Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

July 21

The Bunkers at the Greenbrier Resort

I have read that the government spent over 14 million dollars to build the bunkers at the Greenbrier Resort in White Sulphur Springs, WV. Today, 2010, who own the bunkers - the US government, or the present hotel owner? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eensy-Weensy (talk • contribs) 00:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

It appears that "The Bunker" is fully owned by the Greenbrier. As per this page, "In 1995, the US government ended the lease agreement with The Greenbrier, and later that year, the resort began offering tours of the historic facility." --Zerozal (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

They could make quite the wine cellar out of that bunker... Googlemeister (talk) 14:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/technologynews/view/1068644/1/.html

If found guilty, the company could be fined or handed a prison sentence.

HOW DO YOU PUT A COMPANY IN PRISON???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.176.202.135 (talk) 04:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

This would be a good question to ask the lazy reporter and his or her lazy editor. Comet Tuttle (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

In some jurisdictions, and for some violations, directors or executive officers could be jailed, as they were responsible for the actions of the company. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Pirates of the Carribean

Question

I would like some imformation on piracy in the carribean. how they lived, and why they beacame pirates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.172.1.2 (talk) 09:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Part of the origin of such piracy was that Spain prohibited ships of other nations from trading with its Western hemisphere colonies, yet its own ships couldn't really offer the colonists a broad range of goods at competitive prices. Spain's ability to enforce this trade ban was somewhat limited and sporadic, but if the Spaniards did manage to catch an illicit trading ship, then they were often quite brutal and viciously harsh in imposing punishments. This particular set of circumstances quickly transformed some who were initially interested in trade into armed raiders. Of course, piracy eventually developed into a whole way of life... AnonMoos (talk) 09:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

There are a lot of relevant articles at Category:Piracy. Piracy in the Caribbean is particularly relevant, and has a substantial (but unreferenced) section on the causes of piracy at that time. You might also want to look at Golden Age of Piracy, and some biographical articles, such as Bartholomew Roberts, Henry Morgan, and Edward Teach. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

(I love the formality of that title, to get it away from sounding like the Disney ride/movies.) -- Zanimum (talk) 15:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

(Wikipedia actually has a whole series of serious articles named "Piracy in [Geographic location]", while articles starting with "Pirates of" all point to fiction. "Penzance", for example. APL (talk) 16:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC))

You might also try Buccaneer, which is about the early origins of "pirates of the Caribbean". Pfly (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Third highest ranking official of the UN

Who is the third highest ranking official of the United Nations (following the Secretary-General and the Deputy Secretary-General). Is it the Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services? Cheers —P. S. Burton (talk) 11:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

No doubt your question is inspired by recent press reports. No, there is no third highest ranking official. Below the SG and DSG is the Senior Management Group, akin to the UN cabinet. USG/OIOS sits on this group but only as an observer. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 11:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I missed the recent press reports. Link? --Sean 15:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

This one, for instance. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 15:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Viennese for your quick answer.P. S. Burton (talk) 22:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

essay help

A tells his friend, B, that he wants a house built on his (A’s) land, but he cannot see how he will be able to afford the normal, full costs of having the house built. B, who runs a building firm, tells A that he would be able to find the time to undertake the job, and would be able to do it for a price which is lower than a commercial building firm would charge. While A and B are still in negotiation as to the price and other details about the final scope of the works, B starts the building work. When the house is nearly complete, A breaks off the negotiations because he finds that he cannot afford even the (lower than commercial) price which B wants to charge. What liability in contract, if any, does A have to B? can someone point me in the right direction on this one what should i argue here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.248.18 (talk) 17:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

can u tell me what to argue ...please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.248.18 (talk) 17:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

It will depend on the specifics of the contract (if any) that was signed and the particulars of the relevant jurisdiction. — Lomn 17:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

And it would depend on what type of course this was for. A law school course would require a different answer than, say, a philosophy or rhetoric course. This sounds very law or pre-law to me, which would mean that there are specific lines of argumentation that are hidden away in your textbooks relating to the contracts or lack thereof. --Mr.98 (talk) 18:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

And, jurisdiction is everything. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a pre-law contract homework question, but because the IP is from India, I'm not sure. I'll tell you though that this is easily a standard common law contracts question. You should try looking at promissory estoppel and should try to determine when an agreement becomes a contract, if it at all. Maybe that will get you on the right start. Shadowjams (talk) 06:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It does depend on whether A gave permission for B to go ahead and could stop the proceedings at all times. Would A know what the cost would be at all times? If there is an informal agreement, then the emphasis will be on what is reasonable. B is in the wrong in going ahead in working before agreement is given. B is expected, then, to keep the cost well within budget. Does A own the house? Does B have an intrest in the house? Could A say "No" at any time and at all times? MacOfJesus (talk) 22:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Presuming there is no legislation that mandates written agreements, check out the rule in Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Company and if you have a law textbook the section on acceptance by conduct.Jabberwalkee (talk) 06:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Pirate Latitudes

At one point in Pirate Latitudes, the characters get a large supply of silver bars, only to find out that they're tainted by "worthless" platinum. Is it true that platinum used to be worth a lot less than silver? If so, why? --138.110.206.100 (talk) 18:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is true. Platinium was considered more or less worthless (I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the Spanish conquistadors were frustated on finding here and there platin instead of valuable gold or silver). As to why, I can't truly help you. Perhaps because platin was and still is extremely rare and hard to find? Another factor is the refinement: how can it be refined and how much does cost? I suspect that platin was simply unknown to the public/customers and therefore not used in jewelry and currency. AFAIK the precious/valuable metals in ancient times (Classical Antiquity, Middle Ages and Rennesance) were gold, silver and copper (more or less in this order). Flamarande (talk) 19:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Platinum is much harder to work then gold and silver, which is one reason why it would be less desirable. Googlemeister (talk) 19:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

As an aside, during the late 18th century/early 19th century, Aluminum was once considered a precious metal, on par with silver and gold. Before modern aluminum smelting techniques, it was very expensive to extract (despite being one of the most common metals in the earth's crust), and as such, caried a high price. It was used for coinage and in jewlery. The small pyramid on top of the Washington Monument is capped with aluminum specifically because it was so rare and precious. --Jayron32 02:41, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Platinum is an industrial metal rather than a precious metal. Without a strong chemical industry to use it, there isn't much demand for it. --Carnildo (talk) 05:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

that doorbell song

what's that song, going down, pause, and then back up: cabeebacECDG GDEC. I know I'm TOTALLY butchering this thing with the transcription, but I think you will recognize it if you play that. So, what's the name of that song? Thanks! 84.153.184.144 (talk) 19:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

See the article on Westminster Quarters. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Legal question (probation)

I am in Texas. If someone broke a law and was sentenced to 30 days in jail or 1 year probation, and chose probation. If down the line, they decided that they were tired of the classes, fines and endless hassles, and went ahead and let the state incarcerate them for the 30 days they were originally sentenced to, would that be the end of it ? Would the debt be paid and the book closed ?

Thanks Killa Klown (talk) 21:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

That would be a question specific to Texas law, so I doubt wikipedia would have it. Have you checked google and/or called someone who might know, such as the prosecutor's office? The Probation article has a few what-if scenarios, but most of those have to do with violating probation, which I would doubt is the right way to go about it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay if you believe it is specific to Texas law, that is cool, but do you or does anyone have opinions as pertaining to their state laws ? To me, I am curious how you guys would interpert this moreso than how the law might.

Thanks Killa Klown (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

This is what I would say. The person was given a choice: either (A) 30 days in jail; or (B) 1 year probation. They chose choice "B". That means that the two parties entered into an agreement (a plea agreement or a plea bargain) with Choice B being the operative terms of the agreement. This is essentially a contract. Now, one party (the offender) simply -- and unilaterally -- decides that he does not like the agreement/contract. He decides to break (breach) the agreement ... by not doing the agreed-upon 1 year of probation requirement. To me, that means that the original agreement becomes nullified. Now, both parties start off from scratch, back to Square One, if you will. So, when the two parties go back to re-negotiate a "new deal", the party of the State (prosecutor) may indeed offer up the same deal (30 days in jail) ... or he has every right to negotiate an entirely new deal. No one -- including the prosecutor -- is "bound" by the old deal, since one party reneged on (breached) that deal. In fact, the prosecutor would/should exact a stiffer sentence for the very reason of "teaching the person a lesson": you cannot renege on a deal, midway through, simply because you changed your mind and did not like the deal that you agreed to. Otherwise, every (future) offender would do the same thing: pick one choice, try it out, change their mind, and expect that the other choice is still available to them. This process defeats the entire point of plea bargaining (agreements), from the prosecutor's perspective. Thus, the prosecutor has the right to change the original deal and come up with a new deal, since the offender reneged on the original agreement. The prosecutor's proposed "new deal" may be stiffer, less stiff, or the same as the original deal. That is the prerogative of the prosecutor. At the same time, the offender may choose to agree with -- or not -- the prosecutor's proposed deal (whether it be stiffer, less stiff, or equal to the original deal). And, if the offender does not want to come to any agreement, the offender can take his case to trial -- as he had the right to do originally. But the ultimate bottom line: what incentive would the prosecutor have to stick with the original deal, if the offender has proven that he will agree to something and then, when not to his liking, renege on it? The prosecutor would and should "up the ante" to teach the offender a lesson: that he had his chance at a good deal, and that he blew it. Thanks. (64.252.34.115 (talk) 16:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC))

Like I said, or tried to, it would depend on the approach the offender takes. If he blatantly violates his probation, there are probably separate and tougher penalties for that, very possibly with no options offered. But if he simply raises the question with his probation officer, maybe a new deal could be worked out peaceably. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs brings up a good point. If the offender violates the terms of his probation, that can be (and usually is) an entirely new and separate crime (subjecting the offender to additional penalties). But, if the offender simply "changed his mind" (without violating probation), then -- as Baseball Bugs says (and as I stated above) -- a new deal may be reached. This is at the discretion of the prosecutor, not the probation agent ... since the original agreement was with the prosecutor (who presumably decided to drop or reduce some of the criminal charges). To renege on the original agreement gives the prosecutor the right to reinstate the additional (dropped) charges or upgrade the (reduced) charges. In other words, everyone starts back at Square One. Thanks. (64.252.34.115 (talk) 00:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC))

Thank you both for the insight and opinion. Killa Klown (talk) 00:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Mohammedani Ibrahim

Does anyone know Mohammedani Ibrahim's year of death? Some of his photos seem to be copyright-marked, but can't google his life span. Twilightchill t 21:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Why don't we have an article on this guy? He took thousands of photographs of some of the early pyramid excavations. See, for example. Zoonoses (talk) 19:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

July 22

Dueling - how do the outcomes relate to one's satisfaction and restoration of honour?

In dueling, if the challenge is declines, is the honour of the challenger deemed automatically restored or still declined? If the agreement is to fire a single shot, the challenger misses and the challenge does not, is the challenger's honour deemed restored, unaffected, or further damaged? --78.148.143.76 (talk) 01:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

This, of course, depends on when the duel took place, where, and who was involved. Is it a legal duel, or quasi-legal? Since you mentioned guns I suppose you must be thinking of the quasi-legal seventeenth/eighteenth century duels between nobles when one of them felt dishonoured somehow...and since those were technically illegal I don't think there was a formal set of rules. Generally it was dishonourable to decline a challenge, but was the honour of the challenger restored? Well, was the honour of the challenger at stake? Person A could accuse Person B of something, and offer to prove it in a duel, but Person B could also offer to defend himself through a duel, so if B challenged A, and A refused, would A's honour be impugned? Probably, and he might also be in trouble for making a false accusation (if his accusation could not otherwise be proven, and when requesting a duel that was probably the case to begin with). If A challenged B, and B refused, B would likely be considered guilty of whatever the accusation was, even if the accusation was actually false. If you go further back in time to when duels were perfectly legal and were fought with swords, then there were usually specific rules enshrined in law about who could challenge whom, and for what reasons, and how to get out of fighting with your honour intact. It's all very complicated (for example, a challenge could not be made if the matter was not about property worth more than a certain amount of money, a brother could not challenge a brother, etc). If you have a specific place and time in mind, it would help answer your question more clearly. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

There is at least one scholarly paper discussing the game theory of dueling. It concludes that dueling is a reputation statement in societies where other methods of enforcement are weak (I think). Google for something like "duel and game theory" or "duel and rational choice" or something like that. Shadowjams (talk) 06:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Identifying an artist

I was wondering if anyone would be able to identify the artist of a painting. I tried reading the signature, but I was unsure of some of the letters, and I wasn't able to find anything myself. The painting is here and a closeup on the signature is here.--十八 02:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It appears to read "S. Dressen", and some other websites, showing the same signature on other paintings, seem to agree. See this google search, for example. (Though here someone read it as B. Dressen). ---Sluzzelin talk 02:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Note: You will also find paintings by F. Dressen, but that artist's signature is different from S. Dressen 's [1]. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:41, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

updated Rosie versions

When the Rosie the Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park was officially dedicated, I saw some updated versions of Rosie the Riveter. There was one in particular. It's the same "We Can Do It!" with a modern day "Rosie". The reason I say "modern day 'Rosie'" is because the woman has bangs. I can't seem to find any products with that particular image anywhere. What's a good place to start?24.90.204.234 (talk) 07:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Try TinEye. 92.28.250.141 (talk) 09:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I tried TinEye. But I have to be registered, and that website is complicated. Are there any other places?24.90.204.234 (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I do not think you have to be registered. Find an online image of Rosie the Riveter, copy its URL or that of its page, go to the front page of the TinEye website and paste the URL in the appropriate box. You might be able to get Google to do the same think, as it often offers a 'Find similar' option for images. 92.15.3.219 (talk) 18:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

If "bangs" = "a fringe", is it this one? http://moomoney.net/2007/01/23/moo-the-riveter/ 92.15.3.219 (talk) 18:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

You could give some more information. When was your park dedicated? Was the image you saw a painting or a photo? What else can you remember about it? Was it the version with a redhead eating a sandwich? 92.15.3.219 (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

To answer your first response, no, that's not the one. To answer the questions on your second response, the park was dedicated in October of 2000. The image was like a computer-generated updated painting. It wasn't the version of a redhead eating a sandwich. It was a brunette with bangs, flexing her muscle while rolling up her sleeve.24.90.204.234 (talk) 01:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

There are a googol images of Rosie The Riveter on Google - try looking through those. 92.28.242.111 (talk) 22:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Someone altered the above from "a googel" to "Google". I've altered it back and changed it to googol which is what I should have written. 92.24.191.36 (talk) 09:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Still, does anybody know what I'm trying to find in "modern day 'Rosie'" images?24.90.204.234 (talk) 21:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

This one? ---Sluzzelin talk 01:20, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Not quite, but close. The "modern day 'Rosie'" I'm referrring to in a computer-generated, updated image is the J. Howard Miller design, except the woman's bangs are overlapping her forehead.24.90.204.234 (talk) 03:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

By chance I saw on the internet what you describe as a political poster relating to some place that began with "W" - Winconsin, Wyoming perhaps? I have not been able to find it again. Reading the OPs post again suggests there was an exhibition of many variants of the poster. 92.29.115.186 (talk) 09:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. But what does that have to do with what I'm trying to find?24.90.204.234 (talk) 18:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The title of the question is a clue. If you're going to be obtuse... 92.29.116.34 (talk) 22:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Look, I don't know how the question's title could be a clue. But who said anything about being obtuse?24.90.204.234 (talk) 01:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

incest and family relationships

Let's look at two family's A's and P's, and then some family relationship. A marries B, has C, their only child, then C marries D, who has ten siblings. One of these siblings is from a marriage between P's and Q's son and D's aunt. Is there anything incestuous? 92.229.13.132 (talk) 07:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

How can D's sibling be a child of D's aunt? Rimush (talk) 08:25, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

You tell me. 92.229.13.132 (talk) 09:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

"You tell me"? You're the one who posed the scenario. Perhaps you could be a little clearer in explaining it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Most of the information we have is irrelevant to the question of incest (there's no direct blood relationship between A's and P's families, and the number of D's siblings is not important), and the crucial bit of information is missing: the one sibling of D (let's call her D2) who is the child of D's aunt can only be D's half-sister, and they must have the same father because they do not have the same mother. So D's and D2's father (son of P and Q, so let's call him R) fathered D with one woman (let's call her M1) and D2 with another woman who is D's aunt (let's call her M2). The question now is, is M2 M1's sister (no incest, not even that unusual...R married M1, had a daughter, then they got divorced or M1 died or whatever, and R married M1's sister), or is M2 R's sister (in which case we have incest). - Ferkelparade π 09:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, many societies have traditionally considered it taboo (if not outright incest) for a man to marry the sister of his previous wife. See, for example, the Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act 1907. Gabbe (talk) 10:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

And yet in the Bible, men were expected to marrying their brother's widow to continue the family line. Aaronite (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

That obligatory type of marriage was levirate marriage. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

There's lots of ways to have multiple marriages between two families, for example you could have two brothers marry a mother and daughter (as happened in my mom's family) or like in on my dad's side where 4 members of my grandmother's family (her aunt, herself, and two cousins) married 4 members of my grandfather's family, and none of them had any blood relation to their spouses. In close knit communities, this sort of stuff happens; and it isn't necessarily incestuous. --Jayron32 02:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

closest thing pre-Holocaust to...

Reading this article Palestinian jailed for having sex with Israeli, what is the closest thing that happened to Jews in the pre-Holocaust German atmosphere? 92.229.13.132 (talk) 07:53, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Pre-holocaust? You mean the Nuremberg laws, among others? Shadowjams (talk) 07:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

if that's the closest thing. I'm wondering what the closest thing that happened to a Jew (a single time) was. 92.229.13.132 (talk) 08:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I mean "which pre-Holocaust incident is most similar to the one the Telegraph mentioned in their story?" as suggested by Gabbe.

In that case, I would agree with Shadowjams, the Nuremberg laws are similar, in that they prohibited Jews from having sex with non-Jews in Nazi Germany. There is a big difference, however, compared with the case you've linked. There, the man was not punished for having sex with the woman, but for letting her think that he was Jewish. Inter-ethnic intercourse is not itself illegal in Israel (unlike in Nazi Germany), but apparently not revealing your true ethnicity in order to acquire sex might be. Gabbe (talk) 09:47, 22 July 2010 (UTC) added correction Gabbe (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but I was not looking for a class of laws but the closest SPECIFIC case, for a single Jewish man. What is the closest thing that happened to a Jewish man (or woman)? (Of all the legal things that happened to Jewish men and women pre-Holocaust, which single case regarding a single Jewish man or woman was the closest to the linked event?) 92.229.13.132 (talk) 09:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Hiding your ethnicity is not a crime in Israel. The man was convicted for rape by deception, acquiring sex under false premises. Poliocretes (talk) 10:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

According to your understanding of what happened, what is the closest case (for one Jewish man or one Jewish woman) that you can think of or reference pre-Holocaust. This is a reference desk, after all. I'm not here to debate what happened in Israel just now or why (in fact, I didn't give my opinion of what happened) I am just interested in similar pre-Holocaust cases, specifically the most similar one. 92.229.13.132 (talk) 10:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, for one, there were constant threats of violence against the Jews in Nazi Germany, and there are constant threats of violence against the Jews in Israel today. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion, Baseball Bugs, you are right to suggest that Nazi Germany was under outside threat, and in fact it was eventually conquered by outside forces, certain German cities are partly in ruins to this day. So, that is a correct analogy, as Israel is certainly under this threat from all sides today. However, I wasn't really asking you to think about the threat to Israel, however credible it is. I was asking about the Palestinian in the linked story, who was jailed for having consensual sex with a Jew after misrepresenting himself as another Jew. I was asking what the closest case to happen to a Jew in pre-Holocaust Germany was to this. For example (I'm striking it out, to show that this is hypothetical): "a Jew was jailed for rape after claiming to be Aryan" and "A Jewish man has been convicted of rape after having consensual sex with an Aryan woman who believed he was also Aryan because he introduced himself as [such]". ? So, you see what I have in mind: what was the closest thing to that to happen, to a Jew (not to Germany or its people as a whole)? I am asking for an actual, real case, as this is a reference desk. Thank you. 84.153.200.39 (talk) 18:51, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

You misread what BB wrote. As for "closeness", there is no well-defined metric, therefore the question has no well-defined or unique answer. Circumstances are very different. Nazi Germany, e.g., rarely allowed such niceties as appeals for Jews (you do know that the verdict against Sabbar Kashur is not final, right?). Leo Katzenberger was killed for being unable to prove that he did not have a consensual affair... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:41, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, what BB wrote was quite out of place (a polemical political remark irrelevant to the original question), so the OP deserves an applause for doing his best to ignore its true character and (mis)read some relevance into it.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

(OP here, though I believe my IP has changed). I think we can all agree that a closer example would be one in which someone had lied about being Jewish. Your example probably comes to mind because it is a famous one - in fact the article seems to indicate that it was only a show trial to the extent that the presiding judge was all but debarred even within the NAZI regime. So perhaps a more usual case would be a better example, maybe from earlier in the period or for whatever reason with softer application of the law than the instanced execution, egregious even in the slewed justice system of the time. This of course, will require real reference work.... 85.181.50.210 (talk) 21:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Using the search term "jew false identity papers ... " may help in this search - it turns up examples of jews who lived in nazi germany with 'aryan' status, in one case married to a nazi officer - that is Edith Hahn Beer. However I didn't find anything close to what you described.77.86.76.47 (talk) 23:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Confusion of historical dates.

Wikipedia lists birthdate of Renaissance artist Sofonisba Anguissola as 1535 and her marriage to Don Francisco de Moncada as 1571. However, it lists de Moncada's birth as 1586, death 1635. Both she and he were very prominent people. email removed as per policy guidelines —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.127.47 (talk) 20:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Francisco de Moncada, 3rd Marquis of Aitona is presumably not the same guy...we don't have an article about Sofonisba's husband, apparently. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

This book may give a clue google books snippet - it seems his granfather was also called francisco de moncada - this also reveals that the grandfather was made marquis of aytona by felipe II (or spain or portugal don't know) This makes sense since the later grandson would logically be the 3rd marquis by hereditary after the father....

Someone else should check this - not my subject .. in short though it seems she was married to Francisco de Moncada, 1st Marquis of Aitona grandfather of Francisco de Moncada, 3rd Marquis of Aitona (unless the father was also of the same name .. ?) good luck.77.86.76.47 (talk) 22:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

(more) The catalan wikipedia may be more helpful (the spanish language one has only a short article) http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesc_de_Montcada_i_de_Montcada_(tercer_marqu%C3%A8s_d'Aitona) His father was called gaston, so the grandfather must be the husband of the painter, it also gives his (the 3rd marquis's) wife as " Margarida d'Alagó-Espés i de Cervelló-Castre" .. hope that helps.77.86.76.47 (talk) 22:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

(little more) The article "marquis's of aitona" in catalan http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marqu%C3%A8s_d'Aitona gives the first marquis as "Francesc de Montcada i de Cardona (primer marquès d'Aitona)" no birth but a death in 1594 - this seems to be the right person.

I removed your email address to prevent you getting spam - it's mentioned at the top of the page in the box about asking questions.77.86.76.47 (talk) 22:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, mystery solved - here is the correct man, with correct dates: Fabrizio Moncada. Died 1579. http://www.yourdictionary.com/sofonisba-anguissola

July 23

Butternut color

Uniforms of the Confederate States Army have been referred to as being "butternut" in color. Our article on butternut says the color is similar to khaki. Can anybody find some examples of the color so I can see the differences? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The khaki link that you included has some examples but here is what comes to mind first when I hear the word khaki. Dismas|^(talk) 02:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

compare the color of butternut squash. --Ludwigs2 03:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I know what khaki looks like, my badly-worded question is, what does butternut look like. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 03:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems to be a dark khaki brown. I think it possibly refers to the colour of the wood of the butternut tree. Searching the Pantone site [2] for butternut turns up an example. Also, a google image search for "confederate butternut" shows, well, a variety of possibilities. Some are dark khaki, some are practically orange. (There also seems to be butternut yellow, but I think that's a modern invention.) "butternut brown -squash" is another possibly useful image search. With that I found this colour chart: [3] 213.122.54.16 (talk) 04:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Much of today's Confederate "butternut" tan uniform material started out as gray, either warm or bluish in tone [4], [5]. There were home-made Confederate uniforms dyed with the brownish gray butternut color, but the better uniform coats were of a gray which quite bluish. Cloth dyed gray with butternut dye can fade to a more brown color over the ensuing decades, since the dyes were far fro colorfast: [6]. See images of museum examples: [7]. See "Official records of the Union and Confederate navies in the war of the rebellion(1905)" which tells of a captured shipment of British woolen material intended for Confederate uniforms, which was "neither blue nor gray," but "a shade between these." Surviving uniforms in museums bore this out. There were many different uniforms used by various units. Here [8] is one description of the "official" uniforms. There was no big central warehouse with the ability to order up and issue identical factory made uniforms to all troops, and local tailors and seamstresses did with what they had.

That pantone search was great, thanks for al of the replies. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 21:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

20th century

Does anyone know of any nice quotes from or about the 20th century? Preferably from a wide range of different years and places. Also, whilst I'm here, does anyone know where I can find pictures of famous people or events from the 20th century, but taken this century or late in the 19th?

80.47.250.144 (talk) 09:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

And I forgot to mention, I would like for the quotes to be in some way relevant to the subject of history, if that is alright. 80.47.250.144 (talk) 10:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

You won't find photographs (which I assume is what you mean by "picture", given your use of the word "taken") of events from the 20th century that were taken in another century, that would require a camera that can see through time... --Tango (talk) 11:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe the OP is looking for a photo of a person/place etc that came to prominence during the 20th century but was taken outside of the 20th century. An example would be a photo of FDR as a younger man during the late 1800's or perhaps a present-day photo of Hiroshima. --Zerozal (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Sure, that makes sense for "people" but not for "events". --Tango (talk) 13:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

"Ask not what your Country can do for you, but what you can do for your Country". {Citation reference not necessary, surely.} MacOfJesus (talk) 13:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself". - Franklin D. Roosevelt, Inaugural Address, March 4, 1933. --Zerozal (talk) 13:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Why not try http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=20th+century+quotes - there are many sites.77.86.82.77 (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, this is too vague. If you want quotes about the 20th century, that can be rather specific (for example: [9][10][). But from the 20th century—a near infinite number are out there. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

We have a whole article about this: 20th century. The article needs a lot of help and editing, but it's got a lot of material that should be useful. In a box toward the top, the article has helpful links to our articles 1920s, 1930s, etc., if you need more detail. These articles have a lot of iconic photos that should be useful. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

"There is a Santa Clause!" "One small step....One giant step for mankind", in 1969. MacOfJesus (talk) 20:16, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Get it right, Mac. That's Santa Claus, no e (unless you're referring to a movie). And Armstrong said "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Armstrong was supposed to say that, but in the event seemingly omitted the 'a'. Much argument about transmission faults and scientific analysis of the recording has been expended over this question. see this. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 22:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Most human beings who were alive then, and millions more born since then, have been involved in some way with the debate about what Armstrong actually said. Let us PLEASE not have yet another debate about it here. My point was that he used "step" for (a) man, and "leap" for mankind. MacOfJesus seemed to not quite appreciate the contrast Armstrong made there. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

"....This was their finest hour". "No other time ... so few for so many." (All linked to History).MacOfJesus (talk) 20:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

For a non-English quote: "Ich frage euch: Wollt ihr den totalen Krieg? Wollt ihr ihn, wenn nötig, totaler und radikaler, als wir ihn uns heute überhaupt erst vorstellen können?" (Joseph Goebbels). --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

"Plastics". Clarityfiend (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I am thinking it would perhaps be better to direct the OP towards some Quotations or Image-website. I fear the he/she may not fully grasp the grand scope of the question. --Saddhiyama (talk) 21:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

(I see myself as pointing the OP in the direction of the quotes). (I was expecting more come-back in not giving the Churchill quotation exactly). MacOfJesus (talk) 23:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

You won't like me when I'm angry, I'm racist when I'm angry! A. Hitler Ideas are more dangerous than guns, and we dont let our enemies have guns Stalin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.89.16.154 (talk) 11:16, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Money

Let's say I had a ridiculously large sum of money, like several trillion dollars. I then, in a scene not dissimilar to the scene in the esteemed cinematic film, the Dark Night, piled this money in a warehouse and lit it all on fire. What would this do to the economy, if anything? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ToilFoil (talk • contribs) 10:13, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Reducing the supply of money is a cause of deflation. How much of an effect there would be would, I guess, depend on the ration of money destroyed to money in the economy in question. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It depends where the money came from. If you had been keeping it in a vault and not doing anything with it, then it would make no difference (money in a vault doing nothing doesn't affect the economy, so getting rid of that money wouldn't affect it either). If it had been in circulation just prior to you destroying it, then it would cause deflation. --Tango (talk) 11:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The M0 number published by the government would be decreased by several trillion dollars, which some people would notice and react to. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Only if the government noticed you burning it. --Tango (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Of course, while there are a few trillion dollars in the economy (depending on how you count it.) there's nowhere near that amount in cash money that you could actually set on fire. APL (talk) 15:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

What's the flip side? If he (the OP) had stored this money in a vault for many years, and then tomorrow decides to go out and spend it all? Thanks. (64.252.34.115 (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2010 (UTC))

It would cause the opposite - inflation. There would be deflation when he stored it, though, which in theory would all cancel out. In practice, if the storing was done gradually and the spending quickly, then the markets would overcompensate and you would get net inflation. --Tango (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

These people are so stupid above. What would happen if you burned trillions of dollars that you already physically had, and people knew about is, is that suddenly there would be a panic as to the "true value" of the dollar, the dollar would plummet on forex markets, people would desperately try to acquire anything instead of their dollars. The likely effect of that, nobody knows, but I for one think it would be great economic stimulus. 92.230.65.204 (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

How do you figure 92? Googlemeister (talk) 20:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Also IP 92 please refrain from making personal attacks. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? If you reduce the money supply you get deflation and a rise in value on the forex, not a fall. --Tango (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I think his point is very clear: if people were to see you burn US dollars publicly, they would assume that you have some insider information and know that the US dollar is about to become practically devoid of value (say, that the entire US is going to be destroyed by a meteorite). So they would panic and try to sell their dollars. I think the people are more likely to think that you're just crazy, though.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 18:04, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

See K Foundation Burn a Million Quid. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

In June 2010, the amount of US currency in circulation was $941,097 million. So, first I’d suggest scaling down your ridiculous amount of money from trillions to mere billions. So, let's say you personally destroyed 10% of the money supply. If the money is isolated, there's no effect. If, on the other hand, the money is part of the banking system's core capital . . . baby, it's 2008 all over again! DOR (HK) (talk) 08:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Theories of Conflict and International Security

Poverty, Conflict and International security: Analysis of Linkage —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.219.193.222 (talk) 12:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Question? If not, then look at the relevant pages, article pages on Wikipedia. International threats to security come from terrorist groups with different idology. They offer a threat to those of their own race but with a different idology. This is not linked to poverty. It is more to do with land ownership and power. MacOfJesus (talk) 12:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The topic is quite large and no doubt has numerous books written about it. No one-paragraph answer (like the one given above) will be of much use, especially if it is unsourced. Googling "poverty, conflict and security" turns up all sorts of books that are probably good places to start, like this one. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall

This question is for reference only, no offense. If Prince Charles succeeded the throne of England and became King of England; would his current wife, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, became Queen of England? If so, what title would she take?--AM ^(talk) 12:13, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

This is covered in the article at Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall#Titles and styles. There are even sources and everything. Also, there's no "throne of England" anymore. The full title is a bit of a mouthful, for more info see "Style of the British sovereign". Gabbe (talk) 12:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. According to the article, the expected title of Camilla queen Prince Charles become king hasn't been decided yet. I have one more question. My British civilisation lecturer said that if Camilla can't be entitled Queen, Prince Charles could refuse/deny to become King and, instead, his eldest son Prince William could be the next King. Is this possible?--AM ^(talk) 13:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

If Elizabeth II dies today, Charles would immediately be king whether he wants to or not. However, he could choose to abdicate. The last time a British monarch abdicated it proved to be a sticky situation, see Edward VIII abdication crisis, His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936, Statute of Westminster 1931#Implications for succession to the throne, etc. Gabbe (talk) 13:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

But note that Charles can become King and be married to Camilla without her becoming Queen. Neither Albert (of Victoria) nor Phillip (of Liz-2) were Kings, after all. And the UK "constitution" is flexible enough to allow for a lot of meddling. If Charles wants to remove himself from the succession, he can convert to Catholicism ;-). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Albert and Philip weren't Kings because that isn't the title for the husband of a Queen Regnant. The title is Prince (Consort). The wife of a King, on the other hand, is a Queen. Camilla would be entitled to the style "Queen" if and when her husband becomes King, however that doesn't mean she would use it. She's entitled to the style "Princess of Wales" now but doesn't use it because the public associates that title with the late Diana, Princess of Wales and would object to Camilla using it. She might choose to use a different style while Queen Consort for similar reasons. At the end of the day, it would be Charles' decision (the title's of royals is one of the few things where the monarch is allowed to act other than in accordance with the advice of ministers), so him abdicating because someone won't let his wife be called "Queen" doesn't seem likely. It's not impossible that public pressure would cause him to abdicate, but it's very unlikely. A lot of people perceive a monarch abdicating as a dereliction of duty and would strongly object to an abdication due to nothing more than pride. --Tango (talk) 14:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, thank you all very much for these clear explains. I think I've got the picture now.--AM ^(talk) 13:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Some more information under Morganatic marriage, specifically Morganatic marriage#United Kingdom. My own opinion is that Charles (or George VII to be), will be highly unlikely to abdicate. His grandmother (to whom Charles was very close) always despised the Duke of Windsor for deriliction of duty. Alansplodge (talk) 18:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The case of "Prince Consort" is a little more complex. Victoria actually bestowed it on Albert as his official title, and he's the only example of one (Philip is a "prince consort", generally speaking, but it's not his official title, and "king consort" has also been used to describe the husband of a queen regnant). In fact, it has already been officially announced that Camilla will be "Princess Consort" when and if Charles ever becomes king. See the last paragraph, here. Karenjc 20:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Prince Albert and Prince Philip were already "princes" before they married a reigning monarch, and they retained these titles on marriage. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Albert was a Prince. Philip was not. He had been born a Prince of Greece and Denmark, but renounced these titles in March 1947, becoming plain Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten (in private life he was simply Mr Mountbatten). In November 1947 he married Elizabeth, who was not the "reigning monarch", but the heiress presumptive, as her father George VI was still reigning. At that time he was created Duke of Edinburgh. Elizabeth became Queen in February 1952 when George VI died. Philip remained Duke of Edinburgh, nothing more. Only in 1957 was he created a Prince of the United Kingdom. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:25, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The precedent as regards prince consorts is surely more complex than this. Philip II of Spain during his brief marriage to Mary I of England was officially recognised as King of England and Ireland (although this ceased on Mary's death) and Mary's sister Elizabeth I of England famously refused to take a husband. But things had changed by the reign of Anne of England - her husband, Prince George of Denmark, was always referred to as such, never as a king. --rossb (talk) 21:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

However, Anne's older sister Mary married William of Orange, and he ruled as William III of England even after Mary's death (but then, he was next in line after Anne, anyway). Everard Proudfoot (talk) 21:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Just to respond to an inaccuracy above. Husbands of Queens can become Kings of the realm themselves. It is called being King jure uxoris, or "by right of (one's) wife". England had at least 2 such kings, Philip II of Spain, who got pissed when Parliament wouldn't let him keep the title after his wife Mary I of England died (see Spanish Armada and William III of England, who was techinacally King jure uxoris from his wife Mary II of England, but remembering the problems Philip had, demanded that Parliament name him king in his own right as well. --Jayron32 05:42, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

how much is spent on various activities in the US per year

I am looking for a list or table that shows how much money gets spent in the US/year for a wider range of things and activities in everyday life, eg how much gets spent on, say milkshakes, or dog grooming.

This question arose in the context of a debate (on slashdot) about how much money is being spent on solar energy research, and is this "alot" of money. This question can be answered in a lot of ways, eg the amount of money spent on solar RnD relative to how much we spend for other energy sector activites, but I thought relating it to something ordinary like dog grooming would be a good perspective - I don't know what the answer is, but my personal feeling is that if, hypothetically, we are spending 1$ on solar RnD for every 5$ of dog grooming, then we are not spending "alot" on solar.Cinnamon colbert (talk) 22:23, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Market-research firms compile these kind of numbers (all estimates, of course) and charge thousands of dollars for the data. Sometimes information is available from a trade association. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:13, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The US government is probably the source you want. A bare start is this document, which mentions how much the average consumer in the US pays per year for clothing, insurance, rent, and food. It's much more general than you asked for but it's a start. Comet Tuttle (talk) 02:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Here is another BLS document that drills down further: How much did the average American consumer spend on doing the laundry in 2008? A little multiplication should get you the answer you asked for. Comet Tuttle (talk) 03:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Confucian ritual

Does Confucianism (neo or otherwise) have a ritual that involves kneeling and silent prayer. The ritual might even involve moving forward, backward, and side to side before the kneeling. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 23:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

July 24

Catholic heirs of Mary I

Did Mary I of England have any immediate Catholic heirs? Could it have been possible for her to do what Anne of Great Britain but instead skipped the Protestants in favor of the Catholics?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 01:22, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

There was Mary Queen of Scots, of course, but after she was gone the focus seemed to shift to semi-convoluted arguments (based on John of Gaunt and Catherine of Lancaster, I believe) that some member of the Spanish royal family was the best candidate. Of course, at the time of Mary I of England's death, Mary Queen of Scots was firmly under French influence, and France and Spain were rivals... AnonMoos (talk) 02:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

There was Margaret Douglas. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 06:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Its ultimately moot because Mary's closest heir, irrespective of religion, was her half-sister. The succession was actually established by Henry VIII, who named, in order, Edward his son, then Mary, then Elizabeth as his three heirs in that order. That succession was verified by Parliament. Furthermore, under the common succession, Elizabeth was still Mary's closest living heir. That succession would have, of course, been interrupted had any of them had legitimate children. This was particularly problematic in the case of Mary, since her husband, King Philip II of Spain (who was also titular King of England jure uxoris), would have meant that their first child would have inherited both thrones. This never came to pass; perhaps some sort of division of the realms would have occured (As happened in the case of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor who divided his realms among his brother and son; or as in the War of the Spanish Succession where it was determined that two different Bourbons would rule France and Spain). However, this is pretty much idle speculation. It should be noted that Elizabeth's succession to the throne was not accepted by Philip; he sent a few boats over to England to reclaim what he thought was his rightful throne. --Jayron32 05:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Elizabeth was only Mary's heir if you accept that Henry's divorce from Mary's mother was legitimate. If not, then Elizabeth was an illegitimate heir and therefore ineligible for the throne. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 19:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Looking for the name of a percussion instrument

I'm looking for the name of a percussion instrument. I've heard its sound many times but never knew what it's called. The instrument appears in the intro of Rosemary Clooney's recording of the song Sway. --96.227.54.59 (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps a cowbell? Or agogo bells? It seems to be some sort of deadened metallic idiophone. 99.53.113.16 (talk) 03:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's a cowbell. In contrast, the agogô has more of a ring, is usually higher and pitched (that is it has a clearly discernible note, even when only one bell is being played). The slightly different cowbell sounds you can hear in the Clooney intro are produced by dampening the bell (by tightening the grip harder with the hand that holds it) and of course by hitting it harder or more softly. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. --96.227.54.59 (talk) 04:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

For whatever reason, during the 50s and early 60s cowbells were not uncommon in rock and roll songs. The most obvious that comes to mind is "Little Darlin'", and even some of the early Beatles songs included cowbells. (Hence one of their lines, "I'm gonna love her till the cows come home"?) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

More cowbell! Rmhermen (talk) 04:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

changed names

It is a very common custom to change names of people in controversial accounts to avoid danger to both the narrator and the person in question.I want to know if there is any standard way to change the names or is it just a random fit? (there shouldn't be as that would defeat the purpose i suppose)I mean if the changed name doesn't mean anything why give a name at all? Could have as well said that the person wants to remain anonymous? Does it make any difference? --scoobydoo (talk) 20:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there's a standard way of replacing real names with pseudonyms. If you're telling a short story involving only one anonymous character, it might be OK to not give the person a name, but if you're telling a complicated story with multiple characters whose identities need to be protected, calling the characters "A", "B", etc would be both confusing and distracting. I think stories whose characters have names are easily to understand. --96.227.54.59 (talk) 22:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I often see news reports that police have arrested "a 26-year old man" or "a 30-year old woman" where the actual name of the arrestee is not revealed.

In English literature a person's name may be concealed, as though to avoid slandering a living person, as in the following excerpt:

You know Mr. C**** O****, you know his estate, his worth, and good sense: can you, will you pronounce it ill meant, at the least of him, when anxious for his son's morals, with a view to form him to virtue, and inspire him with a fix'd, a rational contempt for vice, he condescended to be his master of the ceremonies, and led him by the hand thro' the most noted bawdy-houses in town, where he took care he should be familiarized with all these scenes of debauchery, so fit to nauseate a good taste? The experiment, you will cry, is dangerous. True, on a fool: but are fools worth so much attention? -- Fanny HellHill, John Cleland 1709 - 1789 Cuddlyable3 (talk) 00:10, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I can see why an admin initially zapped the question, as the "user ID" shown above is a pseudonym for the real user ID:[11] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

He's actually a sporadic user called Nonstop funstop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually i was reading The Fix (declan hill)where such precautions are necessary given the dangerous field of work. But everytime a name comes up i wonder how it would have been great if we knew who they actually were...an admin zapped the question?--scoobydoo (talk) 13:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

July 25

The King has entered this building ... (aber ... wo ist der Kaiser?)

In Chancellor of Germany:

Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in 1933, a point which historians agree marks the beginning of the Third Reich. ... Hitler used the Enabling Act to merge the office of Chancellor with that of President to create a new office, Führer; although the offices were merged, Hitler continued to be addressed as "Führer und Reichskanzler" indicating that the Head of State and Head of Government were still separate positions albeit held by the same man. This separation was made more evident when in April 1945 Hitler gave instruction that upon his death the office of Führer would dissolve and there would be a new President and Chancellor. On 30 April 1945, Hitler committed suicide and was briefly succeeded as Chancellor by Joseph Goebbels, as dictated in Hitler's Last Will and Testament.

If Nazi Germany was called the 3rd Reich, why didn't it has a Kaiser, a king or an emperor? How could there be beef if there wasn't a cow? If Hitler did not have a son or daughter, who's going to inherit the Reich? How could a dictatorship call itself an empire without setting up a king at first? Did anyone protest? -- Toytoy (talk) 00:51, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The term "reich" doesn't appear to have an English equivalent. It was used during the Weimar Republic as well, so it apparently isn't specific to a monarchy. It's not used anymore because it's associated with the Nazi era. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Checking my dictionary, it seems that terms like "Reich" and "rich" and "right" and "royal" and "regal" and "rex/regis" and even "raj/rajah" are all interconnected and ancient. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:10, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Reich's closest English translation is probably "realm"; kingdom in German is "Konigsreich" and empire is "Kaiserreich". France is often called "Frankreich". See File:HRR 14Jh.jpg, which is in German. France is called "Kgr. Frankreich" in that map, Kgr being short for "Konigsreich". Germany itself here (in this case, being the Germany of the Holy Roman Empire, or the First Reich) is called "Deutschen Reich" or "German realm". It is a term which does not imply any particular form of government, but does imply a sort of national unity. Reich is related to, but distinct from "Volk", which is another concept which has no direct English translation. "Volk" refers to the German people, while the "Reich" refers to the German nation-state. --Jayron32 05:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I always take "Volk" to be equivalent to "the folks", and it seems reasonable to assume they have a common root, as they both mean "the people". "Realm" is probably a good though understated equivalent to "Reich". "Realm" and "regimen" and "region" all seem to be connected to "regis" and "regere", Latin for "ruler" and "to rule". "Real" seems to be a cousin also. Fitingly, "Reich" seems to have a "rich" family of related words. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Rex/Rial/Real/Reich/Raja/Region/Realm etc. all descend from the same root which means roughly "King", but that doesn't mean they still mean the same thing. Meanings can diverge greatly as they take on new cultural contexts. --Jayron32 07:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

“Les Miserables” (The Novel) question

Towards the end of the novel (Part Five Jean Valjean – Book 3 – Chapter 8 [Page 1122 in my book]): Jean Valjean is in the sewers and Thenardier approaches him. It is very clear that Thenardier does not recognize the man he thinks is a "murderer" (Jean Valjean) or the "corpse" (Marius).

However, later on (Part Five Jean Valjean – Book 9 – Chapter 4 [Page 1236 in my book]): Thenardier goes to Marius in an attempt to blackmail Marius for not exposing Jean Valjean as a "murderer" of the unnamed "corpse".

OK, I understand why Thenardier is wrong about the facts, and why he would approach Marius if he knew about Jean Valjean, but I am not following how Thenardier later realizes that the man was Jean Valjean.

I obviously missed something between those pages. Any one remember?--Wonderley (talk) 04:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't Thenardier have known what JVj looked like since they met when JVj came to get Cosette from him? Googlemeister (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Normally yes, but when in the sewer it says "Jean Valjean perceived immediately that Thenardier did not recognize him." In another part it mentions the darkness, blood and mud. After that JVj makes sure he stays out of the light and kept turned so that Thenardier could not get a good look.--Wonderley (talk) 16:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Other countries with an electoral college?

I have been wondering for some time what other countries outside from the United States have any sort of an electoral college (as in the people vote for an elector who votes for a presidential candidate). Here in where I live (the Philippines), it's not like that, the people directly vote for the president, but I would still like to know. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Similar systems existed in France during many of its republics. In the modern (fifth) French Republic, the Senate of France is elected indirectly via an electoral college like system (there are 150,000 or so electors). This tradition in France goes back to the Constitution of the Year VIII, which established the Consulate phase of the First Republic. People directly elected a slate of "notable people" who would then amongst themselves elect the government. There were several tiers of elections, IIRC. --Jayron32 05:11, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

If you consider the British Prime Minister to be the equivalent of the "President" it works kind of like that in the U.K. However, the U.S. is kind of a unique situation, in that this approach to electing the President was part of the "great compromise" that paved the way to acceptance of the Constitution by both the large and the small states. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but I was asking for other countries which elect their president indirectly by people voting for an elector. Another I can think of is Hong Kong, although I'm not sure if it is indirect or not. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 05:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

In the British Parliament, the MP's are effectively the "electors". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, most countries that have a split executive (seperate Head of Government and Head of State) operate on some form of the Westminster System. The PM is not exactly the equivalent of the President. In the U.S. system, the President has a merged "Head of Government and Head of State" role; the U.S. is sort of unique in this regard. In most countries, the roles are divided between a President or Monarch, who acts as the Head of State, and a Prime Minister/Premier who acts as the Head of Government. In countries which use a varient of the Westminster System, the PM (Head of Government) is elected by the Legislature, and not directly by the people. In these cases, however, its better to think of the Prime Minister as something more like the Speaker of the House of Representatives, but with a LOT more powers. In most countries that have a split executive, the Presidency is a largely ceremonial role (like the Queen of England), and is directly elected. See Presidential system, Semi-presidential system and parliamentary system for more. --Jayron32 07:03, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Anne, the last queen of England, on one occasion chose to withhold the royal assent from a bill, so her role was not purely ceremonial. — Kpalion^(talk) 08:17, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

But we're discussing present-day circumstances, not those of 300 years ago: by "Queen of England" (a title not in fact in existence since the aforementioned Queen Anne became Queen of Great Britain in 1707), Jayron 32 doubtless meant the present Monarch, Elizabeth II. You may have actually been referring to this, Kpalion, but your meaning was unclear. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:17, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The prime minister is not the head of state, and so is not equivalent to the president. Anyway, he is not – as Jayron and Baseball Bugs wrongly claim – "elected by the legislature". The British Government is answerable to the House of Commons. However, neither the Prime Minister nor members of the Government are elected by the House of Commons. Instead, the Queen requests the person most likely to command the support of a majority in the House, normally the leader of the largest party in the House of Commons, to form a government. In short, nothing like the electoral college at all. 80.254.147.52 (talk) 13:49, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

In a slightly different context, the British Labour Party has an electoral college for the election of its leader (process currently under way) - the college is divided into thirds, a) elected Members of Parliament and the European Parliament, b) individual members of the party, c) individual members of affiliated organisations such as trade unions and socialist societies. As a party member and a member of an associated trade union, I'll get two votes, but in the weakest categories. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 11:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The position of Holy Roman Emperor was elective. The highest level monarchs subservient to the Imperial throne were even called "Electors". Everard Proudfoot (talk) 19:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Britain's Real Monarch

It seems that this theory can be disproven by the fact that James I of England was the legitimate heir of House of Wessex, the original ruling house of England.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

It's a bullshit claim anyways. Henry VII of England only had illegetimate claims to the throne (he legitimized his line by marrying a legitimate heir, but his own claim was only illegitimate). Furthermore, the monarch is the monarch because Parliament allows it to be so. Parliament has full control over the throne and the succession, insofar as Parliament accepts Elizabeth I as Queen, she is it. There is no further requirment on the situation. --Jayron32 06:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Though I do understand the connection to Henry II, and not the house of Wessex. Historically, remember, that the English monarchy is considered to have started at the Conquest (remember that monarchs are numbered from the Conquest, which is why Edward the Confessor is not Edward I). Furthermore, the connection to Henry II is because of the rather pragmatic agreement between Stephen and the Empress Matilda to put an end to The Anarchy which established the formal succession for the first time. Prior to Henry II, there was no formal system of primogeniture in England, which resulted in some messes. --Jayron32 06:55, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

For the record, Edward the Confessor would have been Edward III, following Edward the Elder and Edward the Martyr. 80.47.195.242 (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Henry VII did have a legitimate claim to the throne - he won it on the battlefield. Just because we don't consider that a legitimate way of becoming monarch these days doesn't mean we should ignore the fact that it was accepted in those days. Applying modern laws to other times usually gets meaningless results. --Tango (talk) 20:24, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

recipe challenge

what are 8-10 appropriate meal ideas for an inept, broke, vegan, diabetic bodybuilder gourmet in a hurry?

in order, the criteria are:

• inept: this person is clumsy and not a great cook, very careful preparation is beyond him
• broke: this person is living on savings and needs to spend about $2-$3 per meal
• vegan: this person does not eat animal products, including meat, fish, dairy and egg products, etc
• diabetic: this person can have only a limited amount of carbohydrates in one sitting (say, 30g) and almost no sugar
• bodybuilder: this person needs to have about 20g of protein per meal, a bit more (30g) would be even better
• gourmet: forget suggesting that this guy just slurp down a can of red beans, he has real gourmet tastes and requires meals that are genuinely satisfying and a joy to eat. The minimum standard should be something you could actually serve in a diner. He doesn't like the taste of soy products, extra points if you can avoid these.
• in a hurry: the meals should average (see below) 15 minutes in preparation.

Now, this might seem like an impossible set of criteria, but please note that all of the parameters (cost, time to prepare, etc) are averages, so that you can suggest, for example, 4 (different) meals that have an ingredient in common which will take 40 minutes to prepare for all four, and then are finished with 5 minutes of work. Space and storage is no big worry, and neither is "passive" preparation time, so if you you require some beans to be soaked for 24 hours, that will count as the two minutes it takes to put them in a bowl and pour water on them. You can amortize dried goods over a six-month period, in sufficient bulk it would add almost nothing to the per-meal cost, and you can assume any kitchen implements you need. The vegan requirement actually makes the meals cheaper, as animal products are relatively expensive. You can have him order any specialty products in any bulk you want, subject to shelf life. It is important, however to have 8-10 distinct meals with their own character that are each good and fulfilling. It's a challenge, good luck! 85.181.48.191 (talk) 10:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

1 suggestion - standard bachelor pseudo-stir-fry:

1. Buy a variety of spices
2. Buy a medium-high temperature cooking oil (like canola)
3. Buy a variety of grains and vegetables (sweet potatoes and yams are a good choice for starches, but rice and bulgar wheat work for alternates, tomatoes are a godsend)
4. Buy tofu, nutmeat, beans, or etc. in quantities sufficient to your needs, or supplement with cheap protein powder

preparation involves choosing vegetables and spices for a particular meal, slicing and dicing, then 10 minutes or so on the stovetop. you can slice-dice a few days in advance and store the makings if you want to speed up the process. meals generally look like a mess, but if you use good vegetables and spice carefully you can get chef-quality taste (use delicate spices - you want to enhance the natural flavor of the vegetables, not obliterate them - and don't be afraid of a bit of salt, which really brings out certain kinds of aromatic flavors). You can get a lot of variety this way with differnt choices, with a minimum of learning curve.

If youw ant something more 'recipe'-like or more high-toned, check out Moosewood Cookbook and google for online recipes from it. You won't get high-protein meals from that, so you'll have to change proportions or add supplements, but Moosewood is a great place to start for gourmet vegitarian cooking. --Ludwigs2 12:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Mark Bittman's How To Cook Everything: Vegetarian also comes highly recommended. -- 174.24.222.181 (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I have two suggestions. First, pease pudding or mushy peas. Soak for 24 hours: cook in oven for 6 hours. Serve with salsa, either shop-bought or home made (shouldn't take long), and a dollop of hummus or tahina. For the gourmet touch, use either black peas or grey peas, both of which are used in Northern England or the Black Country. Secondly, I remember making a dish called succotash, with sweetcorn and red beans. I'd also suggest adding wholemeal bread to any meal as this completes the protein. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TammyMoet (talk • contribs) 12:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thick chunky vegetable soup. Chop the vegetables up, add herbs and pepper, boil for 10 or 15 minutes. You could add some cornflower to thicken it, I'm not sure how much protein that would have, plus drizzle a small amount of cold oil on it. The maximum of 30g of carbohydrate per meal is the limiting factor - I expect a rice or pasta dish would exceed that. Would he get enough calories with 120g of carbs and 120g of protein per day? Edit: For 30g of carbs and 30g of protein, according to Wikipedia he would only get 233 kilocalories per meal from them, when the calorie requirements for a man are usually given as 2500 kilocalories. He may get some estra calories from fat.

Because of his very restricted choices, I believe he should get expert advice from a qualified dietician. 92.15.14.227 (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

ORIGION OF BHATT BRAHMINS (RAI)

Origion of Bhatt brahmins (rai)

Respected sir/madam

Today on 25 July 2010 I have been learnt that u have shown the origion of Bhatt brahmins (rai) on your website wikipedia as the title (rai bhat) in Uttar Pradesh is highly objectionable and based on incorrect informations.

Sir the "Bhatt" means in Sanskrit language is "the man who is expert in all studies and a warrior" and the "rai" is the short form of "rais" and its the vadic title not conffered by muslim or british rulers of India .

Its supposed that by the different views of historians that aryans came from central asia and entered into the northern India .some historians says that Sindhu Ghati culture came first and after that vadic culture but its true that aryans entered into India in different eras .so in early times thier were two classes in aryans.the brahmins and shudras later on these two classes developed into four varnas. The Bhatt brahmins (rai)bourned from the pious fire pit of Vasistha Rishi in the Varuna Yagya which was carried out by Varuna Deva who was the diety of water .the the rishes were bourned from this fire pit .thier origion from Lord Bhrama and the Goddess Saraswati is thier goddess of knowledge. The rishies borned from pious fire pit.

1) BHRIGU RISHI 2) ANGIRA RISHI 3) KAVI RISHI

Thier sons as under

Sons of Bhrigu Rishi 1.Chavan Rishi 2.Vajra Shirsha Rishi 3.Slushi Rishi 4.Aurva Rishi 5.Shukara Rishi 6.Varenya Rishi 7.Savan Rishi

Sons of Angira Rishi 1.Brahaspati Rishi 2.Utattha Rishi 3.Payasya Rishi 4.Shanti Rishi 5.Ghora Rishi 6.Virupa Rishi 7.Samvarta Rishi

Sons of Kavi Rishi 1.Kavi Rishi 2.Kavya Rishi 3.Dhrashna Rishi 4.Buddhiman Rishi 5.Shukracharya Rishi 6.Virja Rishi 7.Kashi Rishi 8.Dharmagya Ugra Rishi

Sir,

The whole generations of thies rishies are called varuna but the bhatt brahmins (rai) called Varuna Bhatt brahmins also.the whole brahmins varna divided into three categories and the Bhatt brahmins (rai) supposed their origion from Kavi Rishi and there are only 49 praveras of them which are counted their gotras also because there are 49 marutas who were the brother of lord Indra bourned from the womb of mother Diti wife of rishi Kashyapa who are the fore fathers of bhatt brahmins (rai).its uncorrect that 750 gotras of Bhatt brahmins (rai).Bhatt brahmins(rai) are acharya in all over India being the supreme breed of arrayan brahmins.

The categories of brahmins varna are-

1)acharya 2)upadhaya 3)buddhist

Presently the refferance of thies brahmins is available in the Srimad Bhagvat, Gita, Ramcharit Manas,Balmik Ramayan ,Vishnupuran ,Brahamavaivarta Puran,Mahabharat (Chapter 85 Anushashan Parva) ,Vedas also . These Bhatt Brahmins (Rai) estbilished many powerful dyansties in India

1.Shunga Dynasty 2.Satawahan Dynasty 3.Gupta Dynasty 4.Rai Dynasty 5.Vakataka Dynasty 6.Peshwa Dynasty.

Presently the Bhatt brahmins(rai)who came in northen India under the aegis of Peshwa Sadashivrao Bhau and Vishwash Rao.Sadha Shiv Rao was cousin brother of Peshwa Balaji Baji Rao and Vishvash Rao was only son.these brahmins were the class one jagirdars of then India and commanders of Maratha army which was sent by then Peshwa Maharaj to face the attack of Ahmadshah Abdali this army was along with a procession of pilgrims who also came to take bath in Kurukshetra on 14-january-1761.this procession came to Agra on 5-June-1760AD and Maharaja Bharatpur Surajmal and Sadashiv Rao Bhau taken oath on the bank of river Yamuna to becoming a friend and to joined the hands againts the aggressor .Maharaj Suraj Mal was in the attack of delhi but he fled before the battle of Panipat that is called third battale of Panipat.Maharaja Indore Malhar Rao Holkar taken the bribe from Ahmadshah Abdali not to take part in the battle .the kith and kins of Peshwa Balaji Bajirao and loyal commanders cut down in the battle the remaining brahmins run back to take shelter to save from the genaral slaughter after loosing the war they reached to the bharatpur where they were hosted by king and queen Kishori of Bhartpur .these Bhatt brahmins (rai)were worshiped by king and queen and given the shelter and protection to reach thier destinations .however few of them could reach up to the Gwalior and lot of people were become the pray of looters these brahmins who came to save the northern India became the subject of conspiracy.they put down thier royal dresses and weapons .again they involed in the first freedom struggle in 1857 ad while the lord Dalhosie implemented the policy of lapse .Peshwa Maharaj was pensioned at Bithore and he was crushed and his palace was destroyed by artillery by general Outram and under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhiji they denied to serve the govt service and any type of coperation .

The Bhatt brahmins community have the five divisions

1) Varuna Bhatt Brahmins 2) Brahma Bhatt Brahmins 3) Bhatt Brahmins 4) Vadawa Bhatt Brahmins 5) Maharaj Bhatt Brahmins

Bhatt brahmins (rai) take the dakshina from thier clients on the birth of child marriage ,katha ,bhagwat and on the occassion of pious puja.they are only authoriesed to preach the relegious surmons and the guru of the whole hindu society and subject to honour and worship.the great personalities borned a few names

1.Kumaril Bhatt 2.Narayan Bhatt 3. Bana Bhatt 4.Arya Bhatt 5.Bhaskaracharya Bhatt 6.Surdas Bhatt 7.Bhushan Bhatt 8.Matiram Bhatt 9.Bhatt Chandra Bardai 10.Ravan Bhatt 11.Shridhar Bhatt 12.Gaga Bhatt 13.Kamlakar Bhatt 14.Kalidas 15.Bhava Bahtt 16.Mayur Bhatt 17.Mahipal Bhatt 18.Sarangadhar Bhatt 19.Vamadeva Bhatt 20.Harisena Bhatt 21.Sayanacharya Bhatt 22.Madhavacharya Bhatt 23.Varamihira Bhatt 24.Pusipajan Bhatt 25.Laxmidhar Bhatt 26.Deva Bhatt 27. Ranachhor Bhatt 28.Pt.Jagannath Bhatt 29.Vaman Bhatt 30.Mahidhar Bhatt 31.Swami Ballabhacharya 32.Bhava Bhatt 33.Mahakavi Jagannath Bhatt 34.Shri Harsha Bhatt 35.Mallinath Bhatt 36.Divakar Bhatt 37.Bhoj Raj Bhatt 38.Vaga Bhatt 39.Birbal Alias Mahesh Das Bhatt 40.Khanda Deva Bhatt

And etc

They use the surname Sharma in the areas of western UP ,Bhartpur,MP,Harayana,Delhi, being brahmins. —preceding unsigned comment added by Jhande Lal Bhatt (talk • contribs) 12:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

(Note: I changed your all caps to lower case sentence text to make it easier for the volunteers to read.) Best, WikiJedits (talk) 13:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

And I corrected your mistyped and non-functioning 'close small' command :-) . 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

(Edit Conflict) (1) Please do not type in ALL CAPITALS - it is seen as shouting and is considered rude, and as a practical matter it is much more difficult to read.

(2) If you think something in an article is wrong, you should ask about it on the talk (Discussion) page of the article - that is what it is for. These Reference Desks are intended for asking general questions of fact.

(3) Although what you have written is hard to understand, you seem to be saying that someone has told you that Wikipedia says something you think is wrong, but you have not read it yourself. If this is correct, please read the material in question yourself to make sure your informant has not misunderstood or distorted what has been written. If you have read the article in question, I apologise for misunderstanding you, but your English is non-standard and difficult to follow.

(4) Wikipedia articles are supposed to be based only on material that has already appeared elsewhere in reliable publications that can cited as sources. What you have written above may all be correct, but Wikipedia could not include any of it unless you tell us exactly where it has been published so that it can be checked. When you re-post the material on the appropriate Discussion page, please be sure to include all your sources.

(5) The way you write English very hard for this native English speaker to understand. Would it be possible for you to have someone with more knowledge of English rewrite it?

(6) I have removed a few single spaces you put before the beginnings of lines, because these cause the text to display in unhelpful ways on Wikipedia. To indent a line by one or more spaces, you should instead use one or more colons (i.e. : for 1 space indent, :: for two spaces indent, etc).

I hope this has been helpful. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:56, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix, 87! Sorry about that.

Hello Jhande Lal Bhatt, thanks for your comments on the articles Rai Bhat and Brahm Bhat. It is great that you have done so much research on the caste and are able to correct the articles. I will copy your comment to the talk pages of both articles (as 87 suggested). Also, I invite you to simply go directly to the articles and edit them yourself, not forgetting to include the references you mention. I think references to the Vedas, Gita, Ramcharitmanas, etc should be fine as long as you give the specific chapters, but to be sure you can always read the instructions at Help:Contents/Links#Citation. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 14:11, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Learning to hate (school) learning

Many years ago, I heard or read somewhere (I do not remember where) that students enter the first grade of primary school with a great enthusiasm for learning, and that somehow that enthusiasm has been almost completely annihilated (from many students) by the time they have reached the age of about twelve years. Of course, everyone in society (parents, teachers, merchandisers, entertainers, religious leaders, and others) can play a part (to good effect, to bad effect, or to no effect), but what is it about the school system that discourages what should be a lifelong love of learning?—Wavelength (talk) 16:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Why does it have to be something about the school system? Could it not be something about the average student (like puberty)? Dbfirs 23:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

How Children Fail is a classic book on the subject. 81.131.68.238 (talk) 00:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Politics

Who gains the most monetarily from President Obama's policies?71.3.157.174 (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Lawyers and politicians. Who else would you possibly expect? Lawyers get a hell of a lot of money to sit around and talk about the wording of all the policies. Politicians make a hell of a lot of money to sit around and talk about adding kickbacks for them and their friends to all of the policies. By the time any policy is passed, it usually has a time-period before it kicks in - something along the lines of 5 years (after the following election). So, they have time to claim they did something before the election, but time to renounce the policy after the election and start all over by handing over a hell of lot of money to lawyers again. -- kainaw™ 19:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't have enough background knowledge to analyze this problem, but I can tell it needs clarification: from Obama's policies as opposed to what? John McCain's policies? A hypothetical moderate with the same leadership abilities? A hypothetical Democrat who followed the letter of their party's platform? The elimination of the office of the presidency? The complete collapse of the US government?

Furthermore, it's hard to say what groups are legitimate answers to the question. Millions of people are affected by policy decisions, and it's quite easy to construct subsets of them who are as sympathetic or unsympathetic as you like. What I want to know is what affect Obama's policies will have on people whose age is a perfect number times a square number. You know, folks like me.

Anyways, even with the necessary clarification, the problem depends entirely on the answers to fundamentally political questions, which are, as I understand it, outside the domain of the reference desk. Some people will claim that John McCain's hot-headedness would have risked starting WWIII. In this case, apparently it's Carlos Slim for the 53.5 billion dollars he'd not have, being dead otherwise. Others will have other ideas. Paul (Stansifer) 20:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Jesus and the cross

If Judaism rejects Jesus, why is there a focus at all on the concept of Iesus Nazarenus, Rex Iudaeorum? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:42, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The article Judaism's view of Jesus may have some answers. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

If I may draw a parallel: If I met an article page on Mohamet, would I object on the same grounds that you the OP use here? He is a fact of history, therefore, he should be there. I reject Hitler and what he stands for but I expect a true historical article page on him, and if missing I would want to write it myself. If I saw bias on that page I would object in the talk page. In fact the article page needs rephrasing in parts. MacOfJesus (talk) 21:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Both of you are focusing on aspects unrelated to my question. I understand Jewish views of Jesus -- I'm asking here about Christian views of Jesus. Why would Christians focus at all on INRI if the honorific is intrinsically awkward because the "King" is not accepted by his subjects. This has nothing to do with bias other than, perhaps and apparently, some odd Christian bias that their god was the king of some nation that denies it. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 23:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Because Christianity was, and to some extent still is, a break-off sect of Judaism. Christianity believes that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, that he is the King (but in a non-worldly sense, i.e. his kingdom is not of this world). Since he said he was a king, and he was a Jew speaking to Jews, Pilate wrote that he was King of the Jews: Christianity generally considers him King of Heaven and Earth, which is broader, but Pilate had written what he had written. Therefore, when depicting the cross, showing a sign with INRI is a sort of shorthand that labels the image, as well as calling to mind various aspects of the story and theology. In brief: Christianity generally considers Jesus the King of Everybody. King of the Jews is a phrase and title that got bandied around during his trial by the people accusing him. 86.164.66.83 (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Possibly helpful link: the INRI is a simple form of Iconography. 86.164.66.83 (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It is also worth mentioning that Jesus was not a Christian. He was Jewish. The followers of Judaism that followed Jesus eventually split off, with all the other people that followed Jesus, and became Christian. Therefore those contemporaries that followed Christ, the people we think of as Christians, really wouldn't have identified as Christians in the way that I identify as Christian. Falconus^{p t c} 02:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I am misremembering my Catholic-school education, but wasn't there an Old Testament prophecy that the Messiah would also be recognized as King of the Jews? So it's just another way of saying that prophecy was fulfilled. (And of course, a way of denigrating the Jews for not even recognizing their own Messiah.) Adam Bishop (talk) 03:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

How can the New Testament, written by Christians, be used as evidence that Jesus fulfills prophecies if their initial premise is that they believe he was the Messiah? That's cyclic. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's religion for you. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Was not this objection raised by the Pharisees to Pilate at the time, and did not Pilate answer the objection? Afterall, there was nothing presented to him that merited the death penalty, so they could not have it both ways. I refer you to; The Gospel according to Pilate or also known as The Acts of Pilate, in Wikipedia as: Acts of Pilate.

I can if you wish go through the prophetic words about Him from the books of The Prophets and draw the necessary parallel citations, but I think I would be wasting my words.

Does not your question begin: If Judaism rejects Jesus....? MacOfJesus (talk) 08:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The name Messiah means "anointed (one)" in Hebrew; the name Christ means "anointed (one)" in Greek, and distinguishes Jesus Christ from other men named Jesus.

The arrival of the Messiah was prophesied in the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, and Jews were expecting his arrival at the appointed time (http://www.multilingualbible.com/luke/3-15.htm).

Please see also http://www.multilingualbible.com/matthew/21-43.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/matthew/23-37.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/matthew/23-38.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/romans/2-28.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/romans/2-29.htm; http://www.multilingualbible.com/romans/9-6.htm.

—Wavelength (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Weighing job title

Is there a particular title for someone who weighs objects for a living? By objects I mean some type of commodity (food, money, etc.). --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. some kind of controller or comptroller would probably be closest. 92.230.233.128 (talk) 21:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The (rather obsolete) term is weighman. See also checkweighman. Warofdreams talk 11:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

See article page: weighbridge and weighbridge operator. "Weighbridge operator" is an article page waiting to happen. The words: "Weighbridge operator" come up so many times in other article pages that an article page on him/her would be justified. Also the controller that operates on a quayside, that balances a boat for weight distribution, to prevent listing, even in the case of a storm. Sorry, don't know his name! MacOfJesus (talk) 21:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Roman Empire

I have been hoping to write a book set during the declining years of the Roman Empire, but I am aware that I perhaps don't know quite enough of the details of life at the time to write an entire novel on it. Could someone direct me to a website where I can learn what I would need to know for this?

80.47.195.242 (talk) 20:19, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

You could start at our article Roman Empire, then follow the links and maybe get hold of some of the books cited. I fear that historical knowledge gained only from "some website", might not be enough background knowledge to please any potential publishers. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Start at http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/life.html, then follow the links. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 20:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

do you want to write a good book, or is a crap one okay? If you need to write a good one, I suggest picking up the phone and actually callig, during office hours, the history departmen of a big university and, being very polite and making clear that you are just calling for the possibility of talking for a minute with the appropriate professor, ask if they can recommend quality historical fiction set during the time you are interested in, or whether they might have someone in mind who is more interested in the subject and who might know. You might need to play a bit of phone tag, just remember to be polite and to the point tell them who you are and exactly what you are looking for - ideally we are talking about a few minute call. you can try doing some of this by email, but I really recommend the first approach. Once you have the list of recommended historical fiction (incidentally you could try the same question of literary departments) just get those books from amazon, read them an analyze them for why they are so good that they leave someone recommending them years after the fact. buy a standard history of the fall of the Roman Empire and Read it with great imagination, keeping in mind the great works you've been reading in historical fiction and the effects you see, why you feel it "works", and try to repeat the effect with your own story and your own writing. be careful not to repeat phrases literary from the recommended historical fiction you read, even though you respect them an are tryito repeat the effect. (this is a common beginner's mistake, repeating verbatim, and so being "derivative" - same goes for plot; find your own). when you've wrtten the book, hold it to the same scrutiny ad thr recommended books: where does yours fall short? where is it more linear, flatter, less surprising, less clear, less interesting. this last one is important, pay special attention to tricks used to keep the reader turning pages. hint: don't be direct about it ("he had no idea what was coming"). put your manuscript aside after all your editing and read it with fresh eyes a month later. does it hav the same effect as your recommended book? If not, rewrite it and repeat all of the above until you love the book when reading it with fresh eyes. at this point write a kind, former, direct letter to professors of history and literature askin them to kindly review your manuscript and write a few brief comments for you I they would. icoude a self addressed stamped envelope for them to use. if our letter to them is nice, they will give you their thoughts. listen to them and do what they suggest. do another round after the changes, with the same and new professors, but this time include writers. if your manuscript is any good, the establishes writers will recommend your work to an agent, who will get back to you about publishing your work. once a publisher is interested, you will also benefit from their professional editorial services and should end up with a fine book. all of the above has bweb assuming this is what you are writing. if you are interested in writing a crap book, my recommendation is just to watch Gladiator, use your imagination as to why Rome fell afterward, and just make everything up, the only thing you need is actual senators' names from the period and cliches like the barbarians at the borders and so on. use you imagination and write anything you want, a love story intricacy is especially easy as it doesn't require facts, so for feuds and so on. just write Gladiator again, but with Rome falling. don't forget detailed descriptions of well-built pectoral muscles and the like. good luck. 92.230.233.128 (talk) 21:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Does your question imply that you are already aware of the historical events but not so aware of the lifestyles of those days? There were a lot of complicated things happening during that time, including the Eastern Roman Empire. Unless your novel has no reference to these, then you would need to study those also. There is a huge amount you could read - from things written by Romans themselves, to non-fiction historical textbooks, to fiction set in Roman times. If I were you I would start reading the more entertaining things first: The Golden Ass and the Satyricon for example, although I don't know what period of Roman history they relate to. There are many textbooks - The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon fits your period exactly but I suspect it may be outdated and a too-long read. Fiction includes I Claudius by Robert Graves. Graves lists some of the reading he did to prepare to write that here Tacitean_studies#20th_century. 92.29.115.109 (talk) 21:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

92.230's flippant remarks do contain a good suggestion - call the history department of a nearby university (or better, the classics department), and someone there is likely to help you. They'll probably pass you off to a grad student who would be happy to help, perhaps for a small fee (those wacky grad students, always trying to pad their CVs). We also have a specific article, decline of the Roman Empire, which might be helpful for a reading list (don't use Gibbon, at least not exclusively). Adam Bishop (talk) 22:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

The OP would probably be better off asking the same question at a public library, since have the books to hand and may even be willing to prepare a bibliography if he was seriously interested. The Further Reading sections of the various Wikipedia articles already make quite a long list of things to read. 92.29.117.139 (talk) 22:50, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

It is the culture and the lifestyles I was interested in, I want to understand more of the way my characters will act and talk, what they do each day, where they live, where they work and so on, rather than the background of historical events which I have already found. I don't suppose there is an entire website out there dedicated entirely to providing such information, by any chance? And I do already know how to write a book, getting inspiration, not copying, reading back through over and over, and so on, this is just the first I will have attempted where I want an accurate idea of a culture I have no personal experience of. 80.47.204.116 (talk) 09:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I found Peter Hall's Cities in Civilization a very interesting academic look at everyday life in a wide variety of cities and time periods. It has well-referenced information on life in Rome in the period from 50 BC to 100 AD, which may be a bit early for your purposes but would still be worth a look. Warofdreams talk 11:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I recommend reading Ammianus Marcellinus. His history covers about twenty years in the second half of the fourth century. It is a fascinating primary source, and easy to get in a good translation (I have the one in Penguin Classics). He has chapters on life in the empire, and long rants on the things that horrify him (displaying cooked food in shop windows before noon! daring to boil water!) as well as an eloquent defense of Julian the Apostate. It's interesting to have the perspective of a non-Christian on this period in Roman history as well. Antandrus (talk) 13:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

This and this are two books that you may find useful. Deor (talk) 15:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

July 26

explosion memorial pins

It seems a lot of people are looking for lapel pins with the same design of the Deepwater Horizon explosion memorial ribbons. What could be a good place to start?24.90.204.234 (talk) 01:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Jewish identity

Does anyone know of a book or paper that speaks at length on how adversity helps Jews hold fast to their religious identity/faith? To put my question into context, the Kaifeng Jews never faced bigotry in Chinese society, so they began to assimilate very quickly. In order to advance their family's social status, many Jews gave up learning Hebrew so that they could study the Confucian Classics and pass the imperial exams. This happened on such a wide scale that by 1800 CE, the last Rabbi died leaving no one with knowledge in Hebrew. This is the exact polar opposite of what I am talking about. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 06:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually the Jews of Kaifeng did not "assimilate very quickly". For a period of about 300 years, when they were totally cut off from any other Jewish community in the world, they continued to observe Jewish practice to the best of their knowledge and ability, and even the many missionaries who tried to convert them during this period were very very unsuccessful. I can speak authoritatively on this subject since I have very recently completed my manuscript of a book entitled "Jewish Religious Observance by the Jews of Kaifeng China" (and am currently looking for a publisher). Simonschaim (talk) 07:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Jealousy

why am i jealous? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.22.179.18 (talk) 11:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

See Jealousy. It will explain every possible doubt you have. --151.51.156.20 (talk) 14:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Doug Nye

How can I contact him by email? Kittybrewster ☎ 12:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Japanese socialist literature

Anyone knows if there is any online archive/website were one can find scans of old Japanese socialist publications, such as Shinkigen? --Soman (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)