Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 February 26

= February 26 =

Straight people in gay bars
I heard that some gay bars are actually becoming places where heterosexual females are to be found in increasing numbers, and the heterosexual males are following them there too, defeating the purpose of a gay bar. What is the prevalence of this? It's difficult to enforce gay-only entry to gay bars in a number of different ways, so has this phenomenon been picked up on much? There is the term 'fag hag' but that doesn't explain the acceptance of straight couples in gay bars... or is it just that gay bars are tolerating straight people as well as long as they don't dominate?--HootlePooch (talk) 00:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I just had this bizarre flash on how one would check to confirm if a customer was gay, as opposed to pretending to be gay, or straight but meeting up with gay friends or family, or straight but a stranger and not aware that gay bars are only for gays or . . . I think the answer is that, with a few exceptions, most bars in gay neighbourhoods welcome customers who eat and drink and don't cause injury to themselves, each other, the staff or the premises. Unless the customer is behaving in a way that makes the staff or the other clientele uncomfortable, no one will care. Women often like gay bars because they may be lively and yet no one is likely to hit on them there. And straight men frequently follow straight women. I don't know of any jurisdictions where, if you are behaving yourself, a bar (as opposed to a private club where membership is required) has the right to refuse to serve you because you aren't gay (or Latino, or a biker or a stockbroker or even a lawyer. . .) // BL \\ (talk) 00:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * (ec) I can't speak about the prevalence. What is the purpose of a gay bar?  Well, one purpose is to create a place where gay people can meet, without fear of harrasment.  If non-gay people are there, as long as they don't do any harrassing, that purpose is not defeated.  While it might be assumed that, in general, a person at a gay bar is gay, this is not the case when it comes to many visitors.  Some straight women like going to gay bars because there's little or no chance of being hit on, apart from straight guys (and lesbians) who happen to also be there.  And some straight guys like going to gay bars, whether accompanied by a woman or not, because they like gay people, have no issues with homosexuality, and maybe they even like flirting a little (or a lot), or like being noticed by other guys, even if they'd never "come to the party".  There are some men-only and woman-only bars that cater for the gay community, and anyone who enters is assumed to be gay, but I'm sure there have been many exceptions.  As for tolerance, the gay movement is all about tolerance; and if they can't tolerate the presence of non-gay people, their cause would be doomed from the outset.  That's why most gay bars have no such thing as a "gay only" policy. Quite how a person "proves" they're gay is quite beyond me, but I do believe there are gay-only bars.    --  JackofOz (talk) 00:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Based on my personal experience of being a straight man who spent a lot of time in Dupont Circle, Washington, D.C., my sense is that a lot of bachelorette parties went to gay clubs, where young attractive women could get trashed without having to worry about being groped or hit on. I can imagine that this would attract some straight men, but I didn't see it.  I have no idea what gays think of this.  It should also be noted that gay bars are just as diverse as straight bars, e.g. there are some bars that you go to when you just want to have a drink with friends, with perhaps more pictures of half-naked men on the walls than one would otherwise see, and there are some bars that are known far and wide as meat markets.  I can't imagine that the owners of the former would have a problem with straights wandering in, as long as they weren't engaged in some kind of 'gay tourism', but I think people who go to the latter would be justifiably annoyed if some straight came in and messed up the social expectations. - BanyanTree 03:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * At least in the Peel Hotel case I mentioned below, I don't think gay patrons particularly like hens parties because they often don't just go there to get trashed but to oogle the gay patrons. Of course if they really just go there to drink then I suspect the gay patrons would not be so concerned. Nil Einne (talk) 11:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Let me sing you the ballad of Canal Street my children, and the things that happened there.
 * Once was a land of gay bars in a time when this was shocking. And these gay bars served a community, as well as those who travelled from afar to see the wonders that could be seen. And lo, they were a refuge and a happy place for many gay people.
 * And then, as these things became less shocking, ladies who were, in fact, attracted to men began to spend their nights out in the gay bars. For they wished to dance and drink with their friends without being groped, and knew of no other place they could enjoy such a thing. Also, the gay bars were full of men dressed up and dancing in an attractive way, but this in no way influenced their choices... And for a while things were happy, as the women who ventured into the gay bars with their friends were generally the sort who had no issues with men who liked other men.
 * But then, people who would previously have nothing to do with such things came to hear of the lovely time these women were having, dressing up nicely and drinking and dancing without men assuming they were doing it for the benefit of men. And less understanding crowds of straight women descended on the bars, and the gay men came to feel self-conscious and objectivised. And the exact straight men who the straight women were trying to avoid heard of all these women going into clubs and enjoying themselves and thought 'We'll be in there'. And these straight men were not the sort of straight men who would have gone to a gay bar unless they were pursuing women with a mob of other straight men who were all defensive about their masculinity. And these men made the gay men feel threatened, and frequently that feeling was justified. And violence and bitter language broke out in what had been a safe haven. Fights. With chairs.
 * And so, many clubs sadly said they would only let in truly gay people, and judged that as they saw fit. Some just by looking, some by questioning. And so if you were a member of a musical theatre company, and many of your members were not gay, you found yourself refused entry to clubs you had previously treated as decent nights out and introduced new members to. Which was sad. But on the other hand fewer people got hit over the head with chairs.
 * The end. 79.66.56.21 (talk) 02:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * About 12 years ago, I - a straight male - would go out on the Canal Street gay scene on occasion with some gay friends. I can affirm that most bars and patrons were either perfectly welcoming (or at least tolerant) of my presence. A very small minority did appear to have an issue with me being there, but not aggressively so. It seemed to me that straight people who treat gay bars as a zoo are generally unwelcome, but if you are respectful and mind your own business then most people don't give two hoots. Rockpock  e  t  07:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * But how the heck would they know you were straight? I don't mean idiots who come in pointing and laughing; when you went with your gay friends, what set you apart? Franamax (talk) 08:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Gaydar? In some cases it came up in conversation with between myself, my friends and other people in the bars. Rockpock  e  t  20:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It appears that whereas men generally want to meet women, women want to avoid meeting men. 194.100.223.164 (talk) 09:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * ???? Evidence?  What on earth are they doing in a bar - any bar - if they want to avoid meeting men?  --  JackofOz (talk) 18:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Having a drink with their friends? --Tango (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think "meet" is perhaps being used euphemistically by the IP. Rockpock  e  t  20:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's right. The impression I get is, whereas men often want to go to bars to hit on women, most women usually do everything they can to avoid being hit on. 194.100.223.164 (talk) 11:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

An interesting example, as noted in our gay bar article is the Peel Hotel in Melbourne which banned (well can refuse entry to) non gay clientele because of concerns over the atmosphere and actions of non gay patrons. Australia does have anti-discrimination legislation but it was ruled acceptable given the reasons for the ban  were considered sufficiently justified. One of the articles say they ask you if you are gay. Obviously you can lie, but I doubt they care about the odd person who does so. If you start to behave inappropriately they can kick you out and because they've said non-gays are not allowed in and you lied about your sexuality, you're not going to be able to sue them for discrimination for example. Nil Einne (talk) 11:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Tiny red bugs
Okay, so my mom's pregnant asthmatic friend stopped me before going to school to see if I new what kind of insect this bug was that she found in her hair. It was tiny and red, and found on her head (No, I don't usually speak in riddles). Could someone tell me what this bug was and give me a link to the page about it (if there is one) Filosojia X Non (Philosophia X Known) 02:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's hard to say without a picture, but the tiniest, reddest bug I know of is the spider mite. - EronTalk 01:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * How many legs did it have? (6 means it's an insect - 8 would suggest a spider or a mite).  Where in the world are you? (It really helps a lot to know). SteveBaker (talk) 01:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am in CA, near Davis and Sacramento Filosojia X Non (Philosophia X Known) 02:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Whilst Steve's right to ask, like Eron I'd anticipate it is a spider mite. -Tagishsimon (talk) 01:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, it didn't look like it was smaller than 1 mm in size, but I guess it couldn't've been much bigger either, I suppoze it could be a spider mite, but it would help to know what else it could've been Filosojia X Non (Philosophia X Known) 02:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Try this Phil_burnstein (talk) 02:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd also try seeing a doctor... Gazhiley (talk) 11:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be an enormous overreaction. -Elmer Clark (talk) 14:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's just me then but if I found something crawling around on my skin that I didn't know what it was, I would go see a doctor first rather than show it to someone else and them discuss it on a ref desk... But as I said maybe that is just me...  Gazhiley (talk) 08:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

But it wasn't a ladybug, and it was too small to be one anyways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.137.194.47 (talk) 00:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think we really have enough to go on, but what the hell—harvest mite (adult)?


 * Why not post this query on the Science Reference Desk? -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

boeing 747
Can I please ask how many Boeing 747's have ever crashed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.178.189 (talk) 02:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Boeing 747 hull losses may be the nearest we get to - 47. There may be many other crashes in which the aircraft was not destroyed beyond economic repair. But if, as I suspect, you mean big-ticket crashes, not low-speed impact with the air-bridge and other taxiing accidents, then that may be what you're after. And that would be 47 out of 1,412, fwiw. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know about that. While I would agree any accident resulting in a hull loss could probably be considered a major crash (although I note 22 of them didn't result in any loss of life and our article says some of them were written off partially because they were old), I would personally also consider any crash which results in fatality directly attributable to the accident a major crash and it's possible some have happened without hull loss I presume Nil Einne (talk) 11:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Of course, you can also have a hull loss not caused by a crash. A number of hull losses – including the first two in our article – were aircraft that had been hijacked, landed, and blown up on the ground after the passengers had all disembarked.  Depending on how you choose to define 'crash', the Tenerife airport disaster may also not qualify.  Two 747s collided on the ground (one was taking off in heavy fog when another aircraft taxied on to the runway).  In 1977, Korean Airlines 007 was shot down by a Soviet fighter.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Free motion gallery/ video footage for use in youtube (creative commons?)
I recently noticed even the BBC's [www.bbcmotiongallery motion gallery] want payment for use of their "royalty free" footage. So much for them working for the nation! Lord MacAuley once said "Copyright is monopoly, and produces all the effects which the general voice of mankind attributes to monopoly. [...] Monopoly is an evil. For the sake of the good we must submit to the evil; but the evil ought not to last a day longer than is necessary for the purpose of securing the good." So, is there anywhere on the entire net that I can find videos that have creative commons licences? It seems to me most of the videos on YouTube are breaching copyright in some way. Many of them made by children or teenagers...surely these aren't breaking the law, they're merely being creative! Is there any other (large) site except than wikipedia that takes creative commons seriously? Thanks, --217.84.188.209 (talk) 10:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The Creative Commons themselves do obviously. I believe Flickr also allows video nowadays. There are also some news agencies (Brazilian for example) who also release their content under the CC license unfortunately they are not always clear when the content isn't theirs/CC. Then there are public domain stuff released by the US government (particularly NASA has quite a few videos I believe) Nil Einne (talk) 11:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Prelinger Archives has lots of PD licenses, Internet Archive in general has lots of CC ones. --140.247.254.97 (talk) 17:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Job descriptions asking for "customer service experience"
I'm looking for a job in Liverpool, UK, and I've seen a lot of call centre based jobs on offer. They usually ask for either "sales experience", which I don't have, or "customer service experience", which I do have but not in a call centre. I've been a receptionist and a library assistant. My question is, am I wasting my time by taking these "customer service" ads at face value and applying? Anyone know if this is jargon for "call centre experience", or if they are interested in people who have dealt with customer enquiries face to face? 86.166.68.249 (talk) 12:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Generally right on the latter - what they want is people with experience of dealing with customers... Sales experience is helpful in the majority of call centre jobs, but generally as long as you have had customer service experience, that is generally enough...  Also to be honest, the turnover of staff in call centres is that high that generally they can't afford to be that picky - any customer experience, whether it be phone or face to face - is often accepted... from one call centre worker to another potential call centre worker, good luck...  Gazhiley (talk) 14:01, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed completely. I have helped set up call centers from the US to Canada to India.  If it'an inbound customer support group for something general (like a wireless provider), they are looking for a strong, confident and pleasant phone voice.  But most importantly, they are looking to reduce first-year attrition.  The most important questions they will ask you will be around "life goals" or "where you see yourself in five years."  They want to hear that you appreciate the work, think that the wage is great, and are going to be around for the long haul (whether you are or not).  Many sites have average tenure of less than one year (or annual attrition rates of > 100%).  Since most include 2-10 weeks of paid training, his is generally a call center's biggest cost: even bigger than IT. NByz (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * We should also note that the reason for such attrition is burn-out from the enormous amounts of apathy and abuse you will receive from the people you call. Adam Bishop (talk) 05:34, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I would think it depends on the job description. Customer service/sales especially in a call center environment pertains to thinking on your feet and doing what you can to help the customer while maintaining the best interests of the company. They want to know that you are good with people, able to handle concerns in a friendly manner, and possibly able to sell. You should look into your transferrable skills and put these forth should you get an interview. As a manager in a customer service environment, I think that with experience as a receptionist and as a library assistant, you are dealing with people a majority of the time. You should be well suited for a job asking for these qualifications.

Wonder the name of the fonts
-- JSH-alive talk • cont • mail 15:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) As in http://www.rp-network.com/tvforum/uploads/cns_font_1.jpg
 * 2) Title of a film named The Terminator.


 * You might try cutting up the image and sending it into What The Font. APL (talk) 17:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * What the Font sucks 90% of the time. It points you fonts that are totally obscure and often quite, quite different from the input files. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if the Terminator headline font was its own font before the movie came out—it looks custom to me. You can easily find fonts based on the movie poster font though. The font used in white for the text is just plain old Avant Garde, of course. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The first one is remarkably similar to Myriad, though it is not the same. But if you are looking for a font with the same look, Myriad in bold looks pretty dang similar, it takes a very close eye to see it is different. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 22:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Juicing key limes
A number of key limes have recently come into my possession. They're adorable-looking little things, but their small size renders extraction of their juice most frustrating.

Can anyone recommend techniques to maximize recovery of key lime juice from these tiny, tasty fruits? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * A food processor and a strainer, perhaps? Note: I've not tried this myself, I just think it seems reasonable.  Peel and seed as much as possible before pulping. &mdash; Lomn 16:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Or use a juicer, which is, effectively, a food processor with a built in strainer. --Tango (talk) 18:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, yes. But I assume Ten has considered such pedestrian, dare we say, passe methods and found them "most frustrating".  I was hoping to hit the "more than juicer, less than chainsaw" sweet spot. &mdash; Lomn 20:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Truth be told, I'm actually coming from the position of having fewer tools, rather than more. If someone can recommend an appropriate gizmo that won't take up too much space in my kitchen or make a nightmare of the washing up, I'm willing to spend.  At the moment, I'm just slicing in half, picking out the seeds, and squeezing mightily &mdash; and finding it to be a less-than-satisfactory approach.
 * If I were at work, it would be an easy matter &mdash; gross dissection with scalpel and razor blade, removal of seeds with forceps, and blend in Waring blender. (Subsequent centrifugation to remove insoluble pulp optional.)  My kitchen is not so well equipped. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * A simple hand-juicer is a lot easier than squeezing, especially with small fruit. We have a nice one that fits over a measuring cup and filters out the seeds automatically. You just slice the fruit in half, twist it on the end, pow, you've got juice. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Juicer.jpg One of these? They're great - very easy to wash and very effective at getting a decent amount of juice very easily (an electric juicer will generally get more, though). You should be able to find one at any half-decent kitchen shop. --Tango (talk) 22:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It will be well worth it, however you get the juice out. You have come in possesion of some of the most wonderful fruits on the earth.  They aren't much like traditional limes, and aren't like lemons either.  They have a flavor which is all their own, sweeter and more palatable than either lemons or limes.  My favorite applications are key lime pie, key lime cheesecake, or key lime squares (like lemon squares or lemon bars, but with key lime juice).  Their flavor reaches their peak when they go yellow.  I am jealous.  They are hard to find around where I live.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  18:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * One of the most beautifully and functional items in the entire history of mankind is the Philippe Starck juice extractor. It's gorgeous to look at - it works VASTLY better than the ugly contraption shown above because you can squeeze directly into a glass or cup - and it's easier to clean.  There is not one single aspect of the design that isn't both entirely necessary and yet beautiful.  Truly a masterpiece of the design art. SteveBaker (talk) 01:36, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * cough* For the tenth anniversary of its launch, 10,000 were individually numbered and gold plated. ... The gold plated version was described as an ornament because the citric acid in a lemon discolors and erodes the gold plating. Starck is even rumored to have said, "My juicer is not meant to squeeze lemons; it is meant to start conversations" *cough* Nil Einne (talk) 02:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well - yes, but that was after 9 years of not-gold-plated ones that worked just fine. I believe that the context of that comment from Starck was in discussing the gold plated version of it.  And he was right...it just started a conversation.  But the stainless steel version (which I have) is entirely functional and does a superb job of extracting juice from oranges, lemons and limes. SteveBaker (talk) 17:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The non-Stark one pictured above, as noted by the person who posted it, is designed to squeeze directly into a cup. The non-Stark one described before the one pictured is designed to squeeze directly into a cup. Everyone I know who has a Stark juicer says it looks great, but is functionally inadequate; juice dribbles down the legs and the rounded top doesn't 'gouge' the fruit as effectively as a normal hand-juicer. Does that not happen for you? 79.66.56.21 (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The juice certainly doesn't - indeed cannot - run down the legs. I don't know who you're talking to - but they either don't have the genuine article or they aren't telling you the truth.  Look at how the legs attach to the body - note that the leg slopes down into the body.  In order for the juice to run down the leg, it would first have to go uphill!  The top gouges the fruit just fine and surface tension keeps it flowing against the side of the body and right into the glass beneath.  Perhaps these people have a cheap knock-off of the original.  Mine works great. SteveBaker (talk) 12:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Incidently, I recommend against the food processor/whole-fruit juicer idea. I think you'd get too many bitter flavors from the skins and pith if you did that.  --Mdwyer (talk) 06:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I think Mdwyer has a point here. I know someone with a juice extractor (meaning the kind you put whole or sliced fruit in without removing the skin etc) and the manual recommends you remove most of the pith for citrus fruit. Also IIRC when doing rind you're generally supposed to avoid the pith Nil Einne (talk) 13:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Lemons and limes produce more juice if they are rolled firmly in the hands first.This loosens the pulp inside and makes more juice come out.hotclaws 19:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * All you need is to slice the limes in half along the circumference, dig into the flesh with a fork and gouge it around while squeezing. No other equipment necessary. // roux   06:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Microwaving them for 20 seconds also seems to release more juice. SteveBaker (talk) 12:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The Starck extractor is beautiful, but in an oddly unsettling way. It reminds me of alleged pictures of aliens, War of the Worlds, etc. I'm not sure I'd want to get up in the middle of the night for a glass of water and see that standing on the kitchen bench, eerily moonlit. I might never get back to sleep. Just putting it away in a drawer wouldn't help either - I'd know it was there, waiting, waiting .... -- JackofOz (talk) 21:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They are too big to fit into a drawer! These things are gigantic.  The tripod design and the cantilevered legs certainly look like some of the War of the Worlds war machines...but it's like that for a good reason.  Three legs is the fewest you need - it's also stable and provides the most space for getting things underneath it.  The cantilevered legs (as I pointed out above) prevent the juice from running down the legs because it would first have to run uphill.  The teardrop shape of the body allows the juice to 'stick' to the body by surface tension and pour off the tip in a fairly smooth stream.  The whole thing is fairly rounded and there are no little crevices - so it's easy to clean.  That's what I like about it so much - there isn't one feature that you can point to that isn't there for a 100% functional reason - yet the result is just so visually appealing.  Oddly though - a tripod design is a disaster for a martian war machine!   How could such a thing move?  As soon as it lifts a leg up, it would fall towards that leg!  With bipedal motion, you can shift your balance by a small amount and balance on one leg while the other one moves - and with quadrapedal motion, you can lift one leg and three have three others providing a stable base.  But a tripod is a terrible solution.  Stoopid martians.  SteveBaker (talk) 12:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Not at all stupid. The common three-legged martian hops in the manner of an earth rabbit, with two power legs at the back which move together. It shifts it weight forward onto the foreleg while the back legs sweep past and settle some distance in front.  In this manner it can move extremely quickly and, given their size, they are capable of conquering whole continents within hours. The lesser-spotted three-legged martian is restricted to swampy regions, where the legs sink far enough into the ground to provide strength while the other legs move. They tend not to invade any planets that don't offer appropriate terrain.  Gwinva (talk) 00:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * We're discussing limes and juicers here, not Martians..... La   Al qu im  is ta  10:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Manav Sthali School
Does anyone have any additional information on the Manav Sthali School? I can't seem to find any information about the history of the school or it's chairman. Any help is appreciated. Papercutbiology♫ (talk) 15:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Power Point Problem
Hey, does anyone know if there is any way to open a .pptx file on an old version of powerpoint? I e-mailed a presentation to myself from Powerpoint 2007 and I have 2005, so I can't open it. I need to open it, so if someone could please tell me a way to open it ASAP that would be great. Thanks! Grango242 (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know the answer, but in general it is unreasonable to expect old versions of programs to be able to read newer versions of their files. What you may be able to do is to persuade 2007 to store the presentation in a 2005-compatible file; but you are unlikely to be able to do anything with the software and file that you have. --ColinFine (talk) 23:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This only mentions '03, not '05, but it might be what you want. Algebraist 23:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * (This is really more of a question for the computer desk, but anyways...) If you go to Save As in Powerpoint 2007, there is the option to save it as a .ppt file. It will then warn you that you might lose some features of the original that are only available with 2007. The only problem I've ever had with this is some font changes and occasionally animation effects. And for some reason, the file usually becomes massively larger. If you're okay with that, there's your solution.


 * Of course, you said you want to open it "ASAP" so if that means you emailed it home from school, need to work on it tonight, and hand it in the morning, and you can't get to your school computer that has Powerpoint 2007, I'm afraid I don't know how to help you. Maybe someone who knows more about computers knows a way to convert the file without Ppt 2007. Best of luck. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 23:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * You might be able to scrape the content out of it by using something like PowerPoint Viewer 2007. I've not used it, but it must be better than a locked file, non? --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Or, you could try downloading the 30-day trial of the most recent Powerpoint version, and, as above, save it as a .ppt file next time. Thanks,  Genius  101 Guestbook  01:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * A reasonable solution is to install the "Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint 2007 file format", which will convert your pptx files into ppt files. I believe it's free and has no prerequisites other than a Microsoft operating system (the expectation that you have an earlier version of Office is so you can open the older-format files, although other software products can open older formats too). See .- gadfium 02:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

aircraft parts
What would become of US Airways Flight 1549 after the investigations are all done? Will the aircraft be dismantled now that it's a total write-off?72.229.135.200 (talk) 23:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The airline will determine if it's cheaper to repair the aircraft or write it off and buy/lease a new one (given the damage, a write-off is likely). If they write it off, the parts are scrapped and diposed of / recycled, as with any other kind of waste. &mdash; QuantumEleven 13:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Will any portion of the aircraft be donated the National Air & Space Museum?72.229.135.200 (talk) 19:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)