Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2013 August 11

= August 11 =

where do i refill the windshield wiper fluid on my 2001 bmw 740i? coolant and wipers
also what sort of windshield wipers should i get? how do i drain the coolant? like what tool do i need to use and where is the drain to drain the coolant? my first attempt resulted in a geyser of green because i didn't know you had to wait for the engine to cool down i just though if i had only driven it a couple miles id be fine. i have a picture here of my engine. how much coolant should i use? i have two bottles. should i do 50/50 with a mix of distilled water or should i do all coolant in order to keep the engine extra cold? or would that be cold as i can make it? also how do i use a jack and two atriles to jack the car up? i'm so confused. how much would it be to pay someone to do this? i already spent 36 bucks on coolant, 12 bucks on an adjustable wrench and the jack and two stands will be another 50.108.212.70.237 (talk) 01:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * This sort of thing is very easy to google, the relevant manuals are downloadable here Some of it might require common sense, like waiting for the engine to cool before doing repairs, but even that is likely to be mentioned if you read the manually carefully. I'd also be quite surprised if you couldn't find someone locally willing to help with a bit of advice on working on a nice car, from a club, a dealer, a repair-shop, or a parts and equipment dealer where you would actually buy wipers (they usually have a help desk, believe it or not) assuming you have no family or friends who can help. μηδείς (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I live in Richmond, California and people here are very unfriendly and unwilling to help. I don't have a father, my mother is my only nearby relative and she has epilepsy so she has never owned a car nor does she know what to do. Most of my friends are poor or moved away years ago due to the rampant crime in the area and since my car needs to worked on here that's why I ask here. When I went to the help desk at several car shops they just ignored me or insulted me for being gay and white. =(108.212.70.237 (talk) 08:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Get a manual. Many of your fluid level questions can be answered there.
 * Some coolants need to be mixed 50/50 with water. It should say on the bottle if so.
 * For draining it, there is normally a petcock on the bottom of the radiator but some cars may be different. Why do you think it needs to be done? It doesn't need to be done often.
 * For wipers, go to the auto parts store and go to the wiper blade aisle. There will be a book which lists every make of car and give sizes.
 * The car should come with a jack. It's normally in the trunk under the carpet.
 * If you insist on doing your own maintenance, get a Chilton or Haynes manual. Again, available at any auto parts store.  They explain all minor repairs and such.
 * Dismas |(talk) 08:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Over many, many previous questions about this car, we've repeatedly told you to go and download the manual (it's easily available online) - that's where all of your questions will be answered. You obviously have an internet connection, or else you couldn't be asking these questions.  I would also recommend the BMW Car Club of America - which has chapters throughout California - and probably has local people whom you could meet to discuss these things.  Car club members tend to be extremely knowledgeable about their cars and can often offer far better advice than even the owner's manual! SteveBaker (talk) 16:13, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Follow the directions on the coolant - if it says to dilute it, dilute it. Pre-mixed coolant is available as well, but it costs about the same per gallon as the concentrated stuff even though it is half water. A stronger concentration doesn't change the cooling properties - plain water works fine for getting the heat out of the engine. The reason you don't use plain water is that the antifreeze in the coolant expands the safe temperature range of the water. It raises the boiling point and lowers the freezing point because either freezing or boiling can be disastrous for your engine. It also provides anti-corrosion benefits. See Antifreeze if you're interested. For a coolant flush you should pick up a service manual like Dismas mentioned - it will explain how to drain it, how to flush the coolant system, and how to purge air bubbles if the system isn't self-purging. It will help walk you through lots of other maintenance and service tasks as well. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * As for jacking the car, the manual or the service manual will cover the proper lift and support points. Don't guess - lifting in the wrong spots can damage the car. You may be able to do the job without lifting the car, but not having any experience will probably make it hard for you to figure out what you're doing without being able to easily look under the car. I've changed my coolant without raising my car, but it's because I knew what I was feeling around for underneath. You definitely need jack stands if you're going under the car - you don't want to risk it falling. Simple ones are pretty cheap. You should already have a screw jack with your spare tire, and if not you should get one anyways so you don't get stuck when a tire goes. A hydraulic floor jack is much nicer to use, but you don't need to go out and buy one. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Ease of New Account Registration
I've spent a little time searching the archives of the VPPR concerning account registration. Most of today's websites require clicking several "yes" boxes, an email, and confirmation when registering a new account. I see that Wikipedia just requires one to pick a username and password and type a simple captcha code (and I surmise the captcha is a recent addition). So what have been some historical discussions concerning the ease of registering? Where can I find them? Have people in the past tried to add extra steps to registering? Herzlicheboy (talk) 16:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * That's where you would find the discussions. --jpgordon:==( o ) 17:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't find any. Can you please give me some links?  Or summarize the historical discussions?  Herzlicheboy (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * See Delete unused username after 90 days.
 * —Wavelength (talk) 18:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You might find this interesting. --.Yellow1996.(ЬMИED¡) 18:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I actually signed up for a restaurant customer loyalty plan where they insisted on calling the phone number I gave and having me enter a code, to verify the phone number. That seemed rather extreme to me.  I've seen such things previously for credit card accounts, but not for something as trivial as this. StuRat (talk) 03:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, just get a fake phone, like a disposable cell phone. Anyway, thanks for the links guys but they are from 2004 and 2006, back in Wikipedia's early days.  Got anything more recent?  Herzlicheboy (talk) 03:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Travel Insurance.
Before I start, this is NOT a question seeking either Medical or Legal advice. I am somewhat baffled by the apparent unwillingness of UK travel operators to provide their own travel insurance to would-be travellers. Instead, they seem overly willing to farm out that potential income-stream to so-called specialist insurers who, quite strangely, seem unnecessarily risk-averse when doing their risk-assessments, especially so when those travellers have pre-existing medical conditions, as do I. OK, I accept that no sensible person would underwrite the risk of insuring someone with say, imminent death from advanced cancer; or perhaps, a long standing history of heart problems; but in my experience, other, less threatening risks such as arthritis or joint replacement or asthma (all properly controlled by the way), seem to be averted with no convincing justification. Oh, I know that some 'specialist' underwriters will add ludicrously expensive additional premiums when faced with such conditions, but in my opinion, these add-ons are so unaffordable that the applicant merely shuns them and either travels anyway, without adequate insurance, or else they decline to travel - as do I (long term well-managed raised blood-pressure and cholesterol). My question? Oh, yes. Does anyone know what sums of insurance premiums are lost to the travel/insurance market resulting from the foregoing attitudes; and if so, what would be the consequential costs of them taking such risks by issuing such insurance cover and paying out on what I suspect would be a minimalistic proportion of those pre-existing medical conditions wherever warranted? Big question I know but worth the asking nonetheless methinks. Thanks 80.6.13.178 (talk) 19:05, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Steve, isn't the tone of your response exactly what THEY said to Andrew Carnegie - a poor weaver's son from Dunfermline in Fife (Scotland), when he went to the USA and at one time became the wealthiest industrialist in the World? "It cannae be done ye ken". But he did it because he had that vision and determination. And, as I understand it, he did it without the "foresight" and applied wisdom of acturies and their ilk. He saw a window of opportunity and went for it. Risk averse?????? "If you're not fast - you're last". But thanks anyway. BTW. I bet you never sit on the toilet before checking the paper supply. 80.6.13.178 (talk) 22:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Businesses have to draw a line somewhere. You might ask why travel operators don't own hotels?  And if they did, why shouldn't they manufacture beer to sell at those hotels?  Why not mine the ore to make the steel to make the tractors used to till the soil to grow the hops that go into the beer that they could sell at hotel they could own to house their customers?


 * Every one of those businesses are profitable...just like insurance companies.


 * No company can do everything - so just as they don't brew the beer for the hotels (even though that's a profitable operation) - they don't feel the need to provide insurance. SteveBaker (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I think the essential question is, why are the companies that do sell insurance so unnecessarily risk averse? --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  05:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I question that premise. Without knowing the actuarial data that the companies are using, we can't know if they are too risk adverse or not.  RudolfRed (talk) 05:35, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Travel insurance is an open market - there is plenty of competition out there - so you'd expect the prices to reduce to a somewhat reasonable level. The problem with travel insurance is the spectacularly high cost of emergency repatriation...which presumably explains the charges.  If you're bed-ridden for some reason, the hospital costs will be significant - but if they have to fly you across the Atlantic in a bed - with nursing care, etc - and at short notice...then that's a SPECTACULAR cost.
 * That said, we had a question like this a while back - our OP was upset at a $1300 charge for two people (with pre-existing conditions) for a month in the USA.  My HMO charges the company I work for $600/month for one person...which is about the same - despite the fact that our OP was going to be on a cruise ship and the insurance would cover repatriation and other special benefits that a regular HMO wouldn't include.  So unless the facts are significantly different here, I don't think the premise holds. SteveBaker (talk) 14:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Insurance is a highly regulated area. If the travel operators were to get into the business of underwriting insurance, they would face expensive registration and compliance requirements.  It makes more sense for the travel operator to stick to its core business and let someone else deal with these regulatory requirements; the amount it could make by selling its own insurance just isn't that great or that core to its business.
 * Travel insurance suffers greatly from adverse selection, because mostly people get travel insurance only if they feel they are at fairly high risk of needing it. In addition, people usually don't have the option to shop around for travel insurance, but simply take or reject the insurance offered.  As a result, insurance costs are much greater than would be the case if everyone purchased travel insurance in a competitive market.  John M Baker (talk) 14:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's true - but the company who selects that particular insurer and offers you the right to decline has a vested interest in finding cheaper insurers...and you can reject their plan and go find one of your own instead. So I think the market is still open. SteveBaker (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't exactly get what is meant by 'people usually don't have the option to shop around for travel insurance, but simply take or reject the insurance offered'. Is this some US thing related to the fact most insurance comes through people's employment and or the fact most people who can afford to travel have health insurance so travel insurance is generally an extension of someone's health insurance? If so, I didn't realise it extends to travel insurance for non work related travel (I presume work normally covers work related travel and does shop around in so much as possible, sometimes to the detriment of their employees if the provider is a bit crap). Here in NZ what with universal healthcare (so many people who can afford to travel don't have health insurance) and with the OE and the popularity of traveling overseas, plenty of different companies would generally be willing to provide travel insurance and some even advertise on national TV. It's true the options within the insurance are limited (there may be different rates for different countries with the US generally being the most expensive place as well as the option whether or not to insure specific expensive pieces of luggage and stuff like multi-trips), but it doesn't sound like that's what's being referred to and I think there is some variance. Travel agents will often have their preferred travel insurance provider and may allegedly provide a slightly better rate than if you shopped direct with that provider, but there's nothing stopping you going elsewhere if another provider has an even better rate and of course plenty of people aren't really using agents any more for simple travel. As far as I know, Australia and the UK are similar. However I do have some sympathy for the OPs problems, I know someone with a wheelchair who doesn't insure it because they demand 10% of the replacement cost (and since he will normally be on his wheelchair barring someone breaking in and stealing it at night, the most likely loss or theft would be during flights). Nil Einne (talk) 22:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I am the Op and want to thank everyone above for their responses to my Q. However, I do take umbrage at Steve Baker's comment about Travel agents brewing their own beer. How patronising is that? Anyway, I do know that should I be fortunate enough to win the National or Euromillions lottery, the first thing I would do would be to launch a non-risk-averse travel insurance company and watch the money come rolling in. Sure, I would pay out the odd million-dollar claim but hey, repatriation would not be a problem because I would own my own plane and medical staff. Simples. Thanks again, James 80.6.13.178 (talk) 14:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you took umbrage at my comment - I don't think I understand how you'd interpret it as patronising - that was certainly not my intent. I merely try to point out that in order for your hypothetical travel insurance company to be possible, it would have to limit the scope of what it does.  For example - you say that you'd own your own plane...but suppose you have to fly two people from widely distant places on the same day...you only have one plane.  So now you'll need to own enough planes to cover the worst day when the most people need repatriation...but for most days you won't need anything like that many.  Suppose you go for an entire week without needing to send anyone home - now your planes (and their pilots, maintenance people, fuel storage depots, etc) are collecting dust someplace racking up interest charges on the payments.  The most efficient thing to do is to find someone who has LOTS of planes and rent what you need from them when you need it.  They can afford to fly planes with an economy of scale vastly better than you can.  Businesses simply can't do everything - and an insurance company can't efficiently run an airline without actually becoming a fully fledged airline.  That's exactly the message I intended to impart to you with my example. SteveBaker (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

term for navel licking
Is there a Latin‐derived word for licking navels? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 19:42, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You'd have to ask the Naval Inspector General. :-) StuRat (talk) 03:11, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Umbilingus gets a few Google hits - Wikipedia doesn't have an article about everything! Alansplodge (talk) 14:46, 12 August 2013 (UTC)