Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 March 9
| Miscellaneous desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < March 8 | << Feb | March | Apr >> | March 10 > |
| 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. |
March 9
editSignature
editAfter reading our signature article, I am still left with a question as to how exactly the average, modern-day signature provides any such security as the article suggests. On average, I find that most people scribble something in place of a signature -- how in the world does such a mark indicate that the signateur is actually the person it indicates? Is it merely an oversight of the common individual to think that a scribbly signature is worthwhile? DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 03:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- It's certainly not a perfect system, but I wonder what would work in its stead or in addition? Maybe a fingerprint? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have heard that in Japan, they use stamps, which strike me as even less secure than signatures. Aaronite (talk) 05:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- In my company, before direct deposit, they used to imprint checks with a signature stamp of the CEO, a process that was of course very tightly controlled. Using a seal is a very old method, which I assume is the basis for the relic expression "my hand and seal" in legal documents. But nowadays I can't imagine a personal seal or stamp being very secure, at least on the face of it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have heard that in Japan, they use stamps, which strike me as even less secure than signatures. Aaronite (talk) 05:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The signature doesn't identify a person, but it allows to tell that two people (eg. the person that signed the back of the credit card and the person signing the credit cart receipt) are the same person. It is far from 100% reliable, though. --Tango (talk) 05:35, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Which is why stores in the US, at least, increasingly ask for a photo ID when you're charging a purchase, especially a good-sized purchase, due to the proliferation of identity theft. It's pretty hard to both forge a signature and to look like the person whose signature you're forging. Of course, you could substitute a picture. Which is why an embedded hologram is used in the photo ID's of at least some states' driver's licenses. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've always wondered about this. I don't have a signature. I just write my name. Surely the use of a credit card (or similar) would be more secure? Yes, you could steal it, but the person who owns the card would notice fairly quickly (I'd hope) and get the card deactivated (or whatever it is you do to credit cards...) Vimescarrot (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- That's all I ever do too. If I write my name, that's my signature, my autograph, whatever you want to call it. If I print it, as opposed to writing it, that's not my signature. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- As far as faking a signature, I believe it's harder to copy somone's signature if it's not made with perfect penmanship. If I were to write my name using the cursive that I was taught as a kid, it would be easier to copy since we're taught as kids to make letters look the same. It would be harder for someone to copy the slashes and sweeps of my (or anyone's) signature. Dismas|(talk) 07:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Good point. I would say my signatures are never "identical", and that's one way that experts can expose forgers, as I recall - a forger has learned to make the signature a particular way and they repeat it over and over, i.e. it's not a "natural" signature for them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Signing credit card receipts is another interesting difference between customs in the US and UK. In the UK (before the days of chip and pin) the retailer would hold on to the credit card as the receipt was being signed and hold the 2 together to compare them. In the US, the retailer almost invariably gives the card back, then hands the receipt over and never compares the signatures. This always struck me as very open to fraud. Of course - we now use chip-and-pin and so rarely sign a credit card receipt now anyway. --Phil Holmes (talk) 11:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Of course here in NZ we still use magnetic strip and pin. On those odd occasions when I've seen people sign, I think they do at least check the signature. Nil Einne (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- In the US, it varies. Sometimes they take a quick look at the card and hand it back. Other times they hold onto it. I assume in the first case they are forming a quick mental picture of the signature and see if the receipt signature matches. Increasingly, they are not even requiring a signature for items under 25 or even 50 dollars. Then there's the signature pad, where you use some type of stylus to sign in a most horrific-looking way. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Ha! We have those for some deliveries in the UK - half of the writing doesn't even appear in the signature. A seriously dubious piece of kit, I've always thought. Vimescarrot (talk) 15:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- In the US, it varies. Sometimes they take a quick look at the card and hand it back. Other times they hold onto it. I assume in the first case they are forming a quick mental picture of the signature and see if the receipt signature matches. Increasingly, they are not even requiring a signature for items under 25 or even 50 dollars. Then there's the signature pad, where you use some type of stylus to sign in a most horrific-looking way. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Of course here in NZ we still use magnetic strip and pin. On those odd occasions when I've seen people sign, I think they do at least check the signature. Nil Einne (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Signing credit card receipts is another interesting difference between customs in the US and UK. In the UK (before the days of chip and pin) the retailer would hold on to the credit card as the receipt was being signed and hold the 2 together to compare them. In the US, the retailer almost invariably gives the card back, then hands the receipt over and never compares the signatures. This always struck me as very open to fraud. Of course - we now use chip-and-pin and so rarely sign a credit card receipt now anyway. --Phil Holmes (talk) 11:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Good point. I would say my signatures are never "identical", and that's one way that experts can expose forgers, as I recall - a forger has learned to make the signature a particular way and they repeat it over and over, i.e. it's not a "natural" signature for them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I've always wondered about this. I don't have a signature. I just write my name. Surely the use of a credit card (or similar) would be more secure? Yes, you could steal it, but the person who owns the card would notice fairly quickly (I'd hope) and get the card deactivated (or whatever it is you do to credit cards...) Vimescarrot (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Which is why stores in the US, at least, increasingly ask for a photo ID when you're charging a purchase, especially a good-sized purchase, due to the proliferation of identity theft. It's pretty hard to both forge a signature and to look like the person whose signature you're forging. Of course, you could substitute a picture. Which is why an embedded hologram is used in the photo ID's of at least some states' driver's licenses. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I had a patient once who paid his bill with a credit card that was not only devoid of a signature but that still had the original "call to activate" sticker. When I asked him about it, he laughed and said it was a social experiment to see how many merchants asked him what was going on or requested ID -- he said they rarely did. I thought it was so funny that I do the same thing myself now, I have 2 credit cards and an ATM card and all remain unsigned and still have the stickers on them. Since I've started doing this about 4 years ago, I think I've come across 3 merchants that asked for ID. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 16:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Heh, I haven't had to sign for about a year, but before that credit cards were signature only. So I made a point of signing a different name to that on my card. My card has my standard signature - my first initial and my 10 letter surname in messy cursive - I regularly signed receipts with "Psud" in legible cursive and was only asked to sign again about one in thirty times. So at least in common usage for credit cards for sub $200 purchases the signature offers absolutely no security at the purchase point, but I suspect the mismatched signature would allow me to successfully dispute the transaction. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- In the Patricia Highsmith crime novel The Talented Mr. Ripley, Highsmith devoted much of a chapter describing how Tom Ripley tried to perfect Dickie Greenleaf's signature with lots of practice. It involved pinning through the original signature and then join the dots together. I'd imagine in those days of the 1950s, signatures were closely scrutinised. --Kvasir (talk) 18:00, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- (Responding to posts higher up) Seals are used for identification in East Asia (still prevalent in mainland China, Taiwan and Japan) because seal imprints are actually quite hard to forge. The carvings on a seal are highly unique - they vary by type of script used, by the style of the carver, and varies even between works of the same carver - and thus are very difficult to replicate exactly. An added advantage is that each imprint of the same seal is identical - so if two seal imprints differ even slightly (discounting differences due to amount of ink etc) - then they are definitely made by two different seals. Traditionally, a person carries his or her personal seal everywhere, so the chance of theft was relatively small. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Seals have many uses:[1] ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- (Responding to posts higher up) Seals are used for identification in East Asia (still prevalent in mainland China, Taiwan and Japan) because seal imprints are actually quite hard to forge. The carvings on a seal are highly unique - they vary by type of script used, by the style of the carver, and varies even between works of the same carver - and thus are very difficult to replicate exactly. An added advantage is that each imprint of the same seal is identical - so if two seal imprints differ even slightly (discounting differences due to amount of ink etc) - then they are definitely made by two different seals. Traditionally, a person carries his or her personal seal everywhere, so the chance of theft was relatively small. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Having worked in supermarkets,it's amazing how many cards have a signature that is pretty much just a straight line or a circle or a couple of swirls.In terms of copyability,they're ever so easy to copy-anyone can doodle a line without too much skill Lemon martini (talk) 01:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Capacitor and Time Travel
editHow a capacitor is linked to time travel? I remember this concept also used in an English movie. --V4vijayakumar (talk) 04:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The Flux capacitor was critical for making time travel possible in the movie Back to the Future. Astronaut (talk) 04:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- It's just Technobabble. (In fact, our Technobabble specifically refers to the "Flux Capacitor" from Back to the Future as an example of Technobabble!). There is no such thing as practicable time travel - the only even slightly scientific ideas entail taming black holes and such. A "capacitor" is a really common, boring electronic component that you'll find loads of in most computers, cellphones - and pretty much any other electronic gadget. But a "flux capacitor" is just a made-up idea - two random scientific-sounding words glued together with no intent to actually mean anything. SteveBaker (talk) 05:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fiction, especially sci-fi, is filled with this kind of stuff. Star Trek and Star Wars, for example, have all kinds of unexplained technologies. If the writer is smart, they won't spend too much time trying to explain them, because (1) that would make them easier to challenge; because (2) they're fake. Superman (1978) had a couple of lines that stuck out. One is when Lex Luthor described Kryptonite as being harmless to humans and lethal to Superman due to "specific level of radioactivity". Whatever that's supposed to mean. Then there was Otis telling Lex that he had set the "directional vectors" on the missiles. As opposed to the types of vectors which lack a direction. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- It may have been director Steven Spielberg who decided the movie needed a gimmick with capacity to induce extra high tension. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Or even the director Robert Zemeckis?91.111.124.236 (talk) 07:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- Of course the Superman writers also did other silly things like making Superman claim he never lies, then making him lie (which effectively means the first statement is another lie I guess) so we probably shouldn't be surprised. Back to the question, as I understand it, e.g. Talk:Memristor#Flux Capacitor you could probably have something which you could call a flux capacitor although it's unrelated to the BttF device and won't help time travel in any way. Nil Einne (talk) 17:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Kal-El apparently practices some Kryptonian version of "situation ethics". He doesn't exactly lie, although he does deceive. Come to think of it, he lied flat-out in Superman II when he told the villains about the molecule chamber. Part of his justification for his secret identity is to keep anyone from getting into trouble from knowing his secret. But the real reason is simply practicality - he would stick out like a sore thumb if he wore his red-and-blues to the Planet office - and basically that he doesn't trust his friends to keep their mouths shut. One exception to that rule was in Lois & Clark, where he revealed his secret to Lois, and it actually worked out well (except in the TV ratings). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- In addition as I pointed out when this came up before Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 September 11#Motivational poster (hence why I thought of it when Superman came up) Superman explicitly and clearly denied being Supermanand surely knew that to be false. This is clearly what most people would consider a lie. Note that whether or not Superman's lying is justified is irrelevant. We aren't discussing the ethics of Superman lying, simply whether he does lie. A lie is still a lie even if the lie is justified. (A real world example, if a agent for some intelligence agency or whatever explicitly lies about who they are, many may feel the lie is likely justified to not only protect them but also their families, but it doesn't mean it isn't a lie if they for example flat out deny being such when queried.) Of course aside from the lying about not being Superman, there's also the small matter of lying about not killing and it's questionable if there's any justification for lying about not killing people (the answer is probably no since that's was a writer screwup). P.S. In terms of the writers, while the need to maintain Superman's secret identity is hardly surprising, making him say he never lies is clearly a silly thing. Even more silly to make him say that, and then not take extreme care in writing to at least exclude any case where he clear lied, for example by using non-denial denials when the issue came up of whether he was Superman. In reality of course, it's unlikely he could really never lie if he needs to conceal a secret identity, ultimately non-denial denials and other things which you could argue are not lies can only go so far, particularly as evidence mounts. Indeed excessive use of such is only likely to cast further suspicion. Nil Einne (talk) 15:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- I always understood it to mean that "Superman" never lies when he is in his Superman persona - but when he's Clark Kent, he behaves like any other human in order to blend in. SteveBaker (talk) 00:20, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- In addition as I pointed out when this came up before Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 September 11#Motivational poster (hence why I thought of it when Superman came up) Superman explicitly and clearly denied being Supermanand surely knew that to be false. This is clearly what most people would consider a lie. Note that whether or not Superman's lying is justified is irrelevant. We aren't discussing the ethics of Superman lying, simply whether he does lie. A lie is still a lie even if the lie is justified. (A real world example, if a agent for some intelligence agency or whatever explicitly lies about who they are, many may feel the lie is likely justified to not only protect them but also their families, but it doesn't mean it isn't a lie if they for example flat out deny being such when queried.) Of course aside from the lying about not being Superman, there's also the small matter of lying about not killing and it's questionable if there's any justification for lying about not killing people (the answer is probably no since that's was a writer screwup). P.S. In terms of the writers, while the need to maintain Superman's secret identity is hardly surprising, making him say he never lies is clearly a silly thing. Even more silly to make him say that, and then not take extreme care in writing to at least exclude any case where he clear lied, for example by using non-denial denials when the issue came up of whether he was Superman. In reality of course, it's unlikely he could really never lie if he needs to conceal a secret identity, ultimately non-denial denials and other things which you could argue are not lies can only go so far, particularly as evidence mounts. Indeed excessive use of such is only likely to cast further suspicion. Nil Einne (talk) 15:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- Kal-El apparently practices some Kryptonian version of "situation ethics". He doesn't exactly lie, although he does deceive. Come to think of it, he lied flat-out in Superman II when he told the villains about the molecule chamber. Part of his justification for his secret identity is to keep anyone from getting into trouble from knowing his secret. But the real reason is simply practicality - he would stick out like a sore thumb if he wore his red-and-blues to the Planet office - and basically that he doesn't trust his friends to keep their mouths shut. One exception to that rule was in Lois & Clark, where he revealed his secret to Lois, and it actually worked out well (except in the TV ratings). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- It may have been director Steven Spielberg who decided the movie needed a gimmick with capacity to induce extra high tension. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Fiction, especially sci-fi, is filled with this kind of stuff. Star Trek and Star Wars, for example, have all kinds of unexplained technologies. If the writer is smart, they won't spend too much time trying to explain them, because (1) that would make them easier to challenge; because (2) they're fake. Superman (1978) had a couple of lines that stuck out. One is when Lex Luthor described Kryptonite as being harmless to humans and lethal to Superman due to "specific level of radioactivity". Whatever that's supposed to mean. Then there was Otis telling Lex that he had set the "directional vectors" on the missiles. As opposed to the types of vectors which lack a direction. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Registered Nurse Licensing
editCan I get a Registered Nurse license in Georgia with a misdemeanor for marijuana possession on my record? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garyandjenny (talk • contribs) 05:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- That sounds kinda like a request for legal advice. In any case, I would be surprised if wikipedia has such detailed info. Have you tried Google? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I had asked if someone could get a Registered Nurse license in Georgia with a misdemeanor for marijuana possession on their record i have called the board of nursing on the matter and they would not give me an answer and i have tried google, ask.com, and every message board and still cant get an answer. If anyone knows it would be of great help. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garyandjenny (talk • contribs) 05:54, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- When you say you "can't get an answer", do you mean they said, "I won't say", or do you mean they simply did not respond? Maybe a more positive approach would work, such as, "What are the requirements for obtaining a Registered Nurse license?" and see if the lack of an arrest record, particularly a drug-related arrest, is one of them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Could you clarify - do you mean Georgia the country or Georgia the US state? I'm guessing the latter, but I'd rather not guess. --Tango (talk) 06:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
GA the state. I have tried every approach when talking to the nursing board and still have gotten nowhere so i figured i would give this a shot. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garyandjenny (talk • contribs) 06:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- They can't tell you what the qualifications are for getting a Registered Nurse license??? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The law is certainly vague about it; a criminal background check is required, but the requirement does not say what degree of legal entanglements are enough to disqualify. --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not surprised the law is vague. Mostly likely they'll be evaluated on a case by case basis with the person applying for registration sometimes interviewed and questioned and while there'll be some examples which will never make it (e.g. imprisoned for murdering patients) it's likely ultimately up to the board to use their best judgement on whether the person's record means it's too risky the person may not be a fit nurse. This would probably also explain why they're so slippery, the person can't guarantee your request will be successful or notso they prefer not so say anything so you can't complain. However I would have also expected they already told the OP something like this. Nil Einne (talk) 17:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Good point. They have to be a little vague, and maybe consider a misdemeanor drug conviction as part of an overall picture in making a decision. For example, if it happened 10 years ago vs. if it happened last week. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not surprised the law is vague. Mostly likely they'll be evaluated on a case by case basis with the person applying for registration sometimes interviewed and questioned and while there'll be some examples which will never make it (e.g. imprisoned for murdering patients) it's likely ultimately up to the board to use their best judgement on whether the person's record means it's too risky the person may not be a fit nurse. This would probably also explain why they're so slippery, the person can't guarantee your request will be successful or notso they prefer not so say anything so you can't complain. However I would have also expected they already told the OP something like this. Nil Einne (talk) 17:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The law is certainly vague about it; a criminal background check is required, but the requirement does not say what degree of legal entanglements are enough to disqualify. --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
High school completion options
editIs it possible to obtain a High School Diploma at age 26? Or, can you only get an equivalency or GED? I want a DIPLOMA...not an equivalency. If it is possible to get a Diploma... Can you take the courses online? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.4.130 (talk) 06:54, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Where are you ? US ? StuRat (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- GED's a uniquely American and Canadian invention, and the IP is to Oregon, so probably the U.S. Shadowjams (talk) 07:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- If they don't have GEDs in other countries, what do adult former drop-outs do if they want a high-school education? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Probably whatever the high or secondary school qualification is in their country? O-level/A-level, NCEA [2], SPM/STPM, South Australian Certificate of Education, well I'm just throwing random examples I know of here so I guess Category:School qualifications is of relevance. Of course some countries probably lack any real centralised qualification even at a secondary school level (the US being one example and part of the reason for the GED I believe) and there may not be anything specific on offer but there will likely be schools which cater to adults and offer some sort of qualification recognised the same way other secondary school qualifications are. And some may choose something with international acceptance like the A-level, International Baccalaureate or probably even the GED even if it isn't the norm where they live. Of course it likely depends on why you need a qualification. If you just need an education, then there will likely be adult or night classes you can take for various things particularly key areas like literacy and numeracy. These may offer a diploma or something which may not have so much recognition (or even nothing at all) but if your primary purpose is for education then this may not matter (you're there for the education, not the piece of paper that says you had an education). If you need it for university enterance well in some places that may not be required for adult students in some courses (e.g. here in NZ) and/or the university may have their own programme for adult students (again here in NZ). The need for qualifications for jobs and other areas of life also likely varies. Nil Einne (talk) 03:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- I take it we're talking past each other here because the U.S. education system is so different from the system that arose in Britain. A high school diploma in the U.S. does not mean you have passed a certain exam. It means you have shown up at school for four years and received passing grades (A, B, C or D) in a certain number of classes. Some states now require students to pass a standardized test to get a diploma, but that test is usually incredibly easy and designed to weed out only those who are absolutely clueless. I'll never be able to understand the British education system, but it sounds as if there is no such thing as a high school diploma. Instead, you take a certain number of exams similar to Advanced Placement tests in the U.S. Since the UK doesn't have high school diplomas, it has no need for GEDs. Or so I understand. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 05:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- (Aside) The UK system is straightforward, in general terms, at least. The precise details and edge cases are, as you would expect, nightmarishly convoluted. Loosely: from the age of about 14 onwards, you choose a selection of subjects where assessment is partly split between internal and external assessment, with the emphasis being on the former (i.e. exams sat and coursework submitted to a third party exam board who sets the syllabus for each course, within government guidelines). Each course result may have a detailed breakdown of some sort, but is normally summed up into a single grade. The length of the courses varies even between schools, but typically is split 2/1/1 years. The grades attained in the final two years are typically what most strongly dictates entry to further education. 131.111.248.99 (talk) 13:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- I take it we're talking past each other here because the U.S. education system is so different from the system that arose in Britain. A high school diploma in the U.S. does not mean you have passed a certain exam. It means you have shown up at school for four years and received passing grades (A, B, C or D) in a certain number of classes. Some states now require students to pass a standardized test to get a diploma, but that test is usually incredibly easy and designed to weed out only those who are absolutely clueless. I'll never be able to understand the British education system, but it sounds as if there is no such thing as a high school diploma. Instead, you take a certain number of exams similar to Advanced Placement tests in the U.S. Since the UK doesn't have high school diplomas, it has no need for GEDs. Or so I understand. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 05:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Probably whatever the high or secondary school qualification is in their country? O-level/A-level, NCEA [2], SPM/STPM, South Australian Certificate of Education, well I'm just throwing random examples I know of here so I guess Category:School qualifications is of relevance. Of course some countries probably lack any real centralised qualification even at a secondary school level (the US being one example and part of the reason for the GED I believe) and there may not be anything specific on offer but there will likely be schools which cater to adults and offer some sort of qualification recognised the same way other secondary school qualifications are. And some may choose something with international acceptance like the A-level, International Baccalaureate or probably even the GED even if it isn't the norm where they live. Of course it likely depends on why you need a qualification. If you just need an education, then there will likely be adult or night classes you can take for various things particularly key areas like literacy and numeracy. These may offer a diploma or something which may not have so much recognition (or even nothing at all) but if your primary purpose is for education then this may not matter (you're there for the education, not the piece of paper that says you had an education). If you need it for university enterance well in some places that may not be required for adult students in some courses (e.g. here in NZ) and/or the university may have their own programme for adult students (again here in NZ). The need for qualifications for jobs and other areas of life also likely varies. Nil Einne (talk) 03:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- If they don't have GEDs in other countries, what do adult former drop-outs do if they want a high-school education? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- GED's a uniquely American and Canadian invention, and the IP is to Oregon, so probably the U.S. Shadowjams (talk) 07:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
The UK education system certainly seems complicated to someone from the U.S., where you simply go to school until you're 18 and then you either go to college (university) or you don't. We don't have GCSEs, O-levels, A-levels, sixth form colleges, etc. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:55, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- And it's typically quite possible for adults or mature students to resume studies using those same exams at college (which I think has slightly different connotations in Scotland vs the rest of the UK, but the point stands). It's worth noting that a college in the UK is then a significantly different beast to a university, unlike in the States where I think the two terms are somewhat interchangeable. 131.111.248.99 (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- And as a further caveat on 131's last point, the term "college" has in the UK no exclusive official definition. I attended a secondary level (i.e. ages 11-18) school in Kent in the 1960s-70s which was then and is still now called Kent College. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Some UK universities use the term in very specific ways. An Oxford or Cambridge "college" is an autonomous institution with its own sources of funding, etc. (See Colleges of the University of Oxford) I went to the University of Kent - and our four "colleges" were nothing more than halls-of-residence with no independence from the university at all. It's variable from place to place. SteveBaker (talk) 03:36, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- And as a further caveat on 131's last point, the term "college" has in the UK no exclusive official definition. I attended a secondary level (i.e. ages 11-18) school in Kent in the 1960s-70s which was then and is still now called Kent College. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- And it's typically quite possible for adults or mature students to resume studies using those same exams at college (which I think has slightly different connotations in Scotland vs the rest of the UK, but the point stands). It's worth noting that a college in the UK is then a significantly different beast to a university, unlike in the States where I think the two terms are somewhat interchangeable. 131.111.248.99 (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- To the original poster: It doesn't sound like anyone here really knows the answer. Why don't you look up the webpage of your local school district? If it doesn't answer the question, it might give the phone number of someone who can.
- You might also consider earning an Associate of Arts or Associate of Science degree from your local community college. I doubt that would be much more work than getting a high-school diploma, as opposed to equivalency certificate. --Trovatore (talk) 23:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Imagine Peace Tower
editDoes anyone know,or know where to find the construction and total costs of the Imagine Peace Tower in Iceland. Thanks in advance.KTo288 (talk) 09:03, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- The Peace Tower home page states that construction and installation of the tower was a collaboration between Yoko Ono, the City of Reykjavik, the Reykjavik Art Museum and Reykjavik Energy. The art museum web site [3] gives a contact that may be able to answer about the tower cost. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:08, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Othmar Zeidler's birthday
editAccording to our article, Othmar Zeidler was born in 1859, and published his thesis work in 1874. This would imply he completed his graduate work at the age of ~15. Now, that second date does seem to be correct, but all I can find in terms of sources for the first date are Wikipedia mirrors and a few random websites giving 1859 as the correct birth-year. Science describes him as "young" when he published his work, but they do not give an age. Can anyone point to a reliable source that gives his birthdate? Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- Talk:Othmar Zeidler is empty and would be the appropriate place to post the question. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 09:43, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- In addition, adding a tag to the date (which I've now done) or asking whoever added this info in the first place (which appears to be User:Afasmit [4]) Nil Einne (talk) 13:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- @Cuddlyable3: Asking questions on an empty talk page of a stub is almost certain to yield no answer.
- @Nil Einne: Thanks for hunting down the diff. I should have done that in the first place. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- If all else fails you can look under the "history" tab and see the list of people who edited the article. That gives you two more possibilities:
- You can find the person or people who edited the article the most (and the most recently) and ask them (via their "talk" pages) whether they agree that the date is correct.
- You can track down the actual person who added that specific piece of information and ask them where they got it from.
- If the information seems dubious and there is no reference (and especially if nobody can back it up) - then you can just delete it.
- SteveBaker (talk) 00:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- If all else fails you can look under the "history" tab and see the list of people who edited the article. That gives you two more possibilities:
- In addition, adding a tag to the date (which I've now done) or asking whoever added this info in the first place (which appears to be User:Afasmit [4]) Nil Einne (talk) 13:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Most used textbooks in American colleges & universities for different subjects
editIs there someplace online to see which textbooks are the most used for, say, calculus, physics I, chemistry I, etc... or maybe rankings to show the top n books used?20.137.18.50 (talk) 17:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- You could use the regional version of Amazon.com to see which books for various subjects have the most sales. It's not a complete accurate picture but it'd be a good guide —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fire2010 (talk • contribs) 19:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I suspect these figures are not wholly available. Even as available, treat them with suspicion, because there is hot competition between vendors. You might consider: How many books are commonly resold? A text that is used over years at a particular university would have many used copies in circulation, whereas a completely new text would have none. Piano non troppo (talk) 02:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- I at least found this myself for physics: http://www.aip.org/statistics/texts/hsttext.htm 20.137.18.50 (talk) 13:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- That's an interesting link, but do note that it's for high school physics, not college/university physics. -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oops, I meant to add this: http://www.aip.org/statistics/texts/tyctext.htm 20.137.18.50 (talk) 13:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
what is Orange Telecom's numbr of users break down ??
editI need to know please the number of users that use services from Orange telecom ( france telecom ) break down in eac country, more details are : if orange telecom has net connection in 30 countries I want to know how many users are there in each country! as an example ( Orange telecom has 15,43453 users in Egypt and has 30,64789 in Nigeria etc ....
Thank alot :)
raamr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasha.Assem (talk • contribs) 18:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have not found all this information in one place, but found two useful links. This link at their website may be useful; it lets you get details on many countries, although the exact stats seem to vary at the whim of whoever typed in the information. The information is also a little dated — clicking Central African Republic boasts about how their commercial activities are planned for 2008. Here, on the other hand, is their 2009 annual financial report, which also has some user data scattered throughout. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Major Google trouble
editMoved to WP:RD/C#Major Google trouble. Coreycubed (talk) 21:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)