Miscellaneous desk
< April 3	<< Mar | April | May >>	April 5 >

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.

So I have a gold ring. It has a maker's mark (VET), a made-in-Finland mark (crown in a heart), "18k", the year thing (either C4 or G4), and then there's what looks like a man wearing a helmet holding a bow or something. Does anyone know what this last mark is, or where I can find a listing of Finnish gold marks that might have it on there? 174.20.95.124 (talk) 01:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That should be the Assay office's mark. Zoonoses (talk) 04:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked that up, and that's the correct name for the crown in a heart that I called the "made in Finland" mark, but not the little dude. 174.20.95.124 (talk) 04:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This file[1] (scroll down to page 21) gives only 3 location marks - Helsinki, Hemeelinna and Ylamaa, but none feature your little dude. Alansplodge (talk) 17:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be able to give us a picture of your little dude? That would be a great help Lemon martini (talk) 17:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, but my camera can't do it! It's too small. 174.20.95.124 (talk) 21:09, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! This is driving me bananas! I can't find a full list of marks anywhere but I now know that the Finnish for "location hallmark" is Paikkakuntaleima. Your turn! Alansplodge (talk) 17:54, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 174.20.95.124 (talk) 21:09, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is that you put a question (in English) on the discussion page of this [2] page, which I'm fairly certain is about hallmarking. Fingers crossed... Alansplodge (talk) 15:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[3] has a picture about halfway down of a Finnish hallmark including what appears to be a small dude of some sort.The caption suggests its a city mark for Vaasa,but the author appears uncertain about this.Does he resemble yours? Lemon martini (talk) 00:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do Kangaroos have a voice and do they communicate with each other? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.186.101.167 (talk) 06:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they do make sounds. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:53, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do they go 'boing boing' when running?--79.76.175.65 (talk) 22:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only in cartoons. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 03:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also in cartoons, male kangaroos might have pouches. But they are typically quiet other than the "boing-boing" sound, as Mel Blanc apparently never came up with a characterization. Maybe he couldn't decide if it should be aboriginal; or Aussie like Paul Hogan, or maybe Eric Idle doing the fake Aussie accent for "The Philosophers Song". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know of any particular company/organisation that I can pay to import beer for me? I'm looking to get a couple of crates of Augustiner Hell from Munchen. 86.3.61.125 (talk) 06:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look here[4]. Alansplodge (talk) 07:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fantastic! Thank you so much! 86.3.61.125 (talk) 07:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or here [5] Richard Avery (talk) 07:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

what is the average sex period of male and female in their lives?

means at what age a normal male/female can start to have sex and untill what age he/she can carryon to do so?

in short the question is what is the life time of sexual life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Household90 (talk • contribs) 09:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to be more specific. Taken generally, the answer could be the entire lifetime (some 75 average years), because in the most basic sense, people are capable of experiencing sexual pleasure more or less their entire lives;though some would argue that children are not developed enough to understand (or moreover consent to) it, few would deny their capacity for such sensations.

If you mean sexual intercourse, specifically, you could roughly take the average age of adolescent onset (puberty) as the starting point, though that is biased towards sexual activity where impregnation is possible.

On the upper bound, people increasingly have sex late into their lives, though it declines due to health and fitness related conditions, spousal deaths, hormonal changes (less of them), and some cultural trends.

Frankly, you have to specify which culture you're asking about, because sexual behavior is often culturally influenced. Barring that, I'd hazard a guess at between 15 and 65 (puberty plus a few years, avg life expectancy minus a few years), so that's 50 years of sex. Potentially. If you're lucky. My hunch is that this number is gradually increasing as people live longer and possibly delay the age of first sexual encounter (non-casual, if you will).

A more interesting question may be, of those 50 available years, what is the average number of years a person has sex at least once per year. Either way, I caution you that the wikipedia miscellaneous reference help desk has not been known to increase this statistic).206.53.157.85 (talk) 11:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speak for yourself! :) The question is asking for statistical data which may or may not be available. But one thing to consider is that Tony Randall fathered children when he was in his high 70s. And don't forget the old saying, "Just because there's snow on the roof doesn't mean there isn't fire in the furnace!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:39, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some statistics on frequency this can be found here. (They are probably for the US in particular.) The same page also has statistics on age of first intercourse. This article discusses statistics relating to the elderly. --Mr.98 (talk) 19:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If by "sex" you mean penetrative intercourse involving the penis and vagina, the male sexual span would begin in puberty with the ability to get an erection. Some men are capable of performing sexually, including fathering children, well into their geriatric years, and the male sexual span ends only with death or when a man's physical health no longer permits erection and/or intercourse. A woman can receive penetration at any age, but her body won't truly be ready to prepare itself for intercourse until she hits puberty. After menopause, she may have difficulties with lubrication and such, just as an older man may have trouble getting and maintaining an erection compared to the average younger man, but these difficulties are rarely severe enough to end a woman's active sexual life. In short: the ability to experience and enjoy genital sensation is present in infants and children, but only with puberty does the body become able to prepare itself to perform sexual intercourse. In older adults, the biological mechanisms attendant to sexual intercourse may be somewhat slowed down, and desire may diminish, but there is no definite cut-off point at which an adult human can no longer perform sexually simply on account of his or her age.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.119.240 (talk) 06:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ability to get an erection begins before birth, not at puberty. DuncanHill (talk) 15:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - you're right; it's the production of semen that marks male puberty. However, just because a small boy can get an erection doesn't mean he's likely to get one in the same circumstances that would arouse a grown man. Unlike a woman, a man generally can't perform intercourse unless he's aroused, so the ability to perform intercourse would more or less begin with the ability to get an erection in response to a sexual stimulus. 71.104.119.240 (talk) 06:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A recent edition of the BBC Radio 4 programme Thinking Allowed (31 March 2010) covered the issue of sexuality in senior years, including in nursing homes. [6] BrainyBabe (talk) 23:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What can be the use of the following three tools [7] and [8]? Pictures in gallery are zoomable. 83.23.244.28 (talk) 15:15, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the 2nd pic (assuming you're not asking about the triangle), those look like they might be stakes for holding down a tent or tarp. The plastic handle might be to get a good grip to pull them out, and also so the whole thing doesn't get pounded into the ground. StuRat (talk) 15:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, they kind of look like leatherworking tools. I wonder where the OP got these items? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I got them from a baazar (flea market). 83.23.244.28 (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's a serious tool addiction, if you see them for sale and must have them, even though you have no idea what they are for. StuRat (talk) 16:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with StuRat in that anyone buying tools without knowing their purpose and then subsequently asking that purpose on Wikipedia should definitely make a money contribution to the Wiki Foundation - (I include myself in that remark). However, the First pics above are clearly paint-mixing tools. The one with the wiggly working end is fine for its purpose but not nearly as much as the one with the 4 bladed rotor which also has a semi-erect penis higher up the shaft that is obviously for hanging it over the paint tin rim when not in use. Very clever. Me? I use an old wooden spoon that I insert into the chuck of a re-chargeable electric drill and spin it in the paint until I get the desired consistency. The other pic. shows a pointy ended spike that is intended for staking out perimeter lines such as might be used when marking out flower beds or vegetable plots - and yes - it could be used for staking out a tent. Wisdom comes with age - like wisdom teeth. 92.30.13.64 (talk) 18:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The yellow handled tool could be for shaping clay. Are there any manufacture's marks? There is something on the wood handled tool, but I can't make it out. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 19:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the yellow-handled one would be for removing eggs (Easter eggs) from a food-coloring dye solution. Bus stop (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"This Old House" has a funny section on identifying unknown tools. From the This Old House article:

"There is also a feature entitled "What Is It?" in which three of the four regulars try to guess what an unusual tool is used for. The adjudicating fourth regular reveals the actual use." Bus stop (talk) 19:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tool with the brown handle (4 bladed rotor with semi-erection) could also have been designed as a type of honey dipper. Maybe this particular type is called something else in English or maybe it's rarer in English speaking countries, for if you do a google image search of "honey dipper" you only get results for a differently shaped one. If you google image search "Honignehmer" ("honey dipper" in German) you will see more examples of the four-bladed type. ---Sluzzelin talk 15:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We do have honey-dippers in the English-speaking world, but we also have an intriguing and versatile implement known as a "spoon", which does everything a honey-dipper does and much, much more. DuncanHill (talk) 15:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. What I meant was that that particular design might be rarer than the wooden coiled variety. Surely we don't want to fork this off into a sticky discussion on the pros and cons of honey dipping! ---Sluzzelin talk 15:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, forks are less than ideal for serving honey. DuncanHill (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

a tool is a functional object, not an ideal type. if you don't know what function a tool was designed to do, then the tool pretty much does whatever you decide it does. they might, for instance, make excellent back-scratchers. --Ludwigs2 16:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Though the tool is somewhat constrained by intentionality. Sure, you might want to use a hammer as a screw driver—but it doesn't mean it will function in that way! --Mr.98 (talk) 01:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not, the proper tool for that would be a knife, nail file, or fingernail. :-) StuRat (talk)

The two tools with plastic handles and bent wire at the end look like they are made to lift something which has a ball above a smaller neck at the top, like a lid of a crucible or a scale weight (crucibles get too hot to touch, fingerprints significantly affect scale weights). The Wood handled tool with the plus shaped cross section at the end would not make sense as a paint stirrer. A throw-away wooden paint stirrer would to a better job and not require tedious cleaning. There would likely be some paint stains on it if it were a paint-mixer. It would be useful for pushing something out of a mold of the same plus shape or for making an indentation of that shape in something soft like clay. If it were for indenting something hard like leather or wood, it would likely have a metal handle for striking. It has been used a lot, shown by the plating being worn off, perhaps by the user's thumb. Edison (talk) 15:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The yellow handle on one of the items to me suggests use around the kitchen, not the garage or a man's workplace, unless visibility is a consideration. The spike-type objects may be crocheting or knitting needles. Or they may be used to mark where a ball has landed in some type of outdoor game, such as bocce. One item certainly bears all the superficial characteristics of paint mixing device, but I don't think it's that. Bus stop (talk) 02:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What does 83.23.244.28 think these tools can be for? Closer examination might have yielded some clues. Bus stop (talk) 23:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]