who has changed the world has sat previously." Again, I don't know that movie, I don't know the context; therefore I don't know how literal or figurative that expression is supposed to be. It could very well be that "sitting" isn't literally sitting in a chair, but a metaphor for where he or she is in the process of making a decision or something along those lines. Falconus^{p t c} 23:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the OP knows the general metaphor. In the movie, the line is delivered to people who are being laid off from their jobs. I don't think it's meant to be a reference to any specific person — as Findlay says, in the movie it is part of an attempt to make the laid-off person feel better about their situation. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:11, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

well, it is clear in the movie that the line was use to motivate the people, i am just wondering if there are specific people that the movie is refering to, OP here MahAdik _usap 00:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Likely not. The generic idea that all people who have gotten ahead have had setbacks is fairly generally true. The specific idea that people who have built empires have been laid off is not true. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe something akin to "Standing on the shoulders of Giants?" 62.30.176.76 (talk) 02:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a common idea: see e.g. Redundancy helped me follow my dreams. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ISBN number

I have written several books. One of them was published by the International Foundation of Employee Benefits, the first and second edition. They have cut back on publishing and I will be publishing the next edition myself. My question is whether the ISBN# would be the same for the edition I publish as the ones they published or do I have to apply for a new number. The same question applies to the Library of Congress Control number. The title and content will remain the same but will be updated. Stephen Abramson, CLU, ChFC, CPC APS Pension & Financial Services Inc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.115.104.122 (talk) 21:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See ISBN. Yes, you will need a new ISBN for each edition, which you can get from the ISBN Agency for your country. Apart from anything else, the ISBN identifies the publisher. If you are publishing via a self-publishing company, they might supply the ISBN.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 21:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]