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

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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

Can't remember movie

I am wracking my brain to locate this U.S. movie I saw as a little kid. It was about deprogramming from a cult. Best memory is that the mother engages a man to kidnap her daughter back from a cult and deprogram her. It had to be either seventies or very early eighties. Also, My best memory is that the actress who played the mother had these incredible crazy blue eyes, if that helps at all.--71.190.242.180 (talk) 03:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket to Heaven fits the time frame, but it's a man who was deprogrammed: [1]. StuRat (talk) 06:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB has a list of cult/deprogramming movies. None of the movies fit both your description and time frame, but it might be worth a look.--Wikimedes (talk) 07:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Can Ellen be Saved?" seems like it fits. 1974, and Louise Fletcher has blue eyes. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You Know That Show is a section of TV Tropes dedicated to finding things that are on the tip of your mind but you can't access them. Create a free account and post everything you can remember here; they ave a large viewer base and can find truly obscure media. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Was it anything like Groundskeeper Willie's part in The Simpsons episode The Joy of Sect? I'd always got the feeling that was referencing something, but the Internet is no help, so far. Might be a clue, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:06, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

problem with toilet float

hello, i am having problems with a toilet float, its sitting too high and making my toilet run 24/7. how do i fix this? heres some pics [2] [3] note the water is falling into the overflow tube. thanskBanan292 (talk) 05:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try googling "fix toilet float". μηδείς (talk) 05:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the resolved tag the previous responder added, because they did not resolve the problem. StuRat (talk) 06:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've had this problem myself. Here are a few possible solutions:

1) Make sure the float isn't waterlogged. If it has a hole in it, you may want to replace it.

2) If it's the type where the float is on a horizontal stalk (which it is, in your case), you can bend it so it sticks down further into the water.

3) Alternatively, you can raise the height of the overflow drain, by inserting a rolled-up plastic sheet, epoxied to it on the inside. Of course, you can't raise the water level too much this way, or it will overflow the tank. This has the advantage of providing a stronger flush.

4) You can combine these solutions. StuRat (talk) 06:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flush the toilet, then try holding the float up as high as it will easily go for about half a minute, if this doesn't stop the water running you will need a new washer. Turn off the water to the cistern, undo the 4 screws on top of the valve, remove the washer you will find underneath, and take it to a good hardware store to make sure you get a new one exactly the same. Put it all back together with the new washer and turn the water back on. You may have to adjust the little white plastic screw to set the water-level, but best to change the washer first. Set the water-level to be at least half an inch below the top of the overflow tube. Good Luck. 122.108.189.192 (talk) 06:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you just adjust the height of the float using that white plastic flat head screw at the end of the float bar? I'm sure I have done this at some stage. I could be wrong though. 59.167.253.199 (talk) 23:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

dirty tricks (2)

legal question asked twice

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I have accessed your article on dirty tricks, but it appeared to be mainly concerned with the political sphere.

What I want to enquire about is a tactic I have been subjected to, and if you could direct me to where I could find further information about it? such as, who (broadly) originated this tactic, who generally practices it, and who (broadly) are the targets of the technique.

Until I experienced it ( and I am 60 years old and well read) I have never come across this tactic before.

This is what happened..

The person I am interacting with, whatever I say, claims the opposite. In the absence of a third party to ascertain the facts of the situation, this creates a situation where one of us is lying. Without independent corroboration, it then devolves to credibility. The person using this technique has credibility, having managerial status, whereas I do not. The cleverness of the technique is, is that when my opponent lies, I am made out to be the liar.

If you could throw any light on this I would be grateful.Wiliamson (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You asked this identical question 2 days ago. Just scroll up for some responses. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For one example, I could not ensure that the events took place in public because they unavoidably occurred in private. I will explain.

My husband died. I immediately left our flat to live somewhere else, but returned after a week to inform the authorities to stop his pension and so forth. The file containing all his documents was missing. The flat had been entered with a key, and I had both of them. My daughter-in-law is the sole executor of my husbands estate, so I assumed she had helped herself. But she sent a text the next day, asking when I returned, could I give her the documents. A burglar would have forced entry and taken items of value. These documents were only of use to my daughter-in-law. In denying her action, she makes it look as if I am responsible for the missing documents (which are not missing - she has them but it pretending not to). Wiliamson (talk) 09:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Wikipedia cannot give advice of a legal nature. We cannot provide any answers to help you in this matter. See Wikipedia:Legal disclaimer. --Jayron32 11:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree any answer would be either legal or criminal advice, and am closing this as asked twice μηδείς (talk) 03:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

missing question

a year or so ago, I asked a question on here, trying to find a latin translation of Montaigne's famous quote 'I have gathered a garland of other men's flowers, and nothing is mine but the cord which binds them' and I received what I thought was a very nice answer, which now I cannot remember. However, the question does not seem to show up whatever search terms I use, or even to looking through the entire language desk archive for the last couple of years. any idea where I might find this question and answer now? I think, chances were, at that time I was editing under my university accommodation IP address too, which I cannot remember. HS7 (talk) 11:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible you've already done this, but here is a search for every use of the word "Montaigne" in the reference desk back to 2007. None of them also contain the word "garlands", though some of them request clarification of specific quotes. There are few enough returns for you to search yourself if you haven't already. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 02:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A search on "latin montaigne" yields nothing. A search on "garland flowers: yields: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2011_July_5#the_fauna_equivalent_of_.27anthology.27.3F I suggest the OP choose his key words and use the search function at the top of the page. μηδείς (talk) 03:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yea, I've tried plenty of different search terms, including spelling mistakes, it just doesn't show up. HS7 (talk) 10:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sealing wooden decking.

Never having been disappointed by Wikipedia responses in the past, here goes again. We live in the UK (Scotland - cold, wet, windy, damp, snowy, frosty, icy - you get the picture)? We bought this bungalow (single storey house) 8 years ago and because my wife suffers from arthritis (both types), I built a sizeable decking around the rear and side aspects at the same level as the house floor so that egress from the house onto the decking was easier than the previously existing steps down to the garden/drive. Since then, I have been careful to treat the decking twice a year with a proprietary sealant after power washing the winter sludge off the surface. So far so good. Wood is clean, sludge and rot free, and water/rain resistant. But yesterday when I went to my local DIY store to purchase several gallons of my usual sealant I was horrified to see the price had gone up to in excess of £40 per gallon which is more than I want to, or can realistically afford to pay. But here's the thing - whenever I have previously applied the sealant, there is a very strong smell of paraffin/kerosene, which is a very thin oil, so much so that my wife, who is also asthmatic, cannot bear the smell, and has to go indoors. So, my question is, can I use paraffin/kerosene (which is much cheaper than my usual proprietary sealant) to seal the decking? All responses will be much appreciated. Thanks in anticipation. 77.99.122.161 (talk) 11:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess everyone will immediately point out the dangers of splashing paraffin all over the place, but I'll assume your a really sensible chap that knows what he's about. In principle I can see little wrong with sealing your decking with paraffin, as you have noticed it is the medium used for many decking sealers. The only slight reservation I have is that it won't contain any fungicide, micro-fungi being the principal cause of wood rot, however paraffin may be fungicidal in its own right and in any case should provide reasonably good penetrative water protection. The other thing I wonder about is that if paraffin is suitable why isn't it used more commonly. Finally, another option might be dressing your deck every other year, to me annually seems super cautious - even in Scotland. Richard Avery (talk) 13:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Annually? The OP seems even more cautious since they indicated they're doing it biannually. Nil Einne (talk) 13:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It could be pitch_oil. Nasty stuff but it works. Caution - some are poisonous. Some have a black residue that stains everything - carpets, clothes, shoes and pets. Linseed_oil#Wood_finish is safe but it does not have any anti-mildew properties. 196.214.78.114 (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked up Wickes and they were selling a decking seal 5L for £20 and two others one at £28 and £35 with a standard delivery charge of £5.95 if you haven't one in the area, so I'm sure you can do better than £40. Dmcq (talk) 15:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way I don't know about decking but I know community and sports floors aren't normally resealed more than once a year and they can get quite heavy use. The surface can get worn away by sand from children's playgroups if not brushed away carefully or from tap dancing but your domestic use wouldn't affect a hall surface much at all. Dmcq (talk) 16:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Give us a chance. All things are relative. What was the 'brand' of your now overpriced sealant so that we can make comparisons. In the good old-days, linseed oils, with a little arsenic and copper served well but if you want a modern alternative to suit your pocket, we need more info ( I,e. Like the brand you used – also, your age – and timber used in construction). If your in your early thirty’s (and built it out of cheap Scandinavian Deal) (and intend to live there all your life) then best sealant may not be the same one I would choose. If your in your late 80's and built it out of green oak and only want it to last only for the next 20 years -then that’s a different matter.Aspro (talk) 19:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Soaking wood in a flammable liquid close to your house sounds really, really dangerous and I think it will do you little good. Kerosene or similar liquids are mostly used as solvents in deck sealants, while the active ingredient is some kind of oil or wax that dries or oxidizes to form the protective layer. We don't have an article about deck sealant yet, but wood finishing has some information that might be useful. Sjö (talk) 07:37, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish connection to Trail of Tears

I heard a Pastor say DNA of Jewish blood has been found in Cherokee Indians and in Oklahoma. Somehow the trail of tears is connected and that the Phoenecians (Lebanon)were here before Columbus.Is this true ? 68.53.174.170 (talk) 19:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)Delores Christofferson...5/14/'13[reply]

There was a good 200 years of European/Indian interbreeding before the Jackson administration. It would be surprising if there weren't "Jewish" Y chromosomes and mitochondria from conversos and others. μηδείς (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd ask the pastor for his source. HiLo48 (talk) 07:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The good pastor has probably been reading one of the many fringe theories of Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact that have circulated in the United States since colonial times; and specifically, he may be thinking of some conjecture about the unproven theory of Phoenician discovery of the Americas, or the perennial speculation about the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, or if he is affiliated with the LDS Church, of the Mormon doctrine that Israelites colonized the Americas, or perhaps he has read something about the Bat Creek inscription hoax in Tennessee, which purported to show a Hebrew phrase in Cherokee letters, or some other archaeological forgery in the United States. Or maybe someone's come up with a brand new speculation based on vague, unprovable DNA theories. There are so many of these pseudoscientific claims for the origin of Native Americans, ignoring the fascinating scientific record, but none have ever been shown to be conclusively and indisputably true. Textorus (talk) 15:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]