Miscellaneous desk
< May 12	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 14 >

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 13

Comfort food inventors

Does anyone know if Natale Olivieri, inventor of Yoo-hoo^®, was related to Pat and Harry Olivieri, creators of the cheesesteak? (I am enjoying them both right now!) Thank you. → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 00:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Distance to shore

Is there a list of countries/territories anywhere which shows the maximum distance from the shore of that country to an inland point? 92.80.57.27 (talk) 09:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Geographical centre. Tevildo (talk) 12:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's not quite the same thing. Imagine a large circular island with a long, narrow peninsula pointing north. The maximum distance from any shore would be right in the center of the circle, while the geographical center would be north somewhat from there (possibly within the peninsula). StuRat (talk) 03:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the country-specific articles linked to from that article do give the point of maximum distance from the sea, though. 81.98.43.107 (talk) 09:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The concept is similar to pole of inaccessibility, if that's any help. 81.98.43.107 (talk) 08:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Wikipedia's got everything. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update for United States Coast Guard Awards and Decorations article

How do I make a suggestion to update an article?

The article on United States Coast Guard Awards and Decorations needs to be updated.

Title II, Section 224, of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (signed by the President on 25 October 2010) authorized a new Coast Guard Cross Medal and Coast Guard Silver Star Medal. This should be included in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gallups (talk • contribs) 12:28, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the Talk page of that article by clicking on the Talk tab at the top, and make your suggestions by editing it exactly as you've done here. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 12:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indicator of socioeconomic status

Hi. I'm interested in others' views (and, if possible, justifications) on which of the following is the superior indicator of a metropolitan area's socioeconomic status: the median property value of ALL dwellings, or the median property value of non-strata dwellings (i.e., houses). I'm leaning toward the latter because there seems to be a more realistic (noticeable) variation in the values, but I'm not sure how I could justify it. Thanks in advance for your thoughts. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That seems a very narrow, single element in a complex situation. Many people of low socio-economic status live in subsidised rental accommodation, so the value of the dwelling becomes somewhat irrelevant anyway. And your measure would vary depending on where you are in the world. In some cities there are many more houses than strata dwelling, and in some the reverse is true. And there are many more factors in socio-economic status. I'm really not sure what you're trying to demonstrate with your proposed measure. HiLo48 (talk) 20:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure median house prices is going to work as an indicator of socio-economic status. The price of the same kind of house varies a lot from place to place, as well as the kinds of houses varying. Taking the median house price doesn't separate those to effects. --Tango (talk) 21:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm attempting to demonstrate a correlation between electricity consumption and socioeconomic factors. I wanted to use average household income, an obviously superior measure, but the most recent data is from 2006 because that's when the census was (in Australia). Can anyone think of a better measure of socioeconomic status for which recent data is always available? —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:33, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might actually look into what stats the ABS offers? Here's the Labour Price index (six capitals) and here's six capital Employee earnings. This statistics package contains detailed indications of SES versus electricity consumption. (4.1% of the upper quintile of disposable income couldn't pay their utilities on time, a key indicator—and people say Australia's the lucky country? Tell 'em they're dreaming.)Fifelfoo (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those links. I should have specified that I'm looking for an indicator for which there is data for individual LGAs in NSW. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use Censuses to produce a time dimension and you can get good correlations. I'd suggest census data because you want to test for multi-variable correlations. Using a "land price" proxy will produce a less accurate result than using Census 2006. (Also, why would a correlation you can demonstrate in the last N censuses suddenly no longer hold?) Fifelfoo (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was an Australian census in August 2011. Surely some new data would be available by now. HiLo48 (talk) 08:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surely not. A quick squizz at Census in Australia tells us "The first results of the (2011) Census will be released in June 2012 on the Australian Bureau of Statistics website." -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 08:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I didn't realise they were so (in)efficient. Anyway, June is just next month. HiLo48 (talk) 18:44, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as a former 8-year ~~inmate~~ employee of the ABS, I can tell you they do all they can to get the results out as soon as practically possible, but there's a huge, vast amount of work that has to happen behind the scenes. The measure of inefficiency is not "later than when I, personally, expected, with nothing more to go on than a completely uneducated idea of how long it takes to produce quality results on a national census of 20 million people spread over one of the largest countries on Earth". I'd have to check, but I'd be surprised if any country of comparable population and/or size does any better in getting their census results out. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 19:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While this may offend JackofOz deeply, I find the ABS to be one of the most efficient, thorough and appropriate bodies collecting statistical information. They expose their categories and assumptions beautifully, critique their own work with a withering scorn that would scare politicians, and supply data with remarkable rapidity. Getting 2011 data exposed in 2012 is brilliant—though I assume that the initial data package won't be the complete census results. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you'd think that may offend me, who defended the Bureau. Everything you say about their approach from your experience as a user is in accord with my experience from the inside. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 01:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to use the Australian ironic mode; it doesn't work so well in text as it does in person. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not worth a cracker, mate. :) -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 08:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was once offered a job by the ABS, but took another path rather than move to Canberra. Ah, what might have been... HiLo48 (talk) 08:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And yet, here we both are. See, there are many pathways to Heaven. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 08:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Real estate prices also seem like a poor indicator of socioeconomic status to me. Can't you get more direct measures, like average income for each area ? StuRat (talk) 03:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Median household income might be more meaningful. From memory that's something that the ABS publishes. I'm not sure why you would reject using this more direct measure just because the data is available only to 2006, are you going to be arguing that people's behaviour in electricity consumption has changed in some statistically significant way between 2006 and 2011? If not, why not just use electricity consumption statistics up to 2006 with income statistics up to 2006?

Property value is an indirect proxy for wealth and I agree with StuRat that it's a poor proxy. Many people pay more for their property for reasons other than that they can afford to (e.g. location of work), which only means their disposable income is lower and they are therefore, poorer in disposable income terms.

The only justification I can think of for using non-strata title property only is that strata title property may be inhabited by someone other than the owner more often than freehold title property. But even then, rental expense is generally correlated with property value, so excluding strata title property seems to me to do more harm in causing bias in your data than whatever benefit it brings. People who live in strata title properties tend to be either poor or young.

Unless your electricity consumption data is also broken down by strata and non-strata property, you will also get a mismatch between the statistics. Say Sydney has 50% strata title properties and Hobart has 10%, your result will probably come out with Sydney-siders using almost 100% more electricity per property than Hobart when in fact the per property usage is equal. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 13:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]