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

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 26[edit]

Health insurance benefits in Vermont[edit]

Hi guys,does anyone know what type of job or what company in burlington vermont is known for having good benefits for their employees? like coverage of surgeries or hospital fees? and in what type of job would someone be less likely to get good benefits?. thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.11.185 (talk) 03:40, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original research warning... IBM has decent benefits, though they just laid off 180 people, so you probably couldn't get a job there right now. Fletcher Allen Hospital probably has a decent insurance plan. They are A) a hospital and B) the second largest employer in the state after IBM. Other than those two, I'm not sure. Dismas|^(talk) 11:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander thought himself god?[edit]

Did Alexander thought himself god?i read in a book that he believed he had a link with Greek god n Julius Caesar also believed that his family has a descended link with god which make him think that nothing can defeat him.is it true?

can u give a list of people who believed themselves god.

thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147taru (talk • contribs) 04:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For your last question, see list of people who have been considered deities and self-deification. Algebraist 06:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Alexander the god, read this article, among many: [1]. And for Caesar, this one: [2]. Good luck. --Omidinist (talk) 12:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remember also that Alexander the Great lived 300+ years before Jesus, and was a polytheist. It probably wouldn't be correct to say that he thought himself to be God (i.e. the big man himself), but rather that he thought himself to be a god (that is, one among many). This probably wasn't so strange then as it sounds now, as Greek Mythology is full of instances of the gods coming down to the mortal realm and impregnating unsuspecting females. (Heracles is a good example.) The line between mortal and divine was much fuzzier in ancient times than it is in Christian philosophy. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 22:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Police breaking down doors[edit]

In movies and TV cop shows we often see police kicking in or breaking down a locked door, to apprehend somebody inside, or to help somebody inside who's maybe tied up or beaten unconscious and can't open the door for themselves. This probably doesn't happen so often in real life, but I'm sure it happens from time to time. We never see the door being replaced, and I've often wondered who is (at least financially) responsible for fixing the door? Is this the police's responsibility? And would it depend on whether or not they had a justifiable reason for their action? Would it vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction? Would a person whose door was kicked off its hinges by the police believing he was their suspect, but was later exonerated of any guilt, have a case for demanding the police pay for the repairs? Or even someone who was later proven to be guilty of whatever the crime was? If the police admit liability for the repairs, do they ever organise the fixing of the door themselves, or do they suggest the owner fix it and send them the bill? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I heard on one of those "Police - Stop" kind of shows, that when the police forced entry to the wrong house the officers were joking that they would have to get the door fixed for the innocent householder. Probably not the comprehensive answer you were looking for, sorry. Astronaut (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that someone who was later exonerated would have any increased standing for compensation for police-caused property damage if the damage was part of a legitimate investigation. If the police could convince a judge that they had a good reason to bust the door down, that there was no reasonable alternative available, then I doubt they would be liable to such property damage. In the US you probably have to file a civil suit to get the damages paid for, and then only likely in cases of mishandling or wrongdoing (e.g. a policeman destroying things as a form of intimidation, unrelated to their investigation), but I don't know that for sure. I am sure the police (in the US, anyway) don't fix it themselves or asking for a bill. Property damage in the case of certain types of investigations is inevitable and the US police only compensate if they've done something wrong. (I'm also fairly sure they won't compensate you for lost work hours that they kept you in a cell when it turns out you were innocent, for example. I know they don't do anything if, say, you lose your job while in jail, and then it turns out you are exonerated.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the answer, but something else to consider is that the owner of the door is rarely the suspect. Criminals tend to be renters (or uninvited "guests"), not homeowners, so the homeowner is the one out of luck. In many cases the homeowner or motel renter has no reason to suspect the tenant/guest is a criminal, so it doesn't seem right that they should have to foot the repair bill. StuRat (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would be pretty shocked to hear that, as a rule, innocent people would have to pay for busted doors just because they were broken during a legitimate investigation. I mean, what if it's a really expensive custom-made door that costs thousands of dollars? Or what if they take apart an expensive sports car while looking for drugs? Why would the innocent citizen have to pay for what is a mistake on the police's part? I mean, that really violates my sense of justice.

Still, it seems that in at least some parts of the United States this may be the case. The first thing I came across was this post, which laments a situation exactly like this. On the other hand, that's certainly not the case in all states, as this Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police Department order makes clear. I quote: "It is the policy of this department to repair any door or other place of entry that is damaged as a result of a forcible entry by a member, or members of the department, when a member, or members may have acted upon misinformation, misinterpretation, or erroneous judgment." That's pretty straightforward.

On the other hand: "Simply because a search or seizure proves fruitless does not mean in itself that there was misinformation, misinterpretation, or erroneous judge[ment]." That sounds kinda bad, but I understand the reasoning: otherwise any drug dealer who manages to flush the drugs down the toilet in time would be off the hook. Whether someone displayed bad judgment is, of course, pretty much subject to interpretation, but I think the idea here is to say that if someone makes a mistake -- busts down the wrong door by accident or doesn't have strong evidence or valid reason to believe that forcible entry is required and justified -- then the department picks up the bill. That still leaves room for situations where the cops really do their jobs properly and act in good faith and with good reason to believe that forcible entry is required, but the suspect turns out to be innocent. However, I'm pretty sure situations like this are very rare. Which isn't much consolation to the innocent citizen, of course, but still. Anyway, I doubt the Metro PD in Washington D.C. is the only department with a comparable policy.-- Captain Disdain (talk) 16:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because someone is innocent does not make the investigation a mistake. There are a lot of procedures and requirements for when police can break down doors (and not knock, etc.) and they have to have a legitimate reason to think that not knocking down the door would somehow really hamper things. If it turns out that they end up exonerating the suspect or whatever, that doesn't mean that making them a suspect was a mistake, or that the investigation was in error. Exoneration is as important a function of police as is conviction! --98.217.8.46 (talk) 23:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even worse than broken doors are the drug forfeiture laws in the US, which allow the police to take any car "used for criminal activity". I bet rental car companies aren't real happy about that law. StuRat (talk) 04:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So the drift I'm getting is that it would be rare for the police to come to the party for the repair costs. Thank you all. I'll bear this in mind next time I get (or my door gets) busted for nefarious activities. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a news story about the LAPD's "Wrong Door Unit" who fix doors broken down in error available via google but unfortunately the posting of the URL here hits Wikipedia's blacklist. Google for "Repairs help rebuild LAPD's image when wrong door broken down". Nanonic (talk) 00:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A friend's house door in London was broken down by the police while they were out. After they returned, and a lot of phone calls, the police conceded that they'd been given a false address by a suspect and paid for the door to be replaced. Warofdreams talk 02:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here in Quebec, a suspect shot a cop and killed him as self-defence for getting into his house brutally. He was found not guilty by the judge though he faced other charges. [3][4] 132.206.22.14 (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of city in India[edit]

What is the definition for city in India? A certain size? A charter with the word city in it? A decision of the state government? Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most probably a decision of the state government, like everywhere else. Cities and villages can fluctuate in population over time, so if city would be defined as having min. say, 50,000 inhabitants, it would be a huge hassle having a place hover between 45,000-55,000 for decades. The thing with charter is definitely not used, since any hamlet could be able to publish a charter and become a city. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 23:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In India, it appears the term is municipal corporations and requires 200,000 population. City status is a national decision in many countries and in some, like the UK, it is down to a word in a royally granted charter so there is no reason that that couldn't be possible. In many places an exact population is required and communities gain/lose their status as population changes. See the city article. Rmhermen (talk) 22:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Books are our friends and punctuality[edit]

Write a small article on Books are our friends And Also write another small article on punctuality for class '''1st standard''' students. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.247.193 (talk) 13:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't want to. You do it.

Also, what?

Poechalkdust (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For "Books are our friends", I suggest you write about how they can keep you warm on a cold night by stoking them into the fireplace. For your article on punctuality, I suggest you take your time and get it right, even if it means handing it in a few days late. If, for some strange reason, these suggestions fail to get you the desired grade, I suggest that you do your own homework in the future. StuRat (talk) 14:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Books are our friends": Books are our friends. They don't tease us like humans do. They keep us company when humans avoid us, and even tell us stories—sometimes wonderful, sometimes tragic—to keep us from going apeshit. Screw you humans, who needs you anyway? I have books for friends!

"Punctuality": Sure, I could get to class on time, but damn it feels good to be a gangsta. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 22:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would have commented when the question first appeared, but I got mugged by a book and have been recuperating. OtherDave (talk) 02:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Books may be you're friends, but I know they're whispering behind my back. They've stopped talking to me and the piles are beginning to scare me. They loom in a threatening manner; I don't think I should go to sleep until they leave. Why won't they leave? WHY?!

Like friends, you have to choose carefully, they can be a bad influence and some talk a lot of rot. Julia Rossi (talk) 02:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Next time you're late tell your teacher you were reading. Then write an article about lying. -LambaJan (talk) 12:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read." --LarryMac | Talk 13:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marshall Plan poster[edit]

I'm looking for a higher res version of the poster at right. Anybody have a clue where I could find such a thing? --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find one online. I'd guess you'd need to find someone who actually has an original poster and get them to scan it. We do have the ship version of the poster in a slightly larger size, though: [5]. StuRat (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MI5/6[edit]

We all know that intellegence officers/spys regularly break certain laws during the performance of their duties for example fraud, deception, forgery etc, but according to MI5/6 they do not murder individuals. My first question is does a specific public domain document list specifically what laws exactly they can and can't break if needs must or is written into the individual laws that intelligence officers can break them? Secondly can we really take their word that they don't murder people, can they really accomplish their (and the governments) goals without resorting to assasination? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.62.11 (talk) 18:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it were written into the laws then they wouldn't be breaking them. Sometimes the government will grant them exceptions under extraordinary circumstances. Other times they will just have to try and get away with it. I imagine that it is not a matter of regular policy but that rule-breaking occurs on a case-by-case basis. Plasticup ^T/C 23:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

squirt water from under toung[edit]

when i lift me toung up in my mouth water sprays out like a venum snake from under it. whot causes this? whot is it called? how many peeps have this? ~~`` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilop17 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saliva glands do this - I occasionally happens to me, and a friend can do it at will.87.102.86.73 (talk) 18:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

gleeking —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.139.77 (talk) 19:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating - I used to be able to do this, but I had no idea it had a name, much less an article. Thanks, 66.188!— Matt Eason ^{(Talk  Contribs)} 22:13, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add: Wow! When I first read the question I never expected an article. Good stuff. Fribbler (talk) 22:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

automobile aquisition sales[edit]

I keep hearing about car dealerships having aquisition sales, how do they work and whats the catch? i find it hard to believe you can walk into a ealership and plop down $69 and walk away with a car.. is their something more to it ?Mamat1218 (talk) 18:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They could have an auction where few people show up and they end up selling good cars at low prices, but they would try very hard to make sure they don't accidentally do this. Therefore, I suspect that any car sold for $69 is worth considerably less, and quite possibly has a negative value (meaning you'll have to pay more to tow it away than you can sell it for). They could also run but be disgusting, say if someone died and decomposed in it or just had a serious diarrhea attack. StuRat (talk) 01:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a record?[edit]

I bought a CD player in 1985. The remote still works with the original batteries. Is this a record, or is it just a CD player? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.140.78 (talk) 22:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well, does it play records, or CDs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.139.77 (talk) 23:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About 15 years ago I bought a cheap Chinese watch for what is now 50 cents. It still works and I still haven't figured out how to replace the batteries. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 23:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but can anyone beat 23 years on the same set of batteries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.140.78 (talk) 23:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the same set of batteries, but here are some long-lasting lightbulbs. Useight (talk) 23:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I can believe that. Its the turning on and off that causes the thermal shock to weaken the filament. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.140.78 (talk) 23:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is literally beyond belief that the 1985 batteries still work. Perhaps someone replaced them and you were not aware of it. Edison (talk) 04:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Tandy multimeter still has the original Radio Shack AA battery it came with, when I purchased it in 1978. Obviously the current draw is very low so the battery will probably last another 30 years, provided it doesn't leak.--TrogWoolley (talk) 10:38, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've used the same CR-RW since 1999 every day. In 2005 I formatted it using InCD, which lets me save files to it directly like a floppy disk. I guess it must have had nearly 200 write cycles by now, so it must be near to failing. I don't use it as a main storage anymore by I regularly use it just to see how long it will last. ZigZap (talk) 15:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bum hair[edit]

Whilst looking in the mirror the other day, I noticed that I have rather a large amount of unsightly hair growing out of my anus. As a woman who likes to look her best in that area for her husband and other men friends, I would like to get it removed without visiting a clinic for waxing etc. Any advice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.140.78 (talk) 23:16, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow I never manage to see my anus when looking in the mirror. :-) As for advice, I suggest you go to a profesional, as that's a very sensitive area and removing hair from anywhere can be painful. StuRat (talk) 01:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

er.... "and other men friends" ?--Shaggorama (talk) 03:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try turning the light out when you are with "other men friends," or girl friends. Then they won't notice. Edison (talk) 04:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't feed the trolls. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, they certainly might notice even in the dark. (As for other men friends, I realize that for a lot of people marriage equals monogamy, but that's absolutely not the standard for everyone.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Malcom XIV, so now that it's been shown to men and girls of the entire internet. Julia Rossi (talk) 02:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the regrowth can be itchy. Removal of hair can also inhibit your body's natural smell reduction strategies. It might be more trouble than it's worth. Steewi (talk) 03:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine how hair can grow from a mucus membrane at all, but a troll maybe. Julia Rossi (talk) 05:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To the original poster: I'm sorry you've become the butt of our jokes, but I'm afraid you left yourself wide open. StuRat (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]