Revision as of 21:24, 9 November 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 1

November 5

Junk Mail

People avoid junk mail like its a cancer. I feel the opposite way, I adore junk mail, not the email kind though. Could someone inform me of a way to get on a ton of mailing lists so that tons of people will send me junk mail? I have a PO box where I live which is at a college dorm and we don't have mail boxes how would I go about getting on junk mail lists? The junk mail doesnt have to be like crappy stuff it could be interesting magazines that are free and the sort. I hope I made my point, I am not very good with English yet since I moved to USA. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.42.31.250 (talk) 01:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Donate small amounts of money to various charities. My Mother receives about a solicitation a day in the mail because she has occasionally given to charities. She also receives endless phone calls, and just the other night while I was visiting she had a children's cancer charity call her three times within two minutes when she said she was not donating to charities other than the Wounded Warriors. If you register an account and email me your address and phone number I'll have her pass it along. Of course I'll want to verify your identity before I do so. μηδείς (talk) 02:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Don't know where you are, but in the UK, typically completing a lifestyle survey is the way to go. They sell their very valuable data on. Make sure you indicate that you don't mind your data being passed on. Another way is to make sure you're on the UK electoral roll. Finally, request some catalogues, especially from the types of mail-order companies that advertise in magazines, eg those that come with weekend newspapers. In all jurisdictions, by proving yourself responsive to direct mail (ie buying stuff) will encourage direct marketers who know their stuff to target you by mail. --Dweller (talk) 11:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

When one vote really mattered?

Is there a list on Misplaced Pages or elsewhere of cases where the final result of an election or other ballot was literally resolved by a single vote? The odds of it happening in any particular ballot are low, but across the world we vote so often that I assume it must happen at least occasionally. Dragons flight (talk) 02:18, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

List of close election results is an article at Misplaced Pages that (while not pretending to be comprehensive) does list many elections that would fit your criteria. Indeed, there were several listed there that were a literal dead heat. --Jayron32 02:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Also found this article which notes the 1910 election for New York’s 36th Congressional District, NOT mentioned in the Misplaced Pages article. (in case anyone wants to add it). --Jayron32 02:39, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

According to my battered old 1984 edition of the Guinness Book of Records a national election has been swung by one vote: "In Zanzibar (now part of Tanzania) on 18 Jan 1961...the Afro-Shirazi Party won by a single seat, after the seat of Chake-Chake on Pemba Island had been gained by a single vote." --Antiquary (talk) 13:19, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Ah, such memories. <rant alert> <lamentation alert> Even by 1984 it was starting to go down hill, but the older editions of Guinness were so much more pleasurable (hence readable) and actually useful than the modern-day ones, which are all about flashy pictures and graphics and zillions of confusing colours, at the expense of quality. I used to read and re-read Guinness because it was so engaging. Now, I can't be bothered. And there are huge chunks of fascinating detail that is no longer included, presumably because they think it wouldn't interest modern readers. So sad to see what's become of a great institution. -- Jack of Oz 19:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I liked when they would slip little editorial comments in. My favorite was the record for divorces, held at that time by the late Thomas Manville. They said, "He made his fortune in asbestos, which he unfortunately could not take with him." ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 20:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

E-mailing your articles

How can I e-mail your articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaskatexas (talk • contribs) 17:31, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Send the recipient the URL for the article. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

This question would be better on the Help Desk (WP:HD), but, for an individual article, click on "Download as PDF" under "print/export" in the sidebar. You can then download and e-mail the article in PDF format. To download more than one article at a time, you can create a PDF "book" containing multiple articles - see Help:Books for details. Tevildo (talk) 17:58, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I'd generally go with Bugs' method, as cutting and pasting the address of the page into your email is quicker and less of a burden on the system. The recipient can then click on it, if your email system makes it into a link, or they can cut and paste it to their address bar otherwise.

The only reason I can see to go the other way is if you want to create a snapshot of the article as it was at the time, say to show somebody an example of vandalism. The link, of course, will show the current state of the article, whenever it is clicked. It's also possible to send a link to any point in the article's history, but I won't go into the details of how to do that, unless you are interested. StuRat (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

There are places where Misplaced Pages access is blocked (some businesses, for example - people living in Cuba) - in those cases emailing an article might make sense. SteveBaker (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Also I'm not sure if it's worth considering something being "less of a burden on the system", although it depends what you mean.

If you mean for wikipedia, well we have a page Misplaced Pages:Don't worry about performance which discourages editors from giving much concern about performance, except as it relates to improving readers (and other editors). While as I said, it's written for editors, the gist of it applies to readers as well. Sysadmins will generally set limits if and when needed but when they explicitly provide a function like the save to PDF one, the fact using it is a bigger load on the servers shouldn't be a concern. (There may be exceptions where you should at least speak to the sysadmins first. Also, limits here includes not only hard coded limits where you simply can't do something, but soft ones where you're asked not to do something by sysadmins like robots.txt and the stuff mentioned in Misplaced Pages:Database download for any scraping bots.)

If you mean less of a burden on the sending and receiving email system, that often that isn't worrying about either, unless whoever is hosting your email system has told you to, or you have reason to think the receiver may want to worry about it. It is worth remembering that while many of the popular email systems like gmail allow large storage capacity and relatively large attachments, some people may still have fairly limited systems. Also anyone who downloads all emails including attachments will have to download your PDF, and not everyone has super fact connection.

In fact that's probably the biggest reason why you should consider a link, it may be the person is not particularly interested in your article, if you send them a link they can choose whether or not to retrieve it. If you send it by email, in some ways and cases, they're forced to retrieve it. With many systems and people, they won't care much more than the annoyance of receiving the email with link or PDF although it may mean they're more likely to delete your email than just archive it, but this won't always be the case. (Note that this also applies to censorship cases. If you don't have good reason to think the person may want to view the article, consider that if you send it by PDF while it's possible you're bypass censorship restrictions, it's also possible you'll trigger some sort of red flag. This could happen with a link as well, but I suspect in many cases it will only happen if you actually try to view the link.)

The other reason as somewhat hinted above to use a link is that a link will mean the person gets to see the latest (or close to the latest in some cases) version of the article which will hopefully be (but not always) the best. Note that if you do want to send a specific version with a link, there's no reason to complicate matters. Just either copy the link under "permanent link" on "tools" to the left or open it then copy the link from the address bar. If you can work out how to save to PDF from the wikimedia interface, you should be able to work out how to get a permanent link since they're both just under different sections of the same menu. There is one issue namely that the permanent link won't necessarily give you the exact same page due to the effect of templates (and also the risk of deletions). However there's no way to do that other than to print or save to PDF, or use an external archiving service (or save the HTML locally).

Nil Einne (talk) 18:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

November 6

Are modern tanks resistant to explosive shock waves?

Aside from flying shrapnel, modern conventional explosives can cause bodily injuries via shock waves - differential air pressure that can rapidly compress hollow vesicles in the body. What sort of measures could one take to prevent injuries form these shock waves? Would one have to be inside an airtight chamber such as a pressurized airline fuselage? Do passengers inside a modern tank experience these shock wave pressure injuries? Are modern tanks fully airtight? Acceptable (talk) 01:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't agree that you want it to be fully airtight. Like during a tornado warning near your house, you want some air flow, to prevent a pressure differential which could cause an implosion. As long as the air holes are small, the pressure wave will be reduced to a manageable level. (You might want the tank to be airtight for poison gas, but that's another matter.) StuRat (talk) 01:49, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Modern tanks have an Chemical, Biological, Radiation and Nuclear (CBRN) defence system (it used to be called "NBC"), which as I understand it, pumps air through a filter into the inside, at a greater pressure than the air outside, so that contaminated air won't leak in. I can't find a Misplaced Pages article about it but I expect that there is one - the article that I linked to only covers civil defence. This forum discusses an M1 Abrams tank that fell into a river in Iraq and the marines inside drowned; opinions by the contributors suggest that a) modern tanks aren't completely airtight (the pressure of the CBRN system isn't enough to keep water out) and b) tanks don't often drive around with all the hatches closed. I found EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS which says that "military vehicles, from jeeps to tanks, are most likely to suffer damage when pushed, overturned, and thrown about by the blast winds."

As to tank crews being affected by conventional explosive blast, I imagine not; otherwise huge amounts of effort wouldn't have been directed at attempting to penetrate a tank's armour, you could just let off a big charge nearby instead. One type of anti-tank warhead is called High-explosive squash head (HESH), in which a charge is flattened against the tank's armour immediately before detonation. The shock waves go through the armour plate and knock off a big scab of steel on the inside, which then ricochets around the crew compartment causing all kinds of unpleasantness. However, this is no longer used because modern composite armour, such as Chobham armour, is able to absorb the shock and prevent any damage inside. Alansplodge (talk) 02:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The thing about opening windows to equalize pressure during a tornado is bullshit. Matt Deres (talk) 14:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

That link says the pressure from a tornado is "only" 1.4 PSI. That's over 200 lbs/square foot. If the side of the house is 20 feet by 50 feet, that makes 1000 square feet. That gives me 100 tons of force on a wall. Now walls might be made to withstand that kind of weight, but not that lateral load. And windows exploding may very well equalize pressure, but the object of opening them is to prevent shattered windows. I also imagine that sudden release of pressure causes more ear damage than if the windows were open. StuRat (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

So in essence, what are the necessary steps one must take to prevent injuries from differential pressure shock waves from conventional explosives? Is hiding behind a concrete blast barrier sufficient? Or will the shock wave go around the barrier and still hit you? Do you need to be enclosed in some sort of structure? Acceptable (talk) 07:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I would imagine it would help, but can't find a reference at the moment. In the meantime, I found Blast mines: physics, injury mechanisms and vehicle protection. and Shielding Body Protects Brain From “Shell Shocking” Blast Injuries. Alansplodge (talk) 11:02, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The blast wall would help against fragments, but wouldn't do much for pressure. For that you need an almost completely enclosed structure. 99.53.105.210 (talk) 14:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Not so, according to THE EFFECTIVENESS OF BLAST WALLS by Dr Peter Smith, Engineering Systems Dept, Cranfield University, Defence Academy, Shrivenham, UK. which concludes:

• A robust, plane, non-deforming wall will reduce peak overpressure and peak impulse significantly in a region extending behind the wall out to between 4 and 6 wall heights

• At greater distances behind the wall attenuation of blast wave resultants still occurs but to a diminishing extent

• For ‘best’ wall performance the explosion should be at relatively short range from the front of the wall"

We have a brief article on the Bremer wall, a type of sectional and moveable wall used by US forces "for blast protection". Alansplodge (talk) 19:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I have created a brief stub-article at Blast wall. Feel free to chip in. Alansplodge (talk) 20:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Another issue is sympathetic_detonation or cooking off of ammunition and propellant charges INSIDE an armored vehicle by very close, very large external detonations. My younger son, the other members of his infantry squad, the vehicle crew and a medic all died when their M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle was lured over an Improvised Explosive Device consisting of three 156mm artillery shells wired to detonate by remote trigger, buried in the road they passed over. The vehicle landed on its back, its exit ports all apparently jammed, and the "combat load" of ammunition for the Bradley's turret gun and other explosives inside the vehicle underwent a sympathetic detonation or cooked off, killing all the men on board. loupgarous (talk) 13:43, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your experience; "Lest we forget". Alansplodge (talk) 19:13, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

• Forgetting the specifics of military technology, let's all recall that shock waves are a very specific thing, and the "the energy of a shock wave dissipates relatively quickly with distance." The exact relation of dissipation with distance depends on the type of shock wave, see explosive velocity and Chapman–Jouguet_condition, and general illustration here . My point is, if an explosion went off near a main battle tank, but the tank was not hit by an anti-tank munition, then (based only off of physical first principles), I don't think the shock wave itself is a very big danger. Tanks are not airtight, but shock waves break apart rather quickly when moving through gaps. Of course precisely how near and the energy of the explosion will matter. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:15, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Or put more succinctly, the unsatisfying to the question in the header is "Yes, certainly." The occupants are in a relatively enclosed space, and will certainly be more protected than if they were outside the tank, at least from the shock wave itself. Quantifying how resistant in terms of protection of human life cannot be done in general. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:18, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

November 7

Movember

I tried asking this on Talk:Movember but got no response and so I'm trying here instead. This may sound daft but I've had a moustache all my adult life and so have never been able to participate, thus explaining my ignorance. Exactly how does Movember raise money? I can see how it might raise awareness but I don't get the fundraising part. Do people sponsor the moustache growers or do they pay the charity or what? Or is it now just one of those alleged charity things that raises very little as it has become just a bit of jolly jape posturing by silly boys a la the Ice Bucket Challenge (I know people are supposed to donate money after doing that but most people I know who participated didn't bother). Keresaspa (talk) 01:08, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Ref #5 in the article (link to funds results overview) is still active and looks like the movement's US homepage, if you want to read up on more details. Apparently participants are encouraged to do their own fundraising with friends, family, neighborhood, etc. I didn't read any further, but there are several more pages full of info. GermanJoe (talk) 01:47, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

When I get to the "Raise Funds" bit it expects me to login before showing me anything so I'm none the wiser. Thanks anyway though. Keresaspa (talk) 03:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I think you simply grow (or keep) a moustache, then ask people for money for a noble-sounding cause. It's like just asking, but with a gimmick. When people are amused, the rational part of their brain takes a rest. Same carny trick that works for fortune telling, freak shows, pro wrestling and junk food (the Heart Attack Grill doesn't differentiate). But if they're amused and confused, the rational part will keep waking up to ask why. So it's good to stick with the familiar memes.

Though I would pay a lot more to see someone try to grow it out in July, when the sweat makes them look more creepy than caring, and dump ice on themselves in November, when it's not refreshing and fun. But then it would be work, not asking. Not the carny way. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:37, November 7, 2014 (UTC)

Dumping ice could easily be refreshing and fun in November, may be not as refreshing as in January but still... It's definitely likely to be more refreshing than doing it in July/August when it seemed more common. Nil Einne (talk) 13:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Right. Sometimes I forget there's another half of the world. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:58, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Personally I think the Ice Bucket Challenge is dumb, but according to our article, the total raised is over $100 million. It's not clear whether this is excluding normal donations over that period, this does say they are tripling research spending. Regardless, I'm not sure it's accurate to say it raises very little money. I would note that per our article, according to some variants people aren't supposed to (but can, and some do) donate if they did the challenge, it's only suggested they donate if they don't want to do the challenge. It may be true that many people don't donate whatever the case (our article says likewise) or that they've raised very little in comparison to the number of participants but that's an entirely different point. Similarly it's probably true that at least some of the money came at the expense of other charities, but again that's a different point. Edit: Actually just noticed our article does say the previous year they received $19.4 million so the current amount would seem to be $80 million more at least. Nil Einne (talk) 13:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The long of Kiev how is it?

What is the long of Kiev? someone told me is 100 handred km, that's right? 149.78.27.187 10:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC) Asked by: 149.78.27.187 10:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.78.27.187 (talk)

First, the concept of length of a city (or place) is a fairly unusual dimension without a clear definition, but I guess you mean the distance between the widest seperate points. Also I assume you mean 100 km or one hundred km, since 10000km (one hundred hundred or 100 00 km) is longer than the the widest seperated points in Ukraine or even possibly Russia . Anyway while I don't know the answer, I think 100km is too high also. According to Kiev, the area is 839 km so this would suggest the average seperation in the other direction is ~8 km if the widest seperate is 100 km, which could be the case if there was a very long but narrow area somewhere, but there doesn't seem to be. Of course definitions of borders of internal divisions sometimes have various definitions, but it doesn't seem likely that there's any common definition where the widest seperated points are 100 km apart. Nil Einne (talk) 13:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Note that Kiev oblast (the region), which Kiev city isn't a part of, is 28,131km, or about 167 km by 167km if it was square. It is 245 km North to South, and its East-West width varies between 78 km (in the North), 173 km (at the widest) and 110km (at the south). CS Miller (talk) 14:06, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

If you do mean the longest length between two points in a city (or any map region), that would be the diameter of the region, see Diameter#Generalizations. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Measuring on Google Maps, the greatest distance between two points along the city limits of Kiev is about 45 km. Marco polo (talk) 14:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

November 8

Pedantry and Possibility

So, this question is the result of idle thoughts during my drive to work, it is highly pedantic, but I find it interesting. Suppose that you are in the woods and hear a noise through the bushes, a friend remarks one of the following "There possibly exists a possible bear behind the bush", "There is a possible bear behind the bush", or "There possibly exists a bear behind the bush". Do these three express the same thing or subtly different things? And how does "possibly" change in scope and meaning?

The first seems to indicate that there may be an object that is capable of being a bear, and therefore may be a bear - as in "it may be a twig or it may be an animal, the animal may be a bear". The second seems to indicate that the thing making the noise may be a bear, but also would permit that it may be a bear. The third seems to be nearly identical to the second, but instead of saying "That which makes the noise may be a bear" it is saying "There may be a thing responsible for the noise, such a thing may be a bear".

Is there any thing we could replace bears and bushes with that would make a difference in meanings? (Supposing that they do all reduce down to the same thing in the bear case). Finally, are there are any other such sentences that could be added to the mix that are, basically, the same, but perhaps not when over-analyzed? Thank you for any insight, and for engaging what is, again, pedantry at its finest:-)Phoenixia1177 (talk) 06:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Not pedantry at all, if that word implies some apology for academic nitpicking (I think it does, in most usage). It goes to precise language, which in turn goes to clear communication, and clear communication is often important.

For now, I'll just respond to your question, "Do these three express the same thing or subtly different things?" Certainly not the same thing, and I think the difference is more than subtle. Each "possible" hedges something different, resulting in a completely different meaning. And you omitted one, ""There possibly exists a possible bear behind the possible bush." Are you sure that's a bush? ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 06:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

As I see it, the first indicates that there may be something, which is possibly a bear, behind the bush; the second indicates that there is definitely something, which is possibly a bear, behind the bush; while the third indicates that there may be a bear behind the bush. Plasmic Physics (talk) 06:22, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

"There may be a bear behind the bush." ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Modal logic might be a useful article to consider, if you'd like to go into the fine technical details. Tevildo (talk) 14:42, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Practical logic tells you that if you really think there's a bear nearby, you probably won't be talking in multi-syllabic words. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

• "Possible bear" is a category mistake. There are possible solutions (to problems), answers (to questions), routes (for travel), winners (of contests). But not possible green, possible bears, or possible inches in any normal sense: bears, pure green (as a wavelength), and inches do not exist "of, to, or for." Possible as an adjective normally deals with goal oriented action and planning. Used as an adverb it has a slightly different meaning of chance or potential. The difference is one of accident versus essence. A person who is a possible winner is a person who might possibly win by chance (accidence), while a bear is a bear by essence, and there's no chance about whether he's a bear. μηδείς (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, not really. "There is (definitely) something behind the bush, which may be a bear", and "There is possibly a bear behind the bush (or there may be nothing behind it)" cover the OP's second and third examples. "Possible bear" isn't really idiomatic, I agree, but it's not meaningless. Tevildo (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

No, it's simply wrong. You are assuming they meant "possibly" but used bad English.

If I said, "That's a likely story," you couldn't respond "I am 100% sure it's a story, not a poem." My statement would be an ironic statement that I doubted that what you said described any truth.

Entities aren't 'possible' or even 'likely'. Situations are possible. "There being a bear behind that bush is possible" is a possible sentence. "It's likely that's a story," could be answered with, it was meant as a true account.

I have a possible bear in my pocket is a sequence of sounds that do not even have a truth value unless you assume some bizarre implied context. The OP did not ask if there was some bizarre implied context, so given what he's said, the answer is, it's nonsense. μηδείς (talk) 01:39, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

How about "There is a possible predator behind the bush" / "There is possibly a predator behind the bush"? Why is "predator" meaningful but "bear" nonsense (rather than unidiomatic)? Or is my first sentence nonsense as well? Tevildo (talk) 14:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

• You probably just want to read up a bit on modal logic, where whole volumes have been written about this very sort of thing, teasing apart should/could statements, oughts/mights, etc. Then you can wrestle with figuring out if Epistemic modality or Alethic modality is the better framework for analyzing the utterances. The one thing you have to accept is that most utterances in natural language fail to have one-to-one mappings to some expression in formal logic. But, people who work in logic (or at least know and enjoy it) tend to speak in ways such that the translation to formal language is much less ambiguous. This reminds me of one of my favorite jokes:

Does that help? SemanticMantis (talk) 19:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh, and note the example phrase "You can't water that plant too much" -- this can have several logical interpretations, some of which are about possibility, some are about necessary truth. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

If there was a herd of sheep, wasn't the logician ignoring some evidence? Nil Einne (talk) 12:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Nil Einne, no. It's all one phrase, i.e. the logical meaning comes in the statement as a whole, and he's reporting everything he knows about black sheep. All the logician knows is that there is at least one sheep in England that has the property that half of it is black. I mean sure, he could have said "there are at least sheep in England, and one of them is half black", but that doesn't tell us any more about black sheep. It does clearly state the fact that the one sheep that is half black is not the only sheep in England. Another common confusion is the logical implications of number statements. "I have three fingers on my left hand" is a true statement for me (and most readers) :) SemanticMantis (talk) 20:23, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

And another anecdote of logical word play for [[User:Phoenixia1177 et al.:

staring Bertrand Russell and G.E. Moore. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

UK - Audience Laughing/Clapping At Random Quiz Show Hosts and Contestants

Is this a legitimate job? Do they get paid to make it sound like people actually care? I can clap and laugh - been doing it since my motor skills developed, around 40 years ago. How do I get into this easy, mindless job, where I sit and pretend to laugh when someone holds up a plackard saying "Laugh Now", or clap when it says "Clap Now"? KägeTorä - (_虎) (Chin Wag) 15:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I can clap and laugh— Gizza job? Sorry, first thing I thought of when I read this. —/Mendaliv//_Δ's/ 16:19, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

The audience is usually primed to laugh and clap, they want to be entertained and the contestant to win. They aren't commanded to laugh at any specific moment. They are told it is okay to laugh or applaud when those lights come on, and both laughter and clapping are hugely contagious, otherwise they are asked not to be to loud, or they will interrupt the show. I once deliberately disrupted a political speech by telling my six or so colleagues at the conference to start clapping when I did. The speaker would pause for breath at what was not a "punchline" but I would clap, my colleagues joined me, and the rest of the audience followed, while the speaker stood there with a puzzled look on her face. In a genuine audience this will happen spontaneously. μηδείς (talk) 18:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

And tickets to be in the audience are generally free and oversubscribed (see applausestore.com ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by ] (] • ])

That depends on the TV show. For some new or not particularly popular shows they offer audience members priority tickets for other oversubscribed shows or free beer etc. to get enough audience. JMiall₰ 00:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

86.175.118.193 (talk) 20:24, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Formal claqueurs are still employed by the Bolshoi Ballet, according to our article, but I don't believe they've ever been used by a TV station. See also warm-up man. Tevildo (talk) 21:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

As usual, most of the answers have no real substance and are simply anecdotal and completely unworthy of being part of an encyclopaedic response to the question. There are some interesting discussions about laugh tracks (aka "canned laughter"), in particular with regard to significant shows like M*A*S*H. Mostly, UK quiz shows are hosted by well-known comedians (e.g. Alexander Armstrong, Bradley Walsh, Joe Pasquale, Michael Barrymore etc) but it's been no different for some time (e.g. Les Dawson, Bob Monkhouse, Larry Grayson, Leslie Crowther, Les Dennis, Bruce Forsyth etc) so it might just be that your "easy, mindless job" is actually easy because you actually find the host genuinely funny and you chose to go to that show. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:20, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

UK Politics question about Cameron, Miliband and Clegg.

Has David Cameron, Ed Miliband or Nick Clegg ever had a what we would call a 'normal job Perhaps working at a supermarket or waiting at a restaurant? --Teaxodarty (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Did you read their articles? David Cameron#Early political career, Ed Miliband#Early political career, and Nick Clegg#Careers outside politics will tell you what they did after they left their respective universities. CS Miller (talk) 20:10, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Maybe they worked in supermarkets (or wherever) before they even left school, or while at uni. Those sections would not reveal such detail. -- Jack of Oz 20:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

You've left out Nigel Farage who went straight from high school to commodities trading. Our article says he was abandoned at 5 by his father. He seems to have chosen ambition over mediocrity or the soft life of university followed by politics sans work experience. μηδείς (talk) 05:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, commodities trading is such a hard life...... Whichever way you spin it Farage is just a loonie, and very dangerous one at that, and the less he's discussed, the better. The OP was clearly asking for the three main parties, not fringe idiots. Fgf10 (talk) 09:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Historic car prices

My curiosity has been piqued by a piece of fiction I've just read:

1. How much would a new Jaguar XJ6 cost in 1973?
2. What would be a reasonable price for a two-year-old XJ6 ("One lady owner, very clean, never raced or rallied") at the same time?

Tevildo (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I found Octane which says that a 1973-1977 JAGUAR XJ6 Coupé was "Price at launch: £5480". Alansplodge (talk) 21:12, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! So, £2000 second-hand wouldn't be unreasonable? (This would be for the Mk1 rather than the Mk2). Quite a considerable sum of money in those days. Tevildo (talk) 21:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

And Oxford Economic Papers - The markup for lemons: quality and uncertainty in American and British used-car markets c. 1953–73 quotes a 1989 study which says that "First-year depreciation ranges from 35% to 40%. Second-year depreciation is about 20%...." (page 3 marked "i33"). Alansplodge (talk) 22:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

November 9

Block of user 173.17.92.61

I saw that anonymous IP 173.17.92.61 has been blcked because of anonblock in the block log. What does "anonblock" mean? Deaths in 2013 (talk) 01:54, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Anonblock is not the reason for the block, it's just a category. Looking at their talk page, the address was regularly being used for vandalism. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

This edit (which went unreverted), the address's heavy focus (both good-faith and disruptive) on Deaths in 2013 and supercentenarians, and that the IP is static could very easily lead one to conclude that the IP address is one you use or did use. That would explain why both you and the IP have incorrectly tried to assert that Misao Okawa have died, and why you're asking about this specific address instead of the many others that get blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:10, 9 November 2014 (UTC).

Environmentally conscious

I am quite environmentally conscious by doing whatever means I can such as re-using paper, recycling as much as possible, using public transport etc, but what I understand is that it does not make an iota of difference. At times, I think of giving it up because it is too much of a bother and others indicate that I am being cantankerous over small things such as use of plastic bags . What is the way ahead?Sumalsn (talk) 06:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Do what makes you feel good, and don't try to directly impose it on others. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 06:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Live according to your lights. If you think it won't make a difference, it won't. if you think it will, then it will. But the best advice anyone else can give you is from my compatriot Shakespeare:

"This above all: to thine own self be true
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man."

--TammyMoet (talk) 11:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Fixed your indenting. --174.88.134.249 (talk) 11:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Please elaborate: "...what I understand is that it does not make an iota of difference." ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 12:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

See, for example, Recycling#Cost–benefit analysis and Renewable energy debate. On a domestic scale, such activities have no impact on the global environment, compared with industrial energy use, pollution, habitat destruction, etc. On the other hand, getting into the habit of thrift, regardless of its actual effect on the environment, may be something to encourage on an individual level. Tevildo (talk) 12:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

While some greenwashing (companies, governments, and environmentalists claiming something helps the environment when it really doesn't) occurs, there are also many real ways to help. Just using less of everything is one way. But I agree with the advice to back off from telling others what they should do, unless they seek your counsel. StuRat (talk) 18:27, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

See Why Environmental "Hypocrisy" Is Irrelevant and Inevitable—TreeHugger (May 17, 2013).

—Wavelength (talk) 19:44, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

• Normally, doing the cheapest thing means doing the best thing, because all things being equal, cheeper means less labor and less resources. Those things are priced into the cost of what you want. That assumes there are no hidden subsidies and no costs foisted off on others. For example, an electric car might seem great since you don't see the smoke, but they cost a huge amount in resources to make (you don't see that cost because the government gives tens of thousands of dollars of subsidies per car) and the electricity is usually generated from burning hydrocarbons anyway, and it's more efficient actually to burn the gas in your car than to burn coal in a plant, convert it into electricity, send it over wires, and put it in your car battery, all of which involves losses in efficiency. If we had plentiful cheap nuclear or fusion electricity and better electric car technology it would make sense to switch, because it would be cheaper than gas-burning cars and subsidies would be unnecessary. If electric cars made sense people would rush to buy them voluntarily and without any taxpayer funded government subsidies. At this point it doesn't, and they don't.

Other hidden subsides and costs are things like unregulated use of fisheries, dumping of garbage, and so forth. Things like this can be addressed by sustainable fisheries (allow only that percentage of animals to be culled that will be fully replaced by the next year's generation) and licensing incinerators to generate electricity from garbage and taxing pollution like coal smoke and commercial packaging materials. For example, in NYC, there is a 5c deposit on bottles and cans, basically a tax. But the streets are clean of them, because jobless people can make a pretty good daily take just by collecting them from trashcans and trashbags. In fact, there is an unofficial truce between the homeless and building superintendents in NYC. The supers leave the trashbags accessible and easily untiable, and the homeless unobtrusively remove all the recyclables, and retie the bags without leaving a mess. I have seen this first hand for decades. I was even once told by a trashpicker please not to crush the soda cans, bcause they can't get the 5c deposit back if the can is crushed.

The basic rules are, if you factor in subsidies and hidden costs, then whatever works out cheapest has the least effect on the environment. If you are forced to do something by law, rather than by cost to you, you can bet it is not a good deal. This is the case where towns have vanity recycling programs. If recycling were actually cheaper, then doing so she reult in a net gain to the town budget. If your town is paying for its recycling with you as a slave labor force doing sorting that they take loss on, then your town is harming the environment. See hidden cost, sustainable yield, problem of the commons, and download a free pdf of the college textbook, Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics by George Reisman. μηδείς (talk) 21:09, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

The living cost in kiev Ukrane

What are the living costs in kiev for a month? (for a 3 student together)5.28.158.164 (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

What is "weather works" - as part of the ship?

As I am non-native speaker of English, I do not understand the term "weather works" concerning ships - and I cannot find this term at the Misplaced Pages. It is used in the sentence "Both ships had ... black hulls, white masts, and yellow weather works". Thank you for any help. --Radouch (talk) 20:10, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I can't seem to find a definition anywhere, but from the context it is used (see for examples) it seems to mean the superstructure above the main deck. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:18, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

On the other hand, this source seems to suggest that the 'weather-works' are the sides of the hull above the waterline. It almost certainly means parts of the ship exposed to the weather (i.e. above the waterline), but beyond that there may be ambiguity. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both. The second source is exactly what I looked for. "My" sentence (from Cyriax's book) concerns painting of Erebus and Terror... :-) --Radouch (talk) 20:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

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