Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 March 28

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 28

Which Muslim based language??

I just had an e-mail attachment that illustrated how, in 20 years or so, because of the smaller European family size and the increasingly Muslim family size (in Europe), Western Europe was inevitably to become an Islamic region, given the declining Western population growth to about 1.6 children to 2 parents, as against the Muslim figure of about 8.1 per married couple. If that is true, and me being a realist rather than a reactionary, and further given that in the past (as an English citizen and speaker), I have chosen to learn Latin based languages such as Spanish, French, and Italian, (mainly for holiday purposes), how would Wikipedia advise me to quickly learn a Muslim based language such as Arabic. Forgive my ignorance but I am assuming that Arabic is the most widely spoken and readily understood language in the Muslim community. Thanks in anticipation. 92.30.0.204 (talk) 00:08, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Muslims speak many different languages. Many of them speak English. If you're taking the "can't lick 'em, so may as well join 'em" approach, probably your best bet would be to study Arabic, as that's the language of the Quran. Rosetta Stone (software) includes Arabic in its list. There's no substitute for "immersion", but if that's not practical, then some elementary course such as Rosetta Stone might be a good start. You should probably also track down a local mosque and ask them about it. Far as I know, Islam is every bit as eager to bring in new recruits as Christianity is, and I expect they could give you some good guidance. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:18, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)There are no Muslim-based languages. Islam is not a language family or grouping. There are langauges whose speakers practice Islam, Arabic is the official language of Islam in much the same way that Latin used to be the official language of Christianity; however Classical Arabic is the "liturgical" language, being the language the Qu'ran is written in, however no one actually speaks that on a daily basis. Modern Standard Arabic is the lingua franca of the Arabic-speaking world. The largest (by population) Muslim country in the world is Indonesia, so the Indonesian language would be a good second choice, but there are not a lot of European Muslims who are coming from Indonesia. There are native European Muslims, for example Bosniaks, who speak the Bosnian language. The Farsi language is spoken widely in Iran and Afganistan, and it is an Indo-European language, so is closer related to English or French than it is to Arabic. To sum up, if you want to speak a language that will allow you to communicate with many Muslims, your options are probably, in order, Arabic, Indonesian, and Farsi.

As an aside, I wouldn't take emails like that to mean anything. Demographic changes happen so rapidly and unpredictably, alarmist and xenophobic analyses like that (Watch out! People unlike you will soon take over your country and you will soon be a minority!) are usually bullshit. I would pay it no mind. --Jayron32 00:25, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Several years ago, there was an article in either Time or Newsweek that opined that Europe would be largely Islamic within 50 years. That was based on the current growth rate, along with the decline of Christianity in Europe, while failing to take resistence into account. It reminds me of a story, I think written by Mark Twain, based on the rate of "shortening" of the Mississippi River over time. He projected backwards that the Mississippi must have been many thousands of miles long in ancient times. As you say, estimates based on current growth (or shrinkage) rates are not necessarily reliable predictors. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

By the third trimester, there will be hundreds of babies inside you. Extrapolation is tricky. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

(another ec):First, that email attachment very likely is nonsense. Moreover, there is no such thing as "a Muslim-based language", or "the Muslim community". But if you want to learn a new language, that's certainly a good idea. Arabic is the language of the Qur’an, and is spoken in different dialects in much of Arabia and Northern Africa, and probably among Muslim minorities in France. Farsi is spoken by Muslims in Iran, Afghanistan and neighbouring regions. Urdu is probably the language spoken as a native language by the largest number of Muslims, and it's fairly widely spoken among Muslims in the UK. Turkish is spoken by around 80 million people, including many immigrants in Germany. And Indonesian has about 200 million speakers. Urdu and Farsi are Indo-European languages, so that might give you a leg up. Arabic is a semitic language and has a long literary tradition, so that's a plus. Turkish and Indonesian are written with Latin letters. Take your pick. As for learning them, there are various methods. If I remember correctly, Richard Francis Burton, who apparently spoke 29 languages, including Arabic, recommended going to the country and living with a local hooker for a month. Others recommend to live with a family that has small children for a while. More conventional are language classes. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

• I recall the email in question from a couple of years ago. I think it originated as an article on a far-right group's website. I have read an excellent rebuttal of it (maybe by the chap who write the Bad Science pieces for the Grauniad). I'll try to find it. DuncanHill (talk) 00:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
  • OK, I've remembered where I heard about this before. It was on a BBC Radio 4 programme about statistics and their misuse - when I can remember the name I'll come back again! DuncanHill (talk) 08:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Considering that the proportion of muslims in the EU is 3.2% (16 million out of a total population of 500 million), and after a couple of generations the fertility rate among recent immigrants usually falls considerably (in fact the fertility rate is currently lower than 8.1 in every country in the world), it will be a long, long time before Islam could even possibly become a majority faith in the EU. It is only racist fuckwits, sorry... far-right islamaphobes who are stoking fears of a European Caliphate or Eurabia. You can safely ignore the email attachment. That said, learning Arabic wouldn't do you any harm. Astronaut (talk) 02:10, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

• OK, these claims came from a Youtube video. They were dealt with on the Radio 4 programme More or Less, and you can read and listen at this link [1]. DuncanHill (talk) 08:38, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Obvious Joke: ...And if Arabic is too hard for you, you could move to USA and learn Spanish! APL (talk) 18:09, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Or he could remain in Europe and also learn Spanish, seeing as that's where Spain is.--92.251.136.245 (talk) 21:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not saying it was a funny joke, but it was sort of based on the premise that the right-wing reactionaries are right, and that both regions would soon be overrun by outsiders who overwhelm the existing culture instead of integrating with it.APL (talk) 22:29, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought America had already been overrun by outsiders who overwhelmed the existing culture instead of integrating with it. DuncanHill (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Well sure, but I meant, you know, again. APL (talk) 04:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, don't cheapen our Manifest Destiny. We overrun dozens or even hundreds of cultures. Googlemeister (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Electric locomotives and locomotive numbers

Why are some electric locomotives called Bo-Bo or Co-Co? And also, as most locomotives that are or were in service in the UK have numbers, where is all this information stored? Is there a database with all the numbers in it, or is it just something used to distinguish locomotives of the same class from each other whilst they are in service? I was looking through a book of British 60s electrics and diesels in the midland regions. Chevymontecarlo. 08:40, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll start you off with links to Bo-Bo and Co-Co. They seem to relate somewhat to UIC classification of locomotive axle arrangements. I think loco numbers were issued by the owning company - presumably British Rail in the 1960s. Info on the 60s is probably now best stored in railway publications of one sort or another. Contemporary numbering will live with the rolling stock leasing companies. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll add a link to List of British Rail modern traction locomotive classes - the numbers relate to the class of locomotive as well as a "serial number", so for example 27056 is a British Rail Class 27, and the 056 relates to its number within the class, the first being 27001. All the numbers of current locomotives, coaching stock, wagons, etc. are all organised by TOPS which also records train formations, timetables and a hundred and one other things. -=# Amos E Wolfe ^talk #=- 09:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

PEACE LILY again

How often will a Peace Lily flower if kept indoors in a pot?LHattingh (talk) 09:29, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

That question was answered on one of the ref desks a couple of days ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Here,[2] in fact. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:38, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

9/11 Report question -- radiation hazards

I was reading the 9/11 Report yesterday (interesting stuff!), and there is some discussion about roof rescues weren't attempted on the World Trade Center towers (in the North Tower at least that would have been maybe the only way anyone above the crash site could have evacuated). There was a mention of radiation hazards on tops of the towers that I was just curious about in a factual way:

Doors leading to the roof were locked.There was no rooftop evacuation plan. The roofs of both the North Tower and the South Tower were sloped and cluttered surfaces with radiation hazards,making them impractical for helicopter landings and as staging areas for civilians. ... Even if the doors had not been locked,structural and radiation hazards made the rooftops unsuitable staging areas for a large number of civilians; and even if conditions permitted general helicopter evacuations—which was not the case—only several people could be lifted at a time.[3]

What were the radiation hazards mentioned? How much radiation are we talking about? (Of course, it seems like compared to the threat of the towers collapsing, a few rems would have been preferable, but that's neither here nor there.) (I am not a conspiracy theorist, mind you. I'm just curious what they're talking about!) (If it is somewhere else in the Report, I apologize... I looked through online with the "find" button, but didn't see anything obvious on my first pass. The paperback version that I am reading does not have an index.) --Mr.98 (talk) 13:31, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

World Trade Center says "The roof of 1 WTC contained a vast array of transmission antennas" for "almost all" of NYC's TV and a bunch of its broadcast FM stations. So when they say "radiation" I think they mean electromagnetic radiation not ionising radiation. Those signals would pose a major hazard for helicopters flying near them. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 14:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

But wouldn't all those have been turned off or had power cut by then ? I certainly did think that there should have been attempts made to rescue from the roof, and that the roof should have been designed for that. Similar to the Titanic, there just didn't seem to be provisions made to evacuate everyone quickly enough. There was always a possibility that certain stories of the buildings could become impassable and evacuation would need to go up as well as down, but they never implemented a plan for this. StuRat (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

This is just wild speculation, but perhaps whichever agencies had helicopters ready simply didn't know the status of the transmitters and what effect that would have on the helicopters. Like you say, there was no plan in place, and finding out this sort of technical information quickly in a crisis is probably not easy. APL (talk) 18:13, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

One of the things they emphasize in the Report is that the plane impacts seriously damaged the electronic infrastructure and that because of this the computer systems were really unreliable in the upper parts of the towers. This was responsible for a lot of problems—this is why the doors at the top were still locked even though the central control had sent a universal "unlock" signal, and why some of the intercom systems didn't work correctly, and why the radio relay system was unreliable (thus emergency personnel who got above a certain height in the tower lost their ability to communicate with people on the ground). So I'm not sure it is clear whether they could have turned the stuff off at the top at that point, even if they had sent a signal. It is not necessarily true that the power would have been automatically cut by the planes.

Incidentally... it is actually rather impressive how many people were evacuated. From the same chapter:

The National Institute of Standards and Technology has provided a preliminary estimation that between 16,400 and 18,800 civilians were in the WTC complex as of 8:46 A.M. on September 11. At most 2,152 individuals died at the WTC complex who were not (1) fire or police first responders, (2) security or fire safety personnel of the WTC or individual companies, (3) volunteer civilians who ran to the WTC after the planes’ impact to help others, or (4) on the two planes that crashed into the Twin Towers.

That's actually a pretty effective evacuation, as far as they go. They got some 14,000-16,000 people (over 88% of those there) out of harm's way in a little over an hour and a half, even though it wasn't at all clear at first that the towers would likely collapse. A lot of the people who died were due to the immediate plane explosion itself, or because they were trapped in the upper floors and had no way below the damage (at least in the North Tower; in the South Tower they had some limited way through for some amount of the time, if I'm remembering right). I think the basic problem re: roof evacuation is that even under ideal conditions, getting 2,000 people out via helicopter would have been pretty much impossible in that amount of time, much less under the conditions they had there (where the heat from the fires itself was enough to make helicopter use extremely precarious). --Mr.98 (talk) 18:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

There seemed to be times when one or both roofs were clear enough for evacuation. In this pic of the impact on the 2nd tower, the roof of the first tower looks clear, for example: [4]. As you said, there wouldn't have been anywhere near 2000 people to make it to the roofs, but, even if there had been, if each chopper could pick up 5 people, and took 1 minute to do so, you could pick up 300 people per hour per tower. That's a significant number, but you'd need a few dozen choppers to do it. I'm sure there's that many in NYC, it's just a matter of having a plan to press them into service. StuRat (talk) 21:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Your hypothetical 1 minute-rescues implies that they're just going straight over to some other building and then back. A "few dozen" helicopters all within a 30 second flight of each other, hovering over a burning building (With all the unpredictable air currents that implies), and stuffed to capacity with survivors ... That sounds like a recipe for disaster. Especially if you're using pilots not trained for rescue work. APL (talk) 22:57, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'd expect them to drop people off at the nearest safe roof. They would want to set up a traffic pattern, where choppers approach on one side, hover in a designated area, land, then leave in another direction. A "control area" could be set up on the roof of a nearby building (or from a chopper hovering above the rest), to avoid confusion. It certainly would be dangerous, but the alternative was that everyone on the roof died, wasn't it ? It was also obviously dangerous for first responders to enter the building, but the did that, didn't they ? StuRat (talk) 00:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The other alternative is helicopters crashing into the people safely evacuating below, or into buildings not currently damaged and not yet on fire.

Seriously though, Incident Command is a complicated thing and setting up the sort of operation you're talking about with dozens of pilots in different types of vehicles, many of them under-trained and never having worked in this sort of group, would take a long time. The very few people in the city capable of even attempting to organize something like this probably felt their time was best spent elsewhere. APL (talk) 01:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I also don't think the roof looks terribly clear in that picture you've chosen. Aside from the fact that it is just a slight moment in time (one in which a plane happens to be exploding into the side of the other building, releasing enough pressure and heat to have severely damaged any nearby helicopters), it still appears there is significant smoke. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

We can't tell from that angle whether the roof has any flat places big enough for a landing. —Tamfang (talk) 06:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Finlay, that makes more sense. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Isn't not landing evacuating from the roof because it was dangerous like saying you won't jump out a third storey window to escape certain burning to death because you might seriously injure yourself?--92.251.164.176 (talk) 21:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Dogo Argentino in UK

The article on the dogo argentino says "it is illegal to own Dogos Argentinos without specific exemption from a court per the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991". What does it take to get this exemption? Is it a matter of proving that you need one (e.g. for protection due to the type of work your involved in) or just proving that your capable of owning one and bringing it up properly so that it does not pose a threat to others or yourself? --212.120.247.225 (talk) 14:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I would start by asking at your local police station, but I suspect you will need a better excuse than "for protection..." and an explanation why you want that specific breed rather than a German Shepherd, for example. I also added relevant links to your question. Astronaut (talk) 17:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

You probably need proper legal advice which we are not allowed to give, but this may help http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/cruelty/documents/ddcircular29.1997.pdf MilborneOne (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

This official page explains the basics of the law, as does this one. It says an exemption will be given if the court is satisfied that the dog is not a danger to the public (however, that can only happen after you've been convicted of owning an unregistered banned dog and fined/imprisoned, as far as I can tell). You wanting a way to defend yourself would not be acceptable, just as it isn't an acceptable reason for carrying a knife. I don't believe there is any legal way of getting a banned dog (they are illegal to breed and sell), though. Exemptions are intended for people that had such dogs before the 1991 Act came into force, I think (and didn't register them and get them exempted before 30 November 1991). My advice would be to forget all about owning one. If you really want to, you'll need to talk to a lawyer - they will probably give you the same advice, though. --Tango (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

There is no reference to the courts in section 1 of The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, which is the section that makes it an offence to breed, sell, or (after the designated date) have a dog of one of the types designated. There are reference to the courts in section 4, which covers destruction and qualification orders. It therefore appears that, as Tango says, there are cases in which the courts may not order a dog to be destroyed, but there is no exemption to the offence. I shall edit the dogo argentino accordingly. --ColinFine (talk) 18:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The 1991 Act authorises the Secretary of State to create an exemption scheme. It was closed after 30 November 1991 and then reopened following the 1997 amendment. The links I gave explain it better than the Act - Acts of Parliament are really hard to interpret without being a politician or a lawyer. --Tango (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Section 4B of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (introduced in a 1997 amendment) allows exemptions to be made without convicting the offender.House of Commons, 4 November 2009 If an individual is found with a banned dog but they have a certificate of exemption and have not breached any of the specific control laws then no offence has been committed.Wyre Borough Council Road Wizard (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Pitch-side advertising

This season, I've noticed a change in the pitch-side advertising at some Premier League games. Besides the usual advertising for the team sponsors, the stadium tours, etc. there are some adverts featuring asian language such as Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai and Korean. For example, the 188BET adverts shown at Anfield, and the Kumiho tyres adverts at Old Trafford. Is there a reason for the appearence of asian languages in these adverts? Astronaut (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Television! the premier games are shown all over the middle and far east so it is advertising appealing to the world wide tv audience. MilborneOne (talk) 17:02, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

For evidence of the extent of this market (the Far East specifically), see the pre-season schedule of the Premier League sides and how many of them play a mini-tournament in Thailand or something and the fact that Everton's main sponsor is in fact Chang Beer. 91.85.128.205 (talk) 19:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The Premier League is extremely popular in Asia - if you take a quick look at www.manutd.com for example, you'll notice the front page has links to Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean versions of the site. I've been noticing adverts in Asian languages at quite a few grounds for a few years now. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 22:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Add in all the kit-sponsors changing from Uk Market based companies to more international companies (e.g Man City's sponsor is Etihad and Man Utd's is AIG). It's all about the increasingly global face of the English Premier League. I recall hearing that Everton were 'pushed' to purchase a player from Asia more in terms of marketing/increasing localised (to Asia) interest in their club rather than purely for footballing reasons. Not sure of the truth of such a rumour (sounds vaguely plausible) but I suppose the existence of the rumour is 'evidence' of the increasing focus on international-interest in the premiership. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Where are you watching this? Some television broadcasts digitally replace the pitchside ads with ones relevant to their audience. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

On Sky Sports in the UK. I see no reason for a UK sports channel to digitally replace the adverts for showing in the UK market. Astronaut (talk) 18:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Several Major League Baseball teams have started running advertisements in Japanese because of the influx of Japanese players in the league. The games get broadcast in Japan. Woogee (talk) 17:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Two of the biggest examples are the New York Yankees, especially when Hideki Matsui was on the team, and the Seattle Mariners, which are partly owned by Hiroshi Yamauchi, the chairman of Nintendo (whose U.S. subsidiary is based near Seattle). --McDoobAU93 (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Simple answer. They pay more for the advertising opportunity... Gazhiley (talk) 10:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Mixer bowl

Has anyone heard of a mixing bowl (most likely made of plastic) that has a hole cut in the center where you can place an electric hand mixer inside the hole and you beat what's inside without it splattering everywhere? Any idea who makes this? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by NancyDrew68 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean one with a plastic top with such a hole in it ? It seems like that would interfere with the ability to mix the stuff that sticks to the sides of the bowl, and also to view how well mixed the results are, so I don't think a professional chef would use such a thing. You can just use the beater on low to avoid splashing. StuRat (talk) 21:22, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Like this?[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:42, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Not quite. They said a hand mixer. StuRat (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but same general idea, right? I find that photo by google-imaging [mixing bowl mixer], as [mixer] by itself tended to bring up mostly electronic mixers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, the advantage of a hand mixer is that you can move it around and control it more precisely to mix what needs mixing and leave alone what is already sufficient mixed (especially important when whipping cream), and you seem to lose that advantage when putting a lid on, so you might as well go to an automatic mixer, I suppose. StuRat (talk) 00:06, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

A possible solution would be for NancyDrew68 to buy a (cheap) plastic bowl without a hole, and cut one herself. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 08:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I found this patent which seems from the description to be what you mean http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5533801.html Otherwise,I use something like this,the "jar" is deep enough to prevent splashes. http://www.cutleryandmore.com/viking/immersion-blender.htm..hotclaws 19:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I have a hand mixer, no stand mixer. The easiest way to prevent 'splashback' is to add items in in small increments. I also tend to tip the mixer forward so the bits spinning off either go into the bowl from the front or are at the wrong angle for escape from the back. If you need something similar to the KitchenAid 'splash guard', I seem to remember Alton Brown recommending using a Frisbee(tm) with a 3" or so diameter hole cut in it, but I can't cite the source.68.32.251.73 (talk) 04:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Transport in WY

Hello guys! I looked for more articles and websites but I couldn't find answer to this:
I'd like to travel from Denver, CO (or Cheyenne, WY) to Riverton, WY by public transportation (NOT by aircraft) but I didn't find schedules. Could you write me, is there so buslines?
Later I'd like to explore Cheyenne, WY. Could you write me, is there public transportation system in Cheyenne, WY? If I good know, on the rail there's only fragile service...
Thanks for the help and I'm sorry but my english knowledge is not the best... :) - Keldvi (talk) 21:53, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Greyhound (bus) can get you to Casper from either Denver or Cheyenne, and the Wind River Transportation Authority (also bus) provides a shuttle between Casper and Riverton. Make sure you check the schedules and figure out a coordination plan, as it isn't like these things run once an hour. Here is a route map for bus transportation in Cheyenne itself. A couple of slight caveats: Greyhound is the 21st century American version of steerage, (it isn't terrible but BO is a frequent passenger), and although I've only passed through Cheyenne briefly, there probably isn't a huge amount of stuff to explore there - probably a few museums and the state capitol and that's it. This too isn't a horrible idea, just know that Cheyenne probably wouldn't be able to provide a week's worth of activities, probably more like a day or two. This site has some more information on stuff to do in Cheyenne. AlexiusHoratius 22:43, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

As for trains, forget it, there are no passenger trains at all in Wyoming. There haven't been any since 1983, in fact. --Anonymous, 03:32 UTC, March 29, 2010.

I am surprised that a town of 9,000 (Riverton) in a county "the size of Belgium" with a population density of 2/km² has an airport with 3 daily flights (all to Denver).[6] Even the state capital only has 8 daily flights (only to Denver or Dallas). It must have to do with Riverton being only 150 miles to Yellowstone National Park or 130 miles to Grand Teton National Park. The only other attraction seems to be the casinos at the Wind River Indian Reservation. Rmhermen (talk) 13:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Greyhound has a location closer to Riverton: Shoshoni, WY (approx 20 miles away), but I can't get any schedule or fares information. I feel sure there would be local buses or taxi companies that could take you the last 20 miles. Failing that, there's always hitchhiking.

Then again, the whole journey is only a few hours, so why not try to convince a friend in Denver to give you a ride all the way there. Astronaut (talk) 18:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I would expect some difficulties finding volunteers to drive you on a roundtrip of 750 miles (12-driving hours). Rmhermen (talk) 16:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Hair color

Why do anime characters have weird hair colors? --J4\/4 <talk> 23:01, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

One reason is probably just so you can tell them apart (especially when they all look vaguely Japanese, no matter what nationality they allegedly are). StuRat (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Why not? A significant portion of anime has far more unrealistic aspects to it, so as long as you're creating a fantastic perfect world, go crazy. Same reason all the women have breast to waist ratios that would kill a normal human - you can, so if you want to you do. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, much of the audience is kids, who might like to have wild hair like that, but their mothers won't let them. So, in the animes they can pretend to be those characters and live out their fantasies. StuRat (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I think there is also a tradition in the art style that dates back to 'pulp comics' where the printing methods were crude and it was tough to make subtle color variations. That's the main reason that superheroes always have primary-colored costumes for example. SteveBaker (talk) 05:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)