Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

June 10

US Trade tariffs

Why are the countries which Donald Trump's administration has just posted tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminium so angry. Aren't the tariffs that they impose on the United States exports considerably higher. It seems hypocritical of the European Union, Canada, Japan, et al. to criticise the Trump administration for threatening their export markets when the tariffs that they impose threaten the United States export market, and lead to huge trade deficits. Surely, when they criticise Trump's 'America First' policy as 'protectionism', isn't that exactly what they do when they have tariffs of up to 300%? How do countries that impose such large tariffs on the United States justify this. On a Eurosceptic note, doesn't this policy of imposing very high tariffs on non-EU products reinforce the criticism that the EU is essentially a protection racket?

Just as an aside, I don't have strong feelings either in support or in opposition to Donald Trump, I just accept that in terms of levelling the playing field on international trade, he may, unless there are factors I'm unaware of, have a point. --Andrew 00:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

The 300% would be in reference to the controlled Canadian milk supply system. The system is closed to stabilize prices for dairy farmers so that they are not in a poor situation like they are in Wisconsin where the farmers overproduce and then sell their milk below production cost and go out of business. Many dairy farmers in the US wished they had such a system. .

References

Plus of course the US gives large subsidies to milk producers which keep them overproducing. Sending it to Canada could be counted as dumping. Dmcq (talk) 10:23, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Besides that, most of the world has been cutting tariffs slowly but surely for the last 50 years, Trump is the first to increase tariffs at the expense of both the US and their trade partners, and other nations don't want to raise tariffs in response (trade war), as it will hurt them as well as the US. Of 19 (talk) 00:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

See Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act for a relevant historical episode. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:44, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Well that's not exactly reassuring. At least you could see the reason then when the Great Depression was starting, but the economy was already growing when Trump came into office, the main problem was that inequality was growing. And as far as I can see inequality is growing even more under Trump. His zero sum game attitude is an inequality driver. Dmcq (talk) 10:42, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

The Anglo-Irish Trade War is a good illustration that countries will not back down under extreme economic pressure. Did sanctions and poverty in Cuba topple that government or get them to change their policies? It may not be in the economic interest of countries to have a trade war but they will most certainly do it if pushed. Dmcq (talk) 11:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

To get back to the original question: There is a difference in average tariffs between the US and the EU, but it is not extreme (IIRC, its 3.5% vs. 4.5%). You ned to look at the overall system, not just individual tariffs. Import duties for car are higher in the EU than in the US, but duties on pick-ups and light trucks are a lot higher in the US than in the EU. These tariffs have been negotiated in multilateral treaties under the rules of the WTO. It is, of course, possible, to negotiate new tariffs and even new rules, But that should be a bi- or multilateral process, and not a unilateral action. Quick changes in markets are bad for the economy - it needs time to organise production chains, and disruptions come at a significant cost. As for the trade deficit: It shrinks significantly, if not only goods but also services are considered (I assume that's Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook and the like). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:57, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

OP, The short answer is, it doesn’t work that way. Companies trade; countries rarely do, if ever. When a producer in one country sells to a wholesaler in another country, the producer may well own the wholesaler (or vice versa) and the transaction may well be merely an inter-company transfer. Pricing may be mainly dependent on where it is favorable from a tax perspective to record the profits.

When populist protectionist career politicians raise the price their own companies and consumers must pay, the companies involved in the trade may earn less profit as the market demands less product at the higher prices.

Economists don’t look at bilateral trade balances except when populist protectionist career politicians force the matter for their own purely partisan purposes. The reason is that bilateral trade balances provide no meaningful information, as can easily be understood by a first year economics student. What matters in the entire balance of goods, services, royalties, dividends, transfer payments, capital investment, portfolio investment, change in international reserves (unless one enjoys seigniorage privileges), etc. In other words, the Balance of Payments.

But, that’s too complicated for populist protectionist career politicians to convey to ignorant voters in a sound bite, so they just jack up prices and thereby lower standards of living. The foregoing may not be entirely objective, but it is accurate. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:33, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Copyright Permission for Photograph (1932)

Arthur Garfield Hays’s book Let Freedom Ring (New York, NY: Boni and Liveright, 1932) includes a photograph of H.L. Mencken and Arthur Garfield Hays facing page 158. The book does not provide any credit information for the photograph in question.

Our assumption is that attorney A.G. Hays held the copyright during his lifetime. He died in 1954. His daughter, Jane Butler, renewed the copyright to the book in 1970. She died on May 3, 2016.

The question is whether the copyright to the photograph has been lost with her death, and whether it is now freely available for use by bona fide users?

Alternatively, the copyright renewal of 1970 may well mean that the copyright is still in force, and it is mandatory to trace Jane Butler’s children?

We decided to make use of the Reference Desk service of the Wikipedia because we assume that, given the large numbers of photographs in the Wiki, you have some real experts in copyright at your service.

We would like to make use of the photograph in a scholarly essay to be published in Menckeniana, a journal published by the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, Md. for the members of the Mencken Society. Menckenire (talk) 18:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

The real experts are at Wikipedia:Copyright assistance. However, determining whether a particular image is still under copyright is a form of legal advice, which we are forbidden to provide - there is a note to that effect at the top of the page: "We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice." Matt Deres (talk) 00:47, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

The picture was published in 1932. U S Copyright Office circular 15 [1] states:

NOTE: If a copyright originally secured before January 1, 1964, was not renewed at the proper time, copyright protection expired at the end of the 28th calendar year of the copyright and could not be restored.

You don't provide details of the 1970 copyright renewal so we can't help you further here, other than to point out that if there was no renewal in 1960 (ask the Copyright Office about that) the picture is now in the public domain. 2A00:23C1:3180:6501:4924:26B9:284A:6CE7 (talk) 17:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

insularity index

Consider, for a given territory, the probability that two randomly chosen residents cannot visit each other without getting on a boat. Has someone made a list of this (or something similar)?

I was amused today to notice that Greece, which would be high on this list, had a royal dynasty from Denmark, also high. —Tamfang (talk) 20:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

The Pacific island nations would dominate the list. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Is there anywhere in the world that allows domestic partners to have as many partners as possible?

Most sources suggest that a "domestic partnership" involves two people. When people write about domestic partnerships, they compare this concept to marriage, hinting that it's supposed to be like marriage, but it is not legal marriage. So... if it's not legal marriage, then does that mean a person can have unlimited number of domestic partners while in a marriage, a person is limited to one partner? If there are 5 working adults in the same house, related or unrelated, then are they all domestic partners to each other? If the said five people are siblings, and the oldest of the five marries and brings in a new family member, who also brings in an income to the household, then is the oldest sibling a domestic partner to all working adults in the household or just a spouse to one person? SSS (talk) 23:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article on this - Domestic partnership. Very US-centric, but worth a read. The word partner itself has multiple meanings. There is the one that implies sexual activity, usually between two people. Then there is the one used in business, (where sex is not involved or is kept secret) where numbers greater than two are normal. When it comes to the domestic kind, most countries have no laws preventing any number of people getting together and having sex. It's just when it comes to marriage that the law tells you how many partners you can have. HiLo48 (talk) 23:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

In a domestic partnership, are the members obligated to engage in sexual intercourse? IIRC, consummation of marriage occurs after the wedding. The marriage must be consummated. If it ain't consummated, then it ain't a marriage, and the marriage can be annulled. If a person just gets a roommate, and the roommate is just there to help pay the bills and do household chores, then is that a domestic partnership? For the relationship to be a domestic partnership, do the members have to engage in intercourse with each other? SSS (talk) 01:07, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

You're right. Sex isn't essential. I guess "partner" is pretty ambiguous. HiLo48 (talk) 02:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

No-one can be obligated to have sex with anyone, even in marriage. Iapetus (talk) 09:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

In most jurisdictions, sex is not obligatory in marriage. However as much as we may find it disgusting, we shouldn't forget there still some jurisdictions where Marital rape is not a crime, and the ability to get divorced simply because the partner demands sex may be limited. Also we should take care in getting too high and might about this given that it was only in the 1970s that it marital rape started to be criminalised in much of the West. (Divorces are more complicated.) I mean heck, Germany only criminalised it in 1997. As a largely separate issue, there are still some countries where non consummation may be grounds for annulment. And likewise consummation may be required for a Common-law marriage. So the OP's point on sex being required for a valid marriage can be somewhat true in some places but it's definitely far from universal. (Although this is generally only an issue between the partners. I'm not sure if many jurisdictions allow someone else e.g. an heir to claim the marriage was invalid because it was never consummated.) And notably, I think many jurisdictions which have some form of domestic partnership have abandoned any consummation requirement. Nil Einne (talk) 08:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

• Group marriage despite having the word marriage in it? 173.228.123.166 (talk) 07:07, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

In modern legal usage, "domestic partnership" seems to be mainly modeled on monogamous marriage. In some traditional societies, a man was allowed to have a wife (or multiple wives), and also concubines, where concubinage was considered less than marriage... AnonMoos (talk) 10:24, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

There is the legal status known as the civil union. Civil partnership in the United Kingdom offers rights and responsibilities similar but not identical to civil marriage, and is sometimes confusingly referred to as gay marriage. Across the Channel, however, 94% of people entering a civil solidarity pact (PACS) are opposite-sex pairs. Also, note that marriage in some countries is not limited to two people. Polygamy has a long history; polygyny (one husband, plural wives) is common; polyandry (one wife, plural husbands) less so. The references in Group marriage might help you find out more about how various societies have dealt with adults in mutual relationship. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 20:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

June 11

Peter Bessell - Lynwyd School?

According to the Times obituary of Peter Bessell he was educated at Lynwyd School in Bath, and this is what our article goes with. The only Google hits for "Lynwyd School" appear to be either Wikipedia mirrors, or other sites closely paraphrasing our article. The only other mention of "Lynwyd" in the Times digital archive is a mention of it as a village in Wales in a marriage notice. My family are from Bath, and none recall a Lynwyd School ever being there. So, my question is, "where did Peter Bessell go to school?" DuncanHill (talk) 01:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I did a basic check of the Newspaper archive for the Bath Chronicle and found 4 possible results for further investigation here (all referencing 'Lyn-Wyd' in Bath). Nanonic (talk) 06:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. It seems "Lyn-Wyd" was used to mean Lyncombe and Widcombe (areas of Bath). Not tracked down the school yet, nor the "Bath Brotherhood" mentioned in one of the articles you found. Presumably some sort of Congregationalist chapel, if so it might jog my Dad's memory. DuncanHill (talk) 11:00, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, not found his school yet, but he was married in the Argyle Congregational Church in Bath, of which my grandfather was secretary! DuncanHill (talk) 11:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Many of the records from the newspaper archive say that the hall was on Somerset Street or Southgate street, which isn't in Widcombe or Lyncombe but is not too far away. I also found a record in the Somerset Archives which suggests that Lynwid hall was called at one point the "People's Mission Hall". On Corn Street, which is very nearby, there is the "mission theatre", which was "a Protestant place of worship" in the 19th century. I'm pretty sure that the roads have changed, as Somserset Street and Corn Street no longer share a corner, so it might once have been on one of the other roads. It's not very helpful I suppose but I find it quite interesting. --KingUther (talk) 09:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, much of Southgate has been demolished and rebuilt twice in my father's lifetime. DuncanHill (talk) 14:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

map legend

In this map[2]:

1. Light green is all land areas other than Hokkaido Prefecture.

2. Purple is Sapporo, the capital of Hokkaido.

3. Brass color is the town being highlighted, Tōyako, Hokkaido in this case.

What about the 4. red and 5. brown areas? What do they represent?

All the maps for Japanese cities follow this legend on the Japanese and English Wikipedias (along others), but I can't seem to find a legend for this color scheme. Mũeller (talk) 11:45, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Red appears to be cities of Japan while brown is towns of Japan and villages of Japan. See List of cities in Japan. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

What's the most negative interest rate debt ever? Has the price of debt ever been 1.01 per unit promised? (excluding repaying in different currency) 1.02? More?

(also not counting losing stock shorting lends since the stock lender was only promised shares, not that the shares would be worth anything)

How negative would bank and bond interest rates need to be before it becomes worth it for companies with liquid asset wealth on the scale of billions or hundreds of billions of $/€/£ to store most of it as banknotes in private vaults instead of banks? Wouldn't that hurt the (general) economy even more? (of course specific industries like vault builders and bank security guards might be helped)

Has a nonfinancial company ever stored that much (legally-earned, not being hidden) cash after say the Industrial Revolution reached them? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I don’t know. But, consider the cost of storing cash, risks and the obvious alternatives (paying dividends — remember those?!? — or stock buy-back tax avoidence schemes). DOR (HK) (talk) 16:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

June 12

Number of times England could have had a king named Arthur?

There are two Arthurs who could have become king of England: Arthur I, Duke of Brittany and Arthur, Prince of Wales. Are there more such Arthurs? Are there other first names no king of England was ever called one could have been? Basemetal 06:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

There was a Frederick, Prince of Wales who died before he could become king, and there has never been a King Frederick of either The United Kingdom or England. There was also an Albert, Prince of Wales, but he dropped his first name and became Edward VII. There has never been a King Albert of either The United Kingdom or England. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Albert, Duke of York became George VI. DuncanHill (talk) 19:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

William the Conqueror's eldest son, Robert Curthose, might have expected to succeed his father, but in the event he was fobbed off with the Duchy of Normandy, primogeniture not having yet having fully taken hold in English law or custom, so we never had a King Robert. --Antiquary (talk) 08:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Again, there was Stephen, King of England, who ended a civil war by ceding the succession to the throne to the man who became Henry II, thus disinheriting his own eldest surviving son Eustace. --Antiquary (talk) 08:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Eustace pre-deceased his father: it was the second son, William of Blois, who was disinherited. Wymspen (talk) 23:31, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

And to have one more shy at this, Harold II's eldest son failed to become King Godwin not because of his slightly questionable legitimacy but because of, well, events, dear boy, events. --Antiquary (talk) 09:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

It depends how far you stretch "could have become king". If Queen Victoria had had no children, for example, she would have been succeeded by her first cousin once removed Prince Ernest Augustus, 3rd Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale. There has never been a King Ernest, a King Augustus or a King Ernest Augustus (it is not clear what regnal name he would have taken). As it happened, Ernest Augustus bore arms against the UK during the First World War and was deprived of his British titles in 1919. Proteus (Talk) 09:32, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Well yes, and there's never been a King Michael while there was a guy in Australia called Michael who it is said was the legitimate heir to the English throne. But, seriously, no. I meant people who had a one time been the immediate heir to the English throne. And note both previous respondents also understood it that way. Basemetal 09:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Basemetal: Alphonso would have been rather "in-your-face" aux Brexiteers  :) —SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 09:58, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Just remembered Sophia of Hanover, legal heir of Queen Anne, who would have succeeded to the throne if she'd just lived a few weeks longer. Also George IV's only child, Princess Charlotte, who predeceased her father. And there have been quite a few kings of England (Great Britain, etc.) whose first child was a daughter, that daughter being soon bumped down the line of succession by their younger brothers. Thankfully that's no longer possible. --Antiquary (talk) 11:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

And finally, no really, finally, I can add the names Thomas, Roger, Edmund, Humphrey, Catherine, Frances, Margaret and Ernest, now that I've discovered our list of heirs apparent and presumptive to the English throne and list of heirs apparent and presumptive to the British throne. --Antiquary (talk) 11:58, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey I didn't know about those lists either. Thanks. Btw, not Edmund: Edmund I and Edmund Ironside. Basemetal 12:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

D'oh! --Antiquary (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Basemetal, I'm surprised noone has mentioned Charles, Prince of Wales, a potential near-future King Arthur. When there is a new monarch, they can take as their regnal name, any of their given names. Edward VII, for example, was named Albert Edward and called Bertie until he became King. Charles is Charles Philip Arthur George. So he could become King Charles III, King Philip, King Arthur or King George VII. If he ever actually becomes King, that is. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

It'd be great if we had a King Arthur, finally. Augustus (heir presumptive 1837-1840), emperor of India, if Queen Victoria had died childless (as pointed out by Proteus), would have been pretty good too. But in that case we should take into account all the given names of all presumptive heirs (as far as they're known). Albert Edward becoming Edward VII while it does show a king can pick any of their given names (or at least that the rules are fluid enough that he was able to get away with it) it seems to me (though I haven't checked the whole list) that was really an exception. Given how things work in England, is there really any firm explicit rule regarding the names that a new monarch can adopt? Why couldn't the new monarch in principle adopt any name they chooose? Does anyone else (the parliament for example) have to agree to it? Is that written anywhere? Basemetal 13:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

WP:WHAAOE - Regnal_name#United_Kingdom --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Great. Thanks. Unfortunately it doesn't answer my last question. Basemetal 18:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

The United Kingdom has no written constitution. Much is based on precedent. Parliament hasn't been asked to approve the previous decisions. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 07:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

"Are there other first names no king of England was ever called one could have been?" - Well, Queen Victoria's first name was Alexandrina, and she could have chosen that as her regnal name. We'd all be talking not about the Victorian era but the Alexandrine era, which sounds quite lovely and less forbidding. And I'd be living in the state of Alexandrina (Australia). The closest we have Down Here is Lake Alexandrina (South Australia). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Getting a bit off topic, but Alexandra of Denmark was a very popular British queen, and the town of Alexandra, New Zealand is one of many places named for her. Alexandra, Victoria probably is also.-gadfium 22:44, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

What happens when a diplomat's motorcade travels to a country that drives on the opposite side of the road?

I have some questions about the recent North Korea summit in Singapore with Donald Trump. (Article is here: 2018 North Korea–United States summit.) This got me wondering. How do they get all of our cars (Secret Service limousines, etc.) over to other foreign countries when the President travels abroad? I assume they fly them? How does that work? Are there special airplanes that fly cars? And what do they fit, like one car per airplane? There seemed to be a huge procession of USA cars there. Let's just say 30. That would take 30 separate airplanes to transport them over there? Thanks. Also, a (sort of) related question. What happens when the USA President travels to a country where they drive on the left side of the road? Do we (USA) have special cars for that? Or does the host country just make an "exception" and let us drive cars that are designed for American driving (on the right side of the road, with steering wheel and driver side on the left)? Similarly, what do we do in the USA when we host other dignitaries from a foreign country where they drive on the left? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Boeing C-17 Globemaster III#United States Air Force: "A C-17 accompanies the President of the United States on his visits to both domestic and foreign arrangements, consultations, and meetings. The C-17 is used to transport the Presidential Limousine and security detachments." In answer to your second question, no "exception" is required. It is perfectly legal to drive a right-hand drive car in countries where they drive on the right, and a left-hand drive car in countries where they drive on the left. Happens all the time. --Viennese Waltz 15:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Further to Viennese Waltz: it's not significantly difficult, or dangerous, to drive on the opposite side of the road from that which a car has been designed. It would be far more difficult for a driver to adapt his/her own engrained habits from a right-hand-drive vehicle to a left, or vice-versa.

My UK family lived in Germany for a period, and like very many others we took a standard UK car to use there. (If one bought a new car for the purpose, there was a significant tax advantage because it was being 'exported'.) The only necessity for such a transfer is to fit headlight adaptors (to avoid dazzling oncoming traffic) if they cannot be altered from the dashboard, and it takes no more than an hour of driving with heightened alertness on the 'new' side before one adapts to the 'mirror conditions'. See Left- and right-hand traffic, particularly Sections 3–4.

Likewise, on UK roads one regularly sees continental vehicles with the driver sitting on the left. (US vehicles are rarely brought to the UK because of the high shipping costs and their designs being often awkwardly large for many UK (and continental) streets, which due to their antiquity are often narrow by US standards.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81l230.195} 2.125.75.224 (talk) 23:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

2.69m wide including mirrors

About how much of Europe would be too narrow for these? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Don't know, but the Presidential limmo might struggle with this street in the City of London. Alansplodge (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Obama's limo famously got stuck on a small hump coming out of the US embassy in Dublin --TrogWoolley (talk) 13:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I would omit the word "dangerous" from that. "Högertrafikomläggningen" was justified by studies showing that an increase of accidents was caused by the popularity of left-side steering wheel vehicles in Sweden while they drove on the left-side of the road. So, they switched to the right-side of the road. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 11:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Difficult or danger aside, it's worth remembering this is the sort of thing which will depend significantly on the laws and regulations of the country in concern. The connections both physical and political within the EU or within Europe may mean it's relatively simple to be able to legally drive a wrong-side car on the road within the EU or Europe.

By comparison, these are the requirements in NZ [3]. For vehicles less than 20 years old

To issue a vehicle with a category A LHD vehicle permit, the Transport Agency must either deem it to have historic value, or it must be a vehicle that was not manufactured in right-hand drive form that meets three of the following four requirements:

Most cars and similar vehicles more than 20 years old would also fall under "These are light vehicles that were manufactured 20 years or more before the vehicle is certified in New Zealand." There are also special cases for specialist vehicles and diplomats (re: the original question). Likewise tourists can temporarily bring their foreign registered cars in and drive on these. I don't know the specifics of the IP's case, but there's a fair chance it won't meet these since it sounds to me like they were just taking an ordinary car.

Singapore seems even stricter, per our article Driving in Singapore#Left hand drive Vs Right hand drive (also in the lead for some reason). It sounds like they may have the diplomat and tourists driving foreign registered vehicles, and for specialist vehicles, but may not have anything even for classic cars or other enthusiast cars. (Also the cars need to have a sign on the back saying left-hand drive. I'm not sure if this applied to the US president's car traveling in a motorcade.)

Also in terms of practicalities, these are perhaps illustrative of local differences [4] [5]. Okay I don't know about Singapore, but in Malaysia or at least KL it's common enough for car parks, even ones at shopping complexes or similar to have ticket machines. (And despite the low labour costs there has been a move away from human operated exits but I'm not sure of the quality of all of these so I wouldn't guarantee your car won't be hit by the barrier if you run across to the machine and then run back.) Then there are the large number of toll plazas due to the large number of concessionary toll roads although I think nowadays at least most of the major ones have the SmartTAG drive through contactless system [6] (~15 years ago though.....) So these are not small inconveniences. (By comparison, in Auckland you get these on occasion and especially in the city and other very high traffic areas but it's easy to never encounter them.)

Even in terms of foreign registered vehicles, there's likely to be a difference. An average of 6000 cars use the Channel Tunnel each day [7] and I guess some more by ferry. While France etc are a big countries, there are enough tourist hotspots that I imagine it's not hard to spot them in certain places. NZ as a relatively isolated island and Singapore as a country where the closest neighbours with left-hand vehicles are Cambodia, Myanmar and Laos and roadtrips from these countries not exactly common. So maybe outside of those who regularly drive near embassies you get this [8].

Note in particular, I wouldn't assume it's always possible to even bring a foreign registered vehicle and drive it as a tourist. (I'd imagine most do allow diplomatic vehicles though.) As I understand it, the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic would at least does generally guarantee it, but plenty of countries are not parties. China is a notable one (and also doesn't recognise foreign licences [9]), and per our article does not allow it. However Macau and Hong Kong are not foreign to China.

Nil Einne (talk) 07:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Legality of left hand drive vehicles aside, my understanding is the tinted windows of Kim's and probably Trump's vehicles would not normally be allowed in Singapore [10] [11] [12]. I think Singapore, unlike Malaysia, does not enforce theor tinting requirements on foreign registered vehicles [13] even though they aren't a party to the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic either from what I can tell [14]. In any case, I'm sure it'll be allowed for diplomatic vehicles so it's not an exemption specific to the summit, but still a sort of exemption. Nil Einne (talk) 07:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

As a mundane example in America, those little US Postal Service trucks have the steering wheel on the right, so that the postman driver doesn't have to scoot over to drop mail into roadside mailboxes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:11, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

It should be remembered that the presidential car does not drive in regular traffic. It drives on closed roads with a police escort as part of a motorcade. Keeping to the right lane and watching your mirrors is not a major consideration; making sure you have a car able to withstand an armed attack is. --Xuxl (talk) 16:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

It's sad that it took so long for the Secret Service and Swiss Guard to get good. They didn't bother bulletproofing the cars till after their heads of state got shot in cars. World Wars had already been caused by "world leader shot in car" for crying out loud. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I doubt if it was entirely a technical problem. Such leaders have always had the conflicting requirement to be seen by and being able to wave to their adoring public. HiLo48 (talk) 21:54, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Actual car the Pope was shot in. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hence the stand up and wave Popemobile, which was still like this when the Pope was shot (2 decades after a superpower's President was shot in a car) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Meanwhile, our own Head of State and her family have to make do with some old horses and carts. Here she is last Saturday. Alansplodge (talk) 19:47, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Wow, they can't even get new horses? —Tamfang (talk) 00:05, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

They're waiting for the 2019 facelift with 4 nostrils. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, all, for the discussion. Very helpful! Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Nazi symbolism

To my slight concern, I've just spotted a guy near where I live wearing a t-shirt covered in neo-nazi/white supremicist symbols. (Including the slogan "14 Words", the SS logo). The centre piece was a large styalised eagle (or possibly a rendering of an eagle statue). It wasn't the standard Nazi Reichsadler/Parteiadler, but I'm sure I've seen it elsewhere. The eagle had swept down wings, and was standing on/clutching a rectangular (rather than the more common circular) doodah. (I think the rectangle contained a swastika, but I didn't hang around to get a better look). Does anyone recognise this eagle from my description, and does it have any particular significance (other than the general Nazi imagery)? Also, the t-shirt also had the slogan "Never Forget" - does that have any particular meaning in nazi/white supremicist symbology? Iapetus (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Maybe the Heeresadler, see also Uniforms of the Heer (1935–45) ("Heer" = German Army (Wehrmacht), in this instance). ---Sluzzelin talk 19:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it was that. I'm pretty sure its wasn't clutching/perched on the swastika directly, but on a rectangular object containing on. Also, the more I think abut it, the more I think it was supposed to look like a statue (of the sort that would be found on top of a public building). Was there any such statue that fits that description, and would have had particular significance to Nazi sympathizers? Iapetus (talk) 08:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

There was Speer's design for the German Pavilion at the 1937 World's Fair in Paris. We do have an image of it on Commons but since France has very limited freedom of panorama, and it only applies to permanent buildings, not temporary structures like this, I'm not going to link to it as it seems to me a copyvio, but easy enough to see it. That is similar to what you describe, though the swastika is within a circle rather than a rectangle.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

That does look pretty much like it. And the image was shown in a slightly oblique view, which may have made the wreath look more rectangular. Is there any reason why this image would be particularly significant or meaningful for a neo-Nazi, or is it probably just that it makes a "nice" image to go on a t-shirt? Iapetus (talk) 09:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

June 13

Labour force after massive development

What happens to the labour force after a country develops? For example, huge projects like zillions of new apartments and houses and roads and bridges and dams are created. Then what happens when it's all complete? What happens to the workforce? Do they get fully absorbed in the home furnishings and bridge maintenance fields and that sort of thing? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Typically they get absorbed in the manufacturing industry and the service industry which has necessarily grown during this economic boom. To over-simplify, these 2 sectors have grown because the workers, while they were employed as builders, were able to pay for goods and services as they were suddenly getting a regular salary above their (previously) survival-only income. --Lgriot (talk) 14:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

That's splendid news, Lgriot. Thank you so much for the speedy, clear, and concise answer. You are very kind. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:00, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Raiatea / Homeland of Maori people

The Wikipedia article Raiatea contains the sentence, "A traditional name for the island is Havai'i, homeland of the Māori people." And the Wikipedia article Hawaiki contains the passage:

Anne Salmond states Havai'i is the old name for Raiatea, the homeland of the Māori. When James Cook first sighted New Zealand in 1769, he had Tupaia on board, a Raiatean navigator and linguist. Cook's arrival seemed to be a confirmation of a prophecy by Toiroa, a priest from Mahia. At Tolaga Bay, Tupaia conversed with the priest, tohunga, associated with the school of learning located there, called Te Rawheoro. The priest asked about the Maori homelands, 'Rangiatea' (Ra'iatea), 'Hawaiki' (Havai'i, the ancient name for Ra'iatea), and 'Tawhiti' (Tahiti).

Both cite a book called Aphrodite's Island by Anne Salmond. Outside of this, there doesn't seem to be much literature equating the Society Island of Ra'iātea with the mythical Māori homeland. So is this a fringe source, or is it even cited accurately in Wikipedia? 50.81.227.4 (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Pacific peoples recounted myths of migration from a homeland named Hawaiki to many European travellers. For example:

• Hawaiki: the whence of the Maori: being an introduction to Rarotonga history by S. Percy Smith, The Journal of the Polynesian Society Vol. 7, No. 3(27) (September, 1898), page 175. "Ra’iatea is Rangiatea, Turi’s ancient home, and the Wahaiki of many a Maori story. Havai’i is the old name of Raiatea. "
• Peoples of the Pacific: The History of Oceania to 1870, edited By Paul D'Arcy, The Birth of New Lands, After the Creation of Havai'i (Raiatea) by Teuira Henry from the MSS. of the REV. J. M. Orsmond, written in 1817 from the lips of Aramoua and Vara, Raiatean Scholars. " Let more land grow from Hawai'i! Spica is the star, and Aeuere is the king of Havai'i, the birthplace of lands..."
• The Journal of the Polynesian Society, Volumes 6-7, 1897, page 172. "'Tis a fish-hook of mine brought hither from Rangiatea / In those poras, that sailed here from afar.--Old Song, Ngati-Kwia, N.Z....In the above lines we notice the Maori and Rarotonga name of Raitea Island--anciently called Hawai'i--near Tahiti."

and these European writers equated it with various islands:

• The Quest for Origins: Who First Discovered and Settled New Zealand the Pacific Islands? by K. R. Howe, University of Hawaii Press, 2003, page 159. "Maori oral tradition suggested that the Maori homeland was "Hawaiki," which was variously interpreted by Europeans as Samoa's Savai'i, Hawai'i or elsewhere in eastern Polynesia. "Hawaiki" is in fact the claimed immediate homeland of many people of eastern..." (sorry, I can't view the rest of the quote on the next page.)

(Mr Google let me see the rest) "...many people of eastern Polynesia, not just Maori. Whether it is mythical or whether it has a specific location/s, including within New Zealand itself is still debated". Alansplodge (talk) 19:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Alansplodge!70.67.222.124 (talk) 19:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

But a modern source has a different interpretation:

• Making Peoples: A History of the New Zealanders, from Polynesian Settlement to the End of the Nineteenth Century by James Belich, University of Hawaii Press, 2001, page 63. "Hawaiki may have been goal as well as source, Promised Land as well as Paradise Lost. Savai'i in Samoa, Havai'i (Raiatea) in the Society Islands, and Havai'i were all named for it. Parts, perhaps even the whole of New Zealand were also originally named Hawaiki. Tikeo claimed that new lands were usually named Hawaiki. The stories of departure from Hawaiki could be interpreted as cultural signals for migration as well as records of it." 70.67.222.124 (talk) 17:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Aphrodite's Island, Salmond, ISBN 0520271327. Akld guy (talk) 19:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Soviet treatment of ww2 prisoners

I was reading that very few german war prisoners captured by the soviet union returned alive, about 1 million died out of 3 million captured according to german estimates, and some captured after battles such as the siege of staligrad, only about 5% of those POW's survived after that. The reasons for their deaths do not seem possible to me even if they were treated poorly. What is the likely hood there were soviet concentration style camps where they were killed? And is there any evidence of this?--User777123 (talk) 19:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Many of them starved alongside the people of the Soviet Union, who had very little food for themselves, let alone enemies who were ravaging the USSR.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

See Gulag: "a total of 1,053,829 [Soviet] people died in the Gulag from 1934 to 1953". They weren't going to be nicer to the Germans than to their own people. Alansplodge (talk) 20:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

See also German prisoners of war in the Soviet Union. It is widely agreed that about 3,000,000 Germans were taken prisoner by the Soviets during the war, though there are differing estimates on how many died, ranging from around 300,000 (Soviet estimate) to 1,000,000 (West German estimate). Common causes of death included disease, starvation, untreated wounds, malnutrition, physical abuse, and general lack of medical care. It was also frequently the case that Germans who surrendered were already in very poor health due to siege circumstances. Someguy1221 (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

From what I have read many people who died in gulags were executed.--User777123 (talk) 20:12, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

By the way, Stalin also treated Soviet war prisoners released from German custody extremely poorly... AnonMoos (talk) 13:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Beyond the general mistreatment, several of the prisoners were subjected to forced labor, which typically translates to poor living and working conditions: "in October 1949, all but 85,000 POWs had been released and repatriated. Most of those still held had been convicted as war criminals and many sentenced to long terms in forced labor camps – usually 25 years." Dimadick (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

June 14

If rape was historically seen as a crime against the property of the man to whom the woman belonged, then what happened to the women without male guardians?

Maybe a young woman's father dies, leaving the woman a half-orphan or full orphan. Maybe the woman's husband dies, leaving the woman a widow. Or maybe the woman is a prostitute, working for the head of the brothel, who is a woman. In all three cases, does the female belong to a male guardian at all? Would rape exist under these situations? SSS (talk) 00:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

It's going to be tough to answer without specifics. Does history of rape help? Under Ancient Rome, it says this: "As a matter of law, rape could be committed only against a citizen in good standing. The rape of a slave could be prosecuted only as damage to the owner's property. People who worked as prostitutes or entertainers, even if they were technically free, suffered infamia, the loss of legal and social standing. " There are links to several related articles as well. Matt Deres (talk) 01:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

SuperSuperSmarty: in many ancient cultures with customs which would now be considered severely patriarchal -- including Republican Rome and the Biblical Israelites -- society was organized into patrilineal lineages, which were grouped into patrilineal clans, so that their definitions of "family" may be different than you're imagining. AnonMoos (talk) 13:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Theodora (c. 500-548) instigated a few legislative reforms concerning the rights of women in the Byzantine Empire: "Theodora participated in Justinian's legal and spiritual reforms, and her involvement in the increase of the rights of women was substantial. She had laws passed that prohibited forced prostitution "and was known for buying girls who had been sold into prostitution, freeing them, and providing for their future." She closed brothels and made pimping a criminal offense. She created a convent on the Asian side of the Dardanelles called the Metanoia (Repentance), where the ex-prostitutes could support themselves. She also expanded the rights of women in divorce and property ownership, instituted the death penalty for rape, forbade exposure of unwanted infants, gave mothers some guardianship rights over their children, and forbade the killing of a wife who committed adultery. Procopius wrote that she was naturally inclined to assist women in misfortune. After Theodora's death, "little effective legislation was passed by Justinian." " Dimadick (talk) 16:53, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

What a great person. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

What did Roy Jenkins have against Lloyd George?

In the acknowledgements to Roy Hattersley's David Lloyd George - The Great Outsider Hattersley writes "It was Roy Jenkins who, many years ago, suggested that I write a biography of David Lloyd George - a politician he disliked so heartily that he could not contemplate writing the book himself". So my question is - why? DuncanHill (talk) 18:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

The lead of our biog of David Lloyd George contains text that might be the answer: "He gave weak support to the war effort during the Second World War amidst fears that he was favourable toward Germany.". But this is speculative. It could have been just about anything - there's plenty in his biog that someone might choose to despise, from his policies to his womanising, and I'm not sure you'll get an answer here that's compliant with the Ref Desk's mandate not to speculate. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Jenkins did write a biography of Asquith, Lloyd George's predecessor. That may provide some answers. Dalliance (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Having slept on it, I found this by Andrew Adonis in the New Statesman "Hattersley declares in his opening words that Roy Jenkins suggested the idea of this biography of Lloyd George, "a politician he disliked so heartily that he could not contemplate writing the book himself". It would help uninitiated readers if he explained why. Jenkins was not only Herbert Asquith's biographer, but Asquithian to the core, modelling himself on the Balliol-trained, urbane, broad-minded Liberal leader. Asquith's enemies were Jenkins's enemies, Lloyd George foremost among them after their wartime split in 1916. For all its empathetic brilliance, Jenkins's 1964 biography fails to acknowledge Asquith's manifest unfitness as a war leader. It also skates over his womanising and excessive drinking." which seems to make sense (Squiffites have always had a curious ability to detest Lloyd George's domestic arrangements while remaining silent about Asquith's compulsive groping). One is tempted of course to add that Jenkins was from Monmouthshire and Lloyd George from Caernarvonshire (quite apart from the traditional rivalry between North and South Wales, LlG had been given a very hard time of it by the south for his attempts to create a single Welsh Liberal organisation), and that Jenkins, for all his good qualities, was a bit of a snob. DuncanHill (talk) 12:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I have just acquired Jenkins's The Chancellors, which includes essays on both Asquith and Lloyd George, and that may provide some more insight. It'll have to wait until I've finished Hattersley, and A. J. P. Taylor's Twelve Essays (which I'm reading in parallel), though. DuncanHill (talk) 13:38, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Railway projects in japan

If Japan railways are privatised, how does Japan Railway Construction, Transport and Technology Agency a government agency get involved in the construction of new lines which the private companies operate? Presumably the government fund the developed proposals, which would be developed jointly with the private operators, but how is it decided which company will operate the new line? And do they just gain ownership or do they buy it off JRTT? 176.250.81.228 (talk) 21:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

See JTT - For the Future Transportation Networks: "The construction projects are funded by the national and local governments as well as by revenue generated from the sale of existing shinkansen lines. We have already completed three sections on three lines including the Hokuriku Shinkansen (Takasaki - Nagano). After completion, facilities are leased to and operated by Japan Railway companies (JR)". Alansplodge (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

List of countries by meat consumption per capita

I want to use this source. How do I get grand totals from that? Are there other sources you might know of?

Why? Here is the blah blah blah...

We do not have List of countries by meat consumption per capita.

We have List of countries by meat consumption but that's how much is eaten per capita including what is missing via retail, food service, home preparation, spoilage, downstream waste, bones, and pets foods.

Lots of articles per capita here: Category:Lists of countries by per capita values

This cat is sparsely populated: Category:Lists of countries by consumption

Many thanks,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi User:Anna Frodesiak, I'm not sure I understand your question: are you just asking how to transfer that OECD data into a wiki page? When I look at the OECD page I see CSV download links that let you pull the data into a spreadsheet. Then you can easily get rid of unwanted columns or figure out totals. You can re-export your modified table as CSV, then paste the CSV here to get a Mediawiki table that you can then plop into an article. Web search on "CSV to mediawiki table" finds a lot of other tools for doing such conversions if the mlei.net page isn't suitable. If you meant something else or want more help with the conversion, please post again. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 03:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for http://mlei.net/shared/tool/csv-wiki.htm. Nice utility.

Actually, what I'm looking for is totals. The chart seems to show "Beef and veal", "Pork meat", "Poultry meat", and "Sheep meat" rather than the total of all those meats. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:41, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

June 15

Thermopylae

Why didn't the Eurypontid king of Sparta fought alongside Leonidas at the Battle of Thermopylae? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.216.51 (talk) 01:29, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

You may be able to find out more at Battle of Thermopylae. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

See Spartan Constitution#Dual Kingship. By that time Sparta had passed a law requiring one king to always stay home. Basemetal 02:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Synthesis in articles

Link to latest discussion Special:Permalink/845717829#A problematic Rembrandt image

At Souliotes a claim that the Italian word Albanese means (among other things) "Albanian soldier" was removed as synthesis because it was sourced to a military, rather than a general dictionary. At Islamic calendar there is a far more blatant synthesis which has defied removal for nine years despite having no source whatsoever. Its basis is that a picture coincidentally appears at a point in Al-Biruni's text where he discusses Muhammad's prohibition of intercalation and must be, therefore, a picture of that event. When it is pointed out that Muhammad made the ruling while seated on a camel far from the nearest mosque the supporters of the description just roll their eyes and say nothing. I say "coincidentally" because the next picture, two folios along, is "Isaiah sees the Messiah accompanied by the prophet Muhammad", but Isaiah is not mentioned in the book. Can we get consensus to remove this description once and for all? 80.47.0.15 (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

• This is the Humanities reference desk. discussions of article content should go to the article's talk page, and if consensus cannot be achieved, shou8ld follow the dispute resolution procedures. See WP:DISPUTE. Note that "synthesis" is often brought into these discussions in various inappropriate ways, so you have my sympathy. See WP:SYNTH, WP:NOTSYNTH, and the many related essays. -Arch dude (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

The matter was brought here because both the article and the talk page are protected. Relevant quotes from those two links are:

• The policy forbids "synthesis of published material that advances a position" (emphasis added). A NPOV article gives appropriate weight to all positions, if there are multiple positions on a subject, by including multiple statements.

• In many cases, there are multiple established views of any given topic. In such cases, no single position, no matter how well researched, is authoritative. It is not the responsibility of any one editor to research all points of view. But when incorporating research into an article, it is important that editors provide context for this point of view, by indicating how prevalent the position is, and whether it is held by a majority or minority.

The supporters fail here, on WP:RS and WP:V and on Jimbo's "principle of least astonishment" which says distressing images must not be included if they do not aid the reader's understanding of the subject matter of the article. 80.47.0.108 (talk) 15:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Teaching history in young countries millenia from now

How would history teachers and professors, and textbooks in young countries like the United States teach a history school class or a college/university course without missing any details 1000 years from now or 5000 years from now? Let me use the U.S as an example because I grew up and live there. How will things like the Civil War, the Great Depression,m, 9/11, etc. be taught millennia from now? Will some details or events not be taught anymore to cram up everything in 1 textbook, class, or course due to time and number of events that have taken place? Can some light into this be shed in how American history was taught 100 years ago or is it still too early and few of years to tell?

On the same line, once a country gains independence, how many years does it usually for textbooks to be written and for school classes and college courses to be made about the full history of that country? Willminator (talk) 16:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

• As it says at the top of the page, we don't predict or speculate here. In this case we would need to make predictions about the nature of civilization and humanity 1000 years hence. Your question assumes that civilization would teach history approximately as it does today (teachers, professors, textbooks...) which is extremely unlikely. See technological singularity as one of hundreds of alternatives. -Arch dude (talk) 16:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
• You necessarily have to "miss details" in order to cover 5,000 years worth of history. Consider World War II, where there's a ton of material. Even today, how would you cover every detail of the war in a conventional history class? The answer is that you wouldn't. You would have to summarize, and the more years that pass, the more you would have to summarize, to hold the class down to a couple of semesters. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) To address your last point, in the case of Lithuania which became independent from the USSR in 1990, the first history textbooks were produced within a very short time, as the pre-independence books were heavily dominated by Soviet ideology. Lithuanian historians attended various seminars and courses at Western European universities before writing the next generation of textbooks which conformed to modern educational theories and about 50 history textbooks have been produced in Lithuania since 1990. See Contemporary History Textbooks in Lithuania: The Case of Innovations (pdf download). Alansplodge (talk) 17:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

We are not supposed to make predictions here, but I very much doubt whether any American history will be taught at all in 5000 years (or any British or European history). Such organisations will probably be totally forgotten except possibly for specialist research. Dbfirs 19:02, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I mean, yeah, looking back 5000 years ago, famous cultures included the Egyptians, the Indus Valley Civilization, the Sumerians, the Minoans, the (Shang and Xia dynasties, and the beginnings of the Trojans. The Egyptians are mentioned in what is currently the most widespread religious text (and Egyptology was a huge craze during the Victorian era), while the Trojans are mentioned in a rather popular legend that gets the occasional movie or miniseries. If I met someone offline who had even heard of the others, I would not regard their knowledge of history as "average" by any means. Then there's the nationalist focus that most nations' high school history courses have, and the simplification of complex issues to make things more testable. During the late second millennium, a region called "Murica" occupied a middle strip of modern Norama on Sol IV (at that time Sol III). Murica discovered electric and nuclear power, developed space flight, and began a centuries-long but ultimately successful peasant rebellion in 1776. This rebellion resulted in the most popular model of government until humanity's extinction several centuries later -- anarcho-totalitarian communo-capitalism. Our current system of government was created in response to the flaws of anarcho-totalitarian communo-capitalism, which had not only caused humanity's extinction but had also denied political rights to dolphins. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:12, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

And the first major battle of that rebellion was 1775. Pfft, 8th millennium dolphin history.. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Nah... all of knowledge of Earth’s history will be forgotten during the dark age that will sweep the solar system after fall of the Martian Empire. Blueboar (talk) 02:41, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

The dark age may already be creeping up on us; "...one in six youngsters said they thought Auschwitz was a Second World War theme park". [15] Alansplodge (talk) 09:56, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Add to that, the number of Holocaust deniers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:38, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

You're probably best off turning to science fiction for explorations of this topic, since any "non-fictional" predictive attempts will probably be as far off-base as Albert Speer's designs of buildings for ruin value turned out to be. Assuming the absence of catastrophic events like civilization collapse of human extinction though, and also the non-occurrence of a technological singularity, there will be a lot more recorded materials preserved than we in the present day have from the time of (say) the ancient Sumerians. So that can possibly give a different understanding. 173.228.123.166 (talk) 22:14, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

TV Tropes has examples of this kind of thing in media. Future imperfect--Pacostein (talk) 10:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Five thousand years previously, 3000 BCE, we lack adequate texts to apply the techniques of the modern understanding of the written past (History / Historiography). Currently the scholarly discipline of "History" has a lock hold over adequate accounts of the "written past," (WP:HISTRS) which is how most people perceive "history," as opposed to other disciplines regarding the natural past or physical remains of cultural beings. As far as the dolphins go, Posadas was right, drop the bomb now. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

U.S. Regions - Is the U.S. Census Bureau's map definitive?

Hello, I have used the U.S. Census Bureau's map of the U.S. Regions as a guideline in my work doing market research because it makes sense that their map would be the best one to use to find what the U.S. government considers to be the correct regional borders. However, while Washington DC is listed as part of the South-Atlantic region in the U.S. Census Bureau map, it is listed in the Wikipedia article on Washington DC as belonging to the Mid-Atlantic region. When I clicked on the "Mid-Atlantic" link, it took me to the page on regions, where there clearly is a lot of disagreement about regional borders. I can understand why/how there might be some disagreement at the U.S. Census Bureau about regions before they make their final decision and publish their map - but once it's decided and the map is published, aren't all arguments put to rest? Thanks SouthATXEditor (talk) 22:02, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

There is no level of government between states and the federal government. The federal government lacks the constitutional authority to group states into regions in any mandatory way. Neither the federal or state governments can prevent individuals from speaking or writing about multi-state regions any way they want to. Jc3s5h (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

This might be the way it is in your country but that's not how it is in the US. Although different parts of the Census map have different levels of currency. i.e. New England is pretty much always the states northeast of New York if you're dividing by state but not even Midwesterners and Southerners agree exactly which states are those (besides their own state and usually the ones immediately adjacent) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:38, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Note that Southwest Connecticut could still be considered to be not New England. It was surely more New Englandy before commuting to New York became practical but it now has a lot of New Yorkers that moved there for whatever advantage Connecticut has (I'm not making fun, state sales/property/fuel/income taxes, school spending etc. vary between states and I barely know 1 New Jersey tax rate much less anything about the further Connecticut) or just that it had the house/suburb/whatever they wanted and they didn't move for the state. Most NFL and MLB fans there root against the New England Patriots and Boston Red Sox (basically the New England Red Sox) when they're playing their favorite team. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses, but to me they emphasize the point that there needs to be a single point of reference that everyone agrees on. There's no dispute about state borders or time zones; you can refer to a U.S. map and know exactly where the boundaries are between states and where the various time zones are. The same should be true for regions. We should not be in a situation where a bunch of people with various views on whether Virginia is or is not a Southern state are having a battle on Wikipedia -- changing it back and forth from South Atlantic to Mid-Atlantic (or more broadly, from South to Northeast). I just did a little more research, and the General Services Administration (GSA) has different designations on their map of regional borders () than the Census Bureau. Why do two federally-funded agencies produce U.S. regions maps with conflicting data? Maddening. -- I suppose the answer to the question is that if you are using regional designations in your work, you need to pick whichever map makes sense to you and note that as your standard (similar to designating an editing style, like AP) so others referring to your research know which states you a referring to when you designate a region, such as "the South." - Cheers! SouthATXEditor (talk) 16:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

References

June 16

Muhammad

Which religion did he come from before Islam religion was created? 123.108.246.27 (talk) 18:46, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

By descent Muhammad belonged to the Quraysh from Mecca who were polytheists (kuffaar). Almost everyone in Mecca were polytheists, that is, there were no Jews in Mecca (contrary to, say, Yathrib). However I don't know (and don't recall reading anywhere, though I'm no expert) that Muhammad himself had ever practiced polytheism. Now what I've just stated is the historically informed Western view. But ideologically Islam propounds another view. According to Islam any human being is born a Muslim and stays that way unless the family or circumstances turn them into something else (in which case they may "return" to Islam if they choose by converting, or, as Muslims say, reverting, uttering the Shahada and so on). In the Muslim view Muhammad did not "invent" Islam and Islam was not created. It'd always been the original religion of humanity that Adam, Abraham, etc. belonged to. So it is possible that, if it can't be shown that Muhammad actually practiced the polytheism practiced by his family, according to Islam, as he was born a Muslim he never ceased to be one. Basemetal 19:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

The article Religion in pre-Islamic Arabia may be of interest for the general background. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.125.75.224 (talk) 09:40, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Indeed. In particular if the OP will search for "Muhammad" in the text of that article they'll get more interesting facts that will help them clarify the relationship of Muhammad and his relatives to the religions of pre-Islamic Arabia. Basemetal 12:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Basemetal, where is this statement that everyone who has ever lived is born a Muslim to be found? Is it in the Qu'ran, Hadith, or elsewhere? 81.139.244.251 (talk) 15:26, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

It is a Hadith found in Sahih Muslim (maybe elsewhere too; just Google "Every child born Muslim"). Basemetal 15:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Yet another piece of information that makes a mockery of the claims one often sees, including in Wikipedia, saying "There are X followers of religion Y in the world." HiLo48 (talk) 21:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

June 17

Odin

is Odin a celestial deity (uranian god)? if no, what type of god is he?--93.61.55.121 (talk) 10:12, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Define "celestial deity". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't know the exact definition.--93.61.55.121 (talk) 15:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Where did you see the term? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:12, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

the english for divinità uranica (italian) https://www.google.it/search?ei=-nwmW_fGF4vUwAKPs6-wBQ&q=divinit%C3%A0+uranica&oq=divinit%C3%A0+uranica&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39k1.7771.28900.0.29283.8.6.2.0.0.0.115.584.5j1.6.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.8.598...0j0i22i30k1.0._0S9V22yWzk --93.61.55.121 (talk) 15:25, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

In English, Uranian does not mean what you think it does (clicking the link will prove educative). It can also refer specifically to the planet Uranus, but it can't be applied to celestial objects as a whole. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Our chthonic article suggests that the relevant dichotomy may be expressed in English as Olympian versus chthonic. It does seem a bit odd to describe Nordic gods as "Olympian", though, whereas Uranus was apparently the personification of the sky. --Trovatore (talk) 21:27, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

After poking around a little bit in our articles, it strikes me that Odin may make occasional journeys into the underworld, but can hardly be described as an underworld god, nor does he seem much like a nature god. On the other hand our Odin article says In later folklore, Odin appears as a leader of the Wild Hunt, a ghostly procession of the dead through the winter sky.

So I guess I'd say he's more like a sky god than a chthonic god, if those are the only two categories available, but neither really seems to fit all that well. --Trovatore (talk) 21:41, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

What type of picture is this?

The caption at All Saints' Church, Godshill says "Painting of Godshill Church, circa 1910", but it doesn't look like a painting to me. It looks more like a hand-tinted b&w photo, but I'm not sure. Anyone who knows technically what this is, please go ahead and change the caption. Thanks. Mypix (talk) 20:15, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

• Wikimedia Commons credits it to Pictures in Colour of the Isle of Wight by Jarrod and Sons, at Project Gutenberg. The second paragraph of the book's foreword describes its illustrations: "being reproductions from actual photographs they may be relied upon as being true to Nature". In other words, the image was not made by tinting the photo (which presumably was B&W), but by copying it (and therefore adding color). --76.69.118.94 (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)