Miscellaneous desk
< May 18	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 20 >

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.

May 19[edit]

song !?[edit]

theres an old song .. and i dont remember much of it.. all i remember is the line "and then she told him of the day she would wed" the song is about a boy and a girl who grew up being best friends, they always had a crush on eachother ,and then when they grew up he was in love with her but then she got married to another guy. i heard the song the other night, and just cant't remember what its called. now i'm from Newfoundland so more then likley thats where it came from. but anyways , i really need to figure it out.. its been driving me crazy! help !? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amandadawe (talk • contribs) 00:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'd definitely stand a better chance of getting a good answer if you asked this on our Entertainment ref.desk. They are amazingly good at this sort of question. SteveBaker (talk) 01:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like the story in The Girl I Left Behind.75.91.102.188 (talk) 01:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Seems like writing a new song in a folk style, and giving it the same name as a famous folk song, would be a needlessly confusing thing to do! :P 80.41.20.78 (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OR - Meaning[edit]

Pardon my ignorance of leet, but what does 'OR' mean? 'Original Research'?--KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 02:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, usually. See WP:OR, which is Wikipedia shorthand for Wikipedia:No original research. Usually if you see a little abbreviated word like this used on talk pages it has a WP: link shortcut equivalent... WP:NPOV, WP:V, etc. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 02:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're thinking of my anonyms.swer to the "Goth vs. Emo" question above, I meant Original Research. Basically Wikipedia shorthand for saying that I don't have a source for what I was saying and that it is my own original research (opinion). Dismas|^(talk) 03:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG! ~EdGl ★ 03:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two letter acronyms certainly have to be important, even TLAs can often be confused with one another so XTLAs are used for the avoidance of doubt. Wikipedia has its own special load of acronyms so two letter ones can be used more often but WP:OR would be more specific, see Wikipedia:Glossary for a lot of other wiki'ed acronyms and terms. Dmcq (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Glossary? TLDR. --Dweller (talk) 09:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, TLDR isn't in that glossary, I'm sure it should be added along with a number of others I've noticed being used here so there is a definitive list ;-) Oh and by the way that's an emoticon, a type of smiley Dmcq (talk) 10:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clocks[edit]

Why do most photos of clocks/watches depict the time as ten to two? 117.194.224.8 (talk) 04:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen somewhere that it's because it's a near-symmetrical position, and thus pleasing to the eye, and it allows the manufacturers' logo to be seen without a hand obscuring it.-gadfium 05:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The position (or ten past ten, which is similar) is called a "smiling watch"[1].-gadfium 05:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is asked probably about every six months or so. If you search the archives, you should be able to find the old answers. We even used to have an article about it before it was deleted due to lack of notability or some such thing. Dismas|^(talk) 05:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was a victory for the deletionists – one of their most egregious, in my opinion. The deletion discussion is here. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 05:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone who is interested here's an archived version of the article--Drogonov (talk) 08:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know this has been asked many times before, but none of them managed to come up with really satisfactory answers. A Google search showed me explanations like "the time of Abraham Lincoln's death" and "time the inventor of the clock died"... You get the picture... And even for the "manufacturer logo" explanation, I find that there are lots of other hand positions that can not get in the logo's way (9:15 or 2:45, for example). I'm still looking for a truly unique quality about the 10:10 or 1:50 position. And, here's another question: Are both positions (10:10 and 1:50) used equally frequently? Thanks in advance. 117.194.224.126 (talk) 07:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen it at 1.50, I've only ever seen it at 10.10 – or 10.8 to be more precise. I think the best answer you're going to get is the first one – there's a pleasing symmetry to it which shows the clock off to the best advantage in the shop. I also heard that it was beneficial for the watch itself to be kept in this position, but I doubt that is true. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 07:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds to me that this is a notable subject though the title of 10:08 probably is not a good one since there are a number of close alternatives. WP:NOTE says nothing about needing an explanation for something to be notable. It has been researched a few times, the research seems reliable enough and isn't just a blog, and a number of possible explanations have been given which may or may not be right, and lots of people are interested, that's quite enough. The delete discussion seemed to confuse reliability of the explanations or the p[articular times with reliability of the research. Dmcq (talk) 08:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cecil Adam's Column covered this a while back.APL (talk) 13:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't necessarily need an article of its own. One reason why it shouldn't necessarily have an article of its own is the difficulty of coming up with a suitable name for such article. Could we call it "Watch or clock faces in advertising"? I don't think that is so great, but it is the best I can think up. But clearly Clock face, which also has a redirect from Watch face, should include material on just this subject, but I don't think that it presently does. And a "See also" section in other related articles could link to just this sub-section. A little verbal note indicating the nature of the subject matter available at that link would also make this information more available to those seeking it. Bus stop (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation for 10:08 is given briefly in Watch#Analog. Astronaut (talk) 15:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a strong inclusionist - but even so - the 10:08 article was poorly named, had no references and could just as easily (and usefully) become a part of other articles (as indeed it subsequently has). The information it contained needed to be included - AND referenced - but the article itself deserved to be deleted. SteveBaker (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Links on Talk Pages[edit]

Very often (I'm not sure - it might be all the time) when I click on a link on a Talk Page, my browser downloads a PHP file and doesn't take me to the link. Is there any way I can stop this happening (using Google Chrome now, but I also found it on Firefox 3.1). --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've had similar problems with IE, perhaps you should ask this at the computing reference desk. --Drogonov (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's really a help desk issue. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 09:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get this with FireFox occasionally: I think it is a connection or server lag issue. An incomplete connection causes the browser to see the raw PHP and attempt to download it. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 14:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Company names[edit]

Though I am in the UK this may be an international issue, but has anybody got any idea why long established companies like Norwich Union, HSA, British Steel etc feel the need to change their company name. It must cost a fortune to do so.--81.170.40.155 (talk) 10:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Norwich Union is changing because it has been bought by Aviva, which presumably feels that it will be better placed if all of its operations worldwide have the same name. I appreciate the point you're making - it is expensive and appears to waste the goodwill and recognition value of the departing name. I guess the owners think the long term benefits outweigh the short term costs & loss.

HSA - "part of a family of organisations with mutual values who have joined together to form Simplyhealth. During 2009, we will be changing our name to Simplyhealth as we believe this better describes who we are and the services we offer." according to their website.

British Steel - bought out by Corus. Same explanation as for Norwich Union, except to add that British Steel had such a crappy history prior to privatisation that I'd guess there was little goodwill attached to the name.

There's a little more at Rebranding --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:49, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note Norwich Union has been part of Aviva since July 2002 and has been trading on the stock-markets as Aviva for a number of years too (since that date). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 13:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some companies build up long long names which, when the nature of their business changes, appears a little cumbersome.

In Taiwan, in recent years there has been another interesting phenomenon - political renaming. Due to historical reasons, many companies and other institutions which operate only in Taiwan are named "China so-and-so" or "Chinese so-and-so". The more independence-leaning politicians find this inappropriate, and in the early 2000s there was a spate of changes: see, for some example, Desinicization. The trend has apparently halted since the election of a Chinese reunification-leaning President and parliament last year. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but what took you so long to reply (ha ha!)--81.170.40.155 (talk) 11:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...and where the h ell did that blue box come from?--81.170.40.155 (talk) 11:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is what happends if the first character in a line is the spacebar. Fixed. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 11:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Tagihsimon said, not all names have a lot of goodwill attached. A good example would be Blackwater/Xe. Other companies may have some degree or mergers/splits/etc and change name. E.g. BenQ which was formerly called [2] "Acer Communication and Multimedia" and part of Acer [3]. Then there's the interesting case of Accenture who were required to change their name as a result of arbitration and splitting from Andersen Worldwide due to disputes with Arthur Andersen who they used to be a division of but had split with a while back and they were probably glad of the change after the Enron scandal which blew up after they renamed. Also there's cases like AT&T or ASB Bank where the initialism of acronym may have stood for something but most people now called the company solely by the initialism/acronym and the company may embrace that because whatever it stood for is no longer meaningful. A related case is Malaysia Airlines who still go by MAS in some situations, which used to stand for Malaysian Airline System but now only Malaysian Airlines which I would say is a better sounding name Nil Einne (talk) 12:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It sometimes happens with products: Here in the UK Marathon became Snickers, Opal Fruits became Starburst, Oil of Ulay became Oil of Olay and so on. Astronaut (talk) 14:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that Mars, Incorporated (read the section 'Mars Limited') renamed several of its products in 1990. Flamarande (talk) 18:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned "tactical rebranding" (article needed), which was the fate of Townsend Thoresen, Ratners, and Windscale--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The NGO English Nature changed its name to Natural England I think. What a waste of time, intellect, and money. 92.26.17.102 (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US economy without population growth[edit]

How might US economic and monetary policy have to change if the population stopped growing? Neon Merlin 14:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the biggest problems countries face when population growth declines is an increase in the average age. That means the proportion of the country claiming pensions (in the US, this is call Social Security) increases compared to the proportion working. That means the amount current workers need to contribute in order to pay those that have retired increases, which either requires an increase in the total tax burden (or increased borrowing) or a decrease in other government spending. --Tango (talk) 16:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I heard on the radio yesterday that in Germany, the old-age pension system is pay-as-you-go, as it is in the USA; and currently 3 workers support every 1 retiree; but in 20 years it looks like it's going to be 1 worker supporting every 1 retiree. There will have to be a higher tax rate, a reduction in benefits, or a new invention that creates free, unlimited energy that solves all the world's problems. Tempshill (talk) 00:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that this was already happening in the US because of all the baby boomers not having as many kids as their parents did. Dismas|^(talk) 02:03, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Machines and robots also age, but politician's brains stay firmly glued to the first industrial revolution. In the "West" machines now work for xyz persons, and this might even, in the long run be noticed by politicians trying to figure out who will pay our pensions.--Radh (talk) 12:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An aging population also means there are fewer young people who need to be supported. Those three workers are not only supporting 1 retiree. They are also directly supporting their own children, and indirectly supporting all children in the country. With fewer children, less will be spent on schools, medical services, vaccinations, and welfare payments/dependent deductions. This money will be freed up to support the retirees. There will also be more workers, as fewer children means women can spend more of their adult lives in paid employment. Countries with an aging population prospect are also encouraging or legislating for superannuation schemes (eg 401K) to make more retirees self-funded.KoolerStill (talk) 20:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the question is not about aging or slowing but an actual stop to population growth, the answer is going to be either a decline in economic growth, or a change in the make-up of that growth. Growth requires inputs, specifically labor, capital and technology. If the input of labor stops growing -- which is not the same as aging, declining labor force or anything other than stable-state labor input -- either growth will slow, or the other factors will have to increase so as to make up the difference. Immigration, for example, increases the labor component which (all else being equal) increases growth. DOR (HK) (talk) 10:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

British House of Commons > Speaker's logo[edit]

[4] Does anyone know where I could find either a larger version of the symbol on that page, or a vectory-PDF containing it? Thanks! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 15:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:House_of_Commons_logo.PNG --Sean 17:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I was more generally referring to the Speaker's logo, which is the logo containing the Portcullis, the Mace, and the words "The Speaker"... :P ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 17:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cell phone as a component[edit]

If a manufacturer wants to incorporate a cell-phone into its products (for example, a manufacturer of hardware wants that its servers send a SMS through the cell-phone net), should it buy a normal (for the consumer market) cell-phone and attach it to the product? Or are there any providers of only a basic cell-phone at the market? A cell-phone without screen, keyboard, loudspeakers, battery.--Mr.K. (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They would almost certainly want to buy the relevant components directly from a cell-phone manufacturer and build them directly into the product. I don't see how you could attach a phone, how would you connect them? Do phones have some kind of API you could use? --Tango (talk) 16:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some cell-phones can be connected through USB. If a product has a computer that should not be a problem, since the computer can dial a number through this connection.--Mr.K. (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you can readily buy a GSM module that can interface with the rest of your electronics. For a soldering-not-desired applications there are also wireless modems that plug into various standard computer ports. 62.78.198.48 (talk) 16:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under my laptop's battery is a little slot which takes a SIM card which would normally go in a phone. If I wanted to, I could subscribe to a mobile internet data service and access the internet anywhere I can get a mobile phone signal. Astronaut (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metal box by the side of the road[edit]

I see them once in awhile. They have one or two rubber tubes sticking out perpendicular to traffic flow which are securely affixed to the roadway. They stay there for a week or two then disappear. I know they are used to monitor traffic, but what are they called? Do they measure speed, or traffic volume, or both? Oftentimes they are followed by a new stop sign or traffic light. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.216.233 (talk) 20:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think they measure traffic volume. There are usually two so they can tell which direction the cars are going in (by which order they apply weight to the cables). --Tango (talk) 20:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - although the doubled ones can also measure speed. The rubber strips are hollow tubes and inside the box there is an air pressure sensor. When you drive over the strip, compressing it, the pressure sensor registers the fact and the box counts 1/2 of a car for the front wheels and 1/2 of a car for the back ones. Big trucks, people pulling trailers and things with more than two axles mess up the count - but they generally aren't after an exact number of vehicles, just a general idea of how busy the road is at different times of day. Some of these contraptions have two strips - and with that they can measure the time between you hitting the first and second strip and deduce the speed and direction from that. I'm told that they can even figure out whether you're accelerating or slowing down by measuring the difference in speed between when the front and back wheels hit the strip. SteveBaker (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A traffic counter? Nanonic (talk) 22:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Humans born and died[edit]

Roughly, how many humans are born per minute? And, roughly, how many died per minute?--Reticuli88 (talk) 20:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to birth rate, approximately 134 million babies were born in 2007. That works out at about 255 per minute. According to mortality rate, that current world rate is about 8.23 per 1000 per year. The current world population is about 6.8 billion, so that works out to 56 million a year. That's 106 per minute. --Tango (talk) 21:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We're doomed. Tempshill (talk) 20:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

see carrying capacity Rangermike (talk) 21:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If one were forced to listen to the sounds of all those babies being born and the sounds of all those people dying, let us say through some kind of electronic, worldwide setup, piped into one's ears via ear plugs, would it be considered a worse form of torture than water-boarding? Bus stop (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very probably :-) Astronaut (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do any Wikipedia mirrors do anything useful?[edit]

Do any of the sites copying Wikipedia content offer anything I can't get from Wikipedia itself (or Google cache if WP is down)? Cause it seems like they just clutter up search results for no purpose. 86.174.136.167 (talk) 21:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. One or two make lip-service at improving their copies of the articles - but without a way to automatically merge in changes we make here - that just means that they get outdated horribly quickly. It's kinda ironic...one of Wikipedia's great claims to fame is that we allow people to make copies - but in the end, any possible benefits from that got kinda wiped out by our own success. SteveBaker (talk) 23:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Once, and only once, I found one useful. I had created a diagram for an article. Someone flagged it for deletion because they didn't think my sourcing information was sufficient, and I was never notified about the proposed deletion. It got deleted, and when that occurs on Wikipedia, there's no undelete. One of the awful mirrors had it, though, so I salvaged it. It would be nice if Google would hammer them all downward in the search results. Tempshill (talk) 00:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was that some time ago? I think admins can undelete images now. --Tango (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was quite a while ago, thanks for the info. Tempshill (talk) 04:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Offline copies are useful. Online copies can serve as backups, but I can't see how they would ever be anything more. --Tango (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Theoretically, any of them could become a major fork if Wikipedia ever became evil. APL (talk) 01:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it the clone with the suspiciously glowing red eyes that you have to worry about? Here we have an entire army of clones! SteveBaker (talk) 02:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of being usefully reproduced elsewhere, Wikipedia's images end up having a huge amount of useful traction in the outside world (you see them all sorts of places—if you are an academic, you quickly notice that almost everyone's Powerpoint images come from Wikipedia for undergrad lectures, and even many academic books feature created-for-Wikipedia images in them). So that sort of accomplishes the original goal quite well. The idea of text redistribution has not really panned out to a whole lot. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 02:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does to a degree. Just today, I copied a huge chunk out of the Quaternion article to put onto our company Wiki (with due accreditation of course). But photos are certainly more useful - I probably raid WikiCommons several times a week. There is definitely benefit to having this free resource - it just doesn't lie in cloning the entire thing, changing the font and slapping adverts all over it. SteveBaker (talk) 02:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes: I downloaded a copy of Wikipedia which is formatted to be easier to read on my Google Phone. The company that did the conversion was not Wikimedia, so I guess that's a mirror/fork. --Sean 16:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.answers.com/ not only mirrors Wikipedia content, it has content of its own. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 18:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the offline copies load more quickly than Wikipedia, which can take a while over a slow connection. John M Baker (talk) 01:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What have I missed?[edit]

I have been busy with coursework for the last few days and hadn't seen much of the news, then I suddenly discovered something seems to be going on. Apparently the government is about to be overthrown, noone is going to vote in the election, the queen is annoyed and the speaker of the house of commons is going to be thrown out. What is going on here?

148.197.114.207 (talk) 21:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are calls for a general election, but the government isn't anywhere near being overthrown. There has been a big scandal over MPs making unreasonable expenses claims and the speaker hasn't been strong enough in working towards reform of the expenses system and has annoyed quite a lot of MPs with how he has handled the whole situation. Some MPs filed a motion of no confidence in him so he resigned to avoid such a divisive issue harming the House of Commons (and causing something of a constitutional crisis - the standard way of getting rid of speakers is chopping their heads off, and that option doesn't really exist these days!). No-one ever votes in European elections, so there's no great change there. I don't know how the Queen feels about the whole thing, she usually keeps her political opinions to herself. --Tango (talk) 22:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We do (of course) have an article: Disclosure of expenses of British Members of Parliament. --Tango (talk) 22:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that in passing when I was having breakfast this morning, but couldn't make head or tale of it as I've not been following the news much in the last week or so. I'd be interested to know what's happening, too. Is there going to be an election? "disOrder! disOrder! I say disORDER!" --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 02:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

David Cameron has called for an election, supposedly to restore public confidence in the government, but a lot of people have noted that the expenses abuse has been completely cross party. In which case, why would we have any more confidence in the Tories or Lib Dems? They were all just as bad. Hence, how could anyone vote for anyone? So, we shall see. Of course, we could vote in an entirely new crop of MPs who have never been in the House before.... Noting the headlines on discarded free newspapers the last week or so has been wonderfully filmic. 80.41.33.31 (talk) 07:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing very dramatic is happening at all. Cameron has been calling for an election for months. I think maybe the OP has been reading the paper.Popcorn II (talk) 08:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why the Speaker has been forced out of office, though. Why is he being held culpable for the perceived dishonesty or greed of individual MPs? Is he supposed to police the expenses system or what? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:35, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've said this before, but I'll say it again, as no-one gave me a round of applause. :) What's the difference between a yarn an old lady spins and a yarn a politician spins? One's a ball of wool. :) --KageTora - (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 10:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you miss the sound of one hand clapping?DOR (HK) (talk) 10:07, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would appear that the Speaker's Office is reponsible for the regulation of MPs expenses. Expenses are submitted to this office, and it seems that no real checking for applicability has been going on. His staff are civil servants, not accountants or auditors. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the article Tango linked: "In the aftermath of the Speaker's statement to MPs, questions were widely raised regarding Martin's future in the job,[165][166] largely due to his focusing on the actual leak of information, rather than the expenses themselves, and due to his response to the point of order raised by the Labour MP Kate Hoey, who suggested that the Speaker and Commons' decision to call in the police was "an awful waste of resources".[167] A Conservative MP, Douglas Carswell, subsequently announced that he planned to table a motion of no confidence in the Speaker, if he could garner sufficient support.[168]"

Does this help? 80.41.33.31 (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When was Owen Hart's time of death?[edit]

I know that this Saturday, May 23rd, would make the 10th anniversary of Owen Hart's death. I'm just wondering, what was the exact time of death of Owen Hart? I live in the Central Time Zone, so what was Owen Hart's time of death? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirdrink13309622 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to our article on Owen Hart, he was pronounced dead on arrival at Truman Medical Center. The live event, Over the Edge, was scheduled to start at 8pm EDT according to this poster, which would be 7pm in the Central Time Zone. I know of no official time of death, but I would surmise it was sometime between his fall (after 8pm) and his arrival at the hospital shortly thereafter. Coreycubed (talk) 23:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article actually says "Hart had actually died while still being tended to in the ring." - so presumably it was quite soon after he fell. So - probably shortly after 8pm Eastern time (7pm Central). SteveBaker (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although the information in a sentence that is inserted in the article in that way, with parenthesis and no citations, should be read with caution. --Saddhiyama (talk) 12:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]