Miscellaneous desk
< November 24	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 26 >

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.

November 25

What is the longest time someone has been in coma that has woken up this year? 2011 or 2012?

What is the longest time someone has been in coma that has woken up this year? 2011 or 2012? Neptunekh94 (talk) 08:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You mean besides the U.S. Congress? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:45, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They woke up this year?? Duoduoduo (talk) 15:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not completely, but they are finally stirring a bit. Someone named Cliff is trying to get their attention. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start the bidding at seven years (2012). Clarityfiend (talk) 23:31, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would it?

Whould it be possible to write a serious limerick? Explaun. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.44.127.151 (talk) 14:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. A limerick is just a format. You can make the content as comical or as serious as you like. --Viennese Waltz 17:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One time a user inquired,

Was comedy always required

In limerick poems?

And so, just to show 'im,

This one off quickly was fired

μηδείς (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To my understanding, "poems" doesn't rhyme with "'im", which would be required if this were to be a proper limerick. Such as this rather silly limerick which I read from Amiga Power:

There was a Scots Lemming named Andy,

Who went to the bar for a shandy.

He lifted his kilt,

To see what he'd spilt,

And the barmaid said: "Blimey, that's handy!"

JIP | Talk 19:00, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "poems" rhymes with "show 'im", and no, the OP didn't want a silly limerick. μηδείς (talk) 21:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How does it rhyme? "Poems" has an "s" sound at the end and "show 'im" does not. And the silly limerick was intended only to illustrate a limerick that does rhyme. JIP | Talk 05:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our article rhyme covers it; an oblique (e.g., spends/henge, i.e., /ɛndz/ /ɛndʒ/), feminine (two final syllables) rhyme. It would be easy enough to do away with the ess, ("In each Limerick poem") but I didn't see any point in spending more than two minutes on it. μηδείς (talk) 06:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is some debate on the point. Our article on the limerick, of course, offers various scholarly sources. Essentially, what you are asking is, "Is the limerick merely a specific pattern of rhyme and metre, or is the humorous nature of its content an essential part of its identity?" Medeis and Viennese Waltz, above, clearly hold the personal belief that the structural pattern is the only defining characteristic of a limerick; experts such as Gershon Legman and George Bernard Shaw, on the other hand, argue rather persuasively that the true limerick form is only satisfied if the content is not merely humorous but obscene or otherwise transgressive of social norms. The Oxford English Dictionary also insists on witty, humorous, or nonsensical content.

Compare, for instance, with the nature of haiku. While most people are familiar with a three-line format of five, seven, and five syllables, the traditional 'rules' are somewhat more complex and also depend on content. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, "transgressive", from the Old Irish, malarkey. The thing with Limericks is their metrical structure alone is funny, regardless of meaning. μηδείς (talk) 21:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are verses in the form of the limerick, but presumably composed before the limerick's tradition of being funny, such as Patrick Brontë's, which manage to be irritating without being funny (or serious while remaining unintentionally funny):

Religion makes beauty enchanting;

And even where beauty is wanting,

The temper and mind

Religion-refined

Will shine through the veil with sweet lustre

As described in G. K. Chesterton's essay "On Bad Poetry", where he gives another example by Brontë, and refers to paraprosdokian. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure a perfectly good and unfunny one can be made like

So you want to contribute to Wikipedia

A funny thing you just saw in the media?

Well type it up right

And provide us a cite

And we'll preserve the stupid idea.

What I really need now is a doctoral, in 21st century postmodern doggerel ... ;-) Dmcq (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dmcq, you haven't read the discussion above carefully enough. Nobody suggests that this can't be done, and Medeis had a go at it above. The argument TenOfAllTrades is refers to says that your verse is by definition not a limerick, because it is not funny. --ColinFine (talk) 00:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I've pointed out on these pages a few times over the years, the question of whether something is or is not "funny" is very subjective. The same person will find something funny, or not funny, depending on their mood, who said it, the context in which it was said (funny if heard at a party, not funny if heard at a funeral), etc. I can well imagine someone laughing at Dmcq's verse; to them, it would be funny, and therefore, according to the supposed definition, it would be a limerick. But I didn't raise a smile, so I'm not supposed to regard it as a limerick. The thing is, it can't both be and not be a limerick. Either it is (for everyone), or it isn't (for everyone). Seems the alleged definition needs work. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You admit that some form of verse can both be and not be funny - so why can't it both be and not be a limerick? Many "definitions" outside of the sciences can be vague or view-dependent. Whether two words rhyme sufficiently well is often a matter of opinion (see debate above!)...how many syllables there are in some words can be a matter of regional pronunciation...whether a word is or is not a "cutting" word or a "seasonal" word is often debatable in (English) haiku. Hence the definition of any form of poetry is vague and reader-dependent, so there is no reason why the definition of what one individual thinks of as a limerick should not include the idea that it has to be funny. SteveBaker (talk) 15:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The idea that there can be some debate over whether or not a given thing meets a particular criterion does not prevent that criterion from being part of a category's definition. For virtually any field outside of pure mathematics, but most especially within the arts, boundaries and definitions are always a bit soft and squidgy. (Science fiction fans will be familiar with Margaret Atwood's stubborn insistence that her novel The Handmaid's Tale isn't science fiction—despite its capture of the 1987 SArthur C. Clarke Award.)

As well, one might consider the writer's intent. If the author intended the poem to be funny then it's a limerick—though if its audience can't find the humor, it may not be a very good limerick. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of old songs were written in limerick style. This one is sentimental, not funny (although the sentiment might seem funny to modern ears, but that's another story):

In the Shade of the Old Apple Tree

Where the love in your eyes I could see

When the voice that I heard

Like the song of the bird

Seemed to whisper sweet music to me

I could hear the dull buzz of the bee

In the blossoms as you said to me

With a heart that is true

I'll be waiting for you

In the shade of the old apple tree

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, if a Limerick has to be funny, what do we call a poem with the form of a Limerick that is not funny? An Illimerick? μηδείς (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Men, women, and breasts

It is fairly well known that most heterosexual men are sexually interested in women's breasts. Now the breast area is fairly different between men and women. I don't have personal experience of being a woman, so I have to ask here, as stupid as it may sound. Are heterosexual women, then, sexually interested in men's lack of breasts? Do women find the breast area of men sexually attractive because men don't have significant exterior mammary glands? JIP | Talk 18:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Each case would be different. It's not possible to generalize as you suggest. --Viennese Waltz 19:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is possible to generalise. Every individual is different, sure, but there are a lot of similarities and trends that can be (and have been) studied. The social sciences are all about analysing such trends and making generalisations. Those generalisations are, obviously, of limited use when dealing with individuals, but they are still useful (and are extremely useful when dealing with large enough groups for individual differences to average out). --Tango (talk) 22:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Waist-to-chest ratio - ... muscular chest are often found to be attractive. Personally I had been told by lady friends that yes, they do look at chest. While watching Thor in theatre there were some cheering and swooning over Chris Hemsworth's shirtless scene. Royor (talk) 20:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This Diet Coke advertisement suggests that they do indeed. Alansplodge (talk) 00:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual attraction and physical attractiveness would probably be good places to start - a lot of research has been done to determine what features affect sexual or aesthetic attractiveness. However, as those articles mention, there is quite a lot of uncertainty over the extent to which these are affected by cultural norms - some characteristics seem to be universally seen as attractive, while others are unique to a specific culture. 130.88.99.231 (talk) 12:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]