Miscellaneous desk
< April 7	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 9 >

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.

April 8[edit]

How do you find and contact an editor?[edit]

I love writing, and I want to go professional some day, but I don't know HOW! Can you help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by The'yellow'poet (talk • contribs) 00:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What type of writing? It is different for different genres. But generally you're best off if you find a literary agent first. They know how to contact editors, it's their job to make it work out. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 00:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that you buy, borrow or steal a dictionary, read a lot of good writers, and look up the words that you don't know, such as the word dubious (which you at least know how to spell), before you seriously consider a career in writing. --Lambiam 05:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or do what I did. I started two articles and got them published in an unknown non famous magazine, but it still got my name out. Then I was basically allowed to write whatever of course in time lines. I'm suppose to finish my novel in six months. Its suppose to be out this year. The problem is I never can stick to one idea. I have so many ideas in my head and can never tie myself down properly. Dubious unsure about the outcome. Dubious possible dishonest or immoral. Dubious of uncertain quality. This is what I remember on top of my head. I have a whole bunch of notes on spelling alternate spellings. Simple definitions of even the most complex word. The only thing I can't seem to get down is math.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 06:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Worry not, that's why there's the mathematics refdesk (though they may not be interested in turning it into plain english for you) ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 08:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi yellow, can you be more specific: do you want to publish short / long fiction ? or periodical writing such as journalism, comment etc in magazines, newspapers and so on ? The requirements can be quite different. 125.237.88.118 (talk) 11:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suleiman the Magnificent[edit]

What on earth do we call that hat? Besides "enormous"? --Masamage ♫ 05:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At[1] they say it's a 16th century Ottoman turban. And if your name is "the Magnificient" it's not going to be street-wear, it's going to be toweringly regal (regalia?). As far as I can discover, it varied from showing much of the inner cone with much less swathing to this. (The earlier headgear with the fur trim c. 13th c's called a sharbush and looks more tribal.) Julia Rossi (talk) 05:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) It is a turban. See Turban#History of turbans. This shape may help to explain the etymology of the word tulip, from older Turkish tülbent "turban". (In modern Turkish, the word is türban.) --Lambiam 05:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I knew it was some kind of turban, but they're mostly small and modest. Still, useful information there. Is there a specific name for a huge gigantic turban? --Masamage ♫ 06:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A very informal, possibly insulting name is "onion head hat." Adam Bishop (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a resident of the city which stopped good old Suleiman´s progress in 1529 (at which time I, the magnificent Cookatoo single-handedly defended the occident from the invading infidels), let me direct you to http://www.sikhnet.com/s/tyingturbans. There are a few different names for the various ways to tie a Sikh turban.

Oddly enough, whilst many of the Turkish / Muslim women in the Vienna of today wear head scarves or even veils, I have never seen a male wearing a turban. Well, I have, but they were clearly Indian Sikhs. In our article on turban there is a picture of a Sikh wearing a rather large turban, but no name is given to it. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 08:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Small and modest"? Massamage I take it you haven't been hanging with a 16th century sovereign suzerain with the power of life and death lately. Looking at the visuals, Suleiman's hat really stood out (not to mention his helmet), which is the point, isn't it? ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 08:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said most turbans are small and modest--eg. the ones I see Sikhs wearing around. --Masamage ♫ 21:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS Can't wait for someone to suggest "Mother of all turbans"?

Perhaps 'the Turbanator'? ;) Lemon martini (talk) 12:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you think his turban is ostentatious, check out his tughra:

—Steve Summit (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the theory of "Turban Envy", as proposed by a late countryman of mine has some bearing on this disturban topic.

Also bear in mind that ornate feathery headgear amongst Amerindians, top hats or the pope´s tiara were / are reserved for (the) hoi polloi. Our article on papal tiara, by the way, mentions that Suleiman had his own tiara made. In a show of one-upmanship it had one more tier than the "small and modest" ones in Rome. Clearly, StM knew about the power of status symbols and the importance of carrying a big stick. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You must mean the "hoity toity" since hoi polloi is the rabble, the masses, the rif raf. ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oooooooooooops, it´s all Greek to me. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Say, I wander around Turkey. Can I buy one somewhere? 24.130.192.59 (talk) 22:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Say, I wander around Turkey. Can I buy one somewhere?"

You're going to have to buy me as well (I don't know how I'm going to get from you). Cause the only people who wear those kind of hates are all sorts of modest.71.142.208.226 (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

It won't look like that until you put the kit together. I'm guessing it's one extra long piece of fabric with an inner cone and you'll need lessons. This[2] looks quite the rival. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a sizable female version. Similar to Julia Rossi's towering example is this turban. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, Sluzzelin, a top hat. Presenting Major Singh, weighing in at 68 lbs, steel cables and 400 meters of cloth – now this is a hat!! : )) Julia Rossi (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... and it ain't no slouch either. :-| ---Sluzzelin talk 13:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the turban seems to have gone out of Ottoman royal fashion sometime in the early 19th century. All the Sultans up to Mustafa IV are depicted wearing a turban. The succeeding Sultans, starting with Mahmud II, are shown wearing a fez, (though Mahmud II can be seen wearing both).

From the article on the Fez: "During the reign of the Sultan Mahmud Khan II (1808-39), a European code of dress gradually replaced the traditional robes worn by members of the Ottoman court. The change in costume was soon emulated by the public and senior civil servants, followed by the members of the ruling intelligentsia and the emancipated classes throughout the Ottoman Empire. While European style coats and trousers were gradually adopted, this change did not extend to headwear. Peaked or broad brimmed headdresses such as the top hat did not meet the Islamic requirement that men should press their heads to the ground when praying. Accordingly the Sultan issued a firman (royal decree) that the checheya headgear in a modified form would become part of the formal attire of the Turkish Empire irrespective of his subjects' religious sects or millets."---Sluzzelin talk 13:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Habits[edit]

How much gum would you have to chew to strain your jaw out? What are the long terms effects of biting the inner lip? This is all out of my own curiosity.

Thank You

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 06:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

The inner lip thing sounds like self-harm so mentally, long-term, not great. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume he means accidentally biting the inside of the lip or cheek. StuRat (talk) 11:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Oops, blinded by visions of bleeding lips, tks StuRat) Julia Rossi (talk) 22:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you'd have to chew a lot, my friend. the human jaw is designed for chewing so its gonna be hard to over strain that. but possible, as I said. you'd just have to chew a lot, thats all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.230.6.32 (talk) 14:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To strain out your jaw I think you would have to stuff more gum in your mouth than your mouth is used to chewing at one time. Your jaw will start to hurt in no time. I don't recommend doing it though.--Dlo2012 (talk) 14:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Celery, raw, develops the jaw/But celery, stewed, is more quietly chewed." --Ogden Nash. No doubt the same principle applies to gum. Human muscles are meant to be used. BrainyBabe (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well its not entirely accidental biting the lip. When I was younger I had fallen and had bitten my inner lip and cut the top of my upper lip (did not feel to good). After that the inner lip in front of the two front teeth has a lump that is virtually numb of any pain. I chew that all the time. That is why I chew gum to get my mind off of chewing the lump. I chew a lot of gum I go through one pack of gum in one day. The same thing kinda goes for peas. I eat five cans of peas a day. I hate celery. It taste bad cook or stewed. Blugh, celery. So more or less I was curious to how much gum would strain a jaw? And the effects of biting a lump more or less.

Always

Cardinal Raven

71.142.208.226 (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Intentionally chewing on that lump could cause you all sorts of problems, from infection to potentially cancer. Don't do it. StuRat (talk) 16:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

background to name of a plant (lily)[edit]

I have come across a lily called 'elaine garrad'. I would intersted to know how this name came aboutPathumfrey (talk) 12:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I searched around a bit, and couldn't find any specific details on that cultivar. In general, though, it seems that the person who has created and registered a particular cultivar or hybrid gets to select the name. As an example, look at this page showing hybrids; the name of the hybrid is shown, along with the person who registered it. --LarryMac | Talk 13:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about lilies, but perhaps this link will get you started. It's the entry for the 'Elaine Garrad' cultivar in the Royal Horticultural Society's Lily Register. I'm not entirely sure of the notation, but it appears that Elaine Garrad was registered in 1984 by D.S. Marriott. There's no indication how the name was selected, but perhaps that will get you started on your search. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fake?[edit]

this is fake, right? [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.117.43.34 (talk) 13:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it is absolutely genuine, and can be found in London, on the Isle of Dogs, close to Canary Wharf. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samilong (talk • contribs) 14:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The picture is genuine, though it is not a real traffic signal but a sculpture[4]. -- Q Chris (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haley Williams haircut[edit]

How would you describe Haley Williams from paramores haircut? What should I ask for at the barbers if I want one the same? ps I'm a guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.16.175 (talk) 17:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just take in a photograph of the haircut and say "I'd like one of these, please" ? Samilong (talk) 18:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have at look at this yahoo! answers post. Has some good pictures of her hair. D0762 (talk) 18:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but as a guy don't you think they might act a bit funny if I take a pic of a girl and say one of these, please? Won't they be like "oh, so he's sailing down THAT side of the river, is he"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.16.175 (talk) 18:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People have all sorts of haircuts and in modern times the stereotypical gender barriers have mostly fallen away. Of course you may experience some discrimination, especially in small-town middle America, but the most important thing is to feel secure and confident in yourself. Have a read of this. D0762 (talk) 19:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah go for that haircut. Really I don't think people will look at you weirdly. Haircuts like that are wildly excepted for some reason. One time just for fun (Halloween costume party fun) I shave parts of my hair to make go bald and then I did a comber over and dress up like Trump. Oh, that was good feeling.71.142.208.226 (talk) 22:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Appraisal[edit]

What's the value of a good condition vintage '79 Peavey 400 Mark III half stack? Bellum et Pax (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i would say about 100 pounds or so, it depends where you are, and what sort of condition its in, it must work, and look nice, people are shallow —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.34.51 (talk) 20:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of those who have no idea what you're talking about, what is a vintage '79 Peavey 400 Mark III half stack? Astronaut (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From the sounds of it, I'm guessing some sort of guitar amp. Acceptable (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something you Cant have[edit]

what is the word that is desribing a state to were you want something so bad and you know you cant have it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.90.98 (talk) 20:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

may be related to the law of the forbidden, one where one wants something, because you cant have it, eg I can get almost any woman I want, but the only ones I want are the ones that dont want me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.34.51 (talk) 20:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not sure but "covet" might cover it, sort of. Like you'd "covet your neighbour's car" because you know you can;t have it. You'd get better luck asking on Languages 81.96.161.104 (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Desire. Sounds awfully simple, I know, but if you already have something there's no desire. Vranak (talk) 22:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crave or craving, is like covet. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Envy?HS7 (talk) 11:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

zoom[edit]

i am trying to find a Zoom UIB02 USB Interface Board for a zoom mrs 1608 multitrack recorder, does any one know where i can get one, how much they cost, and what program is used on ones computer. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.34.51 (talk) 20:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be best to ask the computer desk (here). They deal with most technological stuff in general, despite the name.--^La Pianísta! 17:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing[edit]

Will wikipedia be edited by professionals in the future? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.38.122 (talk) 23:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Professional bowlers. 200.127.59.151 (talk) 23:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I was a professional bowler. I average about 175. Useight (talk) 23:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, am a newb at bowling. Neal (talk) 23:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I think in a way Wikipedia is all ready edited by professionals. Sometimes people know subjects because they are so passionate about them. Video games are edited and written about and researched about because the person playing them was passionate about it. Then they created an article on Wikipedia because of all their passionate information. Wikipedia is all ready a community of professionals yes some of them might just be bums in their homes always on the computer or an actual professor that doesn't make them unprofessional. They are professional on what they know. That is what makes Wikipedia more human. And even professor need to brush up on their information. No one is ever right and in this day and age study, research and science always with new information about that subject. Information is always changing and our knowledge is alway getting bigger as well. The more we learn as unprofessionals the more we become professional.

Always

Cardinal Raven71.142.208.226 (talk) 00:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

I see what you're saying, that in a way it's edited by experts, at least in some fields, but it certainly not edited by profesionals, as all editing here is voluntary and therefore amateur, even if done by a professional researcher in that field as no original research, right? So although Wikipedia has many dedicated experts, it could never truly be wikipedia and be edited by professionals. 81.96.161.104 (talk) 01:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will beg to differ. Its edited by professionals. Yes, they may not be professionals in the way you look at it, but I like Wikipedia the way it is. Its more human the way it is now. I really couldn't sit here reading articles written by stiff logs (especially my video games). It would remind me of those times in the classroom trying to understand my monotonous teacher teach me something. And even true professionals aren't that professional. Later on in life the information they know may be expanded or even deleted for being false. There is never truly a professional the world is vast and ever changing some information may be erased and other information is put on.

Always

Cardinal Raven

71.142.208.226 (talk) 01:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

If the OP means will people be paid to edit the pedia, not while there's passion, knowledge and sharing is my guess. So, no. Julia Rossi (talk) 02:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cardinal Raven, that opinion is extremely naive. I hope the majority of readers don't want to read articles written by 14 year olds who think they are experts because they play a lot of video games. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is not what I meant. I don't want to know my articles are written by 14 years olds who think they are experts because they play a lot of video games. I don't want that to happen. No I meant that someone like me..when I like something say a video game I find as much information about that video games as I can. I find as much information. I want to learn about it. And I think that learning process and that knowledge is what makes people level up in information and knowledge holding. That is what I meant. Hope it made more sense now.71.142.208.226 (talk) 06:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]

Imagine how much more successful in life you could be if you spent as much effort learning about useful things! (Wow, I'm really starting to sound like an old man.) Adam Bishop (talk) 07:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would surely be prohibitively expensive to pay professionals to write Wikipedia. And any professional worthy of the name wouldn't touch Wikipedia with a bargepole anyway. -88.110.156.249 (talk) 11:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the first time I've heard anyone refer to real-life learning as a "level up". I may have to start using that one. 81.96.161.104 (talk) 13:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if 35.11 might have meant "copy edited". Comparisons between Wikipedia and commercial reference works always touch upon how badly uneven the writing style and quality is, even where the factual accuracy is quite good.

However, it's hard to imagine the Foundation hiring enough copy editors to make a dent. *.Wikipedia.org is supposedly up to ten million articles. (Only about 25% in English!) Not to mention Wikibooks. APL (talk) 18:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've certainly edited article in areas where I worked as a professional , and I'm sure that is true of a great many editors, besides the Essjay type pseudo-professionals. Edison (talk) 04:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]