This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aniljay (talk | contribs) at 12:24, 30 November 2006 (→does any one know of how to start a religion? (or following?)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

November 28

could the Vatican become part of the EU

I was watching CNN.When they talked about the popes trip to turkey.I was just wondering could the vacatcin become part of the EU.i got the idea for that question when i heard something turkey becoming a part of the EU.

I know of no reason why it couldn't become a member, but the Vatican has preferred to remain somewhat aloof from most international organisations. For example, it has permanent observer status with the United Nations but has never been a member. JackofOz 00:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I doubt the Pope's status as absolute monarch would be compatible with the EU constitution --Trieste 00:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The Pope is elected. The position isn't passed by family membership like a monarchy... kmccoy (talk) 03:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

And then there are human rights issues, like using a type of absolute rule (well, it is to true believers) to get people not to use condoms. DirkvdM 04:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the pope is an elected absolute monarch and the Vatican is a theocratic absolute monarchy. -THB 04:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, Vatican City has no universal suffrage, and its legislative body is not elected but appointed by the Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City (the Pope) and is all-male. I imagine the EU would require some reforms before accession negotiations could start.  --Lambiam 10:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Copenhagen criteria are the official conditions that have to be fulfilled by a prospective member country. In addition to lacking democracy and rule of law, I doubt the Vatican economy could be considered a "functioning market economy", either. Of course, full EU membership is not realistic for a statelet with less than a thousand citizens--they probably don't even have enough bureaucrats to handle EU accession negotiations and membership procedures. 84.239.129.42 18:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that much of the above has little real relevance to the actual status and character of the Vatican, which operates more like a corporation rather than an independent state. The Lateran Treaties of 1929 were less a 'declaration of independence', and more a way of regulating the process of political exchange with the secular state. Economically, despite 'Peter's Pence', the Vatican would not be viable without Italy, and in practical terms enjoys the same benefits as its 'host' nation draws from the EU. It even issues its own euros. Clio the Muse 11:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, is this the Eu's Guantanamo Bay? It's part of the EU and yet it isn't. :) DirkvdM 07:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Not to be confused with the Isle of Man which isn't part of the EU but it is! :) Grutness...wha? 08:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Link problem - webmaster issue

I am trying to link to the excellent article at http://en.wikipedia.org/Maison_Carrée, from my site, http://latrouvailledesanilhac.com/region.html. However, the accented 'e' in Carrée is not being read by your (or mine?) server correctly, and, if you go to my site and click on the linked text, "Maison Carrée", you get sent to a error page on wikipedia.

This was done with 'cut & paste' from the page. any idea on how to correct it?

Thanks for the help.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.159.158 (talk • contribs)

If you go to the page Maison Carrée, and look at the address bar in your browser, you will see http://en.wikipedia.org/Maison_Carr%C3%A9e (at least that is what I see in my browser). URL's have a limited (defined) set of characters, and anything else must be replaced by hex codes as in that example.

Please sign your contributions with four tildes (~~~~) --ColinFine 01:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Or you could be lazy and just link to http://en.wikipedia.org/Maison_Carree which will work just fine.--Shantavira 10:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

T-shirt under Buttoned down

Why do people wear t-shirts underneath a buttoned down shirt? Hustle 01:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Men wear undershirts to keep their shirt clean by absorbing skin secretions, to make a white shirt appear whiter, to prevent the body from being visible through shirts made of thin material, because sometimes they are more comfortable against the skin than a shirt, and because it shows a lack of good breeding not to do so. -THB 01:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Breeding?? Anyway vests are for wimps--Light current 01:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe the custom of wearing undershirts (now better known as t-shirts) without a buttoned down shirt began with Marlon Brando's performance in A Streetcar Named Desire. The reverse custom of wearing a button down shirt without an undershirt began nearly two decades earlier with Clark Gable in It Happened One Night. Durova 01:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Is a button down shirt the same as a button up shirt?--Light current 01:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I assumed that a buttoned down shirt is a shirt that has a button down collar (clothing) -THB 02:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Wait... is the shirt buttoned down or is open with just a shirt underneath. Either way, the answer, like all your style questions, are not known. They are just fads and trends... why do guys have long hair right now? What's with the skater look? Many questions, no real answers. Cbrown1023 01:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Why? Because I'm generally uncomfortably cold without a flannel shirt on over my t-shirt. Dismas| 02:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

In England it is unusual to see a t-shirt or t-shirt style undershirt (which we call a vest) worn underneath a shirt. For most of the year, this would be uncomfortably warm in a home or office environment. My impression is that this is a US style. Gandalf61 11:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I was raised to wear an undershirt but fell out of the practice as an adult. This is partly due to moving to the UK, where it is generally milder than the Chicago of my youth, partly due to a change in fashion. People used to wear undershirts to protect thier 'shirts' from skin and sweat. Please keep in mind that it used to be prevalent to wear clothes more often and what we consider soiled clothing is not the same as what was considered soiled 100 years ago. People used to bathe less, have thier clothes washed less often (and have fewer changes of clothes) and were more tolerant of each other's smells. Nowadays most people bath every day or every other day at least, while it wasn't unheard of to have a weekly bath just 50 years ago. Robovski 00:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Popping collar

Why do people "pop their collar"? Do women find this more attractive? Hustle 01:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

People "pop" their collars because they believe it influences the way other people think about them in a positive manner. No doubt some women find it attractive and others do not. If you are considering "popping" your collar, think about which kind of women you wish to attract. You might also look the phrase up at Urban Dictionary to see what some other people think about the practice. The average user profile there is likely different from the one here. According to one of them, young men in fraternities "pop" their collars to hide the hickies they got from their fraternity brothers. -THB 01:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It is a fashion trend.... it's preppy... it's like American Eagle and Abercrombie and Aeropostale, just some fad. It's just something that we (teenagers) do, we rarely give explanations other than "it looks cool" or "everybody's doin' it." Cbrown1023 01:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

For those of us ignorant of this practice, could anyone say what it actually involves and which nationalities do it? For instance , do the Spanish do it? 8-|--Light current 16:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It is fairly obvious that this refers to turning the collar of one's shirt up rather than letting it lie flat at the neck, presumably in an attempt to look cool. It was a bad eighties fashion trend that people with any sense know is more silly than cool. Of course the teenagers don't remember how silly it was the first time around, so in their blissful ignorance, they probably think they invented it. pschemp | talk 17:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

AH! just shows that what is obvious to one is not obvious to everyone. THats obvious. Anyway I only do it when Im cold. Is that allowed?--Light current 17:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

So the term actually means letting it stick up rather than folding it down and tucking it under your jacket as normal? 8-)--Light current 18:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You may wear the collar of your shirt any way you wish. pschemp | talk 17:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Because it's cold! - Keria 18:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

People might think you're "uncool" by trying to be cool by "popping your collar." ._. --Proficient 05:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Here's one: It allows teens to wear more formal nice looking clothing without looking too professional or overdressedEd Dehm 23:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

does any one know of how to start a religion? (or following?)

Hello, I want to save the world, I believe I know all of life's' questions (no, really I do) and I need to shear my ideas with others. If I start preaching my ideas will I get arrested? (I live in New Zealand)

They are really good ideas and really nice beliefs, would I get a following?

thank you, much app. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.2.130 (talk • contribs)

You may know all the questions; but do you know the answers? Why not try writing in a paper or magazine first?--Light current 01:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with LC, but if you have freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion; then you can start preaching. Cbrown1023 01:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

See L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Baker Eddy, and Joseph Smith, Jr. -THB 01:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Firstly,I would think all of us know life's questions.It's the ANSWERS we could do with.Secondly,does your knowledge of such matters extend to spelling and use of the apostrophe? Lemon martini 10:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually these days its probalby better to start your own website for your ideas. They will not stand on WP 8-)--Light current 02:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I do not know about NZ but many countries have a tradition of street preaching. I do not see why you should not be able to start and if your ideas are good and your delivery is good; why, you might end up with a following. Good luck! I created a religion myself about 35 years ago; The Church of the Magnanimous Flow; my friends got a big kick out of it (especially when we were, well, you know) so there is always that. --Justanother 03:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll bite. Tell me all of life's questions. -- Abnerian 17:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Reminds me of Hitchhiker's Guide. Except he figured out the question first. Smart! --Justanother 18:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

If you sincerely believe you are a chosen instrument of God (or some other divine being) and you want to start a religion, it would help if you were charismatic and a good public speaker. A few followers and financial backers would be most useful. Then you can start a website, rent a storefront to have services in (free food and social opportunities also highly advisable). Put notices of your services in the local paper, have your followers hand out flyers telling them all the benefits they will derive from attending your service. Nice music can be very useful as part of the service. Services in the language of an immigrant group which they cannot find elsewhere is often a big draw. Edison 18:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Nah, it's much simpler than that. You just put it about that you are the latest Prophet of God, Allah, Jahweh, The Eye in the Sky, or whatever. Then you attract your followers by telling them that all other religions are the blasphemous products of earlier prophets who have chosen to misinterpret His earlier teachings, and that your God, Allah, Jahweh etc., has inspired you to destroy all of them and their followers by whatever means they choose and that their actions will not be a crime as their actions will have been pre-ordained by your new God, Allah, Jahweh, Eye in the Sky, or whatever, and He (certainly not She) will reward them handsomely in Paradise with countless camels and virgins, perhaps even Harley Davidsons (you will thus demonstrate that your new religion is an inclusive one where females and Motor Cycles have an important role to play). Wow, the money will come rolling in, and you will be revered by all the western democratic governments. I think I will join, it sounds wonderful

You may also want to consider preaching an established religion for a while to get some training and a following and then schism off with your own. You may even use the name Sha-Zamm for your religion (or yourself). Go ahead; I give it to you freely. Go now and prosper. Oh, and Harleys are a most excellent idea. --Justanother 03:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Last person to found a religion in NZ was Brian Tamaki. I hope your ideas are better than his! Grutness...wha? 08:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You might scucceed in getting a proper advice, someday. However, it would be a dagerous idea!! The world is already overpopulated with religions and you see the price we pay for it. You still wanna start one more!?

Music question

Does any body here know what a composer of Ragtime or a performer of Ragtime is called. I just have a hard time imagining Rager, Ragist, Ragtimer. This is not a question that must be answered ASAP...I am just curious.__Seadog 04:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"Ragtimer" is indeed the informal designation. -THB 04:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

mordern day philsophers

What do news commentators like Bill O`Reilly,Sean Hannity,Tucker Carlson etc. have if anything in common with the philsophers of the anicent world.

Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson are seen as Conservative Populists. In that sense they follow on from the philosophical tradition of Edmund Burke, David Hume in the 1800s. Look at Ancient philosophy for a list of ancient philosophers. As opponents of the hyper rationality of Aristotle and Plato, you might want to also look at Sophists, the Ancient precursors to modern day Populism. Hope that helps, Jpeob 12:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I.e. they don't have very much in common, any more than saying "they complain a lot, so did some philosophers of the Ancient world." --24.147.86.187 02:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

how do i report inapropriate items posted?

I was looking at the naruto episode list and someone wrote innapropriate items in it (sexual in nature). Since I'm not a member I was wondering who to talk/to write to directly. Here is the link to the abuse

http://en.wikipedia.org/The_enemy_is_%22Shinobazu%22

Fixed. -- Jim Douglas _(contribs) 06:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to be a "member" to edit Misplaced Pages. Just click the edit tab and your on your way.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 12:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You know what I think? I think there should be a new "how to ask a question" tip up there saying "Do not report article vandalism here" and then explaining why not. I posted it up at 'Turducken' and nobody cared except Justanother. Vitriol 02:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's such a big deal. This is where they came first, and if we ask them to go somewhere else they may not bother. Or they might not read the instructions. It's really not such a big deal to just take care of their reports as is. Anchoress 02:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

We have "Do not post your email address" and people ignore that. Vitriol 02:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

And, y'know, 'do your own homework'. Vitriol 02:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Number of alcoholics in the UK

Is it possible to provide a rough estimate of the number of people in the UK who suffer from alcoholism? --Richardrj 08:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

According to Alcoholism: "In the United Kingdom, the number of 'dependent drinkers' was calculated as over 2.8 million in 2001." Dave6 09:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. --Richardrj 09:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course that begs the question how 'alcoholism' and 'dependent drinker' are defined. Without that knowledge the figure means nothing. DirkvdM 07:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

AOE3

I know that in Age of Empires III, the only cards that you could send are the 1st tier resource cards. But in Age of Empires III: The Warchiefs, there are other cards that can be sent a infinite number of times. I was wondering if this was due to a patch, or due to the expansion; in that I mean is this a Age of Empires III: The Warchiefs feature. Thanks.100110100 12:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

There are cards that can be sent an infinate amount of times without the Warchiefs expansion, too. Яussiaп F 13:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Friends?

How do you make friends?100110100 11:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Find people with similar interests to yourself (preferably not over a computer), and talk to them. It helps if you ensure you are not rude, and that you are clean and presentable. If you are having trouble finding people with similar interests to you, try something new. Join an evening class, a book club, a sports team, if you're old enough to drink, go to the same bar / pub over and over, say hello to people when you start to recognise them. Try dating, and make friends with your date's friends. Talk to the people you work with. If you are still in school, join school clubs, learn music, write a school paper, whatever - mainly, be open and friendly. If you're fat, lose weight, as it is still easier for thin, attractive people to make friends. Proto::type 12:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

My after my sis's boyfriend broke up with her, he stopped hanging out with her friends. I always thought it was a form a betryral; my sister's friends never knew this person existed until he started dating her, & hung out with them. Is my thinking wrong?100110100 12:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Betrayal by who to whom? 惑乱 分からん 12:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I would not go so far as to call it betrayal on his part (although I get your point). Sounds like he never really formed a link with her friends as himself but rather did mostly in the persona of "the boyfriend". So, when he no longer had that identity, he was likely ambivalent about hanging out with them. If they feel that they truly were his friends then they should make the first step to restore the relationship; they should make it clear to him that he was valued as an individual, not just as "the boyfriend". --Justanother 14:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that's not uncommon. After a breakup the couple may not want to encounter each other. The unwritten rules state that you keep the friends you had before you met each other. Although people are free to extend a hand to their friend's ex-, they rarely do so, out of loyalty, and a wish to avoid awkward situations. I doubt the friends were offended by your sister's boyfriend's actions. -THB

(moved from the Humanities RD)

Most people make friends by finding people with the same interests and pursuing those interests together. Just decide what you like doing and find groups of people that do the same things.--Shantavira 13:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, most people make friends by being stuck in the same place as them, and being forced to go through the same experiences together. School and work, mostly, but other places as well. Of course, "finding people with the same interests" may or may not be related to this aspect. ☢ Ҡi∊ff⌇↯ 15:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Graverobbery, insanity, a bolt of lightning and a God complex. That will make you a friend, or even a wife. Laïka 16:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Someone said, I forget who, something like "you can make more friends in two months by becoming interested in other people than you can in 2 years by trying to get other people interested in you". I think a positive outlook on life makes it easier for you to become friends with people. People don't mind their friends moaning but someone who on first meeting you is very negative would, for me at least, make less change of a blossoming friendship. ny156uk 17:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

In other words, listening instead of talking. -THB 05:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Navajo Silversmith Paul Johnson

I am seeking information related to Mr Paul Johnson, Navajo Silversmith who started producing in 1972 He is listed in "Hallmarks of the Southwest" Do you have any further information? Thank you Pamela Coates Rio Rico, Az

Jimmy Wales

What is the name of Mr Wales? Is it Jimmy Wales or Jimbo Wales? Thank you.

--62.114.227.222 12:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Either. Яussiaп F 12:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Jimbo is the nickname he goes by.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 12:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

His full name is Jimmy Donal "Jimbo" Wales. I don't know if Jimmy's short for James or not. Proto::type 13:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Sexuality Drawings

What is the name of the Danish student that does the drawings, the artist and student?

What are you talking about? Which drawings? Several "Sexuality Drawings" on Misplaced Pages are drawn by the artist Rama, but he appears to the French. If you don't specify any more details, we can't help you. 惑乱 分からん 15:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right, I should be more specific.They appear under the web address http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Rama/Sexuality_drawings

His/her userpage is at User:Rama, but I think he/she probably wants to retain his/her anonymity. What made you think h/s is Danish? 惑乱 分からん 01:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Createable

Having wandered somewhat randomly onto the topic at work I wondered whether there was anything (beyond lack of consumer demand) that would prevent someone from opening a naturist airline? I'm thinking there are rules and regs about naturism and that wandering around an airport in the altogether is not allowed, but wondered whether it would actually be allowable. Purely something we discussed at work and wondered if people had any input on the idea. ny156uk 17:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Aside from common sense, which dictates that it's a poor idea to be nude around unfathomably large and powerful machines? Nope, not as far as I know. Though the FAA might take exception to it. -- Abnerian 17:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the FAA only cares if you "wear" a seatbelt. --Justanother 18:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Most naturists don't want to do everything naked, except the very few like Stephen Gough. Good grief! I just stumbled across the naked Misplaced Pages.--Shantavira 18:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You're probably going to be restricted in what you can (and cannot, and must) wear in the airport terminal, unless you're prepared to buy and operate your own segregated groundside facilities. Once in the air, the airline is free to regulate (or not) passenger clothing largely as they see fit. There may be additional specific regulations and restrictions on domestic flights within specific countries, consult your local government for details. I recall seeing recent news coverage of private small-plane owners in the United States and Canada offering short flights for the express purpose of allowing their passengers (usually two) to join the 'Mile High Club'. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

This sexualizes the question unecessarily. I know that some national nudist organizations in the United States charter flights to allow for airborne nudity.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 21:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Is it a blue link?.... Mile High Club? Oh, good. -GTBacchus 20:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps dehydration and passenger comfort could become an issue. It can get a bit chilly inside an airplane, clothing helps to keep us warm. Also, the air is pretty dry (it's all air conditioned). Lastly, on a slightly less pleasant note, would you want to sit in the same seat previously occupied during a twelve-hour flight by someone who hadn't been wearing any clothes, hence all their perspiration etc would have been absorbed by the seat material...? — QuantumEleven 12:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Of stings and just desserts

Hypothetically, if some virulent disease or parasite devastates the mosquito population to the point where it is in danger of becoming extinct, would conservation societies aim to re-introduce it to the wild and build their numbers back up to present-day levels? Or, cognisant of how dangerous the little blighters are, would they only keep small populations around in protected areas, or would they just let them pass into the history books altogether? GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 17:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

An excellent question. I would say the group would be divided. The benefits would far outweight the pitfalls, but a hardline conservationist (who presumably wants to stop any kind of human influenced extinction) would potentially want the species to continue to exist. The question would be whether enough conservationists agreed or not. I understand that smallpox now only exists in controlled labs, so maybe it would go the same way? I'm pretty certain that the public mood would be in favour of its irradication if it was plausible, but then I must note that I believe the public tend to favou the saving of fluffy-cute animals much more than the ugly insecty things we co-exist alongside. ny156uk 18:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

What nation ? I don't think insects get protection under the US Endangered Species Act, as that only applies to vertebrates. StuRat 18:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

If that's true, then who organised the new habitats for the Kanab ambersnail? (which was what set me off on this train of thought in the first place) GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 18:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

But the IUCN Red List is for all plants and animals. Re your question, my guess is yes, a "true" environmentalist would want to save the species in the wild although they might not make efforts to rebuild the levels. For all that I find no mention here of what beneficial role the mosquito serves in the ecosystem other than perhaps as a spreader of disease serving to cull weaker animals. --Justanother 19:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I think mosquitos (or more precisely their larvae) are a major source of food for fish in certain ecosystems. --Trovatore 19:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, but I didn't ask about the redlist, I asked who organised the introduction of the snails to the three new springs. I presume if the US government has prevented the destruction of the snails' natural habitat, they'd want to oversee such a movement. But if the snails aren't covered by the aforementioned Act, why get involved? And if they are, then it should be safe to say that mosquitos would be as well. GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 19:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I thought you had asked about mosquitos and that is what I was primarily responding to. Re the other (snails) the US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program protects US wetlands in conjuction with other US agencies like Parks and Fish and Wildlife. But the Corps would be the main enforcement agency since this is a wetlands species. --Justanother 19:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding who is trying to save it - could be anyone; Federal, state, local agency, environmental group, even a developer as part of mitigation for the destruction of natural habitats. You should be able to find out by looking at some of the references in the article. --Justanother 19:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

This link is a good start; see "Recovery Efforts":

To further KAS recovery objectives and Biological Opinion concerns, AGFD and the National Park Service attempted to establish a new wild population of KAS in Grand Canyon National Park from VP stock.

--Justanother 19:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Oldest Public University in USA

Can someone tell me the name of the oldest public university in the United States, when it was founded, issued degrees?

That's an easy one. A quick google search reveals the answer to be the University of North Carolina. All the other information is on that page, or on their homepage. GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 19:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe not so easy. See the University of Pennsylvania article. The state of Pennsylvania seized the College of Philadelphia in 1779 (ten years before there was a college in Chapel Hill). If "university" versus "college" status is important to you, then Penn claims to be the oldest U.S. university, period (see First university in the United States). Wareh 04:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

There appear to be older colleges/universities listed under colonial colleges. Were they not "public" at the time ? StuRat 13:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

That's right. The only ones of these that are now public is the College of William and Mary and Rutgers, but they did not become public until 1925 and 1945-1956, respectively (according to Public Ivy#_note-1). Wareh 16:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, so, depending on the interpretation of the question, we get three different answers:

Q: What is the oldest US college/university which is currently public ?

A: The College of William and Mary (founded in 1693, went public in 1925).

Q: What is the oldest US college/university which was public when founded ?

A: The University of North Carolina (founded as public in 1789).

Q: What is the US college/university which has been public for the longest time ?

A: The University of Pennsylvania (founded in 1749, went public in 1779).

StuRat 23:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Except UPenn isn't public. There were two institutions which were merged to form the school currently known as the University of Pennsylvania, one of which was public and existed from 1779 until a merger in 1791. (This is from the Misplaced Pages article.) In any case, it's definitely private now.

Izzycat 03:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, then, let me revise the last possible interpretation of the question:

Q: What is the US college/university which was public on the earliest date ?

A: The University of Pennsylvania (part of which was founded in 1749, went public in 1779, and went private again in 1791).

StuRat 05:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Forbes List of $ Billionaires (2006)

The Misplaced Pages (Forbes) List of (US Dollar) Billionaires (2006), numbers 275. How many of them are Jewish?

Where is this article? User:Zoe|(talk) 21:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Presumably List of billionaires (2006) --Tagishsimon (talk)

Thanks. The reason I asked is that in general, such lists are considered the intellecutal property of the magazine, etc., which prints them, but this could be considered a compilation of facts, not opinions, and so probably isn't a copyright violation. Do others agree with my interpreation of this? User:Zoe|(talk) 22:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

List of billionaires (2006)

Jump to: navigation, search

Bill Gates - the wealthiest man in the world according to Forbes Magazine Ingvar KampradThe following is a list of billionaires, in United States dollars, worldwide for 2006 compiled by Forbes, not including heads of state whose wealth is tied to their position (see list of heads of government and state by net worth). In 2006, there are 793 billionaires from 49 countries, with more than half being in the United States and Germany. 2006 saw an increase in billionaires from Russia, India, and Brazil mainly due to economic growth in those countries

Zoe, I asked the original question (which still stands by the way). And also, by the way, I have no ulterior motive, my question is purely academic. However, your query as to whether its appearance in Misplaced Pages might be a breach of Forbes' copyright, now prompts me to note that whereas the list I referred to includes only 275 names/families, all detailed, the above italicised-headed summary (taken from the Misplaced Pages article), states there are in fact 793 billionaires from 49 countries. So, to be reasonable, I would happily accept an answer to my original question based on either statistic ie., 275 or 793, or preferably, both. Thanks. But as an aside, I don't see how my copying a Wiki statistic into a Wiki question could worsen any suspected breach of copyright.

I'm sorry, I'm not claiming that your question was a copyvio, but the article might be. User:Zoe|(talk) 02:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory suggests that the "7 powerful families" of the world (notably the Rothschild family who are Jewish) are far wealthier and more powerful than any of the world's billionaires. For centuries they have been funding entire countries and were powerful enough to create international wars. They funded John D. Rockefeller who at one point owned a third of the USA's GDP. The "wealth accolades" can fill a book. Sandman30s 09:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

A third of one percent. Nobody could ever amass $4 trillion in wealth (today's dollars). lots of issues | leave me a message 11:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

That is current GDP. Rockefeller came with Rothschild funding in the early 20th century to target the big industries of the time namely oil, steel, rail, etc. The "one third" was in the billions back then. You think nobody can own a third of a trillion now - you'd be surprised - check out the figures that asset management companies manage - who do you think owns most of those assets? Sandman30s 12:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

What does it matter if any of them are Jewish (or Muslim or Native American or Irish or....)? - Mgm|User talk:MacGyverMagic|]] 10:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Here in post apartheid South Africa, anyone asking you for your race group makes sure they state it is for purely statistical or census purposes ;) Sandman30s 11:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

When posing the original question, I anticipated that, as confirmed by the last two respondents, there would be a suspicion of some ulterior or racist or discriminatory motive in doing so, which is why I subsequently gave my honest assurance that that was not the case (see my earlier response to Zoe). This is an online encyclopaedia and if its informed and otherwise willing subscribers are obsessively, suspiciously and unjustifiably reluctant to answer such a genuine and academically inspired question, then please will the administrators create and enforce a policy whereby such potentially dubiously based questions may not be asked? Sounds a bit like Farenheit 451 to me!! But that being the case, I, and others, should never again be allowed to be curious to know what proportion of the world population at any time was Catholic, white, male, Muslim, gay, Chinese, black, below the internationally accepted level of poverty - or Jewish. I realise of course, that my original question is now lost, as is, I suspect, the whole point of Misplaced Pages.

Word for Jewish "quorum"

I was just talking to someone and searching for the word that describes the minimum number of Jewish worshipers needed for some services. I seem to recall that is sounds like "minion"?? --Justanother 19:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Duh, I should try searching for myself first. Google of "Jewish quorum" led right back to Jewish services and then to Minyan. --Justanother 19:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Fighting Obesity

My friend is fat. Can someone offer me some alternatives to chips, chocolates and other unhealthy snacks that are eaten by kids when they are hungry from after school? The snack should be filling, healthy, affordable and available in North American stores. Thanks. Jamesino 21:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Fruit. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Baby carrot; rice cakes (minimum sweetening). I am a low-carb fan myself so I might go for tuna fish salad or egg salad on low-carb wheat crackers. Cheese and (low-carb) crackers. --Justanother 22:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Google is your friend. It's important to remember tho, that kids and teens who are still growing should not have their fat, carbs or calories controlled too much, but rather the emphasis should be on high nutrition per calorie, reducing empty calories, and getting lots of exercise. Some suggestions include:

• • yogourt
  • chips and salsa
  • snackable veggies like carrots and celery
  • trail mix
  • whole grain crackers or toast with cheese, peanut butter or spreadable cream cheese
  • cereal
  • homous and pita
  • baked potato skins (can be prepared ahead of time)

A good snack should have a balance of fat, carbs and protein (protein is important to help feel full, and carbs are very important for growing people), if grains they should be whole, to digest more slowly and provide fibre, and preferably there should be some fruit or veggies (kids should have 3-5 half-cup servings of fruit and veggies a day, teens 5-7).

--Anchoress 22:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Good points. If you can reduce the empty calories and persuade your friend to take some exercise with you, you will likely see a difference. But it is essential that you enlist his support first; don't do it from some "know-best" attitude on your part. Don't try to do it in a covert fashion ("Damn, we are all out of cookies; oh well, I have carrots.") If you do that he will oppose you and it will go nowhere and hurt your friendship. Find out what he is willing to contribute to the effort and follow his lead. I.e, is he amenable to cutting out the bad snacks, is he willing to go for a walk with you for 20 miniutes or throw a ball around, ride a bicycle, whatever. You can be his friend by providing some "moral support" and structure to his effort, not by leading him by the nose. --Justanother 23:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

As one who has just been diagnosed with serious diverticulitis that looks like I am to have 2 feet of my colon removed, may I suggest that your friend takes really professional advice about a weight-loss high-fibre diet that will include lots of calorie-free roughage and keep the bowel filled with largely indigestible bulk that will not add weight but will keep the bowel walls apart, whilst maintaining a satisfyingly "full" sensation. Not forgetting of course to have an otherwise healthy and nutritious diet.

If your friend has health insurance he could see a physician and a nutritionist. There are some health problems that can cause overweight. Exercise might well be more important to his weight than his diet is. -THB 01:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

maidens

If there's a no ball in an over but no other runs are scored is it a maiden?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.187.156 (talk • contribs)

For those bemused, the questioner is referring to Cricket--Mnemeson 22:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that. This American was really confused as to what balls and maidens had to do with scoring runs. Dismas| 04:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The answer is no. Cricket terminology defines the maiden over as having no score off the bat, or off a no ball or a wide. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Brian Close, hard Yorkshire county and England captain told his bowlers that a "true maiden" over is one where the batsman never touches any one of the six balls, and there are no byes, no-ball penalties, etc.petitmichel90.0.128.118 15:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Per Tagishsimon - there could never be "no score off a no-ball or a wide", because these always by definition result in scores. A maiden over is where there are no scores off the bat, and there were no no-balls or wides bowled in the over, ie. no score at all. JackofOz 01:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

If I looked over a maiden, I would expect to find no balls. Otherwise, I would not score, but definitely run, because that's just not cricket. :-) StuRat 05:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hermph...:) to come back to the original question - the only type of runs that can be scored in a maiden over are byes and leg-byes. If any other runs are scored, it's not a maiden. The reason for this is that a no ball and a wide are both counted as being runs given away by the bowler (they are credited against his analysis). Leg byes are regarded as not really being given away by the bowler (he did beat the bat, after all), and byes are regarded as the fault of the wicketkeeper. Grutness...wha? 08:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You are correct. I was too categorical in saying there can be no score at all. But none of the scores can result from runs taken off the bat, no-balls, or wides. JackofOz 08:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Racial Ancestry

I never really knew, and still don't know, what my racial ancestry really is. One parent is completely European, and the other parent is the child of a white puertorican and a black puertorican. I know that puertoricans are the product of colonization, slavery, and interbreeding and stuff, but approxmately what percent European, African, Native puertorican, or any other race am I? --216.164.249.143 23:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

We don't know about you personally of course, but if you're from Puerto Rico, then the Misplaced Pages articles Puerto Rico#Demographics and Demographics of Puerto Rico may help you answer your questions. -- SCZenz 00:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't really understand how to interpret the DNA stuff, and also, it doesn't distinguish black and white puertoricans. Can anybody help with the question wth this in mind?--216.164.249.143 00:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You are a child of the Universe - no less than the trees and the stars - you have a right to be here.

That is from some song or poem, but which one? JIP | Talk 08:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Desiderata, IIRC. Atlant 12:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You're part of the human race. Or 100% African like everybody else, since homo sapiens originated in Africa. Clarityfiend 00:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Please don't respond with silly answers, I know I am a human. Clarityfiend, people have evolved a lot since African times. I want to know, for example, about what percent of my 10th generatioin ancestors were of each race? Thanks to anybody who may know something on an obscure topic such as this.--216.164.249.143 01:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

From your description, I'd opine that you are greater than 50% European & less than 50% African ... although neither of those are "races". And whilst I can see where you are going with your question, the answer is always going to be complicated by questions of a) granularity: human race, european, british, scot, lowland scot, scottish borders), b) time: there's been much migration over the last 2000 years, for instance. You get a different answer with different time base (written before you suggested 10th generation) . c) don't think you can generalise in percentile terms what the racial antecedents of any large place are, since there are so many different patterns. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Alternate view is that you, if we take the gene pool info from one of the articles above,is that you are 50% European plus (45% European, 37% African, and 18% Native American)/2 = 72.5 european, 18.5 african and 9% native american. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Thank you very much Tagishimon. If anyone has something to add, please feel free to.--216.164.249.100 01:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

No "percentage" model of race will be accurate unless you are talking about probabalistic notions of genes shared among populations, but the answers you will get from something like that will not necessarily correspond at all with popular notions of race ("white" people suddenly become "black" and vice versa). In any case you won't be able to tell things like what percent of your human ancestors were of one "race" or another — genetic information doesn't have information like that in it. You could try to reconstruct those sorts of things with genealogies but even those aren't usually reliable to that degree, and in the end there are ancestors who probably haven't contributed anything to your current genetic make-up. --Fastfission 01:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Assuming that your "white" grandparents were 100% European and your "black" grandparent was 100% African, then you are 75% European and 25% African. Race is not a fixed concept and certainly Europeans and Africans are much more alike than different genetically. Like 99.something percent the same. -THB 02:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Seems like the question is quite complicated. --Proficient 05:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Boricua has some information you might be interested in. -THB 05:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The only way to be absolutely certain is to have your DNA analysed. The black Welsh athlete Colin Jackson (former world 110m hurdles record holder) had his DNA analysed recently for a BBC genealogy TV programme and was determined to be 55% African, 38% European (from a Scottish great-grandfather), and 7% Native American (probably from the original inhabitants of Jamaica). -- Arwel (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting idea. Wonder if this site will give you that info. Looked again and, yes, it appears so:

SuperDNA is the most comprehensive and highest resolution DNA test available in the world for genealogy purposes. Since it includes the Y-DNA67, this is a male only test. It puts together the power of the Y-DNA67 and mtDNA Full Sequence, allowing you to establish a clear picture of your direct paternal and maternal lines for both genealogical and deep ancestral origins.

--Justanother 20:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)