I'm reading CHAIM POTOK novel 'The Gift of Asher Lev'. In it, he mentions many art pieces. He mentions a crucifixion done by Picasso when 25. Picasso being born in 1881, 25ish from 1905-1907. All I can find on the web is a Crucifixion done in 1930. Can anyone find a link for this Potok referenced Picasso? Cheers, --[[User:Specialagent777|i am the kwisatz haderach]] ([[User talk:Specialagent777|talk]]) 20:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm reading CHAIM POTOK novel 'The Gift of Asher Lev'. In it, he mentions many art pieces. He mentions a crucifixion done by Picasso when 25. Picasso being born in 1881, 25ish from 1905-1907. All I can find on the web is a Crucifixion done in 1930. Can anyone find a link for this Potok referenced Picasso? Cheers, --[[User:Specialagent777|i am the kwisatz haderach]] ([[User talk:Specialagent777|talk]]) 20:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
:Texas A&M's On-line Picasso Project[http://picasso.tamu.edu/picasso/] lists 23 crucifixions, including OPP.96:077[http://picasso.tamu.edu/picasso/WorksInfo?CatID=OPP.96:077] from 1896, OPP.03:137[http://picasso.tamu.edu/picasso/WorksInfo?CatID=OPP.03:137] from 1903, and 4 from 1915-1918, but none from 1905-07. You could look through the year-by-year archives, but there's A LOT of paintings (it's a vast archive but I assume not 100% comprehensive, and of course Potok being a novelist might have changed dates or made it up). --[[Special:Contributions/82.41.11.134|82.41.11.134]] ([[User talk:82.41.11.134|talk]]) 22:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
:Texas A&M's On-line Picasso Project[http://picasso.tamu.edu/picasso/] lists 23 crucifixions, including OPP.96:077[http://picasso.tamu.edu/picasso/WorksInfo?CatID=OPP.96:077] from 1896, OPP.03:137[http://picasso.tamu.edu/picasso/WorksInfo?CatID=OPP.03:137] from 1903, and 4 from 1915-1918, but none from 1905-07. You could look through the year-by-year archives, but there's A LOT of paintings and drawings there and I've not checked them all (it's a vast archive but I assume not 100% comprehensive, and of course Potok being a novelist might have changed dates or made it up). --[[Special:Contributions/82.41.11.134|82.41.11.134]] ([[User talk:82.41.11.134|talk]]) 22:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
== did the Pope give any reasons for Palestinians having a state? ==
== did the Pope give any reasons for Palestinians having a state? ==
Revision as of 22:47, 11 May 2009
Welcome to the humanities section of the Wikipedia reference desk.
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.
I want to raise awareness about the causes of suicides in university. I don't want to write a letter to an editor to the newspaper (although I would be happy to do so, if someone would help me) (as in if the letter was an open one where the editor publishes it in the newpaper). What can I do?68.148.149.184 (talk) 01:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No disrespect, but if you need help with writing a letter to an editor at a newspaper, perhaps you aren't quite ready to undertake a project like this by yourself. You might want to contact a local organization that works to prevent suicides and see if they need volunteers, or make a donation to them. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 01:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then start one. Do what you want to do. Saying that you will be happy to do it is one thing. Actually performing the action is another. -- kainaw™03:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is a blog the best way to go about spreading awareness and a soapbox for university suffering and suicide and causes of university suicide?68.148.149.184 (talk) 05:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That mostly depends on how good a writer you are, I suppose. Seriously, though: what do you want to say about the topic? Who do you want to say it to? It seems to me that you think it's important, which is fair enough, but you don't really know what to do about it. I again recommend you contact a suicide prevention group in your area and talk to then. Chances are that they can tell you how you can help. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 07:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Infinite Perception
Me and my friends were talking the other day and we came to the realization that what we, as human, perceive right now is not truly reality, in the sense that our brains filter out information and that our senses are not capable of perceiving certain sensations. For example, when we walk our dogs outside, they're always sniffing around, smelling things that we cannot sense. We then tried to understand what it would be like if we could obtain infinite perception, what would the universe be like? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.109.135 (talk) 03:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You may be interested in reading the philosphy of various thinkers including the Phenomenalism of David Hume, which holds that reality is ONLY what we perceive, and it makes no sense to think of reality outside of perception. Another important school of thought is that of Phenomenology by Edmund Husserl which is a more pragmatic view of the relationship between perception and reality. Both represnet opposing viewpoints in the school of thought known as Positivism which maintains that all knowledge derives from experience. There are VOLUMES of philosophy texts written on the relationship between senses, perception, and reality. --Jayron32.talk.contribs04:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the completely opposite philosophy that reality is one thing, and our perception of reality is another thing. Which is supported by the fact that one person's perception of an event can be very different from another's. Even if they were identical, that still wouldn't mean that they have truly accessed "reality". All we know about "reality" is what we can perceive or intuit about it, and that's the best we have to work with. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On a more practical note, and not entirely related to the OPs question, I would like to point out that it would make you insane. Those with "heightened awareness", shall we call it, can be driven to distraction by the enormity of information that they take in. This is not dissimilar to idiot-savants and some extreme forms of autism. Our filtering of the universe happens for extremely good reason; our brains are simply not capable of processing the information and still retaining much in the way of thought or emotional intelligence. In some science fiction, I think that some extraterrestrial beings are bestowed with greater abilities in this area than humans are, because it's been recognised for years as one of our primary limitations. On another note, and even more removed from the OPs post, you notice a lot more of the physical universe than you think you do. The subconscious is a trap for a lot of perception that our conscious minds filter even further. This is part of the reason why hypnotism is used to try and extract information from people, often information that they are not even aware of knowing. For example, a witness to a crime may not remember what the assailant looked like or what he was wearing, but these details may very well be stored in the unconscious mind. You might not be able to smell the things your dog smells, but if you could, a lot of it would probably be lost somewhere in your unconscious mind as extraneous detail. Maedin\talk13:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I see what you guys are talking about. But I was going off the base that we COULD perceive everything and it wouldn't be a problem. I think it would go beyond the sense of smell and everything, it would have to do with perceiving all quantum particles and they systems they create. My friends and I thought that it would appear just a point, centered at your position of perception. Your thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.109.135 (talk) 14:28, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As Psychology suggests, our perception of the world is unique to each individual, and is the sum of all our past experiences. Some people see better than others, some hear, smell or feel better than others. All of us have past experiences which affect the way we see ourselves and the world in which we live. If we all had the ability to know everything the world would appear as a finite set of challanges, all of which have been met before, just waiting for death. Our unique perspective on life in the world is what generates our drive to succeed, evolve and ultimately to do many of the fantastic things we do. Personally, i don't think my experience could be enhanced by being able to smell piss on a lamp post, but if it troubles you then go for it. russ (talk) 00:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What I'm asking goes beyond human senses. Take a look at the light spectrum, you can see that the human eye can only perceive a very small portion of what it actually out there. My question is what would the world look like to a conscience being that has no limits to his perception. What would the world look like if he could perceive everything that there was to perceive in the universe: atoms, galaxies, radio waves, chemical reactions... and time especially? I'll try to redefine the "point" I was talking about. The only conclusion that we (my friends and I) could come up with, the solution to what the universe would look like if a conscience being had infinite perception, was that everything would be a point, because it would be both infinitely small and infinitely large at the same time. But we are unsure about this theory, so I was wondering what the internet would have to say about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.109.135 (talk) 02:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that it would appear just a point. Perhaps missing the point, so to speak, but there is an old Zen koan about the entire universe being One Bright Pearl. Dōgen, a Zen master and philosopher wrote about it as well. The main line is "The entire world of the ten directions is one bright pearl". The "ten directions" bit supposedly indicates that this is the totality of reality being discussed--all that is with nothing outside it. One bright pearl? Pfly (talk) 07:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mainstream bibles around the world
In the English-speaking world, KJV is the most-widely used translation of the Bible. What are the most widely used versions of the Bible of other languages? How old and linguistically-outdated are they? -- Toytoy (talk) 11:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The KJV is the standard "classical" Bible translation into the English language, but I would question whether it's the most widely-used at this point... AnonMoos (talk) 14:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, the word 'used' opens up a whole 'nother barrel of monkeys. I would expect that the KJV would be more commonly given say as a baptism or wedding present than other versions but rarely used while the NIV is more likely to be actually read. Now finding statistics on that would be a real challenge. Rmhermen (talk) 15:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience the NIV is the most used version in Protestant Churches in the U.S. My pastor intentionally will read from a variety of translations, but the pew bibles in the church are NIV. And, of course, the sales numbers quoted above make it clear that the NIV is the top selling bible. On a personal note, I find the language in the NIV more accessable than even the New King James version, which may go some to explaining its popularity. --Jayron32.talk.contribs20:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that the KJV is most often quoted, because it is public domain, while NIV and other modern translations are still subject to copyright. Steewi (talk) 03:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Greenshed is correct about the Luther Bible being important for German. Other languages have similar versions that are important for their language. Dutch speakers have the Statenvertaling, Chinese speakers have the Chinese Union Version, and Spanish speakers have the Reina-Valera. As for other comments in this thread. I would dispute the NIV is the most used English version in US Protestant churches. In my experience the KJV seems to be the most used (this is based on going to Baptist churches in the South). The NIV seems to be used the most in military chapels. Steewi is incorrect in stating that the KJV is PD. In England, it isn't. I know a guy who wrote Cambridge asking for permission to use the KJV in his Bible program for the iPhone App Store. For more details on how this works, see the KJV article. - Thanks, Hoshie03:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Proto-Helladic period
What is the difference between proto-Helladic and Early Helladic? In the Helladic period article it says Early Helladic II is 2500-2300 BC. However in this article it is indicating the second Proto-Helladic period is 2700-2200 BC. I am trying to get this accurate for the Dokos shipwreck article, which has cargo evidence of about 2200 BC.--Doug Coldwelltalk11:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion: post this query on the discussion page for the Helladic period article, then post a head's up on the two WikiProject pages (WikiProject Greece and WikiProject Archaeology) mentioned there, with a link to your query. This is a great way to alert editors knowledgeable in this field, and also directly documents the query and responses where they'll be most pertinent, i.e. rather than the Ref Desk archives. (I do this often with highly specific queries in geography :-) -- Deborahjay (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why no new objects from the US have been inscribed on the world heritage list since 1995? Is it becaause of some beef between the US and the UNESCO? Why do they keep inscribing on the list such sleepy rural places as Sabbioneta? Would they like to attract more tourists to Europe? Your article doesn't offer any clue. --212.73.96.111 (talk) 12:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sabbioneta was founded in the late 16th century, at that time there were just a handful of European settlements in North America. It is natural that there will be more heritage sites in Europe than the US. (Of course, there were Native Americans around long before European colonisation but by my understanding (which, I'll admit, is rather limited in this area) they didn't have many permanent settlements or other things that would still be around today and worth making a world heritage site.) --Tango (talk) 14:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
World Heritage Sites can be natural sites, not only cultural ones (like Yellowstone and Yosemite, on the list). The U.S. already has more sites listed than any other country in the Americas, according to List of World Heritage Sites in the Americas. Given a quick scan it looks like Europe has more sites on the list than the rest of the world combined, which may say something about the politics of the listings (or desire to have sites listed). Rmhermen (talk) 15:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Projects marred by human rights allegations?
What large projects/events/constructions have been 'marred' (cancelled, even) by allegations of human rights abuses? Beijing 2008, for example, comes to mind. The abuses could be of the workforce or others related to the project. Similar things, like bad health and safety leading to deaths, are also useful to know. Cheers for any help, LHMike (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you will need to narrow your question, especially the definitions of "marred" and "human rights abuses", because if those two definitions are read broadly, an extremist's answer might be "every construction project in the industrialized world". Does "marred" extend to "a reporter has claimed someone is concerned"? Does "human rights abuses" extend to "earning five dollars a day"? These refinements of your question could make the answer meaningful. Tempshill (talk) 18:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise, do you want cases where unfounded accusations caused the damage (i.e. there was no basis for the allegations, but they caused real damage anyways) or where there were real human rights abuses, and where the exposition of those abuses was met with real consequences in the form of sanctions? The tone of the question makes it hard to answer. --Jayron32.talk.contribs20:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Beijing 2008 was not marred by "human rights" treatment of any workers or anyone involved with the project. You may remember (or not) that the "human rights issues" were all somehow grafted onto the event by some fairly sophisticated PR-manipulation. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, surely the event didn't exist in a vacuum, though. China has a pretty bad human rights situation. China hosted the Olympics. The latter is a kind of an obvious tool for protesting the former, and I think it'd be hard to say that there's no connection between the politics of the host country and the event the host country organizes and hosts. I mean, maybe the human rights of the people involved with the project weren't infringed upon, but considering that among other things, China actually banned Tibetans from working in Beijing during the olympics, which led to plenty of people being fired from their jobs, I'd say that it definitely had an impact. (Anyway, personally, I consider that particular issue both more interesting and important than figuring out which dude runs fastest.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 06:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what the OP asked for, though. He asked for a major project derailed because of its human rights issues. For one, the Olympics was not derailed, and for two, if we are going to talk about Olympic games affected by extraneous political action, then almost every game fits that bill - Moscow, Los Angeles, Berlin ... Even the Sydney Olympics attracted masses of protesters passionate about, if I recall correctly, Aboriginal rights. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, "marred" was the specific word he used, which doesn't mean that the project would have to be derailed or ruined, just made less perfect or attractive. Considering the amount of negatiev press generated by the whole thing, I think it's safe to say that the Beijing Olympics were marred to some degree by it. In any case, China definitely engaged in plenty of activities with a dubious impact on human rights directly because of the Olympics, as the Seattle Times article referenced below demonstrates. (The Human Rights and Censorship section of our article on Concerns and controversies over the 2008 Summer Olympics lists a number of other incidents that aren't exactly the sort that bring to mind liberty and an overall respect for human rights.) I don't think the same could be said of the Sydney Olympics, but I may be wrong -- and if I am, I don't think that would disprove my point. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 23:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And I'd like to see a cite for Tibetans being fired during the Olympics for being Tibetan. It sounds like the kind of news stories that spreads because a foreign government policy is dressed up 100 times and sensationalised into a zippy headline. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure -- as this Seattle Times article puts it, "The worst came last week, when police told Horne he had to get rid of two bartenders who are of Tibetan origin. Horne was told no Tibetans could work in Beijing during the Olympics; police apparently fear they might mount disturbances in sympathy with the widespread protests this spring against Chinese repression." Is that true? Well, could be that it isn't. More to the point, though, would that be in any way inconsistent with the Chinese government's treatment of Tibetans and its other actions during the Olympics? I think not. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 23:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I took this from the NYT: "students can spend 40k or more per year to be herded into an auditorium for a lecture from some sage only to be actually taught by graduate students is a scandal that no K-12 institution could ever get away with."
Is that possible? What institution charges 40k and do that?
--80.58.205.37 (talk) 17:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would expect that at most research universities, some portion of the teaching is done by graduate students. I'm note sure if the quote is trying to say anything more than that, or not. It's definitely phrased in an inflammatory manner—I don't remember border collies or cattle prods being involved. -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, a little fact checking helps so much. Googling a key phrase above took me to this blog. Notice that the sentence quoted above is not said to appear in the NYT article but in the comments to the NYT article. A little more searching took me to the article itself where the phrase doesn't occur.
In other words your quote is not from the NYT but from someone commenting on the NYT. So you can treat it with exactly the amount of attention it deserves. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does that really happen in the US? Here in NZ, postgraduate students may teach in labs/tutorials/etc and may mark papers etc but they don't tend to be involved in lectures except as assistants. At least in the sciences. Nil Einne (talk) 20:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I only recall a grad student giving 1 lecture when I was in school for engineering (2003-2008), and that was because they were filling in for a sick prof. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are two types of grad students: Masters students and PhD students. In many universities, the qualification to teach is a Masters degree. Therefore, it is not surprising to have a PhD student giving lectures. The student has met the requirements to teach, but is furthering his or her education. In my opinion, the complaint is from a student who failed to learn. Instead of accepting the blame, the student is attempting to blame the teacher. I get that often. Just this semester, a student turned in 4 out of 12 assignments and missed four full weeks of class. He said that it was my fault for not calling him and telling him that he needed to show up to class and do his homework. -- kainaw™20:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In NZ most lecturers have PhDs. This is I believe a requirement to be classified a lecturer in the university pay scale. I think I've heard of a few people without PhDs giving lectures in year 1 courses but they tend to be those who have a fair amount of experience teaching and are usually not postgraduate students and are I think usually primarily used when they couldn't find someone else. On the other hand a 400-600 student lecture is not uncommon in the first year so don't expect it to be very personally (although most lecturers would still be available for questions.) I agree with, it is amazing how many people will pay $40k (or whatever) and then not attend lectures etc, as well as how many students don't attend lectures etc and then are surprised when they fail. Nil Einne (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The lectures in most universities in the U.S. are done by PhD. WHen I was in school, we had one class taught by a non-PhD, and he had two Masters degrees, one of which was in education. Otherwise, the standard practice is for the PhD professors to give the lectures. Graduate Students often staff the "Tutoring Center" or hold "Review Sessions" where people can go and ask questions and get help with their homework. The quote in the OP is probably refering to the fact that the person who stated it learned more from the grad students assisting the professor than from the lecture itself. That is unsurprising, as the sort of personal contact one gets from a grad student who is working in the Tutoring Center is far more than what one gets sitting in a lecture hall with 200 other students. Also, that situation usually only exists with entry level classes. My largest non-100 level class was probably 20 students. So, in General Psychology you are likely to sit in a lecture hall with 200 other students. But if you are taking an advanced psychology class, something expected of junior and senior level psychology majors, you are more likely to be in a small class of 20 or so students. Also unsurprising. Lets face it, what you are going to learn in Psych-101 or whatever the freshman level class is, you could easily teach yourself from the textbook. The real learning happens in the advanced classes, where the professor's unique expertise in the subject comes to bear. The sad fact is, as alluded to above, many people in U.S. colleges never make a serious commitment to their education, and so take "easy" majors without academic rigor, so ALL of their classes are taught in 200 person lectures. --Jayron32.talk.contribs20:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the UK, it depends on the subject - most subjects these days are taught almost exclusively by people with PhDs (barring the occasional lecture where the regular lecturer can't make it due to illness or another engagement, and tutorials/supervisions/labs/etc. that are sometimes taken by postgraduate students). Some subjects do allow people without PhDs to teach, but they would be professional teachers, not students, usually with at least a Masters degree (and probably some kind of teaching qualification) - usually arts subjects more than science subjects, although my Uni's Computer Science dept includes quite a few lecturers without PhDs (it is, however, a rubbish department and will, as of next year, be merged into Engineering because it can't manage itself [they say it is because of low student numbers, but everyone knows the truth]). --Tango (talk) 23:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I once taught a university lecture before I had any formal university degree at all (I hadn't graduated with my BS degree but it was nearly complete and I'd been allowed to start taking MS classes). The year after I again taught a lecture, this time armed with a formal BS degree. In both cases the reason was that the professor was absent. Now, the curious thing is that both those years the lecture was on the same topic - I wonder if it's a coincidence that the professor always happened to have other engagements when the time came to teach floating point arithmetic... Haukur (talk) 15:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because it almost definitely happened multiple times and in multiple places long, long before we had any semblence of written records. Bonobos also practice oral sex as do other animals so it likely predates anything resembling modern humans. Nil Einne (talk) 20:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a general rule of thumb, any statement that starts "Humans are the only animal that..." is almost certainly wrong. Numerous such ideas have been assumed to be correct only for someone to find an animal that does it too. People used to think only humans used tools, but that was proved wrong. Then they assumed only humans made tools, but that was proved wrong too. People have assumed various things about humans and language that have been proven wrong. Humans really only differ from the rest of the animal kingdom by degree - we have more complex language skills than any animal (that we know of, at least), but there is no simple cutoff point which humans achieve and other animals don't. Similarly, we make more advanced tools, but there is no simple dividing line between simple tools that animals can make and advanced tools that only humans can make. Sexual activity for pleasure, rather than procreation, has long been assumed to be a purely human thing, but it isn't true. Bonobos, dolphins, etc. all do it. Oral sex is no different from other forms of sexual pleasure, many of which have been observed in the animal world - masturbation, homosexuality, prostitution... --Tango (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or maybe not. Tuxedo-clad entities would be more likely to be the clients of prostitutes than the prostitutes themselves. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you go specific enough then obviously you can find things. "Only humans engage in economics" would be false, though (there are plenty of examples of animals trading - penguins even trade sex for stones). --Tango (talk) 23:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think all sellers of subprime mortgage-backed securities deserve to be called human? I think the jury is out.
But, more seriously, I agree that efforts to find humans unique among species have to go towards the abstruse. - Jmabel | Talk04:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Follow up based on findings from Tango's response above
After reading the above responses I thought i'd have a look around at what the 'key' separators were between Humans and animals. I always thought one of our key separations was that we are able to 'consider' the thoughts of others - I can't think of the appropriate word for it, but essentially that we can put ourselves in someone else's shoes (sort of like empathy). Anyhoo i've no idea if it's true - just something I heard. Anyhoo onto my actual question. According to our article Human we are one of 9 animals that pass the Mirror test. I thought that was quite interesting and I wondered - are there examples of humans that do not pass the test? (i'd rule out blind/physically disabled) - more of question of those that lack the, presumably, mental function that makes us pass the test. ny156uk (talk) 22:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think empathy is, indeed, the word you are looking for (although empathy is usually used when referring to the emotions of other people rather than more general thoughts, so perhaps there is a better word). That is one of the things people have assumed only we can do and have been proven wrong. Empathy#With animals gives a very brief discussion, but I have seen more detailed examples (just can't find them now!). --Tango (talk) 23:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and as for people failing the mirror test, you just have to take a human that is sufficiently young or mentally disabled. You can't rule out the mentally disabled since you are talking about a mental disability - you could ask if it is possible to lack that ability and not any others, but it would be a little difficult to define. --Tango (talk) 23:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Sufficiently young," by the way, can be surprisingly old. Many of my (apparently not mentally-challenged) teenage students have a near-total inability to empathize with another's emotional state, although most can fake empathy to a degree. Aylad['ɑɪlæd]14:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did the tradition of long hair as a sign of royalty go pass the Merovingian kings of France? I just talking about the Franks not the other German kings. Did the Carolingian, Robertian or even the Capetian have long hair? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 03:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hard to say. I don't imagine we have very much contemporaneous art from that time period; we would have to go on written accounts, and most of what we have is of the "Such and such a king fought such and such a battle and captured such and such a fort" kinda stuff. Most of the chroniclers didn't necessarily note hairstyle... --Jayron32.talk.contribs04:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since the last Merovingian king symbolically had his long hair cut off, presumably it was not a tradition of the Carolingians. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you are right but I don't agree with you Adam. The last Merovingian had his long hair cut off because Pepin the Short overthrew him and had him enter a monastery. It would only symbolize that the Merovingian had lost the royal power (long hair). Earlier Merovingian kings had relatives who were their enemies tonsured and had the long hair themself. Also for Christians the early Frankish king seem unChristian since they grew the barbaric long hair and practiced polygamy. --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 05:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any firms that are listed on both the NYSE and NASDAQ markets currently or previously? Is it even possible to list on both markets? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.78.64.101 (talk) 04:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing in terms of regulations preventing a company from listing on both exchanges should it deem the benefits worth the increased cost of administration and reporting to two exchanges. Hewlett-Packard is listed on both. Googling "dual listing NYSE and NASDAQ" will probably find you other examples.
I read in an old Usenet post recently something along the lines of, "If you listen to the arguments for why the US should be the world's only superpower, they sound a lot like the arguments for why the Communist Party should be the only political party in China. Similarly, if you read China's arguments for a multipolar world, they sound a lot like the arguments for multiparty democracy." I was wondering, is there any truth to this? Is anybody able to point me to any pairs of arguments with these noticeable parallels mentioned in the quote? --superioridad(discusión)07:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
as you can see at the top of the page, the reference desk is not the place to start debates. If you're wondering what would make America unique among countries you could read our American exceptionalism article. But this is not the place to debate it. 79.122.45.107 (talk) 07:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the OP is asking for a book, article or other source that explores this parallel in more detail, not editors' opinions on it. It's a proper ref desk quesiton, and provided those answering don't get carried away with their own opinions, it wouldn't be a debate. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds plausible to me. Basically the countries in question adopt different views when talking about nations on the international stage than they do for their own domestic politics. There are many reasons that one could use to justify this; interactions within nations and between nations are apples and oranges. It is not hypocritical to think that different philosophies would govern them differently (and more than it would be say that one's company board meeting need not be patterned on national politics either). --98.217.14.211 (talk) 13:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ask the Usenet poster to cite some reliable sources for his claim - you've got his e-mail address if it was a Usenet post. Tempshill (talk) 15:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that you only get paid welfare in the US for six months after losing a job. I'm curious about what happens next? Starvation? Here in the UK the equivalent of welfare goes on for ever, although you do get more and more encouragement or pressure to get a job as time goes on. And in the US, what happens regarding people who are sufficiently disabled as to never be able to earn a living? 78.146.219.21 (talk) 09:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jobseeker's Allowance (the official name for UK unemployment benefit) doesn't go on for ever, it just doesn't have a fixed time limit. It goes on for as long as you are genuinely seeking a job. If you make a real effort to get a job - fill in application forms/send in you CV, go to interviews, accept a job if you are offered it, etc., then you can stay on the dole indefinitely, but it is unlikely to go on too long except in situations like the current one when there are very few jobs available. --Tango (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When Jobseeker's Allowance (a fancy name for unemployment benefit) ends you do automatically recieve another benefit that can go on for ever, unless I think you have too much wealth apart from your own home. Even then, you still get something. And of course, free healthcare all the time for everyone. 89.241.158.255 (talk) 19:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked through the article Social Security (United States) and some of its links, it seems that disabled people are given money, but I havnt been able to see what happens after the 26 weeks is up. The article also claims that not many American people are eligible for unemployment benefit. 78.144.240.92 (talk) 13:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not surprised you are confused; our article on this is pretty poor. One problem with writing a great article about the US program is that each of the 50 states runs a different unemployment benefits program. The summary: If you are fired from your job for cause, you don't get to collect unemployment benefits. You're on your own. If you have never had a job, same. If you are "laid off" — that is, made redundant because your position at the company has been eliminated — then you can start "collecting unemployment". Every time you receive a paycheck at any job, the employer has to pay some percentage of your wages to the state; this money is pooled and used to pay all the people who currently receive unemployment benefits. This link has a bunch of information for claimants from the state of Washington. To answer the original question, the sufficiently poor can apply for direct payments of money and food stamps. Hm, that article says about 10% of Americans get food stamps. Tempshill (talk) 15:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Welfare benefits in the US used to go on indefinitely. In the 1990s, they limited them to a few years, but there were many exceptions to the cut-off date and in practice, few people were entirely cut off when their limit was reached. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the abscence of any other information, I assume you just get food stamps unless the unemployment benefit period has been extended in your state. If I may say so, the amount of support for the poor and underprivelidged seems far below what we expect in Europe. 78.145.24.191 (talk) 12:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Women and the internet
(I don't know which is the right desk for this question; arguably it would fit better under computers or science, but I tend to think it's more of a sociology-type question which fits under humanities.)
Have there been any reliable studies comparing the relative levels of comfort, facility and expertise men and women have as end users of the internet, or even of computers in general? Many thanks. --Richardrjtalk email10:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can't just throw words around like 'society' and 'patriarchy' without providing some kind of coherent argument to back them up. Besides which, simply blaming 'society' for any behavioural differences there may be in men and women's approaches to the internet is quite staggeringly simplistic. --Richardrjtalk email18:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how. Please enlighten me to the other reasons for behavioral differences between most women and men on the net. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually don't bother, I know I'm fighting a losing battle here, it's just for some reason these all sweeping studies really bug me, trying to define me and whatnot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's not to say I think you're right and I'm wrong, I just don't see any point in arguing about it, plus ref desk guidelines about debates etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, probably. Try this google search (keywords: gender differences internet) and you'll pull up several academic papers in just the first few hits. Hopefully you can narrow down to the specific comfort question. Also, perhaps check the "internet use" section in our article Gender differences. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 13:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moved follow-up question to own section
Have I broken the law?
Since people haven't noticed I said this later on, I'm located in England.
In an earlier discussion, someone claimed that everyone has broken the law at some point, so there are no true non-criminals out there. I'll admit I've broken copyright law...I was too young to know better (well, that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it). But I've since stopped. I've never broken the speed limit, never gone somewhere I shouldn't by law. So if I hadn't downloaded those songs when I was younger, would I be legally innocent of everything? Can anyone suggest something that I've almost definitely broken? My experience of the Ref Desk would lead me to believe that this is a somewhat unusual question, but I see no reason it wouldn't be allowed... Vimescarrot (talk) 10:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's likely you've unthinkingly 'broken' some law or another. Crossing the road at a non-designated crossing area is against the law in some countries and i'm sure 99.999999% of the given (adult) population have done that at some point. Copyright law seems to be the easiest thing to break - be it making a copy of a cd for a friend, or downloading music/games/software illegally. Being in a (moving) car without wearing your seat-belt is illegal in many countries and I suspect millions have unwittingly done this out of forgotfulness. Similarly you may be an 'accessory' to a crime, or you may have known of criminal activity and failed to report it. These can often be against the law, at least theoretically even if they are difficult to prove in practice. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
England. Is crossing the road in non-designated areas against the law here? From memory I honestly can't actually remember a whole lot of designated areas around here. I've never been in a car without my belt on to my knowledge. Vimescarrot (talk) 10:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As long a you don't murder anyone or cause a load of damage to something, you aren't likely to get into trouble. Keep your head down, don't get caught and nobody cares —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.54.169 (talk) 10:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you ever ask for anything in pounds and ounces instead of kilos and litres? Ever photocopied a page from a book, or a newspaper? Ever told someone how bad someone else was? (slander)... There are plenty of low level offences that people commit without even thinking in the UK! But it's not against the law to cross the road wherever you fancy - unless you're on a motorway! --TammyMoet (talk) 12:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some more ideas, since a specific location isn't mentioned. Have you deleted the songs you downloaded? If not, you're still in breach of copyright merely by owning them. Many crimes like assault, nuisance, threatening behaviour, harassment, stalking, and breach of the peace have very vague definitions so that theoretically you could be prosecuted e.g. for shouting at a shop employee or customer service worker, playfully punching someone, moving in a threatening way (could all be assault), shouting in the street (particularly in the evening), swearing in public[4], wearing a t-shirt or badge with an offensive message[5], holding a protest sign or sending emails protesting about animal testing[6], taking part in a political protest or demonstration, or many other things. Public drunkenness is also illegal in some jurisdictions (it's illegal to buy alcohol when drunk in some places, e.g. Australia - see Legal drinking age), so if you ever have more than one or 2 drinks, you could have violated some law. Of course, if you conduct yourself with decorum at all times, never raise your voice, never adopt an aggressive stance, you may be ok. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 12:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In almost evey state in the United States, you are required to pay "consumer use tax" on any item that you purchase from a merchant in another state (e.g., vis the internet, phone order, or mail-order) if the seller does not apply your state's sales tax. Look up "use tax" on your state's web site to verify this. Almost nobody in the entire country complies with this law. in Virginia, the rate is 5%,and I pay about $1000/year -Arch dude (talk) 12:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Woo...Let's see. Never photocopied anything, never asked for anything in any weight measurement. I no longer own the downloaded content. I've never shouted, punched, moved threateningly, or worn offensive clothes or badges, or protested against anything. I don't drink. I don't live in the US so I'm not sure that last one applies to me. Vimescarrot (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I shouted across the warehouse I work in once rather than sprint towards the person whose attention I needed. Does that count? Other than that, I haven't raised my voice for many years. Vimescarrot (talk) 12:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never idly murdered anyone or unthinkingly robbed a store? Nah but seriously given the sheer volume of laws in the UK Law of the United Kingdom - or try perusing statutelaw.gov.uk it'd be amazing if you've not infringed one of them. Tax-law would be something you've potentially broken unwittingly. Things such as gifts are a tough law - a value of more than £250 is potentially liable to inheritance tax. I reckon your easiest place to find a broken law is in copyright though - intellectual property has huge numbers of rules about 'sharing' that are well beyond what (most) would consider reasonable. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By some interpretations, just loading a webpage that contains a copyright violation is itself a copyright violation. --Tango (talk) 15:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've just realised that I've never picked up a coin from the ground as a tax-paying adult (since I was 16). I don't get out much. But to be fair, had I seen one, I would have picked it up. Vimescarrot (talk) 16:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Returning to copyrights, it's very hard to not break the law. Being in one room with someone who listens to downloaded music, or checking an e-mail on a friend's computer makes you the user of copyrighted material, and accomplice if you don't call the police on them. Playing your own songs on your own guitar for yourself seems to become crime as well, as I already heard of cases where a band was playing his own songs without asking for any payment: they should have copyrighted it, payed the price for it, so that the money can then flow to those on the top of the billboard. (They redistribute the money based on the number of listeners, so those who's one/time hits play on every radio station ten times a day, will get the most of it). And if one of Bill Gates's early ideas would have come in practice (still don't know if it's just an urban legend, it seems plausible to me) it would be illegal to write a computer program for yourself without a license. So if you are in the way and they want to fine you, they can. The only thing I think that stops them, that is more waste to hunt down those tax evasionists who find a coin or do nut plug in their ears when hearing a possibly pirated piece of music, than what could be won, so the law enforcement typically concentrates on more serious
You say you are in England. Have you ever taken a photograph of a police officer? That has recently become illegal -- lots of quite innocuous things may fall foul of the Serious Organised Crime Act, such as reading out a list of war dead in front of the Cenotaph. So you see that what is criminal can change over time as well as jurisdiction. The sexcrime in George Orwell's 1984 was just a man and a woman in non-adulterous love. BrainyBabe (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ever advocated abolition of the monarchy? (According to Charles Stross in a Usenet post some years ago, that was made a capital crime in 1848, non-capital some little while later when the panic subsided; still on the books, though no one has ever been prosecuted.) Ever said anything that could be construed as disapproval of (e.g.) homosexuality or Islam? —Tamfang (talk) 04:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly ... the 1940 Smith Act in the US made it a federal crime to "knowingly or willfully advocate, abet, advise or teach the duty, necessity, desirability or propriety of overthrowing the Government of the United States or of any State by force or violence". I heard that on an early Saturday Night Live show, one of the monologuists mentioned this, and then said "I hereby advocate the overthrow of the government of the United States by force." This was not a particularly brave test of the law, as it took place several decades after the height of McCarthyism. Tempshill (talk) 20:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bridge types
I've been somewhat confused by the various types of concrete bridges. I can understand arch bridges, but what exactly is a deck arch bridge? The arch bridge article mentions a few types of deck arch bridges, but it doesn't spell out exactly what a deck arch bridge is, and I'm quite confused about Commons:Category:Concrete deck arch bridges in the United States. If you look at its parent Commons:Category:Concrete arch bridges in the United States, you'll see just three pictures (all of which are mine, because I didn't know if I could classify them further), while there are dozens in the deck arch bridges category, many of which (to me) don't seem to fit the definitions of "suspended deck arch bridge" or "supported deck arch bridge" given at arch bridge. Nyttend (talk) 12:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a start to your question, the main load- and traffic-bearing element of a bridge that is not an arch is generally referred to as the deck. This term is used to varying degrees by particular civil and other engineering and highway maintenance disciplines. Deck arch bridge is another way of saying that, although the "arch" is part of the construction, it is not the construction, or the main load-bearing element. It is the actual concrete deck which is carrying the traffic, but the deck and the arch work in conjuction as the structure. A deck arch bridge comprises both the suspended and supported types, I would assume, though there may be other design possibilities which don't fit very well into either category. It is possible, for example, for an arch to be present but for it not to be a part of a working bridge. Here in the UK, some smaller arches that are understrength can be over-slabbed with concrete. No one ever sees the slab on top of the arch, because it is largely hidden by fill, but it is, technically, "taking over" the loading from the still-present arch. I'm sure others will be able to explain or help more fully! Maedin\talk12:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and a concrete arch is different from a deck arch bridge. With a concrete arch, the structure is still more or less operating as an arch, and as a single construction type. It still disperses loading by means of fill over the top of the arch. Looking at the three bridges you say you placed in that category, I would suggest that the Hayden arch is a supported deck arch bridge, the Melan Arch is just a concrete arch, and the Twin Bridge, I don't know, as the elevation isn't shown. Maedin\talk12:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If this hasn't answered your question, by the way, it is probably more suited to the science desk than humanities. Maedin\talk14:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stafford Hospital scandal, UK
Where is the article about this? I cannot even find an article about Stafford Hospital. According to this url, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/03/18/up-to-1-200-may-have-died-over-shocking-patient-care-at-stafford-hospital-115875-21206422/ up to 1200 people died in shocking circumstances. Surely this is noteworthy. I will not write the article as I know little about it. As an original-research aside, when I was involved with another public organisation nearby in the Midlands that was also (literally) unbelivebly badly run, I found that even people in responsible positions were apathetic, apparantly believing that things would run themselves. It was as if they had not discovered the necessity for feedback, and their management model was that of a strong-willed person forcing or frightening subordinates into lip-service or silence (like omerta), like hydraulic pressure radiating from the centre, with no upward communication. 78.144.240.92 (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The only mention I can find in WP is here in the last line of the second paragraph. If what the Mirror has charged is true (and I know nothing about the reliability of it as a source) then there have to be other stories about, and in the fullness of time, someone will start an article. See also the BBC's recent report on the matter and on reports on the matter. // BL \\ (talk) 13:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Sorry, writing at same time as you, Bielle.) There is a reference to the report in the Stafford article. If you don't write a new article yourself, 78.144.240.9, you can list your request at Requested articles. If you do decide to write something yourself, the Reference Desk can help you find good sources if you get stuck. For example, a good source would be the NHS report itself, available here [7], plus newspaper reports such as the one you linked to and the Prime Minister's apology that show it became a major scandal. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strange fertility pattern of Anna of Bohemia and Hungary
At seventeen Anna of Bohemia and Hungary married an eighteen year old. They had no children for five years, but thereafter she was extremely fertile. Has anyone at the time or since pointed out that this is rather odd, or am I the first person to suspect that someone other than her husband was fathering her children? Based on his article, her husband Ferdinand had no mistresses or illegitimate children. Perhaps he was just away a lot early in their marriage, or perhaps she was reluctant to grant him conjugal rights, but later discovered that she loved babies. Perhaps she started to ovulate at an exceptionally late age. Perhaps she had some miscarriages that aren't mentioned in the articles. Whatever the truth, I think the babyless era at the beginning of her marriage requires an explanation. Mowsbury (talk) 14:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This request would best be answered on the talk page of the article, unless you are volunteering to do the research yourself. There may, of course, be no verifiable explanation, in which case, speculation is inappropriate. There are lots of marriages that are childless for any number of years, and then fruitful thereafter, and for a host of different reasons. // BL \\ (talk) 14:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please be very wary of adding WP:OR into the article. Bielle's suggestion of posting at the article talk is a good one - a RS may have discussed this issue (sorry for the pun) in the past. --Dweller (talk) 14:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I posted the question on the talk page first, but she's a rather obscure figure in the English-speaking world so it isn't likely that many people will read it. What I was hoping is that someone who has some knowledge of what the secondary sources (perhaps in German, Czech, or Hungarian, which I can't read myself) say about the issue would answer my question. Please pardon me for trying to use the reference desk as a reference desk. I thought that questions about obscure issues are what this page is for, but it seems I was mistaken. Mowsbury (talk) 15:45, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whoah! I've not noticed anyone slap you down for posting here - all you've had is helpful suggestions. And if you're prepared to wait, without getting angry, you may get more. --Dweller (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's also a fairly well-known medical phenomenon called "adolescent infertility", "adolescent sterility" etc., referring to when teen girls seem to be sexually developed by most criteria, but they don't get pregnant. (Having difficulty figuring out whether there's anything in Wikipedia on this.) AnonMoos (talk) 15:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake - menarche is the better article, with more detail. It says "In most girls, menarche does not signal that ovulation has occurred. In postmenarchal girls, about 80% of the cycles were anovulatory in the first year after menarche, 50% in the third and 10% in the sixth year" and this statement is referenced. WikiJedits (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not a complete answer to your question, but the German wikipedia points out that Ferdinand and Anna were inseparable, always travelling together. I would say that that makes it rather unlikely that she had fifteen children with someone other than her husband... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They married in 1521 and the children we know of are born in and after 1526, when Ferdinand became king of Bohemia and Hungary on the death of his brother-in-law Lajos II. Perhaps there was a change in their living situation at the time he became king; perhaps children born before he assumed the throne were not meticulously recorded, and those afterwards were. And perhaps five years just elapsed before they had children. - Nunh-huh18:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fertility often increases after conceiving the first child. Ask women you know - most will be able to tell you of all the friends and relations who discovered that (often by mistake). I could tell you of several I know who struggled to conceive the first, and got caught out afterwards. Gwinva (talk) 01:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it took them 5 years to find out how to have sex properly? This is not a facetious suggestion: about ten years ago I heard a talk given by a fertility councellor, who said that something like a quarter of cases of apparent infertility she dealt with in the USA were due to the couple literally not knowing how to perform sexual intercourse correctly; insertion of the penis merely between the thighs, into the navel, or in one case into the urethra (ouch!) were some of the variants. If this is true for 20th/21st-century America, it must be a possible consideration for 16th-century Europe. I'd think, however, that if the actual reason isn't already known it's unlikely to be discoverable. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 04:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
US foodstamps
Are there restrictions on what people can buy with foodstamps so that they get basic nutrition requirements? Can someone take $50 of foodstamps and buy 100 snickers bars? Or 5 cases of Pepsi? Or can they only be used on vegetables and meat and milk and stuff other then junk food? What about beer? 65.121.141.34 (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The standard food stamps (now called SNAP) have few restrictions. Basically they're good for any groceries. There are other programs like WIC, that are much more specific about the types of foods, their nutritional value, and their price. APL (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your specific question, alcohol can't be purchased on food-stamps. I don't know if snickers bars can be counted as a grocery. Check the FAQ here. APL (talk) 16:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ECx2) According to Food stamps "The eligibility for purchase with food stamps of all items intended for human consumption except alcoholic beverages and imported foods (the House version would have prohibited the purchase of soft drinks, luxury foods, and luxury frozen foods) and "These stamps could be used to purchase any prepackaged edible foods regardless of nutritional value (for example soft drinks and confectionery could be purchased on food stamps). In the late 1990s, the food stamp program was revamped and actual stamps were phased out in favor of a specialized debit card system known as Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) provided by private contractors. Many states merged the use of the EBT card for public assistance welfare programs as well. The successful replacement over time of all paper food stamps by EBT cards enabled Congress to rename the Food Stamp Program to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, as of October 2008, and update all references in federal law from "stamp" or "coupon" to "card" or "EBT". This was effectuated by H.R. 2419, The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (a/k/a "2008 Farm Bill") passed into law as Public Law No: 110-234, over President Bush's veto". From what I can tell this hasn't changed although there is nutritional education as part of the plan Nil Einne (talk) 17:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I may totally wrong, but it was my understanding that SNAP only covered ingredients, and not pre-packaged materials. You can buy macaroni, cheese, salt, etc., but you can't use SNAP to buy a package of macaroni and cheese. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 00:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
From the FAQ at the SNAP link above:
Households CAN use SNAP benefits to buy:
Foods for the household to eat, such as:
breads and cereals
fruits and vegetables
meats, fish and poultry; and
dairy products
Seeds and plants which produce food for the household to eat.
Households CANNOT use SNAP benefits to buy:
Beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes or tobacco
Any nonfood items, such as:
pet foods;
soaps, paper products; and
household supplies.
Vitamins and medicines.
Food that will be eaten in the store.
Hot foods
In some areas, restaurants can be authorized to accept SNAP benefits from qualified homeless, elderly, or disabled people in exchange for low-cost meals. SNAP benefits cannot be exchanged for cash.
So it would appear that beer is definatly out, candy is probably out. Chips, Pepsi, etc maybe. It seems there are a lot of things sold in the store that don't fit any of the categories. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chips and Pepsi are "food for the household to eat", so they qualify - the agency just didn't want to list junk food in the list as if it were a suggestion. Tempshill (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
John Hersey's Books
I just read your article on John Hersey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hersey) and looked at his list of books at the end of the article. I know he wrote another book -"Under the Eye of the Storm," but I do not know the date it was printed other than in the 1960s, I think. Perhaps someone can verify this and update the book list in this article.Ronkriel (talk) 16:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.
Ron Kriel
Feel free to click "edit this page" at the top of that article, and add it yourself. If you're uncomfortable adding this stuff yourself, the discussion page for the article (Talk:John Hersey) is probably the best place to mention this, rather than the Reference Desk. Tempshill (talk) 17:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added a worldcat ID external link to the page. You can follow that link to a list of hiw book available in libraries and thense to the listing for this particualr book. Published in 1967. -Arch dude (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great x ? uncle
A former president was my great-great-grandmother's uncle. What is he, then, to me? I'm trying to figure this out... Thanks, guys! hmwithτ17:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there a grand in there instead of another great? From my understanding, they mean the same thing (one generation up each). hmwithτ18:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because language isn't mathematics, and language isn't logic. Great-uncle and grand-uncle are synonyms; you can use either term, and people tend to use the one they're used to. - Nunh-huh18:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned it because I wasn't sure that you knew that using both is perfectly standard, with grand used only in the last instance. It's "great-great-grand uncle" or "great-great-great uncle", but it isn't "grand-grand-grand uncle". - Nunh-huh18:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is, really :). In the dictionary I use most (Merriam-Webster's Collegiate) the main definition is for granduncle ("an uncle of one's father or mother") while the definition for "great-uncle" simply refers you to "granduncle". "Granduncle" is apparently the older term, though not by much (the date for "granduncle" is "15th century" (i.e., the 1400s), while that for "great-uncle" is 1547). I'd be very surprised if there were dictionaries in which "granduncle" doesn't appear. - Nunh-huh20:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it's usually hyphenated "grand-uncle", isn't it? Otherwise, the temptation is to perceive it, and pronounce it, as gran-DUNCLE. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've now looked it up in the OED, it mentions both (both hyphenated, the unhyphenated forms don't appear, although the old quotations sometimes write them as two words). Great-uncle dating back to 1438 and grand-uncle from 1475. Great-uncle is the main definition. You learn something every day! --Tango (talk) 12:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I missed all the exciting part! I use grand-uncle or granduncle only in conjunction with one or more additional "greats." Because all the greats together sound funny to me. And you would most frequently be using it with only one other "great." Catrionak (talk) 21:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Renaissance handwriting
I've been for some time interested in the beautiful handwriting of the past ages, mostly renaissance or at least classicist. Does anyone know about some book, or other resource (preferably online and free) where one could learn it? I've searched a lot, but by just looking at images containing that kind of handwriting I could not get very far. Is there a guide, or are there exercises for it? I remember as a kid, we had to exercise by drawing small angled dashes or other simple shapes before actually drawing letters. --131.188.3.21 (talk) 19:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edward Johnston's Writing & Illuminating & Lettering is a classic of the subject, with information about everything from preparing your own pens to making strokes in the correct order to produce letters in different styles to making gilded initials. Judging by Amazon, it's out of print, drat it; but used copies are fairly easy to come by, and many libraries have it. Deor (talk) 21:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For online material, do a Google search for calligraphy +tutorial or calligraphy +lessons. You'll find a bunch of stuff like this and this, which should be quite adequate to get you started. Deor (talk) 21:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was called "copperplate" because the copybooks were printed from copperplates. Liek talking about a "textbook performance". Gwinva (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But wouldn't every style have been taught from copybooks printed from copperplates? Why is only this one style called "copperplate"? Rmhermen (talk) 15:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've recently been introduced to the "monetary reform act" (link and it sounds a lot like a conspiracy theory to me. Though I'm an undergrad in economics, apparently I can't find a small, simple reason why this is clear nonsense. Anyone able to do that? I'm not looking for a debate, so perhaps the following question is simpler: does the link above mean that all commercial lending is outlawed? 75.83.167.54 (talk) 02:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a world government conspiracy theory, which is probably a good indicator of how much credibility it warrants. The basic assumptions don't stand up to scrutiny and the policy recommendations are nonsense:
Increasing bank reserves to 100% of deposits, which would eliminate any reason for banks taking in deposits in the first place.
Recalling all dollars and reissuing a currency sufficient to pay off the national debt and replace all dollars would be massively disruptive, and probably hugely deflationary.
To be pedantic, requiring bank reserves to be at 100% of deposits wouldn't eliminate any reason for banks to take in deposits. They could take in deposits because it's safer for the depositor than putting money into the mattress (whether because of armed guards or because of the FDIC), and then the depositors would pay for this privilege, as they did in the Middle Ages. Does not sound like a blast. Tempshill (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UK hereditary peers
Hi, just a quick question about hereditary peers in the UK House of Lords. When they die does their right to sit in the lords die too, or is their seat passed on to their successor? I would be stunned if the later was the case, but i can't find a source to say otherwise, so just wanted to check. Thanks. 80.47.221.55 (talk) 03:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See House of Lords Act 1999 and Reform of the House of Lords, and the slightly related Constitutional Reform Act 2005. For the past 20 years or so, Parliament has been disenfranchising the Hereditary Lords. In the 1999 act, a cap of 92 hereditary peers was set, and it was formally declared that no one could be a member of Lords merely for being a hereditary peer. The 92 are elected by the hereditary peers as a group. There has been a movement afoot to remove those 92 from office as well. --Jayron32.talk.contribs05:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In nigeria (for example) Apportionment is a topic which has caused much controversy and created many ingenious ideas, but very little empirical research has been undertaken in the field to discover how the problem is realy tackled and whether it has been solved satisfactorily.
Some businesses would find it useful for control, others would not. I'm not sure what "problem" you're referring to. I'm also unsure why apportionment would necessarily have a role in valuing assets; it might for a more complex asset, I suppose. --Dweller (talk) 12:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Paintings in the White House
Improving French WP articles on the White House, I would like to have some informations about the few paintings below. I know that the paintings hung in the rooms of the White House change sometimes with presidential administrations or room renovations, coming from WH collection and also for the Oval Office from museums or private collections. Barack Obama seems to have change few of ones (already changed when he arrived for his first day and no trace on the wall of the former paintings !)
Oval Office : Name of this 3 paintings and the painters ? The central Washington portrait is still there for a long time. But the both side ones not seems to have been there during the Bush administration, aren't they ? I do not find 2008 Ovale Office north wall photos to confirm it but they were not there in 2007. I found the left painting during George H. W. Bush administration (File:Bush senior und Hans-Dietrich Genscher.jpg).
Oval Office : A new one, showing the torch of the Statue of Liberty, hung by Barack Obama. Is that a painting or a photograph ? What is name ?
Roosevelt Room: Names of this landscape painting and of the painter, on the south wall ? FDR portrait : I knew the former tradition between Republicans and Democratics to switch the two Roosevelt paintings (Teddy and FDR). But it seems that George W. Bush administration removed FRD portrait for a room renovation and never put it again. Now we can see FDR portrait again on the south wall on the 2009 photos. Hung up again by Obama administration ?
Cabinet Room : On the left, is it a Washington portrait ? How many portraits of Washington in the White House ? On the right, is it the official portrait of Enseinhower ? I believed that all the 20th century presidents official portraits were in the Cross Hall, the Entrance Hall and the Grand Staircase...
Rockwell's Statue of Liberty also hung in Clinton's Oval Office. Apparently it was "a gift of filmmaker Steven Spielberg who wrote that Rockwell 'painted the American dream... better than anyone.'" [8] ---Sluzzelintalk15:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That portrait of Washington in the Cabinet Room is an earlier Peale painting, George Washington (at Dorchester Heights), as seen here. We don't seem to have a copy of it on Commons. —KevinMyers15:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this quick and precise answers, I'm improving the WP.fr articles with it (my english is too bad for WP.en ones). TCY (talk) 18:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The box near the phone on the desk in the Oval OfficeThe same box on the table of the Cabinet Room
What is the small wooden box with the ominous red button in front of the president in the Cabinet Room photo? Shouldn't they have a Molly-Guard over that thing? :) --Sean15:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
looks more like a red-light than a button to me. Perhaps an indicator to let the President know something is happening or X is waiting (or time has run out). All speculation though, sorry. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is almost certainly an intercom. There is a speaker/microphone with a button next to it to press when you want to talk. --Tango (talk) 19:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently the President and VP go out for fast food: www.associatedcontent.com/article/1719982/obama_and_biden_go_to_rays_hell_burger.html (that website appears to be spam filtered). Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it interesting that the pizza is on a silver plate, in the box. That's some strange hybrid between 'high class' and 'down to earth'. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Masters thesis or master's thesis?
Hello Humanities desk. I was wondering, when you complete a Master of Science degree or whatever, is your thesis a Master's thesis or a Masters Thesis? I thought the former, but the dissertation article seems to think the latter. TastyCakes (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the latter too. It's a thesis that is part of a "Masters" degree, not a thesis that belongs to a "Master" (one doesn't generally refer to the holder of a Masters as a "Master", although I think strictly speaking it would be correct to). --Tango (talk) 17:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm but they don't call him a "Masters" either. Are you sure it's a "Masters degree"? I always though it was master's for that too, since the degree is proclaiming them a Master of whatever subject and it was their degree. TastyCakes (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... Master's degree seems to agree with you. Let's ask google: "master's thesis" gets 1,230,000 ghits, "masters thesis" gets 497,000 (both with quotes). Perhaps you are right and our dissertation article is wrong... I will make the Language desk aware of this question, they may know more than I do. --Tango (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well as the degree is Master of Arts (MA), Master of Science(MSc), Master of Philosophy (MPhil) etc. I would expect the thesis to reflect this and be a Master's thesis. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not to try to split the discussion, but the Language Desk is known to be frequented by pedants who will likely give you 99 reasons why one version is better, and 100 reasons why it is not... --Jayron32.talk.contribs01:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replies from the language desk:
Among those who regard apostrophes and their placement as important, I'm sure that "master's thesis" would be strongly favoured. Among those who don't think they are important one can expect to find "masters thesis". --ColinFine (talk) 23:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Searching Google in yale.edu and harvard.edu "master's thesis" seems more common than "masters thesis" (442 vs 283 hits in Yale but 2160 vs 585 in Harvard). The University of Oxford website in the UK has slightly more hits without the apostrophe, while for Cambridge the figures are almost the same. So it probably doesn't matter in general (even if "master's" makes more sense to me), although if you're at a university/college you could check which style is more common there. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 12:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can Michael Savage really sue the British government for defamation, ie: is this legally possible and how do you sue a country? Thanks for info., --AlexSuricata (talk) 18:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However, see Sovereign immunity#United Kingdom. From that article it looks like he could sue the UK in a UK court for a tort (which I assume libel is, under UK law). And ironically a libel or slander suit is far easier to win in the UK than in the US. Tempshill (talk) 18:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Savage faces many problems in bringing such a case, not least of which is the fact that virtually no-one in this country had ever heard of him before yesterday. To be defamatory, the list would have to lower the opinion of him in the minds of right thinking members of society. That is hard to do when no-one has heard of you. It is especially difficult when most Britons have a very low opinion of so-called ‘shock jocks’ like Savage and Howard Stern anyway."Can the US shock jock REALLY sue Jacqui Smith for libel? (Daily Mail)Nanonic (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding (I am not a laywer) is that in British law, for a thing to be meaningfully defamatory, it must be both false and damaging, and also published (for libel) or said in public (for slander). 'Published' and 'said in public' have specific legal meanings here, of course. I am not sure that the British government has said anything false about Mr Savage; and as mentioned above, it's hard to see how it's meaningfully damaging when most of us haven't heard of him. I'm not sure what court he would have standing in in order to bring such a claim, either. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issue of whether or not he has standing (if it is an issue at all) is the same as the issue of whether or not he has a reputation to have been damaged - if you have a reputation you have standing to defend that reputation. Regardless, I think everything that has been said about him is either true or "fair comment" (essentially, a reasonable opinion to hold, rather than a statement of fact). --Tango (talk) 20:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion is that it's all slightly irrelevant. Members of parliament have absolute privilege against all defamation cases brought against them for statements made in the House of Commons.--92.236.26.38 (talk) 22:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point, 92, but a government exists not just in the legislature (in fact, in some respects, they hardly exist in the legislature at all). It's also the executive branch, which operates away from the parliament and in the public arena, and that's where most of the work of government is done. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Heritage Month
I know that May is the Asian heritage Month. So, Is there a month where Arabs celebrate their heritage, Turks celebrate their heritage, African celebrate their heritage, Latin American heritage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.208.18.70 (talk) 19:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To my knowledge, only African History Month has been officially adopted by the Federal government of the United States. However, there are many (MANY) heritage months, such as Asian Pacific Islander heritage month in April, Jewish Heritage Month in January, Gay/Lesbian heritage month in June, and Latino heritage month in May. Pick a group and I'm sure they've declared some month as their heritage month. -- kainaw™19:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi kainaw, poster 67.208.18.70 is in Canada, I believe. 67.208.18.70, go here for the full list of all other heritage months/weeks/days officially sponsored by the government of Canada. It includes Black History month in February as well as events celebrating Aboriginal, Francophone and Acadian cultures. People with Arab, Turkish and Latin American heritage make up a very small proportion of Canadians (Latin American being the biggest of those groups, see [10]). For holidays that each group might celebrate on its own after coming to Canada, List of holidays by country might help. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 13:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
English libel law
It is often said that libel law in England and Wales is much stricter than other countries, particularly the US. Could someone explain how that is so? The only difference I've been able to find is that in England and Wales it can be libel to mention a spent conviction, even if what you say is true, but that is a very specific issue and the claims seem to be that English libel law is stricter generally. --Tango (talk) 21:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Read Private Eye regularly for a great deal of comment on this! The issues seem to be twofold: firstly in the US there is a constitutional freedom of the press which arguably veers libel law in favour of freedom of speech and against the individuals written about. Most crucially, there is the burden of proof. In England, a journalist must prove his story to be true in order to defend a libel action. In other jurisdictions the onus is on a plaintiff to make a prima facie case of falsehood. Note that this is not my field, and those are only the broad strokes. AndyJones (talk) 21:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I still think it's necessary for the prosecution in a libel case in the UK to show it's not true, because it's an inherent part of libel that it must be untrue. Evidence is really needed when the procecution could lie - like in allegations of homosexuality, in which case the people making the allegations couldn't be prosecuted if they had evidence for this view. Burden of proof may well be different though. - Jarry1250(t, c)06:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the UK it is generally assumed to be false unless the person saying it can prove it is true. This is a reversal of the usual burden of proof, since the burden is on the defendant (once the plaintiff has proven that it was published and, if it were false, it would be defamatory). --Tango (talk) 13:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actual malice and New York Times v. Sullivan have some more background on AndyJones's former point. The best short guide for the non-lawyer on libel remains the chapter on libel in the AP Style Guide (not online, AFAIK) that is written for an audience of journalists. It's a practical guide on how to write a newspaper article and not get yourself sued (in the US). Tempshill (talk) 00:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In civil cases of all kinds the party who must prove their case is at a disadvantage. In modern English (as well as Australian) law, once it is proven that a statement has a defamatory meaning and it was made by the defendant a case is proved. The defendant must then prove that one of the defences applies to them. Truth (in English Law) is a defense to defamation and it is up to the defendant to prove that the statement is true. In US law the plaintiff must prove that the statement was in fact un-true. Proving the truth (even on the balance of probabilities, as is the standard of proof in civil cases) is still a considerable burden. Add in the First-Amendment issues and you have a considerably greater protection of free speach (and therefore a considerably more difficult time for plaintiffs) in the US —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.102.223.231 (talk) 01:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So US libel law expects people to prove a negative? Seeing as that is pretty much impossible in many cases, I guess libel is essentially legal in the US - that's quite a big difference in the strictness of the law! Thank you. --Tango (talk) 13:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not quite that bad. In civil cases (of which libel is) the standard of proof is merely "on the balance of probabilities.' So to prove something, one must merely prove that it is more likely than not. This is in stark contrast to the burden of proof in criminal cases which is "beyond (all) reasonable doubt".60.242.240.24 (talk) 05:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True. I guess with a civil burden it doesn't really matter who the burden is on - there is no default position (no real presumption of innocence). --Tango (talk) 13:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A bank with triple purposes
Hello. Would it be legal for a company to offer insurance services, bank, and investment brokerage all rolled into one? What would it be, and if finance was its core, would it still be called a bank "that offers insurance services" as well? Thanks. --Under22Entreprenuer (talk) 22:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Barclays bank offers Insurance products, banking services and invesment brokerage. Does it matter whether or not a segment of their product-suite is 'white label'? (I.e. they sell it under their brand but it is administered by another firm). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a perfectly normal thing for Canadian banks to do. (But really, they are all giant conglomerations these days, which happen to have bank, investment, and insurance brands.) Adam Bishop (talk) 12:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The answer depends on the jurisdiction whose law applies, and also by what you mean by "all rolled into one." In the United States, since the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, banks have been allowed to sell insurance, directly or through an affiliate. They are also allowed to be affiliated with brokerage firms, although they face some restrictions in providing brokerage services themselves. However, there are restrictions on banks' ability to combine insurance and banking services into a single packaged product, because of fears that banks would force their borrowers to buy insurance from them. John M Baker (talk) 17:34, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
May 7
Elected official from a disenfranchised group
Has an individual who could not vote in a particular election ever been elected in that same election? Has a woman ever been elected by an all-male electorate, for instance? I am specifically not interested in someone who was disenfranchised as the result of a criminal conviction. LANTZYTALK03:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To search for examples I used the terms "active suffrage" and "passive suffrage". I found one example: In May 1931, the Second Spanish Republic authorized "women who met certain qualifications [...] to stand for office, along with priests and government employees, despite the fact that Spanish women did not yet have the national vote." Later, in December 1931, the new constitution "did enfranchise all women and men over the age of twenty-three." (Karen M. Offen, European Feminisms, 1700-1950: A Political History, p. 324, Stanford University Press, 2000, ISBN 0804734208) Also mentioned in the article on universal suffrage which states that three women were elected without active suffrage. ---Sluzzelintalk10:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did the USSR ever use the term "New Soviet man"? I googled extensively, and so far I have not found one positive use of the term from the Soviets themselves, only use by westerners. --Gary123 (talk) 04:15, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
From the article New Soviet man it does seem that there are some contemporary Soviet sources (Nikolay Ustryalov, From NEP to Soviet Socialism (1934) (text online) Template:Ru icon and Bernard Bykhovsky, The New Man in the Making (Moscow: Novosti Press Agency Publishing House)). However it requires either knowledge of Russian or possession of that other book to verify. Personally I had never heard of the term before, I had however heard about Homo Sovieticus that was created by opponents of the regime. --Saddhiyama (talk) 12:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Russian text that Saddhiyama linked to does mention "новый советский человек", a new Sovet man:
"Many already speak of a «new man» in the USSR. Yes, the new Soviet man, regardless of his ethnic roots, is the offspring of a great historic upheaval, the child of a new era."
I found an article[11] says many cannot be returned to their home countries because they may be tortured or killed. Some European countries have indicated that they're willing to accept some released prisoners (Germany is considering whether to add the Uighur prisoners to its existing Uighur community), but others may be settled in the USA. Whether they're going to live across the street from Mac Davis is impossible to answer without knowing his full address. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, majority of the area east of the Appalachians was already under effective European colonial rule before the United States came into existence. AnonMoos (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The doctrine didn't exist under that particular name until 1839, and was used as often against Mexico and Britain as against Indians... AnonMoos (talk)
The land was seen as a wild thing that needed to be tamed. Natives were grouped together with the land and seen in the same way. That is at least part of the underlying philosophy. The Cherokees being forced to leave Georgia in the Trail of Tears was just plain greed. People wanted the land because it was good land, so they took it. Wrad (talk) 20:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also remember that most of the Native Americans (by any counting method) had died off leaving the land much emptier than before European arrival. Some bands died off completely, others were reduced to levels where the couldn't maintain the previous political balances between tribes. Tribes migrated every which way, came into new conflicts or merged with other tribes. Selling off pieces of land they couldn't utilize, couldn't defend (or which actually belonged to an enemy tribe) could be a good economic policy. Of course, the Americans paid little attention to the political structure of the bands and were willing to sign a treaty with any Indian who claimed to have authority - and the Americans would then enforce compliance over the wishes of the actual band leaders. Rmhermen (talk) 23:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very broad question with many answers. The United States is not a person and does not have feelings of justification. It would be more useful to look at specific cases and the specific people involved and ask why they felt justified in their actions. The number of people involved, the great span of time covered by the process, and the myriad disparate reasons why Native American land became US owned make the OP's broad question impossible to answer in a simple and accurately comprehensive way. Pfly (talk) 09:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like Pfly's answer a lot. If you look honestly at every major civilization, expansion and survival are key attributes. Cultures that don't share these features disappear quickly. Perhaps humans are just another animal. Shadowjams (talk) 09:18, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reasons For Opposing Slavery In The North?
Was the northern section of the United States against slavery simply for moral reasons, or did they want to oppress the economic advancements made in the South during the mid-1800s that resulted from plantations and slavery? Gothrokkprincess (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Before about 1818, the predominant reason for opposing slavery was moral grounds, and many in both north and south freely admitted that slavery was morally reprehensible, and should be ideally be gotten rid of. However, beginning about 1818, many in the north began to fear that slavery was dynamic and expanding, and that southerners wanted to devote large sections of the mid-west and Great plains to slave societies, to the detriment of free labor -- while many in the south began to claim that slavery was not reprehensible at all, but was instead a "positive good", and that democratic rights had to be subordinated to the protection of slavery (thus all anti-slavery petitions were banned from being received by the U.S. congress, abolitionist literature was banned from the federal mails in the south, etc. -- see George Fitzhugh for the ultimate development of this tendency). Many northerners also feared that southern adventurers and "filibusterers" wanted to conquer Cuba and all of Mexco and Central America in order to transform the United States into a huge slave empire. If slavery had stayed in existing states south of 36°30', and had not displayed agressively expansionist tendencies, and if southerners had not started to demand extraordinary safeguards for its protection (which were not fully compatible with democratic rights), then slavery would not have becmome a major national political issue. AnonMoos (talk) 19:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What are differences in the leadership traits of the Confederate forces with that of the Union forces? Examples are greatly appriciated..! Gothrokkprincess (talk) 18:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is generally considered rude to just copy your homewok questions directly in to the Reference Desk without a) reading the articles directly related to your topic and b) showing no effort to us of solving these questions on your own. While the previous answers have been mostly helpful, please try to avoid this in the future. Livewireo (talk) 21:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gothrokkprincess, you've said you're wanting to spell things properly. You'll be interested to learn that your "allot" ("it helped allot") is spelled as 2 words - a lot. It's another way of saying "a great deal", or "very much". -- JackofOz (talk) 22:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's this novel?
It was set in the world of classical music performers, came out in the 80's or 90's and was pretty terrible. A mysterious dude goes around to a bunch of highly skilled musicians (orchestra soloists etc) and gives each of them (separately) $10,000 in cash and some sheet music scored for their instrument. They are told to practice the music completely in secret, telling nobody about its existence, then show up at a certain address at a certain date and time to perform. This is probably enough to identify the book so I'll refrain from describing what happens next in case someone wants to actually read the book and not have the surprise spoiled. 67.122.209.126 (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Found it: The Beethoven Conspiracy, by remembering one of the characters' names. Intense googling about various plot elements had surprisingly failed to turn it up. 67.122.209.126 (talk) 08:15, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Two Unknown Books
Hello, I am looking for two books that I cannot seem to find anywhere online. I have searched extensively on Google, GoogleBooks, and Amazon.
The first is a children's book about strange and unexplained occurrences. I believe it has something like "truth is stranger than fiction" on the cover. Some of the stories within included a live frog found by coal miners in solid rock; rain on a particular house only, with no clouds in the sky; a novel written without the letter e; a weeping Mary statue; a flying/floating priest; and paratroopers who realized they were being turned into hail.
The second book I am looking for is about the Chicago Prison System. I believe it was titled "Room XX," where XX was a particular number. The room XX of the title was the first room in the prison system that arrestees were taken to. I believe the book was written in a documentary style by a journalist. dlempa (talk) 20:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think that quite a few books of Forteana for young readers have been produced over the years. The one that my local library had when I was a kid (circa 1960) was Strangely Enough! by C. B. Colby, but I can't recall its containing all the items listed by Dlempa. It may be hard to identify the exact one that he or she has in mind. Deor (talk) 00:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A little Googling turns up evidence of a book titled Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction (1982) by Betty Burns Paden, which some libraries that have it classify as a juvenile book dealing with "curiosities" and "unexplained phenomena." There doesn't seem to be any more specific information about it on the Web, though. Could this be your book? Deor (talk) 01:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not a precise match for your description of the second book, but could you be thinking of Courtroom 302 by Steve Bogira? The eponymous room is in the Cook County Courthouse, not the jail per se, but the book seems to deal with conditions in the jail as well as the courthouse. Deor (talk) 00:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Courtroom 302 is exactly what I was looking for, though I have no way of confirming whether Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction (1982) by Betty Burns Paden is what I had in mind. Thank you all for your help! dlempa (talk) 20:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Ten Pound Court"
At the end of Washington Irving's short story, it is hinted that Ichabod Crane "finally had been made a justice of the Ten Pound Court." After some googling, it seems that such a court actually existed (see for example here), but I couldn't find out what it is about or what with the peculiar name. I suspect there's some joke involved, but I'm just to far removed from Irving's world to get it. --Janneman (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why was marrying one's cousin so prevalent in the past? Is it still prevalent in non-western cultures? PS, Arkansas is technically a western culture I think. 65.121.141.34 (talk) 20:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If your family have lived in an isolated place time out of mind, you are likely to be related in some degree to every marriageable person of the other sex in your social class within a day's walk or a day's ride. Members of the urban middle classes meet strangers and marry them.--Wetman (talk) 21:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the European middle ages, the Catholic church tended to extend intermarriage prohibitions to wider and wider groups of relatives (which also brought in a lucrative side-business of selling dispensations to get around such prohibitions). As part of the Protestant reformation of the 16th century, one of the reforms introduced was pruning back the scope of the relative marriage prohibitions, usually to those mentioned in the Biblical book of Leviticus (which did not include a prohibition on first cousin intermarriage). In the late 19th century in the U.S., the pendulum started to swing back, and a first cousin marriage ban was introduced in many states as a "scientifically" motivated measure to prevent inbreeding, partly due to the efforts of Lewis H. Morgan. From a strictly scientific point of view this effort was a little misguided, since while inbreeding can certainly produce a higher rate of genetic defects in children, first cousin status by itself is not a very good measurement of inbreeding. If the four grandparents came from four different communities, with no close relatedness, then the risks of a cousin marriage are minimal; while in the case of a small community which has been effectively isolated for many generations, there may be significant risk of defects even if the couple have a more distant relationship than first cousins. AnonMoos (talk) 00:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience it's only the USA that get's all stressed out about cousin relationships/marriage. Unless there are multiple generations of cousins intermarrying there's not a huge increase in the likelihood of birth defects. European countries generally consider the USA's stance to be idiotic and draconian. Exxolon (talk) 01:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vioxx, a pain killer, was found to roughly double the risk of heart attack (but not to greatly increase death rates) - it was immediately taken off the market. First cousin marriages are shown to roughly double the rate of birth defects and parts of the U.S. are looked down on for having banning it. Rmhermen (talk) 02:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thats not a very convincing comparison unless both the initial probability of occurrence (heart attack or birth defect) and the perceived benefit are roughly similar. Doubling a 1:100,000 risk (to 1:50,000) provides a very different risk assessment scenario than doubling a 1:10 risk (to 1:5). Note also that pretty much all birth control pills double the risk of stroke, yet those are not taken off the market and most people would take a very dim view of any efforts to do so. Why? Because the benefit is seen to outweigh the risk. I expect cousins who are very much in love would consider the benefit of their marriage to be quite substantial. Finally, alcohol, smoking, diet, maternal health and age have all been shown to greatly increase risk of birth defects (in some cases quadrupling risk), yet I doubt anywhere in the US bans women from drinking alcohol, makes it illegal for women over 35 to get pregnant or force feeds women folic acid. So why legislate against one risk factor, yet not against other, more significant risks? I'd suggest thats why such a ban is seen as a little illogical by some. Rockpocket04:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've never met an English person that thinks banning cousin couples is idiotic or draconian, in fact many seem to think it's odd that it's legal there. Perhaps you mean continental Europe? TastyCakes (talk) 02:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And here is some information about an ongoing study on the health effects of cousin marriages using a project based in Bradford, England. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7404730.stm
It is also worth remembering that the term "cousin" can be used quite widely. First cousins are much more closely genetically connected compared to second cousins, or fifth cousins twice removed, but they are all cousins. We might not refer to them as such in everyday speech, but in previous times "cousin" was a convenient catch-all term of address and reference for many types of imprecise relation. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
GSP and past mayors
Two questions:
Is it possible to find the statistics for GSP for the state of Wyoming going back to the 19th century? In other words, do these statistics exist and if so where are they located?
Where can I find a list of the mayors of the city of Osceola, NE?
I learned that all of the luggage and carry-on bags left aboard US Airways Flight 1549 had to be weighed, dried, and weighed again. It is said that process takes up to eight weeks and could take several months. How is the proceedure done? Is it done one bag at a time, a few at a time, or all at once? If more information is available, please let me know. Thank you.69.203.157.50 (talk) 22:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A January 25 NY Post story said the carryons as well as suitcases and other possessions were frozen (to prevent mold and mildew) then were dried and cleaned before being returned to the passengers. If a plane crashed and they thought it might have been because it was overloaded (as has happened to some light plane crashes) there would be a reason to reconstruct the (dry) takeoff weight. The (post crash) wet weight might be of some academic interest to see how much extra stress that put on the relatively intact plane when lifting it out of the water. The wet weight might have been a factor in the cost of the shipping (in freezer trucks), storage (in mortuary coolers) and cleaning and drying. Each passenger got a $5000 check regardless of the ultimate return. I expect that at the contractor, they were thawed, washable garments were separated from jewelry, paper goods, drivers licenses, credit cards, cosmetics, etc, then the clothes were laundered or drycleaned, while the jewelry, etc, were cleaned and disinfected (not the world's cleanest river). Paper goods, books, or money could be freezedried. This removes moisture by keeping it in a very cold but very dry environment. The moisture sublimates. Conservation of paper might involve other tricks to avoid welding it into a mass. Currency can be replaced if the serial numbers are readable. If anyone had weapons, dope or huge sums of money in their carryons, they might have some explaining to do. Some passengers insisted on taking their purses, garment bags or carryons with them after the splashdown. Even data on laptops was expected to be recovered. Some carkeys would cost $400 to replace. Edison (talk) 16:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In theory, would the US trade-protectionist policy represented by the Smoot-Hawley Tariff have been more successful if it had taken the form of export subsidies rather than import tariffs? NeonMerlin05:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not. Global demand was slumping badly, and any action against other countries' exports to America was bound to result in retaliation. In addition, protectionism drives up the price of goods in the "protected" market, raising the cost of living. Very good article in The Economist this week about how reducing import duties in India created an industrial and export boom. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Evidence seems to show there's not a great deal of difference between the genders[12][13] but looking at various studies[14][15]
Technology is traditionally seen as a male sphere, and the internet fits in that sphere (although studies show girls are very interested in the internet).
Women are slightly less competent with computers and more anxious about it.
Women's lower usage may be explained by socioeconomic differences rather than gender (being able to afford internet is one obvious thing; women tend to have lower incomes)
Men are more likely to use the internet to find out about new technology and for masculine interests such as sport; while women use it more for social contact.[16] --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 14:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Islamic inheritance jurisprudence and will
According to Islamic inheritance jurisprudence, sons inherit twice as much as daughters inherit. What if a person wants to disinherit their son (because he is a drug addict or alcoholic) and leave all their money to their daughter(s)? Would their will break Shariah law? Can a person disinherit their son in, let's say, Iran? Surtsicna (talk) 17:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to Islamic Sharia, one third of one's wealth can be given freely. Two thirds are under obligatory inheritance laws. But one can transfer all one's wealth before death to disinherit one's child. For the Islamic Laws of Inheritance, see [17]. --Omidinist (talk) 03:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cutting the hair during sickness
I have the impression, that in the 18th- and 19th century and before, it was common to cut of the hair of especially women during a long term illness and bed comfinement. It seems that this was simply something which was done in this situation, whithout much discussion, something considered natural. Has someone here ever heard of a specific reason to this custom? After all, in those days it was considered controversial with a woman with short hair - I even think it was common to cut of the hair of female criminals as a punishement. --Aciram (talk) 19:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As recently as 1901 there was belief among doctors that a sick person might become bald when they recovered if their hair was not cut when they were sick. See [18]. In Maryland, U.S.A, circa 1902 there was a superstition that bad luck would follow the cutting of hair during illness. In 1904, the Journal of the American Medical Association said that after fevers the hair was likely to fall out. An article discouraged the cutting off of the hair in anticipation of this expected hair loss. A 1977 book, apparently a reprint of an 1870's book, said that the hair "especially when thick and long, should in sickness be cut only with great caution, and under supervision of a physician." It was seen as a useful head covering. It seems like a magical notion, like cutting off the hair to get rid of sickness per "The Catholic World, 1874 or to transfer the illness, with the hair, to a tree, per Britannica (1911). Hair outside the head is no longer a living part of the body, so all seems superstition. The sensible parts seem to be on the one hand that the hair can keep the head warm, so keep it, or that it may fall out anyway in illness, as in modern radiation and chemotherapy for cancer, so some people go ahead and cut it off to avoid it coming out in clumps. Edison (talk) 02:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia article on Urdu says in the very first sentence, "Central Indo-Aryan language". And it probably uses the Arabic alphabet for the same reason that Turkish did till the reforms of the 20s - historic cultural imperialism. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A Semitic language has a highly-specific method of forming words from abstract three-consonant roots. By contrast, Urdu is a language closely related to Hindi, but with a number of loanwords of ultimate Arabic origin, and written with a form of the Arabic alphabet. That doesn't make Urdu a Semitic language any more than many French loanwords and being written with the Latin alphabet make English a Romance language... AnonMoos (talk) 23:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maltese, on the other hand, is a Semitic language which uses the Latin alphabet (i.e. the common Western-european one). There is no necessary relation between the affinities of a language and the script(s) used to write it --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Was it impossible for the Ducal titles of Aquitaine to coexist with the title of King of France? I noticed rulers of Aquitaine after the beginning of the Hundred Years' War, be it either the Plantaganet Kings of England, who claim to be the rightful kings of France, or the Valois kings, they used the title themself but grant them to relatives. And when it wasn't in the hand of a relative, it was still not a title that the kings used. So, I am guessing Aquitaine could only exist as a fief. Example of this include Richard II of England was never Duke and Henry IV gave up his right to Aquitaine after becoming king of England in 1399. --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 05:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Duke of Aquitaine was legally a vassal of the King of France, as was the Duke of Normandy, and since the Plantagenet English kings tended to hold both territories they were in the awkward position of being someone else's vassal in the largest and richest and most powerful sections of their little empire. In practise the King of France usually couldn't do much about this because he couldn't enforce his own power outside the Ile-de-France. Normandy was brought under direct royal control in 1204 and afterwards it was one of the royal titles; the English recognized this in the Treaty of Paris (1259), but still claimed Aquitaine; when the French tried to take that too, the Hundred Years' War began. In 1360 the war briefly ended with the Treaty of Brétigny, and now the English could hold Aquitaine without being vassals of France, but that wasn't good enough for either side; the French kings started granting it to their heirs, and the English of course claimed the rest of France too. When England lost the war they also lost Aquitaine (though I suppose the various subsequent English claims to the French throne included Aquitaine). So, it's not that it was impossible for the Duchy of Aquitaine to coexist with the King of France, it's just that they chose to grant it to their heirs; it was probably a way of sticking it to the English, that is, it wasn't just a French royal title, they claimed so much control over it that they could freely grant it to someone else. They didn't need to do that with Normandy because it was already firmly under French control. Similarly there's no reason the Prince of Wales couldn't be one of the British royal titles, except that they just chose not to do it that way. (Incidentally, your spymaster is still Duke of Normany, as ruler of the Channel Islands, even though Normandy proper wasn't claimed after the thirteenth century.) Adam Bishop (talk) 13:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Its a little more complicated if you go back a bit farther; back in Merovingian times, Aquitaine was alternately a kingdom and a duchy, and had varying relationships with other states in the area of West Francia. The land that would form the core of the Kingdom of France was Neustria, which did not include Aquitaine as among its territories.
In fact, much of what we think of as France either de facto (Aquitaine, Normandy, Provence) or de jure (Basse-Navarre, Burgundy, Brittany, Savoy) were independent from the French Kingdom until comparitively recently. this map shows the situation at the late 12th century, when Philip II Augustus expanded the Royal Desmesne; and yet the green parts of that map, while oweing fealty to Philip, essentially ran their own affairs. During this time, the relationship between the King of France and most of his vassals was not unlike that between the Holy Roman Emporer and his vassals. France really only became a centralized state in the 1400's... --Jayron32.talk.contribs04:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Has any significant achievement from the last two centuries been made by a muslim? I'm looking for anything that heavily and positively influenced the rest of the world--a book, a painting, a scientific discovery, a philosophical idea, anything. After googling "muslim nobel prize winners" and similar search terms, the answer seems to be a "no", but I want to ask here before jumping to conclusions. --99.237.234.104 (talk) 07:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In other circumstances Abdus Salam could have been considered a Muslim Nobel Prize winner in sciences -- however, the Pakistani government and most publicly-influential Muslim religious leaders are extremely anxious to classify his religious grouping as not being "real" Muslims at all... AnonMoos (talk) 08:17, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, I remembered who I was thinking of originally - Sayyid Qutb. You might not want to argue that he positively influenced the world, at least from a western perspective, but his influence is certainly significant. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did the recent Euromillions lottery have a positive expectation?
The Euromillions draw on friday had a record number of rollovers - the unclaimed winnings from previous draws added to the current prize pot. Did it have a positive expectation - in other words, was the sum of the value of the prizes greater than the sum of the cost of all the lottery tickets purchased? In Britain a ticket costs £1.50. I am only willing to buy a lottery ticket if there is a positive expectation, but it is difficult to estimate in advance. If this record rollover did not have such an expectation, then it probably never will. 84.13.54.183 (talk) 08:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lottery prizes (by the very definition of lottery) are accrued from the sale of tickets, and are always considerably less than the money taken in sales because the sales points, government and other beneficiaries take a large portion of the money. No serious gambler goes in for lotteries as the chances of getting any return are extremely small. (That's why they are called "idiot tax".)--86.25.195.237 (talk) 09:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct that rollovers do, in theory, offer a possibility of a positive expectation. I think this page would have the information you need to calculate it, were it working (which it isn't). I'll check it again in a bit... --Tango (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That site is back up, but doesn't have the necessary information. I can't find the details anywhere. (You need total number of tickets bought and total prize fund.) --Tango (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
HSX is a prediction site that uses a stock market metaphor to price movies that have not come out yet, and predicts how much money they're going to make on their opening weekend in America and then the subsequent 3 weeks. Tempshill (talk) 15:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The symbolic significance of the 5th. of May in Chaucerian times
Once long ago when I was studying Chaucer the teacher said something about the significance of the 5th. May to people in Chaucerian times. Something relating to nature I think - might be the time when everything is in leaf again after the winter. Can anyone remind me of what it was please, and what its name was? I have not found anything on Wikipedia. 84.13.54.183 (talk) 10:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure you didn't mishear the First of May? This was traditionally called May Day in England. The article gives a lot of information about the pre-Christian festivities, which continued in rural parts of England: some of which are still practised to this day. --TammyMoet (talk) 12:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That may well have been what was said, but I suspect TammyMoet is still correct in pointing you to May Day. The only thing 5 May has going for it: there was a tradition that set the date of the Crucifixion as 25 March AD 29. That traditional date results in 5 May being the day of the Resurrection. And of course it's not a big step to generalize from the rebirth of Christ to the rebirth of nature. But it's May Day/Beltane that had all the celebrations and significance. - Nunh-huh00:51, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
25 March to 5 May would be 41 or 42 days, but the Resurrection supposedly happened on the 3rd day after the Crucifixion. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:24, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many modern activities that people choose to do have a risk of an accident or bad outcome of some kind. Drinking alcohol - risk of alcoholism. Gambling - risk of gambling addiction. Skiing - risk of broken limb etc. Driving - risk of accident (driving is a choice behaviour because you could get a job/home combination within walking distance or use public transport). Eating junk food - health problems. Smoking - health problems. Recreational drug use - health and psychological problems. Is there a table anywhere that compares the hazard rate for various popular elective activities such as the above please? 84.13.54.183 (talk) 11:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not answering the question, but I dispute that all people "could get a job/home combination within walking distance or using public transport", certainly not an affordable option for everyone in every location. Tempshill (talk) 15:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The poor rural farmhand could move to a city, though. I think that's the point the OP is making. Someone with no skills might not be able to get a good job in a city, but (outside of recessions) they could probably find something. So, it is a choice. The risk is from driving is generally considered acceptable in light of the benefits of being able live and work in places you like, though. (The risk to the environment is generally considered more significant than the direct risk to the person in the car.) --Tango (talk) 15:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's Truman, not sure if it's the official portrait. By the way, I don't think English is your first language, but I salute you for a very interesting use of the word recidivism (though not a correct use). Tempshill (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, my first language is French. I believed the word recidivism was the same meaning of the french récidiver or recidivisme : doing voluntarily something for a second time, most of the time the word have a meaning of doing something bad for the second time (here use as a joke). TCY (talk) 21:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, recidivism is also a noun, and in English it generally means "returning to commit a crime after being punished for it" Like robbing banks after getting out of jail for robbing banks before. But carry on with your art ID. Its been an interesting line of questions. --Jayron32.talk.contribs04:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What different ways can money be created in finance?
The money supply article says that money is created when banks lend money and only keep a fractional of that amount on deposit. Yet, when a company issues shares, does that not create money also? If the company has $1million of assets, and it sells shares worth $500000, has it not it created more money? The company still has $1M of assets, but now it has an additional $500000 in cash also. This may not affect the nation's money supply, but from the companies point of view it has got another half million for free. What other ways can financiers create 'money for nothing'? 84.13.54.183 (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, unfortunately the "Store of wealth" criterion is satisfied, but the "unit of account" and - more importantly to issues of monetary base - the "medium of exchange" (or "means of payment") criteria aren't. So the newly issued financial assets have to be converted into the traditional definition of "money" (cash or deposits) before they can be used as money.NByz (talk) 20:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I also meant to mention that there is a cost of equity, which represents the required expected dividend yield of equity offering. Investors will demand this expected return to compensate for both risk and uncertainty. This rears its head as - on the equity side - a capital raiser has to offer more and more shares (yield more and more control of the company) to get the same amount of cash. A clever company will issue equity (stocks), bonds (debt) and hybrid instruments (warrants, options, convertible securities) such that their cost of equity = their cost of debt = their cost of hybrid securities.NByz (talk) 20:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike the other kinds of companies described by NByz, retail money market funds may be considered to create money this way, since they do meet the unit of account and medium of exchange tests. The Fed includes their shares in the M2 measure of money.
Money is also created by the sale of travelers' checks (and these are included in the narrower M1 measure). Travelers' checks amount to an interest-free loan to the issuer, which then is able to invest those funds. Repurchase agreements were included in the broad M3 measure, back when the Fed maintained it. John M Baker (talk) 04:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Price of a cow?
Are there any economic models or indices that measure wealth is terms of how many heads of livestock somebody owns? Or on the relative value of a large domesticated mammal in relation to other things in life? (I know in the past, and probably still today in some cultures, this was the way to measure how much a person is worth.)--Sonjaaa (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hah. Well usually the value of any financial asset (a cow can be considered one; it produces a 'return') is the present value of it's expected payments. So you can think of a ow as having an annual yield equal to [Value of Milk Produced] - [Value of feedstock + opportunity cost of land +c any additional inputs] and a final yield of [Value of Meat produced]. The farmer would discount these payments at his or her 'opportunity cost of capital' (how much each dollar of capital is worth to him, by year).
In a high volume, monetary capitalist system, we would use "dollars" as our unit of account to convert these values from one good to another (to account for changes in relative prices), but in a pre-currency economy, you'd have to use some other thing that was universally trade-able.NByz (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if cow ownership produces any additional social benefits (social stature in the community, leadership etc.) you'd have to value those effects by using some sort of "willingness-to-pay" or "willingness-to-accept" measure. How much would the farmer be willing to pay (using either dollars or the unit of account above) to get them, or how much would he be willing to accept to have them taken away. These sorts of experiments are tough to do if we're talking about a historical society. But some clever regression analysis of other things known about that society might produce some estimates.NByz (talk) 20:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NByz -- They aren't hard to do. We have a commodity market that figures out those numbers every day. I'll admit that all the externalities (good and bad) aren't necessarily accounted for, but it's certainly better than academic guesses. Also, the "return" on a cow, reduced to present value, ought to be the price of the cow. Shadowjams (talk) 21:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you just want to know the price of a cow? Right now [19] live feeder cattle (that is cattle for human beef consumption) trade for about $1 USD / 1 lb (0.45 kg). If you figure a ready for slaughter cow is about 1,100 lb (500 kg) (this is going to change a lot and I have no idea if this is a very accurate #), then it's easy math. Obviously there are a lot of costs involved too. Shadowjams (talk) 21:46, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The last bit in parenthesis makes me feel like the OP is most interested in the value of a cow in a pre-currency (or poorly integrated, regional) economy.NByz (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It occurs to me that I don't really know any bassoon music, although I have enjoyed what I have heard of them. For example, the bassoon section of The Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra is one of the few sections I enjoy (apart from the original Purcell theme).
Could anyone recommend some particularly good bassoon music? This could be something solely or mostly performed by bassoons, or something with particularly good bassoon bits. 80.41.71.69 (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fed. Funds are overnight loans from the federal resere to banks. Does that mean that a startup bank, if it meets the regulations, can use Fed Funds as funding.--24.4.54.96 (talk) 23:53, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep! There would be minimum capital requirements, including depositary base and "Tier one" capital (money you, or other investors, put in) requirements and you would need to be a Bank holding company. I'm trying to find some specific numbers... I'll bet these[20] guys would know.NByz (talk) 00:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That characterization of Tier 1 capital I think is a little simplistic, and fed window funding isn't limited to BHCs (bank holding companies). But Fed funds might (i'm unsure) be limited to federally chartered banks. As a practical matter though, almost every bank will have FDIC insurance (federal banks are required to have it, and the vast majority of state banks do have it), which might (again, I'm unclear) grant fed window access. Shadowjams (talk) 10:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many Christians would maintain that triads of gods as found in various mythological systems are not generally very closely analogous to the Christian Trinity at all... AnonMoos (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To answer the question the Hindu trinity of Brahma, Shiva, and Vishnu is really only important in the Smarta school of Hinduism. Vishnavas, Shaivas, and Shaktissee Vishnu (or an avatar of Vishnu), Shiva, or one of the forms of Shakti as a the true Godhead (actually I'm simplifying the Shakti view here). The Smarta view of the trinity is not really like that in Christianity's mythological system, because Smarta see all aspects of the trinity as emanating from the universal Brahman, (they are Saguna brahman). -- Q Chris (talk) 08:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
May 10
Yemen's water system
Are there any figures or estimates available about how much money it would take to improve Yemen's water system? You can interpret the word "improve" broadly, I'm just looking for general info on the subject. Thanks. 24.6.46.177 (talk) 00:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's a flag of any known country. Not all designs are used in flags. It's vaguely reminiscent of the Scandinavian flags and the flag of England, but the position of the cross is not right for any of them and the colours are all wrong. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they may have had sex with them and produced offspring. Marriage is not required to produce offspring. And the term "mulatto" is a bit disfavored nowadays, considering its root (mule) puts the subject in an unfavorable light, implying their parents were of different species. The correct term is usually biracial or racially mixed. But I think it would have occured at least once that an arab who owned black female slaves may have had sexual relations with one of them. --Jayron32.talk.contribs04:04, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Balls were often made from animal bladders, or leather as they are now. And people may not have had pumps, but they had lips, lungs, and fingers, and a passable attempt at inflating a ball can be made using those... --Jayron32.talk.contribs04:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any means of procreation that is separate from sexual intercourse between a married man and woman is supposed to be forbidden. However, GIFT (gamete intra-fallopian transfer) is the only assisted reproductive technology that is considered acceptable to the Catholic church. GIFT is acceptable because fertilization occurs within the female's body, not outside. - Nunh-huh06:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
HIV and the U.S. Military
Me and a friend have some questions regarding this as we are in a dispute over the topic
Troy's question:
What is the U.S. Military's regulations regarding soldiers that are HIV-positive, are they allowed to join, stay, reenlist, or are they automatically medically discharged? if they are not, did they use to, has the policy changed over time at all?
Ian's question:
According to Army Regulation 600-110 the US army will discharge you from all LEADERSHIP ORIENTED programs such as the USMA, OCS, and ROTC. These are all discharges Im guessing is because of security clearances, and that HIV+ acts as an identification factor that violates such clearances. I also think that unit cohesion between the US(A) and the US(DoD) fitness requirements have adjusted the policies pertaining to fitness for HIV+ standards. Ive noticed the revisions on the army regulation. Does this mean that the AR has been changed, and if so can you clarify the changes to me as well as answer my question? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.67.171 (talk) 09:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question about perception biases in art
Hello! I am currently thinking about aesthetics (philosophy of art) for a University course, and am particualrly interested in the problem of forgeries, and of the significance they can have for aesthetic theory. In particular, I am interested in copies (ie not forgeries, like the infamous van Meegeren affair, where forgers make new works and attribute them to other people). My question is this: imagine a machine that, if you fed in a painting (say), could produce a molecule-for-molecule identical copy of it. (A photocopier is a good real-world approximation for black-and-white ink to paper works of art). They copy would, ex hypothesis, be identical to the original. Yet does that mean that it is indistinguishable, if one knew which was which? In particular, I am thinking of whether, if you knew which was which, some sort of cognitive bias (an expectation or confirmation bias, maybe?) could make you actually perceive them differently. For example, you might see the lines as sharper or the colours as more vivid in the original, because (most people at least) value authenticity. The stimuli would be the same, but is there any evidence that people can perceive two identical stimuli differently because of preconceptions, or any known psychological effect that might explain this? (Incidentally, this is, I think somewhat similar to the hostile media effect, although how, in what way, and what disanalogies there are is something else I may look into philosophically in the near-future). Thanks! Batmanand | Talk12:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They would differ in provenance. The copy would not be object that the famous artist touched, looked at, worried over, etc. "Is there any evidence that people can perceive two identical stimuli differently because of preconceptions" - lots I think, this is what the psychology of perception is all about. I also recall the experiment where a group of people get the subject to say one line is longer than the other, even when it isnt - cannot remember what this is called, might be the group effect. 84.13.171.69 (talk) 13:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But how could any machine produce an identical copy of a painting? We (humanity) will discover a means to boundless life before a machine will be invented to produce an "exact" copy of your average painting produced by a human being, nominally called an artist.
Or to say more about your original question, and to address it more directly, certainly preconceptions influence outcomes. Isn't this the basis of the placebo effect, and countless other perceptual phenomena? But it has to be considered that this may be hypothetical. As a hypothetical problem, I don't know if any real answers are available, but I will keep thinking about it.
What your question does challenge, in an interesting way, is what art is itself. In particular it challenges the notions of machine-made art, conceptual art, and even minimalism in some of its forms. It may challenge much more. But I am just giving my responses that first leap to mind. Bus stop (talk) 14:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What the IP above calls provenance was called "historicity" by Philip K. Dick in the novel The Man in the High Castle - one of the characters in the novel deals in antiques and is shocked to realize that the items he has been selling are perfect forgeries. He then goes through a similar thought-process that the opening poster describes: "if these are forgeries, then they are worthless. But, on the other hand, I myself, a professional, thought them worth something, until I realised they were forgeries. Isn't then all of their worth in simply not knowing they were forgeries? Isn't all their historicity in the fact that I never knew they weren't real?" TomorrowTime (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We value authenticity. But the problem you pose, rules out any differences whatsoever. Do I understand you correctly? Therefore we know that the two works of art cannot possibly be viewed differently, except for the knowledge of the authenticity of one and the knowledge of the inauthenticity of the other -- and knowledge and visual perception may or may not be linked. If I am misunderstanding the question of the original poster, I trust he will set me straight about this. Bus stop (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What I was getting at is that there is a whole literature in the philosophy of forgeries about why we value non-authentic works less (or rather, why apart from brute snobbery we might rationally downgrade our evaluation of a work because we discovered it was not an original). Goldman has an interesting suggestion that two indistinguishable works might nonetheless differ in aesthetic value because, in the future, we (or some future critics) might be able to distinguish them - for example, we can train our ears to distinguish sounds that previously we heard as the same - this is part of what becoming a good critic is all about. Goldman's idea is good as far as it goes, but what if the two works were molecule-for-molecule identical? I was wondering whether psychology had anything to say about whether or not we can see the same image differently depending on bias. And no, it is not like the Muller-Lyer illusion, because in that the two images are different). Thanks for responses so far, any more for any more? Batmanand | Talk18:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But the important thing is that no way would, in the example given, a "photocopy" be anywhere near equivalent to a "black-and-white ink to paper" work of art. You are asking a good question. May I rephrase it? (Correct me if I am wrong.) "How closely does a reproduction relate to an original?" Isn't that really what your question is? A reproduction only captures a visual likeness. In point of fact it is always grossly inaccurate. Your question would arise, or have applicability in the case of some "esoteric" forms of art. (And I think it is debatable whether in fact they are "art" or not.) As we know, the art world is littered with types of art. If it can be thought of, it is accepted. I'm not meaning to argue against innovation, progress, open-mindedness, intellectuality, or anything else that "new" works of art may consist of. But in the examples given -- paintings, drawings -- I think it has to be understood that reproducibility is out of the question. Attempt at reproducibility can be made. Results of such attempt can be "pretty good." But reality is that such a reproduction falls flat on its face in side by side comparison with the original. I guess the reproduction could be "better" than the original. But it is unlikely to be equivalent to. Bus stop (talk) 18:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would just be Americans that do that, as they are intensely patriotic and like to call everything in America 'American', as in the 'all American pizza' and the 'American Dream'. On a side note, we don't have a 'British Dream', because we're AWAKE. Sorry, political statement there, (and taken from a British comedy act, I forget the name of) not necessary for Wikipedia RefDesk. Struck out accordingly.>--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 21:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We Italians only have an 'Italian dream'. A nightmare indeed, we are living into it. Endless sorrow --pma (talk) 07:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nationality refers to what country you are a citizen of. Animals aren't citizens of anywhere - they don't pay taxes, they don't have the right to vote, etc., so I guess they don't really have a nationality. They have a country of origin and a country of residence, though, simply from the dictionary definitions of the terms. Whether those have any legal significance or not, I don't know. --Tango (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're overthinking. Obviously the issue here is that the Socks (cat) article uses an infobox originally designed for humans, so some of the fields are not exactly what they should be. APL (talk) 18:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's silly to think of animals having a nationality, ethnicity, citizenship etc. They no more have these attributes than apples, condoms or books do. Sure, they have certain legal protections that apples, condoms and books don't (they have a right to be treated humanely, for example), but that doesn't mean they suddenly have attributes that are reserved for humans. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know that Reggae was invented in Kingston, Jamaica and Rai music was invented in Oran, Algeria. Which music genre was invented in Liverpool, Havana, Dakar, Bristol and Salvador, Bahia, Brazil? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.95.73 (talk) 19:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As for Havana, there are dozens of music genres which were born or nurtured in Cuba's capital city, from the aptly named 19th century habanera to the 20th century explosion of Cuban styles such as rumba, mambo, cha-cha-cha, son, ... to name only the most famous ones. Have a look at the article on music of Cuba for more. Some of the styles originated in the Oriente, but Havana's nightclub industry was crucial for spreading the popularity of Cuban music in the 1930s - 1950s. ---Sluzzelintalk00:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
May 11
Joe Wicks (not the fictional character)
In his memoir/history B Street: A Gathering of Saints and Sinners, Lawney Reyes refers to a lawyer (later judge) named Joe Wicks in Grand Coulee during the period of the building of the dam. He says that Wicks was part-Cherokee, born in Oklahoma, and stood out for being one of the few Republicans around the building of the dam. He also says prior to coming to the Coulee, Wicks studied law at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., served in the Army in France during World War I, became a deputy U.S. marshall in Oklahoma (1921), later serving variously with the U.S. Treasury Department, FBI, and as one of Eliot Ness's Untouchables, and that he "was instrumental" in putting Al Capone in prison. In 1946, according to Reyes, Wick became a judge in Okanogan County, Washington and served for 15 years.
I consider Reyes a generally reliable source, and was about to turn this into an article, but I see that Wicks's name is not on our list of the eleven "Untouchables". Does anyone who knows more about the Untouchables know whether that list of eleven are the only people who would have been called "Untouchables", or what other relation to Ness et. al. Wicks might have had? - Jmabel | Talk00:53, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a family, if that's Iluvgofishband's friend's family. (Note there are some other famous Cossas, for example Renaissance painter Francesco del Cossa or 19th century dramatist Pietro Cossa).
The Antipope's family Cossa came from the Gulf of Naples. They spelled their name "Cossa", "Coscia", or "Coxa", apparently from French "cuisse" (thigh), hence the leggy coat of arms (which reminded of a recent question on Italy's shape). A slightly different looking coat of arms can be found on "Nobili Napoletani" which states that the Cossa were an old Neapolitan family, Signori of the islands Ischia and Procida, and Dukes of Padula. Testimony of the family can be found in the chapel of the Aragonese Castle on Ischia and in the church Gesù Nuovo in Naples. ---Sluzzelintalk03:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Old SCOTUS opinions
I just wrote the article on Missouri Kansas Texas Railway Company of Texas v. Clay May, a US Supreme Court case from 1904. This is the FindLaw link. My question: I can't tell who voted where. The decision says that Holmes wrote the opinion, and Brewer concurred; Brown wrote the dissent, and that White and McKenna "also dissented".
This is less clear than more recent syllabuses. I think this may imply the following:
Everyone on the Court joined Holmes except for the Justices named above;
White and McKenna joined Brown's dissent.
Am I correct? If not, I'd appreciate any pointers to a more clear enunciation of where the opinions fell on hundred-year-old cases like this. Thanks in advance - Tempshill (talk) 05:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will check the books when I get to the office in the morning, but what you found on Findlaw is probably everything the Court handed down in that case. There is no syllabus at the head of the opinion, so there is no handy "voting lineup" to look for. Although the Reporter sometimes wrote a syllabus in cases from this era, the practice of doing that in every case decided by an opinion is much more recent.
The general rule is that every Justice voted with the majority and for the "opinion of the Court" unless otherwise stated. Here, Justice Brewer is listed as concurring separately, and the opinion states that he concurred only "in the judgment," meaning he did not join the Court's opinion. He did not write his own concurring opinion, but simply announced his vote; that was not uncommon at the time.
Justice Brown dissented with an opinion. Justice White and Justice McKenna also dissented. It is not indicated that they joined Brown's dissent. Most likely, if they had, then either the dissent would begin with "Mr. Justice Brown, joined by Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice McKenna, dissenting..." and/or the dissenting opinion would end with a statement such as "I am authorized to state that Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice McKenna join in these views." So it appears that White and McKenna dissented without explaining why, which again, was not uncommon at the time, particularly if the case was considered less critical. The Court was considered badly overworked in these years, and some Justices wanted to save most of their effort for their majority opinions.
With one Justice concurring only in the judgment and three dissenting, this confirms that everyone else must have voted with Justice Holmes, as otherwise he wouldn't have had five votes.
This helps a lot; thanks very much. In the recent opinions there doesn't ever seem to be an announcement of "I dissent" or "I concur" without an opinion attached. One book breezily says that there were "three dissents" but although I was excited at first because this sounded to me like three dissenting opinions had been written, I figure now that the author meant "three dissenting votes", so in the end I"m sure you're right. I will edit the infobox accordingly. Thanks! I nominated this article for a DYK with the hook that a 25-buck fine went to the SCOTUS. Talk about a cranky railroad company. Tempshill (talk) 06:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've now checked the printed opinion and can confirm that what you see on Findlaw is all you get for this case. As for your DYK hook, good luck, but remember that $25 was a lot of money in 1904, plus multiply $25 by every other farm adjoining a railroad track in the state of Texas and you get still a lot more than that, so the precedent was important. (And $25 is by no means the smallest amount in controversy ever involved in a Supreme Court case, either.) Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again. Agreed on everything, except that $25 in 1902 is about $592 today. Do you happen to know the smallest amount in controversy to get to the Supreme Court? Tempshill (talk) 22:29, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mystery bread deliveries
Someone keeps leaving bread or doughnuts (chocolate doughnuts today) on the outside windowsill of the building where I work. This is a mystery to us all, but I work in a building (in Birmingham UK) that, until 14 years ago, was a synagogue. Since these mystery early morning deliveries began a few weeks ago, we wondered whether there was any connection with Passover, but they have continued sporadically ever since. I know Jewish people have a thing about bread, so I wondered whether there is any Jewish tradition that might account for this?--86.25.194.157 (talk) 10:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If this was a video game, they'd be lulling you into a false sense of security until something significant happens. Then they'd poison the bread the day before. Food (haha) for thought. 90.193.232.41 (talk) 18:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Google-maps lets you do a 'from' and 'to' and you can set if from end to end of the street. My calc gets it as 0.6m. It looks like 'The Mall' stops at Trafalgar Sq and turns into the Strand. At the other end it stops at the Victoria Memorial. Not sure if this is the case but that's the site i'd use. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 10:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The OP is correct, it runs from Admiralty Arch (but that might not show up on a map, it's one of the points leading out of Trafalgar Square) to Buckingham Palace. --Richardrjtalk email10:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Institutions and people in developed Asian countries
Hello you fine folks at the Humanities reference desk. My greetings to you all. Some time back I had posted a question here on the varying economic and political development in different countries of the world and the basic reasons behind it. It was recommended here that I read the book "Guns, Germs and Steel" by Jared Diamond to find an answer. Well I purchased the book and read it, and while the treatment was not complete, it did provide valuable insights. Now I have a related question to ask you. One can understand the faster development of social, economic and political institutions in European countries and countries occupied by Europeans on the basis of the reasons described in the book. What I would like to know is the status of such institutions, and the associated public awareness/activism in non-European countries where economic affluence has taken root recently. My specific question is about countries like Japan, South Korea and Singapore which are now economically developed countries. Has economic development in these countries been accompanied by development of civil activism as in the west, leading to vibrant institutions for delivery of justice? Are the people in these countries similarly proactive about civil liberties? Is the justice system just as fair and efficient? Is the political scene as dynamic and representative? Is the news media equally free, critical and active? Are there media like cinema, theater and books through which the society reflects upon itself? In short I wish to know whether economic development in these countries as been accompanied by other adjuncts of western civilization that make the later progressive, representative, dynamic and just. Thanks for bearing with me on this long-ish question. I eagerly await the answer. Thanks you. -- ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 12:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just to make things clearer, one of my interests in finding an answer to this question is figuring out whether a just and intelectually developed society develops naturally as a consequence of economic development. Thanks. -- ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 12:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The first Asian country that developed to a major degree in a "modern" way was Japan (which was never occupied by Europeans); it developed towards a quasi-open society in some respects during the Meiji period (in contrast with the preceding ossified Shogunate period), but definitely started going backwards with respect to closed government after the 1923 earthquake and then the Depression... AnonMoos (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Much as Germany did in the same period. The short answer is, yes, while the parallels are not perfect, the overall picture has been similar.
Pakistan and counterinsurgency
Re: current operations in the Swat and Buner where the Pakistani Army seem to think that sending in gunships and firing artillery is the best way to do counterinsurgency. What solutions could the US (or anybody else for that matter) offer/propose to the Pakistani army in order to ameliorate unintended civilian casualties? ExitRight (talk) 14:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tracking down a Heinlein novel from one snippet of information
In one of famed science fiction writer Robert Heinlein's novels, there is one extended passage in which a small band of pioneers on a remote outpost / another planet discovers that one in their midst is a destructive criminal who endangers the welfare of the group. There is discussion about what to do with him and it is decided to hold an impromptu trial which, however, hews closely – as much as possible – to standards of evidence and procedure accustomed back on Earth. The perp manages by hook and by crook to extricate himself from the situation through a combination of some fast talking and the fact that the impromptu "court" is hamstrung by its too-high requirements for meeting the burden of proof. Later the protagonist reflects that they made a mistake and he vows not to let anyone get away scot free again, due process be dammned.
My other half says it might be from a Lazarus Long story. Does this narrow it down? Apparently "due process" is a recurring theme in Heinlein's work. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it was Tunnel. As I recall, there were two times people tried to challenge Rod's leadership, but neither went to a trial. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FAMOUS GREEN WOODCUT-STYLE ARTIST
What's the name of the artist, I remember reading the wikipage on it, with the style of the usdollar bills? The us may have commissioned him and/or just copied his style. Not A.Durer, but very much like his drawings, although in darker greens. Cheers, --i am the kwisatz haderach (talk) 17:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Racism?
Is that racism [21]? It's a story of a hotel in Austria rejecting Jewish guests due to bad experiences. I mean, provided that they indeed have had bad experiences with Jewish guests, would this be considered an acceptable policy?--Mr.K.(talk)17:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is discriminating against people because of their race, that's racism. Whether it is acceptable or not is a matter of opinion. --Tango (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To avoid semantic quibbling, let's leave out the "racism" part when talking about Jews, who—religion aside—are a people, or ethnic group. This is a matter of discrimination: based on one or several incidents of negative experience with particular members of some group, all members of that group are from now on denied access to a private establishment. If the laws of the country forbid discrimination on grounds of group membership, i.e. age, color, creed, sexual orientation, marital status, normative weight, etc., members of that group could press legal charges, i.e. the policy would be unacceptable (= illegal). Think of landlords who won't rent an apartment to unmarried couples, bosses who won't hire "unattractive" employees for front-office jobs, restaurants that don't allow admittance to children or dogs, etc. If someone has a grievance based on discrimination of this sort that isn't outright illegal in the local jurisprudence, a recourse might be to publicize the offending institution's policy and organize a boycott based on objection to such discrimination. -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it isn't illegal yet then at the rate the EU is churning out new anti-discrimination laws it soon will be. That may not be a good thing. A lot depends on how the hotel implements its policy. If they put up a sign outside then they will probably go out of business just from the shit storm in the media, and rightly so, on grounds of stupidity alone. If it's un-announced and something they keep to themselves, then who will complain? Not I. There are a couple of ethnic groups that I have strongly negative feelings about (from experience) and I don't want them near me if I can avoid it. If I claim the right of free association then I cannot deny it to others. Hannah Arendt wrote about that fifty years ago.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 20:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Your candour and honesty are commendable, Gmw. My question, though, is: How do you know you have "experienced" these entire ethnic groups? You seem to have had some negative experiences with certain members of these groups. Do they necessarily reflect the ways that all members of these groups behave? Any member of an ethnic group is simultaneously a member of various other groups (male/female; short/tall; left-handed/right-handed; sports lovers/sports haters/indifferent; married/single; straight/gay; Wikipedia users/other; .... I could go on at some length). Why was their ethnicity the thing that turned you off the entire ethnic group? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Jack, I'm not going to discuss the nature of my experiences here, nor the designation of the group(s). I make no claims that my experiences can be extrapolated to a general validity and do not try to persuade you to join me in my outlook.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 21:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, within the EU at least, the word "racism" and "anti-racism" laws include any race, origin and ethnical origin, no matter if someone consider it a "race" or not. The question is just if gathering information, statistics, or profiling an ethnic group can be considered racism, when you have real data and are acting upon these real data. (I'm not saying the hotel's owner had real data, just imagine he indeed had bad experiences.).--Mr.K.(talk)21:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In such profiling, what percentage of real data findings validate, thus justify, "protective discrimination?" In my neighborhood, the proprietor of a private country club weighs the potential loss of income from discouraging patrons of Ethnic Group "A" offset by the potential gained income from patrons of Ethnic Group "J" who according to the demographics are more numerous, well-off, and antipathetic to E.G. "A" – even factoring in losses from a boycott of some percentage of "J" who are actually sympathetic (at least in principle) to "A." The "right of free association" claimed by User:Goodmorningworld is actually a claim to disassociate; is that "right" equally applicable to vendors as well as consumers? -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's part and parcel of the right of free association, which would be incomplete unless it included the right to not associate. Equally applicable to vendors as well as consumers? That's an excellent question. Of course, smarter people than I have hashed out the ramifications, up and down and in all directions of the compass, decades ago. I could not possibly add anything and I am not even up to the task of giving an adequate summary of those dusty dried papers. My simpleton's answer is, it depends: if you're a vendor with a small market share, acting on your own without coordination, your right to choose with whom to do business should be close to 100 percent; if you're a vendor with a near-monopoly, close to 0 percent. (I told you not to expect much from me…)--Goodmorningworld (talk) 21:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Google helped me to find this page, which I believe is what I was remembering of Arendt, especially the last quote: ""What equality is to the body politic—its innermost principle—discrimination is to society," she wrote.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 22:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading CHAIM POTOK novel 'The Gift of Asher Lev'. In it, he mentions many art pieces. He mentions a crucifixion done by Picasso when 25. Picasso being born in 1881, 25ish from 1905-1907. All I can find on the web is a Crucifixion done in 1930. Can anyone find a link for this Potok referenced Picasso? Cheers, --i am the kwisatz haderach (talk) 20:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Texas A&M's On-line Picasso Project[22] lists 23 crucifixions, including OPP.96:077[23] from 1896, OPP.03:137[24] from 1903, and 4 from 1915-1918, but none from 1905-07. You could look through the year-by-year archives, but there's A LOT of paintings and drawings there and I've not checked them all (it's a vast archive but I assume not 100% comprehensive, and of course Potok being a novelist might have changed dates or made it up). --82.41.11.134 (talk) 22:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
did the Pope give any reasons for Palestinians having a state?
Aside from His Holiness heading a major world religion and presumably being a recognized arbiter (certainly among his followers) of moral stature, how relevant is this considering the relatively small number and low percentage of Roman Catholics among the Israeli and Palestinian populations? -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oval Office : Name of this 3 paintings and the painters ?
Oval Office : A new one, showing the torch of the Statue of Liberty, hung by Barack Obama. Is that a painting or a photograph ? What is name ?
Roosevelt Room: Names of this landscape painting and of the painter, on the south wall ?
Cabinet Room : On the left, is it a Washington portrait ?
Cabinet Room, May 1 , 2009. On the right, the Enseinhower portrait have been removed. The new one seems to be a Truman portrait.
In the Oval Office Private Dining room, a new painting replaces an old one which is now on the opposite wall.
The new painting stored with others paintings and photograhs in the private study before being hung up in the next dining room.
The painting which have changed of wall in the Dining Room.
.svg){kind=link}