Miscellaneous desk
< June 23	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 25 >

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.

June 24[edit]

Mrs. M. Whitfield[edit]

Can any user please give me information on Mrs. M. Whitfield, B.A., LL.B, who was a teacher of French and German at Carmel College, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, England, from October 1954 onwards. Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 07:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might start by asking that college for info. I imagine that basic biographical info would be released freely. StuRat (talk) 07:37, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you StuRat. I should have mentioned that the college closed in 1997. Simonschaim (talk) 08:37, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd imagine your best bet would be to get the telephone directory for the area and go through the Whitfield entries in the hope you might find a relative. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Simonschaim (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You probably know this, but there's a tiny amount at [1], seems to be an active site, by the son of the college's founder, who could be a good source.John Z (talk) 21:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you John Z. I am aware of this site. Simonschaim (talk)

mosquitoes[edit]

is there any plant which you can grow in your garden to keep mosquitoes away — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.110.213.112 (talk) 07:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not directly, but some plants suck up standing groundwater, where mosquitoes breed, and that would certainly help. StuRat (talk) 07:52, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of plants listed in our article at Insect repellent#Insect repellents from natural sources.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but probably not in the way you want. Lemongrass and geraniums are two common plants that contain natural mosquito repellents,[2] but they will not repel mosquitoes by simply growing in your yard. You have to grow them, and then take a part of the plant and rub in on your body. So, in the end, it's no different than just picking up some organic repellent from the store. It is a common misconception that there are "magical plants" that will repel mosquitoes simply by being present in your yard. They do not exist...or at least, they do not repel mosquitoes enough to be noticeable. The best way to prevent mosquitoes is to avoid standing water of any sort, and to talk to your neighbors about avoiding standing water in their yards. Quinn ^✹SUNSHINE 14:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh also, just a tip: If there is a certain place in your yard you like to sit, like a patio or deck, an oscillating fan can work wonders in keeping the mosquitoes away, but only if you sit in the air current of the fan. Quinn ^✹SUNSHINE 14:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the OP geolocates to Mumbai, which I think is a challenging environment for mosquito control. Looie496 (talk) 15:32, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Venus fly trap? Are there any plants that produce DDT? Shadowjams (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose a Venus fly trap might get one or two, if they happen to land in just the right spot (it doesn't attract mosquitoes, so it would just be blind luck). But you'd need to kill hundreds of mosquitoes a day to make a noticeable difference. StuRat (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might also try to make a small-to-medium sized pond. Mosquito larvae are aquatic and if you have fish in the pond, they'll eat up all the larva. To help against adult mosquitoes, get a citronella candle. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 18:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plants don't make DDT but they can make pyrethrum. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Othello (2001): John Othello and Ben Jago?[edit]

Double-posted question: Do not answer here

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

I have a question regarding the relationship between John Othello and Ben Jago? They share a very complex relationship and I'm struggling to put it to words. Because even though, throughout the film, Jago is hellbent on sabotaging John Othello at the start he states (about Othello), "I loved him to you know". Any help is greatly appreciated! 220.233.24.164 (talk) 08:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the rules, particularly about NOT posting questions to more than one desk. The Entertainment desk is where this belongs, and it will be answered there. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 08:26, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

killing a goat[edit]

OP indef'd for trolling

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

Ok so if I was firing my gun in the yard for example and then I was to fire off a round and it hits a goat in the head in the nex yard along and the goat dies, am I committing murder or manslaughter, and also what are the chances that the same time I fired possibly someone came passed in a car and shoots the goat in a drive by, and that my shot actually went off and did not hit the goat, or that the goat had a heart attack and dited and it's not anything to do with the gun, or actually has already dropped to the ground dead before the bullet hits, if I can't actually get up to the goat and see if there's a wound in it and if it's a death-dealing wound if there is, and would it be best to just keep quiet and hide the gun. My neighbour isn't home Roger 11 Handyman (talk) 17:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that Wikipedia cannot and does not give legal advice. If you find yourself in any of the situations described above please contact your lawyer. Having said that, your question immediately made me think of a story from Sweden where a hunter shot an elk, the bullet passed straight through the animal and killed a skier 60m away. The hunter was acquitted. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In reading the story of a bullet passing through an elk and hitting a skier "Just 60 metres beyond the felled beast" I am surprised that most of the commentary surrounding the incident concerns the passing of the bullet clear through the elk before hitting the skier. Isn't it equally noteworthy that a skier was situated near to where the hunting of elk was presumably permitted? It is not unheard of to miss a target. The hunter could just as well have missed the elk entirely and hit the skier. Bus stop (talk) 18:39, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto: You do not even say what country you live in (and I don't want to know – unless you live next-door to me so that I know its time to move). We don't give legal advice here. For instance, lets take the first point. If you shoot a goat in the next yard your bullet has travelled across your neighbours property – in many places that is a serious fire arms offence. You're in need of asking your local legal eagles (or even police)for some basic law education.--Aspro (talk) 18:09, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the USA, at least, there is no such law as "murder" or "manslaughter" in regard to animals. That doesn't mean there's no crime. There are any number of possible crimes, including crimes against openly discharging a gun within city limits, and negligent destruction of someone else's property. But you can't "murder" an animal. Ain't no such thing. Only humans can be "murdered". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you say this is only an example, presumably it doesn't matter whether your neighbour is really home or not, or even whether you really have a neighbour with a goat. But I think the odds of a drive-by shooting of a goat are pretty low wherever the hell it is you live. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I love logical fallacies. Could a neighbourhood plagued with drive-by-shooting, fill the front their gardens with goats? Hell, I couldn’t let off a shot... the whole dam place is full of goats. Drive round the block again and hit the @%%*** horn this time - an' try scare 'erm off!!! Noap... Dar billies are still milling around like Rowdy Yates is yelling get 'em up little doggies' – Awe... , , , let's go find some street signs to shoot at. Look boz man -theirs one! What's it say – How do I know? I'm still in third grade! I don't know either but it gotta' be easier than goats. --Aspro (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC) [reply]

What kind of dumbass fires his gun in his yard anyway. You just know that one day it is going to end in tragedy, whether it is the shooting of your neighbour's goat, your neighbour's child or in your own head. Astronaut (talk) 18:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You sound like a cityboy, Astronaut. We used to shoot targets, skeet and even hunt pheasant in my parent's backyard. Of course, our backyard was 3 acres but others are larger. Rmhermen (talk) 19:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But what kind of spud gun guns were you using. Even on a three 3 acres lot, just a low power firearm combined with an accidental discharge can ruin your neighbour's whole day and make your lawyer's day... People who don't go out and shoot serious, seem far more dangerous to me, when all they can do is sit in their back yards pinking at cans.--Aspro (talk) 20:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and if killing goat is your thing, then do so by staring at them . If you get good at it, you have a great career future in PSYOP. --Aspro (talk) 19:04, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hey thanks all for your advice, you guys make me laugh! in the end I Decided I would Have climbed over into his yard and took the goat and frayed the rope so he thought it had escaped or someone had stole it (you could see the goat from the road), it was that or turn the goat round so it would look like it was shot by someone driving past. But now do you reckon I should bury it or cut it up and eat it. It Would be in in my freezer at the moment if I had done thisRoger 11 Handyman (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Curry Goat is moorish. However, I think you should post this as a separate question.--Aspro (talk) 20:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it okay to copy wikipedia then change it and put it on your own server? (I think some patent or copyright infringment is going on?)[edit]

Hello I recently came across a terrible web page at http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page

When I looked for wikipedia this site came up and I saw that they copied the wikipedia format, syntax and in fact they cite wikipedia

at http://www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia

(I copied the page below I find it to be possibly liable and or slander!) I Love wikipedia, and think the people who come together here are of the finest ilk, to see a group say terrible things about wikipedia and lie (the very beginning phrase "left leaning communist" to begin with not to mention the copyright breaches they commit while insulting,,?? )

I am at a loss of words, I would strongly urge others to look into this legally (In America the copyright laws are being aggressively exercised and for once I support it,, I hope someone can begin a exchange with these people to remove the identifiable identity of wikipedia from their server, and or at least correct their denigrating those they copy.

I also wish to say thank-you to everyone at Wikipedia for helping build what I consider about the best reference since the oxford dictionary.

(below is the quote from the page I linked at the top of this message) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstavene (talk • contribs)

massive cut-and-paste redacted by me -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 18:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey pal, there no need to quote it all but as you do, I think it depends on your outlook, this is clear a matter of opinion and I think once the text has gone down then it's open for all to use, but I don think what you wrote is necessarily a bad stuff Roger 11 Handyman (talk) 18:23, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed your massive cut and paste from that site. Pasting it here without adequate attribution is surely a violation of copyright (even if it's all from Wikipedia, which it clearly isn't). And if you think something is defamatory, the last thing you should be doing is pasting it again here. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 18:26, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I think that their article about us is hilarious, it's badly sourced and so blatantly biased it's laughable. --Jac16888 ^Talk 18:32, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But their articles on non-controversial subjects are also laughable. Oak tree. Orissa. No article for Creuse, either the department or the river. I pity any teenager trying to use it for their homework. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They think Garret Hobart was a former congressman from Ohio ...--Wehwalt (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I checked out their article on Julia Gillard. I didn't get past the lede, so filled was it with errors of fact, bias etc:

The election was much closer than expected and almost resulted in a hung parlaiment [sic]. - No, it did result in a hung parliament
Her government is … a coalition of seventy-two members of the Australian Labour [sic] Party, one Green Party member and three independants [sic] (a total of 76 seats) – No, it is not a coalition; the ALP changed its spelling from Labour to Labor in 1911; other spelling errors
Gillard's liberal Labour [sic] Party Government is the most unpopular for 15 years, largely due to her misguided attempt at a carbon tax to combat "climate change" – that such a biased statement (and one that ridicules climate change by the use of quotes) could grace the article on the PM of a developed nation speaks volumes about Conservopedia. -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ ^{[your turn]} 21:15, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was just looking at the Atheism article (got to it from "The project was initiated by atheist and entrepreneur Jimmy Wales", imagine if we preceded everyones name with their religious belief), which would be funny if it wasn't so depressing that people actual think these things. "Atheism offers no condemnation of rape and it provides no moral basis a society to attempt to prevent and deter rape" [3]. straight atheist liberal(ish) english administrator Jac16888 ^Talk 21:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear OP, no one has said it yet, so I would like to thank you for your concern for the reputation of Wikipedia, and for your praise of us/it as a reference. We would be delighted to have you on board as an editor. Please consider joining us! BrainyBabe (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To actually address the question; all text written by contributors to Wikipedia is available for others to use under either CC-BY-SA or GFDL licences [4]. Whether Conservapedia's copyright policy is compatible with either licence, or indeed whether Conservapedia's copyright policy makes any sense at all, is not for me to say. Conservapedia saying ridiculous things about Wikipedia (or anything else) is not a copyright issue, but as you rightly say possibly a case of defamation. I don't know what you mean by "identifiable identity of wikipedia", but if you simply mean the visual similarities between the two websites, that is because Conservapedia is built using MediaWiki software, originally created for Wikipedia, but freely available and used to create thousands of wikis on the WWW. FiggyBee (talk) 21:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Their licence basically says "you can use any of the content on our website for any purpose, except when you can't". From the associated talk page, it appears that they have rejected existing copyleft licences as they are too left-wing and anti-American (apparently using the word 'left' implies you are a communist). 81.98.43.107 (talk) 21:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I personally wouldn't read much of anything in to conservapedia's copyright practices. They're fairly well known for their poor adherence to copyright, like making claims of copyright which aren't even supported by their source, and this is with their higher level members. The fact that a lawyer was their founder doesn't seem to have helped in any way. I think they're too minor for anyone particularly on wikipedia to be really interested in suing them, it just gives them more attention then they deserve. Nil Einne (talk) 15:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]