Miscellaneous desk
< October 9	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 11 >

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 10[edit]

Fallacy Name[edit]

What is the logical fallacy where one dismisses a particular scenario/thought experiment only due to it being unrealistic, even if it is a good analogy? Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 03:08, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give an example? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that is a fallacy of any sort. Indeed, I think by definition, an unrealistic analogy is a poor one. If it unlikely to ever happen, how can it be a useful analogy for events that will likely happen? I'm afraid I don't get the sort of situation you're describing. Like Bugs says, a concrete example may help here. --Jayron32 04:25, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Violinist scenario is unrealistic, even though it is a good analogy to pregnancy if one assumes that fetuses are humans beings/persons and if it is slightly modified to make you responsible for the Violinist's illness. For the record, people on both sides of the abortion debate use this scenario to make their point. Futurist110 (talk) 04:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That scenario is absolutely ridiculous, and a bad analogy. No one wakes up to find a violinist surgically implanted in him because he had sex. μηδείς (talk) 04:56, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only fallacy I could think of is the false analogy: that is someone criticizes the analogy because they hold that the analogy doesn't apply to a situation. --Jayron32 04:36, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be noted that this isn't a logical fallacy, which is a fault of formal logic. It is an informal fallacy, which is the idea that the inapplicability of an argument is due to some other factor than its logical soundness. An argument can be logically sound and still be a bad argument based on some other factor. --Jayron32 04:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so happy that I'd never heard of the ridiculous violinist "scenario" before now. I do agree with others who say that something more specific is needed to answer. --Onorem ♠Dil 04:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That simply isn't a good analogy. Pregnancy is not remotely analogous to being confined to a hospital bed for 9 months... (With the exception of a few very rare medical conditions.) --Tango (talk) 12:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think perhaps accident (fallacy) is close to what you have in mind here. (I'm not keen on that name -- the alternative name, destroying the exception, seems more intuitive.) Looie496 (talk) 05:26, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Census Bureau Report Corrections[edit]

How do I contact the U.S. Census Bureau if I noticed two typos in one of their papers/reports (Kentucky's 1910 population and Mississippi's 1970 population here--http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html) so that they could fix their typos? Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 03:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does that government website have a "contact us" kind of thing? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This was what I got by selecting "contact us" from http://www.census.gov --Jayron32 04:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I'll bite, these are typos such as misspellings or placing a city in the wrong county etc.? If you are disputing their counts you may be well to read this towns attempt, even if something as complex and potentially in error as the census, law states it can not be retroactively changed, one reason they spend millions every 10 years trying to get things right that year. But yes curious what exactly the typo is, chances are ain't gonna change. Marketdiamond (talk) 08:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on whether the error is in the Official Census Data itself, or whether the error was made in a derivative document. If the data itself was wrong, you're probably correct on the impossibility of changing it. If however, the problem is in the specific presentation of the data only (i.e. the original data is correct, but a specific table showing part of that data has a typo, like spelling Mississippi with one "p" or something like that) it should be both an easy fix and perfectly allowable. --Jayron32 19:18, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that the data itself (the original source) is correct, but that the presentation of the data in that report (which presents data that was previously published) was wrong and had two typos in it. Futurist110 (talk) 22:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the old census data I've run across many transcription errors, where the census taker's writing wasn't the best and the transcriber did the best they could but mis-read it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent them a message telling them about the errors several days ago. I'm still waiting for a response from them, and will probably wait for several more days. Futurist110 (talk) 07:30, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That said, they've said in three business days, and three business days are almost over right now. Futurist110 (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chopin's "Życzenie"[edit]

What is the last line of this song (Op. 74 No. 1)? The Polish first edition at IMSLP gives "Czemuż nie mogę w ptaszka zmienić siebie!"; so does the Breitkopf and Härtel complete edition, and this is the way Ewa Podleś sings it on her recording with Garrick Ohlsson. However, The Lied, Art Song, and Choral Texts Archive gives a repeat of the last line of the first verse (Youtube video of Marta Eggerth singing it this way). (The first one makes more sense, though.) Could this have something to do with the fact that this song survives in both the autograph version and Fontana's edited version? And what did Witwicki originally write? Double sharp (talk) 10:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Witwicki poem ends with "Czemuż nie mogę w ptaszka zmienić siebie!". The other version you mention seems to be a mistake made by someone who assumed that the second refrain was just a repetion of the first, without noticing that this does not make logical, or lyrical, sense. Apparently, that mistake was perpetuated, probably by people who did not understand Polish well enough to see that something was not quite right. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 10:56, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant article is Polish songs (Chopin). I'm sure Double sharp knows it, but others may have an interest. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:13, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2-on-2 in a hockey match[edit]

Has there ever occurred in NHL that both teams end up with only two skaters each on ice in overtime? If yes, when did it happen for the last time?

Regards, 195.29.156.232 (talk) 15:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly never, but certainly not after 1925. A rule was introduced then that required a minimum of 4 players on the ice at all times per team (3 skaters and a goalie each), even in the case of penalties. The modern rule is here, and I presume it hasn't changed much since those days. Mingmingla (talk) 17:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The body of Heriberto Lazcano Lazcano[edit]

Is there any way to find out why the body of Heriberto Lazcano Lazcano was stolen (and hence by whom)? μηδείς (talk) 17:01, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe some day. It's kinda fresh news, so its long on speculation and short on confirmation right now. --Jayron32 17:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't really mind speculation if it's from a "reliable" source like a columnist who covers such things. I was wondering if perhaps this is not too unusual a phenomenon, perhaps the gang claiming back their own, a rival gang desecrating or holding the body for ransom. I am curious whose custody the body was in at the funeral home, the family's? Unfortunately a search under "why did they steal the body" is too vague to get anywhere. μηδείς (talk) 17:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that until whoever stole the body releases a statement saying who they are and why they did it we can but only speculate... gazhiley 08:44, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone find any report of Mexican gangs stealing a body prior to this? An advanced search by me excluding results with the name lazcano and reports before september 2012 is still coming back with Lazcano at Google and nothing else. μηδείς (talk) 21:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who founded MGM, Paramount, RKO, and 20th Century Fox?[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

For sure, Warner Bros. was founded by four people: Harry Warner, Albert Warner, Sam Warner, and Jack Warner. But I still have questions. And I haven't found the answers. So: 1. Who founded MGM? 2. Who founded Paramount? 3. Who founded RKO? 4. Who founded Twentieth Century Fox? Rebel Yeh (talk) 20:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's already a thread about this at WP:RDE. Lets keep it in one place. --Jayron32 20:06, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.