Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2012 June 12

= June 12 =

Romney vs. Obama
A Newsmax report today states that Romney and Obama are currently running neck and neck, and how that's bad for Obama as the incumbent because undecided votes usually side with the opposition. But then went into demographics to show how Obama may come out ahead because he is favored among women (6 in 10), Hispanics (67 to 27) and black (92 to 5). If that's the case -- who's left? Asians and white males? I mean, if Obama is beating Romney to a pulp in all of these groups, how are they neck and neck? And then it tries to swing things the other way by saying that people prefer Romney's economic skills 46 to Obama's 43 and 61 to 52 for Romney vs. Obama in terms of handling the economy. It's not like we're going to be filling out a questionnaire -- if all that's cast is a single vote for either candidate, how could it be that everything's tied if it appears as though nothing's tied?  DRosenbach  ( Talk 12:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Possibly the differences cancel out? Heck froze over (talk) 14:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses. WP:CBALL. DriveByWire (talk) 14:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The impression I get is that this is quite a poor article. It appears to have cherry-picked individual findings from a variety of different polls on different dates (without linking to them, or stating precise dates).  My guess is that they chose the polls to draw the starkest possible contrast between the overall results and those from particular demographics. 130.88.99.220 (talk) 17:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * They do tend to over analyze this to death. To me it simply comes down to the economy.  If the economy is doing well come election day, Obama will win, if it's doing poorly, he will lose.  This is usually the case.  It's not particularly fair, in that the President has only a limited power to improve the economy (even if Congress did everything he asked, the economy can still go down due to forces beyond his control, like the European debt crisis and the situation he inherited from Bush).  And, since Congress is majority Republican, they can just refuse to do anything to help the economy (coming up with a good excuse, like that we need to pay down the debt before we pass any stimulus bills), so the economy will suffer, and Obama will lose.  StuRat (talk) 18:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Note that, according to our article, Newsmax Media "is a conservative American news media organization". Thus, they aren't neutral and impartial (you can expect their stories to favor the conservative agenda).  By my definition, that's not a news organization at all, but rather a propaganda front.  I suggest sticking to real news. StuRat (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Also note that the electoral system in the US is set up to favor whites, in that rural states, mostly white, get more representation in proportion to their population than the more urban states, where most of the blacks and Hispanics live. This is mainly because every state gets 2 Senators and at least 1 Representative, regardless of population.  See Electoral College (United States).  I don't think it was intentionally set up to favor whites, however, if it had turned out to favor minorities, it would have been quickly fixed, whereas, as is, it may never be fixed. StuRat (talk) 18:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

about sat exams
can one apply for sat while already studying as a engineering student in his 2nd year(i am 4m india)?well if he gets selected then he will have to start 4m 1st year or he may resume it with 2nd year.please, clear this.59.98.96.149 (talk) 13:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The SAT is an admissions, not a placement test. You will need to contact the school you wish to attend to discuss their policy about transferring credits you have already earned. μηδείς (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The answer is the same as it was last week. --Tango (talk) 20:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

the queens signature
Why does the queen always sign papers at the htop and not at the bottom? http://natedsanders.com/LotImages/5/34946_lg.jpeg http://www.10-rillington-place.co.uk/assets/images/autogen/a_TJE_Royal_Pardon_TNA_19_04_09.jpg http://www.icollector.com/images/1593/21060/21060_0307_1_lg.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amisom (talk • contribs) 15:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Relevant article Royal sign-manual. DuncanHill (talk) 19:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

But it does not say why. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amisom (talk • contribs) 19:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe so it's the first thing you'll see? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:45, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * As a tradition, it seems to date back at least to the Tudors and if not further, meaning that it might be quite hard to work out why they were done in this manner. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 23:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * When a column of numbers was added, the sum used to be written at the top rather than at the bottom as we usually do these days. That's even why it's called a "sum" - from the Latin word summa; cf. summit and consummation (which actually has nothing to do with anyone being on top).  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  00:06, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * PS. Having spent a number of years preparing submissions for consideration by government ministers, I can tell you they get a huge amount of stuff crossing their desks on any given day, and they need the system to flow as easily as possible. So do the bureaucrats.  Typically, the main issue(s) will be outlined on the front page, along with a recommendation for any action considered desirable.  The background detail will appear in papers attached to the front page.  They may read the detail, they may not.  There's a space on the front page for the minister's signature, signifying either Approved or Not Approved.  The signature space is often at the top right of the page.  This way, the minister never has to read past the front page - or even past the opening paragraph - if they don't want to, and the signature there also helps when the bureaucrats come to endlessly shuffling their papers when they're not having their endless tea breaks.  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  00:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * To "consummate" something (e.g. a marriage and/or a business deal) does literally mean "to sum up together", i.e. "to finish or complete". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's an example of a document signed by a British sovereign at the bottom. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

What does the "A" mean on an ice hockey jersey?
I watched the Kings/Devils championship game last night. I know the "C" means captain; but I noticed some jerseys with an "A." What does that mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SWEETIEPEETEE (talk • contribs) 17:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Assisstant Captain. See Captain (ice hockey).  -- Jayron  32  19:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Not to intrude, but the article to which you linked states that it actually stands for Alternate Captain. Although, it (later) says that people often do colloquially refer to it as "Assistant Captain." Pine (talk) 06:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Here's the official description from the NHL rules: ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Football penalties data
Is it known how many association football penalties in history have been deflected out of total (in plain numbers or percents)?--176.241.247.17 (talk) 18:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There is a wide variety of stats available here . If you poke around, you can probably find the one that includes penalties. RudolfRed (talk) 22:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Wrong football --Iae (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * What do you mean by deflected? If you mean 'not scored' then I found: O. Kuss, A. Kluttig, and O. Stoll, ‘“The fouled player should not take the penalty himself”: An empirical investigation of an old German football myth’, Journal of Sports Sciences, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 963–967, 2007.


 * This paper states that 74.37% of the 835 penalties (excluding penalties given for handball) taken in the German Bundesliga between 1993 and 2005 were successfully scored. I think you can assume this figure will be roughly similar for similar quality leagues (although the Germans are especially good at penalties... ;)) --Iae (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd understand "deflected" as meaning saved, but not caught, by the goalkeeper. So thereby excluding unsuccesful penalties that were caught by the keeper, bounced off the woodwork of the goal, or missed altogether. I very much doubt you'll find such specific statistics. --Dweller (talk) 10:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)