Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 August 24

= August 24 =

sailing pirate Ship question
What kind of sailing ship can be piloted/maintained by 4-5 people? The ship should be able to hold decent amount of stuff and can house a boarding party of 50-100 people. The ship should of course be highly maneuverable. Cannon numbers are not prioritized.--121.54.2.188 (talk) 00:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I assume you're talking about pirates from the 1600s? You're probably looking for some sort of sloop. APL (talk) 01:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It seems to fit the characteristics perfectly. I guess I'll just narrow on what variant to use in my story.--121.54.2.188 (talk) 02:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Can a sloop of that size really be sailed by 5 people? DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No! Need minimum of two watches. But in any case why carry boarders? The crew of a pirate ship were sailors first, fighting men second.  What would the 'passengers' do whilst waiting for the next fight?  And who will man the cannon ?86.202.27.172 (talk) 15:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)DT


 * Indeed; one would be hard-pressed to find a modern sailing ship capable of accommodating a hundred men for any length of time which could be sailed by only five people &mdash; and that's with the aid of electric winches, autopilots, and no one to man the cannons, swab the decks, or mend the sails. Four to five people actively operating the ship means just two or three awake and on deck at any given time &mdash; and one of those is going to be at the wheel.  Your boarding parties are going to have to do something besides acting as ballast, or you're never going to be able to put to sea.  (Heck, just maintaining a brisk rate of fire requires four men to each cannon, though you can get by with less if your intent is to just fire a single broadside of grapeshot as you come alongside with the boarding parties.)  Per APL, a historically-accurate choice would be some sort of Bermuda sloop.
 * Anyone with an interest in fictional combat in the age of sail would be well-advised to pick up some Horatio Hornblower books. They're all quick reads, with stories set mostly during the Napoleonic wars.  You'll want to have a copy of Wikipedia's article on sail plans handy.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I was guessing that he's imagining a situation where the ship would carry some large number of pirates, but would later be used briefly by the small number of people (For a quick get-away, for example.) This sort of thing happens all the time in novels and films. (Recall Cpt. Jack and Turner capturing a small brig in Pirates of The Caribbean.) I don't know enough about ships to know how realistic these scenarios are. APL (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OP here, yup the plot is similar as APL said. They attacked a merchant ship, underestimated the enemies actual number (it's not exactly a merchant ship) and got almost wiped out. I guess I just have to let some crew live then but still focus on at least five characters. To TenOfAllTrades, will read the novels if I find it in a second hand book store. Are they available online though? It looks like they're reaching public domain status.--121.54.2.183 (talk) 06:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * See Thames sailing barge. They only required a crew of two people. The name is a little misleading as they did sail around the North Sea. 78.147.147.139 (talk) 20:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Did you ever read a novel by this guy? You can find almost anything there is to know about warfare under sails in his books. I'd especially recommend this one. It includes a ship that fits your description and explains what it could have been used for.--Zoppp (talk) 01:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Nokia phone - I can't figure it out
I have a Nokia 2500c-2b. Got it recently. Today I took three photgraphs but for the life of me I canlt figure out how to access them from the phone. I am not good with this stuff. I'm sure this may be extremely basic to some of you but it's not to me. I figured out how to take photographs; you go to menu → my stuff → multimedia → camera and then its shows whatever you point it at and you click "capture". It even makes a little shutter click when you do it. Okay I took three photographs (that I'd really like to retrieve!) so I've spent about an hour trying to figure where they are on the phone! I can't find them. The only other option in multimedia is recorder. When I click on camera, it just goes back into camera mode ready to take another photo. I would have thought once you took a photograph there'd by a folder in there for "taken photographs" or something like it. Anyway, I just googled the phone model and "manual" and didn't find a manual. I also had to take the battery out for a moment because the model number is behind it and I'm hoping doing so didn't wipe the photo memory if it exists. If you can tell me where the photographs are, maybe you can also tell me how I send them to my email? Help!:-)--Lady in polka dot (talk) 03:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh my god I figured it out! The person who created the name for the folder deserves a spanking. It's in "Open Tones & Gr." Now how anyone could find it there other than doing what I did which was fumbling in the dark for an hour and a half is beyond me. Now, there's an option for "send", but it only allows me to type in a phone number. How do I email it to myself?--Lady in polka dot (talk) 04:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The Nokia site has various manuals to download, but not the one for the 2500 (although they actually have six regional sites, so possibly the different sites have different lists of manuals). You could try looking for hints in the manuals for the two phones with the nearest product numbers (I think it was the 2330 and the 2600 or something like that). 213.122.37.163 (talk) 09:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In terms of emailing it to yourself, that is only going to be possible if you have email enabled on your phone. That is a network provider issue, not a phone issue.  Check with your network provider.  A better alternative would be to connect the phone to your computer and transfer the photos to your hard drive that way.  You will need some kind of USB cable, which almost certainly came with the phone.  You will also need to install some software on the PC, which probably came on a disk with the phone. --Richardrj talkemail 09:15, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Or use Bluetooth if it's available to you: most low-end Nokia phones do not come with USB cables. --antilivedT 09:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say most low end phones period. In terms of the question, you may be able to email yourself via MMS but be aware that would likely be limited to between 100-350k per message and the phone may automatically resize the photos Nil Einne (talk) 15:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A plea in mitigation for a designer at Nokia in Finland that might save them the indignity of being spanked: how well could you translate a menu system into Finnish? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speaking for myself, about as un-well as possible, but if I were in such a position I would instead be prepared to spend a good deal of money employing a suitably bilingual technical author to do it for me. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How well could you pretend to be bilingual in order to accept a good deal of money? 81.131.50.206 (talk) 22:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Travel to Ravenscar from Ripon
I live in Ripon and am from London. How do I travel to Ravenscar from Ripon. I wish to do a painting holiday. Is there a rail station please? M. Kemp Mrs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.19.97 (talk) 10:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Train to Scarborough, and bus to Ravenscar, I think. Presumably Ripon to somewhere with a train station by bus, also. Thirsk, presumably - 1 hour 55 minutes, change at York. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no train station at Ravenscar (Ravenscar railway station was closed in 1965). The nearest stations are in Whitby and Scarborough, and the only buses to Ravenscar run from Scarborough - and there aren't many of them, so be sure to check the timetable at  before you travel.  Direct trains run from Leeds to Scarborough, so bus from Ripon to Leeds, train to Scarborough and bus to Ravenscar would probably be the easiest way to get there. Warofdreams talk 10:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe leeds is a little out of the way.83.100.250.79 (talk) 12:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would suggest york to scarborough by train (using buses at either end). Starting the train journey at thirsk is another option.83.100.250.79 (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah you're in the unfortunate position that both Ripon and Ravenscar, North Yorkshire don't have train stations in the cities. As per the above, a bus to York (incidentally my home town) and then a train out to Scarborough would get you close, it's then a bus or taxi ride to your destination. Alternatively get the bus to Leeds and get a Coastliner (route 843 - red line) to Scaborough and get the 115 East Yorkshire bus to Ravenscar (http://www.eyms.co.uk/content/busservices/searchtimetable.aspx?intservice=52&intdeparting=199&intarriving=130). ny156uk (talk) 13:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Transport Direct is a good website for this sort of question; it is operated by the UK government. It recommends bus to York, bus or train to Scarborough, and bus from there to Ripon.  It will give you all the options and times, as well as maps.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.19.20 (talk) 13:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That website has suggested daft routes to me in the past - so use it with care. 78.147.147.139 (talk) 22:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Husayn in Qazvain
Can anyone kindly help me know more about the life and details of the saint Husayn and His Shrine in Qazvain,Iran. IS there any online source for retrieving info about this ?

The picture of His shrine is availabe on the follwoing wikicommons link

(husayn in Qazvain )http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Qazvin_-_Emamzadeh-ye_Hossein.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.1.123 (talk) 11:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is some information I could find. Fribbler (talk) 11:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

thanks very much Fribbler.but i still request if someone can provide me other sources as well.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.1.123 (talk) 11:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Do boarding/prep school teachers actually address their students as "Mr" and "Miss" like they do in movies?
In American movies, boarding school and prep school teachers address their students as "Mr XXX" or "Miss YYY". Are they actually that formal in real life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.79.233 (talk) 11:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It probably happens. I went to a regular high school and some teachers did that. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:38, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Same here, though that was 30 years ago. I suspect it depends on the school.  Marco polo (talk) 13:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That's assuming they know or care who XXX or YYY is. If not, one is likely to be addressed as You boy,... At the British schools I that was so fortunate to attend, the instruction might be You boy, bend over! Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * At the UK boarding school I attended in the late 60s to mid 70's, one's surname only was the usual mode of address both from staff to pupils and between pupils. However, in the 6th Form (last 2 years) closer pupil friends and staff with closer than average relationships (e.g one's Housemaster) might use forenames (or nicknames), particularly in informal (non-classroom) settings. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

When I was still active at the University, I took a complementary class in German, even though I had already studied German in high school. The teacher (a native Finnish speaker, but fluent in German) called her students "Herr so-and-so" and "Frau so-and-so" by their surnames. It's the only time I've ever been, or heard anyone else be, addressed by their surname by their teacher. J I P | Talk 20:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * At my school there were some teachers that used to call us by just our last names (as in no "Mr"). I can't remember any that kept the Mr in, but it might have happened.  TastyCakes (talk) 20:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * At my high school - which was one of the oldest government funded schools in the country (Chatham House Grammar School) they tried to keep the 'old ways' alive - and indeed everyone (even good friends) would use each other's surnames and teachers would prefix with "Mister". SteveBaker (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Then we may have played each other at rugby, Steve, as I was at Kent College, Canterbury. (Drifting off topic, sorry.) 87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

To echo Adam and Marco's recollections, I taught at a traditional public high school in the United States (until just this last June), and I called students "Mr. XXXX" or "Miss XXXX" on at least an occasional basis, if not more frequently. I am (some would say) a bit needlessly eccentric, but I think if this was my practice at least part of the time in a public school environment, then surely at least some prep school teachers must do so at least a majority of the time. How many it would take is up to the OP--would one be enough?--but I suspect the answer is "yes, at least a few teachers do." Jwrosenzweig (talk) 00:32, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Crossng Croatian land borders
I am hoping to soon visit many countries in eastern Europe on an extended road trip in my own, UK registered car. As a British citizen and passport holder, would I likely encounter any difficulties with officialdom crossing from Slovenia into Croatia, and later from Croatia into Hungary? I have an alternative plan to avoid Croatia entirely, should it prove too difficult. Astronaut (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Absolutely no problem. It takes a minute or two and you have the added bonus of getting your passport stamped (as Croatia is non-EU). The Hungarian crossing should be even quicker, as you are re-entering the EU. Fribbler (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My experience driving from Italy to Croatia was stressful. Car hire companies in Venice flatly refused to let me take their car across the border. (After searching I found one dealer in Venice with one Scenic that was my only choice.) The border was unlike the relaxed or non-existent (Schengen area) borders we are used to in Europe. It had armed guards and they demanded Give us your original car papers because copies will not do. Now I understood the reluctance of hire companies because I am told that stolen cars taken into former Yugoslavia are never seen again. However after the border, Slovenia was just a few km to drive through and there was no difficulty proceeding to Croatia where we enjoyed our holiday. People are friendly (tourists welcome, we saw many Germans) and the town Porec was memorable. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 17:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Was that a few years ago? Slovenia has implemented Schengen since 2007, making for a smooth crossing.Fribbler (talk) 18:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. Good news! But perhaps that has just moved the difficult border. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Rental cars might be a problem, but I'm going in my own car. However, should I take the logbook (ownership document)?  Astronaut (talk) 11:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, take the log book. It's stolen car trafficking that the customs are concerned about. Also consider sticking one of those "GB" stickers on the back of your car as this can make things even faster. Fribbler (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've done Slovenia --> Croatia no problem. I don't think we needed any car-related papers, only passports (UK citizen). I did the Italy --> Slovenia bit, also not stressful for that reason. (It was stressful, but that's because we took the wrong turning at the roundabout immediately outside the airport!) I imagine Croatia --> Hungary might be more problematic. The best idea's to pick tourist time, IMO, and hope they wave you through most of it. They're only human, after all. - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 18:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Stadium lighting
How many white LEDs would it take to light a stadium as bright as the bulbs currently used? Would there be a significant energy saving by replacing stadium lights with LEDs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.216.183 (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Can LED's be aimed to particular spots on the field, as arclights can? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 19:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say that there would certainly be less energy spent on lighting the field -- but there would be no saving, because energy, by law, is always conserved :) I say that because LED's, from what I understand, consume so much less energy to light than incandescent bulbs.  Not that this is a proof, but the 2005 Honda Accords have one bulb in each brake tail light, whereas the 2007 Accords have 25 LEDs in each brake tail light.  If they can serve as taillights, can they not also serve to light a field?  DRosenbach  ( Talk 19:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Individual arclights are usually trained on specific small areas of the field, usually from at least 2 different directions to minimize shadows. Can LED's do that? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 19:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. LEDs are very directional. APL (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Energy is conserved, but it doesn't always take useful forms. An incandescent bulb emits lots of energy as useless infra-red. LEDs emit almost entirely in useful visible light. That is why they are more efficient, meaning they use less energy to produce the same amount of useful light. --Tango (talk) 22:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * (ec)While energy is conserved, you have to account for *all* of the energy. So while both LED's and incandescent/halogen/arc lights use the same amount of energy to produce the X,000 lumens lighting the field, they're also producing heat. The catch is that incandescents produce more heat per lumen than do LEDs. A standard incandescent, for example, produces about 15 lumens/watt, only converting 2.5~% of the electricity to light, wasting >95% as heat. An LED does about twice as well, producing about 30 lumens/watt. (Table at Luminous efficacy.) While it's true that an individual LED puts out less light than an individual incandescent, it also uses much, much less electricity (milliamps as opposed to just under an amp). So even when you put 25 of them together to match the brightness of one incandescent, you're still drawing less electricity, because less is being wasted as heat. -- 128.104.112.102 (talk) 22:37, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And towards answering the OP's question, according to the table at Luminous efficacy, it looks like of the two types of lamps likely to be used for stadium lighting, a Xenon arc lamp (30–50 lm/W) about matches the low end efficiency of LEDs (10–150 lm/W), and a metal halide lamp matches the high end (65–115 lm/W). So any energy savings would be highly dependent on the current fixture in use, and the efficiency of the LED that's replacing it. The key benefit to an LED in such an application, though, would be that LEDs tend to have a much longer service life (the bulbs don't have to be replaced as often). -- 128.104.112.102 (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * LED lights have a much higher initial cost than older types of light, but cost less electricity per hour of operation. The most practical applications initially will be those which have the most hour of operation per day. How many hours per year are stadium lights turned on? I expect that they are basically only on for games. This will mean a longer payback time than something like street lights which are on all night every night, or hallway lights which are on many hours every day. Edison (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you're looking for an absolute number it'll depend on the kind of LEDs you're looking at. You can get them up to at least 120lm . I can't find a reference for how many total lumens are needed to light up a sports stadium, but if you could it'd be pretty straight forward to divide through and get a rough estimate of how many of any particular type of LEDs you would need. APL (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Conservation of energy doesn't really apply here. Bright incandescent/arc lamps waste most of their energy producing heat and radiation in parts of the spectrum we don't see. LED's can be arranged to produce almost entirely visible light - in just the right parts of the spectrum - and they don't generate much heat. Hence you can produce the same amount of useful light with less energy. Focussing them is just a matter of designing the right reflector - I don't think that's particularly difficult. The biggest issue is likely to be the number of them you need to get the brightness...and consequently the capital cost of switching over too them. SteveBaker (talk) 00:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Unassisted triple play in baseball
Baseball player Eric Bruntlett achieved a rare unassisted triple play. He caught the line drive, placing the batter out. He then stepped on second base, which according to the story put out the runner previously on second, who had advanced toward third, without the need to tag that runner. Then he tagged the runner previously on first, who had advanced toward second. My question: if the runner from 2nd had reached 3rd before Bruntlett stepped on second, would he have been safe, that is could he advance a base on a caught line drive? Why didn't the runner from 1st head back to 1st, since a missed catch by the 1st baseman would presumably have left him safe on first, or did he have to be tagged by either the 1st or second baseman, unlike the runner from second? It would at least have prevented Bruntlett getting credited with the unassisted triple play, and was probably more likely of success than trying to reach second with the baseman standing on the base waiting to tag him. If he had slid under the tag and touched 2nd, would he have been safe? Edison (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not a baseball expert, but:


 * 1) Wouldn't the runner starting on second be forced to return to second after Bruntlett caught the ball, and before proceeding to third?
 * 2) Doesn't tagging put you out if you are off base, even if you have the option to return to a previous base? DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Here is the break down of the three outs. Before Francourt hit the ball, the players on first and second began stealing their next consecutive bases. So, when Bruntlett caught the fly ball, the batter was out (1). When an out is made on a fly ball, the runners need to tag up to their respective bases before continuing on to the next base even if they make it there before the out is made. Therefore, Bruntlett tagging second base made the player that was initially on second base and now on third base and probably rounding home out (2). The player on first base was already at second base so Bruntlett tagged him (3), although he could have thrown the ball back to first to get it tagged which would have given him an assisted triple play. Even if the player on first base slid in to second, it wouldnt have mattered that he made it because he did not tag up to first base. So if he was standing on base and Bruntlett tagged him, he still would have been out. Does that help? Livewireo (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, from a strategy standpoint, the Mets were down by two runs. Jerry Manuel was banking on the hope that Francourt could hit a single while the runners were advancing and get either one or both runners home for a tie. Livewireo (talk) 20:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * See Unassisted triple play for a full list of occuances of the UTP in major leage baseball history. It is technically possible to have one a third base (I have seen it in a little league game my brother was in once), every major league occurance has occured at second in roughly the same manner as Bruntlett did it.  -- Jayron  32  20:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not exactly. Johnny Neun, who had the only other unassisted triple play to end a game in history, was a first baseman. He caught the line drive, and tagged out the runner from first who was headed to second, then ran over to second to make the force. So a different position player and a different sequence, although there was a force at second in both cases.-- SPhilbrick  T  22:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Such play are extremely rare not because they are difficult to execute, but that the circumstances needed to attempt one are very narrow. You need a minimum of 2 baserunners, there must be 0 outs, and unless the runners are acting in an unintelligent manner, you probably will need the batting team to be attempting a hit and run play, right to a fielder.  It would be like hitting a single roulette number, but it only counts if it is the third Sunday in October, the moon is full, and the wind was blowing NNW at 8 mph.  Googlemeister (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Baseball players acting in an unintellegent manner has been typical of the Mets pretty much all season, so I'm not suprised this happened to them. Livewireo (talk) 20:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I thought that maybe there was a force at work which somehow affected the previous first and second base runners differently. The runner from 1st was not forced as soon as the ball was caught, because the batter was out. That removed the force on the runner from second, as well, correct? The 2nd baseman stepping on 2nd outed the previous 2nd base runner,who was on or nearing third. No going back. The runner from first, seeing the 2nd baseman off base catch the ball, should have headed back for 1st base, even if he had miraculously reached 2nd before the 2nd baseman caught the ball, with some slim chance of tagging 1st before a throw from the 2nd baseman to the 1st baseman with the 1st baseman standing on 1st. In gradeschool/highschool/sandlot ball, a baseman catching a thrown ball is no certainty, though it is expected in the pros. There would have been no need for a rundown between 1st and second, or tagging of the runner from 1st, if the 1st baseman had received the ball and stepped on 1st, correct? Should this count, in some sense, as an error by the runner from 1st? (Special for Baseball Bugs: Who's on first?) Edison (talk) 00:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * On the hit-and-run play, typically the runners are well on their way to the next base when the ball is caught, and it's just a matter of the fielder being in the right place to quickly tag second base and then run over and tag the first base runner before he can reverse his momentum. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Keeping unused phne numbers - normal?
A local school district (Midwest United States) closed a school 1.5 years ago. The number is still in our new phone book from last month, and was last year, too. Is this common? Do businesses often do this, if they think they might need the numbers again? I know #s can be claimed right away if they become unused, and I guess a few hundred dollars for 10 phone numbers won't break a school district's budget. It just seems weird. (Then again, I'm not used to dealing with budgets over a few hundred bucks, period. :-) 4.68.248.130 (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * What happens if you dial it? I'll bet it's not dead, but goes to the board of education.  Lots of people and organisations will have had a note of that number, some of them out of the area who don't know the school has closed, so the school district wants to keep the number going so that such callers get attended to my someone. It's pretty standard practice in large organisations to keep and redirect phone numbers for sites that have moved or closed, even if they're sure they'll never re-open the same site. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 19:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks; I tried and it just keeps ringing. Then again, school doesn't start till Wednesday.4.68.248.130 (talk) 19:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Bear in mind also that no annually published phone book is recompiled from scratch every year, the publishers have to be told that an entry from the previous issue requires change or deletion; sometimes that information may not have been forwarded correctly or at all. Also, the lead time for revising such a data-packed reference is not trivial; depending on the methods used for compilation, checking and printing, the deadline for incorporating changes might be up to several months before publication. Finally, if the school in question was part of some larger organisation (being British, I have no knowledge of US local government), the phone bill may be still be being paid merely through oversight or poor administration.87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

How do drum magazines work?
Google image search shows that some (Thompson drums) are in a spiral, but others look like a single circle with bullets stacked 3 rounds wide around the middle. How does the spring work? 24.6.46.177 (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Should I really say 'thank you'?
I brought my daughter to synagogue on Saturday and the president, having never seen her before, said, "She's beautiful." I didn't want to say thank you, because I didn't really see how that was a compliment to me. Saying that I have a beautiful wife, now that would be a compliment, because I can imagine it sort of increases someone's appreciation of who I am that I can "get a catch like that." But a beautiful daughter...that's just chromatin. Any thoughts?  DRosenbach  ( Talk 22:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It doesn't really matter whether it was a compliment or not. What matters is whether or not it was intended as a compliment, and it probably was. (It might have been a compliment intended for your daughter, just directed at you for rhetorical effect, but that doesn't really matter.) If you don't feel like saying thank you, the alternative is to agree with him ("Yes, she is."), that directs the compliment towards her, regardless of where he was aiming it. --Tango (talk) 22:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (after ec) You don't thank the president because your daughter is beautiful. You thank the president for a compliment that he didn't have to give. You thank him for your daughter because making her happy makes you happy (right?). Vimescarrot (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It was intended as a compliment, it was directed at you, you say "thank you".  (I do not have a reference handy, but I believe this is correct.)  If it helps, feel free to think of yourself as accepting the compliment on behalf of your entire family as a whole. APL (talk) 22:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I like the "Yes, she is" answer somewhat better than "Thank you". Now, if he had said, "She's hot!", then a different answer might have been called for. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 22:38, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But is it a compliment? To praise one for having brown hair is odd, so isn't it the same for anything genetic.  I would say that praising someone for their intellect is slightly different, because one merely has the potential of intellect that he or she chooses to develop and/or express.  But beauty?  Is that really any more than flattery?  DRosenbach  ( Talk 22:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's an awkward moment, frankly, and that's why you hesitated. There's not much distance between "She's beautiful" and "She's hot", and in my opinion neither one is appropriate at a religious service, which is supposed to be about the spiritual, not the physical. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you say a 2 year old is "Beautiful" - it's OK, and it's polite whether true or not. If you say a 2 year old is "Hot" it had better be abundantly clear that it's a joke - or else it's pretty sick!  If your 18 year old is either "beautiful" or "hot" - that's an entirely different matter.  Context matters!  I think "Thank you" is the best response in any case.  SteveBaker (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Now, if it was a wedding, that could be different, as everyone likes to talk about how beautiful the bride is (even if she looks like Phyllis Diller). There, "Thank you" would work. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hell, at a wedding, the bride is beautiful even if she looks like Nanny Ogg. Babies are by definition beautiful, too.  this is a big deal about a simple exchange or courtesies, which might well be lies.  I would go with the "Yes, she is" myself. PhGustaf (talk) 01:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There are both physical and spiritual kinds of beauty so we can speculate what particular beauty the president observed in the OP's daughter. Maybe the president is just a friendly person who means what he says without making a strategical calculation out of it. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "to express a favorable opinion." APL (talk) 23:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Not surprisingly, Wikipedia has an article on that: Complimentary language and gender. Well, ok, it doesn't address your exact scenario, but there you go. --- Medical geneticist (talk) 00:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think regardless of where it was, religious context or not, I think telling someone their 2 year old daughter is beautiful is a compliment more to the parents then the child. The only thing clouding the issue is people applying the incorrect and inappropriate meaning to the word "beautiful". A sunrise is beautiful, no need to "read into it" inappropriate meaning. A two year old girl is beautiful when she is healthy, happy, groomed, well behaved (etc) which are more of a reflection of the parents then the 2 year old, therefore it's completely appropriate to take it as a compliment as a proud parent. In contrast if exactly the same girl was a snotty brat, she probably wouldn't receive that compliment, genuinely anyway..Vespine (talk) 01:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * For some unknown reason, I was thinking he was taking an adult or at least teen daughter. Duh! If it's a 2-year-old and some guy says she's hot, obviously it's time to call the cops. If it's a young child, though, it still seems a little odd for a synagogue official to be commenting on her being beautiful, as if that had anything to do with anything. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Two things that haven't been mentioned. 1) 'Beauty' isn't entirely genetics. Diet and other factors you have an influence over can play a part. (This will include the pregnant mother's condition and diet of course.) For a 2 year old there may not be that much difference provided the parents provided reasonable care but still some 2) It isn't just your genetics that play a part. It's the combination. If you believe a complement of your wife reflects well on you then surely a complement of your daughter 'genes', who has half of your wife's 'genes' is partly a complement of you getting a 'catch like that'. At a more complex level, you could also say it's a complement of both of you in choosing a good match of 'genes' to give a beautiful daughter. Of course as someone mentioned above, this is way too technical, it's unlikely the president cared much what your daughter looked like (all babies are beautiful) and almost definitely didn't think at such a complex level. It was intended as a simple complement regardless of whether it was taken as such. Nil Einne (talk) 02:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) I picked my wife out of all the girls in the dental school lounge because of her eyebrows (and that's my daughter, too).
 * 2) Next time someone comments on my daughter's beauty, I'll be right and ready to request an elaboration of the specific intention :)
 * 3) Most importantly, I'm so glad to have finally met a group of individuals who not only meet but exceed my expectations in terms of pedanticism and wit.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 03:54, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * To my ear, "yes, she is" sounds pompous and self-important, while "thank you" sounds awkward but polite. Tempshill (talk) 03:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

My favorite response is "Why, how kind of you to notice!" DOR (HK) (talk) 04:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Another possible reponse is, "Thank you - obviously, she gets it from her Mother's side!" Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 05:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's nice, although it seems dangerously alluding to Mater semper certa est... What about "You too!". Uhmm, no... this is even worse under that respect... --79.38.22.37 (talk) 08:07, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Taking account of the context, it seems to me that the most beautiful answer is the given by OP's. Indeed, no answer means that the person was somehow not prepared to the compliment, as if he's not aware of his and his family's qualities; a kind of modest attitude that is very appreciated in a young man. Also, it may indicate that in that moment he was somehow more inclined to meditation, another small thing that also might not go unnoticed. --pma (talk) 10:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Obviously, you should have stopped and explained to the man that your two year old daughter's beauty was primarily genetic in origin and not the result of any extraordinary intellectual or creative exercise on your part beyond the superficial trappings of good hygiene and appropriate dress. I'm sure he would have appreciated the correction and thought more carefully before he made such offhand remarks to you again. APL (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes! That'll learn him :) hydnjo (talk) 19:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * A remarkable competition of irony --pma (talk) 20:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The OP's puzzlement mirrors that of the man who announces to friends that his wife is pregnant, and the friends congratulate him heartily on the achievement. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Rusting cars
Years ago I bought a cheap wheelbarrow to use in my garden. It is just a pressed galvanised steel pan mounted on a tubular frame with a rubber wheel. In Summer I use it to carry all kinds of rocks, earth and rubbish and in Winter it stands outside in all weathers, often filling with snow and water. My point is that it has not rusted. Along the roads I see steel lamp posts and road signs that stand for years and also don't rust. But every car rusts. One need only look underneath, especially at the sills and doors, of a 5+ year old car to see the rust. In particular, I bought a used Lamborghini which is far from an economy priced car, and found it was rusted through. My question is Why can't anyone make a steel car that stays as rust free as my wheelbarrow? If the answer lies in the cost of properly galvanising a car, what would that add to the cost of a typical family car? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Most rust on a car starts with stone chips damaging the underseal or paintwork; your wheelbarrow doesn't barrel up the motorway at 100mph taking hundreds of chips. Secondly, in many countries (such as the UK) salt is used to keep winter roads free of ice, and that salt is a major cause of rust; in the wet period after a thaw your car is assaulted by torrents of brine spraying up from the road (into those nice fresh chip-holes). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 23:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * To get rust, you need salt, water AND air. When your wheelbarrow sits there full of water, there is water - but no air - and very little salt.  When your car is sprayed with water - there is air and water in close proximity.  If there are any seams or cracks it can get into, then air and water in close proximity will make things rust.  Salt also make a lot of difference.  In the UK, where everywhere is close to the ocean and the roads are salted in the winter - an exposed bit of metal will show signs of rust in a matter of days.  Here in north/central Texas, we are a very long way from the ocean, there is little or no need to salt the roads.  Although the annual rainfall is higher than the south of England - it comes down in a few intense 3" rainstorms - and any remaining raindrops evaporate off very rapidly in the hot climate.  In the UK, it drizzles small amounts of water for months on end keeping things wet for a long period of time.  I accidentally backed my scruffy old pickup truck into a tree once - and a 6" diameter chunk of paint fell off revealing bare steel (an '87 Ford Ranger is not exactly a 'quality' vehicle!).  Five years later when I sold the truck, the steel still looked shiney - no rust in sight!   So if your wheelbarrow doesn't get salty - and if the water sits in a large solid volume (thereby keeping the air out) - then I don't see why it shouldn't last a long time. SteveBaker (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * My 11 year old Pontiac has no rust whatsoever, and it has always lived in areas of winter road salt. I believe they Galvanized lower body parts. Edison (talk) 01:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It has been done on occasion. The DeLorean DMC-12 (made famous by the Back to the Future films) had a stainless steel exterior &mdash; completely impervious to rust.  The downside is that it is very difficult to get paint to adhere properly to stainless steel, so production DeLoreans were only sold with the naked steel finish.  While the body will never rust, removing or concealing dings, dents, and scratches in a cosmetically-acceptable way is very challenging.  Further, stainless steel is both more expensive as a material, and significantly more difficult to work, than regular (rustable) steels, which greatly increases the cost of the body.
 * There's probably a certain amount of planned obsolescence at work; automakers see no reason to build vehicles which last too long. Most consumers are reluctant to pay any significant premium for a promise of automotive longevity.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

All good answers, but perhaps the key is weight: stronger steel weighs more, and so isn't as useful in cars. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But they galvanize ships (I know this from http://rudimentsofwisdom.com/pages/zinc.htm). Then again, I guess a ship has a lot more weight compared to surface area, and so needs relatively less zinc. Then again again, by the same reasoning you'd think that if the weight of the zinc that coats the surface was significant to a car's performance, it would make the wheelbarrow uselessly heavy. 81.131.63.211 (talk) 14:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ships aren't galvanised. They have sacrificial anodes (essentially lumps of zinc) bolted to them to corrode away in preference to the steel, but the steel isn't itself zinc-plated. The anodes are periodically replaced. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 00:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Does galvanization make steel significantly heavier? The Hot-dip galvanizing article doesn't mention it, and it says that galvanized sheet steel is commonly used in cars.  TastyCakes (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, so it does. So why doesn't it work? 81.131.32.223 (talk) 17:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Athletes, especially pro ones and general injuries
Why do they feel they need to play though them and etc? Especially, when they have more then one of them as well. Should they be on the DL (Disabled List) the minimum time or the maximum amount of time or what for the injury/ies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaabruno (talk • contribs) 23:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It seems more heroic that way; fans will think of you as a crybaby or something if you don't "play through the pain", especially if it's during the playoffs. I think there is a certain feeling that if they make all these millions of dollars, they don't deserve to sit around doing nothing, if it is perceived as a minor injury. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for all of your answer to my question here and it was interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaabruno (talk • contribs) 00:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

There's also the problem that a pro athelete's career is remarkably short. The average NFL player has a career less than 4 years long; even stars can't be expected to play much more than into their mid 30's. With such a short productive lifespan, atheletes need to get as much as possible out of it. Taking extra time off for injuries is perceived as allowing other atheletes to take ones place; and once you are on the bench it can be hard to come back off again. The attitude even has a name; its is sometimes called "Wally Pipp syndrome", after Wally Pipp, who was a very good Yankees first baseman during the 1910's & 1920's. According to legend (entirely approcryphal, but important for our story) he voluntarily took a day off in 1925, and his replacement that day was an untested prospect off the bench by the name of Lou Gehrig. Gehrig would not sit on the bench again for 2,130 games. Thus "Wally Pipp syndrome" is the desire never to take a day off for the fear that the guy who takes your place for one day may keep it forever, leaving you out of a job. It happens frequently in all sports, look at these examples: So, its probably the fact that most of these guys believe that there's someone just waiting to take their job away from them that keeps them playing through injuries. Remember, the guy that takes your job while you are hurt doesn't necessarily want to give it up when you get better. Ask Wally Pipp! -- Jayron  32  02:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Trent Green was injured in preseason of the 1999, and replaced by journeyman quarterback Kurt Warner who won the league MVP and the Super Bowl that year; Green was later cut, and toiled with some horrible teams in Kansas City. Green was for many years viewed as the best quarterback on the worst teams, and all because he got hurt and was replaced by a nobody.
 * Drew Bledsoe was a frequently great quarterback for the New England Patriots, frequent pro bowl quarterback who brought the Pats to a Super Bowl. He gets hurt in the second game of the 2001, only to be replaced by a 7th round draft pick, a nobody named Tom Brady, who wasn't even the full-time starter in college.  Brady has gone on to become the best Quarterback of the past decade, while Bledsoe was shipped off to Buffalo and never had a stellar season again.
 * Bill Walton had one of the best College Basketball careers in history; and even won an NBA championship with the Portland TrailBlazers, yet everyone remembers Walton as a "Malingerer" who's frequent leg and back injuries kept him on the bench for much of his career. Most people remember Walton, not for his college career, but waving a towel on the Celtics bench for much of the 80's.

Thank you for both of your answers to my question here and they were interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicaabruno (talk • contribs) 00:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)