Miscellaneous desk
< November 30	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 2 >

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.

December 1

Where did the prick go?

On my CD for prayer in C it just says 'lily wood',there's no sign of the prick and when they did the chart on radio 1,they didn't mention him.why not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.15.129.71 (talk) 13:08, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case anybody is as mystified as I was, the subject of the question is Prayer in C and Lilly Wood and the Prick (apparently a popular beat combo m'Lud). Alansplodge (talk) 13:34, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WHAAOE, incidentally. Tevildo (talk) 01:26, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I am pleased. I thought it was a request for medical advice ;) Lemon martini (talk) 11:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many apologies; I should know better than to use jokes that offshore readers might get the gist of. Alansplodge (talk) 16:20, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I would think it's blatantly obvious why the full name wasn't used, given the meaning of 'prick' in English.82.21.7.184 (talk) 18:33, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a line from Prayer in C ?

printf('Dear God, please send me more sex buddies');

StuRat (talk) 18:48, 1 December 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Orientation of Welsh Dragon flags on angled wall-mounted poles

--86.161.162.236 (talk) 16:04, 1 December 2014 (UTC)I would like an indication of correct or preferred orientation of the mounting of the Welsh Dragon on an angled wall-mounted pole, if possible by diagram !![reply]

The Welsh Dragon is styled passant, on the Flag of Wales, which means that the dragon is walking dexter (which means to the right, from the perspective of the wearer of a coat of arms, so a passant beast faces to the viewer's left-hand side). Of course most flags have two sides, and if the dragon is facing dexter on one side he will be facing sinister on the other. I'm not sure how vexillologists sort that out, but Flag#Shapes_and_designs mentions that some flags are "through-and-through," whereas others are mirrored so that the beast could face left when viewed from either side. Anyway, the dominant mounting seems to be with the dragon facing the pole when mounted at an angle on a wall, somewhat like this [1]. See also Glossary_of_vexillology#Techniques_in_flag_display SemanticMantis (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Our Glossary of vexillology article says: "Flag illustrations generally depict flags flying from the observer's point of view from left to right, the view known as the obverse (or "front"); the other side is the reverse (or "back")". If I understand the question correctly, the pole and flag are going to be fixed flat against the wall rather than projecting outwards from it; in which case, the pole should be on the observer's left and the dragon, Y Ddraig Goch, should be looking to the left, towards the pole.

The Welsh flag (and nearly every other one) is a mirror image, so the dragon faces the pole on both sides, however the one facing left is the front. The Flag of Saudi Arabia is NOT a mirror image, because it would be a bit rude to have God's name written backwards; so they have to make two flags and sew them back-to-back. But I digress. Alansplodge (talk) 18:51, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too many meetings?

There are a lot of humorous or too-true-to-be-humorous "laws" used in business, such as the Peter principle. Is there a commonly identified one along the lines of no work being done because the more important you are, the more you're called into meetings and the less time you have to do the work? I scanned through List of eponymous laws, but many/most of those are "legitimate" scientific laws. 16:37, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

A good example was an incident where my brother was told to ignore the customer calling in, to attend a meeting on the importance of being responsive to the customer. :-) StuRat (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat related: I seem to recall a law that the intelligence of a committee can be determined by dividing the lowest member IQ by the total number of members. StuRat (talk) 19:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, committees. Meetings with DNA. "A committee is a group of people who individually can do nothing but collectively decide that nothing can be done". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:06, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That way they spread the blame around. (As per Dilbert.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:47, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy to find examples, but does anyone know the answer to the OP's question? And to the associated question of why otherwise seemingly intelligent people still hold so many meetings? HiLo48 (talk) 22:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard a name for it, and it's not at all clear that the OP's premise is true. The purpose of meetings is to inform and to make decisions about the work to be done. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:46, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

However, many working people could confirm that sometimes it seems impossible to find the time to get any work done because virtually all one's time is taken up with meetings. Planning is of course an essential part of any project, and the views of "key stakeholders" need to be considered, but sometimes it seems that consultation and planning take up 95% of the time and actual achievement is only allowed 5% - but it needs far more than that, otherwise we end with rushed and botched projects that have to be redone, but that only happens after yet more endless meetings involving more key stakeholders and far more $$ than was ever envisaged. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:59, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One ironic side effect of "too many meetings" is how difficult it can become to schedule a needed meeting and have everyone there who needs to be there. That kind of thing certainly adds time to projects. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ammunition drums for submachine guns

Some famous submachine guns use round ammunition drums, rather than straight box magazines (e.g. The Thompson). It is easy to see how a box magazine "feeds" ammunition into the firing chamber area: a simple metal folded spring does it. How is the ammunition from a round drum fed or pushed into the firing chamber area?OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. There are various designs, but generally they work on a spiral arrangement with a spring supplying tension. We don't have a real good image or diagram here, but I found this video which, if one can stomach the self-cocking presentation, shows the innards of a drum and gives some information on loading and feed. --Pete (talk) 17:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help : ) OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 20:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why aren't domesticated cats afraid of dogs?

I've been thinking about this for a few years and I just can't figure it out. I've repeatedly observed small domesticated cats holding their own in the face of large dogs being walked on leashes. One would think that small cats would at least step back or show some kind of deference; after all, small things generally give way to larger things for obvious reasons. However, this does not seem to be true with the domesticated cat. I have seen cat after cat remain immobile, except for raised hair and hissing, while defending their territory in the face of extremely large dogs. How can this be? Why are they so confident in their defensive posture? Is it because they know they can strike quickly and run up a tree? What exactly is going through their mind? Do they think that dogs are just too dumb to present any danger? Viriditas (talk) 21:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would depend on the temperament of the individual cat. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Small cat takes on two pitbulls and saves woman's life. I think there is something more than just temperament going on here. Viriditas (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

True, and many just instinctively know what they can do to a dog's muzzle, if they need to. Size isn't everything, and they know it. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 21:57, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably due to their smaller brains. μηδείς (talk) 22:02, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Small cat takes on five dogs. Come on, there's something more than temperament going on here. Viriditas (talk) 22:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)1) Cats are arguably just tame, not domesticated, since we didn't exactly make an effort to breed them for the role of rat-catchers as much as they just conveniently evolved in that direction.

2) It depends on the cat's exposure to dogs previously, and how confident a fighter they are.

2a) My (indoor) cat, whose passivity borders on Buddha-hood, gives roaches the right of way, used to run terror from stuffed animals, and will still have a conniption if another cat can be seen from the window. She's even scared of the "room with no ceiling" (i.e. outside, specifically the sky; not the ground, not trees, but the sky). The best possible reaction to a dog she could have would be to assume it's another human (new people she doesn't mind for some reason), but I still suspect that her reaction would be to run for my while huffing/mewling.

2b) Other cats I've seen, who are more confident, are probably just trying to let the dog know they're not worth the trouble. They don't actually have to win the fight, just make it not worth the dog's while to eat them.

2c) Some cats I've seen assume that dogs are just another form of "big dumb cat," only they don't give food. That or the cat starts to think that it's one of the dogs.

Ian.thomson (talk) 22:14, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the video where the cat saved the lady, that lady was part of the cat's "family" in its mind. We don't have as much context for the other video, but that cat didn't look like it was trying to be a big, bad, and macho so much as it was just letting the dogs know "I'm too much trouble to eat" (because the cat could not read, so far as I could tell, that the dogs' interest was "is this another dog? Does it play?" -- though I'm not as good at reading dogs). Ian.thomson (talk) 22:19, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Having lived around cats my whole life, I believe what they're displaying is nothing more or less than defense of their home territory. A predator's territory is their life and livelihood and the incursion of another apex predator is not one that should be tolerated. It seems to me that the strategy they employ is the "hawk" side of the so-called "hawk-dove game" - at the outset. They can afford to play the game that way because their excellent short bursts of speed and ability to climb trees give them a viable exit strategy if things go south. Speaking more hypothetically, there is some evidence suggesting that cats and humans form an odd parent-child relationship (per Desmond Morris) where in some aspects we play one side (e.g. providing food) and in other times we play the other (e.g. being presented with wounded birds to practice our hunting skills on). It's not outside the realm of possibility to me that house cats can be particularly ferocious because they (partly) view us as offspring that should be defended above almost all else. Matt Deres (talk) 00:32, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that the birds actually aren't for us. The cat got it for him/herself, then remembered he/she has delicious kibbles in a bowl. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. they will leave a dead mouse of bird on your pillow, which makes it quite clear it's a gift for you. (A gift you wish you could return.) StuRat (talk) 04:36, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you run from a dog you can set off their prey response, but if you stand up to them, they might back down. It's not a 100% effective strategy, but cat's ability to puff up their fur seems to indicate that's a strategy they use. And if they are cornered and do have to fight, they are in much better position if facing the threat than with their backside to it. StuRat (talk) 04:43, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably related to puffing up is kittens' habit (I haven't seen it in cats over about four months) of approaching any strange object crabwise, to maximize their apparent size.

I am not sure if this viral cat saves boy video supports the "territoriality" theory above, but it's worth the watch anyway. μηδείς (talk) 05:51, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I live with a lot of cats and a few dogs, and can attest that it depends on the cat. Some are hungry young tigers, some are fat spoiled pussies. Like StuRat says, if you have to fight, aren't a mule, porcupine or skunk, and can't rely on a referee or owner to save you, don't turn around. Ever. A dog isn't likely to catch a rear-naked choke, but quite likely to yank a tail or heel.

Also right about the power of puffing up and screaming. Even bears and sharks can be bluffed away by puny things. Not without reason, either. Have you ever tried to pick up a tiny, crazed cat? If you were half your size, would you want to try doing it with your face? You'd be more inclined if it looked like a timid slipper filled with meat. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:55, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipeida Question

close request for opinion

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

Why does everyone on wikipedia say that they want to improve wikipeida. They say they want to expand articles and improve the wikopedia. But all they do is improve their user pages with userboxes and take ages doing arrbitration elections, and talking on talk pages, and answering questions like these. If wikipedia really wants to improve, they should stop making silly things and focus on actually improving articles. Am i right? 121.90.228.150 (talk) 22:37, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please create a user account and work on your user page. There are a list of userboxes you can choose from. Viriditas (talk) 22:42, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What if I'm using my user page to draft material for an article? Also, actually check user contributions before making the blanket statement that accounted users only work on their user pages. Except for draft areas, most users who bother staying here for long spend very little time editing their user pages. Experienced editors are just really good at making fancy looking pages that look like they spent a lot of time on it. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:07, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to make a request for factual material. As for opinions and debate, see the top of the page. μηδείς (talk) 23:40, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]