Miscellaneous desk
< April 21	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 23 >

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.

April 22

David brinkley letter

I found a letter written to my mother from David Brinkley. Just wondering if it is worth anything.Thanks robertp39660 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertp39660 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it has his actual signature on it, it's probably worth something. Lots of letters from celebrities are autosigned, though. Even then, he's not a major celebrity, so it probably wouldn't be worth a whole lot unless the content is really extraordinary. If it's the usual "thank you for your very interesting letter", not much at all. Looie496 (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that every time someone destroys a deceased celebrity's autograph, the non-destroyed autographs increase in value. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, an autographed photo is priced at $30, and it comes with a certificate of authenticity. Getting yours authenticated might cost more than it's worth (plus you might find it was signed by a secretary). Clarityfiend (talk) 07:49, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And there can be fraud involved in these "certificates of authenticity". The only 100 percent guaranteed autograph you can have is one that you personally collected from the signer. Hard to do with someone like Lincoln, of course. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:17, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem highly unlikely that Brinkley would be the chosen medium for a scam, unless the letter was his apology to Clinton for calling him boring on-air on election night 1996. μηδείς (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finding people

I'm trying to get in touch with old friend David Wallace Jones, Australian aged 51. Can you suggest anything ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.178.136.104 (talk) 03:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Friends Reunited?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone that age may well be on LinkedIn and might be on Facebook. --Dweller (talk) 08:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Parade banner?

What's the most common name for one of these things? Is it typically a "parade banner", or is there something else more common? 2001:18E8:2:1020:8CEA:C571:286B:2680 (talk) 13:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the American usage is to call these Marching Band Parade Banners or Parade Lead Banners. Simply 'Parade Banner' could refer to any banner used in a parade (e.g. this), or indeed a banner used to advertise a parade. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 13:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one of the better ones, a Gary Larson creation.[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:44, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of cities in the United Kingdom

Why is Birmingham listed as the largest city in England, rather than London? Cheers. TBrandley (T • C • B) 19:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greater London is not a city; Westminster and the City of London are. AlexTiefling (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article London sensibly does not agree with you, calling it both "capital city " and "largest city". The List of cities in the United Kingdom really should have in the lead that "This is a list of places in the United Kingdom that have been granted the official status of city" or something like that. The introduction should also make reference to why London (and Rochester upon Medway for that matter) are not listed. In fact I think I will make those improvements tomorrow. Sussexonian (talk) 20:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to our articles on Rochester, Kent, and City of Rochester-upon-Medway, that place actually lost its city status in 1998, because of "an administrative error". Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:42, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) If you are looking for the largest urban areas in the UK, you need List of urban areas in the United Kingdom - in which London ranks first. In the UK, the word "city" can have a very specific meaning - either having a cathedral, or having officially designated city status - as used in the List of cities in the United Kingdom. The urban area commonly called "London" is a very large area, which (as AlexTiefling says) contains two cities (including the City of London - which itself is very small!) and many other boroughs and localities. The West Midlands Urban Area contains the city of Birmingham and many other areas (such as Wolverhampton). Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a hatnote to List of cities in the United Kingdom, which will hopefully direct readers looking for a list of largest urban areas to be directed elsewhere. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to demuddify it and restate a different way what has been explained pretty well already, the word "city" can mean different things in different contexts, and in this case what is being conflated is two different meanings of the word. In one case, the English language uses the word "city" to mean "contiguous urban area" or "conurbation". In this sense, when one says the "city of London" (little c-city), one usually means Greater London (or sometimes just Inner London, this definition is a bit imprecise). This is how someone would describe where they come from to outsiders who are unfamiliar with the area. However, in some legal codes, the word "City" carries a special status, usually referring to a type of incorporation that allows for certain legal rights that other places are not granted. In this sense, that's what the (rather tiny 1 square mile) City of London (big C City) is. Unqualified, the word London refers to the entire conurbation, and when anyone talks about London being the largest city in the U.K., they mean it by the first definition. The second definition is a bit arcane, but still shows up occasionally. Municipal organization is very complex in different parts of the world, and these words mean very specific (and often contradictory) things depending on exactly what the context is. You can't apply one universal definition to a word like "city" and you need to pay close attention to the context to decide which definition is meant. --Jayron32 20:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

City status in the United Kingdom has more details. I have added a wikilink to the lead of the List article, where it mentions "city status". Alansplodge (talk) 10:53, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From Oregon Trail to airplanes

There was a featured article a few days ago, about a man who grew up on the Oregon Trail, and lived to fly in an airplane. There was a picture of him with the article; I think he was sitting, as an old man, and he had white/grey hair and a white/grey beard.

I can't remember his name, so I don't know how to find him in Wikipedia.

Please help.

Thanks,

wbgray — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.222.216.153 (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ezra Meeker?

FYI, I found this by the unremarkable technique of copy/pasting your question: "man who grew up on the Oregon Trail, and lived to fly in an airplane" into Google and taking the first article it suggested. Google is good enough these days that just typing what you know into it will often get what you want.

SteveBaker (talk) 22:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Affordable health care act - coverage for children

What is required for a child to remain on parents health insurance to age twenty six? Can the insurer charge a premium in addition to parents premium . premium for this coverage — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.42.251.227 (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This question is borderline a legal question, and even if it weren't it's too technical to expect a good answer here. You should seek other sources. Shadowjams (talk) 11:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ain't that complicated, at least in general. in the past and now, some employers cover spouses and dependents, some don't. those which do would (i assume) always charge extra for that; my experience with a few companies in one state is that the charge for a couple with no dependents has always been twice that for a single, and the charge for a couple with any number of dependents has always been 2.5 times that for a single, which means of course that big families are getting a break. but maybe that's just in this state, they all have different laws. (that's the actual insurance company charge, the employer can contribute to it whatever they want by whatever formula they want to) anyway, the addition of dependents under 26 law just pushes the age limit up and forbids charging different by age; i.e. if the insurer's rate is 2.5X for a family with kids under 18 then it will have to be 2.5X for kids over 18 under 26 as well, and similarly forbids employers from changing their contribution by age either; i.e. if your employer covers half the insurance cost for a family with kids under 18 then it has to cover half the insurance cost for a family with kids over 18 under 26 as well. also, the coverage/benefits can't vary by age either. basically, it's not basically different in structure from current dependent care, it just includes to 26. so, if i'm understanding the OP's question, yeah they can and undoubtedly will charge a premium in addition to the cost for just the parent(s), as they do currently, but the kid being over 18 or not doesn't make any difference. as for what's involved, the usual paper chase in any insurance transaction. each insurer will attempt to define "dependent child" in a beneficial (to them) way and there will probably be some jockeying, but the law already forbids allowing or restricting coverage on whether the child is financially dependent, a student, employed, living with the parents, and/or can get coverage elsewhere. Gzuckier (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Typical nationalistic stuff

Where? What country? HiLo48 (talk) 08:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The heading suggests that it is the USA. --ColinFine (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio apparently. Alansplodge (talk) 10:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What? Am I supposed to know what American legislators are doing? I'm sorry, bit I don't pay attention to everything American. HiLo48 (talk) 11:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to answer if you don't know. Alansplodge (talk) 11:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You sure do pay attention to what american IPs are posting here though. Shadowjams (talk) 11:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Drop the attacks, please. I didn't know it was an American IP. (I know I can look, but I thought it better to find out in conversation.) I asked a question to see if I could help. That's all I did. It was a completely innocent act. Sorry for thinking I might be able to help. HiLo48 (talk) 11:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm collapsing this because our usual bullshit isn't helpful for goodfaith people that we haven't yet alienated at the reference desk. Shadowjams 11:38, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2013 April 22