Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015 February 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Miscellaneous desk
< February 8 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 10 >
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.


February 9[edit]

Things that never happened[edit]

This is probably an odd question and I'm not sure if there are any answers. I'm looking for notable things that were supposed to happen but did not actually end up taking place. Things for which all the effort for it was put forth and at the last minute some event happened which kept it from happening. That event could be someone changing their mind, someone dying, one nation invading another, etc. But these events (or non-events, depending on how you look at it) should be notable, so not all the weddings that are called off every day throughout the world. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 01:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start. How about the Business Plot, World War III (in Cold War context), and the election of Al Gore as POTUS? Oh, also, Operation Downfall, Operation Sea Lion, the eventual aryanisation of all Europe, and the atomic bombing of Tokyo (had the Japanese not surrendered). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 20 Shevat 5775 01:22, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tokyo was never a planned target for atomic bombing; the original target list was Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, Kokura Arsenal, and Niigata. (Later Nagasaki was substituted for Kyoto because of the latter's religious significance, and was actually attacked because of bad weather at Kokura.) Perhaps Tokyo might eventually have been attacked if Truman had ordered the attacks resumed (I say "resumed" because he personally canceled them the day after the second one, when there was enough plutonium for at least one more; see The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes) and Japan had not surrendered.
On the other hand, a nuclear attack against Germany would surely have happened if they hadn't already lost their part of the war. --70.49.169.244 (talk) 05:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the idea about Tokyo originally came from this guy: [1] Must have seen it on a programme way back when. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 20 Shevat 5775 16:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
UFC 151 was unprecedented. UFC 176 was not. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Cancelled projects and events. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's the most nothing I've ever seen. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How about the plan for the US Air Force to provide adequate air cover for the Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba to succeed ? StuRat (talk) 05:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's no article on Successful Bay of Pigs Invasion or adequate air cover. Almost everything (especially war) went at least a little worse than someone hoped for. It's not like the whole thing fell through. Might have been smarter to cancel, but they didn't. Gran Gasoducto del Sur didn't have a chance to fail. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Pan-American Highway was never completed. StuRat (talk) 05:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not being finished is not the same as never happened. --Jayron32 00:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The completion of the Pan-American highway never happened. Or, if you prefer, the completion ceremony never happened. Compare with the Golden Spike ceremony, which did happen. StuRat (talk) 21:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Gunpowder Plot? --Viennese Waltz 09:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comet ISON was "supposed to be" (whatever that means) brighter than the full moon. And don't even get me started on the Year 2000 problem.--Shantavira|feed me 09:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple end-of-world 'prophecies' and, in fact, the entire works of Nostradamus may come under this category. KägeTorä - (影虎) (Chin Wag) 09:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The 1938 broadcast of The War of the Worlds (radio drama) caused widespread panic in the US, due to millions believing Martians had landed and were taking over the world, but no such landing had occurred. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 11:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In 1939 Johann Georg Elser planted a bomb in the bierkeller where Hitler used to give speeches. On the night in question, Hitler (and other high ranking Nazis (including Goebells, Himmler, Heydrich and Hess) left the building 13 minutes before the explosion. Had he stayed a bit longer the course of The Second World War would probably been different and, I suspect, also the lives of millions of people worldwide.Widneymanor (talk) 13:11, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Most of us, including me, wouldn't exist. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 20 Shevat 5775 16:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I understand from the July 20 plot, the bomb only failed to kill Hitler because all of these three things happened: (1) There was only one bomb and not two as originally planned, (2) Hitler was seated further away from the bomb than originally planned, and (3) because of the hot summer, the meeting was held in a wooden barracks, which collapsed under the shockwave, absorbing it, and not in the Führerbunker, whose concrete walls would have deflected to shockwave back at Hitler. JIP | Talk 13:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weather forecasts that turn out to be significantly wrong happen from time to time. Such as the recent prediction of a blizzard in New York, which turned out not to be much. (Boston was hit pretty hard, though.) Or worse, when a big storm hits and no one predicted it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't I get a lot of flak on this very ref desk for characterising it as such in a loaded question of mine until I mentioned that we might have a boy who cried wolf scenario in NY next time? We then had a much worse snow storm the next week. But yeah, Boston is getting hit pretty bad. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 20 Shevat 5775 16:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please respect WP:INDENT. As of now you have an indent level of 0, making everything below look like it is a response to your comment or one of its children SemanticMantis (talk) 20:16, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How about Unfulfilled Christian religious predictions, Criticism_of_Jehovah's_Witnesses#Failed_predictions and List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events? These lists are Christian-centric; I've no doubt that Muslims, Hindus, and adherents of many other religions have made prophesies that have been widely held by believers as "shortly to come to pass", until, of course, they haven't. My favorite, by the way, is the Great Disappointment. RomanSpa (talk) 15:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Spelling note: You mean prophecies. The word prophesies exists, but it's a verb — "Our great leader prophesies that such and such will happen". Likely you know that and just made a typo; in that case consider this note for the benefit of others. --Trovatore (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Nope, it was a genuine error on my part. I believe I'm generally good at spelling, but I have to check this class of verb/noun pairs every time. In this case I forgot to check, and so am shown to be fallible. Thanks for your kind correction. RomanSpa (talk) 17:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]
This one is also pretty good: "In Leeds, England in 1806 a hen began laying eggs on which the phrase "Christ is coming" was written. Eventually it was discovered to be a hoax. The owner, Mary Bateman, had written on the eggs in a corrosive ink so as to etch the eggs, and reinserted the eggs back into the hen's oviduct." RomanSpa (talk) 15:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Significantly more disturbing than Christ on a piece of toast. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 20 Shevat 5775 16:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Researchers in Sydney have been uncovering more and more evidence that Napoleon planned to invade and seize Australia, these were ready to go ahead until the Battle of Trafalgar put a stop to them. Nanonic (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From 1940-1942, the Nazis were planning on sending all the Jewish people to Madagascar, see Madagascar_Plan. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:13, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of people failed to get to the poles, though they intended to reach them. See List_of_Arctic_expeditions, List_of_Antarctic_expeditions, and this list of specifically "doomed" expeditions [2]. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:22, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That reminds me that the entire Earth is bipolar, so it's no wonder that various inhabitants are also this way. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of sporting events were planned but never took place for one reason or another. For example, 1904 World Series or 1940 Olympics. --Xuxl (talk) 09:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There was an article I started off 'somewhere' (and/or it got moved) on 'failed history' (which included the 'Dewey Beats Truman' reference among other things).

Would [3] be of interest? Jackiespeel (talk) 16:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many expected Jesus Christ to return for the last judgement when the year 1000 arrived, and one account said that notables were gathered in (Old) St Peters in Rome, expecting Him to show up at midnight. President Kennedy never gave his planned speech at the Trade Mart in Dallas on November 22, 1963. The elected (or "selected") Governor of Kentucky in 1900, Goebels, similarly did not get to give his inaugural speech since he was gunned down in the Kentucky capitol. Hank Williams died in the back seat of a Cadillac in 1952 and did not make his planned New Years Day concert in Canton, Ohio. Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and J. P. "The Big Bopper" Richardson did not make it to the "Winter Dance Party" tour concert in Moorhead, Minnesota in 1959 because their small plane crashed after leaving Clear Lake, Iowa. I suppose in many cases of sudden death of notable people in their prime, people are left waiting for some event that never happens. Lots of celebrities, entertainers and sports figures died in plane crashes, for instance, and in some cases the events they were headed for did not happen as a result. Edison (talk) 21:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another example is the tour Michael Jackson was preparing for, when he died. StuRat (talk) 22:01, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Many-worlds interpretation: "Many-worlds implies that all possible alternate histories and futures are real, each representing an actual "world" (or "universe")." Count Iblis (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are also things that didn't happen that we hoped would never happen-Nixon had a speech prepared in case the Apollo 11 astronauts didn't make it back safely,and there was a similar one in the event that the D-Day landings failed Lemon martini (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What Is The Name Of This Type Of Interment ?[edit]

What is the English name( or equivalent if none exist ) for the burial of a corpse in a wall such as this ? Example — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE2E:10D0:958A:16AC:B5CE:380F (talk) 20:22, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are called crypts, so logically, the term should be encrypt, but I can't find that anywhere. There's also immure, but that usually means to wall up a live person. μηδείς (talk) 20:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wall crypt, in particular. The Palatinal Crypt is also a crypt. So wall encrypt, I guess. Sounds stupid as a verb, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, "burial vault" is the more secular term. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:04, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd call that a (primitive) mausoleum, and this dictionary definition associates the word "entombment". ―Mandruss ☎ 20:58, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This would seem to support the Hulk (dammit!) ―Mandruss ☎ 21:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't feel bad. I grew up in a funeral home, but still get mausoleums, crypts and tombs confused. My town wasn't fancy like that. People went in the dirt. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For some odd reason, my mother keeps saying she wants to be cremated. (Wanting to be cremated is not odd; saying it repeatedly, on holidays, is.) So now I have a comeback. Next time I'll reply, "Well, I want to be encrypted." μηδείς (talk) 21:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Next time she does that, slip out to the garage and come back in with a gas can and a book of matches, and say with a smirk "No time like the present..." I suspect that would end that habit of hers. --Jayron32 00:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I sometimes want (and wish more wanted) to be encased in a statue of myself for a headstone. Not sure what the word for that is (encasement, I guess), but I've been outright told no by two places and gotten an implied no from a few cemetery websites. Having your remains on the stone (skull and crossbones-style) is more explicitly outlawed. No clear answers on whether I can do it on my own land, but I haven't asked the right people. Doing it in the ocean would be pretty cool. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What a great idea. Are you planning to be in the archetypal pose of your illustrious namesake? Clarityfiend (talk) 02:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd call that statuary rape. ―Mandruss ☎ 02:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And spoil my alter ego? Nah, I think I'll be entombed under my real name and pose. I doubt any Wikipedians will visit, anyway. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I asked my mum if I could have my body encased in a statue and put in the back garden, but she said 'no', because when my parents die somebody will inherit the house, and trying to sell it will be a nightmare, with a corpse in the garden. It would at least bring the price down. So I decided to apply to give it to science. They'll have a lot of fun with me! :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (Chin Wag) 10:06, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but once science has finished with you, what is left will be given to the family for disposal, you know. So still best to have some idea of what you want. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Does that always apply, Tammy? My friend's mother died last year and her body was handed over for (non-specific) scientific research. That was the last they ever saw of her or any part of her. No funeral was possible; they chose not even to hold a memorial service. But another of my friends died the previous year, and he had always wanted to donate his eyes and various organs to help sick people, so they took the bits they could use and handed the rest back to the family for cremation. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 17:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know (via the person responsible for arranging it in my local teaching hospital), yes it does in the UK. It can be several years before your remains are made available for disposal. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is that mandatory, or is there an option for those who don't want any pieces back? InedibleHulk (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I misread the question title as "What Is The Name Of This Type Of Internet ?" and was genuinely confused for a while. JIP | Talk 13:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why haven't wood stoves been banned?[edit]

With laws outlawing public smoking in effect, why is it ok for people to use wood stoves making entire city blocks a no go area unless you wear a gas mask? :( . Count Iblis (talk) 23:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure that round here, they are. Clean Air Act, I think. But in the US, I'd think it would be a matter for individual municipalities, as it is in the case of smoking. AlexTiefling (talk) 23:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I found some reading (US based) for you in case you wish to educate yourself some more on the topic. This document (pdf) looks like a fairly balanced presentation of the issues involved. Here is some information from a different U.S. state. Here is one from Canada and Here is an article about a study in Denmark. --Jayron32 23:44, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because we have elected officials who think that requiring businesses to post signs saying "we do not require our employees to wash our hands" is somehow a sane way to decrease regulation. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In cities it can be a problem, but in a rural area the houses are far enough apart that they don't have to smell each other's smoke. Also, smoking is typically only banned inside in the US, leading to a cloud of choking smoke and hacking people near every door. StuRat (talk) 23:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cigarette smoke is way much more noxious (and concentrated) than smoke from a neighbor's fireplace or wood stove. And I've always assumed the ones who smoke just outside the door are doing so to inflict it on non-smokers who are entering or leaving the stores. In short, a passive-aggressive rebellion against the no-smoking rules. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Where I live it is illegal to smoke within 20 feet of any doorway (or bus stop, or some other things). Not sure if that is a state thing, or just a local thing, but the buffer zone is helpful. Dragons flight (talk) 18:08, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Helpful for non-smokers. On a hot or cold day, that blast of warm/cool door wind really helps one get through the whole cigarette. Speaking for myself, it was more about my own comfort than ruining yours. There's very rarely an overhang or windblock in these new legal zones. Did more to help me abandon modern society than quit smoking. Never had a complaint about burning wood out here, either. I guess that's a win for everyone. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See Wood-burning stove#Safety and pollution considerations.
—Wavelength (talk) 00:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is an international website, with contributors from all over the world (here be dragons, etc.). Please specify the country you are talking about. KägeTorä - (影虎) (Chin Wag) 10:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you're really making a false equivalence - Maybe you don't like the smell of wood smoke, but being in a restaurant full of smokers is not at all like walking down a block where homes are heated with wood. Also consider that in many instances, wood-burning stoves can have less environmental impact, compared to heating systems that use fossil fuels. Unlike fossil fuels, wood can be a source of Renewable_energy. I'm not saying it's always better, I'm saying it can be better. This site discusses some of the issues [4], I can find more scientific and better sourced refs if you are interested. In many locals, responsible and renewable wood burning for heat is encouraged by governments, who structure tax burdens to favor wood burning technologies. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here is California, we have "Check before you burn" policies in effect in the winter. If the amount of particulates in the air is above a certain level, we can't burn (although some people have exceptions if the wood/pellet stove is a sole source of heat). But, personally, I like the smell of a wood fire and have never been in a situation where it was smoking up the whole block. If you are burning good seasoned wood, or a compressed sawdust fire log, the smoke output is low. Justin15w (talk) 15:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good point, thanks! Here is a page on the CA program [5]. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone for your inputs! Thing is, you really don't want to choose part of your running route through streets where some homes are using wood stoves. When you are doing hard exercise, your lungs are much more vulnerable to damage from pollutants. Count Iblis (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{fact}} or nonsense? Any source for your statement? Just curious.TMCk (talk) 02:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense to me. When you're already out of breath, holding your breath until you get past a particular pollution source isn't an option, so you end up breathing it in deeply, instead. And if it triggers an asthma response, you are in much worse shape if you can't breath then, versus when relaxing. StuRat (talk) 02:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, see also here. Count Iblis (talk) 10:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the uncertainty to healthy individuals (leaving people with pre-conditions aside as this would be a different issue), wood stoves are not mentioned and considering little use of such nowadays + smoke is usually released thru a chimney high up the ground and thus, (unless there is a rare and strong downdraft of wind) all smoke is extremely diluted and far of the source. Smelling it doesn't tell you the amount of toxins you inhale just as you can smell a BBQ 1 or more blogs away. Running close to cars/trucks will get you far more toxins than those rare wood stoves just as jogging in smog prone cities. If you have a pre-condition you don't have to run to get an asthma attack, you can get it at home at any time. If you're concerned do your jogging in a park or even better, out of a city and in the woods. Those stoves are the least of your problems ;) TMCk (talk) 03:03, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are some pollutants you can't smell, like carbon monoxide, and many others you can smell, like sulfur dioxide. Wood smoke is quite easy to smell, and if you can smell it, you are inhaling the pollutants, so should try to minimize your exposure. In the case of BBQ, smelling the food isn't harmful, but if you are smelling lighter fluid or burnt meat or burning charcoal, that could be bad. I agree that car exhaust is harmful, but not that this means other sources of pollution should be ignored. StuRat (talk) 04:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see. So you don't BBQ, never light a candle nor a match, don't drive a car or else or go even close to one, just staying away from any potential pollutant? What a wonderful life you must have. I sure envy you. Your PC is running on clean energy I assume?TMCk (talk) 04:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I use propane when I BBQ (much cleaner), evacuate the house when the neighbor pours lighter fluid on his charcoal, keep my car vents on recirculate except when in motion and in need of defrost, and don't use candles or matches (I use a butane fireplace lighter when I need to light something, like said BBQ). I also avoid smokers (with an exception for pipe smokers, since the pipe tobacco seems to lack the horrible additives that make cigarettes so toxic). As for wood-burning stoves, they stink up the whole neighborhood for days at a time, so are hard to avoid. StuRat (talk) 23:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015_February_9&oldid=1146489565"