Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 March 31

= March 31 =

school fundraising - selling chocolate
How much of a scam are school fundraising initiatives such as having students sell chocolate door-to-door?

Just to elaborate on the question I'll define what I mean by some terms:

scam - I realize that a $2 box of chocolate almonds is a massive ripoff for the end user, but that's not really what I'm after. I was wondering how much of the proceeds actually go to the school (or other non-profit). I realize that obviously these companies make money and are professional fundraisers but I was wondering how much of a cut of the profits actually went to the schools?

'selling chocoloate' - obviously a gross gerneralization, selling anyting door-to-door or otherwise at the behest of the school.

Thanks.flagitious 04:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flagitious (talk • contribs)


 * I really depends on whether you take a dim view of whatever extracurricular activities the students are raising funds for. A sports trip may not mean much to you, but it could be an eye-opening experience for kids who haven't traveled much previously. Just as one example. Vranak (talk) 05:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I take it the question here is "how much money does the school make from selling each $2 chocolate bar?". Just clarifying. I don't have an answer. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 06:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Here is the website of one such organization I'm familiar with. They say 50% of proceeds go to the school/whatever right on the homepage. -- Flyguy649 talk 06:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, I guess whatever you buy from somebody is going to be a higher price than what the product or service is actually worth, because they've got to make a profit, whether the money goes to a charity or not. Chevymontecarlo. 09:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

50% is pretty standard for school fund raisers - some are even less. The only one we've ever found that was any better was a "dance-a-thon" that I believe gave 75% return. I'd also like to direct the questioner to WP:SOAPBOX, which is something he should get off of before asking another question. Matt Deres (talk) 13:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Although phrased a little soapboxy, I think the question is a good one. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * A scam also known as a bunko, con, flim flam, gaffle, grift, hustle, scheme, swindle, bamboozle is a Confidence trick that attempts to defraud a person or group. The OP connects school fundraising with scams. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 50% to the school from the sale of "band candy' or such products is a better payout than many fundraising operations, which use the name of a police department, a political party, or whatever, and 90% goes for fundraising expenses and profits to the fundraising company. In a small town, my church group held carwashes (donated materials, 100% profit, and spaghetti dinners (donated desserts, other food sold at wholesale by friendly grocer, probably 90% profits). One shortcoming of "band chocolate" is that kids may eat the fattening stuff and then have to pay for it out of pocket as in "Beavis and Butthead," episode 116, "Candy Sale:" They have $2 between them, and exchange it back and forth as they "purchase" and eat all of the candy each has. Edison (talk) 18:56, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * When I sold chocolate for school (Cadbury Dairy Milk bars to be precise) we got 80 cents for every $2 bar. The bars themselves aren't that bad a deal for the consumer either at $2 for a 100g block (I think). --antilivedT 12:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Evelyn and Evelyn
Evelyn Waugh, a man, married a woman named Evelyn Florence Margaret Winifred Gardner. They were known as "He-Evelyn" and "She-Evelyn".

Are there any other cases of a married couple, at least one of whom was notable, where both the husband's and the wife's given names were the same? --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   11:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Mm...fiction, but...in the film Adam's Rib Tracey and Hepburn called each other 'Pinky'. Rhinoracer (talk) 13:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I knew a Leslie and Lesley. Neither is notable enough to deserve a Wikipedia article, though. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * This couple is famous now, but it's because they share a name: "Kelly Hildebrandt". --Sean 13:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Only famous in some circles, and different spelling: Francis Cornford married Frances Darwin (Charles' granddaughter). --Sean 13:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, and after he-Evelyn divorced she-Evelyn, he married her cousin (a twist on the usual meaning of cousin marriage), thus acquiring new parents-in-law, one new set of grandparents-in-law, and one recycled set. WRT the original question, if we include nicknames, there must be some couples both named Pat (Patrick/Patricia) or Nick (Nicholas/Nicola) etc. And then there are alternate spellings, such as Sean and Shawn. BrainyBabe (talk) 14:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Paris Hilton was engaged to Paris Latsis. Rmhermen (talk) 14:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Much was made of this when Taylor Lautner and Taylor Swift dated briefly. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Claude is common for both genders in French, as is Dominique. i'm sure there are a number of couple in which both spouses share the name. --Xuxl (talk) 14:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Not quite the same, but a friend of mine had a lengthy relationship with someone who had the same surname. Astronaut (talk) 14:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * So did Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Married her, in fact. --15:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Not public figures as such, but here's a couple both named Kelly Hildebrandt. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Sean, meet Baseball Bugs. Baseball Bugs, meet Sean. You two have at least one thing to talk about. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, it's like deja vu. One possibly useful question would be how to find it. I think I googled [couple same name]. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the ideas so far, folks. So the only other one that meets the criteria so far is Frances/Francis Darwin, and even that's not exact, but if we consider Francis and Frances to be the other-sex equivalents of the same name, we're on a winner. The probability is going to increase in these days of civil partnerships. There would have to be examples already of 2 ordinary Joes both named, say, David, or Rachael, entering into such a union. Showbiz people tend to marry other showbiz people, so it's surely only a matter of time before a well-known gay person marries a person with the same gven name. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   20:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * As with the Kellys, there is another couple who have achieved some minor fame by virtue of the nominal coincidence: this tells of a Chinese couple:
 * A Chinese man and his wife in Danjiangkou, Hubei province, have become quite famous because they have the same name and date of birth. Both are named Wang Yang and both were born on April 29, 1982, reports the China Daily.
 * As for civil partnerships, two Davids or Marys, yes, but less likely to share the surname, unless one of the happy couple changes it (or indeed both of them do). From another angle, it used to be common for married women to be known formally by their husbands' first name, e.g. Mrs John Smith (see Mrs. and Married and maiden names). BrainyBabe (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * My grandparents were Frances and Francis. Woogee (talk) 23:32, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As to Jack's second reply, I've already heard of a few same-sex long-term partnerships with same first-named couples. The reaction I heard was disgustingly cute all the way through to adorably cute. In all cases, they had different surnames, so the only problem was when there was a phone call, and someone said "Hi, can I speak to X?". Steewi (talk) 08:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's a famous married pair:   --Sussexonian (talk) 21:02, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Jack and Jackie ... you know who. 63.17.57.193 (talk) 04:09, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Train ticket prices inconsistent (UK)
The cost of a return train ticket from Ellesmere Port (England) to Winsford is three times that of a ticket to Southport even though they're approximately the same distance. Why?? --78.144.189.209 (talk) 11:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * One factor may be that Ellesmere Port to Southport is covered by a single rail company (Merseyrail) whereas to get to Winsford you have to use Merseyrail to go to Liverpool Lime Street and then catch a London Midland service . Also, although the "as the crow flies" distances may look the same, the Winsford rail trip will be longer because you have to go north into Liverpool to change trains and then come out again heading south. But expecting any sort of rational and logical structure in UK rail fares is ... ummm .... optimistic. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Unlike many other countries' rail systems, rail ticket pricing in the UK is not simply based on how far you travel. It doesn't even seem to be based on how much it costs for the rail company to run the service.  In fact it is hard to determine any rationale in ticket pricing other than how much money can be screwed out of the customer.  Why else would it sometimes cost less to get a day return ticket than a one-way ticket? Why else does it cost less for me to get a day return to an obscure suburban station, rather than just to the major London terminal that I would have to pass through on the way to the obscure suburban station?  Astronaut (talk) 13:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Supermarkets do very similar things. Case in point - on Monday I bought some tinned Coconut milk the can I purchased was 30p, I found it in the International aisle in the Indian food section. The 'same' product cost 60p in the Thai area of the SAME aisle! But wait it gets better - in the rice/pasta aisle, next to the stir-in sauces it would've cost me £1.90! This pricing philosophy is pretty common and I can't remember the name for it but it's discussed in the book The economic naturalist and is all about price-sensititivity. 14:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * How can the same product have 3 different prices? Do they not use bar code scanners at supermarkets in the UK, or were the cans not the same?  Googlemeister (talk) 14:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * They were technically different 'products' in such that they were different brand-names but for someone like myself that's just buying it to add to a soup it's not a product that's going to vary hugely and so the difference in price was astounding, particularly when you consider the placement of the different products (the most expensive being exactly where the 'i need this for a recipe' type person would most frequently look). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:29, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * In the US they smack another stick-on bar code over the manufacturers. Here they do that on clearance items, like food near it's expiration date, and the effect is to always lower the price.   It could also be used to add a surcharge, although there would be some risk that people might peel the stickers off.  But, of course, they could just go to where the lower priced cans are and pick one up there, anyway.  There's an interesting psychological effect, though, that people feel the more expensive product is better, even if the cans are identical right down to the batch number.  StuRat (talk) 15:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you sure they're the same thing? There's a difference between coconut milk and coconut cream for example. And there may also be lite varieties. These have differences in the fat content and other details Also when it comes to the different brands, the place or origin often varies. For example here in NZ if often either comes from Thailand or one of the Pacific Islands. However I usually find the coconut milk in one location anyway. And if I were looking for coconut milk I would probably look in the Thai or SEA section before anything else anyway. Nil Einne (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe that's price differentiation: . What, no Wikipedia article ? StuRat (talk) 15:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Price discrimination. Jørgen (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I added a redirect to fix the red link. StuRat (talk)

Railway fares in the UK seem to follow demand pricing - that is to say, the more people who want to travel over a particular stretch of track, the higher the fare will be. Particular times of day, or days of the week, will attract higher demand and therefore higher prices. Prices are set to maximise income - so a journey to an obscure suburban station used by a few hundred people a day will attract a lower fare than a journey of similar length to a busy terminus used by millions. The situation is complicated by competition being available on some (but not all) routes, and a very complex system of regulation which does not apply to all ticket types. DuncanHill (talk) 20:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Even stranger, when I get the train from Portsmouth to Redhill, on the edge of London, I buy a ticket to East Croyden, the next stop along the line, because it costs rather less than a ticket just to Redhill. 80.47.135.51 (talk) 10:15, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Book contact
To who can assist me with,

I need to contact a writer who wrote the book I purchased after I got the information about from the Wikipedia. Can someone give me an idea how to contact him? Please respond.

I really appreciate your help.

Timothy Banh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.178.225.164 (talk) 14:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I've removed your email to prevent spam and protect your identity; and besides, no one will email you anyway (see the guidance at the top of this page). I also added a section header to separate your new question from the one above.
 * We have no way to track which pages you have viewed. Without telling us the book's title or author, how can we guess who you are talking about?  Astronaut (talk) 14:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually the answer is going to be the same whoever it is. Authors almost never give out their personal contact information. Your best way of contacting them is to write to their publisher, whose address will be in the book. If the author also happens to be a university lecturer, for example, you could try contacting them through their university. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Speaking in a general sense, start with the publisher. There will either be an address to the publisher in the front pages of the book, or at least you can Google the name of the publisher and get a mailing address that way. Contact them and see if they would be willing to forward a letter to the author of the book. Prominent authors (those that write a number of books) sometimes have their own Web presence, so you might want to Google the author and see if he/she has a site. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Many authors these days (both famous and less famous) also use Twitter and other social networking sites. And many writers, particularly of non-fiction and poetry, work at universities or other institutions where they can be contacted (by email or post).  But Google is certainly a good start. --Normansmithy (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * In this day and age, searching on the internet will more often than not get you to your author's website, which usually has a "contact me" section on the web site. Truthsort (talk) 02:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

A man, a can and the ocean
This morning I watched about five minutes of the show sunrise earth ....web page is here: The episode I saw was the "Playa Grande Moonset " in Playa Grande, Costa Rica. During the brief time I watched, a man could be seen walking around about waist deep in the ocean, holding what appeared to be a small can in one hand and something much smaller in the other. He seemed to be holding the unidentified item slightly in the air, out in front of him. I am not certain but there may have been a string attached to the can. Does anyone have any idea what he was doing? He was fully clothed, walking around and at times struggling to remain upright in the heavy surf. I really don't think it was any type of recreational activity. All I can think is that it must have been some type of an attempt to catch a bird or fish? I wish I would have had time to see the whole episode as I am sure I would have seen more clues. Thanks, 10draftsdeep (talk) 15:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Was the can above the waterline or right on it? --Mr.98 (talk) 20:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Completely unrelated. Beach drifter (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * To Mr.98, he was holding the can out of the water as you would hold a drink,but he was not drinking from it. (that's something I would do at the beach.) 10draftsdeep (talk) 23:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That episode appears to be up on youtube. I'm afraid I got bored after a couple of minutes of one segment of it, but you might be prepared to do a little more research than me. No URL since I'm not sure whether it's a copyvio and hence might be a WP:LINKVIO. You know how to usse a search engine. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * At 9:50 on part 2/5 on the youtube vid, a caption appears that says that the man previously caught a 25lb snook hand casting. The item in his right hand appears to be a fishing line with a small weight and rig attached, with the rest of the line wrapped around the can. Beach drifter (talk) 00:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Then that must be it. Interesting fishing method. Thanks everyone. cheers, 10draftsdeep (talk) 13:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

confused, please help
what does it take some one to convince a point if he/she is hell bent to contest with all the weirdest theories to defend himself. are there any 3-4 fundamental pointers in convincing somebody if they are met we can say we are on the winning side.this is a general question with no topic attached. this sounds crazy but i hope many of you got the underlying message.asking for the fishing rod not the fish..any help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.36.6 (talk) 15:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I think the only general answer is that you have to find out what it is that the other person uses in order to gauge truth. Most of us would love it if it were "raw facts" but even for very scientific people that is just part of the overall equation. Some people are persuaded by authority. Some people tend to believe the exact opposite of authority. Some people just like to be contentious for its own sake (probably because they think it makes them look smarter). Some people are persuaded most by people they are emphatic with—people they can relate to easier. Some people like hearing arguments that carefully weigh both sides of a question, while some people are more persuaded by people who take very extreme positions. I've never seen any sure-fire approach that worked for all people, all the time. There is probably a good list of what not to do that is probably pretty general (most people are probably offended by some of the same things), but for what you should do, I think that is going to vary quite a lot depending on the situation and the people. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * This very well-thoughout post incorrectly uses a commonly mixed up word. When trying to describe feelings of personal identification with someone you called it 'emphatic', which means strongly expressed (ie I emphatically told him no). The correct word is 'empathetic', or 'empathic' (in which case it might have been a spelling error) . 206.53.153.163 (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * And also note that there are some people that will never change their view on certain things, regardless of facts, evidence, arguments etc... Googlemeister (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Or, as I like to say, you can't logic someone out of something they haven't been logicked into. --16:57, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * One thing I know for sure, from observing wikipedia for a few years, is that the OP won't get his answer from wikipedia! The indef list is littered with the husks of user ID's whose drivers didn't "get it", no matter how much anyone tried to explain things to them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Go read some of the Socratic dialogs - Socrates was a master at building convincing arguments. That being said, you have to understand that you cannot reason with a belief.  it takes a certain way of looking at the world for a person to recognize that their beliefs are simply beliefs; for most people in the world, beliefs have an inherent (ontological) truth-value.  You can present all the arguments you want to someone who holds a belief-as-a-matter-of-truth, and all you will convince them of, in the long run, is that you're an ass (they will think that you are using some silly logical tricks to contradict what they know to be true, and they will be angry at you for trying to trick them).  If you really want to be able to convince someone of some point using reason, then you first have to convince them that beliefs (in general) are not ontologically true, but are conjectures or principles that one chooses to hold.  Once you've convinced them of that, then you can use reason to try to get them to choose a different set of beliefs.  However, this implies that you yourself know that your own beliefs are only conjectures, and you run the risk that they will convince you that they had it right.  goes with the territory...    -- Ludwigs 2  17:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * A fairly obvious example is evolution vs. Genesis. There is no way to convince a Biblical literalist that evolution can be real, as conventionally accepted by scientists, requiring billions of years to occur. Because no matter what evidence you propose, they will have an "explanation" that makes sense to them: including, I kid you not, the possibility that Satan put dinosaur bones in the ground, in order to fool us. Once someone takes that stance, you may as well hit the road. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I like the idea of using their own belief system against them. In the Creation argument, you can do as was done in Inherit the Wind: "How do you know a Biblical creation day was the same 24 hour day we have now ?  Couldn't God have made it 25 hours, or a year, or a thousand years, or a million, or a billion ?".  Of course, when the Bible has things created in the wrong order, then that's harder to explain. StuRat (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Because it says "one day", and God does not deceive. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah, but God doesn't define, either. StuRat (talk) 18:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Let's not get into a intractable discussion on a totally separate question, please... --Mr.98 (talk) 17:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not a separate question, it's a subset of the OP's question. You can't convince someone who believes they're right, that they're wrong. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Of course the creationist views the problem as entirely opposite—once you have decided that everything must be a naturalistic evolutionary adaptation, you look for all sorts of ways to justify that belief. I'm not claiming that both sets of beliefs rest on the same level of empirical evidence, but a scientist is going to value evidence produced by what he/she considers to be the legitimate scientific community as being more truthful than the evidence of scripture. Determining which evidentiary basis is "better" is, as far as I can tell, based almost exclusively on an inductive, not-terribly-rigorous appeal to "well, science has made us nice things, hasn't it?" If you decide a priori that the world is naturalistic, you see naturalistic explanations as necessarily better. If you decide it is supernatural, then you prefer supernatural explanations. (And before someone invokes Occam's razor, it's worth remember that it's just a heuristic, and a fuzzy one at that. It is not a logical proof.)
 * All of which is to say, again, that there is not one particular sure-fire way to convince all people of all things. To continue the Creationist example, I have found that most Creationists are not convinced by appeals to scientific facts. They simply are suspicious of the evidentiary status, that they have been produced in good faith, and their ultimate truth value when compared to what they consider to be lived experience with scripture. Appeals to E. Coli don't have much of an effect because they are not conditioned to regard such appeals as powerful. How one responds to that issue—earlier indoctrination into scientific ways of thinking, attempts to enhance the effect of scientific views in politics, etc.—is a separate question. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * "Appeals to E. Coli" ?  That's one weird Freudian slip.  Do you by any chance have food poisoning ? :-) StuRat (talk) 18:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of the E. coli long-term evolution experiment in particular, which I see trotted out as proof of evolution on a pretty regular basis around here. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course some creationists apparently do fear the E. coli and make a fool out of themselves in an attempt to show it's bullshit Nil Einne (talk) 20:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Short answer? Honesty and humility on the part of both parties. Vranak (talk) 19:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The OP may enjoy the article about Rhetoric, a term that Plato coined to denounce what he saw as the false wisdom of the Sophists, and to advance his own views. The art of rhetoric (and capitalising the first word of sentences) can help the OP use language to communicate more effectively. However it is crazy to expect to be given a formula that vanquishes any person with whom you disagree, regardless of the topic. You will get further by finding what you agree about. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 20:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * well, per TR - "walk softly and carry a big stick" people are ever so much more inclined to reason when you're sufficiently armed...-- Ludwigs 2 23:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I actually don't think it's worth bothering trying to convince anyone of anything. If they want to agree with you they will. Remember Galileo and "eppur si muove"? The might of the Roman Catholic church was thrown at him until he officially recanted - but it's obvious he didn't really believe his recantation. By the standards of the time, Galileo was wrong: but by the knowledge we nowc have, he was right. Be humble and accept you may be wrong. That often goes a long way towards convincing people you may be right! --TammyMoet (talk) 11:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * It occurs to me that people are most likely to change their minds about something if you can demonstrate that it affects them. Nobody ever went broke appealing to people's selfish interests. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Another important aspect of convincing people is that it has to come from a source they trust. Consider communists in the West.  Many of them considered communism to be a "worker's paradise" and believed all the propaganda which came out of Russia, early on, and ignored anyone in the West who contradicted that propaganda.  But, after Stalin died, and Khrushchev gave a speech critical of Stalin, communists in the West had their doubts confirmed by somebody they actually trusted.  Many turned away from communism, as a result.  An interesting case of unintended consequences. StuRat (talk) 14:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

WPLN4080BR
I have never used a BMS before and do not no what to look for when firstly anylzing then condition a Battery. Unfotunatly i do not have a user guide either. What be be deemed a good result? with regard to the screen readings i am seeing (i have tryed finding a user manual online but to no avail) with regard to readings ETC...Chromagnum (talk) 17:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * This page claims to have the manuals for the WPLN4079BR, which is probably quite similar: . StuRat (talk) 17:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Nope just another site claiming to have it but doesnt thank you anywayChromagnum (talk) 05:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Why on earth do so many websites do this - advertise they have a product but only have links to other unrelated things? Anyway, I would have thought the Motorola website was the place to look for this kind of thing - but a thorough search eventually led me to their "download manual" page but it doesn't have the particular product type your are lookintg for.  How about contacting Motorola's product support by phone or email? - this is the contact support page for the US (I'm sure they have a similar page for your country).  Astronaut (talk) 12:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The Internet presents limitless opportunities for the bait and switch approach to sales. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:08, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Project Management
How does resource scheduling tie to project priority? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.231.63 (talk) 17:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Obviously, if a scarce resource is needed simultaneously by two projects, the higher priority project gets it first. Although there might exceptions, like if withholding the resource will only delay the high priority project by a day, but would require that the low priority project be canceled entirely. StuRat (talk)

Car doors
Why did doors with hinges at the rear go out of fashion on (most) cars? You'd be able to step out of the vehicle much more easily (and, consequently, elegantly) since you don't have to twist whilst disembarking. 94.168.184.16 (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * See suicide door. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 22:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ya beat me to it. :) It's a safety issue. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's a shame. Thanks for the quick response! 94.168.184.16 (talk) 22:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeh, I'm despondent. I'm thinking of driving down the highway at high speed in a car with doors hinged at the back. That might take awhile to fulfill, though, as those babies are expensive. I also have to figure out how to fall out of the car, as wearing seatbelts is required by law. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Still - if you don't shut your suicide door properly - the wind rips the door off the hinges and it bounces down the highway, wiping out the car behind you. If you don't shut your normal door - the wind keeps it shut.  You'd think it would be easy enough to engineer a fix for that though - a big bolt that extends from the door into the car body and a sensor that refuses to start the engine if it's not firmly closed...but I guess suicide doors just aren't fashionable enough to justify the cost. SteveBaker (talk) 01:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As mentioned in the suicide door article, there are still modern cars that think it fashionable enough to engineer a solution - the Mazda RX-8, for example. --Phil Holmes (talk) 09:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The new(-ish) Mini Clubman has a single rear-hinged back passenger door, but the German designers put it on the wrong side for safe use in the UK. Alansplodge (talk) 11:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * My wife has a MINI Clubman - and the suicide door (which they call a "Club door") has some pretty beefy interlocking stuff. It's also only about 18" wide.  I agree that it was kinda bad to put it on the 'wrong' side for the UK - but for most of the rest of MINI's market, it's the best side for convenience.  Sadly, since they sell more cars in left-hand-drive markets and didn't want to engineer a completely different set of body parts - the UK loses out. SteveBaker (talk) 03:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Lily(care of)
I was given a lily plant(live in Michigan) wondering how to take care of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.203.162 (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Our article Lily has lots of pretty pictures but doesn't discuss how to take care of one. I googled how to take care of a lily and there were several useful-looking pages; the first one on ehow looked like what you want (I can't link directly due to a blacklist).  Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * You want to make sure the lily is in a warm location that is not in the direction of a heat source. You'll want indirect sunlight, but not too much. Then, of course water it every other day and check the dryness of the soil to make sure how much water it needs. Note: I got this information from an eHow.com article. Truthsort (talk) 02:12, 1 April 2010 (UTC)