Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2012 February 1

= February 1 =

Has Ireland Abandoned the Euro?
This BBC article has confused me. €50,000 (£42,000) on sweets? Billions on a house? I'm still getting paid in Euro from an agent in Ireland. What is this article trying to tell me? KägeTorä - (影虎) ( TALK )  03:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Its not that spectacular. Old banknotes are routinely shredded and recycled.  There's an article at ehow dot com, you can access it through this google seach (spam filter won't let the ehow domain thru) this explains it a bit.  Basically, when a bank gets a note that has too much wear on it, they exchange it one-for-one with the central bank for a new note.  There's no currency inflation, just replacing an old bill with a new one.  The old bills are then shredded.  The U.S. government gives shredded money away as souvenirs (its worthless paper, some of it is likely recycled or burned or something like that), so likely the subject of the article was able to acquire a shitload of old, shredded bills and simply used it like fiberboard to build a house.  No big whoop.  -- Jayron  32  03:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * From time to time when I was little (less now, for some reason), I used to see those souvenir glass jars full of such shredded money and fantasize about somehow putting it back together like a puzzle and spending the money. Ha.  Kingsfold   (Quack quack!)  18:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I can understand the house thing - I read the article a few times again after asking this question. But why can't the old lady exchange her 50,000 for 50,000 newer notes? The Euro's not even been around pretty long anyway. In the UK when we have a changeover of currency (new notes versus old notes - not the old stuff with pounds ,shillings ,and pence) we've always had a period of time where old notes and new notes can all be used at the same time, to a certain extent, whereafter we can exchange the old ones for new ones at the banks, within a certain period. The article makes no sense to me.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The old lady doesn't have 50,000 euros in notes, what she has is a brick made from pulped and compressed old notes. The article states that clearly.  She's making a joke, noting that 50,000 euros in old notes were pulped to make the brick.  The relevent quote is "The money, which forms a pulped brick of shredded notes, is part of an art installation - and home - built by unemployed Dublin-based artist Frank Buckley" in the 4th paragraph (bold mine).  It's just a brick made from compressed bits of shredded paper.  The source of the shredded paper is old Euro banknotes which were shredded by the central bank in the manner I describe above.  It wasn't old money she had lying around that was made worthless because she forgot to cash it in, its just a fiberboard brick made from recycled paper.  -- Jayron  32  04:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe this is where I am misunderstanding, then. A 'brick' of notes in Liverpool slang (Irish/British) means a 'wad of notes'. Not an actual brick that can be used to build a house - notes that can be used to buy things. I see now. Thanks.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  04:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All coins and notes of the Irish Free State are redeemable for their euro equivalent at the Central Bank in Dublin, any weekday morning. The Bank of England will redeem any of its notes, generally on the spot, though if they were the sort counterfeited during WWII, they will take it for authentication and send you the proceeds by post, if any.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It's entirely possible that the "brick" of notes is a visual play on words. It also occurs to me that the bills don't really look very finely shredded. For a few bucks you can buy a bag of about 10,000 American dollars at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing in DC, ground to a size not much larger than powder. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It is also possible to do this with bills that are not shredded, you just need a bit of hyperinflation like in the Weimar Republic to get pictures like these. Von Restorff (talk) 05:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * For sure. And it's even worse when it's the razzbucknik. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Or a (non fictional) 50 billion Zimbabwe dollar note. Roger (talk) 09:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Frank Stewart's bridge column
Today (well, Tuesday) Frank Stewart presented a hand in which North held: S K3 H JT84 D A42 C Q963

South opened the bidding with one notrump, West passed, and North responded three notrump, which Stewart notated with an exclamation point.

Why, exactly? North has ten HCP and a balanced hand. Slam is out of the question and you definitely want to be in game, unless you're playing weak notrumps 12-14 or something, which looking at the South hand shows is not the case. If you're playing 15-17 notrumps then you might only have 25 HCP between you, but to me 15-17 for one notrump suggests a style where you don't mind being at game with 25 HCP.

I suppose you might futz around with Stayman if you think the doubleton might be worth an extra trick at Hearts, but that will also give the opponents more info, so surely this is anyway a judgment call.

Any idea why Stewart thought this bid was so remarkable? --Trovatore (talk) 10:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know the answer, but the column in question can be seen here. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * My bridge is a bit rusty, but that's the whole purpose of the Stayman convention: to find the heart fit. By not using it, North landed his partner in an inferior contract that could be defeated. Giving the defenders information is a secondary consideration. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It's true that as the cards actually lie, four hearts is icy, whereas three notrump can be defeated by precise defense. But there's no way to know that looking at the North cards, even after South shows his hearts in response to the two-club Stayman bid.  Remember that the major-suit contract requires an extra trick for game, and while the doubleton looks good for a ruffer in dummy, there's no guarantee you'll be able to use it (and the defenders may be able to score a ruff or two of their own &mdash; as the cards lie they can't be stopped from getting one club ruff, although it's not entirely clear to me whether it's instead of a club trick they'd otherwise have taken). --Trovatore (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Phillip Adler states, "It is drummed into beginners that if they find an eight-card fit in a major, that suit should be trumps. And most of the time, it will be the right move. Sometimes, of course, three no-trump will make when four of the major would fail, but that is a rarity." Stayman was a very popular convention way back when, and I'm guessing it still is, for just this reason. South could easily have no stopper in spades, and by not using Stayman, North would actually be encouraging West to lead a major through his king. Now if they were playing matchpoints, and NS were behind and needed to make up ground, I could see them zigging where everyone else was zagging, but that's not the case here. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I normally think in matchpoints, which admittedly may be the wrong key in which to read newspaper columns. So what I'm thinking is "there's a good chance I'll take the same number of tricks in NT as in hearts, in which case the extra ten points will be worth a lot of matchpoints" (assuming both contracts make).  --Trovatore (talk) 21:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Given that, the ! may be a typo for ?, ie a bad bid. --Dweller (talk) 12:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That's chess, not bridge. Stewart seems to use the bang for a bid he thinks is unusual in some way. --Trovatore (talk) 20:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

What to see on a visit to England?
A colleague from Costa Rica is visiting England for a week or two, I believe on his first visit to Europe. He's interested to know what he should really see while he's here. I'm struggling to think what the "can't miss" attractions are. One thought I've had thus far is that personally I wouldn't recommend really old and relatively unimpressive (physically) monuments like (for example) Stonehenge.

He's likely to be based mainly in the south-east, but might travel further afield - perhaps not into Scotland or Wales though. He's said he does plan to visit a castle, or perhaps several castles. I suppose he ought to visit a cathedral?

Searching old Reference Desk archives I've found this advice about places to visit in Kent, and also another thread about places to visit for a holiday with interesting walks (Windsor was suggested). I'm going to suggest HMS Belfast if he's interested in military matters of that era, and indeed other the other branches of the Imperial War Museum. Another colleague also mentioned Chatham Historic Dockyard.

What else? 87.115.94.82 (talk) 20:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * What is he most interested in? Art, science, culture, women, history, nature, etc. ?--Aspro (talk) 20:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Quite possibly all of the above, but he has at least expressed interest in history and culture (including architecture). 87.115.94.82 (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a trip to York? Plenty of things to see there, the whole city is practically one big monument, and there is York Castle and York Minster for your castle and cathedral requirement-- Jac 16888 Talk 21:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * If he's interested in history, I recommend the Museum of London, one of the best history museums I've seen. There is of course a lot right in London, including obviously the Tower.  Marco polo (talk) 00:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If he's in the south-east, I suggest he spends a day in Brighton. Not much history there, but the beach and the shopping are excellent and the Royal Pavilion is a must.  For castles, not far from there is the wonderful Bodiam Castle. --Viennese Waltz 00:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Aspro, I have to ask: If his primary interest, selected from your list, is women, what would ye be suggestin' to him then? --DaHorsesMouth (talk) 01:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The best part of Britain is the amazing green countryside. It's great to drive around on those ridiculous narrow curvy roads. But if it's a rainy day, and you know there will be one, my favorite indoor attraction that I've been to in the UK is the British Library. The permanent exhibition is incredible: the Lindisfarne Gospels, a Gutenberg Bible, the sole surviving Anglo-Saxon manuscript of Beowulf, the original handwritten lyrics to "A Hard Day's Night," etc. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Cricket at Lords. HiLo48 (talk) 08:16, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Oxford, Cambridge and Bath are all cities with masses of great architecture and historic interest, and are all within easy range of the south east. Either Oxford or Bath could be tied in to a tour round the Cotswolds, and if he's in Bath he might want to visit Bristol as well.  Re castles, bear in mind that the biggest ones are where there was the greatest need for them - so, where there was a threat of invasion (like Dover), or where there was hostility between the English and the Welsh or Scots (so, Chepstow, for example - close to Bristol, but remember the bridge toll!)  For quite different slants on "England", try Devon or Cornwall.  There is obviously masses of information available on sites like this, this, and this.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Castles: Bodiam is beautiful, but it wasn't necessarily built as a serious defensive unit (Historians differ). The Tower of London, similarly is part castle, part palace. My top tip for a serious castle in England would be Warwick Castle. But if your friend is prepared to go a bit further, Edward I's castles of North Wales are IMHO among the finest in the world: take your pick from my favourites (POV!) Caernarfon Castle or Conwy Castle. The group of them have been recognised as a World Heritage Site. Which leads me on to this NPOV answer: there are just 28 World Heritage Sites in the UK and your friend could do worse than have a look at the list and the "tentative list" (ie candidate sites) just below it. --Dweller (talk) 11:18, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * PS A visit to Lord's cricket ground is, I agree, a brilliant view into the minds of the British and a wonderful idea. This brilliant recent article by an American sports editor encapsulates his first experience of cricket. Unfortunately, the season doesn't begin until late March, with Lord's hosting its first (four-day) match of the year starting on April 12. Your friend could, however, soak up some of the history and culture of the place, by having tea in the famous Long room. --Dweller (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Without wishing to be rude, I doubt whether more than 5% of English males - and virtually no females, Scots or Welsh, who are also British - would consider such a day to be anything other than the ultimate in a day wasted in utter tedium. And I like cricket (sometimes)!  Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * True, it's a long way from Wales or Scotland to get to Lord's. But on my last visit there, I saw quite a lot of "females", most of whom seemed to be enjoying wasting the day (actually it was night). --Dweller (talk) 11:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I hear good things about Windsor Castle and Leeds Castle, each is do-able as an easy daytrip from London but both may be a bit too much of a commercial tourist trap (and Leeds castle is nowhere near Leeds, but is in fact in Kent). However, there are plenty of things to see in London itself: Tower of London, Hampton Court Palace, Buckingham Palace (not really a castle but the residence of the Royal family), Palace of Westminster (again not a castle but the seat of government). Then there are various churches and cathedrals, and museums for pretty much everything (art, science, history, etc.) Astronaut (talk) 12:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, if your friend loves castles, it's worth bearing in mind that Leeds Castle is a most misleadingly named place. Not only, as Astronaut says, is it hundreds of miles from Leeds, it's not really a castle. What you see today is a stately home/folly built mostly in the nineteenth century, on the site of a former castle, made to look a little like a castle. So, not in Leeds and not a castle... but it is very pretty. --Dweller (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * As a tourist in London, the highlight for me was probably the British Museum. And as a person living in a place with no subway, I can say that you must have him ride the Tube everywhere; it would be the envy of my city.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We Londoners are forever moaning about The Tube - it always comes as a suprise when people from abroad are impressed by it. Apparently, the first trains were American, so it's not all our doing. P.S. The most stunning London sight that tourists routinely walk right past is The Banqueting House, Whitehall. Greenwich is well worth a trip too, with the Old Royal Naval College, National Maritime Museum, Royal Observatory, Greenwich and the Cutty Sark all next to each other and it's one of those World Hertage thingummies. Alansplodge (talk) 21:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Was just about to suggest Greenwich. Tunbridge Wells is beautiful and historic, worth following the town trail.Itsmejudith (talk) 21:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure there is much to see at the Cutty Sark - it is presumably still undergoing restoration after the fire. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * "We expect to complete the conservation project and new museum space early in 2012. The ship is scheduled to re-open soon after the completion of works." "The work should be completed in time for the 2012 Olympics". Alansplodge (talk) 01:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If the weather is fairly good, it might be interesting to spend a morning or afternoon visiting one of the white horses (like the Uffington White Horse) or stone circles that you can actually walk around and touch: this would also generally involve seeing some of the countryside, and could incorporate a visit to a nearby pub for lunch. Visiting Avebury would be a good choice if he's interested in this sort of thing: it's kind of weird how much it's just part of the landscape, everywhere. If you visit it, most people have a drink or meal in the Red Lion pub in the village, which (last time I visited, anyway) is well aware that being traditionally English is a draw for tourists. 86.166.41.126 (talk) 21:39, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * We had a question last October about things to do and see in London, which suggested some ideas not already mentioned in this thread. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

7.62x54R
have old case of above cal. bullets have yellow tip what are they ????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.148.134 (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I googled [7.62x54r ammo yellow tips] and quite a few references came up. The tip color appears to have something to do with the specific contents of the bullet. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:58, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Our 7.62×54mmR article has a table of different Russian varieties - none has a yellow tip. However, the image at the top right has the caption "...Hungarian silver/yellow-tip, mild steel core, heavy ball...". This page has a more detailed table; all-yellow tipped rounds are shown with "YT". They are Hungary 1951, Czechoslovakia 1953 and Bulgaria 1955, all Heavy Ball, Lead Core. Also the Hungary 1970 and 1975, silver over yellow tip are Heavy Ball, Steel Core. Alansplodge (talk) 16:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

silly phone question
I find myself in the awkward situation of needing to buy new mooney for my mobile phone after it seems to have run out, trouble is, though, this is not somethin I have done before and I have no idea where I would go to do this. the phone is on the virgin network, so I looked in tesco, thinking they might do it, and it seems they have only money available for a couple of other networks and not mine. So, anyone know what would be the quickest and easiest way of fixing this? Would it be possible to do it online tonight?

148.197.81.179 (talk) 22:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The virgin mobile website maybe, you'd probably need to register an account, or maybe do it through your phone, either using its internet if it has it (the home page probably has a "my account" link) or through the top-up phone number. Also a lot of cash machines have a phone top-up option, maybe try your nearest one?
 * Looks like you can do it online, check this link . inb4 "which country are you talking about?", it's obviously the UK. --Viennese Waltz 23:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Well that's nice of them, I need to either access my phone's own internet, which it doesn't have, or use my pasword, which I don't have one of either, silly plan inventing all these new rules just to stop people with old phones from using them any more. 148.197.81.179 (talk) 23:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I seem to recall from my time on Virgin PAYG that if you call 789 from the phone in question, you can top up by card instantly --Saalstin (talk) 23:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Exactly so. That's one of the options given on the page I linked to above. --Viennese Waltz 23:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You can buy a voucher at the checkout of many places such as supermarkets (including Tesco). No (phone or bank) account, internet access, or password is required, just text the number on the voucher to 789111 or call 789.  This is described at the top of the page Viennese Waltz provided the link for.  Astronaut (talk) 10:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)