Miscellaneous desk
< July 25	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 27 >

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.

July 26

Vowels/Consonants at the End of Many Female/Male Names

this question has been moved here to the language desk

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

How come in a lot of languages female names generally end with a vowel or a vowel-like sound (a, e, i, o, u) while male names generally end with a consonant or a consonant-like sound (ex. "Philippe" in French)? Futurist110 (talk) 04:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Philippe Petit is male. Be that as it may, the Latin-based languages typically have a trailing "a" to denote feminine gender, so it's reasonable they would do likewise with female names, including those derived from male names. "Paul" and "Paula" come to mind in English. You also have names like "Maria" and "Mario". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When did the Burger King on the corner of 7th Street and Warren Ave. in Bremerton, WA first open its doors?

Here. Thanks in case someone actually finds out, though I'm not at all confident anyone who sees this has the ability to find out. I went there as a kid many years ago and just was curious. 20.137.18.53 (talk) 13:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Kitsap County's parcel data web app, [1], it was built in 1970. Building details link: [2]. General info link: [3]. It is possible it was not originally a Burger King. The parcel was sold in 1985, for $355,000: [4]. Pfly (talk) 23:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your best bet would probably to either ask the Burger King store itself (probably not easy to get you question passed up to someone that would actually either know or get someone to look in to it) or the PR people for Burger King for the state or country or however Burger King organises themselves and see if they will provide the info. Nil Einne (talk) 06:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to get in touch with the franchise owner, and they should know (unless it has passed hands since opening). A lot of owners put up a sign mentioning who owns it, and a manager could also help get you in touch with them. I also agree with Nil Einne that BK corporate can probably help. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google Talk

Today, my Google Talk suddenly started acting weird. I haven't changed any of the settings, but when I log in, a green ball appears beside my name. However, none of my contacts are displayed in the pane below, and even when I try sending them fresh invites, nothing happens. I tried reinstalling G.Talk, and signing out and signing in multiple times. Nothing's working. The same thing happens when I'm online on Gmail. I can see the contact names, but none of them are online (even if they are in real life) and no one else can see me online either. Can anyone tell me what the matter can possibly be? Thanks in advance. 117.227.167.242 (talk) 14:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's a Google Talk outage going on - [5] --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

"The kitten was bearing its mother patiently as she licked it vigorously up and down its back. " In this sentence, is the use of "bear" correct, or should it be "was bearing with its mother.." instead? 117.227.151.153 (talk) 18:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As written, the sentence implies that the kitten is carrying the mother. "Bearing with" would be better, but it still has the potential to be misconstrued as "carrying" rather than "putting up with" eldamorie (talk) 18:31, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Bearing with its mother's attention" would work better. μηδείς (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's comprehensible, but confusing. I think there are two different problems with it (though I would call them lexical, not grammatical). One is that "bear" in this sense is usually a static verb, like "like", and is not normally used in the progressing ("be bearing"). The other is that "bear" (in that sense) usually takes an action rather than an actor as its object ("I can't bear this carping"). When it does take a person (or an animal), it refers to something the person habitually does, rather than a specific action ("I can't bear him!"). It can also take a dummy object ("it") with a temporal modifying clause, and that is what I would use here: "The kitten bore it patiently as its mother licked ... ". --ColinFine (talk) 19:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the verb should be treated as static, and thought to comment on the preferability of bore with its mother's attention. But one can imagine circumstances where an active description might make sense if the context of previous sentences warranted it. Frankly speaking, I can't stand people who say things like "I'm loving it." But I am old-fashioned in that I have standards and traditions. μηδείς (talk) 04:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have a Language Reference Desk, where any future questions about grammar should be posted. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 21:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest substituting "tolerating" for "bearing", to make this sentence clearer. StuRat (talk) 10:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference in connotation and sense. Tolerate focuses on the result and can mean "doesn't mind", while bear with focuses on the emotion and self-control of the subject who, it is implied, does mind the treatment. μηδείς (talk) 16:19, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone remember this toyline?

Does anyone remember this toyline? It was from the late 1970s - early 1980s. There were robots, which were a standard, blocky shape, but came in various colours. They could be connected to each other to form larger structures. There were also accessories, like drillbits, and maybe wheels and treads, that could be attached to the robots. There were also tiny, non-poseable human figures that could serve as pilots of large vehicles formed from the robots. JIP | Talk 18:17, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you mean Transformers, but I thought I'd ask. It might be helpful if you said what country these were in. --ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a die-hard Transformers G1 fan, I'm certain it wasn't Transformers. I saw these in Finland, but I don't think they came from there. They were probably either from the USA or from China or Japan. JIP | Talk 19:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds familiar, but my search of ebay and amazon was fruitless. μηδείς (talk) 22:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I searched Plaid Stallions for "robots", and the third result was an item about Microbots, which mentions Micronauts. I don't suppose it was either of those? (I also noticed Space Robots: UFO series.) I guess as a Transformers fan you know all about Category:Toy_robots already. Robotix (toys) seems a possibility but (judging by an image search) was not very blocky; Zoids is also possible, but was even less blocky. Card Zero (talk) 22:56, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of reminds me of Voltron, specifically Armored Fleet Dairugger XV but doesn't quite exactly fit your description. Vespine (talk) 04:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe GoBots? Adam Bishop (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, none of these are at all like the toyline I remember. It was more of a construction toyline than a robot toyline. The toyline basically consisted of rectangular building bricks, except that these building bricks were kind-of like robots - as I recall they could move their arms and legs around a bit, and had faces. Every robot was the exact same shape, but they came in various colour schemes. You could build vehicles from the robots like you would from LEGO bricks, but you could also play around with individual robots. Various accessories, like wheels, treads and drillbits could be attached to the constructions. It was definitely a 1980s toy, but I'm not sure if it was already around in the 1970s, I was three years old when the 1970s ended. JIP | Talk 15:01, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Robotroids/Bloccars? --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 17:41, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this toy? It does not appear to have detachable wheels and treads, but it is a modular construction toy with drillbit like tools. --Modocc (talk) 21:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Foul smell from mouth

we cannot offer diagnoses or suggest treatments for medical conditions

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I read in a magazine that a person didn't had tooth decay but his mouth gave a foul smell. I was thinking about it, what could be the possible reasons behind this. Why was his mouth giving smell even when he had no decay and had white clean teeth. I think smell may came from his stomach but I am not sure. Just like that magazine character, one of my friend also has such type of problem. Can you, please, tell me the possible reasons along with its prevention? What measures one can take to overcome such a mouth smell problems? Sunny Singh (DAV) (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC) "The reference desk will not answer (and will usually remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or request medical opinions, or seek guidance on legal matters. Such questions should be directed to an appropriate professional, or brought to an internet site dedicated to medical or legal questions." μηδείς (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is permissible to link you to the article bad breath, without further comment. (This doesn't amount to a diagnosis, since "bad breath" is merely a descriptive term, another way of saying "foul smell from mouth".) Card Zero (talk) 19:21, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's mistake was to refer to one of his friends, thereby making it a request for a diagnosis. If he had left it in the realm of the hypothetical, i.e. by just saying "what are some possible reasons and cures for bad breath", the discussion would not have been closed down. Pity. --Viennese Waltz 19:56, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Better safe than sorry. If the cause is not immediately obvious (for example, never brushing one's teeth, or smoking heavily), then a doctor needs to check it out. There can be any number of possible causes, from the trivial to the dangerous. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A closed discussion is a closed discussion. We don't need to encourage such posts with wouldashouldacouldas and we don't need to sneak in advice on how people who don't brush aren't at as much risk as others--there is consensus for this closure and if you object take it to the talk page. μηδείς (talk) 04:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]