Miscellaneous desk
< January 13	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 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.

January 14

Round protrusions on side of 18-wheeler trailer

What are the 6 (a bit of a 7th one is visible on the right edge) round things on the side of this truck? Some of them are dented in. Thanks -- Sean —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.94.172 (talk) 00:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ventilators maybe? SteveBaker (talk) 01:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Light? Bus stop (talk) 01:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Protrusions from structural support beams making some kind of structure inside? Interesting! --Ouro (blah blah) 06:00, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Access covers for wiring or pipes? Is this a 'fridge' truck by any chance? --220.101.28.25 (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a setback to allow for some type of hardware that is used to anchor some other type of device that would be used to secure a load, to prevent the load from shifting while in transit. Bus stop (talk) 13:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a fridge truck (as far as I can tell). I see them all the time, and it was bugging me enough to take pictures of them. I'll just have to ask a truck driver, I suppose. Maybe some trucker web forum will know. --Sean 15:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty curtain Steve Baker is right, those are ventilation covers. TomorrowTime (talk) 15:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)I've asked several of the traffic folks here at work. Some of them have been dealing with trucks since the 70s and none of them had seen these kinds of marks before. They all came up with the same guess, though - that they were punched into the panels to provide extra support for load bars. Normally, the bars are either latched in or kept in place with pressure, but it's possible that there was some kind of requirement to provide a more secure place for the bars to fit in. The guys I asked have tons of experience, so I feel pretty confident that they're not standard on North American trucks. Matt Deres (talk) 15:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell from the picture, but I'd say they're either vents or recessed tie-down points (ie. anchor points that don't protrude into the main volume of the trailer). --Carnildo (talk) 00:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New York Question

In a multi-storey building in New York, what would the 'Metro Level' be? --KageTora - (影虎) (Talk?) 00:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to guess, and could be totally wrong, that it's the level at which the "Metro" station is, i.e. the commuter train, likely below street level. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it would be. Just like Paris, right? :) Thanks! --KageTora - (影虎) (Talk?) 01:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article[1] which I actually found by googling ["empire state building" "metro level"] on a hunch, where it talks about Bloomingdale's, indicates that the metro level is indeed the subway level. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Bugs! Funnily enough, that is the EXACT building I am writing about! --KageTora - (影虎) (Talk?) 01:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice searching, BB. Bus stop (talk) 01:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here I find a sentence on the same topic: "The new Metro Level (call it anything but the basement, pleeease) is only the first phase …" Bus stop (talk) 01:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Bus Stop! I will remember that! --KageTora - (影虎) (Talk?) 01:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, KageTora! Bus stop (talk) 01:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How did we get in Boston? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:24, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We took the subway. Weren't you paying attention? :) JJohnCooper (talk) 17:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Did he ever return? No, he never returned, and his fate is still unlearned..." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weird wind turbine google earth shadow

Hi all. There is a wind turbine at Lat 52.656818, Long 0.683378. The google earth image seems to show a tower without the nacelle and blades. But the shadow seems to indicate their presence. Anyone know how this can be explained? Thanks. - Akamad (talk) 01:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, Google Maps link here. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 01:09, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally this page and this one say that that this turbine (on Turbine Way in Swaffham) is an Enercon E66 like this one; it's apparently part of this place, and indeed Wikipedia has a photo of this precise turbine (right). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 01:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These people have spotted the same anomaly and theorise as to why. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 01:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And for no reason other than completeness, here is a short documentary about climbing it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwmalCmwtFU -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 01:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, here is a proper link [2]. There are a couple of possibilities:

There could be a seam between two photos taken at different times running nearby. The mapping system blends those maps together to try to hide the seam. What can happen is that (perhaps) the tower was built - the first photo taken - then the generator and blades were added and the second photo taken. The result might be that the shadow fell into one photo and the tower into the other. However, such seams are generally much more obvious - so I suspect that's not it in this case.
Google's photos are often taken by aircraft flying up and down in regular strips over the ground - in order to keep the number of strips to a minimum and thereby save fuel, time and money - they don't just take 'looking straight down' photos - but also photos that look sideways out over the ground. Because the Google Maps interface is presenting a more or less straight down view, the mapping software tries to correct for tall objects that come out weirdly when a photo taken on a slant is presented as a plan-view map. This correction relies on the software correctly estimating the height of the object. The way they calculate that height is by comparing two photos taken a few seconds apart as the airplane flies along - when you compare those two photos, the tops of taller objects move relative to the ground beneath them from one photo to the next. The software can figure that out and apply the necessary corrections.

I'm betting that it's the second of those things: OK - now consider a windmill. The blades are spinning in the wind. This will confuse the height-estimation software because the blades are moving either much more or much less compared to the ground than an object of that height should (depending on which direction our photo-plane was flying). The height estimation software may simply be confused into doing crazy stretching or shrinking - or it may have clever tricks to recognise this situation. We know Google's software does things like that because it's not often confused by things like cars driving along roads that are roughly parallel to the direction of flight of the plane. However, what it probably does in cases of confusion is to remove these fast-moving features completely...and I'm 99% sure that's what happened here.

It conveniently explains why the tower is being drawn - but the moving parts are gone. I'm a little surprised that the blades weren't also removed in the shadow - but this is a complex situation - and Google don't publicize the fine details of their algorithms for height data extraction and motion detection - so we can only speculate.

SteveBaker (talk) 01:24, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 1st theory would entail the pre-construction and post-construction photos to have both been taken when the sun was at pretty much the same angle (despite being perhaps weeks apart); that seems like too much of a coincidence. The 2nd theory (at least some kind of strip-stitching artifact) is credible. It works even without a height-estimation issue, if the strips are horizontal (that is West-East), which an evident stitch boundary a little north would support. In this case, by coincidence, the blades and the tower end up in different strips. The frame used for the tower has the arms in a Y position, but they two upward ones are cut off and the lower one hidden by the tower. A different configuration is visible in the strip used for the shadow section. The two strips may have been taken maybe 30 minutes apart, or maybe Google's plane has multiple cameras (as the streetview car does) and they don't care about perfect time synchronisation when merging their view (bar weird stuff like this, they wouldn't need to). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 01:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the blades are included in the picture but the plane in which the blades lie is such that they are all but invisible from our vantage point. Bus stop (talk) 03:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No - even the big box containing the bearings and generator is missing. In the photo, the top of the tower seems to just end with a smoothed-off look. It's pretty clear that the software just screwed up due to the motion of the blades. SteveBaker (talk) 14:31, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the absence of the nacelle is the most difficult to explain thing. Bus stop (talk) 16:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Google's photos are often taken by aircraft flying up and down in regular strips over the ground - in order to keep the number of strips to a minimum and thereby save fuel, time and money - they don't just take 'looking straight down' photos - but also photos that look sideways out over the ground. I just wanted to point out that all aerial photos (orthophoto or otherwise) necessarily look "straight down" only at the one point directly beneath the camera. All other points in a photo are at some angle. The photos aren't this way by choice--it's just the nature of photography. This isn't to say the process doesn't involve taking photos to the side. I'm not sure about that--at least the flight strips are usually laid out so that they overlap each other enough to provide two views of each point. Also, unless I'm mistaken Google doesn't fly planes, take photos, or do the orthorectification themselves. They purchase the imagery from vendors who have already done all that. I've seen various imagery that was definitely orthorectified before Google purchased it (USGS imagery, for example). It doesn't make sense that Google would spend all the money to do the hard work when they can just buy it from numerous sources. Pfly (talk) 05:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having said that, I looked at the Google Maps link for a while and found it odd. Here's my best guess (basically what Steve said!): When aerial photos are orthorectified and mosaicked there's always a bunch of "touch-up" work to do. Software can automate the process to some degree but to do a really nice job you need people to tweak things here and there "by hand". Sometimes this means hiding seams better by doing some smoothing and "cloning". Tall objects often cause weird distortion the software can't handle. You can see "by hand" fixes on things like bridges. The Golden Gate Bridge, for example (see link here). You can see that the overhead cables and the shadows have been fixed up to some degree, but it's obviously not perfect. Sometimes the photo angles work out and by luck things look fairly good. Other times they don't work out and there's no easy fix. Each vendor has to choose between how much time and human effort they want to put into making everything look perfect and how acceptable it is for things to look a bit odd here and there. Since utter perfection is rarely required by the customer the vendors typically accept a bit of oddness here and there. That's what I think happened with this wind turbine: The upper part of the tower came out of the orthorectification software looking all wrong and instead of trying to fix it they just removed it. If so, they did a pretty good job. Does it look like the tower or any ground below has been retouched? Signs of "cloning", blurring, smoothing, etc? Not obvious to me, but maybe. Pfly (talk) 05:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 'cloning' isn't obvious because that's not how it's done. Because they have multiple photographs of the same point on the ground - but taken from different angles, the software can pick out pixels from whichever photo(s) provide the least distortion or confusion. So long as the strips of pictures were taken close enough together in time that the shadows didn't move or the sun go behind a cloud or something - then the process is essentially perfect except when there are 3D objects on the ground and you have to do this height estimation/correction step. For something like the Golden-Gate bridge, you can be sure that someone went in and did the best possible retouching job imaginable - but for some random windmill that hardly anyone will ever care about, they'll let the software do it's thing and if is screws up occasionally, that goes with the terratory. SteveBaker (talk) 14:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the blades are depicted. It's just that they are depicted in the ground vegetation and other texture in the area on the ground which is surrounding the top of the tower. It seems that perhaps the software made a compromise between the semicircular configuration of the moving, and therefore perhaps somewhat blurred blades, and the surrounding ground texture and color. The result is I think a somewhat circular area in the ground behind the top of the tower. Bus stop (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, Google doesn't update their maps nearly as often as they claim. The picture of my house shows a car in the driveway that we haven't had in six years or so. JJohnCooper (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do they claim otherwise? They claim (truthfully) that they update some of their pictures every few months, or whatever, they don't claim to update all their pictures on a regular basis. --Tango (talk) 22:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

5 people in NYC cab?

Can three adults and two children ride in a NYC cab? Bubba73 ^{(Who's attacking me now?)}, 01:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. I googled ["new york" taxi how many people] and it led me to this city government page [3] which gives a variable answer. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on whether it's an SUV or sedan vehicle, and whether the front passenger seat is currently occupied by the driver's shopping/laundry/dinner. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It also depends on where you want to go; it may be almost as convenient and much cheaper to take the New York City Subway. --Jayron32 02:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do they still have "jump seats" in cabs? Or are those considered unsafe now? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We are planning a tourist trip that will go to several places. I'm getting too old to do too much walking (I can go a few miles a day). Efficient use of our time is important. Bubba73 ^{(Who's attacking me now?)}, 03:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I figured you weren't asking just from curiosity. :) You might want to call Yellow Cab or whatever, and find out what your options are. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In an American big city I have ridden in a cab with more people than this, in transit between bars. It involved someone (an off-duty female cop) sitting in a lap, or laps- memory of the occasion is a bit fuzzy. Edison (talk) 05:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The part about the off-duty female cop seemed to stick with you somehow. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should really consider the subway. You're from Georgia (based on your userpage)? I don't think you'd find the subway the least bit difficult, and a lot cheaper than taking cabs everywhere, even considering 5 people. If you get tired or lost, then a cab's an easy fix, but especially if you're worried about capacity and you're in the city (including the boroughs), the subway makes a lot of sense. Shadowjams (talk) 08:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My wife wants to take the subway - walk to the station, walk from the station to where we are going. At any rate, we will be doing a lot of walking, and I want to avoid the extra walking to and from the subway. (I don't know if I can hold out for that much walking.) Plus I think it would be a more efficient use of time to take cabs. Bubba73 ^{(Who's attacking me now?)}, 16:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Big Apple experts need to weigh in here as far as a practical solution. Specifically, how frequently are there subway stations, and does getting to and from them require a lot of stairs-climbing, or do they have escalators/elevators? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My experience with NYC is limited, but In the past I've noted that at certain times of day the pedestrians are moving at about the same rate as the cars. Depending on where you're going, the subway may actually get you where you're going faster. (That's what it's for, after all.)

Certainly if you were going to Boston I'd recommend the subway over taking a cab.

But if you insist on sticking to the streets, why not take two cabs? It may be easier than trying to find one of those relatively rare SUV cabs. APL (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If five elephants can get into a Mini... then yes. (old joke: two in the front and three in the back for the younger Wikis).Froggie34 (talk) 09:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could definately get five adults in a London taxi cab. See Hackney carriage. 89.243.186.173 (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that most New York City cabs will take 5 people in addition to the driver. Everyone has to wear a seatbelt, and most cars only have seatbelts for 5 people, including the driver. If your priority is efficient use of your time, then taking the subway may be the better choice. It can be faster than a cab, especially during rush hour, when parts of Manhattan approach gridlock. However, taking the subway does involve climbing lots of stairs, though some stations will have elevators. Stations with a symbol for handicapped access on the subway map will have elevators, though they may require extra walking to reach. Another option to consider is the bus. Manhattan has a large network of bus lines, and buses obviously require less climbing of stairs and will deliver you closer to some destinations. Marco polo (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New York State doesn't requie seat belt usage in cabs.[4] So unless the city has a different law, that shouldn't be a problem. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 19:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The taxi used in Cash Cab seems to be able to seat 5 adults easily, with three rows of seats. I have seen such cabs availible around New York myself. There are a variety of models of cars used for taxicabs, so I am sure you will find similar "minivan" style taxis plentiful. Also, besides the "hold up your hand and wait" sort of taxicabs, you can also call ahead and arrange for a taxi. Just let them know before they send a car you need seating for 5 adults. Problem solved. --Jayron32 18:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I wasn't aware of the exemption for taxicabs. So this should be possible. Marco polo (talk) 19:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw Cash Cab the other day and noticed two seats in the middle row and three in the back. Bubba73 ^{(Who's attacking me now?)}, 02:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

clothing line made of money

how do i get my clothing line listed into wikipeda http://www.yowatchawurth.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yowatchawurth (talk • contribs) 04:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As with any other article, you would need to prove notability via independent, reliable sources. You would also need to write it in such a way that it does not sound like an advertisement. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's easy - You don't.

Your clothing line almost certainly doesn't meet our Notability guidelines - as such, any article you wrote would likely be deleted soon after you created it.
If you are trying to promote your clothing line this way - it's a really bad idea. Remember, anyone can edit a Wikipedia article. That includes your worst competitor and dissatisfied customers.
You'll almost certainly end up writing it like an advert - and that's not allowed either.
Everything you write must be backed up by independent sources. That means books, newspaper articles - things that neither you, nor the company wrote. That makes it incredibly tough for you to put any 'meat' into the article.
You will be accused of Original Research and Conflict of Interest - neither of which are looked upon favorably here.

This is an encyclopedia - think about that. Just how many clothing lines do you think warrant an article in the Encyclopedia Britannica? Just because Wikipedia is large and open doesn't mean that it's here to advertise your clothing line for you...nothing could be further from the truth! If your clothing line became so awesomely famous that it justified an article about it - then someone would almost certainly have written it already...if it's not that famous then there shouldn't be an article about it.

Sorry. SteveBaker (talk) 14:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we may be talking at cross-purposes here. When I saw "clothing line", I thought the OP meant "a piece of string hanging horizontally in my garden to tie clothes to while they dry". And I think you are assuming the same thing. But after a bit of thought, I reckon the OP is talking about a line, like a brand, of clothing (as in: "Tattered and Torn is a clothing line...") As far as I can tell, no actual clothing lines have Wikipedia articles at present, but plenty of brands of clothing do (which doesn't mean that the OP's is notable, of course). Marnanel (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, some free advice: Get yourself a proper website designer! Your website is AWFUL! If you wish to impress people with your design skills - you need a well-designed website. Yours does not resize properly - in Firefox, the text in the "store" section overlaps so you can't read it...all of that centered and underlined text is ugly, ugly, ugly. SteveBaker (talk) 14:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elegance, schmelegance. When you go to an "elegant" website like google.com, how are you supposed to know the current time?! --Sean 15:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discerning customers of money clothing know better than to trust a "prim and proper" well-designed website. This is simply a matter of targeting a specific audience. The website bears striking similarity to other websites targeting the same audience, such as those that sell anti-police-RADAR-varnish for speeders' cars and medical saline bags for improvising SWAT-team-style door breaching charges. Such companies need not care about "spelling", "color matching", or other hallmarks of clean website styling, because their target audience will be dissuaded by those symptoms of reputability. Nimur (talk) 16:23, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After clicking on this site I was sure it was going to tell me about Nth dimensional quantum gravity vibration auras and how we can use them to insure homeopathic eternal life and free energy for all. APL (talk) 19:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it is. Just stick some dollar bills onto a cheap T-shirt using 9 dimensional quantum gravity vibration (you'll need a handy Casimir-effect generator) and homeopathic eternal life will immediately be yours! SteveBaker (talk) 03:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI - If I were you I wouldn't be advertising my illegal activities so much. It's a crime to "mutilates, cuts, defaces, disfigures, or perforates, or unites or cements together" US money of any kind. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 16:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^{[citation needed]}. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

18 USC CHAPTER 17 - COINS AND CURRENCY. --LarryMac | Talk 18:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just going to ask - if it is illegal to burn money, how legal is it to stitch it into clothing? TomorrowTime (talk) 18:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"...with intent to render such bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt unfit to be reissued". You left off an important part of USC 331. This page, including a letter from the Department of the Treasury, implies that without some sort of fraudulent intent there's no crime. [5]

I'm no legal scholar (not by a long shot), but isn't that implying that the act of destroying the bills must be intention (say, by sewing it into a garment) and not accidental (say, by accidentally setting your clothing on fire [it happens!])? Of course, if one could still spend the garment, then it's clearly "fit to be reissued", and there's no problem! – Clockwork Soul 19:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, I think we can assume good faith here and not go around offering alarmist legal advice. APL (talk) 19:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

XBOX 360 HDMI cables

I have an XBOX 360 and an HDMI TV (says so on the front). Can I buy these cables and will it work? Sorry if it sounds like a dumb question, but the cable seems fairly inexpensive and I wanted to know if I was missing something or will be needing to buy something additional, etc. Thank you in advance. --24.187.98.157 (talk) 05:44, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First look at the back of your 360 and make sure there is an HDMI connector on it. If there is, then, yes, that HDMI cable will work fine (as long as it's a functional and working male-to-male HDMI cable). I think, but am not sure, that some Xbox 360s lack an HDMI port. Our Xbox 360 article is not explicit about this. Comet Tuttle (talk) 07:09, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I got an HDMI cable from Argos for my 360 (Arcade) for £4.50 - works perfectly. I just wish they'd do the same with hard-drives, but they force me to pay extortionate prices for a hard-drive just because it is official xbox (really makes me rather mad so i've not bought one). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with this Jeepney?

Yesterday, I noticed a jeepney that was simultaneously releasing black smoke and a lot of embers from its exhaust. However, the driver doesn't seem to care about the problem. What is wrong with the jeepney and were the passengers on board in danger? --121.54.2.188 (talk) 07:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect people who have never visited the Philippines will have trouble answering your question to your satisfaction. From the perspective of the driver, there was nothing wrong with the Jeepney because it was still rolling along making money! From your perspective, it sounds as if the engine combustion was out of sync - possibly due to bad sparkplugs. SteveBaker will likely be along shortly to break it down in excellent detail. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno about that. Blue/black smoke generally means that the engine is burning oil - typically because the piston rings are worn or the cylinder walls are scored. (White smoke indicates water getting into the engine - a cracked head, cracked block or (if you're very lucky) a blown head gasket). If you're seeing blue/black smoke then - aside from the smells and pollution - you'd need to top up the oil more often than usual - and you'd certainly feel a drop in power due to poor compression. But the Jeepney might continue to run for years in that state so long as the owner doesn't forget to check the oil regularly.

If the jeepney had a diesel engine then there might actually be nothing wrong with it at all - beyond perhaps being somewhat in need of a tune-up.

But "embers"?! Really?! I can't begin to imagine what would be causing that. Embers are bits of solid material and it's really hard to imagine a source for solid materials coming out of an internal combustion engine. Maybe the "creative" mechanics in that part of the world tried to use cardboard to fix up an exhaust leak or something crazy like that!

SteveBaker (talk) 14:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that the "embers" are from deposits on the inside of the exhaust system. If the vehicle is runny smokily enough (and it sounds like it is) then it would almost certainly deposit on the exhaust, and this would potentially build up enough to come out as small solids. FWIW I used to rally a Twin Cam Escort that was a little smoky for a while (100 miles per pint of oil) and it had a fuel pump problem which starved the engine when running flat out. The symptoms of that were a sudden loss of power and a sheet of flame about 15 foot long coming out of the exhaust, where the unburnt oxygen burnt off the coating of the exhaust. --Phil Holmes (talk) 17:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is that flame-thrower car in this list ? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It could be :-) --Phil Holmes (talk) 08:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answers. I assume that the danger of the jeepney exploding/catching fire is unlikely since the embers are only formed at the exhaust and not at the engine itself. --121.54.2.188 (talk) 08:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SIM card rejected??

My 11 year old cousin messed it up big time. He was playing around with my cell, and went to my settings, and entered the wrong PIN and PUK codes so many times that now, whenever I switch my cell on, I get a message saying "SIM card rejected". Is my SIM card done for? Will I have to change my SIM, and my phone number to boot? Is there any way my service operator, or my nearest Nokia store will be able to help me? Is there a way around this?? Please help.... I don't want my parents to know....They'll get mad at me for not keeping the cell out of reach of my bro... 117.194.229.140 (talk) 08:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The funny thing is, if I call my cell number from my landlind, I can hear a voice tell me "The subscriber is currently swtiched off." Does that mean I've still got hope?? 117.194.232.93 (talk) 09:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the nearest Nokia store can help you. Get there at once! 218.25.32.210 (talk) 09:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take proof of purchase (if possible) and the original box (if possible) and any passwords or original information that was set up when you first got the phone. Dbfirs 10:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That happened to me once, and eventually my parents did find out, but all we had to do was contact my service provider (In this case Orange) and they sent back a envelope to put the SIM card in, and then a couple of weeks later they sent a replacement free of charge. Chevymontecarlo (talk) 14:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is that Chip Place ?

A while ago I saw a documentary on either the History Channel or Discovery Channel about French Fries. What we call in New Zealand, chips. ( We use the same word for thin sliced bagged ones also - what the English call crisps - discovered in that New York restaurant by accident - or tantrum - in the 1800's. ) In this film, we saw a place that sold a scoop of chips that looked to be at least a foot high, but at what seemed a relatively cheap place, but I cannot remember the name of the diner or cafe. It was in Indiana, I believe, but there could be other places like that. Does anyone know ? It looked like more than anyone ( except me ) could eat. If I ever get to the US, I would like to try that place out. Thank You. The Russian Christopher Lilly 11:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but if you get as far as the UK, I recommend you tackle a chip butty at the Grindleford Station Cafe.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you didn't see it at the Food Network instead? It seems like there's always a show on there on "extreme" foods and the places that serve them. TresÁrboles (talk) 03:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for that. I am sure that wherever one can go in the world, the chips will be good, and if not, don't go there again for a while. I don't recall ever watching the Food Channel, but it might have been borrowed from there, or a similar programme. The one I watched was about unusual foods. As for reccommeded places, an excerpt from a British magazine was posted on the wall of the Wainoni Fish Supply, 88a Wainoni Road, Christchurch. The article listed good fish and chip shops all over the world, and this shop in question was one of them - which explains why the owners put it up. We have gone there on and off for over twenty years, before which we went to one in Hampshire Street, Aranui. As for truly best, we do have a best fish and chip shop in New Zealand competition. I recall that one item used to cost ten cents in 1974, and now costs up to two dollars in Christchurch, and more if it is a special like Blue or Red Cod. I shall endeavour to find the place if - no - when, I get to America.--The Russian Christopher Lilly 08:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Good luck! Although I would imagine that most fish and chips you will get in any Commonwealth nation will be better than what you can find in the States. I also doubt the quality of fries at any place that sells them in sky-high stacks. (Hey, "Sky-High Fries", I should trademark that!) TresÁrboles (talk) 22:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SWOT Analysis

ABC Company deals in knitwear. The company offers high quality jackets, suits and woolen sweaters. Currently company is performing better than its competitors in terms of market share and product quality. The manager of the company identifies that more sales can be generated through market diversification before seasonal trends change in local market. Company is exploring international markets for exporting its product. For better performance in local market, company is planning to remove deficiencies of its service staff through training.

Conduct SWOT analysis of ABC Company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanibhatti (talk • contribs) 12:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for posting here. We don't do your homework for you, but you may like to look at our article on SWOT analysis for information about how to do it. --Dweller (talk) 12:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{dyoh}} "Do Your Own Homework" template (for future use) ;-) --220.101.28.25 (talk) 13:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Panasonic lumix drc zr1

Does this digital camera have an auto exposure bracketing (aeb) function? Thanks. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try Google?
As Google so succinctly puts it "Did you mean: Panasonic lumix dmc zr1 ?"
If you did then I suggest the search "Panasonic lumix dmc zr1 bracketing".

DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I did try google, and could not find an answer to my question. Thanks for the search string though, worked perfectly. Now it's just a matter of finding that option in the menus... Aaadddaaammm (talk) 15:23, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Out of interest, what search string did you try? I tried a variety of 'panasonic lumix dmc zr1 bracketing' 'panasonic lumix dmc zr1 auto bracketing' 'panasonic lumix dmc zr1 auto exposure bracketing' 'lumix dmc zr1 bracketing' with and without the correct name for the camera, as always suggested by Google, and all of these give the ZDnet review with the specs which clearly specify yes as the first result. Even 'lumix dmc zr1' and 'lumix drc zr1' give the cNet and dpreview reviews as the first and second results which also specify albeit perhaps it's harder to notice if you don't realise it's there (and the dpreview doesn't call it auto even though it's clearly referring to auto exposure bracketing). I can sometimes see how someone would have gone wrong in their searching, but in this case I'm having difficulty seeing it (as I sometimes do) so am interested in seeing how people go wrong with such basic stuff (since I admit, it annoys me as it does a number of contributors when people don't even appear to have done the most basic of seaches). BTW, please don't be offended by this but you may want to consider brushing up on your searching skills since it can be a fairly important and basic skill nowadays and you seemed to have difficulty with what seems to me from my own tests to be one of the simplest of searches. Nil Einne (talk) 11:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drinks

My father, who is a very smart man, did not know the answer to this question, so I come to my second standby.

Are there any mixed drinks or cocktails which contain beer?

Thanks for your time. JJohnCooper (talk) 17:31, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Black and Tan and Irish Car Bomb come to mind. We also have an entire article on Beer cocktail. Nimur (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Shandy. --LarryMac | Talk 17:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was a bit too easy. Why is a flaming Dr. Pepper any cocktail without Dr. Pepper in it? JJohnCooper (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One from my experience is when one fills a beer bong with cheap beer for a friend, then when the friend is not looking, two shots of vodka are poured surreptitiously into the funnel. This may fall short of the terms "mixed drink" and "cocktail", however. The addition of the vodka is not noticed, the same way that the beverage as a whole is not savored. Disclaimer: This may kill you, I suppose, etc. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Beer and tomato juice, or V-8. DOR (HK) (talk) 04:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Flaming Dr. Pepper is not any cocktail without Dr P, it's a specific cocktail without Dr P. However I still don't quite get the question. After all, a Monkey's Brain shooter doesn't contain an actual monkey's brain (more's the pity), nor does the aforementioned Irish Car Bomb contain any high explosives. --LarryMac | Talk 18:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A boilermaker could be considered "mixed". Dismas|^(talk) 19:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No cocktail actually contains any cock tail. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? APL (talk) 06:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong. This requires one to have a big cock. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would nominate the old "winter warmer", popular with the Bow Street Runners, called a Dog's nose. Take a pint of dark beer, preferably porter (or, nowadays, stout which was originally "stout porter"), mull (or microwave) it until hot, add a single or preferably double gin, then sprinkle with powdered or freshly grated nutmeg. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 00:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I knew a few ladies in college that were fans of what they called a "Diesel." One part beer to one part Pepsi. To say it was vile is an understatement. Livewireo (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dyslexia paper.

Actually, this has nothing to do with dyslexia (I think). I have seen several examples of how the brain can re-order mis-spelt words, and read and understand their true meaning as long as the first and last letters are correctly positioned. But I can't find the examples that sometimes pop up in my Inbox and I want to show a friend such an example of mis-spelt text as he doesn't believe me. Anyone here able to help? Thanks.92.30.6.162 (talk) 19:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article on the subject (see above). That could be a good place to start. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the paragraph you are thinking of. Here is another, more scholarly link. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You've just been compared to a device that removes dead skin cells. I wonder if there's a barnstar for that? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take it. Could have been far worse, I'm sure. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic [second] link. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 11:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha - and thanks. Sometimes you folk are like a backscratcher - you know - a long handled device that reaches the itch you can't reach yourself. Brilliant. Fast, and exactly what I was looking for. Amazing. Thanks immensely. Very grateful. 92.30.6.162 (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yuro'e wleocme. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dno't froegt taht smoe plopee wlil sepll it "lysdexia". ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autoharp repair

My autoharp has seriously lost its tuning, and I can't seem to get it back. Any suggestions? I'd be happy to take it in for repair (Vancouver BC) but I can't find a local place that specializes in folk instruments. Should I trust general instruments shops or finding a luthier?Aaronite (talk) 20:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Typing "Luthier Vancouver BC" into Google gives me this: [6]. There are lots of options here. Give a few a call; even if one shop doesn't do the work they may know of someone that does. --Jayron32 20:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here are tools including a digital tuner for the Autoharp. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:44, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]