Miscellaneous desk
< June 30	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 2 >

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 1

100K Initiative, Project Pengyou, and Golden Bridges

Hello!

I was hoping that you could let me know if these organizations are notable enough to write about. Obama's 100K Strong Initiative is meant to promote U.S.-China cultural understanding by encouraging American students to study abroad in China. Project Pengyou and Golden Bridges are two organizations meant to promote this initiative as well as other programs promoting this cross-cultural dialogue (which, obviously, is very important).

Thank you! Joey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfritz14 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I replied to your original posting of this question on the help desk but it looks like it's dropped off into the archive. You can see my reply by clicking this link: [1]. CaptRik (talk) 20:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When legally can a former two term president serve as a technical third term president?

When legally can a former two term president serve as a third term president? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.65.140.206 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 1 July 2013‎

Basically never, assuming you are asking about the USA, unless he were appointed vice president with only two or fewer years left for the current president to serve. See 22nd Amendment. μηδείς (talk) 03:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since the question is "when", the answer that the OP might be looking for could be: before the 22nd amendment was ratified. --Lgriot (talk) 10:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does the answer perhaps depend on some hypothetical technical distinction between being "elected to the office of the President" (the language used in the 22nd Amendment) and "serving" as President (the language used in the question) ? For example, does an acting President "serve" as President even though they are not "elected to the office" ? Gandalf61 (talk) 10:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you mean the US as others have done and presuming you mean full terms or close to it, my impression and I believe it's been discussed before is that it's fairly unclear whether someone who has served two full terms (or one full and more than half of one) can be elected to be the vice president and can take over of president, it depends a lot on how you interpreted 'elected' and 'qualify'. See e.g. [2] [3]. If the courts interpret it as allowed, then the obvious case is when someone is elected vice president and the president or president elect resigns or dies. If you want full terms I believe the president-elect will have to die, perhaps by commiting suicide per President-elect of the United States since even if the president-elect refused to take the oath of office, they will still become president, although I'm not particular sure about other cases like the president-elect giving up their citizenship. Of course the other obvious case is when the constitution is amended to allow it. Nil Einne (talk) 15:12, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--Jessica A Bruno (talk) 03:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

European to North American power conversion

I know that Europe and North America have different plugs and different voltages. If I want to use a European appliance in North America, would it work OK with just a plug adaptor, or do I need something else as well? The appliances I would be using are a laptop computer and a mobile phone charger. Thanks, --Viennese Waltz 07:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Check your power-bricks - these days most are universal and will work with 100-240 V and 50-60Hz. If yours are marked as such, all you need is a plug-adaptor. If they are not, you'll need a power-converter to turn US power (110VAC, 60Hz) to European power (230VAC, 50Hz) - these things are usually heavy, expensive and tends to run hot; you might be better off purchasing new power-bricks that will accept universal input. WegianWarrior (talk) 07:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that this applies to laptops and mobile phones (and USB chargers), but much less to other appliances (TV, washing machine, blender, ...), which are less likely to be moved around and more specialized to a particular market. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've burned out a fan and a white noise machine in my time. Check the back or the brick on the power cord and see what voltages it will take. If it says 100-240VAC, you are safe.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with all above advice. If the 'plug pack' / 'power adapter' / 'wall wart' / 'brick' says "100-240V AC" and "50-60Hz" then all you need is a an plug adaptor or AC power cord that allows it to plug into the type of mains power outlet in the country you are in. Checking my Toshiba laptop 'brick' it says just that "Input/Entree: 100-240AC~ 50-60Hz", and as the mains in is a plug-in lead all I need is a lead with the appropriate 'foreign' pin configuration or adapter to Australian mains plug. 220 of ^Borg 12:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you already have a foreign pin configuration (nearly everywhere ;-). What you need is a cable or adapter with a local layout. See mains electricity by country. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:15, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth checking out your laptop and phone charger, but I would be very surprised if it didn't say 100-240 V 50-60 Hz. If so, it turns out you just need a plug converter, and they can be found in many stores in Europe and at every airport (eg. the post office at Vienna Airport stocks 'Reisezubehör' according to the airport's website). Astronaut (talk) 20:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Southwest Freeway(Houston) Article

In the article above there is a picture of the southwest freeway 1972 traffic. The lead car is a red 1963 VW.with a Texas Medical Center decal? in the lower left windshield & an Alabama Alumni? sticker in the lower right. I am 99.9% sure that is me. ARE there any more pictures that might show the tag? 98.81.97.7 (talk) John , July 1,2013 —Preceding undated comment added 16:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant page is U.S. Route 59 in Texas. I cannot say if there are any more photos of the same vehicle. The date is given as 05/72 which should be May 1972 if that helps? This photo was taken as part of DOCUMERICA , sponsored by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The originals are held by the National Archives and Records Administration. See its' page on Wikimedia Commons for more information. 220 of ^Borg 16:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vicky from india. looking for a software's name along with photos,history of origin this method by whom article and where it using or can get rit now??

Hi sir,

i am looking for a astrology software which is seems like red umbrella or avira antivirus,compatible with mobile and no need to pur date of birth,English alphas name or surname simply input ur name in Hindi and ur father name an make your horoscope 100% accurate.

also don't know who created this method and how old it is want to know abt this every thind in your wikipedia articl.........

plz. let me know the details......... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.97.136.65 (talk) 19:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about software, but I suggest have a good read of our article about astrology and its associated articles, to understand why I would seriously doubt any "100% accurate" claim. Astronaut (talk) 20:09, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't. Though the interpretations of such things are pure hooey, there's a mathematical accuracy and precision to the calculations of astrological charts. Not too long ago you had to know how to do stuff similar to logarithmic interpolations. Now you just plug dates into a program and it draws pretty pictures with the resulting data. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 21:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The OP is interested in a program that uses as its input data only the subject's name and their father's name. That has nothing to do with astrology or horoscopes. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... I guess it depends on how broadly those terms are used. For instance, this page [4] says "This horoscope is aimed at informing you of what's likely to happen to you this week according to your first (given) name." The site also claims that making predictions based on names is called "prenominology" -- though that word only returns a few google hits. Anyway, I suspect the OP is looking for some specific application that did that kind of thing. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's funny how something as hooeyful as astrology can have versions that are even more hoeeyful than others. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 21:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's no more, and no less, hooeyful than any other method of divination or fortunetelling, whether astrology or flinging poo on the wall and deciphering the splats. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 22:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Horoscope describes what a horoscope is all about. A horoscope itself is not any kind of prediction; that's something that might feature in a particular interpretation of a horoscope. That people sometimes mistakenly use the term "horoscope" - including ones totally unrelated to the positions of celestial objects at the subject's moment of birth - to mean "prediction", is just an artifact of human fallibility. It doesn't mean the word has general currency outside of astrology. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does the Bible say marriage can only be between one man and one woman?

In the Old testament, it was acceptable for a man to have multiple wives.(King David's wives). When did that fade out or become prohibited under Jewish marriage rules?Was polygamy legal only for kings, like Solomon and Rehoboam, who had scads of wives? Was it still common in Jesus' time, or was a Jewish man then limited to one wife at a time? Is there a chapter and verse where Jesus explicitly states the one wife rule, and did he create the rule, or was he reiterating some earlier rule? Edison (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a point of order, it was reported that people had multiple wives. The fact that it is written about in the Bible doesn't make it acceptable, either then or now. I'm pretty sure that murder isn't considered acceptable then or now, and that story of Uriah the Hittite is in the Bible doesn't mean that the Bible condones murder. Which is not to say anything about whether anything written in the Bible does or does not condemn any particular marriage. But the excuse that "someone does it in the Bible", even prominent figures such as David or Moses or Solomon or others, does not mean that it's "ok" according to the Bible. --Jayron32 23:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True, but on the other hand, Leviticus lays out forbidden unions in great detail, and "the man is already married" is not one of them. --Trovatore (talk) 23:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but the OP didn't bring up Leviticus, he brought up King David. Distinctions are to be made between historical events reported in the Bible and specific laws and statutes. The fact that an event is reported does not necessarily mean one way or the other whether or not it is or is not condoned. But your point on Leviticus is a good one. --Jayron32 23:38, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the last question - it depends how you define "explicit". The relevant passage is Matthew 19:4-6 - "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." If "wife" (singular) excludes "wives" (plural), and "twain" implies "_only_ two", then it's explicit. If those assumptions don't hold, it isn't. Tevildo (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Polygamy was banned by a rabbinic ruling, ie a stringency over and above Biblical interpretation / Talmudic exegesis. This took place in the 11th century CE (ie roughly 1000 years ago) and is ascribed to Rabbenu Gershom. The ruling applied and applies only to Ashkenazi Jews. Prior to that, polygamy was legal for all although it's hard to determine how common it was. --Dweller (talk) 22:18, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Polygamy in Christianity says that the Early Church followed the law of the Roman Empire in allowing only one wife. This was finally confirmed at the Council of Hertford in 673 AD. Alansplodge (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dronestream

How does [5] collect its data aside from news sources? Does any research institution consider Dronstream's data valid? Thanks. 105.236.20.136 (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The web page says that the data comes from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Looie496 (talk) 21:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]