Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 September 16

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.

September 16

hurricanes

any hurricanes to hit ontario canada —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.49.48.25 (talk) 00:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Are you asking if any hurricanes are about to hit Ontario (no) or if they have in the past (yes)? A search for "hurricanes in ontario" returns the relevant results for the latter, including our article on Hurricane Hazel. The Ontario Weather Page includes a section on hurricanes. — Lomn 00:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, in the past. See Hurricane Hazel and List of Canada hurricanes for further information. Battleaxe9872 ^Talk 01:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Even when we don't get them directly, we often get leftover rain and wind, like last week. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

And that's what "Hurricane" Hazel was. It wasn't a hurricane by the time it hit Ontario, but it was still a serious enough storm that people were killed in flooded river valleys. The answer is no. Unless you mean this "Hurricane" Hazel. :-) --Anonymous, 12:15 UTC, September 16, 2010.

Winchester gun

I have a Winchester Repeating arms Weapon Sereal # 17062 I've been told it is a rifle but it use to shoot 12 gage shotgun shells in its day. It belongs to my Husband and we would like some information on the gun. It has a plate under the handle that reads Manufactured by the Winchester Repeating Arms co. New Haven Conn. U.S.A. Pat Feb 16 & July 20 1886. We would like to know how old it is, was it used to feed the family, etc. Any information you can give us would be greatly appreciated Thank you so much Butch and Diane Kindig E-Mail= <email removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.13.121.117 (talk) 03:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I have removed your email address for your own safety; as mentioned above your question will be answered here. May I recommend that you try to find an antique arms dealer or appraiser. There are people who specialize in identifying and appraising weapons, and a google search of the phrase "antique arms dealer" turns up some leads. You may try to find one (or maybe more, for a second opinion) in your local area to help you research the origins of your gun. --Jayron32 03:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

We do have an article Winchester rifle with quite a bit of information, including links to articles on some specific models. You might look at the pictures to see if you recognize yours. Looie496 (talk) 05:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

There are a lot of gun websites out there. You seem to be unclear about what kind of weapon it is. How big is the barrel's opening (internal diameter)? If you look inside it does it have grooves that go around in a vortex pattern? or is it smooth? Those facts would help quite a bit. Also, is there a patent # on the gun? Shadowjams (talk) 06:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Does Winchester Model 1887/1901 ring any bells? Shadowjams (talk) 06:24, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Three questions

The first two questions concern this picture. http://quizilla.teennick.com/user_images/B/BA/BAB/BabyBoo108/1143999033_pprabbit.jpg

What is the font used for the wird 'rabbit' and we want to know if there are any similar pictures to this as the quiz on Quizilla has been deleted for some reason.

The third question is this: What is the value of other world currencies compared to the U.S dollar? Like Dollars to Euros, Yen to Dollars, etcetera? 64.75.158.196 (talk) 04:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

For the third question, you can go to Google and type in '1 dollar in euros' and it will give you the current exchange rate. Dismas|^(talk) 04:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I find this Universal Currency Converter very useful. --jjron (talk) 15:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

As for font identification, I don't have time to do this for you, but you could edit that picture to get rid of the background pixels around the word "Rabbit", so it's black-on-white; and then upload to WhatTheFont, and it will try to ID the font for you. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The font is Savoy. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:35, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Chinese food

I was watching Mr. Mom tonight and was reminded of something that I had wondered the first time I saw the film. In it, Michael Keaton's character pulls a chunk of what appear to be dry white thin noodles off of a larger brick of the same stuff. He throws this chunk into a wok and they almost instantly expand to a couple times their size. The stuff doesn't look heavy at all and it reminds me of a white tumbleweed. What is this stuff? And why do I never see it in Chinese restaurants? Dismas|^(talk) 05:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I haven't seen the movie since God was a small child, but that sounds like dried rice noodles. They puff when deep fried, similar to maltodextrin-based prawn chips. → ROUX ₪ 06:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Ramen? WikiDao ☯ (talk) 06:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It's possible, but I doubt it. Ramen is generally a wheat-based product, which would require significant use of maltodextrin and at least two more steps in its cooking process to arrive at an end product which would puff in boiling oil. → ROUX ₪ 10:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

They were the only kind of noodles I could think of in general terms of "a brick" and "Chinese"(sic). I still have no idea what happened in the movie, though, so should have just kept my mouth shut on this one. ;) WikiDao ☯ (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

See [1] which is somewhat dark and [2] (much better quality but found it second) examples of deep frying thin rice noodles/vermicelli Nil Einne (talk) 10:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It must have been rice noodles! Dismas|^(talk) 22:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Population

If the one child policy was never created, what would the population of China be today?--72.123.255.96 (talk) 08:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Kinda hard to give an exact answer on that one, since we have no way of knowing the amount of children the average Chinese couple would have. And it always varies with each generation, you can't look at the statistics of families pre-one child policy and decide that if, for example, it was normal for the average couple to have 4 kids that it would be the same way today. 24.189.87.160 (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

However, it is worth noting that due to the policy and the cultural preference for males, a lot of female babies have been aborted or killed. Maybe were it not for that policy, those (well maybe most, you can't account for accidental miscarriages or life-saving abortions) female children would have lived, so if there's any reliable statistics on how many female babies were aborted or killed in China since the one child policy was implemented, that would be the closest you could come to getting an approximate number on what the Chinese population would be like today without the policy. By the way, haven't they relaxed the policy to two children now? 24.189.87.160 (talk) 09:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

See One child policy#Effects on population growth and fertility rate:

The Chinese government estimates that it had three to four hundred million fewer people in 2008 with the one-child policy, than it would have had otherwise.

-- ToE^T 15:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

According to the article Missing women of Asia, there are 50 million less females in China. However I don't understand how you use this information to derive the answer. These two things are too loosely connected. Other Asian countries without the one child policy also experience this effect. And you don't know any statistics on how frequently female babies are aborted/killed. In my opinion this is not a good method. The first method is better.--71.67.176.29 (talk) 06:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Since you and the OP both hail from Ohio.... perhaps you'd provide some of the evidence you provide above. Are you arguing the lack of abortion in those countries accounts for the discrepancy? I don't see you arguing that, and your point about the distinction is interesting, but what are you getting at? Shadowjams (talk) 07:39, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Can you not read? I am saying that 24.189.87.160's first post makes sense, but second post is not helpful. The number of males in China outnumber females by 50 million. 24.189.87.160's second post says you can use this information to determine: China's current population if not for the one child policy. I am saying no that is a bad idea, they have nothing in common. Taiwan has a male/female ratio of 110:100 even though Taiwan does not have a one child policy. South Korea has a male/female ratio of 108:100 even though South Korea does not have a one child policy. (see one child policy for proof) Therefore it is pretty apparent that the one child policy is not the sole contributor to the missing females in China, as other countries without the one child policy also have the gender imbalance. So therefore you cannot look at the gender imbalance of China and say it is caused solely by the One child policy. And if you can't do that, then you obviously cannot use that information to determine the One child policy's effect on China's population, as 24.189.87.160's second post says you can. And that is what I'm getting at. As for my ip, sorry for the confusion. I was using my smartphone to make the original post.--71.67.176.29 (talk) 08:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

First, never did I say that looking at the amount of aborted female babies in China was an accurate measure of what the Chinese population would be like today without the one child policy, I said it's the closest that one could get to an approximate number, considering there is no reliable method of knowing how large the Chinese population would be like without the policy. And I also never said the gender imbalance in China is caused solely by the one-child policy, however there is no denying that it greatly encourages it, since parents who are allowed to raise only one child by law will undoubtedly prefer to have a son due to the cultural preference for boys, and they will have no qualms about turning to abortion/infanticide if their first-born happens to be a girl. 24.189.87.160 (talk) 02:47, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Witches

Greetings Some time ago I read, but can no longer remember the source that there is an incorrect translation regarding "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" it was stated that in the old if not ancient, Hebrew the writing "witch" is minutely different from "Poison Murderer" and could quite easily be translated to witch instead of Poison murderer. I also understood the in the old bad Roman Catholic times they in fact because of this translation demonized witches and references to Germanic countries should actually be replaced with "old Roman Catholic dogmas relative to the times/dark ages." who started the so called witch hunts in their misplaced fervor to rid the world of evil, they only added more evil if you regard it in the light of the commandment "thou shalt not kill" because many innocents were falsely accused and most horribly burned at the stake or stoned. Apparently Christianity abhors such actions but nevertheless it was perpetrated.

I am not affiliated to any religious group and would really like to know about the translation.

I find for instance many words have the same spelling but used in a different context those same words can actually have totally different meanings. In Hawaii I read that only a mother understands her toddler. Facial expressions, body language and the way a word is spokenor expressed gave it a total different meaning. Their Kahunas although they were healers would have been declared to be witches. This is merely an aside regarding the use of words, and not the main question regarding the translation "Poison Murderer" vs "Witch".

I do not know how you reply but if required my E-mail address is:- redacted If nothing can be found may I request that you E-mail me and just say "sorry we can't help you"

Peace be with you. Daniel 41.240.209.62 (talk) 10:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

• • N.B. Edited after reading answers and viewing pages referred to. **

Having read some of the postings I am appalled. We seem so far removed from the original and as no-one still speaks the language as then spoken, all seems conjecture and bullying for position to put forth their opinions based on educated guesses. To me kill and murder has the same meaning, taking the life of any creations with blood in it's veins is beyond me. My question thus to me remains answered as these things apparently were taken from the old testament and not the new order of love, support of each other as preached by many religions. I must repeat I am not a christian I have no religious or witches or any other affiliations but have read many religious and non-religious books in my search for knowledge. I could possibly answer quite a few questions on witches based on modern day knowledge. Truth lasts for ever under different guises/changed to local requirements. My question will apparently remain answered until the old ones return. One man said poisoner ten jumped and outvoted him. Who was correct I cannot perceive. I thank you all for the enlightening comments and references and bid you peace and Fare thee well. 41.240.209.62 (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I removed your e-mail address. You'll get answers to your question here (and I don't doubt there will be plenty), and leaving your e-mail address in a public place like this quickly results in your inbox being filled with spam. TomorrowTime (talk) 11:05, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

To get you started, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" is a quote from the King James Version of the Bible, translated under James VI & I, who was vocally Protestant and anti-Catholic (arguably as a direct result of the Gunpowder Plot). He was at the forefront of much of the witch-hunting in Britain. 86.164.78.91 (talk) 11:47, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I commend to you our pretty decent article witchcraft and the less good article witchcraft and divination in the Bible. If you look here and here, you can compare translations of the passage in question. 86.164.78.91 (talk) 12:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

(ec) At this site you can view many translations of Exodus 22:18 such as Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live (KJV), You are not to permit a sorceress to live. (Complete Jewish Bible), maleficos non patieris vivere (Latin Vulgate), A la hechicera no darás la vida (Sagradas Escrituras 1569), Eine Zauberin sollst du nicht leben lassen. (Elberfelder 1905, German) and more. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

This citation from the article Witchcraft relates to the OP's question: "In the 16th century Reginald Scott, a prominent critic of the witch-trials, translated kashaph, pharmakeia and their Latin Vulgate equivalent veneficos as all meaning 'poisoner', and on this basis claimed that 'witch' was an incorrect translation and poisoners were intended. His theory still holds some currency, but is not widely accepted." Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I think you were thinking of the commandment "thou shalt not murder", which is a bit different from thou shalt not kill. Capital punishment is not the point. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 18:09, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Is not killing innocents murder? WikiDao ☯ (talk) 19:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Not killing innocents but killing "guilty" people is still murder 61.231.65.54 (talk) 19:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

That gets a little more complicated (and, actually, even killing innocents can happen without that being considered murder). See eg. Civilian casualties and Capital punishment, but I think we are getting off-topic. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 19:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The original Hebrew of Exodus 22:17 says, "Mechashefah lo techayeh." A "mechashefah" is a witch or sorceress. "Mechashef" is the masculine. This page discusses a bit about what constitutes the actions of a mechashef. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Hebrew-alphabet spelling is םכשפה — a participle derived from the triconsonantal verb root k-sh-p "to practice sorcery". Don't know of any Hebrew word meaning "to poison" which has a similar pronunciation... AnonMoos (talk) 10:36, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

(After the OP edited their question) There is no sensible reason to be appalled at the fact that volunteers have given properly referenced answers to your original question. Please do not use this desk for what appears to be soapboxing for vegetarianism. Most people enjoy being carnivores and would dismiss the notion that anything is wrong with taking the life of an edible creature with blood in its (not "it's") veins. I think you mean your question is unanswered, not answered. It is not necessary for you to delare your religion or non-religion here, nor a belief in "old ones" returning, because it does not affect the answers we may give. Murder is defined as unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being while killing is just the terminating of a life (any life, including that of the ant you stood on recently). Fare thee well too. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Five-pointed stars on house

Star on house

In other parts of the country (particularly in the midwest US), I see five-pointed stars on houses. What does it mean? Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 15:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

See Hex sign, although that article seems to suggest that six-pointed stars are used. Rojomoke (talk) 16:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps a little more specifically, see also barnstars and related star-shaped anchor plates. — Lomn 16:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, barnstars, File:Strasburg 51 E Main.JPG is more typical of what I'm talking about. Sometimes they are 3D like that one, sometimes 2D. Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 16:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

See also Distelfink, another Penn Dutch barn symbol. (and a word you just don't get to use often enough) 75.41.110.200 (talk) 18:05, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Those stars are quite popular simply as pieces of kitsch. Many places sell them and many people have them for no other reason other than that they look nice. I have one over my kitchen stove for no other reason than it looking nice. Dismas|^(talk) 20:08, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Or perhaps to visually break up a large empty space? My wife and I considered hanging a barnstar in the "pediment" of our home because as is, it looks pretty plain. Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 16:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Bubba73 ^{(You talkin' to me?)}, 20:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Soybeans

What is the procedure to ferment soybeans —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tijjany (talk • contribs) 16:09, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

See our excellent article on Tofu. → ROUX ₪ 16:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Tofu is not usually fermented. Soy sauce is fermented, but that article doesn't give much information on the process. Looie496 (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Nattō has a few details on how it's produced and there seem to be various guides online. This seems relevant when it comes to soya sauce [3]. This person [4] also appears to have some knowledge on fermenting soya beans, they said they would post a guide but never did it from what I can tell, perhaps they will if you ask nicely Nil Einne (talk) 22:33, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

William Holden Actor Bio.

I read the Wikipedia of the Actor William Holden. He was one of my favorites & I've seen most of his movies. I looked at the Movies he was in, and didn't see the LAPD Police move he stared in with (A young) Actor Stacy Keech. He was a crusty old veteran by the movie name of "Bumper Morgan" and it was a pretty good film. That lead part was later played in a sequel by George Kennedy. I have often wondered why I haven't seen this movie on replay -- then to see you don't list it ??? Why ?

Thank You,

9/16/2010 Fr: Tom Larson, Phoenix, Arizona —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.26.76.32 (talk) 18:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I've removed your email address -- posting such things on Wikipedia is not a good idea. Looie496 (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

... and to answer, the movie was The Blue Knight. The version with William Holden was a made-for-TV movie. Looie496 (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

That link just goes to a disambiguation page; we don't have an article for the movie in question. And as for "why" we don't have information on it, it can only be because you , questioner, haven't researched it and then made an article about it using reliable sources. Be bold, write the article, and then the next person who wonders about that movie will read your article and get the information they want. Pretty cool, huh? Everything here was written by folks like you - and even dopes like me! Matt Deres (talk) 21:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out the discrepancy, Tom. (Matt beat me to other things I was going to say!)
• Though "The Blue Knight" was mentioned on his page at Emmy Award, "Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actor - Miniseries or a Movie" for 1974, I have now put it into his filmography.
• Remember that anyone can edit Wikipedia, if you see this sort of missing detail you can put it in yourself (click where its says [edit]).
• If you are interested in writing an article see Your first article - 220.101 talk^\Contribs 21:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Natural resources

Why are virtually all important natural resources (e.g. coal, oil, uranium) found in areas with lots of violence and turmoil (Middle East, Africa, etc.)? --71.153.45.75 (talk) 22:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Umm, probably because they're not. A quick glance at List of countries by oil production, List of countries by uranium production, List of countries by coal production, List of countries by aluminium production and List of countries by iron production just does not reveal that sort of pattern. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The OP might want to read confirmation bias. Dismas|^(talk) 22:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

To elaborate, it's only when the source of resources is put into question (by political turmoil) that it becomes an issue that gets in the news. The U.S. gets much of its oil from Canada but, because there is never any doubt about the oil is actually coming, and because Canada is pretty politically stable, the issue (or rather non-issue) isn't written about. On the other hand, when Russia threatens to shut off the gas to Western Europe every couple of years, you hear a lot more about it. Buddy431 (talk) 00:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Likewise, the U.S. oxygen supply remains steady, despite international pressure. Shadowjams (talk) 06:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The above are good answers, but also see Oil curse. --Sean 15:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

"Anarcho-Totalitarianism" source

The term "anarcho-totalitarianism" was in July 2010 attributed in a magazine article to the late William F. Buckley, jr. Unfortunately, I can find no sign of the term in any prior usage, and I doubt he used it this year. Can anyone find an actual cite from the period he was alive to confirm he is the source of this usage? It is not in any National Review archives, nor in any Google books. Thanks! Collect (talk) 22:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Using Google Books, I find a quote from the book The voice of reason: essays in objectivist thought, written by Ayn Rand and published in 1989, that says "A term coined by author Ernest van den Haag to describe Libertarianism captures this aspect perfectly: anarcho-totalitarianism" (page 325). Not sure why you were unable to find it. Looie496 (talk) 00:41, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

"A worried William F. Buckley Jr. called it "Anarcho-Totalitarianism." The Nation, Sept 2010. Seems to be making the rounds. And wasn't Ayn Rand dead by '89? WikiDao ☯ (talk) 01:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The book is a collection of her writings. No idea when she wrote the piece in question. Looie496 (talk) 02:36, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

As an afterthought, since Google Books only gives a snippet view, I can't actually say for sure that the sentence I quoted was written by her rather than one of the editors. Looie496 (talk) 02:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Appears clear the tem was from van den Haag, and not from Buckley. Unsure why the new article (yep - making the rounds) attributes it to Buckley. And I was looking for "Buckley" in my searches <g> which explains why I did not find him to be the coiner. Thanks. Collect (talk) 10:25, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Apparently van den Haag did lots of his writing for The Nation, Buckley's mag, so a connection of some sort seems plausible. Looie496 (talk) 16:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Buckley's rag is National Review. Haag apparently became a long-time contributor to it "after befriending Buckley". It's very right-wing, of course. The Nation is different, and left-wing. Anyway, even if Haag wrote or said it first, it was at least most-likely "published" first by Buckley. I could see Buckley just appropriating such a phrase if he wanted to, and it seems like a phrase he'd want to. Or Haag could have gotten it from Buckley. Attributing it to Buckley (assuming he ever used the phrase at all which, again, seems likely) seems more-or-less accurate either way. If the phrase catches on I'm sure there will be a full scholarly looking-into-it eventually. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 20:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

(out) Still found no sign of usage by Buckley during his lifetime, while van den Haag is found. If it were "published" it would, indeed, have shown up somewhere <g>. All of Buckley's columns and books are indexed now - and it is not used in any of them. Collect (talk) 17:32, 19 September 2010 (UTC) BTW, "The Nationa" is not "The National Review." Honest! Collect (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)