Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2012 July 23

= July 23 =

Image on Wikipedia
Why does the file description page for File:A customer of a prostitute. Photo taken in the brothel Erotikakademie, Berlin 2001.jpg say, "No pages on the English Wikipedia link to this file", when the image is clearly present in Prostitution in Germany? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 01:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Because there is a redirect involved. The image on Prostitution in Germany actually links to [[Image:Freier .JPG]], which on Commons is a redirect to the image you see. Looie496 (talk) 01:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Questions about WP itself belong on the Help_desk, not here. μηδείς (talk) 02:59, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sharing to Facebook
This is more of a suggestion, but I could not find a place for one. I think it would be great if there were share buttons to places like Twitter and Facebook to better share Wikipedia content.174.126.90.38 (talk) 06:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You can make suggestions for improving Wikipedia at WP:Suggestions, although you will find that this is something that has been suggested (and rejected) before. Alternatively, one of the good things about Wikipedia is that if you think you know a way to make it better, you can Be Bold and do it yourself. The other good thing is that someone can undo your changes just as easily... - Cucumber Mike (talk) 06:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It's already been done, though unofficially. See User:TheDJ/Sharebox.  Dismas |(talk) 07:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * You can share anything on Facebook just by posting the link as a status update. It will show up exactly the same way as if you had shared it from the website itself. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you give an example of this, Adam? I rarely use facebook but have to use it to comment at certain websites.  I would like to know an easy way to give a wp page. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Log into Facebook. Into the "Update Status" field, paste the link. That's all he means. It's the equivalent of clicking the "share on Facebook" button that many websites offer. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * In other words you are just posting the url? μηδείς (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's all sharing an URL on Facebook does. Facebook will plump it out with a little image and snippet but it's the same thing. --Mr.98 (talk) 11:14, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, not really. Sharing a random URL on Facebook causes it to do its own auto-detect. If the page has Open graph tags, Facebook will use that when sharing a raw URL. But custom 'share' buttons can override the button and image anyway they want Unilynx (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah that's what I did in the past if I wanted to share something from Wikipedia on Facebook. Futurist110 (talk) 02:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

boat pumps and so on
possibly the weirdest question you're going to hear in a while, but I am serious here. What we want is to set up say a dozen inflatable boats in a lake and have people paddle them around quite a lot, but at the same time, have something attached to the inflation valves of the boats, so they continue slowly filling whilst they are in use, until one by one they burst from the pressure. trouble is the suggestions we have come up with so far are electric pumps, which would be a problem with the water, pressurised CO2 cannisters, which would end up suffocating people, and hoses attached to an air compressor on the shore, which would get tangled around each other. So, what else can we use to destroy these boats?

Kitutal (talk) 09:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It depends how frequently you plan on doing this? If it is just a one off then low voltage electric pumps would be fine as they will be too low voltage to cause electric shock, but would be unusable after sinking in the water... But the cost of exploding 12 boats each time must surely not be cheap either therefore the cost of 12 pumps won't add much more to it surely? I think low voltage pumps are the better idea - I certainly cannot think of anything else... gaz hiley  09:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * How low a voltage would these be? do you mean just normal battery power? Kitutal (talk) 10:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know the voltage, but yes it would have to be bettery power to avoid electrocution... No idea if it would be strong enough though...  But the point raised by Cucumber Mike below is more of an issue than the type of pump - the material of these types of boats will take a lot of pressure to burst, therefore the seal between the pump and the valve is more likely to go before the rubber bursts...  gaz hiley  16:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

An alternative idea would be to just put a reasonable amount of dry ice into the boats. As it evaporates, it will expand into CO2, of course, but I doubt this is a problem on an outdoor lake. Just don't overdo it... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:36, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure that a mechanical compressor small enough to go in the boat will have enough oomph to over-inflate it. How about using a Scuba tank filled with compressed air? You'd need to make sure that there is a) enough volume of air and b) enough pressure in the tank to over-fill the boat, and you'd probably also want to insert a regulator valve to make sure that you get a suitable length of paddling time before the boat meets its maker. Also consider the fact that failure will probably occur at the point where the hose enters the boat, so rather than exploding you might find it takes off like a balloon that's been let go.

An alternative solution could be to have 2 people in each boat, and arm one of them with a hand-pump. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 12:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

You would need a pretty high pressure to explode each boat; I doubt whether a hand pump could do that. Wouldn't it be simpler to have the boats slowly deflate until they sink, or am I missing the point? Whatever you do, please upload the result to Youtube.--Shantavira|feed me 16:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I definitely want to see this happen, but I would be a bit nervous about people getting tangled in the remains of a popped boat. The pressures needed to pop one also mean it will probably hurt pretty bad to get hit by the shrapnel, but I doubt it would cause any real injury. CO2 would probably work, just make sure it is well regulated. The CO2 in a dozen boats is nothing compared to the fresh air all around the boats. I think battery-powered pumps as suggested above is probably the most reasonable way to do it - you won't have to worry about regulating down high-pressure tanks, and you can probably find a pump that is easy to hook up to the boat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.131.76.183 (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

ok, I'm sorry. although, of course we were going to test everything beforehand to make sure it worked and was safe. Kitutal (talk) 17:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Just watch this clip and think about whether you want to be inside that raft. Looie496 (talk) 22:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

First successful song that combined electro/house with mainstream?
What was the first successful song (one that did well in the charts) that sampled/combined house/electro music with rap/pop or other more mainstream music? For example, much of David Guetta's current works belong in this hybrid genre. The earliest success I could think of was Stronger by Kanye West, which sampled Daft Punk. Is there an earlier example?

Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 14:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I have moved the question here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Entertainment#First_successful_song_that_combined_electro.2Fhouse_with_mainstream.3F to the entertainment desk where it's more likely to get answers. μηδείς (talk) 17:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

obscuring identity in current videos
What is the rationale behind pixellating the faces in a documentary or news video or photograph, if a readily identifiable tattoo remains visible and unpixellated? I am seeing this more and more, and it doesn't make sense. I understand the desire to grant anonymity to passers-by in some circumstances. I note that this courtesy is sometimes extended to people apparently committing crimes. Fine, I don't want to argue the rights and wrongs of that;. But *if* you decide to scratch out the face, why leave the tats on display? Is it just a legalism? Is it auto-software? BrainyBabe (talk) 16:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The Reference desks are intended for people actually looking for information, not for rants disguised as questions. Looie496 (talk) 17:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Personality rights. They need to sign a release to have their image used for commercial purposes.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know the answer to the OP's question but the above comment only partially addresses it. Speaking of the US states here, and likely other places as well...  If you're in a public place and someone is taking photographs or video in a public place, you may loose many of your rights and releases do not necessarily need to be signed.  Dismas |(talk) 17:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * To be used in a commercial manner (in the U.S.), it's still typical to require a Model release if a person is identifiable. What it really comes down to is limiting liability for a publisher.  As to tattoos, I would guess that even for very distinctive tattoos, it is less easy to identify someone solely on that basis than on a face.  Once someone sues for their photo being used in a commercial manner based on being identifiable though a tattoo, I'm sure that publishers will begin to blur them out too. Buddy431 (talk) 18:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There are personality rights and privacy rights and they vary widely state to state (the comparisons between New York and California law on the subject is an instructive example of how different they can be). Shadowjams (talk) 21:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Is There a Free Service/Program on Google Which Allows You to Write Something and then have the Computer Say it in Your Language of Choice?
I think I saw something like this on Google before, but I can't find it right now. Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 23:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. I found what I was looking for-- http://translate.google.com/?hl=en&tab=TT Futurist110 (talk) 00:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Do note that Google Translate cannot speak all languages (assuming you wanted it to talk). (I wanted something spoken in Hebrew once, and I couldn't find anything for the life of me...) - Purplewowies (talk) 00:36, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It appears that you're right. Is there any service (on Google or outside of Google) that can talk in any languages? Futurist110 (talk) 00:41, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Given that there are "approximately 3,000–6,000 languages that are spoken by humans today" (language) I'd say not.--Shantavira|feed me 05:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Based on personal experience, I'd say Google Translate barely speaks any languages at all. Machine translation just isn't reliable. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * It's still better than nothing, though. Futurist110 (talk) 07:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)