Miscellaneous desk
< December 16	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 18 >

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.

December 17[edit]

Adding brief summaries of articles[edit]

In my own work, I have had to edit down hundreds of long Wikipedia articles to just 1 or 2 pages. It would be a shame to let this valuable work go to waste. These executive summaries would be a valuable resource for people who don't have the time or the will to read and digest massive amounts of data. Many users just want to see a really good boiled-down version of the larger article. However, when I tried to submit such a summary, I got a nasty message saying that I was "vandalizing" the edit page and that I would be kicked off Wikipedia if I did it again. What's the deal? I am making a legitimate attempt to improve this site. Who are these people that submit all this content and how do I become one of them? 63.168.218.2 (talk) 00:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about edit Wikipedia should go to the Wikipedia:Help Desk. However, I'll say this: While summaries are good, adding them to the existing article just duplicates content and makes it harder for people that want the detail to find it. The summaries need to go somewhere else where people that want them can find them. Perhaps they could be subpages of articles, or on a different site altogether. If you want to suggest that we include summaries somewhere, do so at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). That said, the lede of an article should be a summary of it, although it should be shorter than 1 or 2 pages in most cases - you might want to try improving the ledes of some articles. --Tango (talk) 00:42, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to mention Tango's last point. If any of the articles you summarised are missing ledes, then a summary of the article would probably work there. Other than that, it sounds like the sort of thing which (dare I say it) would be a useful extra project within the WIkimedia collection - Wikipedia's biggest and/or most complex articles summarised. Sort of a bit like what WP simple English does, but with the article content rather than the language use. Grutness...wha? 00:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on how technical they are in their shortened form, they may be suitable for the Simple English Wikipedia. Dismas|^(talk) 05:27, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They might also be very usefully translated for non-English editions of Wikipedia, which might not have any version at all of the article (Look on the left-hand side of an article to see which language editions, if any, have articles on the same subject). In one sense the project for a printed paper edition of Wikipedia (Wikipedia 1.0) is partly such a collection of summaries as Grutness describes. See also WP:LEAD for the conventions about the summary paragraphs that usually begin longer articles. ¶ Could you give us an example of what you summarized, and where it was rejected? I can't find one in your list of contributions (but that list may just be from one of several computers you use to edit Wikipedia.) —— Shakescene (talk) 09:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The OP mystifies me. They "had to edit down hundreds of Wikipedia articles" in their "own work" whatever that is, which means they did it for a reason. It's nice that the OP regards the results as "valuable work", a "valuable resource and "really good" but only the OP is responsible if the reason was a bad one so that the results have gone to waste. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does Steven Seagal wear a toupee?[edit]

Does anyone know? Just trying to settle a disagreement. --95.148.108.56 (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to prove a negative - I can't find any credible sources that say he does - but that doesn't conclusively prove that he doesn't. I strongly suggest that whoever is on the "yes, he wears a toupee" side of the debate should present their evidence. We can then examine the quality of that evidence and give you a better idea of whether it's credible or not. SteveBaker (talk) 03:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you enter ["Steven Seagal" toupee] in google, there are plenty of references, but as you suggest, likely none of them would pass muster with wikipedia, so it may just be groundless gossip. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is provable is how his career went into the toilet afer he got himself killed off in Executive Decision.C.B.Lilly 04:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher1968 (talk • contribs)

Invasion of Iraq[edit]

Which countries actually took part in the invasion of Iraq? More specifically, was Spain part of the invasion? There is a disagreement about it on the Iraq War article, and I can't really find any reliable sources that are specific enough on the matter just searching the internet.--Stinging Swarm ^talk 03:32, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Spain was. The full list is here, midway down infobox. Is there a disagreement about Spain's involvement? I remember distinctly that spain was involved. Wasn't it one of the purported reasons for the Madrid bombings? Shadowjams (talk) 03:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a cite [1] Shadowjams (talk) 03:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the cite. An anon is disputing the fact that Spain took part in the invasion, claiming they only joined afterwords. So Spain was removed from the list. There seems to be a bit of unreferenced editing going on to that list, so I don't really trust it as of right now! However, the source you provided will help to resolve it.--Stinging Swarm ^talk 04:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, there were no Spanish troops present during the invasion, they began deploying around the middle of July. There were non-combat personnel, including either a field hospital or hospital ship (or both). I'll look for some references.—eric 04:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Iraqi Freedom—By the Numbers

(2003, July 11). "AFTER THE WAR; Spaniards on Way To Back U.S. in Iraq." The New York Times. A5.

"The Spanish ship Galacia delivered humanitarian aid and a field hospital to Umm Qasr" Cordesman, A. H. (2003). "8/9 April." The Iraq War: Strategy, tactics, and military lessons. p. 112.

Apparently 200 combat troops were sent to defend Turkey, and around 900 personnel aboard a "hospital ship" (probably Galacia) including some to work on mine clearing and chemical decontamination.—eric 05:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Spanish flotilla of three ships and 900 personnel departed Spain in March and arrived in the Northern Arabian Gulf on 8 April. The next day, the amphibious landing ship Galacia sailed up the KAA waterway to Umm Qasr and off-loaded a forty-bed field hospital with fifty-three medical personnel, a biological and chemical decontamination team, and a construction battalion. Cowden, A. (2005). The Naval Institute almanac of the U.S. Navy. pp. 25-6.

—eric 05:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very helpful, thanks a lot. So it seems they supported the invasion with personnel, but did not directly take part in combat operations. Thanks again.--Stinging Swarm ^talk 20:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Higher education in EU[edit]

I've been hearing for some time now that in certain countries of Europe higher education is either free or very cheep. Today I came across a Danish University advertising on Facebook offering free education in English for EU citizens. So is there a catch or do some countries really have free and good higher education ? ~~Xil (talk) 10:03, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in some countries, at least for undergraduates. For example, in Scotland (see, for example, [2]). Note that in Scotland undergraduate study is free for Scottish students and also for EU students not from the UK - but not for English, Welsh or Northern Irish students. Until the late 1990s, it was free throughout the UK. Warofdreams talk 10:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know in what other countries I can get free education as a EU citizen ? ~~Xil (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can find details on page two of the latest edition of Key Data on Higher Education in Europe - basically, in some nations it depends on which institution you want to study at, and which course you are taking. I believe, although I can't find a reference, that in any of those nations which offer free tuition to nationals, they must offer the same to nationals of other EU countries. Warofdreams talk 15:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is true. Higher education in Sweden is completely free for any citizen of the EU. Belisarius (talk) 17:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A nitpick but that doesn't really say it's true. However the fact that in both Sweden and Denmark are offering it, strongly suggests it is mandated otherwise it's a bit odd that they are. I looked for a clear cut ref but couldn't find anything either. Surprisingly neither European Higher Education Area nor Educational policies and initiatives of the European Union seem to mention anything and Bologna process only mentions that fees have sometimes been raised as a result of it however lots of refs mention that EU citizens pay local fees in specific EU countries (obviously if you have no fee for locals then a local fee is no fee), e.g. [3] Top-up fees#How the fees work. I just can't find anything that mentions that this is legislated or where it's legislated. Of course it's often true that EU citizens have to be treated as locals in EU countries Nil Einne (talk) 18:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the EU member states have a general obligation to treat citizens of other member states no less favourably than their own citizens, so a specific requirement for one sector (e.g. education) would not be needed. There are a few limited exceptions (for example suffrage, armed service and membership of a diplomatic corps). DuncanHill (talk) 13:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also Norway - I wrote a bit about that in a reply here: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009_November_18#Free_University_Education. A small catch might be that the Scandinavian countries (where higher education is, in general, tax-financed, like health services are), undergraduate higher education tends to be mostly available in the national language. I know they give language courses to foreign students at least here in Oslo, though. And there's a lot of good graduate (master's) programmes available in English. Jørgen (talk) 08:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you all figure education is "free"? You're paying for it through taxation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually if you're coming from some other EU country I don't think you are Nil Einne (talk) 16:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're paying taxes to support schooling in your own country, right? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the same as paying directly. It's hard to explain why, but...well, it's just not the same. (If you don't understand, that's probably why you'll never have free health care :)) Adam Bishop (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that you pay for it whether you use it or not. That means using it doesn't cost you any more than you would be paying anyway, which is a pretty close to "free". (In the UK we use the phrase "free at the point of use" to describe things like the NHS.) --Tango (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The University on Facebook was advertising undergraduate and graduate courses in English to people of whatever country Facebook thought I was in (It was saying free to Polish, when I was in Estonia, know it has figured out correctly I'm in Latvia). I currently am studying in another country for a fee, which would count as huge in my country, I wouldn't mind trying to transfer, if I found school with as interesting courses or considering free graduate studies. Paying taxes seems to be way smaller burden than paying tuition fee (and let's not forget cost of rent and food). The link to pdf User:Warofdreams posted shows error when I try to open it, so any countries other than Scandinavian ? ~~Xil (talk) 19:38, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's down for me too, at the moment, but the Google View is working. It mentions Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia and Scotland as completely free, plus Finland, Sweden and public universities in Norway as requiring only a subscription to a student organisation, some students getting free tuition in Latvia, and certain classes of programme in the Czech Republic and Spain as being free. Some other countries are listed further down as having no tuition fees - Hungary, Romania, Malta and some areas of Germany - I'm not clear whether there are other charges which led to them being omitted from the first section of states where study can be regarded as free. Warofdreams talk 20:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I study in Estonia, it most definitely is not completely free. Are you sure they don't mean state funded study places for best students or something like that ? ~~Xil (talk) 03:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do I log unto Tagged when it says "service unavailable"?[edit]

For several months I had been using the social networking site called TAGGED.COM. But recently, I just discovered that I can neither read my mails nor get across to my friends. Anytime I try to log in, the site shows a "service unavailable" sign. What alternative way can I use to log unto this site?

If you can't even get to their home page, the site is probably down and you won't find an alternative means of access. You'll just have to wait until it's up again, probably in a few hours time. All websites go down every now and then.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Their home page is up - but perhaps one of the servers behind that is dead. SteveBaker (talk) 20:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a website... downforeveryoneorjustme.com - maybe worth checking on there. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current Lumber Prices[edit]

What is an average cost per board foot to a consumer for Honduras Mahogany? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arilynmithra (talk • contribs) 14:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This will almost certainly depend on your location. Marco polo (talk) 14:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The New England area in the USA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arilynmithra (talk • contribs) 15:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More specific location. Boston should have a very different price then Bangor. Googlemeister (talk) 15:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metrowest Massachusetts —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arilynmithra (talk • contribs) 15:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you order online, the cost won't vary too much within the United States. This vendor sells Honduran Mahogany for $4.50 per board foot, though the website doesn't discuss shipping charges. Those are unlikely to exceed $3 per board foot, even to Massachusetts, particularly on a large order. That vendor may have a high minimum order, such as 100 board feet. This site sells boards with one straight edge for 15.24 for orders of less than 20 board feet. The shipping cost via UPS ground for an order of 10 board feet would add about $3.50 per board foot. Marco polo (talk) 16:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]