Miscellaneous desk
< October 7	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 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.

October 8[edit]

yamaha 125 tzr motorbike engine[edit]

how do you assemble the engine if it is stripped to the core or where will i be able to get a workshop manual for this specific bike. help is urgently needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pieter schuurman (talk • contribs) 07:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are some on eBay:[1]. Amazon should have some as well. Get the most comprehensive one you can.--Aspro (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of pet collars are popular in Europe and the United States?[edit]

What kind of pet collars are popular in Europe and the United States? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Summer zara (talk • contribs) 09:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would think a ("safe" unless you are actually interested in kinky sex) google image search on the terms "dog collar" and "cat collar" would be the best way to get your answer. μηδείς (talk) 10:52, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the US: For cats, they are usually cloth collars with "breakaway" rubber loops on them (that break if the cat gets stuck on something, so they can't get stuck or choke). I've never seen anything but those on cats. For dogs there is more variety because they are used for more than just identification. There is a standard cloth collar. There are varieties of metal "pinch" collars that work against tugging dogs. There are harnesses that hold them more around the shoulders. There are "gentle" harnesses which attach to the head somehow. I think that's all of the variety that I'm used to seeing. (I'm a "dog person" and live in an area where I see dozens of dogs being walked each day.) --Mr.98 (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also Dog collar. --Psud (talk) 13:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have five dogs and we have plenty of collars. What has been said is accurate and any additional info can surely be found by searching the web sites of any retailers such as PetsMart or PetCo. Dismas|^(talk) 14:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bridal Showers[edit]

I have been invited to a bridal shower. The invitation said it is a "show shower", and so the gifts should not be wrapped. What, exactly, is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.86.144.51 (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read bridal shower? That seems to explain it pretty well.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any explanation of a "show shower" there, although it sounds like it may mean nothing more than "bring unwrapped gifts". StuRat (talk) 22:44, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"show shower", so no pressure then! Caesar's Daddy (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

internet acronyms[edit]

What is the longest phrase / sentence that you can write only using internet acronyms? Harley Spleet (talk) 15:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Acronyms are nearly all nouns, so I don't see how one could create a phrase or sentence using only acronyms.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:35, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My favorite from my days in Eve Online probably has the most letters - OMGWTFBBQ. You can add a LULZ at the end, but it becomes TL;DR FTL-- Obsidi♠n Soul 19:08, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What if you then add QSO DSV KN to the end of that? 148.197.81.179 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Queensland Symphony Orchestra Diving Support Vessel Knudsen Number? I approve.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 11:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are "internet acronyms" and how do they differ from normal acronyms? 82.43.90.142 (talk) 06:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps OP is referring to textspeak. I have a friend with whom I regularly correspond by text. We make up our own initialisms on the fly and can usually understand each other. Textspeak is not acronyms.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pre-mature ejaculation[edit]

how to prevent it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.128 (talk) 15:32, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read premature ejaculation? We can't give you medical advice, but there are some suggestions in the article.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Think of baseball, or England if you're closeted. Dualus (talk) 04:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or, wait until you're mature (as opposed to trying it when you're pre-mature). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably better if you didn't chime in on everything bugs. Shadowjams (talk) 10:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I don't. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

string theory[edit]

can anyone explain this in way average people like me would understand. im wondering why is this a candidate for TOE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.112.82.2 (talk) 15:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion for easing your way into this is to read (or watch) Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, which, though it has some parts that make real scientists squirm (and the book is a little out of date), is a nice overview of why scientists like string theory in particular, and why they think it makes a nice candidate for a TOE, and also some of the major challenges that they have with regards to it. --Mr.98 (talk) 17:49, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TOE? Would that be Theory of everything? Astronaut (talk) 17:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:18, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"String theory is often called the 'Theory of Everything' (TOE). However, since so far it makes no predictions observable by experiment, a better name might be the 'Theory of Everything Not Appearing in Laboratories' (TOENAIL)." — Warren Siegel
-- BenRG (talk) 06:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with string theory is, not even physicists understand it, so of course they can't really explain it to average people. That, naturally, won't stop people to write popular science books on it. – b_jonas 18:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No human could ever possibly understand an omipotent and eternal being who created the universe out of nothing, but that sure hasn't stopped people talking and writing about God forever. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]

But creating fantasy fiction is much easier than describing a ToE that, to be scientific, has to accord with observable (and by everyday standards quite weird) reality :-) . {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.142 (talk) 21:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you get bored of high dimensional space, there is the possibility that the universe 2-D instead of 3-D which is well regarded and increasing in popularity especially in the U.K. Dualus (talk) 04:53, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Specification for Bell & Howell Micro Plus ?[edit]

This is a low-end hearing aid. I'd like to know the following:

1) What battery does it use ?

2) Is it a directional microphone ? If so, specifically what type (shotgun, cardioid, etc.)

I'd also be interested in seeing any reviews of the product (originating from anyone who isn't trying to sell it, of course). Thanks. StuRat (talk) 21:17, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hat etiquette in 1935[edit]

Were men allowed to keep their hats on inside a courthouse in 1935 Alabama? I am asking because I am playing the role of Judge Taylor in the stage version of "To Kill A Mockingbird" and there is one actor who is wearing a hat and it just bothers me and seems like it would be considered disrespectful. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.46.18.178 (talk) 23:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not. The judge would have reacted as in My Cousin Vinny.μηδείς (talk) 23:29, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or for that matter, as he reacted in Disorder in the Court. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a still from the 1962 film - only the ladies retain their hats. It was made less than 30 years after the book was written, but the story was told as a recollection of childhood memories, so must have been set a few years earlier than 1935. Alansplodge (talk) 23:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The dude on the left is a time traveller from our day — he's answering his cell phone in court and getting away with it! Comet Tuttle (talk) 07:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where does that happen? Last time I was in a courtroom, if a cell phone was even seen, the judge [2] confiscated it and it cost $20 to get it back. — Michael J 20:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite a trick to get a connection to a cell tower that won't be there for another few decades. Googlemeister (talk) 14:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Men are not typically allowed to wear headgear, except religious headgear, in courtrooms even today... Neutrality^talk 00:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A restriction on wearing a hat in the courtroom meets this standard. First, it is reasonably related to the maintenance of courtroom civility and respect for the judicial process. Judges have an obligation to maintain the dignity of judicial proceedings and to oversee courtrooms in a manner that promotes their integrity. Requiring litigants to remove their hats out of respect for this process is reasonably calculated to advance these valid interests. Similarly, it is appropriate for a court to expect litigants to appear in attire that is suitable to the dignity of a courtroom, rather than to show up in clothes they might have worn to a baseball game. The reasonable admonishment of litigants who wear casual or inappropriate attire promotes legitimate ends by reminding them that the judicial process deserves to be approached with respect.

Footnote: The interests in courtroom order and decorum may also be outweighed by an individual’s right to wear a hat based upon the dictates of his or her religious practice. See, e.g., Tyson, 2004 WL 1837033, at 6 ("Accepted standards of courtroom etiquette do not necessarily prevail over an individual’s exercise of his religion, if the latter does not impact courtroom security or interfere in courtroom procedures."); Close-It Enterprises, Inc. v. Weinberger, 407 N.Y.S.2d 587, 588 (2d Dep’t 1978) (finding right of defendant to wear religious skullcap in courtroom). Of course, no such religious practice is implicated here.

On this side of the pond, the judge doesn't go bareheaded either. Alansplodge (talk) 01:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I often wondered if anyone ever showed up in a US court wearing the formal UK court dress and got told off for disturbing court decorum. Googlemeister (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine a US judge would assume you were doing it as some sort of gag. APL (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would help in an insanity plea. Googlemeister (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]