Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2013 March 29

= March 29 =

Chess.com online chess site
Hi! Anyone on here have any experience with the chess site "Chess.com"? What do you guys know about it personally? Has anyone had any experience posting stuff in the forums there? What do you think about it? Thanks, OGBranniff (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently not very much: chess.com. μηδείς (talk) 01:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Well I don't mean Chess.com on wikipedia, I was asking what people know from being on the site itself. Thanks, OGBranniff (talk) 01:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Recommend you ask the user Bubba73, who is a chess maven here. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:43, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I know Bubba73, we're part of the same Wiki group. I'm interested in other's experiences and opinions on Chess.com.  Thanks, OGBranniff (talk) 01:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, good, but have you talked to Bubba73 about it? I'm just saying you'll probably get more informed answers by asking chess regulars. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't used it. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * We don't do requests for opinion on the Ref Desk, read the guidelines at the top of the page. Given your user page and contributions you don't seem unfamiliar with how wikipedia works. μηδείς (talk) 01:57, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeffed? Suhprise, suhprise, suhprise! μηδείς (talk) 21:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Jeddah Hajj Terminal
Is the Hajj Terminal at King Abdulaziz International Airport used outside of the Hajj season? The Wikipedia article does not state whether or not the Terminal is used only during the Hajj season, although in Google Maps there appear to be planes parked there, but it doesn't necessarily mean the satellite image was taken during the Hajj season. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * A simple search for 'Hajj Terminal only used' easily finds sources saying it's only used during the Hajj season however if you read carefully, some of them suggest it may now be used for anyone performing Umrah     . More careful searching on this point 'umrah hajj terminal', finds people reporting who were initially told to would be taken to the Hajj terminal by shuttle but were not (and also later told they should check in to another terminal), but also suggestions any plane with an umrah passenger are supposed to use the Hajj terminal and that it has been rename to the 'Umrah and Haj Terminal' (but again it's somewhat unclear how well this is followed)  . Nil Einne (talk) 06:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Understanding UK small business economics
If a small business/start-up in the UK wanted to buy a piece of kit that retails for, say, £100, what's the least it could actually cost the entrepreneur, if they take advantage of all legal tax and other efficiencies? --Dweller (talk) 10:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If it retails for £100, then it would cost £100. As far as I know, the only advantage is that it could be listed in expenses, and therefore non-taxable.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  10:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't UK businesses reclaim, for example, VAT on business-related purchases? --Dweller (talk) 10:39, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You can only claim VAT on expenses if you are VAT-registered yourself. Also, you do not need to be VAT registered if you make less than £60,000/year. In fact, I was advised by the HMRC not to become VAT registered when I started up, as it was a waste of tax for myself.  KägeTorä - (影虎)  ( TALK )  12:43, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes but you'd still have to pay it upfront then claim it back. If you're starting up in the UK all your business-related expenses are offsetable against tax for the first 18 months. That doesn't mean stuff costs you nothing as you first have to pay for it, which means you're either paying for it out of your own resources, or taking out a loan to buy it, which means it will cost you more as you have to pay back the interest. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:07, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. So, to refine the question, the lowest ultimate cost for a widget to a small business could be zero, because it'll be offset against income? What if the company is successful and makes a lot of profit - how can the bottom-line impact of that £100 investment be assessed? Also, what happens to business-related costs after 18 months? --Dweller (talk) 11:11, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Here's the HMRC guidance on start-up. What I meant by the 18 months is that for 6 months before the official start date, you can offset business-related expenditure against your first year's tax. Some of it also depends on how the business is set up: are you a sole trader, a partnership, a limited liability partnership, or a limited company? The best answer to this question, as always, is to consult an expert: have a word with an accountant. Most of them will provide up to an hour's free consultation. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not anything, so don't have an accountant, and couldn't answer those questions as I was thinking about it in the abstract. It seems it's too complex a question to think about in the abstract and not possible to simplify. Thanks for trying. --Dweller (talk) 11:34, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * People can and do think of these things in abstraction: see Return on capital employed. It may make more sense to you than it does to me: I'm just a serial entrepreneur who does things and employs accountants to sort stuff out! --TammyMoet (talk) 15:35, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Of blacks and chickens
Hi all, this isn't trolling, but I'd like to ask, is it true that African-Americans (or blacks) in general like to eat fried chicken a lot? If yes, why is that so? I see many Internet memes of black people eating fried chicken online! Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 14:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to clarify, no more or less so than any other American. It's merely a stereotype that was created for unknown reasons in the past, keep in mind that it is considered a particularly rude one, and not something you bring up casually.  You'll not get a good answer as to why it is rude, except that it was used in the past as an insulting stereotype, and as such, is usually to be avoided.  -- Jayron  32  14:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of it as stereotypical, but I was wondering what's the logic behind this stereotype. And yeah, watermelons. You should see the number of memes they have online of Michael Jackson eating KFC. ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 14:20, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The best answer I can come up with that I have seen before is that chicken is relatively cheap as a meat source. Watermelon is a very cheap fruit (you can generally still get a whole watermelon for a dollar or two).  So, the stereotype may derive from that.  But again, be careful when throwing the stereotype around.  It is insulting, whether or not we wish it to be so.  -- Jayron  32  14:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Watermelon costs me about twice that much. And just because it's a stereotype, this doesn't automatically mean it's untrue.  That is, while certainly some African-Americans don't eat fried chicken and watermelon, it's quite possible that, on average, they consume more than the general population.  Their food choices likely go back to slavery, where they were only allowed to eat the cheapest foods.  This continued after slavery, where most remained impoverished.  Frying is an inexpensive way to cook chicken, and also increases the calories.  This is a bad thing today, but, when this practice was first started, those extra calories were welcomed, to fend off starvation.  Now that many African-Americans can afford healthier food, there's the unfortunately problem that such unhealthy foods as these have become part of the culture.  This is also true, although to a lesser extent, for the rest of Americans. StuRat (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Jesus Christ. . --Viennese Waltz 15:27, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Ask, and ye shall receive (although a study specifically to determine if African-Americans eat more fried chicken would be decried as racist):, , . StuRat (talk) 15:34, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * In addition, where groups of people like to eat a particular food a lot, it's because it tastes good. Thus the popularity of Kentucky Fried Chicken and its imitators in the United Kingdom, where I don't believe the customers are especially likely to be of African origin, and in China where it has 4,200 outlets, and also the popularity of the Full breakfast (mostly fried) in many English-speaking countries, and of Fish and chips (entirely fried) in the UK and UK-influenced countries. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Right, and they taste good because evolution has selected for people who favor foods high in nutrients we were traditionally deficient in, such as meat, fat, and salt and who disfavor foods which were traditionally more plentiful, like vegetables and those high in fiber and low in calories. StuRat (talk) 16:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Fried chicken and watermelon are both popular foods in the South, among both blacks and whites. The majority of African-Americans either live in the South or have historical roots there.  John M Baker (talk) 17:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * There are cultural reasons that various foodstuffs are consumed disproportionately by different groups of people. Jewish-Americans likely consume far more gefilte fish than do African-Americans, for example. That being said, the burden of proof is on those who assert the stereotype as true. As stereotypes go, eating a certain kind of food strikes me as being rather benign, in and of itself, with the exception of foods that people believe to be morally suspect, like eating dogs and cats. It's when these traits are combined towards establishing a general negative caricature that they're an issue. The people who in a racist way portray African-Americans as eating lots of fried chicken or watermelon aren't saying that friend chicken and watermelon are bad foods. The negative stereotype is about insatiable appetites for such food, with the implication of lack of control, beastial-nature, and so on. (Incidentally, around the turn of the century there were similar associations between Jewish immigrants and pickles, but that's another story.) --Mr.98 (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 98 expresses something I was having a hard time saying above. It isn't that "fried chicken and watermelons" is itself offensive in any way, it's that their use was part of an intentionally offensive caricature of black people at one point.  The caricature was deliberately offensive in other ways, and the fried chicken and watermelons went part and parcel with it.  So, it is offensive because it recalls the offensive nature of the original caricature, even if it is benign on its own.  -- Jayron  32  17:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The explanation I heard (on TV, and I don't have a source to cite) was that during segregation and before the invention of coolers, black Americans who were moving long distances to look for work, or who had jobs that involved traveling long distances, needed a food that would keep for a day or two at room temperature, because they weren't allowed to eat at most restaurants and truckstops. Fried chicken fit the bill. thx1138 (talk) 17:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * If you're interested, Dave Chappelle does several comedy routines on chicken and watermelon, e.g. here: . He seems to take it as given that his culture eats more of these foods, and goes on to make some insightful comments about racial stereotypes, mixed liberally with vulgar humor. Also, in line with the comment above, watermelon is a great way to get refreshing and necessary water, that stays sanitary at high temperatures and over long distances. SemanticMantis (talk) 23:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I always heard that things like chicken and watermelon were cheap, and hence poorer people opted for them. One thing is certain: KFC wouldn't exist without gazillions of white customers. And lots of folks all races, creeds and colors like watermelon. As Bill Cosby once said, simultaneously ridiculing both the silly stereotype and the reaction to it, "Watermelon is good, man!" ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Chicken being a cheap meat source is a result of mid-twentieth century development of massive and efficient factory chicken operations. Before that, it it was a relatively expensive meat, if purchased at the butcher shop. Edison (talk) 00:00, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Can we close this down now? Given the lack of referenced comments I am beginning to think maybe trolls ate fried chicken due to the lack of fried dwarves and burrahobbits. μηδείς (talk) 00:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Reference. As it was mentioned above. For historical reasons, slaves ate chicken. Since this was the south, that chicken was often fried. When freed slaves left the south, they took their taste for southern cuisine with them, and some people outside the south interpreted this as "black food". A stereotype is born.Someguy1221 (talk) 00:32, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You apparently also missed the 3 references I gave. Please read more carefully. StuRat (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I think our article on Soul food provides some good context. Ditch &#8733; 18:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Israeli Muslims hajj
There are a considerable number of Muslims who are expected to do the hajj as part of their Muslim life who live in Israel.However,Saudi Arabia has the policy that if you have an Israeli stamp in your passport or evidence of travel there,you will be denied entry-so how do they get around this-do they have to travel to another country to fly in,and use a separate passport,or another method? Lemon martini (talk) 18:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Our article, Hajj passport, implies (without a reference) that Israeli Muslims may obtain documentation from Jordan in order to make a pilgrimage. This is confirmed here, although, again, no reference. It's possible things are done on a 'need to know basis', I suppose. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 19:45, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Lady Holm
Is Penelope Wilton, who was married to Ian Holm when he was knighted, still Lady Holm, or did she lose that title when they then divorced, or when he later remarried? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * According to Debrett's, "She [the former wife of a knight] is addressed as the wife of a knight, provided that she does not remarry, when she will take her style from her present husband." Therefore, she could if she wished, irrespective of Sir Ian's marital status, be known as Lady Holm until such time as she remarries. She may not, however, call herself 'Peneleope Wilton, Lady Holm' as she could before her divorce. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 18:39, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, very interesting, and funny it's the one alternative I didn't think of μηδείς (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)