Miscellaneous desk
< September 13	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 15 >

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 14

Eating sandwiches - around and round versus just going throught he center

When I eat a burger or eat a sandwich, for some reason I have always liked to eat in a circle/square, so as to be turning my food. I was just wondering how many people do this, becuase while I have continued this as an adult, I notice most people eating through the middle so that the edge is left at the end. (I guess my idea has always been to get the "boring" part out of the way frist, and finish with the part that's got the most filling or something.)209.244.30.221 (talk) 02:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eating from one side to the other is less messy. ;) --S.dedalus (talk) 03:54, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spinning it in circles is messy! I prefer to get a firm grip and hold steady throughout the whole ordeal, munching onward through the center and out to the other side. Plasticup ^T/C 05:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I use a knife and fork for large sandwiches and hamburgers. Much less messy! Pierre DuPaix III (talk) 06:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some sandwich fans invert the sandwich, since the juice has dripped onto the lower piece of bread rendering it less capable of supporting the contents than the dryer upper bread. Edison (talk) 02:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandwich fans? And I didn’t realize people thought about these things so deeply. :) --S.dedalus (talk) 00:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I eat toast I always eat three of the crusts first then the middle then the last crust. --124.254.77.148 (talk) 10:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC) I spin my burgers while eating them. I prefer them sloppy, and eating from just one direction would quickly push the more gooey contents out of the other end of the burger, (and possibly all over my hands). Eating around the centre pushes the contents into the middle, making less mess and keeping more of the flavour in the burger. 82.36.179.20 (talk) 13:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chess

I was playing someone in Chess, and the game ended in a draw. I was down to a queen and my king, and my opponent had a rook and his king. Was there any way for me to checkmate him?Calamus Fortis 03:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you cornered his king it is hypothetically possible, but chances are you could not position your pieces in such a way that you wouldn't lose one, and your opponent wouldn't have left his king unguarded by his rook. Stalemate. 70.9.225.189 (talk) 03:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have a monstrous article on Chess endgame. I've stumbled through it before, and I think the answer is Yes. You technically could have, although I don't know how difficult it would have been. Plasticup ^T/C 05:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, checkmate is inevitable with proper play. See Philidor_position#Queen_versus_rook. —D. Monack ^talk 09:16, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should be winning, see Pawnless_chess_endgames#Queen_versus_rook, but it can be extremely difficult; there are many examples of grandmasters failing to find the winning line, e.g. Gelfand vs. Svidler, 2001. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 11:53, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then it would have been impossible for me since I am no grandmaster. Thanks to all of you for answering my question.Calamus Fortis 18:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's a bit of an oversimplification. I assume the examples of grandmasters failing to win in this case are mostly against players of the same caliber - your opponent could have just as easily screwed up as you could. So basically - in theory, yes it's possible; and, as always, you can't really know who would have won in your game unless you actually played it out. --Random832 (contribs) 19:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may also be interested in our Endgame tablebase article. If you can remember the positions of the pieces, there are links in that article that let you query the tablebases on the web. -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the Queen can checkmate, but more often the queen has to win the rook by a fork or skewer first. In all but a few cases the queen wins, but there is a defense that is very difficult to break down. Bubba73 (talk), 20:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why no naked zombies in films?

In zombie movies typically (such as 28 days later), a zombie is created when a person is attacked and bitten by a zombie. These zombies are very aggressive and attack people everywhere, breaking into homes, etc. My question is if that's the case why are all the zombies wearing clothes? The zombies presumably would have attacked naked people too, like in their sleep at home, or while having sex, and those people would automatically become zombies. And i doubt that they, as ravenous zombies, would bother getting dressed. So what's the deal, folks? Pierre DuPaix III (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that they are going for realism, having accepted zombies and all. Plasticup ^T/C 05:41, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because if a female zombie smashes some guy's skull and eats his brains, that's PG-13, but if you see her breasts, that's R. --Trovatore (talk) 06:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth noting that the film you cite as an example, 28 Days Later, does have naked female zombies in it. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think it does. Why just female zombies? Pierre DuPaix III (talk) 07:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It probably has naked male zombies, too. I can't recall if it's at the road blockade or later, at the military fort. I am leaning toward the former, but it may even be both! The scene shows a female "infected" running down a hill, in a somewhat forested area. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked the DVD, there is a naked female zombie at 1:29:20.58.170.101.47 (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While it has been long supposed that zombies are just frothing, hungry idiots, indeed they have their own culture, mores, etc. To assume that zombies should naturally run around naked simply reflects your own anti-zombie bias. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can a GEICO commercial be far behind? Clarityfiend (talk) 18:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are naked zombies, both male and female, in Return of the Living Dead. Corvus cornix_talk 20:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The film-makers are limited, to a degree by people's expectations of what will be in a movie. Although people who go to see zombie movies are probably less likely to be offended by nudity, most of them (as heterosexual males - the target audience) would prefer to see female nudity. The presence of full frontal nudity in a film, especially in countries with higher levels of censorship, such as the USA and the UK, will result in a higher rating (R18+, etc.) that might reduce the number of people able to easily see the film. As a practicality, they may leave it out. Additionally, you probably have to pay extras more if they appear nude. Steewi (talk) 23:54, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

British Board of Film Classification guidelines [1] allow the depiction of "natural nudity with no sexual context" at all levels of classification, even U. The levels of horror and violence which one would expect in a Zombie film would normally attract at least a 15 rating. I think it's highly innaccurate to suggest that nudity would attract a higher rating than violence in the UK. The MPAA may indeed be a different matter, it is much less liberal on matters of sex and nudity than the BBFC, but I'm bemused at your description of the USA or the UK as countries with higher levels of censorship. Where do Saudi Arabia or China come on your scale??

On the more general question, I recall some naked or semi-naked zombies in the grand-daddy of the modern genre The Night of the Living Dead, so I'd dispute the premise of the question that you never see naked zombies. Valiantis (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a naked male zombie in Shaun of the Dead. Seraphim♥Whipp 09:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's only fair. The Alien was naked, the shark was naked, Natasha Henstridge was naked. Cast off your shackles of horror, my friends, you have nothing to lose but your clothes! Franamax (talk) 10:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I just point out that the people infected with the "rage" virus in 28 Days Later are NOT zombies? A zombie is a reanimated corpse; the people in 28 Days Later have not died, thus zombification is not possible. --LarryMac | Talk 12:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to see Lifeforce.

Atlant (talk) 20:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The common name of that wood photo-op thing at circuses, tourist traps, etc

More specifically: They're wood panels that have something painted on them (some scene or another) and with holes cut in them so that people can stick their heads (or other body parts) into the painted scene.

Like this: http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a281/BlogAbroad/Clarissa/IMG_6796.jpg Clngre (talk) 12:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They seem to be most commonly referred to as "carnival cut outs": [2] Fribbler (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Train driver

How does one become a train driver on either the Trans-Siberian Railway or the Qingzang railway? 58.146.161.138 (talk) 13:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By applying for a job with one of the railway companies that operate on these lines, I would imagine. I don't know how many of them there are, but I do know that Russian Railways is one of them. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 15:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Railways, which CD has linked to, also gives a postal address on its website and maintains a number of offices in Europe (in Berlin, Warsaw and Helsinki, inter alia). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:16, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Such a high profile railway as these would probably demand some experience with train driving. You might be able to get some experience on the outback freight rail lines in Australia, Canada and the US. What a dream to have, though. Good luck with it! Steewi (talk) 23:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or you might have to work up from a more junior position. Decades ago in Britain, with steam locomotives, you would have to work for some years as a locomotive cleaner, then as a fireman, before becoming a driver. --Anonymous, 00:58 UTC, September 15, 2008.

EU

How could you define the new superpower EU ,a nation or what else? Could you give me in a word a good definition ? (organization is a non sense answer).Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vindobona (talk • contribs) 14:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section of Confederation describes the current status of the EU quite well. The article goes on then to say it is not a de jure confederation. Fribbler (talk) 14:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then again the EU article describes it as being a sui generis political entity (i.e. uncagegorised). Fribbler (talk) 14:54, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A not very clear explaning....it isn't a confederation in fact it's a union.....You rightly said is described QUITE WELL,in fact the guys that wrote the article have no idea of EU.Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vindobona (talk • contribs) 18:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The EU clearly isn't a nation, it's a collection of many nations. I am even wary of "superpower" - the EU is an economic superpower, but it doesn't yet have a common foreign policy, and it may never have united military forces in the way that the US and China have them. Strawless (talk) 21:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superstate? It's used as an example in our article. I'd prefer suprastate, but I'm not up on my Greek (or Latin, or whatever). Franamax (talk) 10:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EU is a superpower because has High Rapresentant for Foreign Affairs Solana.He can act with the whole support of EU states(as we have seen also in Georgia).EU has EDA(European Army) which can set on the battlefield in a very short time 60000 soldiers ,100 battleship and 400 aircraftsall over the world.So everibody answer me about other things(and not very quite well) but not about the main question about EU!Nobody answer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vindobona (talk • contribs) 10:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sunshine, you get to ask the question, but you don't get to control the answers. The EU is not a nation; it's not a federal republic like the U.S. or Russia. And given current political realities, you'll be waiting a long time before you see 60,000 European Defence Agency troops anywhere, even on parade in Brussels. NATO, not the EU, leads the ISAF in Afghanistan, with 41,000 troops as of July 2007 -- more than a third of those were U.S. --- OtherDave (talk) 11:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EU isn't interested in Afghanistan.EDA has already done huge movements all over EU,also in south Italy my darling.Us troop should stay alone in Afghanistan and not asking the help of other states.Anyway how can you define the superpower EU?Nobody answers!What a delusion! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vindobona (talk • contribs) 14:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you have to define it as something else? There aren't exactly a lot of them. What difference would it make to you or what would you do different if you were able to group it with other things? Dmcq (talk) 18:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the typical insignificant answer!Who is able to give an exact answer?Nobody?Who wrote the article had no ideamay be.I'm waiting..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vindobona (talk • contribs) 18:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Time to move on. OP is not interested in answers, merely in propaganda. Corvus cornix_talk 20:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not waiting for offensive things or unuseful opinions ,i'm waiting for a real answer.Not more.Who is able to answer in a sufficient way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vindobona (talk • contribs) 09:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're not going to get a good answer, because the EU is unique. We used to have a statement in the article saying "the European Union may perhaps best be seen as neither an international organization nor a confederation, but rather a sui generis entity". Sui generis here isn't a classification of government, but a descriptor meaning "of it's own kind." There isn't a single word which adequately describes what the EU is, because until the EU existed, there was never anything quite like it. So you're either going to have accept that you can't describe it adequately in a single word; describe it inadequately with "union", "confederation", etc.; or coin a neologism meaning "like the EU". -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 00:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This answer can be good.The EU is a political sui generis and sovereign subject.I like also your definition...EU is a new thing...different from others...it 'd need as you said a neologism to be referred at EU,like eunionism...for istance...i like your answer.Very GOOD!

turkish cuisine - fircones

Last week in Istanbul, I saw bottles containing various sizes of fircones in among the pickled and bottled vegetables. Can you really make fircones edible? If so, how, please? What do you eat them with? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.199.89.144 (talk) 14:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that you would be after the pine nuts inside the pine cones. They are common in western culture too, although we usually sell them without the cones attached. Those with nut allergies are usually allergic to these "nuts" too. Plasticup ^T/C 15:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I was unclear. What filled the bottles were complete fircones, some three inches from nose to tail. Some bottles had smaller ones, so were perhaps immature. In either case, I do not think it would be possible to extract the pine nuts from them upon opening. Knowing how woody fircones are (I use them as fuel) I wondered how they could possibly be rendered edible to anyone without the teeth of a squirrel.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.199.89.144 (talk) 17:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes you can get Pine honey in bottles/jars with a pine cone inside. Nanonic (talk) 17:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, of course, Pine nut oil. There seems to be a current fad for putting all sorts of weirdness in bottles of oil, so it could have been this. Nanonic (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your replies. I do not think either honey or oil can be the explanation - the bottles were 90% filled with cones. Any more suggestions please?

My first response to what do you eat them with is indeed the teeth of a squirrel, but there's a reference here[3] to pickled cones and many other things in Istanbul where pickling of all kinds of things is/was a high art. So as pickles are used to preserve food and to enhance less flavoured foods, why not the fir cones? Julia Rossi (talk) 11:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that the whole cone is pickled so that the pine nuts can be served in the cone. As you probably know, in France people eat snails. They often gather them in summer and bottle them to consume in the winter. They keep the shells by (separately) so that they can eventually serve the snails in their shells, with the garlic and parsley butter that is much nicer than the actual snails. The difference in the case you cite is that it is possible to keep the item whole in the jar. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:15, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks yet again, but I am still not answered. The snail shell reply will not work because the fir cones were totally closed. You could neither extract nor replace any nuts. No doubt, the cones had been 'pickled' in some way, presumably by placing in vinegar, but I still want to know how any hard wood, impregnated with resin - as a pine cone will be - can be rendered edible. It would be a great answer to world hunger! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.199.89.144 (talk) 07:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dummy cell-phones/mobile-phones

Similar to the ones at this site, does anyone know where I could find a high-street store in the UK that would sell or be able to order in such items? I don't do online commerce where I can help it, you see. Thanks. ╟─Treasury§Tag►contribs─╢ 18:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most branches of Woolworths that I know of simply throw these out (the fake display phones) when the ranges are changed, they're great as kids toys. Might be worth asking in-store if they have any. Nanonic (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Not a direct answer, but...) Online commerce via paypal is very safe. It need not be linked to your bank account or anything dangerous like that. Plasticup ^T/C 14:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help finding interest rates

Hi. I'm trying to help a friend locate some information, and we're not having much luck Googling. My friend is saying that he's heard about good interest rates that banks are paying on CDs in Italy. How can I find that kind of information, preferably in English? Thanks in advance if anyone can help. -GTBacchus^(talk) 19:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gay (and possibly straight) etiquette question

Hello,

Firstly, I know its tragic to ask this to a bunch of strangers but nonetheless, i'd like some advice so here goes..

You're walking down the street and you see someone you like, so you give them 'bedroom eyes' followed by the follow-up backwards glance as you pass by.. Now, its not uncommon (at least in the gay world, and perhaps the straight one too) for both parties to do the backward glance, so you're eyes meet as you're walking away from each other. What are you supposed to do then? is there any way to capitalise on the situation and talk to them, or is coquettishly walking away the only thing to do? Thoughts please!82.22.4.63 (talk) 19:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to talk to them? Well... yeah. You can stop walking and say, "hey, what's up?" I mean, I'm sure there are some intricate signals you can start with at that point, but if you're interested in someone, at some point you're gonna have to bite the bullet and say something. If it's at a party or some other comparable event, you can take your time about it and try to pick a good moment, but I'm afraid that if the two of you are walking in the opposite directions, that's pretty much the definition of a point where you have to shit or get off the pot -- either you communicate your interest or you keep walking. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 21:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could always try (depending on a million variables) stopping and saying, "Hey, you don't by any chance know a good place around here to get a cup of coffee?" Moves the conversation in a (possibly) positive direction. Darkspots (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I usually just keep on walking with a slight inward smile acknowledging that brief yet meaningful connection with another human being. Plasticup ^T/C 00:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hopeless at this. Shortsighted as I am, I can't tell the difference between I-want-you eyes and why-are-you-staring-at-me? eyes. I would recommend the coffee shop example. If the other person likes you, maybe he/she will walk you there. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^Talk _{Contributions} 00:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could always “accidently” drop something that contains an email/phone number. If they’re actually interested in you then they have both an excuse and the means to contact you at a later time. --S.dedalus (talk) 02:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of time, one well-recognised code in the gay community is "Excuse me, would you have the time?" . Innocuous enough if you've misjudged their interest, but it can be interpreted another way if your gaydar was in fine tune. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Except that I and many other straight people use the exact same phrase to see if we’ve missed the bus. :) --S.dedalus (talk) 05:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drop your handkerchief? Exploding Boy (talk) 05:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with Escape Artist Swyer on the eye ball thing – hard to spot nuance with bad eyes and poor social intuition. Here in oz, eyeballing can be aggressive leading to Taxi Driver type situations, (Are you lookin' at me?) – and that's just the women. Figure what works in pubs anyway, is asking for someone's number or offering it. They/you can always say not. Then there's the go-between recourse. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You guys are awesome.. I think 'shit or get off the pot' just about sums it up nicely.. I rthink i might start relying on wikipedia for more of the stuff. Someone should start a WikiDate?82.22.4.63 (talk) 20:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of my socks is single ;) -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^Talk _{Contributions} 23:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]