Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

March 20

H Donald-Frith H Donald Smith, portrait painter

Was there a portrait painter with a name like this? - Kittybrewster ☎ 00:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

There was a William Powell Frith, an English portraitist. Is that useful? ៛ Bielle (talk) 02:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Not the chap I am looking for. I think I am looking for H Donald Smith and would appreciate it if someone would create an article. - Kittybrewster ☎ 00:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Homelessness

I live in an area (40 by 40 blocks) where homelessness is rampant. Area businesses have learned to cope somewhat with people begging for money outside of their establishments. The area was originally developed to provide low cost housing for State university students but for the most part now has been turned into section 8 (low cost government funded) housing. The crux of the problem is drug and alcohol abuse for the hard core homeless and a mental inability or unwillingness to work to earn money for rent, food or clothing on the part of most of the remainder. I'm looking for a private or public agency or project or some other way to address all parts of this socio-economic problem. My thoughts are that some form of mental disability award could be made, but there are many critics to this solution who do not live in or near an area with this problem or stand any chance of ever having this problem themselves. These people need a life jacket or lifeboat and I have no idea where to turn. 71.100.10.177 (talk) 09:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

If you're in Alberta, I suggest you contact your MLA. (Since you didn't say where you live, I have to assume you live where I do. Everyone does, don't they?) --NellieBly (talk) 03:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflict: Thanks, no sorry, not Alberta, Canada. I live in the USA, in the State of Florida, in the County of Hillsborough. The City just South of the area in question is not as tolerant (if that is the correct word) of the Homeless as the County, hence one of the reasons that a large population of homeless exists just over the City line in the County. What most people do not really understand including the Deputies who patrol the area that while they are required to pay rent just as I most of these people are unable although it may appear they are only unwilling. It would probably take a psychologist or psychiatrist to comprehend the effect and power of the metal block that stands in the way which can only be removed after the person has be rescued. Its kind of like being overboard with two broken legs and being chastised for not helping to power the ocean liner by kicking when what is needed is a lifeboat and splints until the legs are healed rather than the requirement or demand to start kicking. Surely there must be a world wide homeless organization that knows and understands this and can offer some clear direction. Going to the County Commissioners is a good idea but not without a plan. I need an organization which in fact has a plan. 71.100.10.177 (talk) 09:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No, Section 8 is a US program. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Behind The Choir of Hard Knocks was the recognition of lack of quality of life at this level – something that makes people want to get up in the morning. I googled "homelessness solutions USA" and there are discussions but there might be avenues of funding. Thing about the Choir is it raised people's regard for the participants – and while it began in one city, it caught on in another. I forget where (maybe UK?) that someone implemented a scheme that fostered "responsibility" (or a response at least) by getting people involved in organising something to do with their housing development. It just gave some dynamic to thinking as well as living at that level. Myabe you could get in touch with people who are active in this way. Have you seen our article Street newspapers? There's also The Big Issue as an example of this. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Unfortunately the homeless are rarely screened for entertainment talent but that is a very good idea. Theater might become an avenue for the homeless. I can think of any number of plays that reiterate the plight of the down and out. Who better to play the parts? A very good idea.
• Fostering "responsibility" seems to reflect a common misunderstanding. These people are very responsible. The problem is that they do not want to waste it. They do not want to be responsible for getting a job done, for instance, on behalf of someone else that drains them of even the will to live while making the other person far better off in comparison in exchange for a meal and a place to stay the night. They are people who have been robbed and who do not want to let themselves be robbed again.
• In America in places where buildings have been all but abandoned and the homeless have asserted squatter's rights, in some cases the government has supported their claims especially through adverse possession laws and an occupancy of longer than 7 years. In the area under discussion, however, many homeless wander the area looking for toilet facilities and have taken up residence across from the County bus terminal on the sidewalk so they can use the facilities as soon as they are open. Public toilets, aside from this, are non-existent in America by design forcing the homeless to search out private facilities. One of the most cherished jobs for the homeless is the job of being the first to arrive in the morning and to clean the bathrooms and police the property for trash before the fast food restaurant opens. The job can lead to things like working the grill when the restaurant opens. Many homeless have personality problems as mental disabilities so such jobs may not last long. 71.100.10.177 (talk) 09:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind signing with four of these things ~? It's hard to know which non-signer is speaking. Cheers, Julia Rossi (talk) 09:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Auto signing should be standard and manual override the exception as well as stable sidebar frames. etc. 71.100.10.177 (talk) 09:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

If I understand you right, you're looking for ideas? You're looking for stories of programs (anywhere in the world) that have had success in helping the homeless? Here are the ones I found:

Shared Learnings on Homelessness resource website

Care 2 message board discussion: Preventing Homelessness

5days.ca student awareness campaign

Seattle's FareStart job training program for the homeless

WGBH TV program on successful programs in Massachussetts

newspaper article on Philadelphia's phenomenal success helping the homeless

In addition, you might be interested in Do Something, a website that helps people channel a general desire to help into manageable, concrete actions. WikiJedits (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Correct. County Social Services has a Homeless Recovery Unit. They do not, unfortunately have a Homeless Rescue Unit. One gets the feeling County Services exist to recover the dead rather than than to rescue the living. Anyway I forwarded the information you have graciously provided to both the HRU by phone and to the Social Services director by email. The ball is now in their court, but in absence of any positive response I will look at each link myself and see what I might present to the County Commission. The non alcoholic or drug abuser homeless are more than willing to accept a fast food restaurant gift certificate. County Services at the urging of the County Commission might be able to provide them with food vouchers if the existing Catch-22 can be dropped. Currently residency must be proven to qualify for help from the County and proof of address is not possible for the homeless. 71.100.10.177 (talk) 03:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday I watched on DVD the 1936 film My Man Godfrey which has a theme of homelesness in the US - "the Forgotten Men" - so things havnt changed much. In Britain a magazine called The Big Issue is sold by homeless people on the street, as a way of getting them back into regular employment. I think the founder tried to start the same thing in the US, but as far as I recall it was not a success. I believe that here in the UK local governments have a legal responsibility to house the homeless, and there are also temporary Salvation Army hostels and night shelters for the homeless. They are probably first in line for council housing which is effectively free housing if you have no income. I would like to think that nobody in the UK who does not want to be homeless has to be (leaving just the insane and the addicted homeless) but I'm not certain if that is true. Recently a formerly very-well paid television journalist Ed Mitchell has been the subject of a tv documentary and numberous newspaper articles. He used to have a luxury house but spent all his money on alcohol and gambling and ended up sleeping rough. Although in my experience begging is a rarity here, I believe the policy by homeless charities is that you should not give them money as they spend it on alcohol or drugs, and the free food given out by some charities in central London, such as the buddists, may be misguided as it also disencourages people to get off the streets. 80.0.102.40 (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

update

Okay, since my original post I have learned that all of the major fast food chains now offer gift cards that you can put money on in the same way as cards used for copy machines. Cards can be traded for booze or drugs but not as easily as cash so handing a homeless person a gift card instead of cash may avoid the dilemma of providing hard core alcoholic or drug abuser more drugs or alcohol.

The other thing I have learned is the best thing property owners and government can do for the homeless is to eliminate places where they can sleep illegally. This means tearing down abandoned buildings and clearing overgrown areas. What this does is force the homeless to seek help from the government so correspondingly the government has to be ready to help. In the case here its a matter of overcoming the Catch-22 that an address is required as a prerequisite for obtaining government help. 71.100.10.177 (talk) 08:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Divorce and women in the Middle Ages

I've been reading the Wife of Bath's tale from Chaucer. Clearly a woman of the world! This got me thinking of the position of independent minded women in the middle ages. The catholic church allowed divorce for non consumation of marriage. Are there any records of women taking action along these lines and, if so, how did the case proceed?Alisoun of Bath (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Not quite what you are looking for, but you still might be interested to read about Eleanor of Aquitaine, who was quite insistent about getting an annulment from her first husband. It was granted in 1152. But it wasn't for nonconsummation; they had two daughters and had been married 15 years. It was for consanguinity (they were distant cousins). (That was a far more common reason for annulment, btw).

Another feisty woman was Ingeborg of Denmark – her husband tried to annul their marriage in 1193 citing nonconsummation but she fought back, insisting on her rights. Unfortunately, her husband then locked her up for 14 years.

It may be hard to find what you want because nonconsummation seems to have been usually only invoked in cases of child marriage. See page 299 in this book. WikiJedits (talk) 14:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, in the Carolingian church (according to Frances and Joseph Gies. Marriage and the Family in the Middle Ages. ISBN 0060914688.) valid grounds for divorce were: adultery, servile status, leprosy, lack of consent, impotence, one's partner becoming a monk or a nun. Not failure to produce children, much to Lothair II's annoyance when he tried to divorce Theutberga. He created this complicated story of incest, sodomy, witchcraft and abortion (he had to explain why he had acknowledged her virginity with a morgengabe and went a little overboard it seems). She insisted on a trial by ordeal, which her champion won, clearing her name. That didn't stop Lothair from continuing to try on different grounds for eight years until Theutberga was ready for an end and entered a convent.

The Anglo-Saxons were perhaps more equitable than others; under Aethelbert a woman was entitled to half the family's goods if she decided to leave with her children, and a share even if her husband kept them. But it seems Anglo-Saxon kings could dismiss their wives without any church interference.

Anyways, our article doesn't mention it, but the Fourth Lateran Council reduced the consanguinity ban from seventh to fourth degree to prevent more situations like Eleanor of Aquitaine's, where the couple sought annulment after years of marriage, claiming their weren't aware of the relation. Was never really a problem for peasants who didn't keep track of family trees. Bigamy was the more common grounds for divorce it seems. (Doesn't surprise me since you could be considered married simply by saying, "I will have you as my wife," rather than "I will take you as my wife.")

So far on how a case proceeded, divorce based on non-consummation meant checking the wife's virginity. Apparently in 15th century England there were provisions for checking the husband's impotence as well (interestingly, my book mentions that in some places this was done by appointing "seven honest women" to test him). — Laura Scudder ☎ 21:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I can give you, Alisoun, some words that might appeal to the Wife of Bath herself! Here they are;

"The...witness exposed her bared breasts and with her hands, warmed at the fire, she held and rubbed John's penis and testicles, embracing and frequently kissing him. And she stirred him up to demonstrate his virility and potency then and there."

"She says the whole time the said penis was scarcely three inches long... remaining without any increase."

Did I make these statements up? No, of course not! They can be found in the records of the Bishops' Court of York for 1433! Clio the Muse (talk) 02:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Medieval marriage, and therefore annulment, was quite different to our modern institution. You might be interested to read this earlier discussion, which was about consanguinity, but I got distracted and talked about marriage and annulment more generally. Gwinva (talk) 19:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Medieval crime and punishment

I have another question about life in the middle ages, if I may. We think of the period as one of savage violence, both in crime and in punishment. Was crime peceived to be out of control and is that why punishments were so severe?Alisoun of Bath (talk) 13:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that most medieval punishments were based on the principle of retributive justice rather than rehabilitation. --Bowlhover (talk) 22:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

...or restitution. —Tamfang (talk) 19:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

And there's the also the perspective of the times to consider. They would probably consider our current forms of enlightened punishment, in the main, to be incomprehensibly and stupidly lenient. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the question is somewhat flawed. It was not a period of savage violence; sometimes, in some places throughout the thousand years of medieval history, there was of course savage violence, but is this any different from anywhere else at any other time? Crime was sometimes out of control; sometimes there wasn't much crime at all, the same as now. Punishments were sometimes severe, sometimes not. I think punishments were surprisingly lenient sometimes! Actions that would lead to a criminal trial today were often dealt with under common law in the middle ages; assault, for example, was almost always punished by a fine, and the size of the fine depended on the social status of the assaulted and the assaulter. But on the other hand, there could be severe corporal punishment for crimes that would today carry a relatively lenient punishment (repeat offenses, like a third case of robbery, could be punished by chopping off a limb or two). My two favourite medieval laws/punishments, from Jerusalem (with which I am most familiar, although there are parallels in other societies) are that a man can kill his wife and/or her lover if he catches them in bed together, but he is not allowed to kill both of them; and if a man sexually assaults another man's Muslim slave, his testicles will be cut off. These are certainly nothing like any laws we have now! But as I said, laws and punishments are so varied across time and space that you can't have one set that applies everywhere at the same time. The only constant I can think of is that there were no prisons, which I suppose is because prisons require a stronger central administration and bureaucracy that was usually lacking in the middle ages. The counter-example to that is the Byzantine Empire, which did have prisons. So, I hope this answer has not been too vague or rambling; medieval crime and punishment is a very complex topic, and I could give you pages and pages of more examples, none of which would apply to all of Europe at any one time! Adam Bishop (talk) 01:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

(Hmm, I should clarify that there were universal laws and punishments, namely canon law, which applies to the previous question about marriage, and Roman law, which carried over into the middle ages in the Corpus Iuris Civilis. But still, there was no single law code that would have covered all crimes for, say, someone in Spain in 500 and someone in Poland in 1500.) Adam Bishop (talk) 01:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In considering the kind of issues raised by this question, Alisoun, you might begin with Johan Huizinga's classic study, The Waning of the Middle Ages, where he says that crime was "...a menace to order and society, as well as an insult to divine majesty. Thus it was natural that the late Middle Ages should become the special period of judicial cruelty."

One has to consider punishment in this context, not so much as retribution but as spectacle more than anything else. It should not be assumed, moreover, that this was simply a top-down process, a way of 'educating' the community in the severity of the law. There was also a considerable amount of popular pressure for criminals to receive forms of punishment that were both harsh and terrifying. In 1389 in England Popular pressure persuaded Parliament to petition the king for the limiting of pardons granted for violent crimes.

The Middle Ages were violent for one reason or another. Legitimate and public violence was considered to be the only way of dealing with illegitimate and private violence. There was no prison, so all punishment had to carry some deterrent purpose; either the absolute deterrence of execution, or relative forms of deterrence implied in mutilation of one kind or other, which required the wrongdoer to live forever in the community carrying the stigma of his or her error. In A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteenth Century, Barbara Tuchman writes;

The torture and punishments of civil justice customarily cut of hands and ears, racked, burned, flayed, and pulled apart people's bodies. In everyday life, passers-by saw some criminal flogged with a knotted rope or chained upright in an iron collar. They passed corpses hanging on the gibbet and decapitated heads and quartered bodies impaled on stakes on the city walls.

Yes, it was terror; but it was also about forms of reassurance: that justice was being served and society protected: the more extreme the crime, the more extreme the punishment. Even 'clemency', when it was exercised, was, if anything, even more barbarous. In England in 1221 one Thomas of Eldersfield was reprieved from hanging at the last moment. In a show of ‘mercy’ he was blinded and castrated instead! Robert Bartlett described the scene that followed, "...the eyes were thrown to the ground and the testicles used as footballs, the local lads kicking them playfully at the girls." It was all part of the salutary spectacle.

It would be wrong to assume, though, that the didactic purpose of punishment ended with the Middle Ages. In Discipline and Punish, Michael Foucault describes the gothic intensity with which Robert-François Damiens was done to death in 1757 for the attempted assassination of Louis XV. It was the apotheosis, it might be said, of execution as public display; of natural and divinely-ordained retribution. Clio the Muse (talk) 02:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In addition to the books Clio mentioned, you may also be interested in Roman Law in European History by Peter Stein, Medieval Canon Law by James Brundage, and Trial by Fire and Water by the aforementioned Robert Bartlett. There are also numerous editions of actual legal codes that are fun to read, like the Germanic ones edited by Katharine Fischer Drew. I notice there is also a book called "Medieval justice: Cases and laws in France, England, and Germany, 500-1500" by Hunt Janin, which fits this topic and discussion perfectly, but unfortunately I am not familiar with it (Clio? Anyone?). Adam Bishop (talk) 07:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

North and South

Do the themes explored in Elizabeth Gaskell's novel North and South indicate that she was opposed to the political economy of the day?

From above: "Do your own homework. The reference desk will not give you answers for your homework, although we will try to help you out if there is a specific part of your homework you do not understand. Make an effort to show that you have tried solving it first." Marskell (talk) 15:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you read it? AllenHansen (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, have you read North and South? If you really want to know what Elizabeth Gaskell's view of political economy I would draw your particular attention to the passage where John Hale, the factory owner, gives Nicholas Higgins a book to correct his 'sad mistakes' about wages. In this poor benighted Higgins will discover that “wages find their own level, and that the most successful strike can only force them up for a moment, to sink in far greater proportion afterwards, in consequence of that very strike." Margaret Hales' vision of harmony between capital and labour is essentially that of John Bright, who argued that employers should always follow the road of 'enlightened self-interest' when dealing with their employees. There is no reason to suppose that Gaskell thought any differently. Clio the Muse (talk) 01:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I've been working on the mini series article all day. Such an awesome serial, go rent it!--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 18:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Is the Swiss Franc still immune from inflation?

I heard that the Swiss Frank is immune from inflation, but the swiss franc article says

“ The Swiss franc has historically been considered a safe haven currency with virtually zero inflation and a legal requirement that a minimum 40% is backed by gold reserves. [4] However, this link to gold, which dates from the 1920s, was terminated on 1 May 2000 following a referendum regarding the Nazi gold affair with Swiss banks and an amendment to the Swiss Constitution.[5] ”

So...is it still immune from inflation, or is that a relic of the past, over as of 2000?

No currency is immune from inflation. Even when a gold standard existed, inflation could and did occur, for example in countries with trade surpluses. Prices in Switzerland are higher today than they were 30 or 40 years ago. Switzerland has a lower rate of inflation than most other countries, but it has inflation. Marco polo (talk) 15:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

when you talk about prices being higher, that could mean in real terms too, though. For example, prices in a small community in America could triple over a one-year period, but that doesn't mean the value of a dollar in real terms is reduced! So, if I am interested in using Franks as a medium to store value, against inflation that could strike dollar-denominated alternatives, I don't care about prices in Switzerland.....

Switzerland is small country with a population of 7.5 Mio.

One of the main industries is banking.

The country has a system of bank secrecy which would be impossible to maintain in the EU (or almost elsewhere, as far as I know).

If the banking system was forced to become transparent, massive amounts of investments would flow out of the country. After that, it would be easily confused with Swaziland.

The inflation rate in Switzerland is 0.6%, in Swaziland it is 6%. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Cockatoo is no doubt right that Switzerland benefits from its unique banking sector. However, bank secrecy is not the country's only asset. The banking sector has an unusual level of expertise in international finance for a small country that would allow it to retain international clients even without secrecy. Moreover, Switzerland has a much more developed infrastructure than Swaziland, which makes its real economy (outside the financial sector) much more efficient than that of Swaziland. Also, Switzerland has an internationally competitive precision instrument manufacturing sector (whose products are not limited to its famous watches), a strong food processing sector, a strong pharmaceutical industry and perhaps Europe's strongest biotech sector, and, due to its scenery and proximity to many other affluent nations, a strong tourism sector. I don't think that Switzerland is in any danger of resembling Swaziland in our lifetimes. Marco polo (talk) 01:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I neglected to add that while the Swiss franc has done well against the dollar in recent years, future movements of currencies are very hard to predict. At a certain point, Switzerland's real economy will start to be hurt by the high value of the franc, which makes its exports less affordable. Its central bankers will then be under pressure to ease interest rates to help cheapen the franc. Also, the current strength of the franc is a function of foreign investors' risk aversion. At a certain point, the appetite for risk will return, and therer will be a sell-off and a sharp drop in the relative value of the franc. So, if you decide to invest in francs, you may need to be nimble. Marco polo (talk) 01:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

A picture of Wilhelm Liebknecht, Karl Marx and three of their comrades

Once ı saw a picture of Wilhelm Liebknecht, Karl Marx and three of their comrades on wikipedia. I can't find it. Can you provide it? Thanks in advance.

This image from commons fits your description, but it doesn't seem to be in use on the English wikipedia. DAVID ŠENEK 18:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The other three comrades are August Bebel, Carl Wilhelm Tölcke (redlink! but there is de:Carl Wilhelm Tölcke), and Ferdinand Lassalle.  --Lambiam 19:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks like someone took the initiative to create the redlink. bibliomaniac15 Midway upon life's journey... 22:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It amuses me to read that Lassalle and Marx were 'comrades'! They had enjoyed a reasonably cordial epistolary relationship, though this changed after Marx spent a month in Berlin in 1861 as the guest of Lassalle and the Countess Sophie von Hartzfeld. It was all far too bourgeois for the great prophet of revolution, and Lassalle himself altogether too vain, self-important and pompous. In correspondence with Friedrich Engels Marx began to refer to his 'comrade' as 'Lazarus', 'Baron Izzy', or, more distastefully, as 'the Jewish nigger', a comment on his dark complexion. "It is now quite plain to me," he told Engels, "as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify, that he is descended from the Negros who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandfather interbred with a nigger)." The heavy-handed humour of the day, one supposes. Clio the Muse (talk) 01:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

agriculture,writing

There is a link is there not between the introduction of human agriculture (eg seed crops - wheat etc) , and the development of writing - or at least written records.

Q. Who have put forward this idea of a link, and who were the first? (to notice the connection)83.100.183.180 (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

As to why this might come about: agriculture means that grain and other crops can be grown beyond immediate needs, with the surplus being stored or traded, and a consequent need to keep records. Some early "writing" systems used little molded clay token to represent a jar of grain or such, eventually followed by impressions of a peice of clay in lieu of molded tokens. Agriculture engendered accounting, by this notion. Of course hunting could have similarly produced a need for record keeping, if pelts were traded. Animal husbandry produced a need to track sheep ownership. Mining and smelting could similarly produce a need for record keeping. Edison (talk) 18:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) Agriculture was developed at least 10,000 years ago, but the history of writing does not nearly go back that far. The oldest written forms of symbolic communication ("proto-writing") emerged in the 7th millennium BCE, with true writing (recorded human language) dating from the late 4th millennium BCE. With a gap of several millenia between the two innovations, any causal link can hardly be direct and strong. This is not to say there is no connection at all. Generally speaking, the development of writing can only flourish in a sedentary culture with enough division of labour to sustain a class of scribes, and that kind of culture is only possible when agriculture is sufficiently advanced. This equally applies to other professions, such as blacksmithing or architecture.  --Lambiam 18:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, you've given me some extra things to think about - metalworking is especially interesting, I need to explore more any link between transmutation or ore to metal, and the change in human behaviour (to a sedentary lifestyle as mentioned above) have a direct connect eg our muscles become weak but the iron becomes stronger - does correllation imply causation. Thanks again.83.100.183.180 (talk) 20:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Frederick the Great and religious belief

Was he a sceptic or not?

That is somewhat hard to answer also for lack of a precise definition of the notion of sceptic. Being a sceptic is not absolute; most people are sceptic about some things (like supporters of creationism are sceptical about evolution theory), and most self-identifying sceptics hold to some tenets (like the power of reason). According to our article on the man, his father was raised a devout Calvinist and feared he was not one of the elect. To avoid the possibility of his heir Frederick having the same fear, the king ordered that he not be taught about predestination. Although he was largely irreligious, Frederick adopted this tenet of Calvinism, despite his father's efforts. This paragraph in the article concludes: It is unknown if the crown prince did this to spite his father, or out of genuine religious belief. Adopting the predestination tenet of Calvinism does not quite jibe with being a wool-died sceptic, so if he was known to be a sceptic, historians would have concluded that he did not do this "out of genuine religious belief".

Frederick the Great had a long-lasting friendship and correspondence with Voltaire, who is often considered a sceptic. It appears, however, that Voltaire, although a free-thinker for the period in which he lived and critical of the Catholic Church and in fact all establishment, was likely not an atheist. Apparently, he even had a chapel erected on his estate at Ferney.  --Lambiam 20:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Frederick had a somewhat instrumental view of the social and political function of religion. His own personal views are, I think, better described as agnostic, rather than sceptical. He also had a tendency to see elements of good and bad in all religions. It was only atheism that he condemned outright, because it served to undermine the function of religion in securing social solidarity and cohesion. Above all, in Frederick's scheme of things, religion was necessary to secure obedience among the governed. Adherence to strict religious principles was not necessary for a ruler, though, and Frederick feely confesses that his ancestors became Lutherans, not out of any great religious conviction, but in order to acquire church property. They later became Calvinist for the same instrumental reason: to maintain better relations with the Dutch, and thus facilitate the acquisition of Cleves. Of all the eighteenth century rulers Frederick was the most tolerant, extending his protection to all religions and sects, even to the Jesuits. The sole exception to this general policy of toleration was the Jews, whom he condemned as practitioners of usury. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I've always thought that Frederick was somewhat suspicious of the Jews extensive ties all over the world. AllenHansen (talk) 18:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Heroes of their time

Is it possible to draw any comparison at all between Lermontov's Pechorin and Goncharov's Oblomov, or are they simply opposite extremes? Yermolov (talk) 20:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

What do you think? Try listing similarities and differences. AllenHansen (talk) 21:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Yermolov, in the very first detailed analysis of Mikhail Lermontov's A Hero of Our Time, Vissarion Belinsky, one of the leading Russian critics of the day, said that figures like Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin were inevitable in that period of history, the Russia of Nicholas I-"That is how the hero of our time must be. He will be characterized either by determined inactivity or else by futile activity." He will be characterised, in other words by passive conformity or pointless personal rebellion. If Pechorin represents the one pole-that of futile activity-then the eponymous hero of Ivan Goncharov's Oblomov surely represents the other, in all its passive indolence. They may illustrate opposite extremes; but for all that they are complimentary extremes, distinct symptoms of the Russia of Tsarist absolutism. Clio the Muse (talk) 00:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Case study on Anonymous

Before Anonymous (group) attacked Scientology I could do a google search for Anonymous and get what I want, but now I'm having trouble.

There was a satirical paper I read on the net, and it was an investigation on "Who is Anonymous?" Anonymous is responsible for many great literary works in history, and must have been one great mind! That's how I remember it. I need to find it again. 22:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

In Google, use the "-" operator to disclude any pages containing that word. Eg, "anonymous -scientology" --76.192.189.206 (talk) 14:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

University Applications

One of my acquintences claim that most Universities use computers to process applications, does this apply to a lot of universities, if any at all?

I'd be extremely surprised if the vast majority of unis don't use computers to process applications. But I don't know that as a fact. And I guess it depends on what you mean by "process". -- JackofOz (talk) 23:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the identical wording, but a near miss edit conflict with JackofOz.

I would be surprised if there is a single tertiary institution which does not use database systems for the entire logistics of their operations.

I can´t give you a proper reference, but I have just checked about a dozen universities in the EU and in Australia and all of them seem to have student admin systems (not accessible to random browsers, but clearly there).

Out of curiosity, what makes you think this is odd ? Every government agency, every bank, every hospital and virtually every dime store at the next corner uses IT. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

One large public university in the midwestern US used a point system several decades ago for grad school admission. A regression formula assigned points for the GRE score, the undergraduate GPA, the quality of the undergrad school (determined somehow) the quality of the references (scored by a reader), and extra points simply fro being from certain racial minority groups. Extra points were added for publications and assistantships. The number thus calculated screened out the clear rejects. Naturally, offspring of large donors or politically prominent families got special consideration, regardless. The ones who were likely to get admitted got additional screening by a committee to make sure nothing dodgy jumped out, and the marginal ones got extra examination to choose the more promising ones, or to fill particular needs of the faculty. Books in the last five years or so about admission to selective undergrad programs in the U.S. said that the applications all got read, but some were clear rejects (excepting the connected or athletic) based on grades, test scores, and the quality of the high school, and some were clear admits, with the committee spending most time on the marginal cases. It would be irresponsible for a college charging an application fee not to track each application on a computer too follow its process, so as to make sure none were lost and to know how the class was filling up. Human scorers doubtless read the essays. Edison (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It would be more common in larger universities than smaller ones. But you'd be surprised how much is read by a human as well. My wife worked as an admissions officer at a number of universities and she says they read just a ton of applications and essays and really put a lot of thought into it. While I don't think a system of the magnitude of the University of California can do something quite as comparable, these weren't the smallest schools, either. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 01:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

At least the University of Michigan must (have?) use(d?) a point system as this university was sued for its affirmative action program, which assigned extra points for being from a racial minority (compare what Edison wrote), see Gratz v. Bollinger; anyways, the use of points for affirmative action seems to be discontinued (read last paragraph of intro of University of Michigan... another sad example against grassroots democracy). BTW, the point system itself was never challenged in court, and I'd bet that this is what most schools with hundreds and thousands of applicants use.

Personally, if a point or grading system is used (and I'm not sure there's a better way to make dozens or sometimes even thousands of applications, read by different readers, comparable), I don't find any odds in having computers do the scoring for obvious calls, such as points awarded for certain test scores (which stink anyways), grades depending on school, etc. I would guess the only reason that many schools don't do this is that it might not pay off programming so many options and exceptions (e.g., the number of international schools, weighted with quality or whatever...). --Ibn Battuta (talk) 14:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible that the OP meant "process applications" in the sense of using OCR software to read them? That might make it a more reasonable question. Daniel (‽) 17:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Daring medical rescue

Nearly a decade ago, I saw this thing on TV. It was about a medical rescue by Navy SEALs. A man was with his family on a pleasure yacht. He somehow got injured or sick. The affected area was turning gangrenous. Someone radioed for help. The Navy sent their SEALs to rescue the man and his family. Eventually, the man got the medical help he needed. Does anybody know what I may be referring to?72.229.136.18 (talk) 23:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

March 21

Economies of the Home Countries

It has often been said that if California would be a country of its own, it would have the fifth economy in the world. How about the four Home Countries? If England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland would become independent, how would their economies compare to the economies of existing countries? Aecis^Brievenbus 00:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

This took some calculation and extrapolation from existing statistics. The most recent statistics on GDP for subunits of the UK seem to be these numbers from 1998. Unfortunately, the subunits covered here do not correspond directly to the Home Counties as our article defines them. These numbers include Bedfordshire, Oxfordshire, and Sussex as well as the Home Counties more narrowly defined. Using this source, I found GDP in sterling for the UK as a whole in 2007. Then I estimated the 2007 values of GDP for the UK subunits assuming that they were in the same proportion to national GDP as in 1998. I know that this assumption isn't accurate, as I seem to recall seeing that the Southeast has grown faster than the UK as a whole, while Wales has grown more slowly, but this was the best that I could do to come up with numbers that would allow comparisons to our table of 2007 GDP for countries of the world. Comparing the UK and its subunits to this list, I found that the UK has the world's 6th largest economy. England alone would have the 9th largest (between those of Brazil and Russia, both of which have much larger populations). The Home Counties (including Bedfordshire, Oxfordshire, and Sussex) would have the 33rd largest economy, between those of Belgium and Bangladesh. Scotland would have the 53rd largest, between Nigeria (with over 100 million people) and Morocco. Wales would have the 64th, between Belarus and Ethiopia; and Northern Ireland would have the 71st, between Oman and Lithuania. As I have said, these comparisons probably understate the size of the economy of England and the Home Counties (whose economy is probably really larger than that of Belgium if the three outer counties are included) and overstate the size of the economy of Wales. Marco polo (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't think he intended to ask about "home counties" (i.e. southeast of England separarate from the rest of England) at all... AnonMoos (talk) 06:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your calculations and work, Marco polo, but I'm afraid my question was about the Home Countries, the four constituent parts of the United Kingdom, not about the Home Counties. Your answer did provide me with a lot of information though. I'm baffled why Scotland, with its massive oil and gas reserves, would only be equivalent to Morocco and Nigeria (with all due respect to those countries, obviously) and why Wales and Northern Ireland would rank so low. If I interpret these figures correctly, this would make the latter two the poorest areas of Europe. Aecis^Brievenbus 11:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I've lived in Britain all my long life, yet I've never heard of the expression "home countries" before. I think it is a mistake, unless perhaps it is an expression used in say the 19th. century during the days of empire. The Home counties are those counties that border on London. London or South-east England would, if taken sperately, have a large GDP greater than many countries. 80.2.192.179 (talk) 13:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita is more relevant than overall GDP, or alternatively limit the GDP comparisons to countries of similar size and in the same region. For Scotland that would mean Denmark, Finland, Ireland and Norway. The statistics place Scotland last among the five, and a long way behind Norway, but that does not seem unreasonable.

The figures shown in Wales and Northern Ireland, on the other hand, seem improbably low, in the same range as the Baltic States or even Poland. I don't believe that these can be at all accurate. As for England, it is such a large part of the United Kingdom that removing Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales would make relatively little different to the GDP or GDP per capita. It might be that England would be one or two places lower on the List of countries by GDP (PPP) than the UK, but it might also creep up the per capita list. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

On a per capita basis, England would show a number slightly higher than the UK as a whole, close to Germany. Wales would have a higher per capita number than the Baltic States or Poland. The per capita number for Wales would be comparable to that for New Zealand. Northern Ireland's per capita number would actually be slightly higher than that for New Zealand and a bit below that for the Republic of Ireland. Marco polo (talk) 16:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That isn't what the Wales & NI articles say: Wales 19,546 USD; NI 19,603 USD. I don't doubt you're nearer the truth than those are, but if you can find a reference it would be worth fixing those articles. Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Paul Scofield and Sir Thomas More

The sad passing of Paul Scofield prompts this question. What exactly does it mean when the title "Sir" is given to someone (for example, Sir Thomas More)? And where exactly does it come from? Also, am I correct to assume it is not a part of the person's legal name ... but, rather, a title no different than Mister or Doctor or Senator or the like? If so, why are these individuals referred to (for example, in Wikipedia articles) as "Sir". That is, why do we always refer to More as Sir Thomas More when we don't necessarily refer to George Bush as President George Bush? Thanks. PS: Rest in Peace, Paul Scofield. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

"Sir" means the person has been given a knighthood. I think that it is a title and does not form part of the person's name from a legal perspective. But from a cultural perspective, it may as well be part of their name. More would have been addressed as "Sir Thomas" (not Sir More, btw), and any references to him that weren't confined to his surname would be as "Sir Thomas More". Former U.S. presidents are called "President <name>", but that's more a courtesy title. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

"Sir" also applies in the case of a baronetcy, which can be thought of as an hereditary knighthood, although it's not a knighthood as such. Incumbent U.S. presidents are entitled to be called "President <name>" in formal settings, but we tend to drop the title when talking about them between ourselves or in the media, because it's cumbersome and it's clear who we're talking about. But we much less often refer to Queen Elizabeth II as simply "Elizabeth". -- JackofOz (talk) 00:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, though, the wife of a knight or baronet is Lady <last name> rather than paralleling the male styling. — Laura Scudder ☎ 01:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

So, how do you know when someone "takes on" the new name ... how do you know when he becomes knighted? For example, let's hypothetically say that Thomas More was knighted on January 1, 2000. So, prior to that date (up until December 31, 1999), he would be simply "Thomas More". And, on January 1, 2000 (and thereafter), he would be correctly known as "Sir Thomas More". How would we know when the correct date (and accompanying name change) occurs? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 08:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

"Honours Lists" in UK are published by the London Gazette - a UK registered as a newspaper published by Authority and established on 1665. If you want a list please visit this website. Probably this answers your question. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 09:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

And what I am really getting at is this. In the film A Man for All Seasons, is Paul Scofield playing a character / role by the name of Thomas More or of Sir Thomas More? That is, if More was knighted prior to his death, Scofield's character / role is "Sir Thomas More". If More was knighted after his death, Scofield's character / role is only "Thomas More". Am I correct? And how would I know which? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 08:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

He was knighted in 1521, long before his death. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Posthumous knighthood is currently impossible (as several petitions have discovered) and, as far as I know, always has been. Algebraist 10:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You might compare it with the title "Dr" in some ways. Before his doctorate is awarded, John Smith is just John Smith. Afterwards he is Dr John Smith. SaundersW (talk) 13:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there's been no case of a posthumous knighthood I've ever heard of. There was a bit of a campaign to get George Harrison one such gong, but it went nowhere; his fans simply left their run too late. The media sometimes erroneously reports a "posthumous knighthood", where a person accepted the honour but died before it was publicly announced. Sir Henry Cotton is a well-known case. In such cases, the date of effect is made retrospective to a date no later than the date of their death, whereas every other new knighthood is with effect from the date the Honours List is promulgated. These awards are always communicated privately first, to see if the person actually wants to accept it, and if they do they have to keep their trap shut in the meantime (if they don't want it, they're supposed to never reveal the award was ever even offered). Paul Scofield himself declined a knighthood three times. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all of the input. So, in the UK ... the honor is bestowed by the Queen ... to whom? Whoever she sees fit? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC))

This article has some useful information. In short, the process varies by the order of knighthood to be conferred. Carom (talk) 05:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

But to answer your specific question, there are certain awards said to be "in the monarch's personal gift", such as the Royal Victorian Order. She can, of her own volition and without consulting anyone at all, decide that Joe Bloggs is a nice man and deserves to become Sir Joseph Bloggs KCVO. But the ones not in her personal gift are decided by committees, governments and such like, and she more-or-less rubber stamps the awards. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Percentage of scientists

Apporximately what percentage of the world's population is actively involved in scientific research? Also, what percentage of fresh workers commit themselves to scientific research? Thanks ahead. 99.226.39.245 (talk) 00:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, narrowing the question down to something more manageable — just physics in the US — I can say that there were roughly 12,000 physics PhDs awarded in 2005 in the US [1]. They spent on average six years getting their degrees, probably doing research about five years out of the six [2]. Add to that the 54,000 full time faculty with PhDs [3], which might lump some lecturers in, but we're not bothering to count the private lab researchers anyways so hopefully it'll all even out, and you something like 65k people in physics in the US doing scientific research, or roughly 0.02% of our population. So I'd guess around 0.1% are in science in general. Less for the world as a whole. — Laura Scudder ☎ 01:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

What would "THE" original battle of iwo jima flag raising photo be worth?

The first copy of the first picture taken of the original raising of the flag. How much would that go for?NewAtThis (talk) 01:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

However much someone would pay for it. It's the sort of thing that would be auctioned. (And would need to be authenticated, of course.) It doesn't have a pre-set pricetag. A trained appraiser could probably estimate how much it might be worth, but in the end people will pay for it what they will pay for it. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 01:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

well what's the going rate for historical photos like this one...like on ebay or that PBS show?70.1.91.172 (talk) 08:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be quite surprised if any photo of the same caliber were on that show. We're not just talking about a posed picture of some general that was passed down through family members from generation to generation but one that is known to millions (billions?) of people the world over. One could even argue that the picture itself made the battle more historically significant, not due to the battle itself, but due to the coverage that it received from the media and the interest of people who wanted to know more about "that photo with the guys raising the flag". It's sort of akin to asking how much the Mona Lisa would be worth. Paintings of that much renown aren't sold often enough to gauge a very accurate estimate by the lay person that we most likely have here. Some expert appraiser who knows that market may be able to put a ball park guess on it but then they know the market and the potential bidders. Dismas|^(talk) 11:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The original negative is in a file at a photo bureau. Countless prints were made from it. How would one be authenticated as the "first" as opposed to the 97th print? The very first print was probably a test print which went in the trash, to be followed by a better exposed print, or perhaps one with different cropping, dodging or burning to improve the appearance. Prints from the original negative might be distinguishable from prints made from a duplicate negative, to avoid wearing out the original. A print with a notation on the back by the photographer would be more desirable, as would be one with a special provenance, such as having been presented to some notable General by the photographer. Edison (talk) 16:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Communication technology and economics

I was thinking about expanding my article on history of communication with information about how it impacted our society. One of the first parts I am thinking about would be how changes in our communication technologies impacted business/economics. Any ideas and in particular referenced works would be highly appreciated.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Update: Elizabeth L. Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change is a good source on printing press, but does not exhaust the subject.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Theorist/essayist Walter Benjamin had something predictive to say about reproductive technology (ie print) and its effects on society, culture and the value of art objectsThe Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, and Other Writings on Media, Harvard University Press, ISBN 0-674-02445-1. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, I will certainly take a look at that.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Israel and ISM

Are detained ISM volunteers barred from entering Israel again at a future time? --S.dedalus (talk) 06:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Parliaments of the English Protectorate

Did they achieve anything at all and did politics operate in any normal sense during the protectorate of Oliver Cromwell?

Iranian Minority

Which part of Iran, meaning which provinces do minority Sunnis mostly live and which provinces do minority Christians live? Do Iranian Christians follow Roman Catholic or not? If not, which article should I read about which sect of Christianity do they follow?

See Islam in Iran and Christianity in Iran. The Sunnis are mostly in various border regions. The christians are mostly members of the Armenian Apostolic Church, who apparently mostly live in New Julfa and Tehran. Algebraist 15:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Arab Christians

Which Arab nations has the significant population of Christians? I believe Lebanon has the most - maybe a third? Everywhere else is 1-5%. --76.192.189.206 (talk) 14:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Wrad (talk) 15:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Some sources give the Christian share of the Palestinian Arab population as 6%. Coptic Christians number at least 4 million people, or 6% of the population of Egypt. The Copts of Egypt are actually the largest Christian minority in the Arab world in numbers, even though they make up a smaller percentage of the total population than do Christians in Lebanon. Marco polo (talk) 15:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Punjabi-speaking Pakistani scholars

Is there any Pakistani scholars who do tafsir quran and give lectures and speeches in Punjabi?

There is Ameer Muhammad Akram Awan. His writings are in Urdu or English, but you will find videos online of him speaking in Punjabi. There may well be other Punjabi-speaking mufassirun in Pakistan. Marco polo (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Indian bengalis

Do Indian Muslims in West Bengal and Tripura speak Bengali or not? Because I want to know if there are any Muslim scholars who give lectures in Bengali?

Yes, most people (including Muslims) in West Bengal and Tripura speak Bengali, and according to those articles Bengali is (with English) the main language of education. I can't find anything on Bengali lectures; it might be that university education is mainly in English. Algebraist 15:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Fall of the Directory

Would it be true to say that the fall of the Directory owed as much if not more to its own inefficiency and corruption than to the ambition of Napoleon? If so in what way was this inefficiency undermining the French war effort? Is there any way that French government could have been reformed from within without the necessity of military dictatorship? Thank you. 81.129.85.240 (talk) 15:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

current events-British Columbia-Canada

I am looking for the context of the quote made by MLA Dennis Mackay reguarding his statement that some (Aboriginal) people have benefitted from attending residential school.

Proving residency in a State

According to the Real ID Act one must prove a residency to a particular State. What if you were a vagabond and had no 'fixed' State of residency. In other words, what if a person was a fulltimer RVer and never settled in any one place for very long. Then when located in a place there is no utility bills, since it is automatically in the rent of the place where you are staying (since it is just temporary). Many resort places in the Southern United States rent condos to snowbirds for 90 - 180 days and the rent is all inclusive (all utilities included). In this case, there is no utility bills in your name. One can then be in one of these condos temporarly for 5 - 6 months and then be traveling the remainder of the time in a recreational vehicle. Say each winter one stays first in one of these all inclusive condos in Texas, then travels for the summer, then a condo in Florida for the winter, then travels for 6 months, then a condo in Myrtle Beach for the winter, then travels for 6 months, etc. What State does this person have residency in? My understanding is that there is something like a million fulltimer RVers. What about them?--Doug ^talk 20:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

A person only has to be a resident in a given state long enough to get ID from that state. ID from one state will be accepted in another. The rental contract (lease) for a person's winter lodgings would probably suffice as proof of residence. If not, then the phone or cable bill at that place of residence would work. Often, even a credit card bill can constitute proof of address. If the person secures winter lodgings on, say, December 1, that person can then go and apply for a state picture ID (e.g. a driver's license) in the first week of December. If the person stays at that address even through the end of January, he or she will receive his or her ID from that state and can then pack up the RV and move on to another state. Marco polo (talk) 20:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this any different than the residency requirements needed to get a driver's license in the first place, much less keep your vehicle registration up to date? You just need an address of some sort and proof that you receive mail at it, if I recall. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting about the lease agreement. So happens the condo complex I stay at in the South has no lease agreement. Also no Deposit. You just pay the monthly rental fee each month - which includes all utilities, hence no utility bills. Stay there 5 or 6 months a year, then travel in an RV the remaining time, staying at campgrounds, State and National Parks. Mail is "General Delivery" in the city I am at in the winter time. All other mail is by e-mail. Banking is by the internet and through Banks that have multiple Branches in many States. Which would be consider the State of my residency?--Doug ^talk 20:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Would that be the State that issued your driver's licence or your vehicle reg? Would a signed statutory declaration cover your winter residence? Julia Rossi (talk) 22:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It really seems as if you have gone out of your way to eliminate any proof of residence from your life! I have rented dozens of apartments in my life in 4 different states and 2 different countries, and I have never once lived in one that did not require my signature on some kind of rental agreement. If you are concerned about establishing residency in some state, then I would find a condo that provides some kind of rental agreement and an address for delivery of mail. Short of that, I would write your address on your rent check and the following note in the lower left corner of the rent check: For <month name> <year> rent at the above address. When you receive the canceled check or its facsimile from your bank, you have your proof of residence. It really isn't a problem if your state of residence changes every year, but if you need proof of residence, you might choose situations that make it easier for you to establish it. Marco polo (talk) 00:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the check idea. Thanks for the hints and answers. Appreciate it.--Doug ^talk 14:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Francis Fowke and George Fowke

So, I've just written an article on George Henry Fowke, a senior officer of the Royal Engineers, b. 1864. There was a prominent engineer by the name of Francis Fowke, who died in 1865 aged 42; the DNB just says he had three children who survived infancy but doesn't give details. His wife was born in 1822, so would have been in her early forties in 1864.

"Fowke" is a fairly uncommon surname, and it seems possible to me that one is the son of the other - sons following in father's footsteps and all that - but none of the (albeit sketchy) biographies of GH Fowke that I can find make any mention of his father. Anyone any idea how to follow up this hunch? Shimgray | talk | 22:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

If you are prepared to invest a little money in the search, you could try to locate and track them through the UK Census. SaundersW (talk) 10:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Smoking Law In UK

Obviously it is illegal to purchase smoking products if you are under 18 in the UK. But is this the minimum age to smoke or just to purchase ? What is the minimum smoking age ? How can a minor legally acquire smoking products ?

That's the minimum age to buy or sell. I don't believe there is a minimum age to smoke, but I can't find a source. Legally acquiring tobacco as a minor might be difficult, since it is also illegal to buy tobacco for a minor. Doing so illegally is generally very easy, however. Algebraist 22:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Just as growing marijuana for your own use is okay, so growing tobacco for your own use would, I imagine, be okay for a 16-year-old. (caveant: jurisdiction specific). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Where is okay to grow marijuana for your own use? It is probably quite difficult to discover who is doing it, but I don't know if there is a right to do so. Mr.K. (talk) 14:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know of any jurisdiction where it's legal. It certainly isn't in the UK. Algebraist 14:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

March 22

Cult Definition

Why isn't Christ and his disciples considered a cult?

Max Weinreich famously said (on the difference between a dialect and a language) that "a language is a dialect with an army and a navy". I think the same is true for cults versus religions. I'm sure that after 1000 years of recruiting the cult of Xenu will seem as respectable as the cult of the zombie that's given me the day off today. --Sean

A famous saying goes, "The difference between a cult and a church is how many members it has." -- Kesh (talk) 00:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Alternatively, one could define cult a little narrower, to not mean so much "unpopular/fringe religious sect" but rather religious sects that require extremely high degrees of investment (cut of all ties to your family, divert all resources to the group, pressured or coerced to conform to group expectations, not allowed to leave the group). I'm not sure if the original relationship between Christ and his disciplines would fit into such a definition, at least by the New Testament account—participation seems to me to have been pretty much voluntary, and if anything Christ was a little contemptuous of his disciples deciding to follow him around, if I recall correctly. Perhaps someone who has read the book of Matthew more recently than I (it has been about ten years for this agnostic) could share with us their perceptions on how well this definition fits or does not. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 00:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Christ was not at all contemptuous of being followed. He told many of his disciples personally: "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men". He asked them to follow him. Wrad (talk) 00:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I seem to recall—and it has been awhile—him occasionally making disparaging remarks about how irritatingly dense they were at times. There were some times he seemed positively pissy. But again, it's been awhile. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 03:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I once saw an episode of a well-respected TV quiz show where the question was something about which religion some famous person belonged to, and the answer was supposed to be "Christianity". The answer given by the contestant was "He was a Roman Catholic", which he was. To the contestant's anguish and the viewers' amazement, it was marked wrong, and the explanation was that the religion is considered to be Christianity, but Catholicism and all the other varieties of Christianity are considered separate cults of the overall religion, and they weren't asking about the person's cult but their religion. Not sure how many complaints they had about that one. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Muslims would say he was Muslim. Wrad (talk) 00:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Since Jesus went to synagogue, his group was probably a sect in those days, with teachers commonly being accompanied by followers. Julia Rossi (talk) 02:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

A functional definition of cult is not based on the success of a cult, but on information control, use of fear, emotional manipulation, isolation from outside influences, power structuring, etc. Any gestures towards such definitions are routinely reverted at Wikipedia, a symptom of cult information manipulation in itself. --Wetman (talk) 09:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Christianity was originally considered a cult (by the romans), and persecuted. See Christianity#Early_Church_and_Christological_Councils87.102.16.238 (talk) 12:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Moral philosophy of evolution

Is there a moral philosophy which posits evolution as the source and answer to ethics questions? If so how would this philosophy answer the following paradox? (Is there a name for this paradox btw?)

An old lady and the Mona Lisa (or some great work of art) are in a burning art museum. You have time to save only one. Which do you choose?

Thanks, --S.dedalus (talk) 05:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You could take a look at bioethicist Peter Singer especially this section[4] to do with evolutionary biology. Singer is an evolutionary atheist by the way. Now I hope to push the little old lady out of the way of the crowd rushing towards the mOna Lisa. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

PS I like your conundrum about the two little old ladies. The value placed on either of these is fraught. JR

I can not speculate on the legislation in other countries, but in the EU you would be charged with "gross negligence leading to the death" of Ms X, if you were to have saved Ms Mona Lisa. I think the US term is "criminally negligent homicide". --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

In most places in the U.S., criminally negligent homicide wouldn't apply, as there is no legal duty to put your own life at risk to rescue others, and as neither Ms. Mona nor Ms. Biddy are in your care. - Nunh-huh 14:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Altruism is considered to be a mechanism which has affected evolution (or the other way round). Sorry if this is Weasel-speak, but I can´t find the reference I have stumbled across some weeks ago.

If my memory serves me right, these scientists (anthropologists ?) argued that altruistic behaviour may have been instrumental in the survival of tribe X whilst a less community oriented and selfish humanoid clan, tribe Y, may not have survived.

Maybe somebody else knows what hypothesis I am referring to ? --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you are referring to group selection as the proposed mechanism of the evolution of altruism. - Nunh-huh 19:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally I'd be very skeptical of any attempts to base a moral philosophy on some independent foundation, and in particular one from the natural sciences. There have been adherents of the theory of Social Darwinism who viewed this theory not as a descriptive, but as a prescriptive theory, legitimizing the elimination of "social misfits". I have no idea, though, how such people would have solved your conundrum.  --Lambiam 20:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You could also look at Porphyry (philosopher) arguably Springer's forbear. Julia Rossi (talk) 03:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

There is an entire field known as evolutionary ethics. Unfortunately such attempts often fall into the naturalistic fallacy at best, and a projection onto nature at worst. Every ten years or so we have a totally different idea about what sorts of conclusions we should draw from our evolutionary lineage (were our predecessors more like the carnivorous chimpanzee, the noble gorilla, or the sex-crazed bonobo?), and science has, in my opinion, proven itself quite unsuited to the normative, or prescriptive, task when it comes to ethics. It tries to base it in nature, but nature doesn't boil down to simple answers or maxims—nobody looks more out-of-date than the ideas of a scientist who has proclaimed ten years previous that they understood how nature says human behavior should regulated. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 04:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Sdedalus for subjecting cleverly us to the false dilemma otherwise known as "the lesser of two weevils". Not the fastest bull in the arena,[5] I learned a lot.  ; )Julia Rossi (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I would save the old lady, since I don't much like the mona lisa. What about everything else in the museum. surely it would be much better to just put the fire out?HS7 (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, evolutionary ethics is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! As for the “dilemma” I believe it’s actually intended to be a Value theory question. It considers the value of art over life, but in this context it is made more complicated by the fact that the woman is over the age of reproduction. (Sorry, that’s a pertinent factor when considering evolutionary value.) Thanks for the help folks, -S.dedalus (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Based on my limited understanding of his work, I think the "biological ethic" of Herbert Spencer might also apply. User:Jwrosenzweig, not logged in 03:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Burma, Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand: Indosphere or Sinosphere?

Our Indosphere article places those countries in that orbit. Is this clear cut?

Lotsofissues 06:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Countries often fall into numerous spheres of influence - some of the countries you mention also fall into a 'sino-sphere' of influence.87.102.16.238 (talk) 12:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

All four countries currently use a writing system derived from Indian alphabets (as opposed to Vietnam, which used a writing system based on Chinese characters before going over to the Latin alphabet in the late 19th-century). However, active ongoing cultural influence from India may not have been too significant in recent centuries... AnonMoos (talk) 20:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

These nations could be said to be the middle of the Indo-/Sinospheric Venn Diagram. Ninebucks (talk) 15:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Princess Anastasia

I saw a cartoon on tv yesterday about Anastasia. My mum says she thinks it was about a real russian princess. She dosent know any more. She says I should ask here. What happened to the real Anastasia. What happened to her family. Yours sincerely, Julia Mackenzie (aged 8)

The cartoon was probably Anastasia, which is based on stories told about Grand Duchess Anastasia, the daughter of the last reigning Tsar of Russia. The Tsar and all his family were killed in the Russian Revolution, but many people hoped that somehow Anastasia had survived, and many women later claimed to have been the long-lost Anastasia. Unfortunately, the stories were false, and the women, like Anna Anderson, Eugenia Smith, and Nadezhda Vasilyeva, were impostors: Anastasia had died in the Revolution with the rest of her family. -Nunh-huh 08:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

My great-aunt, who died not so long ago, happened to be a playmate of Anastasia when she was about the same age as Julia. Small world.John Z (talk) 09:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I've seen this film. It really is a very offensively revisionist piece of propaganda. The achievements of Leninist Russia are completely overlooked, and the Romanovs, some of the worst tyrants in history, are portrayed as fairy-tale characters. Ninebucks (talk) 15:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Does the Christian celebration of easter have its origins in the Hindu Bahagavad Gita ?

If so, what is the relationship?

Easter festival was originally a pagan festival - search for "easter pagan" for more details.

See eostre for more details.

I don't know if the link goes back further - do hindus have an 'easter festival'?87.102.16.238 (talk) 12:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

This page gives a little more info http://hindugenius.blogspot.com/2007/06/pagan-origin-of-easter-festival.html I can't find a direct link though.87.102.16.238 (talk) 13:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

The answer is "no". And "Eostre" only gives the name of Easter in English -- the actual religious observance of Easter goes back to the Jewish passover (the word for Easter is usually a variant of "Pascha" in most European-derived language). AnonMoos (talk) 19:32, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Not the whole story. Nearly all Old World, northern hemispheric civilisations celebrated some kind of spring festival, as a pagan celebration of the annual rebirth. These ancient pagan celebrations were quite universal, having counterparts spreading from India to the Middle East to Northern Europe. After millenia, people start to make up bits of religion to superimpose over these ancient festivals - thus, Passover. The celebration of Easter within Western Christianity today is a synthesis of the purely Christian story of Jesus' death and rebirth (having, itself, Jewish roots), and pre-Christian spring-tide festivals throughout the Roman world. Christian Easter, Jewish Passover and Hindu Bahagavad Gita are all essentially divergent festivals from a much more ancient style of rebirth celebration. Ninebucks (talk) 15:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

That's an opinion, but not necessarily the correct one. Unlike Christmas, where the date was fixed pretty much arbitrarily and probably to coincide with previous pagan festicals, Easter's date is tied to Passover. So to show that Easter is 'derived' from pagan festicals you have to show that Passover was. As for modern Easter practice (bunnies, eggs, chocolate) etc.) yes a lot of that is derived from Spring festivals. But none of those are that closely tied to the Christian festival of Easter. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Philosophers Wealth

How did the great philosophers throughout human history- Plato, Aristotle, Descartes- earn a living and become considerably wealthy ? Surely all they had to offer were opinions and ideas about the nature of the world and time, where is the money in that ?

Descartes inherited sufficient wealth that he never had to work for a living. I believe Plato and Aristotle were in the same boat. Algebraist 15:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

As to antiquity: A significant number were, in modern terms, teachers of patricians. Have a look at our article on Academia which has a section on Plato, Plato´s Academy and Ancient times. One of his students, Aristotle, later took on a pupil by the name of Alexander, who presumably paid hefty fees before embarking on a spot of empire-building.

--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

There are basically four ways to make money with philosophy: 1. already have it, 2. teach, 3. find a beneficent donor, 4. go to law school and become a lawyer! ;-) --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 18:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Some of them were poor homeless bums, like Diogenes. Adam Bishop (talk) 22:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Diogenes of Sinope, in (simplified and loaded) modern terms, was an anti-social anarchist drop out.

Societies, then and now, protect themselves from those who dare to question the dogma. The methods vary (legal prosecution / mental institutions / public ridicule et al).

Those who misunderstand the meaning of the much maligned term cynic may still wish to read it up. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 01:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Does that make professional philosophy a leisure pursuit? Looks like Socrates brought it down to earth a little without leaving his name to a syndrome. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Population

How can any organisation be even close when estimating the human population of this planet ? Surely as people are constantly dying and being born at only roughly equal rates, one can never be certain of the population. There must be no way of ever knowing how many of us there are, or if anybody's estimations are anywhere near the truth. Wikipedia states that on January 25th, 2006 the estimation was at 6.5 billion, but what is the margin of error ?

This website has information on methodology. Carom (talk) 19:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Population counting itself is not a unique statistical problem—statisticians have been dealing with exactly these sorts of issues since the dawn of statistics as a discipline (it was, at the name implies, the science of the state, that is, the science which tells you about the nation-state itself, about how many people are in it, who they are, how they are doing, etc.—what might today be more specifically called demography). In anything where you are tallying people you have to make certain assumptions about how reliable your models are, who you are missing, how much you can extrapolate from a small sample size.

The silliness comes in when places like the US Census make it look like their estimates are valid all the way down to the individual person. This is a display of false precision. I wish I could tell you the margin of error in such things but it is likely that the last four—and probably even more—digits given are just false precision, statistical junk that nobody has bothered to filter out. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) Demography and population statistics are specialized fields. If you count all people in a given area during a certain period, say a single day (as is done in some countries when census is taken) the effect of the difference between the birth rate and the death rate will be small. If the annual growth rate is 1.18%, the growth rate per day is only 0.0032%. The main error is then in not counting people who are away (or possibly hiding) when the census taker comes. Given the growth rate, which usually will not suddenly change dramatically, such numbers can be projected to dates like January 1. By counting some parts more precisely, it can be estimated what the undercount is in general. Using standard statistical methods, the variance can be estimated, and can further be checked with differences between projected and counted results. When summing estimates of different areas to obtain a global estimate, just add up the respective variances as well. The main issue for global estimates is that problems such as civil war may make it impossible to take the census of some countries. Such disturbing aspects are much larger than uncertainties related to the constant going on of births and deaths.  --Lambiam 19:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Art Work

What is the difference between G/P and S/N on a Thomas Kinkade painting?

I can't find a GP. The prints listed for sale on the Thomas Kinkade website [6] are marked "S/N' and "A/P". S/N stands for "Standard Number" which places it in the Kinkade inventory somewhere; it is also the number written on a brass plaque that accompanies the print. "A/P" stands for "artist's proof" which seems to mean, in this case only, that is is slightly larger than the rest of the print run and is basically just another shorter run of the same "S/N" print. The "A/P" costs more than the "S/N". Please note that Kinkade print runs tend to number in the thousands, and even if an "A/P" is a shorter run, it still may be longer by far than the full run of most other artists' numbered print. (I once attended at a framing lecture given by Kinsler where she said that any print run longer than 250 copies was not "limited" in any realistic sense." ៛ Bielle (talk) 02:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Stalin's father

I read that there may be some doubt over the exact parentage of Joseph Stalin, not shown in your article. Is any more known? Rigsby's Cat (talk)

Only the doubt that seems to spring up about the parentage of many famous figures.... AllenHansen (talk) 11:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

See Nikolai_Przhevalsky#Przhevalsky_and_Stalin; our article calls it an urban legend. BrainyBabe (talk) 14:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

What do interest rate cuts have to do with inflation?

I'm trying to understand the US Economic policy, with its interest cuts and Economic Stimulus Package. I heard a few arguments on why interest cuts would increase inflation. Is this because more money will be able through credit? I thought the fed did a good job controlling inflation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Legolas52 (talk • contribs)

This is an involved topic. Here are some articles for you to peruse to get an overview: money supply#Link with inflation, inflation#Controlling inflation, monetary policy. –Outriggr § 00:20, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Devils

How, and to what extent, does Dostoyevsky's novel reveal an understanding of the inner workings and philosophy of The People's Will? Yermolov (talk) 21:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean the Volonté generale? ... AnonMoos (talk) 22:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No, sorry. I mean Narodnaya Volya, a political movement in tsarist Russia. Yermolov (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there no answer? Yermolov (talk) 17:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

According to our article on The Possessed, another name for The Devils, the novel is from 1872, while the terrorist activities of Narodnaya Volya's seem to date from 1879 onwards only. So perhaps Dostoyevsky had a general intuition of the mindset of extremist revolutionaries of his day and age that also was valid for N.V. (Or, an interesting hypothesis, they may have been inspired by his novel.) However, I don't know anything about "the inner workings and philosophy" of N.V., and I'm not qualified to comment on the degree of similarity. You can read something of what a mixed bunch it was here.  --Lambiam 01:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

ebooks

Hi, im looking for books on 'how can i know/understand myself better', 'how to study people's behavior', 'how to deal/behave with people'..etc. Could anyone suggest me some good online library along with the titles of the books, where i can find my need. Thank you in advance.

For a starting point or guide, have you seen our list of Self-help books? Please sign your posts with four of these ~ to avoid confusion. Thanks, Julia Rossi (talk) 07:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC) Oops, fixed the link so you can try again, cheers. JR

Depression in students

In universities, are students majoring in arts more likely to have depression than those majoring in sciences? NeonMerlin 23:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Statistically, whether they are students or not, arts-persons are more likely to suffer from depression that science-persons. Wrad (talk) 00:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it is the other way round: depressed people tend more to like art than not depressed people. If the correlation is true at all, of course. Mr.K. (talk) 01:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This 2008 article in the New York Times science section[7] about the work of neuroscientist Dr. Jack Pettigrew is worth a look. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice source, but this article is not from 2008, but 1999.WikiProteus (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

So it is, thanks, WikiProteus. I looked at the wrong header. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

March 23

About a photograph

I found this strange photo in a gallery with the name "Amazing photos throughout our history", and I was wondering - since it's been placed in such a category - if it has got some kind of story to go along. It seems to be a portrait of either a inbreed family or a freakshow. Any suggestion what it is?

Here it is: [8] --Petteroes (talk) 00:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Hard to say without any information as to who it is a photo of, where taken, and when taken. Could be a Photoshop project, could be a family some of whom have unusual appearance, could be a 19th century institution. Edison (talk) 18:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Judging by certain prominent anatomical features, these individuals exhibit several conditions resulting from developmental birth defects such as congenital hydrocephalus ("water on the brain;" the young woman fourth from the left) and microcephaly ("pinhead," the small person on the right). More recent medical advances such as treatment (shunts for hydrocephalus) and in-utero screening (for deformities of brain and central nervous system that might indicate reason to abort the affected fetus) have made these conditions uncommon today, but they certainly continue to occur. The subjects' wardrobe (about which I'm no expert) places them in the late 19th or early 20th C. I would suppose they are unrelated and were living in an institution for the feeble-minded, or similar term current at the time. Those similarly afflicted but less fortunate would possibly have been exploited for their "freakish" appearance and displayed in sideshows, well portrayed in Todd Browning's classic film, Freaks (1932). Author Robertson Davies offers a literary treatment of one such non-institutionalized mentally disabled individual in What's Bred in the Bone (1985). -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Huang Yong, Chinese serial killer

Hi friends, some users (or the same) are vandalizing this guy's article. What can we do? Maru-Spanish (talk) 02:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Try these guys, Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Task Force. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Do Jews believe in hell and the devil?

Do Jews believe in hell and the devil?

They believe in Sheol and Satan. AnonMoos (talk) 03:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

But nothing like Christian concepts of the two. See Jewish eschatology and this page on Judaism and HaSatan (the adversary). -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Supply and demand in the labor market

For jobs paying minimal wages is clear that there is much more supply than demand. For jobs paying some hundred dollars/hour the contrary is the case.

But, how can we calculate all these cases in the middle?

If I know that a job pays $15/hours, how is the ratio of supply and demand?

Where is the point where there is as much supply as demand?

Mr.K. (talk) 03:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Your assumptions are not necessarily correct. In some places or times of high unemployment there can be more demand even for minimum wage jobs than there is supply. For some high paying jobs (doctors, for example, here in Canada) there is much more supply of jobs (i.e. demand for doctors) than there is demand. Other dangerous or difficult jobs can also be in plentiful supply, despite their high pay. You might be better thinking of pay rate as being a balencing factor between supply and demand; for example during the bursting of the dotcom bubble both demand for software workers and their pay rates went down. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

must religious stereotypes be bigotted???

religion MEANS its adherents will have certain ideas, so how is it bigotted on its face to attribute it to the members of that religion? It's just a question of true or false, isn't it, since either the adherents will or won't have the thoughts you ascribe to them.... can someone explain why religion should be treated as though it didn't involve BEING certain ways, as though it were just being a circumstnace of someone's birth?

It depends on whether the stereotype is hateful or not, and whether one is compressing a great deal of variance into a simple statement. It's one thing to talk about beliefs that are very widely held by groups, it's another to start ascribing other attributes to them. On the whole, it is not bigoted to say that Mormons are anti-gay, that Catholics are anti-abortion, and Jews and Muslims aren't supposed to eat pork. But in all of those there will be variance as well—it's not a question of true or false, some Catholics aren't anti-abortion, some Mormons aren't anti-homosexual, some Jews and Muslims doubtless think God has bigger things to worry about than their lunch. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 04:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Like his own lunch. How many calories a day does an omnipresent being need, anyway? It must be an awful lot. -88.109.94.132 (talk) 09:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Could God make a sandwich so big he wouldn't have room for dessert afterwards? Important theological question. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

What does "anti-homosexual" mean? The reason I ask is that mormons don't think that God hates guys, they just believe the lifestyle is morally wrong. Wrad (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

They're against people being homosexual. Claiming that something which is clearly a form of identity is a "lifestyle" and therefore suppressible is, I think, grounds to consider someone being against the thing itself. In any case, I don't think one has to believe that God Himself hates gays to be anti-homosexual. They are against people identifying as homosexual and acting in a homosexual manner. That's about all you need to be anti-homosexual, in my book. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

"They're against people being homosexual." That's absolutely correct. I just think that "anti-homosexual" is a bit ambiguous. There's a big difference between the "God hates fags lets go kill some" crowd and the "love the person not the act" crowd. Anyway, yes, you're right, Mormons are against the homosexual lifestyle, though they are not part of the decidely more extreme and hateful anti-gay crowd. Wrad (talk) 04:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Does that mean that as far as Mormons are concerned, it's ok to be homosexual in nature as long as you keep your sexual activities secret, you never tell anyone, and you never openly live as one? That may be a less extreme position than killing fags, but it still sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

No, we (speaking as a whole) don't consider it 'ok', lived secretly or openly, but it's a matter between the person and God, who'll deal with it in his own time, in his own way. We don't teach hatred against homosexuals. I have a homosexual realtive and a homosexual friend and I love them, but it doesn't mean that I agree with the choices they've made. There are restrictions, such as not partaking of the sacrament, going to the temple, or, for none members, being baptised, but those restrictions apply equaly to, say, adulterers. AllenHansen (talk) 08:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

You speak of "the choices they've made" as if it's simply a matter of choice. I'd love to know why a person would willingly choose to expose themselves to the possibility of ridicule, hatred, vilification, discrimination, imprisonment, execution, religious persecution, religious restrictions, and murder. That's the attitudinal record against homosexuals down the ages, and much of it still goes on. Why would anyone ever choose to put their head into such a lion's mouth? Most straight males have a visceral reaction to the concept of 2 males having sex, which varies from mild displeasure to outright repulsion. So who are these people who go against their own nature to choose to enter into what they themselves consider to be repulsive sexual arrangements? What could possibly explain such utterly bizarre behaviour? Insanity? Extreme rebelliousness? And how does it go from being repulsive to being attractive, desirable and sexually arousing? Oh, I know, maybe they were always attracted to such things. Is that just barely possible? And wouldn't this mean they never chose this "lifestyle", just as they never chose to be left- or right-handed, never chose to be born in whatever country they were born in, never chose to be male or female, never chose to be short or tall, never chose to be a musical genius or tone-deaf, never chose to have parents who were Mormons, witches, Breatharians or whatever. I hope you see my point. The only choice homosexuals have is whether to acknowledge their nature and live their lives in accordance with it (not that it defines them or their life's purpose any more than being heterosexual does), or not. There are many reasons why many don't do so, and it's not hard to see why given the immense challenges they would often face. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

You might ask why anyone would "choose" to become a Mormon and "expose themselves to the possibility of ridicule, hatred, vilification, discrimination, imprisonment, execution, religious persecution, religious restrictions, and murder." Yet millions choose it anyway all over the world. Why does anyone do anything hard? Wrad (talk) 21:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

We're not asking you to agree with the viewpoint, Jack, just saying that such a viewpoint exists. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't what I was saying, Jack. I was refering to deciding to live that lifestyle (for lack of a better term). That's my opinion and it doesn't make me hate or dislike them. I'm not downplaying the struggle or difficulties. I don't, however, see any reason to like homosexualism. I'm sure there are things that you yourself find repulsive. 192.117.101.209 (talk) 20:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

To Jack from his question way back: ::No. They believe it's wrong whether you hide it or not. They believe it's wrong to have that lifestyle in secret or in public. They believe it's a sin. I just wanted to make the clarification because, as a Kansan, I've had more than my share of Fred Phelps. He makes me sick. Wrad (talk) 21:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I just read that link. All I can say is YOIKES. I've never heard Phelpsian teachings in our church. 192.117.101.209 (talk) 21:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify that there is a big difference between Mormon anti-gay and Phelps anti-gay. Anyway, I'm starting to wish I'd never brought it up. It's starting to become a classic example of the problem originally posed. Religions can't say anything without being accused of being bigoted, when in my experience, non-religious folks can be just as bigoted. I've run into bigotry on both sides. Religion does not hold a monopoly on bigotry. Wrad (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope my remarks weren't interpreted as being in any way bigoted against religions, because that was certainly not my intention. I'm just trying to get my head around this question of "lifestyle". Is this simply another way of referring to sexual activity, or is there more involved? Let's take a married man who has occasional homosexual feelings, and has a single clandestine homosexual experience. I assume the disapproval would be on 2 grounds: (a) it's adultery, regardless of the gender of the sexual partner, and (b) any homosexual acts, in any circumstances, are frowned upon. If a man, whether he's married or single, does this on repeated occasions, does this mean he's practising a gay lifestyle? If a man takes it further and acquires a male sexual partner, or a series of them, is this the gay lifestyle you're referring to? Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Mormonism believes in strict chastity before marriage and complete fidelity after marriage. So, in mormonism, if you're engaging in sexual acts outside of marriage, then it's a sin. It doesn't matter if you're homosexual or heterosexual. Wrad (talk) 23:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

That, I can understand and accept as a position. I just wonder why people don't say it as simply as that, rather than getting into the "lifestyle" language, which just seems to muddy the issue because people have different concepts of what "lifestyle" means. Thanks. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. This particular issue has a lot of muddy definitions that hurt both sides. Wrad (talk) 23:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Who is the earliest known person?

I've tried to locate the earliest historically known person, which I think should be some time in the 4th millennium BC or perhaps even earlier, prior to Sargon of Akkad of the Sumerians/Akkadians and Iry-Hor of the Egyptians. I've found many mythical names who supposedly existed before recorded history, but I'm looking for a real historical person. My guess is that it would be the name of a ruler, or perhaps a scribe who signed his (surviving) works. — Loadmaster (talk) 04:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Scorpion I? If the scorpion symbol associated with him is his name. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, we had an article on this topic but it got deleted due to lack of sources. — Kieff | Talk 05:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ötzi the Iceman? Not historically attested I suppose...but he was a real person. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Well if you allow Ötzi, you'll have to allow Lucy.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

See also a related question from December 2006: "Who is the first recorded human by name?". ---Sluzzelin talk 10:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Mitochondrial Eve (140 kY ago), whilst not documented by her contemporaries, indubitably existed. Indeed, you may argue she still exists.

Y-chromosomal Adam, by comparision, is a spring chicken, aged 60 kY. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The list of Kings of Sumer extends back a long way. The lengths of reigns are obviously inaccurate, but according to the theory I first read, Enmerkar ruled at roughly the same time as the first known egyptian pharohs Tiu and the Scorpion, around 3050BC, but the lists here seems to suggest instead that Ngushur ruled at their time, which was apparently 3200BC. Names before that are increasingly unlikely to have been real people, but I doubt there's any point where we can say, 'none on the list before this king were real'. Or maybe there is no first person and all our history is circular. HS7 (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

In case anyone says "Adam", "Chap One" preceeds him in most Bibles. --Dweller (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

does the California State Military Reserve allow gays

?

I don´t know if this is applicable to the question, but under the link http://www.calguard.ca.gov/ig/Pages/Homosexual.aspx the subsequent statements are made:

• Applicants for enlistment will not be asked nor be required to reveal their sexual orientation
• Applicants for enlistment will not be asked if they have engaged in homosexual conduct
• While on active duty, soldiers will not be asked about their sexual orientation or conduct unless there is credible information of homosexual conduct

--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't ask, don't tell --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 22:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Date Of The New Moon Visible In Jerusalem Nearest The Spring Equinox 2008?

Please can someone help me with the date of the new moon visible in Jerusalem nearest the Spring equinox this year 2008? Grateful thanks.NZGail (talk) 07:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Apparently it should be April 7. See here for example. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Unless you use an optical aid; then it could be April 6. And are you sure the new moon preceding the equinox is not closer?  --Lambiam 01:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The council of Nicea formula was the first Sunday after the first full moon after the vernal equinox, by the way... AnonMoos (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Where the vernal equinox is defined to be on the 21st of March – which is way off if you follow the Julian calendar.  --Lambiam 01:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Lord Jim and Imperialism

Could Conrad's novel Lord Jim stand as a metaphor for the late imperial experience? What does it reveal about the values and attitudes of Victorian England?Jessie George (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

When you've gone into it more, come back to us with things you find tricky (as per the intro box about homework above), Julia Rossi (talk) 08:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I have gone into it, thank you very much, Julia Rossi. I was looking for opinions to compare with my own. I did not come here to be patronized. If you have nothing to say might I suggest that you confine yourself to saying nothing.Jessie George (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Jessie, your bitchy reply to Julia (a valued contributor to this Desk) is sad and unnecessary. The people who reply to questions like yours are not paid nor is this their regular job. So have a thought for Julia's feelings. Your question certainly sounds like homework and Julia was quite correct to ask for more information - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 19:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems I came here, first, to be patronized and then lectured and insulted for my bitchy response. I do not need any silly little homilies from you, Adrian Pingstone. I know how the reference desk works. I asked my question because I was impressed by the expertise some people here have shown in dealing with literature and its historical context. Not, seemingly, in this case. My question was placed in good faith. The responses I have had have been shallow and stupid. I've done with Wikipedia and I have done with the reference desk. So long. Jessie George (talk) 08:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you present your opinions so we can compare all the better? AllenHansen (talk) 07:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Aklavik

Do exist a city called Aklavik in Alaska? Or is only in the Northwest territories? In an atlant of 1967 there are monthly temperature of "Aklavik (Alaska)" (9 mt of altitude): January: -27,8°, February -26,9°, March -22,5°, April -13,1°, May -0,6°, June 9,4°, July 13,6°, August 10°, September 3,3° October -6,7°, November -19,4°, December -26,7°. Is only a confusion? Francesco.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aklavik,_Northwest_Territories for the settlement in Canada.

There are a few references via Google to an Aklavik in Alaska, but but none of them give any useful details. Maybe contacting the relevant authority in Juneau would give a precise answer. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I can find no indication that such a place exists. Like Cockatoo, I tried a Google search of "Aklavik Alaska" (With quotes around it). The only result that remotely suggested an actual place was a description of a photo from a museum's archives: "Notes: Aerial photograph of Aklavik, Alaska taken by the Royal Canadian Air Force." I don't know what the Canadian Air Force would be doing photographing Alaska; smells like a mistake to me.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 13:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. A Google Maps search only shows "Aklavik Circle, Sterling, Alaska" which looks like the name of a street rather than a town. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 02:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It's pure speculation but I could imagine that a US weather service, wanting to report weather over the whole of the US, might find that the nearest reporting point to some chunk of Alaska was actually Aklavik in the NWT. And I could imagine them referring to that part of the country as "Aklavik, Alaska" - especially if their system didn't allow for reporting points outside the US. As I say, just speculation. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The US Geographic Names Information Server (page requires Javascript enabled) has no entry for Aklavik, so it certainly would seem there is no such place in Alaska. --Anonymous, 23:24 UTC, March 24, 2008.

Demonology trivia

Who fits the following description: "the lion-headed, eagle-footed Assyrian-Babylonian demon of disease and evil?" He is believed to wield a "mace of wounding" and a "dagger of killing." I need the name of this creature so that I may worship him.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 13:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Gozer? Adam Bishop (talk) 13:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

No Ghostbusters jokes please. This is a serious question (although a separate question of interest might be whether the fictional monsters Gozer and Zuul were based on actual Sumerian demons--but let's attend to my primary question first).--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 13:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, sorry, I couldn't resist. But if I am looking at the same book as you on Google Books, then it apparently doesn't have a name. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

It is an irritating and somewhat uninformative book; however, I believe he does have a name and very possibly a Wikipedia article. I am of the opinion that learning this entity's name will allow me to animate a host of undead warriors from the bowels of the Earth. Any Wikipedian who helps me discover this name may be permitted to rule at our side.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 13:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly Asag. It's how he is depicted in Hordes of the Things, for example. See here. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm restoring your first comment (hope you don't mind). I think this actually helpful, and I love that picture! If I had to guess, I would think that "the Hordes of the Things" designer probably used this as inspiration (see figure 2). scratch that. on closer inspection, the miniaturist said he constructed his creature from a griffin with the head of a temple dog. However, I can't find evidence that Asag was described this way in ancient poems.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 14:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Zu or Anzu. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so.... Anzu looks like an actual bird--and not a particularly anthropomorphic one. I think my demon is more of a half man-half beast kind of a deal. Also bear in mind that the demon I wish to worship is "Assyrian-Babylonian," not "Sumerian." Can someone tell me whether these cultures had discrete mythologies, or whether they overlapped or derived from one another......--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 14:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Mesopotamian religious practices "overlapped" greatly: the succesive waves of new immigrants tended to incorporate -and deeply respect- the religious traditions of the peoples and "older civilizations" they found already established in the region, and syncretism run rampant. As a clear example, long after Akkadian had replaced Sumerian as the spoken language of Lower Mesopotamia, Sumerian made its last stand as a venerated religious language in which certain rites continued to be performed. - Ev (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

rofl I just saw the picture at Google Books :-) This kind of demon is generically known as an ugallu, but I'm not aware of any instance of one being individualized and given a proper name. Its depiction in the walls of Assyrian palaces was intended to protect the place from supernatural beings and evil spirits, much like a lamassu or the Roman Lares. - Best regards, Ev (talk) 14:20, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Ugallu = Gallu? Or is that a different type of Mesopotamian demon?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 14:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16653/16653-h/16653-h.htm " Gallu was applied in the sense of "foreign devil" to human and superhuman adversaries of certain monarchs."

Elsewhere they are described as 'demon bulls'

Caution. Don't these creatures usually make unreasonable demands in return for their proper name eg Your soul, years supply of snickers bars, gold subscription to XBOX Live etc...87.102.16.238 (talk) 14:44, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Different types. Mesopotamian languages are full of homonyms: gallu or gallû itself can also mean "soldier" or an equivalent to our "policeman". - Ev (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

State first to throw a million men into war?

Lotsofissues 13:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Achaemenid Empire, if you believe Herodotus...but no one does. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Roman Empire probably could have. Or India. Or, if it doesn't matter if they were all on the same side, maybe China. The Maurya empire had 50 million people at it's peak, the roman empire between 70 and 100 million 400 years later. A large part of the roman army seems to have been used for defence of it's huge borders, which might count as a war. at the time of the Maurya empire, the chinese Zhou empire was ending in a civil war. I don't know any exact numbers though, but I suspect it must be one of these three.HS7 (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The Qin Empire of China (221-206BC) (which emerged the winner after the centuries of civil war that ended the Zhou Dynasty) had an army of over a million. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Douglas MacArthur

How popular was it to name a child after Douglas MacArthur during World War II? What references show this?--Doug ^talk 13:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I doubt many people changed their child’s last name, so probably not that popular. --S.dedalus (talk) 21:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Good point! I will reword the question: Were there an unusual number of new born sons named Douglas during the time of WWII because of the popularity of Douglas MacArthur? Sources that say this?--Doug ^talk 21:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I went here and calculated the numbers of Douglases per decade as a crudely rounded percentage of the total through the twentieth century. I'm not going to even try to cobble together an ASCII graph of the results, but here they are in tabular form:

1900–09—.06

1910–19—.09

1920–29—.1

1930–39—.2

1940–49—.5

1950–59—.7

1960–69—.7

1970–79—.4

1980–89—.2

1990–99—.1

As crude as they might be, these numbers show a marked spike, more in the post–WWII years. Remember that his fame extended into the fifties with the Korean War. --Milkbreath (talk) 22:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. These suggest, but of course do not prove, that it had something to do with MacArthur. Some of the Douglases may have been so named purely because it had become a popular name for baby boys (which in turn may have been because of MacArthur's prominence). The popularity of individual names rises and falls for all sorts of complex reasons, and maybe it would have happened anyway. Then again, maybe MacArthur wasn't kidding when he said "I will return" (he never specified in which form he'd return).  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 04:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Not that this will prove the matter, either, I went back and did "Dwight", a rarer name (This is all US data, by the way.):

1900–09—.04

1910–19—.04

1920–29—.04

1930–39—.04

1940–49—.07

1950–59—.1

1960–69—.07

1970–79—.04

1980–89—.02

1990–99—.02

The frequency of the most popular name (Robert, Michael, etc.) stayed in the range 3 to 8 percent throughout. --Milkbreath (talk) 11:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Well thanks for the statistical information on Douglas. I was born in 1945 and nowhere in my family history is the name "Douglas", so wondered how I came of this name. I do believe you have confirmed my suspicion.--Doug ^talk 16:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Those are some interesting calculations. By the way, it was once not uncommon in the US to use the first and last name of a famous person when naming a child, so if MacArthur lived a century earlier, I'd expect there'd be plenty of guys named Douglas MacArthur Smith and Douglas MacArthur Jones, etc., but I don't know if this first & middle naming practice was common in the 20th century. The most obvious examples of this are all the people named George Washington something. In my own family tree there is an Andrew Jackson Myers and a Ulysses Grant Myers; there were probably hundreds of boys similarly named. Even someone not well-known today, like Bishop William McKendree, had notable people named after him: William McKendree Springer, William McKendree Robbins, and William McKendree Gwin. There are doubtless many such examples, though I would expect presidents and generals to top the list. I wonder if there was a corresponding naming practice for girls? —Kevin Myers 00:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Florence was not a common name for girls before Florence Nightingale. Edison (talk) 04:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Martin Luther King, Jr. is a relatively recent example of the given names being the given name + surname of an honoured person. Although MLK was born in 1929, this name was adopted in 1935. One example does not establish that it was common, of course.  --Lambiam 11:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What were Sazonov's Thirteen Points ?

I read that foreign minister of Russian Empire, Sergey Sazonov declared a famous Thirteen Points during First World War that established war aims of Russia. However I was not able to found the exact text of those points or their exact composition. Does anybody now if there is an online text with his points, and what were they ?--Molobo (talk) 15:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The first google hit for 'Sazonov thirteen points' is an article that claims to list them. In case you can't access JSTOR, here they are:

1. The three allied powers have as their primary goal the destruction of German power and the German desire for military domination;
2. Territorial modifications must be determined by the principle of nationality;
3. Russia will annex the lower course of the Niemen River and the eastern portion of Galicia; it will also annex to the kingdom of Poland eastern Posen, southern Silesia, and the western portion of Galicia;
4. France will regain Alsace-Lorraine, and, if it so desires, a portion of the Prussian Rhineland and of the Palatinate;
5. Belgium will receive a significant territorial increase in the vicinity of Aix-la-Chapelle;
6. Denmark will regain Schleswig-Holstein;
7. The kingdom of Hanover will be restored;
8. Austria will be divided into a tripartite monarchy, comprised of the empire of Austria, the kingdom of Bohemia, and the kingdom of Hungary; the Austrian empire will include only its hereditary provinces, the kingdom of Bohemia will be comprised of present-day Bohemia as well as Slovakia, and the Hungarian kingdom will have to reach an understanding with Romania concerning Transylvania;
9. Serbia will annex Bosnia, Herzegovina, Dalmatia, and the northern portion of Albania;
10. Bulgaria will receive from Serbia territorial compensation in Macedonia;
11. Greece will annex the southern portion of Albania, with the exception of Valona, which will fall to Italy;
12. Britain, France, and Japan will divide the German colonies; and
13. Germany and Austria will pay war reparations [une contribution de guerre].

That's (a reconstruction of) the version sent to Paris by the French ambassador to Russia after talks with Sazonov. It should be noted that the thesis of that article is that the points are just Paléologue's write-up of an informal discussion, and never constituted official Russian policy. Algebraist 17:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Could these go in the article? Julia Rossi (talk) 01:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

why dont citizens of other countries get to vote in U.S. elections

why don't citizens of, say, France, get to vote in U.S. elections, given that they're just as much affected by the results as Americans are...?

Because it would be anarchy. Governments are a group of people who hold a monopoly on the legitimate use of force in a given territory, therefore it makes sense that those within that territory should be the ones to chose that government. Foreign citizens are not bound to the land they are living in and could therefore vote with a shorter time perspective, or with other interests pertinent to his/her country of origin. Besides, voting is a right and rights bring with them certain constraints and obligations that foreign citizens might not want to have.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 18:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Anarchy is a lack of government, not expanding the suffrage to include non-citizens. The reason citizens of France don't get to vote in US elections is because the US has made voting a right that comes with citizenship—it's as simple as that. You could imagine a situation in which a country allowed non-citizens to vote (say, non-documented immigrants, or people with work visas, etc., or citizens of territories, etc.). It would be unusual to say the least but I don't think it destroys the idea of government itself, anymore than the idea that citizens can vote even if they are not residents of a territory (e.g. by absentee ballot) would. Thousands of Americans vote from other countries, they are not necessarily any more "bound to the land" than, say, a French national living in New York. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The "unusual situation" wasn't soo unusual in the US until the 1830s or so; white male non-citizens, immigrants residing in the US could and did vote in some places. Too lazy to dig up a cite. Should be somewhere here. John Z (talk) 21:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

In Australia, voting is both a right and a responsibility (as long as you're registered to vote, which is also a responsibility). It's no longer the case, but there were times in our not too distant past where certain persons (eg. British subjects) who were not Australian citizens but resided here could register to vote, and having registered, were then required to vote. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The number of supra-national elections is very limited. The two that come to mind are:

• Papal elections, where 80-odd cardinals of various national bishoprics elect the Pope in the papal conclave. Clearly, this is not a sample of universal suffrage.
• Elections for the European parliament, where some 350 Mio Europeans vote for this legislative council by general and trans-national suffrage within the 27 member states.

Bear in mind that trans-national elections are a massive logistic problem. They also pose significant problems in the allocation of seats. Compare this to the US senate, where every state, regardless of the size holds two seats. Also consider that the electoral system of voting varies. In the US, the president is elected indirectly, in some countries you have a proportional system, in others a majoritarian system.

There are stacks of other complicated issues. In many European countries a parliament can dissolve and call for new elections. In the US there is no such option (at least in my understanding). All these conflicting issues have to be tackled and solved before a trans-national election makes any sense and can be implemented. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Italy has seats in its parliament reserved for representation of Italians living abroad. A man who had migrated to Australia many years ago, and who I assume has dual Italian-Australian citizenship, won one of these seats and became an Italian Senator a couple of years ago, but his primary residence is still in Australia. If my assumption about his dual citizenship is correct, he also not only gets to vote in Australian elections, he is required to do so; whereas he's not required to vote in Italian elections. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

In Canada, the right to vote was not limited to Canadian citizens until the 1970s or 1980s. Any Canadian resident who was a British subject could vote -- which basically meant any citizen of a British Commonwealth country. However, this is just an example of the way Canada's status changed in gradual stages from British colony to independent country. Until about 1947, there was no such thing as a Canadian citizen (or UK citizen either) as distinct from the broader term "British subject". And the vote never extended to British subjects resident elsewhere. --Anonymous, 23:31 UTC, March 24, 2008 (copyedited later).

Preposterous. By the same token, why don't US citizens get to vote in French elections? No man is an island, after all. AllenHansen (talk) 07:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Many ideas that are accepted now were once considered quite preposterous, such as that of allowing common people – and even women! – to vote. I any case, there can be little doubt that the original questioner did not pose the question to get factual information, but to express the opinion that non-US citizens ought to be able to have a say in who will be the primary political leader of the First World. However, Wikipedia in general and the Reference desk in general is not intended for soapboxing or general debates, however interesting.  --Lambiam 12:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

what's the MOST number of people that could be hidden and unaccounted for without anyone realizing it?

n/t

6.5 billion. Absolutely no one would be able to know where has everybody gone to.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 19:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to be nit-picky but who are "anyone" in this case? Obviously the people being hidden would know they were being hidden, obviously the people hiding them would know. Are we talking about an organization of hiders and an organization of the hidden? Are the hidden being hidden by choice? Why are they being hidden? Does "realizing it" mean knowing the specific reason people are disappearing or just being aware of the disappearances at all?* Does it matter who is being hidden? (The most could be only one if it's the wrong person -- if you hid my wife, I'd know pretty quick!) It's a somewhat silly and unanswerable question if you don't define the parameters a little more carefully. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 19:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

*Just as an example of this: the Manhattan Project was only "secret" in the sense that many people outside the project and even many inside the project did not know it was a project specifically to build an atomic bomb, but there were thousands of people both inside and outside the project that knew there was some sort of secret project. So we say the Manhattan Project was a massive secret, but what we mean is very few people outside the project knew it was made to develop specifically an atomic bomb rather than nobody knew that there was a project at all. Vice-President Truman famously did not know the purpose of the Manhattan Project—but he did know that there was a $2 billion dollar research venture going on in Tennessee, Washington, and New Mexico (and had in fact started to investigate the spending before he was called off it by FDR). --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 19:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

If 100% (all) were to disappear, nobody would be left to notice that they are gone.

If 0% (none) were to disappear, nobody would have left to be noticed that they are gone.

Anything in between would be noticed, at least in a reasonably "safe" society, sooner or later.

Bear in mind that societies have existed and still exist where hundreds, thousands, even millions disappear before the "outside world" realises.

--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Cookatoo! All this time I've been living in one big safe-house and didn't know it! Well, there ya go – that secret's outta tha bag. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Oops! I am an agent (the name is Smith, James Smith) of the almighty Xenu, he who has whisked you all away to the terrestrial loony bin without anybody realising it.

You have penetrated the Inner Darkness and will be cast into the slavery of the evil Diskus Wikipaedos (that is just a rotund version of the one-way boomerang, by the way). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 01:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Paintings of the Popes in the Vatican

Is there an article on the Vatican's paintings of the Popes in St. Peter's Basilica? The artwork is a line of circular portraits of each Pope. Alientraveller (talk) 18:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls where numerous holders of the papacy are depicted in a frieze. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 19:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

That's the one! Thanks! Alientraveller (talk) 20:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Gay Nazi Officer

Who was gay in the Nazi Germany? Was Himmler? 190.49.110.46 (talk) 20:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The obvious ones are Ernst Röhm and his deputy Edmund Heines, who were purged in 1934. Himmler wasn't gay. Algebraist 20:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The largest resistance in the WWII

I am working on article on Armia Krajowa, the Polish resistance (now A-class and future FAC). Many sources state it was the largest resistance force in WWII but a few give it the second place after the Yugoslavian partisans (see Armia_Krajowa#endnote_anone). The Yugoslavian partisans article is in pretty bad shape, and I was only able to find information that they numbered about 800,000 in 1945. I am looking for some more numbers, particularly for 1944, when AK numbered about 400,000. In 1945 AK has grew smaller due to hostility from the Soviet Union, while it would appear Yugoslavian partisans grew larger (since they were communist allied; with the coming of the Eastern Front Polish communists - Armia Ludowa grew from ~5,000 in 1943 to 10,000 in early 1944 and 30,000 in mid 1944). Hence I would like to verify if possible the numbers for Yugoslavian partisans in 1944, and also whether there was one of several organizations of them (perhaps the confusion stems from the fact that AK was the largest organization worldwide, but the Yugoslavian partisans refer to the total number of several organizations)? Also, I do wonder what were the numbers for Soviet, Chinese and Soviet partisans... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Depends on what you define as the "resistance". The Chinese Red Army had 900,000 members in World War II. However, they were re-formed as the Eighth Route Army of the National Revolutionary Army of the Republic of China in 1937 (full scale war broke out slightly earlier in the same year), so was nominally part of the "official" army of China. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Resistance - behind the lines, partisans, irregulars, etc. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

2010 quarter

What will the United States quarter coin look like in 2010, after the 50 State Quarters program has ended? Presumably the obverse will be kept, but what will happen to the eagle on the reverse? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 22:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Different strokes for different fokes

I have not heard this comment used in any other way than to defend deviation from norm. It does raise the possibility that fokes are different and the reason for the difference is that they follow different rules. For instance, when someone spits on the sidewalk an immediate line is drawn between them and me. I do not spit on the sidewalk because it is disgusting to feel one's shoe slide a little instead of taking firm hold of the concrete and looking down to see where someone has thoughtlessly eliminate their mucus. I consider that the rules I follow and the rules the person who did this follows are irreconcilably different and that like divorce merits separation. Divorce is one way in which irreconcilable differences in the rules that people follow are ultimately and decisively handled. Are there any other ways in which irreconcilable differences in the rules that people follow are ultimately and decisively handled? ${\aleph _{0}}^{\aleph _{0}}$ _{(talk) (email)} 23:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

For sake of discussion, there's a difference between laws (legality) and rules (customs). Something such as spitting on sidewalks is illegal in the US, Beijing, Singapore and discouraged by consensus in other places – usually for public health reasons. Possibly how people respond to this is "different strokes for different folks", meaning they can choose a way to deal with the prohibition (such as not spitting, spitting into a tissue etc). DSFDF is more to do with choices within legal parameters. In the divorce example for dealing with irreconcilable differences, there may be ways of carrying it out, such as the friendly way (amicably and co-operatively), the angry way (with hostility and endless litigation), between the parties (through mediation say) or in the courts. Or are you looking at other avenues of handling irreconcilable differences (such as in civil disputes, talking it through, moving away, aggression etc)? Not all different strokes are legal and not all have to be laws since there's an area where people are expected to be reasonable. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

As to degree all rules are made up of variables and in terms of human endeavor variables can have multiple states. What is not often realized is simply the order in which variables are arranged may represent a difference in the rule that the variables combine to make. In other words the most significant variable for me might be not spewing mucus on the sidewalk which for others it may be whether I say "Hello." Usually the violation of another's rule can be overcome by an apology unless the violation happens too much. This is what I expect you mean by "reasonable." However, I am referring to cases in which no apology is offered and no change is made in the rule, making the difference permanently irreconcilable. ${\aleph _{0}}^{\aleph _{0}}$ _{(talk) (email)} 00:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

That seems to bring in a third option sometimes called, cutting your losses. Someone told me an anecdote possibly from the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying (but it wasn't my find, so I can't verify it) about a man walking down a street with a hole in it and repeatedly falling into that hole, until he decided to take a different street. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

hummm... are you possibly saying one way irreconcilable differences might become reconciled is if the rule which an individual upholds results in undesirable consequences promoting him to change that rule? ${\aleph _{0}}^{\aleph _{0}}$ _{(talk) (email)} 00:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I feel the individual need not change that personal rule if it's a valid one, but change it's application and timing. The subject is just reconciling himself to an irreconcilable difference. He just takes another street, not another world. Julia Rossi (talk) 01:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

In logic it may only take a change in state of one variable or a change in significance (order) of a set of variables to make a difference reconcilable. Taking an alternate route makes the problem reconcilable. Now if two people are walking home and one wants to use the scenic route and the other the quickest route then unless one yields to the other as to the rule that they will follow an irreconcilable difference occurs that requires separation. 71.100.175.66 (talk) 01:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

March 24

Hitler's "compassion"

Inspired by the Gay Nazi section above I saw this in the Rohm article: "as a last act of compassion, [Hitler} ensured he had an opportunity to commit suicide first". Why was Rohm's and others' chance to commit suicide seen as a better gesture than killing them outright since they were already sentenced to death? Julia Rossi (talk) 00:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Its the admission of being wrong in one's belief that homosexuality is an acceptable sexual orientation so as to show one's support for and harmony with the Nazi state (ideal of heterosexual orientation) despite being sentenced to death for being a homosexual contrary to the ideal. ${\aleph _{0}}^{\aleph _{0}}$ _{(talk) (email)} 00:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

In some cultures, the Japanese culture comes to mind, of course, suicide has been regarded as an honorary method to conclude one´s life, whilst an execution was shameful.

Consider that virtually all of the top Nazis (Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, Bormann) comitted suicide. Adolf Eichmann is the only major official who did not follow this path.

It does, fortunately, sound entirely alien and sick to us, but granting to somebody the right to suicide was a privilege in the twisted Aryan "Blood and Honour" mythos of the Third Reich. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this what explains the many suicides of the youthful and radical followers of Islam? 71.100.1.14 (talk) 00:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Martyrdom is entirely different from Seppuku or its German equivalent. --S.dedalus (talk) 00:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you describe the act of Jesus Christ as somewhere in between? 71.100.175.66 (talk) 01:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you describe yourself as a troll? :) --S.dedalus (talk) 03:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

No, as a Jew. However, your post fits the act of a troll very well. 71.100.175.66 (talk) 08:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I will ignore the above posting, as it is logically unrelated to Julia´s query.

On seconds thoughts, if you were on death row, you may prefer suicide to the degrading spectacle of being strapped to some contraption and know that 20 witnesses watch your death throes.

Consider also, that some of the executions in the Third Reich were gruesomely slow executions where victims struggled for half an hour against impending death. The offer of a gun may have been almost a sign of human compassion. As you know, Ernst Röhm refused this offer. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks all – I was wondering about the cultural meaning of even being given the choice. Maybe Röhm had something else at stake. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

By "else" i mean something in his own mind, to his own way of thinking. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC) ...spiritual reconciliation with the ideals of the Nazi State, perhaps for the benefit of his family or friends is what I think is implied by the response above. 71.100.175.66 (talk) 01:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing but - family and war pension - being shot as a traitor leaves the family in an awkwards position. Commiting suicide lets them avoid the court martial and firing squad - leaving them with a 'clean slate' - did that make sense.?87.102.16.238 (talk) 10:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

There does seem to be a culpability factor. Thanks all, Julia Rossi (talk) 02:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

to give somebody the possibility to commit suicide was a custom all over Europe. The custom is even portrayed in movies. If I remember correctly The Life of Emile Zola shows Dreyfus being offered a handgun.--Tresckow (talk) 04:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Link title

American economic history

Is the following objectively correct?: In the 20th Century, lasting/major conflicts have had a positive effect on the American economy: WW1, WW2 and the Vietnam war all gave an good boost to the US economy, primarily through industrial production and employment: but the current Iraq war, although a lasting conflict, has not stimulated the economy, as top-level technology has not significantly increased industrial production nor employment. Thanks for help and information, --AlexSuricata (talk) 01:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Nationally I'm unsure, but following internet bubble, and post 9/11 has greatly helped to expand the Northern Virginia area according to this Time article which referred to Fairfax County, Virginia as ""one of the great economic success stories of our time." (albeit because of our so-called "Rich Uncle.) Essentially, government, and government contract jobs makes Fairfax County, Virginia have a unemployement rate of 1.9% incomparison of the national rate of 4.9%. The main reason is that is geographically extremely close to the Nation's Capital, and that many private and public companies and Fortune Five Hundred companies are located within the county's borders. Most of said companies deal with the Military-industrial complex, intelligence gathering, technology/IT/technical for government and companies, lobbying, or just white collar/professional employement. Besides that, Fairfax County, and next door neighbor Loudoun County have the first and second highest medium incomes in the nation respectively, for the same reasons. The Northern Virginia/DC Capital Area is just booming due to the influx of federal spending. As an aside, mine own father works as a Computer program developer and tester for the CIA (I think; he legally can't tell me anything. Kinda cool huh?). I hope this helped to answer at least part of your question. Zidel333 (talk) 01:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It may be that the post-9/11 military spending has helped the DC Metro Area and perhaps other regions dependent on military spending, but nationally it is hard to find a positive effect. Instead, spending on the Iraq war and other military activity has increased the budget deficit and contributed to the U.S. current account deficit, to the detriment of the overall economy. Also, the pouring of resources into essentially unproductive uses instead of into productive infrastructure or other capital weakens the U.S. economy in the long run. In fact, while the Vietnam War stimulated the economy in the short run, in the somewhat longer run, it undermined the dollar by forcing the collapse of the Bretton Woods system and led to the harmful stagflation of the 1970s. I think that if you look closely at the supposed positive economic effects of wars, they amount to no more than short-term stimulus that does the economy more harm than good long-term. While a long-term boom followed World War II, after a late-40s recession, this can be better explained by structural factors that favored the U.S. economy in the aftermath of the war than by the warmaking itself. No war since has placed the United States in a such a favorable global position, and arguably every war since the Korean War has weakened the position of the United States in the global economy. Marco polo (talk) 02:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I neglected to say that an almost decade-long boom followed WWI in the United States (though not so much in Europe), again due to the way the war improved the global economic position of the US rather than due to the short-term stimulus of the warmaking (which led to a sharp recession in 1919–1920). World Wars I and II improved the global economic position of the United States mainly by devastating the economies of its main competitors (Britain and Europe in World War I, Britain, Europe, and to a lesser extent Japan in World War II). This left the United States in the position of the world's workshop and supplier. Quite unrelated to these wars, however, the United States was rising to global ascendancy due to 1) its relatively early industrialization and extensive transport infrastructure, 2) its large and rapidly expanding population, commanding a relatively high standard of living, and 3) the size of its market. While its competitors mostly shared the first advantage, they did not share the second or third to the same extent. Since World War II, the United States's military adventures have not brought the same advantages for the following reasons: 1) wars since World War II have diverted US resources from productive investment while leaving its main competitors (Europe and increasingly East Asia) free to invest in new and more productive infrastructure and industrial plant, 2) the second and third advantages of the United States listed above have diminished. The United States population is not expanding as rapidly as it once did, and the median standard of living has actually been dropping due in part to policies that have sharply increased income disparities in the United States, eroding the purchasing power of the median household. Meanwhile, the main competitors of the United States have internal markets that are potentially as large or larger (China) or have combined in trading blocks to compete with the United States on the basis of scale (European Union). Therefore, the United States no longer enjoys the same structural advantages over its competitors as it did in the first half of the 20th century at the same time that it has, in effect, been wasting its resources on wars that did not improve its economic position while its competitors have been building their economies. Marco polo (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Break-up of the Soviet Union

How strongly did the Soviet Union in the period 1981-1991 fear a possible coming civil war? Thanks, --AlexSuricata (talk) 01:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

What broke the State occurred at the top and not the middle or the bottom. 71.100.175.66 (talk) 01:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Very strongly, although 71.100.175.66 is essentially correct. --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 01:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Erm is that true? Did anyone in the soviet union say in 1985 even vaguely fear civil war. This is news to me. References please etc??87.102.16.238 (talk) 11:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Post 1985, but: There was the August coup (1991) against Gorbachev, there was his resignation and the dissolution of the Supreme Soviet. Under Yeltsin there was widespread corruption, economic collapse and the 1993 Russian constitutional crisis when the parliament was shelled by tanks.

If you imagine similar events: President X steps down, Congress and Senate dissolve, California and the newly formed Confederate States cede from the Union. The role of the armed forces is not necessarily clear cut as tanks are rolling towards Washington. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 13:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Nazi justice and foreign workers

First, my belated thanks to the person who gave such a wonderful response to my last set of questions on the Nazi state. I would like to build on this by asking one more. Germany had a huge number of foreign workers from 1940 onwards, some forced and some voluntary. I would like to know precisely how crimes, misdemeanours and the like committed by these people were treated by the normal apparatus of law and justice? Some were treated worse than others, I know, but precisely how? Tee Pot (talk) 13:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Attitude towards disabled people in Buddhism

I have heard and sometimes read that certain elements of Buddhism discriminate people born with disabilities as they believe it to be punishment for former life. I would be greateful for more information on that subject.--Molobo (talk) 14:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This does not form part of Buddhist teaching. You may be thinking of the caste system, which is a Hindu tradition. You might be interested to read about karma in Hinduism and karma in Buddhism.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Analyzing "bog land" by Seamus Heaney

I understand that I am not supposed to ask for homework help, but I am totally stumped. Its for English Literature, and I'm supposed to be analyzing the poem "bog land" by Seamus Heaney. Currently all I've got is that the poem represents Irish history - with the layers of the bog preserving it (such as finding bog bodies from thousands of years ago). I'm not asking that anyone analyze the poem for me, only that if some kind person could point me in the right direction or give me a few hints. Thank you. Sincerely, Robbert. 79.76.231.232 (talk) 16:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This search may help. There seems to be good stuff out there, such as Landscape or Mindscape? Seamus Heaney's Bogs. I hope this answer does not prevent a more knowledgeable soul from assisting. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking for any information on Harold Johnson, 60s-era jazz pianist

Hello there. I'm looking for whatever information is available on 60s era jazz pianist Harold Johnson of the Harold Johnson Sextet. Repeated google searches have turned up very little info. I've managed to find a very basic bio, but I'm looking for whatever additional information is available, such as: Is he still alive? Where is he living? Is he still playing? How do I contact him for bookings? etc etc. Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks in advance. (Santegeezhe (talk) 18:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC))

Please sign future edits by typing four tildes (~~~~) after your post. As you can see here wikipedia, currently does not have any info on the person you are looking for. Perhaps you could use a search engine. When and if you find anything you may want to create a page about him here on wikipedia. Please make sure it follows Wikipedia: guidelines and WP:N though. Thanks --Camaeron (t/c) 17:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Googling "Harold Johnson Sextet" brings up a mention of him (without a redlink) in Leon 'Ndugu' Chancler and a short article here which is clearly about your man but may be the bio you have already? Here is a page which says that in 1967 he was still a senior at the Washington High School in Westmont, California and may be the same Harold Johnson who later played keyboards on Motown recordings and was an organist behind Liz McComb. An interview here also mentions him - "There was a guy named Harold Johnson who was a grade ahead of me in my piano class in Horace Mann Junior High School. He also played in his father’s church... When I got to Washington High School, there was a talent show that he played in with his own band." You could try calling the local paper and/or public library in Westmont. Xn4 00:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Time Capsule

Hello. The term "time capsule" was used since 1937. The idea of time capsules existed 5000 years ago. What were time capsules called before 1937? Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 21:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

On a wider scale: Books? Manuscripts? Cave paintings? Language? Evolution?

All of those are time capsules of a kind. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Burials with personal things and treasures or artifacts worked as time capsules but were not likely intended that way – even if they were meant to be collected later in the afterlife it's for "use" rather than for post-time value. Looks like it's a retrospective kind of application. Julia Rossi (talk) 01:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Musical instrument learning resources (Piano in particular)

I'm looking for recommendations on resources for learning different musical instruments. My main goal is to find a quality resource for learning piano/keyboard, but I'd also appreicate if you could recommend me some for ANY other instruments, especially guitar and percussion. Thanks! --Voyaging ^(talk) 21:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

While self-taught can work, I've found having a real live teacher saves so much learning the hard way. But it's hard to recommend a teacher in person over the web. Do you have any friends whose kids take lessons? That may be a good way to find a good teacher. NB that for piano, people generally also learn to read standard music notation, whereas for guitar many play by ear or learn tablature or some other system. Hope you have fun! WikiJedits (talk) 15:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what a resource is, but Mel Bay's "Rhythm Guitar Chord System" is excellent. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

By resource, I mean just basically anything you can use to help teach yourself. Books, videos, sites, references, etc. Thanks guys for the help! I'm probably going to try to find a teacher. --Voyaging ^(talk) 16:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

March 25

Nation and Ethnic Group

What is the difference between the terms nation and ethnic group. Is there a certain criteria differentiating one from the other.

A huge difference, a nation is a political entity which (hopefully) endears itself to social and cultural unity for all the different sub-groups with in it. An ethnic group is a group of people sharing at the very least a genetic linkage, and sometimes a social and/or cultural link as wel, howevere the two can exist very independently, and can split each other up. If we look in the conext of Africa. When the Europeans arrived they thought Africans should be divided up into ethnic groups and tribes because that is what they expected, and thus in a way you could argue they invented tribalism and emphasised the idea of unity within ethnic groups. Then they drew nations around these groups, unintentionally splitting up the true social groups with political boundaries. Look at the troubles within Kenya now, there is little nationalism because loyalty is to ethnic and social groups rather than to the political entity that is Kenya the nation. Nationalism was not a known concept at first in Africa because people didn't give their loyalty to nations, but to other social committments. So there is an interplay between the two, but they can affect each other greatly and exist independently. SGGH ^speak! 02:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I must disagree. A nation is not the same as a country. Try reading Nation#Ambiguity_in_usage for a start, and compare that with ethnic group, particularly ethnicity and nation. Nationalism and the European conception of the nation-state are also useful related concepts. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd certainly agree with BrainyBabe's commentary, and I think the question is a good one to ponder. My opinion (based on my experience and reading, which in this area is not very extensive) is that when I use "ethnic group" I am talking about a self-identified community that is organized primarily around shared ancestry/race, whereas when I use "nation" I am talking about a self-identified community that organizes itself primarily around societal/political structure. The Kurds, in my example, are an ethnic group (they see themselves as a biological community), and most Kurds would identify themselves as a nation (that is, a community that is or ought to be unified structurally). I might call Native Americans an ethnic group (I think that's a community connected biologically) but not a nation (this is not a group seeking to unify itself in one structure, from my perspective...nations for Native Americans are at a lower level: the Navajo, for example, which I would call an ethnic group and a nation). "Americans" (or whatever we call the denizens of the United States) are, in my terminology, a nation but not an ethnic group. I believe I am using these words as they ought to be, but if anyone has a better (and more easily explained) distinction I'd be anxious to know it. Hope this helps, Jwrosenzweig (talk) 04:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It is always difficult to stake out the differences between two closely related notions, each of which is somewhat fluid. Although members of an ethnic group will often have a larger genetic commonality among themselves than with randomly selected people, it is a mistake to use genetic linkage one way or another as a criterion for ethnicity. The most important aspect, in my opinion, is a shared culture, which includes many aspects, such as language, art, myths, customs, dress, and cuisine. Also important is a sense of a group-derived identity, of belonging to the group, which is only possible if there is a shared culture. Quite naturally, people who identify as members of an ethnic group are more likely to marry within the group, which explains the stability of genetic commonality.

I am not inclined to call the Native Americans an ethnic group; rather, they are a conglomeration of many diverse ethnic groups.

The word nation is related to nativity, and originally indicated a group of people, such as a tribe, related by birth. The "German nation", as used in "the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" (Sacrum Romanum Imperium Nationis Germanicae, Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation), consisted originally of an ethnic group, the Germans – although in 1512, when this name was adopted, the Empire had expanded so as to extend to many non-German ethnic groups. It is only with the advent of the nation state (which the Holy Roman Empire was not), with its ideology of nationalism, that the notion of "nation" acquires a new meaning, diverging from that of an ethnic group. The new notion of "nation" becomes primarily political: a group of people who share a sovereign territory under a common leadership, and have a sense of sharing a common destiny.  --Lambiam 13:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

translators/interpretors salary

how much do they make an hour, like court interpreters and medical interpretors?

In the US, $35319.23 - $57864.66 for court interpreters and bilingual job descriptions as at 2005. Another google find (search: court interpreter salary) gives 30k to 80k pa. A nice link to FAQs on this is here[9]. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of "list of automobiles - makes with histories.

Hello, I have never asked a question before which will become obvious shortly. I was reviewing the entrie(s) in the above topic/listing and saw a discussion, I believe, about deleting the above lists? Will they be replaced with something similiar or new? Are they believed to be incorrect? I have found them to be very interesting and informative. They are, I believe, rather incredible w/ many names, makes etc. that are completely unknown to me along with their histories, pictures etc.

It appears this "deletion" is imminent(sic). Could you please advise as to the current decision, if any? Would there be a similiar replacement of them? Where should I look for an answer? Thank you for your patience! Respectfully, jdmoran2Jdmoran2 (talk) 03:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't find the article you're talking about. The best way to get an answer here would be for you to go to the article you mean, copy the title, and paste it here between double square brackets, like this: Audi. This will create a link that will take us straight to it. --Milkbreath (talk) 10:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

1937 Soviet census

What literacy rate did the 1937 Soviet census determine for the USSR? The education in the Soviet Union article gives the literacy rate in 1939, but the 1939 census was doctored by the government and is not reliable. --Bowlhover (talk) 05:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Absurd Philosophical Notion

Which writer or philosopher was it, or have there been several, who raised the notion that we only admire great men of history because of the atrocities which they committed? In other words, for instance, Lincoln would not have been lauded as nearly so great a leader if he hadn't shown a willingness to shed blood on the battlefield. Our saints and prophets are marginalized and neglected, for the most part, while those who make haste to commit murder and evil are commended as heroes and saints. Even our most acclaimed cultural and historical figures - such as Washington, Lincoln, and FDR - have undergone this process. It sounds vaguely Swiftian, but I don't recall Swift ever going quite as far as this.

Thanks once again for your help! MelancholyDanish (talk) 06:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)MelancholyDanish

Social Darwinism? and the relentless publicity machine, PR (aka history)– usually commandeered by the victors. my bad, you were looking for a philosopher who raised the idea... apols  ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

First thought that came to mind was Max Weber's disctinction of ethics of responsibility ("Verantwortungsethik") and ethics of conviction ("Gesinnungsethik") in Politics as a Vocation. But I believe similar thoughts can also be found in Nietzsche's On the Genealogy of Morality and all the way back to Machiavelli's thoughts on Agathocles. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Conquest of the Desert and the 1982 war for the Islas Malvinas (Falklands)

In what way precise way did Argentina's nineteenth century Conquest of the Desert lead to the later dispute with Britain over these islands? I have more in mind here than simple geographic proximity. TheLostPrince (talk) 06:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Argentina only claims sovereignty on the Falkland Islands on geographical grounds (the islands are located on the Patagonia's continental shelf, see: Argentine Sea). The Patagonia became a part of Argentina after the Conquest of the Desert, so if this hadn't taken place Patagonia would either be independent or it would belong to any of the other countries that were interested in the region (France, Spain, UK) and Argentina would have never fought against Britain. Hope this helps. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 16:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

According to Falkland Islands, Argentina has claimed the islands since independence on the basis of prior Spanish claims. Is this incorrect? Algebraist 17:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

No, because Spain was the Island's sovereign until 1811, but when the revolution broke out Spain had to move their troops, leaving the Islands unprotected. That is why Argentina's Uti possidetis claim applies, because no treaty was ever signed by Spain or Argentina.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 19:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

help plz

i m writing something on what makes life insecure ( imean the external influences) such as bomb blast, political unrest, inequality of life leading to crimes). Can anyone please provide some good sources for primary reading. and citation or anyone who has written about these things (any online essay or link).

:Just had to decap your question or you might be ignored (kidding), Julia Rossi (talk) 09:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

There's this[10] in our article on lists of publications in sociology: social change section. Then if you really, really like reading, there's the Pierre Bourdieu article – a social scientist who talks about kinds of capital (as in what people have going for them – or not). Happy reading, Julia Rossi (talk) 09:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Things People Have Crossed Canada In

Alright. I know Terry Fox ran across canada. I know Rick Hansen wheelchaired across canada. Some woman went paddling across it. Is there a list somewhere of Things People Have Crossed Canada In For Charity? 24.69.167.145 (talk) 08:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Terry Fox completed about two-thirds, so I take it your list is not of people who completed the journey. There must have been early voyageurs who crossed all of known Canada by canoe. Amelia Earhart flew across part in her early aviation trips. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

You can add walking, rollerblading, cycling, car and RV but I don't know of any existing list. WikiJedits (talk) 15:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Barbara Kingscote rode her horse Zazy across Canada in 1949 when she was 20, and much later wrote this up as Ride the Rising Wind [11]. There's a touching review of her giving a reading here. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Critique of Dialectical Reason

In what way does Sartre use his existensial phenomenology to support the arguments he advances in the Critique of Dialectical Reason? F Hebert (talk) 11:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Marxism and Existentialism

Is it possible to reconcile a determinist doctrine like Marxism and the subjective forms of freedom that Sartre had promoted for most of his intellectual life? Was his attempt to do so a final surrender to intellectual dishonesty and creeping bad-faith? F Hebert (talk) 11:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

These will be on the mid-term. --Wetman (talk) 01:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

If you bend them enough, you can reconcile any two doctrines.  --Lambiam 13:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

War of the Two Matildas

Hello, all good people. I need some guidance from you historians. Would it be OK for me to describe the English Anarchy of the twelfth century as the War of the Two Matildas? Thanx.

Well, Matilda of Boulogne was only involved because she happened to be Stephen's wife, so I don't think that would be the best description. I guess you can call it whatever you want in your daily life, but on Wikipedia you should stick to The Anarchy (unless this counts as a reliable source!). Adam Bishop (talk) 12:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

gear vehicle

Are all cars sold in developed countries non-gear automatic cars? What about truck?

Can you clarify what you mean by "non-gear automatic"? I'm not sure what specific car type you're referring to.

Regardless, the answer is almost certainly "no". Cars in the US are sold with both manual and automatic transmissions, commonly with 4 to 6 gears, and continuously variable transmissions are emerging in the market. Pickup trucks share the same options, but large trucks are predominantly fitted with manual transmissions. In any event, it is unlikely that all cars will be fitted into any such category. — Lomn 13:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, the tendency to like automatic transmissions is mainly a USA thing, for whatever reason. Americans also tend to favor ridiculously large, living-room-on-wheels type vehicles- apparently valuing sitting in comfort more than they value actual driving. We take steps to improve auto safety, but this generally involves forcing manufacturers to make heavier vehicles, rather than encouraging people to actually pay attention while driving. Our cars show this. The rest of the world tends to make fun of us for that. Friday (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

citation needed.

Sorry. Perhaps that was a bit soapboxy. I'm confident that the bit about automatics being way more common in the US than most of the rest of the world is factually correct, tho. Friday (talk) 15:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you completely, Friday. If everyone in this country had manual transmissions then they'd pay more attention to driving than phone calls, eating, applying lipstick, shaving, etc. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 15:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Wishful thinking! People in the UK still do the same thing in manual cars. I have had someone say "hang on, I need to put the phone down to change gear" - even though using a non-hands-free phoe when diriving is illegal in the UK. -- Q Chris (talk) 18:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

It's illegal here too, but it really isn't enforced throughly enough. I didn't see a single police car on my 30 minute drive to work this morning, but I did see scores of people yakking away on their cell phones. Anyway, the fact is that the person calling you knew that he/she had to change the gear means that they were paying more attention to the road than someone with an automatic whose frontal vision turns into peripheral vision the moment they start talking. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Automatics are rare in Europe. User:Krator (t c) 15:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

81.93.102.185 (talk) 15:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

How does anyone know people driving sticks pay more attention than those driving automatics? has this been documented? Or is it a big assumption people make? Does driving an automatic make you lazy, or do lazy, inattentive drivers tend to prefer automatics? I drive an automatic and don't talk on my cell, and try to look where I'm going most of the time. I'm not sure paying more attention to my transmission would make me a better driver. It seems like substituting one distraction for another.66.152.245.18 (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's one source discussing the question. And there are plenty of forum posters with personal opinions, of course. I have to imagine the insurance companies would know- they're interested in any factors that help them predict who's likely to be in an accident. That one source implies it's a wash, though. In the US, where the vast majority of cars are automatics, the manuals tend to be either economy cars or performance cars. The performance-car enthusiasts may enjoy driving more, and thus may pay more attention.. or they may be irresponsible kids taking stupid risks. I dislike cars that get you away from the feel of driving, because I think they make the driver more likely to forget he's holding a deadly weapon in his hands. But, people are capable of being inattentive in manuals, too. I think the most neutral answer is "go with what you prefer." Friday (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Manual transmissions are more common in other countries as petrol (gasoline) is generally much more expensive and manuals are more economical. Exxolon (talk) 00:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

If the direct-shift gearbox becomes widespread, we could see automatic transmissions without torque converters, which is mostly what causes their inefficiency. And presumably automatic shift timing will also get better with technology. Right now efficiency, convenience, and performance are the biggest factors in what people decide to drive. But it's just a matter of time before technology catches up, and it will be no less efficient to drive an automatic. Then it will be purely a question of how much people prefer manual operation vs. automatic. 66.152.245.18 (talk) 17:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

From my own experience in the UK, some of the larger hire car companies provide automatics by default as they are "easier" to drive in that there is usually only one configuration (Neutral, Park, Reverse and Drive gears). Manual geared cars can have 7 gears or more depending on the make and the layout of the stick selection varies from model to model. In view of this, UK drivers can obtain an "automatic only" driving license which gives them the right to drive but prevents them from ever using a car with a manual gearbox unless they retake the full test. Historically, automatics were more expensive and seen as a "luxury" item - today a flappy paddle gearbox still is. 84.66.15.200 (talk) 06:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Whereas some off-road vehicles have "seven gears or more" (often accessed by a separate "low ratio" shift leaver and a "standard" shift lever), and some high performance sports cars have six forward gears plus reverse, almost all cars have five forward plus reverse. Some low range have only four forward plus reverse. Every car I have come across since the citroen 2cv and the early Renaults were withdrawn (early 70s?) have a standard shift pattern for the forward gears. Reverse gear can be in different places and may need a collar bellow the stick to be lifted to go into reverse, but for forward driving people expect the standard layout.

The above layout will cover any car you are likely to come across will have the above pattern, maybe with the fith gear missing and with the reverse somewhere else. See Manual transmission for details, though note that column mounted changes are almost unheard of now and sequential gearboxes are normaly only used in track-racing, not road cars. In short European drivers expect to be able to get into a manual transmission car and not have to worry about where the forward gears are. BTW for most cars automatics are still more expensive in the UK, though luxury models often have it as a "no cost" option. -- Q Chris (talk) 10:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sony vs. Casio

What Phone has sold more units, the sony ericsson w580i or the casio G'Z one type-s?

Please don't post the same question on multiple desks. If somebody can find the answer, they'll provide it. --LarryMac | Talk 15:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not write to the two companies and ask? Going to the source seems like a good idea at this point. 08:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Scriabin's Sonata in E-Flat Minor (1889)

Alexander Scriabin is my favorite composer, and I enjoy playing his music on the piano. However, I have a couple recordings of people playing his 'Sonata in E-Flat Minor', and I can't seem to find the sheet music to this sonata. The work doesn't have an opus number, so that doesn't help much. It is a very interesting sonata from what I've heard in the recordings; I would love to play it myself. Does anyone know of anywhere I can buy a copy of this piece in sheet music form?

Allpianoscores has a downloadable pdf-file. It's free. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks a lot!

SS

Hi all I would like a bit of information on the SS which operated in Nazi Germany. I have read the article on the SS but found it a bit overwhelming. I have heard the SS being called a 'state within a state'. Could anyone explain to me whether this is true or not and if so, how? I realise that the SS amassed great wealth through the use of slave labour during the second world war and that they operated as a sort of army and police force. Any expansion or simple explanations of the SS and their role would be much appreiciated!

Not to be condescending, but the version at the Simple English Wikipedia is briefer and (obviously) more simply written and may be more of what you're looking for. -Elmer Clark (talk) 06:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Rubles at turn of 20th century

I'm writing a short story set around 1900, and I have a question that I can't answer (and don't really know where to look for). Approximately how much would it cost, in rubles, to travel from the western Russian empire at this time across the ocean to America (say New York)? And if you don't know but have an idea where to look, that'd be good too. Any help would be appreciated!

This is a very cool question, so I had to take a stab, but it's a huge research project for a non-expert. Still, if no expert appears, maybe this can help get you started. The first part, cost of getting from your character's starting point to Hamburg or other main port (maybe Danzig? Bremen?) I have no idea. But as for the ship crossing, here are some interesting links:

American Historical Society of Germans From Russia: Passenger Ships and Immigration Links

100 Years of Emigrant Ships from Norway: Cost of passage, Norway – America This gives you 166 Kroner from Trondheim to Boston in 1900.

New York Times, April 9, 1892. Steerage Rates Raised This gives Bremen/Hamburg – New York passage as now up to $30 from $25 in 1892. ("steerage rates" might be a fruitful google search term.)

And a couple more interesting sites that popped up Emigration From Hamburg – description of the passage, though a bit earlier than you want. And Genoelogy.com gives the contact info for two America-Russia history societies.

Happy writing :) WikiJedits (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

The answer is on the tip of my tongue, but you might find answers in histories of Jewish emmigration. 192.117.101.209 (talk) 20:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Unreasonable and outdated dissatisfactions

The purpose of this question is to gather data for making improvement to several Wikipedia articles, namely the Wikipedia article on Racism. Please do not allow your own personal sentiments to overcome the need to find relevant background information. Thanks.

You've no doubt heard the old saying "Man is never satisfied." The topic I am researching appears to be one of permanent dissatisfaction. It seems that American Blacks do not feel they have been adequately compensated for the work their ancestors did as slaves and express a general dissatisfaction with life as it now exists. In all of the cases I know about, however, Whites who agree have not withheld compensation but rather have made every effort beyond any reasonable call of duty to provide extraordinary compensation. I know White women who have provided compensation in the form of bearing Black children as Barack Obama's grandmother did. Yet Blacks I have spoken with continue to demand the overthrow of White culture as the only compensation capable of satisfying them. They demand Whites act as if history did not begin prior to their enslavement by plantation owners before the 1900's. What I need are works (books) which explore the reaction of White impatience with such unreasonable and outdated dissatisfactions and promote withholding further compensation and the demand that prior compensation be returned. Multimillionaire (talk) 16:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Your question is loaded with assumption, many of which appear to me to be flawed. In what way, for instance, was Barack Obama's grandmother compensating for slavery in getting laid by his Grandpa? You might want to start at Reparations for slavery and work forwards from there, or, who knows, there might be some other websites which are better tailored to your particular world view. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, my current perspective can only be improved by including a review of such works in my research. Thanks. Multimillionaire (talk) 21:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Freedom of speech is number one on my list of things that make America great. (Other things on the list are habeus corpus and universal suffrage.) How can we know who is who unless we let them reveal themselves? And when all viewpoints are aired, we know we've chosen from a complete list when we decide how to behave. The racist point of view, though pretty seriously discredited not too long ago, notably in Europe, has enough scientific underpinning and de facto tradition to remain viable. So I can't understand why every single proponent of it comes off as a cross-eyed, rabid shithound when they talk about it. They always preach to the choir, not even trying to convince anyone, and they can't stop themselves from spewing when they should be persuading. It's like some sort of tic. I don't even approve of racism, but I could make a pretty good case for it in debate. That nobody but patent loonies seem to espouse racism makes it look like a bad idea, but that is only guilt by association. How can we discredit and abandon racism once and for all if we never have a Bryan to cream? Take your Obama-bashing racist nonsense down the pike, please. That's me practicing freedom of speech. --Milkbreath (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, Milkbreath, my actual moral and political position is that I abhor legal discrimination on the basis of race and to some extent social discrimination. Only a Mulatto, however, is in a position to express such sentiments without being presumed to speak for only one side. However, the most ardent racists I have ever met are in fact Mulattoes . The reason they give me is the position their ancestors put them in. They are neither one race or the other but rather their forefather's lack of concern as to the consequences for them of having sexual relations outside of their own race. Care to enlighten us as to which race or races you descent from? And when you are done can you please provide me with references to the works I am seeking so that my writings can be influenced or persuaded by what others have written and speak. Multimillionaire (talk) 21:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Has it occurred to you, Milkbreath, that you might be part of the reason why only complete loonies seem to espouse racism? Racism is so socially unacceptable in the mainstream that no moderately sensible person would ever say anything that might even be mistaken for it. If anyone accidentally does then they are immediately discredited and categorised with the loonies, by people saying things like "Take your Obama-bashing racist nonsense down the pike". You can't attack every racist sentiment and then complain that there are no sensible racists left. For myself, I'd be happy if it just withered on the vine. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

If someone were to make a rational case for any philosophy, however unpopular, I would counter with a rational case of my own. I was trying to be kind and assume good faith with my comments there. But now that the cat is out of the bag, the OP is an obvious troll whose only reason for posting was to cause trouble. We can't remove garbage like this without incurring a charge of exclusionism or censorship, so rebuttal was called for. The method the troll used was Obama-bashing racist nonsense. Such stuff should be taken down the pike. I'm trying not to feed the troll but to throw a little dirt over him to keep down the smell. --Milkbreath (talk) 19:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd recommend reading or listening to Obama's speech on racism. [12] I personally found it fascinating as regards what you're discussing here. Wrad (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Due to time constraints I ended up reading the reviews before hearing or reading the speech. I recall several passages in the book and movie entitled To Kill a Mockingbird which seem to disparage Obama's point of view. Multimillionaire (talk) 23:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

So Lee Harper used the Tardis to go forward in time to hear Obama's speech and disparage it? Well, makes as much sense as everything else you've said. hotclaws 08:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This is not about me or what I have to say. This is about my research and finding the truth, which apparently certain people do not want me to do. Multimillionaire (talk) 12:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Which would be fine, but for the fact that all other evidence suggests that you are seeking confirmation bias. Your clear dislike of ingrate blacks, and, elsewhere, "queers", marks you out as one who is very far indeed from "the truth" or from a search for it. That being the case, you are somewhat wasting our time. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I am very much interested in your reactions to such a question as it helps to bring the people who work the reference desk into perspective. However, your characterization based on other unrelated posts is completely erroneous which tells me far more than I wanted to know. Multimillionaire (talk) 13:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I feed trolls! Here is your edit history, and that of your IP. I think we're entitled to draw conclusions from the history of a person's contributions to wikipedia, however inconvenient that might be to the facade you're labouring in vain to maintain. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

If you follow the travels of most authors prior to the work they create you may see only madness and reach the erroneous conclusion that they are mad when in fact they are not. Multimillionaire (talk) 14:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Equally if you read the collected posts of a wikipedia account and find them obsessing in the worst possible way about issues of race and sexuality, you are entitled to form an opinion based on that reading. I fail to see the erroneous element: are you telling us your next post will celebrate diversity? I shall not be holding my breath. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I second this. Clearly a troll. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 12:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me to more clearly understand the mentality, perspective and operation of gangs. Multimillionaire (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Changing fortunes of the Nazi Party

Hi there I was wondering if anyone could help me understand how the fortunes of the Nazi party changed in their 12 years of power (1933-1945) or could recommend any books which deal with this subject. If you were wondering, this is a school assignment but I am asking for help as I have no idea about what to write. I think the defeat at Stalingrad in the second world war seems reasonable to mention as it was a change of fortune for the Nazis. If anyone could inform me of any other events which denoted a change of fortune for the Nazis or just give me some hints that would be great! Thanks.

Are you looking for the basis of the change of fortune? I can't find it just now but I have read somewhere that the current reason it is rejected is that it was deemed part of the Jewish agenda (see verse 26) to dominate the Earth and regard States and government as animals rather than as men. I'll keep looking for the reference. Multimillionaire (talk) 23:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Um, maybe it's a little early for me, but are you suggesting that Nazism is not in favor now because it is regarded as part of the "Jewish Agenda", which you have defined as a passage in Genesis? Because that's ridiculous, as well as ignorant. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. As a member of law enforcement I am often within earshot of members of the brotherhood of which several members have been overheard expressing the point of view that because Hitler's grandfather was a Jew there is a Jewish connection which reveals a Jewish purpose. The purpose is to dominate the Earth of which government, business and a mered of other enterprises are a mere part. Multimillionaire (talk) 13:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, in 1943 the allies started targeting their oil sources in Romania (covered a little here). It had been the Axis plan to capture Arabian oil fields to ensure a supply, but obviously that didn't work out. — Laura Scudder ☎ 23:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I am reasonably certain that any "brotherhood" whom you might "overhear" as a member of law enforcement, Multimillionaire, is not likley to be a relaible source for reasoned political and social histories. Wild fringe theories based on distortions and misunderstanding, deliberate or otherwise, yes; thoughtful analysis based on evidence, no. ៛ Bielle (talk) 17:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Kublai and Genghis

Why is Kublai Khan so much more famous than Genghis Khan in America, but Genghis is more famous in Europe? Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that American culture (South Park, Citizen Kane etc) always mention Kublai Khan whereas in the UK I'd never heard of him until these references but Genghis is infamous. Thanks a lot. 90.192.223.225 (talk) 18:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm American. I've never heard of Kublai Khan until 2 minutes ago when I read this question. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 18:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm also American and don't think that Kublai is more famous than Genghis here. Both are covered in world history school textbooks. Kublai might get a little more attention because Marco Polo claimed to have met him and because Kublai was also emperor of China. (I may be old, but not old enough to have met Kublai Khan!) Marco polo (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Marco Polo may also get relatively more attention in American textbooks because he's treated as a predecessor to Columbus.--Pharos (talk) 19:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Kublai Khan is almost certainly not better known than Genghis Khan in America. To the extent that Kublai Khan may be relatively more popular than in Europe, I would put that down to Xanadu in Citizen Kane, which was of course inspired by "Kubla Khan" by Samuel Taylor Coleridge. I imagine that Kublai Khan may also be more relatively popular in Britain than in the rest of Europe because of the Coleridge poem.--Pharos (talk) 19:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Another American who thinks Genghis is more famous than Kublai.--droptone (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

The questioner is probably thinking of What Would Brian Boitano Do?, which mentions Kublai Khan, but I believe that is only because it is such a bizarre reference. Referencing Genghis would have fit the meter as well, but it wouldn't had the same bizarre effect, since everyone knows who Genghis Khan is. In popular culture, he was the leader of the Mongols in the original Civilization, and my favourite, John Wayne played him in a movie. Adam Bishop 01:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Is that where he said "Truly this is the son of Genghis!"?  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 03:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Haha, that reminds me of an anecdote I once read - Wayne was directed to give that line "more awe", and on the next take he said "Awwww, truly this is the son of God!" Adam Bishop (talk) 13:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Authorship and publication of Wikipedia

Who wrote the Wikepedia? Also, when was is publihed?

Volunteers wrote wikipedia anoymously and continue to edit it constantly; it's not been published in any real form. Kuronue | Talk 01:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that people asking this question are usually trying to fill out bibliographical citations. If that's your purpose, see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 04:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

In English law, Wikipedia is certainly published and is an "electronic publication" of the Wikimedia Foundation. There's no answer to 'When was [Wikipedia] published?' - but you can of course establish when particular statements or words in it were published. Xn4 09:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Republic of Ireland: Income tax liability for actors

I have checked Taxation in the Republic of Ireland and also read the material produced at the government website, as linked at the bottom of the WP article. Writers, painters, sculptors can be exempt from paying income tax in the Republic of Ireland, providing the work they do is "creative". (There are other qualifiers and distinctions, too, but this is enough for a lead-in to the question.) Does anyone know if musicians and/or actors, full-time or part-time, receive any taxation exemption or reduction based on their earnings in these fields. (I know it is possible that they may not pay taxes because of the limited amount they earn.) ៛ Bielle (talk) 19:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

stores in history

Before Auto Zone, Meineke, Pep Boys, and many other auto parts stores, there was Grand Auto. Before there was Home Depot and Lowe's, there was this home improvement store called J. Borg & Company. Whatever happened to them? Anyone know?72.229.136.18 (talk) 21:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Pep Boys has been around for quite a long time; the article indicates that the first store opened in 1921. In general, however, before large nationwide chains of any type, there were more local or perhaps regional operations. I'm not personally familiar with Grand Auto or J. Borg, where were these stores located? --LarryMac | Talk 21:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

H Donald Smith

What was her given name? - Kittybrewster ☎ 21:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

According to the National Portrait Gallery website [13], it is "Helen". The NPG -and ArtPrice- hyphenates the last two names as "Helen Donald-Smith". ៛ Bielle (talk) 21:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

A painting by Picasso of Modigliani

Hello, Humanities. I am in desperate need of a good picture of Picasso's painting of Modigliani. In particular, the one in cubist style, made not long before Modigliani passed away. It is a portrait of Modigliani, taller than it is wide, I can only guess it is entitled "Modigliani". I would be much obliged for your help on the matter! 81.93.102.185 (talk) 22:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

PS. It was shown in the movie about Modigliani, as part of the exhibition contest. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 22:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't seen the movie and can't trace the painting. I wonder, could you be thinking of Modigliani's portrait of Picasso (1915)? Xn4 08:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This is the OP. No, this would not be the painting I had in mind. It follows closely the style of Picasso and Braque's cubism, that which Picasso used around 1910-1912. Indeed, see [14] for what is, stylistically, very close to "Modigliani" by Pablo Picasso. Edited for tildes and addition: I wonder if the picture is in private ownership by the Modigliani family. 213.161.190.228 (talk) 09:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure this is not a fictional portrait, sprouting from the fantasy of the filmmakers to spice up the film's largely fictional story?  --Lambiam 17:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Strories set in the Deep South

Is there any stories set in the Deep South, like Forrest Gump?

The Heart is a Lonely Hunter set in the deep South yes, like Forrest Gump, no. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

John Ball's In the Heat of the Night and Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird come to mind, not to mention Margaret Mitchell's Gone with the Wind. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Song of the South? Exxolon (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh my lawd. That is the epitome of historical inaccuracy. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 01:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You'll be interested in the genre Southern literature.--Wetman (talk) 01:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't fret, Bibliomaniac. The OP didn't ask for an accurate picture of the deep South, just a book set there. 01:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

For more current reading, there is James Lee Burke's Dave Robichaux novels set in and around New Orleans and the bayou country, and those by Virginia Lanier with the bloodhound theme. ៛ Bielle (talk) 01:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

William Faulkner is an noble prize winning American genuis whose works focused on early 20th century Deep south. Plus, Mark Twain, Ernest Hemmingway, Tenessee Williams, Truman Capote. Those are some truly big ones. 68.229.113.142 (talk) 02:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil is another well-known one. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What about John Grisham? Adam Bishop (talk) 07:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Pulitzer Prize: The Yearling. Non PP: The Black Stallion's Ghost. And that female forensic pathologist who keeps digging up corpses. Atmospheric. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

March 26

legal age for...

I read the archived question about the "legal drinking age" and I was wondering a few things.

1.)being that the legal buying age is 21, if you're 21st is on sunday and you want to buy liquor the day before. Are you allowed?

2.) has anyone read/heard of any specific laws in the state of virginia that are irregular of other drinking laws in the rest of the united states. if so, help!?! I've been looking for them online and can't find them.

3.) establishments, once again in virginia, that have a 21+ policy for entering do so at their own will, right? it isn't illegal to have someone that is under 21 in a bar. it's illegal to serve and/or have someone intoxicated in said bar, correct?

4.) since the zero tolerance law was made, I was also pulled over and given an under-aged possession charge. I have court on the day before my 21st birthday (next week). the initial reason for being pulled over wasn't stated until the officer first gave the car a once over, then was able to find an expired sticker on the license plate. 1.) I did allow him to give me a breathalyzer test because I didn't think that he'd ticket me (he did). I blew under the legal limit for being ticketed for a DUI, however he decided to ticket me for under-aged possession.

1.) if I hadn't consented, what would have happened? 2.) even though I did, drinking wasn't the initial reason for my being pulled over as the officer told me that I was driving just fine. 3.) is there a way to get out of this without having to hire a lawyer and/or do ASAP and community service?

71.63.38.230 (talk) 00:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Cimmaron

We don't give legal advice. Find more trustworthy hands to place yourself in, guy. Wrad (talk) 00:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

We don’t give legal ADVICE here. We do answer legal questions, which is what 1, 2, and 3 are. The last two we can’t help with however. --S.dedalus (talk) 01:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The answer to #1 is definitely no. I wonder if maybe you're referring to areas with blue laws, where it wouldn't be possible to buy alcohol on the Sunday itself, but I would still say the answer is certainly no. -Elmer Clark (talk) 06:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe that question 1 is related to the longstanding American common law principle that "a person attains a given age on the day before his corresponding birthday". So actually, it probably would be legal for you to buy alcohol the day before, but you might get to court before you meet anyone else who knows that. FiggyBee (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, those born on 29 February have a modest head start, as many systems of law deem their birthday in non-leap years to be 28 February. Xn4 08:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Mexicans in the US

Of the Mexican population in the US, how much of them are immigrants and how much are autochthonous of some annexed territory? Mr.K. (talk) 02:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• I don't have the numbers on hand, but I believe the majority of Mexican Americans are neither, that the largest group is probably children and grandchildren of immigrants.--Pharos (talk) 02:35, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, of course. There is still this possibility. It sounds quite plausible, by the way. Mr.K. (talk) 04:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

As for "autochthonous of some annexed territory", there were only a few areas populated by a relatively large number of Spanish speakers ca. 1836-1853 and included in the territories annexed by the U.S. -- mainly the city of San Antonio, the Rio Grande valley in south Texas, and northern New Mexico. I would doubt whether in 1848 most ancestors of most current-day Mexican-Americans were then living north of what is now the U.S.-Mexico border . AnonMoos (talk) 06:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Folk illnesses

I think this is more culture than science so I posted it here. Are there any other folk illnesses that only a certain culture gets, just curious? For example, it seems that only Filipinos suffer from Pasma while Bangungot sufferers seem to be concentrated in Japan, Thailand and the Philippines. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sickle cell is much more prevalent in sub-Saharan African and African-American populations than in the rest of the world's population, and Tay-Sachs disease is similarly overrepresented among Jews of Eastern European descent. Neither is 100% unique to those cultures, though, although there are certainly strong cultural connections between those groups and those diseases. -Elmer Clark (talk) 06:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

IANAD, but I am quite sure the question was about folk illnesses (specific medical conditions recognized by traditional medicine of the respective culture, but not by the modern medicine), and not about genetic disorders. Both Tay-Sachs and sickle-cell anemia are recessive genetic disorders, so two copies of the gene involved must be defective for the symptoms to emerge. Obviously, prevalence of marriages within a given culture or community increases the chance of this happening. As for non-genetic culture-specific illnesses of unclear etiology, there are conditions that are known from written tradition (like tzaraath) or historical texts (like Sudor anglicus) but not diagnosed as such by modern medicine. There are also conditions attributed by folk medicine to evil spirits or influences; these are religion- and culture-specific, of course. Please also note that we have a short article on Folk Illness that seems to stress the latter aspect. IANAD, so I will not expand it. Is there a doctor in the audience? Our article needs help! ;) . Cheers, --Dr Dima (talk) 07:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Zombies only exist in Haiti and its diaspora, because (some) Haitians believe in them. Similar chemical reactions in Japan are put down to the neurotoxic fugu fish. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to you both. --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

How about Fan death? APL (talk) 13:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Windows

When were glass windows invented? --Carnildo (talk) 06:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

According to Guns, Germs and Steel (through Google Books), the Romans invented them around 1 AD. Beyond that I'm not even sure where to start looking for info. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

See Fleming, S. J., Roman Glass: reflections on cultural change (Philadelphia, 1999). He also dates the first glass window panes to the reign of Augustus and says they were contemporaneous with the first glass tiles. Xn4 08:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The Don Flows Home to the Sea

How accurate is Sholokhov's depiction of the Don Cossacks and their role in the Russian Civil War in his novel? Is there significant political bias? Yermolov (talk) 06:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sholokhov's depiction of the Don Cossacks is amazing. He grew up in the Vyoshenskaya Stanitsa and most of the characters are based on people that he knew and who had fought in the Civil War. There is also no better depiction of the Vyoshenskaya uprising. He managed to show not only what they were fighting for, but also their indecision and rivalries. I lived in the Don region for a while and all the Cossacks I've met raved about the book. It's suprising how sympatheticaly they were portrayed for Soviet times. AllenHansen (talk) 12:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Is it true that the best Guillotine blades were made by Gillette???

Or is that just marketing?

Please sign future edits but typing four tildes (~~~~) after your post. Where on earth did you hear that? The Company Gillette is named after King C. Gillette! = ) --Cameron (t/c) 11:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean Gillette, the company founded in 1901? In the article on the Guillotine, it does mention that device was used for execution after 1901, but a Google search of Gillette +guillotine does not return any worthwhile results.--droptone (talk) 11:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Mulatto - White and Black perspectives

Removed trolling. --Milkbreath (talk) 13:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This post is not that of a troll and you know it Milkbreath. You need to stop harassing me and committing vandalism as well. Multimillionaire (talk) 14:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)