Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 September 24

= September 24 =

Top 25 Militaries
List of countries by size of armed forces Of the top 25 countries, which ones do you suppose go overkill w/ the military thing (I mean to say which countries have a large military but live in relatively safe neighborhoods and/or have few enemies).

Thailand comes to mind. What's the worst Cambodia can do even if they don't get along?

Lotsofissues (talk) 00:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If we are only considering direct neighbors, what is America so worried about?  Plasticup  T / C  00:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Especially now that Alaska has Canada flanked.
 * Anyway, regarding Thailand, it's adjacent to Burma, which has been ruled by a military junta for the last 45 years. That can be plausibly construed as a cause for concern.  Additionally, Cambodia was home to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge -- another unpleasant neighbor. &mdash; Lomn 12:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Armies aren't always for defence from outside attack. They may be used to control internal divisions, or to form a political class, for public works, or a source of public prestige. DuncanHill (talk) 13:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * For example, Thailand had a military coup just two years ago. Were I Somchai Wongsawat, I would think several times before cutting army spending. Of course, another use for armies is for attacking other countries: that's the reason for the enormous US military, for example. Algebraist 13:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought it was to keep the Military-industrial complex happy. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That too. Anyway, it's not for defence. Algebraist 20:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed you'd note that Myanmar is higher then Thailand on the list Nil Einne (talk) 08:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't really think that table tells you much about it. Firstly, there is an enormous difference between having a million people armed with pointed sticks compared to ten guys running a cruise missile battery.  Secondly, some countries have armies designed to ramp up enormously in size when required (Israel for example - where pretty much everyone does military service and may be called upon to go to war at any time) - versus a country which maintains a standing army that doesn't change size between wartime and peace.  Yet other countries maintain armies more to protect their elite from their own rebellious citizens than to fight wars overseas.  Mere numbers don't tell us very much in that regard. SteveBaker (talk)

website
is there a website where they show all the adult sites by category such as latina, asian, indian, black, white, petite and etc? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.130.50 (talk) 00:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Damn.  Corvus cornix  talk  05:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Although, I doubt that anyone has a comprehensive list of every adult site.  Dismas |(talk) 05:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think Google may come close. -Phydaux (talk) 11:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Why do people wearing a fedora always tip thier hat?
And why do they feel compelled to do it every single time? Whenever I'm out riding the bike, or walking around the block just mindin my own business, Tipmaster Tony has to show me the bald spot! And not just today. Check out those old videos from the 30's and 40's where you can clearly see these people with thier "good day madam" bullsh*t. Sinatra was the only one who had the dignity to leave it on (maybe that's why he was considered cool?)

And it's only a fedora. You see dudes with baseball caps, hardhats, Abraham Lincoln stovepipe thingamajigs (on Holloween and the Big L's birthday), and they're not tipping it. Sometimes when they're high or drunk they do, but then as only a diversion to look away from the mailbox they crashed into. The only exception is a magician's hat and they only tip it after a great trick. Or a screwup (there it's clearly a diversion). Why does this continue to happen in the modern era, and who can I blame for starting this rediculous custom?--THE WORLD&#39;S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk) 01:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by THE WORLD'S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk • contribs)


 * Tipping one's hat is good manners - a sign of respect to the person tipped at (the tippee?). As to why fedora wearers should have better manners than folk in baseball caps, I really couldn't say. DuncanHill (talk) 01:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * On the other side of the coin, I always wonder why many sportspeople conduct indoor post-match press conferences with their caps sitting tightly on their heads. This is surely poor form, no?  And surely unnecessary for indoor wear in any case.  Many of them don't wear any headwear while out there competing, but indoors they cover up.  Crazy.    --  JackofOz (talk) 02:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it is that whilst playing the sport they aren't concerned with the appearance of their hair, but post-match they don't have time to 'sort' their hair so rather than looking scruffy/sweaty-haired on tv they cover it up with a cap? That's always been my assumption anyways. Oh and the potential they are paid to wear it (I think it is F1 where they have to wear they are given a cap and watch they have to wear on the podium/post race stuff). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's very bad manners indeed, but I suspect that they get paid to wear them. DuncanHill (talk) 02:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * While historically it may be considered bad manners, it is now considered just part of the uniform. Therefore, they don't generally take it off when they are in uniform. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Military officers remove their caps when giving press conferences. --  JackofOz (talk) 21:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm with Duncan; the cap is just another few square inches they can squeeze an ad onto. FiggyBee (talk) 06:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It becomes second nature after a while, especially if your a historical recreationist. Steewi (talk) 03:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've been wondering all night what that means, Steewi. Are you referring to people who've taken a break from any adherence to historical/traditional customs; or are you referring to tipping one's hat in this day and age when it's not much done anymore?  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe Steewi may be referring to the practice of historical reenactment, sometimes also called "historical re(-)creation". Thylacoleo (talk) 00:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's right. It's deliberately ambiguous as recreation and re-creation. When you're used to tipping your top-hat or tricorn, you start doing it with your fedora as well (or cap, or just your fringe). It's like the Japanese bowing on the telephone stereotype (which does happen). Steewi (talk) 01:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologise for causing you to have to explain a piece of deliberate ambiguity. I would never intentionally breach this unwritten law.  --  JackofOz (talk) 03:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably because anyone wearing a fedora in this day and age is deliberately trying to look old fashioned, so they're also going with antique mannerisms and gestures of courtesy. APL (talk) 13:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Didn't this tradition start to show that you're hiding no weapons? Kinda like the handshake did? Couldn't you just keep a weapon in your left hand, and tip your hat with the right? THE WORLD&#39;S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk) 17:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by THE WORLD'S MOST CURIOUS MAN (talk • contribs)

Strips of the world
If you take a land mass (e.g. the mainland of Australia), draw lines of longitude that pass through its most easterly and most westerly points, and extend them north and south, you get a vertical strip of the world that includes all or parts of: Indonesia, East Timor, Papua New Guinea, Malaysia, Brunei, Micronesia, Guam, the Marianas, the Philippines, China, Japan, North and South Korea, Mongolia, and Russia. I exclude Antarctica because every such longitudinal strip would pass through it, and it's not a country anyway.

Doing a similar exercise with lines of latitude drawn through mainland Australia's most northerly and most southerly points gives me a horizontal strip of the world that includes all or parts of: Vanuatu, Fiji, New Zealand, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Tonga, the 2 Samoas, Cook Islands, French Polynesia, Pitcairn Island, Easter Island, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Tristan da Cunha, Angola, DR Congo, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Lesotho, South Africa, Madagascar, and Mauritius. Papua New Guinea might just scrape in, but I haven't done the research to confirm this.

I may have omitted some small countries, but you get the idea. Do such "strips of the world" have a name? And which land masses would have the least number and the greatest number of other countries or parts thereof in their longitudinal and latitudinal "strips"? Which would have the greatest and least number relative to their own size? Ignore Antarctica, because it would include every country in its N-S strip and probably zero countries in its E-W strip. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know if such strips have a name, but I can pretty much guarantee that Russia dominates the vertical strips. It gets eastern Europe, all of Asia, all of Australasia, and all of the Pacific Islands.  Plasticup  T / C  03:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You could find some of this information by comparing list of countries by northernmost point and list of countries by southernmost point with extreme points of Australia (or whichever landmass you are considering). This suggests that the Australian mainland extends from 10°41'S to 39°08'S, giving some overlap with countries including Papua New Guinea, Tanzania, Kiribati, Indonesia and Tuvalu. Warofdreams talk 11:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I never heard of a name for such strips, but they could lead to some interesting experiments. For example, a north-south strip of Chile would be very narrow and not intersect many other countries, but the east-west strip would include far more. (Maybe I should count them!) — Michael J  18:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Lune (mathematics) —Tamfang (talk) 04:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

By coincidence, User:The Anome has just published a list of the minimum and maximum latitudes and longitudes of all countries here. Someone with time on their hands could take this & work out all manner of JackofOz Strip (as I believe they should be coined) intersections. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * All excellent lists, which would be a good starting point for anyone who wanted to work all this out. I was really only thinking of contiguous land masses, not necessarily political territories, because one does not normally think of, for example, the UK extending as far south as South Georgia, and there's a lot of non-UK in between.  I surely can't be the first person to have ever wondered about this exercise.  Or is my strange little brain really that strange? (Don't answer that).  I might have to see if The Anome is aware of any work that's already been done.  What I have discovered from comparing lists is that the 2 countries closest to the Equator that are wholly in the northern and southern hemispheres are both in South America - Venezuela and Peru respectively.  I never knew that.  I respectfully decline the eponymisation suggested above because, well, it sounds ... crap.  But thanks anyway.  --  JackofOz (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * because one does not normally think of, for example, the UK extending as far south as South Georgia. Whilst one does think of Africa extending up through Europe. Self-confirmation of the strange brain supposition, I'm afraid. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Does one really think that? This one has never thought so. Strange I may be, but not quite that strange.  I was of course referring to South Georgia, not south Georgia or south Georgia. :)  --  JackofOz (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * JackOfOz strips sound a bit racy to me. I'd be interested to know which countries' strips contain only that country (not counting Antarctic territory). Iceland is a possibility, but that seems to be about it. Steewi (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Not even Iceland, actually. According to my map, its vertical strip would intersect with Greenland, Western Sahara, Mauritania, Senegal, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, and the Cape Verde Islands.  --  JackofOz (talk) 02:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I wonder if there are any latitudinal strips that contain only water and Antarctica. — Michael J  07:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I am going to properly analyse the data provided above, but on a reasonably thorough visual scan I think the only places in the world that would fit that, Michael, are the waters around the South Orkney Islands and some of the southern members of the South Sandwich islands. You could sail due east or west from these places and the first land you encountered would be back at your starting point.  Starting from any other land mass or marine point in the world, you'd inevitably run into the Americas (the big bully!), Africa, or Eurasia.  Vertically, there might be an extremely thin strip of water that runs from the North Pole, through the Bering Strait, passes through the Aleutian islands, the Hawaiian islands, and the islands of Kiribati and Samoa, and then down to Antartica.  But that would be the only one.  So, basically, unless you live in the South Orkneys or the South Sandwich islands (and virtually nobody does), no matter where you live in the world, there's always going to be land to your north, south, east and west.  Quite a neat design, really. --  JackofOz (talk) 11:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Presumably, you could start near the southern tip of South America, and provided you're not level with the Falkland Islands, the Kerguelen Islands or the northern South Sandwich Islands, you could sail due east or west until you arrived back at South America. Warofdreams talk 14:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, that would probably work too. --  JackofOz (talk) 00:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

inbound call centres
What is the average amount of calls an inbound call centre operator takes in a day (8 hours)? Are these statistics recorded anywhere? I would prefer Australian stats if possible.

Thanks a lot. 203.202.144.223 (talk) 03:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What type of business is the call center for? I've worked for a gift company in their call center and the number of calls varied drastically between December (Christmas time) and July (no large gift related holidays).  On the other hand, a credit card company or something like that probably has a more steady stream year round.  Dismas |(talk) 04:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking more like a customer enquiry line fora government organisation or say for a internet service provider. 203.202.144.223 (talk) 04:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * From personal experience of working for TalkTalk in their callcentre in Northampton, UK; I took around 30-40 inbound calls an hour with a 3-5 second gap inbetween (I once got a bonus for keeping all of my calls under 200seconds duration in a day, that was fun). This was in a call centre of 200-300 people with a call queue of never less than 2000 waiting during normal office hours. You may find some statistics relevant to you at http://www.callcentres.com.au/, but may find that some companies are reticent about publishing their figures beyond calls resolved/time taken (or even go to the extent of charging for them. Nanonic (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This may not help - but the image at right ==>
 * ...shows a report from an unidentified call center. It looks like this employee was handling 500 calls in a month.  However, since there is a "sales" column, we may deduce that it wasn't a "help-line" kind of thing.  I would imagine that a call center that basically just takes credit card orders over the phone would require a lot less time per call than (say) the Microsoft business support center where they could spend an hour or more helping a customer track down a problem with their computer.  It's going to be impossible to guess what the real numbers might be without finding data that relates to something very close to your exact business needs. SteveBaker (talk) 22:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The most important determinants of daily call volume per agent are 1) Average handle time (AHT) 2) Amount of time in the "productive mode" where they are available to accept inbound calls (versus team meetings, coaching etc.) and 3) occupancy or, inversely, the average amount productive of time not spent on calls per day (which depends on call volume).


 * For a high-volume group, you'd want your productive mode @ about 90-95% of the agent's paid time (less if you are paying them for lunches). To avoid burnout and the resulting high attrition, you want your occupancy (or amount of that productive time spent actually on calls) at around 85%.  This leaves about 6-6.5 hours per 8 hour day on calls.  You have to divide this by the average handle time to determine an average call volume per day.  Simple groups like credit card activations will have AHTs in the 60-120 second range (including notation time), allowing agents to handle 150-180 calls per day.  More complicated groups like billing or customer service could vary in AHT from 250-600 seconds (35-80 calls per day), and lastly tech support can easily exceed that amount (10-20 calls per day).


 * Calls per day isn't a good measure to use to cost out a site. You should concentrate on productive hours, AHT and expected call volumes.  Small groups that are open for more than 8 hours make staffing cycles much more important.NByz (talk) 06:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Drinkability of 40 yr old gin, whiskey and SoCo?
Hi all,

I was cleaning out my grandmother's house and found three bottles: a Seagram's Crown Royal Whiskey, a Tanqueray Gin and a bottle of Southern Comfort. There are no dates on the labels, but I'm guessing they're from around the 60s or 70s. Anyone know if they'll still be good to drink? Or even better now? I think they've been fairly temperature-controlled (and the Seagrams is even still in it's little purple pouch with it's certificate).

Thanks! &mdash; Sam 11:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Have they been opened? That can change things. If they have not been opened then they should be just fine. If they have been, it's a toss up. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 13:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * You should submit them to an expert for extensive testing. I can be contacted by email or on my talk page :) DuncanHill (talk) 13:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I can't guarantee it, but I would be surprised if there was anything harmful about them (assuming they're still sealed), but they may not taste too good. I don't think they'll be any better for being older - the age of a whiskey is how long it was in the barrel, once it's in a bottle it stops changing, I believe - gin is probably similar. In addition to temperature, the other thing that could harm them is light - if they were in a dark cellar, they are likely to be better than if they were in daylight. --Tango (talk) 14:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Last year a friend of mine found a 22 year old bottle of André. That stuff retails at about $4. Although it tasted awful it didn't make anyone sick. Now something like whiskey which is meant to survive for years is probably okay. I would be very surprised if it wasn't.  Plasticup  T / C  15:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for all the advice. The bottles are unopened (I would have mentioned if they were) and as far as I know have been in the dark. Sounds like I'll have to crack one open now... sigh... &mdash; Sam 16:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Although there are no dates on the bottles, are there any codes or other identifying marks? You might be able to contact the distillers to determine exactly when they were bottled. — Michael J  18:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that hard liquor is much more stable than wine when exposed to oxygen. Acetobacter sp. will transform the ethanol in wine into acetic acid but they can't grow in hard liquor. I think. Please correct me if I'm wrong. ike9898 (talk) 21:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know the science behind it, but anecdotally, you're absolutely right. A bottle of wine, once opened, will go off within a few days, a couple of weeks tops. A bottle of spirit will last months or years. --Tango (talk) 23:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Whiskey does not mature/age in glass bottles it matures in oak barrels. 12 year old whiskey that spent 20 more years in a bottle is still 12 years old. But maybe you can auction that whiskey off to someone who doesn't know that. Mieciu K (talk) 01:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Renewing car registration in CT
The city of Stamford is saying that I owe a car tax on a vehicle I haven't owned in a year in a half. I just off the phone with the tax collector and she pretty much said so what, you still have to pay the taxes in order to renew the registration on your current vehicle which is due this month. After I pay the taxes, what do I have to do? --Anilmanohar (talk) 14:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Try calling the DMV at 800-842-8222. -- LarryMac  | Talk  14:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * we cannot give legal advice —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What's the (major) problem? As long as you don't move out of state, you can claim the equivalent credit on your CT state taxes. (I did, when I lived there.) Of course, it's annoying that you don't have use of that money for months, since they're due on different dates. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Supernatural
I am trying to find pictures of people performing supernatural acts such as levitaion, spoon bending, telekenisis, ect ect ect or anything in this vein. preferably on wiki thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A Google video search for David Blane might have something for you. If you are looking for still images, try the wikipedia commons category commons:Category:Magic.  Plasticup  T / C  15:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

computer
where can i get an answer to this question (history of computer in the past ,present and future?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tesybless (talk • contribs) 16:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * You'd be well advised to start by writing a question. Then, from wikipedia, you could search for "history of computers" or similar, which might give you pointers to such articles as:

As for the future, maybe: and I'm sure many other articles which will be linked to the seven or so that I've listed. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * History of computing hardware
 * History of personal computers
 * History of computing hardware (1960s–present)
 * History of computer science
 * History of computing
 * Computer
 * Biocomputers
 * Optical computer

In addition to the links Tagishsimon posted, you may also be interested in Quantum computer. Laenir (talk) 18:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a honking great set of tables in the Computer (which I immodestly point out that I originally wrote) - which are just stuffed full of links to all matters relating to computers. You can find articles about every "generation" of computer there. To add to Tagishsimon and Laenir's "future-computing" links, I'd recommend Spintronics, DNA computing, Chemical computer and Nanoelectronics. SteveBaker (talk) 22:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * What's with the naming of History of computing hardware & History of computing hardware (1960s–present)? The first article, in History of computing, appears to be referred to as Hardware before 1960. Seems a bit odd to me. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

What's the time in Antarctica right now?
and in the North Pole? --190.49.126.98 (talk) 19:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Stations in Antarctica generally keep the time of their supply bases; see South_Pole, for instance, or Time zone. No time zone has been set for the north pole - see North_Pole--Tagishsimon (talk) 19:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Antarctica does not have a time zone, although Graham Land is technically at Universal Coordinated Time minus three hours.  Plasticup  T / C  19:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh no! Not the old logic question. Right now as when it was put on line, or right now as I am typing this response. Dealing with this question can send first year students potty... even lead to fisticuffs86.197.173.49 (talk) 14:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)petitmichel

nursery rhymes
what did Tom, the Piper's son play in the musical rhyme —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.11.58 (talk) 19:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Pipes, like his pa. "Tom with his pipe did play with such skill" --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

nursery rhymes 2
what was the only song that Tom, the Piper's son could play? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.11.58 (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Over the hills and far away, noted in the fourth line of the rhyme - Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Which is, incidentally, the tune the nursery rhyme is most commonly sung to. 79.66.84.84 (talk) 14:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

nursery rhymes 3
accourding to the nursery rhyme, who put pussy in the well?
 * Little Tommy Green, as is evident from a cursory reading of the rhyme. Please think about whether you could answer any of these by doing a modicum of research, such as reading the rhymes, first. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Per all three nursery rhyme question answers...you're good Tag. --71.98.3.250 (talk) 23:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Racoons
what is the collective term for a group of racoons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.11.58 (talk) 20:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Gaze, according to . Google is not broken tonight. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Be a little cautious in using those sorts of lists, though. As I understand it, a number of them, in a misguided attempt to be "complete", contain group terms which are not, nor have ever been, used commonly. For instance, they may include terms which were made up by someone else as a nonce word, or coined as a one-time joke. (e.g. from the list given: "a rash of dermatologists".) The folks at Reference desk/Language may have a better understanding of the situation. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 22:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * "A gaze of raccoons" may be a pun, given the creatures' distinctive facial markings. Our article on raccoons is quite good, and it makes no mention of a "gaze".  Plasticup  T / C  23:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * From WP: List of animal names. -hydnjo talk 00:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That is an awesome article. Thanks.  Plasticup  T / C  03:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And it contains the collective noun for racoons that the OP was no doubt looking for, given the surrounding spate of questions. There is also an appendix of collective nouns on Wikitionary.  I haven't compared the two lists to see if they correspond, except the racoon case, for which they do.  -- LarryMac  | Talk  12:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The book An Exaltation of Larks says it is a mask of raccoons. -- KathrynLybarger (talk) 04:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What a great book! It should be in every Ref Desk Regular's library.  --  JackofOz (talk) 05:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've always liked a flourish of strumpets and a grasp of millionaires. --- OtherDave (talk) 12:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * My favourite is this progression: a plenitude of freshmen, a platitude of sophomores, a gratitude of juniors, an attitude of seniors, a fortitude of graduate students, an avunculus of alumni, a clamber of assistant professors, a tenure of associate professors, an entrenchment of full professors, and an ex cathedra of professors emeriti". --  JackofOz (talk) 20:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Both wiki sources say "a nursery of raccoons". It appears we have a conflict on our hands.  Plasticup  T / C  15:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Whatever a group of raccoons may be called, it would be a technical term even scientists don't use. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 17:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You'll probably come across it in archaic literature though.  Plasticup  T / C  21:44, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I doubt it. If you plug those sorts of things into Google Books all you get are similarly fanciful lists of what groups of animals are called. I suspect most of these terms are created for, and exclusively used in, such silly lists. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 23:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Sporting ground
what sporting ground is The Nursery End, the Pavillion End and St john's Road linked with? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.235.11.58 (talk) 20:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Lord's Cricket Ground. Tell me you're doing a pub quiz... -Tagishsimon (talk) 20:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * (And for future reference - Google Maps is pretty good at finding that sort of information.) SteveBaker (talk) 22:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Women leaving the Roman Catholic Church.
Dear Reference Desk.

Can you send me infornation on: Women leaving the Roman Catholic Church.

I understand that this situation is getting worst year after year, but this year, it is at its highest.

Thank you. (email removed by User:Plasticup to save you from spam bots) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.234.97 (talk) 20:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * According to our article: Roman Catholic Church..."Church membership in 2007 was 1.131 billion people; a substantial increase over the 1970 figure of 654 million." - if the membership nearly doubled over the last 37 years, it's unlikely that the total number of women can have decreased over the same period. Hence, (if you are right) it seems likely that it's a fairly recent phenomenon. SteveBaker (talk) 22:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course, that depends on how those numbers are counted. If it's simply the number of people who have been baptised, it's a misleading figure because it doesn't allow for people who have decided to no longer be associated with the church but have not put anything in writing.  This would include many millions of people who were baptised as tiny babies but have, at least since they were adults, decided the church's way was not their way.  Even if they did formally "resign", I suspect the church would still consider them members in any case.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

You could say that the church's situation with women is getting worse even if their gross numbers are increasing. If they made up 50% of the membership in 1970 and only make up 45% now, I would say that is indicative of... something.  Plasticup  T / C  23:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This is purely anecdotal, but having gone to Catholic schools all my life, I do not know any women my age who wanted to become a nun; I know several men who have become priests, though. (I also know several women who have become Anglican priests...) Despite that, the numbers of men and women who are totally and annoyingly devout are pretty much the same. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.49 (talk)
 * Annoyingly devout? I have no issue with people being devout.  I guess you're referring to those who can't keep their devotion to themselves but project their religious philosophies onto others in a judgmental way.  --  JackofOz (talk) 03:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, I mean one of the cliques in a Catholic high school is the really really Catholic kids :) Adam Bishop (talk) 03:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That reminds me of the missionaries who came knocking on my door, calling themselves "elders" (they would be asked for ID if they walked into a liquor shop) and trying to speak to me in horrible Chinese. --antilivedT 06:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Count me among those who would be considered Catholic by baptism but no longer associate with the Church. I've always said the greatest cure for catholicism is 13 years of Catholic school, of my entire graduating class I know of maybe 3 people who have anymore association with the church than celebrating Easter and Christmas. The church is struggling especially here in the Los Angeles area becuase of recent scandals involving Cardinal Mahoney (he was one of the first things that drove me away) -- Mad031683  (talk) 23:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, he and his ilk might have cause to reflect on "By their fruits shall ye know them" (fruits here referring to deeds, as opposed to words). It's not only the Catholics that have a problem with this - in 2003 our Governor-General, Peter Hollingworth, an Anglican Archbishop, had to stand down because of issues of this nature.  --  JackofOz (talk) 00:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

concise recapitulation of the patients course hospital
what is a concise recapitulation of the patients course in the hospital? a. discharge summary b. medical history c. social services record d. progress reports —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.48.187.149 (talk) 21:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably a., but we don;t do homework. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Seeing as how its your homework, I'll tell you that it's definitely c. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

good haircut
what would be a good haircut for a man with a square face? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.210.46.125 (talk) 22:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a matter of opinion, and we try to avoid opinion questions. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Although my quick research shows that often men with square faces don't have hair at all. Gwinva (talk) 23:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)  Striking out my facetious comment; apologies for being flippant.  Tango and Tagishsimon offer  sound advice.  Gwinva (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * fwiw, I thought your advice was apt & to the point. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Your barber/hairdresser can probably advise you better than we can - it's their area of expertise. --Tango (talk) 23:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably something angular or square like, like Kid-n-play? Bilodeauzx (talk) 03:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * (my comment keeps disappearing? Any ideas) Logically if you have a square face you have two options: 1) a hair-cut that highlights the 'strength' and angularity of your face-structure or 2) a hair-cut that 'softens' the edges off to make your face appear more round. Try this link (http://beauty.about.com/od/hairbasics/a/flattering.htm) 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If all else fails, you can never be wrong when you shave your head altogether. --Ouro (blah blah) 06:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * We must have an article on How notable people with hair on their heads would look if they were bald. If we don't, we should.  Btw, what's the hairy counterpart of "bald"?  "Fred is bald, but George is  ____".  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)