Miscellaneous desk
< October 19	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 21 >

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.

October 20[edit]

US interstate highway auxiliary numbers[edit]

See Interstate 69 in Indiana and the intro to List of auxiliary Interstate Highways for the context of this question. Interstate 469 is a beltway around Fort Wayne, Indiana, but there's no Interstate 269 in the state: why is there a 469 but no 269? Given the existence of Interstate 465 around Indianapolis, and given the fact that the northeastern chunk has been built for (comparatively) many years while Neo-Luddites are still trying to hold up the construction of the southwestern chunk, it doesn't seem reasonable for AASHTO to presume that they would need a 269 designation and thus relegate the only 69 auxiliary to the 469 designation. Nyttend (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they're building an I-269 in Tennessee. I suppose Indiana figured there's no sense in duplicating Tennessee's number and possibly confusing someone. I-269 is a new highway, but maybe it was planned earlier. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:17, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They don't have to number the auxiliary interstates in order. The only rules are 1) last two digits match the parent route, and 2) odd first digit = connected to parent at only one end, even first digit = connected to parent at both ends. AASHTO will usually ascede to whatever the state chooses for a number, so long as it fits the rules. In the specific case of Indiana, they chose 469 instead of 269 probably because Indiana State Road 269 already exists. But even if it didn't, there's nothing compelling them to use 269 first. As far as avoiding confusing with neighboring states; that's doubtful. There are two I-291's within a few miles of each other, see Interstate 291 (Massachusetts) and Interstate 291 (Connecticut). There are many examples of states having Interstate auxiliary routes numbered out of order; in South Carolina there is a I-126 and an I-526, but no I-326. Georgia has an I-516, but no I-116 or I-316. I'm tired of looking, but you can find dozens like this. --Jayron32 01:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I never before noticed that the auxiliary routes would ever go out of order. I suppose I should remember 269, since (judging by its description) I drove on it last month. Nyttend (talk) 05:14, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what the planners want to do and why. Minneapolis-St.Paul is surrounded by a continuous beltway whose southern portion is labeled I-494 and whose northern portion is labeled I-694. The dividing points are where I-94 crosses it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

US local government severance pay[edit]

The County Executive of Wayne County, Michigan, Robert Ficano, is under investigation by the FBI for offering absurdly high compensation to his employees. For example, he just gave a $200,000 severance payment to somebody who quit. While no severance is customary when somebody quits, I'm not sure it's illegal to give a whopping severance package (to a woman I assume to be his mistress, in this case). So, what laws govern this type of thing ? StuRat (talk) 02:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is worse in that she wasn't really severed. She moved from one county-related job to another county-related job (Development Board to Airport Authority) with similar pay rates. It is not yet clear closely how Ficano was involved in the payment approval except for poor justifications afterwards. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 14:38, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

10/19 coincidence?[edit]

Is there any connection between the proportions of the U.S. flag (10:19) and the fact that the British surrendered at Yorktown on October 19, 1781 (10/19)? I suspect it is just coincidence. — Michael J 04:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a coincidence. I googled [us flag proportions] and found this article,[1] which explains the practical reasons how the flag came to be 10 to 19. It also points out that that's merely a custom or a convention that has evolved, not prescribed by law. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know if months were written in numerals in the 18th century? If so, when did the British and American usage diverge? 19th October is 19/10 over here. Alansplodge (talk) 10:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Calendar date gives some clues about that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the proportions were based on the calendar date, the 10/19 or 19/10 format divergence would probably make no difference, as the length of national flags is by rule greater than, or, at least, equal to, their width. The only national flag that is wider than it's long is the flag of Nepal (proportion 5:4), but it has a non-quadrilateral shape. --Theurgist (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What address should I use if I were to mail or write to someone in the western part of the Bronx?[edit]

I have an aunt who’s planning to move to Riverdale in the Bronx. She currently lives in Mott Haven in the Bronx. I know that the western part of the Bronx was part of NYC since 1874. So, if I were to send her a card (which I will do so) or any other thing by mail when she moves to Riverdale some time in the future, would I write “Bronx, NY;” “New York, NY;” “Riverdale, Bronx;” or “Riverdale, NY” in the address to her when she moves, or would any of them be equally acceptable to write in the address?

I know that one would only write New York, NY in the address when sending a mail to someone in Manhattan. I know one would write only Brooklyn, NY in the address if one were to mail something to someone in Brooklyn. I know that one would use one of Queens’ neighborhoods, the ones that used to be towns, in an address if one were to send some mail or write to someone in Queens. Willminator (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have lived all over the Bronx, including Riverdale. You just use Bronx and the Zip Code. μηδείς (talk) 16:45, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My research says Medeis is correct. Note that the street address is always "Bronx", although the real-estate area may be Riverdale or North Riverdale. Bielle (talk) 17:59, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful information, but historically speaking, why wouldn’t “New York, NY” be written in the address for Riverdale and other neighborhoods in the western part of the Bronx? Willminator (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"New York, NY" would refer specifically to Manhattan (and a smidgen of mainland bordering the Bronx), aka "New York County". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That smidgen includes part of the Riverdale neighborhood. Certain people in that area insist they be listed in the phone book as Manhattan, rather than the Bronx, which is part of what motivates this question, I presume. If you want to make her happy address it to Riverdale. It will eventually get there. μηδείς (talk) 23:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you get the zip code right, especially a 9-digit zip, then the "city" name should be somewhat less important, as long as it's not ridiculous. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The question answers itself: "historically". Why not try sending some mail to Prussia?

The fact is, you can just put her name and zip, and, if the post office has her name uniquely listed, she will eventually get the mail. You can also put Riverdale instead of Bronx with the zip if you want and she will get it. The USPS is not so perverse as not to want to delver the mail if you provide enough information for her to get it. But Bronx, 104XX is the best way to address it unless you want to delay her mail, make others do extra work. μηδείς (talk) 21:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you look up the ZIP code on the USPS website, it will give you the "proper" city of address. According to the site, "BRONX, NY" is the "actual" city, while "RIVERDALE, NY" is "not correct." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thanks for your answers. I will mail my aunt by using “Bronx NY” when she moves to Riverdale. That answered that part of my question, but as you might have seen, I asked being aware of the history behind the western section of the Bronx and how the history of the other boroughs have affected the way the addresses are written in those places. With all that in mind I asked about which address option should I use when I start mailing stuff to my aunt. After receiving the answer to my original question, I wondered why the western section of the Bronx gets to use the "Bronx, NY" address only. So, on my follow up question, I asked about why historically the western part of the Bronx, which includes Riverdale where my aunt is going to move, does not get the “New York, NY” address that only Manhattan gets since that part of the Bronx, as can be seen in this 1895 map, was part of the original city that existed before 1898. As it is in the histories of the other boroughs or parts of them, shouldn’t that history be reflected in the western part of the Bronx where my aunt is moving to? Willminator (talk) 01:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little surprised that nobody has directed the OP to the web site for the United States Postal Service since they would be the authority on such things... Dismas|^(talk) 01:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Country with greatest difference between most populous settlement and second most populous[edit]

Talking with respect to the relative difference (i.e. the ratio between them). The article List_of_largest_cities_and_second_largest_cities_by_country is the best resource I can find, but can't be used to answer the question directly. From this Barbados has the greatest ratio I can see from random checking (Bridgetown (94,197) over Speightstown (2,364) is a ratio of 39.8). Is there anywhere with higher? What about only for nations with a population of over one million (Mongolia has a ratio of 11.1 so is a possible contender for this)? --90.215.0.177 (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is known as a primate city but that article is rather unhelpful with regards to your question. If you want truly large cities, Mexico City's agglomeration is 20m, followed by Ecatepec de Morelos at 1.6m, or 12.5 times. Mexico City proper is only 8.8m, though. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyo appears to be about 10 times larger than the next largest city in Japan. I was surprised to find that Tokyo is not listed at List of cities in Japan. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation given is that "Tokyo is not included on this list, as the city of Tokyo ceased to exist on July 1, 1943. Tokyo now exists as a special "metropolis" prefecture (都 to), with 23 "special" wards (with the same status of city) making up the former boundaries of the former city in the eastern half of the prefecture." Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 18:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To do this right, you need to compare either populations within city limits (excluding suburbs) or metropolitan area (agglomeration) populations. It doesn't work to compare the metropolitan population of Mexico City with the city-limit population of the next largest city, for example. According to our List of Japanese cities by population, Tokyo is nowhere near 10 times the size of the next largest city. If we compare Greater Tokyo with Greater Osaka, we find that the former has only about twice the population of the latter. In Mexico, Mexico City as a municipality is about 5 times larger than the next largest municipality, Ecatepec de Morelos, but Ecatepec is essentially a suburb of Mexico City. In terms of metropolitan populations, Mexico City's is about 5 times larger than Mexico's next largest metropolis, Guadalajara. Mongolia's ratio is impressive, but I think you will find the highest ratios—for countries with more than one million people that are not city-states—in Africa. In Liberia, for example, the capital, Monrovia, is nearly 18 times larger than the next-largest city, according to this source. Marco polo (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would the Republic of Ireland have the biggest difference in Europe, with List of towns in the Republic of Ireland by population giving Dublin as 1,045,769 followed by Cork at 190,384? -- Q Chris (talk) 20:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's about 5 to 1, the UK seems to have a larger difference at about 7 to 1 from London to Birmingham, according to List of largest United Kingdom settlements by population. From randomly sampling about a dozen articles, it looks like the average ratio in Europe is somewhere around 2 to 1. -- Ferkelparade π 21:05, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A better comparison for the UK would be from this list, which gives a ratio of London 3.6 : 1 West Midlands urban area (= Birmingham). Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Iceland manages 6.9 to 1 (Reykjavík to Akureyri) rising to 11.5 to 1 if you include the Reykjavík metropolitan area. Hut 8.5 21:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Montevideo, Uruguay is about 13 the size of the country's second-largest city. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) There are several large countries with figures comparable to Mongolia. Lebanon is 9.9 to 1 and Peru is 10.1-1. Suriname, with a population of half a million, is 15.7-1. Hut 8.5 22:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That just beats Djibouti (List of cities in Djibouti) which is 15.6:1. --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malta also manages a larger (European) disparity -- about 13.2 for Valletta and Mosta. Thanks for the answers everyone. Liberia certainly seems like one of the most 'top-heavy', given its population. --90.215.0.177 (talk) 14:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, ignore that first bit. Valletta only works if you count the surrounding urban area, and Mosta isn't the second largest settlement anyway --90.215.0.177 (talk) 14:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you count the ratio, then some of the microstates with only a single town might be on the top. – b_jonas 18:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can't beat Vatican City, which is infinitely larger than its non-existent second largest settlement. --Dweller (talk) 12:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dili, East Timor looks like a good candidate. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 15:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Media markets vs. "viewing areas"[edit]

When I look at this map of Kansas media markets I see that they are quite different from television stations' viewing areas. For example, Phillips, Smith, Jewell, Republic, Cloud, Clay, Geary, Morris, and Chautauqua counties are in the viewing areas of almost all Wichita television stations, and they report on news and weather in those counties as well. Republic, Ottawa, and Dickinson I also know are covered by WIBW-TV out of Topeka, and KSNW and KWCH out of Wichita also include some border counties of southwestern Nebraska, Yuma, Cheyenne, and Kit Carson counties in Colorado, and (also KAKE in this instance) several border counties of northern and northwestern Oklahoma. I would have thought media markets determined viewing area of TV stations, but apparently this is not the case. What determines the viewing areas of TV stations in the United States? Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 22:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Determining what a television station's viewing area can be problematic, as there are various definitions which do not agree. Nielsen Media Research, which is the predominant ratings service in the U.S., has established 210 areas that it calls Designated Market Areas. For the most part, Nielsen assigns each county to one specific market, even if stations from two cities can be received in that county. (Some large counties in western states are split between markets, but even they have no overlap, only an artificial border.) Another ratings service, Arbitron used a similar system, but its markets were not always the same as Nielsen's, especially in overlap areas. The FCC has its own Television Market Areas which usually follow county lines but not always, and sometimes differ from the ratings services. None of these correspond to the actual coverage area of a station's transmitter, which is determined by a transmitter's electronics, location, power, surrounding terrain and other factors. The transmitter coverage area is basically the area where people can receive the station (not counting cable), while the ratings market areas are where people are counted as viewing. (There is a bit more in the article Media market.) — Michael J 07:33, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What I think your map reflects is not just the viewing area of television stations from the cities indicated, but viewing area plus a calculation which metropolitan area residents of a given county are most likely to drive to for shopping. For example, even though residents of Smith County can receive TV stations from Wichita, they are more likely to drive to a closer city in Nebraska to purchase a car. Therefore, commercials on Nebraska stations advertising Nebraska merchants may be more effective for residents of Smith County. Marco polo (talk) 15:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That dead Libyan guy[edit]

How is his name supposed to be spelled? I've seen at least five different spellings, and there doesn't seem to be one that's more common. --75.33.218.167 (talk) 23:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's discussed in his article. See Muammar Gaddafi # Transliteration of his Arabic name. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 23:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) This has been asked a couple of times on the Language desk. See our article Muammar Gaddafi. It can also be written 'Kaddafi', 'Khaddafi', and 'Qaddafi'. In standard Arabic, it is written 'Qaddafi', but due to Libyan Arabic pronunciation of the letter qaf, we also have the other three variants I have just mentioned. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:34, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(EC)Unfortunately, there is no generally agreed, standard method of transliterating Arabic letters into Roman ones, nor any generally agreed, standard method of transcribing into the Roman alphabet all the sounds involved, some of which do not exist in English and whose actual pronunciations anyway vary between the different national dialects of Arabic and the pan-national "standard Arabic". Many publications and organisations have chosen consistent "house styles" for their own use, but there is no "correct" answer. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.33 (talk) 23:44, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Yep, so his name can be spelled any number of ways so long as they communicate about the right sound. Works the same with many semitic languages given that some of the sounds don't exist in English (though they do in German oddly enough). Also, good news everyone! BLP doesn't apply to him anymore! :D Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 22 Tishrei 5772 23:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By, not existing in English but in German, I assume you mean the sound represented by 'ch' in German? Well, I have news for you. We even have both the 'ch' in 'Bach' and the 'ch' in 'ich'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 02:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon, not existing in English that isn't Welshified. :p A lot of Anglophones have problems with it sadly. :( Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 23 Tishrei 5772 05:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps ß is what he refers to? Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 05:31, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We have that, it's usually put as this letter: s. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 23 Tishrei 5772 05:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...Though the eszett usually is transliterated as ss, rather than just s, for clarity about what it represents. (It's the difference between as and ass.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

M'yes, that is indeed so. However we don't have the -ch sound which is akin to the Hebrew כ or -ig which is the same sound as ח. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 24 Tishrei 5772 18:20, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've never really understood which Economist articles are paywalled, but if you can get this then it might help explain the above points. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling is "مُعَمَّر القَذَّافِي"; anything else is a transliteration. --Carnildo (talk) 22:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is this problem common in transliterating Arabic names? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 24 Tishrei 5772 18:20, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]