Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 October 22

= October 22 =

Wikipedia Homepage Organization
Why is Spanish on the top right of Wikipedia's homepage --where Deutsch(German) should be at?

Spanish only has 400,000+ articles, while German has 800,000+ articles.

The language with the most articles should be place on top of the languages with fewer articles.

MrZhuKeeper (talk) 04:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't have any source to back this up but I would venture a guess that Spanish is the most popular second language in otherwise English speaking countries. And also, due to the fact that Wikipedia was started by Americans (correct me if I'm wrong) they chose the second most popular language in the US to take that spot.  Dismas |(talk) 07:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I also don't know the answer. But do you have an authoritative source for the claim that "The language with the most articles should be place on top of the languages with fewer articles"? It sounds like a personal opinion to me. --ColinFine (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There was a recent decision, forget where I saw it, that the order would be by the number of readers rather than articles, which had previously determined the order.John Z (talk) 09:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If they gave out the rankings based on pure enthusiasm, Esperanto would be in the top left corner. It blows me away that a language spoken by fewer than 2 million people worldwide has 100,000 articles in their wikipedia. English is spoken by 1.8 billion people and we only have 2.5 million articles. Darkspots (talk) 13:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * See Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008_August_1--132.206.22.13 (talk) 17:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The decision (which seems very logical to me) was to order them by the number of visitors (according to http://www.alexa.com rankings) - not by the number of contributors or by the number of articles or anything of that sort. Evidently, while the Spanish speaking world is not as enthusiastic about writing articles as the German speaking world - they do actually USE Wikipedia more frequently than German speakers do.  It was generally considered to be better to organise the list by utility (greatest use for greatest number of people) than to reward active wikipedians or something of that sort.  After all, who can say that the greater number of articles in German are necessarily of better quality - or relate to more useful topics than the Spanish version?  In the end, the readership are the people who matter...if they find Wikipedia useful then we can help visitors out by listing the national versions that the greatest number of people wish to visit.  Hence the Wikipedia's that are in the top ten list are the top ten most visited.


 * For those who are amazed at the number of articles in some of the more obscure Wikipedia's, it's important to realize that in some of these languages, the VAST majority of the articles are bot-generated from some kind of bulk source data. It's very easy to write a piece of software that takes (for example) lists of data for towns and cities in the USA from public databases and automatically generates an article in some language for every single city.  That kind of automation gets you an enormous number of articles for almost zero effort.  Some of the language versions that have been deleted (Klingon, for example(!)) were removed despite having more articles than other languages precisely because their inflated article counts were due to bot-manufactured pages.  Even in English Wikipedia, you'll notice that articles about very small towns in the USA are almost word-for-word identical with each other - but with the salient facts about them inserted into the appropriate places.  That's because all of those articles started off life as bot-generated boilerplate in the very early days of Wikipedia.  Compare (for example) our articles on Springfield, Jackson County, Wisconsin and Springfield, St. Croix County, Wisconsin - they are almost word-for-word identical!  Now let's take a look at the West Frisian language wikipedia - it has almost 10,000 articles - yet there are less than 100,000 people who can write the language with any kind of fluency.  Let's look at their article on Illinois - it's perhaps a little surprising that the inhabitants of an island off the coast of the Netherlands would have taken the time to write such a comprehensive treatment about a US state...but go take a look at the article - it has the exact same structure as the Aragonese wikipedia's article here.  Aragonese has maybe 10,000 speakers who all live in a couple of towns in the mountainous regions of Spain - we have over 10,000 articles written in that language - more articles than people who speak the language!!  Clearly the same bot wrote both articles - and it's obviously the exact same bot that wrote the English article on Springfield, Jackson County, Wisconsin.


 * SteveBaker (talk) 12:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Although Friesland is a province not an island - its still quite small. Rmhermen (talk) 23:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * While the general idea of sorting by visitors is sounds, the idea of sorting by Alexa rank is highly flawed Alexa rank . It appears that this is now being sorted using the most logical measure (we run the sites, we should be able to measure visitors ourselves Meta:Talk:Www.wikipedia.org template). I'm very disappointed that no one noticed the flaw in the proposal before it was implemented. Of course this isn't the place for such a discussion but since you suggested sorting by Alexa ranking was a good idea, I felt it needed to be said. Incidentally, German does in fact have more visitors then Spanish Nil Einne (talk) 21:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Taxes (IRS)
Does anyone knows what happens when you file your taxes late? A family member manages an athlete and they received the IRS in their home country until May. They mailed them to the IRS on May but they have yet to hear back. Whats the latest you can possibly be and still have everything go through? Keep in mind that the earner was in the US on a visa and resides overseas. Any bit of information will help. Thanks! Brusegadi (talk) 06:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * How to Contact the IRS has an international contact section. Darkspots (talk) 09:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

From www.irs.gov: If you are a United States citizen or resident, whose home and main place of business or post of duty is outside the United States and Puerto Rico on the due date of your return, you are allowed an automatic extension until June 15, to file your return and pay any tax due. This also applies if you are in military or naval service on duty outside the United States and Puerto Rico. This is in a section that is conditional on your tax year ending Dec 31. It is not entirely clear from this section what the deadline is if you're a fiscal-year filer whose home and main place of business is outside the US. I am just quoting here; this should not be considered advice of any kind and I could even have made editing errors, so if you want to be sure you should go to the site yourself. --Trovatore (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, actually, on rereading your question, it looks like this is not your situation, though it's a bit hard to tell from the way you phrase it. --Trovatore (talk) 19:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, taking advice from random strangers at a website regarding tax law is a fantastically bad idea. Contact the IRS, a certified public accountant, or a tax lawyer if you really want to know.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  19:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Very true, which is why I limited myself to quoting the official IRS site directly. --Trovatore (talk) 20:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you all. BTW, I was not strictly seeking advice, just curious to see if I would find an experience that would make a good beginning. Taxes in the US are complicated. Thanks again, Brusegadi (talk) 04:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

the latest you can possibly be and still have everything go through is April 15th. Any later, and you need an extension. Even if you have an extension, you will still have to (a) pay an estimate of the taxes owed; and (b) pay interest on any tax owed but not covered in the estimate. And, yes, US taxes are needlessly complicated. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Effect of heat on food
How does heat add taste and flavour to food items61.2.235.1 (talk) 09:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Cooking is a little thin but covers this subject. Darkspots (talk) 10:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a little vague on what you mean by heat? Do you mean like higher temperatures or do you mean pungency?  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  10:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I just meant the heat we provide for cooking, like we do in our cooking pans and all.


 * Mostly it's by various decomposition reactions in the food as it's heated - things like Maillard reactions, in which various components of the foods react and decompose to form new compounds that, to our tastebuds, are more flavoursome. If you're interested in this kind of thing some of the books by Hervé This are very interesting. ~ mazca  t 11:57, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Mazca for your explanation.

12 year old girl tricks con-man
Hi I was wondering if any one would be able to help me locate an article please? Sorry that it's incredibly vague, but it's all I have to go on: Around 3-7 years ago it was reported in a number of papers (possibly including JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association) and the Economist) that a 12 year old girl had devised a trick that refuted a man's claims that he was able to devise something about someone, by doing something. Any help would be very much appreciated! Many thanks. 147.188.28.99 (talk) 10:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I tried searching the JAMA database, but there aren't many keywords to go upon: 12, girl, man, trick, con, that's about it. I couldn't find anything, sorry. zafiroblue05 | Talk 10:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Try Emily Rosa, the youngest person to ever publish in the JAMA. APL (talk) 13:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The Ref Desk and its contributors constitute an amazing search engine. Edison (talk) 14:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

APL - Thank you so much! That's amazing that you managed to find that so quickly! Thanks again, really appreciated.147.188.28.99 (talk) 15:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

type of music
There is a Type O Negative album called world coming down. On this album in the song White Slavery they have mixed in the sound of a tap dripping, but mixed it so that the drips are in different keys and therefore play a tune or melody. Also on this album they have mixed all sorts of sounds to create a musical journey of sorts. It cannot be described fully in words, you just have to hear it. Then there is a Devin Townsend album called Ocean Machine Biomech, this album, while not being the same type of music, has the same feel, it has been mixed and edited, mixed and edited over and over with strange sounds woven into it. What type of mixing is this or what type of music, how does one get these effects, I have mixed my albums 'till I am blue in the face but to no avail. It is almost as if there are no gaps in the music atall, even in the empty spaces there is something happening. What is this called, how is it achieved? Sorry if this is vague, but if you listen to these two albums you will immediatly see what I am talking about. Please help, Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * As far as I am aware the type of music is 'experimental'. We studied similar pieces to those you are speaking of in music when I was at school. Other pieces used far less technology to get the sound but the main distiguishing feature was a very abnormal sound, especially for western music. Hope this helps Weazelcheese (talk) 21:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Fox deterrent
Is there a proven way of deterring the local fox population from eating my chickens? I have heard of ultrasonic deterrents, but these may affect my dog. Does anyone have any successful experiences of deterring foxes? Thanks! sparkl!sm hey! 16:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Sporting goods stores often carry things like the scent of coyote urine, etc., which can deter smaller predators. Little Red Riding Hood  talk  17:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * My sister's chicken coop stands on a concrete plinth, making it impossible for the local foxes to dig under the coop's walls when the chickens are in for the night. Either that, or it's the scent of her 3 dogs that deters foxes from coming into the garden.  Astronaut (talk) 21:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hardware cloth of 1/4 inch mesh will, per this site keep out snakes, birds, mice and other little varmints, and would certainly keep out foxes from getting into a chicken house through windows. A fox trying to pass through hardware cloth would strain himself badly. With 1/2 inch mesh it would be cheaper. Chicken wire has a larger mesh still, and is a lighter built product, but cheaper. Some predators like raccoons can reach through it and grab poultry if they venture near. [Chain-link fencing]] comes in rolls for protecting a perimeter around a chicken yard so they can go out and scratch in a "free-range" manner. Remember to latch the gate and avoid setting objects or trees near the fence a fox can use to climb over. Hardware cloth or other metal can be buried along the perimeter to prevent digging under.  A good dog tethered outside the chicken yard can alert you to come and deal with any thing which threatens the chickens. I am skeptical that an ultrasonic device would repel hungry predators without upsetting the protected animals. Edison (talk) 22:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, just buy a wire fence and put fox urine on it to stop 'em. - hope it works-Warriorscourge (talk) 04:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced fox urine repels foxes. Wouldn't fox hunter or Foxhound urine be more likely to scare them away? Edison (talk) 04:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

No. Foxes mark territory by urinatining. THAT'S why I chose that method. Oh, and, it doesen't scare them. -Warriorscourge (talk) 05:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * How the hell do you get hold of fox urine??!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.187.55 (talk) 07:16, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * First,catch your fox.... Lemon martini (talk) 10:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Google "fox urine". Click on top hit. Choose the form of fox urine you want (raw pee, granules, spray, etc).  Enter credit card info. Darkspots (talk) 07:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to foxes catching the chickens while they forage during the day. A way I'd like someone to try is to place a trap inset into the fence of the chicken pen to catch the fox. Dont kill the fox or you will just get another one. Give the fox a memorable bad experience such as shouting at it and throwing water at it before releasing. I have never heard of any urine deterrent for foxes actually working. From experience I found that foxes will have trouble carrying large chickens over a fence to get away, this gives time for you to rush out and confront them. A good rooster will fight the fox giving you more time. Polypipe Wrangler (talk) 21:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The urine isn't a deterrent. It marks the chicken coop as some other fox's territory. --Carnildo (talk) 22:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * ...Which deters other foxes ;-) . Ilikefood (talk) 03:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

To clarify - my chicken house is set on a concrete base, completely fox-proof. During the day they forage around in their own pen, which is made from 6ft high avairy wire. Problem is, the fox is (I suspect) cunning enough to climb over the back of the chickenhouse, onto the roof and down into the pen. What I want is not to have a completely fox-proof enclosure (he'll always find a way in), but rather to put him off altogether, so he doesn't come anywhere near my garden or the birds. This clever-looking device is more like it, but a) does it work? and b) will it be harmful to my dog? I have to say there are some splendid ideas above though - thanks!! sparkl!sm hey! 13:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Dilution of English as the UK national language?
After a gap of some 40 years when I lived in central London, I just had a week there and was amazed, despite having since lived in Scotland a mere 400 miles away, at how English has to all effects become a "minority language". Every race on earth, every creed and colour, every language imagineable, and every form of dress were very much in evidence, as were their own languages, dialects and accents in everyday useage. What truly amazed me was how many "service" personnel were from ethnic minorities and who simply didn't understand me and/or who couldn't respond in clear English. Add all of that to the fact that "cockney" English is itself quite difficult to the untutored ear, and I was left wondering how long it would take for that great cacophony to morph into something completely "foreign" to standard English speakers, whether UK born or otherwise, whilst perhaps becoming a London specific language all its own? Any suggestions anyone? 92.20.213.111 (talk) 18:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the key factor will be what language(s) 2nd-generation immigrants speak. If they learn English at school and use that among their friends, etc. and only use their parent's language at home, then there probably won't be much overall change to the use of language in the country/city. If they primarily use their parent's language, then I think we're likely to end up with discrete sub-communities (or, rather, keep and enlarge the ones we already have) each with their own language and little interaction between them (this is highly undesirable). Generally speaking, languages are constantly changing and migration is one of the major factors in that, English will probably absorb words from the languages of immigrants. At first, those words will be only used locally, but they may spread to the rest of the country over time. --Tango (talk) 19:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * A quick look over a Charles Dickens book shows that the language has moved (in written terms) quite a bit since his time, but for the most part it is still decipherable. I suspect that it would take many 100s of years for the english language in London (or elsewhere) to develop/change to such that a random english person in 2008 couldn't decipher most of what is being said by another english speaking person (though admittedly some dialects are easy to comprehend than others). I'm not sure if there is any studies online on language changing like this but can't search as my internet is through my mobile phone and thus ultra-slow (think 56k modem on a bad day) ny156uk (talk) 19:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: The following are responses to a post that the editor has since withdrawn:


 * I think what our questioner is saying, though, is that they don't so much "speak the language" as define or decide or influence, to an extent, what that language is that they and everyone else in their broader community speaks. It's a bit like the Uncertainty Principle - the very act of observing a phenomenon changes the phenomenon: the very act of bringing a different linguistic background to a new country changes the way the people in that country speak their own language.  --  JackofOz (talk) 19:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * According to Wikipedia, xenophobia is an intense dislike and/or fear of people from other countries. IMO introducing the term xenophobia into this discussion is going well beyond the available evidence. I'm crossing out my comment as it referred to an earlier comment that has since been withdrawn.  Wanderer57 (talk) 23:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Working in central London, I too am amazed at the variety of languages I hear just walking down the street on an ordinary day. However, according to our article, the population of London speaks over 300 languages; something that contributes to it being the world city that it is.  Astronaut (talk) 21:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Being the OP, and having just returned to my question to see what if any responses I may have solicited, I am shocked at the appearance of the Xenophobia theme, which appears to have been edited out. For clarity, my question was entirely related to language development in london - and not to race-hate. Readers may have noted my comments about the difficulty of understanding cockney English?? But not having the benefit of reading the edited-out xenophobic comments, I feel deprived of answering any such comments objectively and must leave it therefore to those readers who had sight of them prior to removal. 92.20.213.111 (talk) 23:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The comment mentioning xenophobia was redacted by the person who wrote it. Seems they misunderstood your question.  Don't worry about it too much; it happens all the time around here.  Astronaut (talk) 23:20, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That is a common problem in internet discussions. The lack of extratextual cues (not just body language, but tone and cadence as well) sometimes makes it hard to understand the subtext.  Plasticup  T / C  01:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's surprising such misunderstandings don't happen more often than they do, given that it's generally considered that non-verbals normally contribute to around 90% of the meaning of a communication, with the words accounting for only about 10%. --  JackofOz (talk) 05:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Estuary English might be of interest for you to read, OP. It's not completely relevant, but it does show a trend in the opposite directon to your hypothesis. Steewi (talk) 05:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, I know people who are from an entirely English background having difficulty understanding some of the broader Scots accents. I think often when you learn a second language you are even more likely to have difficulty with accents you are not used to; a lot of the people you met may have been able to communicate well with London or South Eastern accents. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Speaking as someone who works in London, I think it is rather charming that people from so many different cultures and countries want to live and work in our great city. And I certainly appreciate the efforts that they make to learn English, as it is much easier for me to understand their different styles of English than it would be if I had to try to make myself understood in 300 different languages ! Personally, I think the English language is enriched by this diversity, not diluted. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * it's not just language.  Little Red Riding Hood  talk  18:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)