Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous: Difference between revisions

Line 340: Line 340:

* It’s a very big question, but some of the most important differences in a nutshell. I’ll link the articles where you can read up on these in more detail:

* It’s a very big question, but some of the most important differences in a nutshell. I’ll link the articles where you can read up on these in more detail:

** Singapore is a very diverse multicultural society: Chinese people make up a large majority of the population, with Malay and Indian minorities, and English (or [[Singlish]]) is the main language. Malaysia is majority Malay with smaller Chinese and Indian communities, and [[Bahasa Malaysia]] is the main language (a standard form of the various Malay languages). See [[Demographics of Malaysia]] and [[Demographics of Singapore]].

** Singapore is a very diverse multicultural society: Chinese people make up a large majority of the population, with Malay and Indian minorities, and English (or [[Singlish]]) is the main language. Malaysia is majority Malay with smaller Chinese and Indian communities, and [[Bahasa Malaysia]] is the main language (a standard form of the various Malay languages). See [[Demographics of Malaysia]] and [[Demographics of Singapore]].

** Singapore has an extremely high GDP (by some [[purchasing power parity|PPP]], the highest GDP per capita in the world), is one of the [[Four Asian Tigers]], and is considered a [[developed country]]. Malaysia’s GDP is a lot lower (only 15% of Singapore’s GDP per capita measured nominally, or 30% measured by PPP), and is considered a [[middle-income economy]]. (This isn’t a completely fair comparison, since there is a huge difference between [[Kuala Lumpur]] and rural Malaysia. KL is economically and socially a lot more like Singapore). See [[Economy of Malaysia]] and [[Economy of Singapore]]

** Singapore has an extremely high GDP (by some [[purchasing power parity|PPP]], the highest GDP per capita in the world), is one of the [[Four Asian Tigers]], and is considered a [[developed country]]. Malaysia’s GDP is a lot lower (only 15% of Singapore’s GDP per capita measured nominally, or 30% measured by PPP), and is considered a [[middle-income economy]]. (This isn’t a completely fair comparison, since there is a huge difference between [[Kuala Lumpur]] and rural Malaysia. KL is economically and socially a lot more like Singapore). See [[Economy of Malaysia]] and [[Economy of Singapore]]

** Singapore is effectively a [[one-party state]] – the [[People’s Action Party]] has never had any serious competition. Malaysia now has a more open political landscape, but until recently it was dominated by one party, the [[Barisan Nasional]], whose power was only broken in the 2000s. Both rank as [[flawed democracies]] with some human rights protections but also authoritarian regimes that threaten various freedoms. See [[Politics of Malaysia]] and [[Politics of Singapore]].

** Singapore is effectively a [[one-party state]] – the [[People’s Action Party]] has never had any serious competition. Malaysia now has a more open political landscape, but until recently it was dominated by one party, the [[Barisan Nasional]], whose power was only broken in the 2000s. Both rank as [[flawed democracies]] with some human rights protections but also authoritarian regimes that threaten various freedoms. See [[Politics of Malaysia]] and [[Politics of Singapore]].

** Buddhism is the largest religion in Singapore, but there are also large minorities of basically every major faith (and no faith), and the country has almost total religious freedom. Islam is the largest religion in Malaysia (except [[Sarawak]], which is majority Christian), and Malaysia is officially a [[Sunni]] Islamic state. Religious liberty for ethnic minorities (but not Malays) is still protected to an extent, but it is – for example – a crime to renounce Islam if you are a Muslim, and the country has both civil and [[Sharia]] court systems. See [[Religion in Malaysia]] and [[Religion in Singapore]]. [[User:Smurrayinchester|Smurrayinchester]] 10:03, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

** Buddhism is the largest religion in Singapore, but there are also large minorities of basically every major faith (and no faith), and the country has almost total religious freedom. Islam is the largest religion in Malaysia (except [[Sarawak]], which is majority Christian), and Malaysia is officially a [[Sunni]] Islamic state. Religious liberty for ethnic minorities (but not Malays) is still protected to an extent, but it is – for example – a crime to renounce Islam if you are a Muslim, and the country has both civil and [[Sharia]] court systems. See [[Religion in Malaysia]] and [[Religion in Singapore]]. [[User:Smurrayinchester|Smurrayinchester]] 10:03, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikimedia Project Page

I have a question: Why do some members of the online urbanist community believe that buses in general are polluting vehicles, at this point that any flaw regarding buses would make them consider trams to be a superior option? Many official, and even secondary sources from government agencies around the world cite that buses are also a clean mode of transit. 12:26 31 December 2025 User:KobaltKolibri (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:30, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that kind of question is best posited to the community you’re talking about? This page is not an “online urbanist community”. If we’re sticking to anecdotes: Urbanists that I follow tend to point out that a tram moves more people per hour over the same route as compared to a bus, but that depends on the capacity of the tram too. In my opinion buses definitely have strengths where they outshine in certain areas compared to trams – being more flexible, for example. But “a clean mode of transport” still gives room for some forms to be “less clean” than others and online communities are opinionated based on their own experiences.

Potentially helpful sources: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0967070X02000094 and https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1077291X2201760X

Potentially relevant article: Passengers per hour per direction

I’ve lived in Nottingham (buses+trams), London (metro+buses, not really trams), and other cities (just buses) and the cities that invest in metros OR trams tend to have better bus services too (and at least one source says spending correlates) – but electric buses usually have to carry their own batteries, whereas trams can generally get their energy from overhead cables. Komonzia (talk) 07:04, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diesel engines are still a very common power source for city buses, but several cities around the world operate fuel cell buses that use hydrogen as their power source, with zero pollution. Statements about “buses in general” are not particularly meaningful.  ​‑‑Lambiam 08:26, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coventry has a fleet of electric, zero emissions buses.[1]. Compared to 40 people driving their own cars, buses could be described as a ‘cleaner’ option. MinorProphet (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know there are other sustainable fuel mode options that exists, but why online urbanists tend to favour trams over buses? The reason why I said “official sources from government agencies” because the sources seem to contrast from the urbanists’ opinions on social media. User:KobaltKolibri (talk) 09:48, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of being repetitive, we’re not online urbanists, nor can we read their minds. And we don’t forward questions to online urbanists. Please treat this page a bit like a library reference desk. Komonzia (talk) 10:15, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s because trams are electric, and therefore less polluting of a city’s atmosphere than most buses, which use an internal combustion engine. Less pollution = better health for all, in theory. Can you provide a link to any of these “official sources from government agencies”? What is your preferred mode of urban transport? Installing a new urban tram service requires considerable planning and resources, and city councils may be keen to reduce short- and medium-term costs. Buses are the easy option. MinorProphet (talk) 11:33, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Traditionally and typically, transit buses are diesel-fueled, and so contribute somewhat to local air pollution. Trams are almost always electrically powered, with essentially-zero local emissions, and are ultimately as ‘clean’ as the electricity mix that supplies them. That said, there are a lot of ‘ifs’, ‘ands’, ‘buts’, and other caveats and variations.

A bus with forty people on board is always going to be much more fuel efficient and lower carbon emission – per person – than forty individual private automobiles. Older or poorly-maintained diesel engines may have unusually high particulate emissions (the fine particles of diesel ‘soot’), though, even compared to those forty private cars.

Over the last quarter century diesel engines have gotten cleaner, and newer technologies have started to roll out to further reduce emissions. Hybrid diesel-electric buses and – more recently – full battery-electric buses have started to appear.

And then there are trolleybuses, which blur the line a bit between buses and trams. These electric buses powered by overhead wires have been used for decades. More recently, some systems are adopting overhead charging of in-motion battery buses, ameliorating the big limitation on battery-electric vehicles: the need to drop out of service to recharge.

As an aside, I’ll note that in some cases the major appeal of tram and light rail systems are infrastructure features that tend to be implemented alongside them, rather than things that are intrinsic to the vehicles themselves. There’s an image of buses as having to be stuck in mixed traffic, whereas rail-based systems are imagined as enjoying signal priority and dedicated rights-of-way, or even full grade separation. As a matter of politics, building rail infrastructure is expensive, and represents a commitment by a government or transit agency. It’s much easier to redraw a bus route than to move a tram line. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:57, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“There’s an image of buses as having to be stuck in mixed traffic” … Have you never come across a bus lane? We even have them in Brexit Britain. I just remember trolleybuses in Reading in the late ’60s. <grabs Zimmer frame for comfort> MinorProphet (talk) 16:09, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, there’s an image, rather than a reality. There are a surprising number of places in the world where bus lanes would be tremendously valuable, but are limited or absent due to lack of political will (and/or fear of entrenched interests.) The auto lobby in the United States and Canada is quite potent, and objects vociferously to any proposal that might take away one of ‘their’ lanes (or even one of ‘their’ rows of on-street parking) for public transit vehicles or cycling infrastructure. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:44, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The politics point is kind of why I would raise eyebrows (and want to look) at the ‘official government sources’, which are usually feasibility studies for a particular implementation of tram/bus rather than general. I can only think that trams were seen as ‘dirtier’ because of the construction and decommissioning cost, not the actual use – unless the trams in question were very short ones. Even electric buses have to carry their own batteries whereas trolleybuses and trams have the energy supply offloaded and don’t have to expend energy (work) to carry it. Komonzia (talk) 14:10, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some cities in the UK use buses that run on biofuel derived from sewage and food waste. This study from Bristol claims “up to 97% reduction in dangerous particulate emissions… 80 – 90 % reduction in nitrogen oxides (NOx)” and that “CO2 emissions are 20 to 30% lower than from diesel vehicles”. Alansplodge (talk) 14:25, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could South Africa be part of Western world, and why though? I have seen that some of these sources consider South Africa as part of the West, while others, such as Clash of Cultures, regard South Africa as part of Africa civilization, as well as rest of Africa. That same goes with Latin America too. If you consider South Africa to be a Western country, will these apply to Russia, Singapore, and Oceania and Pacific Islands as Western? (as a temporary account|he/him) ~2025-43569-93 (talk) 16:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It will vary based on the author’s definitions. —User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 19:02, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was historically an economy denominated (and arguably still influenced) by a mostly Caucasian minority (White South Africans). That may be why it was sometimes historically seen as part of the West (similar to Australia) depending on who you ask and when. The article you linked covers South Africa as a special case (based purely on the author’s thesis which was written 2 years after the nominal end of Apartheid). At the start of the Cold War (see First World), it was more under the sway of the US than the Soviet Union. Those allegiences in the Cold War are what primarily defined “East vs West” for a time (based on Orient vs Occident is older). I believe modern sources would consider it an LEDC and part of the Global South, and as it is also not part of the OECD and instead joined BRICS, it doesn’t really fit into the West politically although it is still influenced by it.

One more relevant article: Westernization — this is a significant one because most ethnic groups in South Africa could not be considered culturally “Westernized” at the exact point Apartheid ended (though that is also changing as the country rapidly urbanises and the vague definition of ‘Western culture’ changes). Komonzia (talk) 05:58, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See also our article Western world and the various definitions discussed there.  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:52, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of months ago, a user asked if there were any valid sources about the US invading Venezuela. (See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2025 October 25.) As of now, the answer appears to be “Yes”. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:27, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• The user also asked if Trump intended to use the US military bases un Colombia, something that our article does not seem to cover. –~2025-34611-58

WP:NOTFORUM. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have question. Why it seems that Wikipedia is biased and its operation depends on person by person? What I meant to say is that take an example. Two experienced editor seems to have different opinion on same subject, one believes Draft are not deleted before 6 month no matter how dump-like or garbage looking they are, while other writes that it will be deleted very soon because it lacks any source. Why? Is there two teams in Wikipedia, because if the person claims that it will be deleted then he knows already that a person from his team WILL delete it. What is this and why there is no single guideline on Wiki that all must follow?

PS. Here is the example’s real evidence: see reliable source topic and this.
Team is just a metaphor for different opinions or shared ideologies. [Apparently posted by User:Orwell reader at 11:26, 4 January 2026. MinorProphet (talk) 14:20, 4 January 2026 (UTC)][reply]

If you are Orwell reader, welcome. Please always sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~ . I’m sorry, but the Reference Desks are for factual questions, not for how Wikipedia works. Learning how to use Wikipedia takes a very long time and a great deal of patience. According to your talk page, you’ve only been here a week. I’m sure others will explain further and point you in the right direction. WP:DNB applies. MinorProphet (talk) 14:20, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To add to MinorProphet’s response, the best place to ask questions like this about how Wikipedia works is the Teahouse. You can also ask at the Help Desk, but the people who answer questions there are less inclined to be patient and will generally assume that the person asking questions already has more baseline knowledge of how Wikipedia works. — Avocado (talk) 14:42, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that, and thanks for right direction. Orwell’sreader (talk) 02:11, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Orwell reader: Dude, chill. If you are in a hurry, forget it, Someone with less patience will throw their interpretation of “The Rules” at you, and you will retire, hurt. There is no “team”, only 50,000 individual editors with their own idea of “what should be done”, and I would rather herd cats for free than organise even five wiki-editors to do anything, even get together for a drink. Have you even read 10% of the articles in the welcome message on your talk page? Happy editing. MinorProphet (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting example of this just happened on another topic. I like to add wikidata infobox templates to art articles. Well, it turns out that there are several editors who do not like this. One of them finally explained to me their position and I found it quite enlightening, as I had never considered their POV before. While the OP speaks to the beauty and simplicity of a single guideline to rule them all, I’ve discovered quite the opposite. It’s from all the different versions and approaches to the rules that we get slightly closer to greater understanding, not as OP suggests, by enforcing a singular understanding and approach. Without nuance, everything is reduced to black and white, and that’s not reality. Viriditas (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You are actually true tbh, if Larry Sanger had to say that Wikipedia is NOT what it was SUPPOSED to then……..because I am just a editor who have not read even 10% of his Welcome page, is not that true? Orwell’sreader (talk) 02:33, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to point out that MinorProphet is right regarding the yin and yang. I had meant to type “Without nuance, everything is reduced to black or white, and that’s not reality”, but it somehow came out and. In other words, the reality is that everything is black and white, which was my point. Viriditas (talk) 22:07, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that Sanger is an idiot, whatever he says is worth less than housefly droppings. —User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:00, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MinorProphet You are not helpful. Don’t lecture me how training works. You might have problems cleaning you buttocks in infancy but right now you can, does that rings any bell? Second thing you are not here to just organise Wikipedia without criticising it. I just had came from complaining how gori-sh ITN was, so if you want to be smartass, shut up. Orwell’sreader (talk) 02:10, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

5… 4… 3… MinorProphet (talk) 02:24, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Counting to down to trolling blastoff? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:24, 5 January 2026 (UTC) [reply]

Mmmm. Account less than 4 weeks old, a lot of contentious editing on it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} ~2025-31359-08 (talk) 22:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen your face in mirror? ~2026-10226-5 (talk) 23:22, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Says the drive-by to a long-established user. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:36, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioning Larry Sanger with a “gotcha” tone displays ignorance of the fact that Sanger has repeatedly been spectacularly wrong about online encyclopedias for well over 23 years now. He is, however, very good at holding grudges. Cullen328 (talk) 09:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Someone calling themselves ‘Orwell reader’ is advocating obedience to Big (Co-)Founder? That’s an interesting take… AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:06, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

hmmmm….I see where you are coming from, but let me tell you, its not that easy. If I would advocate him thats because he did not find something like this or he is this (both of which I personally dislike) rather he is like “Prometheus” who gave us “fire to burn” corporates (Its because of Wiki that many things are available to everyone), isn’t that correct? Wikipedia and decentralized protocols are tools for everyone, not products for a CEO. By your logic, would an Orwell reader be a hypocrite for supporting Julian just because he founded a large organization? There’s a clear difference between building a cage and building a key. Orwell’sreader (talk) 02:44, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comparing him to BB, would you after watching this ? I think he is pretty much 180 degree of what you were comparing him to. I doubt your knowledge now, tbh. Orwell’sreader (talk) 03:00, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I heard a complaint that Wikipedia’s neutral-point-of-view policy stopped working, but nothing concrete about how his vision of encyclopedic neutrality differs from that of Wikipedia. Elon Musk bought Twitter to make it a platform for free speech and wants to go after Wikipedia for having a woke bias. Do you see him as a hero in the fight against BB for his forceful support of unbiased free speech?  ​‑‑Lambiam 10:11, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I can see no point in continuing this discussion. Nothing concrete has been provided beyond vague allusions to Larry Sanger’s personal opinions of Wikipedia. Given Sanger’s past history, and his repeated failed attempts to create alternatives to the project (all of which seem to ultimately fail for the same reason – lack of interest from potential contributors), I see no reason to see him as any sort of ‘expert’ on anything of consequence, and his personal political views (which are well documented to have moved considerably to the right since the days when he had any influence on Wikipedia) are of no more relevance than anyone else’s. Having repeatedly failed to create alternatives to Wikipedia more in suiting to his own personal preferences, Sanger’s ‘thesis’ amounts to more of the same – to create something which would then be Wikipedia in name only. Given that it his proposals (in as much as they actually make sense – some are outright contradictory) are in many places fundamentally contrary to the consensus policies evolved over decades by the thousands of contributors to this global project, the only result of this coup (where it to succeed, which it clearly can’t) would be an immediate loss of contributors – quite possibly to a fork (probably no longer US-based, given the political climate) where exiting consensus policy could be maintained.

Any meaningful discussion of ‘bias’ on Wikipedia needs to be specific: ‘bias’ compared to what? Measured how? Demonstrated where? Everyone has ‘biases’: some good (I’m biased against boiling kittens for entertainment), some bad (As much as I try to rectify it, I was raised in a society at a time where e.g. racism, sexism and homophobia were norms, and such deep-seated structural biases are very difficult to eradicate entirely). Wikipedia is built around pro-knowledge ‘bias’ (clearly not everyone seems to think that making knowledge freely available is a good thing), and around a ‘bias’ to giving weight to subject-matter experts – academics in particular. Beyond that, in the least surprising result ever, it’s ‘biases’ tend to skew towards the more general ‘biases’ of its contributor demographic. In as much as this is an issue, it can only be rectified by broadening the demographic. Not by screaming ‘bias’, representing Sanger’s ‘thesis’ as some sort of master-plan, and failing to offer anything more meaningful to build a discussion around. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:14, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting way of NOT continuing a discussion. — Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:17, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We all know that most of the technology and culture have been invented and developed in United States of America, Europe, and in China and Japan. But, could any of you list the things that are invented in Philippines? I would like to appreciate that. ~2026-92091 (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The karaoke machine, arguably. See Karaoke#Roberto del Rosario. Then there’s Dado Banatao (the microchip) and Gregorio Y. Zara (the videophone). —Viennese Waltz 13:26, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WHAAOE. List of Filipino inventions and discoveries — Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 16:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the list is a lot larger than that. I’ve noticed many Filipino engineers. Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, can you explain the difference between shopping malls and outlet centers in terms of sales and design? Thank you. ~2026-10251-8 (talk) 22:53, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regular malls are typically fancy-schmancy to some extent, while outlet malls are typically no-frills kinds of things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baseball Bugs (talk • contribs) 22:58, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m surprised that strip malls (which tend to be lower-end, sometimes even rather scruffy) and other non-linear shared-parking lot shopping centers aren’t considered a subset of shopping malls. Our shopping malls article addresses only indoor shopping malls. — Avocado (talk) 11:57, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The stores in shopping malls are typically retailers, purchasing the goods from wholesalers or from the manufacturers themselves and reselling them to the shoppers. In contrast, a true outlet store is run by the manufacturer, cutting out any middlemen, so the wares in the store have not been bought. They may not be of the same quality as products of the manufacturer sold through retail; see the article Outlet store. (Some retail stores may masquerade as outlet stores because of the perceived notion of prices being reduced. Conversely, some stores that fit the definition of “outlet store” present themselves like a fancy-schmancy store.)  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:15, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am familiar with several shopping malls where I live (Northern California) that consist of a mix of conventional retail stores and movie theaters and restaurants, and also factory outlets run by manufacturers. Cullen328 (talk) 09:20, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That’s broadly my understanding. I’m not sure of the reason (probably space), outlet stores are more usually configured into strip malls (i.e. retail areas that share a parking lot) than shopping malls (i.e. retail areas that also share an interior area that joins the stores together). But a given shopping mall can certainly have some outlet stores in it. Just pointing out that shopping mall and outlet center aren’t necessarily distinct kinds of things: one describes the physical shopping space and the other describes a particular procurement chain. Matt Deres (talk) 13:46, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess that ease of access to your vehicle to stash large scale or large quantity purchases before proceeding to the next store would be more of a priority for outlet shopping than for general mall shopping. —User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:20, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This may apply for merchandise for which it makes sense for consumers to buy in bulk. Many outlet stores specialize in clothing, particularly fashion, and shoppers in these stores will rarely purchase more than they can easily carry.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:37, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn’t match my observations. Everyone I know that bought clothes at outlet malls bought piles and piles at once from each store. —User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:25, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If someone kills many people in different prefectures, in what jurisdiction he/she must be prosecuted: in that of the address residence or in that of the official arrest?

Wouldn’t this question equally apply if they killed one person? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:31, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, then in what jurisdiction? ~2026-11635-6 (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not simply where the crime was committed?  ​‑‑Lambiam 23:31, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But if the culprit is a serial killer who murdered many people in diffetent prefectures of Japan, he/she was prosecuted by the court in his/her place of residence or by the court where he/she was arrested? ~2026-12027-2 (talk) 00:05, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you answer me? ~2026-12990-6 (talk) 07:24, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are not seeking legal advice for a string of murders you are planning to commit.

The murders may have been committed by a contract killer whose residence is in Argentina and was arrested there after an Interpol notice went out requesting their arrest and extradition. Obviously, the locations of residence and arrest do not play a role in determining the jurisdiction of the prosecution. This is just common sense.

While not knowing any particulars of the criminal justice system of Japan, if the system is similar to what is common elsewhere, prosecution may proceed at any of the courts that have jurisdiction over at least one of the murders, while other cases can be transferred by decisions of the courts that would otherwise have had jurisdiction. Alternatively, the perpetrator may have to stand trial several times. The choice is usually a matter of convenience.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:25, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not a criminal. I’m only curious about that question. Thanks for the answer. ~2026-13255-6 (talk) 10:44, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One approach would be to look at real life cases where this has happened. Category: Executed Japanese serial killers has some who committed crimes in multiple prefectures, and thus presumably across multiple jurisdictions. I’ve had a quick look, and it’s hard to distinguish any clear pattern. A few examples:

• Ryuun Daimai, picturesquely known as “The Nun Slayer”, committed crimes in several prefectures, was arrested in Fukuoka, but tried in the Tokyo District Court.
• Sokichi Furutani committed murders across west Japan, was arrested in Kyoto prefecture, but tried in Kobe, Hyogo prefecture.
• Kiyotaka Katsuta, believed by some to be Japan’s most prolific serial killer and who committed murders across five prefectures, was arrested, tried, and executed in Nagoya, Aichi (one of the prefectures he offended in).
• Yoshio Kodaira killed 8 in Tokyo and Tochigi prefectures; not clear where he was tried, but executed in a 3rd prefecture (Sendai, Miyagi prefecture).

~2026-16453-1 (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(I’m not a climber and never will be.) I know that some areas are off limits for religious, spiritual, or political reasons and those are not what I’m asking about.

There are usually one or more well-known routes to the top of a well-known mountain or rock formation. But are there many many “non-routes” that clearly no one is ever going to try? Or is the number of “non-routes” to the top of everything significantly shrinking as people get around to climbing every single way up? TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:20, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To a mathematician, the set of routes is uncountably infinite; but seriously, how much similarity makes two routes the same? —Antonissimo (talk) 22:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TooManyFingers, I am (or was) a mountaineer though never a particularly good one. The usual pattern is that an interesting mountain is first climbed by the easiest route, and that subsequently, skilled climbers attempt more and more challenging routes. The very famous El Capitan in Yosemite Valley is a cliff face, not really a mountain. There are several ways for fit hikers to get to the top with no rock climbing skills. But the first climb of the sheer cliff face in 1958 took 45 days of active climbing with repeated retreats to the base of the climb, and was a major accomplishment at that time. More information is at The Nose (El Capitan). Since then, over 100 routes have been established on El Capitan and it is sometimes climbed in a single day. Few other mountains or rock formations have that many routes but proliferation of new routes is an inherent part of the sport. Cullen328 (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Other than looks, how are rally flaps judged for quality? Is there a thickness that is preferred? Material? Stiffness? Overhang? Mounting brackets? I’ve been looking at them and all I see is the looks, not any type of performance quality and when I look at websites that sell them, they only discuss appearance and size, nothing about quality. ~2025-42594-02 (talk) 15:35, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rally flaps are often installed just for looks, by people who aren’t very interested in how well they’ll actually work. Manufacturers, seeing the money opportunity, are quite willing to provide ones that look good but aren’t necessarily designed to work the best. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 15:56, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you do want “the truth about rally flaps”, see if you can find online discussions by a group of people who actually just count on the flaps to do what they’re meant to do, rather than people who want a certain look. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Finding online discussion groups is difficult. Not only does it have to be a proper forum, it has to be readable (not microscopic text, medium gray on dark gray background), and it has to be accepting (not auto-deleting all new questions for breaking some arbitrary content rule). ~2025-42594-02 (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many browsers have some kind of “reader mode” you can activate, which temporarily turns off the colors and the font sizes to show it normally, allowing you to actually see. Check if yours does. (Or, in desperation, copy and paste into your word processor to read it.) TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 16:50, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What are rally flaps? DuncanHill (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I turned the red link blue. Viriditas (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I added the term to the article, but it probably needs a citation. Matt Deres (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Continued here as original post is archived)
I am still looking for answers as to the following things:

1. Why are mascot suits so expensive and unaffordable for ordinary folks like myself?
2. Where can I find more affordable costumes that cover my face?
3. What is that shiny material that is used in the costumes in the video clips I linked, and why can’t I seem to find costumes made of it for sale anywhere I looked?

Thank you, I appreciate the very minuscule amounts of info given to me in my original post. I hope to receive more information here. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 18:26, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The aforementioned videos are reproduced here:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=W17ozpXuC-0?si=4-QI14um0mfRC5LC&t=9m Video 1

https://youtube.com/watch?v=E88myPE8AhM?si=RiilibgpBcNa3CcN&t=25s Video 2 ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The original post is still visible here, and the answers still stand. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It will be archived in a couple of hours. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 22:16, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why don’t you take the advice given to you in the original section? How badly do you want this information? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:14, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do think it would give me peace of mind. I’m just not sure where to start looking. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

1. There are good reasons for the pricing. Mascot suits are either durable or cheap. They are either safe or cheap. They are either suitable for continuous, prolonged, frequent use, or they are cheap. They are either carefully fitted to the individual customer, or they are cheap. 2. Search the web, just like you’re hoping one of us will do for you. 3. Metallic spandex and “stretch holographic vinyl”. –jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 23:54, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fair points, but more elaboration would be appreciated. Especially for question 1. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That’s the best you’re going to get; there aren’t any specialists in custom costume design here, most likely. –jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 00:33, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Where my I find such specialists? ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 00:44, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I sent an enquiry to a costume maker with the following text:
Dear [Company Name / Costume Maker],

I hope you are doing well. I am writing with great respect and genuine curiosity regarding the pricing of your mascot costumes, and I would be very grateful if you could help me understand a few things.
I should mention upfront that I have no background in costume-making, materials, or manufacturing processes, so I may be missing important details without realising it. Over the past several weeks, I have been searching extensively for a mascot costume within my budget of £150–£750, but I have been unable to find anything suitable. I have also looked for second‑hand options, yet I haven’t been able to locate any, and I have had particular difficulty finding costumes made with shiny spandex‑type materials, which is something I’m very interested in.
Because of this, I am feeling quite frustrated and confused. I have noticed that most mascot costumes—both from your company and others—are priced far above what I expected, and I would sincerely appreciate a detailed explanation of why the costs are so high. I am not questioning the value of your work; rather, I am trying to understand the factors involved, especially since so many costumes appear to be made to order. As someone unfamiliar with the process, I would be grateful for any insight you can provide about materials, labour, construction, or anything else that contributes to the final price.
This enquiry is very important to me, and I would be extremely thankful if you could treat it as a high‑priority request. I am eager to hear from you soon so I can better understand my options moving forward.
Thank you very much for your time, patience, and assistance. I truly appreciate it.
Warm regards,
[Your Name]

(1) There’s not much of a market for costumes, so prices are going to be high for limited runs. Even the Phillie Phanatic doesn’t need hundreds (does he?). Clarityfiend (talk) 00:37, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Clarityfiend I agree with the others. ~2026-14449-5 (talk) 01:21, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Am I right in thinking that some people take the piss with their prices? I suspect anyone who charges more than £3k does so. I would appreciate more resources for figuring this out. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean “take the piss with their prices”? Since you have no information whatsoever about the actual costs involved in designing and manufacturing these things, you’re just guessing that their price point is somehow unfair. But clearly the market supports the pricing — there are lots of different manufacturers, and if anyone thought they could do well making and selling them at bargain prices, they would jump in and undercut the competition. That they haven’t indicates either (a) there’s price-fixing going on in the mascot costume industry; or (b) it’s based on how much the things cost. –jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 23:17, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are bargain prices from China. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 23:40, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When I say “take the piss”, I mean being expensive on purpose due to general assholery or similar. And price fixing. ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 23:41, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to mention at this point that I like the idea of a mascot costume, as I’m very sensitive about my appearance and I’d rather have my face covered up if I’m wearing a costume. I also don’t understand the pricing of animal suits (not Furry suits). ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does Philippines have an effective transportation system, compared to Singapore, Japan, and Taiwan? Is this kind of transportation system developed enough? ~2026-10951-8 (talk) 00:38, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-10951-8 See Transportation in the Philippines. The answer to your question would highly depend which city you are referring to and which modes of transport you have in mind. Komonzia (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why are malls in Philippines larger, bigger, and more in popularity, than in United States, despite King Of Prussia, and Mall Of America? ~2026-10951-8 (talk) 00:41, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why are malls in Kuwait, Iran, and Malaysia larger than any of those? –jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:32, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also why are Malls in Scotland so basic in comparison to Mall of America? ~2025-38704-07 (talk) 01:58, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Malls in the United States (and presumably other countries) are on the decline because of the great success of online shopping, especially with Amazon.com. And when people want to shop at brick and mortar businesses these days, many prefer locally owned small shops in older small town business districts which have undergone a revival in recent years. Cullen328 (talk) 04:13, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What year was the Printing Press invented at, and what year did it enter in Europe? How did the Printing Press started the literary revolution, and how did it impact the literacy rate of the people? Does this invention still seem to be alive today, despite its legacy and origins surrounding this? ~2026-14449-5 (talk) 01:13, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do your own homework. –jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:18, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpgordon like what? ~2026-14449-5 (talk) 01:20, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You could start by reading the pages that you linked. —Antonissimo (talk) 02:54, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously, the OP linked “literary revolution” to the article Literary modernism, which is strange and even suspicious. The question whether “this invention” still seems to be alive today, “despite its legacy”, is also curious, to say the least.  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:14, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See also History of printing and Global spread of the printing press. Long is the way (talk) 15:26, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Should we list Animax on the examples of Network Decay, because of reasons? ~2026-14449-5 (talk) 01:46, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That question is best raised at Talk:Network Decay Talk:Channel drift. —Antonissimo (talk) 02:55, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me why there isn’t any information about Ethnicity Pay Gap Day in the UK which is 8th January.
If you google it you will find the information you need to add it. This is an important day that needs recognition.

Regards
Dianne Greyson
Founder #EthnicityPayGap Campaign ~2026-15661-2 (talk) 12:39, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In order for a subject to qualify for a Wikipedia article, it would require significant coverage in independent published reliable sources. From a quick Google search, I can’t really see any evidence of that. Unfortunately, you need the ‘recognition’ first, to justify an article. This is core Wikipedia policy, agreed by consensus over many years – without it, we’d be swamped with all sorts of articles, for good causes and not-so-good ones, and would end up looking like a collection of press releases (at best) rather than the online encyclopaedia we are aiming for. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:21, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/worklife/article/20240104-how-the-ethnicity-pay-gap-campaign-is-tackling-salary-inequity and https://www.forbes.com/sites/drnancydoyle/2024/01/08/ethnicity-pay-gap-day-2024-the-stark-consequences/ are a start but I think you need more sustained coverage in addition to these. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:29, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Question moved to “Rock it rock it tonight” on the Entertainment desk. — Komonzia (talk) 20:21, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why do some historical maps place east at the top rather than north? What linguistic, religious, astronomical, or cultural factors influenced this orientation, and how widespread was the practice across different civilizations (for example, in medieval European, Islamic, Chinese, or Mesoamerican cartography)? Additionally, when and why did north-up orientation become the dominant standard in modern mapmaking? PuzzlePieceGreen (talk) 02:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here’s an essay on the subject.[2] It seems that switching from the Holy Land at the top to north at the top was influenced by the discovery of the compass and magnetic north. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:44, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See also Map § Orientation, which ascribes the orientation of medieval maps towards the East to this being the presumed direction to the Garden of Eden.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:47, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambiam @Baseball Bugs Have you included Antarctica and Pacific Islands? PuzzlePieceGreen (talk) 08:12, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The European maps on which east is up do not include regions that had not yet been visited by European explorers, other than purely hypothetical representations of Terra incognita. No islands in the middle of the Pacific Ocean were known to the European cartographers before the voyages of Willem Schouten of 1615 to 1617 and Abel Tasman of 1642 and 1644. Antarctica was first sighted in 1820.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:35, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, can you explain the difference between bookstores and libraries? Thank you so much! ~2026-20139-4 (talk) 14:16, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no difference, to a thief. MinorProphet (talk) 15:09, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming this isn’t a troll: bookstores sell books. Libraries lend books. (Well, some libraries just collect or keep them and don’t lend.) — Avocado (talk) 15:11, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the OP’s first language isn’t English. In French the word for “bookstore” is librairie; in Italian, libreria; in Spanish, librería. He/she wouldn’t be the first to need the difference explained by a long way. —Antiquary (talk) 15:34, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fair. — Avocado (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But if the OP is misreading “libraries” as librairies, there is no difference requiring explanation. —Viennese Waltz 17:34, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And of course a bookstore is not the same as a book store. A library could be seen as an example of the latter. DuncanHill (talk) 22:46, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes libraries have sales of old books, so they become a temporary bookstore. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:20, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

See book at Etymonline: “Proto-Germanic *bōk(ō)-, from PIE *bokiz “beech” (source also of German Buch “book” Buche “beech;” see beech), the notion being of beechwood tablets on which runes were inscribed; but it may be from the tree itself (people still carve initials in them).” “Latin and Sanskrit also have words for “writing” that are based on tree names (“birch” and “ash,” respectively)”.” … “compare French livre “book,” from Latin librum, originally “the inner bark of trees” (see library). Learn something every day, eh? And then there are the bouquinistes – pour moi-même, à mon avis, selon moi: ça, c’est Paris. MinorProphet (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good saturday evening. Does anyone renember those dancing gorrila toys that played the Macarena and other latin songs? They were fairly popular in the early 00s. ~2025-40048-69 (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn’t the Macarena pretty much out of fashion by then? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:08, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they were more 90s than 00s. Here is a wiki article about them: https://chinafake.fandom.com/wiki/Magogo_Gorilla. Also, i think the Macarena is one of these songs that are universally popular and everyone knows them. ~2025-40048-69 (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be confused with Magilla Gorilla. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:41, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This lead section of 2020s reads Cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin and NFTs, have also increased in popularity. and Several popular social media applications launched, such as Threads, BeReal, Clubhouse, Bluesky, Gettr, and Truth Social, continuing advances in digital technology.

I wanted to know that those consider to be defining moments of the 2020s. But are they considered to be trending as of 2020s? For the advancement, are NFTs still relevant as of 2026? Additionally, what are other social media platforms launched in this decade? ~2026-21649-7 (talk) 05:03, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whether something that was a trend yesterday remains a trend today can be a judgement call; one person’s viral phenomenon is another person’s nothingburger. Wikipedia is not and does not seek to be a crystal ball; only when this decade is over and well can we take stock and see which things that seemed significant at the time left a lasting impression.

Looking at a graph of the historic exchange rate of bitcoin into USD, I can’t think of a clear and concise way to describe the mountainscape with its ups and downs since 2020. I do see a fair deal of volatility, which may indicate that to some investors this is a speculative fad.

In the section 2020s § Technology, I read: “The NFT market experienced rapid growth during 2020, with its value tripling to US$250 million.” But also: “A report in September 2023 concluded that 95% of collected NFTs now possess zero market value”. So it appears to me that this was a short-lived trend.

I hadn’t even heard of half of these social media platforms, so I suppose these have not conquered the social media landscape by storm. Here is a comparison of three:

(I cannot vouch for the reliability of the sources.) If you want to compare other platforms, I suggest you just type “User statistics” + the name of the platform in the Google search box and see what comes up.  ​‑‑Lambiam 21:11, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(The numbers for Threads need some context, since it’s built into Instagram. The usage numbers for Threads appear to include a great many Instagram users who happen to engage with content posted via Threads. In June 2025, for example, Threads had 400 million “active users”, but only 115 million app users, and only 7 million web visits.) Smurrayinchester 08:46, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Now that we’re halfway through the decade, we should revise our guesses on what will be its defining features. NFTs in particular got a lot of noise in the early twenties, but have since (deservedly) vanished without trace. I don’t think they were ever really a cryptocurrency, but just something sold to people with more money than sense. They died a death soon after they arrived, probably not because we’re any more sensible than we were in 2020, but because we all have less money. Chuntuk (talk) 16:41, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Alaska not an independent country, instead of being a state of U.S.A? Why are there countries like Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea independent, but not Alaska? ~2026-23709-7 (talk) 04:38, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Countries and states are not part of nature. Their borders sometimes make sense in terms of natural features, but they often don’t. They are the result of politics, including the nicer parts of politics (accommodating each other’s needs and friendly negotiation) and its worst parts (oppression and war), and anything in between.

People want to live in good places, not bad places. In the past, and maybe still true, in some of the most remote desert areas where it would be very difficult for people to live, borders between countries were not really defined because no one was ever planning to go to that area anyway. Countries surrounding the remote desert had definite borders only in the areas where the land was fit to live on.

You can of course read more at the Alaska article, but there was a deal with Russia involving money and negotiations. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 07:01, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alaska was a Russian territory, which the USA purchased and made an American territory. It was granted statehood in 1959. American states are “sovereign”, but not “independent” except collectively as the USA. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:10, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-23709-7 Further to Japan – maybe you think those countries could have been part of the USA because the Japanese metropole was occupied by the USA after World War 2, but the political agenda at the time was not interested in adding more states. So only small parts of the Empire were added to US (and other Western) overseas collectivities/dependencies/etc (key examples being Northern Mariana Islands, Marshall Islands, etc). The Cold War played a part in both decisions (to not continue occupying Japan and also to keep some Pacific territories) — and ostensibly the US wanted to keep the Emperor’s legitimacy, and you can’t have monarchies that are also US states, per its constitution. Read more at Occupation of Japan and United States Army Military Government in Korea and Taiwan under Japanese rule § End of Japanese rule. Komonzia (talk) 12:05, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that before European settlement, Alaska did not exist as a coherent whole. It was just a vast and sparsely populated territory, with very different ethnic groups occupying areas very distant from one another. That was nothing at all like Korea or Japan which have had a common people and civilization for centuries. Xuxl (talk) 14:40, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaii had been a monarchy for almost a century, until it wasn’t (a circumstance in which American settlers – if not the USA per se, at least formally – played a major role). Then it was annexed by the USA, and eventually made a state. I wonder if Trump has an eye on history when irt comes to his designs on Greenland. — Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:05, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the decolonization period following WWII, many new states were formed artificially by the colonizer states granting independence to former colonies, shepherding the process of forming the governing structures. The US strongly support decolonization, and Alaska was a colony of the US at the time, so why was Alaska not decolonized and welcomed as a new state? Part of the answer is that the US was not entirely without self-interest in their promotion of decolonization elsewhere, but, more importantly, many colonies had strong independence movements that would form the backbone of the institutions of the state-to-be, while Alaska did not. It is dubious whether Alaska could have survived at the time as an economically independent entity. The vast oil and gas reserves of Prudhoe Bay were only discovered in the 1960s and then it still took decades before they started to produce oil. Alaskan gas was first exported (from another field, to Japan) in 1969.  ​‑‑Lambiam 14:50, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When is the term “geocaching” coined in? ~2026-23709-7 (talk) 04:39, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Geocaching appears to have begun in 2000. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:12, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It started in 2000 because that is when the U.S. government allowed more accurate GPS to be used by the public. Before that, GPS for the public was garbage and useless for geocaching. Without GPS, it was too difficult to do geocaching. But, this is strictly referring to the term “geocaching” and not the concept of leaving a treasure at a specific coordinate. That idea has been around for thousands of years – just under different names. ~2026-29536 (talk) 12:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That’s all very interesting, but it has nothing to do with the question asked, which was already answered. —Viennese Waltz 13:28, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No offense to Bugs, but I don’t think saying when “modern” geocaching “appears to have begun” answers the question of when the word was invented at all. ~2026-24892-0 (talk) 15:12, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To be clearer: While it is very possible that at some point in human history, some human made the verbal sounds “geocaching,” the use of it to refer to using GPS to find something hidden began in 2000 because that is when the technology for it to begin was available. This is one thing where we have a hard date, not a guess. It didn’t “appear” to begin in 2000. It began in 2000. ~2026-29536 (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More precisely, the first geocache ever was placed by Dave Ullmer on May 3, 2000, who, in his announcement, used the term “GPS stash”.^[6] Other terms used in the early days of geocaching were “geostash” and “geostashing”.^[7] But already two days later, on May 5, 2000, Matt Stum, disliking the term “stash”, suggested “geochache” and “geochaching” as replacements. These terms eventually caught on and crowded out “geostash”.^[8]  ​‑‑Lambiam 13:56, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, it’s predecessor, Letterboxing, where caches are found by map and compass, originated on Dartmoor in 1854. Alansplodge (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, can you please tell the difference between these two decades? Thank you so much. ~2026-25369-8 (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years exactly. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 00:31, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When a single event is, as often happens, reported by naming only its year of occurrence (“She was born in 1973”) there is implicit uncertainty in the true time of the event, see Accuracy and precision. (“Her actual birth was at noon July 2, 1973 plus/minus 182.5 days”). While two persons may claim to have the same birth year, their birthdays may differ by up to 364 days. When a single event is reported by naming only a decade (“He was born in the 1960s”) we can draw no more precise conclusion than that he was born in year 1965 +4/-5. When two separate events are assigned to different successive decades (“The largest meteor strike in the 2010s exceeded the largest meteor strike in the 2020s.”) then the time difference between the meteors may have been anything in the range of 1 to 19 years. For the fine-grain treatment of this kind of uncertainty in mathematical computation see Round-off error ~2026-26504-7 (talk) 12:07, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One difference is that the 2010s are over while the 2020s are not. So it is too early to take account of the brief WWIII of late 2026 that ended human civilization before AGI or climate change could.  ​‑‑Lambiam 14:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So, the difference is not ten years, but five years… so far. (Or six, if you start with the year ending in zero.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What’s up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:05, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphrasing a statement from CS Lewis: It depends greatly on your age. The younger you are, more things are new and never happened before. The older you are, the more it is just the same thing over and over again. ~2026-29536 (talk) 19:14, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to know the difference. perhaps the culture, the history itself, or maybe the politics? What happens, if they reunite? ~2026-26901-9 (talk) 16:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the time since they separated, the changes in each country have been significant, and not in the same directions. I think the levels of disagreement and confusion would be extremely high, especially regarding how to govern the new country. TooManyFingers (he/him · talk) 17:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They were only briefly together – see State of Singapore (Malaysia) for some of the reasons that led the countries to separate. Ever since its founding by Stamford Raffles in 1819, Singapore has been on a different path. Mikenorton (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• It’s a very big question, but some of the most important differences in a nutshell. I’ll link the articles where you can read up on these in more detail:
  • Singapore is a very diverse multicultural society: Chinese people make up a large majority of the population, with Malay and Indian minorities, and English (or Singlish) is the main language. Malaysia is majority Malay with smaller Chinese and Indian communities, and Bahasa Malaysia is the main language (a standard form of the various Malay languages). See Demographics of Malaysia and Demographics of Singapore.
  • Singapore has an extremely high GDP (by some PPP, the highest GDP per capita in the world), is one of the Four Asian Tigers, and is considered a developed country. Malaysia’s GDP is a lot lower (only 15% of Singapore’s GDP per capita measured nominally, or 30% measured by PPP), and is considered a middle-income economy. (This isn’t a completely fair comparison, since there is a huge difference between Kuala Lumpur and rural Malaysia. KL is economically and socially a lot more like Singapore). See Economy of Malaysia and Economy of Singapore
  • Singapore is effectively a one-party state – the People’s Action Party has never had any serious competition. Malaysia now has a more open political landscape, but until recently it was dominated by one party, the Barisan Nasional, whose power was only broken in the 2000s. Both rank as flawed democracies with some human rights protections but also authoritarian regimes that threaten various freedoms. See Politics of Malaysia and Politics of Singapore.
  • Buddhism is the largest religion in Singapore, but there are also large minorities of basically every major faith (and no faith), and the country has almost total religious freedom. Islam is the largest religion in Malaysia (except Sarawak, which is majority Christian), and Malaysia is officially a Sunni Islamic state. Religious liberty for ethnic minorities (but not Malays) is still protected to an extent, but it is – for example – a crime to renounce Islam if you are a Muslim, and the country has both civil and Sharia court systems. See Religion in Malaysia and Religion in Singapore. Smurrayinchester 10:03, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]