Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007 July 2

= July 2 =

London Banks or Finance Companies
07:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)07:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)Does Guaranty Private Credit Bank located at Guaranty Building, London WC1B, 1XD, UK exist? And further does Dr. Bruce Haggins work for them? Thank you.


 * A google search did not find them (only questions about their alleged existence). The spelling of "guaranty" is unlikely in England. Personally, I would run a million miles from a bank which claims to be in Britain but seems not even to have a basic web-presence. DuncanHill 12:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * As for "Bruce Haggins" his name crops up in relation to fraudulaent lottery schemes, see this link for more info Fraudwatchers web forum DuncanHill 12:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Mansion Floorplan
I'm trying to write something involving a big, slightly haunted house, but I've discovered I don't actually know how they work. What kind of layout is used inside a large, two- or three-story house? What rooms go where, and what do they look like? Black Carrot 07:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * An ordinary house, that is, not a house of horrors. The kind of thing some old rich guy with a large collection of something (statues, pottery, paintings, something like that) might own. Black Carrot 07:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Try searching on google for something like '"floor plan" mansion'? In the UK www.rightmove.co.uk often has floor plans included in the details especially for larger houses. Best to choose an area in england outside London (for example Norfolk) and look at the most expensive houses in the area. Or you could google for "country house", which often means a country mansion in British English. If this is going to be in a historical setting you could also have a look at Mrs Beatons cookery book which includes extensive details of how to treat the servants etc but not any floorplans. 80.2.205.119 09:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

ER SIGNS
WHAT DOES THE ER SIGNS SHOWN ON MOST OF THE UNIFORMS WORN BY THE QUEENS SOLDIERS MEANS.

ER stands for "Elizabeth Regina" (which means "Queen Elizabeth"). It is also written as E II R, to mean "Queen Elizabeth the Second". You will see a similar badge on police uniforms and post boxes. DuncanHill 08:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Do they replace all those metal mailboxes when there is a new monarch? The letters appeared to be molded into the metal, not just stuck on. Edison 16:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No. There are still some in my area that still have GR or VR on them. --80.229.152.246 16:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I though 'Elizabeth Regina' stood for 'Elizabeth Reigns'? 88.109.232.152 16:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No. The English word "reign" happens to be derived from the Latin word "regnum", which is related to the words "rex" (king) and "regina" (queen).  But the R in ER is definitely Regina = queen.  --  JackofOz 21:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Native Systems of Writing to Latinized Transliterations
Hello. I often use Altavista's babelfish to translate words from one language to another, but one problem I encounter is with those languages that do not use a Latin based Alphabet such as Russian or Chinese. Is there some site or process I can use to translate in this manner?

For example, I was trying to figure out what the Chinese would call an Eagle or bird of prey. I took the translation from Babelfish (老鹰) and searched for that article on the Chinese wikipedia, which I then translated as an entire webpage with Babelfish again. All that told me, though, was that the characters that mean Eagle are apparently "Shape" and "Item" and not how to pronounce 老鹰.

Can anyone help me figure out a way to translate in this manner? Thank you. --Demonesque 08:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If you are looking up Japanese, you can use something like rikaichan to see the hiragana it is composed of. I know there's a website that performs a similar service, but I forgot what it was. Keep in mind though that a Chinese character could have multiple pronunciations- at least the Japanese version. Babelfish however is an incredibly inaccurate translation- you would be much better off finding a forum where a bunch of people either know or are learning Chinese, and ask them. For all you know, Babelfish's result for Great Win is Elephant. If you're really curious, you should learn the language yourself- so you know how accurate your translations are --ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 10:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem with that, however, is that I am writing a novel that has heavy elements of multiculturalism. I need to know translations for certain words from all sorts of different languages. I cannot possibly learn every major world language, but nor can I rely on seeking someone out every time I need a word translated; so I was hoping to find a site that could do it for me. I am aware that Babelfish is inaccurate, but it's the best I can do without people helping me with research and editing. Do you have any tips or suggestions for finding forums such as the kind you mentioned? That would be a wonderful resource to have. --Demonesque 10:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * How about Pinyin and Romaji? --antilivedT 12:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't say it's not possible. Polyglots do it all the time. If you don't have a human knowledge of something, your best bet would probably be translated works, such as fansubs. Maybe some dictionaries. --ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 14:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Adsotrans.com will romanise Chinese text using the pinyin system, which is the standard Mandarin pronunciation (the default setting needs you to hover your mouse over the Chinese characters to see the meaning and pronunciation). Presumably there are similar websites for different languages. Ironfrost 03:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Out very own Language reference desk has many linguists proficient with different languages. There really is no substitute for real translators if you want accuracy. &mdash; Shinhan  &lt;&thinsp; talk &thinsp;&gt; 11:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure why Babelfish told you those characters were "shape" and "item", since they actually mean "old" and "falcon" when translated individually. One website for simple translations from Chinese is zhongwen.com. Zhongwen will also give you the pinyin transcription of many characters. Be careful, though: many letters in pinyin don't indicate the same sounds they do in English. And also there's much more to translation than just looking up individual words in a dictionary. -- The Photon 16:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Do note that Chinese is a tonal language and if you have no experience with tonal languages in particular your pronounciation of words even with the pinyin to guide is unlikely to be very good and may not be understadable. Of course with all languages if you're just trying to pronounce the word even based on IPA it's likely to be difficult but your pronounciation may at least be understandable with a bit of experience for a non-tonal language. Nil Einne 08:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

International text messaging
Living in the UK, I would like to send a text message to the US. I have their number, beginning with 1 (country code), then another three digits (assuming area code?), then finally 7 digits after (actual cell phone number, I assume). When sending the text message to this number, I just receive a failed message. So, I added 00 to the beginning (as this is the code you enter when *phoning* internationally), but it still failed. Any idea what I have got to do? (PS: With Orange network, if that matters ¬_¬). Thanks, 81.132.208.111 11:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Try using the + symbol at the start of the number instead of the 00, so that if you are texting, say "1 123 1234567" you would enter "+1 123 1234567" DuncanHill 12:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Since 00 is the code for international dialling, I think it's unlikely that substituting + in its place will make much difference. I think the problem is more likely to be related to compatibility between cellphone networks/protocols.  I used to try texting people all the time in the US and it never worked.  Texting (or SMS, if you must) is not such a big deal in the US as it is in Europe. --Richardrj talkemail 13:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * A large percentage of North Americans don't even know SMS exists. According to Telus, only about 5% of their customers over 21 use it regularly, and only 25% have ever used it. -- Charlene 06:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Sidenote, the second group of 3 is actually the telephone exchange code, which if you want to be really annoying, you can render into it's older name. 68.39.174.238 11:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

How many grains of sand are there on all the beaches on Earth?
How would one estimate the number of grains on all the beaches in the world? Had a pub bet with a friend - I guessed 1020, he guessed 1016. Batmanand | Talk 12:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * More than the number of atoms in the universe. Wait, wait, no, that's not right. I'm thinking of something else --ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 13:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you mean more than the number of stars in our galaxy? estimates somewhere between 1020 and 1024. Not a particularly reliable source but it's all i've got at the moment. This might include deserts and not just beaches. So you're looking at less. I think you're closer than your friend, though. 213.48.15.234 14:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course it's more than the stars in our galaxy which is in the order of 100's of millions. I think the famous comparison is the one that states there are more galaxies in our visible universe than the number of grains of sand of all the beaches on earth. Or is that stars in the universe? :) Sandman30s 14:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Found a more in depth source. Looking at only beaches (about half way down the page) seems to calculate it at around 1021. Plus he shows some working. Still not exactly reliable, but you're not going to get accurate measurements :) 213.48.15.234 14:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This page estimates the number of grains of sand in all the world's beaches as 7.5x1018, and it shows its working. This page estimates 1015 grains per mile of beach. Gandalf61 14:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, this page shows the answer as 1023. Sandman30s 14:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * ... although if you read the page it links to you find that the actual estimate is between 6x1021 and 6x1022, so I'm not sure where our article gets 1023 from. Gandalf61 15:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If I understood high school maths correctly, I think 6x1022 is between 1x1022 and 1x1023 so the article contributor rounded it off to the next order of magnitude. Not sure how that linked page got to the "6x" - it seems quite an arbitrary thing to estimate. Sandman30s 20:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * 6.023 gazillion. Edison 16:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Apparently there are more molecules in a glass of water that grains of sand on the earth. Assuming a glass contains 2 or 3 moles of water, that would mean that the number would be less than 2 or 3 times $$ 6.02 \times 10^{23}$$

MHDIV ɪŋglɪʃnɜː(r)d  ( Suggestion? | wanna chat? ) 16:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Nameless, faceless guard types?
Is there a term for nameless/faceless soldiers/guards in things like film and video games? Things like Stormtroopers, and the guards from FF12 -_ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 14:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Good question, "heavies" springs to mind, as does "cannon-fodder" (heavies when they are dishing it out, cannon fodder when they are on the receiving end). DuncanHill 14:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Grunts? Batmanand | Talk 14:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep, I would go with Grunts. Commanders refer to them as maggots in movies sometimes. --GTPoompt (talk) 15:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Red shirts :)  Corvus cornix 16:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Red Shirts have names... and faces... --ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ
 * Droids 80.0.135.176 17:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Goons (but not Neddy)hotclaws 00:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, goons is it. DuncanHill 00:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

More specifically, does anyone know of these types? Things where the armor is heavy enough that it entirely conceals the person's identity. Thinking about making something for halloween --ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 02:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * My sister has friends in the small workshop who made the stormtrooper uniforms for Star Wars. A group of the guys made themselves stormtrooper costumes for a fancy dress party. Sadly none of them was the standard clone shape, so they were all "a little short" or some variant on the theme.SaundersW 07:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Rereading this posting after several days, I suddenly remembered the term spear carrier. --Anonymous, July 9, 2007, 03:05 (UTC).

Unusual Laws
Further to the earlier question.... the UK introduced non-smoking laws on July 1. One section deals with private homes, which are only covered if a Council official enters. Then they at once become no smoking areas. So an Englishman's home is no longer his castle.90.4.125.25 14:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)DT


 * Do you have a reliable source for this ? The FAQ at the Smokefree web site says "The the smokefree law does not apply to private dwellings and private residential spaces, except for parts of dwellings used solely as a place of work by more than one person" and The Smoke-free (Exemptions and Vehicles) Regulations 2007 says that private accommodation is exempt from the regulations. Gandalf61 15:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * An Englishman's home was never his castle. It's not like you can do drugs, commit murder or commit fraud - as long as you are in your own home. Batmanand | Talk 15:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It sounds like a joke conclusion someone reached, based on it outlawing smoking in workplaces. Given that smoking is still allowed in prisons, with a cell being considered a private dwelling (or some such) rather than the workplace of the wardens, I doubt the interpretation you describe would apply. Skittle 15:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * In fact, The Smoke-free (Exemptions and Vehicles) Regulations 2007 specifically allows such things.

Private accommodation 3. —(1) A private dwelling is not smoke-free except for any part of it which is—

(a) used in common in relation to more than one set of premises (including premises so used in relation to any other private dwelling or dwellings); or

(b) used solely as a place of work (other than work that is excluded by paragraph (2)) by—

(i) more than one person who does not live in the dwelling;

(ii) a person who does not live in the dwelling and any person who does live in the dwelling; or

(iii) a person (whether he lives in the dwelling or not) who in the course of his work invites persons who do not live or work in the dwelling to attend the part of it which is used solely for work.

(2) There is excluded from paragraph (1)(b) all work that is undertaken solely—

(a) to provide personal care for a person living in the dwelling;

(b) to assist with the domestic work of the household in the dwelling;

(c) to maintain the structure or fabric of the dwelling; or

(d) to install, maintain or remove any service provided to the dwelling for the benefit of persons living in it.


 * If you follow that thread, it specifically avoids classing a private dwelling as smoke free just because someone has to do building work, or tell you the gas has been cut off. Skittle 15:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The UK didn't introduce a smoking ban on July 1st, England did - the other constituent countries all introduced their respective bans earlier. And it's not the same set of restrictions, either. For example, interview rooms in police stations in Scotland are exempted (ref) but their equivalents in England aren't. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think what the questioner is referring too is that, possibly inspired by the smoking ban and health and safety concerns, a specific council (Liverpool) the council requested that smokers don't smoke for up to half an hour before a council employee visits. The BBC news story is here . This is not related to the smoking ban and is only a request, there is no power to enforce it I think. Cyta 07:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It seems it was a joke. But it is far from a joke when the Trades Union Council recommend that non-smoking be negotiated with homeowners otherwise a unionised person may not visit. The argument is that the visitor needs protection from second-hand smoke. See www.smokefreeengland.co.uk/faq/exemptions.html86.219.35.208 16:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)DT


 * And? People have a right to choose not to work in conditions that will endanger their health. You can't force someone to carry out work in your house, and if your house is unpleasant to work in they may choose not to. If the union makes such a decision (and its members support it), they will just be doing this en mass. Skittle 19:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not at all unreasonable for the Liverpool council to ask for that. It's known that second hand smoke is a health risk.  If one of their employees is required to visit the homes of smokers then it is quite certain that their health will suffer - perhaps in very small ways - but their probability of getting lung related diseases is increased by the hazardous activity.  It follows that it's only a matter of time until these people start to sue for industrial injury rights - and at that point the council is in a nasty little dilemma.  It is required by law to provide these services to the public - and yet it's also required by law to take action to protect employees from industrial injury - so it naturally follows that it should make a very public effort to minimise risk to employees in order that it can produce evidence that they've taken every reasonable action to protect their staff.  If they did not do so in full knowledge of the health hazard then one might argue for a negligance case.  So I imagine they are very serious indeed about this.  SteveBaker 20:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Fireworks (for agricultural use)
I saw a report on the news yesterday that talked about how (in Florida) it is against the law to purchase really big fireworks unless you sign a paper stating that you will only use them "for agricultural use." Naturally that raises a question: WTF? How do you use fireworks for agricultural use? To scare off flies that are bothering your horses or what? Recury 17:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Possibly to scare off deer from eating your crops. Another way to do this would be to use a deer cannon.  (Don't know if we have an article for that one...)  Dismas |(talk) 18:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Bird scarer might cover it. DuncanHill 18:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It has the same use, guess I'll throw in a redirect. Thanks,  Dismas |(talk) 18:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, Oregon says agricultural fireworks are used "to control birds and predatory animals that are injurious to crops".--Pharos 00:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You can also (in theory/folklore) use a natural gas cannon to prevent a hailstorm, so perhaps a suitably large bottle rocket could do the same? --TotoBaggins 21:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hand-held computer game from the 80s
I used to own a hand-held computer game in early 80s UK and I would like to know if anyone else remembers it, and if there's anything about it on the web. It was a cartridge-based affair, with a number of different games available. It had the name Blockbuster, but i can't remember if that was the name of the whole system or just that of the cartridge that it came shipped with, which was a variation on the standard game where you had to break through walls brick by brick with a moving ball, which you had to keep in play by batting it up. It was a long, clunky thing with a very small (2" sq) LCD display. Anyone else remember it?  Many thanks.  Blockbuster is a disambiguation page which doesn't help, btw. --Richardrj talkemail 18:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * According to this page Blockbuster was a game on a console called a "Microvision". You'll need to scroll down to find comments about Blockbuster. DuncanHill 18:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's the one! Thanks very much. --Richardrj talkemail 19:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Saving Private Ryan Morphine
In the movie Saving Private Ryan, medics are seen giving shots of Morphine to injured and wounded soldiers, who then immediately dies. Why does morphine do this to one's body?Acceptable 19:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I always thought that the morphine was to eliminate (or reduce) the pain and suffering of the patient. I think that the soldiers were in agonizing pain and were about to die regardless.  That is, they did not die because of the morphine injection.  (JosephASpadaro 19:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC))


 * I'd agree with Joseph, the morphine is given to ease the final moments of a fatally wounded comrade. DuncanHill 19:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Morphine causes respiratory depression; large doses cause breathing to stop altogether (respiratory arrest) and death. In many such cases (more often in war movies than in real wars, I suspect) the medic gives the mortally wounded soldier an especially large dose - this gives him complete relief from pain at the expense of hastening his death.  When pain is sufficiently severe effective analgesia is de facto euthanasia. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Is there any basis for supposing that the medics gave lethal doses, or just therapeutic doses to reduce the agony? Decrease stress and shock and prolong life? Edison 22:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I definitely remember a scene in a movie can't remember which, and don't know if it is based in fact but doesn't sound unreasonable, someone received an obviously fatal massive and painful wound, like their bottom half was blown off, but wasn't unconscious and probably going to take hours to die in agony, the fellow soldiers each donated one of their three rationed morphine injections, up to ten or whatever which was a fatal dose, to put the wounded soldier out of their agony, like a euthanasia injection. Vespine 00:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

If the morphine shots were merely to reduce pain and not forcibly kill the soldiers, why did Sergeant Horvath in the movie, along with the rest of the soldiers, hestitate when Wade and Captain Miller asked them to inject Wade with the morphine? This seems to hint that the injection of morphine will lead to an unfortunate inevitability. Acceptable 02:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please, please, please remember "It's only a movie" - if it suits the needs of the plot or the emotion of the moment, the movie folks are very happy to bend, break or even reverse the facts! Saving Private Ryan is based very loosely on a true story - there really was an unfortunate mother of several sons - who lost all but one of them in combat - and there really was a team set out to bring that last son home.  But all else is purest fiction.  Attempting to infer anything about reality from what happened in the movie - or to place motives onto fictional characters using real world medical information - is completely futile. SteveBaker 04:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * See Niland Brothers, Sullivan brothers, and Sole Survivor Policy for the relevant articles on that. Although, SteveBaker is right, they have poetic license so-to-speak, the movie was also praised, from what I recall, for its accuracy in other matters.  So bending the rules for this seems a bit out of place.  How long would it take someone to die of a morphine overdose and how much would be needed though?  That may help the suppositions here.  Dismas |(talk) 19:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If it's any help,overdosing junkies have been found with the needle still in their arm.hotclaws 23:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Once, in a hospital, I had morphine before an operation. It was great, then followed cocaine sprayed in the sinuses (to reduce bleeding) nitrous oxide, and valium, for whatever reason. They were using a chisel to cut holes in my sinuses, and it probably hurt, but I didn't care in the least. I laughed all the way through it. Anesthesia is wonderful. This all counted as "local anesthesia" since I was not "put under" so there was less chance of death. Edison 05:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

No carriers based at Pearl Harbor?
I was looking at the list of Nimitz class carriers and was wondering why the navy has no carriers based at Pearl Harbor? Two carriers are in Washington state, two in San Diego and the Kitty Hawk in Yokosuka in Japan. Why not Pearl Harbor? --Blue387 21:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * One in Japan because they need one that far west. For the rest, people are going to tell you stuff about harbours being shallow or docks too short or about complex tradeoffs for steaming time to various potential trouble spots, or the costs of getting stuff to place X vs place Y. But you know the real reason - California sends 53 people to the House of Representatives, Washington sends 9, Hawaii sends 2, Guam doesn't send any. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

"propaganda" song
Recently I saw a modern English language movie (a crime or thriller movie) set in a city in the present day US. The song that played through the opening credits (I think with shots of buildings) repeated, in a rather Stentorian manner, the lyric "PROPAGANDA!", sung in an accent that might be Turkish or Arabic. But I can't remember which movie, and I don't know which song. You just can't google for stuff like this - any ideas? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Try http://www.whatsthatcalled.com Corvus cornix 02:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you give us something more to go on? Any plot line or scenes to help identify the movie?  152.16.59.190 07:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

What is a "Rolling Chassis"?
I've been doing some preliminary searches, and have found references to this term in various locations (RC race cars, F1 race cars, etc.), but have not been able to find a definition of what a "Rolling Chassis" really is. Sounds like an easy one for one of you academic types, but in my limitted mental capacity, I just can't seem to track it down.

Many thanks,

Jorj. JorjKurious 23:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe this refers to the complete car minus the powertrain. In some areas it's common for things to be sold this way, when they assume the purchaser will supply the extra needed stuff.  Friday (talk) 23:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Friday is basically right. I read about restorations of vehicles rather often and the term comes up quite a bit since one of my hobbies has to do with vehicles.  It's basically the frame of the vehicle in question with the axles, wheels, and tires, and maybe some of the more important bits of the steering (to make it easier to move if so desired).  It's literally just a chassis that rolls.  Most times it does not include the body of the vehicle.  Dismas |(talk) 10:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Re.: Unusual Laws
Here is the ISBN, other information that refers to a book that deals with unusual laws that are passed all over the world. This is LOONY LAWS...THAT YOU NEVER KNEW YOU WERE BREAKING, written by a Robert Wayne Pelton, ISBN is: 0-8041-0744-0. It talks about bizarre, crazy laws that are all over the planet. One good one is that, in Kansas city, MO., a kid can get a shotgun, but cannot get a toy cap gun. What, if any, articles, can this source concerning bizarre laws be placed ? 205.240.144.225 23:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Our usual problem is that we have unsourced articles needing citations. We don't usually deal with the problem of uncited sources in search of articles.  So I wouldn't worry about it.  (Unless you're trying to promote this book, that is.) —Steve Summit (talk) 00:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think this is an answer for "Unusual Laws" - a few questions up from here. Thanks for the info - next time, could you please put it below the question.  Thnks! SteveBaker 01:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem with these books is that they are usually fairly inaccurate or overstated. I Live in kansas city, and I don't think I've ever seen a toy store that didn't sell cap guns. If you can find an article that this would be appropriate in, you should cite that specific law, not a book which claims something to be law, that way it can actually be confirmed. --ʇuǝɯɯoɔɐqǝɟ 02:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The deal is though that these old laws aren't typically enforced - so the fact that you see a cap gun in a toy store really doesn't prove that the law doesn't exist. However, I agree that a lot of these laws are reported as being still on the books when in fact they have been repealed or superceded in some other manner. SteveBaker 04:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)