Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011 May 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.

May 1

Analogue Signals

Why are they turning off the analogue signals? jc iindyysgvxc (my contributions) 09:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Are you referring to the change over from analog to digital TV in Australia, and the subsequent removal of the analog transmissions? Mitch Ames (talk) 09:56, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes. jc iindyysgvxc (my contributions) 11:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a waste of resources to have the same things transmitted on both digital and analogue, so you need to choose one or the other, and digital TV has several advantages over analogue TV (the biggest one being that you can fit more channels in the same amount of the radio spectrum). See Digital television#Conversion from analog to digital for some more information. --Tango (talk) 11:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I haven't checked the situation in Australia, but in the UK we were told it was also so some frequencies could be released for other uses. It would be nice if I could find a frequency usage chart. Astronaut (talk) 14:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

... and in some parts of the UK, turning off the analogue signal means that we now have no signal at all except from a satellite (at twice the cost for reception and recording). I hope others are seeing some benefit. apologies for the grouse! Dbfirs 17:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem with the grouse - they're delicious. But I wish you'd keep your damn capercaillies off the lawn! 90.201.110.85 (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Bits of radio spectrum is one of the resources I was talking about. --Tango (talk) 19:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Crossword creation

How are crosswords made? I know someone thinks up the clues but how does it get from there to the grid? How much is computer generated? Does the creator give a computer twice as many clues as a puzzle needs (so that it can find at least one set that all meshes together) and then the computer works out how to fit them all together to get one puzzle? Dismas|^(talk) 10:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Two commonly-used applications, at least for UK setters, are Sympathy and Crossword Compiler. These can either generate a complete grid from scratch, or setters can ask for certain words to be included. for example if they have a particularly good clue for a word, or of they want to include a number of words based around a theme. I believe some setters still work entirely by hand, using trial and error, but this is rare nowadays. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Working by hand is probably more common than you think, especially for compilers of cryptic puzzles. A limited range of standard 15x15 grids is used, each with their own merits. The compiler will first select one of these and fill it with words, starting with any that s/he particularly wants to include as part of a theme, also making use of homographs and homophones where appropriate (which a computerized compiler will not favour). Only then are most of the clues written.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

My comment wasn't entirely guesswork: it's partly based on conversations with some setters of cryptics in UK national newspapers. For example, in his "Crossword Manual" (2006 edition), Don Manley says: 'Although I still occasionally use pencil and paper ... I now use a computer to help me with grids and clues". Crossword setting is not a well-paid occupation, and many setters prefer to use software to help with the time-consuming and sometimes tedious job of filling in the grid, leaving more time for the more creative business of clue-writing. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:05, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

There is a great documentary on crossword culture, history, and making, called Wordplay, which is really worth looking at. It shows the creation of at least one New York Times crossword from scratch by a master creator (Merl Reagle). In the documentary, he starts with the long words, and then starts to work out the smaller bits and the overall structure from there. It looks laborious and difficult, but the guy in question is also just incredibly gifted at wordplay. I wouldn't be surprised if the Times crosswords are all hand-created, though I also wouldn't be surprised if lesser crosswords (for the Times is really the best at this) are computer generated. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

You may find the John Galbraith Graham article enlightening. I have wrestled with his puzzles for years and find them most enjoyable. And he is most definitely not a computer! --TammyMoet (talk) 15:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure whether machine/person made but some crosswords but a lot of crosswords have a symmetrical design/some form of symmetry going or at least the Guardian does - oh and guardian.co.uk/crosswords is brilliant for all types of crossword, especially for learning cryptic ones as you can 'cheat' and half-start the grid to get yourself going (i'm terrible at cryptics but love trying them).

New York Times crosswords are indeed created completely by hand, and the creator is always credited both in the newspaper and in later compilations. It was once estimated that the crossword earned the Times more money per square inch than any other feature: something like 15% of NYT subscribers claimed that the crossword was the main or only reason they subscribed, and compilations of NYT crosswords often top the non-fiction paperback best-seller lists. One crossword creator claims to use only three tools - paper, pencil, and dictionary. --NellieBly (talk) 05:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

And they also published a crossword dictionary, so it's the cash cow that keeps on giving. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Calligraphy

Is there a website where you write your name in English and it form your name in Arabic calligraphy and in any shape like fruit, animal or something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.155.226 (talk) 15:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

[Link Redacted] are fonts and programs for arabic calligraphy, learning, typing and editing. (None tested). Cuddlyable3 (talk) 16:23, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I removed the link, because it has been identified by Web of Trust as being a phishing/spam/malware site (see report at Web of Trust website). Redacted link may be found here: [1] Proceed at your own risk! Falconus^{p t c} 00:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for that precaution. I visited the link with no observed ill effect. However it contains a large number of further links, which is where the danger lies. As stated, I did not test them. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

You may find Samples of simulation typefaces helpful, I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:31, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

communism

why do british people say that "communism was a red herring"?? Sally james langley (talk) 20:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Do they? In what context have you heard or read this? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

We don't, as far as I'm aware. A British person may well have said it (it's a rather bad pun and we are good at bad puns!) but it isn't a standard saying. --Tango (talk) 22:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

It's an idiomatic phrase meaning misguidance, false clue, Wrong info. See Red herring the 'red' also applying to the communistic symbolic red. Red square ,redflag etc.190.56.17.105 (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Red Square was 'red' before the communists got there - the idea that they were responsible for its name is a red herring! AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:06, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Much appreciated! I like it. 17.105.Phalcor (talk) 22:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, a British person said it in a movie (several times, IIRC) and it may have become a minor meme of some sort. The person was the actor Tim Curry and the movie was Clue (film). I am not aware of the line being used prior to that film, and it quite likely became a minor catch phrase after it. --Jayron32 00:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)