This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RudolfRed (talk | contribs) at 21:24, 11 January 2013 (→Jeremy Bentham). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

• WP:RD/M

Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

January 6

Non-religious/atheist given names

Please suggest some non-religious given names. --PlanetEditor (talk) 10:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Too many to list. An ordinary baby's name book will be of use. Classical names:Hector, Claudia. Celtic names, which precede any saints that carry them: Alan,, Saoirse. Germanic names: Ethel, Robert. Names taken from surnames: Clive, Bradley. Place names: Lorraine. Made-up names: Raylene. Flower and tree names: Daisy, Hazel. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:10, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Lucifer ("shining one, morning star, bringer of dawn") is kinda catchy, especially for the militantly atheistic. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:22, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Although Lucifer comes from the Old Testament, Isaiah 14:12, so not really "non-religious". Alansplodge (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The OP also asked for atheist names; I can't think of any more blatant than that (although one's offspring might object in later life). Clarityfiend (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Or Keeeith. --Saddhiyama (talk) 11:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Dweezil and Moon Unit are attractive options. Celebrities' kids are a good source of non-traditional names, but not everyone agrees the names are entirely sensible ones. --Dweller (talk) 18:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

All the Old English ones: Edward, Albert, Edwin, Alfred, Emma, Hilda, Elfrida, April, May... Just look at given names of English kings and queens up to the Norman Conquest (and just after) and you'll get some ideas. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I heard a goodie the other day: Tintagel (from "The Green Mill Murder" episode of Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries). I can just imagine some eccentric type naming his six sons Tarquin, Tintagel, Peregrine, Vespasian, Nebuchadnezzar and Rumplestiltskin. But for a real-life weird name, try Hiawatha Coleridge-Taylor (1900-1980), son of the composer Samuel Coleridge-Taylor (no relation to the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge). -- Jack of Oz 19:32, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

This genealogy forum has some corkers from the 19th and early 20th century UK censuses; 36 children registered with first name Mafeking in 1900 (at least 13 females), a few girls born in WWI called Zeppelina, 959 individuals with the forename Napoleon born in England, a William Wellington Waterloo Humbley and a William Wellington Waterloo Jackson, a Tom Tootle Plucknett born 1839 and Albert Posthumous Brown born in 1894. On the 1891 census, a child called Santa Claus and a list compiled from the 1911 census includes a 6 year old boy called Love Child Charles Wales Bull and a chauffeur called Alfred Stephen Danger Wood. Alansplodge (talk) 19:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd suggest that Santa Claus, being derived from Saint Nicholas, is quite religious. HiLo48 (talk) 20:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's true. I had lost sight of the original question and was just going for the amusing ones. I'll go and stand in the corner. Alansplodge (talk) 22:22, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

We need an article for a Canadian/US pianist named Waugh Lauder. Sounds exactly like "Warlorder". What were his parents thinking? Then there was Voltaire Molesworth. -- Jack of Oz 20:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Waugh Lauder doesn't sound anything like "Warlorder" in Canadian English. --NellieBlyMobile (talk) 18:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, and my nephew thinks Mary Maugham sounds exactly like Merry Mom and Marry Ma'am. But it doesn't. μηδείς (talk) 20:45, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Charlton Heston is named after two London suburbs. Itsmejudith (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you guys. --PlanetEditor (talk) 01:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Whole bunch here. "Number 16 Bus Shelter" is the most ridiculous one. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

J M Barrie invented the name Wendy for the book Peter Pan. HiLo48 (talk) 09:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

That's a nice story - but our article "Wendy" begs to differ: "The name is found in United States records from the 19th century; the name Wendy appeared over twenty times in the U.S. Census of 1880" - Peter Pan was written in 1904. SteveBaker (talk) 21:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd always accepted the Barrie claim at face value, too. But it's clear all he did was to popularise it as a girl's name (it was previously better known as a male name or a surname). Amazing how this got translated into "Barrie invented the name". -- Jack of Oz 22:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Not even that...it was short for the female name "Gwendolyn" even before he used it - and that name had been around since the thirteenth century and was well known in England from the 1860's. SteveBaker (talk) 14:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I see xkcd has some at  ;-) I can't see that one should be worried, I go and listen to choirs singing masses and I'm an atheist. Dmcq (talk) 15:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

163rd Depot Brigade

Where can I find information about the 163rd Depot Brigade, an World War One unit?--*xia9jan (talk) 17:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Thanks!

Thunder Phoenix. LoL 203.112.82.1 (talk) 17:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure that you're right about an "all African American" unit. According to this book, The 88th Division in the World War of 1914-1918, Wynkoop Hallenbeck Crawford Company, New York 1919 (p.29) it was the base unit for the 88th Division, through which recruits were posted to the front line units in the division, and a home for specialists and those unfit for active service. It was formed at Camp Dodge near Des Moines, Iowa in June 1917. Presumably it followed the division to France, but you'd have to read the book properly to find out - just click the pages to turn them. The book includes a long list of names of all those who served in the division. Alansplodge (talk) 19:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, a bit more digging and I found Black soldiers in WW1 (92nd & 93rd Divisions), which mentions two African American soldiers who were sent to 163rd Depot Brigade at Camp Dodge, before being posted to a front-line Pioneer Infantry Battalion in 92nd Division, the "Buffalo Soldiers Division". So it looks as though the 163rd were the staging unit at Camp Dodge, feeding men to various divisions in France. This page (second entry) confirms that 163 Bgde were still at Dodge in April 1918. I suspect that the various units within the brigade would have been racially segregated; perhaps someone with more knowledge of the US Army in World War I can comment please? Alansplodge (talk) 19:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

According to McGrath, 'The Brigade,' ..'ith the large number of draftees coming into the Army in 1917, a specialized brigade was established, the depot brigade. These brigades, organized for each National Guard and National Army division, processed new draftees and provided basic training. Each depot brigade had from two to seven training battalions, though some were organized with one or two training regiments as well. These units were eventually removed from divisions and placed directly under cantonment commanders.' The Brigade: Its Organization and Employment in the US Army: A History, John J. McGrath, Combat Studies Institute Press Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, 2004, p.35. It appears that the 163rd Depot Brigade was the depot brigade for the 88th Div. The U.S. Army was not desegregated until after World War II, so units almost certainly were segregated. Buckshot06 (talk) 04:53, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Alansplodge (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Women dress type

Is there a specific name for the upper cloth of Kitana, Mileena and Jade from MK 3 onwards (with that type of laced decolté)? thanks--93.174.25.12 (talk) 21:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

January 7

Most popular leisure-time activity in Switzerland in 1920

What was the most popular leisure-time activity in Switzerland in 1920? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.170.206 (talk) 01:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Making little Swiss people. --Jayron32 02:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

For outdoor activities, I imagine winter sports like skiing and skating. StuRat (talk) 04:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

"Winter sports" is a wide category, but my impression is that in actual snowy/icy regions most such activities were, until somewhat into the 20th century, just ways of getting around, and that it was (largely Anglo-saxon) holidaying foreigners who transformed them into "sports." I'd therefore be cautious about assuming any were native "leisure activities" in the Switzerland of 1920. The OP might want to click through the link above to the individual sports listed, and read up their histories. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 84.21.143.150 (talk) 12:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see them being ways if getting around being incompatible with them also being leisure-time activities. Back when horses were the primary mode of transportation, people still went horseback-riding for fun, too. StuRat (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but there's a big difference between cross-country skiing (originally a means of getting around) and downhill skiing (originally a pointless entertainment for British people with more money than sense). I think I'm right in saying that skiing-as-transport was a Scandinavian thing anyway. Alansplodge (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I've done cross-country skiing for fun and exercise, so it's not just about transportation. StuRat (talk) 00:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. But the sort of skiing done in Switzerland in the 1920s was downhill by wealthy tourists. Alansplodge (talk) 09:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

But didn't the Swiss already have cross-country skis for getting around in winter ? If so, it seems reasonable to think they might have occasionally taken unnecessary trips with them, in winter, just as people sometimes go for walks when they don't need to, in summer. StuRat (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Try reading the local paper - several are available online. For example the Gazette de Lausanne for 1 Apr 1920 is available here. Read the advertisements too - they're probably more useful than the news in answering your question. Zoonoses (talk) 04:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Skiing. Rebel Yeh (talk) 07:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Swiss people in 1920 were a lot less affluent than they are today, and most would not have had much money for "leisure activities". As such, the top leisure activities of most Swiss people would have been the following: playing with one's children; for men, chatting with friends in the local pub over a beer or a glass of wine; for women, chatting with friends in one another's kitchens with baked sweets and some kind of beverage; mostly but not exclusively for men, fishing in a local lake or river; for women, doing some kind of creative craft such as embroidery; for men, doing a creative craft such as woodcarving. Marco polo (talk) 17:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Rental car keys

I recently had to rent a car. The key ring, which was permanently closed, had both keys and both fobs on it. (along with the rental company's id tag with make/model/license plate number/etc) Why do they do this? It's effectively only one key now and if I had a second driver, they wouldn't be able to keep a key for themselves. Also, I had this huge mass of plastic and metal to stuff into my pocket. Why not keep a key at the rental agency? Is the idea here like when businesses tape a spoon or other item onto their pens so that people don't stick them in their pocket and walk off with them? Or when the key for the bathroom at a gas station has a huge stick chained to it so that it's not lost? Dismas| 03:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

They probably didn't think it through. They have all these keys for one vehicle, and they want to keep them together, so that's what works best for them. They never thought of it from the customer's perspective. I might be tempted to break out the bolt cutters (although they might charge a thousand dollar fine for damaging their 10 cent key ring).

I had a similar silly key practice imposed on me, this time by the manufacturer of the car. They provided separate keys to unlock the passenger compartment and the trunk, thus allowing you to give only your passenger compartment key to a valet, and keep them from fishing through your trunk for valuables. Good idea. Then they added a button in the passenger compartment to unlock the trunk. :-) StuRat (talk) 03:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Does your trunk-release lever have a lock on it? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 09:53, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

That was an old car, and I don't believe it had a lock, no. My current car does have a lock on the trunk release button, but only has a single key for both passenger compartment and trunk. This doesn't make sense, either, as any valet will have the passenger compartment key, which is also the key to the trunk, and unlocks the button, as well. So, that lock accomplishes nothing. StuRat (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

My current vehicle has two keys. Both of them open the doors and operate the ignition, but only one works on the trunk. I do not understand how this is done, though.    → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 15:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

That could be just mechanical, with an extra (or missing) groove for the trunk lock. You should be able to see the difference by a careful comparison of the grooves on the keys. My last few car keys have had transponders that have to send a matched radio signal to the ignition system before the car will start. I was thus able to make copy keys that would open the mechanical locks but would not start the car (useful for regular passengers). Some high-end cars (not mine!) have valet keys that limit engine revs via the transponder, as well as not fitting the trunk (boot). Dbfirs 19:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

For my car (a MINI Cooper) - there is a software patch you can get installed that limits engine RPM and the distance that the car can be driven when in "valet parking" mode. SteveBaker (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I once lost the key to a rental car (long, bad, bad story!) - the rental company told me that they had no idea where the spare key for the car was because the vehicle goes from one rental office to another almost randomly and there is no means for them to get the spare key to go along with it. Since they do eventually sell those cars - and because the keys have become quite expensive - it does make sense to keep them all fixed together like that so that they stay with the car at all times - even though it does seem kinda nonsensical. SteveBaker (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I have an even worse car key related horror story. Somebody bought a car from the dealership, then, when it ran low on gas, they went to a gas station, only to discover it had a device on the gas cap to lock it shut, and prevent siphoning, which the dealer failed to remove when it was sold. The dealership was now closed, and they didn't have the gas needed to get there, in any case. I now give cars an extremely thorough check when I pick them up from the dealership, looking for this and any other problems, before I accept the car. StuRat (talk) 00:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

KHS Hall, Taiwan

This is just a quick question. Does anyone know the address of the KHS Hall in Taipei, Taiwan? I tried searching online and on Google Maps, but I get few relevant hits, although it appears to be in Luzhou. There appear to not even be any images of it online (or at least of the exterior). Also, what does "KHS" mean in its name? Is it related to a Taiwanese music company named Kong Hsue Sheh? Narutolovehinata5 11:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

According to its website, the address it 新北市蘆洲區中山二路162號2樓, which translates to 2nd Floor, No. 162, Zhongshan 2nd Road, Luzhou District, New Taipei City. Here are some (small) images of the exterior. KHS is short for "Kong Hsue She" (gongxueshe), 功学社 or 攻學社, see here. —Kusma (t·c) 13:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Nudity questions

I recently attended my first ever nude photography workshop. I was there with eight other photographers, including the workshop instructor. There were four nude models, all female, presumably 25 to 30 years old. As the workshop cost 240 €, I don't think I'm attending another one quite soon. This brought to my mind several questions:

1. I now have almost 900 photographs of the models. Assuming I get the models' permission, should I upload some of them to Wikimedia Commons? I have no intention of selling them to commercial parties.
2. How much do female nude models generally charge from photoshoots, per day? Keep in mind I'm not talking about top quality Playboy models here, but about models you'd expect to see at nude photography workshops at education institutions or photography associations.
3. One of the models was quite thin and small-breasted. This brought to my mind a question: What exactly can a woman do to control the size of her breasts, apart from surgery? Or is there anything at all?
4. Last, a rather silly question: It came to my mind that humans are the only species that normally wears clothes. Had any other species developed photography, the workshop wouldn't have been any special. When exactly did humans start wearing clothes? Is it known in any way? JIP | Talk 19:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

For last question, see Clothing#Origin of clothing --Jayron32 19:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I added numbers to your Q's, for ease of response:

3) Lots of things. How much a woman weighs disproportionately effects breast size. And, being mostly a reservoir of fat, the percentage of body fat is particularly important. Thus, athletes will often have smaller breasts. Hormones can directly affect breast size, and are often given to transgender (male -> female) individuals. There are also a host of products claiming to increase breast size, most of which are probably scams. Then there are many products to increase the appearance of breast size, many of which work well, like push-up bras, padded bras, etc. StuRat (talk) 20:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

For the first question, the models probably signed a contract and a release form setting out the terms under which they modeled. You should check with your instructor or whoever arranged the workshop to ask about those terms. They may not allow electronic distribution of the models' images. Marco polo (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec) For question #3: Women's breasts get larger toward the end of pregnancy...and they typically only reduce in size by a lesser amount once the child is weaned...so I suppose that's one way (albeit a little drastic!)

For question #1: You might also want to check the terms & conditions of the workshop itself - they might easily have imposed some restrictions on what you can do with the images. (I kinda doubt that WikiCommons needs any more photos of naked people - that area of photography seems more than usually complete!) SteveBaker (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

The quality of nude photos on commons isn't always very high, though, so photos taken at a professional workshop will probably be above average quality. The problem with nude photos is that there really isn't much variety. Once you have photos of a man and a woman from a handful of angles, you've pretty much got all you need for our purposes - despite what certain parts of the media may want us to think, we all look pretty much the same with our clothes off... --Tango (talk) 23:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The amount paid varies a lot from place to place and model to model. For standard "we have artists who want to learn to draw" nude modeling, it's apparently not very much, like $50 to $100 for a session (typically an hour or so, though of course that varies as well). If you're good at it (and some people are definitely better than others, physical appearance aside), you can make a little more and/or get get a few more sessions a week, but it would not be something anyone could live off of. I've seen sessions of nude photography where payment is essentially getting a (professional) set of the pictures, with no cash changed hands at all. Supply and demand, I guess. Matt Deres (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Model agency scams

Odd then that many modeling agencies demand fees from impressionable young women to take a portfolio of photographs. Astronaut (talk) 17:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

How is that odd? A lot of people have an inflated sense of their own attractiveness. Charging such people weeds out the unserious ones. People who are attractive enough actually to make money modelling are usually recruited by agents or agencies willing to pay for their photographs for them. μηδείς (talk) 21:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a scam. They tell any woman they could be a model if they just had a portfolio done, and collect their fee, knowing full well that person just wasted their money. StuRat (talk) 21:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

How is it a scam? The model pays for a portfolio of pictures, the agency takes the pictures and collects the cash. It seems like a straightforward business transaction, the agency provides the service they are contracted for, and the model gets the pictures they wanted taken. It would only be a scam if the agency didn't provide the service they claimed (i.e. they never took the pictures, they just took the payment and skipped town) or if the service was a front for nefarious purposes (i.e. as a front for pornography; getting women into compromising situations and taking advantage of them). However, there's no problem with an agency providing pictures for someone who pays for them, even if they stand little chance of working as a professional model. --Jayron32 21:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a scam because while there are legitimate photo studios where the client pays for the photographer's skill, and legitimate model agencies which pay for the model's features and skills, the 'businesses' under discussion falsely claim to be, or to provide access to, the latter, while actually operating more like the former. And I'm not sure it's good for the market - the scam agencies deprive the legitimate photographers of business while harming the reputation of the genuine agencies. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The scam is that they misrepresent the chances of the person becoming a model as a result of having their pictures taken, so that it looks like a good investment, when it is actually a poor investment. It's really no different than if a company said their stock's average return rate was much higher than it really is, thus inducing you to buy. StuRat (talk) 21:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

On the other hand, just because a young woman enters into one of these transactions in the deluded belief that she will next month be the latest "supermodel", does not make the arrangement a scam. It all depends on exactly what services the agency is offering for the money it charges. -- Jack of Oz 21:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe it also depends on whether they make false statements. If they claim 95% of their clients went on to become professional models, when none did, and this can be proven, they may be open to charges of fraud. StuRat (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I separated this to its own section because it has deviated off the topic of nude photography workshops a bit now. JIP | Talk 05:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

January 8

Campaign medals

Why do two WWII campaign medals extend eligibility to March 2, 1946. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.130.78.13 (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I assume that you're referring to things like the American Campaign Medal. The obvious answer is that war-related activities (and thus service) did not cease immediately upon the formal end of the war in September 1945. A date of six months after the formal Japanese surrender on September 2 was apparently thought appropriate. Deor (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

They probably thought it was long enough for returning POW's and soldiers to get back home. Unfortunately (as was the case with my father) it took years for some people to return from some theatres of war.--TammyMoet (talk) 14:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I have created a header for this question. Matt Deres (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The draft system for WWII continued until Oct. 1946 although the numbers drafted fell off rapidly. Soldiers were required for occupation duties in several countries - the American sector of Germany, Japan, Korea, etc. Rmhermen (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Another point is that, while VE Day and VJ Day were widely celebrated as "the end of the war" (but even with just those two, we already have room for confusion), a number of countries remained technically at war with other countries for some years after 1945. -- Jack of Oz 19:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Worth mentioning is that neither of those dates marks the actual end of combat operations. In Europe, the Battle of Poljana took place a week later, while in the Pacific, the last combat involving an organized Japanese force took place in March of 1947. --Carnildo (talk) 03:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

As usual, the British requirements were more rigorous (or parsimonious depending on your viewpoint). The end date for qualification for the Atlantic Star and France and Germany Star was 8 May 1945 (Victory in Europe Day exactly), and for the Burma Star and Pacific Star it was 2 September 1945 (the exact day when the Japanese Instrument of Surrender was signed). Alansplodge (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The Moment of Truth unaired episodes

Are they gonna show those 5 unaired episodes of The Moment of Truth ever on TV? Or continue series? 62.72.230.103 (talk) 15:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

We really couldn't tell you, I'm afraid. (Although, that said, the Entertainment Desk would have been the place to ask this question anyway. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

data entry job

Is the infobuzzle website is fake or real ? please tell me that.I want to join to work . they want Rs. 500/- as registration fees. please help.Rikisupriyo (talk) 16:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know how genuine the site is but a piece of practical advice is that most job offers that ask for cash in advance are scams. There may be exceptions but it is a safe general rule. If they won't deduct your registration fee from your first pay, then there is something wrong. Gurumaister (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks real but could so easily be scam. In many countries, asking for this kind of registration fee is illegal, but I don't know what the situation is in India. To earn Rs.500 (about US$ 9) you need to fill 250 forms and, if each takes a minute to do, that'll be over 4 hours solid work at a keyboard with no breaks for lunch, refreshments, smoking, chatting, facebook, email, toilet, etc; note that the infobuzzle home page has an earnings chart which suggests this would be around 2.5 hours work, but the maths simply doesn't add up. You might be able to do that in a day and it is above the minimum daily wage in New Delhi, but you would be laying yourself open to RSI and it all assumes there is enough work sent your way to do that many forms in a day. A better way of earning Rs.500 would appear to be getting people to register with your website for Rs.500 each. Astronaut (talk) 17:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

You could search for infobuzzle fake or infobuzzle scam ... —Tamfang (talk) 19:50, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Medals

Getting an official medal for something is a very important event. But other than the honour, prestige, and reputation, is there any practical benefit in being given a medal? I know that some medals, such as the Nobel Prize or the Fields Medal, carry monetary prizes, but is this true for all medals? What about military decorations? JIP | Talk 18:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

It depends, but usually "not much". In some countries, there are incidental benefits - highly decorated military veterans are given small legal privileges, or a nominal annual payment as a supplement to a service pension. In India, holders of a number of military decorations are exempt from national highway tolls. (The signs for this are great - towering outside the tollbooth, and starting with i) THE PRESIDENT, just in case they were coming by and happened to forget they didn't need to pay)

In the UK, the Victoria Cross carries a small pension, instituted in the late nineteenth century to stave off the embarrassment of ex-soldiers appearing on music-hall stages to capitalise on the fame associated with the award. It's tax-exempt, and that particular exemption mentions a number of other military decorations where related payments are explicitly exempted from income tax. Our articles don't mention annuities for several of these, though (eg the Military Cross) so it's possible that this is something now discontinued. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:03, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

In sports, having a medal, especially an Olympic gold medal, could greatly increase your earning potential, provided it was in the right sport. Such people were highly sought after as coaches and performers, in shows like the Ice Capades and it's successors. Similarly, Nobel prizes and such could make the person more marketable on the lecture circuit. Also, some medals themselves can be sold for quite a bit of money, if it comes down to that. StuRat (talk) 21:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

In many branches of the U.S. military (and, I suspect, in other nations' armed forces, too) decorations count directly toward the scores used to determine promotions among enlisted personnel. For instance, the Air Force uses the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) for promotions to grades E-5 through E-7; up to 25 points are scored for the soldier's decorations. (The Achievement Medal is worth 1 point; the Medal of Honor is good for 15 points; other awards fall somewhere in between.) While the soldier doesn't receive a direct monetary reward for possessing the decoration, eligibility for earlier and/or more rapid promotion (with associated increase in pay grade and ultimately in pension) is certainly a substantial indirect financial benefit. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

U.S. military enlisted may enter at a higher grade if they earned Eagle Scout, Quartermaster Award, Silver Award, Gold Award or Billy Mitchell Award. --— Gadget850 (Ed) 00:04, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Winning a Newbery Medal or Caldecott Medal will certainly lead to extra sales and, therefore, bigger royalties. Rmhermen (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

@ Gadget, do you have a source for that? It seems unlikely that an award like that of Eagle Scout available only to heterosexual religious males would stand as a preferential criterion for enlistment nowadays. μηδείς (talk) 04:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

A source is given right on the Eagle Scout page. Open it and search for "Eagle Scout". Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 04:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I see they have a Girl Scout award too, but the religious part of the Boy Scout oath and whatever their stance on homosexuality is this week seems to make preferential treatment to those given an award from a private "moral" institution an endorsement of religion. μηδείς (talk) 04:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

sale date

What do a sale date on your house mean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrvision (talk • contribs) 19:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The date when the house became yours, usually when you passed papers on it. This can be important, especially for tax purposes, where it comes to calculating who owes what in property taxes. --Jayron32 21:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Where? HiLo48 (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Somewhere. --Jayron32 23:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Ha! DRosenbach 02:53, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Missing your inauguration

So Chavez will his inauguration as President of Venezuela. Have there been other examples of the same situation and how were they resolved? Rmhermen (talk) 23:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

You've missed a "miss", Miss.  :) -- Jack of Oz 00:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

fixed Rmhermen (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

In the US, at least, the President elect only has to say a brief pledge to uphold and protect the Constitution. There's no requirement that they stand outside in the cold to do so, that's just tradition. If they weren't able to say the pledge even from a hospital bed, then that would bring up the Q as to whether they are able to perform the duties of office. StuRat (talk) 03:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The President can be sworn in anywhere, especially if the previous President croaked. Coolidge was sworn in at home by his own father, who was a judge; LBJ did it on an airplane. I doubt very much if the early presidents, especially the notoriously shy Jefferson, gave a speech out in the cold. Harrison gave the longest speech and had the shortest presidency, as a direct result. Someone, possibly Richard Armour, defined the inauguration as "a ceremony where the president stands out in the cold and rain without a hat on." ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The best part in the US is the President doesn't even need to mean it. μηδείς (talk) 06:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

They don't have time to read it, they're too busy defending it. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 07:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Here's a situation very similar to what is happening in Venezuela: In Brazil, Tancredo Neves was elected President in January 1985, but became severely ill the day before his scheduled inauguration (which was to take place on March 15). Vice President-elect José Sarney took the oath of office as Vice President and immediately became acting President. Neves never recovered and died before he could be sworn in, on April 21, at which point Sarney was sworn in as President. --Xuxl (talk) 10:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

So why not travel to Cuba and get the whole inauguration done from Chavez's hospital bed; or does the inauguration have to take place in the home country? Just the bare minimum needed to make it legal - maybe the Vice President, church and legal representatives, and someone to carry out the inauguration - plus some hangers on like relatives and the press core. It'll be a bit like getting your relatives to that caribbean island for your wedding ceremony) Astronaut (talk) 13:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

As I understand it, Venezuela's Supreme Tribunal of Justice (which is appointed by a legislature where Chavez's party holds a majority) has held that the Chavez government can continue even without an official inauguration ceremony. In other words, not having an inauguration has no real consequence, at least in the short-term. Of course, if he is unable to lead, then power devolves to the vice president, which seems to be the more salient point at the moment since it is unclear if Chavez is ever going to recover. Dragons flight (talk) 12:45, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

January 9

can i print with my kindle

How do i print with my kindle? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.199.211 (talk) 01:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Try running an ink roller over it and pressing it onto a piece of paper. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I doubt that you can. They wouldn't want you making illegal copies of books. Of course, you could always take pictures of the screen and print those, but that hardly seems worth the effort and expense. StuRat (talk) 03:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure there is no way to do it directly. If you have access to a PC, you can download the Kindle software from Amazon and you'll have access to all of your books from the PC as well as the kindle itself. Then you can use the PrintScreen function to print one screenfull at a time. Painful - but OK for short sections. Printing more than a small percentage of most books would be illegal under copyright law anyway...although there are plenty of Kindle books that are out of copyright. SteveBaker (talk) 03:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Here I thought it was the Kindle that wasn't worth the effort and expense. μηδείς (talk) 04:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The 'classic' kindle's screen is by far the best way to read an electronic book yet devised, the 200+ hour battery life and the totally free-for-life unlimited-data cellular Internet access provided on the early versions is spectacularly useful in a bind. Don't think of it as a very limited tablet computer...it's not...think of it as an electronic book with a few extra goodies. SteveBaker (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

And, contrary to the name, they don't even make good kindling. :-) StuRat (talk) 07:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Chopped-up small German children are the best things to get fires started. That's where the word "kindling" came from, you know. Jack of Oz 12:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

This probably should have been on the Computer desk. However, to print them is trivial. Instead if installing the Kindle software install calibre (software). Import all your books into Calibre and convert them all to text files. You can then print them out. Of course this will only work for books without Digital rights management. There are ways around the DRM but it's probably illegal. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 13:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, almost every Kindle book that's out of copyright (generally they are the $0.00 downloads on Amazon.com with 'generic' front covers) was downloaded from Project Gutenberg (http://gutenberg.org) - where there are over 40,000 out-of-copyright ebooks that can be printed (in full, legally) from within your browser. Project Gutenberg is a fantastic resource - it deserves as much support as Misplaced Pages from volunteers who care about the preservation and publication of human knowledge and culture. SteveBaker (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

online job

I want part time online job . please tell me some trusted online part time job site. I'm from india .Rikisupriyo (talk) 02:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

That's a difficult question because it depends on what skills you have. Jobs that can be done online, from home (or whatever) that also require minimal skills tend to be outsourced to places where labor rates are incredibly low - even the relatively low wage expectations in India are proving too much to compete with yet lower paying countries. Hence most sites that are offering this kind of thing are scams. If you have skills appropriate to online work (computer programming, for example), then there are specialist agencies that handle this kind of thing. There are other kinds of business you can start yourself - web page designers, for example (again, you need a certain skill-set for that). SteveBaker (talk) 03:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

You asked yesterday about a specific provider of this kind of work. I think the same cautionary advice applies in a more general sense too. Astronaut (talk) 13:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

FAA DI BRUNO

ME GUSTARIA SABER SOBRE FAA DI BRUNO, SI TIENE FAMILIA EN PROVINCIA DE BUENOS AIRES DE ARGENTINA...

DESDE YA MUCHAS GRACIAS....

MARTA DESDE MERCEDES, BUENOS AIRES. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.105.49.212 (talk) 02:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm - first, this is the English language wikipedia - if you need to ask questions in other languages, you'll need to find your language's equivalent. Secondly, typing questions in ALL CAPITALS tends to make them hard to read - which annoys many respondents. I fixed your formatting problems! SteveBaker (talk) 03:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I am guessing the OP is speaking Spanish, in which case Marta from Mercedes, Buenos Aires, Argentina, is asking if we can tell her anything about FAA DI BRUNO; if he/she has family in the same province. Not rocket science or the occasion for an abrupt response. Not that I intend to google the answer myself for her either. μηδείς (talk) 05:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

in SteveBaker's defence that didn't seem abrupt to me - he was just explaining the etiquet of this board... Didn't type anything rude or condecending... gazhiley 09:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

This may or may not help: Faà di Bruno ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Cricket

As a 30-something born and bred American, I can barely understand even the opening paragraph of the article on Cricket. I actually find it funny that one has to redirect towards the insect -- to me, it's "also" a game, not "also" an insect. Anyway, I found the article quite confusing nearly to the point that I still have no idea what's going on or who stands where, when they do it and well...how to play cricket properly. My question is -- is it just that it seems difficult, or is it actually way more complex than, say, American baseball? I'd consider American football way more complex than baseball -- is it even more complex than that? Or is it just that I've had about zero exposure to it and it's really no more complex at all? DRosenbach 02:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Although many of my fellow countrymen would probably like to lynch me for saying it...there isn't all that much difference between cricket and baseball. Cricket has two bases instead of four. Aside from that, you could watch a game, happily assuming you were watching two-base-baseball.

As for the redirect - there are large parts of the world where those insects either don't exist - or are considered (incorrectly) to be grasshoppers, and cricket (the sport) is played by far more people in the world than baseball - so your idea that a marginal sport is redirecting to a majorly important insect is a very US-centric view - for most people in the world, the sport is major and the insect minor.

(Hmmm - Cricket (insect) has no mention of the range of this animal.)

SteveBaker (talk) 03:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

It is not clear from our articles that anywhere lacks crickets. The invasive house cricket from Asia, the African/Mediterranean cricket, the lucky crickets of China, etc. Perhaps they are missing from the UK? Rmhermen (talk) 04:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

There are crickets in the UK, but they are not particularly common - . Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree that it's absurd that the sport gets naming priority, but consider the fact that a full 5% of wikipedia articles are about soccer players and you will know all you need to. μηδείς (talk) 03:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The intro makes perfect sense to me, but I know something about cricket. But as Steve indicates, on a very high level there are many similarities between cricket and baseball. There is even an article Comparison between baseball and cricket which you may find useful. Also, if you look back in the histories of these two sports, they were even more similar in the early 1800s. I recommend giving cricket a chance. And once you understand the game, you may be able to improve the intro to make it more understandable to someone unfamiliar with the game. P.S. I find cricket way, way much more interesting than soccer. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 03:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Soccer is more fun to watch when tackling and clotheslining are allowed. μηδείς (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

That already goes on a lot, except it's in the stands. Someone once said that Rugby football improved on Soccer football, and American football improved on Rugby football. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 05:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Brits like me may need to read wikt:clothesline to understand what they're on about.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The spp. of the genus Rugby (genus authority Ellis, 1876) though varying in distribution, all share a common phylogeny expressed as an oval ball that is more commonly thrown than kicked to advance a team's position.

Species include:

• Rugby americanus
• Rugby canadiensus
• Rugby rugby (the type species)
• Rugby yorkshirenus

For personal reasons I don't want to discuss, I'm a huge Packers fan. Recently saw a Packers game on TV, and there was a Field goal play, and it was pretty much identical to a rugby union or rugby league drop goal set play.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) What SteveBaker said. I'm an American, but have watched and read about Cricket some. It's really not that hard to understand. Here's the basic rules:

• The playing surface consists of a big grass oval with a dirt strip down the middle. At either end of the dirt strip is a wicket, which is three long sticks stuck in the ground topped by two short sticks over the gaps between them.
• At any one time, there's a team with the ball and a team with the bats: The team with the bats can score runs, and the team with the ball is trying to put them out. Whatever team has the ball has all of their players on the field at once; while the batting team has two players on the field at once.
• Play starts with the bowler (analogous to a pitcher in American baseball), who stands by one wicket, throwing the ball at the other wicket. The batsman tries to defend his wicket by deflecting the ball away from the wicket. The batsman is out if the ball knocks down part of the wicket, or if he hits the ball and it is caught on the fly. Otherwise, if the batsman puts the ball in play, he has the option to run at the other wicket. Standing at the other wicket is another batsman; so if the striking batsman puts the ball in play, the two batsman exchange places. Every time they exchange places counts as a run. Any number of runs (from zero on up) can be scored, but if the wicket is left unguarded by a batsman, any fielder can knock it over and put a batsman out, so batsman will stop running if the wicket is threatened.
• Once a batsman is out, he is replaced by another batsman from his own team; until there's no one left to replace him. (Thus, a team bats until there's one batsman left, you need two to field a batting team).
• Each bowler can bowl six balls in a row (called an over) before he has to be replaced by another bowler. There's no rules on how often a bowler can bowl, except that a bowler cannot bowl two consecutive overs.
• The team with the most runs at the end of the match wins. The end of the match is defined differently for different forms of cricket:

• Test cricket is the longest, most grueling, and highest level of the sport. A single match can last most of a week, as this version has unlimited overs and four innings. That means that each team gets to bat twice, and continues to bat until all batsmen (save one) are out: a team can bat all day and not have all of their batsmen retired.
• Limited overs cricket is designed to be played in a single day, and limits the number of overs in an innings, so as to shorten the game: these games are still usually pretty long, but don't last longer than 1 day, but an innings can end before all of a teams batsmen are dismissed.
• Twenty20 is a recent innovation, it is both limited overs and limited in time: it's a two-innings game, and a team must complete 20 overs in 75 minutes. This makes the matches much faster paced, and the shorter time makes it possible to watch a whole match on TV in a single sitting, something only the most dedicated fans could so in the longer forms of the game.

Does that help? --Jayron32 04:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, very helpful, but in response to "Any number of runs (from zero on up) can be scored, but if the wicket is left unguarded by a batsman, any fielder can knock it over and put a batsman out, so batsman will stop running if the wicket is threatened", how do batsmen actually "defend" the wickets? It's obviously physically impossible to stop a fielder from knocking one down without really nasty physical violence. μηδείς (talk) 04:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

With their bats. The wicket may only be knocked down by the ball. If the batter is in the proper position (behind their crease, a line on the ground that defines them as "safe") then the only person who can knock down the wicket is the bowler. The bowler bowls the ball at the wicket, trying to get it past the batter. The batter swings the bat and tries to deflect the bowled ball so that it doesn't hit the wicket. Once the batter leaves their crease (in an attempt to score runs), then any fielder can knock down the wicket with the ball: they can do so by throwing the ball at the wicket, or but knocking the wicket over with the ball in hand. Once the batsman (or his bat) is over the crease line, then the non-bowling fielders can no longer get him out. --Jayron32 04:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes perfect sense now. μηδείς (talk) 05:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Laws of the game are available here. Zoonoses (talk) 04:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

If the stumps (the small wooden bits at the top of the wickets) fall, the batsman is out. This includes if he accidentally hits them himself, not just the ball. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

You mean bails, KT. The bails sit on top of the stumps, and the bails and stumps collectively make a wicket. If the wicket is 'broken' and the bails removed, the batsman is out. Not to be confused with the wicket, meaning the strip of prepared grass/dirt upon which the game is played. See wicket - Cucumber Mike (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, thanks for the correction. You've bailed me out there. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, if we're getting that specific, there are times when parts of the wicket can fall but the batsman would still not be dismissed. For example, if the ball were in play, and a gust of wind blew the bails off, or if a fielder accidentally bumped the wicket, then play would continue, though the fielders would now need to physically remove one of the stumps to get the batter out. --Jayron32 13:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The games diverged so long ago trying to understand cricket with baseball comparisons is generally unhelpful. Just watch a few matches - you'll pick it up. You didn't figure out baseball by reading our baseball article. Zoonoses (talk) 04:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

You do realize that most Americans, unless they pay a ridiculous rate for a pay-TV cricket package, or spend time looking for, travelling to, and actually watching cricket for hours, are going to find that advice fatally unhelpful? Jayron's explanation was wonderfully clear on the other hand. μηδείς (talk) 05:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Presumably, any American with access to Misplaced Pages also has access to YouTube, where there are hundreds, nay, probably thousands of opportunities to watch Cricket. Americans do not necessarily have to hunt for an obscure sports channel on a cable system. There are even edited videos on YouTube that cut out some of the boring bits, so you can get the gist in a short while. --Jayron32 05:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but I generally find sports boring, and your explanation quite economical. Why spend hours watching when less than a minute's reading of a good encyclopedian's comments serve even better? μηδείς (talk) 05:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Baseball is played by little girls in England. Cricket is for men. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Except for British baseball which is played by men. --Jayron32 05:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec) Also, to add to Jayron's excellent explanation, in the longer games a team which is batting first can retire at any moment. If they get, say, 300 runs, and don't think the opposing team will get that far, they can choose to become the bowling/fielding team. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Is that supposed to be risible or insulting, KägeTorä? μηδείς (talk) 05:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Not at all. I was merely pointing out a major difference between baseball and cricket, though Jayron corrected me above. I did not know we had baseball teams here in England, despite being a resident of Liverpool, where apparently it's most popular. We played Rounders when we were kids, but I've never heard of adults playing it. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The reference to "little girls" seemed dismissive, especially when the article referred to children. Of course I knew a Scot who called his sons ladies. It was only years later I figured out he was saying "laddies". Are boys called girls in Liverpool? μηδείς (talk) 05:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, i did not mean to sound like that, it's just that is actually how it was. I went to a boys' secondary school, where we played a version of this in PE class using a soft football. In my street when I was younger, most of the kids were girls, and we lived in a cul-de-sac, which was perfect for rounders, so we just played that all the time. We had nothing else to do. No internet, no Xbox, no mobile phones, just a ball and a bat, and coats we could throw on the ground to use as bases. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Not at all. I fucking (bloody?) hate political correctness; I only had the article to go by. I just wanted to be perfectly clear. My favorite '70's/'80's activities pre-pubescence were beating up the boys and eating insects, spiders, and minnows alive. Pong came out when I was 10 and Atari when I was 12. μηδείς (talk) 06:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Brits have often teased Americans about baseball being a schoolgirls game in Britain. There's a fair amount of truth in that. In the early 1800s, in addition to actual cricket, there were a couple of major variations of baseball played in the northeast - the "New York game" and the "Massachusetts game". The former was more like modern baseball. The latter was more like rounders than the New York game was, and it eventually faded. Cricket lost popularity in America as baseball developed. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 07:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

We played American Football in PE class many times, but without the helmets and body armour. It started off as American Football, but the rules were not explained to us properly, so it diverged into Rugby, then every time it just ended up like a massive bar fight. Scores were really low, because nobody actually even cared where the ball was. I remember the headmaster coming out and asking what was going on, as we were all attacking each other, and the PE teacher just said, "At least they are getting some exercise." before going back into the school and leaving us to it. There was no hard feelings between any of us afterwards (my teeth were broken once, but that just meant I got the rest of the day off school to visit the dentist - this was actually done in the changing room, and had nothing to do with the game). KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

For an Australian women's sport that re-unifies aspects of both baseball and cricket, see Vigoro.--Shirt58 (talk) 08:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

It really is literally the alternative to cricket for girls. Our school didn't let us play cricket in PE, not even once, as we had to play rounders when the boys played cricket. Really annoying, as cricket is one of the few sports I could have done quite well in. I'm hopeless with a rounders bat, and pretty decent with a cricket bat: hopeless at bowling in rounders, but okay at bowling in cricket. They did let us play rugby for a year, though, before relegating us to hockey. And football briefly before funnelling us into netball forever. 86.140.54.211 (talk) 20:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Two other questions, Jayron (or whomever) (1) Can the batter bunt? (2) Is there a set number of batters per type of game, or are the teams simply equal by mutual agreement, or can teams have uneven numbers? μηδείς (talk) 05:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

There is no equivalent of the "bunt" in cricket. The batter can hit the ball as hard or as soft as he chooses; there are advantages and disadvantages towards how the batter may hit the ball: A ball hit hard can clear the bounds, which grants the batter 6 runs, or may drop far away from the wicket, allowing a better chance at runs but such a hard hit ball also stands a better chance of the ball being caught on the fly. A softly hit ball won't go as far, but can dribble along the ground, and thus ensure that the ball can't be caught on the fly. It's one of the many nuances of cricket strategy. AFAIK, the standard number of batters is 11; schoolyard games could have any number of batters (like a pickup game of baseball or basketball in America), but in most sanctioned games a team is 11 players. --Jayron32 05:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

What does 'bunt' mean? I am not clued up on baseball terminology. I lived in Japan and helped teach it to children there, but I had to learn it myself first from Japanese people, in Japanese. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Bunt (baseball) --Onorem♠Dil 05:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's a shame that Misplaced Pages doesn't feature a search box where one could look up information on terms or concepts one didn't know about. Oh wait, it does. Well, since you did go through the trouble to type a long question asking what "bunt" means, from the Misplaced Pages article Bunt (baseball), reachable from the disambiguation page Bunt, it explains it fully, but basically it is a type of specialized hit in baseball, whereby the batter, instead of making a full swing, holds his bat steady in front of the pitched ball, in an attempt, instead of batting the ball far, to drop it on the ground right in front of himself. Bunting has special rules that apply to it (for example, a foul ball on a bunted third strike would count as an out, while on a full swing it would not). The advantage of the bunt is that, aside from the catcher, there really isn't usually another player close enough to make a play on the ball, so a particularly fast runner could beat out the throw. --Jayron32 05:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. We do that in cricket. Generally the reason is that the fielders are in positions which are difficult to avoid, or the ball is coming straight at the wicket and you stand a chance of LBW. Just lightly tapping the oncoming ball or guarding the wicket without moving, basically. Also, thanks, Jayron - I had never even heard the word before, and didn't use the search box because I thought it might be slang. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Sort of. There are bunt-like hits in cricket, but in baseball the bunt has extra rules associated with it. In cricket its just one of any number of batting strategies, and does not take special mention in the laws of the game. The bunt has its own rules and definitions within baseball whereby it is treated differently by the official rules than a normal hit. See . --Jayron32 06:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

It actually is kind of slangy. Note that "bunt" and "punt" are related, and for similar reasons. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 05:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I am almost in my sixth decade, and that's the first time I ever realized that "punt" and "bunt" are related. Gotta love WP. μηδείς (talk) 06:04, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

In a recent NFL game, I forget which one, the quarterback did a pooch punt, which is an occasional football tactic that's done for somewhat the same reason as a bunt in baseball. The funny thing is that etymologically, that expression amounts to a "push push". Who says football isn't educational? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Tom Brady did it against the Broncos in last year's playoffs: . Is that the one? --Jayron32 06:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

That wasn't the one, but it's a good example. I'm thinking the one I saw came in the Vikings-Packers game a couple of weeks ago. But it's always for the same reason, namely to get the ball downfield and hopefully catch them off guard and get good field position. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 07:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks BB, I didn't know that at all. So basically it means 'doing as little as is needed, and not more than can get you or your team mates out of the game' as a tactical decision. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, not exactly, it's a tactic whose purpose is either to catch the fielding team by surprise, or at least to make it difficult for the fielding team to make an optimal play. Either way, it's a variation on Wee Willie Keeler's batting success credo: "Hit 'em where they ain't." ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

For those who like power hitting, here's a rare feat, accomplished by Yuvraj Singh a few years ago. Looks like a good cousin of baseball. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 05:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure a "six" is that rare in Cricket. Looking at Boundary (cricket), it doesn't seem to be that different than a Home Run in baseball in terms of rarity. Indeed, according to the Misplaced Pages article, there was a Twenty20 match that featured 24 "sixes" between the two teams in a single Twenty20 match, the nearest equivalent home run record in baseball is List of Major League Baseball single-game records which states that the record home runs for a single team is 10 in one game. --Jayron32 05:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Individual 6's are not that rare, but an over's worth of 6's by one batsman is unusual. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah. I hadn't watched the whole video. Yes, an entire over of sixes is pretty amazing. Akin to Reggie Jackson's 1977 World Series performance of three home runs on three straight pitches. --Jayron32 06:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

That would be an excellent analogy. In this case, there's a Scottish version of Howard Cosell behind the mike. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if the Americans in this thread (that's most of you) are aware of Cricket in the United States. DRosenbach, why not get yourself along to a game some time? -- Jack of Oz 07:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

We had a league in Japan, in Shizuoka. It was mostly Australians and Sri Lankans, but some Brits. Just an amateur league. I only played once, before I moved to Nagoya to get married. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Australia is a rare country from where one can play cricket and baseball internationally. Some Aussies have made it to major league baseball. While ingrained with cricket knowledge from birth, I've played baseball too. Learnt a lot about it. Enough to be willing to try to explain the infield fly rule to beginners. A much better player of both games, Ian Chappell, captained the national cricket team for years and also played baseball at interstate level, and once sacrilegiously declared that baseball was a more complex game than cricket.

Nobody yet has mentioned the fascinating book Playing Hard Ball by Ed Smith. Smith was an English test (international) cricketer, now a professional writer, who was interested in baseball and for a few years joined spring training with the New York Mets. He draws some really interesting parallels between the two games. For example, from the point of view of sports psychology, he thinks it makes more sense in some ways to compare a baseball pitcher to a cricket batsman, rather than a bowler, partly because of the frequency of mistakes. A batsman can do everything right for thirty balls in a row, but one mistake and he'll be out, and his innings will be judged a failure. Similarly, a pitcher can throw a series of perfect pitches but then give away a home run off an easy pitch, and no-one will remember the earlier pitches. (I'm sure the analogy isn't perfect, and Smith explains it much better than I have, but I found it convincing). --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 11:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Our article on Cricket is in poor shape and I've more than once started and failed to get to grips with it. Some of the explanation of the gameplay above is excellent. Cricket is a sport that's difficult to explain, but easy to pick up when watching, so long as one is not distracted from the main concepts (attempting to score runs without getting yourself out) by the many subcomplexities that exist in cricket, like they do in most interesting sports. Like baseball, it features the attempt of a team to outwit an individual, and vice-versa. Its beauty is best seen in the five day version, where a script that's been seemingly played out for days on end can occasionally be torn up by an individual's brilliance in an hour or so. Finally, for those who like sports with stats, cricket is awash with them. --Dweller (talk) 11:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, yes, a statistician's paradise for sure. Also, I grin when I hear people complain that cricket (particularly the Test variety) is "boring". They have not even begun to think about scratching the surface of the game. Cricket is like a Mandelbrot set of subtle complexities. -- Jack of Oz 12:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm surprised no one suggested this kind of guide to the in's and out's of cricket. Astronaut (talk) 13:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Ha, I was just about to suggest the same, as it does really clarify the essentials of the game. Here is the text:

"You have two sides, one out in the field and one in. Each man that's in the side that's in goes out, and when he's out he comes in and the next man goes in until he's out. When they are all out, the side that's out comes in and the side that's been in goes out and tries to get those coming in, out. Sometimes you get men still in and not out.

When a man goes out to go in, the men who are out try to get him out, and when he is out he goes in and the next man in goes out and goes in. There are two men called umpires who stay all out all the time and they decide when the men who are in are out. When both sides have been in and all the men have out, and both sides have been out twice after all the men have been in, including those who are not out, that is the end of the game". Ericoides (talk) 15:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Does that ("both sides have been out twice") mean there are two innings? μηδείς (talk) 01:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

In traditional test-match cricket, which can run five days, Yes. Also for the Twenty20, as Jayron notes. I've not actually seen one of those matches. The one-day matches, limited to 50 overs per side, have one innings per side rather than two. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec) That means there have been four innings - one innings (note different singular to baseball's 'one inning') is a single team batting while the other fields. So when both sides have been (all) out twice (bearing in mind that only a batting side is got out), that's four innings. AlexTiefling (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

That's another way to look at it. It's actually used both ways. See Innings. That same semantical oddity exists in baseball. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 01:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Alex is correct. In cricket, each team's at bat is called "an innings". In test matches there are 4 innings (two per side). In ODI and Twenty20 there are 2 innings (one per side). Thus "an innings" in cricket is equivalent to "a half inning" in baseball. --Jayron32 01:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Of course in a one sided Test Match or other First-class cricket match it's possible that the winning team will bat for only one innings and the losing team for two, being unable to pass the winning team's total even then. That is described on the score card as winning by an innings and x runs. HiLo48 (talk) 02:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Called a Follow-on, for anyone who wants to read more. --Jayron32 02:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

A follow-on is not always required for an innings win. It can happen if the team batting second scores considerably more than the team that bats first, which then bats poorly in its second innings so that its two innings scores combined are still less than the other team's single score. HiLo48 (talk) 03:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Yup. It was unclear from your post when you said "the winning team will bat for only one innings and the losing team for two..." if you were also indicating a temporal relationship. It could be read to mean (as I did) WLL, which is a follow on. --Jayron32 03:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see what you mean. HiLo48 (talk) 07:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Bugs is correct about innings, as his link shows. I watch a lot of cricket. From skimming, everything else by Jayron is incredibly good, for an American. IBE (talk) 07:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ditch those last 3 words. I know many Australians who don't know as much as Jayron about cricket. -- Jack of Oz 08:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The test is being able to understand lbw. This is a mysterious and arcane shibboleth that only a 9th dan cricket watcher can describe properly. Sort of like offside in soccer. IBE (talk) 09:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Like many rules in many sports, the Leg before wicket ("LBW") law is essentially fairly simple: if the umpire judges that the ball would have hit the stumps if the batsman hadn't blocked it with his legs, the batter is out. "The rest is commentary, go and learn it", as Hillel the Elder said in the bit that's normally left off what has become known as his Golden Rule. --Dweller (talk) 10:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Sadly it's not that simple. For one thing, the batsman (not "batter", please) cannot be given out if the ball pitched outside leg stump, regardless of whether it would have hit the wickets. For another thing, it can sometimes depend on whether the batsman offered a stroke. These things are not just commentary. Our article on the law is pretty clear. --Viennese Waltz 10:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I refer you to the second of the two sentences you're responding to. --Dweller (talk) 11:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean. Your description of the essentials of the lbw law is simply incorrect, as I point out above. --Viennese Waltz 11:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

When introducing an outsider to something complex, it's best to boil it down to essentials. The LBW law is extremely complex, and has become even more so in recent years with the advent of referrals. However, it is in essence (and its history derives from) stopping the batsman gaining an unfair and unentertaining advantage by blocking the ball with his legs. The newcomer need know no more than that until he or she wishes to look into the complexities which I explicitly mentioned. Complaining that someone has said something "incorrect" when they give a simple version of a complex matter is both a truism and ridiculous. You might as well go complain to a school history teacher that the "reasons Germany lost WW2" he teaches kids are "incorrect". --Dweller (talk) 11:55, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

What I was objecting to was your quotation "the rest is commentary", as though the complexities aren't really part of the law, but merely to do with the law. Viennese Waltz 13:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

You've prompted me to start a new discussion on the Entertainment desk (which is apparently where sport belongs) about other "shibboleth" rules. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 10:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Further to my comment above about the article Cricket, I've started improving it today. It's a big old article and there's a lot of work to do. --Dweller (talk) 13:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Ouchie

Why do people (under normal circumstances) say "ouch" (as opposed to other things, like, say, "Babooba!" or "Michael Jackson") when they hurt themselves or feel pain? Is it a natural reflex? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, historically it was just Americans who said "ouch" (according to the OED); Brits said (and still say) "ow". Both have unclear etymologies, but basically they're imitative: you just say the first thing that comes to mind of a short, punchy variety, presumably. So a bit of both, IMHO. - Jarry1250  11:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

KELLY CLARKSON! --Jayron32 21:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

When travelling, I've heard non-English speakers make a variety of noises in such circumstances, including "oowa", "ay" and "ayee", the latter of which I found to have the same effect on me as the sound of fingernails on a blackboard. --Dweller (talk) 12:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I usually scream 'yabadabadoo!' and then dance Gangnam Style. I think the possible reason why 'ch' is on the end, is because it was about to be 'Jesus Christ', but of course that was considered blasphemy in earlier times, so we are just left with the 'ouch'. In Japanese, a lot of people say "ita!", which is short for "itai!" ('it hurts'), but also means 'somebody was here!' (or somewhere not specified), so when I was married I enjoyed saying to the wife 'Who was where' whenever she burned herself in the kitchen, which in retrospect, was quite fun to watch. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The ever-reliable Online Etymology Dictionary says; ouch 1837, from Pennsylvania German outch, cry of pain, from Ger. autsch. The Japanese word is itai. Latin used au, hau. It also says ow (interj.) 14c. as an exclamation of surprise; 1919 as an expression of sudden pain. So what wounded English folk said before that, I can't imagine. My French dictionary translates "ouch" to "Aïe". Alansplodge (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

We English are renowned for our stoic "stiff upper lip". In times of great pain, we simply stiffen our resolve and carry on. Words are not required! (OK - I say "f**k") In truth, I'm sure there was never any shortage of expletives or sharp sounds. Dictionaries are volumes of words - a reflexive sound, a grunt, yelp, squeal or sharp inhalation of breath isn't going to be described as a dictionary word - it only hits their radar when the word is spelled out ("O-U-C-H") and in a context where the meaning is clear, probably from the first time it appeared in print. SteveBaker (talk) 21:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Indeed; when Henry Paget, 2nd Earl of Uxbridge had his leg blown off at the Battle of Waterloo, he was supposed to have said "By God, sir, I've lost my leg!". Of course, we have an article - Lord Uxbridge's leg. Alansplodge (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

• Interjections and expletives are interesting in that they lay between language and animal calls. Stroke victims who lose language can typically still curse and say ouch. I had a relative who had Wernicke's aphasia for the last month of her life, and although she talked like this woman. Her speech was like doubletalk, but her comprehension and her ability to curse and yipe appropriately were not affected. (Note also the coprolalia and verbal tics of people with Tourette's syndrome, showing a deep, primitive biological component to this type of speech.) Note also the apparent linguistic universal that these words start with an /a/ and then form a falling diphthong going to /i/ (Ay!) or /u/ (Ow!). The vowels /a/,/i/, and /u/ are so basic that almost every language has them, and they are typical of babbling. While there is obviously some learning going on, you're not going to find a language that has a word for ow that sounds like strengths or squirrel. μηδείς (talk) 21:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I think that ow and ouch are linguistic and not animal cries. In German, there is the word Au, pronounced much like English ow. It means "river meadow". In Mandarin Chinese, ào (pronounced with a falling tone just like the English exclamation) is the pronunciation for several homophones, including ones meaning "proud or haughty" and "mountain valley". Marco polo (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

And in english, the word "eye" doesn't mean what the Spanish word "ay" means. My point was that while these "words" are learned and given phonemic form (which is why you call them words and not animal cries) they are processed at a deeper non-semantic level. Ouch is a verbal or oral gesture, not a word with an abstract meaning as such. When it is used as such it is a cry. If we get meta we can say "He said 'ouch'" and then we won't scream it. But in that case we are using the word the way we use "sigh", which is not actually the sound we actually make when we do what is called sighing. I am sure Steven Pinker discusses this at length in various places if people are interested. μηδείς (talk) 00:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Medeis, my apologies, I didn't read your earlier comment carefully. You weren't claiming that the syllable /aʊ/ could not have semantic meaning; I see that now. However, I don't think that ouch is a word like sigh. Sigh describes a sound that is different from the sound of the word itself. Sigh is like belch or groan. Ouch is different, because people really do say /aʊtʃ/. (Parenthetically, although Americans do say ouch, we also say ow, and in fact I think ow is more common in American English.) Ouch is an exclamation, like damn or yuck. Each of these is uttered in a specific circumstance and communicates an emotional state or attitude toward the speaker's circumstances. In this, they are more communicative than sighs or other noises that nonhuman animals also make. Marco polo (talk) 02:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, yes, as an adult who's been needle-stuck thousands of times (allergy shots and chronic illnesses) I do sometimes just say ouch, in an almost ironically calm manner. But the deeper point is the biological difference between the spontaneous cry of pain and and the word referring to that cry of pain as a word. It's the biological underpinnings of it that explain the universal /a/ vowel with an offglide in such circumstances. A stroke victim who's lost her speech will still cry ow, or ay, or ouch when you prick her. If, however, you ask someone with aphasia what the word people say when they get hurt is, they will find it difficult or impossible to answer with a word. It is because this is a cry and not a calmly spoken word that people do not say complex words like "Michael Jackson" as the OP asked. μηδείς (talk) 21:20, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Eric Partridge's A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English might have some fodder for this q. -- Jack of Oz 02:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Responding to the original question more directly, I think it is a natural impulse to cry out in response to pain. Other primates certainly do so. However, uttering ouch is not simply a natural impulse. Instead, it is a learned expression. Children who learn American English learn that they can communicate a feeling of pain (as opposed to anger or other emotions) by crying out ouch. That is, the natural impulse to cry out is channeled by culture into this American English utterance. As others have pointed out, other languages have different exclamations for pain. Marco polo (talk) 02:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's at the heart of it here. If you get a tiny injury or pain - like pricking your finger with a needle - then you'll say the word "ouch" to indicate to people around you that you have a minor injury. If you are in a lot of pain from a much more major injury - then animalistic cries and other non-words will certainly result. The idea that someone who is involved in a major car wreck would say "ouch!" is flat out comical - precisely because it seems so uncharacteristic of real people. Similarly, someone who gets a needle prick yelling "Aaaaaaaarrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!" at the top of their lungs seems crazy compared to just saying "ouch". This suggests that there is a clear difference between using a "word" and making a purely reactionary/animal "cry". It follows then that words like "ouch" might well differ between nations and cultures - as well as change over time - but the underlying pain response is universal and timeless because it's physiologically/evolutionarily demanded rather than a matter of intellectual intervention. SteveBaker (talk) 15:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

That is true so long as you are not saying that the alternative is merely saying the word "ouch" the way you might say the words "Michael Jackson" on one hand and incoherent 'aarghing' on the other. There is a quite distinct and universally human middle ground of expletives/interjections which have a learned phonemic form in each language (and person to person) but which have an animalistic emotional impetus rather than an abstract semantic meaning. Those words are unique in how the brain handles them, separate from normal speech, and revealed in their uniqueness as exhibited in stroke patients and some Tourette's sufferers. This is widely illustrated in books like The Stuff of Thought by Steven Pinker. To miss that very vital point it to address the OP's question on a pre-scientific armchair level. μηδείς (talk) 05:56, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

January 10

Purchasing The Cat in the Hat Knows a Lot About That!

My name is penny,I am a nurse who cares for a special needs child with cerebral palsey.This little boy loves the (CAT IN HAT KNOWS ALOT ABOUT THAT).He attends school 5 days a week so he gets limited time to see his favorite show.My question is,can the 30min. movies be bo ught?If so how much are the episodes for 2012-2013? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.73.208 (talk) 02:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

To clarify the question, the series is The Cat in the Hat Knows a Lot About That! -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 02:35, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that heading, Finlay. I hadn't heard of the longer title.

Try This google search. --Jayron32 02:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

amazon has reasonable prices for individual episodes, http://www.amazon.com/Knows-About-That-Wings-Things/dp/B003EQN65S. You can download whatever's been uploaded to youtube, www dot tubeplus dot me or dailymotion dot com. μηδείς (talk) 06:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Imposing sanctions on the US until it sorts out its gun laws

Casino Chip

Recently I was given a casino chip. It was a present and I was lead to believe that it was real. It says - World Pomer tournament: Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas Casino, Nevada. Then there is $10,000 value written on it. I am keen to find out whether this is a real chip. I ould like to send a picture of the chip as an add on to the question but don't seem to be able to... apologies for this. How would I find out if this casino chip is real? Which Casino do you think it might come from? If you would like me to send a photo of the chip please let me know how to do this and where to send it. Many thanks and I look forward to hearing an answer to these questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.231.194.25 (talk) 08:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow, just like the plot element in Skyfall! I recommend you donate that chip to your favorite charity and let them worry about it. :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 08:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not saying it's fake, or that your benefactor is not extraordinarily generous, but you can buy such things on eBay for a few dollars.--Shantavira| 09:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The question is: Can the person who gave it to you afford $10,000? And do they like you enough to give you $10,000? Only if yes is the answer to both questions can it be real. If the answer is no to any of the 2 questions, then you can assume it is not real. I have never heard of a casino called "Fabulous Las Vegas Casino", but I don't know much about Vegas. --Lgriot (talk) 09:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

If you google , I think you'll find it's literally just a chip for playing poker with, not a thing of value as such. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 09:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what "pomer" is, but in a poker tournament the chips don't actually have monetary value, although they are often referred to as though they do. Everyone gets the same number of chips at the start of the tournament and the last person with any left is the winner. You pay a certain amount to enter and the last few people in get a certain amount in prize money, but those amounts bare no relation to "value" of the chips. The chips used in tournaments are usually of much lower quality than the main casino chips, which is one way to tell. The word "tournament" on it is another good clue. --Tango (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

What, you've never heard of the famous "World Pomer Tournament"? That's where misspellers go to test their "metal" agin each other. Dan Quayle is a chumpion many times over. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Confirm, that "Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas", as if it were a slightly old-fashioned neon sign, like the one illustrated a bit down in this page, is generic in Las Vegas. The souvenir stores are stuffed with goods displaying it. I doubt it would be used for a "real" chip. I don't see on Google that "World Poker Tournament" is the name of an actual tournament although there are similar, World Series of Poker for example. My guess is that this is designed as a cheap unofficial souvenir of one of these tournaments.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Or, it's "World Poker Tour", which is a real thing, and quite happily puts its name on merchandise such as sets of poker chips. If it's a real tournament chip, it will almost certainly say "no cash value" on it. --jpgordon 16:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

"On Wings of Eagles"

Does anyone know please if this exciting and true story by Ken Follett has ever been made into a film and if so where might I buy a VCR copy?85.211.131.113 (talk) 09:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

On Wings of Eagles says there was a mini-series in 1986. You could check around on google and see if it's available in some way or another. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 09:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hare Krishna absence in the Eastern U.S.?

I used to see Hare Krishnas all the time in NYC. They would hand out flowers and pamphlets and so on. They were always at the airport doing whatever it is they do, proselytizing ... It just occurred to me that I haven't seen a Hare Krishna in years and years and they are very noticeable with their colorful robes and hairstyle. Are they just no longer much in New York, or have they stopped proselytizing, or are they much reduced in number in the Northeast U.S., the U.S. in general, or something else?--108.27.62.131 (talk) 17:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

International Society for Krishna Consciousness is a good place for you to start your inquiry. --Jayron32 17:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The last time I saw a Hare Krishna was in the Phila In'tl Airport in the mid-late 80's. I can't recall having seen one in NYC at all since then. Maybe they have a website? μηδείς (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

They are definitely still around. There is an ISKCON center not far from my office in Boston. On my lunch hour, I have noticed people coming and going from the center, some dressed in the stereotypical peach-colored robes, but others in conventional Western professional attire. I think that, probably due to generational change, they are not as connected with youth culture as they were during hippy and post-hippy days, and they are maybe not proselytizing as publicly, but they still exist. Marco polo (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

26 Second Avenue seems to be their address in NYC. Alansplodge (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

9/11 really put a damper on them being able to pass material out at airports. Livewireo (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

regression for data that is a power function

I have some data that looks like it is in a Power function. Of course, taking logs and doing a linear regression will give the constants.

1. Is this a good way to do get the constants?

2. If a correlation coefficient is calculated on the line, is it meaningful for the original data? Bubba73 20:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Copying this to the Maths desk where they really know about these things and ignoramuses like me won't be tempted to hazard an answer. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Look for answers at WP:Reference desk/Mathematics. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Whoops, I thought I had selected math. Bubba73 20:53, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

January 11

Electrical conduit

So I have this electrical conduit with 9 wires running through it into the panel. All the breakers are 2-1 pole. This is in Canada by the way, which has the same conventions in these matters I believe as the US. There are 3 blacks, 2 whites, 2 reds, 1 blue, and 1 green in the conduit. The board is a 3 phase, 4 wire, as it says. These aren't attached to any receptacles.

I don't quite understand what these are supposed to be. A black, a red and a blue suggests to me a three-phase circuit with a common neutral. So then maybe there is another 2-phase with a common neutral. But then there is another black with no neutral? That doesn't seem to make any sense. I don't really want to mess around with the circuit breaker, so I'm not going to be able to crack open the conduit at that end to see what runs where exactly. Is there any other way I can safely figure out what is going on with these? --69.196.176.227 (talk) 06:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Hire an electrician. --Jayron32 06:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

It's possible to purchase a current meter that clips round each wire to measure the current flowing through it. I suppose you could identify the circuits this way by drawing current from different outlets. It's also possible to detect which wire is "live" with a sensitive meter (without removing the insulation), and identify the circuits by switching on one circuit-breaker at a time. But if you don't already know this, then the best advice has been given above. Hire an electrician! Dbfirs 13:59, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

You have at least two circuits, going by the number of neutrals, and probably some switch loops (I'm assuming this is a 12-ga branch circuit). As Jayron said, hire an electrician - this is beyond homeowner tools and skills. Acroterion (talk) 16:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips, guys. I shall hire an electrician to wire everything for installation, I just wanted to safely figure out what was already installed in the space so I can think about options before beginning construction. The conduit runs directly from the panel, so could there still be switch loops then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.176.227 (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Two questions about Cracker Barrel

This is somewhat related to my series of questions on American restaurants last year. Anyway, today's featured article is Cracker Barrel, which happened to be among those restaurants and chains mentioned in my first question on the topic. As stated in the article, they have locations in 42 states... but they are only in the United States. This is made obvious by the fact that it only has a Misplaced Pages entry here on the English Misplaced Pages. They don't even have a single location in Canada, unlike Waffle House which has at least one. But why? Is there any particular reason why: 1.) No other Misplaced Pages has an article on it, and 2.) Why they haven't expanded internationally? They already have locations in most states (although mainly down in the South), and there are several chains which have a presence in less states but have a presence in Canada, so why not Cracker Barrel? Narutolovehinata5 13:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I think we pretty much covered this the first time. The answers being money and lawyers. Dismas| 14:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Well the answer for question 2 is money and lawyers. The answer for question 1 is "no one has written it yet". If, perchance, you have a working knowledge of another language, you could be responsible for fixing this problem. --Jayron32 14:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Cracker Barrel's branding, marketing, and in store ambiance are full of references to the historic culture of the southern United States. The company's managers may have determined that its branding would not sell well outside of the southern US and other areas (pretty much exclusively in other US states) with historic ties to the US south. Marco polo (talk) 17:27, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

That never stopped Kentucky Fried Chicken and Colonel Sanders from expanding internationally. But I hear what you say. Just because some US franchises spread their wings, doesn't mean all of them have to. -- Jack of Oz 19:17, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, to be fair KFC and Cracker Barrel are different sorts of restaurants with different operating models, different types of cuisine and service, etc. etc. The only things they have in common are "serves food vaguely connected to Southern U.S." The kind of scalability and expansion potential for a single-item fast food joint like KFC, compared to a sit-down table-service restaurant like Cracker Barrel is likely vastly different. Things like employee training and management, brand awareness, throughput of customers, etc. etc. all must weigh in to the decision. Part of the reason why most of the American restaurants which have been successful outside of the U.S. have been fast food restaurants like KFC and McDonalds is that their menu is very limited, they need less staff and less training to run the restaurant, which keeps startup and overhead down. Expanding a large table-service restaurant to a new locale requires a greater commitment in terms of startup costs, training of employees, establishing a brand identity, etc. than a fast-food restaurant does. One cannot downplay the limited menu as being a key to the difference here. McDonalds: Burger and Fries. KFC: fried chicken. Pizza Hut: Pizza. Cracker Barrel: ??? I've eaten at a Cracker Barrel many times, and even then I can't identify the one food item that's their "killer ap". Don't get me wrong, its good food, but there lacks that way of identifying the restaurant with the singular food item that makes people connect with it. That doesn't mean it is impossible to expand into foreign markets, but it does provide a level of additional risk which the corporation may not be willing to take. --Jayron32 19:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you're looking in the wrong place, Jayron. According to our article (which I had to read to learn about this expression), a "killer ap" is a computer program. Not many food items I'm aware of are computer programs.  :) -- Jack of Oz 20:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

See analogy and metaphor. Come back if these don't make sense to you. --Jayron32 20:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm really struggling to see the logic in...

"...they are only in the United States. This is made obvious by the fact that it only has a Misplaced Pages entry here on the English Misplaced Pages." HiLo48 (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

What I think the OP was trying to say was that the lack of presence is countries where English is not the dominant language is connected to the lack of Misplaced Pages articles in other languages. This could be remedied by writing those articles in those other languages, which was my point. --Jayron32 19:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I got that that's what the OP was thinking, but there's a lot of other English speaking countries. Expansion into those places could not be ruled out "by the fact that it only has a Misplaced Pages entry here on the English Misplaced Pages". HiLo48 (talk) 19:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the cause and effect goes the other way here. The lack of presence in non-English speaking countries leads to a lack of coverage in non-English Wikipedias, not the other way around. --Jayron32 20:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Dismas and Jayron are definitely on the right track. Expanding internationally is a huge pain in the ass, not just in legalities and politics, but also in logistics and standards. For one thing, Canada has different standards when it comes to food labeling laws (not to mention it all also has to be in French) and ingredients regarding stuff like sodium levels and trans fats. Quick serve chains and their limited menu simplify that hugely - there's, say, thirty items you need to worry about, not hundreds. On the logistics side, consider this: let's say you have a signature... barbecue sauce. Ingredients-wise, it's fine for selling in Canada. Who's going to make it? Will you have to regularly import it through Customs and all that entails? If you find someone in Canada to manufacture it, will it taste exactly the same as you want it to? Again, the number of items you serve will compound those issues. Matt Deres (talk) 19:56, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

It's not even just logistics. Think about the difference in training someone to prepare the KFC's menu versus training someone to prepare the Cracker Barrel menu. "Put chicken in fryer. Take it out when the buzzer sounds." Done, you're now trained to work as a cook at KFC. Consider now how many different food items you'd have to be able to prepare to work at a Cracker Barrel. Everything from steaks to fried chicken to fish to pot pie to the side dishes and deserts. Now, train an entire staff to do so. Oh, and train the waitstaff. And bussers and dishwashers. And managers, both front-of-the-house and back-of-the-house. At any one time KFC needs a manager on site, two or three cashiers, two or three cooks, that's it. You can run the entire operation seven or eight people, and their training is fairly minimal. Cracker Barrel probably has seven or eight cooks, including a head cook and various line cooks, who need to know how to prepare a diverse menu, as well as a back-of-the-house manager that needs to manage food supplies, maintain employee morale and training, etc. Plus the waitstaff and host/hostess and front-of-the-house manager (another 9-10), plus all of the cleanup staff. It's an entirely different animal. --Jayron32 20:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Jeremy Bentham

I am pretty sure that Simon Sebag Montefiore mentions in his "Prince of Princes. The Life of Potemkin" that Jeremy Bentham joined his brother Samuel for some time in Russia. Of course I don't know whether anything he saw there was of value to him.

Since it isn't mentioned in Misplaced Pages's entry I decided to put it here as a question in case somebody is interested (I read the book on loan from the library, therefore can't provide any reference other than my memory.)

Silke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.217.116.29 (talk) 20:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

∘== Finding hotels for major event ==

I am trying to set up an event for next year, for which I would want to book the whole of a hotel, all the bedrooms, conference rooms, restaurant and so on, to accommodate guests and activities. However, I am having trouble finding a suitable venue, when I search for hotels in a particular area, I find large numbers of tiny B&Bs or other small hotels that can only accept a dozen or so guests. I have a large area within which I would be willing to base the event, but although I do not mind searching through and contacting large numbers of potential venues to find the best one (though even this is proving difficult when I can only search one small area at a time), I am disappointed to find that the majority of these are either far too small or too large for our needs. So, just on the off-chance, is there anywhere I can go to find out about hotels with space for between, say, 50 and 300 people, or at least that will tell me the size of the venue and maybe even let me use that as part of my search terms? or any way of advertising my needs and letting suitable hotels come to me?

thank you for any help,

86.15.83.223 (talk) 21:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe that most travel sites (Hotels.com, expedia, etc.) allow you to search for chain hotels over B&Bs as a matter of preference. You could also look through the major international chains, and go through their websites directly to see if they have anything that suits your needs. If you find a chain you would like to give your business to, I'm sure if you call them directly and explain exactly what you just did here, they have mechanisms in place to help you with what you're trying to do. --Jayron32 21:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec) Try asking the Chamber of Commerce for city where your conference will be. They might be able to provide you with a list of area hotels that match your requirements. RudolfRed (talk) 21:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• Pages automatically checked for accidental language links
• Misplaced Pages resources for researchers
• Misplaced Pages help forums