Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007 August 17

= August 17 =

My schedule for MyNetworkTV
What do you think about my schedule for MyNetworkTV when I say that Mondays are martial-arts nights, Tuesdays are telenovela nights, Wednesdays are crimetime nights, Thursdays are professional wrestling nights, Fridays are sitcom nights and Saturdays are Saturday Night Live nights?
 * I have no idea what you R|are talking about. Please clarify.  Plasticup  T / C  03:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * It appears that User:AdamDeanHall has been adding a table of programme scheduling to the MyNetworkTV article and now someone called User:Ericthebrainiac is asking our opinion of that change which he claims to have added?! If that's true, then maybe we have a sock-puppeteer on the loose here...which is a heinous crime.  Anyway...my answer to the OP:


 * Depending on your definitions, sock-puppetry is either not necessarily a heinous crime, only evil when misused, or this is not necessarily sock-puppetry, even though a single individual uses more than one account. There's nothing wrong with using more than one account, unless you use them to create a fake community in any of a variety of ways. Skittle 20:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think this kind of information belongs in an encyclopedia because it's ephemeral. The schedule will change - possibly very often.  Who will continually update it so it's always right?  Most likely this user will lose interest in it after a year...two years...(a month, more likely) - and when that happens, the encyclopedia will be wrong.  We should avoid this kind of ephemeral thing.  I'm 100% certain that there is a policy someplace that says that you shouldn't do this - but it's late and I'm tired and I have better things to do.  So I'm going to 'be bold' and simply delete it. SteveBaker 03:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This question has been asked at least once before, however I am too lazy to go look up when. Do not start debates or post diatribes. The reference desk is not a soapbox. Lanfear&#39;s Bane

User:Ericthebrainiac has a longstanding history of trolling the RD about MyNetworkTV and Good Burger, both with that ID and under a large multitude of anon IP addresses, and should be ignored. Corvus cornix 16:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

new zealand citizenship by descent
41.208.216.59 05:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)My Grandfather was born in New Zealand and moved to South Africa. My father was born in South Africa in 1924 and aquired New Zealand Citizenship by way of his father. Please tell me whether I am able to apply for New Zealand citizenship by decent, bearing in mind that my father also automatically becam a British Citizen by way of UK Statuary Law by being born in South Africa in 1924
 * We cannot give legal advice. See the top of the page. Your best bet would be to call up this government organization and ask them --L ucid 08:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Our article mentions this case. Please see New Zealand citizenship (and then a lawyer) Rmhermen 13:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you don't mind that I corrected the spelling in your title, which was intriguing but confusing. Sorry that I can't answer your question.  Marco polo 15:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course I am not a lawyer and not qualified to advise on this, so please consult a lawyer before taking action, but it seems that the critical question is whether your father now lives in New Zealand and can sponsor you, according to the New Zealand Immigration website, because it does not look as if you can gain New Zealand citizenship through your family otherwise, unless you would otherwise be stateless. However, if you have a skill that is in demand in New Zealand, you can apply for a resident visa as a skilled worker and apply for citizenship five years later.  Marco polo 15:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

How can I recolor a sprite?
I like the sprites of all the video games. I wanted to recolor a sprite to make it look different. How can I recolor a sprite?
 * Use MSPaint, zoomed all the way in, and a 1 pixel brush? That's how I always did it way back in the day.  Time-consuming, but effective.  --Haemo 06:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And remarkably rewarding when you finally zoom out and see the finished thing. Capuchin 08:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You can do it faster by using the dropper to select the colour you wish to replace then right clicking the colour, in the selection, you want to replace it with. Select the eraser and right click over the picture. Takes the original colour and 'erases it' to the new colour. Ding fries are done. Lanfear&#39;s Bane

Urban legends associated with Wikipedia
I was reading the article on Polybius, and I was wondering, are there any urban legends associated with Wikipedia itself? Like, any weird pages said to have existed in the past that have mysteriously vanished? Any eerie effects claimed as a result of viewing certain pages? Has anyone said they have met the Men in black after working on a controversial article? Any John Titor-esque vandals? I realize that this is all kind of silly, but I'm just curious. Zagalejo 07:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, there was a recent claim that an anonymous editor has "inside information" about the recent murders committed by a professional wrestler, Chris Benoit. See, for instance, this time article.  Probably not spooky enough for you, though.  --Haemo 07:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And we have real men in black editing Wikipedia; for instance, as this news story explains here. --Haemo 07:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You did read the John Titor talk page archives, right? Rmhermen 13:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * There's nothing on Snopes about us... yet. Of course there's the countless claims of various biases, which could be considered urban legends, as well as the legend (sometimes even asked here) claiming that the Wikipedia is actually run by Wiccans, but neither is a proper urban legend (email forwarding, friend of a friend etc). See also WP:TINC and List of cabals; a list of Wikipedia based conspiracy theories. Laïka  17:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There are occasional allegations made against specific editors (usually admins) from a groups of self-proclaimed overseers of Wikipedia, accusing them of being all sorts of people editing for all sorts of shady purposes. Fortunately they don't get enough wider coverage to qualify as a urban legend proper, but if enough Wikipedian's believe their allegations, they be the Wiki-equivalent. I'm not going to link to any, as its improper to spread such muck-raking (and currently against policy to link to their sites, I think), but if you poke around long enough you will come across some. Rockpock  e  t  17:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't tell anyone, but Wikipedia is run by JEWS! Recury 18:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There is a recurring urban legend that I’ve heard, and which has been asked about on the RDs several times, which holds that Wikipedia spreads viruses; often through the edit function. This was easily discredited when the question was asked on the Miscellaneous Desk. --S.dedalus 22:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * WP does crash my browser once in a while. —Tamfang 08:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * "Wikipedia is communism". Try Googling that (with the quotation marks). I did that a year ago when I realised that the Wikipedia method goes beyond communism - wikipedians don't "do what they can and take no more than they need", but instead they "do as they please and take whatever they want". Now apart from whether that is true or not, any discussions about it (which there must have been) are obscured by the links to a vandal by that name (user:Wikipedia is Communism) and other discussions on vandalism. So I wondered if this might be a trick to deliberately obscure such discussions. There is a more varied list of hits right now (a year ago it was only about the user), but I still can't find any discussions about the idea.
 * Btw, the reason that Wikipedia can work this way is of course that Wikipedia is based on information, which these days can be spread at virtually no cost. That is also true for Open Source. So I googled "open source is communism" and that does result in quite a lot of discussions on the subject. DirkvdM 07:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Interesting stuff. Thanks for the responses! Zagalejo 15:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

What is the appropriate title for Doctor Who?
I was wondering: is referring to the popular TV show Doctor Who as "dr" Who still correct, or this improper usage?


 * The official BBC name is Doctor Who, but if you write Dr Who everyone will understand what you mean. I do not believe Dr Who (or Dr. Who) has ever been correct. -- SGBailey 14:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The BBC themselves don't seem to have a problem with using "Dr. Who", abeit they more often spell it out in full as "Doctor Who" - see . Then there is the (non-BBC) film, Dr. Who and the Daleks - however this is definitely a non-canonical film and likely uses the Dr. rather the Doctor to get distance from the Beeb stuff ... Dr. Who is an earthling scientist in the film, not a time lord. --Tagishsimon (talk)
 * The BBC has used 'Dr Who', although mostly seems to use 'Doctor Who'. 'Dr. Who' was, I believe, limited to the films. Skittle 20:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The various series have always been Doctor Who. DuncanHill 20:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Spelling it Dr. Who makes it look like a name. It's probably spelled as Doctor Who since it's more like a question ("I'm the Doctor" "Doctor who?") and not the name of the character. Wikipedia's article on the Doctor has a section ("Doctor who?") which explains that the character is usually referred to as "the Doctor" and only very rarely as "Dr. Who". --Bavi H 04:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In the original series, with William Hartnell (1963), it was always spelled "Dr. Who" in the credits. The whole "Dr." "Dr" "Doctor" thing has been debated for forty odd years now, and doing so today is still as retarded as it was 40 years ago. It's a fictional show. The BBC themselves don't care about how it's spelled. Nor do they care about tiny details like dots..

Shortest time considered appropriate for rated game of chess?
As title - I was wondering how short (i.e. time allotted to each player) a game of chess can conventionally be while still being considered appropriate for submitting for rating? Thanks --58.152.170.225 14:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * This is purely my own speculation, but I consider any game with less than 5 minutes per player to be less about skill than about who can move the quickest (and, if an online game, who has the fastest computer). StuRat 06:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The United States Chess Federation considers games with a time control under game in 1 hour to be "quick rated," although I believe games with time controls between game in 30 min. and game in 1 hour are "normally" rated as well, although this wasn't always the case. -Elmer Clark 11:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Response to broken leg
Would the average 16 year old cry after breaking her leg?
 * Sure, but it all depends on the break. Some are more painful than others.   Psychic tears are a perfectly normal response to physical pain. --M @ r ē ino 15:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * In a softball game locally, a young lady broke her leg nearing home plate and as she slid into home rather than crying she sank her teeth into the leg of the catcher. Alternative to the old "bite a bullet," I suppose. Edison 15:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Many people cry from even the simplest of bone fractures or injuries. --Proficient 15:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I would generally expect they would cry. I reckon I would, and I'm a considerably older male. Interestingly though, sometimes people that suffer severe injuries do not feel any pain, at least initially, and therefore may not cry; or if they do cry it may be a reaction to seeing the injury, rather than crying from the pain. For example, this article from USA Today talks of an injured Iraq veteran: "Pruden, 27, was driving an unarmored Humvee that was caught in a roadside bomb attack in Baghdad on July 1, 2003. He took 173 pieces of shrapnel and one AK-47 round that passed through his left knee. A piece of shrapnel the size of a golf ball shattered his shoulder blade and lodged near his spinal cord. His arms and legs were shredded. He doesn't remember feeling pain at the time, but as he tried to maneuver the vehicle, he realized his legs didn't work. He couldn't see, couldn't hear and couldn't feel his left arm." This type of reaction has been regularly reported in wars and is also seen in places like injuries on the sporting field. It has a name which I can't remember precisely, something like 'Battlefield syndrome' (but I don't think that's it). This book (Pain: A Textbook for Therapists) discusses this issue - look particularly at the paragraph about halfway down the second column on page 6. An interesting statistic in there is a 1982 study that found 38% of people attending a normal emergency clinic did not feel pain due to their injuries. So, make of that what you will. --jjron 16:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm no expert on this but the alternative to crying/screaming/begging for morphine etc is shock.87.102.14.51 17:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Pain is a very complex phenomenon involving fear and other mental states as much as (or more than) the actual physical stimulus, so it's difficult to predict reactions for a category as broad as "a 16 year-old". My daughter has cried due to a small sliver of glass in her foot, and laughed about a large biking-related cut on her leg that required an ER visit and sewing up.  I'm sure broken bones go the same way.  --Sean 20:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * How old is your daughter? --Kaypoh 08:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * She was 6 or 7 at the time of those incidents. --Sean 18:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Should also mention the obvious, that socialisation and peer pressure will likely play a part as well. The thing below about rugby players is a succint point. You specifically mentioned a 'her', likely a 16 year old guy is slightly less likely to cry then a female for socialisation reasons. I suspect that someone who breaks their leg alone is probably less likely on the whole to cry then if they have company (and if they do cry, not for long) Nil Einne 21:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I feel we must mention WP:BEANS.Do NOT go round breaking girlies' legs to see if they cry. They might lash out instead... Lemon martini 11:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Rugby footballers don't cry. At Nick Youngs is the excellent statement "His son Tom Youngs made his Tigers debut against London Irish on Boxing Day 2006, but broke his leg after five minutes and came off after thirteen." Xn4 22:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A friend of mine played half a sevens match with a dislocated shoulder. PeteVerdon 22:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes and no. I would imagine if the 16 year old was tough, they'd tough it out. I broke -- no, shattered the crap out of -- my foot and I was in reactive pain but never cried. Mind I am older than that. Guroadrunner 11:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

looking for a blank, dual-layer, double sided DVD
do these even exist? I can't find one for sale.


 * I didn't think that DVD writers could write to the inner layer of a dual-layer DVD. You might want to ask this question over on the computing desk though. SteveBaker 17:44, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I've answered the topic question over on Computing, but just wanted to point out that dual-layer DVD+/-R drives have been available for a while.  In fact, since shortly after I bought a single layer drive :-/  -- LarryMac  | Talk  20:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I hate when that happens so much that I resolve to never pay for the upgrade to the newer technology. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go listen to some 8-track tapes. StuRat 06:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ha! My music collection consists largely of lp's. Stu, you're soooooooooooo passé. DirkvdM 07:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

FWD bicycle vs. RWD
Why are all modern bicycles rear-wheel-drive? What would be the pros and cons of having a front-wheel-drive bicycle instead? Acceptable 19:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The most obvious issue is that you'd need something much fancier than a simple chain to handle driving the front wheel, assuming it could sill turn. Rear-wheel steering is possible I suppose, but it would introduce its own problems.   I can think of no obvious advantage to fwd in a bicycle, so I suspect nobody much bothers.  Friday (talk) 19:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * After conflict:I would think that the mechanical aspects of steering would be a nightmare and a hassle to maintain. If you ran the chain to the front and the steering to the back, you'd have to run some sort of cable system for steering the back wheel. Or if you wanted both steering and provide power through the front wheel, you'd need a mechanism that moved with the wheel. Dismas |(talk) 19:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd discounted rear wheel steering as hopelessly unstable, but maybe there's some way to accomplish it. Nothing I can think of obviously, tho.  Friday (talk) 19:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Rear-wheel steering doesn't work: the bicycle is no longer self-balancing. Somewhere in our bicycle-related articles, we've got something about why that is. --Carnildo 23:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * From the "D'oh" file- front drive bicycles were once very common. Friday (talk) 19:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, but penny-farthings didn't have a chain drive. When the pedals are directly on the driving wheel it's easy for the rider to compensate for their changes in position during steering, as children demonstrate every day on tricycles.  As soon as you introduce a chain, things get more complicated.  And there'd be no benefit to front-wheel drive anyway, so why bother? --Anon, August 17, 22:17 (UTC).


 * Without rear-wheel drive you couldn't pop a wheelie; now what fun would that be ? StuRat 06:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Even on a recumbent bicycle, where the pedals are sometimes in front of the front wheel, a long chain is led to the rear wheel. A shaft-driven bicycle could be made fwd without too much difficulty, I imagine. However, this is all about human-powered bicycles and that wasn't specified in the question. So the VéloSoleX with its clip-on engine also counts. DirkvdM 07:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * A quick google reveals several FWD recumbents, eg FWD Is it practical? and Dual Suspension FWD. Just for fun, here is a 2WD bike --TrogWoolley 17:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Would you want all that gearing on the front of the bike? FWD works only for single-speeds, I am going to assume. Guroadrunner 11:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Can I get a good reference?
I know you can't answer legal questions, and that's fine, because I know what the law says. However, I need a good, reliable reference to give my client, who is having a legal dispute with her former boss over the copyright of her images. She's a photographer, an independent contractor, and she never signed a contract, so the images are still under her copyright, but her former employer is claiming she owns them because she doesn't understand copyright law at all; I need a reliable source that explains simply and easily that my client owns the copyright to the photos she took until and unless she signs them away. Most of the online sources I found are catered to online copyrights, but I need an online source due to the entire communication being through email, and I figured, no other place worries so much about reliable sources and verifiability as Wikipedia. Thanks in advance. Kuronue 20:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Since you seem well-aware of the fact that your friend should be seeking professional assistance, and since you seem intent on acting on your own understanding of the facts and circumstances, and since you seem familiar with WP policy regarding these kinds of questions, I will simply ask if you've had a look at the references shown in the "further reading" section here.


 * If you want more detail then that, please consult this and this. Sorry if that's not very helpful, but you understand the constraints here. dr.ef.tymac 20:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Follow-up: And if you *do* take a look at the U.S. Copyright Office site, you'll probably do yourself an even greater disservice if you fail to read this. Especially since it clearly indicates certain circumstances involve complex legal analysis. dr.ef.tymac 21:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * That's exactly what I need! She's an independent contractor, and as there was NO contract signed there was clearly not a written agreement that it was work-for-hire, so her employer screwed herself over not signing a contract. She's currently devising a contract for future use in case she gets hired again by someone who doesn't want to write one up. It's so sad, they were good friends so they thought they didn't need one... tisk tisk. Kuronue 21:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Just remember, that link was given simply to re-emphasize that business arrangements regarding intellectual property involve complex issues. Any documents or links you get on here should only be considered a starting point to help convince your friend she needs professional assistance. Please also read this if it is not absolutely 100% clear to you that these links are not being supplied to you as advice, but as recommendations for seeking outside professional assistance. You simply won't get that anonymously off the Internet. This is not a joke. dr.ef.tymac 21:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course. I'm not going to assume the internet can solve all our legal problems, we just wanted some reference information in the hopes that the two of them can reach an agreement, because if they can't we have to call a lawyer. We (my client and I) just wanted some tools to see if we can work it out civilly because lawyers are expensive. But thanks for the warning. Kuronue 00:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm assuming that you're in the United States...? If so, you go straight to the horse's mouth, as it were: the United States Copyright Office, at http://www.copyright.gov.  The relevant bit on transfer of copyright is in their Circular 1:
 * ''"Any or all of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights or any subdivision of those rights may be transferred, but the transfer of exclusive rights is not valid unless that transfer is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner’s duly authorized agent. Transfer of a right on a nonexclusive basis does not require a written agreement...." (Link)
 * Hope that helps. Obviously, Wikipedia is not in the business of giving legal advice, so I couldn't (and wouldn't) want to say how and what parts of that apply to your client's situation.  As others have noted, for that you will need a lawyer. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Awesome, thanks guys. I'll pass this on along with my recommendation that she seek a lawyer; she's also gone to register her copyrights on certain images that are in hot debate. I appreciate your willingness to help, even with your hands tied ^^ Kuronue 20:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Er, sorry, but the OP states that his friend is in dispute with her "ex-Boss" over the copyright to pictures taken, presumably, whilst she was employed in that capacity so to do, so, in my humble opinion, any rights to any works she carried out whilst so employed belong exclusively to her ex-Boss, unless her ex-Boss signed those rights away, which clearly, she didn't do. "Don't spend any damages or compensation before seeing a copyright lawyer and actually winning the dispute", is the advice I would be giving your friend right now.


 * These issues you mention are already discussed in the links provided to the OP. dr.ef.tymac 10:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)