Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2012 July 29

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.

July 29

Boat identification

Yesterday I was at a local craft fair. There was a woman there who had, among other things, some pictures of boats. I don't know where she took them and I realize that I should have asked to narrow the search. The boats had long thin beams on both the bow and stern that were nearly 2/3 the length of the boats themselves. They seemed to be a type of fishing boat but I can't be certain since the picture was taken from a ways away. On one of the boats, I could see that there were lines strung through a pulley that was at the end of one of the beams and the lines came back to the main portion of the boat. This made me think that maybe lines with hooks or some type of net could be attached to the lines on the pulleys. The boats themselves looked fairly simplistic, hardly more than canoes. So does anyone have any idea what type of boats these were? And what the beams are used for? Dismas|^(talk) 07:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Like this? The overhead beams are for stringing, pulling, and hoisting nets and lines. It's an inexpensive fishing boat typical of the Indian Ocean. 207.224.43.139 (talk) 07:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Not like the picture the IP mentioned. The beams pointed straight out the bow and stern. They were parallel with the long axis of the boat. Dismas|^(talk) 09:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I would guess they are doing a type of drift netting, where instead of using the boat at one end of the net and a buoy at the other, they use the two ends of the extensions of the boat to hold both ends of the net, which then runs under the boat. This would prevent other boats from hitting their net. StuRat (talk) 07:42, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

[1]? Bowsprit and boomkin?—eric 14:51, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

David Miscavige's wife

Is there anyone investigating the "disappearance" of David Miscavige's wife? Has there ever been an official investigation? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 18:16, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Is she actually missing? The article has "disappeared" in quotes which I read as meaning she didn't really disappear. RudolfRed (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

She has been missing for years. No one outside of the Church knows where she is, or even if she's still alive. Those within the Church just say she's fine, but she hasn't appeared in public for years. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 21:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Unless there is actually some evidence that they are lying and she isn't really just in seclusion, then there isn't likely to be a police investigation. The police generally expect someone to report a crime before they investigate it, rather than starting investigations based on vague rumours. The press might investigate it, though - internal disputes with the Church of Scientology are quite a popular topic for investigative journalists. --Tango (talk) 00:32, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, he's a gun enthusiasts and a control freak. I'd be suspicious, too. I would expect her family to file a missing persons report, if she is really missing, unless they are also controlled by Scientology. StuRat (talk) 04:58, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

This thread is problematic and the comment directly above is a clear BLP violation.

Hatting performed by User:Medeis, who failed to sign. StuRat (talk) 21:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

For the love of God, Medeis, read the article. It's a fact that Michelle Miscavige publicly disappeared. If you have issue with a particular comment, hat or delete the comment. The OP's question is fine. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

That was not the reason for the closure. If we closed a discussion about the sexual orientation of a dictator we can certainly close unattributed speculation about an unconvicted and uncharged private individual. μηδείς (talk) 02:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The fact that he's a gun enthusiast is in one of the sources for the article "Miscavige, a firearms enthusiast, introduced Cruise to skeet shooting at the compound..." [2], as is his need to control those around him: "Miscavige’s official title is chairman of the board of the Religious Technology Center, but he dominates the entire organization. His word is absolute, and he imposes his will even on some of the people closest to him." [3]. StuRat (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't dispute he's a gun enthusiast. You're calling him a "control freak" is a bit of synthesis on your part. I have attributed it to you, so it should not be a problem. Let's stay away from giving legal advice to his wife's relatives as well. μηδείς (talk) 02:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

It's difficult to tell what you dispute, since your hatting reasons are always so vague, if listed at all. Saying that I would expect her relatives to file a missing person report if she was actually missing does not constitute legal advice. And "control freak" isn't synthesis, it's paraphrasing the quotation above. StuRat (talk) 02:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

My question was not a BLP violation, unless you think the article itself violates BLP. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 23:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

No, I did not think the question itself was a BLP violation or I would have acted sooner. StuRat's unattributed and unsupported implications were. That seems to have been taken care of. μηδείς (talk) 02:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

If you are unable to find the sources linked to in our article, just ask for help doing so, don't hat the Q. StuRat (talk) 02:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Here are some recent news stories.[4][5][6] There are various rumors about her whereabouts, and journalists have certainly investigated, but nobody mentions a police investigation. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:40, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Cola, those links are great. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 23:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)