Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2013 March 13

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.

March 13

Decatur, Illinois - Sister Cities

How do I contribute more information on The Decatur Sister Cities and use their website as a reference (www.decatursistercities.com) to the Decatur, IL wikipedia page.

Thank you -Joel- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.214.12.175 (talk) 02:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:REFB explains how to cite sources. RudolfRed (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Diploma in teaching in the lifelong learning sector

Hi,

I am trying to find out if a dtlls qualification, level 5 is the equivalent of a (teaching) degree. Can you tell me if it is?

Thanks

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.77.21 (talk) 02:40, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Equivalent for what purpose? when you say "a teaching degree" I suppose you mean a BA/BSc Hons with QTS/QTLS? I would think that the Diploma would be equally well regarded for many practical purposes, but for further academic study it is not as good because it is at L5 whereas a degree is L6. Itsmejudith (talk) 08:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

If you mean for teaching in state schools in Rotherham or elsewhere in the UK, then the answer is "no" it will not be regarded as equivalent, but that qualification will be appropriate for some jobs in education, especially ones for which QTS is not a legal requirement, including teaching in independent schools. You will have to ask individual employers. Dbfirs 08:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

It depends what you want to do with it in the end, and what you are asking. Is it the equivalent of a BEd? Well no I don't think it is. Will it enable you to teach in FE/HE institutions? Yes it will, but your career progress may be hindered unless you undertake further study. Will it enable you to teach in schools? Probably not, but it may give you an entry into school teaching, but you would have to do a conversion course. If you have an endpoint in mind (like working for an FE college) I suggest you contact the college and ask them, as it is quite possible different institutions have different views on the subject. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

SOE training

How long did SOE agents have to train before they were considered ready for deployment in Nazi-occupied territory? I'm writing a military thriller where one of the characters is an SOE agent involved in a rogue operation to help Jews escape the Holocaust, and I want to know whether her first deployment would have been to Poland or to the Netherlands (she enlisted right after the start of the war). Thanks in advance! 24.23.196.85 (talk) 02:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You probably want to link directly to Special_Operations_Executive and not the dab page.  Done by User:Shakescene I don't have the answer to your question, but the article says the agents went to several classes after their initial training, so if you can estimate how long each class took then you could come up with a good guestimate for the total time. The article says nothing about training centers in the Netherlands. RudolfRed (talk) 03:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Wait, where did I say anything about SOE training centers in the Netherlands? What I said is, my rogue agent, Margo, will at one point be deployed in the Netherlands for this operation (after having trained in England) -- and my question was, if she enlisted in September or October 1939 (right after Hitler's invasion of Poland), would she have finished training before May 1940 (in which case she'd first be deployed to Poland until 1942) or after (in which case she'd be deployed straight to the Netherlands). 24.23.196.85 (talk) 04:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint, but SOE did not come into being until 22nd July 1940, with Churchill's famous instruction to 'set Europe ablaze'. Prior to this, the activities that would later be undertaken by SOE were being done by three organisations: The Foreign Office's Department EH; a section of the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS - later to become MI6) called Section D; and War Office department GS(R) (MI(R) from late 1939 onwards). These sections, I believe, drew their recruits from the regular services. The type of recruitment that would allow someone like Margo (who, I assume, was a civilian until the outbreak of war) would not start until later, probably late '41 or into '42. If, however, you can contrive some way to get Margo into the intelligence game, I think she would probably want to be a member of Section D. According to our article, they would 'investigate the use of sabotage, propaganda and other irregular means to weaken an enemy' - which sounds like the sort of thing you have in mind. Also, if you have a particular need for her to be somewhere in the early stages of the war, make it so. At that time, the intelligence services were nothing like the stuff of James Bond, or even as professional as the SOE would later become. They were much more of a hobby for eccentric Army officers and Foreign Office civil servants. I would guess that training was much more down to the individual agent to muddle through - so if you want Margo to be in Poland in 1940, just write her training so that she is. It will be believable because the training in those days was very much made up to fit the situation. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 08:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Cucumber! In this case, she'll probably have to wait until July 1940 to enlist, which would mean that she'll be deployed straight to Eindhoven after completing her training. (I could of course have her enlist in Section D in the fall of '39, but since she's a civilian -- the one part of her backstory that I absolutely have set in stone is that she was a volunteer in the Kindertransport right up until the outbreak of the war -- this would not be very plausible.) And I don't really have to have her sneaking Jewish kids out of the Radom ghetto for my story -- this is more to show how much she cares about her self-imposed mission. 24.23.196.85 (talk) 00:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm no expert either, but the Polish paragraphs in Wikipedia's SOE article (Special Operations Executive#Poland) offer a very promising possibility in Witold Pilecki, a Polish officer who actually contrived to be sent as an inmate to Auschwitz with the intention of gathering information, disseminating it, and doing what he could to organize and support the other inmates. According to the Wikipedia article, he proposed to SOE a joint plan for liberating Auschwitz that was rejected as infeasible. As a novelist, you could probably try a little counterfactual history where either the politico-military authorities, the intelligence apparatus or your fictional rogue agents make a different choice. —— Shakescene (talk) 04:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

In my case it will be Margo the rogue agent and her equally rogue control officer who make the decision to help liberate Jews (from the ghetto, not from the concentration camps) against strict orders from their higher-ups. In fact, I'm sure such a rogue operation could have been done without anyone else's knowledge, as long as it was kept small and tightly compartmented. Hell, they could even combine it with a legitimate intel-gathering operation for cover! 24.23.196.85 (talk) 04:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't want to sound as preachy or condescending as the instructions at the top of the page, let alone snarky, but have you tried Googling "Special Operations Executive training" with or without the extra search terms "period" and "length"? — which can lead to pages like this: Training SOE Saboteurs in World War Two By Bernie Ross (BBC History) or this 300-page doctoral thesis on women in SOE The women agents of the Special Operations Executive F section – wartime realities and post war representations. Elizabeth Kate Vigurs (Leeds University), which has an extensive section on training (beginning on p. 38) that says it could last from as little as three weeks to as much as five months. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Side issue: if the character is British I think she is more likely to have spelt her name "Margot" ('the T is silent, as in Harlot'). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

She's British all right, but Margo is her alias, not her real name. I won't tell you what her real name is -- in fact, I don't know that myself and I don't even care, because the only place she will actually appear in the story is in occupied Lille (where she will go by the alias of Maigret), and the only other place where she'll be mentioned is when Alfred (the chimney sweep turned demolitionist) will tell Mike (the shot-down American pilot turned sniper) about his work together with her in Eindhoven (where he will introduce her as Margo). 24.23.196.85 (talk) 00:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

How many British Isles?

From the Wikipedia Great Britain article: “Great Britain is surrounded by over 1,000 smaller islands and islets.”

From the Wikipedia British Isles article: “The British Isles are a group of islands off the northwest coast of continental Europe that include the islands of Great Britain, Ireland and over six thousand smaller isles.[9] “

Who reconciles such apparent discrepancies? I.e. >1,000 islands or >6,000 islands?195.11.198.1 (talk) 12:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

That's not necessarily a discrepancy. The logic implies that Ireland has 5,000 islands around it that aren't around also Great Britain. But I think that's unlikely. There's also the point that "over six thousand" is still "over 1,000", but that's a rubbish point. --Dweller (talk) 12:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The Great Britain article has a reference to the Ordnance Survey answering the question 'How many islands are there around mainland Britain?' by 'Ordnance Survey identifies 803 islands with a coastline around mainland Britain. Thousands more smaller islands and rocks are shown as a point (dot) on the maps.' (The >6000 figure is cited from the Encylopaedia Britannica.) I think it will very much come down to 'it depends what you mean by "island"' (and "islet"). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

• At what phase of the tide? how high above the surface and how large in area? This is an intractable question dealing with fractal scales. See How long is the coast of Britain. μηδείς (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Which is why the estimable experts at the OS stated "islands with a coastline" which I believe can be taken to mean not inundated at any stage of the normal tidal range. Alansplodge (talk) 20:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

That's fine, and I am sure it applies to many rocks. One still also needs to give a time period, given sea levels have been hundreds of feet higher and lower than they are now. μηδείς (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I think 'hundreds' of feet is an exaggeration. My town is 5 miles from the coast, and only 300ft above sea level, and we don't walk around finding sea shells all over the place. The sea has never been up this high, ever. Maybe the sea was a few feet higher than now, in the distant past, because when the Romans were here, the land nearer the coast than us was marshland at the time. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion is of interest, but not so much as the scientific record, which shows the sea level being hundreds of feet lower and higher than it is currently, during ice ages or when all the ice has melted. A period needs to be specified for an answer to be given. μηδείς (talk) 22:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

During the ice ages, we were covered in glaciers and there was no sea anywhere near the islands. After the ice melted, the sea level rose, of course, but not right up this far. If that were the case, one would have to wonder where it's all gone, considering we are no longer in an ice age. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

A lack of seashell fossils means that the sea hasn't covered that land since it formed. However, some land has formed relatively recently, from volcanoes. The UK isn't particularly volcanic, today, but may have been millions of years ago. That's still a lot more recent than the 4.3 billion year-old Earth. It's rather hard to find rocks dating from that era.

Millions of years ago, we weren't an island. We were a peninsula stuck to the continent. We only broke away from the continent 8,000 years ago, which is after the last ice age. We broke away because we didn't want to be in the Eurozone :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, it's quite possible that the sea was over 300 feet higher, but, at that time, the land was higher, too, so wasn't covered by the sea. StuRat (talk) 22:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

One more minor point: the OP is using the present tense, so I think we can safely assume the question is about the present situation of our islands. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

It's still undefined. The best you can get is, according to a photograph taken at xx:xx:xx at :xx:xx hours, there wer approximately this number of islands of this size within this distance of London/Greenwich/Downton Abbey. μηδείς (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be wiser to choose the exact centre point of the British Isles, rather than London, as France is closer to London than Scotland, for example. The exact centre of the British Isles is, interestingly, a few miles east of my house, in Lancashire. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikivoyage/Wikitravel

If Wikitravel in merged with Wikivoyage under WMF, why the Wikitravel domain is still active? --PlanetEditor (talk) 13:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikitravel#Community fork in 2012 --Viennese Waltz 13:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

First Class Upgrade on US Airways

I'm flying US Airways in a few days. I recently upgraded my flight to a "choice seat" on an aisle because I didn't want to sit in a center seat. The cost was $67.

According to their website, when you check in, you have the option of upgrade to first class. Let's say when I check in I decide I want to upgrade. Let's also assume, for instance, the cost to upgrade to first class is $100. Would I be credited for the $67 I've already paid when I upgraded to a "choice seat?" In other words, if I decide to upgrade to first class, would I only pay $33 in additional money? Or is the original $67 upgrade forfeited? OR, is there a separate charge for people who already upgrade to a "choice seat" that takes this into account?? I'm flying soon so I need to know. Thanks!! Jared (t)  14:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you direct these questions to the airline itself. --Viennese Waltz 14:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I've sent an email but response time is 7 business days, and I don't have the ability to make a phone call right now. I figured I'd see if anyone here with past experience could help out. Jared (t)  14:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I fly US Airways frequently, as they're headquartered in my city, but unfortunately I don't have a clue. Maybe it isn't a factor for you, but US Airways first class, at least on domestic flights, is nothing to write home about. The extra space is pretty pathetic and aside from a free drink or two there are few perks. Their coach accommodations are solid and at 6'1" I'm fairly comfortable in aisle or window seats even on five hour flights. --Daniel(talk) 16:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, if there's no written policy on this, it may all be up to which agent you ask. Maybe some will discount the $67 already paid, and others won't. Or, if you do it all online, it should be consistent, but you may not know how it will work until you do it. Ideally, they should allow you to review all aspects of the transaction before you approve it, but this frequently isn't actually the case. StuRat (talk) 22:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I expect that an upgrade to first class will cost much more than $100. For example, I just checked US Airways' website and the price for a round trip coach ticket from New York to LA was $430 while a first class ticket costs $2116.--Wikimedes (talk) 07:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Virtually no one pays the sticker price for first class. While airlines are very closemouthed on the topic, industry experts estimate that fewer than 10% – and perhaps as few as 2% – of passengers in first class are paying full fare: [1]. The vast bulk are 'upgrades', bought for cash at much, much less than the nominal markup, paid for with loyalty points/air miles, or just plain given away free to frequent travellers. Domestic 'first' is also often no better (and often worse than) 'business' or even 'economy extra' on long-haul international flights: a free drink, a snack, and a bit more leg and elbow room. For short- to mid-haul travellers, the biggest advantage to a first-class ticket is often the priority check-in. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Gates, Jobs, Torvalds all atheists?

I read on Facebook that someone said that overly religious people shouldn't use either Microsoft Windows, Mac OS or Linux on their computers because Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Linus Torvalds are all atheists. But is this true? JIP | Talk 20:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably not. We note in our article that Jobs was Buddhist (with a Lutheran background prior to that). "Buddhist" is not generally considered synonymous with "athiest", though I suspect that's not a universal interpretation. We note in our articles that Torvalds is decisively atheist, and that Gates is agnostic (these are all in the articles you linked). — Lomn 20:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Sadly for the Facebook guy, though, there aren't a lot of other options. JesOS 2.0 still hasn't committed to a release schedule. — Lomn 20:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe he could use Inferno. Henry^Flower 08:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, Gates being an agnostic and Jobs having been a Buddhist (he's dead now) are mentioned in the infobox, but Torvalds being a strict atheist isn't. It's mentioned in the article itself though. JIP | Talk 20:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Do atheists come in "orthodox" (i.e. "strict"), "conservative" and "reform"? Or is there only one type? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Our article covers some of the various forms. — Lomn 21:27, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

According to Christopher Hitchens, when stopped by the paramilitary in Northern Ireland, one can declare oneself atheist, but one has to identify as a Protestant or Catholic atheist. I am the latter. μηδείς (talk) 00:59, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I would suggest someone who believes no gods exist would be an orthodox atheist, someone who believes that one might is a liberal atheist. Gzuckier (talk) 19:25, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the infobox, the bar for placing religious metadata in the infobox is higher than usual; see WP:BLPCAT. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 21:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Apparently, anyone who spends a lot of time with computers, only to have all their work wiped out when it crashes, must conclude that there is no God. :-) StuRat (talk) 22:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Christians have no problem with this happening,by following the example of their God-because Jesus saves!Lemon martini (talk) 09:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't forget this old saying: "Jesus saves. Moses invests." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Jesus may save, but does he backup? Nil Einne (talk) 19:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

He must, because it says He can restoreth thy soul. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

No - just that there is also a devil. Anyway I'm glad to report that true believers don't have to avoid air that has been brathed by atheists or water that has passed through them because when they rise high into the atmosphere they are blessed by God [citation needed]. ;-) Dmcq (talk) 00:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)