Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011 January 25

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.

January 25

"environmental impact fee" on long distance bill

I have a cheap carrier of long distance calls. Sometime in the last few months they started adding a $10 "environmental impact fee" to the bill each month, which is more than the average cost of my long distance calls. Do all long-distance carriers do this? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Could it be because they are sending you a paper bill, while an electronic version would be cheaper? HiLo48 (talk) 02:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I went to their website and found out that is the case. $10 is a lot per month to send a bill! Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 02:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Therefore, it really encourages you to go paperless. If you do so, they save money. If you don't, they get your $10. They win either way. Dismas|^(talk) 03:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I wonder how much of the $10 "environmental impact fee" goes towards reducing "environmental impact"? Or should I stop wondering now? HiLo48 (talk) 03:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Stop right now (thank you very much!); I'd be really surprised if the ten bucks went toward saving Mother Earth, it's probably in the line that cheap carriers charge a lot for even the simplest extra stuff. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The people who run these companies and charge these outrageous fees are the ones who protest the loudest about "revenue raising" when they get caught by a speed camera while exceeding the speed limit. How do I know this? I just know, that's all. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

If the OP had a contract with them which didnt involve paying $10 for a paper bill, and then they've started imposing this amount without (by mutual agreement) starting a new contract that included the extra $10 fee, then would this be unlawful? 92.29.126.211 (talk) 16:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

It would depend on the terms of the contract. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hands up all those who have read and understood all the small print in their phone company contract(s). Come on now. Quickly....... HiLo48 (talk) 02:01, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Repetitive phrases

I have this problem when I'm writing of sometimes using certain (usually transitory) phrases or constructions, such as 'however', 'as I [participle], [main clause]', etc too many times, especially if I've gone back to revise. This creates a lack of variety and a sense of staleness in my writing, but they make my writing smooth. If I see one construction used too much I will try to edit it out, but sometimes I don't notice it, especially if I'm writing a longer piece. Is there a site that can detect frequently used words and phrases or count how many times I use a phrase in a document or something? THanks. 24.92.70.160 (talk) 03:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

You can try to achieve a rapid, concentrated vocabulary expansion by taking words you sense that you overuse and putting them into a thesaurus -- so instead of always using 'however,' you could have in mind to sprinkle in 'although,' 'moreover,' 'notwithstanding,' 'nevertheless,' 'albeit' -- I know that helped me a few years back. Don't know about a detection program, but if your brain detects it while writing, you won't need a program :) DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 07:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The word "however" suggests that the foregoing statement might have been formulated better.Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:11, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, there are lots of subtle shadings of meaning, but DRonsebach's answer is apt: build an arsenal words that create smoothing subordinating structures, and get variety by picking the best one for each occasion. I happen to like using "contrariwise" when applicable. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Regular expressions will help you search for patterns in your text. Specifically you could use grep to find repeated structures and sed to manipulate the text into a more varied form. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Not an answer to your question, but such things are often called "crutch words" or "crutch phrases". There doesn't seem to be anything on WP about them, but google gives some pages on the subject. (Some info on training yourself not to do it so much.) Staecker (talk) 21:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Pincode in Kolkata

what are the pincode of southcity,Tower-4,29th floor,flat no-29L,kolkata —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.172.174.52 (talk) 07:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Question reformatted in own section. Richard Avery (talk) 07:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

You may like to try this [1] site. Richard Avery (talk) 07:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

According to this source, the PIN is 700068. Marco polo (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Gelatin source

Hello, This is the 1st time i have tried looking for something but havn't got my answer from anywhere on net. I hope the excellent working team of wikipedia will find a satisfactory answer. I am in Pakistan & i bought a hair care product from a multinational store here. But when i tried to inquire about some products involved in its composition i didn't get my answer so i tried to find it on the company site but no answer. The product is GNC Women's Hair, Skin & Nails Formula. http://www.gnc.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3943821 I want to know that "what is the source of gelatin in this product?" It is important to know because if its some animal bovine source or a pig source than it will not be for muslims, because of religious obligations & neither for pure vegetarians.

Hope I'll get a reply soon Regards Sohaiba HayatSohaiba hayat (talk) 09:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Gelatin is usually derived from pork skins, pork and cattle bones, or split cattle hides. Recently, fish by-products have also been considered because they eliminate some of the religious obstacles, see here. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

If it were a Halal product, then one would think that GNC would mention this as a positive selling point. As they don't one must assume that it isn't; especially since GNC declare “demanding truth in labeling. However, you can mail or phone them and ask. [2] or ring 1-877-GNC-4700 . We have an article on them so maybe the answer could go there somewhere.--Aspro (talk) 10:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I changed the question title for easier access in the archive. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 11:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Is not halal, being derived from kosher rules, in specific relation to gastrointestinal consumption? Unless you are drinking or otherwise introducing this hair care product into the oral cavity, why would it matter if it's derived from pigs? Are Muslims banned from making use of pigskin in coats, tambourines, American-style footballs, etc.? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 05:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Topical medications don't usually come in caplets in my experience; and I don't know of any dietary supplements (by definition) that one rubs on the outside of the body or hair whilst eating food. Therefore, I can only imagine that one is supposed to swallow this supplement, so in this case I think Halal is the applicable law. However, if others think they might know better... And remember: always read the label or Patient Information Leaflet (PIL) or ask the pharmacist if your not sure--Aspro (talk) 11:12, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

From the article Halal: Muslims must ensure that all foods, particularly processed foods, pharmaceuticals, and non-food items like cosmetics, are also halal. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

So, I think we can agree: that as people don't wear these caplets as beads or kick them around as a game/sport nor try and make music with them, they fail the Halal test. They are not, no way, Halal. --Aspro (talk) 21:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

So what has tambourines got to do with it ? Oh! The wonder of Wikipedia --- the encyclopaedia that any Tom, Dick, or Harry can edit! Happy tenth birthday!--Aspro (talk) 22:32, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Are you asking because you're only familiar with tambourines that don't have a drum element? Or because tambourines are not in fact relevant to the question? 86.164.58.119 (talk) 00:15, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

No, I was referring to a pig-skin tambourine -- kosher laws apply onto the ingestibles, and not to eyeshadow, hats or any other non-ingestible pig product. Conversely, no benefit may be derived from biblical prohibited mixtures of milk and meat, so dog food, for example, that consists of such may not be utilized by a Jewish person because feeding it to one's dog serves a monetary benefit, in that you are not monetarily exempt from feeding your dog for a while because he's full. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 15:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, Woe is We! Pray, tell us, oh wise one: How can this gelatine caplet pass through the alimentary canal without being digested? You speak, as though you have been granted access to secrets that we – the hoi polloi- can only wonder at. Or are you now, going to disappear - yet again, (like it has been prophesied), into the night, to leave us once more, in the darkness of miserable ignorance? I want my coal-black hair – to shine like the plumage of a raven! Yet like a crow, you fly off at tangents. Are you now gone? And remember: always read the label--Aspro (talk) 23:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but we are talking about Halal and not kosher. Yes, they are related in that Islam has certain cultural connections to (7th century) Judaism. But that doesn't mean that the modern practices have to be identical. Not to be too flippant about this, but Muslims don't have to consult with Jews when deciding their own religious codes. If Halal includes non-ingestibles as proscribed things, but kosher does not, so what? --Jayron32 15:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

What does Ebay want to choke out the smaller sellers?

Recently, I discovered that ordinary sellers are now limited to selling only $5,000/month (before sellers' fees, no less), or 100 items, whichever comes first. Why?

I also see something about requesting permission to sell more. What all would it take to be given that permission?

Anyway, since eBay only seems to prefer the big-wigs nowadays, what are some great auctioning sites for the smaller sellers now? (Please don't mention Craigslist; they don't have an auctioning sub-site, and their graphics appear to have not been updated since I was 10 years old.) --70.179.181.251 (talk) 14:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I've been using ioffer lately. There isn't as much passing trade as ebay but the company seems more friendly, like ebay was a few years ago. Having said that, I don't trade anywhere near as much as 100 items a month. ioffer allows items which ebay ban, such as the Baise_moi DVD. --TrogWoolley (talk) 15:10, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I would guess that Ebay are under severe pressure from governments who are losing tax revenues as sellers who are really operating as businesses are not paying the sales & corporate taxes they should. I imagine that to exceed the limit you'd have to produce documentation that you are a registered business that is complying with local tax laws. Exxolon (talk) 20:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I second that. There is an increasing number of people earning a living from ebay but not declaring it as income so not paying tax. The thing that frustrates me is the number of people who think it is within their rights to do this just because the loophole has existed for so long. Vespine (talk) 03:12, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I also don't really know what you mean by choking out small sellers, I only sell a few things on ebay every few months and i don't feel choked out at all. Works fine for me. Vespine (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Why does e-bay not let shippers use FedEx?

129.130.32.204 (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I adjusted the title and format. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps because FedEx takes too long? The Ebay Home Page has a 'Contact Us' link on the bottom right. You could ask them directly through that. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

As someone who has sold items on eBay, I am aware of no restriction on the seller on which companies to use for shipping. I have actually sold items on eBay and shipped them via FedEx. Mind you, eBay may not integrate Fedex into its auction software, but I'm not aware of a restriction. Also, if there IS some contractual restriction, I might have been in violation. --Quartermaster (talk) 14:10, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

How much better is Amazon Auctions than Ebay?

Are their fees lower? By how much? Also, in what other ways are Amazon Auctions better than Ebay? In what ways are they worse? Do you think it's worth my time to set up shop over there? --70.179.181.251 (talk) 14:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Your question seems to be a loaded one. As far as purchasing, I have had good experiences with both and bad experiences only with eBay. The problem is used and new items, with which the latter Amazon only deals. Being a seller on eBay, it would seem, is no easy task. I feel Craig'sList would be more inviting for a seller. schyler (talk) 14:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

childrens book called pug

I am looking for the author and publisher of a book called PUG. It is a beginners reading book. I read this in the mid 70s and I believe it was around many years before then. It was basic with lines like, "See pug run. I see pug run." Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Sure it wans't "See Spot Run"? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 17:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you're looking for Pug by Theodore Lester Harris (Oklahoma City : The Economy Co., 1975 - OCLC 251451705). WorldCat has it listed as part of the "Keys to Reading" series and a "Preprimer." Given that it was published in 1975, there's a good chance this is it. I can't say how easy it will be to find copies though. Here is the link that will pull up all titles in the series including things like Activity book for Pug. Annotated teacher's ed. --Quartermaster (talk) 19:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Since T. L. Harris's Pug was published by The Economy Co. I think this must be an illustration from it. --Antiquary (talk) 19:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Alcohol

Is there any shop that sells non poisonous 100% alcohol? Most pure alcohol have methanol and are used for industrial purposes. Money is tight (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:49, 25 January 2011 (UTC).

It is exceedingly difficult to produce 100% ethanol; such preparations are VERY expensive because of the difficulty in producing it, because water and ethanol form an azeotrope. It does exist, but almost always as denatured alcohol, that is it is laced with something to make it unfit for human consumption. The highest proof commercially availible spirits for actual drinking that I know of is the 190-proof (95%) version of Everclear. --Jayron32 16:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Although you might call it "non poisonous", with such concentrated alcohol it would be easy to suddenly kill yourself by alcoholic poisoning. 92.29.126.211 (talk) 17:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I presume you mean, Absolute Alcohol . What do you want to do with it, as it is too strong to drink undiluted? You might as well buy a bottle of 'clear' vodka ( as opposed to flavoured vodka).. for it is filtered through activated charcoal and other media to adsorb trace amounts of molecules that alters or gives off-flavors to the vodka. Otherwise, go to a Laboratory chemical supplier for the absolute stuff.--Aspro (talk) 17:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

If you are intending to drink it after dilution, make sure that it is the human-consumable kind of alcohol and not the kind that makes you go blind. 92.15.22.33 (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that's what he means by non-poisonous. A better way of saying it would be non-Denatured_alcohol. It's relatively easy to find high-concentration alcohol that has been denatured with naptha or methanol, but that would be poisonous. As an aside in some places I have heard they use dye and bitterants rather than toxic chemicals to denature alcohol, making it both more pure and less suitable for use as surrogate alcohol. The article on denaturing mentions Poland as one such location.65.29.47.55 (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think you can buy 200 proof ethanol in the US anyway. You can get 190 proof, as noted previously. I think if you want 200 proof you're going to have to do it yourself in a lab. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it seems like you can buy it, but it's sold for laboratory use. I don't know how easy it would be to get it without a lab affiliation of some kind, but it must be possible. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

[3]. Note that there's a federal tax of 27 USD/gallon on 190 and 200 proof, non-denatured alcohol. Aldrich will helpfully include the tax in the price of the solvent, and take care of any paperwork. At nearly 90 USD a liter, you'd expect them to. Compare to the denatured stuff, at "only" 47 USD a liter. Buddy431 (talk) 02:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Note also, that you can get reagent grade anhydrous methanol (built-in denaturing, so to speak), for 35 USD a liter [4], or 50 USD for 2 L. However, I don't think that methanol forms an azeotrope with water like ethanol does (in fact, looking at methanol, it looks like methanol is produced more or less anhydrously anyway). Reagent grade Isopropyl alcohol can be had for 42 USD per liter. Rubbing alcohol grade isopropyl alcohol (either 70 or 99%) can be had for like 5 USD a pint (or something; go to your local drugstore and buy their generic brand). Isopropyl alcohol, while not strictly edible, is pretty non-toxic (I'm not sure if it gets you drunk though. If we try to search this online, we just get a bunch of pansies screaming that it will make you go blind or kill you. They're of course confusing it with methanol, which really is as poisonous as people say). It bears noting that the principle reason methanol is so toxic is that it's oxidized to Formaldehyde and then Formic Acid. Ethanol is oxidized to the much less toxic Acetaldehyde and then acetic acid. Isopropyl alcohol is oxidized to acetone (and no furthur). This makes the breath of those who've drunk rubbing alcohol smell "fruity" (quoting our Isopropyl alcohol article). Acetone, though not strictly food, is relatively non-toxic. Buddy431 (talk) 03:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit: Once we get past all the fear mongering, it turns out that isopropyl alcohol is intoxicating, though apparently it takes a bit longer for the blood alcohol level to peak (30-120 minutes for isopropanol, vs. 20-60 minutes for ethanol): [5]. Most of the toxic effects are due to the Central nervous system depression (in other words, the same reasons why ethyl alcohol is bad), as well as the perils of intoxication: coma with an obstructed airway (i.e. choking on your own vomit), accidents, etc. It does have a Median lethal dose of about 4-8 g/kg [6], somewhat less than ethanol's 10.3 g/kg [7]. In contrast, methanol's fatal dose is about 100-125 mL, giving an LD50 closer to 1-2 g/kg. Buddy431 (talk) 03:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

To be able to get pure ethanol it is necessary to have a permit from the US Department of the Treasury, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. Universities and other scientific research and medical institutions can get permits easily, but I doubt that a private individual would be able to. Looie496 (talk) 04:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

In a well-known university chemistry department a few decades ago, a popular party beverage was a punch bowl filled with "Rocket Fuel," made from Everclear, lime sherbet, pineapple juice, and ginger ale, with dry ice to make it bubble. Had quite a kick, and went down smooth. (Do not attempt this at home). Edison (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand that you can increase the amount of alcohol in something by leaving it outside to freeze, and then removing the ice, which leaves the alcohol. I hope nobody will misuse that information. 92.15.10.209 (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Ya that's true. It's sometimes called ice distillation, I think. I read once that it was technically distillation and thus illegal without a license in the U.S., but I'm not sure whether or not that was an authoritative source. Shadowjams (talk) 09:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

In pioneer America, it was popular to leave a barrel of Hard cider outside in winter, so it would would freeze into a mass of low alcohol ice and a portion of high alcohol Applejack (beverage) or "Old Stonewall," so called because the drinker might feel like he could "Walk through a stone wall." This is Fractional freezing or "poor man's distillation," since it does not require a copper boiler and copper tubing, firewood, or masses of cooling water. Edison (talk) 18:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Found a story about a UK company doing a one off whisky with 92% alcohol - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4752164.stm. Exxolon (talk) 20:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Our Ethanol purification article discusses the chemistry in detail. Chemically it is impossible to purify ethanol beyond 95.6% without methods other than distillation. That article goes on to explain that purification (distinct from distillation in this case) is possible using benzene (and other chemicals too) but all of them make a hangover look like a stubbed toe (in other words humans can't drink them). Shadowjams (talk) 09:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I assume that I'm misreading what you've said here, Shadowjams. There are several methods listed in the article for breaking the ethanol-water azeotrope that don't involve noxious chemical substances. Molecular sieves are generally compatible with downstream food and beverage uses. (Zeolite is nontoxic and reusable; cornmeal, though single-use, is about as human-friendly as you can get.) Membrane distillation and vacuum distillation involve no addition of chemicals whatsoever, though the equipment may be more costly (or difficult for the amateur to acquire). TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Rectified spirit is quite common and easy to get in Poland, but most people still drink vodka. Vespine (talk) 03:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Editing A Page

Hi, I was wondering if I could edit the article of "Glenn Allison" the first 300 bowler and write about how he is and what hes been through. See, I'm his grandson and I want people to know if they look him up; what hes like. Before I put my contributions into the page I want to know if I can get permission or not. Write back as soon as possible, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GlennRichardAllison (talk • contribs) 21:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Typically conflicts of interest are discouraged. In addition remember that any and all additions must be Verifiable as true by a publically-available independant source —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.29.47.55 (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Although we have rules about not writing about your self, your close relations, and your company (they're here). However, you can do so as long as your follow our neutral point of view and conflict-of-interest guidelines. Basically, cite reputable sources (see cite how to), and don't remove criticism unless it clearly unjustifiable. Add {{template:citation required}} instead of removing things, this indicates that there is no cite to back up the statement(s). You might want to put a note on his article's talk page to say that your are related; this will give you some more good-faith if others have to revert your changes. I've added a list of how-tos on your talk page, if you've never edited a MediaWiki site before. And one last thing, have fun! CS Miller (talk) 21:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm still a little confused. I know how to edit a page and all but what exactly do I have to do. Sorry if I'm frustrating you...