Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 January 23

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miscellaneous desk
< January 22 << Dec | January | Feb >> January 24 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


Contents


[edit] January 23

[edit] Local custom - crossing fingers on the sight of a fire-engine, ambulance etc

A local custom from my youth was to cross your fingers on the sight of a fire engine, ambulance or even a gas board van (whilst shouting e.g. GAS VAN GAS VAN) that was heading in the general direction of your house and then either leave them crossed until you saw another object (some friends say a dog or cat, others say the rules were more complicated) or have another person uncross them for you whilst wishing you good luck. I grew up in an urban area of Wiltshire, England, where this was fairly common in the 1980's amongst schoolchildren and adults.

I can sort of understand that this may have been a general superstition along the lines of 'I hope that fire/accident/gas explosion isn't related to me', but does anyone know of any other history in this? Does it perhaps stem from the warding off of evil? Does anyone know any other variations? 86.21.74.40 (talk) 02:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

In Cornwall one holds one's collar upon seeing an ambulance, as I recall untill one then saw a black or white animal. DuncanHill (talk) 08:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
While browsing A Dictionary of Superstitions, I read about a custom of holding or touching the collar of your coat when you saw an ambulance, and not releasing it until you saw a dog. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the book at the minute, but I remember this custom was prevalent in the North of England, reported most recently in the eighties, and that there were many, many variations on what to hold, for how long and what conditions had to be met before you could stop.
Sorry I haven't got more information, but the book is a fascinating read, if you can get hold of it. --Kateshortforbob 23:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
When I lived in Chile, it was common to cross oneself upon seeing an emergency vehicle, for fear that it would come for you next time. Steewi (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Same in Ireland. Guessing it's a Catholic thing. 83.147.143.14 (talk) 12:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
In Fire and Hemlock, the practice is mentioned of holding one's collar after seeing a hearse, until one sees something else specific. That bit's set in the 70s, I think, in Britain. 79.66.24.40 (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ettitquette: Gold/silver/bronze when drawn

I was field marshell at athletics carnival. One event had a tie for second place place. We had spare medals just incase this happened. I order that first be given gold, then silvers to the two who came second, but no bronze medal be awarded as the next compeditor is judged to have placed 4th.

This didn't go down well with the compeditors/family/friends etc. Someone told me in the olympics that they still award silver when two people tie for gold. I find such a concept rediculous but apparently its standard practice?--155.144.251.120 (talk) 05:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I think they were just sore losers. Ties at the Olympics don't happen often, but when they do, a medal is skipped, just as you say. See Swimming at the 2000 Summer Olympics - Men's 50 metre freestyle for example. FiggyBee (talk) 06:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Leapin' Lent

Is Lent one day longer this year because of leap year? Pais (talk) 06:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No. It does not depend on date. The Lent is worked out from easter, going back 40 days skipping saturday to arrive at ash wednesday. The date doesn't matter. It has no effect, it remains 40 days. This is the same reason why it doesn't change length even though easter changes what date it falls on practically every year.--155.144.251.120 (talk) 06:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
The date changes every year, no exceptions. I checked this out elsewhere - see Talk:Easter#Same consecutive Easter date. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
155 is correct that the actual dates are irrelevant for this question. I never knew until I read Lent that Sundays aren't included in the calculation. It's 40 days from Ash Wednesday to Holy Saturday (often incorrectly referred to as 'Easter Saturday') inclusive, excluding Sundays. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, because the Sundays are feastdays, not fastdays. Which means you can eat all the chocolate you've been depriving yourself of during the week :) Skittle (talk) 16:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
As I once read, the exclusion vs inclusion of Sundays in Lent was one of the conflicts between the Celtic and Roman churches, with the Celtic church insisting the 40 days represented Jesus' 40 days in the desert, which certainly included the sabbath. But I couldn't see any reference to that controversy in those articles, so I can't confirm the accuracy right now. Gwinva (talk) 19:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It's certainly in the articles as an Eastern/Western thing. Orthodox churches count the days differently to Rome and the protestant churches which practise Lent. I believe the Roman church also holds that the 40 days represent the 40 days in the desert, but that Sunday's being mini-easters trumps it :) I suppose once you're not spending those 40 days actually in a desert, consuming nothing, anything is a compromise... Skittle (talk) 01:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Map creating software

I kind of have a weird hobby where I like to draw maps of fantasy cities on paper. By fantasy, I don't mean the fantasy genre, just layouts of realistic looking, imaginary modern cities, kind of like urban planning. Anyway, I was wondering if there is any software out there where I can do this on a computer instead of paper. I basically want something like Sim City, but without any of the actual gameplay, if that makes sense. I'd like to be able to create terrain, lay out roads, place buildings, etc, and just keep doing this until I complete a layout. I don't really need a feature to design my own buildings or structures, I could use pre-made ones. If possible, I'd like to see a top-down map view, and maybe a 3D isometric view. I know many professional urban planners use software like AutoCad to basically draw urban layouts, but I'd like something simpler that maybe has a Sim City-like interface. Does any software like this exist? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rc251 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The sim city 2000 urban renewal kit seems to fit your description nicely. Other than that i can't think of anything. I would kind of like to know this myself. Cryo921 (talk) 06:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I played Sim City 2000 way back in the day, and while I barely remember the URK, I do remember it gave a pretty good measure of control for laying out cities. I don't have it installed now unfortunately, so I can't check it out myself again, but something like that with graphical updates and more features would be great. I did a lot of searching online, but most of my results seem to be graphical or statistic based apps targeted at professional. Did the newer Sim City games get rid of the kind of control that the Sim City: 2000 URK had? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rc251 (talk • contribs) 06:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
  • In Sim City 4, it's relatively simple to set up a map with infinite cash, allowing you to experiment with infrastructure as much as you want. I don't recall any easy way to make particular privately-owned buildings pop up where you want, though. Also, SC4 uses a "neighborhood" system where you have several smaller, interconnected maps -- this may be even more fun for you, or it may detract from the sort of designing that you want to do. --M@rēino 16:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
As a side note, if you like making such maps and the like, you might be interested in playing geofiction. I myself have been part of the ImagiNations game for years. (The game is indicated in that article.) — Michael J 02:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Toter Uhu

I just noticed that the English Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an article (not even a stub) on this Manet painting, which is currently featured on the German Wikipedia's main page. Out of curiosity, is there a list of foreign language FAs that have no corresponding articles of any quality here? Zagalejo^^^ 06:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You might find this interesting. SaundersW (talk) 09:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
And also Wikipedia:Featured articles in other languages and Wikipedia:WikiProject Echo. Algebraist 10:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] relateed to chemical engineering.....

A space shuttle has to be launched in an orbit of radius 6700 km. The space shuttle to be launched is designed by a NASA Scientist. The mechanism used to launch is different from other old satellites. The space shuttle is first given a special velocity at special angle to do this fuel used here is nuclear type. The main advantage is that it uses a small amount of fuel and small weight of satellite. The reaction which takes place to provide energy by nuclear fuel is A�R. The amount of heat released is 9676 MJ/mole of A. Reaction rate is 1xCA and the reactor if mixed flow type and the concentration of A is 1 mole per litre. Cost of the reactant is 4500$ per mole of A and cost of reactor including installation, cost auxiliary equipment is 1000$ per hour per litre. The space shuttle is firstly rotated on a smooth vertical circular rod and the mechanism is such that when it acquires the special velocity the rod is broken at special angle and the satellite escapes. But there is a defect in the design as the special angle is increased engine has to do more useless extra work, the energy waste is 0.01 MJ/thieta (angle at which the satellite is launched Θ). While rotating in upper vertical circle the shuttle acquires n upper temperature T1=1000 K and lower surface acquires T2=298 K. Smart scientists overcome the special angle problem by exploiting the surface temperature. They make a thermal engine which works on temperature T1 and T2 and extracts 70% of the maximum possible work which they use in providing special velocity. The whole of the process is to be completed in exactly in one hour while rotating. The energy given by nuclear fuel in providing special velocity is 40% efficient. Mass of the upper and lower surfaces are same and equal to 15 kg and heat capacities of both the surfaces are same and equal to 10 KJ/kg C. Find: 1. Minimum amount of R to be produced 2. Optimum feed rate of A. Given the radius of earth is 6400 km.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitagl27 (talk • contribs)

There are two reasons this is unlikely to receive the replies you want. Firstly, it is on the miscellaneous desk, rather than the science desk, and I suggest that somebody who has not done the research to find the most appropriate desk is not trying very hard. Secondly, it looks very much like homework, and you will see if you read the rubric at the top of the page that we don't do homework (except on the Humanities page, but I don't think that the respondents there are terribly hot on physics). If this is a horrible misreading of your situation, then I apologise. SaundersW (talk) 09:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
A third reason is that it is not a question. It is an instruction, without even a please or a thank you.--Shantavira|feed me 10:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I will answer, though - The minimum amount of R to be produced is the smallest amount of R that can be produced over the course of the hour, whatever other variables. The optimum feed rate of A is the best and most efficient rate at which the A should be fed. Never let it be said that the ref desk isn't helpful! Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 13:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
This has got to be a school assignment, possible a mixed course first year university assignment.--Dacium (talk) 22:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why do women make no sense?

If women really want "security" in a relationship, as they frequently claim, then why the hell are not us geek losers popular with the girls? We don't run around at night, screaming, drinking, being football hooligans, etc. Yet they pick the hot, fit hunks. It appears as if an "alpha male" is solely judged by his physical appearance even to this day.

It would make sense to stick to a geek if you want a stable relationship. From this, I conclude that this claim is complete and utter bullshit and women do in fact want idiots who hurt them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 08:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

More of a statement than a question, but the best way to phrase it is generally young women are more attracted to the "bad boy" or "athletic" kind of persona. It is later in life, and probably after a few failed relationships, that they start going out with the more "geeky", stable types, and of course by this time the geeky types that get the girls are the ones who have developed confidence in themselves. This is just fitting into your example here, I'm not looking to stereotype here, but that's a simple answer to a common question. Croat Canuck Talk 09:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Ever met a guy who had the choice between going out with (1) a hot chick with little social conscience, intelligence, or conversation skills who will probably eventually find someone cuter, and (2) a clever, thoughtful, honest, homely girl with no figure who would -never- run around on him (because few guys would hit on her in the first place)? The average guy goes out with girl (1) every time. From this, we may conclude that men want idiots who hurt them, too.
The more interesting question to me is whether being good-looking from a superficial standpoint actually leads to being a jerk in relationships -- i.e., the reason the hot, fit hunk will run around eventually is that he knows he can replace his current girlfriend, so there's no ultimate penalty (i.e., loneliness) to him if he feels like being a jerk on a given night. I think someone could write a good book out of this, and probably wind up going on Oprah. It's certainly not going to be me, though. Good luck out there. Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 10:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Well that's because guys are after the hotties and don't care about stable relationships :O --f f r o t h 12:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
What I meant to imply (but by no means remembered to say) was that I don't see any reason to believe that men and women really have different relationship goals -- I think we all go after the hottie instead of the sensible choice, and we all suffer from the same temptation to risk throwing away something meaningful in the temptation of a one-off, and we all get frustrated because the other gender lies like a cheap carpet. That said, Atlant's comment below opens up new room for research... Deltopia (talk) 15:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I guess I don’t fit the cultural average. (Okay what Wikipedia does. . .) I’d pick No. 2 every time. Who wants to listen to a valley girl. :) --S.dedalus (talk) 08:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Recent research has shown that women vary their preferences in men over their menstrual cycle. When they are most fertile, they tend to choose "bad boys" but during the rest of their cycle, they tend to shift towards the stay-at-home males. The upshot is that women tend to want to be impregnated by the bad boys but cared for by the good boys. Such is life. (I have no citation, but I'm confident Google could find this.)
Atlant (talk) 13:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the original, men may gho to the moon and even colonize other planets, we may even discover time travel, but we will never ever understand women. All we can do is pine for these wonderful, beautiful beings until one day they see the light —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 13:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

p.s. nice guys finnish last —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.191.136.2 (talk) 14:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

See the article Promiscuity. Its not just women.--TreeSmiler (talk) 15:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Dare I suggest that most geeks are not great catches? In my experience many self-described geeks are unsocialized, rude, unthoughtful, unempathetic, narcissistic, and act like adolescents for much of their lives. The women who do end up with geeks—in my limited experience, as someone who has moved from one geek enclave to another and is some sort of hybrid geek himself, half-way between a full-time computer programmer and a full-time historian—usually end up with someone whose idea of a "fun time" is to sit around and goof off online, who think wearing more than one outfit a week is "unnecessary," who regard personal hygiene as optional, and who, in the end, end up unconsciously embracing 1950s gender roles. Obviously this is a massive generalization, but I've never been impressed by how great a catch most geeks actually were. I dare say that if geeks were a little more self-critical about themselves, and the culture of "geekiness", and took a little more time to think about the thoughts and needs of others around them, they'd probably do all right. In fact, most geeks I have known actually do do alright in the end, after they decide to grow up a little bit and become a bit more personable. Just my two cents. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 15:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps this is a case of people having differing definitions of (among others) "geek", "dork", and "nerd"? Among those that I know, myself included, "gedords" tend to reclaim at least one of the terms as a positive appellation, reserve one of the terms for outright derision, and use the third for that guy who wouldn't be so bad if he could just lay off the Warcraft for a week or so. As to which is which, though (and as to where each person falls on the good-catch continuum), there seems to be little consistency. — Lomn 16:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Speaking as a woman who married a total and complete geek--but also one who enjoys and respects me and doesn't tell me I make no sense, that anything I say is bullshit, or that that my life's other crushes made me a bad person--go away. --Masamage ♫ 16:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Speaking as a sensible person: learn how to read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 20:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Uh. Since obviously I can read, are you saying I misinterpreted you in some way? Because I sure thought you were here to complain about women's poor choices in men. I'm just saying, most of us do in fact like nice guys--and that I think you're being kind of mean. --Masamage ♫ 23:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Sigmund Freud had something to say about this: The great question that has never been answered and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is "What does a woman want?". -- JackofOz (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

They kept telling him too but he wouldn't listen to the answerhotclaws 23:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

thats easy! Answer:Everything but in the right order.--TreeSmiler (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Frankly I believe it's you, 85.225, who has a problem, not all women on Earth. --Taraborn (talk) 00:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Personal opinions and anecdotal evidence aside, there is a ton of research out there on mate selection in both males and females, examining the question from biological, evolutionary, and sociological perspectives. Some essays on the subject I've recently read had some interesting conclusions about women's selection preferences and criteria being quite context-specific. Also, science aside, 85.225, your question does come off as a rather bitter and unfair projection onto all women of your own preconcieved notions based on your obviously limited experience of the subject in question (sorry). - Azi Like a Fox (talk) 05:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Couldn't have been said better. --Taraborn (talk) 12:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Nearly everthing I wanted to say has already been said and I won't repeat it except perhaps to emphasise I definitely agree with Azi's final point and to go further to say that someone with such a preconceived notion is likely to be a significant turnoff to nearly all women. The only other thing I will say is this. Bear in mind that from an evolutionary stand point, the intelligence advantage is probably still fairly recent. Sure nowadays the intelligent guy is generally far more likely to succeed in life then the hunk who doesn't know what 1+1 is but up to fairly recently, this generally wasn't the case. There was actually a good comic on this in one of the Dilbert/Scott Adams books where he said that in the past a woman need a guy who was good at hunting and could bring home the antelope (or whatever). Nowadays, she needs a guy who can install an ISDN line without yelling at the support line. In case it isn't obvious, what this all means is that even if a more intelligent guy may be the better choice for her, most of her will be honed to go after the hunk since evolution is a very slow process. To avoid being sexist, this probably applies equal to a man's mate choice. (With modern medical advances, who cares what her hips are like?) It is a lot more complicated then that as a number of people have mentioned and I'm sure some of the stuff Azi mentioned will give you a better idea but an important point to consider. Nil Einne (talk) 17:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Also, it's not as if intelligence and physical fitness are mutually exclusive. It's certainly possible for a guy to be intelligent and emotionally mature and still have muscular arms, broad shoulders, a six-pack, and an ass so nice you hate to see him sit on it. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 17:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The OP might be interested to read about ladder theory, especially this exposition of it at intellectualwhores.com. —Steve Summit (talk) 17:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sailor Moon's skirt

Why does Sailor Moon's skirt become much shorter when she morphs into "super hero" mode? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 10:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Two words: target audience.
Two more: Fan service. --Mdwyer (talk) 06:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Because superheroes are supposed to look exciting, and short skirts are that, aren't they? If you watch the old Wonder Woman TV series (featuring historic hottie Lynda Carter), you will find that her legs are featured prominently in her superhero feats. It's tradition. Faithfully, Deltopia (talk) 10:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
With many superheroes who magically transform from their alter-egos into their super versions, their clothing rapidly disappears. If I were to speculate it would be in part to draw the distinction between the "normal" people they are before and the "super" people they are after. A prominent example for males is, of course, He-Man, but even Superman has a variation of this (going from wearing a suit and glasses to a cape and skin-tight underwear). --24.147.69.31 (talk) 14:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
So it doesn't get in her way. --Masamage ♫ 16:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

So that both girls and guys want to watch it at the same time, even if it is for different reasons.--Dlo2012 (talk) 23:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] When is it proper to use Diamond Anniversary? 60th or 75th year Anniversay?

Hi! Our hospital will be celebrating its 60th Anniversary and we are unsure if it is proper to label the event Diamond Anniversary because the term Diamond Anniversary is also being used and accepted to celebrate 75th Anniversary. My question is: strictly speaking when is it more proper to use the term Diamond Anniversay to celebrate 60th anniversary and when is it more proper to use it to celebrate 75th Anniversary. Thanks. Arisluke (talk) 13:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC) Aris

Our article Diamond Jubilee says 60th for a person (eg a King or Queen), 75th for a thing. DuncanHill (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
(ec) According to Diamond Jubilee it's 60 years for a person (e.g. Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee) or 75 for an 'event'. However, there's no citation for this assertion, and I've never heard of the 75-year rule before. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Isn't 60 years ruby? 81.159.218.124 (talk) 13:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No, Ruby is 40 - see Wedding anniversary for the full list. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Did Hitler really watch The Great Dictator?

Is it true that Hitler watched Chaplin's 1940 film "The Great Dictator" not once, but twice? I'd do almost anything to know what he thought of the film, or even better, watch his reactions as he sees it. Little or nothing is known about this, however. :| —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 14:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

According to the Internet Movie Database: "When this film was released, Adolf Hitler banned it in Germany and in all countries occupied by the Nazis. Curiosity eventually got the best of him and he had a print brought in through Portugal. He screened it not once but twice. Unfortunately, history did not record his reaction to the film. When told of this, Charles Chaplin said, "I'd give anything to know what he thought of it." It goes on to say: "Although this movie was banned in all occupied countries by the Nazis, it was screened once to a German audience. In the occupied Balkans, members of a resistance group switched the reels in a military cinema and replaced a comedic opera with a copy of this film, which they had smuggled in from Greece. So a group of German soldiers enjoyed a screening of this film until they realized what it was. Some left the cinema and some were reported to have fired shots at the screen." [1] Laïka 20:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
A bit of trivia - Chaplin was born 16 April 1889, and Hitler was born 4 days later, on 20 April 1889. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Ha! Thanks for this answer -- I have always loved Chaplin's parody of Hitler and had no idea that Hitler saw the movie himself. Makes my day. Pfly (talk) 09:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is cherries and milk poison?

I've been worrying about this for a while. MalwareSmarts (talk) 18:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a myth. There's an amusing anecdote about it at everything2 --18:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagishsimon (talk • contribs)
That's one I've never heard. When my sisters were little, a camp counselor told them they should never drink milk in hot weather, because it would curdle in their stomach. Now it's true of course, that milk will curdle in your stomach in hot weather, but then milk will curdle in your stomach in cold weather, too. That's what happens when milk comes in contact with gastric acid. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 19:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Cecil Adams briefly covers this here. APL (talk) 22:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Focus Groups

What are the main advantages of Focus Groups? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.200.138 (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

See Focus group - the clear advantage would be that you have a group of people who are looking at the same 'issue'. That should mean that the group is 'focussed' on an issue at hand, rather than perhaps spending time looking at other issues. Another benefit might be that you would expect the members to be relatively knowledgeable on the subject that is being discussed - perhaps even be Subject Matter Experts. The group may also be more prominent and 'respected' when it comes to that issue being tabled to government/public authorities because the group is focussed on that issue so is more likely to have indepth/interesting input than perhaps a group that is currently looking at 100s of issues. ny156uk (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh and i've been a numpty - the above is more of a description of a pressure-group, rather than a focus group (at least a brief look at the article suggests this) sorry! ny156uk (talk) 19:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Do USAian schools actually metal detect search students?!

Is this just something you see in movies, or does it actually happen? And if it does, surely only very few schools do this? Sounds like total madness to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 21:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It actually happens, though the prevalence is fairly low (about 10%, as of 2003) and its efficacy is uncertain. Additionally, "USAian" is a rather awkward construction. Issues of national arrogance aside, "American" is generally unambiguous in this context. — Lomn 21:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Upon first reading, I thought 85.225 meant U.S. Asian. For some reason, my brain threw another "s" in there. I had to read it a couple times until I realized that you meant American, 85.225. Dismas|(talk) 21:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
England is rushing to catch up, apparently. Metal detectors plan for schools from the BBC. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, north of the border in Canada, it is extremely uncommon for elementary to high schools to search students. Acceptable (talk) 23:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Most of the metal detectors were installed in the post-Columbine time period. --.ιΙ Inhuman14 Ιι. 02:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk about working from the wrong end... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.50.83 (talk) 10:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
It's worth noting that I don't think that 10% is evenly distributed. APL (talk) 14:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lombard Wikipedia fall

According to [2] the Lombard Wikipedia lost more than 90.000 articles last month. How's that? --Taraborn (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Something to do with this, perhaps? It looks like Lombard Wikipedia had thousands of bot-generated articles, and they're all getting deleted. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 22:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Heh. Thanks. --Taraborn (talk) 00:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Symbolism Meanings

Hello, I recently decided what I want for a tattoo, but before i get it inked on permanently i want to cross check any references that it may have...don't want to offend anyone accidentally. I've searched the web for references to this symbol, but with no leads, other then people recognizing it and seeing it on other people i have no clue how to locate it. How would you suggest finding this symbol? Vachementness (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It would help if you told us or showed us what the symbol is. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 22:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. If you'd like to do your own research here, check out Category:Symbols and List of symbols. Dismas|(talk) 22:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
There is also an encyclopedia of symbols that you can search by graphic elements as well as by meaning. SpinningSpark 00:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
If you don't understand what a tattoo means, then you probably shouldn't get it. Tattoos are expensive, personal and permanent. Unless the symbol has strong personal meaning to you, you should probably select something else. EvilCouch (talk) 02:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)