Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 March 2

= March 2 =

Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald's death
Is Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald really dead? Ericthebrainiac (talk) 00:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not according to our article. Though, if a fictional character dies, the writers of the fiction can always bring them back to life. See ret-con.  Dismas |(talk) 03:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this a normal mandolin technique or did I do something original?
I just got a mandolin (Suzuki M210, looks like a lute, made in 1975 apparently) and I will go to the E strings, fret the high E string, 3rd fret, while leaving the low E string open and pluck. Is this common or did I make something up? MalwareSmarts (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Usually the answer to "did I make something (new) up?" is no. Why not? Because if you were clever enough to have actually made it up for the very first time, you'd probably know it! ;-) Suffice to say, what you did sounds pretty simple, I doubt you're the first to do it. For a guitar that's not anything special; I doubt it is for a mandolin either. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 02:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Just about anything that is possible to do on a western instrument has been done some time somewhere before. See extended technique. --S.dedalus (talk) 03:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you mean the low G string (assuming you're in standard GDAE mandolin tuning)? Plucking two Gs (one open, one fretted), isn't new. More directly, even if you did keep trying and manage to come up with a new combination of strings to play, what's the effect? It seems to me kind of like the kids' game of stringing together a bunch of obscure and unlikely words, to be able to say that you were the first person EVER to say those words in that order. jeﬀjon (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * A marvellous splendidly idea what. --Dweller (talk) 15:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Four thirds system - mechanical adapter rings/ring mounts for adapting other lenses (for example Canon of Nikon) to four thirds cameras
Hi Wikipedia. My first question ever!

Background information: The Four Thirds system, is a lens and mount standard, developed especially for digital slrs by Olympus.

Question: On the Four Thirds page, it says this about the system, "lenses for many other SLR types can be fitted to Four Thirds cameras with simple mechanical adapter rings. (Such mechanical adapter rings typically require manual setting of focus and aperture.)"

I have looked on the internet and asked at a photography shop. I have found no evidence of this. The given fact is not citated. Is this information correct?

Chksolic (talk) 03:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems reasonable, as the flange focal distance of the 4/3 system is a lot smaller than the others, so a simple mechanical adapter/spacer is the only thing required to get the flange distance back to the distance the lens was designed for. Other things like autofocus and the like are more problematic though. For a practical example (Nikon->Canon though), see . --antilivedT 08:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Wiki?
Where can i start my own? --Carpenter182 (talk) 04:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * See Wikia for one option. Though the MediaWiki software that runs Wikipedia can be run on most any server.  You just have to find a host that meets the minimum requirements.  Dismas |(talk) 05:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Dagger-proof coat
How is a dagger-proof coat made? Is it as questionable at stopping daggers as a bulletproof vest is at stopping bullets? Neon Merlin  04:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I notice that when I try to Google it, almost every single hit belongs to The Hunting of the Snark by Lewis Carroll. Perhaps it's a fictional object?  --M @ r ē ino 06:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You may want to search for "stab-proof vest". As an aside, I recall hearing once that UK police tried using the same type of protective vest that US police use, but found them useless because they were only bulletproof, and UK police are far more likely to face knives than bullets. Bovlb (talk) 07:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * And one should note, of course, that its very different materials problem to be bulletproof versus stab-proof. With a knife you'd probably want to either deflect or outright stop the blade; with a bullet you distribute the force around the body. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * In either case you want to deflect or stop the weapon by distributing the force around the body; the point is that the two weapons, one sharp but relatively slow-moving, the other fast-moving but blunt, act differently on the vest, so different materials are needed to resist them. People have been defending themselves against knives for longer than they have against bullets, and the technology they evolved for that was the traditional suit of armor in its various forms. --Anonymous, 22:00 UTC, March 2, 2008.


 * You don't deflect bullets. You don't distribute the force of the dagger. It's not the same sort of thing at all. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Eh? Of course you need to distribute the force of the dagger.  What else would keep it from cutting? --Anon, 04:15 UTC, March 4.


 * Knife proof clothing does appear to exist. --S.dedalus (talk) 22:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Vikings wore leather to protect them from slices, but I'm not sure how stab-proof clothes would be made. Maybe sewing iron or steel plates into some clothes?  bibliomaniac 1  5  I see no changes 22:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hardened leather could be extremely resistant to arrows, cuts and stab wounds. Other garments, such as the gambeson,  relied on quilting many layers of fabric (and strengthened by the thread used in the very tight sewing).  The coat of plates and the brigantine had little steel pieces sewn within the fabric (or leather) outer. While not as protective as plate armour or mail, they were all very good.  Knives or swords (etc) might penetrate slightly, but the defences served to reduce the impact or pentration or deflect the weapon.  Gwinva (talk) 00:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Why has the Bush cabinet been unstable?
White House shakeup Do most of these changes have to do with sucking?

66.91.224.203 (talk) 09:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it's because one of the legs is wonky. I'm sure you can easily find something to prop it up with Lemon martini (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The Bill of Rights folded and tucked under one leg should keep it from rocking. Edison (talk) 02:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not sure it is necessarily more unstable than other presidental administrations—you'd have to check that out in more detail to make that claim. But some of the resignations have been due to scandals, lawsuits, or failures, from what I can tell, though with others it is harder to say that with much confidence, unless there are complicated internal politics that I am not privy to, which is likely. --22:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.18.109 (talk)
 * By my count, Bush has had 33 secretaries in his cabinet compared to 29 for Clinton. Bush had one more department (Homeland Security) for most of his term. So the difference is not that great. One difference is that Bush has had only one cabinet member with him the whole time, labor secretary Elaine Chao (not including ONDCP director John P. Walters). Clinton had four secretaries with him for the duration. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Unsafe conditions
Where do I find photos of unsafe conditions in factories?196.25.222.153 (talk) 11:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Searching Google images for "unsafe factory" and "dangerous factory" brings up quite a few....--Shantavira|feed me 16:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Reference Desk
How did the reference desk get started, and what was the first ever question? The archives only goback to Jan 04 as far as I can tell but it seems to have been nearing full flow by then, judging from the time between questions. Thanks 81.96.160.6 (talk) 13:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The first question was apparently asked on February 22, 2002 and the question was...drumroll...why do dogs eat other dogs' poop?. In order to find this for other pages, instead of looking at archives, go directly to the history of the source page and click "earliest" on the history navigation links.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah thank you! What a classy first question. Although in the text it actually says the question was posted on Jan 11 2001, so it goes back further than you'd think, I guess. The edit history must only go back until the actual reference desk was formalised, I guess. Thank you! 81.96.160.6 (talk) 16:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This has been asked on here awhile back. The page used to be called just Wikipedia help desk. The post says it was posed on Jan. 11, 2001, but I'm betting it was actually Jan. 11, 2002, per this edit and the likelihood of screwing up the date so early in the new year. Which would actually imply that some of the other questions on the page are from earlier, from potentially as early as June 2001. Anyway it's pretty clear that Sanger's dog poop post was from January 2002, not 2001, and that a desk already existed when he asked it. Dig the revision history. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 21:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The oldest version I can find at the Wayback machine is from August 10 2001, and the earliest questions were posted on June 26. The first appears to be: "Who was Thomas Reid and what did he have to do with the Scottish School of Common Sense?" Warofdreams talk 04:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The reference desk couldn't have had its first post on Jan. 11, 2001, because Wikipedia didn't launch until January 15 of that year. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Online Colleges
I was wondering if anyone knew what some good online colleges are or if there was a reference or guide to let me know what the top online colleges are and which ones to avoid? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.125.159.81 (talk) 14:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Did we have this question a month or two back? Julia Rossi (talk) 09:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I found something from October 2006, but nothing useful there. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Googling "online colleges ranking" gets you some sites. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The name of Harmony (Passions)'s prison
What is the name of Harmony (Passions)'s prison on Passions? Ericthebrainiac (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I couldn't find one exactly, only references to being in jail in Harmony on Passions. But to create your own, it would be logical (if not actual) to call it Harmony plus prison, jail, penitentiary, detention centre, correctional facility, penal institution...in the meantime – and for fun, Harmony jug, big house, slammer and so on.Julia Rossi (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

LSD forever
Is it make true that if a human tries LSD, it will always remain in body and they will not be able to find professional employment due to potential flashbacks?The Ayatollah (talk) 16:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No on both cases. And if it were a barrier to professional employment then the ranks of academia would be gutted! --98.217.18.109 (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Even if the second half were true, how would they know? I've never been asked about (let alone tested for) LSD use at any job I've ever applied for.  At any rate, our article on LSD discusses the flashback issue. —Steve Summit (talk) 16:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC), edited 17:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (E/C) Never had a flashback, as I'm sure many others will attest:-) Quoting our article on LSD "70 percent of LSD users claim never to have "flashed back"; ...a higher proportion of psychiatric patients report flashbacks than "normal" users... Apparently the urban legend of permanent testing has legs but it's just that, an urban legend. See, The only place I think this may come up in a professional setting is for certain types of jobs where they really delve into your background. I was at an FBI recruitment session a few years ago, and they advised that they would be asking every person under polygraph all about their drug history. I don't remember the specifics exactly, but we were told something like "you can't have smoked marijuana in the past 5 years or more than 7 seven times ever", something similar for cocaine but more stringent and I think they said you can never have taken LSD--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if it's true, but I heard a rumour that the LSD will retain in the spine of the person indefinitely. Acceptable (talk) 19:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you'd looked at the links given above, you'd see that the rumor is not true. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 21:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Make no doubt, it has the potential to really screw you up. However, I've heard more about people being fucked up for life from Meth. That is damn scary stuff. 24.76.169.85 (talk) 04:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In any case, no real point in taking it. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Submerged Cargo Pumps
At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Mohn_AS there is a reference at submerged cargo pumps. I noticed there isn't any article about them. Can anyone please post a rticle about the usage of submerged cargo pumps, advantages/disadvantages from the non-submergable pumps and any other information? If this is not possible, can you please link a site where I can find that information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.10.129 (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Baking soda whiten teeth
Looking on Google, there seems to be a lot of hits that claim brushing with baking soda will whiten teeth. Is this true? If so, why does baking soda whiten teeth? Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Baking soda says that it is "marketed as a whitener because of its abrasive properties in some toothpaste brands". --98.217.18.109 (talk) 21:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

A dental body has today in the UK announced that too much use of teeth whitener does actual harm. So be careful.86.200.7.112 (talk) 15:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)DT

Goat and Sheep
What does goat and sheep meat taste like? What about goat milk? and please don't tell me it taste like chicken unless it actually does.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you've never eaten them, they're impossible to describe accurately. It's like trying to convey an accurate sense of the colour purple to someone who's never seen purple.  (And no, they don't taste like chicken.)  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I'll give it a go. IMO goat's milk is quite sharp and so is the cheese, light and tangy, nothing like cow's milk products. Sheep aka lamb (from french influence on English language) is more tender and sweeter than beef steak. As for goat's meat, never tried it. The Indian diner near me makes goat meat curry, but by the time I try it, my answer will be so late. Red meat is never afaik anything like white meat (as in chicken), it's got a stronger flavour and coarse texture, and kangaroo is stronger still so that the flavour's described as "gamey" which means strong tasting, slightly tougher and lean (very low fat). Hope it helps, Julia Rossi (talk) 09:04, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * We actually have an article on lamb and mutton and a section on goat meat, although it might not help much in this case. They are both red meat, much like beef.  In fact, goats, sheep, and cows are all in the bovid family, which may explain why they each taste closer to each other than they do to, say, a Suidae like a pig or a Leporid like a rabbit.  --M @ r ē ino 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Julia, what do you mean by 'from French influence on English language'? The word 'lamb' has nothing to do with French: it is IIRC only found in West Germanic. You are perhaps thinking of 'mutton', which is from the French 'mouton'. --ColinFine (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah Colin, thank you, mouton was the thought. Julia Rossi (talk) 04:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)