Revision as of 18:20, 4 December 2014

• 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

November 28

Office cubicles; a US phenomenon?

Our cubicle article seems to be focussed mainly on the US (as sadly are many articles), but in this case I wonder if that is because the office cubicle is actually mainly a US phenomenon. Now, I work in academia in the UK, and all bets are off there, but I've never seen cubicles in a European office environment. Mind you, I haven't seen many commercial offices, so hence my question. Are cubicle offices common at all outside of the US? Maybe in Asia? 131.251.254.81 (talk) 16:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

What do you have instead of cubicles? A wide-open sea of desks? People seem to forget that cubicles were intended to be an improvement on that kind of environment. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:47, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, in one of my workplaces I'm in a small office with 8 desks or so, and in my second workplace with 2 desks. But yes, in general, I think that's what happens. That's why I'm asking the question, I don't know. I don't see however, why anybody would want to work in a cubicle, no chance of having a chat or even seeing someone else? Surely it's lethally boring? But I digress. 131.251.254.81 (talk)

I work in cubicle enviroment in Bulgaria, Europe. If you take the first picture in the article as reference- there are 7 of max 8 panels used to separate the space. Here 4 of 8 panels are used and cubicals are arranged into larger "cubicles" of 6-8 desk cubicles.Gergo vassilev (talk) 16:58, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm in the UK, and I've only once worked in an office with individual cubicles. It was an insurance company, we weren't allowed to talk to each other and we just kept our heads down and got on with our own work. Which meant that when the girl who opened the mail went off on maternity leave, nobody opened a single item of mail for several weeks. That's when they brought me in from the temp agency. I only lasted a couple of weeks. But I've never worked in a completely open-plan office either. Usually you would have sections divided off with standing partitions or banks of filing cabinets, inside which you'd have maybe eight or twelve desks, some of them back-to-back in groups, with the section manager usually having his/her own stand-alone desk. It's a decent compromise between individual cubicles and open-plan, more sociable and less dehumanising than either, and means people voluntarily pitch in to cover when others in their team are absent, because they know what everybody does and how much they depend on each other. My current employer tried to introduce rotation and hot-desking a few years ago (as part a misbegotten attempt to organise a service activity according to Lean manufacturing), but it didn't take. --Nicknack009 (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

• The IP geolocates to Cardiff. The UK certainly has cubicles in its more modern (London) office buildings, which you can see from simply watching British TV. μηδείς (talk) 17:29, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

"No one in the US builds cubicles any more, and in the UK they never really did." I've seen cubicles on only two UK sites, both intended for individual employee study/training rather than as an employee's fixed workplace, and one of them was more than ten years ago. (I have some little experience of German sites, but didn't see any cubicles there either.)

What are extremely common in open-plan UK offices are the half-height dividing partitions between rows of desks and at the end of rows of desks. These are at approximately shoulder level when the employee is seated, so that the employee can converse with the person opposite them by looking straight across the partition; but will not see the person opposite them if they are looking down at work on their desk or at their computer screen (depending on placement). They're also soft-coated so they are effective in deadening noise, and you can stick printouts of Dilbert cartoons (complete with portrayals of cubicles), or calendars or other appropriate items, to them. They also have the effect that whatever is on your desk is partially private, since no-one sees it unless they either walk up behind you (analogous to "entering" a cubicle employee's cubicle) or stand opposite you and peer over the partition (which would be an uncommon way to behave.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:43, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I thought shoulder-height barriers were what were meant by cubicles, not beehive chambers. Only on Seinfeld did Americans work in closets. μηδείς (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Shoulder-height partitions when standing is the (now slightly outdated) American way. Search "The Matrix Escaping from Work Scene HD" on YouTube to see what I mean. As I said, shoulder height or slightly below when sitting, is the UK way, if partitions are used at all. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:51, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Whoever said "no one in the US builds cubicles anymore" must not have been in any US offices. Google "Steelcase cubicles" and you'll see a major cubicle-builder. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:59, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, that was a reliable source, not a vendor. I would agree, though, that many US businesses are still determined to try to use this method of control. While, at the same time, companies in most other continents avoid it. That's what the OP was asking about. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:46, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Every office I've ever worked in or visited has cubicles of some sort. You call it a "method of control". It's actually less controlled than the sea of desks was. The idea was to give everyone a private space to work in. Nowadays they've pulled back from it a little bit, creating little "huddle" areas for impromptu meetings and the like. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Every office you've ever worked in, Baseball Bugs, has been in the USA. Do you remember the OP's question? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:46, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Somebody was saying the US doesn't do cubicles anymore. That's false. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 04:48, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

• I am surprised to learn I was really in London all this time, not New York. Not only was my cubicle shoulder high as I sat, I could raise the seat itself, and regularly communicated with the women surrounding me. μηδείς (talk) 02:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

• The OP didn't ask about New York. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:46, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

My hovercraft is full of eels? μηδείς (talk) 22:07, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

That explains the problem - you can only see over the partition because you are afloat inside your own hovercraft. Mostly in/on a mixture made from jellied eels.

I am quite sure that using the interior of a hovercraft as office space is not especially cost-effective. --Demiurge1000 (talk)

Possible Burundi centenarian

I have found an old article which says that Lazaro Busuku a 96 year old man from Burundi moved to Omaha in 2007. I would like to know is he still alive because now he would be 103 years old and probably first centenarian and oldest known person ever from Burundi. But if he has passed away is there any article or obituary about him? 62.72.229.12 (talk) 18:04, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Have you searched for an obituary under his name, which is certainly not going to be common in Nebraska? You can also call the state coroner or whatever they call that position in NE. I only found my estranged cousin had died of complications from a brain tumor by calling the relevant dept. In Pennsylvania. μηδείς (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

He's in the Omaha phone book for 2014. That doesn't mean for sure that he is still alive, but it suggests he probably is. Note though that ages for people from countries like Burundi are often not very well documented. Looie496 (talk) 15:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

In NY State there is no legal right to maintain a local residential phone number listing under the name of a dead person; but so long as no one complains, and the bill is paid, or even if the bill is changed to the name of a third party, the listing will not change unless someone gives cause or complaint. For many decades, the name Howshall, Harry P. was listed in the Philadelphia white pages, but i have not been able to find a recent listing. μηδείς (talk) 02:54, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

November 29

one website that advertises one's hobby and one website advertises one's assignment

Is there a website that allows you to advertise your hobby for example photography and videography of female feet? also, is there a website that allows you to advertise your assignment for example assignment of female feet photos and videos as part of photography and videography assignment? just asking. nothing curious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.34.205 (talk) 16:33, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Sounds like either Instagram or Pinterest will meet your needs here. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:21, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

And if you want something where specifically foot photography might be welcomed, you might try fetlife. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:49, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I might have made a mistake. What I mean was that I wanted models to be my foot models regardless of their ethnicity, religion and race, and I wanted to post that modelling as advertisement. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.34.205 (talk) 23:54, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

state dept.

Do they offer visits to the public?2001:558:6020:157:7D03:47EF:C282:FCAF (talk) 18:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

They have this (you have to register for a tour in advance). I imagine most of the rest of the place is just boring offices; a tour of them probably wouldn't be very interesting. Deor (talk) 18:34, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

That's exactly what they want you to assume. Does the sinistry (sp: sinisterness? sinistrality? sinistrousness?) of their cunning know no bounds? -- Jack of Oz 19:18, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

The BBC offers a virtual tour of the UK Home Office, which they call The Dark Department. In contrast, the (non-BBC) government's online presentation is transparently white. The only shade of grey in all the minister and managers is in the one unphotographed guy, Charles Farr. Googling to see any possible differences from Kevin White, I found nothing to fear. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:54, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

November 30

Can I use this, and if so how?

This criminal trial transcript is available: http://fg.j3224.co.uk/RvGParkJudgesSummingUp.pdf

Can it be used for the article: Lady in the Lake trial? If so, what citation guidelines do I need follow? Alligators1974 (talk) 01:18, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

No, it cannot be used in an article. The website hosting this material (fg.j3224.co.uk) does not qualify as a reliable source, the document claims to be subject to copyright (and not by the website hosting it), and we have no means to verify that it is authentic. (in future, please use the Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for such queries). AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:24, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Type of home design

Today I saw a house of a design that I've seen before and I'd like to know what the design or roof type is called. It was a two story home. The roof was flat and the second story exterior was quite heavily sloped. The exterior only widened maybe a foot or so from the top of the house to where the eaves hung over the first story. Yes, there were eaves but, as I described, they were very small as far as horizontal distance goes. Is there a name for this design? Thanks, Dismas| 02:16, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Saltbox? --Jayron32 02:34, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Not a saltbox, I know saltboxes. I realize now that I left out the fact that the second story exterior wall was slanted on all four sides. There were no gable ends. Dismas| 02:43, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time visualizing exactly what you're describing. Something like a mansard roof? Deor (talk) 08:21, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, like that. But the top of the house was flat, from what I could see. And there was no upper pitch to it. It was all one pitch which was very steep. Though I did notice that that article says "The upper slope of the roof may not be visible from street level when viewed from close proximity to the building." Dismas| 09:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Mansards are often like that, with a minimally-sloped roof up top, or the mansard forms a parapet that hides a roof at a lower elevation. Acroterion (talk) 01:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Locking children in car

In which US states is it illegal to let your child wait in the car?--Kopiersperre (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

The 20 states which have such a law are marked on a map in a Mother Jones article from this year: "Where Is It a Crime to Leave a Kid Alone in a Parked Car?". You can click on each state for details. This kidsandcars.org site only lists 19 states (the list is at least two years old), but you can read the actual legalese text for each state. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:08, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

That's very interesting. I wonder if (and where) there is a distinction between locking the child in the car (similar to how, if one puts a dog in a car and then closes the door, the dog can't get out), and leaving the child in the car (the child is 6 or over, and can quite happily release the handbrake, open the door and exit the vehicle, or assert its wishes in other ways, if it is determined to do so).

Leaving an 11-or-so child "home alone" for extended periods of time (a week?) in the UK often leads to the parent being arrested. But "in car alone" for ten minutes while the parent goes into a shop for a pint of milk? For 20 minutes? For 30 minutes? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:48, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Apparently, it's dangerous to either leave an American kid locked in the car or free in the parking lot. You could take him into the mall with you, but why risk it? Leaving him with a relative or family friend seems reasonable, until you hear they abduct 76% of found missing children. Thankfully, there's a National Safe Place (although our article says it provides a "safe place", in "scare quotes"). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:27, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Imagine that the child refuses to come shopping and wants to stay in the car. Must the parents beat the child to obedience, that the parents can follow the law?--Kopiersperre (talk) 22:38, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

If the kid is so big you have to resort to violence to control him, he's probably big enough to not be subject to that child-endangerment law. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 22:56, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Not everyone who beats their kid does it a last resort. Often just the easiest. Black Friday sales don't exactly encourage patience. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:48, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Koperspierre, if you think that any parent whose child displays obstinacy is somehow forced to use beating, then I hope you're not a parent. -- Jack of Oz 03:28, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

I can't understand why you would let them wait in the car. Why would they want to do that? Surely you mean make them wait in the car? KägeTorä - (_虎) (Chin Wag) 10:48, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Sometimes (and this may be hard for you to understand, but trust me, it DOES happen) parents will ask their children what they wish to do from time to time. Some parents don't spend 18 years ordering their children around 24 hours a day. Some parents do, once in a while, ask their children for what they want to do, instead of commanding them to do everything during every waking hour. --Jayron32 12:18, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

When I was ten years old, I was locked in a car with my baby niece while mum and dad went to the pub. The kid couldn't stop crying, and I was, "What am I supposed to do with this thing?" We get along much better these days, however (30 years later). I just wouldn't recommend it. Also, I wasn't asked if I wanted to stay in the car with the baby. I was told to. If I had been asked what I wanted to do, I would have gone with them, so they could share the responsibility of little crying baby while I happily sipped a glass of coke. KägeTorä - (_虎) (Chin Wag) 15:18, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but there are parents who do ask their kids what they want to do. I know that doesn't match your experience. But your experience is not necessarily universal. See Deor's experience below. --Jayron32 15:28, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

As a child, I would have preferred going to the dentist to accompanying my mother while she shopped for clothes or food—and my attitude to shopping has not improved with the years (unless you count browsing in bookstores). I spent a lot of time reading in parking lots in those days, though I suspect contemporary children might prefer to play electronic games on hand-held devices. Deor (talk) 14:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

OTOH, my mother, who's had 4 children so far (she's only 89), has always said she would prefer to go through childbirth than go to the dentist.  :) -- Jack of Oz 21:14, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

• Back to the question at hand, and the side questions everyone seems to be asking: This is the reason why it is illegal to lock a small child in a car while you go into the mall to shop. If even one of those articles doesn't fill you with rage and/or disgust and/or pity, you are a horrible person. --Jayron32 15:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Incidentally, you need to be careful when looking up laws regarding stuff along these lines. For some reason, there are many rules of thumb out there regarding children left alone that people widely assume to be laws, but which have little or no basis in the law books. For example, as my daughter got older, we asked friends about when it was okay to start leaving her home by herself and were confidently told that kids could be left alone at 11, could babysit siblings at 10, babysit strangers at 13, and all kinds of self-contradictory stuff. Matt Deres (talk) 16:44, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

It can get insanely hot inside a parked car and children die fairly frequently from parents and other care-givers stupidly shutting them inside. This US-centric article says: "Since 1998 there have been at least 636 documented cases of heatstroke deaths of children in vehicles. This data and study shows that these incidents can occur on days with relatively mild (i.e., ~ 70 degrees F) temperatures and that vehicles can reach life-threatening temperatures very rapidly."...and for those who say "Well, it's only for 10 minutes"...take a look at the graph at the bottom of that article showing that even in 70 degF weather, the car can easily reach life-threatening temperatures within 10 minutes. We tend to use our own bodies as guidance here - but thermoregulation is nowhere near as good in small children as it is in adults - and their surface-area to mass ratio is much MUCH higher than in adults - so this is an incredibly dumb analogy. So is "I've done this loads of times and nothing bad happened". Since people are not too smart about reading statistics and looking at graphs (including at least one respondent here)...we have to pass laws. SteveBaker (talk) 15:48, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Even police dogs aren't above the laws of thermodynamics. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:13, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

December 1

Where did the prick go?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is this a line from Prayer in C ?

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

Orientation of Welsh Dragon flags on angled wall-mounted poles

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

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

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

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

Too many meetings?

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

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

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

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

That way they spread the blame around. (As per Dilbert.) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:47, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Ammunition drums for submachine guns

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

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

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

Why aren't domesticated cats afraid of dogs?

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

It would depend on the temperament of the individual cat. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:55, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wikipeida Question

December 2

On Siamese twins

Perhaps I've been eating too much blue cheese,but whilst watching a documentary on Siamese twins,a couple of thoughts wandered into my brain..

1.Is it only possible to have Siamese twins or it is theoretically possible to have Siamese triplets,quadruplets etc? and are there any recorded examples?

2.If you were to have sex with Siamese twins and one gave consent and the other didn't,would that be classified as rape?-who actually gets to give consent for their body to used?

Lemon martini (talk) 12:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Read about Chang and Eng, the original, and literal "Siamese" twins. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 14:46, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Chang and Eng were distinctly two people joined at the chest but with separate lower bodies. More pertinent as an example might be Abigail and Brittany Hensel who are much more conjoined and in the lower body have only one set of organs. I think you'd need a unanimous decision - but it is a pretty bizarre question. Richard Avery (talk) 15:03, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

This is the reason we have judges in law courts. The law certainly won't have been written about that...any more than if one twin steals a chocolate bar in a supermarket and whether both of them go to jail for shop-lifting - or if one twin assaults the other causing actual bodily harm. Judges have the power to interpret the law, to look at the nuances of what happened and to decide how (if at all) the law applies. The tougher decisions get passed on to appeal courts and ultimately to supreme courts...and if the final decision of those courts is not something everyone likes, then the law can be modified by governments. If a judge were to make a decision in a case like this, that decision would tend to be taken into consideration in future cases of a similar nature - at which point it becomes case law and most judges will decide the same way in future cases.

Just recently, here in the US, a man who had been saying on Facebook that he'd kill his estranged wife was hauled through the courts because they couldn't agree on whether it's an exercise of free speech or an actual death threat...the law is vague on this - so it's being taken up by the US Supreme Court who will have to set some kind of a limit on what constitutes a threat to murder - and what is free speech. Once they do that, future case will undoubtedly follow what they said - even though the law is silent on the matter.

In this case, it's hard to guess what they'd say. My bet is that both twins would have to consent. Happily, I'm not a judge - so who knows? SteveBaker (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Of course if this question didn't mention sex someone would have very quickly said "Sorry can't you read, we don't give legal advice", but there you go, Avery's Law on RD responses to questions of opinion or advice - the more bizarre or sexual or gruesome the less responders can resist answering. Richard Avery (talk) 19:18, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to start an argument, and as an IP editor I usually stay out of these disputes, but I do feel that your interpretation of this as being "legal advice" is mistaken. There is no hint that the OP is asking about anything he/she or anyone else is actually involved with, and the question seems to me to be only about legal information pertaining to a hypothetical situation. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 20:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry 212 I forgot to put a :-)) st the end of my post Richard Avery (talk) 13:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

No probs – work stress was lowering my humour-detection sense. I wish everybody would agree to introducing an ironic font such as 'backwards italics', as someone once suggested. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

As for question (1), it's really just a question of the geometry of embryological development. If an early blastula becomes partially split along a plane, each half will develop somewhat normally distally from the plane of intersection. For this to happen in a three way split, it is virtually impossible, since it would require two separate incomplete divisions that happened to have the same orientation, but happened separately. One might imaging causing a head to head split mechanically in a lab, then causing the twins to split lengthwise, like cutting a square piece of paper into square quarters, but leaving them attached at the center. But the difficulty of this and getting the fetus viably to term is outweighed only by the sheer vileness of the notion. Actually conjoined triplets are terribly deformed, and nonviable conjoined quadruplets not cute minature montypythonian three-headed knights.μηδείς (talk) 20:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I am aware of a case in Australia of triplets where two of them were conjoined. The conjoined pair were joined at the abdomen and were successfully separated soon after birth. All three are now healthy young adults. HiLo48 (talk) 23:52, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

That's interesting, can you give a link. I will predict they were not coinjoined accordian-like, but asymmetrically. μηδείς (talk) 04:34, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Ooops, I misunderstood. The third was not conjoined at all? That's a big grey animal with floppy ears and tusks. μηδείς (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

This is a link to an example of what HiLo48 was talking about. Hack (talk) 04:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

HiLo spoke of three surviving to adulthood after two were separated, this sad article says the conjoined twins died soon after birth. μηδείς (talk) 04:44, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

This is probably the case he was talking about. Hack (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Yep. That's them. HiLo48 (talk) 07:33, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

There's an ongoing, fictional case of Siamese twins with various crime-related consent compatibility issues on American Horror Story: Freak Show. New episode tomorrow. Probably won't answer your questions, but may have clues. It's loosely based on history. At the very least, it's an interesting role for Sarah Paulson. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:57, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

The Third Twin. μηδείς (talk) 02:47, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

How does a "Frame by Frame" film analysis seminar work?

Eminent film critics sometimes host "frame by frame" analysis seminars, where other film critics, cinema industry professionals, students, and interested members of the general public can attend. An important film will be analyzed in depth by the group. Since films are shot at twenty-four (24) frames per second, however, won't these seminars be interminably long if they literally pause on every frame, as the name implies? How do these seminars actually work? Thanks. Zombiesturm (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Probably just a cute way of saying "in-depth analysis". Do you have any examples? ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 14:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

They don't really go through the entire movie frame-by-frame. They may choose to do that to explain or discuss some tiny nuance - but the term is generally just a way of saying that they break the film down into it's fundamental parts and analyze each part in detail. Questions like: Why was such-and-such actor lit this way when the person standing next to them was lit that way? Why was that particular camera angle chosen? Why did they cut back and forth between the two protagonists during this conversation when they panned between them in that conversation and held them both in shot for this other conversation?....that kind of thing. They could spend 20 minutes discusssing a single frame of the video - then skip 20 minutes of the movie without even watching it. SteveBaker (talk) 15:18, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

The point is that they are not watching the movie. That would require paying the distributors for the right to show the movie, which would require charging for tickets. For it to be free and legal, they are just sampling bits of the movie to critique. 209.149.114.72 (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

There are "fair use" provisions in the copyright act that allow for using material in an educational setting and specifically for "visual art educators". SteveBaker (talk) 20:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure "frame by frame" refers to the most notable scenes. It's not a literal use of the term. Viriditas (talk) 06:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Cinema Interruptus is a notable example of a "frame-by-frame" analysis done with a large group of people. Not actually frame by frame of course (though they call it that), more like "shot-by-shot". Staecker (talk) 12:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Most effective study strategy for exam with a choice of questions

I'm studying for an exam. I know what could be asked in each of the 4 questions, and there is no overlap. I can choose which 3 of the 4 questions I will do . Is it better to use my limited study time as if I had to do all 4 questions, or prepare for 3 questions and ignore 1? We have obviously done all of the material covered in class so I am already somewhat familiar with them all. Kind regards 79.97.222.210 (talk) 21:14, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Assuming you spend equal amounts of time studying for each, and the same amount of time studying under both approaches:

Study 3: You dedicate 20 minutes per study hour to each question, and will choose either 100% or 66% of the questions correctly.

Study 4: You dedicate 15 minutes per study hour to each question, and are guaranteed to choose 100% of the questions correctly.

Studying all four would not be much of a reduction in time (and so possibly quality), but a undeniably safer bet in terms of coverage. Another option would be roughly study all four, and then go back and focus on the three you're least sure of. You'd average out to about 17 minutes for every study hour overall, and still effectively choose 100% of the right questions. However, a complete pyramid approach (study, knock the most sure off, repeat) would probably be a bad idea unless you're absolutely sure about the first two you drop. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:27, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I can choose which of the questions I want to do. Updated my initial post--79.97.222.210 (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh, in that case, why would you study the question you're not going to answer? Ian.thomson (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

I haven't in the past, but I thought maybe there was some statistics that show learning all the questions is more effective. Maybe I'm likely to forget things and if I'm prepared for everything I can choose what I remember better. I'm asking because I've never seen any statistics about it.--79.97.222.210 (talk) 21:47, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

No, the main reason I suggested study 4 above was because of the risk of not choosing the right questions with study 3. If that is not an issue, the only issue is how much time you get to devote to each question, which makes study 3 the best option. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:52, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

For clarity, do you mean you know the precise question (or possible questions), or simply what the question will cover? If you don't know the precise question, it can sometimes be an advantage to study all 4 in case the precise question of one of the 3 you did study turns out be something you find yourself struggling with for whatever reason. Nil Einne (talk) 05:49, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

In the UK, this is called "question spotting". If you constrain yourself to 3 only, you're absolutely stuck if one of the questions is put in a way you find difficult to answer, despite your preparation, for example, you're not quite sure what the examiner is after or it demands knowledge of an aspect you've inadvertently overlooked. I'd suggest you prepare all 4, even if, as Ian suggests above, one of them is prepared more sketchily. Don't forget, the way exams are structured, it's relatively straightforward to pick up the first mass of marks with even a rudimentary knowledge, which will help lift your overall average in a disaster. Think of it this way: getting 100 marks on each of 2 questions and 0 for the third is 200 marks. Getting 90 for the first 2 and just 50 for the third is 230. --Dweller (talk) 09:53, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

December 3

Sony's hack moments

Through some news articles about Sony being hacked while they didn't have access to the internet, the hackers distributed movies online and then they caused other damage to the box office. I'm guessing the article of Sony needs some information about such hacks they've made.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 07:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

You would need proper sourcing. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 08:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm quite spectical this belongs in the Sony article. Sony is a massive company with involvement in many different areas and in the end it's not clear that this is any more significant to Sony the massive company than the PlayStation Network outage which also isn't mention in our Sony article, and probably shouldn't be. The recent hack is mentioned in Sony Pictures Entertainment just as the PSN one is mentioned in Sony Online Entertainment which is probably right since these hacks do seem significant enough for the respective subsidiaries. Nil Einne (talk) 12:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

the sentencing month

Prison sentences in These United States are often (I gather) stated in months. Is that a common calendar month, so that the length in days depends on when the sentence begins, or a constant month defined for the context? —Tamfang (talk) 21:53, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

You know, I never would have guessed at how complex a question this is. Even assuming we're exclusively talking about federal law (this certainly varies between states), I would have expected to have found a definition for the word "month" either in the federal sentencing guidelines, in the US Code, or in the Bureau of Prisons regulations: I found nothing like that. The impression I get from the treatises (such as Federal Procedure, Lawyer's Edition) is that the date of release would probably be set on the earlier of two conflicting dates if there was ambiguity as to what a month means. As an example, Federal Procedure, Lawyer's Edition states that if the date of release would otherwise fall on a weekend or federal holiday, the date of release is usually bumped back to the weekday before. —/Mendaliv//_Δ's/ 02:18, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Let me understand. Are you asking, Tamfang, whether prisoners get released on the 29th of whatember in leap=years, and on the 28th of leapless years? And does your question apply to common-law countries, Napoleonic code countries, those governed by Sharia, or elsewhere? μηδείς (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Read the actual question before moaning, it clearly states it's about the US. (Kudos to the questioner, most people don't bother with that.) 131.251.254.81 (talk) 08:23, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

On the other hand, googling "calendar month unless otherwise" + "sentencing" appears to show a number of states that define "month" as calendar month (unless otherwise expressed). Googling it without "sentencing" indicates that "month" is defined this way in other legal areas as well. I also found older texts where "month" is defined as "lunar month" in legal context, but as calendar month in commercial context. The Judicial Dictionary of Words and Phrases Judicially Interpreted, 1890 (Stroud's Judicial Dictionary). ---Sluzzelin talk 02:56, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

In googling, I found some estimated release date calculations published by the state of Nevada that unambiguously used month = 30 days. That said, I don't know whether that was an official standard for jail terms in Nevada or just an approximation used for the estimation. Dragons flight (talk) 18:11, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

December 4

Cats

How do they get photorealistic paint jobs on vans?

Or other types of autos for that matter? Are they covering the side of the van with a thin film that has the image and then covering it with some kind of clear equivalent of powder paint job that gets baked to form a protective coat over the film image? Peter Michner (talk) 14:37, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Wrap advertising is the Misplaced Pages page on the subject, although it has "multiple issues". This YouTube video shows the process of transferring the film with the image on it to the vehicle. Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Contribution

I will be happy to MAIL a check to fundraiser, if you will supply me an address — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.243.7.6 (talk) 14:55, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

There's a "Donate to Misplaced Pages" link near the top of the sidebar of every page: this will tell you all the ways you can donate. --ColinFine (talk) 17:46, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

donations

I have several times recently been asked to donate to Misplaced Pages. I have done this in the past but am now so suspicious I need to make sure how to donate safely. 217.44.45.246 (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Please see the answer immediately above. --ColinFine (talk) 17:46, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Before you donate even one red cent to Misplaced Pages, you should read what Wikipediocracy has to say about how the WMF spends its money. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 18:14, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

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