Miscellaneous desk
< January 18	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 20 >

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.

January 19

Reference Desk In Other Languages

Which other languages have Reference Desks? I know the Japanese Wikipedia doesn't. I'm not so much bothered about the blackout later on, as I'll just pop over there if I need to look something up, but I will miss the RefDesks if I need to ask something. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:13, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

German has one unified RefDesk: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Auskunft . --DaHorsesMouth (talk) 01:58, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, excellent! That will do me! KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 02:04, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the intewikis at WP:RD and WP:RDL. And don't forget that the blackout won't last forever, Wikipedia resumes regular work just 24 hours after it starts. --Theurgist (talk) 03:03, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It also seems likely that the "mobile" version is not in fact going to be blacked out, so smartphones and tablet computers will still be able to edit. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:37, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be so sure. Selery (talk) 04:27, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The foundation had already mentioned the mobile site was supposed to be available and since Javascript was used, you can just disable Javascript (or use something like Noscript), see [1]. Both of these did work, as did disabling stylesheets (as speculated at computing). Nil Einne (talk) 05:13, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what's his name?

From the article Katyn massacre: Those who died at Katyn included an admiral, two generals, 24 colonels, 79 lieutenant colonels, 258 majors, 654 captains, 17 naval captains, 3,420 NCOs, seven chaplains, three landowners, a prince, 43 officials, 85 privates, 131 refugees, 20 university professors, 300 physicians; several hundred lawyers, engineers, and teachers; and more than 100 writers and journalists as well as about 200 pilots. Does anybody know the name of that prince?-Meerkatakreem (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's sourced to The Katyn Controversy: Stalin's Killing Field by Benjamin B. Fischer here at Polish prisoners-of-war in the Soviet Union after 1939, but doesn't name him. None of the people named at Category:Katyn massacre are him, and none are sourced to lists, just individual verification references, or not at all. Dru of Id (talk) 04:37, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the url moved. Dru of Id (talk) 04:38, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[[Category:1940 deaths]] list 6 in article titles, none correct (1,968 listed). And I see we're out of time... Thursday, then? Dru of Id (talk) 04:57, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not identified as such here, and everything I looked at elsewhere online just rearranges the same list. Sorry. Dru of Id (talk) 06:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any evidence of a prince having been killed in any of the many books on the topic available through Google Books. This one specifically mentions that two Princes, Janusz Radziwiłł and Jan Lubomirski were placed in an alternative prison because of their high social standing, and were later released. Warofdreams talk 21:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't also find the real identity of this prince. Thanks dru and WOD for the effort.-Meerkatakreem (talk) 12:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Polish Wikipedia article about the Katyn massacre names one admiral and 11 generals, but fails to mention any princes. There are also lists of victims here, here, and here, in Polish; I did a quick text search, and, as far as I can tell, there are no princes there either.

I think I should clarify what the word "prince" would mean in this context. It does not mean "heir to the throne". Poland ceased to be a kingdom in 1795. However, a large number of noble families remained, and some of the most prominent families were granted the right to call themselves "princes". Many of them remember their titles to the present day. The number of princely families was and still is quite substantial - there are around 30 extant princely houses. Some are still prominent (for example, Prince Stanisław Albrecht Radziwiłł was married to the younger sister of the wife of John F. Kennedy), but others have completely faded into obscurity.--Itinerant1 (talk) 23:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's very informative Itinerant. Thank you. That explains then why it's hard to find the identity of the prince mentioned in our Katyn massacre article.-Meerkatakreem (talk) 03:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pressure v Weight

What seems like a hundred years ago my then teacher could not answer my question, "what is the difference between pressure and weight?". I never got an answer, can anyone enlighten me before I die please?--85.211.142.228 (talk) 08:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just look at the units to understand. I will use US measures, but the same would apply in metric. Weight is measured in pounds, while pressure is in pounds per square inch. That is, weight has no area associated with it, while pressure does. If you put a 100 pound weight on a 10 square inch stand, it will exert 10 pounds per square inch (PSI) on it, while the same weight on a 1 square inch stand will exert 100 PSI. StuRat (talk) 08:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like a very good answer Sturat. I didn't know, but feel slightly more clever now. I am not the OP, but thanks --Lgriot (talk) 09:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what a fast answer, I can die in peace now! Thanks--85.211.142.228 (talk) 09:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has articles which define pressure and weight, and for good measure mass.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:35, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I will mark this question resolved. StuRat (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Help with google search parameter for type of light

I need a particular type of light fixture but my Google foo is not working to find what I'm after because I don't really know what they are called. This is what I need: I have a wooden post in my front yard where the house number is affixed and where the light fixture is affixed atop it. This is out on the lawn next to the path leading to the house. It has electrical wires running up through the post but the old iron light fixture at the top is all rusted and no longer works, though the electricity is fine. The searches I have tried keep finding lights that mount on the wall, that is they are side mounting, that would not work on a post.--108.14.197.46 (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A search for outdoor post light turns up a variety of suppliers that may have what you need. Deor (talk) 16:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a Lamppost?Quinn ^➳WINDY 16:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try "post mount light fixture" or "pole mount light fixture" without the quotes. RudolfRed (talk) 16:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to make sure and come back and not just leave you writing in the void with no response. Your suggestions worked great! I have ordered a lamp fixture. Thank you all very much--really greatly appreciated.--108.14.197.46 (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

saving a human

can u save a human if he is shot and dying , by preserving the body from dying at the most lowest temperatures?? plz help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oronos (talk • contribs) 15:49, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, cryopreservation at the level of a human body (or even a substantial organ) would be uniformly fatal; the term "corpsicle" covers this concept. However, therapeutic hypothermia is an emerging treatment for some limited cases involving low blood flow. — Lomn 15:58, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My answer would be a big, fat maybe --Dweller (talk) 15:58, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Under normal circumstances, human brain is considered irreversibly destroyed after five minutes without blood circulation. Cooling the brain by 10 degrees ºC before the heart is stopped allows to extend this period to about an hour. (Some brain damage still occurs, but it's considered mild enough that this is routinely used during open heart surgeries.) Going to lower temperatures will extend the survival time even further, to a few hours, but with considerable side effects.

The idea of cryopreservation/cryonics is to find a way to keep the body frozen indefinitely. To achieve that, the body has to be cooled well below freezing (typically, to the temperature of liquid nitrogen), doing that is quite tricky, and we don't yet know how to thaw the body once it's been frozen.--Itinerant1 (talk) 06:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't with the thawing, but with the freezing. Ice crystals grow within the cells during freezing, which destroys them. There's no way to bring anybody back from that. StuRat (talk) 06:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And those ice crystals have a larger volume than liquid water (or anything that's mainly water), and they burst through things. HiLo48 (talk) 06:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right, and the cell wall could probably manage to stretch 10% to accommodate the increase in volume, except, of course, that the cell wall is frozen first. StuRat (talk) 06:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is a common misconception. Modern cryonics techniques involve pumping the body with cryoprotectants before freezing. That prevents the formation of ice crystals, but makes it problematic to thaw the patient: for example, one common cryoprotectant is ethylene glycol a.k.a. antifreeze, and freezing the patient might involve saturating the body with 10 kg of ethylene glycol, whereas a regular live human would likely kick the bucket after accidentally drinking just 100 g of the substance.--Itinerant1 (talk) 07:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the context of this question, where the patient is still alive, it's obviously not possible to pump out their blood and fill them with antifreeze, as that would kill them. So, then we're stuck with the problem I stated. StuRat (talk) 19:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, for the purposes of this question, it is neither necessary nor possible to cool the patient to the temperature of liquid nitrogen. If you need to save someone who was shot, and his heart stops before you could get him to the emergency room, you can buy an hour or two by submerging him in a bathtub with ice water. But it needs to be done very quickly.--Itinerant1 (talk) 21:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OP said "the most lowest temperatures", which I took to mean well below freezing. StuRat (talk) 05:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Car rental in China

I read a few years ago that self-drive rental cars in China were only available to foreign tourists in a few major cities (or maybe just Beijing and Shanghai?); and that use of the cars was restricted to be within the city limits. I also read that China is in the middle of a vast highway building program and that the new highways were equipped with Chinese and English language signs. The same article went on to speculate that the restriction on driving rental cars out of the city might be lifted. Does anyone know if the restrictions have been lifted so I could (for example) rent a car in Shanghai and drive round the country for a few weeks? I have done similar driving holidays in other countries and quite enjoyed the experience, driving at my own pace and stopping wherever takes my fancy - sometimes with a schedule in mind, sometimes with no schedule. If the regulations have not changed, some ideas on how I could achieve a similar experience in China would be appreciated (that is, the independent, loosely scheduled holiday, rather then the must travel by car at all costs). Astronaut (talk) 17:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitravel says one must have a Chinese licence to drive in mainland china ("driving in china"). I believe the BBC's Excess Baggage programme had someone on it last year who had tried, and eventually hired a driver/translator instead. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 17:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Original section EC with above) I don't know what you read, but various sources like [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] say there is no legal basis to drive in China without a Chinese drivers licence. They suggest some authorities may ignore it, perhaps with the help of a bribe, but it doesn't mean it's legal. Edit: One or two seem to imply some rental companies may therefore choose to ignore the requirement for a Chinese drivers licence. I don't know whether it's true but if it is, they're likely to be the smaller ones who may be only based in one city and will likely restrict you to the city in any case since they don't want you going somewhere the authorities are 'less understanding. However they also suggest it is possible for a foreigner to get a Chinese drivers licence ~~(although I don't know if it's possible if you have almost no understanding of Mandarin)~~.

So the answer to your question is it's probably possible right now, but you do need a Chinese drivers licence. I personally doubt the new highways are by themselves going to change things in the near future and in any case, it's usually difficult to know what the Chinese authorities plan to do.

Edit: Reading more carefully the sources suggest it may be possible in some places in China to get a drivers licence if you have a poor understanding of Mandarin. They also suggest you may not need to take a practical drivers test (at least for a temporarily licence) if you have an international licence. Which may be a good thing because I've heard, and some of the sources suggest that despite what you may think from their driving, the practical test particularly in the large cities where you will need to be if you don't speak Mandarin, can be rather difficult.

BTW, I don't know where you've driven before but as the sources mention (and also these links from the sources [14] [15]), bear in mind driving in China isn't going to be like driving in many parts of the developed world. Even compared to some developing Asian countries like Malaysia, driving in China is going to be far worse. Also while you may be able to get a licence without a good understanding of Mandarin, it's going to make things difficult if you have an accident or need assistance. Particularly if you are driving between cities so would end up in areas that gets less tourists. There is also the risk you may be targetted by unscrupulious people (authorities or otherwise) if you are identified as a foreigner. Also there may be places you shouldn't or are not legally allowed to go.

All that being the case, you may want to consider just hiring a driver (obviously one who has a decent level of English or whatever other language/s you do understand). As may be obvious and the sources mention, given the low wages in China the cost compared to a self drive car rental is not going to be much higher.

P.S. On further consideration, I'm not 100% certain that a tourist with a Chinese drivers licence can rent a car to drive between cities but the sources seem to imply to me it's possible (some of them seem to be referring to driving between cities or other long term drives). And Avis seems to allow you to rent cars for travel between cities (although it could be they'll restrict it to those with a business visa or similar).

Nil Einne (talk) 00:02, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finlay's Wikitravel link looks interesting. Strange, I had always imagined an International Driving Permit would be a minimum requirement for self-drive car rental, rather then needing an actual Chinese driving license. I would also prefer to not have to hire a driver for the whole trip I have in mind. It would mean I would be stuck with an unknown travelling companion for whom I would have to pay for an extra hotel room and all their food (even if their actual wages are quite low). That could easily turn an expensive trip into a prohibitively expensive trip - effectively hiring the driver as a full-time employee for a few weeks, as well as potential hassles with Chinese employment law. The language is not an insurmountable obstacle, though it might take some lengthy pre-trip preparation. Any ideas on alternatives involving internal flights, trains, bike rental etc? Astronaut (talk) 11:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the same vein, it seems unlikely food will significantly add to the cost, we're talking China here. They're not going to expect to eat at a fancy restaurant and being Chinese should have no problem finding a cheap hawker or similar. Accomodation is likely to be more of an issue. Again, I don't think they're going to expect to sleep at a fancy hotel and I would guess in most places they'd be able to find a cheaper place to stay, although it'll still likely be a noticable addition to the cost. I doubt employement issues are likely to be more significant then trying to get a Chinese drivers licence, it's clear a lot more tourists hire drivers then try to self drive. (Also we're not talking about picking up some random person in the street, but someone who does it all the time, perhaps thru an agency.)

This source [16] I linked earlier mentions a number of helpful things including discussing a car+driver for intercity travel. It does say it's much more expensive then public transport (and also discusses public transport although I believe some of the other sources did too) but I don't think this is that surprising (my point was the cost compared to hiring a self-drive car). You can of course travel between cities with public transport or whatever then hire a local only car+driver for the big cities when needed.

BTW just to emphasise when I referred to language I meant for a self-drive case. Unless you plan to learn Mandarin, I don't see how 'lengthy pre-trip preparation' is going to be particularly helpful when you get in an accident (perhaps one which the 'victim' intentional caused) and neither the authorities nor the victim speak sufficient English. Worse if you end up in jail.

Nil Einne (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise against doing this, especially on your own. There is just too great a risk. It is the sort of thing that could be memorable, the problem is, it is generally a bad idea when a tourist to be in an unsafe area, to be noticeable, and to be without protection. I agree, hire a car and a driver from a tour service experienced in dealing with Westerners. You will probably enjoy it the more from appreciating what you would not understand on your own. Yes, it would cost money, but far cheaper than it would be in the West.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

10-minute shower as opposed to 40.

If people who take showers daily take it for 10 minutes, would a 40-minute shower keep you clean for 4 days?

(If not, would you post any kind of scientific backing to your claim?) Thanks. --129.130.102.100 (talk) 20:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A shower removes most of the dirt on you almost immediately. However, dirt accumulates on you at a relatively constant rate, so you would probably be around four times dirtier by the end. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't work the way the OP thinks. Your body is either clean or dirty, and that's it. You can't "store" cleanness into your body for later use. Showering for 10 minutes gets you clean, but any showering after that is just going to waste. The water's not going to remove dirt that isn't there. However, if you have gone without showering for four days, you might need a 40-minute shower to get clean. JIP | Talk 20:38, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably. I only get about 10 minutes of hot water (small water heater), and the cold is very cold this time of year. So a 40-minute shower would send me into hypothermic shock, and I would probably be in bed for the next 4 days recovering, and you don't get very dirty lying in bed. Looie496 (talk) 20:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm amused by the request for scientific backing for any claim that contradicts the premise. I doubt any scientists have bothered to study such an obvioulsy flawed idea. How long you stay clean between showers has to do with what you do during that time, not how long you stayed in the shower. If you stay in your house watching television you are not going to get dirty as fast as someone who is workng in a coal mine or hiking in a forest, or doing anything that makes them sweat. If you brush your teeth for five minutes or thirty seconds, it doesn't make any difference if you immediately eat a bag of Oreos after you are done. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The OP's premise is perhaps akin to the idea that if you impregnate 9 women, you can get a baby in 1 month. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, medical professionals (when asked how to prevent winter itch, which can be exacerbated by long showers) seem to say that a short shower is as good as a long one in terms of getting clean. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:45, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Prophylactic hygiene? It is certainly an interesting idea. If I spend a full 10 hours in the bathroom, showering, shaving and brushing my teeth, I would not need to mind my hygiene for the next two months. DI (talk) 12:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As someone from Australia where drought conditions dramatically restricted water supplies, even in the biggest cities, for much of the first decade of this century, I really baulked at the sound of a 40 minute shower. 40 minutes would have been seen as criminal. In many places we were encouraged to restrict ourselves to 3 or 4 minute showers. I went on a school camp with a bunch of 15 year olds who found themselves using communal bathrooms where the water turned off after three minutes in the shower. To get it going again one had to leave the shower stall to press a button on the wall on the other side of the bathroom, maybe five metres away. Many students found this the toughest aspect of the camp! HiLo48 (talk) 02:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the need to point out (in the spirit of internationalism) that daily showers is a peculiarly American fixation. four days without a shower probably wouldn't be noticed in Europe, and - short of athletics, hard physical labor, or some particularly dirt-prone task - probably wouldn't result in a noticeably filthy person. I mean seriously: haven't you people ever gone camping? --Ludwigs2 03:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ludwigs2, you say this about Europe because the bidets there take care of the users in between showers. Unless we are particularly wealthy, tech-savvy, or more hygiene-conscious than the norm, we do not have the luxury of a bidet. This may explain why we feel so compelled to take showers daily. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 07:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, so many stereotypes being aired here about "Europe". In Denmark it is certainly the norm to shower everyday, and unfortunately the usage of bidets is not customary here. In fact I think it is only a small number of countries in Europe where they are generally used. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking on behalf of myself and 98% of my fellow Europeans I can testify that we shower daily. After 4 days without showering, I think most people would be left sitting alone at their lunch room table.DI (talk) 12:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was given the impression that once every two or three days was quite sufficient outside of special circumstances that might leave someone dirtier or smellier than usual. Then again, what do I know.

98% ^{[citation needed]}. Frequency varies vastly with culture. The "each day" convention is certainly gaining in popularity, but only sixty years ago the "once a week bath in front of the fire" was fairly common, at least in parts of the UK, and, I suspect, many parts of Europe. Dbfirs 13:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some official survey on this anywhere? 148.197.81.179 (talk) 13:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A shower can remove the past dirt on you, but not the future dirt. It is simply impossible. Oda Mari (talk) 17:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC) font color="#CC0000">J[reply]

Quick lookup in database, blocked on my IP

http://bmd.stcatharines.library.on.ca:1968/

Hi, could anyone with normal internet access search Henry Sytrcker in the above database? It's run by a public library, yet blocked on the IP I'm on currently. -- Zanimum (talk) 20:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No records found. Warofdreams talk 21:23, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Sytrcker"? You sure that is not a typo? At least I wouldn't know how to pronounce that combination of consonants, and Google comes up blank on it. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, sorry, Strycker. Actually, heading home right now, but thanks anyway for the attempts! -- Zanimum (talk) 22:03, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing found for Strycker, either. Warofdreams talk 00:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use remote control on Nikon D40

I have a Nikon D40 with a ML-L3 remote control. How do I use it to trip the shutter? (I know about setting the length of time the remote stays on.) Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 21:58, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about some instructions? Dismas|^(talk) 04:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is for long-term exposures only and it doesn't give instructions for the D40. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 15:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found the Nikon tech support number, 800-645-6687. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 15:42, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

The Review is gone?

Ok, I have a confession to make: I sometimes lurk over at Wikipedia Review as a reader only, just to see what the various WP malcontnents over there have say about the big issues over here. So, I was curious as to what their take on the SOPA blackout might be, and lo and behold, it appears our foremost critics are off the air. Does anybody know who is actually in charge of paying WR's bills? I can't say I would be heartbroken to see it gone, but I'm curious as to whether the supposed "white hats" over there are willing to pay to keep their site online. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:30, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that seems to have happen is they forgot to pay for domain renewal. This isn't particularly expensive (for a .com domain, potentially under US$10 a year.) so I doubt cost has anything to do with it. More likely someone just forgot and didn't check the email (or doesn't have access to the email) or otherwise missed the renewal reminders their registrar undoutedly sent. (Admitedly it's been ~3 days.) I note their registrar is GoDaddy which lost a number of customers due to their initial support of SOPA/PIPA, may be WR wanted to move but couldn't work out how or wanted to blackout their website to protest but weren't sure how so decided just to let their domain expire. Nil Einne (talk) 00:10, 20 January 2012

When an organization forgets or neglects or chooses not to renew their domain registration, can someone else slip in and take over the registration? Is there some rule that the original party can get it back for the nominal fee? Edison (talk) 05:49, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's known as domain sniping. There's a 30 day grace period for owners to reclaim their domain after it expires. --Kateshortforbob _talk 09:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However different TLDs may have different rules. The above article links to [17] which gives some examples. Nil Einne (talk) 13:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per the article deletion discussion, it seems the person in charge of the domain name can't be contacted. You can still access it via [18] (I had expected it may be possible, but couldn't be bothered finding out the IP of the host). BTW I forgot to mention but even Microsoft failed to renew some of their domains on occassion in the past [19] [20]. A quick search finds other companies [21] [22] [23] Nil Einne (talk) 13:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to explain the situation: [24] Falconus^{p t c} 17:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After this royal screwup, maybe they'll be a little more reflective about criticizing others? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]