Science	Mathematics	Computing/IT	Humanities
Language	Entertainment	Miscellaneous	Archives

How to ask a question

Search first. It's quicker, because you can find the answer in our online encyclopedia instead of waiting for a volunteer to respond. Search Wikipedia using the searchbox. A web search could help too. Common questions about Wikipedia itself, such as how to cite Wikipedia and who owns Wikipedia, are answered in Wikipedia:FAQ.

Sign your question. Type ~~~~ at its end.
Be specific. Explain your question in detail if necessary, addressing exactly what you'd like answered. For information that changes from country to country (or from state to state), such as legal, fiscal or institutional matters, please specify the jurisdiction you're interested in.
Include both a title and a question. The title (top box) should specify the topic of your question. The complete details should be in the bottom box.

Do your own homework. If you need help with a specific part or concept of your homework, feel free to ask, but please don't post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers.

Be patient. Questions are answered by other users, and a user who can answer may not be reading the page immediately. A complete answer to your question may be developed over a period of up to seven days.

Do not include your e-mail address. Questions aren't normally answered by e-mail. Be aware that the content on Wikipedia is extensively copied to many websites; making your e-mail address public here may make it very public throughout the Internet.
Edit your question for more discussion. Click the [edit] link on right side of its header line. Please do not start multiple sections about the same topic.
Archived questions If you cannot find your question on the reference desks, please see the Archives.
Unanswered questions If you find that your question has been archived before being answered, you may copy your question from the Archives into a new section on the reference desk.
Do not request medical or legal advice.
Ask a doctor or lawyer instead.

After reading the above, you may
ask a new question by clicking here.
Your question will be added at the bottom of the page.

How to answer a question

Be thorough. Please provide as much of the answer as you are able to.
Be concise, not terse. Please write in a clear and easily understood manner. Keep your answer within the scope of the question as stated.

Link to articles which may have further information relevant to the question.
Be polite to users, especially ones new to Wikipedia. A little fun is fine, but don't be rude.
The reference desk is not a soapbox. Please avoid debating about politics, religion, or other sensitive issues.

May 14

Mary - mother of Jesus

I have learned that Mary - the mother of Jesus - is the Mother of the Catholic Church, but what makes her the Mother? Is it merely because she is the mother of Jesus? Or is it because of some virtues she possesses?

In 1964, at Vatican II, Paul VI introduced the modern use of the title Mother of the Church. The text of the address in which the declaration was made is available here. It may help answer your questions. --Cam 02:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All mother goddesses look alike to men. See also Isis#Links to Christianity. --DLL 19:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And The Two Babylons, interesting article in its entirety. The questioner may want to consider the significance of the hymn lyrics

"All I have I give you,

Every dream and wish are yours,

Mother of Christ,

Mother of mine, present them to my Lord."

Also, this may help. <<Pius XII, in a message to the Marian Congress of Ottawa, Canada, on July 19, 1947 said: "When the little maid of Nazareth uttered her fiat to the message of the angel... she became not only the Mother of God in the physical order of nature, but also in the supernatural order of grace, she became the Mother of all, who... would be made one under the Headship of her Son. The Mother of the Head would be the Mother of the members.">> From [1] Skittle 16:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's the doctrinal point of the Blessed Virgin Mary and particularly of the immaculate conception. N.b. this has nothing to do with parthenogenesis. All of the mainline churches say that Mary was a virgin at the birth of Jesus, but immaculate conception refers to eternal virginity. The exact status of Mary is hard to specify in RCC theology. Perhaps "chief of all saints" would be a way of thinking of her, as well as "top intercessor of all humans." She is not divine by even the most radical and non-conformist Catholic tradition, but she is as blessed and sanctified as possible. Geogre 17:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All of the mainline churches say that Mary was a virgin at the birth of Jesus, but immaculate conception refers to eternal virginity. This is a common misconception (no pun intended), Geogre. The two claims are:

Virgin Birth: That Jesus was conceived in Mary's womb without a human father, and that she remained a virgin even after giving birth to Him
Immaculate Conception: That Mary herself was conceived without stain of original sin. JackofOz 08:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WAIT JUST ONE SEC. Why would a woman be at the head of the Catholic Church? Isn't all glory supposed to be to God? Isn't that why Jesus sacrificed himself for us? That raises the question: Why do Catholics pray to Saints? Doesn't that totally destory exactly what Jesus set up? --Welcometocarthage

Looks like a set-up to me; nobody in this discussion said that Mary was the head of the Catholic Church. In Catholicism (in theory), all glory goes to God. The saints (including Mary) are just there to help. It's like when you ask people in your community to pray for you, except you know they don't have much else to do :-) You can say someone is pretty fab without that meaning you give any less 'Glory' to God. And how does praying to saints 'totally destroy exactly what Jesus set up'? Did Jesus set up a 'don't pray to saints' club? I thought it was meant to be a bit deeper than that. Skittle 16:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'39

In the article for the song '39 by Queen, it says the lyrics include, "your mother's eyes in your eyes/cry to me...All my life/still ahead/pity me!" I've been listening to my recording of the song over and over again, and I'm pretty sure they're "from your eyes" and "For my life". Can I get a confirmation on this? Black Carrot 02:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[2], [3], and [4] agree with you. But [5] is the only one on the the first page of a google search that returned that it said "Your mother's eyes in your eyes cry to me." All of them, however, agree with you on the "for my life" part. schyler 03:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've updated it. Black Carrot 14:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EXPCITE

What does this mean in the context of the United States Code?Patchouli 02:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The help section of the united states code webpage says that EXPCITE stands for EXPanded CITation (seems the U.S. Government is starting to turn to Newspeak afterall). Also, all I did was a Google search inputing "united states code expcite" and it was the first return. Pretty easy. schyler 02:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Patchouli 02:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Snowy Mountains Scheme

Does any of you know of any articles or good books about The Snowy River scheme and specifically the immigrants that worked on it? Even stuff like Journal articles I can track down if you know of something particular.

Thanks Waynejkruse10

My Dad has a couple (one very mediocre written by a former worker, and a much better one written by a professional historian), but I don't know their names. Normally, we don't answer questions by email, but in this specific case contact me on my talk page or through the "e-mail this user" link to remind me and I'll ask him next time I speak to him (probably in a day or two).

If you're in Victoria a good place to search for books like this is to check on Coolcat, which lets you search all the academic libraries in Victoria including the State Library and all the University libraries. I assume there are equivalents in the other states. --Robert Merkel 12:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Messages and Metaphors in the song Leningrad by Billy Joel

Firstly, here is a link to the lyrics of that song:

http://www.lyricsdomain.com/2/billy_joel/leningrad.html

I am looking for historical refrences and messages in this particular song. So far I have come across these:

And never saw his father anymore; A child of sacrifice, a child of war; Another son who never had a father after Leningrad - Battle of Leningrad in WW2, very bloody battle.

A cold war kid in McCarthy time - Joseph McCarthy, anti-communist.

Stop 'em at the 38th Parallel - Korean War

Blast those yellow reds to hell - Refrence to Communists but I am unsure why its the "yellow reds" rather than just "reds". Does this mean anything else?

Under their desk in an air raid drill - Duck and Cover in the USA

But children lived in Levittown - Levittown, iconic image of suburbia after WW2, planned city.

Until the Soviets turned their ships around; And tore the Cuban missiles down - Cuban Missile Crisis

Haven't they heard we won the war; What do they keep on fighting for? - Im unsure about this one, was there a particular point where it was obvious that the USA was domonent in the Cold War?

Can you spot anything else that I have missed? Any particular meanings that are significant?

Thanks.

"Blast those yellow Reds to hell" is the Korean War again, referring to North Korea and/or China, which of course had/have communist governments.

"You took a yellow Red before a white American, which is pretty pinko."

"You're even boring in Technicolor."

—Zero Gravitas 04:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Besides being an icon of suburbia, Levittown is also where Billy Joel himself lived as a child. --Metropolitan90 05:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks y'all.

"Haven't they heard we won the war; What do they keep on fighting for?" -- is most certainly ironic. Think about what it would mean for a songwriter to write that today, except about the war with Iraq. --Fastfission 22:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- For that matter, much of the song is meant to be ironic, as I look it over a bit more carefully. It is fairly explicitly expressing the idea that the that Soviet citizens were portrayed in the U.S. as being pure militaristic evil, and yet the Soviet citizens were really the ones who suffered the most during the entire period. --Fastfission 22:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Frederick II of Prussia

Where did Frederick II of Prussia die? It doesn't say in the article, and I'm looking for his place of death so I can add his name to WikiTree.

Potsdam (specifically, Sanssouci) - Nunh-huh 04:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Black-Velvet 09:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Water management of the Nile

What water management techniques are there in use on the Nile, other then the Aswan High Dam? --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trinityx 8 (talk • contribs) 09:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

While I can't answer your question myself, this article, based on a UN press release may be able to get you started on the right track for your research. Another helpful thing might be to search the UN homepage for "Nile water management." One of the documents that came up when I searched for it was this PDF file which might also be useful in your research. DavidGC 11:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mother's Day

Maybe I need to put his in the formt of a question. Mother’s Day is a farce created by a capitolistic society. I dont need Hallmark to tell me to appreciate my mom on May 14th. And to show that apprectiation by buying her some pre-determined genre of a gift. Any proof to that?

Forgot to buy your Mom a present, I take it. Not sure we can help you convince her how meaningless the "holiday" is at this late date. --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 17:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about checking out the "History" section of Mother's Day? The reference desk is not the place for soapboxing or debate.Wikipedia: "Also an encyclopedia!" --DavidGC 17:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You ingrate. Apparently, you weren't spanked enough as a child. --Nelson Ricardo 22:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So don't buy her a fancy gift, just make her something nice, with a unique card. You can make mother's day work for nothing at all if you are clever about it. And yes, like most holidays this one is an excuse for companies to try and make you buy their stuff. But like all holidays there are ways to do it without buying a thing. Be creative. But it's a little late for that. --Fastfission 22:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Parents Day.Patchouli 08:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just tell her that you don't recognise Mothers day as something you need to specifically give a present for, for the reasons you allude to above, don't buy her a present or card but be nice to her at other times. She'll probably moan a wee bit for the first year or so (mine did) but she'll be ok with it. AllanHainey 08:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mother's Day did not start so very commercialised. It was actually tied in with religion for a while. Russia Moore 23:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I was insulted.

I was having a conversation with an asian assosciate of mine and he, jokinly called me what I understood as sounding like:

lanchoos banderjuda bander de bund

Now I believe he is pakistani. I am aware these were insults but I dont know what htey mean or even what language they were in. I apologise for my ignorance.

thank you

Perhaps the Language Reference Desk would be a better place to post this. Isopropyl 18:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

Is the U. S, House of Representatives exempt from the provisions of the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT?

IANAL, however according to Wikipedia's FOIA article, the act governs only federal government agencies, which would limit it to the executive branch. If this is true, there would be no specific exemption for the House of Representatives, as it would be unnecessary since the legislative branch would already fall outside of the act's purview. There may be other laws or procedures that govern similar issues for the House and Senate. --DavidGC 18:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DavidGC is right. Congress exempted itself from FOIA. How nice of them. -- Mwalcoff 18:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI there are also some absolute exemptions from the UK Freedom of Information Act, relating to certain government areas. Tyrenius 03:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gustav Mahler's "Unplayed Symphony"

I have been told that there was a symphony written by Gustav Mahler that is very rarely played as it invokes suicidal thoughts in listeners. I'm not sure if this is related to his fear of the Curse of the Ninth, but any information about the validity of this would be greatly appreciated.

Em, no. Henry ^Flower 19:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing related to this that I was able to find was that he discovered his wife was having an affair, which led to his scrawling suicidal notes on the unfinished manuscript of his Tenth Symphony, which you can read about here. Additionally, his youngest brother committed suicide in 1895, the same year his Second Symphony premiered in Berlin, which you can read about here. Neither of these are really examples of what you're looking for, though, and any piece of music that would actually move its listeners to suicide merely by listening to it would be immensely psychologically significant. DavidGC 01:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe somebody has said this is the reason why all of Mahler's symphonies should be very rarely played. :-) Tyrenius 03:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, and they're entitled to their opinion. But there's never any problem attracting an audience to a Mahler symphony, so he's going to continue to be performed and recorded, which I for one am very happy about. JackofOz 06:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:-) = joke (don't want anyone getting upset here) Tyrenius 15:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I saw the smiley alright, Ty. Maybe my response was imbued with a kind of Mahlerian angst. Maybe I've been listening to him too much .... nah, never. :--) JackofOz 01:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're not thinking of Gloomy Sunday, are you? It's not by Mahler, but it's a song that is said to invoke suicidal thoughts in listeners. --Richardrj 07:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would be his kindertotenlieder? alteripse 13:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

King Wen & the I Ching

How did King Wen contribute to the Book of Changes ? Did he add some chapters or did he write a commentry or what ?Hhnnrr 20:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you've checked out I Ching which has some info. There's an interesting site that says he introduced the 64 hexagrams, their name and description.Tyrenius 15:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you , the site did help . So it seems that Fuxi wrote the foundations of the I Ching , but King Wen is the one who inventdd the hexagrams that make it up today .. as the Book of Changes did not recieve that name until his time . Am I right ?Hhnnrr 10:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radicalism in Modern Germany

I'm doing a project for my German class and I need information on radicalism in modern Germany. I'm looking for info about the anarchist, communist, socialist, syndicalist, etc. movements specifically, but any information about leftist radical groups, people or events currently taking place would be great.

Thanks.

Here's a start List of political parties in Germany, Anarchist Pogo Party of Germany, Left Party (Germany). Look in these pages for further links. Tyrenius 22:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

their is a resurgence of nazi groups as well.

Thanks a lot. Pckeffer

Baseball, steroids, and Congress

Why is steroid use in baseball such an important topic, worthy of congressional hearings? --71.103.104.121 21:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some might view the use of illegal substances by professional athletes to be problematic in light of the position of many professional athletes as role models for youths. I'm unfamiliar with Congressional hearings on the issue, and the issue of what is worthy (or not) for Congressional hearings is debatable -- essentially it's whatever they decide to have a hearing on. However, I would not be surprised if the preeminance of athletes in United States culture (and the apparent perception that steroid use among athletes -- especially baseball -- is unacceptably rampant) combined with other factors to move Congress to consider the issue for a hearing. --DavidGC 02:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say, more cynically, that the selection of topics for Congressional hearings is based less on the national importance of an issue than on the opportunity for the majority party to garner publicity or advance its political goals. Note this example:

Back in the mid-1990s, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, aggressively delving into alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration, logged 140 hours of sworn testimony into whether former president Bill Clinton had used the White House Christmas card list to identify potential Democratic donors.

In the past two years, a House committee has managed to take only 12 hours of sworn testimony about the abuse of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

That's from The Boston Globe [6]. As for steroids, millions of Americans don't care much about most political issues but do care about baseball. This issue therefore moves ahead of others that are more important and more within Congress's purview. JamesMLane t c 18:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this explanation is pretty accurate too. --DavidGC 03:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How is the I ching used ?

I understand the I ching is a book of divination .. but how exactly is it used ? I mean do they flip a coin in order to determine to draw a broken or an unbroken line ? What I read told me what these lines mean .. but how does one get the lines in the first place ? Hhnnrr 21:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see our article at I Ching? User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very strangely, (unless I've missed it) it doesn't seem that our I Ching article actually contains that information! The older, more traditional method of divination involves a complex ritual involving 50 yarrow straws. The more convenient method uses three coins. For each line of the hexagram, toss the coins. get the total, adding 3 for heads and 2 for tails. The result wil be 6, 7, 8, or 9.

6 (three tails)= changing broken line

7 (two tails, one head) = unchanging solid line

8 (two heads, one tail) = unchanging broken line

9 (three heads) = changing solid line

The lines are drawn from the bottom of the hexagram up. Toss the coins for each additional line, adding it on top of the ones you already have.

The primary hexagram is the one for the primary divination. Then you change the changing lines (from solid to broken or vice versa) to obtain the relating heaxagram. For interpretative methods, take a look at [7] - Nunh-huh 21:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pirate Flags/Symbols

Hello!

I'm looking for a list, or maybe just a link to a list, of all sorts of different pirate flags. For instance, there's the normal Jolly Rogers, the red 'jolie rogue', Black Beard's time-counting skeleton, Calico Jack's flag and the dancing skeleton. But are there any others? So, a list would be most appreciated, especially if pictures are attatched.

Thanks, S.M. See Pirate Flag or Jolly Rogers

This site, linked from our article about piracy shows a number of pirates' flags. -- AJR | Talk 23:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flags Of The World also has information, both on the page linked and on additional pages in their index. The first page I've linked has links to about a dozen flags used by specific pirates ( Stede Bunnet, Henry Every, Christopher Moody, Emanuel Wynne, Thomas Tew...) Grutness...wha? 06:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a Wikimedia Commons category commons:Category:Special_or_fictional_flags AnonMoos 07:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 15

Artist of a Painting

Can someone tell me the artist of the following piece?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Samsara.jpg

Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.195.3.235 (talk • contribs) .

The image page gives the details of its source which is from a Google image search, linked to the web site [8], although the image is no longer on that page. I suggest you contact them. I notice the person who posted the image emailed the site and got no response. However, there is also a phone number to try. Tyrenius 03:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Either the guy lived in a period when loin clothes, red dye, balls, books and rings existed yet, either he was the greatest inventor of his times. --DLL 20:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That picture was in an edition of the Bhagavad-Gita As It Is that I bought about 12 years ago, now unfortunately lent-n-lost. It was a hardcover printed in India if I remember correctly, and sold by the local Krishna community. It was authored by AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. I see it is at spiritual.com.au reincarnation page, maybe the people there could guide you further. You may find other places to help you if you google for "picture reincarnation" with or without "krishna", or ask on one of the Krishna web sites. Hope this helps --Seejyb 20:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Public School Rules

In many public schools, there are certain rules for the students to follow; dress codes, use of electronics, etc.

Taking dress codes for example, isn't hindering a citizen's freedom of speech (through clothes) unconstitutional? Do schools have the right to have these codes? If they do, does that mean that a minor isn't a real citizen?

I'm not an expert on constitutional law, but from what I remember, schools as well as other institutions that have an interest in maintaining order (such as prisons or military bases) can generally curtail the rights of persons on the premises or under their control. --Impaciente 03:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, there are a wide range of juvenile laws in the U.S. legal system (and in many other countries) that treat youths much differently from adults. These include but are not limited to curfew laws, laws against smoking and drinking, and laws regarding sex.

If I recall the laws correctly, in some states it is illegal for someone who is 18 to have a sexual relationship with someone 2 years younger... and in some states there is an awkward period where it is theoretically possible for someone to break the law for having sex with someone who is only one or two days younger than themselves. There are other situations that arise due to such laws, such as being able to vote, smoke, and kill people in the military at age 18, but still being unable to consume alcohol legally until age 21. DavidGC 03:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also Tinker v. Des Moines, the seminal student speech case (the holding of which remains largely intact) and its progeny, and the general discussion at in loco parentis. Joe 03:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joe is right: it's all about in loco parentis. Your school is your alma mater in more ways than one. At what age the powers of in loco parentis ends differs from place to place. N.b. all of these discussions are a propos only in the U.S. Geogre 16:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A minor is a real citizen, but not an adult citizen. Wherever one is, the legal minor does not have all the rights, nor priviledges of a legal "adult". Nor do they have the obligations, nor are they judged (criminally) in the same way as adults. Taking choice of body covering as something as precious as freedom of speech is difficult to understand for to those who does not have freedom of speech. --Seejyb 18:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the U.S., often juvenile suspects are tried "as adults." That means that if a teenager is an Eagle Scout, volunteers at the old folks' home, gets straight A's and launches his or her own million-dollar computer company, he or she is still treated as a child, but if he kills somebody, he or she is an adult. Regarding the schools thing, it's a tricky issue. Yes, the school is part of the government and should be limited in the restrictions it imposes on people. On the other hand, you can bet that people who work at your county courthouse aren't allowed to wear jeans to work (maybe on casual Fridays for charity). But then again, they're not forced to work there, but you're forced to go to school until you're 16. Certainly some restrictions are necessary to ensure a proper learning environment. Unfortunately, in my experience, schools tend to attract workers who get a kick out of telling other people what to do; the kind of people who in other countries would be members of fascist death squads. -- Mwalcoff 22:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of dress is not freedom of speech. Furthermore, it is not unconstitutional to hinder freedom of speech (in the United States). — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are many circumstances in which a governmental rule restricting freedom of dress is unconstitutional (in the United States) because the rule violates freedom of speech. Tinker struck down a public school's rule that students couldn't wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. Similarly, Cohen v. California held it unconstitutional for a state to punish someone for walking into a courthouse wearing a jacket that used an obscenity to express opposition to the draft. JamesMLane t c 13:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it just that its a rule, no-one will force them to wear uniform, but as its a private school, if they don't the school has the right to throw them out, and abiding by the school rules is probably part of the agreement on which they allow you to attend the school. Philc _T^E_C^I 22:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

in the interests of a broader picture, this very issue has just played out in the high court in the UK. basically a muslim school girl sued her school becuase they wouldn't let her go to school with a more conservative dress. she argued that this breached her right to freedom of expression and religion. this case was won then the school appealed and had the verdict overturned. the judged eventually ruled that the school (with a muslim majority) has accommodated (some) muslim's desires but the right to impose a school uniform, if you will, was deemed to overule the idividuals rights to abrogate from it- for whatever reason.it was thought that if you allowed muslim girls to compete to be seen to be "more muslim" this would have done more harm than good. additionally you may or may not be aware that in France, schools have no uniform as such (for reason's you've outlined) and yet forbid any displays of one's religion, which, for the country with the highest muslim population in Europe, is causing a little anger amongst muslim girls who wish to cover up. 87.194.20.253 23:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

country music

Why are country singers obsessed with saying honky tonk? A Clown in the Dark 03:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honky tonk. --Cam 04:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It provides a link to traditional country music, rural Americana and so on, no matter how slickly produced the music. The same way rappers talk about drugs and guns a lot, really. It's an attempt to imbue their music with authenticity. And, seriously, honky tonk. It's a really great phrase. All those "onk" sounds. I'm going to start saying it more often, myself! --ByeByeBaby 04:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Periods of Relative Peace

An interesting thought came to mind today. I am curious to know if [1] there has ever been a period in all of recorded history when no war was taking place (I can assume there is always at least one small conflict or skirmish taking place throughout the world), meaning "war" in a strictly technical sense (i.e. The Peloponnesian War, World War II, The Vietnam War, etc)? And [2] if so, what was the longest period of relative peace ever to occur on a worldwide scale? Thanks ahead of time for your input. - R_Lee_E (talk, contribs) 04:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Gibbon considered the time of the Antonine emperors to be the best candidate for a period of near-universal peace and prosperity (at least in the segment of the world known to the Romans). God only knows what was going on elsewhere. alteripse 04:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

During the Antonine period (130s-180s), China seems pretty quiet, until the AD 184 Yellow Turban Rebellion. The main Indian dynasty of the time, the Satavahanas, were involved in some border scuffles, but probably not all-out war. If you want real wars, and not just dust-ups at the local honky tonk, perhaps War cycles might be of interest. --ByeByeBaby 05:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a teenager, my grandfather gave me a timeline poster that showed every war in recorded history. At absolutely no point in time was there a period in which there was no war if you consider civil wars and military invasions to be wars. If you limit it to just formally declared wars (ie: Vietnam did not formally declare war on itself and the U.S. only went in as a "police action". Also, Iraq did not formally declare war on Kuwait. It just invaded.) then you have periods with no declared wars, but you also extend conflicts. North and South Korea still have a declared war but there is no active conflict. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice use of honky tonk. — Laura Scudder ☎ 22:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting stuff. Thanks guys. - R_Lee_E (talk, contribs) 14:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gibbon's note was no coincidence. The Pax Romana was not only a truism for scholars through the 19th century, it was also linked in with Christian typology and Christology. The argument went that the King of Kings was born in a time of universal peace. As recently as Auden and Isherwood's The Dyer's Hand, there is some speculation by serious people that this was a portentious time of peace in the world. Geogre 16:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know much about the "Antonine Period". If it is from 130AD to 180AD as ByeByeBaby noted, then there are some major conflicts at that time. There is the Bar Kokhba Revolt (a Jewish-Roman war) that the Romans certainly knew about. There is also the Parthian war(s). As for civil unrest, that period would line up with the end of the Han Dynasty in China, when civil unrest led to enough rebellions that Dong Zhuo was able to topple one instution of dynasty power after another. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Augustus states proudly on the Monumentum Ancyranum

Janus Quirinus, which our ancestors ordered to be closed whenever there was peace, secured by victory, throughout the whole domain of the Roman people on land and sea, and which, before my birth is recorded to have been closed but twice in all since the foundation of the city, the senate ordered to be closed thrice while I was princeps. Dr Zak 01:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old books

Are there any surviving copies of the 1488 Homer edition by Demetrius Chalcondylas? Are any exhibited anywhere? dab (ᛏ) 07:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if it's on display, but Niedersächsischen Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen has a copy, OCLC#56856166. --CTSWyneken 12:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Public Library has one too. You may find more by searching Demetrius Chalcondylas homer on Google or another search engine. --Halcatalyst 13:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lvov-Sandomierz Operation

The german lost 37,400 men and the soviet 198,000!? Source? Only in the Brody pocket the german losses were 25,000 dead and 17,000 prisoners! The soviet lossesw were, according to Krivosheyev, 65,001 irrecuparable and 224,295 medical. Vess

42. Henry ^Flower 18:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Come on; no one Suitly emphazied this? You're slipping, guys... Joe 20:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

locating a computer

I frequently talk to people over such chat programs as msn and aim, but I have the feeling that some people are lying to me about where they actually live. Usually I would not care but I have become close to these people. Is there any way without them knowing that I could find out where they live? I know there is a number or something that each computer has that lets you know what city it is coming from, but can I get that number without flat out asking them for it? thanks for your help.

I know that unless they have stricter privacy settings, ICQ would show the IP address amongst the user information. To the best of my knowledge AIM does not display IPs, but I don't know about MSN at all. Anyway, if you do find their IP displayed somewhere you can use the appropriate Regional Internet Registry (for instance you can search American IPs at http://ws.arin.net/whois/). Be aware though that the IP address your computer sees could be the number for the proxy that they are connecting through rather than their own computer's, so such a check still wouldn't eliminate a tech-savvy fraud. — Laura Scudder ☎ 22:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try getting them to send you an email, perhaps by sending them one first. The email should contain the user's IP number in its headers. Laura's words of caution still apply here. --DavidGC 03:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't trust them not to lie to you, perhaps you're less close to them than you believe. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mona Lisa

With all the media through the famous "Da Vinci Code," I'm curious.. What is the Mona Lisa REALLY about?

It's not about anything. It's just a picher. Henry ^Flower 22:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A person and artist of Da Vinci's creative intelligence would undoubtedly have a deep and complex agenda, philosophically, psychologically and aesthetically, which fed into the picture's creation. The trouble is that we don't know specifically what it was in relation to this painting, which started off as a portrait, but which he kept with him all his life. This has helped to augment its mystique. The bottom line, as the previous answer, states, is that it is a picture, which speaks for itself. What do you think/feel it's about? Tyrenius 23:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously it'd been a much more interesting painting if he'd named it "Lady smiling because she has a secret." ;) --BluePlatypus 23:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. --DavidGC 03:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extraterrestrials were to give Da Vinci the power of invisibility if he painted 'Mona Lisa' for them; they never came back to pick it up, and it ended up in the Louvre.--Teutoberg 03:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They did, however, compensate him for his work, which is why he never makes public appearances anymore. --DavidGC 04:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pish, pshaw and nonsense. For the true involvement of extraterrestrials with the Mona Lisa see here.

It's a fake. --Bth 11:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People have speculated over the "meaning" of the Mona Lisa for centuries. Freud had a wonderful theory, if I recall, that the Mona Lisa was supposed to be the result of an unconscious memory of Leonardo's mother, from whom he was separated at the age of four. But it's honestly anybody's guess -- Leonardo didn't leave behind a manuscript saying, "OK guys, here is what it is about." There are a number of interpretations which can probably be disproved or ruled out (it was clearly not supposed to be a reference to, say, anything that happened after Leonardo's death), but there will most likely never be any way to know about any of those which are at least semi-plausible. It's this inexhausibility of the emotions and interpretations evoked by the painting which makes it one of the classics. --Fastfission 02:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

Haake Und Slasche

Just out of curiousity, has anyone ever heard of the California-based fencing club named Haake Und Slasche?

No sorry!

Well, I hadn't until I searched for it. --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 01:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gender of God

What do you think the Gender of God really is..Male or Female? And why is this so?

I think he has no gender because we have never heard of a spouse or any sort of relationship.Patchouli 01:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective, He is male because He calls Himself "Father" in the Bible. --CTSWyneken 01:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but God also describes Godself as "suckling" the Children of Israel, "giving birth", and countless other metaphors involving breasts, motherhood, and birth. So the Father argument is unconvincing. Father is a masculine name of God, but God also has Shaddai and Shekhinah, both being feminine related. In my opinion, gender and gender language, a human attribute, is irrelevant and inappropriate when discussing God, who is above such things. СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 01:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth would God do with genitals? He doesn't need them! --E ivind ^t ^@^c 01:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gender is only meaningful in the context of human limitations. God does not have human limitations. Peter Grey 01:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which god are we talking about here? The question is too vague. Dismas|^(talk) 01:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to get into an argument, but please note this is from my perspective. The question asks what the answerer thinks. A little more unpacking. God the Father is not human at all. But as creatures, we come in two genders. We find it difficult to imagine a person without gender. It seems impersonal, which, as I understand God, He is not. That would be the end of it, were it not for the fact that I believe God the Son became Man in Jesus Christ. To me, it is simply a matter of believing what I think God has revealed in the Bible. You are, of course, free to believe whatever you wish.--CTSWyneken 01:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad this question came up. I FIRMLY believe that God has no gender. Gender is an animalistic trait that God, being pure spirit, would completely transcend. I believe that God is referred to in scripture as He/Him or our "Father" due mainly to the limits of human language. I'm tempted to refer to God as "It" but "It" just sounds too disrespectful. I also wouldn't use the terms She/Her or "our Mother" because I believe that to do so would inject an undue degree of gender politics into the issue. So I'm forced to refer to God in the masculine. But I still FIRMLY believe that He/She/It has no gender.

As far as the idea that He/She/It would have some sort of relationship, I actually find the whole idea quite silly to think about. We're not talking about some man or woman-like creature having "relationships" as we understand them. I leave that to the primitive pagan conceptions of gods like Zeus and Hera etc... God, as I understand Him/Her/It is pure spirit. Loomis51 02:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<sarcasm>Oh, c'mon, he fathered a Child!</sarcasm> User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he's a transsexual. --Nelson Ricardo 02:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm casting my vote solidly for intersexual here. ;-) --DavidGC 03:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's surely male; the article Jimmy Wales makes that clear. Joe 04:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

God has no gender. The limitations of English require some pronoun and all we have are "he", "she" or "it". Traditionally, God has been depicted as a white-bearded man, and the pronoun He has been used. But are there any languages that have an indeterminate personal pronoun? In those languages, is God referred to by that pronoun, or still as He? JackofOz 06:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the Persian language, the same pronoun is used for he, she, and it. However, it is specifically stated in discussions that it is male.

I believe God is depicted as male because writers of mythology and religious books were exclusively males themselves; women were encouraged to be illiterate before the Renaissance - almost always. Here, we are postulating that there is a God for which there has been no clear proof. Even Albert Einstein who beat his chest talking about God also acknowledged that there is no divine intervention in people's daily lives.Patchouli 08:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is one area in which the scientific method is utterly irrelevant. There never will be proof. And there never will be disproof. Einstein, for all his genius, was no more of an expert about the ways of God than anybody else. JackofOz 11:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are an infinite number of premises that can be neither proved nor disproved, all of them useless by virtue of their unfalsifiability. Einstein couldn't comment on the gender of God, but he couldn't measure the mane of the Invisible pink unicorn either. Does that mean her mane is a profound mystery? Bhumiya (said/done) 23:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Useless? Maybe in a scientific context, but since when was science the only valid paradigm for considering things in the human realm? Science has nothing to say about whether I love my children or not, but I assert that I do indeed love them, and this is in no sense "useless". Science can't be used to know anything about God, including his existence or non-existence. You have to look elsewhere for your answers about God. The question was about the gender of God, not about what science says about the gender of God. JackofOz 23:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much the "official" answer among accepted theologians of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam (if that's what you want) is that God has no sex as such, but that the words for "God" in the languages in which the holy scriptures of these religions are written (Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic) have masculine grammatical gender (which affects how humans refer to God, but is not a limitation on God's attributes). AnonMoos 16:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When the absolute takes flesh into reality, it is always following what we call the principle of gender, frequently seen as sex amongst living things on earth. There can't be any mono-gendered manifestation. Also, Christ had his consort (parèdre in french), Mary Magdalene, according to St Dan. --DLL 19:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there's the God of the theologians and the God of popular belief. I think Mormons regard God's masculinity as an article of faith, but that's a very uncommon position. Most religions do not emphasize the issue, and may take pains to de-emphasize it. Indeed, Muslims consider it blasphemous to speak of God in personal terms.

Nevertheless, if society were more favorable to the idea of a male or female deity, it wouldn't be too terribly difficult for theologians to "prove" God's sex using some clever exercise of sophistry. All sorts of "attributes", which ought to be unknowable, have been associated with God over the years, even when they flatly contradict one another. For instance, He (She?) is at once all-powerful and all-knowing, omnibenevolent and vengeful. Any impressive-sounding notion may be attributed, and any apparent contradiction may be rationalized as a byproduct of one's "imperfection" or "faithlessness". At any rate, that's my view of the debate — that there is no debate, only metatwaddle. Bhumiya (said/done) 23:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

surely God's a woman. if 'it' was a man 'it' couldn't bear to sit back and let evolution run its course -he'd just have to get involved and tinker. and i think we all know that that didn't happen. 87.194.20.253 23:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could the author of that sexist remark please identify herself (or possibly himself) by signing what she wrote? Sounds to me like a female chauvinist pig. Loomis51 00:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Title 8, Aliens and Nationality

What section of the United States Code specifies after how long the Citizenship & Immigration Services has to answer a green card application?Patchouli 01:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can look it up on the CIS website here. Wikipedia does not give legal advice, so see an immigration lawyer if you have any problems or queries. --Canley 02:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know that Wikipedia does not provide legal advice. I have searched the U.S.C. and C.F.R., but could not find an answer. I am asking this question with the minuscule hope that an immigration lawyer stumbles upon it, and drops a reply.Patchouli 03:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

halal meat

Is a Sunni muslim take a halal meat from a Shi'a Muslim shop?

Not that I'm any sort of expert on Islam at all, but it would seem that Sunni's and Shi'as would certainly accept each other's Halal meat. I'm mainly saying this because I know as a fact that, believe it or not, Muslims (perhaps not all) actually consider Kosher meat, that is, meat that has been prepared according to Jewish religious requirements as being, by definition, Halal. It would seem to me only logical, that if Muslims accept Kosher meat as Halal, than they would surely not squabble about whether the meat is Sunni Halal or Shi'a Halal. But I may be wrong. I've seen stranger things than that. Loomis51 02:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halal means prepared in accordance with Islam law. Whether the muslim who did that is Sunni or Shi'a is when it comes to the meat totally irrelevant. The only reason they may not take the meat from another muslim is if they don't like that particular person. How do Sunnis and Shi'as think about each other? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

quotations

Who said "Politics makes strange bedfellows"?

The phrase was originated by Shakespeare in The Tempest: "Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows." Loomis51 02:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it was Charles Dudley Warner who said that. It makes no mention of it in the article but a Google search for the quote did. -- Colonel 12:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And Wikiquote:Charles Dudley Warner (wikiquote needs more advertising) is even more specific. MeltBanana 17:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religious leader

The name and title of India's religious leader that was exiled in the 20th century if i'm correct but not sure.

This doesn't seem to be a question. Do you mean you think you know who this religious leader is but would like to check? If so, please tell us your idea, and also check if Wikipedia has an entry on this person. Notinasnaid 09:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how the question reads to me. I think he means that he thinks there was an Indian religious leader who was exiled in the 20th century, but doesn't know his name or title. So, fair question I think. Not that I know the answer... --Richardrj 14:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean a religious leader exiled to India in the 20th century, could be the Dalai Lama... AnonMoos 16:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a guess too. I think the question means an Indian religious leader who was exiled somewhere else, i.e. outside India. Tyrenius 02:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rite of Spring

What is the awesome chord in The Rite of Spring by Igor Stravinsky at about 3 minutes into it. You know: buh buh buh buh buh BUH buh BUH buh buh buh BUH! I really don't want to cut out that part, convert it to OGG then upload it. Hopefully someone knows what I'm talking about. schyler 03:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I totally know what you're talking about and I'm listening to it right now to figure out what it is. —Keenan Pepper 03:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I definitely hear the notes E, Bb, C#, and D#, but there may be others. I guess you could call it an E-13-flat-5 if you really wanted to. —Keenan Pepper 03:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Double-bass F flat and C flat; cello A flat and F flat; viola G and B flat; violin D flat and E flat; there are also F horns notated as playing C flat, E Flat, G flat, D, F, A flat and B flat, but the transposing is beyond me. What does that make? Henry ^Flower 08:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fb-major-13-sharp-9-sharp-11. —Keenan Pepper 13:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wo... I almost crapped my pants when I put that into Finale Notepad and it was right (except for the horns. It may be in the score, just it's Finale playing it, not humans). That is soooo cool. schyler 12:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Piece of Music is This?

A friend asked me what this piece of music was (it plays at this page [9]). What is it? I think it might be by Liszt, but not being I fan I wouldn't know.

Page not found. Henning 08:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That link is broken or external linking has been blocked by that website. Could you tell us how to navigate to that page? --DavidGC 08:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taiji , Tao , and the Unique Principle

How are they related ? From my understanding they seem to be the same .. so are they ? I Know Taiji is the unique principle ..But Tao ? Hhnnrr 11:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I REALLY need an answer to this .. doesnt anyone have a clue ? I've looked everywhere and I found some one on the Taiji talk page saying Taiji is the practical term for Tao ( not that I know what that means ), but I can't find the sentence in the article which puts me in doubt .. Hhnnrr 21:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From the sense I get reading our article (I've not heard the term before you mentioned it) my answer would be yes. since Zhuangzi is one of the most respected Taoist masters and it is the highest principle, according to his text, the two should be roughly the same. The caution is that philosophical and theological texts are often very subtle with fine distictions and precise definitions. So, a Daoist master is likely to say, "yes, but..." --CTSWyneken 10:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Secular Countries & Religious Holidays

I understand countries like the United States and the United Kingdom are considered secular states not ruled by religion , but what is reason behind having religious ( mainly Christain ) festivals as national - or official - holidays ? Christmas is the obvious example . Is there a law that defines which religious occassions are to be nationally observed ? Hhnnrr 11:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas is not nationally observed at all; it's just that a lot of people celebrate it, so it becomes a sort of "default" national holiday. (As for the United States being considered secular, lol). Battle Ape 12:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Christmas is a holiday for federal employees (see below). While it's true that Christmas certainly is a religious holiday, there's a perfectly reasonable secular reason for it to be a day off. A lot of people would take the day off anyway, so very little would get done if the office were to remain open. -- Mwalcoff 22:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are there not official vacations ( schools etc. ) on Christmas in the US ? I think so , and I think that makes it some what an official Holiday . And isn't the US supposed to be secular ?!13:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Technically (constitutionally) the U.S.A. is supposed to be secular in the sense that there is no official state supported religion & a separation between church & state (though how separate these are is debated, especially in the current Administration). It isn't secular in the sense that most Americans are very religious (at least compared to Europeans), frequently attend church and focus to a greater extent on religion as a justification/explanation for events. The U.K. isn't secular as it has the state supported churches the Church of Scotland and Church of England which are the official religions. However despite this the U.K. is certainly a more secular country than the U.S.A. in terms of church attendance (though not in terms of the proportion of folk who call themselves, at least in censuses, Christian). AllanHainey 13:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are, by my quick unofficial count, 10 federal holidays (that is, holidays observed by employees of the US Government) in the US. Of those, only Christmas is religiously affiliated, most likely because it's one of two primary holidays for the US's most-observed religion (the other, Easter, never falls on a workday). Non-federal agencies may, of course, designate other days as well. Our article notes that states are not compelled to observe the same holidays, though most do.

The others are New Year's Day, MLK Day, President's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, and Thanksgiving Day. — Lomn Talk 14:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U.S.A. rules for dealing with aliens

A while ago I heard of a document drawn up by the U.S.A. federal government basically planning how they'd treat aliens if they landed somewhere in the U.S.A. I recall the aliens would be taken to some veterinary quarentine place but I can't remember anything else about it. Does anyone know the document I'm thinking of, & perhaps have a link to it? Thanks. AllanHainey 12:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was an article in Popular Mechanics magazine about that in February 2004. See here for the full article. The article says, "Instead of sleeping in the Lincoln Bedroom at the White House, the alien will be whisked away to the Department of Agriculture's Animal Disease Center on Plum Island, off the coast of New York's Long Island." I don't know where the regulations that say that can be found, but Popular Mechanics is a reasonably reliable publication and the article appears to be written in a factual (as opposed to science-fictional) manner. --Metropolitan90 05:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such would largely depend on the nature of the alien! If it was the high ranking represenative of highly sophisticate race, it probably would be treated differently shipful of abuductors who, crash with humans in their ship, or from an unintelligent alien, such as a pet of intelligent life that somehow comes to earth!

In any case, if the aliens can achieve interstellar travel, they almost certainly have far, far superior technology to our own, and that probably includes military technology. Our ability to dictate to such aliens that they spend their time in Plum Island may be limited. Of course, this naturally assumes that the aliens would choose to land in the United States. That's plausible, but by no means certain. Who's to say that they might not choose to land in New Zealand? If you were an alien, who would you prefer to deal with? Dubya's minions, or Helen Clark? --Robert Merkel 00:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U.S.A. Congress' church

The previous question on Christmas got me thinking. At uni I was taught that either the church officially used by U.S.A. Congressman/the church associated with Congress or possibly the nearest church to congress (It was some time ago) always by tradition had a Church of Scotland (or at least Presbyterian) trained Minister. I had a browse through the Capitol & Congress,HoR & Senate pages but couldn't see any info. Can anyone confirm this & provide a wee bit mor info? Thanks AllanHainey 13:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Marshall was a well-known preacher at the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church. His story was told in the movie A Man Call Peter. JackofOz 13:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some say that the Washington National Cathedral is the de facto U.S. national church building, though of course, the U.S. government doesn't and can't give it official recognition as such... AnonMoos 16:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See United States House of Representatives Chaplain and United States Senate Chaplain. These are the clergy actually appointed by Congress itself. As you will see from the lists, almost all of them have been Protestant but there has been no particular tradition of having a Presbyterian/Church of Scotland chaplain in either house. The Washington National Cathedral is an Episcopal cathedral, anyway. --Metropolitan90 05:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Death Penalty

Ive heard the argument that, and im paraphrasing, that the mere existance of the death penalty, and the knowledge that it exists, deters many would be crimes/murders, there for murder trials, and finally potential death penalties (and I believe a figure was involved, a pretty significant one at that, if i remember correctly). The argument then went on to say that any opposed to the death penalty, should there for be pro-capitol punishment because the death penalty prevents so many murders and therefore death penalty scenario's/convictions. I kind of liked the idea, by the way is there a name for that sort of logic? Anyways, whats the rebutle to that argument?

I'm not sure of the name of the argument, but a proper rebuttal would attempt to either (a) isolate the existence of capital punishment as a sole variable in crime statistics and then show that the assertion is invalid (unlikely to be achieved) or to (b) point out that, lacking specific evidence, this particular argument is not grounded in fact but in someone's wishful thinking.

For instance, the book Freakonomics makes an interesting case for abortion being responsible for the crime rate decline in the US during the 1990s. However, the authors also note that it's not a definitive argument because plenty of factors besides abortion are in play over a given time frame. — Lomn Talk 14:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds to me like circular logic and possibly a strawman argument, if I've understood what you are saying correctly. I would say the rebuttal is partly

a) That there is no evidence that the existence of a death penalty decreases the murder rate (there are conflicting data from different countries at different times showing the murder rates going up or down with abolition or instatment of capital punishment). People who plan on killing are unlikely to be deterred if they think they can get away with it, and people who don't plan on murdering (crimes of passion) won't be affected by the potential punishment because they don't think it through that much.

b) That people opposed to the death penalty are not necessarily going to be swayed by 'keeping the death penalty leads to fewer people killed by the death penalty' as that is clearly rubbish.

c) That people may be opposed to the death penalty because of reasons such as 'the state shouldn't kill people', 'it is retribution, not rehabilitation', 'it doesn't allow the possibility of reform/change/'rebirth, 'it is wasteful of resources', 'it is inhumane', 'it leads to innocent people being killed, as no judgement system is perfect', 'it condones killing in certain circumstances', etc. The very existence of it in a justice system may be abhorent to them. They are unlikely to consider the argument you found to address these issues.

Hope this helps. Try capital punishment, it might have other information. Skittle 14:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To elaborate on the rebuttal, capital punishment is not an effective deterrent because a) in most countries where it is used, most murderers are not executed- the penalty is reserved for the worst murderers (in practice, often the blackest and/or poorest). And b) the prospect of a lifetime in prison is likely to deter just as effectively as the prospect of being killed. The real deterrent is the chance of getting caught, not the nature of the punishment. Alternatively, one could take the Catholic view of principles over pragmatics: that killing is a moral evil even if doing so might save lives. Henry ^Flower 14:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Others have probably found different results in their research, but my own experience researching this topic for my criminal justice major was that deterrence is probably the weakest argument one can make in favor of the death penalty. It was a lengthy research project, and the results of the research actually ended up changing my opinion on the issue. --DavidGC 14:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A crime is minor, in which case a person stays in society and compensates victims by his work or income or whatever. Or a crime is major, and there is no longer a place in society for such a person. If he/she cannot get away from the society, then kill the person. Not penalty, not punishment, not retribution, simply getting rid of a useless piece of the structure. No prisons. Much more efficient society. What would be the problems with such a system? --Seejyb 19:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of other 'useless' people: the elderly, the handicapped, the insane. Are they on your little list too? Henry ^Flower 19:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Errors, among others. I recognize this is not what you're doing, but to argue that the system would be free from problems would be setting oneself up for defeat. If a solution existed that was free from problems, moral or otherwise, the issue would have been resolved by now. --DavidGC 10:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that it is hoped that would-be murderers will be deterred is of course the whole point of having capital, or any, punishment (apart from brute animal revenge). To test the hypothesis is another matter, you have to look at countries that introduced or abolished the death penalty and see how capital crime numbers changed. As Skittle says above, no correlation was found between abolishing capital punishment and the number of perpetrations of capital crimes^{[citation needed]}. dab (ᛏ) 19:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use the death penalty if you want to make a hero out of a criminal or a martyr out of a terrorist. Philc _T^E_C^I 21:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr GB Shaw. The idea is that prison is a major waste of resources. For US citizens this is pertinent, since there are more persons in US prisons than in Europe combined. For what to an outsider sometimes seems rather puerile reasons, very much revenge driven. If a Person really cannot remain safely in society, then he/she should be executed. The expectation is that this would be quite rare. Incidentally, what is the crime in being aged, infirm or emotionally disturbed, that I should add it to a list? Even if it were a crime, then surely it would be of the non-prison, non-murder type, meaning the person stays in society, not in prison. Capital punishment has never been shown to reduce murder, and in the stated sense it is not a punishment, but some murderers or serial rapists are not worth keeping in society, and that is where the "get rid of" class could be applied. And as I said, it's not about revenge, but about cost to society of keeping such a person around. --Seejyb 07:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the time I researched this issue, all sources I could find indicated that due to the checks and balances in place to reduce the potential for error, it is actually cheaper for the state to keep a person in prison for life than to pursue the death penalty against them, under the current system in the United States. This may have changed since I researched it, but that's the way it was at the time. --DavidGC 10:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

indeed, pro-death penalty people should perhaps consider what the criminal would prefer - life in prison or the easy way out?

Divorce, Alimony and General Partnership

I am getting divorced. My wife is a general partner in my business. Would I still have to pay spousal support seeing that she is entitled to 50% of the profits from the business. I have been married over 10 years.

Thanks

John

Please see the note at the top of this page indicating that you should contact an attorney for legal advice. --LarryMac 15:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spousal support states that alimony is affected by

length of the marriage - for this the alimony amount should depend on your jurisdiction
time separated while still married
age of the parties at the time of the divorce
relative income of the parties - probably same in your situation
future financial prospects of the parties
health of the parties
fault in marital breakdown - see your state laws.Patchouli 02:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such is now less likely since spousal support is often rehabilitative, done say till she finishes a degree or can be set up as economicaly independent!

Can a Sikh be a pacifist?

Can a Sikh be a pacifist? I read about Guruh Gobind Singh transforming Sikhism to a military community, and it sounds almost as though the Quakers became a military group. Were there any groups of Sikhs who resisted this change and wanted to remain pacifists? -- 88.105.84.95 16:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the article Sikhism. The common tale that Guru Gobind Singh converted the peaceful Sikhs to a military force is oversimplified. They were a military force before that, but didn't have a full-out war against neighboring Islamic sects yet. I do admit that simplified version of the story is great. I'm amazed that Hollywood hasn't made a movie about a group of peace-loving religious people who are harrassed by an outside group, but the leader keeps saying to stay peaceful and pray for the bad people. Then, the religious leader is killed and his son takes over, turning the group into an elite fighting force. Heavy rock music, fast cars, big guns, and plenty of explosions ensue. Of course, it would have to star Will Smith. --Kainaw ^(talk) 16:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, after re-reading I see that it was more of a gradual process than I had at first thought. I am still interested in whether a modern-day Sikh could be a pacifist, or whether pacifist views would be generally at odds with Sikh beliefs. -- 88.105.84.95 19:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If all the Muslims were killed, the Sikhs would be pacifists. The religious war is not with all non-Sikhs. It is strictly with the religion that, according to the Sikhs, drew first blood by killing the Sikh Gurus. Now, do you actually believe that a group that has gone generation after generation hating another group of people could ever live as a pacifist? I don't. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like Europeans and Jews? White Southerners and Blacks? The English and French? Swedes and Danes? Koreans and Japanese? Greeks and their neighbors? Yes, I do believe that is possible. --BluePlatypus 21:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such would be possible, but unlikely. Sikhs are stalwart military men! They served every ruler, from the muhgals, to local mahrdas, to the British Raj, to the Republic of India!

How was the congress of Vienne both successful and unsuccessful?

How was the > Congress of Vienna both successful and unsuccessful?

DYOH dab (ᛏ) 16:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poland got screwed, for one thing... AnonMoos 17:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'unsuccessful' would mean 'failing to acheive its desired result', so unless it was their stated puropose to keep Poland in one piece, that was a success. Other articles you may want to read to answer your question are Revolutions of 1848, Bourbon Restoration and France in the nineteenth century. dab (ᛏ) 17:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just taking a wild drunken stab in the dark here...through the "Concert of Europe" diplomatic process that came out of it, the Congress kept Europe at peace for 99 years. So in that way it was pretty successful. On the other hand, Belgium, nice rolling battle country that that nasty Mr. Bonaparte liked to invade central Europe by, became an area whose independence was guaranteed, leading to the major reason England got into WW I when the Germans came the other way. Perhaps you could also make the argument that as it was a case of the 'old bosses' reasserting their authority, the Congress didn't deal with rising nationalist feelings that at least in part lead to the major conflict starting in 1914.--Shandon 23:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Falls, bleeding, out of the shadows.* Knew I shouldn't be standing so close to drunk people on the reference desk. Skittle 15:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism

What are the primary beliefs of Hinduism?

Please do your own homework. Hinduism might be a good place to start. - ulayiti (talk) 17:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are having a for fun trivia contest at work. Can you help me. What was the first Star Trek series without "Star Trek" in its name.

Have you tried looking in the Star Trek article? I think it is most probably Enterprise. Colonel 18:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which womens sport get the highest TV rankings?

In any specific country, or internationally? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 07:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What group made it into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame despite having just one Billboard top ten single??

It's not fun if you don't find the answers yourself. Henry ^Flower 19:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care if it's not fun to find the answers myself, i need help with finals.

Well, good luck with that, then. --DavidGC 10:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which religion was founded first?

This is a subject I am certain has been discussed around here before... I myself is rather curious; I know it's either Judaism or Hinduism, I've heard people saying that Judaism was founded 4000 years ago and Hinduism 3500 years ago when the Rig-Veda were written, but I've also heard people say that Hinduism is considered to be the oldest religion still in practice and Judaism "only" _one_ of the oldest? Do we have a theologian here who dare shine some light on this subject? It would be most appreciated.

Someone asked this recently, and the answer he got was the obvious one: there is no answer. These religions weren't 'founded', they evolved. For more on how they evolved, see Judaism and Hinduism. Henry ^Flower 18:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

looking only at revealed religions, the race is between Judaism and Zoroastrianism; realistic dates are Judaism: 700-500 BC, Zoroastrianism: 1000-600 BC, but note Akhenaten. dab (ᛏ) 19:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A big problem is defining Judaism and Hinduism. Judaism went through two huge changes: When Jerusalem was settled and the temple was built, the religion centered itself on the temple. Many scholars claim that the strict monotheism belief of Judaism formed at that time. Then, after losing the temple (twice) and being enslaved by the Babylonians, the religion became a written one, or a Religion of the Book. Another change in structure happened after the Roman invasion, but it is rare that people claim that Judaism changed. In modern times, there are many sects of Judaism. Some are very new (such as Judaism with the belief that there is no God) and some are a little older, but not pure Judaism (such as Judaism with the belief that Jesus was the messiah).

Hinduism is worse. It is a blanket term for all the religions that popped up around the Indus valley (Hindu = Indus). They have many things in common, but also have distinct differences. So, by definition, Hinduism started when the first person sitting around the Indus valley started talking about gods and life/reincarnation after death. Of course, we don't consider the shamanistic traditions to be religions, so we stick with the ones that recorded their history in the Vedas. Unlike Judaism, which changed drastically when they started writing what would eventually become the Bible, Hinduism documented their religion in the Vedas, they did not change it (to our knowledge). --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that, in a nutshell, is what I meant. Shrauta Hinduism (the most conservative form) preserves ritual of maybe 1000 BC. Anything earlier is continuous evolution without a clear beginning. The Rigveda does quite well at describing religious/ritual practice, but that changed drastically over time. Of course old elements survive, every religion at all directly continues elements of Paleolithic ritual, no exceptions. dab (ᛏ) 19:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animism is founded first.

Road-question

My English currently lacks the word that describes those bumps in the asphalt that are contstructed to slow down vehicles. It has to be called something more advanced than "speed bump"?

Nope. They're speed bumps. It's a perfectly good phrase, there's no need for anything more "advanced". —Zero Gravitas 21:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC, judder bar is the term one often hears used in Australia. Joe 22:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Britain, aren't they called sleeping policemen? User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I remember that from when I was a kid, but I haven't heard it recently (speaking as a Brit). --Hughcharlesparker 23:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Sleeping policeman" is pretty rare. As for judder bars, they're a little different to speed bunps/speed humps - a speed bump (at least here in NZ) is a wide raised section of road - often a metre or so - that the car has to travel over. Judder bars are much much narrower (usually only a few centimetres) and usually come in groups of two or three. Grutness...wha? 01:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian usage is definitely "speed bump" for a hump with a rounded top, half a meter to a meter or two in length. I don't think we have judder bars here, unless they're cousins to the rumble strips?. For broader bumps with an elevated flat section we also have the term "speed table" [10]. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although this is almost entirely unrelated to the question, "sleeping policeman" sounds freakishly similar to the Spanish phrase "policia muerto," which is the colloquial form I grew up with. --Impaciente 07:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have photographs from a trip to Jamaica showing signs that read "Sleeping Policeman Ahead." However, that trip was taken in 1979, so perhaps things have changed. --LarryMac 15:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can also say "traffic calming device," although that can refer to other anti-speed things as well. -- Mwalcoff 07:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I happen to have known a girl from the southern united states (i live in the north!) who says there are speed "Bumps", "Lumps", and "tables". I Don't know how well this holds true down there but i hope it helps.

Could the questioner be referring to Botts Dots?

Want to add link to image of NC's first flag on NC flag page

I am trying to add a link to an image of North Carolina's first flag on Wikipedia's page for North Carolina's flag. I think it would be helpful to those who are interested in North Carolina's flag and how it changed. I did it once but I believe the editor got rid of it for some unknown reason. (Doesn't he want others to know??) How can I make it permanent?

Thanks!

Rebeleye

The external link you added previously was incorrectly formatted; I assume that's the reason for which its insertion was reverted. In any event, I've cleaned up the link, which I think is likely useful, so all should be well. :) (Flag of North Carolina is the article, btw; feel free to expand it.) Joe 22:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

old music

Hi, Am looking for a song from the seventies for my father, searches through file sharing and search engines have turned up nothing. The only info i have are some lyrics SIXTEEN BROTHERS ON THE RUN FAILING TO REACH THE SUN. Any help greatly appreciated.

Cheers.

Why did Louis Armstrong sweat so much?

You can call me sloppy but can you please show me where in your biography does it explain ,"Why did Louis Armstrong sweat so much?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Armstrong

A lot of professional musicians do, especially those playing brass instruments. Hot lights, smoky atmosphere, and a LOT of physical exertion. Grutness...wha? 01:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't sweat. That's jazz nectar. - Banyan Tree 20:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fire is catapult room on USS Lake Chapmlain (CV-39) 7th Aug 1953

Hi Reference Desk,

I hope you can help me. I have read your article on USS Lake Champlain and its history. But I am missing some information an was hoping that you could confirm it is some way.

On Aug 7th 1953 there was a fire in the catapult room and 15 of 16 crew died. Apparently there were/are articles in German and Norweigan but I cannot find anything in English to comfirm that this event ever really took place.

To give you some more information. The aircraft carrier was in the Mediteranean Sea on the way to Italy.

Some names of those who died are Joe Carnes (Louisville Kentucky) Don Hatcher (Kansas City) Elbert Schaeffer (Washington State) and Thomas Moore (unknown). The sole survivor was Ken Cantrell ( 6/15/1932 Huntsville Alabama).

Hope this helps. I need as much information as soon as possible. But mostly to confirm that the event took place.

According to the US Navy, [11], she would still have been off Korea in August 1953 - she was in the Med that year, but only at the end of April and in November. (This is where the bulk of our article on her came from). I can't see anything about a fire - perhaps it was another carrier? You would probably be better off contacting the US Navy's history department; a query under the Freedom of Information Act should tell you if such a fire ever took place, either on the Lake Champlain or on any other carrier in the area. Shimgray | talk | 23:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a fire on the Lake Champlain - [12] [13] - 3rd July 1957, and she was in port in Marseilles; three crewmen were killed. Our article on USS Leyte (CV-32) mentions a fire in her catapault room, killing 37 in total, in 1953 (at Boston?). Shimgray | talk | 00:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help finding the title of this Sci-fi short story

There is an sci-fi short story I read in a collection (it could have been the Sci-fi hall of fame series; nebula winners) written between 1950-65 I read that involved rocket-ship building and time travel. The two characters meet eachother in British university; one is a hard-working but awkward engineer and the other is a brilliant yet lazy aristocratic mathematician. Eventually with the help of the mathemtician the engineer becomes a wealthy industrialist. The mathematician creates the plans for a rocket ship and the engineer sets out to build it and succeeds with a piloted mission. Can anyone with a knowledge of science fiction help me pin down the story?

There may be somebody who knows over in Usenet's rec.arts.sci-fi.written . AnonMoos 14:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 17

search warrant

does anyone know if a search warrant has a wrong date on it ,if it is not legal to be used,even if the warrant was notorized,but the date is outdated by almost 1 year,can anything be used in the courts from that day?

This is not legal advice. From your question, I'm unable to determine whether you mean to suggest that a warrant, otherwise properly issued and acted upon, was incorrectly dated (we might understand this to be a clerical error) or whether law enforcement sought to search based upon a warrant issued several months thither (we would likely understand this to be a volitional attempt to circumvent the Fourth Amendment, or, in any case, as unreasonable). In the case of the former, it's possible that the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule might apply; clerical errors are generally seen as ministerial mistakes, such that a search warrant should be invalidated only where prejudice can be shown. Whether one might nevertheless pursue a civil action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 is unclear, but I tend to think such an action would be barred. In any event, if this is not a hypothetical question, you would do well to consult an attorney; if you are an attorney asking here on behalf of a client, you would do well to send us half your fee. Joe 03:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, which country are you in? For great justice. 04:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the inquirer is in the United States, but if he were in most of the Middle Eastern countries, then it wouldn't have a chance to talk about any sort of warrant.Patchouli 04:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because the ISP is Georgia-based Peachtree, I assumed the user to be in the United States. I ought to have stated such assumption, though, and also replied more generally. Our article search warrant is certainly US-centric, and I think we'd do well to expand it; unfortunately, I've but a paucity of info on search warrant procedures in other nations, but I'm sure we've plenty of people at the RD who might add to the article. Joe 05:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am lawyer, the answer might depend on why the wrong date was on the search warrant! If it was merely a typo, most courts would probably allow it. However, it would not be exceptable to use a year old warrant!

Hmm... Maybe the lawyer will come back and explain what "exceptable" means. Must be one of those weird legal terms. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exceptable (adjective): How a public defender spells acceptable. (Yes, I know that exceptable is in fact a word [though it's not properly used by our lawyer friend; in fact, its meaning is diametrically opposite to that which he imputes to it]. Further, I simply kid; I interned with the Wisconsin Public Defender's Office during the summer after my senior year in high school, and most of the staff attorneys were relatively competent.) Joe 19:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KFA

Why does the Korean friendship association so antiwoman, is it because they are predominatly homosexual!

Business practice in Korea (and in much of East and Southeast Asia) may be very different from what you are accustomed to in your own country. Check out this page, particularly the information below "Status Barriers" and the "Gender Barrier." It has nothing to do with sexual orientation. The link you are attempting to make between gay people and misogyny is tenuous at best, and probably offensive to both Koreans and gay people. --DavidGC 10:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rhodes Scholars

I'm interested in Cory Booker, the mayor-elect of Newark, New Jersey, who was a Rhodes scholar. The documentary "Street Fight" is the story of his unsuccessful run for mayor of Newark in 2002. It's an excellent documentary that has introduced Cory to people everywhere.

Booker won on his second try for mayor a few weeks ago.

So I've read everything about him that I could find. He has an impressive college record and also was a Rhodes scholar. But I can't find what he studied during his scholarship. Is there a website that lists topics studied by various Rhodes scholars?

According to the Stanford press release, he was to study for a PPE (Philosophy, Politics, and Economics [14]) degree. The official RS website only provides biographical details and proposed courses of study for those having been elected in 1996 or later. Joe 06:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MASTURBATION

does mastubation (the ejaculation of semen )will cause any health problem?

You could refer to the masturbation article. It's easier to run a search before asking a question, as you might get an answer sooner. --Impaciente 06:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The method makes a difference. I think men who rub their genitals against a soft cotton are safest.Patchouli 09:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you will go blind, possibly grow hair on your hands, and possibly go insane!

Many men and women straddle their pillows.Patchouli 11:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question: does mastubation (the ejaculation of semen )will cause any health problem?

Answer: You lose weight, about 5 grams each time.

Ah ha! at last, the answer to the world-wide obesity crisis. JackofOz 12:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I won't be answering any ref desk questions for awhile, I'll be busy, ummm, "working out." :-) --LarryMac 14:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are esoteric/spiritual ideas that you lose psychic energy (chi or whatever) from the practice, and that it is better to have a "psychic exchange" through sex, though I guess this could depend on whom you're exchanging with... There is some research that not releasing semen through masturbation or sex can increase the chances of cancer in that region of the body. Orgasm through masturbation or sex releases a chemical that aids sleep, so do it last thing at night, not first thing in the morning. If you do it too vigorously you can damage a blood vessel (moderation in all things). If you really go to town and split the small strip of skin under the foreskin, you will spray blood all over room. This is true: there was a TV documentary of couples which this had happened to during sex. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm feeling a bit queasy. Tyrenius 16:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. As long as you masturbate in moderation, it's unlikely to cause any health problems. Myths like that you could go blind from masturbating were created by parents who didn't want their children to be sexually active and by people who consider masturbation a sin. http://www.jackinworld.com is pretty good and ripping apart such myths (warning: that link has quite explicit content that's not suitable for some. No pictures) - Mgm|^(talk) 11:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

prestige

In the UK what is more presitious to be an MP, or MEP? In the U.S. What is more presigious, to be a senator, a govenor, or Cabinet member?

Prestige depends on the criteria you use to define it. Senators are usually viewed as a bit more stately than Representatives, as the requirements for their position are a bit more stringent, there are less of them, and they serve for longer terms. In addition, the Senate confirms many presidential appointments, such as for Supreme Court justices. Representatives, on the other hand, could be viewed as representing the will of the people to a greater degree than senators, as they are up for election every two years, increasing accountability. As for cabinet members, they are almost always highly qualified but ultimately serve at the will of the president, and as such can be dismissed easily. And as soon as the president they serve under is gone, they usually are as well. --Impaciente 06:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK, very few MPs or MEPs can command much prestige these days. It's a rather outmoded concept, especially in politics. --Shantavira 07:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While agreeing with Shantivira I'd say MPs have the greater prestige or respect, this is reflected in the relative numbers who bother to vote in European & general elections. AllanHainey 07:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second AllanHainey, also that no one's got a clue who their MEP is or even if they have one, whereas MPs are at least featured in the local paper following a sleaze scandal or visiting the local primary school. Tyrenius 16:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, I think it would depend on what cabinet post you're talking about. I think secretary of state is secretary of state might be one of the five or six most-prestigious positions in the US government, behind president, VP, House speaker, chief justice and maybe Senate majority leader. On the other hand, something like secretary of veterans affairs would rank way down the list. It's very prestigious to be a senator; perhaps even more than to be a governor. You sometimes see governors running for Senate when their terms as governors expire. -- Mwalcoff 07:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And sometimes the reverse: Pete Wilson, Ernest McFarland, Dirk Kempthorne, Frank Murkowski, Lowell Weicker... —Zero Gravitas 19:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the United States, this is tricky. More prestigious in the eyes of whom? For the average citizen, the state they are from may make a difference as to whom they view as more prestigious. For government officials, members of the military, etc., the answer may depend on where within the government they work. --DavidGC 10:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also in the US, individual senators and governors have different levels of prestige, depending on their own individual political experience as well as their activities. For instance, Senator Patrick Leahy, the minority leader on the Senate Judiciary committee, has a fairly prestigious position, particularly since the committee has had two Supreme Court justices to confirm recently. He's probably more prestigious than, say Governor Brian Schweitzer, the current governor of Montana. On the other hand, Governor George Pataki of New York is probably more prestigious than Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. For what it's worth, I looked at the list of senators, governors and cabinet secretaries (I'm a Canadian, with a passing interest in US politics) and recognised the names of about 35 of 100 senators, 11 of 50 governors and 5 of the 15 cabinet members, which indicates that cabinet and senate are probably more prestigious than governors, at least from an international perspective. And as my final point, four of the last five presidents were governors. So I don't know that there's one general rule. --ByeByeBaby 06:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

THE DEAD SEA SCOLLS - ISAIAH TRANSLATION INTO ENGLISH

I have been trying to establish what is the correct and truthful translation of certain passages of the Essene Dea Scroll of Isaiah, which as you probably know was written in Aramaic. The passages I refer to are:- Is 7 v 14 which I believe the true and factual translation is:- THEREFORE THE LORD HIMSELF SHALL GIVE YOU A SIGN, BEHOLD A YOUNG WOMAN SHALL CONCEIVE AND BARE A SON AND SHALL CALL HIM IMMANUEL. This translation is confirmed by the Hebrew Bible as well as certain so called Christian Bibles. Now when I was looking at a supposed translation of the Isaiah scroll recently on the net I found that the Christian translator had used the word "virgin" the same as it is found written in the Auth King James, which is the nearest translation from the early Greek to English that all true CALLED by GRACE Christians have but woe even the AKJ Bible has descrepencies therein. Which leads me to the other querie in translation which does NOT read as being correct or true, which is chapter 9 of Isaiah v 7 which the TRUTH is:- FOR A CHILD HAS BEEN BORN TO US, A SON GIVEN TO US, AND THE AUTHORITY UPON HIS SHOULDER, AND THE WONDEROUS ADVISER, THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, CALLED HIS NAME, "THE PRINCE OF PEACE" But in EVERY Christian whether it be a modern corruption or even the Authorised King James they ALL publish the same wording, which is:- "FOR UNTO US A CHILD IS BORN, UNTO US A SON IS GIVEN; AND THE GOVERNMENT SHALL BE UPON HIS SHOULDER; AND HIS NAME SHALL BE CALLED WONDERFUL CONSELLOR, THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, THE PRINCE OF PEACE."?

Would it therefore PLEASE be possible for your Organisation, without prejudice arrange for the correct and truthful translation be done taken from the Essenes Dea Sea Isaiah scroll in respect of these two very important passages of Scripture, which in TRUTH have with other perversions and secularism been the root of present day so called Christianity, who ALL deny that the LORD JESUS MESSIAH was a man of the FLESH born of Joseph and Mary for they, especially the Roman Catholics in the 3rd cent under Constantine and the antichrist bishops did change Holy eternal Scriptures to please the Roman people, who were worshipping the Satanic Godess Isis and her son Horus (Who's birthday was revered as the 25th December the winter solcis, the 25th December is NOT the birthday of the LORD JESUS MESSIAH! Amen)and they did merely change the names from Isis and Horus to Mary and Jesus and then call and worship their Mary as the mother of God precisely as Isis was and also call her the queen of Heaven, even as described in Revelation 18 AKJ Bible and also Jeremiah 44 AKJ & Hebrew Bibles!

These are ONLY a few TRUTHS of the Gospel of GOD unto Salvation that has and still is increasingly being corrupted and deceiving unsuspecting souls to worship Satan through his many counterfeit disguises, some that appear good and pleasant until one is drawn into the trap of deceit and LIES and turmoil and torment, which in most cases it is too late for this fiend tells you its alright you can escape you can do it and you can have better things, power, money, pleasure, health, be popular etc for he tells you also he does NOT exist and most of all he tells you that the LORD JESUS MESSIAH is a myth, precisely as these people like Dan Brown et al are publishing today; hence why true CHRISTIANITY has been over run down the centuries and more so today as the end draws closer, whatch the Middle East in particular Isreal the land of the Almighty GOD'S chosen, first Covenant people! Amen

Your assistance would be much appreciated. Thank you. I have inserted my e mail address for this pilgrim is ready, in wearing the FULL armour, to STAND and do ALL to stand for the times are perilious and evil, as proclaimed by Paul in 2 Timothy 3 AKJ Bible and, the days of Noah as prophesied and warned of by the ONE true Shepherd of the flock JESUS MESSIAH THE LORD as it is written in Matthew 24 AKJ Bible, are almost upon us! Amen IN WRATH O GOD ALMIGHTY AND FATHER, REMEMBER MERCY - THROUGH JESUS MESSIAH OUR REDEEMER AND SAVIOUR! Amen John Harper (Contact details removed by Skittle 10:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC) to protect you from spam. We do not email you, we answer here.)[reply]

You might find our article on The Two Babylons interesting. I'm not sure if you're chicking, but I strongly suspect you misunderstand many people's positions on a number of topics covered in your message. It is unlikely that the editors of Wikipedia will translate the whole of the Dead Sea Scrolls for you, but they may have comments on individual passages and the strength that can be placed on any one translation. Skittle 10:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The urge to edit this question is very strong in me, Luke. ;) --DavidGC 11:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... is there a question in here? Oh, yeah. Almah in the Great Isaiah Scroll from the Dead Sea. I'll check a little later. The short answer is the word can mean both young woman AND Virgin. In ancient times, a young woman was married at or near puberty. So, to be a young woman meant to be a virgin. (they were called something else if they were not virgins by our definition. One of those things was wife! 8-) ) The debate, and it is fierce, is over how to translate it. Following Matthew and for the sake of the doctrines of the Virgin Birth and the Inspiration of Scripture, Most christian scholars go with virgin. Others translate it differently. Since the Great Isaiah Scroll is supposed to be identical to the Hebrew text of Isaiah we had before the discovery, the translation problem should be the same. --CTSWyneken 11:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Truthful translation? What the hell is a truthful translation? The only truthful translation is what God really meant. And no one knows that! Ohanian 12:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well... there are a lot of POVs on that! 8-) From mine, a conservative Lutheran view, we do know what God intended. He inspired Matthew to translate הָעַלְמָ֗ה (almah: young woman, virgin) as παρθένος (parthenos: virgin). Since I believe God spoke through Matthew, that seals it for me. Needless to say, you are free to disagree. All viewpoints are welcome in Wikipedia.--CTSWyneken 13:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't know. You only believe you know. Just like I believe I know the answer to a math question in my exam but later the lecturer marked me WRONG. Except for you, you will have to wait until after you had died before you know for sure. Ohanian 13:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...assuming you'll be capable of knowing anything at that point. --DavidGC 13:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything. I only believe that I do know. Ohanian 13:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's really off topic, I'll end by saying that that's your view. You're welcome to it -- if you really exist. For me, "I think therefore I am." I don't know if you're there, or just last night's hamberger pizza -- at least by your philosophy. 8-) --CTSWyneken 13:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect there are more things. I believe that Ohanian does in fact know that he is Ohanian, but has been operated on by religious fanatic aliens to think that he only believes he knows things. Prove me wrong :-) Skittle 14:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voter Turnout

Please could you tell me what would happen in England if a polling station did not get anyone to turn up to vote at all. Would the previous councillers still be seated or would there be another polling date? What might happen if the vote was for a general election? Would all the parties be in chaos with no MP for that district. Thnakyou, Lyn

If no one voted then there are no winners. If even one person voted then there is a winner. If an even number of people voted then you may have a draw/stalemate. Ohanian 12:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In that case would there be noone in that seat or parliment if the entire country did't vote. Thanks for answering so promptly, Lyn

Looking back at the way you worded your original question, I assume that those manning the polling stations also vote. Therefore, if they were present to man the station, they would probably vote as well, regardless of whether or not they had anyone turn up to vote at the station they were manning. If they were unable to man the polling station, then that would probably present a different sort of problem. --DavidGC 13:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so what if no one voted at all, including polling station staff. Ie if people were so sick of all the goverment parties and wanted to make an impact and encouraged no one to vote so as to show their displeasure. What do you think that would do to the goverment? Would there be no one in power if it was a local election? Thanks for your replies, Lyn

Reminds me of the movie "Suppose They Gave a War and Nobody Came".

Each constituency has more than one polling station, so even if nobody voted at one polling station, there'd still be voters at the others. There's a theoretical possibility that nobody voted in a given constituency; not even the candidates voted for themselves. But given the nature of political candidates, that is so incredibly unlikely that I doubt any serious consideration has ever been given to special rules for such a circumstance. I would assume the election would be declared inconclusive or null, and a new election for that seat would be held (and cross your fingers that someone bothers to turn up this time). If nobody in the entire country voted, they'd just nullify the whole General Election and hold it again.

It is marginally more likely that the only voters were the candidates, all of whom voted for themselves, resulting in a tie. Where there's a tie in a UK constituency, I think the Returning Officer draws a name out a hat and declares the winner that way. Or does he have a casting vote? Nope, don't really know, sorry. JackofOz 14:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting, Thank you. What about if no one was allowed to vote ie picket lines? Could you really elect a prime minister if only candidates voted? Cheers, Lyn

I believe if there is a draw they ask if anyone wants to concede. Doubtful if anyone does and hold it again. Of course for it to get to this stage there would have been about 5 different recounts (including arguments over the applicability of spoiled ballots) and it is extremely unlikely that it would still be a draw. If it is though I think, though am not certain, they run the election again.

Lyn, in the UK we don't elect a Prime Minister (or at least noone outside his constituency does & they're only voting for him as their MP). It is illegal to picket a polling station or to try to stop people from voting(or for candidates/supporters to try to persuade people inside the grounds of the polling place) in any event so the situation you suggest would never arise as you wouldn't get a circumstance in which only candidates vote as all political parties rely on very committed supporters and party workers to get out their vote in the constituancies & council wards. Many of these people whom I know (& myself of course) would fight their way through crowds of rioting lions & bears in 5 feet of snow to get out to vote (and so would at least some stubborn ordinary folk). (This was user:AllanHainey who forgot to sign)

Yes you could, and it would be the damn fault of the people who encouraged abstention as a form of political protest. It seems to follow from the rather dubious idea that you can only vote for 'government' candidates. Surely far more effective than stopping everyone from voting (and thus ensuring that only the candidates supported by party members/ 'Them' get voted for) would be encouraging everyone to vote for your own candidate. After all, anyone with the deposit and a minimum number of signatures can stand as a candidate in a constituency. Also, I suspect that picketing a polling booth to stop people voting is an offence of some kind. Interfering with people's right to vote? Skittle 14:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Going back to one of the original questions "Would all the parties be in chaos with no MP for that district." - No this infact happened in 2005, not no candidate being returned but no election being held in one of the constituencies. I can't remember where it was but one of the candidates died between his name going on the ballot and the election being held so, in accordance with the law, the general election there was postponed for a certain period of time to allow a new ballot to be prepared. I think the general election in that constituancy was actually held a month or so later than the rest of the country. It didn't make a blind bit of difference to the national political scene or the composition of Parliament. AllanHainey 14:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a tie, the election is decided by lot: [15] It's happened at council elections, but never in a parliamentary one. Henry ^Flower 15:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this happened in the Elections earlier this month. Keith Stammers, the Tory former mayor of St Albans, the incumbent, and Judith Shardlow, the Liberal Democrat candidate both got 1131 votes after three recounts. They drew pencils, and the Lib Dems won. I assume this tie rule would still apply if it was tied on zero. The delayed election last year that AllanHainey mentions was in South Staffordshire, where the Lib Dem candidate, Josephine Harrison died about a week before the election. --Hughcharlesparker 21:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC you have to have ten signatures on your nomination paper to be accepted as a candidate so presumably some of them will end up voting for you. Jameswilson 22:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'd think so, but see Catherine Taylor-Dawson who stood for the Vote For Yourself Rainbow Dream Ticket party in last year's general election and polled just one vote. -- AJR | Talk 23:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woman

Please tell who that woman is on the left i`m tryin to finish my art project atm.

http://img227.imageshack.us/my.php?image=72aj.jpg

Appreciated.

Wikipedia even has a copy of the painting, it's here: Image:Waterhouse Echo and Narcissus.jpg. Dr Zak 14:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the bloke looking into the pond is obviously Narcissus I'd assume the woman is Echo. AllanHainey 15:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

philosophy is i know not what

i was reading a philosophy text book which said that the statement (philosophy is i know not what) was made by wittgenstein .pls can anybody explain what it means.thank you.

Ludwig Wittgenstein purposely used phrases that seemed odd because it was his opinion (from what I can tell) that philosophy was an artificial science created by fundamental problems in language. Therefore, a phrase like "I know not what philosophy is" would be arranged in a Yoda-like manner as "Philosophy is I know not what". --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

logic and truth

how can logic help in the attainment of truth.

It can block the way to truth. See Zeno of Elea's paradoxes. One of these is the situation of wanting to cross a room. First you must get to a halfway point. Logical, yes? Then you have half the room left to cross, and first you must get to the halfway point of that remaining half. Again very logical. Of course, you can keep on applying this logic, so there is always half of the remaining space left to cross ad infinitum, so logically you can never reach the other end of the room. (Actually I think I've given an interpretation of the original, but the principle applies.)

Jung postulated four modes of consciousness, based on the medieval humours, with the correspondences of earth (senses), air (thinking), fire (intuition) and water (feeling), and that truth is the unity of these, putting it crudely. Logic belongs to air (thought) and so is only a part of the total picture. As such it has a role to play and can eliminate certain falsehoods, but still needs to be integrated with the other aspects. In fact, most of the time we do this to a greater or lesser extent without even realising it. Much so called rational or logical thinking is really a rationalisation of something we observe, feel or know intuitively beforehand.

Tyrenius 00:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One could read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance as a primer on dichotomies in thought process and the use of logic as a problem solving tool. The main issue with logic is it is the process of dividing or separating things. The more you divide things, though, the more things there are to divide into. You get all these hierarchical trees. It never ends. Therefore, logic will fail you in finding truth, because everything is infinitely divisible, and you will never reach an end...which would be truth. (Someone will point out that I am using logic to set up this proof that logic is no good to find truth...<groan>) But what do you define as truth? On a day-to-day level, logic can be quite useful in steadily ruling out potential sources of a problem until you eventually encounter the correct one.--Shandon 15:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But surely if I place a dry pea under a cup, put it next to another empty cup, and shuffle them I can use logic to tell me which cup the pea is under (if I shuffled them), by reasoning that the pea must be under the same cup it was under previously. If I have forgotten which that is, I can determine which cup the pea is under by lifting only one cup, not both, no matter which it is under. So I can use logic to determine 'The Truth' of the pea's location :-) Skittle 16:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. That would be an example of a day-to-day level problem, which logic is quite good at helping out with. However, try to figure out what the underlying nature of reality is (What is light? A wave or a particle? Neither!), or matter, and logic can't give you an answer. Molecules are divided into atoms which are divided into atomic particles which are divided into (hey!) subatomic particles which are...um...embarassingly...made up of mostly empty space. The more you look the more there is to see. Brings up an interesting question though: logic can help you 'see', but can it help you experience? And can one know truth by only seeing it, or do you have to experience it? Look upon Alethiology, ye mighty, and despair!--Shandon 16:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

name of the the thief which was cruxified at the side of Jesus

Hi, I am searching for the name of the thief which was cruxiefied at the side of Jesus and repented. I allready searched in various articles but was unable to find his name. If there is an article about him (I pretty much doubt it, but perhaps an article about such "minor" christian caracters) would you please tell me? Thanks Flamarande 17:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are not named in the Bible. The passages you are looking for are: Mark 15, Matthew 27, Luke 23, and John 19. In all four, they are simply referred to as two criminals. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, but they have apocryphical (non cannon) names, don´t they? Flamarande 17:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barabbas, perhaps? --LarryMac 17:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody hell :), no. That dude was liberated by Pilate on wish of the crowd (historicaly highly dubious). Flamarande 17:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's something ironic about using the term "bloody" while discussing crucifixion stories. :-) --LarryMac 17:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-biblically, they are Dismas and Gestas. --Cam 17:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder how User:Dismas thinks about that... - Mgm|^(talk) 11:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a total aside, Lenny Bruce had a hilarious bit about Dismas. :) --BluePlatypus 20:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of names for the Biblical nameless is one of our more poetically titled lists. Henry ^Flower 13:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bible/scripture quotes

Good Afternoon....I would like to know the origin of the often referred quote "an eye for an eye" came from. Jim

You could have found this quite easily. look in An eye for an eye and read the article, its quite interresting. Flamarande 17:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC) PS: sign your msgs with 4 " ~ ".[reply]

Googlin is useful, the whole bible is not in WP. I tried "an eye for an eye bible" and found - to be checked - Exodus 21: 23-25. --DLL 19:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole Bible is in Wikisource though. Rmhermen 03:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opposite of a patent?

Recently I've been interested in the JMRI/KAM dispute over a patent infringement. (which in short consists of KAM saying JMRI is infringing on KAM's patents, while JMRI claims that what KAM's patents are invalid, because what's patented has been in use for a long time before the patent was issued.) So, I wonder... if I invent something new and clever, but would like to do the opposite of patenting it... that is, would want it to be publicly available and impossible to patent... what do I do? My jurisdiction is Norway... but that's not really very important. I'm not sure how these things work internationally anyway. Just answer my question generally. Thank you in advance. --DarkPhoenix 17:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would think you'd get a patent on it and then declare it free for use. It's sort of antithetical to an "antipatent", but that would seem to be the most logical way of preventing someone else from patenting the same. — Lomn Talk 17:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no lawyer, but surely in order to patent something the applicant must be able to show that it is his or her invention. As long as you can show that it has been in use (though I'm not sure for how long) nobody else can patent it. Nobody can patent the wheel (though this has been tried - see wheel). --Shantavira 18:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IANAPL, but I would have thought that getting a patent yourself is unnecessary. Publishing the details of the invention makes it prior art, and (although our article doesn't make this clear) I think it's then no longer novel and so no longer patentable. (Incidentally, the wheel article seems to say that yer man did get his patent.) Henry ^Flower 18:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The technical term for what you describe is a "disclosure". --Robert Merkel 00:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of the wheel (in Australia), it was registered, but Commissioner of Patents Vivienne Thom said: "To obtain the patent the applicant must make a declaration that they are the inventor. Obtaining a patent for the wheel would require a false claim, which would certainly invalidate the patent." From BBC report.

Conjoined Twins/Legal Status

In the United States are conjoined twins viewed as one or two individuals? For example, are they each given a social security number or do they share one? 70.159.43.66 18:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)Blake70.159.43.66 18:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Jewish law, DICEPHALUS conjoined twins (twins with two heads on one body) are considered to be ONE individual.

Yes they are viewed as to seperate people!

Would the person who mentioned dicephalus and Jewish law please sign his/her comment and cite a source, as the comment appears to me to be very odd considering the general tenets of Jewish law. Loomis51 11:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to Loomis51: The source is the Gemara, Menachot 37a: "Pelemo inquired of Rebbi [Yehudah Hanasi] 'If a man has two heads, on which one must he place the Tephillin?'" The language of the Gemara clearly shows that such a dicephalus "twin" is regarded as one person. Furthermore if this dicephalus "twin" was regarded as two people, the question would be superfluous - Tephillin would have to be placed on BOTH heads. I have just finished a detailed research paper (in Hebrew) on this question and I intend putting a copy of it online. Rabbi Dr. Chaim Simons (P.O. Box 1775, Kiryat Arba 90100, Israel)

Jewish or Hebrew Religion

Based on the material I've read from your excellent encyclopedia, I have a general perspective, but I would like verification from your knowledge.

The week that Christ was crucified, the gospels mention that there were two sabbaths in one week. One is Saturday. The other I have concluded was The Feast of Unleavened Bread. I never realized that there could be two sabbaths in one week. Do you agree? Also, do you have any idea which day of this week was for Christ? My thinking is that it would be the day before His crucifixion; perhaps Wednesday. Thank you for your assistance.

As I understand it (see Passover), the first night of Passover is always celebrated as a Sabbath, no matter where it falls in the week. Perhaps a Jewish editor will comment if this is correct. Every week, the weekly Sabbath is celebrated from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday. So, almost every Passover there are two Sabbaths in the week. According to Matthew, Mark and John, the Passover Seder was eaten on Thursday. The evening on Friday began the weekly Sabbath. That is why the relatives were in a hurry to get the bodies off the crosses by sundown. Does this help? --CTSWyneken 21:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Jewish religion, while the first night of Passover (the night on which the Passover Seder feast in celbrated) may carry with it many prohibitions that would make it appear like a Sabbath, such as the prohibitions against doing work or lighting a fire, it is certainly not a true Sabbath as Judaism would define the term. Incidentally, in the Jewish Diaspora (i.e. outside of Israel), Jews celebrate two Seders on the first two nights of Passover, which would lead to the possibility of having three Sabbaths in one week, if one were to consider the Seder feast as a Sabbath. But this is not the case. There is only one Sabbath each week, and it is observed as CTS points out, from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday. Loomis51 01:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

Smoking on Airplanes

Are there any airlines left that permit smoking on flights? I realized that US airlines and EU airlines expressly forbid it, per law. But past those, are there any left that do?

--Paul

You might be interested in this website. However, please note that it was last updated in 2003. --DavidGC 02:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Da vinci Code

I do not see what the big fuss about the claim that Jesus is married is about. in the Bible it often refers to marriage as the sanctified and correct thing to do. They said in Genesis that "a man will leave his own father and mother. He marries a woman, and the two of them become like one person. Gen 2.24" i thought that Jesus becoming married might show other Christians about the sanctity and the value of marriage. or I might be completely on the wrong track.

Is there a question here? --CTSWyneken 03:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the "big fuss" seems to be about the book's questioning of the divinity of jesus. does jesus, being 100% god as well as 100% man condescend himself to marrying an earthly woman? i think the argument put forth in the book is that jesus was not really divine, and so marrying mary would not be out of the question. i've heard the theory that jesus, being a young and pious jewish man, was seriously out of bounds in not marrying. but really, was jesus in the habit of following the strict jewish laws of the time? seems to me that he was in the habit of doing pretty much the opposite. also seems to me that they pinned him up to a tree for that very reason. 71.31.102.60 04:54, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main concern I've seen about the 'code does not have to do so much about Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married, but it's claim to be based on research when, in fact, many scholars have pointed out it is entirely fiction. If time permits later, I'll post more links, but here is something to get you started. Cracking The Da Vinci Code. --CTSWyneken 10:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem any contradiction in saying a novel is based on research, most are. It seems to be some section of the readership who can't tell fact from fiction, confused perhaps by the use of real-world props. Notinasnaid 11:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, though, it goes beyond that. The author said that the story is fictional, but that it is based on certain facts, but the facts in question were not actually true (see Criticisms of The Da Vinci Code). Whether you call that lying, creative licence or poor research is up to you. Henry ^Flower 13:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered the same thing! it seems alot of people arent able to see that it could be fiction, or they are so tight in their beliefs that they have to shoot down EVERY possible thing that doesnt agree with their system. (I know people like this.) Maybe its both too! Either way, i havent read the book, but i might check out the movie, even though some christian leaders are in a fury to prevent people from "watching a movie which insults their religion" !

Hmm, was he citing as facts only things that other people had cited as facts (such as the people who tried to sue him recently)? If so, that seems reasonable, Wikipedia would do the same. That lawsuit seemed very odd, since if the other book were factual, then copying its "facts" is entirely legitimate, since facts cannot be copyrighted. Only if the authors of the other book were saying it was fiction could copying their stuff be plagiarism, or so it seems to me. I observe in Criticisms of The Da Vinci Code the phrase Although Brown's website makes use of words such as "alleged," "rumored," and "seem to be," some critics consider the qualifiers misleading which suggests that the critics are out to get him no matter what. (Perhaps if I'd read the book I'd feel the same). Notinasnaid 20:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, what is the big deal about a married Jesus? Well, by itself that would be absolutely unimportant theologically. It would make the Magdalene a greater saint, as it would suggest that Jesus chose her over Peter, that Peter was the foundation of the church but that Magdalene was more important still. Since the anagogical readings of history always suggest that the church is the body of Christ, the idea that Christ was married would challenge that language (not a very, very big deal). The challenge would be to the primacy of the Pope. Since all popes derive their position through apostolic succession from Peter and Peter's chosen status, if Magdalene were chosen above Peter, it would eliminate bans on women bishops and lower the power of the Pope as an interpreter of doctrine. For most Christians, that would still not be a big deal today.
The other part of it comes in the late middle ages, when there was a cult of virginity. I'm not sure why this cult developed, but it's quite important. Using reception aesthetics, we can argue that it was an age more obsessed with virginity and purity of body than perhaps any other, as the numbers of hagiographies of virgin martyrs explodes. For thinkers at that time, a married Christ would be a polluted Christ, and a married Christ would be less divine. N.b. this thinking was not all that common before or after the 1100-1400.
Finally, the thing that the Holy Blood, Holy Grail folks were taken in by (other than a huge hoax) was the idea of the last scion. They believed that there was an issue of the marriage, that there was a semi-divine blood line running about. To believe in this, you have to believe a ton of extreme things (divinity being transmitted by conception, awareness of divinity transmitted the same way, essence coming from blood...all that divine right of kings nonsense). For protestants, none of this should be terribly more challenging than the run of the mill heresy. For Roman Catholics today, the question of papal primacy would be under attack (again).
Make your own choice of how offended you'd like to be. Geogre 13:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not a married Jesus. So much work has been done to prove that Jesus never ever touched (or even saw) a vagina. Some have even worked out ways he could have been born without touching Mother Mary's vagina. If he was married, all that work is wasted. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the evidence outside the scriptures that Jesus even existed is pretty small. That's not much evidence one way or the other, as most of the contemporary writers of the time whose works have survived weren't working in the area and would have had little interest in Jewish preachers; see Historicity of Jesus. --Robert Merkel 23:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue against Robert Merkel's point that there is very little evidence that Jesus existed outside of scriptures. All the major religions recognize that Jesus existed, and most scholars do to, its just there is little support for his divinity amongst those. There are many engaging books on this topic. As well, as for the Da Vinci Code, it is fiction, and the author's research is definitively faulty, so that story of Jesus is obviously a fabrication. Anyone Christian who feels that this challenges or threatens there faith, obviously does not know enough about the roots of their faith, and any non-Christian who comes to believe that Christianity is false just because (and i italicize because) of this movie, obviously does not know anything about the subject. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 01:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banned Steroids in Major League Sports

anabolic steroids, and similar performance enhancing substances are banned in major league sports. Are they only banned by the leagues involved or are they in fact illegal to all citizens? For example, Barry Bonds may be prohibited from using steroids, but is this because of MLB policy or is it actually a state crime? Is an ordinary Joe who isn't a professional athlete prohibited by the state from using these substances? (I realize that different jurisdictions may have different laws. I'm not even American myself, but an answer that concerns the US only is acceptable.)Loomis51 02:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak for the US, but in the UK (and I'd imagine many other countries) steriods are a controlled substance, in just the same way medicine for heart conditions or gout is. As such, it's illegal to possess them without a prescription from a doctor or vet (unless one has a licence, as pharmacists and drug makers have). Like other drugs with medical uses, it is of course legal to possess them with a prescription. Unfortunately I can't find a decent reference which says in which category steroids are categorised. Other performance enhancing substances might not be, or certainly aren't, banned. Testosterone, pseudoeffedrine, even caffeine and ginseng are prohibited by sporting bodies, but are available over the counter in medicines, herbs, drinks, and foodstuffs. Petty the poor distance runner who runs 10 miles every morning in the rain, frequently catches a cold, and can't take effective over the counter remedies lest they be randomly drug tested the following day (a sudafed you took yesterday tests the same as a big syringe full of pseudoeffedrine you took a couple of weeks ago). Middenface 13:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, possession of steriods without a prescription is illegal because they're a potentially harmful pharmaceutical, and not because of their capacity for sporting abuse. That said, clearly a court is going to take intention into account when sentencing, and having steriods to give to your cancerous granny will likely be mitigatory, while having them to sell to athletes so they can cheat at sports likely won't. Middenface 14:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did I hear that right? Caffeine is a banned substance in professional sports? Should I take that to mean that a footballer who had a cup of tea/coffee with breakfast runs the risk of being banned from his/her sport for such an ordinary everyday practice that the rest of us do with hardly a thought? Wow, I'm glad I'm not a professional athlete! (You can keep the money, I need my morning cup of tea!) Loomis51 11:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I belive you have to drink like 20 cups of coffee to go over the limit set by World Anti-Doping Agency. So an athlete can enjoy a cup of coffee if s/he wants to, it just to prevent athletes taking those caffeine pills students love. --E ivind ^t ^@^c 06:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a medieval musical instrument-- what is it's name?

This instrument looks like a block of wood (about 8 inches high and chunky) with the mouthpiece on a protruding tube. I believe that inside is a very long coiled tube for the air column. (sorry my description is not more technical but except for having seen and heard it I know nothing.) Could you tell me its name, construction and materials, and if it is the ancestor of any modern instrument. Thank you. ----

Do you mean the ocarina by any chance? —Zero Gravitas 08:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you mean the Rackett. But other thoughts: Serpent? Shwam? Anything here? = Nunh-huh 09:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC) Further rackett info with pictures: [16] [17]. Also, delightfully, called the Wurstfagott (sausage bassoon). - Nunh-huh 09:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Shwam" is Shawm, BTW. Grutness...wha? 11:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a rackett, yeah. Can't imagine what else it might be. --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 13:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South Carolina and Oregon similarities

I typed in the name of the town I live in to see how many others were out there. At least 20 were listed but there was only one state that had the name listed as a county and city, which is the same story here. I got curious and started looking at all the cities and counties in Oregon and came to a startling conclusion: South Carolina and Oregon amazingly share the same names of towns and counties. We also have the same state drink (milk).

here is a list of names of cities that we have in common:

Florence-county in south carolina; city in oregon

Pendleton-city in SC; city in OR

Charleston-city and county in SC; city in OR

Lexington-city and county in OR; city in OR

Manning-city in SC; city in OR

Seneca-city in SC; city in OR (*both towns named for same reasons--apples)

Summerville-city in SC; city in OR

Richland-county in SC; city in OR

Gervais-name of major road in columbia, the SC capital; city in OR

Union-city and county in SC; city and county in OR

Columbia-city and capital in SC; city and county in OR

Goshen-infamous home of the hound of goshen, a white dog that haunts newberry county in SC; city in OR

Marion-county in SC; county in OR

Valley Falls-city in SC; city in OR

now that I have shown you the evidence, let me ask these questions:

Do you think this is a mere coincidence that these two states are alot alike? I dont. What I want to know is the correlation between the two. I have tried to see if anything is mentioned about the origins or founding fathers of the two states. Ive hardly had any luck.

Were they the same people? Did the people who had started South Carolina venture out west and plant southeastern roots in Oregon? I am finding this discovery to be quite intruiging. Anything to lead me in the right direction is welcome. One could almost say its sort of a parallel universe. I wouldnt mind packing up my camper and taking a road trip to visit the area. Taking pictures of the towns' welcome signs and comparing with the ones around here would be wild. Margaret

Perhaps its a secret sign of your forefathers that the ppl of South Carolina and the ppl of Oregon are part of the 13th tribe of Israel? Perhaps they were members of a secret religious conspiracy? Perhaps the names of these cities are indications for the aliens to land here? Perhaps these names are supposed to help in the reincarnation of Jesus or perhaps... even Elvis?

Sorry about that, I am cynical by choice and possses a strange sort of humour. Now seriously, what are you looking for? An explanation why these names are all the same?

Easy answer: because they knew and liked them (the same reason we always give our babies the same names). We like to repeat things, like names. You can say that we as a species don´t have a lot of imagination. Everybody copies everything frome everybody, but mostly we like to repeat names from our own cultural past because we simply like them, they are familiar and fashionable. It is hard to be original, because many times being original means being diffrent. Many times being diffrent is not considered "proper".

I will give you even a few good examples: Why are the names of almost everything in the USA the same as in the Old World? You have "New York" and we have "York", you have several cities called "Carthage" and we have a city with the same name (ok, it was part of the old Roman world, so what?), etc. Your personal names are many times the same as ours (John, William, Bill, Jack, Alice, Brown, it goes on and on), many times they are from the bible (Seth, Christian(son), Mary, Sara, Stephen, Moses, David, Peter, Eve) or are ppl from our past (Alexander, Julian). We are repeating names more than 2000 years now, and perhaps even longer than that.

South Carolina came first, and so probably the founders of Oregon copied the names because they simply knew and liked them. Likely they even came from that area or passed by it. Flamarande 11:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the west coast was settled largely by people who crossed the country from the east, it's not impossible that a large number of people from South Carolina were among those who settled Oregon. Grutness...wha? 11:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I saw a trivia thing once that Lexington is the only city in all 50 states. I went to look for Lexington Hawaii and couldn't find it. So, I think the trivia thing was wrong - but Lexington is a very popular name. All other names you mentioned are popular too. If you want to find true similarities, what percentage of ALL county names in both states are the same? What percentage of ALL city names in both states are the same? This is, in all reality, about the same as noting that City A and City B both have Main St., Oak St., 1st St... --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the USGS name server doesn't have a Lexington, Hawaii. Seneca, South Carolina seems to have been named after the Seneca tribe of Indians not after an apple. Many of the mentioned towns occur in a number of states, not unique to SC or OR. Rmhermen 17:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

City Name	# of States
Clinton	29
Franklin	29
Fairview	27
Marion	25
Milford	24
Greenville	24
Oxford	24
Salem	24
Springfield	24
Arlington	22
Kingston	22
Cleveland	22
Madison	22
Princeton	22
Centerville	21
Newport	21
Auburn	21
Troy	21
Georgetown	21
Washington	21

According to some data which I have, the "top 20 city names by number of states they appear in at least once" are as shown in the table at right.

I also did some queries to elicit the states which had the greatest similarity in naming of populated places... the tops are Ohio and Illinois (233 names in common), Texas and Illinois (211), Ohio and Pennsylvania (211) and Missouri and Illinois. Oregon and South Carolina are far down the list at 22 similarities, these being:

Charleston
Elgin
Florence
Gaston
Gresham
Hampton
Jefferson
Lexington
Norway
Oak Grove
Oakland

Pendleton
Princeton
Salem
Seneca
Springfield
Summerville
Summit
Troy
Union
Valley Falls
Waterloo

Note that these statistics only consider "populated place" entities (towns and cities) and not counties as the original questioner included. KWH 06:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cathedral "Raven"

I am looking for a "cathedral Raven" I bought a button with this stamped on the bottom. It also has a picture of the church. Looking for the exact place.

The raven is a symbol of several cathedrals, notably the Giralda in Seville, Spain. A quick google search of raven+cathedral may turn up something. Grutness...wha? 11:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the cathedral in Ravenna. AllanHainey 07:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy

What is the difference between "noumenal reality" and "ontic reality" ? Thank you. - Willie

You might find some help at the articles Noumenon and Ontology, andeven the one on Reality. --Halcatalyst 15:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the Holy Trinity as symbol for components of atom

Is there any analysis that has been done on God being a symbol for the atom, ie: (electron + proton + neutron) = (Father + Son + Holy Spirit), and if this has been evaluated, which of the 3 corresponds to which of the other 3? Thanks for info. and/or useful links (sorry if in wrong area, didn´t know whether to post under religion or science). --JoelAbend

People are always putting ideas like this together. For example, "Trinitarian traces abound everywhere in creation. The atom is proton, neutron, and electron. Our experience of time is triune – past, present, and future. The family too is a reflection of Trinitarian love – the love of husband and wife, distinct and very different persons, generates the child who is from them but is nonetheless distinct from them, indeed absolutely unique" [18]. But I would say this is not theological consideration but rather imaginative analogical thinking, and certainly not analysis. --Halcatalyst 15:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've seen this used as a metaphor for the Trinity before, but I can't remember where. Theologians will typically respond by saying: "that's fine as far as it goes, but it isn't perfect." Which, of course, they would say about all metaphors that try to get at the nature of God. 8-) --CTSWyneken 15:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The human mind is exceedingly good at seeing patterns - even when there are none. The root of your theory is "all things which come in threes are related to the Christian Trinity". Without further evidence, all you have is coincidence, and coincidence does not imply causality. You could say "but lots of things come in threes!". Yes, but lots of other things don't come in threes. There are four seasons. Two illumination states (light and dark). Two sexes. Six types of quarks. Ninety-three natually occurring elements. Ten, eleven or twenty-six dimensions. You can say that God is a metaphor for the atom, but the idea of a deity is far older than the proton-neutron-electron decomposition of the atom. So it sounds to me like someone is trying to inject meaning where there is none.

My €0.02... :) — QuantumEleven 08:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to offend anyone, but as was implied above, three is a common number in nature (just as two or four are, for example.) Just as an example, has anyone looked into the symbolism of the three leaves distinctive of poison ivy and attempted to look for its symbolic relevance to the Holy Trinity? I wonder what that would imply! Again, that wasn't meant to offend, just to point out that looking for notable "threes" in nature can lead to extremely varied results and is probably best left to theologians (if that). Loomis51 11:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is the official name of this religion

The followers worship a god called Janus. This religion is now extinct.

See Janus (mythology). Henry ^Flower 11:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

history

I am trying to find out the name of the person who was last publicly whipped in the state of Delaware. I have been able to find out that it was in the year of 1952 but I need to know the name.

Thanks

Carrie

Google hasn't been of any help with a name...you may have to go through public records (say of either a courthouse or municipality)...which town was the sentence handed down and carried out in? BTW thanks to you, "red hannah" has now been added to my vocabulary--Shandon 16:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC) Hmmm...changed 'whipping' to 'flogging' and came up with this site [19] that gives the date of punishment as June 16, 1952 and says it was a burglar who got 20 lashes. This site [20] gives the instructions & form for accessing Delaware court records.[reply]

Homosexuality in Mexico

I'm having trouble finding information on the wiki about homosexuality in Mexico. What are the social attitudes towards homosexuality? Is it really conservative because of the catholicism? Will my boyfriend and I get beat up if we're holding hands on a public street? -- LazerTruck666 13:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard at least two instances from my friends who said to have met pre-operative transsexuals or transvestites in Tijuana.Patchouli 13:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Were they aware of this before they paid? :) -- Mwalcoff 22:54, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but homosexuality and transexualism are completely different things. --Richardrj 14:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just like most countries it depends on where you are. Larger cities or tourist spots like Mexico city, Guadalajara, Cancun etc. have a decent size homosexual population and culture. In the rural areas things are more conservative. As always, use common sense and err on the side of safety. Here is a report from glbtq giving a history of homosexuality in Mexico. [21]Nowimnthing 16:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is purely anecdotal because I can't remember the documentary I was watching when I heard it, but I do distinctly remember that Mexico DOES have quite a problem with tolerance of homosexuality. I'd do some more research if I were you. And just to add, it probably has nothing to do with the fact that Mexico is a predominantly Catholic country. In fact you'd probably find quite a bit less trouble in most Catholic countries/provinces (eg. France, Spain, Quebec) than if you were to find yourself holding hands with your boyfriend in, say, Alabama or Mississippi! Good luck and be safe. Loomis51 11:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World religions and belief systems: similarities?

im doing some independant research to try and prove that there are similarities between religions..... basically im trying to find as many similarities as i can to prove that maybe there is one universal truth and that we see it in different ways, since we are human and imperfect. my problem is, i only know small parts of christian belief, and the american indian beliefs system as a result of my studies. ive found that both native and christian religions have a flood story. Natives also have ties to the sauna which was used in mythological times in europe (they call it the sweat lodge). The question i have is: are there any other connections between native religion and other religions/belief systems? trust me ive googled and searched all over for a long time, but it seems there are almost no sources that compare native religion in this way. any help would be appreciated. thank you!

Surely you can do the comparison yourself? That's what independent research is. Find out what native American believed (hint- probably different things in different places). Find out what Christians, Hindus, Buddhists etc. believe. Compare them. You might also be interested in the comparative religion article. Henry ^Flower 14:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, its just that i am under the impression that there is not alot of comparison dealing directly with native spirituality. (im guessing i misworded things above, so i am clarifying) I thought that there would have been more info, but it seems that because of the actions of the white man, Native things have really gone underground. i mean its supposedly re-emerging, but i really cant find alot about comparisons specifically having one side be native american spirituality. Not even your link has this, although it seems to show alot of good information on other religions. Does anyone know where i can get some good comparitive information dealing with natives?

Artists / Artworks that can be or need to be touched

For a part of my thesis, I need information about art that can or need to be touched. Almost all art is only meant to be looked at (paintings, most sculptures,... etc), not to be touched or felt.

There are some artists who make art which can be touched, and should be touched to get the full "idea" the creator had when creating the artwork.

Note, there is a whole class of artworks and exhibitions, specially aimed at blind people. These are not the works I'm looking for. Also, a lot of art workshops exists for children, with the possibility to touch and feel the art.

I've been searching a lot already, but can't find any good leads. 'Haptic art' or 'tactile art' are closely related to what I'm searching for, but don't give the expected results.

Anyone who can help or give me some leads? I've been googling and searching for about a week now, and only have a handfull of names and links, most of them not even exactly what I'm looking for.

Rgds, -bg

Interesting subject. Sorry I don't have any examples from real life, but I do have two fictional examples: In the movie Harold and Maude, Maude has a sculpture in her house which she says Harold needs to touch to fully appreciate, and in Larry Niven's Known Space series, the Kdatlyno are an alien species who have no sense of vision and they're famous for their tactile works of art. —Keenan Pepper 15:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of the opposite - the Detroit Institute of Arts has a bronze donkey at its entrance that you are encouraged to touch - so that you can appreciate the damage done by visitors touching the artworks. Rmhermen 16:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Found it, Artie the Donkey. The only image I can find is somewhat small... Anyone knows another links to an image? -bg

The Canadian sculptor Katie Ohe has produced a number of kinetic art pieces which are designed to be touched -- her most famous is Zipper, which is a campus landmark at the University of Calgary. It was designed to be spun, and is -- hundreds of times a day. (Except the day the engineering students stole it.) There's a picture here; the two spiral vertical pieces each spin on their axis, and then the whole thing spins on its' base. For more information about this sculptor, read, of all things, this column by pro wrestler Bret "The Hitman" Hart. --ByeByeBaby 21:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's an Anish Kapoor piece on exhibition at Tate Modern at the moment which you can/have to walk into to experience it. I would try emailing them for more info on your question. They are quite helpful. Tyrenius 22:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More mundane, but equally valid are the works of those bona fide artists who design and make articles for daily use - a walking stick, a steering wheel, a spoon. I'm thinking not of a design for mass production, but of items that are individually made and have a look and feel about them that says something to the user. Would this be a separate field of art study? --Seejyb 13:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lotion

Where did lotion originate and when please?

Probably not really a good answer for this. Invention books list the first recorded use of cosmetics and other personal hygiene products in Ancient Egypt. The use of various plants (like aloe)to help with skin problems goes back into prehistory. In other words thousands of years ago, know one can ever know for sure since there was no writing and no physical evidence could have been left from such a transitory activity. If you were looking for a specific brand of lotion, you could get into company histories, but just lotion in general, no real answer. Nowimnthing 18:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy: God

Just a question id like to see responses to: if god is all knowing, and all loving, why would he create a person whos actions would send him to hell? surely god would know this person would have sinful intent, so why create a population that you love, but that has to suffer eternal damnation? Just an interesting idea to think about.

This is waaaaay too close to a deterministic view of the universe for me. Have you seen any evidence of this eternal damnation? I think it's a state of mind rather than an end state (well, one of us is in for a big surprise)--24.80.70.174 18:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Reference Desk is not a soapbox; however, you might be interested in our articles like free will, determinism, and the problem of evil. — Lomn Talk 19:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing the 'one of us is in for a big surprise' you might like to look at Pascal's wager. DJ Clayworth 20:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might find The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis interesting reading... AnonMoos 05:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your question looks like Jean Meslier's (read his text). Also, did you try Pascal's wader ? --DLL 19:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you really want to know a decent rebuttal to that argument, you can drop a line on my talk page here because its a lil too long for the reference desk. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 01:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient near east....

Were Babylon and Akkad the same city with different names? I'm trying to settle a dispute, so some nice little sources would good :P Oskar 19:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Akkadians called Babylon "Babilu". While the location of Akkad is unknown, it is unlikely that they called the same city two different names. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Puzzled

Doing a quiz here and having trouble with the last question about a church in which a famous Saint was buried...

http://img104.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bonus8kv.jpg

Think we would need more info here, do you have the name of the church or even what country it is in? Nowimnthing 23:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks Scottish? Jameswilson 01:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I have to go on is that a legendary Saints tomb resides within it Also it is a Cathedral

St. Mungo's Cathedral, Glasgow. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 10:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

X-Men: The Last Stand Cast

I have been trying to find out what the salaries were for the cast of X-Men The Last Stand. It's my understanding that they were able to re-negotiate new contracts this time around. The only salary I can find of anyone in that movie is Brett Ratner.

This might be hard, as salaries of actors are not required to be disclosed to the public. The ones that we know about are usually leaked to the press. Nowimnthing 23:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If www.aintitcoolnews.com doesn't know about it, I'm not sure where you'd look. It's probably the closest thing to a Hollywood Smokinggun.com. Geogre 11:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The History of COPLEY TOWNSHIP in OHIO

Hello Everyone,I'm writing to from ENGLAND, I want to know how COPLEY came about in Ohio, as my maiden name is Copley, and I'm interested in the history of this. All the Best, Mrs Joy Taylor, (nee Copley)

There is a short history on their offical webpage: [22] Nowimnthing 23:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 19

Quotes found on Desk Calender

I enjoy reading quotes on the desk calender at work however I keep coming across quotes that are attributed to P.K. Shaw and W.G.P. I have searched high and low to find out who they are and there is no reference in any search engine I have tried.

Would someone be able to give me information on who these people/organisations are?

Thanks for the help.

Pelican.

Juse because something is quotable doesn't mean it was said by anyone well known. And the initials W.G.P. are quite common. Have you tried doing a search for the quotes themselves?--Shantavira 07:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to this (which includes a list of some of his best ones), "W.G.P. is a gentleman by the name of Willam George Plunkett who worked for the Collins company for nearly 40 years. He worked in the print room and oversaw the production of the refills. Over the years he wrote his own quotes and they started appearing in the product. He died in 1975 and Collins have continued the tradition of including some of his quotes on a Wednesday". JackofOz 08:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Light in August (Faulkner)

As you might know, Light in August has a lot of Biblical allusions, including Joe Christmas representing a Jesus figure. What I don't understand is why Faulkner linked Christmas to Jesus if Christmas is such a violent and troubled character, while Jesus is the ultimate pacifist? Any thoughts? Thank you. --Oobra 04:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Violence : fought with daemons, with temple merchants, with diseases and death. :Trouble : discussed with priests, with dead Moses & Elias, said he was a stranger king, put the revolution in Jerusalem and so on. Jeez was not only Mary's little baby. --DLL 18:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sparta and wheels

Did the ancient Spartans have wheels?

Certainly, in the ancient Olympic games there were chariot races (same time period). Wheels are know in Europe and Asia since the ancient Egyptians at the very least and probably before any written records. Only in North and South America was the wheel intruduced relativly later (with the arrival of spanish collonists and conquistadors). Flamarande 07:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's "only in North and South America, Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific islands", thanks very much. And that might be missing out places like Mauritius, too... Grutness...wha? 05:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Made in Germany U.S. Zone

The label above was used for goods manufactured in the U.S occupied areas of postwar Germany, but when was this practice abolished? --Agamemnon2 06:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of the occupation!

That is wrong , after a while the label was changed into: "made in West Germany", but I don´t know precisly when. Flamarande 16:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extreme eating habit

As an extention to vegetarianism, i have been told that there are people that recon that killing plants is i,moral aswell, and so they will only eat other people's leftovers, they will only eat the food killed for the pourpose of being eating by another human.I have been tring to find information about this for the past half an hour on wikipedia and google but have been astoundingly unsusccessful, does anyone know anything about the subject or able to put a name to it or even if its true--mexaguil 06:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether there is a specific term for this practice, which is certainly economical and ecological, but since they rely on the generosity of others the word vagrant comes to mind. You might also be interested in the even more extreme practice of breatharianism.--Shantavira 07:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Freegans? There are also fruitarians. Henry ^Flower 10:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many plants have parts which are "designed" to be eaten as a way to disperse seeds, and the plant does not die when you eat it's berries. I can't see how anyone could object to eating such plant parts. StuRat 12:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is highly likely that there are bacteria on the plant that you will kill if you eat it. Some take the "thou shall not kill" to such an extreme that they believe the only proper thing to do is sit still and avoid harming anything at all until you waste away. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But your immune system is killing millions or organisms as you sit there. Perhaps they should kill themselves immediately, and thus only kill a single organism ? StuRat 20:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finally - that took forever to find. Fasting until you die is called santhara. And, the human immune system is discussed at great detail by those who take this seriously. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also recommend our overview article on Jainism, who are the largest religious body to practice at their high levels of nonviolence and asceticism, not eating root vegetables (which kill the plant), for instance. In particular, the Digambar sect, whose ascetic monks only possess two things -- a water gourd for drinking and a feather broom for sweeping the ground they walk on (so they don't accidentally step on insects). Note this list doesn't include clothes. --ByeByeBaby 01:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose they could wear the gourd in a strategic location, LOL. StuRat 17:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naive realism

I'm looking for arguments and counter-arguments concerning naive realism, the examples given in wikipedia being rather poor.

Thanks

Check out google results. There are 61,600 of them. Tyrenius 09:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But if you choose "refutation of naive realism" in google you only come to 7 results. So, could somebody give examples of that?

If naive realism argues that a red apple tree must exist because you perceive it to be there, then what happens if you were only hallucinating? --DavidGC 15:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good. What else?

Erm, red apples don't exist, because everything is made of atoms so they must be an illusion, based on the incredibly limited range of our senses.

If you trust what you see, then a bus in the distance is the same size as a red apple close to you.

Tyrenius 14:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rousseau

Was Jean Jacques Rousseau a revolutionary?

No, he was a philosopher, you can find out more by going to Jean Jacques Rousseau. AllanHainey 11:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Not a bomb-throwing revolutionary, but a revolutionary in his field. To oversimplify very slightly, he invented socialism and romanticism. Henry ^Flower 11:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense! Jean Jacques Rousseau is a french chick in the TV series LOST. Next you will be telling me that John Locke is a philosopher. Yeah right! Ohanian 12:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Brown controversy

How historically correct is Dan Brown's suggestions that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, and that Mary moved to France and gave birth to Jesus' baby?

None at all. The number of violations of Occam's razor necessary for it is staggering. It fails common sense, violates history, and is just plain absurd. It requires hyper-effecient and effective conspirators who would exceed the abilities of any known secret agency in history, overnight execution, and international cooperation that has never been seen otherwise. However, there are hundreds of debunking sites out there that can explain this. Geogre 13:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's ridiculous. Everyone knows Jesus moved to India. - Nunh-huh 13:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is also another ludricous theory whithout any real proof, like the story that Jesus in his childhood was studing with the Druids. Look: if you accept that Jesus was a man with sexual needs and that Mary Magdalene was very devoted to him, you can imagine all sorts of things. Now to prove them is impossible. There are some gnostic (not church approved) texts that say that Mary was his favourite disciple, but there isn´t any text anywhere (gnostic or cannon) that says that they were married. Apparently there is a single parchement which says that Jesus kissed Mary on the..." and then a hole appears in the text. Dan Brown is the single person in the entire planet which can read: "on the mouth", everybody else can only see a hole in the text, go figure. Flamarande 16:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that many other things that are believed about Jesus violate Occam's razor and fail common sense in more ways than the idea that Mary moved to France. Who doesn't want to move to France? Great food, the Louvre, lots of cinemas and bookshops. David Sneek 16:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You must have missed the Anti-French memos, and anyway Jesus moved to Afghanistan - India was only a short layover during his trip[23]. Rmhermen 17:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably look at the book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail which is the 'non-fiction' book on which Brown based his novel. I personally, and the vast majority of historians, think it's complete rubbish but at least you'll get the theories there without getting them mixed up with a piece of crime fiction. DJ Clayworth 17:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have an article on the Priory of Sion that explains the hoax that the Holy Blood, Holy Grail ~~idiots~~ authors fell for. Add that foolishness with the single 12th scribal error of "sang real" for "san grael," and out pops a book and a novel. Geogre 20:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

its perhaps worth noting that there isnt a lot of historical evidence for a lot of what happened in Jesus' life - resurrection being the obvious one. some people believe the Da Vinci Code, some people believe the bible - chacun à son goût, as the french would say (maybe to jesus himself) 87.194.20.253 22:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They're hardly equivalent. Choose between four sources all saying the same thing that are then followed by fifteen or so sources that say different things but agree that Jesus wasn't married followed by hundreds of people working out a theology who never mention this fact and a group of four authors who, 2,000 years distant from the events they purport to know, say that something entirely otherwise was the truth and that there was a complete erasure of this truth (except for them) that was so complete, so fast, and so unanimous that it left not even a scar in the original tales. There is no reason to doubt the historicity of Jesus, the words of Jesus in the Gospels, or the narrative of the life of Jesus in the Gospels, not for anyone, as none of it violates common sense, historical setting, or historical narrative. Naive empiricists doubt the miracles and the central mystery of Christianity, which is their right, but compare even that to the miracles Dan Brown and Holy Blood, Holy Grail require (miracles of silence, miracles of intercontinental efficiency, miracles of speed, miracles of precision) and the alternative narrative they offer, which violates historical narrative, historical setting, and common sense. No, they're no way equivalent, even from an atheistic point of view. Geogre 00:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We have to assume of course that Jesus was married for the simple reason that no one says he wasn't, something which would have certainly been pointed out by the Gospel writers to indicate yet another extraordinary facet of the man, going against the grain, when it would have been expected that a man of his age (and a teacher to boot) would certainly have a spouse. Have you ever read in a report of George Bush's public appearances that he was wearing trousers? Obviously not, because we take it for granted, as it is the custom. Same for marriage in that society and at that time.Tyrenius 14:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're being ridiculously argumentative. In fact, married men have their wives mentioned in the New Testament and the Old Testament. Furthermore, it was not "expected" that religious leaders and prophets marry. John the Baptist was not married. Finally, the burden of proof is on the assertion of presence, not on proving a negative -- which is impossible (as Iraq found out when Bush demanded it prove that it had no WMD). Geogre 17:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remeber.... Its a novel... Philc _T^E_C^I 18:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Senators against Guantanamo

Which senators, if any, have publicly spoken out or voted against holding prisoners in Guantanamo? Or how could I find this out for myself? Thanks! — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 13:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't have an example for you, but I would be pretty surprised if Russ Feingold hasn't spoken out against Guantanamo. --Chapuisat 14:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Found one [24] --Chapuisat 14:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can to go thomas.loc.gov and search for bills with "Guamtanamo" in them. What you want to look for is who voted to pay for the detainment camp, who voted to pay for running the detainment camp, and who has not voted to close the detainment camp. Of note, in a quick glance at the results, I saw a bill about "irresponsible" media for reporting on bad conditions in Guantanamo. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. The only really relevent bill I could find was the Guantanamo Detainees Procedures Act, which doesn't seem to have been voted upon yet. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 14:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to look at the appropriations bills. Quick trip to fantasy land (aka - how I view government)... The President can talk all he wants, but he needs money. Congress gives him money. He wanted to build the detension center in Guantanamo Bay. Congress had to pay for it. They knew what it was for. So, by saying "we'll pay for that", they were saying "we agree that you should do that". But, after the fact, they all point their fingers at the President. Back to reality... there are appropriations bills with notes about "special category residents" in Guantanamo. --Kainaw ^(talk) 15:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jo Swingson

What are the likelihood the 26 year old female MP Jo Swingson would have sexual intercourse with me?

Well, you could start by getting her name right. --Richardrj 14:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She's probably the best person to answer that. Her email addresses are given here. TheMadBaron 21:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that if you have to ask this question on Wikipedia, the likelihood of such is probably very low.--203.214.51.22 23:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sworn officer

What does it mean to be a "sworn officer"?

It would normally mean that they have sworn some kind of oath, like an Oath of office. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 15:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It means to be a ful law enforcement officerment officer. They are called a sworn officer because they have to swear a special oath.

Police employees are often divided between sworn officers with full police powers (for arrest, weapons, etc.) and other police employees who may be dispatch, crime scene technicians, secretaries, etc. There are also other types of sworn officers: "officers of the court" include not only some police but also lawyers, bailiffs, etc. Rmhermen 17:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How much does it cost the U.S. Government to manufacture a penny?

I heard recently on the radio that since the price of copper has nearly doubled worldwide within only the past several years it now costs more than ever to manufacture penny coins. I assume the other manufacturing costs have remained the same. I can't recall the exact price, but the radio broadcast seemed to imply that it cost over $1 to manufacture each U.S. penny. Can this be true?

I have heard the price of copper has risen so drastically mostly due to speculative trading of copper futures.

No it's not that bad. But a penny does cost more than a penny: [25], [26]. David Sneek 16:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shoot, David beat me to the punch. Anyway, [27]. As David said, it seems one penny costs 1.23 cents to make. --Chapuisat 16:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the questioner is bringing up the argument to stop producing the penny, look into the Norwegian debate about removing the Øre. It was a rather large debate when I was in Norway in 1993. I am rather certain that they did stop production of it before 2000. --Kainaw ^(talk) 16:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, New Zealand is about to change some of its coinage and is phasing out the 5c piece (the 1c and 2c went about a decade ago). Given that that means the smallest denomination will be the 10c, a case could easily be made for lopping off a zero and starting from scratch. Grutness...wha? 05:13, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the resonses...I must have mistaken 1.23 cents for $1.23.

You might want to check out the Wikipedia articles on Cent, Nickel, Dime, etc. Note that of all the coins, the penny (cent) contains the smallest percentage of copper. --LarryMac 17:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some decades ago, the copper in a penny was worth more than 1 cent. People would indeed melt down batche sof pennies and sell the copper for a profit. However, starting in the early 1980s, pennies are made of zinc with a thin copper skin. And zinc is cheap. -- 12.5.49.27 20:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're asking about the US but this is related, in the UK last week a newspaper article showed how they took coppers to France (it's illegal to deface UK coins in the UK), melted them down and sold them for a profit --iamajpeg 23:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People's Republic of China GDP vs. U.S.A.

The GDP of the U.S.A. is quoted as in the billions and sited at #1 in the world. On the People's Republic of China page the GDP is quoted in trillions and is sited as #2. One of these is incorrect and needs to be fixed, but which one?

The PRC figure was off. I fixed it; thanks for the tip. List of countries by GDP (PPP) is fascinating, if you're into this sort of thing, in having three different lists and numbers from the IMF, World Bank and CIA so you can see where they disagree. - Banyan Tree 21:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entering politics

I have always been intrested in the poltical happenings around me and have always been able to give a fairly accurate forcast of tommarows politics based on a analysis of the facts and a good intuition. the problem is i am only 21 and as such am finding it hard to break into the political arena. what do you suggest?

The obvious first question to ask is, in what country, state/province, city do you live in?

Second, I'm curious to know of what "accurate forcasts of tommarows [sic] politics" you've been able to predict. It would be helpful in understanding what you mean by that, in order to give you further advice. Loomis51 22:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well...as a politician meeself, I can say: Do Not Enter unless you are willing to be called vicious names by people who you haven't ever met, and apply yourself unfailingly to bureaucratic processes that take years to convert action into meaningful results. Dive in and see what happens, but don't expect any fireworks or a parade because you did. Um, as far as your thoughts about your age, the best time to get in is now, because experience counts and everyone overlooks mistakes made by young people. So you just trudge away and keep at it. But it is long work and commitment that most people don't understand or know about, and it is in many ways unrewarding. You have to have the reason why you are involved worked out for yourself, or it'll be a miserable experience. Anyway, stand up, go for it!--Shandon 09:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Shandon said. But, anyway, the basic process is to go and join an existing political party, or form one of your own. Discounting the "form your own" for a minute, if you join a party the next step is to learn the mechanics of politics, by participating in internal party discussions, volunteering to help out during elections, even working on the staff of a politician. This is hard work; a lot of it isn't much fun, and as Shandon says it can be pretty unrewarding as the work piles up and the ideals you got involved for can sometimes seem to get further and further off the horizon. But anyway, ultimately you put yourself up as a candidate for some elected position (this is easier in the United States, as there are many, many elected positions which elsewhere are held by appointed bureaucrats, or outside the domain of party politics) and the party will use its internal processes to decide whether to endorse you or somebody else. If you pass that hurdle, then you have the joy of campaigning for office. --203.214.51.22 23:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World Population

The wiki article on world population only provides estimates for the world's historical human population for at the earliest, 950 AD, at 250 million. Would anyone know of any reliable data by anthropologists or any other experts in the field for earlier than that? I'd be interested in estimates for around the year 1 AD, 1000 BC, 2000 BC, 3000 BC etc... Thanks! Loomis51 22:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you poke around the graph on that page showing data back to 10,000 BC, you find this link to somewhere in the US Census' web site. It goes back to 10,000 BC although I'd personally say that a best guess for the world's population any time during the Mesolithic is 5 million. --ByeByeBaby 01:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poetry that references New Jersey towns

Bold textWho is the poet that references New Brunswick, Hanover, and Flemington (all in New Jersey) in their poetry?

Sounds like a homework/exam question. Modernist, American, long poem about the town of Patterson, New Jersey...three names..."Carlos" is the middle name.... Geogre 03:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 20

multiple view points or multiple station points

I am looking for any information on multiple view points or multiple station points used in painting during the renaissance.

Life expectancy in Nepal

While reading the Nepal article, I noticed that the average life expectancy is 59.8 years. This didn't surprise me. What surprised me was the internal breakdown: 60.9 for males and 59.5 for females. Isn't it strange that males should live longer, particularly in a war-torn developing country? Does anyone have an explanation for this? Bhumiya (said/done) 01:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This trend is the same almost everywhere, and in fact many times more accented. A major fact is exactly war (who is normally the soldier - the man, guess who dies more often?). As for reasons there are so many reasons as there are POV's. I personaly think that (as a rule) men simply have the "harder" jobs (construction, law enforcement, military, etc) which reflects itself in the average life expectancy. Flamarande 09:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal Civil War says that 11,000 people have died in five years. This is nothing compared to a population of 27 million. Tintin (talk) 09:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forget what I wrote above, in Nepal its the other way around? Men live longer than women? Well that is strange, as in the wide majority of the countries, men usually die sooner than the women. Flamarande 09:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The WHO says it's the other way round: its 2003 figures are "Life expectancy at birth m/f (years): 60.0/61.0" [28]. Factual inaccuracy on Wikipedia!? If we really are right, I'd suspect childbirth is to blame. Henry ^Flower 09:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The CIA Factbook for 2006 gives: male: 60.43 years, female: 59.91 years (2006 est.) Rmhermen 14:49, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name for shaky-camera style

I've been racking my brain, but I just can't remember the term I've heard for the shooting style that uses a handheld film or TV camera to provide the you-are-there feel that some modern films and TV shows are using. I've searched Wikipedia and Google for combinations of words like "handheld", "shaky", "camera", and "effect", but haven't found the phrase I'm looking for. (Most of the hits are about how to introduce the effect digitally or how to avoid it. Nothing I looked at used the term I'm trying to remember.) Can anyone help? Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrectly, people call it cinema verite. Cinema verite didn't want to get a shaky camera; it wanted to get the truth and was forced to shake. When multi-billion dollar corporations intentionally turn off all the stability on their handicams to get shakes, it's cinema faux verite. Geogre 03:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard it referred to as "hot camera".--Fuhghettaboutit 04:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of something like steadicam or helmet-cam, on the order of "hand-cam" (but it isn't that). I'm pretty sure I heard it more than once when TV marketers were playing up the cool new way of shooting that grabs the attention of an ADD-ridden young audience (although I doubt they put it that way). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary style? -- EdC 06:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Coen brothers use a device they call the shakycam: "It's a device borrowed from Sam Raimi (who learned it from cinematographer/director, Caleb Deschanel) that consists of a twelve foot-long pole (or piece of wood) with a camera mounted in the middle and two people on either end running as fast as they can." [29] David Sneek 13:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Raimi also pioneered a camera mount on a motorcycle front wheel, which is used pretty extensively in the Evil Dead films. I'm not 100% sure but I think he referred to that as a "shakycam" too. --BluePlatypus 22:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reading

Do people really read less today than in the past? How much did people read in the past? Is the average amount read per person constantly decreasing? Why do people not read as much anymore? Would people read more if they were encouraged to at an early age?

From a personal feeling, I would say that we read more, but it is different reading (like, on computer screens). When it comes to reading books, I think we are becoming lazy, and choose the easier entertainment of television. --82.146.104.90 06:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)I[reply]

"Why" and "would they" is impossible to answer. There are more readers today than ever. This is a function of population and literacy. Is the percentage of readers among the general population higher or lower than in the past? In the US, the percentage is higher -- again, thank general education and the specializing of publishers to produce things called books for people who "don't read" (sports compendiums, celebrity profiles, "Miracle on Sand" national events books, Jumble Word Search books, etc.). However, belle lettres are having a smaller readership. Partially because of trade publishers developing all kinds of niche product, there is less and less audience for good books. Geogre 11:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

counts and castles

How many castles were owned by the counts in Europe during the old times? Please, give me the list of castles or counts that existed during the old times.

Counts owned 42 castles in the old times (although this figure was reduced to 32 in the late old times period). Unfortunately, the names are still secret. Henry ^Flower 10:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "old times" is a bit vague to say the least, don´t you think? Flamarande 10:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pay no attention to them! Really there were thousands. Heres an incomplete list of counts. For centuries they would pretty much all have had castles, though later on some of their homes were really palaces that were just called castles. Jameswilson 03:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ancient history

Hi Most Helpful Person, I am interested in Roman Corinth 40BC to 100AD Could any one tell me where I can find information concerning every-day life, customs and cultural practices? Things such as litigation, marriage rites and practices, celibacy, women’s hair styles and coverings, farming practises, women's role in the society, slaves role, meals, feasts, markets, houses and buildings, trades, rhetoric, schools, the human body, charity and beliefs on the after life.

Do Plutarch, Pliny and Juvenal, or are there others, who wrote about these things?

Thanks, Doug

Are you familiar with the Corinth Computer Project? They are, in their own words, "making a computerized architectural and topographical survey of the Roman colony of Corinth". If they don't have the specific information you're looking for, they could probably point you to some good books or other references on the subject. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any free on-line Portuguese speaking service?

The thing is that I want to do some Portuguese listenings to improve my ear. What do you suggest I can do? Thanks.

Why not tune into one of the Internet radio stations based in Lisbon or any local Portuguese television station. If you can't get something there, you absolutely can from Brazil. Geogre 11:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://multimedia.rtp.pt/ --Nelson Ricardo 20:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Art History

Between 1952 and 1954 I did my postgraduate studies at the world famous Institute of Fine Arts (a branch of NYU) where I leaned from famous art historians such as Francis Offner and Karl Lehman Hartleben, among several others.

Francis Offner opened up the glories of the Italian Renassaince for me in a manner which I had never understood before. Originally a confrere of Bernard Berenson; the two parted ways over a quarrel whether the painting "Ginevra da Benci" was by Leonardo. Offner was convinced that the beutiful painting was indeed by Leonardo; and he spent two lectures on the subject, by the end of which I was convinced as well.

Karl Lehman Hartleben was both an art historian and an archeologist, and I took a two semester course named "Pagan Origins of Early Christian Art". During this course I learned about Mithraism and other pagan cults in the far flung Roman Empire. Prof. Hartleben showed us a large variety of images, such as halos over heads of people engraved on pagan tombstones, to show at least one precurser of early Christian Art. Prof. Hartleben also introduced me to two books by the Belgian historian, Franz Cumont; "Pagan Religions in Ancient Rome", and "Mithraism"; both of which have had a lasting impression on me.

The Institute of Fine Arts was created by a grant by, and a home of, a branch of the New York Lehman family to house the influx of mainly German Jewish art historians who had fled Nazi Germany, aided by a State Department official whose name I have forgotten.

I am writing this on May 20, 2006; some 50 years later, and I would like someone knowlegeable in Wikipedia to expand more fully on everything which I have written above. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Menahem (talk • contribs) 10:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. You've reached the Reference Desk here. This is all interesting biographical information, but what is your question exactly? --DavidGC 11:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are all three good article possibilities. I think the author is attempting to request an article. If only our Request for Articles worked at all. (That's not sarcastic; no one uses RA, which makes for some horrid stubs getting written by people who probably don't even want to write them.) We have an art portal project. If anyone is familiar with those folks, it would be a big mitzveh to pass the user's note to them. Geogre 11:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you have an account, Menahem, you could easily start these three articles yourself with the information you have written here. It is likely that more information will be added to them by other editors - especially if you add either a stub template or an {{expansion}} template to each one. Grutness...wha? 01:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Population of China

Does the population figure on the Demographics of China Wikipedia Page include Taiwan?

Ta

Demographics of China doesn't give a figure- it directs you to separate figures for the different entities. Henry ^Flower 11:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The figure at People's Republic of China is from the CIA World Factbook, which takes its population data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau's figures for China do not include Taiwan, Hong Kong or Macao. --Cam 15:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Man Songs of Doveglion

Does anybody have the copy of Man Songs by Jose Garcia Villa? Thanks. Carlrichard 12:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked for these and have had no luck finding them. Sorry. --CTSWyneken 12:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US income statistics.

Hello,

I was wondering if, along with median income in the US, I could get the statndard deviation of income.

The article on per capita income might be a good place to start your research, though this would be the mean income, not the median. Maybe some of the links on the page could lead you where you need to go, though. --DavidGC 15:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The importance of taking towns during WW2?

I've been reading and watching Band of Brothers. In it, the regiment's experience of war seems to mostly involve taking towns held by the enemy. While I think the book explains that Carentan was important logistically because it had a couple of roads in and out, I've mostly had to guess for myself why a regiment would want to take a small place like Foy if it's constantly changing hands through counterattacks, or hold onto a larger town like Bastogne if they're completely surrounded - so here's my theory: (1) you can fortify a town better than a random point in the woods or along a road. (2) towns provide shelter for HQ companies, and things like water, fuel and electricity (???) (3) roads mostly connect one town to another, so towns are the vertices you hold onto to stop an army advancing into your own territory. Are these the correct reasons, in roughly the right order? It probably sounds really stupid, but I had to think a bit before I came up with these reasons why regiments don't just treat towns like another blip on the landscape. --86.143.171.239 14:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some other possible reasons:

Towns could hide significant enemy forces, leaving any army which bypasses them vulnerable to sabotage and/or rear attacks.

A captured town might contain enemy HQ personnel and documents, which could provide needed intelligence info.

For humanitarian reasons, the advancing army might want to rescue the townspeople from the enemy. Also, the rescued townspeople might join your force to defeat the enemy.

Psychological reasons: both the plus to your army's morale and the damage to the enemy's morale every time a town is taken.

I do agree, however, that it usually makes little sense to take a town you won't be able to hold. StuRat 17:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The airborne landings on D-Day had two roles; one was to protect the flanks of the landing infantry, and the other was to grab strategic positions which could be used to move inland. In the east, the British airdrops took Pegasus Bridge, which allowed the invading troops to move across the river east of Caen; in the west, the American drops secured the routes through the marshes to the east of Utah Beach, and the bridge over the river to the south. This bridge was by Carentan; if you controlled the town, you controlled the bridge behind it. Image:Battle for Carentan - Map.jpg and Image:Cotentin Peninsula.jpg may help you visualise it.

If in doubt, think about supplies. 3 is pretty good in this regard - it's a lot easier to advance along roads than across them, so you're going to need to capture the towns at the vertices to keep moving.

Bastogne was a major point in the transport network of the Ardennes (Image:P08-09(map).jpg makes it pretty clear). There really aren't many roads through the Ardennes - it's mostly dense forest - so you need to control major junctions in order to be able to supply armies through it. During the Battle of the Bulge, the German offensive relied on trying to supply an armoured spearhead through these few roads... so control of Bastogne was essential. Looking at Image:Battle of the Bulge 5th.jpg, you can see that Foy also holds a significant position - it's blocking the road coming into Bastogne from the north, so if you can hold this village you can prevent a thrust down this road into the town. Shimgray | talk | 01:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks very much for the replies and specific examples with the 506th. Interesting stuff :-) --86.143.171.239 02:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's always helpful to find the maps and have a look at them - a lot of quite odd things become clear when you can see the geography and the positions of the forces in retrospect, on a larger scale... glad it cleared it up. Shimgray | talk | 02:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When was Julius Caesar born?

We think that he was born in July 100 BC. However, if you could go back in time and ask him "when were you born?" what would he say?

If you're wondering what date was Julius Caesar was born, according to the calendar system in use at the time of his birth, I'll take a stab at it: Quintilis in the year of the consulship of Lucius Valerius Flaccus and Gaius Marius VI. See Roman calendar and List of Republican Roman Consuls. --DavidGC 16:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you and what are you wearing? What tongue is that? :-) But seriously, according to Roman Calendar:

In the Roman Republic, the years were not counted. Instead they were named after the consuls who were in power at the beginning of the year (see List of Republican Roman Consuls). For example, 205 BC was The year of the consulship of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus and Publius Licinius Crassus. Lists of consuls were maintained in the fasti.

However, in the later Republic, historians and scholars began to count years from the founding of the city of Rome. Different scholars used different dates for this event. The date most widely used today is that calculated by Varro, 753 BC, but other systems varied by up to several decades. Dates given by this method are numbered ab urbe condita (meaning after the founding of the city, and abbreviated AUC). When reading ancient works using AUC dates, care must be taken to determine the epoch used by the author before translating the date into a Julian year.

It might be worth looking at both Roman Calendar and Julian Calendar, since he set that last one up. Of course, it would depend what year you visited him in, whether he'd set up the Julian Calendar yet. Skittle 17:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And in fact, looking at those articles, it is indeed Quintilis as David GC said because it was later named Julius after him, because it was his birth month. However, the year would most likely be 654 AUC, since 45 BC was 709 AUC. It would really depend on when you asked him though, as the articles show there was a great deal of change and reform. Skittle 17:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Clinton - Rhodes Scholar?

William Jefferson Clinton was given a Rhodes Scholarship to study in England. Did he ever complete the course work and submit a thesis and thus become a true "Rhodes Scholar?"

Googling shows multiple sites claiming he did not complete the program. None claim that he did complete it. --Kainaw ^(talk) 16:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Rhodes Trust refers to those merely awarded with a scholarship as "Rhodes Scholars," so it appears that as far as the Rhodes Trust is concerned Bill Clinton was a "true" Rhodes Scholar. --Cam 03:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it works the same way as other Oxbridge scholarships, you dont have to "do" anything to be considered a "proper scholar". As soon as you are awarded the scholarship you are a scholar. Even if you drop out after one day you are still entitled to call yourself a scholar for the rest of your life, if you want to. Jameswilson 03:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's quite true - the scholarship is an award of funding rather than a qualification. It's not that you would be entitled to call yourself a scholar for the rest of your life, it's just that it would remain accurate to say that you had been a scholar. --Hughcharlesparker 10:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

doesnt matter if its Oxbridge or the US, "Scholarship" and "Scholar" does not imply that you have to finish a program or gain a particular qualification e.g. Fulbright Scholarships Bwithh 05:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The greatest selling movie soundtrack of all time

I've been trying to find it, but it's near impossible. I'm interested in a list of the greatest selling movie film score cd (soundtrack) of all time.

I think I saw a page that said Star Wars had sold over 114 million copies, but I can't find it anymore. It would be awesome if you can include that in here.

There might be even a article about this issue. Flamarande 19:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think your answers are going to breakdown depending upon whether you're looking for film composing and soundtrack. For example, Star Wars by John Williams and Rocky by Bill Conti would have huge numbers, but how would they compare to Saturday Night Fever or American Graffiti, both of which were "top selling soundtrack albums." The latter had no film music and were the background songs played during the film. This, too, is also going to breakdown once you begin taking in non-English and non-Anglophone charts, as Bollywood would through a wrench in the works. Geogre 00:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The soundtrack to The Sound of Music was one of the biggest-selling albums of all time. Others to add to the list as possibles include Tubular Bells (though this depends on whether you mean music specifically composed for a film) and Chariots of Fire. Grutness...wha? 01:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wedding traditions

Today I was watching You've Been Framed which is a show on TV in the UK in which are presented humourous home videos of unfortunate members of the public / the animal kingdom meeting misadventure in one form or another.

Amongst the clips today was a scene from a wedding. The bride and groom and family were lined up to shake hands with the guests. When the male guests passed down the line, each one kissed the bride and then the groom but then slapped the groom around the face. It seemed as if it was a tradition or custom rather than just an extremely odd bunch of people. I've heard of back-slapping at weddings but not full facial slaps. Does anyone know what country or culture this may have been from?

Unfortunately the guys at You've Been Framed didn't explain and cut away immediately to a clip of a toddler punching his dad in the nuts - got to give the public what they want etc etc. But if anyone out there knows the answer, that would be great! Thanks. --The Gold Miner 20:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptance of Responsibility Letter

Would you happen to have a copy of an acceptance of responsibility letter. This letter is to be written and handed to a probation officer after they do a presentencing investigation report on anyone being accused of a crime. I have been looking online to see what the letter is suppose to say and I have found nothing. If anyone can help me I would really appreciate it.

bill of rights USA

hi, i know this is technically a legal question but as i'm not about to sue anyone anytime soon, i figure i can ask joe public. Basically, the US constitution guarantees a number of universal freedoms, however, i have recently discovered (through wikipedia) that not all of these things apply to everyone. specifically, to be guaranteed equality before the law (aritcle 14?) you have to belong to something called a "special status" group (or something similar). i.e. seperate but equal is wrong because blacks are special status so the law has to be rigorously equal.- if you don't belong to said group, then the government need only provide a "rational basis" for discrimination. why is this so? what is the point of a bill of rights if it doesn't apply to everyone equally? (i'm asking this question in reference to the numerous anti-gay pieces of legislation the US seems to have which, as a brit, i'm baffled by). any thoughts? 87.194.20.253 22:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly did you find this? Assuming you're talking about the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it says "nor shall any State... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" - apparently without further qualification. Was the specific term "special status" used in your source? I can't find anything about that on Google. Henry ^Flower 23:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the limitation you're referring to is one that separates a class of citizen from an attribute of a group. For example, can you randomly stop people on a highway, thus detaining drivers? If the state offers the rationale that they're looking for drunk drivers and have a probable cause that this class of person is specially and uniquely probable to fit that crime, they can get away with it (so far). Can you go grab everyone on the street and search for weapons? No. Can you do it because they're Black? No. Can you do it because they are near a place where a gun was illegally discharged? Yes. The distinction is between discrimination based upon a transient and inherent quality, I think. Transiently, you are standing near the fired gun. Permanently, you are Arabic in your ethnicity. Geogre 01:04, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IANAL, but I believe what the questioner is referring to is the concept of "protected classes" under the 14th Amendment. Obviously, laws treat people differently all the time. It's OK to tax rich people at a higher rate than poor people, for example, because income groups are not protected classes. On the other hand, the 14th Amendment presumably would prohibit governments from imposing a "black tax" on a racial group. -- Mwalcoff 15:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mwalcoff's explanation is, to be sure, correct. See also suspect classification, whence you may explore strict scrutiny (a standard of judicial review generally employed, for example, in evaluating legislation/administrative action that involves (or tends to involve) racial classification) and intermediate scrutiny (the standard of review, for example, for gender-based classification). Joe 15:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. What is the distinction that I was babbling about called, then? (Obviously, I have a beef with it, as the 4th and 14th are getting smaller and smaller in their scopes as the years go by, it seems to me. (I don't think "everyone with a phone" is exactly probable cause for "people calling Al Qaeda," and I don't think the people doing the tapping think so, either, else they would have used a court.)) Geogre 18:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May 21

risk: the board game

i would appreciate someone helping me out with a good strategy for RISK the boardgame, i cant beat my friend, and ive tried all i could think of. any help would, well, help.--69.140.210.163 00:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Start in Australia in slowly (I mean slowly), move out... The great thing about Australia is that it creates a bottleneck because it only has one entrance to defend... South America is also good to start with. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 01:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read our article about RISK? It's got a few strategic pointers, plus a few good links at the bottom. Personally, I've found that if you are playing only one or two other people, then holding continents is the most important strategy, whereas if you are playing a large number of opponents, then wiping out opponents (and getting their cards) is more important. --ByeByeBaby 07:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ex-Representative, Mr. Ron Dellums- I need to get in contact with him

Hi,

How can I get in touch with Ex-Representative Mr. Ron Dellums? I've just seen the movie based on his daughter Piper's story, read your bio on him, and frankly admire his work. He is the type of representative I would've voten for if I had been an adult when he was a politician, even if I'm caucasian. Can you help me? I'm very interested.

Thank you!

Mary Hill

He is currently running for mayor of Oakland, Calif. Here is the contact info for his campaign office. --Cam 03:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Italian dramatists

Who are the great italian dramatists, comparable with Shakespeare, Racine, Goethe etc?

There are none. Come on, the list of the world's dramatists that are "comparable with Shakespeare" is a pretty short list. I think you'd have a heck of a time putting any Italian playwrights in the same league as the three you mentioned; this is particularly difficult because it's hard to compare across eras, and the best dramatists from Italy aren't from the 1560-1830 range of your three models. For modern times, look at the list of Italian dramatists and playwrights; the ones with the best reputation are Ugo Betti, Luigi Pirandello and, to a lesser extent (depending on your politics, really) Dario Fo. But, of course, there's also the Ancient Roman dramatists and playwrights, where I'd note especially Seneca the Younger. --ByeByeBaby 06:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plautus is pretty cool. <shrug> T.S. Eliot famously said of poetry (not drama), "Dante and Shakespeare divide the world between them. There is no third." Geogre 18:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

18th. century Atlantic Voyages

Please help me to locate articles containing description of Atlantic crossings circa 18th. century--Ken73 09:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of Atlantic crossings? If you are refering to the slave ship crossings try the articles on Slave ship or the Atlantic slave trade Colonel 11:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information but slave ships are not what I am after. I need personal accounts of any voyager sailing from England to the Americas ( or reverse) and depicting their observations of the voyage. I have seen such an account in the past but cannot remember the who and cannot find a reference on my usual reference sites.

leonard davinci painting of the last supper of Chrsit

please help me The record shows Davinci was born in 1452 but the last supper was when?

where did he get the information about who sat where at the last supper?

what was his religious background?

how many years after the death of Christ to the life of Davinci?

Thank you. Charles Ola

Yes, davinci was born in 1452. The last supper took place around 30 AD. He based it on conjecture, and guess work. Perhaps putting appostles and associates of Jesus who where in, Davincis opinion most important closest to Jesus, and or important to that part of the story. Mary madalines inclusion at all is entirely an educated guess, since I do not believe the bible specifically mentions Mary Magdelin attending the last supper. As Davinci painted mileniu after jesuses life Their is no reason to believe davinci had any special incite, or historical knowledge on the life of jesus that does not exist today. Da Vinci was a main stream Roman Catholic Christian. Their is not evidence that he held hetrorthodox beliefs, relating to the story of jesus. He also had no involvement in proto reformation religious groups. His arts focus on religion is fairly attipical of art of the the time.

There was approximatly 1420 years beteen Davincis birth and Jseus' death.

Minor correction: "Mary Magdalene's inclusion at all is an uneducated guess by Dan Brown who doesn't understand the contemporary traditions of St John the Evangelist and his depiction." It is a rather odd interpretation of the painting, not the painter's interpretation of the Bible. Skittle 15:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More corrections. I don't think Leonardo based his painting on "conjecture, and guess work", or that he even tried to accurately portray the table setting of the _real_ last supper. He made his decisions on artistic grounds: on the one hand he created a strict symmetrical composition by arranging the apostles in four groups of three, on the other hand he heightened the drama by having each one respond in a different way to Christ's announcement that someone would soon betray him. Also, there is some evidence in Leonardo's notebooks that he was not a very strong believer. David Sneek 16:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreeing with David Sneek: His composition is based on 500 years of art history and tradition of how the Last Supper should be treated. Although a renaissance painter with a fantastic control of perspective, it was theologically and artistically necessary that the middle point of the painting, and the center of focus, be the most important figure, Jesus, and that the eye move in a line. The painting is a masterpiece because every element of the viewer's experience is carefully controlled by the artist. As for the Magdalene being there: she isn't. Was she at the real Last Supper? She's not mentioned as being so in the Synoptic Gospels, and unmarried men and women would probably not eat at the same table in strictly conforming Jewish houses. Dan Brown's claim is poppycock, historically. Geogre 18:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Scott Wilson

The reference to Scott Wilson (legislator) under Richard Hickock is wrong. It should be linked to Scott Wilson (actor), which doesn't exist yet. Who should I be sending this to in the future?

Thanks and keep up the great work! I love Wikipedia!

Andrew

Well, if it's just a matter of changing the link, you can do that yourself right now! If you're want someone else to do it, usually the article's talk page would be the place. If you want an article on Scott Wilson (actor) to exist, the best plan is to get an account (all you need to give is a name to be known by, no other details, no email confirmation) and create the article yourself. Then other people can add to it if need be. There are places to request articles, but it's quicker to do it yourself if you know anything about the subject. Good luck! Skittle 15:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the artist?

I am trying to find the name of the artist for the following painting. I know that it's an early work of this artist, but not the name of the artist or the period in which the artist lived. Would anyone be able to help? Please?

File:Who is the Artist.jpg

--Jim^Collaborator ^«talk» 15:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Mount Soledad cross

Was the cross erected by the City or by a private group, under a conditional use permit, or what?70.95.234.119 16:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]