Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2007 October 21

= October 21 =

Generals in CF
How many Full Generals (4-stars) are there in the Canadian Armed Forces? I took a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_Council_%28Canada%29 and only the Chairman was a Full General. Acceptable 00:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The Canadian Forces maintains an address book for flag and general officers here: . Looking through the list, I see only two individuals that are full Generals: the aforementioned Rick Hillier (Chief of the Defence Staff), and Ray Henault (former Chief, and current Chair of NATO's Military Committee).  Our article on Lieutenant-General (Canada) (3-star General) implies that only Chiefs of the Defence Staff tend to be promoted 4-star rank. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Evolution of computer vs firearms
Why do firearms (portable weapons) evolve (increase in superiority) so much slower than say, computers? With respect to Moore's Law, CPU speed double about every 18 months. If firearms evolved at this rate, then the weapons seen in sci-fi movies would pale in comparison with them. Is it because of a lack of funding? Or has guns already reached near-perfection? Thanks. Acceptable 02:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Perfection? I'm not sure what you mean by perfection in relation to firearms.  Going back to your question though, how can firearms be improved?  Are you thinking of rail guns like in Eraser?  Or laser blasters such as in Star Wars or even the phasers of Star Trek?  Dismas |(talk) 02:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, both articles for railgun and coilgun go over some of the hurdles in production that have yet to be jumped. Dismas |(talk) 03:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I see no problem with applying the word 'perfection' to a gun. It surely means simply making as good a gun (for a particular purpose) as possible, both in design and in what we can call craftsmanship, or perhaps quality. I can also see a fine gun as a thing of beauty, just as I can a sword. And yes, I should say the gunsmith's art changes only slowly because the technology of firearms is essentially simple and old-fashioned. Xn4  04:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * But guns have different designs and purposes just like computers. There are different tasks for different guns.  So I don't see how a gun could be "perfect" unless you make other qualifications on its use and standards it needs to meet.  Dismas |(talk) 12:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Moore's Law doesn't say CPU speed doubles every 18 months. It says transistor density doubles every two years.  A firearm is a a tube, a projectile, and a propellant; what in that is equatable to transistor density on an integrated circuit? FiggyBee 08:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Simple answer - firearms can't be minaturised - that's the reason.87.102.16.28 09:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, they can, but it doesn't improve their performance. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) &bull; 14:01, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * My two cents, the handheld gunpowder-and-projectile weapon itself is about maxed out. The ammunition, though, continues to evolve, and the sky's the limit. It would be possible to create a projectile that was essentially a miniature cruise missle, that would fly around on its own little wings looking for human beings to spit a pellet of poison at, for instance. You could even have it seek out officers by their insignia, or set down awhile and wait if there was nobody around. I'm sure there are things being developed right now that we know nothing of. Money is the problem. That and the inertia of the military-industrial complex. There are also rules of war that limit what can be done; there was a big flap about the tumbling bullet.
 * The problem with ray guns is power storage. My laptop weighs more than my .308 does. --Milkbreath 14:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The difference is certainly miniaturisation. Computer chips are basically designs printed onto silicon.  When we improve the 'printing' mechanism by making the details twice as sharp, we can get four times as much circuitry onto a single chip of whatever size.  Also, when you do that, you halve the amount of time electrical signals take to get from one component to another. So (essentially) the chip goes twice as fast and is either four times as complex or four times less area (which pretty much also makes it four times cheaper...not precisely so...but roughly).  I also consumes less power - and possibly also takes up less space.


 * Moores Law isn't really a law - it's just an observation about how well our ability to shrink these designs improves over time. It came about from observing how the industry has been improving things - and (somewhat to the surprise of nearly everyone), it continues to be a reasonably accurate predictor of the growth of the technology.


 * In other areas of technology, there is rarely such a simple relationship between making something smaller and making it better. In fact, for almost everything else, smaller is worse.  If you make a car engine smaller, you get less power out of it.  If you make the cartridge/bullet of a gun smaller, it has less "stopping power".  If you make your house smaller, it's less comfortable to live in.  Electronics are really the only things I can think of that get better/faster/more-powerful as they shrink.


 * We are eventually going to hit a limit though - Moores law will eventually 'run out' as our components get smaller, they'll soon start to hit physical limits that are not breakable...the size of an atom for example. There are other ways to make our electronics better - but simple shrinking will stop working in not too many more 18 month cycles - certainly within our lifetimes.  But, by that point, our electronics will be vastly better than we have now and it's hard to predict what effect that might have.  Many people believe in the technological singularity - the point at which humans lose control of an exponentially growing technology.  SteveBaker 14:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Note that the weapons in sci fi movies are often visually impressive but would be physically uninteresting. Plasma would make a lousy projectile (hot, charged gas, that would not only be easy to deflect with an electromagnetic field but would at most briefly scald you before its heat dissipated); lasers require massive poewr supplies before they become interesting—both of which really have nothing on kinetic force projectiles or explosive projectiles in the question of amount of bang for your buck (either financially or just energetically). Just because they look cool on screen doesn't mean they'd actually work in real life.
 * In any case, I don't think the market for firearms is anywhere near as lucrative, competitive, or additive as computers. People expect to get a new computer every few years; companies constantly are upgrading and buying massive amounts of computers. The same can't be said for firearms—not only as a market issue, but also because even if you were in the market of outfitting your employees with firearms, you wouldn't want them to each have totally different weapons which required totally different training, certification, ammunition, and repair procedures. With computers the differences between basic setups are trivial; even the differences between Macs and PCs are not so hard to navigate these days. It's a very different type of market, aside from being a much larger market. --24.147.86.187 14:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

What I meant was, for example, the M-16 platform has been around since the 1960's during the Vietnam War, yet the M-16/M-4 variants are still the standard issue weapon for many US forces and the military of many other nations today. We certainly don't use computers that are 40 years old, nor phones, TV's, radio, refrigerators that are 40 years old. So why are firearms not been constantly improved at a faster rate? Acceptable 21:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Some tech gear from the 1960s, and earlier, is still used and even highly prized. Vintage studio microphones, like the Neumann (or Telefunken) U 47, and others that don't have wikipedia pages. You'd think that in 50+ years people would have been able to improve the quality of the top-line microphones, but no. We can make smaller microphones now, but not better ones. Perhaps an even more extreme example is violins, with 300 year old Stradivarius instruments still being used by those who can afford them. Pfly 05:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That's not entirely fair. The technology of TV's, radio and refrigerators hasn't changed much over the last 40 years.  The recent advent of flat-screen TV's is the first significant improvement for 40 years (when colour TV started to appear) - radios haven't changed much since the invention of transistor radios - refrigerators haven't changed at all, almost since they were first invented!  Same with the M-16.   You are correct in saying that we aren't using the same exact model of refrigerator/TV/radio - but we aren't using the exact same M-16 either - all sorts of minor tweaks to the design have happened over the years.  This is what happens with most forms of technology - slow gradual improvement over many generations.  Things that have improved rapidly (and phones are certainly one of them) have done so mostly because they are actually computers.  Even things like cars still use the same basic technology as a Model T Ford - except that with a computer to adjust the fuel/air mix and automatically advance/retard the spark - we now get more horsepower and better fuel consumption.  What got better was the computer - not the car.


 * What happened with computers is (so far) a one-off event. No other technology in all of history has developed so fast - within one generation.  That's why everything throughout society has been so deeply impacted.  We're hardly beginning to scratch the surface of what this means.  It's only been a couple of years since you could have a device that you could own that could literally reach the whole of human knowledge.  Wikipedia+iPhone means that you can have almost any knowledge of almost anything within a couple of minutes of wishing to know it.  No human being has yet gone through childhood to adulthood with all of human knowledge at their fingertips...we have no clue what that'll do to us as a species. SteveBaker 23:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

One of the big differences is that computers merely process information, while weapons have to do real work.

There is a theoretical limit on the smallest amount of energy it takes to change a 0 to a 1, and of course other parts of a computer have to do little bits of real work (spin a disk, light a screen, send and receive Wifi signals, wiggle a membrane to generate sound waves encoded in a pirated MP3 file, etc.), but over time, the amount of energy a cutting edge computer requires can and does keep getting smaller. But if you want to fling a projectile at your enemy, fast enough to do some damage when it hits him, the laws of physics say there's a nontrivial amount of energy it'll take to do that, and the physical devices you need in order to carry that energy around and contain it as you fire your missile are nontrivially large and heavy. Or if, instead of flinging a projectile, you want to just fire some sort of directed energy ray which will vaporize some portion of your enemy's anatomy from a distance, well, that'll take nontrivial amounts of energy, too. —Steve Summit (talk) 23:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah ok, thank you guys. Acceptable 01:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Human meat
How would human meat compare to other sorts such as cow? Is it really tender? Tough? Taste weird? Is soylent green the best thing since tacos? Bellum et Pax 04:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It tastes like pork, according to Armin Meiwes. See . A.Z. 04:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * A bit sweet, I've heard. But that might be about modern humans who eat a lot of refined sugar. (Does that make any sense?) It is also said to be quite addictive, but that may just be scare stories. DirkvdM 09:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Like pork the meat needs to be bled. If you have ever seen unbled pork and chicken you will know why. Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.166.234 (talk) 12:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

My college friend served in the Peace Corps in Fiji, where cannibalism was common not all that many generations ago. According to my friend, the common knowledge among Fijians is that human flesh tastes like pork. Indeed, the Fijian phrase for a human corpse considered as food is "long pig". I also found a couple web references that mention how human flesh tastes like pork: MrRedact 17:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Jonathan Swift even suggested that "a well-grown, fat, yearling child", roasted whole, was far superior in taste and magnificance to a pig.--Shantavira|feed me 08:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Schools in an encyclopedia
The question I wish to pose is quite simple. Why are SCHOOLS on a website that is basically an encyclopedia??? You see, just having the school's listed and described in a positive light (ie Tilton School), but DISALLOWING people to post true testimony is in fact one of the largest (in my eyes) violations of the NPOV, or Neutral Point Of View, requirement that is set forth in posting on Wikipedia. Now obviously if you look up say Red Tailed Hawk, thats looking up something physical; something studied. If you look up 'Beaver Dams' then you find postings that are based on factual information. However, I've found two schools that I attended on Wiki, and when I attempted to offer my point of view, (which is obviously expert on the basis that I WENT THERE and experienced it) it was deleted, and without even asking me, the individual said in the comments "personal rant deleted by someone with no affiliation to the school".... So being an Alum, I suppose, bears absolutely no affiliation what-so-ever. So the challenge I pose is this: please explain to me why schools should be in Wikipedia, and if you agree that they should be, please further explain why they should have to follow the NPOV regulation, and why both sides to a story cant be posted. Thankyou.

76.238.87.22 07:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Wynn H.
 * Someone's 'testimony' is not compatible with Wikipedia's verifiability policy. - Mgm|(talk) 08:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * In particular, the very fact that you went to that school almost guarantees that you won't have a neutral point of view about it. It will inevitably be slanted by your experience there, whether positively or negatively.  And it's not published information, so no go.  Sorry.  --  JackofOz 09:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The other major guideline is No original research, primarily because it usually violates WP:V and WP:NPOV, as Mgm and Jack alluded to. — Matt Eason (Talk &#149; Contribs) 10:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * See WikiProject Schools for Wikipedia's policy on articles about schools.--Shantavira|feed me 12:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If you have VERIFIABLE negative evidence (for example, a newspaper report or a local government report showing that the school doesn't meet educational targets or something) then you may certainly put it on that page. If someone here objects to you doing that, then come and tell me and I'll beat them up for you next breaktime behind the bike sheds I'll join in on the discussion.  However, just posting random claims without backing information to verify that is not acceptable because we simply can't trust the say-so of some individual.  Positive claims are also not acceptable without evidence either. SteveBaker 14:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

So in essence, what your all saying, is if one were to publish something entitled "The worste time of my life" and talked all about a school in that light, then it would be admissable content for posting on a school page? sorry, im just trying to understand..... 76.238.87.22 21:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Wynn H.
 * If it was a reliable source, yes. ¿SFGi Д nts!  ¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review! 21:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ideally you'd want a source like a newspaper, Research Journal, or government report. If you Just wrote (and got published) an autobiography about your time in the school, then your book would probably be mentioned, but its contents wouldn't necessarily be reported as fact.
 * "Wynn H. thinks this school Sucks." is an opinion.
 * "Of 5,000 Students interviewed 87% of them think this school sucks." is a fact, and if you could cite someone who has proven this fact, then it belongs in the article.
 * If your school really does have serious issues then it should be possible To find references in your local paper. It's a good excuse to play with the microfilm machines at your local library.--APL 22:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * NO! Categorically, absolutely not! We are most definitely not saying that you could just write something like that and add it to the Wikipedia page!  That would be considered "Original Research" and there is a very specific Wikipedia rule that says that you can't use that (WP:NOR).  But that's not because you want to say something negative - absolutely not.  If you wanted to write "This school is really, really good and it was the happiest time of my life"...we'd still want independently verifiable proof that this was true - and we'd still complain that this was a violation of WP:NOR.  Worse still, because it was YOU who had this terrible time, we can't expect you to be able to write from a neutral point of view.  You are inevitably biassed - and that's not allowed either.  (The relevent standard is WP:NPOV).


 * We are saying that you can add relevant facts, even if they show the school in a bad light - IF they can be backed up by a reliable source - such as a newspaper article, magazine report or a book - and IF you are not likely to be biassed in your point of view. However, neither of those are likely to be true if you were to write "The worst time of my life", so that's gonna get deleted ASAP under the WP:NOR and WP:NPOV rules.


 * SteveBaker 22:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, with great respect, you are not, as far as we know, a notable person. It might be relevant to report that, say, George W Bush had a terrible/great time at School X, if that was independently published somewhere and if it was somehow germane to our article on his later career.  But a non-notable person's bad/good time at a particular school is not something that any encyclopedia is interested in writing about.  Otherwise, to be consistent, we'd have literally millions of bits of information about the school-day experiences of millions of people that nobody apart from their families and friends and work colleagues have ever heard of.  Would you want to read that?  I certainly wouldn't.  -- JackofOz 04:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Symbol?
Anyone know what the symbol at the bottom of the 'Heroes' section is? I've seen it before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.24.65 (talk) 13:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm being thick, but what is the 'Heroes' section? --Milkbreath 13:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Opps! Sorry lol. I forgot to include a link: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=78351145 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.25.251 (talk) 13:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's a fleur-de-lis, a stylized flower. As a symbol it stands for many things, including the Boy Scouts. --Milkbreath 13:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Although if it were meant to represent Scouting I imagine the 'petals' wouldn't be so deeply separated. —Tamfang 04:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's also part of the Province of Quebec's flag in Canada. Acceptable 22:50, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * ... because before that it was the symbol of the French royal dynasty. – Mumble years ago I worked the heraldry booth at a Renaissance Faire. One day a punter referred to f-d-l as "Boy Scout thingies" and I had to set him straight. "In heraldry we do not call them Boy Scout thingies. We call them French thingies." —Tamfang 04:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Bernie Ecklestone
Does anyone know why Bernie Ecklestone always wears long-sleeved shirts? Even in the heat of recent Far-East Formula 1 races he was wearing long sleeves. Richard Avery 17:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know who he is, but is it possible he's wearing Nomex shirts? --Mdwyer 06:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Bernie Ecclestone is the Formula One supremo. I had noticed the same thing, but never thought much about it (the Australian GP is often on stinking hot days, and he always seems to be in long sleeved shirts and pants as a minimum). I simply assumed that as with many other businessmen, he is simply dressing in what he regards as a professional manner for a man in his position. Given that even on race days he is likely to be involved in contact with people pretty high up in many industries, governments, and not to mention race teams, he may think getting along in shorts and a T-shirt a bit unprofessional. --jjron 08:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Could he be covered in tattoos ? Or worse. All his tattoos advertise banned substances like alchohol, tobacco, cheap firearms and hallunogenic sweets. It deserves investigation. Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.166.234 (talk) 22:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

HM prison records
i want to track someone down but the only information i've got is their first name, the prison and the year (1992) they went to prison, what websites can help me or can i be supplied with records or where do i go to find out information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.88.226 (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You could try writing to the prison concerned, but with many hundreds of people in every prison, if all you have is their first name and a year, I doubt whether you'll be able to trace them. And I doubt you'll find personal information about inmates on any website. Convicts Reunited perhaps?--Shantavira|feed me 18:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The prison information will likely be of less use than using their name in various public records types of sites. I've used Intelius before with good success for finding info about people with just their name. Obviously the more unique the name, the easier it is to narrow it down. --24.147.86.187 19:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Intelius appears to be for USA searches only.--Shantavira|feed me 09:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Red Dragon
At the end of Red Dragon (film) what's the song being played when the guy busts up all the FBI agents with his shotgun? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.217.195.89 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Try the Entertainment reference desk: WP:RD/E --Mdwyer 06:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Canon Rock mp3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjA5faZF1A8

Where can I find this in mp3 form? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.187.66 (talk) 19:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You could just convert it yourself using a tool such as this one (I just grabbed that off Google, so it comes with no guarantee). Algebraist 20:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Can confirm that that converter works great for vid's/mp3's from Youtube. Dureo 12:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

public being ripped off?


The jacketed group on the bottom is 16 AWG household appliance cord, the lead on the middle left (black with thick insulation) is 8 AWG battery jumper cable from a discount auto chain about 15 years ago. The middle right (black with thick insulation) and upper right (red with thick insulation) are battery booster cables from a South Korean vendor at the local flea market that measure 14 AWG (at best) and 16 AWG (more likely) with claim of 400 amp capacity (or at 12 volts, 4,800 watts).

Is 400 amps a realistic claim for 16 AWG at 12 volts or is the public being ripped-off?


 *  Clem   —Preceding comment was added at 21:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * At twelve volts, if the cable is ten feet long, if you shorted the ends together you'd only draw 126 amps, and probably melt it. --Milkbreath 22:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Why would it only draw 126 amps?  Clem   22:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is rather blatantly false advertising, if not a total ripoff.
 * The resistance of #14 stranded copper wire is about 0.0032 ohms per foot. So if you have 20 feet of wire (a round trip at 10 feet), that's 0.064 ohms.  Ohm's law says that if you pump 400 amps through it, you'll get a voltage drop of 25.6 volts.  So if you started with 12 volts, it ain't gonna work.  At 12 volts and 14 AWG, the most you'll get is 12 ÷ 0.064 = 187 amps.
 * (It looks like Milkbreath's lower figure of 126 amps is for 16 AWG.)
 * With that said, the cables probably aren't 100% useless. Oftentimes, even if you've got nice, heavy-duty jumper cables (mine are 4 AWG), you can't clamp them tight enough onto anything big enough to get full current flow anyway.  In that case, you have to wait five minutes or so until you've partially charged the dead battery.  Then, you can usually get the car to start with a combination of power newly stored in its battery, plus the wimpier current your jumper cables can carry.  Therefore, if you don't mind this more timeconsuming technique, you can get away with cheap-ass cables.  (But of course this still doesn't excuse their labeling them as "400 amp".  Sheesh.) —Steve Summit (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It looks like they also cut 3 feet off the length. The cables are only 7 feet long. I guess that would lower the resitance but not enough to count.  Clem   13:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * While we're on the subject, don't let anybody tell you it's all right to have your car running when the dead car you're jumping tries to start, what I've heard called a "hotshot". Turn off the donor engine before trying to crank the dead one. You can burn your regulator. I used to know exactly why, but now I only distinctly remember that I once knew, and I tend to believe myself. It has something to do with the way battery voltage can fall so much when you crank that the regulator is taken out of its comfort zone trying to make 7 volts be 13.8. Also, hook the dead battery up first, and connect ground on the good car last by clamping to the chassis at some distance from the battery. --Milkbreath 02:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

google earth
i have installed google earth but i cnt see my house clearly.......i want to ask is it the graphics problem or the resolutin ov lens that focussed the picture is not more than thatRoar2lion 21:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * There is probably no problem on your end. Unless you live in or near a major urban center, you likely won't be able to see much around you clearly. Even some major cities are surprisingly blurry. You may want to try your luck with another satellite. I might start with flash earth, since it allows you to shift between different satellites fairly quickly.--YbborTalk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Down on the bottom of the screen, you should see something like "Streaming ||.||||| 90%". If that goes straight to "Streaming ||||||| 100%", w/o going through anything in between, then you have an internet connectivity issue; if it takes awhile to get to 100%" (but not more than 30 seconds or so), it's good, and the photo the folks at Google used for the area around your house is just crummy, plain and simple. 72.197.202.36 21:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Flash Earth is stupid. Once I've clicked the map, the instructions disappear despite there being plenty of room for them (because the map is way too small), there is no link to them, nothing is intuitive, there are no navigation buttons and refreshing doesn't get the instructions back. DirkvdM 09:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok, found the zoom button - it's not in a logical place. And to get the instructions back, I have to click the link again. But why doesn't keyboard zooming work? There's no slider bar either. DirkvdM 09:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, the slider bar has sudenly appeared. But it uses 'smooth scrolling and zooming', which makes me seasick. So many people hate this that there should always be an option to permanently turn it off. DirkvdM 09:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fire in San Diego County
I live in Poway, CA, and smoke so thick that the sun in blocked out seems to be coming from the northeast to southeast. Something this large would usually be “live” by now, but I haven’t been able to find anything on it. Does anyone have more info? 72.197.202.36 21:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * There are a couple of brush fires burning to the north-east and south-east of you. There are news articles here and here and more if you search Google News for Potrero fire. — Matt Eason (Talk &#149; Contribs) 21:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, CNN (and many other media outlets) are reporting fires in Malibu. See here and here.  Josborne2382 21:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * As an update, if you happen to live in Poway, especially the north-east of the city, you should probably keep your eyes on local tv and radio into the night. The winds picked up this evening and, with Santa Ana conditions forecast through Thursday, the potential of the fires are now being compared, ominously, to the Cedar Fire. The entire town of Ramona, California is under a mandatory evacuation order for Sunday night local time. At 11pm the mayor announced that the fire is estimated to enter the city limits around 1am to 2am Monday morning through the San Pasqual Valley. This appears to the be most aggressive front of the fire. Some parts of north-east Poway is now being asked to evacuate and the rest of the city is directly in the south-western path of the fire. The evacuation points are being advertised on the rolling local news updates, but Mira Mesa High School appears to be the main one. They were advising people to go to Poway High School, but now this itself is under an evacuation order, so don't head there. There is also another fire to the south, around Potrero and Tecate, California, though this is a less populous area. A state of emergency has now been declared, so State and federal assistance should be available in the forthcoming days. I live less than a mile from the coast, about 30 miles away but directly downwind of the fire, and the smell of smoke is extremely strong here now and there is ash falling. The last time that happened was back in 2003 during the Firestorm. Hopefully the winds will drop or else there is going to be a lot of damage. Good luck. Rockpock  e  t  06:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * They were showing aerial shots of the CA fires on BBC News 24 today. Looks very nasty. Hope you're OK, 72.197 — Matt Eason (Talk &#149; Contribs) 22:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

George Bush Signature
I have a used paperback that is signed G.W. Bush on the title page. A bit less than half of the book is underlined with scattered margin comments as if read by a student. The signature doesn't look like GW Bush's current signature. How can I find an image of G.W. Bush's signature from his late teens or early twenties? Poinsot 22:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I think you meant to add this as a new topic thread, so I have adjusted it as such. Josborne2382 22:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Two thoughts about the differing signatures, from my own perspective. Some people's signatures change over the years.  Mine is very different now (I'm 56) from when I was in my 20s (I've never quite worked out why - it just seemed to evolve without any conscious attempt on my part).  Also, signatures often don't look much, or anything, like the names they represent.  My name was never obvious in either my old signature or my current signature - but my handwriting is quite legible when writing most other things.  Sorry I can't help with locating GWB's old signature.  --  JackofOz 23:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Here is a photo of the president containing his autograph - I don't think you'd have guessed that said "G.W.Bush" - so if you were able to read the name in your book, then it's probably not the President's signature. I typed 'G.W.Bush' into the Intelius 'people search' tool and found 25 G.W.Bush's in the USA (I'd bet there are a heck of a lot more than that).  What are the odds that the book you have is signed by a president - rather than one of those others G.W.Bushes?  (4%?)   When I was a kid in the UK, I went to the same school that Sir Edward Heath (then Prime Minister) had previously gone to (Chatham House Grammar School).  In those days, school books were signed out to students and returned at the end of each school year - practically every school book I ever saw while I was there (including those that had only just recently been published!) had some variation of "E.Heath" or "Ted Heath" written into the list at the front of the book!   Clearly there was a lot of forgery going on there! SteveBaker 00:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * All my books had "Mike Hunt" and "Ben Dover" etc in the front cover :/ -- ⁪ffroth 01:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah - that too. My sweetest moment at that school was when Heath was taking the country into the European Community.  He gave a lot of speeches to the European Parliament in French - but he had by far the worst french accent you've ever heard in all your life!  It was completely humiliating to the entire languages department at the school...which needless to say gave the students no end of fun.  It was just great to ask in class: "Excuse me Sir, could you please tell us the correct pronunciation for 'XXX'?"  (where 'XXX' was something Heath had horribly mangled on the previous evening's news). SteveBaker 18:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Have the book tested for the presence of cocaine residue. If there's no coke, the signature's a fake. See George W. Bush substance abuse controversy.

Atlant 00:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

stay or leave
salam 2 all

I'm a sunni muslim women, who is very confused about wat to do or wat not to for her and her kidz future.

My problem is that wen i got married, i picked a kasam on the quran that i would never leave my husband but at that time i didn't know that 10 years later i will be living a life of a single parent and now after trying extermely hard, me and my husband stil constantly fight over everything especially over money.

All this arguing and bickering is effecting my children because they see and hear this everytime (plz don't tel m how cruel this is because honestly i already know this), i don't want my children to think that this is a marriage and this situation (marriage) is doing them no justice.

Plz any1 tel m what i can and can't do with taking after picking the kasam, as i am so confused.

Thank you 2 al that reply.--Ninaz31174 22:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)n--Ninaz31174 22:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * A local leading person of your religion could probably advise you on the religious aspects, and secular counselling could provide you with other appropriate information. You don't say where you are, and that could affect some of your legal options.  Someone in your area, who is familiar with your situation, may be able to give you more specific advice than random people on the internet.  In a situation such as this, it is always best to seek advice from professionals.  152.16.16.75 23:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you value society's benefits more or less than your personal liberties? If you've taken a religious vow, you'll have to weigh possible repercussions in the muslim afterlife (not very familiar with Islam, sorry) and possible social ostracism.. since Islam tends to be a totalitarian religion, you also may need to think about physical danger if you're in a muslim country. Consider these things before you break any vows.. You should at least try marriage counseling first -- ⁪ffroth 01:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * In any case I wish you much luck with your difficult situation and your difficult decisions. You have the sympathy and empathy of someone from a very different culture, background, and maybe location.`--24.147.86.187 01:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not familiar with religion but you really do have to think of what you're doing to your children. Is an unhappy marriage giving them a good example for what they should do in life? There are various conselling services available, whether it's marriage conselling or advice over a divorce. Ask your GP for information. -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk to me Articles touched by my noodly appendage 10:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot give legal or medical advice. -88.109.95.39 10:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * So it's a good thing that this is neither, isn't it? According to Islamic marital jurisprudence, while marriage is valued highly in Islamic culture, it's seen as a legal agreement rather than a religious commitment (which it is in Christianity). This means that divorce is possible, and more or less acceptable, even though it shouldn't be taken lightly. I can't find much information on the Kasam (Qasam/Qasem) you speak of. According to this website, a Qasam can be broken, or violated without grave consequences, but as the previous commenters have pointed out, it really is best to consult with the religious leader of your community. You should also know that you're not the first person this has happened to. People in relationships all around the world have problems like these, and in almost every community there are ways to deal with it. Finally, I think the most important thing to do is to talk to your husband. I think you both know that the situation is problematic, and that it's bad for your the children. Before finding a long term solution (like marriage counseling or divorce) you could at agree to try not to fight in front of the children. This has two positive effects, the children will see you fight less (they'll still know though, so it's only a short term solution) and you'll both acknowledge that there's a problem, and you'll be working on it, which at least gives you room to talk and work thing out. If you want, you can give us some more information about your situation (where you live, whether you are more worried about the religious consequences or the social consequences, etc.), so that we can offer more specific advice. risk 15:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

How many 10th graders got accepted into Brooklyn Tech in 2006?
How many 10th graders got accepted into Brooklyn Tech in 2006? Also, about how much do you need to score to get into Brooklyn Tech if you are taking the score as a 9th grader trying to enter 10th? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.57.235 (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)