Miscellaneous desk
< June 19	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 21 >

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.

June 20

How to demand STD testing

How do you ask your partner to get tested for STDs? I mean, how do you bring that up in a non-awkward way? And if they do agree to get tested, do you ask for the result sheet or do you just take their word for it that they're "clean"? Should you also agree to get tested even though you know it's straight up impossible for you to be infected with any diseases ^{due to lack of experience}? 67.68.191.83 (talk) 02:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the correct location to get advice of any sort. You should ask someone else. We can only provide references to reliable sources or to Wikipedia articles here. Immediately below this post, someone will ignore the rules of this desk and post some random, unreferenced, unwise advise. Don't listen to them. Run far away from this place and seek advice from somewhere else. --Jayron 32 02:50, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)I have simply always gone with my partners of both sexes (I'm bi) whenever any such mutual issue might be relevant, and the doctors are very accommodating, especially in Quebec. The doctor will almost always want both partners to have relevant tests. E.g., if she's preggers, they'll wanna know if you have Zika, etc. I think we can tell you both to seek medical advice, but as for relationship advice, "trust me", we can't help you there. μηδείς (talk) 02:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking theoretically, not as a way of eliciting relationship advice from you guys. I am not even in a relationship at the moment. ^{Besides, I've seen relationship advice being dispensed plenty on this board, so why the sudden aversion to offering it in this case?}67.68.191.83 (talk) 07:04, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why assume that there are no references to reliable sources? Here's one that took me almost a whole minute to find: [1]. Sjö (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sjö, you've got a very poor understanding of American politics, the nature of politically funded advocacy websites, and what a reliable source is if you think a website is a reliable source if it has an address ending in .gov. I suggest you consider such things as the perennially discredited food pyramids, the "just say no" campaign, the anti-AIDS abstinence campaign,, US government campaigns against eggs, and for high-carbohydrate diets. The site you have linked to is basically the current administration's advice column. I have, per our guidelines, suggested the OP seek medical advice from a licensed physician. You've randomly googled something and offered it on your expertise as a wikipedia editor. μηδείς (talk) 03:16, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a rule of thumb, if one is in a relationship and doesn't feel comfortable talking about the issue of STDs, then perhaps one should also reconsider whether it is appropriate to be sexually active in that relationship. Sure, such conversations can be somewhat awkward, but a strong relationship won't be harmed by a little bit of awkwardness. Sexual activity can have a lot of consequences, especially for people who rush into without thinking about the consequences and without taking appropriate precautions. So talk about these things, and make sure both of you are comfortable with the answers. Dragons flight (talk) 17:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right. As awkward as it may be to ask now, it'd be a thousand times more awkward to explain having any incurable STI to future perspective partners. A little awkwardness now saves a lot later. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can "demand" that anyone do anything, unless you have a court order or something. But if someone's unwilling to take such a test and prove the results, run away. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cause of Traffic Accidents

I have to prepare a 5 page report on it , please give ideas.--Aryan ( है?) 06:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a useful site, and here is another one. I hope they help. I suspect the frequency of any particular cause is likely to vary in any particular country. Richard Avery (talk) 07:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And not only by country but by area within that country. I wouldn't expect many accidents due to ice on the road in Texas but it happens quite a bit in Vermont. So, relating that to what Aryan is asking, you might want to look at the area that you're thinking of and look at things that way. Dismas|^(talk) 12:38, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Beware of studies done by those with agendas. For example, "alcohol involved accidents" is a term often used, but doesn't mean that alcohol was a cause of the accident. For example, if somebody who had been drinking was stopped at an intersection when rammed by another car (with a sober driver), then that's still listed as "alcohol involved". (I have no doubt that alcohol is a major risk but that doesn't mean we should exaggerate the risk.) Also, studies done by government bodies may underestimate dangers they are responsible for, like poorly designed roads and construction zones, lack of guard rails, incorrect road markings, or police cars sticking out into the street when they pull people over. Poorly placed road signs can also pose a hazard, and speed bumps with no warning could cause accidents more than prevent them.

One surprising cause of accidents, and increase in fatalities, is trees close to the road. StuRat (talk) 15:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Like suicidal trees jumping in front of cars?--TMCk (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in addition to driving into a tree, a tree can fall onto a car or into the roadway, and can block the view of oncoming traffic or pedestrians. So, they must be plotting against us. :-) StuRat (talk) 15:40, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see no surprise in that and where do you get an increase of fatalities due to trees from?--TMCk (talk) 15:49, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hitting a substantial tree is like hitting a brick wall, so where running off the road would have just resulted in getting stuck in a ditch, if there's a big tree there, instead, it can prove fatal to the car occupants. StuRat (talk) 04:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The major cause of auto accidents is the auto hitting something or something hitting the auto. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any source for that bold claim? :)) --TMCk (talk) 16:59, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By definition. The other case would be if the driver crashes the car on purpose. Then it's not an accident. By definition. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was of course joking but here are statistics of "Collisions with fixed objects and animals" over the years confirming "this trend".--TMCk (talk) 17:43, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I recently did a lot of research on the amount of accidents between cars making left turns at intersections (USA of course) and didn't find any statistics, my interest had to do with red-light cameras and how many citations were for left turners. Raquel Baranow (talk) 17:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For years, my father used to make a left hand turn on red at a rural intersection in the Jersey Pine Barrens. Evidently he'd never noticed the old stop sign had been superceded. One day returning from the shore house by that route, an out-of state guest remarked, "So they allow left turns on red in NJ?" There was shock, then laughter, then it became a running joke. μηδείς (talk) 20:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, it's spelled superseded. Probably just a typo in your case, but a lot of people honestly think it's spelled with a c. I used to, until some years ago, when I had it pointed out to me. --Trovatore (talk) 20:44, 20 June 2016 (UTC) [reply]

See Wiktionary:supercede, which helpfully explains something about the etymology. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks guys, I kept thinking the spellchecker was broken, and I actually know enough Latin I should have figured it out, but I just gave up and hit enter. μηδείς (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a very good report on pedestrians killed by cars in the USA [2]. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:25, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another source: TRAFFIC SAFETY FACTS 2005. Got that one from the Epidemiology of motor vehicle collisions article.--TMCk ([User talk:TracyMcClark|talk]]) 17:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @TracyMcClark, SemanticMantis, Medeis, and Trovatore: and other --Aryan ( है?) 04:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, है?, my answer was basically a funny irrelevance. But I did have a friend who died driving home on the White Horse Pike when she hit a tree in Hammonton, New Jersey where two others had also died. They finally cut down the tree. μηδείς (talk) 04:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do Americans call traffic lights "traffic signals" or "stoplights"? (South Africans call them "robots"). There was a film about a man who was prosecuted after he killed someone driving through an intersection. The man protested his innocence and asked a teenage passenger to give his story. During the course of his narrative the boy said "He drove through the stoplight". The man replied "Why are you saying that? You know it's not true." The boy repeated "He drove through the stoplight". An argument then ensued. Someone else then asked the boy "What colour was the light?" and he replied "Green". 86.168.123.89 (talk) 16:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The formal and precise term would be "traffic signal", or "traffic light". The term "stop light" is often used informally. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The French, rather lyrically, call it a "signal fire" (feu de signalisation). Alansplodge (talk) 09:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of interesting discussion, but a long way from the basics. There are really three causes of road accidents: driver error, mechanical fault, and external intervention. Driver error is a significant factor in the vast majority of them (about 90% - http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/human-error-cause-vehicle-crashes). That may be down to alcohol, excess speed, or poor driving skills. If a car hits a tree, that is driver error (unless the brakes failed - though it can be argued that even mechanical failure is usually the fault of the driving not doing the maintenance properly). True external causes are limited - and animal running into the road, a tree falling, a landslide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wymspen (talk • contribs) 14:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Driver error" is actually a subset of "human error". That includes such things as pedestrians crossing the road without looking, cyclists turning right without signalling and approaching drivers falling asleep at the wheel. 80.44.160.251 (talk) 14:25, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does watch refer to a pocket watch here?

The following is taken from Aldo Leopold's "A Sand County Almanac" published in 1949: "I seat myself on a beach, facing the white wake of the morning star. I set the pot beside me. I extract a cup from my shirt front, hoping none will notice its informal mode of transport. I get out my watch, pour coffee, and lay notebook on knee." I think "watch" here should be a pocket watch rather than a wrist watch. Am I right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.128.173.24 (talk) 13:38, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Probably - but there is nothing to stop someone keeping their wristwatch in their pocket. There is nothing in the text to help identify exactly what type of watch is meant - though it must be a timepiece of some sort. Wymspen (talk) 13:59, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For all we know, it could be an ankle watch. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or even a stopwatch. Akld guy (talk) 08:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to Watch#Wristwatch they gained respectability as a man's accessory in Britain after WWI. Leopold was already in his 30's by that war's end, it's likely, given the context, he already had a pocket watch, and given the wording, there's no reason to doubt it. Both of my grandfathers, born at the turn of the century, carried pocket-watches, and my grandmothers' wrist watches were fashion accessories, not normally worn unless they were going out on the town. μηδείς (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, see Great War trench watches.

Photos of Leopold usually show him wearing casual or country clothing. Pocket watches tend to go with jackets and/or waistcoats (which I think may be called vests in the US). I would expect someone dressed like that to have a wristwatch rather than a pocket watch. Wymspen (talk) 14:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And I believe a vest is called an "undershirt" in the U S. 80.44.160.251 (talk) 14:47, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]