Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2022 December 25

= December 25 =

Cinema Name Contradictions. Should I rename the article "Wetherby Cinema"? Also could someone replace the out of date image with the newer images I've listed?
Wetherby's Cinema hasn't been called Wetherby's Cinema since April 2015 when it was renamed Wetherby Film Theatre.

It's still called Wetherby Film Theatre today as shown by the signs on the North and South sides of the building, however...

Its website, its Facebook profile, its Twitter profile, and its Instagram profile all have it listed as Wetherby Cinema.

A Blue plaque which was added in April 2015, and is located on the East side of the building, to the left of the North-East corner entrance, also has it listed as Wetherby Cinema plus it has Cinema written above that Eastern entrance.

I think...
 * The article should be renamed Wetherby Cinema
 * Wetherby's Cinema should be added to the Former Names
 * Wetherby Film Theatre should stay as an "Official Name

I also think that the out of date photo should be replaced with... And maybe even... Elsewhere on the article. However I wouldn't know how to add the images to the article. Danstarr69 (talk) 06:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * This taken from the North-Eastern side https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wetherby_Film_Theatre,_Crossley_Street,_Wethery_(12th_July_2015).JPG
 * This taken from the North side https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wetherby_Film_Theatre_(18th_July_2019)_003.jpg
 * This taken from the East side https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wetherby_Film_Theatre_(17th_August_2019)_002.jpg
 * The Blue plaque obviously https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wetherby_Film_Theatre_(10th_August_2015)_003.JPG
 * This taken from the North-Western side https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wetherby_Film_Theatre_(9th_March_2019)_001.jpg
 * This taken from the South side https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wetherby_Film_Theatre_(18th_July_2019)_002.jpg
 * Maybe you could contact someone who owns the theater, and ask them for its official name. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:46, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Baseball Bugs: do you mean by emailing info@weatherbycinema.com? It would seem that they've already disclosed their official name by way of a unified social media presence. The OP is correct that the website, Facebook, Twitter, and IG (and domain name) all agree on that name. If the signs outside the building don't agree with that, well wcyd? Elizium23 (talk) 11:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The OP is trying to get the answer indirectly. By actually contacting someone directly, they might get the information they're looking for. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:53, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Baseball Bugs the article needs the photo changing as it the old name Wetherby's Cinema...
 * And the article needs renaming as it's also titled Wetherby's Cinema
 * The question I'm basically asking is...
 * Should the new article name be Wetherby Cinema aka the online presence and Blue Plaque name?
 * Or...
 * Should the new article name be Wetherby Film Theatre aka the name on the building itself?
 * Which should be the primary name? And which should be the secondary name? Danstarr69 (talk) 15:02, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Baseball Bugs Elizium23 I've just had a quick look on their Instagram profile, and noticed the sign outside the building is also now Wetherby Cinema, so I've answered my own question.
 * They've had another refurbishment (just one of many over the last 10 years) which apparently finished in October, so Wetherby Cinema is definitely it's new name, and the photos I recommended are now all out of date too. Danstarr69 (talk) 15:14, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Baseball Bugs, since this is not actually a Reference Desk question but a Wikipedia content question, perhaps your answer is valid for the former while I am answering in the latter context. "I talked to someone at the business on the phone" is not a source. Elizium23 (talk) 15:31, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * "Wetherby Film Theatre Ltd" is the registered name of a legal entity operating a cinema (perhaps several in the future) that goes by the (recently introduced) name of "Wetherby Cinema", but was formerly, and perhaps colloquially sometimes still, called "Wetherby's Cinema". Mentioned in a historic context, like here, one expects to see the old name. --Lambiam 17:29, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * We do not necessarily always use the most recent photographs. Historical photographs may add cachet to a topic with a considerable history, like photos from 1896 and 1908 in our article Picadilly Circus. --Lambiam 17:38, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Presumably you've already said all this in Talk:Wetherby's Cinema and got no response? —Tamfang (talk) 18:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Possibly the most bizarre question to ever touch the reference desk
Someone in a Discord group chat asked whether it would be okay to microwave several packets of balloons. Nobody knew the answer, but I got curious and decided to ask here if it would be safe to do so, because why not? Just to make sure nothing goes wrong let's assume these are not metal balloons (because attempting to microwave anything like metal will never end well) and that they are straight out of the packet. 172.112.210.32 (talk) 16:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Indeed a bizarre question. If a fully inflated balloon is microwaved, it will very likely burst. The greater risk is that the packets of balloons will get so hot that they catch fire and damage the microwave or leave a mess of half-burnt, half-melted rubber that is very tough to clean up. It would certainly not be okay to use my microwave for the experiment. --Lambiam 17:46, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Attempting to heat rubber balloons (why?) will be as bad for the microwave oven as running it empty, which is definitely NOT okay. Without an effective energy absorber present, high standing waves in the cavity can damage the magnetron and/or cause electric arcing within a few seconds. Microwave ovens are primarily intended to heat food that contains water molecules. A frequency of 2.45 GHz, wavelength 122 mm, is commonly used. See Electromagnetic_absorption_by_water and Dielectric_loss. Rubber items have Relative permittivity (also called Dielectric constant, that quantifies their ability relative to a vacuum to carry alternating current) much lower than water. This source lists various dielectric constants:
 * Water (68° F) 80.4, Rubber 3.0, Rubber (Chlorinated) 3.0, Rubber (Hard) 2.8, Rubber (Isomerized) 2.4 - 3.7, Rubber Cement 2.7-2.9, Rubber Chloride 2.1-2.7, Rubber, Raw 2.1-2.7, Rubber, Sulphurized 2.5-4.6, Silicone Rubber 3.2-9.8.


 * Again, why do you consider this pointless experiment? Philvoids (talk) 18:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What makes it your business to dictate what is and isn't pointless for the OP or for the reference desk? If you feel it's pointless, don't answer the thread saying as much. On the other hand, the rest of your answer which contained useful scientific information was helpful. 🌈WaltCip - (talk)  17:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Next time you address this referenced desk, please provide a short header that gives the topic of your question. Philvoids (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You should try it. I mean shit, why not? Dinglepincter (talk) 01:58, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You want the OP should start a fire and burn their house down? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:36, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It'd be an attended fire, near a sink, assume good faith. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Good faith and smarts are not necessarily synonymous. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:05, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * So, like, there are zillions of videos out there of people applying (insert name of device here) to (object here). Just do an video search for something like "microwaving balloons"; someone out there probably will have tried this. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 04:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * yup. lettherebedarklight晚安 06:29, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * And here we have an illustration of the difference between theoreticians (yak, yak, yak) and experimenters (do, do, do). Final result: the balloons popped. No fire, no calamity. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:23, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * One of the differences. I have it on good authority that theoreticians have a higher average life expectancy... AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:25, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * These are all about balloons filled with some fluid. What will happen if you stuff the microwave, as specified in the question, with balloons that are "straight out of the packet" (in fact, out of "several packets of balloons")? I don't think for a second these empty balloons will pop. --Lambiam 10:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Not to pop your balloon, but also some with just air inside. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:08, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Air is a fluid. --Lambiam 13:41, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Air that someone has blown into a balloon is usually humid. Philvoids (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * And often fetid (maybe wear a mask). InedibleHulk (talk) 06:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)