Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 July 1

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.

July 1

enrollment as a lawyar in uttar pradesh(under allahabad high court)

Hello sir/madam,i am a fresh law graduate,i would like to become enroll myself in uttar pradesh,under allahabad.i would like to know the proceedure of my enrollment as a lawyar,i would like to know how much money is required for my enrollment,i have passed my LLB from Gauhati University,ASSAM...please give the reply of my queries....thanking you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.49.205 (talk) 10:36, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.

However, I did some research for you. Wikipedia has some useful articles in Category:Allahabad. Also, you might like to contact the Allahabad High Court (official site: http://www.allahabadhighcourt.in/indexhigh.html), or the Faculty of Law at Allahabad University (official site: http://www.allduniv.ac.in/).

Good Luck. Astronaut (talk) 04:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Arguing with Referees in Soccer/Football

In international soccer/European football matches such as the recent Euro 2008, players from different countries are frequently seen arguing with the referees. What language do the players and referees speak while exchanging dialogue? Obviously if both the players and referee speak the same language, then that is not a problem, but what if a Japanese-speaking referee was marshaling the game between Germany and Spain? Acceptable (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It's english, generally. You can hear them sometimes and lip read their "filthy talk" other times :-) . Fribbler (talk) 00:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Also I suspect that often they are just babbling at the ref in their own language, regardless of whether or not it can be interpreted word for word it's generally easy to get the idea of what they are protesting about (hand gestures go a long way). 194.221.133.226 (talk)

The most effective language is universal... it is coloured red or yellow.86.209.25.112 (talk) 10:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)DT

I also wondered what language Matarazzi used when provoking zidane into headbutting him. 125.21.243.66 (talk) 10:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Those insults were levelled through the medium of Italian. Zidane can speak the language having played in Italy for a number of years. Fribbler (talk) 10:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thank you! I always thought it was in English. Wiki's great. 125.21.243.66 (talk) 10:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Identify a form of mahjong

Please help me identify a form of mahjong which I was shown informally by a Chinese lady.

• Four players
• Only 128 tiles used (dots, bamboos, characters, winds, red dragons; no green or white dragons)
• Each player starts with 16 tiles, except first player starts with 17
• One tile is removed from wall and placed on top of wall; the three other tiles that match this are used as jokers
• Hand must consist of suited tiles only; winds and red dragons are treated as "flowers" (i.e. set aside and replaced from wall)
• Winning hand = 5 melds + 1 pair
  • by "meld" I mean either a chow (run of 3) or a pung (3 of a kind); presumably kongs (4 of a kind) are also allowed but this did not come up

What are dragons? I know how to play Canton mahjong at a basic level, and can't think of any tile that can be possibly translated as "dragon"... --antilived^{T | C | G} 08:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

This is what I mean by a "red dragon". See mahjong tiles for more info.

social studies

Peruvian flag has this animal that lives in mountainous regions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akash2008 (talk • contribs) 06:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

In the article, Flag of Peru and Coat of Arms of Peru, I spy with my little eye, a Llama. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The llama is a quadruped. Grutness...wha? 09:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

business or company

What meant by an incorporated company? or what is meant by Inc. in yahoo inc.? Sang048 (talk) 07:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

See Corporation. --Allen (talk) 07:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Sex over time

Is it easier to get laid nowadays that it was say 100 years ago? Are people more willing to "give it up" as it were and do the nasty than in previous historical incarnations? Why is this? Cadon Monrel (talk) 09:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I think for the first time in human history whores are out of work. Too many sluts these days, makes whores jobs harder when they could get it for free. The reason: Myspace.

I'd agree. I read a report which said whores in Germany were taking to other professions like caring for the elderly in old age homes because of diminished career prospects. Hail Wiki! 125.21.243.66 (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps what has changed is that we've moved from the more 'puritan' age into a more liberal age sexually. The only way I conceive of it being easier today than before is that there it is easier to travel and find someone willing to, but I doubt that people give it up 'easier' in the past - what I think has changed is the willingness of people to discuss such matters publically. Roman times, Greek times and etc. are all littered with examples of sexually liberal behaviour - it's really just that there seems to have been a period in the 1800-1900s that was more puritan/prudish than other points in history.194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that sex has both less consequences today than it did in the past. Pregnancy is very easy to avoid if one really wants to avoid it, one can choose when and with whom one reproduces much more reliably than anytime in the past. Additionally the transmittal of STDs can be mitigated greatly with proper use of prophylactics, and of those STDs, many more are curable than in the past as well (yes, AIDS is the big exception, but even the spread of that can be greatly mitigated with the proper use of prophylactics). So some of the great taboos and good reasons for them that developed around sex have lessened. Women are less likely to regard it as totally forbidden, because unlike in the past, they're not likely to produce a child from casual but protected sex.

At least, in the West. I've no idea about other places.

Again, I think 194.221 is right though that it isn't the case that it went from total abstinence to the present. There has always been a lot more sex going on than people thought was appropriate. But it is remarkable that in a world with the pill and latex—both late-20th century inventions—how much about sexual consequences has changed. I do suspect than most people have vaginal intercourse with more partners today than would have been the case 100 or 200 years ago. However it's worth noting that there are other ways to "have sex" than just vaginal intercourse.

Of course, just because abilities are there doesn't mean attitudes change. Notice the above determination about "sluts", which is really just a form of the old way raising its hackles, however meant to be a joke.

There is, as you can imagine, a whole lot of academic work on the history of sex, because there is a whole lot of academic work on just about any topic. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I have a problem with all the above responses as they all sound, to me at least, text-book-ish. They all sound too as though they have been written by 17 year old puritans. I think that most kids today are influenced by rock-concerts; teen-mags; and celeb-mags, which to me at any rate, give a distorted sense of values and practice to young yet-to-be adults. What a shame. And what a shock those kids are in for when they are in debt, in mortgage crises, in shortage of morality guidelines whilst their parents are away sunning themselves before death. C'est la vie. 92.20.117.56 (talk) 23:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC

Trust me 92.20, we 17 year olds do not "read" teen magazines. We just look at the pictures. :) But seriously, for teenagers who love to read, fiction is preferable, but some of us do read about global issues. The other 95% of teens dislike reading and avoid it at all costs. The Reader who Writes (talk) 02:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

And I don't know if I was being included in the group of "17 year old puritans", but I am neither 17 years old nor a Puritan. My main point was that in this day and age enhanced sexuality is not necessarily something that carries long-term physical consequences. And personally I think that "most kids today" think about sex exactly as much as "most kids in the past", the only difference being that they might be actually acting on those urges more often. And thankfully, most of us do outgrow the shortsightedness of our teen years, a period whose "distorted sense of values" has been lamented for centuries and yet somehow, in the end, we all grow up enough to lament it. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Q: Why do the natives throw the virgins into the volcano? A: Well, they're not going to throw the sluts away! :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.119.114.114 (talk) 14:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

lol Nice little dog (talk) 15:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Corporate Video

How to make an innovative corporate video? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.69.10.222 (talk) 09:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

By being innovative yourself, of course! Anything else would be false advertising, wouldn't it? --antilived^{T | C | G} 09:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

My old company once made a corporate video in which they laid down rails to move the camera thingy on and videoed the employees working. I "starred" in it as they videod me entering the office and going to my desk to work :P. There were other things in it like a message from the CEO, praise from clients etc. Hail Wiki! 125.21.243.66 (talk) 10:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

"The one where they let a film crew in" has been a standard episode in soap operas from, I think, M*A*S*H onwards. You could make a corporate video about what happened when you tried to make a corporate video ... Gandalf61 (talk) 13:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Baked. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmtXaZ_HhBg 81.187.153.189 (talk) 22:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

What does the word assessment mean?

Manager would like for me to do an assessment on my manage and include any information concerning the avau=ilability of resources, relationship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.213.146.150 (talk) 10:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Assessment means gauging, measuring, estimating or otherwise finding out the quantity or degree of something. You could also look up a dictionary. Could you please restructure your question so that we can better "assess" what you are asking? Oh, and Wiki knows everything! 125.21.243.66 (talk) 10:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds as if your manager is asking you to give them a performance appraisal - this may be part of a 360-degree feedback process. There should be a form that you just fill in. Best thing is to ask them to tell you more about what they want - it is not a test ! Gandalf61 (talk) 13:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

See! 125.21.243.66 (talk) 14:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Inspirational individualist films

Is there a list of inspirational individualist films somewhere? Like Fight Club, I am legend, Into the Wild. Mr.K. (talk) 10:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Cast Away leaps to mind. Plasticup ^T/C 12:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

For someone who keeps their head while everyone else doesn't, there's The Shawshank Redemption. Julia Rossi (talk) 13:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Rocky????--Endless Dan 13:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Continuing a theme, how about Rambo? Rmhermen (talk) 13:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hell, what about Over the Top?? Every single dad should watch that movie.--Endless Dan 14:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Million Dollar Baby, though it gets somewhat depressing towards the end. Forrest Gump too. 125.21.243.66 (talk) 14:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess the OP is asking for a whole list of all of them. 125.21.243.66 (talk) 14:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Million Dollar Baby would be good if Mr. K was Mrs. K. --Endless Dan 14:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha so I guess we should stick with Rocky :-) 125.21.243.66 (talk) 14:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

LoL, I was just sayin'. --Endless Dan 14:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Help with the initials of bands

a) DJ, MN, MD, PT
b) RT, KC, BY, PD
c) SF, BM, KE, M
d) ST, JP, TH, BW, JK

All refer to the initials of band members within these bands. GreekHeroine (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

First one - Davy Jones, Mike Nesmith, Micky Dolenz, Peter Tork, i.e. the Monkees. Trying to get the others... this is a fun game... --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Apparently c) is incomplete and is supposed to be SF, BM, KE, MF, NB, which makes it Westlife. Strike that one off, then.GreekHeroine (talk) 15:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Westlife, eh? No wonder I didn't get it. Is this "Boy Bands from the Sixties to the Present"? I've racked my brains and I can't get the other two. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No, the larger list is pretty much standard fare bands, Beach Boys to the Cure, Fleetwood Mac and what have you. There's a peppering of contemporary outfits like the White Stripes and Outkast too, if that's at all relevant. GreekHeroine (talk) 15:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

d) would be Aerosmith. Friday (talk) 15:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Matchbox Twenty for b). Gantpupo (talk) 16:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Solunds like an interesting quiz list... where is the original? I wouldn't mind trying my hand at the others! Grutness...wha? 01:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

how long is a piece of string?

Is there a witty answer to this question? It annoys me when people say this and I want a snap response to bark back at them. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nice little dog (talk • contribs) 15:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I did hear one once, from the British comedian Stewart Lee. He gave the question and then pulled a piece of string out of his pocket, saying "Well, this one is 12 and a half inches" or whatever. Pretty funny, I thought. Of course, you'd need to carry a piece of string around with you at all times to make this retort work. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Other retorts include "Twice the distance to its middle". Splash - tk 16:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Who says what? What bizarre situation would call for an expression like that? What does it mean? Matt Deres (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Is that a retort, Matt, or do you want to know about "how long is a piece of string"? Fribbler (talk) 18:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not a retort at all. What the heck does it mean? Wiki doesn't even have an article for it, so I've gotta think it's a strictly regional kind of thing. Matt Deres (talk) 23:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Matt, it began as a facetious/idiomatic answer to an unanswerable question, or one where the answer is variable, to show that the question is impossible to answer. "How much does it cost to build a house?" – "[You might as well ask] how long is piece of string!" It might be regional, but it's pretty common. 95,700 ghits. Being a well known idiom, it is now also used as a cliched question, completely out of context, just for the sake of asking a stupid question. Gwinva (talk) 00:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I like Splash's suggestion. It is witty while at the same time nonchalant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nice little dog (talk • contribs) 18:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

When I'm asked this question I usually reply "Twice as long as one half its length". Get's em every time!--80.176.225.249 (talk) 19:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The expresion means, the answer is unknown eg, how long does it take to write a post? depends on how much you choose to write, therefore a sarcastic answer would be... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.33.2 (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Good day. If anyone asked me that question I would answer simply: "As long as you want it to be."I hope I have helped. I'm sure my answer isn't as witty as others, but it still works. Have a positively wonderful day.Rem Nightfall (talk) 21:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

"No shorter than the Planck length". --Sean 14:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I also say 'twice the length of half of it'Avnas Ishtaroth (talk) 02:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Depends on how fast its traveling in the direction of its length. (relativistically speaking)

Meaning of an idiom

Hi! I am not native :) and am eager of the mood or atmosphere of the following idiom: Beware! Someone is about to read the riot act to you. Is it funny? Is it friendly? Or official? Is it well-known for everybody? Thanks, --Zimmy (talk) 16:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Conveniently, we have an article on the Riot Act—there's a section lurking down at the very bottom that addresses the question: Riot Act#"Read the Riot Act". Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

(ec)It means "Someone is about to shout at you", generally for doing something wrong. The idiom comes from an old British law: Riot_Act#.22Read_the_Riot_Act.22. Plasticup ^T/C 17:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

My problem is not the meaning (we have also an article in Hungarian), but the atmosphere of the idiom. Pls. read again the second part of my question. --Zimmy (talk) 17:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, the title was a bit misleading. --Zimmy (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It can be friendly, threatening, funny or (rarely) official. It depends on context, and tone. In the exact example you give above I'd say it's friendly advice that you've done something that somebody will get worked up over. Fribbler (talk) 18:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I've only heard the idiom used in reference to something outside of the immediate conversation. That is, I've never heard someone say, "I'm gonna read you the riot act now!" In my experience, it's usually used as a gossip term, as in "Boy, he sure read me the riot act that day!" or "Did you hear about Jane? Her boss really read her the riot act over being late every day." That kind of thing. It is widely known among fluent English speakers, so far as I can tell. I would not say it to the person whom I'm planning on yelling at, unless it was completely clear that the entire situation was in good humour. Matt Deres (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't say I've ever heard this expression in an American English conversation. That may not count as "fluent English" for some people, though. --Several Times (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I speak American English and am quite familiar with this expression. --LarryMac | Talk 20:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The article claims it long ago passed into history, but I have personally been present when a policeman informed a crowd via loudspeaker that they were unlawfully assembled and would be arrested if they did not disperse. Sounded a lot like the description of the "riot act." They didn't and most weren't. Edison (talk) 21:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Reading the riot act isn't a threat to arrest, it's a threat to use deadly force. Algebraist 08:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

British English and never heard the term, nor read it. Danny252 (talk) 22:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I call it neutral - it doesn't imply humour necessarily, or familiarity, but it is colloquial, and its only use in formal situations is if you are literally going to read them the Riot Act. Steewi (talk) 23:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the help. --Zimmy (talk) 09:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Would you find this or maybe any other idiom or proverb apropriate in the title of this template?--Dami (talk) 10:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Arabian Football Player Is Taken by the angel of death

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiVjzSTIPOc&feature=related

found this while looking at Slayer music. What really happened during this incident, maybe some football fan can help us out. who is/was this guy etc etc etc Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.33.2 (talk) 20:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

There is some 'information' in the youtube video description on the right. Unfortunately this is the only information I could find; copied and pasted word for word (even in other languages) on hundreds of sites. No reliable sources, and the video is too short to see what happens before hand or afterwards. Could be a seizure, a heart attack, or just a really nasty tackle. One thing it ain't is the Angel of Death. He's too big of a football fan to interrupt a match like that. :-) Fribbler (talk) 22:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The Angel of Death is a bigger fan of the real football. :P Useight (talk) 02:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There is scant information on our article about Abdulrahman Al Shoaibi. Nanonic (talk) 06:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

If it WERE the Angel of Death,I'm sure he would be booked for entering the pitch without the ref's permission,and the team that claimed him would have 12 players... Lemon martini (talk) 09:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The New Age Has Risen

Good day. Lets talk New Age medicine for a second. Why do people think new age medicine works? I mean some work such as acupuncture for lower back pain, but I am talking about the crazier stuff. Such as the Chinese new age medicine Ti Ti (I think that is how its spelled)where they can rewrite your energy flow so you can heal better, but they don't physical touch you. Why do people want to believe that this stuff will work? Thank you for taking your time to answer my question. I really appreciate it. Have a positively wonderful day.Rem Nightfall (talk) 21:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

There's a sucker born every minute... There's hundreds of reasons, mistrust of mainstream medicine, misunderstandings of science, desperation to be cured when mainstream medicine fails and even just religious devotion. There's also the placebo effect which can lead to people feeling better and telling everyone they know that it works. While few to none of these methods stand up to scientific evaluation, most people don't care about this or know what it means. Some of the practitioners genuinely believe in what they are doing while others are the worst kind of con men, taking advantage of people in a desperate situation. -- Mad031683 (talk) 23:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Once again, Rem Nightfall, you seem to have mistaken the Reference Desks for some kind of discussion forum. That is not the case, we are not here to talk about "what people believe and why", except, perhaps, at a very basic factual level. Please keep this in mind. --LarryMac | Talk 12:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

and have a positively wonderful evening :) 125.21.243.66 (talk) 13:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Good day. I'm sorry. I'll be more formal next time then. Because when I talk about "what people believe" I am talking "why they believe." I am always curious about people and their thought process and I'm always looking for that proceess. I guess my questions aren't formal enough so they get misunderstood for something else. I apologize for this and I will word my questions in a better way. Mind you I am not trying to make excuses. I want to follow all the Wikipedia rules and the reference desk rules. I want to make this place a wonderful place. I will try even harder for that goal. With that being said have a positively wonderful day. :)Rem Nightfall (talk) 15:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael Shermer's books, including Why People Believe Weird Things (ISBN 0805070893) may be of interest to you. -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Rem, further to Larry's point, would you care to edit mainspace a bit more than you do? There is a massive backlog on articles to be wikified. It would be great to have some more help there, or maybe you would like to join the WP:ICU. Very friendly people and a collaborative atmosphere. I love reading reference desk questions and replies and contributing now and then, but there is a lot more to this encyclopedia. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's appropriate in any way for you to tell Rem how he should be spending his time on Wikipedia. There's lots of things to be done, but we don't require any individual to do all of them or any of them. Do you go around mainspace talk pages, telling article editors that it's time for their shift on the Reference Desk? If you wish to discuss your philosophy further, feel free to start a discussion on the talk page, where you'll reach a more complete audience of Ref Deskers (some of whom do a lot of editing, and some of whom don't). -- Coneslayer (talk) 00:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Good evening. All right Itsmejudith I'll edit some articles. I'm just a bit embarrass. Since I'm only in high school and only know so much. My knowledge is limited and I'm scared of putting the wrong thing. I can rewrite sentences though and I can change wording around. I'm really good in English, okay in science, really okay in history, and terrible at math. So I'll try my best. To make Wikipedia a better place of knowledge is my goal. And I will reach it by helping out the articles. I hope I can help. Have a positively wonderful evening. Here I go.Rem Nightfall (talk) 23:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rem, you might find the articles Energy therapy, and Energy medicine interesting, but as to why people believe or not, I have no answer. IMO only, wikipedia's a huge place and personally I'd say take your time getting used to it. If you make a few mistakes, someone will fix them. I went to ICU and it strikes me as not the easiest way to begin since it needs some surgical researching on not too central topics. You'll get used to phrasing the question in a way that pleases the desks by looking at the more basic ones. Ex: Why do some humans readily trust practices that are unverifiable, such as... etc. Users User:Mad031683 and Coneslayer are on the money. Cheers, Julia Rossi (talk) 23:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the reason people believe in things that may not work or are unproven is quite simple. We all believe in what it makes us comfortable to believe in. Same for disbelief. That's what keeps us sane.

That said, I think the question is not exactly appropriate for this setting as stated above.

Ruairí Óg the Rogue (talk) 02:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Merchant Marine Act of 1928

Working on the APL article, and on the APL website this act is mentioned (see http://www.apl.com/history/html/timeline_02.html - 1920s page, under 1928 quite obviously!). Wikipedia doesn't have this act, but has a Merchant Marine Act of 1936 when searching for "Merchant Marine Act". The link to the Jones Act on that page links to another Merchant Marine Act - but in 1920, and none are listed in between. Does the 1928 one exist, and if so, is it notable and/or worth having an article on? Danny252 (talk) 22:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes it exists. It was known popularly as the Jones-White act: see here. Looks like an article to be created to me.... Fribbler (talk) 22:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Righto, will put in a blank link to that and an article request. Thanks Danny252 (talk) 22:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)