Miscellaneous desk
< March 15	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 17 >

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 16

nascar

why are nascar venues not included in largest sports arenas. it is a sport —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.236.160.209 (talk) 02:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean why are they not held in the same stadiums? If that is the question, the awnser is: Because it would be too costly to transform a stadium for an automobile race. Sumsum2010·T·C 02:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I read the question to mean that the OP was wondering why NASCAR tracks are not included in some sort of list of the largest sports arenas that we have here at Wikipedia. And the two articles that I find that relate to that are List of stadiums by capacity and List of indoor arenas in the United States. But NASCAR tracks don't match either qualification. They are neither stadiums nor indoor arenas. Dismas|^(talk) 02:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) ::To me it is obvious the OP is referring to one of our articles, perhaps specifically List of North American stadiums by capacity,I hope this helps: List of NASCAR race tracks. 10draftsdeep (talk) 02:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)x3... No, he's refering to the fact that when people quote stadium sizes, they often note that the largest stadium in the U.S. is Michigan Stadium at 109,000 and change. That stat often ignores the fact that there are a dozen or more racetracks that seat more people; Indianapolis Motor Speedway can seat more than that in its main grandstand, and overall has seating for over a quarter of a million people. However, he didn't get his question from Wikipedia; the Wikipedia article List of sports venues by capacity includes racetracks; Indianapolis is second in the world to LeMans, which seats over 350,000 people. Indeed, the largest non-racetrack on the list is Rungrado May Day Stadium in North Korea at #12 on the list; though like many "official" stats from North Korea should be taken with a grain of salt... The next largest which isn't a racetrack is Salt Lake Stadium in Kolkata, India at a capacity of 120,000 and which is somewhere down in the deep 20's on the list (I'm not counting that far). In other words, to answer the OP, as far as Wikipedia is concerned racetracks DO count, and they account for nearly all of the largest 25 or so sporting venues in the world. --Jayron32 02:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard race tracks referred to as "stadiums", and that bit of semantics might explain why Michigan's is considered the largest "stadium" in the US, whereas Indy is a "sports venue" as you note. Ironically, the word "stadium" originally pertained to a running track rather than to its surroundings.[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could also include racecourses in this: I was once hiring Doncaster Racecourse for an event and was told that the fire safety limit was "250,000". --TammyMoet (talk) 10:55, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably the maximum capacity of the venue, including employees and other non-spectators, AND would be for events with added seating capacity; i.e. a concert on the infield where they fill the grass with folding chairs, or something like that. Many sporting venues have a higher capacity for total occupancy than for seating for events because a) standard seating is much below maximal safe capacity, given than the configuration can change based on the event and b) the maximum safe occupancy includes all persons, not just paying patrons, and so will necessarily be larger than the maximum seating capacity. You'll notice the list I include does have racecourses (horse racing venues), seventh on the list is Nakayama Racecourse and there are several others in the top several venues... --Jayron32 12:44, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They may have gotten it from wikipedia. As another answer mentioned (perhaps not seen because of the EC) our List of stadiums by capacity does indeed exclude race tracks as it should, since racetracks are not usually considered stadiums, as BB and others have mentioned. The inclusion of race tracks on List of sports venues by capacity seems appropriate since most would agree a racetrack is a sports venue. The OP's specific comment was 'sports arenas'. This would generally refer to yet something else and if you're referring specifically to indoor arenas we have yet another List of indoor arenas by capacity. We don't have something for arenas in general perhaps because the term is fairly inprecise but I don't know if I'd include many things called stadiums. Nil Einne (talk) 13:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The term "arena" originally referred to the sand on which combats were staged, the sand being good at absorbing blood.[2] The term "arena" now implies an indoor venue that's big enough for basketball and maybe hockey, but typically not big enough for football or baseball. Meanwhile, Duke's basketball arena is called Cameron Indoor Stadium. Looking at wikipedia's Stadium article, there doesn't seem to be any particular reason why a racing oval couldn't be called a "stadium", but for whatever reason, it's not generally done that way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The terms are all confused, and while people generally think of stadiums as being outdoors and arenas as being indoors, there are enough counterexamples to confuse the issue. Besides all of the various domed stadiums (which while indoors, are as large as outdoor stadiums) and the aforementioned Cameron Indoor Stadium, which despite being a rather small basketball arena is at least qualified with the adjective "Indoor", there is also the former Chicago Stadium which was never so qualified, but was also a basketball and hockey facility. There are also other terms, such as "field" or "grounds" or other similar terms for baseball facilities (c.f. Ebbets Field, Polo Grounds, Fenway Park, Camden Yards) the term "bowl" is common enough for American football venues, especially those which were "bowl shaped", see Yale Bowl, Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl, though there is also the curious Baker Bowl, which was a retangular-shaped baseball stadium. Add to the mix the term "Gardens" which is used for several current and former basketball/hockey arenas (Rose Garden, Madison Square Garden, Boston Garden, TD Garden, Maple Leaf Gardens) and the rather bland "center" or "place", (Bell Centre, Scotiabank Place) and a whole slew of other names, some kinda cool and unique (The Palestra, The Palace of the Fans). --Jayron32 15:04, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's safe to say the OP's question has been addressed, and this is almost more of a language discussion now. Chicago Stadium was an odd one, in that it was the only major professional sports venue in Chicago that was named "Stadium"... and was the only one that was indoors! (Dyche Stadium was Northwestern's college football venue.) Baker Bowl apparently got that name in connection with a banked bicycle track that looped around the field during the 1890s, a time when bicycle racing was probably more popular than baseball. The "Garden" items are mystifying, but there must be some obscure explanation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An Exultation of Larks

I am hoping to find an electronic copy of this book An Exultation OF Larks by James Lipton availal on the internet for payment or not. It is about collective nouns. Does anyone know? 117.241.120.50 (talk) 06:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May I just correct that to "An Exaltation of Larks". This book was published in 1993. Richard Avery (talk) 08:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OP also asked this question at another ref desk. I asked whether he has tried to contact Bravo or Penguin Books. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response removed by poster. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 15:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Off-topic

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Could you possibly think for a minute before posting responses like that? That search does not lead to any e-book editions of this book. It leads to pages that mention the book and the word "ebook" on the same page. No help to the OP at all. And by the way, since you're so keen on correcting others' spelling, it's "ecstasy". --Viennese Waltz 13:20, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! A bonus! He gets to yell at both of us at the same time! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) Most of which relate to sites that sell ebooks and sites which sell 'An Exaltation of Larks' both not sites I've seen which are an intersection of those two sets. By the way according to the article on the author it was first published in 1968 but has been revised since then. The 1993 edition appears to be the latest revision also called the ultimate edition. Given the results, while I wouldn't commit myself to this answer, I have doubts the book is available in ebook form with the authors or publisher's permission. (We won't of course help you find any copyright violating form here.) Not particularly relevant but I looked in to this before I checked which book the OP was interested in but it seems the An Exaltation of Larks by Megan Hart published in 2002 was once in ebook form [3] mentions it was available [4] but a search doesn't find any sign of it or the author. [5] shows the book was once available there by a different publisher but not anymore. They still sell others books by the author [6] so I guess the rights on that one just ran out. Perhaps it's with a different publisher now, I gave up on looking once it was clear it was irrelevant.Nil Einne (talk) 13:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OP indicated he was willing to pay for the book, so if it's still in print it shouldn't be that hard to find. I'll check and see if it's on Barnes & Noble's website. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it is.[7] So that's at least a starting point. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Take arguments elsewhere

Look, he asked for the e-book, not the book. So that link is not "a starting point", but completely useless. I could easily have linked to Amazon when this question first came up, but didn't. But then again, I'm not concerned about my post count or the number of "references" I provide. --Viennese Waltz 14:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peace. Be still. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or, in other words, "I know I'm wrong, but I'm not going to admit it." --Viennese Waltz 14:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see you taking 2 or 3 shots at other users who are at least trying to help, and I see you providing ZERO useful information to the OP. So either offer some useful info to the OP, or go find someone else to hassle. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My posts point out that those well-meaning attempts to help are in fact useless and as such have no place on this desk. The idea would be to try and improve the signal-to-noise ratio. --Viennese Waltz 15:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now you've made FOUR comments, all of which are ZERO help to the OP. Way to go. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um, as you well know, they're not aimed at the OP, they're aimed at you and at C3. I could take it to your respective talk pages if you like, but it makes sense to keep the discussion in one place. --Viennese Waltz 15:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's FIVE now. Do you intend to try to help the OP at all, or is it your plan to be strictly a nanny here? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Use talk pages to argue, not ref desks. Vimescarrot (talk) 15:20, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The bottom line is that the only legal electronic copies you're likely to find would have to originate from the publisher. If someone else transcribed it, it is likely a copyright violation. The ref desk will not aid and abet copyright violations. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I used to enjoy driving

I used to enjoy driving until a couple of days ago. Most of the way to work is a major divided highway, with two lanes in each direction and grade-separated intersections which limit access to just four places along its 25 km length. At the time I travel, the road is not heavily congested. The other day on this highway, I got pulled over by the police for going considerably faster then the speed limit and was quite rightly fined a large sum; in fact the police officer said I was lucky to keep my driving licence. Since then, I have stuck to the speed limit and quite frankly I find it boring as hell. The countryside seems to crawl past at a snails pace and I find my attention wandering to the fields rather then the road ahead. Passing slower vehicles, usually trucks since they are the only ones going slower than me, has become a tedious ordeal and made me afraid of being rear-ended by a faster moving car. What can I do to put the enjoyment back into my drive to work while still keeping to the speed limit, or at least how can I avoid falling asleep from the tedium of it? 212.123.243.220 (talk) 12:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Listen to the radio and/or music. Sing? 92.29.117.90 (talk) 12:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or, audio-books and audio-dramas. I'm not a huge fan of audio-books, but when read by someone with a decent voice they can be quite engrossing. Your local library will likely have a lot of them on CD.

Personally I've been enjoying the audio-dramas from Big Finish Productions. They're surprisingly well done. Not many places still make audio dramas for whatever reason. APL (talk) 14:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BBC radio makes lots and lots - particularly on BBC Radio 4. They are available to download as "podcasts" in the UK from here http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/genre/factual , although the selection of drama shown there is only a tiny fraction of what I thought was available. I do not know if you can download them abroad. The BBC World Service has quite a lot of material to download including drama and documentaries http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/docarchive/all , and it is probably downloadable worldwide. As a UK license payer I would not mind the material being made available to download for free worldwide, for its prestige/propaganda/educational benefits. 92.15.26.91 (talk) 21:18, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're willing to put money into it, You could get a car where you sit much closer to the ground to increase the sensation of speed. Double points if it's also a convertible. Or you could get a vehicle that's intrinsically more interesting to drive, like a motorcycle.

If you're looking for a challenge 25km is beyond what I would consider a comfortable bicycle commute, bit it's not outside the realm of possibility. APL (talk) 14:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

50 km sounds like an ideal long-distance bike ride. ~A H 1^(TCU) 15:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Become more honest to yourself, and change the first sentence to "I used to enjoy driving faster than the speed limit, and felt no respect for the authorities who set that limit". If you truly enjoy driving, it shouldn't matter what speed. HiLo48 (talk) 16:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or perhaps if said authorities would set the speed limits based on what was necessary for public safety exclusively, instead of often setting them based on how much ticket fine revenue can be generated ... a/k/a speed traps. --McDoob AU 93 16:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I specifically didn't want this to become a discussion about different speed limits and the associated legal issues. @APL, I already have the radio on, but maybe I could switch to a talk radio station rather then music; I've never really enjoyed audio books though. Yes, it is a bit too far to bicycle, but a motorcycle is an idea (though I would have to take lessons and pass a test first). 212.123.243.220 (talk) 16:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But you made it all about speed limits and legal issues when you made it clear that you openly flouted the law by breaking a limit set by authorities who probably know a lot more about setting such limits than you do. And to McDoobAU93, I have never seen any solid evidence (which is what we like here) that road authorities set limits in order to raise revenue. It's an optional tax. Though I guess I should thank you folks for paying it. I don't. HiLo48 (talk) 19:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid Motorway/Highway driving and stick to what in the UK would be termed A Roads or B Roads. I find driving on motorways intensely dull (but efficient) whereas most of the A-roads where I live are quite 'challenging'. That is to say they go up/down, tight corners, long corners, open bends, closed bends etc. All the while you can be going below the speed limit of the road and still feel like you're going quite fast. ny156uk (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At the very minimum, such roads are at least more visually stimulating. A good example: I was returning home from a family event when a series of wildfires closed down the interstates/motorways I had planned on using to get home. Instead, I took the state routes and other local roads (I'm presuming similar to A- and B-roads in this case), thanks to my GPS' directions. Fortunately, the trip took almost exactly the same amount of time as the all-motorway trip would have, and I saw a section of the state I'd never visited before. --McDoob AU 93 17:55, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How bored can you get in a 15-minute trip? 25km is not a long commute. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 17:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Travel a different route each time. This also has the benefit of helping you avoid being assassinated. Also, install hydraulics, roll down the windows and play the song "Low Rider" while nodding slowly. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could also play Slow Ride, but I wouldn't recommend I Can't Drive 55. Googlemeister (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about Shut Up and Drive? :-) ~A H 1^(TCU) 15:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prithviraj chauhan's tomb

I would like to confirm whether Prithviraj chauhan's tomb is still in afghanistan and is treated very badly by the locals there? I have not seen an image of his tomb. so, i am not sure whether this is really true.

I've searched a lot about this topic on net but the responses i got are old i.e., aroun 4-5 years old. Here are some links :-

http://midhun.allubrothers.com/blog/2006/04/prithviraj-chauhan-new-insight.html
http://forum.startv.in/showthread.php?t=63234
http://www.zeenews.com/news232105.html
http://www.jatland.com/forums/showthread.php?22009-prithviraj-chauhan-s-grave

Please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AishwaryaPandey (talk • contribs) 13:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]

When you posted this question you succeeded in removing the rest of the reference desk [8]. This was quickly reverted. I have readded your question and added a section header as the instructions at the top say. Do note that other than annoying other contributors, there is a fair chance no one will bother to add questions posted in that fashion back. In future I suggest you use the new section tab at the top right Nil Einne (talk) 13:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you already know we do have this article: Prithviraj Chauhan, but it doesn't mention the tomb, unfortunately. Bus stop (talk) 16:33, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Q who?

The letter Q has long fascinated me, because this letter is not used at all in native Finnish, and quite (pun intended) seldom used in English or any other language I understand. So naturally I've been also fascinated with two fictional characters named Q: Q (James Bond) and Q (Star Trek). The origin of the name of the first character is quite (pun again intended) easily explained as being short for "Quartermaster". But where does the name of the second character come from? JIP | Talk 20:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the intro to the latter article: Gene Roddenberry chose the letter "Q" in honor of his friend, Janet Quarton. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget Q clearance! I would be happy to discourse on why the top-level Department of Energy clearance is named "Q" should anybody care... --Mr.98 (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also Q-ship. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.165 (talk) 22:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent question! --Quartermaster (talk) 22:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what other languages JIP understands, but Q is used frequently in French (and Latin). The A and Q are even switched on French keyboards. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What, the top row is AWERTY? Quelle horreur! -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 07:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AZERTY actually, since the W and Z are also switched. It's not that bad, really, but what I can't get used to is that the M and the semicolon are switched. (Well, and the punctuation is all in different spots, and you have to use shift to get a period...I could change the settings to English, but I enjoy the ease of typing accented letters, so I guess I will live with it.) Adam Bishop (talk) 07:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand basic Latin and French, but not nearly as well as I understand the four languages I consider myself really capable in: my native Finnish, and the three Germanic languages English, Swedish and German. The letter Q is nearly non-existent in Swedish, and quite rare in both English and German. JIP | Talk 19:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We have a Letter frequency article which coversd several European languages. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 22:37, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JIP may be amused to read in this table, that the frequency of the letter Q in Swedish is 0.007 %. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 11:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's the name?

What's the name of the professional who administers a business, employed to provide social services,especially to the disadvantaged,authorized to teach,practice law; conducts lawsuits or gives legal advice for them. Thank you very much —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.129.82 (talk) 22:57, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As to the law portions, lawyer. A lawyer could, I suppose, do the other functions too; but under most laws, only a lawyer can do the law functions you describe. Shadowjams (talk) 07:20, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that in some countries, the legal profession is split between solicitors and barristers. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not so much a split as a conspiracy or collusion. :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of legal aid? Not that that's a person.—msh210℠ 22:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be referring to the functions of an ombudsman. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm struggling to see a single job here. A person "who administers a business, employed to provide social services,especially to the disadvantaged" is one thing. A person who is "authorized to teach,practice law; conducts lawsuits or gives legal advice for them" is quite another. I've never heard of the same person doing all these things in the same occupation. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 18:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]