Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous - Wikipedia

Hi everyone. The "Download as PDF" is not working. You are formidable, and your work is great, thank you for that. 105.100.190.117 (talk) 10:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

It is working for me now. In future, should you encounter a technical problem, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) is the best go-to place.  --Lambiam 11:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

As of 2020, the system has changed. But until 2016, how was the vote cast? Did one have to write the names of the candidates (president and vice president) on the ballot? Thank you. Andreoto (talk) 08:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed a few of these questions. Federal documents are publicly avaialble. This is the 2016 electoral vote for Georgia. In each question, assuming you are the one asking over and over, you ask if they write down the names. All they did here was sign a shared document that was hand delivered to Congress. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 12:44, 28 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it was always me. I'm an “enthusiast” of the American Electoral College, in this case I'm intrigued by the way the Electors cast their votes. Those are the certificates, of course, but first they vote obviously in two separate ballots. Voting can be done in different ways, the mode changes from state to state, but you always vote on ballots. Voting can consist of putting a signature, writing a name, checking a box etc. That's what I meant. Thank you very much for your helpfulness and responses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreoto (talk • contribs) 18:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I can give second-hand account of what it is like to vote as an elector. My father was an elector in 1984 for Missouri because he was high up in the machinists union and they publicly backed Reagan in both 1980 and 1984. He drove down to Jefferson City. The group met in a conference room in the Capitol Building. They were sworn in and then a bunch of hoopla. Then, they sat at a long table. A stack of pre-printed papers were passed down. Each elector had a box of pens. They used a separate pen for each paper. It was the same document, a vote for Reagan and Bush. He said there were about 20 copies of it total. Then, they were asked to sign a small card with just their name, not everyone's name on it. That was given to them with a pair of pens as proof they were electors. There were snacks and they were sent on their way. At no time did he secretly write down names on a stub of paper and slip it into a secret ballot. All he did was sign his name on a pre-printed collective vote over and over. He didn't go to Washington DC. He didn't vote there. Missouri sent at least one of the collectively signed documents to Federal Congress to announce their electoral votes. My opinion is that Missouri is not weird in how they did it. I expect most states operate in a very similar manner. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 16:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much for your testimony and for sharing this family memory with me. I read you with pleasure. Thank you again for your answers which I found very helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreoto (talk • contribs) 18:24, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

At the Swedish National Museum in Östermalm, Stockholm, Sweden there is a small clay figure at a display case. It's an adult male figure, wearing a suit and tie, with thick black eyeglasses, reading an opened book on its hands. I have a picture of it but have not uploaded it to Wikipedia or Commons. Does anyone know whom this is a figure of? JIP | Talk 00:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think you will find the museum people very helpful at info@nationalmuseum.se phone +46(0)8-519 543 00 . Specifically you can ask their Image Services at images@nationalmuseum.se, visiting address: Holmamiralens väg 2 (by appointment only). Philvoids (talk) 11:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

You don't need to upload it to commons, you can upload it to a free image hosting service like imgur and post the link to the image here. --Viennese Waltz 11:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

imgbb doesn't even require any signup.  Card Zero  (talk) 12:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's good to know. I've never uploaded images (it's years since I used a camera) but I believe Commons doesn't require signup either. There's a form to be filled in, so you can be certain you're not violating any copyrights. And the description can be updated, useful for future reference. 2A02:C7B:10B:4800:CB6:FD0D:1A20:91AF (talk) 13:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Here is a picture of the figure at imgbb. I tried creating an account but imgbb just says "Check the errors on this form to continue" without showing any errors. Anyway the picture has been uploaded and will be autodeleted after two weeks. I could have uploaded it to Commons but was unsure about whether the copyright status would allow it. Does anyone recognise whom this is a figure of? JIP | Talk 23:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

My lizard hindbrain recognizes it, but can't tell me the answer. I'm thinking either cold-war-era political figure, or intellectual TV personality. Best guess so far: Henry Kissinger. (But why would they have a little clay idol of Henry Kissinger?)  Card Zero  (talk) 06:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

My first idea was Bruno Kreisky, but again: why? The suggestion to contact the museum was a good one. --Wrongfilter (talk) 06:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is Gunnar Sträng, see here. --Viennese Waltz 07:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

See also Lisa Larson § Gallery.  --Lambiam 08:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

In a telephone conversation between two officers of an Armed Force of differing seniority, is it correct on the part of the junior officer to respond to the call by saying "Hello"? What is the correct way of beginning the telephonic conversation by the junior officer? Sumalsn (talk) 07:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

How one starts a telephone conversation in a military context depends on whether one is making the call or responding to a call, whether there is an operation in progress and whether the line is secure. The word "Hello" itself conveys nothing but it would be correct to use in "Hello can you hear me?" During a predefined operation there may be routine calls that merely announce "Observation post reporting, no enemy sighting." An unexpected call might be initiated with "Hello this is General Threestar's office with new orders to General Twostar" to which the response might be either "Hallo this is Twostar, what the blazes is going on?" or "Hello the general is unavailable, shall I connect you to Lieutenant Standin?". Philvoids (talk) 11:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Our protocol was to answer the phone with: (Name of Unit) (Name of building) (Your rank and last name) speaking. How may I help you? 12.116.29.106 (talk) 11:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Should the same protocol apply to the incoming call "All your base are belong to us, you have no chance to survive make your time"? Philvoids (talk) 11:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Would that be a senior officer calling? —Tamfang (talk) 18:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

How would the junior officer know a senior officer is calling him? (unless he has all of the Armed Force in his contacts list) FWIW we said "Good morning. This is Major Gump." 196.50.199.218 (talk) 12:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Caller ID? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

This all assumes that the soldiers speak American/English. They may say something completely different. -- SGBailey (talk) 21:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Regardless of nation, it seems reasonable to expect that the call would initially be answered in a businesslike manner, similar to what 12.116.29.106 said. Then the caller would identify themself, and the actual conversation could begin. Just answering "Hello" is not businesslike. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

This was a subject of some controversy in 2018 in the august ramks of the British Army. Apparenty, the accepted formula:

"When the telephone rings I must answer with the name of my department, my name, followed by 'how can I help you sir?'"

was challenged by a Colonel Steve Davies, Assistant Head of Employment, Directorate Manning (Army), who thought that the use of "sir" might cause offence to a female. [1] This generated a considerable reaction. [2] What the upshot of all this was, I cannot tell. You might think there were more important things to worry about. Alansplodge (talk) 18:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your own normative judgement of "businesslike" without something to back it up is inappropriate here. The word hello is a cross-linguistic telephone greeting (and predates it in general hailing situations) -- there is nothing that is intrinsically non-businesslike about it. (Arguably, historically, as it is a means of attracting a business transaction, it is an entirely businesslike greeting -- hence the importance of providing something on the ref desk beyond your personal beliefs.) SamuelRiv (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Maybe you've never actually worked at a company or are otherwise unfamiliar with good phone etiquette. "Hello" is how you answer your home phone. If it's your business phone, you state who you are. If you only say "Hello", the caller is liable to think they've mis-dialed, and you're off to the wrong start. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Here's some basic advice on answering a phone professionally.[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

And here are some tips on answering the phone where military is concerned.[4] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

To be clear, you are stating that answering a phone with only saying the one word "Hello" is not business-like. If you answer with "Hello" followed by who you are and where you work, that is business-like. It isn't that the word "Hello" is banned. It just isn't business-like to use it with absolutely nothing else. It can be worse. My grandfather was raised on a reservation and didn't have a phone until he was at least 40. He didn't get the whole "Hello" thing and answered the phone by saying "Speak." 12.116.29.106 (talk) 13:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Off topic, but according to a Spanish course I did (long ago), the telephone greeting in Spanish was "Diga me", which translates to something like "talk to me", so starting with "hello" is something culturally. I agree that answering with only "hello" in English doesn't sound business-like. Rmvandijk (talk) 09:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

My thanks to all the esteemed members of this desk who have spared their valuable time to answer my query.

Regards Sumalsn (talk) 10:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Our restrooms now have light switches thet glow when turned off. I noticed that if I turn off the light and shut the door so it is dark, the light flickers just enough to see it slightly faster than once a second. I assume that with the light switch off, the light has no power. Is it that the glowing light switches periodically send electricity to the light or is it a sign that the switch is broken. Note, all of the bathroom lights on these switches flicker. In the back office where they don't have a glowing switch, it doesn't flicker. So, I am certain it is something to do with the fancy glowing switch. For clarity, by "glow" I mean that the rectangle of plastic around the switch is like a little orange light that turns on when you turn the switch off. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 15:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Maybe a motion sensor? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

A light switch has two contacts that can be "closed" (bridged) to close an electric circuit that includes the electric lights. While the circuit is open (switch is "off") there is a voltage difference between these two contacts. This can be used to power a sentinel light, and also an electronic circuit that produces pulses that periodically close the circuit briefly.  --Lambiam 06:03, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why would the same style lights blink ever so slightly when on a glowing switch but not blink at all on a regular switch? (If that is what you answered, I'm sorry that I simply don't understand your answer.) I've been searching and what I've seen claims that there is a capacitor in the bulb that causes a slight flicker depending what else is on the circuit, but again, that is the bulb. If the bulb flickers, the bulb flickers. In this case, the bulbs only flicker when using the new switches that glow when turned off. Searching, this looks exactly like the kind of switch we have, but I can't claim it is that specific model. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 12:25, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Others have noticed the same - "a light switch that has a built in light in the switch so you see it in the dark" [5] 2A02:C7B:10B:4800:CC5C:F7A6:E40C:851 (talk) 14:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

First off don't trust me one bit on wiring, if you aren't comfortable enough to have already pulled the switch to see what's happening probably best to get someone to fix the problem for you. These are LED lamps that are flickering correct? Incandescent bulbs can run off alternating current, they are just heating up and glowing, light-emitting diodes need direct current to work. The driver circuit will convert household AC to DC, and you can see a photo of the circuit on that page. That looks like a capacitor to me in the very center, and here is someone disassembling a $1 LED lamp to look at the circuit, which looks to me to have a bog-standard rectifier and Capacitor input filter.What's probably happening is stray voltage is charging that capacitor which will eventually reach a high enough voltage to power the rest of the circuit which will then discharge the capacitor. So not 'flickering' but 'flashing' at your regular interval of slightly faster of 1/sec.Another possibility is that you might have a dead-end switch where the wiring first goes to the fixture and then to the switch. I think this might cause this problem with a lighted switch and LED lamp but not all all sure. Another possibility is that you have older wiring which does not have a ground wire or the ground to this circuit could be faulty. Without popping the switch and testing things the simplest way to solve the problem would be to replace at least one of the bulbs which are on the switch with an incandescent. You might try a different make of LED bulb and it might solve the problem or at least give a different flashing rate for variation. fiveby(zero) 22:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

The OP is talking about multiple lights in "our restrooms", so presumably at his/her place of employment. I doubt that he/she is in a position to start taking the light fixtures and switches apart or replacing the bulbs. The best practical option would be to ask for an explanation of this (probably normal) phenomenon from the establishment's Facilities Maintenance Department*.

(*That's what it would be called in the UK, where I used to work in that sector; doubtless it will be something different in the US. I'm talking about qualified electrical (& mechanical) engineers, not janitors who can change a light bulb.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 00:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

You are correct. I am referring to public restrooms in a library, which have new light switches installed. Before the change, I never noticed the faint blinking of the lights and the same type of lights are not flashing on the old switches that do not illuminate. I believe the answer is that the circuitry inside the switch that makes it glow also causes the circuitry inside the light bulb to periodically charge up and flash the bulb. This isn't really a problem as anyone who enters the restroom will likely turn the light on right away and never notice the flashing. It was just a curiousity. I would bring it up with maintenance, but they are located at the main library, not our remote branch, so I rarely see them. I'm not really certain when they came in and swapped out the switches. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 17:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Our article suggests that wavy noodles are always instant, but why is this, if that is the case? (Bearing in mind WP:NOTSOURCE.) Surely air-dried, egg, and other non-instant noodles could be made into wavy noodles, too? SerialNumber54129 19:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

To disprove the claim, all it takes in one example of wavy noodles that are not instant noodles. That is easy. Yoshio Murata invented a machine to improve the method of creating wavy noodles in 1953. Momofuku Ando invented instant noodles in 1958. It is impossible for all of the wavy noodles from 1953 to be instant if instant noodles were not invented yet. So, this comes down to a semantic argument. What exactly does "wavy noodles" mean and what exactly does "instant noodles" mean? If by wavy noodle you are referring to any noodle with waves in it, such as wavy lasagna pasta sheets, you have a clear example of a noodle that is wavy and not instant. If by instant noodle you are referring to any noodle that is dried and later cooked in boiling water, you are limiting the selection of non-instant to noodles to only fresh non-dried noodles. I have assumed that by wavy noodle, you are reffering to packed ramen noodles, which are wavy so you can pack more into a bag without them breaking as easy and by instant you are again referring to ramen noodles that soften quickly when in boiling water. Even that is a dubious claim in my opinion. I boil ramen for two minutes. I boil angel hair pasta for four minutes. The two minute difference isn't really much to say one is instant and the other is not. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 19:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply