Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 June 9

= June 9 =

Speed of light gibberish at the end of advertisements
It all started with a legal requirement in various jurisdictions that political advertising include an indication of who was paying for the ad and some other details. On TV and radio, this information was squeezed into a sliver of time at the end, the audio equivalent of fine print at the end of a print ad. That sliver has been getting thinner and thinner, and the information has to be spoken faster and faster, so fast that the information is now next to unintelligible for many people, and thus defeats its own purpose.

This also sometimes happens where viewers are advised to be aware that the price quoted in BIG print is subject to the various qualifications in small print. At least, that's the gist of what I think they're saying. That would be in line with requirements for ads not be misleading, and I can understand and support that, as long as the information is actually comprehensible enough for consumers to be able to make use of it in their decision-making moments.

But what's happening more and more is that this is being used as a "technique" in ads for things that have nothing to do with politics and it's nothing, as far as I can tell, about the price. Ads for things like hair products, baked beans, you name it, are routinely finishing with garbled gibberish spoken at a speed faster than many human ears can comprehend. What they actually say in these extremely brief moments of fame is beyond me, so it's all a complete waste of time as far as I'm concerned. They might be speaking the fine print words that sometimes appear at the bottom of the ad, but those words usually stay on screen for only a second anyway, which makes them unreadable and a waste of space - so I wouldn't know.

What can explain this gimmick, if that's what it is? I can't deny it gets people's attention, but if the attention is gained only at the very end of the ad, what happens to the rest of the information?

But why do it at all? Why make an ad for chocolate icecream sound like an ad for the Progressive Democratic Reactionary Party? They won't sell any more icecream that way. --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   01:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know how things are in Oz, but in the U.S. such things are usually included to satisfy legal disclosure requirements, and it doesn't matter whether they're intelligible (or legible, if they're presented in "small print") as long as they're there. The ones that always get me are those of the "This product may cause dizziness, projectile vomiting, incurable eczema, Tourette's syndrome, and sudden death" sort. I'm not taking any of any of that stuff no matter what my problem is. Deor (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * From the Virginia Legislative Information System: Regulated Advertising Practices. "In radio ads, where terms, conditions or disclaimers are used, they shall be clearly announced during the ad. They must be explained clearly and at an understandable speed and volume level." ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 01:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You see different ads, but we have much the same thing in the States. For organizations like banks and auto companies, there's a lot of disclaimer verbiage, some of which has entered common speech ("your mileage may vary").  Some of that is a legal requirement; some is just the legal department weighing in.  For other advertisers, my guess is that the motormouth endings are either ironic humor or mindless imitation.  This was done differently (not as an ending) some years ago by the actor John Moschitta in a number of ads for the company now known as FedEx. --- OtherDave (talk) 01:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * During radio ads for the station's contests, they'll often say "For full rules and conditions, see our web site at..." This is in Vermont, US.  Dismas |(talk) 01:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not an answer to your question, but in the UK political broadcasts will have before it the TV channel's announcer saying something like "Now follows a General Election broadcast for the X Party" and at the end something like "That was a General Election boardcast by the X Party". Since these are said by someone from the TV channel, rather than someone from the political party, they are said at a completely normal speed. It seems to work well. For regular ads, disclaimers are usually done using small text (often too small to read and displayed for less time than it takes to read), spoken disclaimers are rare. --Tango (talk) 02:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Disclaimers explained. hydnjo (talk) 02:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well shouldn't it be legally required for those very disclaimers to also be legible/audible? If people can't see it or hear it, then what's the point? 24.189.90.68 (talk) 06:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. The end credits on The Simpsons and some other programs are flashed up for such microscopically short moments that any notion of creative people actually being acknowledged for their contributions goes straight out the window. The clear message is "We have to mention them, but there's no law that says how long we have to mention them, so we'll just get away with as short a mention as possible".  --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   11:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And the truth is, I don't think most of the audience really cares about all of the credits. I find it so wonderfully pleasant when old movies told you the main actors, the director and producer, and left it pretty much at that. Nowadays (thanks to various union contracts) the guy who brings sandwiches and coffee gets creative credit for the final movie. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, it has gone to absurd lengths, I agree. But 24.189's point remains: If you're going to mention someone in the credits at all, for whatever contribution, there's no point doing that unless the potential readers of the credits are actually given a reasonable opportunity of actually reading the credit.  Same with end disclaimers: If they're spoken so fast as to make the message incomprehensible to the general listener, then communication does not occur, and listeners are not adequately warned or advised about whatever it is they're supposed to be warned or advised about.  --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   19:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't know what it's called (other than a dislaimer), but it has been used to humorous effect in some (cartoon) shows. One I recall (perhas in Family Guy) had a TV advert where the main line was something about a guaranteed cure for some ailment, while the rapidly mumbled disclaimer listed a number of undesirable side effects and ended with "...this is not a guarantee".  Astronaut (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Certainly things like gambling and financial services are regulated over here. Bank ads always end with "Standard Bank is a licensed financial services provider and a registered credit provider". Gambling ones are even stricter: "GrandWest Casino is a licensed casino. Gambling only for over-18's. Gamble with your head, not your heart. Winners know when to stop. Toll-free gambling counseling line 0800 xxx xxx". Don't know about hair products and baked beans (exactly how much were you exaggerating?), but there could be rules related to medicines/cosmetics and food safety. Check with your local Advertising Standards Authority? Zunaid 19:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm a fully fledged Ref Desk Respondent, so it ought to be extremely obvious that I never exaggerate. :) Maybe I pulled some examples out of the air, but I really have seen/heard some ads where this mumbled gibberish at the end appears to be there for theatrical effect only, but as I say, the effect, whatever its noble aims may be, is totally lost on me. --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   19:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Television producer Chuck Lorre uses this technique at the end of his various shows, often flashing a very lengthy message in very tiny print on the screen along with his copyright information. See the section in his article titled "Vanity Cards". — Michael J  20:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

North Korean football team in World Cup
I hate "crystal ball" type questions on these desks, and yet here I am asking one; sue me. I find it very interesting that the Korea DPR national football team has qualified for the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, for the first time since 1966. What is the likelihood of one or more of the squad joining the ranks of North Korean defectors? It seems to me a golden opportunity for someone to get away from one of the world's most repressive regimes. --Richardrj talkemail 08:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The RefDesk is not here to supply answers to your crystal ball questions. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  UK EYES ONLY  ─╢ 08:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know that, which is why I prefaced my question with a humorous disclaimer. Plus, I'm a regular on these desks (answerer more than asker), so I merit a little leeway. --Richardrj talkemail 08:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, you prefaced it. You can stab someone and plead guilty, it still doesn't mean you get given a small present... ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Regent  ─╢ 09:29, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There may well be notable speculation on this topic (personally, I wasn't able to find anything really relevant, though I found a couple of bloggish comments and something on a not-so-famous American newspaper's website, but deemed it useless). There are also precedents that may be relevant. Your analogy isn't very helpful. ---Sluzzelin talk  11:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it is. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  belonger  ─╢ 12:04, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You may find it interesting that three players of the 23-man squad selected to represent Korea DPR at the World Cup play for non-North Korean clubs. --Магьосник (talk) 09:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This from the article on Hong Young Jo is also interesting (bear in min DailyNK is 'run by opponents of the North Korean government' as is obvious from the links in the site). Nil Einne (talk) 11:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I cannot find a link but I remember some african athletes snuck away from the olympic village during the sydney games and applied for refugee statusJabberwalkee (talk) 14:07, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * My own OR speculation would come to the conclusion that athletes who try to claim refugee status will likely have their families suffer out of retribution. Livewireo (talk) 14:10, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not speculating on South Africa but note that North Korea had many away games in the 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification (AFC). 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification - AFC Third Round was in South Korea. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * How could we know what the likelihood is? It's not something quantifiable or even likely knowable. But if we look at the experience of other states that deny people the ability to emigrate, like the USSR, the common way to try and keep a high value sports player or entertainer or scientist is 1. keep their family at home (most people are not interested in permanently abandoning their families, especially if they think that harm might come to them if they did so), 2. keep a close watch on them while they are abroad, 3. create incentives for them to be happier at home (a nice dacha, for example). --Mr.98 (talk) 15:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I was surprised to find that we don't have any articles on Sports defectors or Cuban sports defectors - a fairly populous group perhaps most similar to North Korean sportsmen. Rmhermen (talk) 20:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Members of the Eritrea national football team, as well as Eritrean club teams, have routinely defected during any international competition, and those who run the team have started to force players to put down a surety before leaving. Eritrea is the only country that comes close to being as bad to live in as North Korea, and it's actually ranked worse than North Korea by Reporters Without Borders in terms of freedom of the press. So it can and does happen. As others have said if any planned to defect it would have happened already; defecting now, when everyone is intently staring at South Africa, would probably not be the brightest of moves because of the attention it would draw. A Korean person would look rather out of place in South Africa anyway. Xenon54 (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't claim any expertise in answering this question, but it's worth remembering that the North Korean regime doesn't hesitate to punish people for the "crimes" of their family members. Some people are locked up because their grandfather fought on the wrong side of a war generations ago. So I can certainly imagine a soccer player fearing that his family would be mistreated if he were to defect. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

On a related note: several Cuban soccer players defected the last time they played a WC qualifier in the USA. Compared to N. Korea, Cuba was always a long shot to make the finals and while their government is repressive, it's not quite as bad as the truly monstrous DPRK regime. Don't count out the possibility that some North Korea players are waiting to defect until after they've played in the World Cup. —D. Monack talk 00:28, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

State Capitols
Looking at List of state capitols in the United States, I notice that most of the Capitols/State houses are built to a similar plan, two large wings with a domed centre structure (usually with columns on the front, sometimes with a cylinder or tower in place of the dome). Is there a particular reason for this copying of the US Capitol? Alternatively why are Alaska (rectangular office block), Hawaii (low, rectangular office block), New Mexico (round), New York (romanesque), and North Dakota (an anonymous looking office tower) notably different in design? Astronaut (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If you look carefully, you'll see a couple of other state capitols (such as Virginia's) that don't follow this model. However, most do.  This kind of structure became popular in the early U.S. states during the early 1800s as an expression of the Federal style of architecture, itself a late version of neoclassical architecture.  The popularity of this style had to do with the self-image of the new republic as the heir to the spirit of the ancient Roman Republic and the democracy of Athens.  An architectural style hearkening mainly back to ancient Rome was seen as fitting for the republic's public buildings, particularly the buildings where its federal and state legislatures assembled.  These buildings feature a dome probably because their architects wanted them to have a strong visual signature against the skyline. At the time, towers and steeples were the main alternative to domes as vertical architectural features, but they would have suggested an unwelcome connection to a feudal, theocratic, or aristocratic past. So, these architects chose what they saw as the Roman republican dome. The United States Capitol in particular became something of a model for state capitols built during and after the mid-19th century.  However, there was no requirement to follow this model, and a few state governments clearly chose not to conform to it, in one or two cases choosing architectural styles reflecting local cultural traditions instead.  Marco polo (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It should also be noted that many state "Capitol" buildings are no longer the seat of the legislature as they used to be; many have been outgrown and supplanted by more modern structures. For some examples, North Carolina State Legislative Building and the Alabama State House.  The state capitol buildings themselves were almost always copies of (or closely inspired by) the United States Capitol.  Interestingly, the earlier state capitols resemble the original U.S. Capitol, with its lower dome, and later state capitols mimick the later larger dome.  Compare these pics:


 * The U.S. Capitol and, thus all of the multitudinous state capitols, are undoubtedly based on the design of St. Paul's Cathedral in London, and further back, to The Pantheon, the grandfather of ALL domed porticoed buildings. List of state capitols in the United States is an interesting table, and has cool pics.  -- Jayron  32  01:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Neoclassical architecture (through its various stages including federal architecture & Greek revival) became very popular for public and establishment buildings (government buildings, museums, banks, etc), since is evocative of state power, prestige, greatness, through its homage to the (perceived) pure, rational world of the ancient Greeks & Romans (and their successful empires). Thus it is perfect for those states trying to assert their imperial governments/establishments.  The USA was not alone in adopting it; others include Nazi Germany, the USSR, and others of the Soviet bloc, and the British Raj eg. New Delhi.  Gwinva (talk) 10:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Many neoclassical buildings of that time are designed in the styles of either Palladio or Gibbs, because they wrote books on the subject, making it much easier for many other people to imitate their way of designing, and as such many buildings around the world look similar or even identical. 80.47.183.121 (talk) 12:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Alaska's capitol building puts me in mind of Systematization (Romania), more brutal than Baroque.→86.152.79.31 (talk) 20:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Geico Gecko name
Does the Geico gecko have a name? Googlemeister (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes. -- LarryMac  | Talk  16:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Martin? Googlemeister (talk) 16:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep - named after the Ad Agency who created him: "The Martin Agency". SteveBaker (talk) 16:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

UK Blood Donation
I'm just going through the process of booking myself in for a blood donation through the National Blood Service website. When doing the "can I give blood" health check, it states that people who have "travelled to Ravenna province in North-east Italy may not be able to give blood". Why's this? Our article on Ravenna doesn't seem to help. matt (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, found out why. Apparently there was an outbreak of the Chikungunya virus in 2007 .  Perhaps this can be added to the article.  matt (talk) 16:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I know it's not directly related to your question but in Ireland, anyone who has spent 1 year or more in total in the UK, including Northern Ireland, in the years 1980 - 1986, cannot donate blood. Stanstaple (talk) 08:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The same is true when donating in the US, 1980-86 being the peak of the BSE epidemic (no matter how vegetarian one was during that time). Conversely one cannot donate in the UK if one has recently visited anywhere where West Nile virus is endemic, which now accounts for much of North America. To my mind we should collect these kind of things in Blood donation rather than specific blood donation organisations or geographic areas, and link briefly from the diseases to Blood donation when mentioning their (sometimes alleged) transmissiblity in this fashion. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 09:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * See Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Gandalf61 (talk) 09:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

InterRail question: I've got the rail pass but no reservations
I bought an InterRail pass from Copenhagen to Kraków, from there to Spittal an der Drau, and from there to Stockholm. This is otherwise all OK, but for some reason, the Finnish railways can't sell reservations to trains travelling in Poland. So I've got two rail trips on my journey, from Lübeck via Szczecin to Kraków, and from Kraków to Vienna, that I have a valid InterRail pass for but no reservations. Can I buy just the reservations from the Polish railways or some other place over the Internet, or do I have to take the chance to try to buy them on the site when I'll get there? J I P &#124; Talk 17:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I tried the Polrail website, which sells tickets and reservations, but it doesn't seem to be set up to sell just reservations to Interrail holders. You could try buying reservations for the Polish portion of your trip when you get to Copenhagen.  Denmark may not have the same restrictions as Finland.  Otherwise, your only choice seems to be to wait until you get to Szczecin. According to this site reservations are needed for 2nd-class tickets within Poland only for the faster express trains. You always have the option of taking a slower train without a reservation. Marco polo (talk) 19:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I looked the trips up at http://www.bahn.de/ (the German railways), which I use as a trusty resource for international connections, because the website of the Finnish railways only gives timetables for trains within Finland, and I don't understand Polish, or any other Slavic language. None of the individual connections travelling within Poland say Reservierungspflicht (mandatory reservation). I noticed that at least one of them says bitte reservieren (please reserve) but I don't think that's an absolute requirement. It might very well mean that without a reservation, I have no hope of getting to sleep in a bed during my overnight trips from Szczecin to Kraków and from Kraków to Vienna, but will have to do with sleeping on a normal train seat. J I P  &#124; Talk 20:11, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you not make a reservation through bahn.de ? Astronaut (talk) 00:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it appears I can't. When viewing the timetables at http://www.bahn.de/, it says Nicht im Internet bestellbar (not available for purchase over the Internet). I've contacted the German railways by e-mail but I don't know when they'll reply. J I P  &#124; Talk 05:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If you have to attempt to get last-minute Schlafwagen reservations in Szczecin, don't be afraid to try German if the ticket agent doesn't speak English. I found that lots of Poles, especially in western Poland, speak German. Marco polo (talk) 12:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I sent e-mail to the German railways, trusting my German skills to be good enough, asking about this. They replied the following day, saying that it should be possible to buy reservations online through http://www.bahn.de/. However, I can't find any place on the site to do that. On the contrary, the site keeps telling me that train connection can't be reserved through the Internet. I've sent a reply to the e-mail I got (also in German) about this. I would very much like to have reservations at least for the overnight trains so I could avoid sleeping on a seat. At least if nothing else works, I can try to buy reservations on the site when I reach Copenhagen or Lübeck. J I P &#124; Talk 19:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The German railways replied to me again. From what I could understand, they are aware that they are not available to provide online prices and booking for every single route their timetables can find, but that they are assuring me online booking is still possible. I didn't understand exactly how it's done however. I think I shall have to try to book an earlier train on the same route (which would not actually do, as it would have me wait at a station in the middle of the night) but explain in the comments that not only do I have an InterRail pass and only want a reservation, not a full ticket, but also that what I actually want to book is a later train on the same route. J I P  &#124; Talk 20:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You'll need to do this by phone or via a travel agency. They have a policy not to sell Interrail reservation too easily, because people have a tendency to buy reservations and then not use them, but also not cancel them, leaving a 3 euro reservation that they could have sold as a 60 euro ticket. --Gerrit CUTEDH 20:06, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Why don't modern ships include sails?
Why don't modern ships include sails to supplement their regular propulsion? It must cost a fortune to propel a big container ship or tanker. They could be used when the wind is with the ship, and I bet they would save loads of money. Or would they? (P.S. I'm sure you'll find one or two ships that do use sails, please don't link to those and answer "they do", why don't the vast majority of ships use sails?)--178.167.212.167 (talk) 17:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually this is an idea that is starting to get attention    . However most of the modern proposals involve kites not sails and the reasons why sails are problematic is somewhat explained in the refs. As to why not before, I would take a guess that the cost (including initial outlay, maintenence, crew etc) didn't seem worth it until recently where probably with the increasing cost of fuel (bear in mind that most of these are from when the price of fuel seem to be increasing without a clear end in sight, before the global economic meltdown and corresponding collapse in the price of fuel, I first read about it in 2005 in the NS article) and the lower cost of materials, automatic systems etc, people started to re-evaluate such possibilities. Note that while I don't know what you mean by 'loads of money' the tests suggest a savings of 10-35% in fuel which is probably a decent amount of money isn't an exceptionally large amount percentage wise. Nil Einne (talk) 18:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That begs the question, if a kite "is more efficient at capturing wind power than standard sails, takes up less shipboard space, and supposedly does not require additional crew", why didn't they use kites instead of sails 3 centuries ago? :-)--178.167.212.167 (talk) 18:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hard to sail upwind with only a kite. Rmhermen (talk) 18:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I wonder what the weight of a typical steamship is, compared with the weight of a clipper ship, for example. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The Stad Amsterdam displaces a bit over 1,000 metric tons. A lot of modern cargo ships exceed 20,000 tons, and the really big ones can go over 100,000 tons.  Googlemeister (talk) 18:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Container ships and clippers are apples and oranges. Better to compare frigates and trawlers, or Battleships and small freighters/ferries.--178.167.212.167 (talk) 18:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Because those are the modern ships the OP was asking about. And I might add that the clippers, designed for speed, are still rather slower then modern cargo vessels.  Googlemeister (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There are a couple of reasons (I'm guessing) why sails were used historically rather than kites.
 * Sails give better control. for instance, a ship with sails can actually maneuver into the wind (see Tacking (sailing)) which would be impossible with a simple kite.
 * materials strengths. Kites affix at a single point, concentrating all the strain of force there.  sails affix at multiple points, spreading out the force, and usually large ships have multiple masts which distribute the force even more.  a kite on a wooden frame ship would probably tear the bow off.
 * that being said, early ships - roman and greek warships, and egyptian barges, for instance - had simple fixed sails which effectively operated as kites, and usually had to supplement with oarsmen. even later trade ships, such as spanish galleons, had big fixed kite-like square sails for traveling at speed with the wind, and smaller lateen sails for trickier maneuvers.


 * Note also that both sails and kites have diminishing returns issues. I doubt that a modern freight carrier or oil tanker could be moved entirely by wind power (at least, not at anything resembling a decent speed).  The largest spanish galleons displaced something on the order of 2000 tons; modern container ships are bigger - the Emma Mærsk displaces 137,000 tons, or some 65 times the size of such wind-powered vessels.


 * Traditional sailing ships were very labor-intensive. A few decades ago there was discussion of having masts on container ships to use wind as propulsion, with sails something like venetian blinds, operated by motors rather than by Jack Tars scaling the ratlines to unfurl sails. Wind is energy which could lessen the fossil fuel required.  Edison (talk) 02:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe wind power could supplement steam power, but it occurs to me that it would take some big honkin' sails to get a huge cargo ship going, so I don't see how sails alone would be practical. And if you run motors to raise and lower the sails, there goes your fuel savings. There's no free lunch. Regardless, you have to have an engine as a backup to the sails (as is done on small sailboats), just in case the wind dies down. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, come on &mdash; there's no relationship between the energy used to power the motors to raise and lower the sails, and the energy provided by the sails. They're completely separate issues.  I haven't done the math, but I would be shocked if the first were even a noticeable fraction of the second.  --Trovatore (talk) 05:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Wait, you think the energy required to close a blind is a significant percentage of the energy required to power a supertanker?--178.167.179.162 (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * There are alternative schemes such as rotosails and turbosails. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 12:04, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Ryanair to close down routes to Glasgow Prestwick
While reading the article about Glasgow Prestwick Airport I found that the routes to Brussels, Budapest, Gothenburg, London, Milano and Rome will be suspended. Is this really true? Dreamfurniture (talk) 20:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I would either look on the official website (there may be a blog of some sort) or look on a news site such as BBC News. Also, if there is a reference for that then try going to that. Chevy  monte  carlo  04:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That appears to be last year's news, according to this article. If the announced cuts actually occurred, Ryanair made a renewed commitment to Prestwick earlier this year according to this article. It reaffirmed that commitment in this recent article, while suggesting that it might move flights from Prestwick to Edinburgh.  It's hard to know what to make of that suggestion.  It could just be part of a negotiating strategy to get Prestwick to cut the fees it charges the airline. I would think that the airline would be reluctant to yield market share at Prestwick. Marco polo (talk) 14:03, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Begging license
Oslo has recently seen an increase in the number of beggars, apparently from former East European countries. This is an unwelcome sight in this generally wealthy and tourist-friendly city. Today a politician proposed that the police should impose a license for begging. What experience exists with such licensing and what are arguments for and against it as a solution? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Begging has a discussion on some attempts to legally regulate and restrict panhandling. Specifically, that section cites an Orlando, Florida ordinance that required permits for begging. You may want to use that as a launching point, and look in Florida newspapers such as the Orlando Sentinel for some more info and opinion as to how that law went over.  -- Jayron  32  00:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * As an aside, I am intrigued by the concept of a former East European country, as if some land has been floating across the ocean to another part of the world, leaving behind some refugees in Oslo. In any case Norway extends further east than Istanbul so is arguably the easternmost European country other than Russia.  Sussexonian (talk) 08:50, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Until after the fall of communism, "Eastern Europe" was synonymous with the 8 countries of the Warsaw Pact. Former East European country is a political rather than geographical description. Romania is one of those countries and is the source of many beggars on the streets of Oslo. Arguments that I have collected so far are:


 * For: Gives the police direct means to deny organised begging, to prevent aggressive begging, and to identify criminals and illegal immigrants. Enables tracing of beggars and registering for emergency health care.
 * Against: Needs a costly beaurocracy and police effort to maintain. Effectively legalizes begging activity but does nothing to solve the problem; in that respect it is comparable to legalizing prostitution. It can make Oslo an even more attractive place for beggars. Personal data protection can be a concern. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

What type of banchan is this?
I'll tell you what type, the most amazing ever, that's what type! Seriously, does anyone know what it is? It was crunchy and somewhat spicy like the kimchee cucumber on the left (along with the kongnamul at far left), but also had a sort of savory flavor too. It tasted amazing and I'd like to know what type of plant it was at least. Though it resembled them, it did not taste like scallion or any kind of bean. Deglr6328 (talk) 23:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I know you've said it didn't taste like any bean, but it looks like long beans to me. Chinese long bean As you can see, they're not beans but a sort of vine. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like garlic stem/sprout to me. See and . Oda Mari (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)