Miscellaneous desk
< April 3	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 5 >

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 4

Maps to update change before the entire freeway section gets renumbered

I have an San Bernardino-East Valley City Maps from AAA Company that is 2007 edition, and I believe the map is published in late 2000s, and the SR 30 were shown to completely replaced to SR 210. Do some maps completely update information before real signs actually get replaced, I thought maps always get outdated, so I would never hear a map can completely update before real signage completely updated. I thought to say when did I-110 replace SR 11 really and I-710 to replace SR 7 really is a meaningless question, the only definite answers is only depend on what you mean from it.--69.226.42.134 (talk) 01:50, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To give some background to this question for other readers, California has long used it's own numbering system for freeways, at odds with the rest of the US. A few years back they agreed to change to match everyone else, but this change is rather gradual.

Now, as to your Q, the problem is that the cartographers don't know exactly when the signs will be changed, depending on budget cuts, union negotiations, etc. As you can imagine, changing signs is a rather low priority, as compared with fixing dangerous problems, so it is highly susceptible to delays. Therefore, the mapmakers do their best to change the maps right when the signs are about to change, but don't always guess right. Having both the old and new numbering on the maps is better, if it does make it look rather busy. The Ohio Turnpike used dual numbering for years, when they went through a similar transition, but for exit numbers rather than freeway numbers. See Ohio_Turnpike#Exit_list. StuRat (talk) 03:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stu, I'm amazed that you understood enough of that to get a question out of it! Going off what you said and taking it a step farther into the digital realm, I've seen where Google has updated their maps and directions before the signage is changed. A few years back, I realized that I had missed my turn in New York when I saw a sign that said "Welcome to Pennsylvania". Google's directions (No GPS at the time) was using the new route number when the signage still had the old. Dismas|^(talk) 03:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I once accidentally drove into Canada. I guess I'd better cancel my drive near the North Korean border, just in case. Too bad, I was so looking forward to it. :-) StuRat (talk) 02:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Any games that can save the world?

Well writing for free to distribute knowledge is kind of fun but I think I like to solve other problems too. I read before that there are some games out there that help solve some world problems such as classifying species and discovering the best antibodies to combat certain cancers.

Any links about them? --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on your idea of what counts as a game, cellslider might be a good start. There are lots of similar zooniverse projects, but they're mostly less save-the-worldy. There's one for species classification in the Serengeti, but it only runs intermittently (they get through the pictures very fast). Henry ^Flower 01:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We've got a featured article about one, Folding@home. It's not so much a game in that you don't do anything but it uses distributed computing to solve problems. If you are interested in games, I encourage you to read Reality is Broken by Jane McGonnigal. The subtitle of which is "Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World". Otherwise, if you play games at freerice.com, 10 grains of rice are donated for every correct answer you make (it's a multiple choice quiz site). I don't know if it's still up and running, but McGonnigal mentions an app called "The Extraordinaries" (you can see some information about it on the bottom of this page. You could also check out Foldit which is also a protein folding game, but is more like a game in that you are actually doing something. I tried this a year and a half ago and didn't really figure out how it worked, but you might want to give it a go. In any case, I strongly urge you to give the book a read. Ryan Vesey 02:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really like the idea of Foldit. Apparently the generic term for this form of gamification is called Human-based computation games. Exciting stuff. APL (talk) 05:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How about a nice game of chess? --Trovatore (talk) 01:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for the game and book links :) However, I think I'll pass on playing with nuclear missiles for now.--Lenticel ^(talk) 03:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone interested in the general concept of gamification, Penn is offering an online course through Coursera here. It started on Monday, but anyone who wants to take it can still enroll for free. Ryan Vesey 05:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe studying game theory? --Jayron32 12:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This thread made me think of The Last Starfighter. I wonder how dated that film would seem to a ten year old today? --Dweller (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One interesting fact that sticks in my head about "The Last Starfighter" is that the 3D model of that ship was the most complicated 3D graphic model ever made up to that time...now, there are probably more triangles in one tiny piece of scenery way in the background. It's pretty seriously dated.

Anyway - there is a whole genre of so-called Serious games that individually seek to solve many of the world's problems...but nothing that individually is going to "save the world" - there are just too many things it needs saving from! SteveBaker (talk) 20:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pornography

If people say Pornography why is it not just banned? I know how stupid it sounds but I thought it seems legit. I personally have nothing against Pornography (And I do no understand what is wrong with it). So yeah... RunningUranium (talk) 09:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not banned outright because most societies have deemed it acceptable to allow some kinds of pornography to be produced, as long as their circulation is restricted to adults. However, there are restrictions in place governing what is and is not legal. In the United Kingdom, for example, see Obscene Publications Act 1959. --Viennese Waltz 09:26, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One should keep in mind that it was in fact banned all over the world until the late 1960s, where the first countries (Denmark, then Netherlands and in 1971 Sweden) legalised it, and other countries following suit the following years (as can be seen in History of pornography). So while we may find it perfectly natural that it is legal, it is not so long ago that that there wasn't a single country in the world where you wouldn't be prosecuted for either possession or production of it. Which of course meant that a large black market of pornography thrived. --Saddhiyama (talk) 10:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First, define "pornography". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:09, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's confusing about that word? It has a perfectly straightforward dictionary definition. Wiktionary (for example) says:

pornography
1. The explicit depiction of sexual subject matter; a display of material of an erotic nature.
2. (usually humorous) The graphic, detailed, often gratuitous depiction of something.

I think it's safe to assume the first meaning is what is intended here. SteveBaker (talk) 16:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That definition at least makes it clear why pornography is not broadly banned, since it includes things like Joyce's Ulysses -- not to mention the novels by Henry Miller. Looie496 (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By that definition, artistic nudes can be considered "pornography", though in general they haven't been "banned until the 1960s". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That semantic argument is as clever as it is new Bugs. That things are hard to occasionally define doesn't mean definitions are worthless. Shadowjams (talk) 21:26, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The point being that the OP's premise is flawed, as is Baker's. Some folks call Playboy "pornography", which it ain't. So your premise is flawed also. There is no universal definition. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's two arguments that are being conflated here.

There are different definitions of "Pornography" -- True but irrelevant. A lawmaker simply needs to choose one and specify it.
Any definition will have a "Grey area" -- True, but not fatal. The existence of dawn and dusk does not stop you from telling the difference between night and day. Similarly, intelligent law enforcement would naturally try to only enforce cases that are clearly on the "bad" side of grey area, and not waste their time on cases where reasonable people could disagree.

APL (talk) 23:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you ponder it for a moment, you will realize that the OP's premise is flawed, because "pornography" is, in fact, still banned. What has changed is the definition. It has narrowed quite a lot since the 1950s. Hence it's still banned, but what specifically gets banned now is a much shorter list. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:34, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Banned where? In some countries pornography is not banned, although certain forms of pornography may be banned. The definition of what is pornography may have changed in these countries, but things considered pornography by producers and consumers, supporters and opponents is not banned nor does the law state all forms of pornography are banned. In other countries, anything widely considered pornography may remain banned. In some of these countries, the definition may not have changed much since the 1950s, if anything things not considered pornography before may be considered so now and therefore come under any ban. A perusal of [[Pornography by region] and pornography may be helpful here. Nil Einne (talk) 04:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing the US, although the OP's context is unstated. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pornography is that stuff that some unfortunate public servant has to look at lots of and be corrupted by so that the rest of us can remain pure and innocent. HiLo48 (talk) 06:13, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which public servant would that be? --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The one who decides what needs to be censored. HiLo48 (talk) 21:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see. It wasn't the way it occurred in Denmark, and most other European countries, since pre-publication censorship is specifically banned in the constitution (in a paragraph that is to be found in similar wording in the constitution of many other European countries since they are all calqued from the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, the publisher "...shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law"). This means that the ban was usually enacted through post-publication seizure of the particular item and subsequent legal action against the publishers. I am not aware of any currently functioning censors in Western countries, but am prepared to be unpleasantly surprised by specific examples. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I need to know, if you see a vandalism, are you supposed to edit it out, or tell someone? If I am supposed to tell somebody, where and how would I do this? I also want to know: When I go to the village pump, and go to 'Idea lab', would clicking on the Idea lab link tell you about it? Thank you for reading/answering. Warab (talk) 10:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)Warab[reply]

You could try reading the section "Vandalism on Wikipedia", a few sections above this one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer: fixing it is great. It helps, though, to look at the Page History first, because often editors vandalize several times in a row, and if you only fix one of them, other editors may assume that the problem has been solved and not see the rest. Usually the best way to fix recent vandalism is to revert the vandal edit. See Wikipedia:Vandalism for more information. Looie496 (talk) 15:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the really obvious stuff will be gone by the time you investigate. Between regular patrollers and cluebot, the obvious stuff gets handled. The real help is needed in the less obvious variety. Shadowjams (talk) 15:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama Age Question

If Hillary Clinton runs and wins the U.S. Presidency in 2016, would the age difference between Obama and Clinton be a record for the age of a Presidential successor being older than the age of his/her predecessor? I know that Ronald Reagan (Jimmy Carter's successor) was 13 years and 8 months older than him, but Hillary Clinton is 13 years and 9 months older than Barack Obama. Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 18:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Franklin Pierce was 13 years and 7 months older than his predecessor James Buchanan, but no other pair come close. Looie496 (talk) 18:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about this? Futurist110 (talk) 19:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I was feeling bored and went through all of them (not too hard using the infoboxes in our articles). Looie496 (talk) 19:50, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your answer. Futurist110 (talk) 21:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Um, Buchanan didn't precede Pierce. He came after him. It was the older Buchanan who succeeded the younger Pierce, but otherwise the numbers are correct. You just flipped the names. --Jayron32 21:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correction of Gary Crosby

<redacted> J. Pat Geis, Santa Rosa, CA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.0.244.71 (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have redacted the question, because we can't have unsubstantiated allegations about people, even if they are no longer alive. The question refers to Gary Crosby (actor), the son of Bing Crosby -- it questions whether the statement in our article that he "dropped out" of Stanford University is accurate. I have no idea what the answer is, but it would be better to raise this issue at Talk:Gary Crosby (actor). Looie496 (talk) 19:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this website[1] is "official" or not, but it reports that Gary did not graducate from Stanford. That doesn't necessarily imply that he dropped out. It would be sufficient for the article to say "attended but did not graduate" or something like that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

can anyone name any romantic-comedies where the guy is in his 20's and the chick in her 30's?

can anyone name any romantic-comedies where the guy is in his 20's and the chick in her 30's? 21:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venustar84 (talk • contribs)

Didn't you ask that question recently? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably should be Entertainment desk... for an extreme answer, Harold and Maude, Big (film) is another one (both a little weird though, if you think about it)... of course Sunset Boulevard. But none are exactly the date ranges you are looking for. In Bull Durham Kostner's in his 30s while Sarandon is in her early 40s. Perhaps when they shot it it was close? I think The Good Girl technically meets your criteria, but it's the only one I've found. In the Bedroom too, but it's not a romantic comedy by any stretch. Shadowjams (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, Venus already asked that question at Entertainment, 3 days ago,[2] and maybe due to the absence of responses, decided to re-post it here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Graduate? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 02:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A great movie, but Mrs Robinson was no chick.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

She fit the OP's criteria - the actress was 36 at the time. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:03, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think she was played as 36 in the film, though, because her character had a grown daughter. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doing the math, one could make a plausible argument for Mrs. Robinson being in either her late 30s or her early 40s. Part of her character's back story is that she dropped out of college and married Mr. Robinson not out of love, but because she became pregnant (daughter Elaine, we're told, was conceived in a Ford). Depending on whether this event came early or late in her college career, she could have been anywhere from 18 to 22 or so years old at the time. Elaine is still in college during the course of the film, putting her age as well at twenty-plus-or-minus. Add those two numbers together, and Mrs. Robinson comes in at an even 40 years old, give or take. I await film experts to point out any specific clues that could narrow this down further. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am a world-renowned film expert, and I claim she was 42. That's all you really need to know. I bet Douglas Adams got his idea of 42 from watching the movie.

But those with a tiresome need to check the facts can read the Wikipedia article on The Graduate: Benjamin Braddock says, "next week I will be 21" ... Mrs. Robinson states, "Benjamin, I am twice your age." -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That strikes me as the same argument used to assert that the Bible claims pi is 3. Still, it is the most direct evidence we've had so far.

So Hoffman was playing nine years below his age, and Bancroft, around six years above. Par for the course. --Trovatore (talk) 22:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Timelines in movies and on TV aren't always consistent. I recall Richie Cunningham, as a teenager, having a date with Shirley Feeney, also a teenager, despite the characters being teens in different decades. StuRat (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down stars Antonio Banderas as a 23 year-old who kidnaps an older Victoria Abril (so she will fall in love with him) who plays an older (ex-junkie and porn-)actress with a past. She seems about 30 given he background in the story, but her age is never mentioned. In real life she's a year older than him. This is a five-star movie and perhaps one of Almodovar's best--I cannot recommend it highly enough. μηδείς (talk) 17:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We hope you mean the movie and not the kidnapping. As per WP:BEANS,please do not attempt to kidnap people so they will fall in love with you.It doesn't go well.... :) Lemon martini (talk) 22:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]