Miscellaneous desk
< June 4	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 6 >

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

June 5[edit]

toaster oven settings[edit]

What do the keep warm, broil, bake, and toast pizza settings on a toaster oven do? There is already a timer and a temperature dial, so what else can you control? --MagneticFlux (talk) 02:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some (I'm particularly thinking "keep warm" and "toast pizza") are likely shorthands for common operations, much like the "popcorn" button on microwaves. "Broil" and "bake" suggest basic functionality in line with time and temperature -- on standard ovens, these terms represent use of top and bottom elements, respectively. I'm not up on my toaster oven anatomy, but I would expect these to represent either the same basic functionality or some approximation thereof.

(Some) toaster ovens can also vary which heating element they switch on for specific tasks. For example, "toast" might energize both the top and bottom elements whereas "bake" only energizes the bottom elements and "broil" or "top brown" energizes just the upper elements.

Atlant (talk) 11:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, some toaster ovens have a convection feature. When you utilize the "bake" setting, a fan is activated that circulates the heated air from the elements. (great feature for reheating eggrolls).10draftsdeep (talk) 19:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Keep warm" probably alters the activation pattern of the heating elements, either by running them at low power or by rapidly switching between on and off, in order to keep radiated heat from browning whatever is in the oven. It probably also keeps the oven temperature at a level below the low end of the temperature dial. --Carnildo (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see a toaster oven question again, its been a while. Mhicaoidh (talk) 10:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC) Indeed it was 23 May 2007, the great international toaster oven / milk packaging conference. Mhicaoidh (talk) 10:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Metrix[edit]

What is a metrix? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.28.116.1 (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, I don't know what metrix [1] is. I wonder whether you are actually looking for Matrix or Metric? manya (talk) 04:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about Met-Rx, the nutritional supplement? Many people say they're having "a Met-Rx" when they mean a shake or smoothie made up with one of the supplements, as Bridget Fonda does in Jackie Brown. Remember when Samuel L. Jackson leaves the apartment, and Fonda asks DeNiro if he wants a Met-Rx? He follows her into the kitchen, and...well. It's a good movie. Mitchell k dwyer (talk) 06:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or are you referring to Metrics which is a way of quantifying several things. Dismas|^(talk) 11:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nextdoor painters got paint on my car, cost $125 to remove now they won't respond.[edit]

It cost $125 to get the paint of my car. The apartment manager said she talked to painting people and that they would send me a check in the mail. It has been almost 2 months since the incident, still no check. Apartment manager said company told her they sent the check a week ago. She gave me the guys number and he won't return my calls. What is the next step to getting my money? Who should i contact now because I am pretty sure they are avoiding me and are hoping i just forget about this and let it pass. Any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.126.152 (talk) 06:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forget the painters. Go for the building owners. Berks911 (talk) 07:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The cheque is in the post" is one of the world's oldest excuses. Ask your lawyer for advice. Astronaut (talk) 11:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't many lawyers cost more than the $125? Not legal advice, ( I have no idea if you have a case or not.) but Small Claims Court might be the right place to pursue something on this level. APL (talk) 12:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are lawyers that charge a smaller rate (possibly for a short amount of time, I'm not sure) that might also be able to advise you. I've seen ones that charge $50 or so for a short session to settle stuff like this. But yea, a small claims court might still be a better idea. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 19:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no way any lawyer (in the US at least) is going to deal with any case for a possible payout of $50. Small claims is your best/only option, aside from just asking to be paid again. Well, actually, your best option might be to do nothing at all. Is it worth tons of hassle to (hopefully) get back $125? Maybe, maybe not. The law is not well-equipped to deal with matters so small. Mangostar (talk) 21:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

+44999[edit]

Would the phone number 0044999 connect to the UK emergency services? ----Seans Potato Business 12:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I just tried it, and before anyone complains, I would have hung up before I got an answer. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 12:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how it might work in the UK, but I know from personal experience (OR alert!) that hanging up after accidentally dialing 911 still resulted in a call from the police, checking to see if there was an actual emergency. --LarryMac | Talk 15:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried it too, from my mobile. "The number you have dialled cannot be reached at this time, please try again later". Hopefully the UK's emergency services aren't taking a break :-) so I'd have to say it's not possible. Fribbler (talk) 12:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are categories of phone numbers that can be dialed only within a country. Presumably, 999 in the UK and 911 in the US are in such a category. Marco polo (talk) 12:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So how do you phone the emergency services from another country? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.115.175.247 (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine you'd need to, but the embassy could probably put you through to that country's police service if need be. Laïka 15:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I am missing some vital clue here, but what would be the purpose of calling the UK emergency service from the continent?

"Hi, it´s me! I am wandering here in the middle of the Black Forest - which is in Germany, just in case you don´t know - and there is this nasty Big Bad Wolf stalking me! Can you send a bobby quicksmart to my rescue or surely I will be eaten alive..." --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can imagine a situation in which you wanted to report an emergency to the UK police—for example, if you were engaged in a phone conversation with someone in the UK and something awful befell them while you were talking to them (and they were in a situation where they obviously couldn't call emergency services themselves). I don't think we should assume that everyone calls emergency services for themselves (I've called them a few times, never for me, always for others). In a world as networked as ours is today, I can imagine a lot of scenarios in which someone might need to do so in such cases (chat rooms, etc.). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 22:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly. This does happen in real life. It could be any form of rapid communication. What you do in such situations is to call the telephone operator where you are (long-distance operator if that's a separate number) and explain the situation. "This is an emergency. Something has happened to my sister and I need to contact the police in London, England." --Anonymous, 22:59 UTC, June 5, 2008.

Where is there a list of operator numbers for different countries? --Seans Potato Business 13:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably use the number 1-1-2. That works all over the EU, including the UK. Richard B (talk) 14:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In many countries, 1-1-2 just redirects you to the local services, though. Laïka 14:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Light switches and wiper blades[edit]

For the last 14 years, I've driven Jeeps, so my experience is a bit one sided. The windshield wiper controls have always been such that if I push up on the stalk, the wipers turn on. First intermittent and then on constantly. If they are on intermittently and I turn a little inset dial upwards (from my perspective as the driver) the frequency with which the wipers go back and forth increases. Although on my wife's Toyota, pushing down on the talk turns the wipers on. And turning the inset dial upwards doesn't increase the frequency of wipes but instead increases the amount of time in between wipes. So, this got me thinking (strange thing to think about, I know) about whether this is a standard American vs. Foreign car thing or if it has something to do with light switches. Here in the States, up turns the lights on and down turns them off. So are light switches in Japan opposite of those here in the States? Dismas|^(talk) 14:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it can be broken down that cleanly. My Chrysler's wipers behave the same as the Toyota described, which is not only an American car but part of the same corporate conglomerate as Jeep. As for light switches, that convention only holds if the electrician is careful. — Lomn 14:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen both types of controls and other variants too. My Saab has down for intermittant, up for speed 1 and up again for speed 2, and the little dial goes up to increase the gap between intermittant wipes. IIRC the Peugeot I had before that was like the jeep, but the intermittant control moved left to right and long ago my father's Honda van had the wiper control on the left side of the steering wheel (a bit freaky when the wipers go as you turn down side streets!). As for light switches, I don't know about cars having an American vs Foreign "thing", but American household light switches appear to work upside-down compared to our switches here in the UK. Astronaut (talk) 16:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Among the cars my family have we have a Vauxhall (UK GM brand), a Mercedes and a Honda - all three have wipers with roughly the same function direction as your Jeep. ~ mazca ^talk 21:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

100% rule[edit]

In a Wikipedia article about Gnatt charts there was a reference to the 100% Rule; what is the 100% rule? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rita Barbara (talk • contribs) 16:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article Gantt Chart links to this. But business-speak scrambles my brain, so I physically can't read it to decipher what it means. :-) Fribbler (talk) 16:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In short, the "100% rule" means that your schedule needs to account for all of the activity related to the whatever-it-is, and none of the activity not related to the whatever-it-is. 100%. No more, no less. — Lomn 16:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

do people in some cities have a specific personlity?[edit]

For example, are people in NY less polite or people in the South more open? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.205.37 (talk) 16:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I heard that people from large cities are ruder than those from the countryside. Astronaut (talk) 17:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As with all such generalizations, this sort of thing should be defined carefully. Do all inhabitants of NYC have a specific personality? Of course not. NYC as a general culture, though, is distinct from rural Mississippi. Getting into "more or less polite" is difficult -- what defines politeness? If person A is more polite in one regard than person B but less polite in another, who is generally more polite? Articles such as demographics of New York City raise the question of whether its feasible to even define an average New Yorker. — Lomn 17:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One survey revealed that people in New York were the most polite in the world. Corvus cornix_talk 18:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Polite" is, of course, a cultural matter. In much of America, it is considered polite to tell someone they look marvelous no matter how they look. In NYC, probably not, especially if you know them at all well and whatever makes them look sub-marvelous is fixable. In much of America, irony is inherently sarcasm and inherently "negative". Many New Yorkers use it almost continuously in their speech. In much of America, it is considered impolite to speak while anyone else is speaking. In New York, if you don't do that, you'll never be heard, because someone else will have started talking before the first one stops. New Yorkers, as a rule, don't find each other rude because of any of these things; it's people from other cultures who find them so. - Jmabel | Talk 18:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And politeness depends on who you are as well. Black women in the South get treated pretty differently by white men than they do in New York City, for example, in my experience. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a contributor from across the pond. In what way are they treated differently? Just to ask. Fribbler (talk) 22:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Increased willingness to treat them as stupid, to use the term "girl" with them more than they would with white women, increased likelihood to blame the messenger, etc. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ya wanna know what's rude? Slow-moving gangs of tourists spread across the entire sidewalk so that honest, hard-working New Yorkers can't get by them without having to walk in the gutter. We're not rude. We've just lost patience with annoying out-of-towners. --Nricardo (talk) 02:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Art Carney pretty much summed it up for me with one of his quotes from The Honeymooners: "Life is like a sewer: what you get out of it pretty much depends on what you put into it." I've been to a lot of places that are allegedly "rude" (Paris, New York City, etc.) and never found the average person to be rude. But that's probably a reflection of how I approach folks, smilimg, engaging them in appropriate small talk, and the occasional self-deprecating joke. Not unlike how I approach the Reference Desk, when you come to think of it!

Atlant (talk) 21:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having grown up in the south of England, but living in the North, I can say that what is considered polite varies even in this range. So things which are strongly ingrained in me (like avoiding all eye-contact with strangers in public and the straight-forward-to-me-and-yet-quite-complicated-when-I-think-about-them rules about when it is appropriate to acknowledge or talk to strangers and what it is appropriate to say in that case) can come across as cold or rude up here, as they seem to be less strongly applied. But I have to consciously remember the difference to not feel people are being rude when they break these rules towards me. So we both strike each other as rude when being as polite as we can be :) 79.74.56.70 (talk) 04:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its rude to look people in the when meeting them? I always thought that was polite! Crystal eyes17 talk

It is easier to be rude in big cities, since probably you will not meet a stranger again. GoingOnTracks (talk) 17:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well no, if meeting them in the sense of actually talking to them, eye contact is required to an extent. But if walking through town, or riding public transport, or otherwise simply being in a public space, I would not expect anyone to make eye contact with me except in particular circumstances, and I myself avoid doing so. It feels shocking to me every time someone violates it; almost as bad as a stranger approaching you and striking up conversation outside 'acceptable' circumstances. 79.74.56.70 (talk) 17:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball v. Basketball[edit]

In high school i played baseball and hated basketball. I found basketball to be uncilivised, gauche, and suffering from a low-class image that attracted the wrong characters. I remember i was in the distinct minority in H.s. as most students thought basketball was the "cool" sport and baseball was passé. My question is do high schoolers feel this way today? JeanLatore (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I currently attend high school and I can say that basketball is one of the cool sports, but certainly not the "coolest". Football and baseball rule high school sports in my experience. However, this may have to do with geography, so...I live in the U.S. Not sure about anywhere else.69.251.130.210 (talk) 19:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As of 2006, US high schools saw approximately 10% more participation in boys basketball than baseball.[2] Given that a baseball roster is larger than a basketball roster, that suggests that basketball holds a distinct popularity edge. The discrepancy between basketball and softball for girls is even larger. Notions of whether or not sports are seen as uncivilized, gauche, or passé are likely beyond the verification of the Ref Desk. — Lomn 19:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am also asking about those that are 'fans' of professional basketball and baseball as well as playing it. Most of my fellow students that didn't play on the basketball team at least played pickup basketball on a regular basis and rabidly followed the NBA. I myself tried to have nothing to do with the sport or the NBA. It just really seemed low-class. JeanLatore (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon my impertinence, Jean, but I suspect these notions of "class" and "the wrong characters" would definitely place you in a rapidly diminishing minority. My recommendation is to like or dislike things based on criteria that have nothing to do with the perceived "class" of the participants. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I'm not sure what you mean by "class" but, in your world, what sport would someone from a higher "class" play if he/she were really good at basket ball and not-so-good at baseball and they had to choose one? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 22:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a matter of interest, what class of person would generally be interested in "Anal Sex with Sluts"? -- JackofOz (talk) 22:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone shared my initial shock at reading that, I think Jack's referring to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 May 17#Anal Sex. Right? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 22:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly relevant, but my query related to the first item mentioned here. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JeanLatore, were you at high school when the basketball cards were big? Julia Rossi (talk) 06:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes i was, why? JeanLatore (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(econ) I'll just pop it here though to answer, because other people have said a similar thing with basketball being so dominant and other sports being backgrounded, even eclipsed. They were annoyed with the um, commercial popularity and marketing that went on but if they liked basketball they went for all that – cards, shirts, signature shoes and hero worship. It was world wide. And I don't know, but it does seem as if basketball was relatively down-classed before that rise. Julia Rossi (talk) 13:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do remember that the popularity of different high school sports depends on the location of the high school. Football is huge in Texas. I do not know the geographical distributions of the sports controlling for popularity, but surely there is some variability there. From Eastern North Carolina, yes, basketball was more popular than baseball (if we judged based on attendance at the games).--droptone (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Robins[edit]

Why are Robins so bold and able to approach an area where people are working in the garden when all other wild birds like blackbirds and starlings fly away? 86.154.171.134 (talk) 19:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From the European Robin article, "[A Robin is] relatively unafraid of people and likes to come close when anyone is digging the soil, in order to look out for earthworms and other food freshly turned up ... Robins also approach large wild animals, such as wild boar and other animals which disturb the ground, to look for any food that might be brought to the surface." D0762 (talk) 20:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An American robin approached within 3 feet as I was hoeing and rototilling a garden. Then he chirped at me a bit, not with any apparent hostility, just like a neighboring gardner saying "Hot enough for you?" I have seen them make a nest in a small tree at a height of 5 feet (less than 2 meters) next to a busy sidewalk. It is amazing how fearless they are of humans. This is despite reported human eating of robins during famine. Edison (talk) 03:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edison: do you believe that robins know it? Should we tell them?GoingOnTracks (talk) 15:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, they know. They know. Fribbler (talk) 18:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like pigeons, really. They won't even fly out of the way of an approaching car, preferring to walk. Plus, if you've ever been to Trafalgar Square, which is more famous for its pigeons than it is for Nelson's Column, you'd know what it's like to be covered in the blighters when you are trying to have a sandwich.--ChokinBako (talk) 21:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. One time we were having a picnic, and this sparrow came by. Even if it would shooed, it would hover and fly right back, sometimes approaching within inches. Hope this helps. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 22:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the absolute simplest, easiest, and cheapest way to pop and individual popcorn kernal.[edit]

Easily, inexpensively, and simplisticly pop one individual popcorn kernal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.191.102.55 (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably just stick it in a microwave for short bursts until it pops. ~ mazca ^talk 22:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Microwave popcorn packets contain more than just popcorn. There is also a layer of oil in them. So I'm not sure if microwaving a single kernel would work or not.

Also, with just a single kernel in the microwave, it is mostly empty. Using a microwave when it is empty can damage it. --Bavi H (talk) 02:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reference for the claim that a microwave would be damaged by operating it empty or with one grain of popcorn? What is the minimum safe load, in grams of water equivalent? Edison (talk) 02:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how this source is, but I remember the same thing mentioned before on the ref desk about empty microwaves. However, I wonder if there is a minimum safe load. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 03:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Next easily, inexpensively could be a lighter under a spoon or tinfoil with the said kernel and oil drop. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert on microwaves, but I don't think you're supposed to put silverware or aluminum foil in them. Oh, with a lighter. Gotcha. That'd probably work. Useight (talk) 07:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, spoons are safe in a microwave. Tin foil (aluminium foil, or whatever you want to call it), is what makes the sparks. Don't you watch Mythbusters?--ChokinBako (talk) 20:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edison: I remember reading the manual for one of the microwaves that we've had saying it could damage it if it's used while empty. I did a quick search of microwave oven manuals online and they seem to agree that you shouldn't use them while empty. I don't know if having a single kernel of unpopped popcorn in a microwave is enough to prevent damage to it, but thought it might be wise to err on the side of caution. --Bavi H (talk) 02:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the issue with empty microwaves has to do with the properties of microwaves(the actual waves themselves). They tend to be reflected from metalic object and absorbed in other things. Thus, when you have food in the microwave, the food is able to absorb the rays, and no damage is done. However, when there is nothing in the microwave, the rays bounce off the metalic walls and eventually reach the microwave emitter. This can damage it, causing it to become inoperable or to explode.

On a side note, anyone ever considered an air popper? I don't go shopping for popcorn poppers every day, but I think they still sell them. It would easily pop one kernal of popcorn(the kind that comes in a bag with nothing but kernals). Leeboyge (talk) 05:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Wonder if you could use the Sun and a magnifying glass.--APL (talk) 03:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nvidia quadro nvs 140m[edit]

Will I be able to play Spore with this graphics card?--96.227.101.82 (talk) 22:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The system requirements for Spore have not been released. According to the article, you will easily run the creature creator. I would guess that you'll manage the real game. Paragon12321 (talk) 22:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]