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

May 16

Royalty and "style"

This question may not even be answerable but here goes: Princess' Beatrice and Eugine are very attractive young ladies. Why would they (or any of the Royals for that matter) wear such stupid looking hats (such as at the recent wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton)? I mean, hats should enhance one's beauty not take away from it. I can't understand why they do this. Anyone have any ideas? 99.250.117.26 (talk) 01:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I suspect the answer is that hats are rarely worn to "enhance one's beauty". Instead, they are worn to assert one's status. The higher up the status totem-pole one is, the sillier the headgear one can get away with: AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

For free publicity.
Sleigh (talk) 02:43, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Reporters suggested it was a way for their mother to get back at her former in laws for not being invited to the wedding. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:11, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

With this helmet on, I'm tall enough to go on all the carnival rides. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC) ===>

The British were not to be outdone - see Sir Henry Galway's plumage. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 05:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

If you like it you oughta put an eagle on it. Fifelfoo (talk) 08:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Why not? If a princess can't break out of conformity and try something different, or even just have a laugh by acting a little silly, then who can?

It's not like the hats worn by ladies in the Victorian era were any less ridiculous. 66.31.230.189 (talk) 07:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

99.250.117.26 -- When you get to the "bleeding edge" of fashion, its purpose is not really to make yourself look attractive, but to push the envelope and call attention to your own ultra-trendiness. I would strongly doubt whether many straight males would find that most of what is paraded down haute couture runways enhances the women's attractiveness, since it's ultra-stylized kabuki which has very little to do with what most women wear most of the time. As a royal woman attending formal royal events, Beatrice has little opportunity to be ultra-trendy in most respects, but headgear is one area where flamboyant creativity is somewhat tolerated... AnonMoos (talk) 07:42, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Anyway, you can buy it here, if you're willing to bid more than $15,000 for it... AnonMoos (talk) 08:24, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The concensus of opinion in my social circle was that the princesses had inherited their mother's dress sense! --TammyMoet (talk) 12:24, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It isn't just the Yorkies... you should see some of the hats that show up during Ascot Week (or, for that matter, some of the hats worn to the Kentucky Derby in the US). Such hats are considered high fashion in posh (and wannabe posh) circles. To some extent, the fault lies with the hat designers (who have to come up with something unique for their clients), and to some extent the fault lies with their clients (who can't seem to say 'are you nuts? I'm not going to wear that'). Blueboar (talk) 13:03, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Lady Gaga wears weird things all the time. In this case it was only a hat. I expect the designer wanted to make a name for themselves. 92.28.245.12 (talk) 15:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Philip Treacy, the designer of the hats, already has a huge name for himself. There was even an episode of Project Runway last season in which the competitors had to design clothing to complement Tracey hats. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 17:49, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Bomb threats and codewords

The UK news is buzzing today with rumours that an Irish terrorist group is planning to bomb central London, and great credit is being given to the threat because it was delivered using a "known codeword." Assuming that this doesn't just mean Gaelic (!) what exactly are these codewords? Are there any known examples? Thanks. ╟─TreasuryTag►Tellers' wands─╢ 12:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

When I worked for Eurostar, we had training in how to respond to terrorist threats. We were told not to worry about codewords, as the threat was treated just as seriously whether or not one was given - and that in the experience of the ex-Special Branch officer running the course, the presence or absence of a codeword had little relationship to whether or not there actually was a bomb. DuncanHill (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

If the IRA and the Police had agreed a list of codewords, do you really think they'd be common knowledge? Every Tom, Dick and Eamonn would be calling up saying "I have a bomb and to prove it here's a codeword"! By 'eck, lad, use your head!--TammyMoet (talk) 12:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean, what words are used as codewords? I meant, what is the function they perform, are there any books that cover the subject etc.! ╟─TreasuryTag►directorate─╢ 12:24, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It's apparently some pre-established way for the IRA (or whomever) to confirm with those on the other end that they are who they are. Here's an article from 1996 on the subject. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

As stated above, these aren't generally given out, because that would lead to hoaxers using them. However, this book gives an example of a codeword used by the defunct Loyalist Volunteer Force: "covenant". This term holds significance for ulster loyalists, given the Ulster Covenant, and is unusual enough that it would be memorable to who received the call. I suspect that republican codewords are selected on a similar basis. Warofdreams talk 14:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The Loyalist Volunteer Force is not totally defunct, it's on ceasefire (not the same thing). THe article says it was stood down in 2005, yet CAIN says it still has a few members. It's the Mid-Ulster UVF which are defunct having been stood down by the UVF Brigade Staff in 1996 and then most of its members having gone over to the LFV with Billy Wright.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

'Big wedding' was used as a code phrase by al Qaida. Dismas|^(talk) 04:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Just before the 1998 Omagh bombing the Real IRA called Ulster Television using their code word "Martha Pope" which was recognised by the RUC hence the urgency to evacuate the people from High Street where the bomb was thought to be to Lower Market Street where it went off. It was the use od the code word which caused the RUC to take the threat seriously. Unfortunately, the caller gave the wrong location. Back in 1983 in Dublin there was a bomb scare in the city centre but the police told people in town it was likely a hoax as the caller used an outdated UDA codeword.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

We have part of an article about the famous P O'Neill codeword. I remember Unionist politicians insisting that some the war wasn't over until P O'Neill (as opposed to Provisional Sinn Féin) announced it. Matt's talk 15:35, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The invisible pink unicorn

Is comparing the possibility of a creative force existing and the presence of an IPU a valid analogy? Can all things that are unprovable, regardless of their plausibility, be compared to something that is an obviously fabricated absurdity? I truly saw a chip monk digging in my vegetable patch last week. No one else saw it, the physical evidence has been repaired, and I have no recording of the incident. It is unprovable and unknowable to anyone but me. Could my insistence that it happened be mocked by someone invoking the IPU? Are all things that are unprovable ridiculous to talk about? Could someone that gives no attributes to a creative force and makes no assumptions about it, but holds the idea that one could exist run the risk of being slammed by the IPU analogy? I guess I am wondering where or if a line is drawn.--67.187.72.116 (talk) 17:41, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

One field that is relevant to your chipmunk claim is police work and trying to judge the reliability of eyewitnesses. Our articles evidence and evidence (law) are relevant, as are proof (truth) and its sublinks. As for the IPU, the usual saying I'd reach for is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", a statement popularized by Carl Sagan. I don't find your chipmunk claim to be extraordinary, so your eyewitness testimony is probably enough for me to accept the truth of your claim; but if you were to also claim you saw the IPU in your back yard, I would be less credulous, and would require more evidence. As they say on the user forums these days, "Pics, or it didn't happen." Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

If they say they "saw" the INVISIBLE pink unicorn, then you know it's a lie. :-) StuRat (talk) 21:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

To me, the existence of (any) God is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary proof. StuRat (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The IPU is about falsifiablity — about the idea that there could never be any negative evidence against the existence of a God. This isn't the same situation at all as with your chipmunk: we could certainly consider conditions under which your story was simply impossible. (If you saw a visible pink unicorn in your backyard rooting through your vegetable patch, you'd probably start to doubt your own sanity — at that point, your own evidentiary organs are no longer valid!) Just because we cannot prove it one way or the other in your specific instance does not mean it is an unprovable assertion. This is different from the category of claims that the IPU is meant to represent. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

So my instance is not important. The only thing that has to be shown is that A chip monk could possibly be digging in A vegetable patch?--67.187.72.116 (talk) 21:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I suppose it depends on the context. If your only defense from a murder charge is that you were busy chasing said chipmunk around your yard when the murder occurred, then you'd need more proof. The difference is, then you would have reason to lie, but otherwise you don't. Also, if you did just make up the chipmunk story, it really doesn't much matter, in normal circumstances, so demanding proof seems like a waste of time. Incidentally, we sometimes get people on the Ref Desk who demand proof of things as trivial and believable as this, presumably just to waste everyone's time. StuRat (talk) 21:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Chipmunk

Let me put it this way: there is a difference in saying, "there could never be any evidence against you having witnessed a chipmunk in your garden" and saying, "there could never be any evidence against there ever being a chipmunk in your garden". The first is a rather limited claim, the latter is categorical. The comparative claims in a God scenario would be to question whether a specific instance of Godlike intervention had evidence (e.g. a miracle claim) versus the ability of marshaling evidence against God at all. IPU is used as an analogy for the latter, not the former. It means, in effect, "look, we can all create non-falsifiable explanations — it's easy and trivial." It is only analogous to situations in which you are creating non-falsifiable explanations. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

chip monk (two words, with an "o")

chipmunk (one word, with a "u")

The first one doesn't even redirect. 138.192.56.24 (talk) 21:33, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It does now, thanks to me. StuRat (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

A chip monk is more likely to be a friar. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 22:56, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The original poster may enjoy our reality article, particularly the "Truth vs. Fact" section. Did the chipmunk exist, or did it not? Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't see the comparison. You could provide physical proof that chipmunks exist, could provide physical proof that you have a vegetable patch, and you could provide physical evidence that the former likes to dig around in the latter. You're not alleging new phenomena, or even really new entities.

If you could prove that invisible pink unicorns existed, and were native to your part of the world, then I would take you at your word that you claimed to see one. (Assuming that you could also explain how you saw something that was invisible.) APL (talk) 01:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Invisible Pink Unicorn thing is more than an analogy, it tends to be used in a mocking way, sometimes friendly, usually not. It can easily be used in ways that belittle religious beliefs. It is frequently not used simply as an analogy, but as a comment about how stupid the other person is being. The OP worded its use as "being slammed". The FSM thing is similarly used. It reminds me of the use of the Christain fish symbol, with legs and the word "darwin" added. There are too many people who seem all too eager to wage some kind of religion vs. science war, and who are quick to ridicule the other side. The whole thing strikes me as counter-productive and mean spirited. Both the IPU and FSM memes were slightly funny the first couple of times I heard them, but after a while they just seem lame and snide. Personally, I find the God(s) as described by many religious people, be they Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc, unlikely to an extreme, but hard-line atheism seems dogmatic and closed. The OP asked, "...someone that gives no attributes to a creative force and makes no assumptions about it, but holds the idea that one could exist". The IPU and FSM retorts are clearly meant to mock how unlikely it is for some specifically described deity to actually exist. That reality includes some kind of "creative force", left undescribed (perhaps with the added caveat that any term, like "creative force", is already missing the mark by describing it in words), seems blatantly obvious to me. At the risk of missing it again, let's call it "Tao". Invoking the invisible pink unicorn has no bearing on whether or not "Tao" exists. In fact, it could be taken to accord with this notion of some "Tao" that exists but cannot be described. The Tao that can be described is not the Tao. The unicorn that is pink is not visible. The IPU makes a decent Tao analogy. Pfly (talk) 02:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

You may be interested in Russel's_teapot (and references therein). Also keep in mind absence of proof is not proof of absence... SemanticMantis (talk) 03:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Conditional ordinations and conditional confirmations

Another technical question from one who is not a believer:

We have an article titled conditional baptism. The Council of Trent said dogmatically that the same thing applies to confirmation and to holy orders. Has either of the latter two sacraments ever been done conditionally? I'm fairly sure conditional baptisms have actually happened, but Wikipedia's article doesn't say so and cites neither instances nor statistics. Can those be provided in the article? Michael Hardy (talk) 20:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

See http://www.eskimo.com/~lhowell/bcp1662/baptism/private.html for the Church of England version: "IF thou art not already baptized, N. I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." -- AnonMoos (talk) 02:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Conditional sacraments, when I've discussed them with people who received them or ministered them, seem to be given in private, given their nature. As such, I'm not sure how easy it's going to be to find solid statistics. 86.164.60.255 (talk) 10:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC) Oh, you ask if they (conditional confirmation and ordination) have ever been done: well, I've certainly heard of them being done, including from some people who say they have had them, but like I say it is generally performed privately and not made public. 86.164.78.220 (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

So you've spoken with people who say they've been conditionally confirmed or conditionally ordained? Plural? More than one of each? Michael Hardy (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

One of each that said they had themselves, although this was online and not a Wikipedia-strong source. More people who suggested they were aware of them having been performed. Not article-quality sourcing. 86.164.78.220 (talk) 18:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I meant to add this after your last question: you might have better luck with these questions at forums.catholic.com (Catholic Answers), one of whose stated aims is answering exactly this sort of question. It skews American, and has a couple of scary conservative posters, but otherwise seems very welcoming of this sort of thing: the main rules are that you have to be 'charitable' in your posts, and you shouldn't join just to try to convert Catholics! There's a section for terse, 'official' sort of answers to questions from a couple of people, and other sections for discussions of questions involving whoever, so I think it would give you decent answers to these sort of questions, better than I can. 86.164.60.255 (talk) 10:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, "86.164.60.255" and "AnonMoose". Michael Hardy (talk) 02:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I would like some book recommendations

1. Can anyone name some famous welsh mystery novels that are not in a series? 2. Can anyone recommended a fantasy book for adults that is not in a series under 300 pages with a simple plot? Just to let you guys know I'm 27 years old. I like any kind of fantasy book as long as it not too wordy or abstract. I don't like Lord of the Rings. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 22:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you like hard fantasy or comic fantasy? If the latter, then you can't go wrong with Terry Pratchett. I'd also recommend this collection of short comic fantasy stories - ISBN 978-0007385034 (I think; I borrowed it from the library ages ago, but the description on Amazon sounds about right, however I might be thinking of ISBN 978-1857236354). CS Miller (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It might not meet all of your criteria but Welsh mystery makes me think of Cadfael. Our article on the author, Edith Pargeter says many of her other works are set in Wales or have Welsh characters so you might want to check that out. --JGGardiner (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Owl Service by Alan Garner is a Welsh fantasy/mystery.In fact all his books are pretty good and short. Hotclaws (talk) 21:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Most Beautiful/Most Handsome?

Hi, I been looking at the art of the human face for a couple of years now. I not only appreciate the diversity of the human face but also the similarities and universalities (nose, eyes, mouth, etc.)

What has given me a hard time recently is the hailing of someone like Aishwarya Rai or Angelina Jolie (eye roll) as the most beautiful. Is it because the exoticism of Rai's face? With the indian gold skin color and the eye color of the caucasoid race?

I know some of the things that are appealing to an individual maybe facial symmetry, flowing hair, etc. but is there subjective factors as well?

How can one person be considered the most beautiful for the entire human race?

Thoughts on this and who is worthy of the title of world's most handsome man?

Say, you see a good looking woman on the street. Is she worthy of world's most beautiful?

How on earth are these things decided? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.85.4.42 (talk) 23:09, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The last time you asked a similar question, in this thread on March 16, you were provided some links to read. Do you have any further questions, or are you just trying to get people to debate? Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:23, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

On the BBC's QED program, in an episode called "The science of sexual attraction", shown on the 6th of March 1985, psychologist Michael Cunningham claimed that (by some broad consensus of he and other face measuring blokes) Jaclyn Smith had the most beautiful face (or at least, had a face that, of their sample, most closely matched the standard of proportion and symmetry that they claimed people called "beautiful"). New Scientist's review the following week (the 14th) decried the episode as "entertainment value", however. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 00:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

More formally, Cunningham's academic paper in this area seems to be "Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty.", Cunningham, Michael R., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 50(5), May 1986, 925-935. The abstract of the paper discusses the measurements in question. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 00:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

May 17

Why do Rastafarians smoke marijuana?

1. Why do Rastafarians smoke marijuana? 2. What does the word Babylon mean? Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

3. Why don't you read the article you linked to on the Rastafari movement (Rastafarians) which answers both 1 and 2? Nil Einne (talk) 00:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone name any mermaid fiction books for adults?

Can anyone name any mermaid fiction books for adults? Neptunekh2 (talk) 01:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Please only ask the same question on one desk. You already asked this on another desk, and it was answered there. --Jayron32 04:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Person synonymous with brevity?

I need to illustrate the concepts of both long-winded and exceedingly brief speakers. For long-winded, the famous picture of Strom Thurmond holding up rolls and rolls of paper during his 24 hour filibuster of the Civil Rights Act is quite suitable. I'm having a hard time coming up with an equally obvious (edit) VISUAL representation of brevity, however. Suggestions? The Masked Booby (talk) 07:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Lincoln's Gettysberg Address ? (Sorry, I don't know the ZIP code). StuRat (talk) 07:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Or the spelling, apparently. It's Gettysburg, Stu.  :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't have time to proofread my post, as I was eating a hamberger at the time. StuRat (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

If you want something even shorter, how about Rene Descartes' "I think, therefore I am". This was actually written, not spoken, but would be suitable for a speech, IMHO. StuRat (talk) 07:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

There's some good examples of laconism at Laconic phrase. --JGGardiner (talk) 07:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

sorry lads, omitted a key requirement by mistake, looking for visual representations here... The Masked Booby (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

How about the poster from The Simpsons, that said Brevity is ... wit? It's a visual representation, in that you can see it. --Trovatore (talk) 08:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Why not simply use a visual of the laconic Spartans? Fifelfoo (talk) 09:00, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't remember who, but one author sent a letter to his publisher querying how his new book was going. The letter consisted of one character, "?". -- Q Chris (talk) 09:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

It was Victor Hugo, who was equiring with his editor about his book sales ("?"). His editor was supposed to understand what the question was, as there was only one question that they were both interested at the moment when this was sent. But he was a joker, and replied "!". --Lgriot (talk) 08:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Brevity is the Soul of Wit. :-) Anton Webern was a composer and conductor whose music was known for (among other things) it's brevity. Among poets, Kay Ryan, Timothy Murphy and H. L. Hix are well known for their short poems. ^Avic_ennasis @ 09:06, 13 Iyar 5771 / 17 May 2011 (UTC)

QChris, it was Victor Hugo, and his publisher's response was "!". --TammyMoet (talk) 09:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

How about a piece of paper with the hand-written word "NUTS!"? From the allusions in your question, you seem to be American, so that'll go down well with your audience. --Dweller (talk) 09:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I am told that in Yorkshire dialect the phrase "What is the matter with that gentleman?" is pronounced "Warap wim?". Cuddlyable3 (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

• U.S. President Calvin Coolidge was famous for his brevity (known as "Silent Cal"). The (quite possibly apocryphal) story featuring Dorothy Parker mentioned here is quite famous. --Jayron32 13:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Try a one-pane cartoon. 92.15.1.9 (talk) 13:51, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Ken Iverson. – b_jonas 17:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

U.K. Elections

In the 2010 U.K. General elections, the result was a hung parliament. My question is, why was it taken for granted that the liberal democrats would get to play kingmaker? Instead of being held to ransom by the lib dems, why couldn't Labour and the Conservaties at least explore the option of a coalition between them, leaving the lib dems as the opposition? (This possibility would hopefully at least spook the lib dems out of their hubris). The same phenomemom seems to exist in Germany and elsewhere too. In hung parliaments, rarely do the big parties seem to consider forming a coalition with each other. The smaller parties' kingmaker position seems to be taken for granted. What am I missing here? Eliyohub (talk) 11:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The parties ideology and policies are supposed to be too far removed from each other for this to happen. What could have happened is that either main party could have tried to form a minority government, and see if they could have got their bills passed with rogue MPs from the other side and the Lib Dems. That is how hung parliaments have always worked in the UK in the past (with the wartime exceptions), and I think it would have been better for the UK now (but this is not a forum for debate!). --TammyMoet (talk) 11:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Also doing a deal with a small party means you have more control within the coalition. The small party sees itself as "lucky" to be able to get some policies passed and have some influence. -- Q Chris (talk) 11:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Discussed at some length here (note this article was written before the election took place). --Viennese Waltz 11:41, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

There is a longstanding belief that the Lib Dems, on many policy issues, take an intermediate position between the two larger parties. That is an over-simplified assumption, but is still broadly true. So, finding agreement on a legislative programme would be much easier Lab-LibDem, or Con-LibDem, than Con-Lab. It is possible to imagine a hypothetical scenario in which, say, a party like the BNP became the third largest party but would be so despised by both the major parties that both Con and Lab would form an alliance against them - but it is extremely unlikely that that situation would ever occur. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Extremely unlikely at a national level but it could happen in a local council. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

...and has done - http://www.heraldscotland.com/all-change-labour-goes-into-coalition-with-the-tories-1.842222 (Not that I'm equating the SNP with the BNP, I must stress.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

A lot of this is covered in our grand coalition article, which comes complete with examples (including some from Germany). Warofdreams talk 13:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Another way to think about it is that they not only want to gain power for themselves, but also want to deny it to their rivals, who might be able to use it to expand their influence and win the next election. With a small party, seen as less of a threat, this is not as much of an issue. StuRat (talk) 18:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Lab-LibDem did try to talk initially, but it was quickly wiothdrawn frot he current Con-Dem coalition.

Further, there are examples such as in Scandinavia (ant the recent Finnish parliamentary election, 2011 that can form strange coaluitions.Lihaas (talk) 21:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL @ "frot he". And "strange coaluitions" could be "strange coagulations", which sort of works. I suggest you get a new keyboard (or new fingers). :-) StuRat (talk) 21:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Length of time of feelings of jealousy

This is the second time that "Looie496" has deleted my postings. Please stop doing it! You are either a vandal or you have mistaken me for someone else. 92.15.1.9 (talk) 13:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I can only remember feeling jealous once in my life, for about two days. During that time I felt that the person who was the object of my jealousy was a thoroughly bad person, even though they were not.

Can people feel jealous of someone for weeks, months, or years? For those who experience jealousy, are such lengthy times common? I imagine that people who feel the emotion for any length of time would be people who do not habitually consider their own biases etc, but just act on unthinking emotion. Thanks 15:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.1.9 (talk)

It's the same as any other emotion. Some can feel it forever. Some don't. ^Avic_ennasis @ 15:25, 13 Iyar 5771 / 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Emotions vary in duration. Sadness seems to last a long time, happiness or euphoria is fleeting, anger seems to vary from person to person. 92.24.186.11 (talk) 12:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Someone put a "resolved" tick at the top of this posting. I don't think one line by one person does resolve it, so I've removed it. 92.15.1.9 (talk) 15:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Our jealousy article is pretty lengthy and has a number of relevant links. Have you read it? It doesn't have any statistics or study findings about the duration of jealousy, but our understanding of emotion in general seems to be pretty poor, IMO, so this isn't very surprising. Your last statement is really about a person's being able to control their emotions, which is an age-old subject that our emotion article touches on. A final personal opinion is that the jealousy of a sibling's new toy is of a different sort than the jealousy of a sibling's status as "favorite" with a parent; the latter could be lifelong resentment. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Why recommend something which you admit does not provide the answer?? 92.24.186.11 (talk) 12:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I would agree that there is no "time limit" (either minimum or maximum). It will be different for each individual, and each situation. Blueboar (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I think many people are not aware of being jealous, but simply attribute bad things to their victim, which may be part of the cause of prejudice and bigotry, the class war, etc. 92.15.21.174 (talk) 11:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Should Empress Jingū be included in Template:Monarchs of Japan?

I found that template on Japanese and Chinse Wikipedia did not include Empress Jingū.--Inspector (talk) 14:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Respect Party candidates

Is there a website where it shows the list of candidates of Respect Party for the 2008 and 2010 UK general elections? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.43.217 (talk) 14:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

There's a full list of 2010 candidates (and results) in the Weekly Worker. There wasn't a general election in 2008. If you mean 2005, there's a list in Socialist Worker. Warofdreams talk 14:41, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Whole history of humankind in one narrative.

I am looking for single narrative (be it a book or series of books) that concisely covers entire history of humankind. I know that such scope is huge but I wish to read entire history of humankind from start to finish. I have an interest in history and while I know some parts in great, university level details, I am missing on some others and I wish to have basic rudimentary understanding of all of world's history. Book I'm looking for has to start at least 7-8 thousand years BC all the way up to at least 20th century and it has to cover non-English speaking history as well. Ideally along with popular topics in history it would cover South and North American pre-Colonional history, African precolonial and Eastern Asian history as well as non-British European history (eg. Finish history, not just well known Roman history) because I feel those are my weakest areas.

Does such narrative exist?

P.S. It would be perfect if it's available as audiobook. 110.174.117.185 (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

There are many such books; see History of the world#References. One classic in the genre is The Story of Civilization, an eleven-volume series by Will and Ariel Durant. I find it quite enjoyable to read, although many of the claims are now outdated. I have heard good reviews of The New Penguin History of the World. Lesgles (talk) 15:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Concise? The entire history of humankind? The first thing that comes to mind is The Times Atlas of World History. Hard to make an audiobook version of an atlas though. Pfly (talk) 16:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I have the "Atlas of World History" by John Haywood (not the John Haywood that's the subject of either Wikipedia article) which I find eminently readible and well done, and it coveres just about everything from the earliest humans through the Bosnian war, and hits all different parts of the world quite well. --Jayron32 17:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The moving picture History of the World, Part I should cover everything you need to know. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I forgot to mention H. G. Wells's Outline of History (1920), which is available on audiobook. It is entertaining, though obviously out of date as well (it has some pretty outlandish theories on prehistoric man and race). Lesgles (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Incidentally, if you want a book that synthesizes a huge amount of human history (rather than trying to do a chronology), Guns, Germs, and Steel does a pretty good job of that. --Mr.98 (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

(ec)Try The Cartoon History of the Universe. I highly recommend it. Matt Deres (talk) 17:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I was about to comment, saying that is a great series but unfortunately ends somewhere in the medieval era. But checking the page about it I see he recently finished a couple more books, bringing it up to modern times. Great! Now I need to get my hands on those! I thought he had given up on the project. Pfly (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha! I'm in the process of re-reading TCHotU at the moment myself. Great stuff. Pais (talk) 08:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

History begins with the invention of writing. You need prehistory before that.
Sleigh (talk) 03:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I happen to be writing just such a series of books now. Give me a few months and I should have volume 1 (of 20) finished and ready for you to read. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 07:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's perhaps more social science than history (and written by natural scientist), but Guns, Germs, and Steel is refreshingly broad in scope. It tells large parts of the history of the world, covering "the world" broadly in space and time, through the theories of the author. Jørgen (talk) 10:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The beautifully and simply written, one-volume A Little History of the World by Ernst Gombrich. Highly recommended. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Nehru's Glimpses of World History is a bit unorthodox - it's a history of the world from c. 6000 BC to 1930, written in prison without the use of a library, and originally organised as a set of letters - but I'm told it's very good as a readable, broad, world history. I've never come across a copy myself, so I'm afraid I can't confirm this! Shimgray | talk | 23:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Looking for a specific image depicting the Enlightenment

Resolved

I'm looking for a specific image that I have seen on Wikipedia before. It looks like a 17th- or 18th-century woodcut depicting a man standing on the Earth and literally pulling the sky aside like a curtain to see what's behind. I believe it is meant to represent the Age of Enlightenment, or perhaps empiricism, or maybe the scientific revolution. Any tips? Thanks, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 19:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't suppose you are referring to the Flammarion engraving (apparently a composite, but in this form dating only from the late 19th century)? --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, that's exactly it. I was wrong about the whole Enlightenment thing, as it turns out. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 21:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Women banned from performing

Is it correct, that women where banned from performing proffesionally on stage by the Catholic curch in Rome and the Papal States? If so, exactly when was this? Which year was it banned, and when was the bann lifted? I am referring to women acting professionally in theatre as well as opera. I assume it was banned in the 16th-century, when women started acting on stage in Italy, if this was indeed the case, and that the ban was lifted in ca 1800, but I really have no idea. I have also heard that women where baned from playing musical instruments professionally in 1686 - is this correct and if so, when was the ban lifted? Can anyone help me with these questions? I would be most gratefull. Thank you in advance!--Aciram (talk) 20:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Women were banned from being actresses in England before the 1660s (don't know about the papal states)... AnonMoos (talk) 22:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

From our article on Nell Gwyn: "During the decade of protectorate rule by the Cromwells, pastimes regarded as frivolous, including theatre, had been banned. Charles II had been restored to the English throne in 1660, and quickly reinstated the theatre. One of Charles' early acts as king was to license the formation of two acting companies and to legalize acting as a profession for women." StuRat (talk) 04:53, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, but my question pertains to Rome and the Papal States in particular. There would have been a ban against women acting, singing and playing music professionally there in the 16th-18th-centuries. The ban against women playing music would have been in 1686, but I don't know the years for the banning of actresses and singers. Do you have any knowledge of this?--Aciram (talk) 08:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Nothing in Catholic Encyclopedia about acting but under dancing [1], men and women participating in "mimic" or "histrionic exhibitions" were regarded by Roman law as infamous.
Sleigh (talk) 04:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Interesting, but it seems this was about Rome in antiqiuity rather than the 16th-18th century? Is there any information about that?--Aciram (talk) 08:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Nell Gwyn was the most famous Restoration actress. Charles II of England and Scotland was the first king of England to license actresses. I don't know when the pope lifted the ban.
Sleigh (talk) 04:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

With regard to a terminus ad quem, our article Travesti (theatre) contains the rather vague sentence "The use of castrati for both male and female roles was particularly strong in the Papal states, where women were forbidden from public stage performances until the 19th century." Deor (talk) 11:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

That was the law I was referring to, yes; I would like to know which year it was introduced, and which year the ban was lifted. When in the 19th-century? What would be a good guess, at least? In 1800 or in 1870?--Aciram (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

May 18

Documentary about textile industry in South East Asia

I'm looking for a documentary which covers the textile industry in south east Asia -- one that particularly focuses on human rights, wages, etc. It would be nice if it were available on DVD, and even better if I could get it on netflix. A search on wikipedia, and elsewhere, so far, turns up nothing notable. Thanks. Llamabr (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The nearest I can come up with is a report publichsed in 2006 called "Fashion Victims". I believe BBC3 also produced a series about this, but a search of the BBC website has produced nothing. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. "Fashion Victims" seems to be a report about places like Primark and Marks and Spencer, which would be good, but I'm looking for a documentary movie. Something by BBC 3 would be perfect, but I don't see anything either. I can't believe that there is no documentary about this issue. Llamabr (talk) 20:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

the most "Transgendered" (by population) place in Usa \ Canada? and Europe?

thanks... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.19.219 (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know, but for the US, it is almost certainly a large city, not a rural area. The US city with highest per-capita number of transgendered people might be one of the 'gayest' cities mentioned here [2]. Both gay and transgendered people are often attracted to cities with prominent LGBT networks. SemanticMantis (talk) 13:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Not necessarily a large city. Some highly LGBT places like Provincetown are quite small. Pais (talk) 13:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but the OP is looking for stats "by population" and not by percentage or per capita. So, taking New York City for example, even if NYC isn't that high on the transgendered stats list, it still likely has more transgendered people by population than a smaller town/city such as Provincetown. Dismas|^(talk) 14:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law issued this report, which notes two studies, one done in Massachusetts, and one in California. It concluded that 0.1% of Californians are transgendered, which would come out to 37,253, and .5% of people from Massachusetts are transgendered, which would be 32,738. This report of a 2007 Ohio GLBT census concluded 1.5% of Ohioans are transgendered, which would be about 173,047 people. I find it hard to believe that there are more than twice as many transgendered people in Ohio than in California and Massachusetts combined, so data collection and interpretation appears to be a major issue. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 14:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

If it is correct that urban areas have a much greater concentration of trans people than rural ones, then a major determinants is how the boundaries are drawn around urban areas. California contains more suburbs and rural areas than Massachusetts, I think. If you compared downtown LA with downtown Boston there might be less difference in the rates. On the other hand Ohio is largely rural and the rate of 1.5% seems very high. You would have to look and see whether the methods and questions are comparable. If a questionnaire has boxes to tick "Male, Female, Neither/prefer not to say", a relatively large number will tick the third option. But if the boxes are "Male, Female, Trans, Other/prefer not to say", then the pattern will be different. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

If OH is 'largely rural', then CA is too, perhaps moreso. OH has 257 people/mi^2, while CA only has 227 [3] SemanticMantis (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

SemanticMantis's link to the "gayest cities" notes right at the top that it's an unscientific list, and this link quotes a demographer as saying that the "gays live in urban enclaves" trope is "something of a myth", though that's about all the detail that particular article gives. I acknowledge this is off-topic because transgender doesn't equal homosexual. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. I just thought it was a decent starting point, and others have pointed out above that this is a difficult topic to get good data for. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

There's an article in The Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services: vol. 20, no. 3 (2008) "Transgender Men: A Demographic Snapshot." The authors attempted to get demographic data on female-to-male (FTM) people using Surveymonkey. They got 390 participants in the survey, and 321 valid responses. 299 of those were from the US, and 22 from Canada. The US states with the highest number of responses (21-44) in no particular order were Washington (state), Oregon, California, New Mexico, Texas, Florida, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, New York, and Massachusetts. All the Canadian provinces with any responses got between 1 and 5. Those provinces were British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 12:29, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I just noticed that the number of responses for the three Canadian provinces adds up to less than the total Canadian responses. Not everyone who replied disclosed their state or province, and I could be missing Nova Scotia, but it doesn't look colored in on the distribution map to me. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 12:46, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Money as a means of communication

Does some economist see money as a means of communication? If you pay a couple of buck for someone, it means that you have delivered something to someone else, which was worth a couple of bucks. It also means that you have not expended these two bucks of value that you created somewhere else. Quest09 (talk) 12:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The assertion that money was a form of speech was one of the assertions in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. I have not heard it stated by anyone outside of that case, but it wouldn't surprise me if somebody had previously thought about it in that way. It strikes me as a poor method for talking about both money and communication: it obscures the really salient aspects of both in search of a weak analogy. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, decisions by US courts that equate giving money with free speech (which is protected), basically legalized certain forms of bribery. StuRat (talk) 17:23, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

There's quite a bit of economic theory that says that the flow of money is useful information. Specifically, companies and products in which people invest are (usually correctly) judged to be superior.

Police (and those chasing drug kingpins and terrorists) often "follow the money", in that someone who is being paid large sums of money is presumed to be providing something in return. StuRat (talk) 17:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Money talks. Sometimes it just whispers, other times, it shouts, but its message is nearly always understood. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Hayek thought that one of the most attractive elements of capitalism was the ease with which information was passed through and used by individuals and firms. See information economics and The use of Knowledge in SocietyJabberwalkee (talk) 00:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what the original poster is asking about, but perhaps there is something in the Gift economy article? Jørgen (talk) 08:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

You may find our article on consideration of use. It is a legal concept that touches on the meaning of the use of money or other items or promises of value in the formation and communication of contracts. Neutrality^talk 18:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Stories from Nazi Germany

Hello. I was wondering if many fictional books written in Germany during the Nazi era have survived. I find a lot of things about their society interesting (not in the sense of accepting what they did to people). Were Jews and other "enemies" portrayed in their fiction, and what were these portrayals like? 212.68.15.66 (talk) 12:43, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

One example we have an article on is Der Giftpilz, a 1938 children's book about how awful the Jews are. You might also find helpful information in the articles Blood and soil and Nazi propaganda#Books. Pais (talk) 12:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Anything like detective stories? I'd guess that (as with other countries) enemy spies were commonly used as antagonists. 212.68.15.66 (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Nazi propaganda#Books mentions that blood and soil genre novels were popular; "Red Indian" stories by Karl May were permitted and Cinderella rewritten as a racial morality story. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Jamaat Shibir (Bangladesh)

Hi,
I'm looking for a reliable source which answers the following question: is "Jamaat Shibir" a portmanteau word which mixes "Jamaat-e-Islami" and "Islami Chhatra Shibir", or is this a separate party or organization?
Thanks. Apokrif (talk) 13:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. To my knowledge the name "Jamaat Shibir" isn't used. Rather "Shibir" is the common name for the Jamaat-e-Islami student wing in Bangladesh. In the press when the wording "Jamaat-Shibir" is used, such as in this http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=166357&cid=2 , it denotes that the journalist in question cannot separate between the two (i.e. for sure know many of the arrested are Jamaat members, how many are Shibir members). --Soman (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

In that case it would be an abbreviated dvandva compound... AnonMoos (talk) 16:18, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Edmund Burke on James Mackintosh

1.) In his book Vindiciae Gallicae (1791) James Mackintosh replied to Edmund Burkes Reflections on the French Revolution (1790). To which text from James Mackintosh did Edmund Burke reply in his Reflections on the French Revolution? (It can't be Vindiciae Gallicae)

2.) Since when have both been in correspondence (writing letters)? Thanks for your help. -- (no native speaker) 141.20.195.101 (talk) 13:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Have you tried reading our articles on Edmund Burke and Reflections on the Revolution in France? --Saddhiyama (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The articles don't answer the question. Are you sure that Burke took issue with Mackintosh in Reflections? If so, it would have been with his journalistic writing in a paper called The Oracle. There is a summary of Mackintosh's writing career in an edition printed shortly after his death of History of the Revolution in England in 1688, here in Google Books. It is an interesting summary. I am endeared to Mackintosh hearing that he turned up an hour late for his PhD viva, keeping the whole Senate of the University of Edinburgh waiting. If Burke and Mackintosh were alive now they would be editing Wikipedia and probably slogging it out in an enormous ArbCom case. Itsmejudith (talk) 14:25, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure that Burke took issue with Mackintosh in Reflections? My mistake. The German translator, Friedrich Gentz, wrote the chapter Versuch einer Widerlegung der Apologie des Herrn Mackintosh in addition. It's not from Burke. -- 141.20.195.101 (talk) 15:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Wesley Snipes & The Sovereign Citizen Movement

Somebody told me they saw on 60 Minutes that Wesley Snipes was a member of the Sovereign Citizen movement, or at least that movement was mentioned on that segment in reference to him and his non-payment of income taxes.

I didn't find any mention of any such connection on the Discussion pages of his Wikipedia article.

Is he indeed a member? If so, maybe the portrayal of the SCM as white and racist may be exaggerated or one-sided. And also, shouldn't any connection he has with the SCM be mentioned in his article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.126.175.120 (talk) 15:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I saw parts of that piece, and all I remember being said was that Sovereign-Citizen influenced terminology or arguments appeared among the reasons he gave for not paying taxes. The segment was mainly about the Sovereign Citizens, with only a somewhat passing mention of Wesley Snipes. By the way, our article Sovereign citizen movement seems to omit some of the truly bizarre and wacky pseudo-legal theories associated with it, such as that any legal document where your name is written in ALL CAPS doesn't actually validly refer to you at all, etc. etc... AnonMoos (talk) 16:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

This article from the Southern Poverty Law Center says Snipes's "tax filings made clear that he was a sovereign tax protester" and discusses some testimony in that trial about the "movement". (The article is referenced in the sovereign citizen movement article that AnonMoos pointed us to.) If you can find the transcript of the trial there will probably be all the details you'd want. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

To actually answer the question, I'm not sure whether he is a member, but our article section Wesley Snipes#Federal tax convictions says the government described him as a tax protester who was using the "861 argument". Here's a letter Snipes wrote to the government explaining he's a sovereign and doesn't have to pay any taxes. He subsequently lucked out and was only convicted of three misdemeanors instead of any felonies. Anyway, back to your last observation, the presence of a single black person in a nearly all-white movement doesn't mean much, and you should go by statistics of some sort instead of anecdotes about individuals. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

We should be a little cautious of inferring what Wesley Snipes believes, or to what groups be belongs, based on the court proceedings. The New York Times summarised his defence in the felonies as his being "a well-intended victim of bad advice" (ref). That the jury acquitted him on the felonies, but convicted his advisers on related felonies, suggests the jury believed (or at least couldn't reject) that assertion. We can't build on that foundation a claim that he "believed" in the SCM theories or that he was a "member" of anything. It may very well be that Snipes is just the latest, and perhaps most extreme, of a long line of musicians, actors, and sportsmen who've "signed on the dotted line" and found later that the basis on which their adviser told them they were acting wasn't as watertight, or as legal, as they'd been led to believe. That said, his conviction on the lesser charges shows the jury didn't feel that he was an entirely innocent and naive party either. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 18:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

UK Law:The Wildlife and Countryside act 1981 with respect to Natrix natrix

How is the Wildlife and Countryside act 1981 interpreted with respect to the grass snake (Natrix natrix)? I (mis)interpret the act, as it applies to Natrix natrix, as meaning you cannot sell or advertise for sale a living or dead grass snake (section 9(5) only). I read the Act, perhaps wrongly, that sections 9(1), 9(2), 9(3), 9(4) and 9(6) in particular do not apply to Natrix natrix. --Senra (Talk) 16:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Please don't try and sell a living or dead grass snake. They are harmless and not worth any money. I found the law difficult to read too. Perhaps it exempts grass snakes because they are common, but there is still no reason to harm them. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:20, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

No intention of harming them in any way. So sorry if my question is misinterpreted. I am writing an article for a local web site and wanted to check the protected status, that is all. I read somewhere else that

Although they hiss menacingly when cornered, these reptiles are neither venomous nor aggressive, and so killing any of them is quite unjustified; indeed to do so is a criminal offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981.

— First Nature

and wanted to check the accuracy of the statement.

Given what I believe The Act is saying, I will simply write "The grass snake is protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981"--Senra (Talk) 16:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I assumed you might be looking for a loophole and glad your motives are quite otherwise. I'm sure it's worthwhile including the statement you suggest. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

(e/c)We do not give legal advice, which is what you are asking for. You should see whether your local council has a wildlife officer (many do), or contact your local Wildlife Trust. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

PS:Our article says that "In England, grass snakes are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and cannot be harmed or traded without a licence, although they may legally be captured and kept in captivity... In 2007, the grass snake was included on the updated UK Biodiversity Action Plan as a species in need of conservation and greater protection." Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The Act states that its an offence under s9(1) to intentionally or recklessly kill or injure certain animals including the grass snake (natrix natrix). It also states that its an offence under s9(5) to offer for sale, sell, advertise for sale etc. certain animals (which again includes the grass snake). Unless some amendment has creeped past legislation.gov this is probably how the law stands. (This isn't legal advice, its just some facts of legal nature). Regards, Bob House 884 (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

1099 tax form

If I'm supposed to file a 1099 tax form at the end of the year, but I don't, will the government find out? If so, how? My employer is paying me cash and wants me to file a 1099 at the end of the year, but I'm wondering if its possible to just skip it. Also are H-4 visa holders allowed to even seek 1099 employment? Thanks in advance.--164.107.37.92 (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, we cannot give you tax advice. I can advise you to research the issue with a tax professional (there may be free university services if you have an affiliation with a university). You can also get information from the IRS here [4]. SemanticMantis (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Tax evasion is illegal. We're not going to give you advice on how to break the law. --Tango (talk) 23:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

If you have an H-4 visa, you may wish to read the line in our article: "H-4 holders are not eligible to get a Social Security Number and cannot be employed". Given how limited H1-B visas are (H-4 visas apparently being for immediate family members of H1-Bs) why on earth would you (a) risk getting yourself caught and possibly deported and (b) the same for your spouse? Don't work, and don't think that you can break the rules and hope they don't notice. --Saalstin (talk) 23:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Well if I can't work in this country I dont really care that much about being deported back to Canada. And it's my dad who has the H1-B visa so I don't think my actions can get him deported too. I just want to know more about how the 1099 process works. For example how can the government tell if someone fails to submit a 1099 tax form? It appears to me it's just based on trust only. If that's the case, then I can probably just get by without submitting one--164.107.37.118 (talk) 00:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

If your employer is paying you cash, but still expects you to file a 1099, then the employer is keeping records of the payments to you. In that case, the government will have the employer's records and will be looking for offsetting ones from you. Anecdote: I took a 3-week job in January of one year, and, by the time it came to file my income tax (15 months later), I had forgotten all about it. (Who knows what happened to the paper work?) In September, I received one of those superficially polite notices from the tax department about some income I had overlooked, and would I pay up now and, yes, there is interest and a fine. Bielle (talk) 01:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't really understand the rationale for why you (as opposed to your employer) would file a 1099. As far as I'm aware, the 1099 is filed by the person who pays the money, not the person who gets it. Is he asking you to do his paperwork for him? Or is it possible that you've misunderstood, and he is in fact planning to file a 1099, which means the IRS will know about your income whether you do anything or not? --Trovatore (talk) 02:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

It's not true that 1099s are only filed by employers. It's true that they usually do, but technically speaking, you are supposed to report any supplementary cash income on your own 1099s. Obviously most people don't unless the employer files a 1099. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Which 1099 is that? I thought you just put it on your 1040, either under "other income" if it's a small amount, or Schedule C if it's serious consulting. --Trovatore (talk) 20:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, perhaps you are right. I was wading through some tax pages that implied you would file your own 1099 Misc's even if the employers didn't, but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. (The pages on 1099s are often quite confusing about who is filing what.) This page seems to indicate that it would go under the 1040 if you don't receive a 1099. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I can only begin to imagine the fine you'll be liable to if you still owe taxes from 1099. --Dweller (talk) 12:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

This is essentially legal advice which the OP is asking. He should consult a tax expert, such as H&R Block or one of those, and find out what to do. He should also approach whatever he does with the intent of obeying the law rather than trying to get around it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

lead bullets illegal in US

Are lead bullets illegal in the US? Albacore (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. The EPA considered regulating lead ammunition in 2010 but backed down after the NRA and etc. went bananas over it. Some states ban using lead ammunition when hunting (e.g. California bans using lead bullets in areas where condors live[5]), but those are pretty specific bans, and they aren't bans on possession or sale. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

there is, however a restriction on lead shotgun shot. Since it cannot be used in any wetlands and a good amount of bird hunting is done in wetlands (duck, geese, ect.) even if it's not totally banned in your locality it can be very difficult to find lead shot. Most retailers in my area seem to have decided the market is so small that it's not even worth stocking lead and instead offer an array of differently-priced alternatives from steel to tungsten. HominidMachinae (talk) 08:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I shoot the hippopotamus / with bullets made of platinum / because if I use leaden ones / his hide is sure to flatten 'em. Pais (talk) 15:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

No, lead bullets are not illegal in the US. Most bullets have a copper or brass coating but others can be purchased that are just lead. I've got some .22 bullets that are just lead soft-nose. As an example, look at File:.22 LR.jpg - the left & middle bullets are unprotected lead, while the right-hand one has a copper coating. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 18:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

How does money work, exactly?

What I want to know is, if money is just numbers in a computer, who is making sure than when one number goes up, another goes down by an exactly equal amount? Since banking is international, what is to keep banks and governments from flat-out lying that they haven't made some numbers go up without others going down? I mean, let's face it, dollars and cents (and euros and yen, etc., etc.) have about as much reality as points in Giga Wing, so what's to keep someone from using a cheat code?

A related question: when Madoff made off with billions of points dollars of other people's Giga Wing scores assets, why didn't the government just reset the victims' bank balances to make up for the missing dollars as one resets an electromechanical clock after a power outage to make up for the missing hours and minutes? 75.35.96.51 (talk) 23:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

For the US, see Federal_Reserve_System, which oversees how much currency exists and how it is transferred. You may also be interested in bitcoin, which seeks to define a federated (P2P) currency using mathematical/cryptographic notions of trust and security. SemanticMantis (talk) 00:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't forget that money that you or I deposit in the bank is a liability to the bank. That is, it is money that the bank must be able to come up with should you or I ask for it back. Randomly creating money in a person's bank account doesn't help the bank at all. Also, banks really do just create money out of nothing. And in countries without an explicit reserve requirement they can create as much as they like. See money creation Jabberwalkee (talk) 00:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Money is not just numbers, it is a form of trust. If you lose faith in its ability to convey value, the entire system collapses. The people who break the system would have only a brief moment of profit before the whole thing collapsed around them, taking any potential future wealth with it. If China started just ignoring its obligations in terms of wealth or just starting "printing" new currency willy-nilly (electronically or on paper) it would be the same sort of hyperinflation that has happened again and again in the history of collapsing economies. When you inflate the value of assets beyond any tangible value, that's the definition of a bubble — eventually it pops because people stop trusting the bank, the state, the stock market, whatever.

Niall Ferguson's The Ascent of Money gives a concise account of how the various instruments of finance developed. You can't really understand how the numbers in modern computer systems translate into wealth unless you understand how the whole system works; the book is a nice, historical introduction to the basic concepts that underly it. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

If you want to find out more, this bloke wrote a bit about the subject too. Not an easy read perhaps, but worth a glance at least, for another perspective. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Old Kazza's writings about money are, to my mind, less than useful here. Marx primarily writes about the value form and its self-expansion, which is a separate issue to the total volume of money in an economy. Marx's writings do have an impact on the historical "value" of money between any two major crises, but his chapters in Capital on the finance system aren't inspiring in the way that his work on production is. At least to me who as someone who interacts with money as wage and work as stolen labour time. If you want Marxists on Money I'd look at later Marxist writers than Kaz. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Let's look at an example of someone using a "cheat code." At many times in history, states have owed large amounts of money to people, other states, etc. These are just "numbers on paper" that symbolize a willingness to deliver payment (with interest) over time to the people owed. The "cheat code" is when the state says, "ha, those numbers don't mean anything, I'll never pay you back!" This is a sovereign default and these happen with some regularity even today. The short term effect is that the people owed money are left in the cold, which makes them rather unhappy. The long term effect is that future investors are probably not going to loan the state money in the future without very large, compensatory interest rates attached to it — so the state is, in effect, making any future loans more expensive for itself. These kinds of defaults can have major effects on international finance and severely impact economies of other states. It doesn't mean the end of the world, though — the finance system is robust enough that it can absorb things like this periodically (and they do occur, even today). They are not a new thing; some countries (cough cough, Spain) have been doing them again and again for a long time. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Bank to bank transfers

The above question got me thinking - Lets say I open a bank. I have one customer who comes in and deposits 1 million dollars, cash. I put it in the bank vault. The same customer later goes online to AvicsAwesomeBank.com and transfers his million dollars to another account in a different bank. This is done electronically, right? (ACH?) So... What happens to the million dollars in my bank vault?

I can't imagine that for every electronic transfer I make, an armored car is dispatched to move physical money between banks. So, I guess my question is, do banks ever move physical money between them, and why or why not? ^Avic_ennasis @ 05:38, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

You might find the article Clearing (finance) useful. As a sweeping generalisation, banks keep track of what they owe to each other as totals of all their (thousands to millions of daily) individual transactions, which often nearly balance out, or show a consistent pattern allowing predictive payments and investments. They then only have to transfer the remaining relatively small imbalances rather than the full amounts of each transaction. Historically in the UK this was done at the end of each working day by the banks' head offices in London exchanging the actual cash necessary in a "clearing system" (which is why major banks in the UK were called "clearing banks" - smaller "non-clearing banks" would typically take longer to carry out transactions because they had to use more cumbersome methods); nowadays it's doubtless done mostly electronically.

The same predictable patterns were and (probably) are used (again, in the UK) to calculate how much customers' money in total each UK bank theoretically has in the window - traditionally 3 days - between money leaving payers' accounts and going into payees' accounts, which they invest on the overnight money market to earn themselves interest. This is a major reason why that window has been much slower to reduce than the introduction of effectively instantaneous electronic transactions would allow. By contrast, UK solicitors temporarily holding substantial sums of clients' money (as they may do when involved in property or other business deals) are (or at least were) legally obliged to invest that money on the money markets and pay the interest earned to those clients. [Disclaimer: much of the foregoing derives from family involvement in relevant professions, hence the lack of reference links and the caveats re currency of practice.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.34 (talk) 07:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

When you deposit money in your bank account, it goes onto the books of the bank. The bank now has an asset - cash - and a equal and opposite liability, which it records as a credit on your account. The bank's obligation to you is to repay you on demand and in the meantime pay you whatever rate of interest it has agreed with you - say 1%. It can do whatever it likes with its new cash asset, as long as it retains enough liquid assets to be able to meet any reasonable level of repayment demands (which is enforced by banking regulations). So it might lend its cash to other banks, perhaps earning 2% interest - or lend it to another customer, perhaps earning 5% interest. Whatever is left over after paying you your 1% interest is profit for the bank. Of course, if the other bank or customer fails to repay the loan, then your bank makes a loss - so higher interest rates are (generally speaking) associated with higher credit risk. And if all of the other banks or customers fail to repay their loans, then your bank goes into liquidation and cannot repay you (although you may be able to recover some of the money that was in your account if it was protected by a government guarantee scheme).

A solicitor, on the other hand, is not a bank, and if it holds money on behalf of a client, this money does not go onto its books and it cannot use that money - it has to hold that money in a segregated client money account. If the solicitor goes into liquidation, the money it is holding on behalf of its clients is still safe. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

May 19

Will they ever lower the drinking age in Las Vegas and the rest of the united states from 21 to 19 or 18?

I mean drinking age in most of Canada is 19. Shouldn't America be fair to it's young people who are 19 and 20 and give them the freedom to drink? Neptunekh2 (talk) 03:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

My crystal ball is not working at the moment, so I'm not sure. :-) Also, your definition of being fair to 18-20 year olds may not be the same as everyone else. I do find it humorous that you can be pressed into military service and die for your country, but can't come home and have a beer afterwards. CBS 60 minutes has an interesting article about lowering the drinking age. Although, since the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, the NHTSA estimates that a legal drinking age of 21 saves 700 to 1,000 lives annually. Since 1976, these laws have prevented more than 21,000 traffic deaths. Just how much the legal drinking age relates to drinking-related crashes is shown by a recent study in New Zealand. Six years ago that country lowered its minimum legal drinking age to 18. Since then, alcohol-related crashes have risen 12 percent among 18- to 19-year-olds and 14 percent among 15- to 17-year-olds (62).* Clearly a higher minimum drinking age can help to reduce crashes and save lives, especially in very young drivers. - ref from NIAAA

* (62) Kypri, K.; Voas, R.B.; Langley, J.D.; et al. Minimum purchasing age for alcohol and traffic crash injuries among 15- to 19-year-olds in New Zealand. American Journal of Public Health 96:126–131, 2006. PMID: 16317197

Given that supporting a lower drinking age would also seem to support more deaths on American roadways, I doubt any movement will come close to actually lowering the drinking age. ^Avic_ennasis @ 03:53, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm always amused by people who wish for "fairness" to young people, when in 2-3 years you aren't going to be young anymore (assuming this is an 18 year old lamenting not being 21). Seriously, wait till you are in your 30's. I've had shits that seem to last 3 years. Isn't it odd that the young seem to define "being treated unfairly" as "not getting to do whatever I want whenever I want to." If that's the case, life is a whole lot less fair to adults. I haven't been able to live that kind of "fairness" since I was about 18. It only becomes less fair the older you get. It's unfair enough, it'll drive someone to drinking, even...--Jayron32 05:37, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The OP has a userbox on their page stating they are 27. :-) Young at heart? I advocate for teen rights on some issues despite being well outside that category myself. ^Avic_ennasis @ 06:16, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Who's advocating for MY rights as a 34-year old then? Cuz teens will have all the same rights I do (as pitifully few as they are) in a short few years anyways. Why all the fuss? --Jayron32 06:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The major line is drawn at 18. When you are younger than 18 is when the issues really arise. A 15-year-old being harassed (outside a school setting where teachers/staff would hopefully intervene) has no legal recourse for this harassment other than through their parents, who sadly may not care enough to take action. Whereas an 18-year-old is a legal adult and can file a police report and get a restraining order, for example. In the case of parental abuse that can sometimes be hard to prove, a 16-year-old who leaves home is a run-away and a delinquent, whereas an 18-year-old is free to leave as they choose. In both cases, waiting a "few short years" can be very harmful. I'm sure there are better analogies, but none come to mind. ^Avic_ennasis @ 06:41, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree that abuse and neglect and the legal recourses therof are serious issue. They also have nothing to do with the OP's question. The right not to be verbally assaulted and the right not to be abused or bullied or things like that are quite apart from the right to drink alcohol or drive a car or any of the other things the young claim are "unfair" when enforced against them. --Jayron32 02:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed - I was replying to you, not OP. You asked "Why all the fuss?" about getting all the same rights you have now, instead of waiting. Your statement seemed to me a little broad, as opposed to just the right to drink, so I gave examples of other rights and their usage. :-) I apologize if my wording or point was misunderstood - I can't always properly convey my meaning. ^Avic_ennasis @ 03:03, 17 Iyar 5771 / 21 May 2011 (UTC)

There's an interesting cultural bias shown here, in simply accepting that society MUST define a minimum age for drinking or buying alcohol. In parts of Europe, particularly non-English speaking parts (so not likely to be well represented here), such a rigid concept does not exist. Some countries see it as a personal and family matter to decide when kids drink, not something for society to legislate on. I wonder why a country generally so strong on personal liberty as the USA is at the other end of the spectrum when it comes to alcohol. I don't think arguments about the road toll, while probably valid observations, are really the basis of this philosophical difference. HiLo48 (talk) 07:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that's the basis for the higher age - Just that if you were to suggest a lower drinking age, one of the main arguments your opponents would use is "What are you trying to do - you want to kill those kids?!" ^Avic_ennasis @ 08:49, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Another idea that comes to mind for Vegas, specifically - the legal age to gamble is also 21, so it's unlikely that a lower drinking age would affect the city much, as you still have to be 21+ to get into any casino, and by extension, any casino's bar. Though I have no idea how many bars might be separate from casinos there. ^Avic_ennasis @ 08:52, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Note that while the drinking age in the US is legally twenty-one, it is in many cases practically much lower. I choose not to drink, going with the theory that it isn't worth it in the off chance I do get caught, but I have certainly had plenty of opportunity to do so, and I have known a great many who do. It seems to me to be a rather pointless and counterproductive ban, but I've only got another three months to go. Falconus^{p t c} 10:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

And it's worth mentioning, to me at least, that I will become drinking age not by turning twenty-one, but by moving to Europe. Falconus^{p t c} 10:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

My personal opinion - At 18 you should be given a choice: apply for a driver's license or apply for a drinker's license, but not both. I suspect this would be a difficult decision for most American teens. Blueboar (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

In Germany, the drinking age is 16 for some forms of alcohol, like beer, whereas the minimum age to get a drivers license is 18. (IIRC) This always seemed a better option to me - let the person get used to alcohol effects on their system before giving them a chance to get behind the wheel. Although, I believe getting a DL in Germany is difficult/expensive anyway - I believe you need 25-45 hours of driving instruction, plus 12 hours of theory. ^Avic_ennasis @ 16:28, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Given that the current presidential administration doesn't think adults should be allowed to decide whether or not to buy health insurance, it's unlikely that it would support allowing 20 year-olds to make decisions about alcohol. User:HiLo48 wonders, quite reasonably, "why a country generally so strong on personal liberty as the USA is at the other end of the spectrum when it comes to alcohol." A main reason, I think, is that libertarian ideas about personal liberty are, to a surprising extent, now seen as dangerous, radical, irresponsible, or old-fashioned by many political leaders and opinion makers. See recent elections for examples. —Kevin Myers 14:37, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's very charitable to describe the U.S. as "a country generally... strong on personal liberty". Witness the current marijuana laws, as one of many examples. Qrsdogg (talk) 14:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

At the risk of starting to merge with the monster thread on the Misc desk, what I always find surprising are the the very young ages at which Americans can legally start to drive motor vehicles. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

That goes back to the days when the average American lived on a family farm or ranch... older children needed to be able to drive the farm/ranch vehicles. Blueboar (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure about that one. As far as I'm aware, no license is needed to operate any vehicle if it's driven only on private property. I know of 14 year-olds who help out on the farm using vehicles sometimes. Perhaps this was so they could drive to the city/farmer's market on behalf of their parents? ^Avic_ennasis @ 16:28, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

But you have to get the equipment to the fields - often miles away on public roads. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 03:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Some people believe that the drinking and driving age requirements should be switched. Aacehm (talk) 11:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

As I recall, some states did experiment with lowering the drinking age to 20 or 19, back in the 1970s. They soon realized the lack of social benefit to that change and reinstated 21 as the minimum age. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

U.S. history of alcohol minimum purchase age by state, National Minimum Drinking Age Act. There were many states that were just fine with a lower drinking age until the Federal government strong-armed them into raising it to 21. Buddy431 (talk) 21:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, as I pointed out, a number of states lowered the drinking age in the early 1970s. Illinois, in particular, dropped the age from 21 to 19 in 1973, then raised it again in 1980. As further noted in the linked article on the uniform drinking act, states that did not raise it or restore it to 21 faced cuts in their highway money. You can call that "strongarming" if you like, which is also the way they got the speed limit lowered to 55, but nonetheless the states did have a choice, and they chose to raise the drinking age. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:02, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Not, largely, because of the "lack of social benefit", as you imply, but because the federal government threatened to take their money. Buddy431 (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If you read the history behind that federal act, as discussed in National Minimum Drinking Age Act, you will observe that my observation on the matter is correct. :0 ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:30, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Finance: Fictional bank account scenario

Several works of fiction have used this concept: someone has some money in the bank, they disappear for some reason for a very long time, and when they return the interest has made them wealthy. Example- Futurama, in which Fry spent 1000 years frozen in which time his account has grown from 93 cents to $4.3 billion. My question is, wouldn't they (the bank) declare you dead after you were missing awhile and keep your money? Do they really have to let it accrue interest as long as they stay in business and you are missing?Thedoorhinge (talk) 03:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure that varies by state/government laws. As an example, I had about 20 dollars in a old bank account in Ohio that I forgot about. They sent me a letter 11 months after my last transaction, telling me that under Ohio law, if there was no activity (I.e., deposits/withdraws, et cetera) after 12 months, all funds in my account would automatically pass to the state. Specifically, the Unclaimed Funds department of the Ohio Department of Commerce. (The law that allows for this is Ohio Revised Code, Chapter 169, if your curious.) According to Ohio's DOC website, "Every state and the District of Columbia have an unclaimed or abandoned property laws." So, at least in the US, I would say it's unlikely. ^Avic_ennasis @ 04:11, 15 Iyar 5771 / 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The concept of a bank or any other private commercial enterprise declaring one of their customers dead is fraught with enormous obstacles. They do not have the resources or expertise or authority or legal right to investigate the private lives of their clients in order to make such a declaration. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 05:46, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Of course, if you really were dead, there would be no chance of you actually going to claim the money, they would never have to give you it and so all they would have to do is keep some record of what you would have, if you ever came back, right? They wouldn't actually lose any money from that, unless you turned up one day years later and proved you really were still around?

Meanwhile, my sister was given £10 around the time she was born, it was kept in a bank account for her for years, and it was still there when she was finally allowed to go and get it, by which time it had built up to the quite impressive sum of £17.148.197.121.205 (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

In the United Kingdom, money in abandoned bank accounts (those with no customer activity for 15 years), has in recent years, been claimed by the state, and will apparently be used for charitable purposes. [6], [7]. --Kateshortforbob _talk 09:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually I don't think that's true – the articles are talking about potential government plans, but there would need to be an Act of Parliament passed before seizing people's money became legal, and as far as I know, there hasn't been. ╟─TreasuryTag►Regional Counting Officer─╢ 09:15, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, I don't think it's come in yet. I was under the impression one could still get one's money back if it was requested, on the assumption that few ever would be. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Also remember that the heirs of the account owner have a claim on the money if the person is declared dead. In the US, most unclaimed or abandoned property laws have provision for this. Blueboar (talk) 12:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I suspect the largest impedement to the general scheme will be that interest paid on deposits is outstripped by price inflation, meaning that the purchasing power of your $4.3 billion after 1,000 years is less than the 93c at year 0. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Unless someone can come up with an earlier and more prominent example, I think the canonical example in fiction must be from The Restaurant at the End of the Universe, in which after dining at Milliways, a restaurant that serves dinner in the last moments of the dying Universe, you manage to pay the enormous bill by traveling back to your own time and depositing one penny in a bank account, then allowing compound interest to build it into the mountain of cash necessary to pay the tab. Similarly, in The Age of the Pussyfoot, a firefighter from the early 2000s is placed into a medical coma until a few hundred years later when the tech is sufficient to repair his burned lungs; when revived, he has a quarter of a million dollars ... but unfortunately, because of inflation, this is only enough for him to live on for a couple of days. Anyway, two ways around this problem, if that's what you're looking for, are (a) to pass a law creating a government department that knows about all this, and making it the custodian of the money, which is what must have happened in Pussyfoot; or (b) to form a corporation as the legal owner of the money, and the time traveler is the owner of the corporation. Because of corporate immortality, the bank wouldn't ever be able to declare the account holder is dead. (A disadvantage of the latter is that corporations have to pay annual fees and file certain reports, and over the thousands of years, paying mortals to do this does add up.) A possible (c) might be to purchase US government bonds instead, though the government might pass some law with no objections that thousand-year-old bonds would not be honored. I recommend option (b), if possible, because the corporation's director can react to world conditions as time goes on. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the ultimate origin is the rather well known 1914 short story "John Jones's Dollar" (which I have little doubt that Adams was aware of), in which the deposit of one dollar in a bank in 1921, to the credit of a direct descendant in the fortieth generation, eventually leads to universal socialism throughout the solar system. Deor (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

That story brings out some quite interesting economic assumptions. It's all in constant dollars, for one thing - inflation was something that wasn't widely thought about in 1914 - but there's also not much net improvement. We're told that after 900 years the trust would own "practically all the wealth on Earth, Mars, and Venus", nomininally $332 billion, and the total estimate for all the value of the solar system in 2921 was about twenty times that, six trillion or so.

The GDP of the UK (GB/I only, not the Empire) that year was ~£2.45 billion - approximately $12 billion - and the GDP of the US was ~$36.5 billion, per the datasets at eh.net/hmit. The figures quoted here let us estimate a ratio of US/UK GDP to world GDP, giving something on the order of $140-190 billion as world GDP in 1914. Either there'd been some fairly drastic deflation, or our interplanetary society of a thousand years hence wasn't a particularly well-off place... Shimgray | talk | 23:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The Sleeper Awakes is even earlier than 1914.. .AnonMoos (talk) 06:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Incidentally, an increase from 93 cents to $4.3 billion in 1,000 works out to an interest rate of 2.25 percent, compounded annually. Nowadays, you'd be lucky to get a 1% interest rate, which would give you just 19,492.01 after 1,000 years. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:03, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The dialogue in that episode of Futurama does state the interest rate. I was quite surprised they went to the bother of actually calculating the correct total after a thousand years of interest, but then the DVD commentary does suggest Matt Groening is quite a geek. Astronaut (talk) 09:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It's not really any bother. It takes about 3 seconds with a pocket calculator. --Tango (talk) 19:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The history of Vaageshwari Maatha temple in Rajasthan

I found the below statement on Yellapu

• "The history of Vaageshwari Maatha temple in Rajasthan reveals the story of Vellapus."

I had searched for the history of the temple but could not get any information on that. I appreciate if you get me the history of Vaageshwari Maatha temple in Rajasthan...

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.154.176.44 (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Rajasthan, but a google search for "vaageshwari maatha" -wikipedia yields almost no results, which might indicate either it was invented by a Wikipedia editor, or it's misspelled, or it's really obscure and not notable. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Name the book

Hi there, I'm searching the title of a book I've read some years ago (less than 20). The hero (who was the narrator I think) was forced to share a room with a other boy (maybe in a boarding school) who was obnoxious. Among the thing I recall, was the fact that he was using oil from canned sardines against acne. He was also using mnemonic to remember thing but misremembering them like HOUSE instead of HOMES for the Great Lakes (and another one about the Boston Tea Party). It was annoying for the hero, but turned to help him, as he was able to pass exams thanks to the mnemonics.

Even though I read it in French (as I am French), I am quite sure it was an American novel.

Thanks in advance Pleclown (talk) 11:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Is it illegal for the police to carry a backup gun ?

The reason I am asking this question is because someone said to me once that a)it was made illegal (I assume they were talking about America or somewhere in America) and b) the reason was that there were occasions when a police officer could plant that weapon.Scotius (talk) 14:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

It depends on the specific jurisdiction... each state has different gun laws (and even some cities). However, in the States and localities that do allow backup guns, the backup would be registered to the officer in question (so planting it would not be a good idea... the officer would be incriminating himself) Blueboar (talk) 14:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Many novels have the police using what they call "throw downs", which are unregistered, untraceable hand guns, in order to "prove" the police were right to use their own (registered) weapons because they were under threat. That's fiction, though. Bielle (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's not just fiction. The New Orleans police department, with deep corruption and a record of violence against citizens, around the time of Hurricane Katrina, was infamous for carrying such guns, known by the code term "ham sandwich". This was documented on an episode of Frontline (U.S. TV series), named Law and Disorder, first aired August 25, 2010 (season 28, episode 16). The relevant portion of the program is between (47:00) and (50:00). This episode is available for free, as a streaming video: [8]. StuRat (talk) 18:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The answer is "no, at least not everywhere". As Blueboar wrote, in the US, the law on this is not consistent and uniform across the whole country. Actually not only every state and city, but every police department has its own regulations on whether the police can carry multiple weapons. I looked at the Los Angeles Police Department manual (click "Table of Contents" on that mostly-blank page to proceed) and section 610.20 discusses backup weapons; they define a "backup weapon" as an additional weapon that's carried in a concealed manner. The police can also use their personally owned handgun as their primary or backup weapon, as long as the weapon meets the LAPD's specifications and it's registered with the department. As far as your planting theory — if an LAPD officer were to carry a backup firearm that was not registered, like the "throw downs" that Bielle mentioned, that would be a violation of these regulations ... but I don't know if possessing such a weapon is a criminal act also. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I just remembered that they also said something about that as its illegal far a citizen in America to carry a concealed weapon than the police, FBI, etc that wears suit or civvies while on duty may also be bracking those same laws. I was thinking that there may be laws that that exempt them, seeing that they are police, FBI, etc. Scotius (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, our article Concealed carry in the United States says, "48 states have passed laws allowing citizens to carry certain concealed firearms in public", although the circumstances under which concealed carry is allowed vary from state to state. Pais (talk) 11:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I believe it depends on the circumstances - for example, AFAIK, Concealed carry of a firearm is prohibited in all 50 states when entering a courtroom. Most states have an exemption for law enforcement personnel, using language such as "No weapons permitted unless you are a law enforcement agent on official duty." The key point there is "official duty" - a cop who is off-the-clock and just wants to go watch a trial in a court would not be allowed to carry a weapon, and hence could be breaking the law. ^Avic_ennasis @ 14:59, 16 Iyar 5771 / 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Alcohol in candy

While working on the papers of U.S. Senator Birch Bayh, I found that many people wrote to him in 1971 about a proposed bill that would have permitted 3.5% alcohol in candy. Does anyone know where I could find more abAout this bill? I've Googled <"h. r. 7785" candy alcohol 1971>, but I can't find anything. 129.79.34.83 (talk) 14:30, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

After a few tries that yielded nothing, I googled "h.r. 7785" 1971 and the first link I get is to a web page describing a book or pamphlet called "Confectionery amendments to the Food and drug act", which sounds like it's what you are looking for. Adding the magic word confectionery to the above search yielded four results, including this page from Johns Hopkins, which claims to have the book online if you have a login. Comet Tuttle (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice sleuthing, Comet Tuttle. If this is any help to the OP, your IP address appears to originate from Indiana University. It just so happens they have a hardcopy of the book in their Auxiliary Library Facilty. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 17:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

It's not a book so much as a set of Congressional hearings. It includes the text of the bill and discussions of it between the subcommittee and various witnesses. If you have access to Lexis Nexus Congressional through your university (which is likely), you can get it very easily online. Incidentally is 8.5% by volume, not 3.5%. The hearings are only 30 pages long. If you can't access them easily, leave me a message on my talk page with your e-mail address and I'll send you a PDF of the transcript. (An amusing exchange from it: Mr. Carter: "You don't think youngsters would be damaged or hurt by eating this delicious confection?" Mr. Kuykendall: "I think all he would get, if he ate 32 pieces of this stuff, is a bellyache, Dr. Carter.") --Mr.98 (talk) 18:46, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Major Dundee questions

Tunes in film Major Dundee

Hello, wise people ! Recently our french "TV Arte" broadcasted a restored version of Peckinpah '65 film Major Dundee, & this awakened among those who had seen it long ago (as well as on the WP french article) some questions like : when Dundee's troop exits Fort Benlin, each faction of the command singing its own distinct song , the blue ones singing "John Brown's body's..." , some other "My darling Clementine", but what do the grey ones sing ? It seems familiar to me, the words begin with "Oooooh I wish I were ..." , & I wonder if it is not associated with J.E.B. Stuart's banjo-man ...Thanks a lot to you beforehand, t.y. Arapaima (talk) 16:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

"Oh, I wish I was in the land of cotton..." which you can listen to here. Someone familiar with the film may be able to confirm if this is correct. Alansplodge (talk) 16:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The Entertainment Desk is the proper place for this type of question. StuRat (talk) 17:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

"Ask and ye shall receive" Alansplodge (talk) 23:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

"My cup overflows", thanks Alansplodge !Arapaima (talk) 07:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Howitzer in film Major Dundee

Hello wise people ! (this question is related to the one just above). As far as a french amateur (me) can assert, weapons in this film seem fairly well represented & not at all anachronic for 1864 : classical GI muzzle loaders, new Henry repeaters, big double barreled shot-guns ( in the first scene) , Colts etc...About the "baby howitzer" Lt Graham brings back, can you tell me what it is ? Conic shape, modern design, brass, estimated caliber about 10 mm, carriage (I think) a little too long for a howitzer, seems technically coming from our Napoleons...Thanks a lot beforehand, t.y. Arapaima (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I have found a brief shot of this gun in action here - after about 1:30. It seems to be a studio mock-up because at the point of firing (if you freeze-frame), the muzzle is out of alignment with the rest of the barrel! However, a likely candidate for the gun it's supposed to resemble is the M1841 Mountain Howitzer. Very interesting combat with some French Chevau-légers. Did anything like this really happen? As the French cavalry were amongst the best in the world at the time, I think they would have given this American rabble a bit more of a contest. Alansplodge (talk) 17:20, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks +++ Alan for the charge footage, very impressive. Am making some research about any french-union frictions on the Rio Grande in 1864, & let you know on your talk page as soon as possible . Cheers, Arapaima (talk) 08:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Site of "Fort Benlin" in film Major Dundee

Hello wise people ! (question related to the 2 ones above) . Have you any idea about where "Fort Benlin" (even if it is fictitious : I could not find any such fort, neither any famous Benlin, in WP...) is located ? Dundee points on the map a Sand River Crossing, 30 miles away from Fort Benlin, where he sends Lt Graham to intercept and "borrow" guns from a supply train "going from Denver to Sante Fe, where the 2cd California Column is garrisoned" ( BTW, I thought the California Column had made its grand hike in 1862, April-August...Did a "2cd" California Column stay in Santa Fe ?...) . And it took 11 days riding (200 miles in all ? towards the south-west? ) to the Dundee column to get to a point "50 miles away from the border, & 86 miles away from Fort Davis"...Is it enough for a triangulation ? Thanks beforehand, t.y. Arapaima (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Why people with no needs would network with people with needs

This isn't an opinion question. I just want to know some objective and logical reasons, given human psychology, why someone with a job with which they are satisfied and are negligibly in need of anything career-wise would bother to network with someone who needs their help and doesn't have anything at all to offer in return. If I need you but you don't need me for anything, why would you bother with me? If anything, I would think that since some companies offer an employee a cash bonus when a referral is hired, that selfish motivation is what makes the gainfully employed person exert some effort for the person in need. The person in need himself isn't giving the employed person the money, but they are the means of the employed person getting money from the company. Barring that, at the core, does it absolutely depend on altruism? 20.137.18.50 (talk) 18:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The people with "no needs" are in that position because they're better people than people "with needs". If you want to be rich very quickly, just become a better person. You will soon have all the opportunities you can handle, and even more, but because you're a good person, you will say "no" to opportunities that are beyond you. In other words, whatever your skills, you will be maximally able to use them. Part of being a better person is being friendly and interested in other people. I hope this answers your question. 188.156.14.134 (talk) 18:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Believe it or not, there are more motivators in life than pure self-interest and greed. HiLo48 (talk) 18:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, Thanks 188 and HiLo48 for your responses. I can see how the "good" feeling the person with no need gets by feeling like they are doing the person in need a favor is their reward. As said here, "It was known that once [Mahatma Gandhi] settled in a village he would immediately begin to serve the needs of its people. When a friend inquired if his reasons for serving the poor were purely humanitarian, Gandhi answered, 'Not at al(sic). Rather,' he said, 'I am here to serve myself only, to find my own self-realization through the service of others.'" I wonder if anyone has rigorously studied the likelihood of one to help another as a function of the socioeconomic gap between the two. I haven't seen too much outside of fictional movies where a high level manager or CEO becomes the mentor of a poor person. It would seem to me that in most cases, a person would be most likely to help another person a few notches below them (if helping others for its own sake has value to them). 20.137.18.50 (talk) 19:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Gandhi was spot on. Being of service to others is NOT, repeat NOT about self-sacrifice, self-denial, duty, "what a decent person would/should do", or any other such notions. It's about getting at least as much yourself from the transaction as you give out. If you're not getting something, nay a lot, back from doing whatever you do for others - and that something is self-defined and is almost never monetary - then the whole thing does not work and cannot be sustained. You will burn yourself out, become bitter and twisted, and then become unavailable to help anyone else. That's where it won't work for you. And the recipients of your service will know you're not helping them purely as a natural expression of who you are, but out of some sense of duty, and nobody wants that sort of help. So it won't work for them either. Lose-lose is not the way to go. Win-win may sound trite, but it really is the only way that actually works. In anything. Gandhi knew and practised this better than almost anyone, which is why he is so revered around the world. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe that's why they shot him. My Libertarian friends refer to that approach as "enlightened self-interest", and likewise say that that approach is the most productive; the win-win, as you say; the core philosophy of the book I'm Ok, You're OK. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The Freudian concept of the superego is that we sometimes do things just to feel good about ourselves. In an evolutionary context, this might have developed so we help out the group, which tends to have genes in common with us. Thus, helping them survive helps out genes survive, and therefore those egalitarian genes are passed down. The idea of karma also holds that you will be rewarded "by the universe" for good deeds and punished for bad deeds. In a religious context, good deeds may lead to heaven. There's also the pragmatic approach, that helping others may make others more willing to help you, at some future point when you need it (if somebody needs a kidney, would you be more willing to donate to Ghandi or Osama Bin Laden ?). StuRat (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

We have a whole article on altruism. There is also altruism (ethics) which is related. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The questioner is thinking short term. While I might need nothing career-wise now, you never know when you might need those network contacts in the future. I keep networking, so I don't need to start to build one from scratch when I actually do need my network. It's selfish, but it does help others at the same time. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

You might also wish to consider the concept of social capital. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

What an unusual article. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Really? How so? --TammyMoet (talk) 13:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The volunteers answering questions here at the Reference Desk qualify, by the way. None of us need you, but we're all helping you out. If there's a benefit for us, it's related to the social capital concept whose article TammyMoet pointed out. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Constitutional Rights and religious Freedom

What are the constitutional rights and religious freedom in Canada? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.155.52 (talk) 19:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

You have the right to read the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (of which I'm embarrassed to say, I'm wholly ignorant). Clarityfiend (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Aw, no high school politics class? It's in Section 2. There are some more links to follow from that article. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The charter came in after my salad days, you young whippersnapper. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Extraterritoriality

I'm trying to find some sources about non-countries which have extraterritorial status of one sort or another, particularly the International Bureau of Weights and Measures and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta. Does anyone know of any books or academic articles which discuss these bodies' extraterritoriality? Thanks. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 22:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Unhelpful bickering not answering the question asked. —07:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The Knights of Malta have received diplomatic recognition by several many countries, and several of their buildings are considered to have equivalent status to a foreign embassy by the Italian government. The International Bureau of Weights and Measures has no such recognition, so I'm not sure what the comparison is. AnonMoos (talk) 05:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC) The International Bureau of Weights and Measures does have extraterritorial status, as even a quick glance at our article on it (which I linked above) and an even quicker Google search would quickly tell you. Thank you for your 'help'. ╟─TreasuryTag►UK EYES ONLY─╢ 07:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC) However, it is not a state-like body, and does not have diplomatic recognition as if it were a state, so the usefulness of a comparison with the Knights of Malta is somewhat limited. AnonMoos (talk) 07:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC) Why didn't you read my question? It wasn't about diplomatic recognition. It wasn't about comparison. I'm trying to find some sources about non-countries which have extraterritorial status of one sort or another, particularly the International Bureau of Weights and Measures and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta. Does anyone know of any books or academic articles which discuss these bodies' extraterritoriality? Do you know of any sources, or are you just interested in engaging in (incorrect) quibbling? ╟─TreasuryTag►draftsman─╢ 07:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC) As far as I can tell, the Knights of Malta buildings receive extraterritorial status in pretty much the same way that any foreign embassy in any country does. However the International Bureau of Weights and Measures HQ receives extraterritorial status, it's a fairly sure bet that it's not because it's treated as a state-like entity given diplomatic recognition... AnonMoos (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC) What are you talking about? My question made the statement that both organisations have "extraterritoriality of one sort or another" which is true. And then it asked if anyone had relevant sources or books they could point me towards. Bickering over non-issues is not helpful. ╟─TreasuryTag►pikuach nefesh─╢ 07:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Chinese economics, American debt

I'll start with the questions, then follow with my current understanding: Q1: What does China give the U.S. when it purchases U.S. debt? what does the U.S. receive? Q2: What purpose does holding so much foreign debt achieve for China?

At first I assumed that China returns goods and services for U.S. debt, but I figure the proportion of Chinese GDP created by the government is rather small, and I don't think private enterprises are happy to receive T-bonds for real products. So I'm a little confused about how China "pays for" the debt? Certainly they aren't handing the U.S. renminbi?

Regarding the second question, I've often seen it mentioned in an offhand way that holding so much debt is a strategy for controlling China's domestic inflation. I'd be grateful if someone could explain the mechanism by which this works, or explain the real reason they hold so much debt if inflation control is not the actual reason. Thank you! The Masked Booby (talk) 23:36, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

As to the first, my understanding is that the Chinese buy US debt using some of the large amounts of dollars paid by US firms to Chinese firms for their products. As to the second, buying debt is a non-inflationary way (from the Chinese perspective) to spend the dollars amassed as a result of the US/China trade imbalance. Perhaps the best way to understand why it helps to control inflation is to consider what happens if instead it is injected into the Chinese economy, e.g. as wages or as government orders for products or services ... any of those would increase the Chinese money supply, which tends to be a cause of inflation. (Crudely, people in China would have more cash and hence there would be more demand for product, and a commensurate increase in prices, assuming that production - supply - cannot be ramped up to mop up the increased money. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The obvious (and already stated answer) to Q1 is money, cash, greenbacks and their digital equivalent. For Q2, the main reasons the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) holds large amounts of US Treasury bills and Agency paper are (a) to prevent the trade surplus from boosting the money supply to the point of generating inflation; (b) to maintain a cushion so as to be able to purchase imports even if there are insufficient export earnings to generate hard currency; and (c), to maintain economic independence, i.e., to not have to go hat-in-hand to the IMF and accept their terms in the event of a balance of payments crisis.

By the way, the money held in the PBoC is just like your own money in Citibank: it is your money, not the bank’s.DOR (HK) (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

May 20

Slovenia influence on U.S.?

Several years ago a trabvl agency in mass. Featured a tour of slovenia and mentioned, in their brochure,that thomas jefferson was inspired by it's history when he was composing the united states' declaration of independance.. I do not recall the name of the agency but when i phoned them back then, about the veracity of the claim about slovenia,they affirmed that it was true and that it went back many centuries ; also highlighted was referance to a coronation hundreds ago years ago in slovenia ;it made special mention of a throne of stone upon which their rulers were crowned...

Now i cannot find the article nor remember the agency...can you illuminate the way ??

Also i heard that the word slave comes from "slav" because they and other slavs were survile to the vickings centuries ago .got any info on that subject?

Joe horvath

(email address removed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.65.154 (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If you Google "Jefferson Slovenia", you'll find lots of stuff about this, such as this page from the U.S. State Department. The story is that Jefferson was influenced by Jean Bodin who relates a legend about how the common people in Carinthia, or Slovenia, collectively agreed to be ruled by a certain duke. This page quotes a book which says the relevant passages had been marked out in Jefferson's own copy of Bodin. I see no reason why this shouldn't be true. As for your other question: yes, that is roughly the origin of the word "slave", except it was not exactly Vikings. As the Oxford English Dictionary puts it, the name "Slav" came to mean "slave", "the Slavonic population in parts of central Europe having been reduced to a servile condition by conquest".--Rallette (talk) 06:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Declaration_of_Independence#Influences contains what Wikipedia has; for influences of historical events of European history, the Act of Abjuration and the memory of the Glorious Revolution are more often mentioned... AnonMoos (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Answering the second part of your question first, regarding the folk etymology of the word "Slav". If you read Slavic_peoples#Ethnonym you'll see that indeed the word "slav" resembeled the latin word for "slave", so the two terms got confused. However, the actual source of the term "Slav" in the Slav's own language means merely "people who speak". The English word for "Slave" derives from the Latin and Greek words meaning the exact same thing; however the connection to the name of the Slavic people comes from a misunderstanding. A very old misunderstanding, but a misunderstanding nonetheless. Regarding the Slovenian people specifically, it is possible that Jefferson was familiar with the so-called "Slovenian enlightenment" led by Sigmund Zois, Jefferson was quite well read, and looking through the Zois article, it looks like he shared many of the same philosophies that Jefferson shared. So it would not be outside of the realm of possibility that Jefferson knew of Zois and of his ideas; but I don't know that Zois or other Slovenian intellectuals influenced the Declaration of Independence or Jefferson's philosophy in any significant way. Knowing of someone (and we have no proof, as yet, that he even did, just that they were contemporaries who shared a common philosophy) and being influenced by them are two different things. --Jayron32 06:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't agree about the folk etymology. Although I would agree that's what our article suggests. From what I know, sclavus meant both Slavs and slaves from an original meaning of just Slavs. Although the development may have occurred in the Greek sklabos. That seems to be what most scholars say anyway.--JGGardiner (talk) 07:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

There's no folk etymology going on. See [9]. Sclavus is the Medieval Latin word for slave (the Classical word was servus), and it does indeed come from the Slavs' name for themselves. (Since Greek and Latin words never began with sl- at the time, they put a [k] sound in between to make it easier to pronounce.) Pais (talk) 13:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Aside: The word ciao derives more or less from the formal sono vostro schiavo, "I am your slave", along the lines of the old closing for a letter "y'r obedient servant". Schiavo is pronounced SKYAHvoh, not SHYvoh as in Terry Schiavo. The transformation of a stop followed by [l] to a stop followed by [j] is a reasonably regular one. --Trovatore (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Joe, just a quick word about netiquette: Please don't write in all caps. It makes it harder to read and comes across as shouting. Astronaut (talk) 06:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Slovenian user here. I had heard this story before, but it seems to me to be apocryphal at best. Maybe there is a kernel of truth in it, maybe not. The coronations mentioned were coronations of dukes in old Carantania (which some people here believe was a direct ancestor of present day Slovenia, far-fetched as that may sound), the thrones either the Duke's chair or the Prince's stone (I forget which at the moment), and the story, as someone mentioned above is about how Jefferson read of the ceremony in a book and got some inspiration for the Declaration of Independence from the vows the dukes-elect took on coronation day. It all seems a bit far fetched to me, but it is a convenient nation building myth, so there is a number of people here in Slovenia who sincerely believe it. Jayron also explained what I was going to say about the origin of the name Slav. (And just an unsolicited bonus, in case you didn't research this yourself: judging from your interest in this I take it your ancestors were Slovene, and judging from your surname, there is a high probability they were from Prekmurje). TomorrowTime (talk) 07:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

This book says the story is a myth, Transition and the Politics of History Education in Southeast Europe, p. 65—the Jefferson story mentioned in the footnote as an example of the main text (on pp. 64-65) description of how following the Slovanian election of 2004 the new government pushed for a shift in history education in a nationalistic direction. Apparently the minister of education wanted the Jefferson story taught more extensively in schools, even though "academic historiography had already defined [the story] as mythical." I have no idea whether this book is correct or not—I never heard of this story until just now. Just found it with a quick search through Google Books. From what I could gleam quickly from this and other books, it seems that the theory of Jefferson being influenced by Bodin's writing about Carantania is based on little more than Jefferson having "marked" this page in his copy of Bodin. It appears Jefferson didn't write anything in particular, just made a mark. If that is all that is behind the theory, it is rather flimsy. But again, I only did a quick search so may have missed something more significant. Pfly (talk) 08:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Nah, that's pretty much it, AFAIK. As I said, it's a nice nation building myth, but probably no more than that. TomorrowTime (talk) 08:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

online books

So, if I have written some books and one of them I think, I would like to provide this one for free online, for anyone to come along and read, (and perhaps occasionally provide some feedback on what is wrong with it) where might I go to do that. I assume there are popular and respected sites that allow such things, though I have no idea where, or what would be best for me. Only thing I can think of right now is going to the site where my blog is, starting a new blog and posting each chapter as a new post on there. But, has anyone got any better suggestions?

148.197.121.205 (talk) 08:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikibooks? Llamabr (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, if the books are textbooks. It depends a lot on what kind of book you've written. See Category:Ebook suppliers for some other possibilities; maybe you can find one there that suits your needs. Pais (talk) 14:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

This thread from just a few days ago discusses putting your book up on Apple's online bookstore for download on iPhones and iPads. It's possible to put it on the Kindle bookstore, too; here is the link. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The Wall Street Journal

Financial Times is generally Keynesian. What economic model is promoted by WSJ? Are they supply sider, Austrian or advocate of Chicago school? --Reference Desker (talk) 10:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I have no citation for this, but they're consistently in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy, so their editorial board has given the thumbs-up to the flat income tax and supply-side in general over time. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The Wall Street Journal's editorial pages are particularly associated with supply-side economics. They generally are also advocates of monetarist/Chicago school views, and they often speak of Keynesian economics with disdain. The news pages are written more neutrally. John M Baker (talk) 20:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Loans to unsuccessful factions

During the Spanish Civil War, both sides borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars (in 1930s prices); whilst the Republicans funded the majority of this with the nation's gold reserves, the Nationalists had no such fund. If they'd lost, what would the creditors have got? What about annexed nations? Has the winning country taken on the debt of the losing, just as an international good grace? What about the lending country seizing assets of the borrowing, has this happened? Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Usually those who financially back the losing side in a war lose their money. It's a risk you take to dabble in politics. Blueboar (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Supporting Blueboar's point: After the American Civil War, the US Constitution was amended to include: But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States (...) but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Extradite between US states

Are all extraditions granted? Quest09 (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

All US states extradite... but not all requests for extradition are granted. It depends on the circumstances. Blueboar (talk) 12:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Some seem automatic, though, such as kidnapping, according to our article here. Llamabr (talk) 13:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Every state will honor every other states' request for extradition for felonies, per federal law. There are no "safe-havens." Extradition law in the United States#Interstate extradition states: The Extradition of Fugitives Clause in the Constitution requires States, upon demand of another State, to deliver a fugitive from justice who has committed a "treason, felony or other crime" to the State from which the fugitive has fled. 18 U.S.C. § 3182 sets the process by which an executive of a state, district or territory of the United States must arrest and turn over a fugitive from another state, district or territory."

However, each state decides whether or not to pursue extradition, as it's often a costly process. I know that generally, Ohio will not bother to extradite for a misdemeanor, whereas Pennsylvania often does. ^Avic_ennasis @ 14:41, 16 Iyar 5771 / 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Article 4 Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution explains extradition, although it doesn't use that term, but rather it describes it.[10] It's of some interest that the second part of it, cannily worded, had to do with returning slaves to their owners, which of course was made obsolete by the amendment abolishing slavery. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

"Penny Schools" in the United Kingdom

Hi all. I am looking to find out a bit of info about Penny Schools, which (from what I can gather) seem to have existed in a few places in the UK in the 18th and 19th centuries. I will soon be writing an article about a place of worship which occupies a former Penny School, so I want to include a brief couple of sentences about what they were, which authorities were responsible for them etc., for context. There's surprisingly little info online, so if anybody has any suggestions for "history of education"-type books, primers etc. I can research in, I would be very grateful! (I visit libraries at least once a week.) Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I haven't heard the term before, but it may be referring to the Dame schools which were private enterprises, often run by older women with no other income. A good account of an early 19th century dame school here (NB for "rude drawings" read "rudimentary drawings"!). This page suggests "Fees were about 3d. a week" so 1d (a penny) a day might not be too far off the mark. Alansplodge (talk) 17:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Me again. This page suggests that "penny schools" were the same as Ragged schools, with parents contributing a penny a week if they were able (I couldn't find any other reference to support this though). These schools were usually run by the Church of England, but also by other denominations, charitable trusts or by concerned individuals. This page has more details. Alansplodge (talk) 18:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I've just found a reference (in the Victoria County History of Sussex) stating that the former school was founded by a Mrs Welch and was run by Dissenters at first, which suggests a Dame School. The links you provided are helpful as well. ("4 times 9 is 30" ... hmm!) Odd how the terminology seems to differ in different places: all three of my sources which specify the type of school call it a Penny School, but I've never encountered the term in relation to any other Sussex schools. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 21:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Is this it? Alansplodge (talk) 22:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Yep, that's the one. Became a Friends Meeting House in 1965 apparently. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thirty pieces of silver

How much would the 30 pieces of silver paid to Judas be worth in 2011 money? How might it compare with the average annual income at the time? Thanks 92.29.112.23 (talk) 13:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Googling "how much judas 30 pieces silver worth" yielded all sorts of results. Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 13:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

According to our article Denarius (liberally sprinkled with "citation needed" templates), the denarius (the "penny" of the Bible) was worth about US$20, and 1 denarius was a typical day's wages. So, about $600 and about 1/12, to answer your questions. Tevildo (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I thought he was supposed to have been paid in Shekels though. So, if, as the article suggests, A Denarius contains 50 grains of silver, around 3.25g, and a Shekel is almost pure silver of 14g, that would suggest a value closer to $2500. And then he went and threw it all away, as though that could change anything. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 08:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

What time will I be raptured?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Hello. I'm worried about the end of the world, which is meant to be tomorrow afternoon, according your your article on the 2011 end times prediction. In particular, I have a kayaking trip tomorrow that I don't want to miss, so I want to be sure I've got the bulk of it done before I run out of time. Your article suggests that rapture will occur at 6PM, and that it will sweep across the globe according to daylight savings time zones. But I'll be paddling down the Mississippi River, which separates Eastern and Western time. Which time should I prepare for? Should I paddle closer to the shore of Georgia to try to squeeze another hour out? Also, should I post this to the Science Reference Desk, since matters of cosmology perhaps are better situated there? Thank you. Llamabr (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

This is the right desk; predictions made by one man based upon religious texts are certainly not science (and questions should not be posted to two desks at once). The way you phrase your question makes it seem as though you either scorn the prediction entirely, or take it very literally, down to expecting rapture to wait for an hour at arbitrary time-zone lines. Perhaps you can get better answers if you clarify your question. Also note that we don't have a crystal ball. SemanticMantis (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It also seems you have no idea of U.S. geography. The Mississippi River doesn't divide any time zones; it's Central Time on both sides. And Georgia doesn't have a shore on the Mississippi; it's two states (and one time zone) farther east. Pais (talk) 14:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I think this is fairly obviously a 'joke'. ╟─TreasuryTag►directorate─╢ 14:14, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The conventional Christian view (which I understand to be Bible-based, though I can't say which specific verses) is that not only does no man know when the end of the world will come, even Jesus does not know. Only God knows. Assuming He's even decided yet. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The International Date Line is presumably at UTC+12, so when it gets to be 6 PM there on the 21st, it should be 6 AM in the UTC time zone. Hence we should know the answer less than 16 hours from now. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Please do not humour joke threads. It's not constructive. ╟─TreasuryTag►condominium─╢ 14:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm not altogether convinced that it doesn't have at least a grain of seriousness, and the fact we have an article on it suggests that certainly someone considers it notable. It may not be notable, after tomorrow. But we'll see. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Llamabr: Only 3% of the world's population is going to be raptured tomorrow so odds are that your kayaking trip won't be interrupted. However, be careful of all the zombies. Fortunately, the CDC has issued guidelines for what to do tomorrow.[11] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Old street in Belfast

Resolved

I bought a picture taken in Belfast around the turn of the 20th century. It says Castle Place on it and shows central Belfast with a lot of large shops. Would anyone happen to know where exactly Castle Place is and whether or not it still exists? I cannot recall ever having come upon that street name when I was there. Thank you.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Google Maps claims to find it, but I can't see the street name there. Unfortunately StreetView doesn't get close enough to check. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It also shows up if you use the Royal Mail's Postcode Finder. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you remember a department store called Robb's? Picture here. DuncanHill (talk) 14:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Commons has a whole category of pictures here. DuncanHill (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Funny coincidence, I was looking up the recent Northern Ireland elections and their result on the Belfast Telegraph site a couple of days ago. They've digitized the Linen Hall Library's collection of 6,000 picture-postcards of Ireland (including Belfast) from a century ago. That doesn't answer your question directly, but perhaps there are some views that match up with yours and can help you to locate Castle Place. See their page for Belfast —— Shakescene (talk) 14:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Castle Place is part of what Google Maps thinks is Castle Street, to the east of the junction with Royal Avenue. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I've been here! I never knew I was on Castle Place. Thanks everybody! A pity Robb's has been demolished. I went to Donegall Arcade, but it's a poor replacement for an old building like Robb's. I appreciate all your help. The irony is that I was on Castle Place the day I bought the photograph and never realised it!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Psychology questions

I have found some people changing their profile photo in facebook frequently and some others not changing at all.Is there any psychological interpretation of their behavior?

No. --Jayron32 14:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

To be more precise... There is always a psychological interpretation for anything and everything, but most are not accepted by experts in the field or justified by valid experiments. In this case, there is no accepted or justified psychological interpretation. -- kainaw™ 14:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

To be even more precise, in all likelihood no one has ever performed an experiment to test any hypothesis regarding the psychological motivations of changing one's profile photo. Pais (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Answering a slightly different question, this sparks a memory of a radio programme (probably on BBC Radio 4) that I heard a year or so ago about some research that had been done into the kind of photos that people use in profiles, and how these affected other people's opinions of them, but I can't remember much more. I think it was related to a competition for amateur researchers. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Found it! - see the posting about "Nina and Bernie". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Your best bet would be to look for studies about people who move their furniture around frequently vs. those who get it set the way they like it and leave it as-is for the next few decades. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Historical French Flags?

Flag of France calls this "The flag of New France (1663-1763)".

What flag would France have used between 1690-1700? --CGPGrey (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Our article Flag of France claims that it was the image to the right. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Bannière de France

The image you have shown is the flag of New France ie French North America. The French flag from the middle ages onwards was known as La Bannière de France (The Banner of France) - three gold Fleurs-de-Lis on a dark blue background. There were minor changes in the style of the Fleurs-de-Lis; I believe this is the correct one for 1700. Alansplodge (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

More about historical French flags here. Alansplodge (talk) 18:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Oops! New France, got it, sorry. Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Remember though that a banniere is not a drapeau. That was a standard, a war flag, and not the national flag per se. It seems that France did not have a national flag before the tricolore. As the article notes, various flags were used and it appears the closest thing to a national flag is the one to the left of the New France flag in the gallery there. I don't want to add yet another picture here. --JGGardiner (talk) 19:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The King's Standard? Dualus (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one I meant. Or are you asking me to explain that? --JGGardiner (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

This painting of the Battle of Cuddalore (1783) shows the French ships carrying a plain white flag as an ensign. There's a joke there somewhere ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 21:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Except that it isn't a joke. The white flag was often used at the same time as the blue w/ yellow fleur de lys. Some of the white flags were charged with fleur-de-lys, while at other times they were used as a plain white flag. The whole "France surrenders all the time" is such a tired joke because a) it is overplayed and b) it's so badly wrong that it says much more about the person who repeats it than it does about the French, who simply do not have a history of surrender. The French Navy under Admiral de Tourville was a formidable force under the White Flag, far from surrendering it was known for defeating navies many times larger than itself with superior tactics and fortitude. Back to the OP's question, the other choice for the flag of france was File:Pavillon royal de France.svg which the article Flag of France notes was the royal banner of the Bourbon dynasty as Kings of France, and so was the unofficial flag during the years 1690-1700 as the OP asked. The blue flag with the three yellow fleur-de-lys was the flag of the Valois, IIRC. --Jayron32 22:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll get my coat... Alansplodge (talk) 23:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Pavillon royal de France

The Pavillon royal de France (shown to the left) is the flag most often used to represent France in displays of the six flags over Texas. The French colonization of Texas was very brief, lasting only from 1685 to 1689, but the time period is so close to that of the OP's question that I assume the flag would have been well known and widely used in the 1690s, even if it wasn't the one and only French flag. Pais (talk) 22:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The flag that I identified decorates the Kingdom of France article here and in fr.wikipedia. As our caption there notes, "France had no official flag, but as in other autocratic monarchies the monarch's Standard was used as the main flag used to represent France." All of the articles identify the white flag with Fleurs de lys alone as the one used in the presence of the royal family. fr.wikipedia has an article on the flag of the Kingdom of France It identifies the blue flag with the Fleurs de lys as the royal flag preceding the one that I identified. The flag of France article on fr. says the one that I identified was used from the time of Louis XIV without identifying a specific date. His reign was from 1643-1715. So I that my earlier answer was probably correct. --JGGardiner (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

graduate attitudes towards education and honesty

Some months ago a young American crew member on my boat met some new friends on shore and invited them out to the boat for an evening of drinks and conversation. It was a fun evening of music and lively, animated conversation. Nobody was getting drunk and it was enjoyable, but there was one persistent thread in the conversation that I privately found a little disturbing. They were five people all apparently in their 20s and recent graduates from, I think, 3 different universities. I was the old guy and so made only minimal contributions. Most of the conversation, naturally, centered around their university experiences. The disturbing part was that at no time did I hear any remarks like how satisfied/dissatisfied they were with their education. what value they placed on their education, what they might do with it or what more they might learn. The main thrust was how they had all "cleverly" tricked or manipulated their professors/educators, how they had "cleverly" cheated on all the tests and generally avoided their educational responsibilies, how stupid the educators were and how they had "cleverly" squeeked through to get the appropriate piece of paper. Other than two who knew each other they were all strangers from different universities but with the same basic experiences and attitudes. I'm sure you can understand why I found this a little disturbing. I have no connection or affiliation with any universities, so I have no idea if these random strangers may be representative or typical of today's university products. A little enlightenment might help me to develope an oppinion on that subject. Help?Phalcor (talk) 18:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It isn't hard to understand. Why do you think they needed that piece of paper? They wanted a job that required it. The job doesn't require an education. It requires a degree. So, the education is secondary to the degree. I teach and I understand this well. I tell my students that it is their job to trick me into giving them a passing grade and my job to trick them into getting an education. They laugh, but they agree that it is true. They don't want to learn how to program a computer, but some old guys sat around a sandwich shop and decided that they needed to take one course in programming. So, they do what they can to get the grade without learning and I do what I can to trick them into learning a little bit. Because we are all in agreement, nobody has a problem with it. -- kainaw™ 18:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• If you are concerned about the soul of educated America, I can say, don't worry. First off, our universities have had lots of cynical, transactional students ever since we were British colonies. Many of them crash and burn in adult life, but many others become our most creative, entrepreneurial, and industrious citizens. Also, there are still plenty of students who attend university because they love to learn. These people tend to end up working for either non-profits or the government -- which are, incidentally, the two sectors that employ 99% of America's schoolteachers and professors. --M@rēino 19:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

You might find some answers at http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/. (As with websites in general, I do not endorse the quality of English on that website.)

—Wavelength (talk) 19:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

My Google search for students cheating statistics reported "About 5,690,000 results", the first being http://www.glass-castle.com/clients/www-nocheating-org/adcouncil/research/cheatingfactsheet.html, which has some statistics on students cheating.

—Wavelength (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

See also Plagiarism: How to Avoid It.

—Wavelength (talk) 21:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If they were all relative strangers, as I think you imply, I think they would have been looking for common ground, on which to converse. They might have had an idealistic side that was not displayed because at that stage in getting to know one another they might not have wanted to stand out for their relatively idiosyncratic dimensions. These young recent graduates may have had real interests that they wished to pursue. But if they were a disparate group, young, and they didn't know one another well, they may have been hesitant to launch into a dissertation on their pet interests, and instead opted for the least common denominator of the university life they just left behind—the trials and tribulations of getting a passing grade. The discussion about deceptively obtained degrees can be seen as humbleness. It is understood that cerebral acuity is a value that is hard to beat. This is especially understood by those who have just passed through an educational system. They may have merely been taking a contrarian view and batting the idea around that being oblivious to intellectual accomplishment is also acceptable, as that notion also enjoys the support of some sections of the intellectual universe. Bus stop (talk) 21:30, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Jack Cohen, somewhere in his book The Privileged Ape talks about how as soon as the education of the young has been entrusted by a society to a special group of educators, collusion between the educators and their pupils is to be expected.--ColinFine (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much everybody. This has been enlightening. Wow!Phalcor (talk) 23:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It reminds me of the 4 Yorkshiremen sketch from Monty Python. You're not meant to actually believe them: what they're doing is an example of oneupmanship! --TammyMoet (talk) 13:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

12/21 or 12/23?

Which of these dates completes the 13th b'ak'tun? 12/21 or 12/23? (Neither one is the end of the world, by the way.) 74.72.130.137 (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia article Baktun, "the current (13th) baktun will end, or be completed, on 13.0.0.0.0 (December 21, 2012 using the GMT correlation)."

—Wavelength (talk) 20:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Serious suggestion to the OP. Because the numbers in the heading don't even look like dates to most of the world's population, do try writing the names of the months out if you want a useful response here. HiLo48 (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me. :) So, is this supposed to coincide with the Winter Solstice? If so, I would think it would be the 21st. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

@ What time should I be raptured

Forget that. The world's not ending tomorrow, it's scientifically proven. 74.72.130.137 (talk) 19:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If it does happen as predicted, at 6:00 PM local time in each time zone, it would start at the international date line, which is UTC + 12, or 12 hours ahead of 18:00 UTC. Hence it would start at 06:00 UTC, which is about 10 1/2 hours from now. So we'll see. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

You shouldn't expect it. Camping apparently believes in the Calvinist doctrine that salvation is unmerited. Our article notes that he estimates a 3% rapture rate. Bugs is right though, 6:00 is the prediction. Probably 6:30 in Newfoundland. --JGGardiner (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article "2011 end times prediction" has information about that doctrine.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Um... does the prediction take into account the fact that much of the world is currently on Daylight saving time? (and what happens in those countries that don't use DST... do they get it at 5 PM?) or is the prediction using Standard Time (which would mean that it will actually occur at 7:00 Daylight Time).

A request to aspiring prophets of doom... give us something we can work with next time... "dawn" or "sun set" are both nice and traditional. Blueboar (talk) 20:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If Bugs was a true believer he would know he should be using Jerusalem time. The holy texts says nothing about the International Date Line. Everything including the calculation of Easter uses Jerusalem time.--Aspro (talk) 20:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm going strictly by what it says in 2011 end times prediction. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

But that is a Wikipedia article... do you believe everything you read in Wikipedia? I 'KNOW' people who edit it !!! Are you a heathen follower of the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? For if so, I hope you a have your spare set of dentures at the ready, for there will be a great gnashing of teeth.--Aspro (talk) 22:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

No,no,no... the Pastafarian rapture isn't scheduled to start until 7:45 PM (open bar) Blueboar (talk) 22:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If the time given in the article is not accurate, feel free to correct it. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:27, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

A credible citation from a reputable source telling us that the Earth and all the people in it have ceased to exist could only be from some other planet. And we, the people who might conceivably have made use of that information had we been alive, will all be dead. I wonder if dead people can edit the Plutonian equivalent of Wikipedia. Seems a reasonable idea. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

By the pallid bust of Pallas on the night's Plutonian shore? --Trovatore (talk) 00:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

No, Jack, tomorrow is just the Rapture. Armageddon proper is on October 21st. 97% of us (at least) will still be here on Sunday. Do try and keep up. :) Incidentally, am I alone in thinking that 3% sounds rather on the high side? According to [12], Christians only make up 33% of the world population, and presumably Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Anglicans aren't in with a sniff, so that means virtually _all_ the "Protestant" population are in? Naah... Tevildo (talk) 01:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to burst your bubble Jack but tomorrow is not the end of the world but rather the beginning of the end times. Most of us will presumably survive the weekend although internet service may be spotty. The actual end of the world will be in October. --JGGardiner (talk) 01:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, sor-REE!!!!! How about I go and cut my throat right now; surely an appropriate fate for one who has failed utterly to give a bone-crunchingly correct answer to a Ref Desk question about the precise UTC time of the end of the world. I used to be a genius - where did I go so appallingly wrong? I know, I'll ask the good folk at the Wikipedia Reference Desk, they'll know. They know everything. Apparently.  :) :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 01:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Please, dear Jack, don't do anything hasty. Who knows? You might be one of the 3%, and you would look and feel pretty silly mounting throatless to the heavens, trailing streams of brightest crimson. Bielle (talk) 02:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

That's a vivid image, Bielle. Nice, different, unusual. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

What I find startling is that according to both our article and this NPR article, the rapture will apparently progress in discontinuous jumps across the planet by time zone, rather than progressing gradually over the planet as would be the case if it were driven by some natural time measure like apparent solar time. Time zones, or indeed any form of standard time, have only been in existence since 1847, and are a purely human invention that only exist because human legislatures have adopted them. If God is basing the rapture timetable on human-legislated time systems, will it be possible for a legislature to postpone the rapture indefinitely within their jurisdiction, by repeatedly adopting a declaration that the time is at that moment restarting at midnight? Or perhaps if they repeatedly legislatively adopted a date well before May 21, 2011, similar to how the date changed by multiple days legislatively on a country-by-country basis as countries switched from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar? Red Act (talk) 05:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

It would be easier just to declare that 6 p.m. today will be skipped. If God is a good timekeeper, just slipping in two leap seconds to go directly from 17:59:59 to 18:00:01 should be enough, and barely noticeable by the population. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, the clocks go forward rather than back, don't they. I can never remember. 18:00 BST has gone, 17:39 UTC now, so clearly they are going on proper time, we still have 21 minutes left, it seems. So, if nothing happens here, I'll let you know. If something does happen, chances are the internet will go out. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The strike of six, again, and still nothing has... what was that? Be right back. 148.197.121.205 (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey, Australia

Are there any Australians here? Are you guys hanging in there? Have you seen any zombies yet? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

No response? Uh-oh. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

It was something like 3:00 AM in Australia when you asked that... even the zombies have to sleep. Blueboar (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't be silly, Blueboar. Zombies don't sleep.  :) A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

True... but Zombies don't edit Wikipedia, either (fingers keep breaking off when trying to type). Blueboar (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The last day of planet earth, which I suppose is in about 5 billion years, shall hereby be DEFINED as May 21, 2011 :) 76.27.175.80 (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Princess Nora Univ. faculty and grad student numbers

Can someone please figure out Princess Nora bint Abdul Rahman University's faculty and enrollment numbers from [13]? I've tried my best with the infobox, but someone who can read the original in Arabic might have a lot better luck. I'm just most interested in numbers for faculty and graduate students, since there are other sources for total student enrollment and (administrative?) staff. What is the "female students" table at the end of that statistics page all about? The whole university is supposed to be women-only. Do they have male grad students? Dualus (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

May 21

Name of bias

What is the name of the bias (if there is one) in polls/surveys/etc. that results when some respondents answer a question how they think they should answer and not how is actually true? By this I mean like if a poll asks "How often do you pray?" with the responses being "Several times a day", "At least once a day" or "Less frequently than once a day", many people who do not regularly pray will probably put "At least once a day" because they think they should be praying that often. Thanks. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 01:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Response bias. --JGGardiner (talk) 01:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Specifically, the social desirability bias. Neutrality^talk 05:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Is 3% the usual number of people?

What percentage of the world's population dies every day? I'm just wondering if the 3% figure that the 2011 end times prediction article states is close to the daily average. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 01:17, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

A note on the prediction. 3% of humans will be raptured. Many more may die from the earthquakes and other disasters. --JGGardiner (talk) 01:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

According to Mortality rate#Statistics its approx 155,000--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

No. Some really rough calculations....

Assume 50 years average life span. So, 100% of those people die in 50 years. That means 2% die in one YEAR. So in one day the percentage is 2% divided by 365, approximately 0.005% HiLo48 (talk) 01:26, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

That may turn out to be in the ball park, HiLo, but it only considers the deaths of people who are alive at any given moment, not those who get born in the ensuing 50 years, many of whom will also die in that period. I think this is a fine question for the Mathematics Desk. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 01:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I might take it over there now. And maybe I should have said "... incredibility rough calculations involving several outrageously simplistic assumptions..." ;-) HiLo48 (talk) 01:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

It's now on the Mathematics Desk too if you want to play over there. HiLo48 (talk) 01:47, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I think what must be happening is that the blessed are being replaced by automatons during the rapture so that the rest of us are not unduly pressurized into faith by seeing the real selves of the raptured ascending into heaven. ;-) Dmcq (talk) 09:45, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Come on! If 3% of the world's population died every day, everyone would have died in a little over a month! -- Arwel Parry (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Airline industry

Hi I have two questions, inspired by the new ITN item. First, why does the WTO get to tell Boeing it has to pay back $5.3bn in subsidies? Why is it any of the WTO's business whom the US government subsidizes? Practically, does Boeing have to listen to the ruling? Second, the Spoke-hub distribution paradigm and Point-to-point transit articles say that after airline deregulation, airlines switched from the latter model the former. What about the regulations made the airlines unable to switch? Thanks! 68.35.40.154 (talk) 01:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

AFAIK the USA is a member of the WTO and one of its basic rules is that government subsidies are unfair competition as they distort the market. It's more or less the following: there is an international market which buys a certain number of large planes every year. If one of the main producers gets a large subsidy of its local government it can logically lower its prices against another producer which doesn't get such a subsidy from its respective government. That's very obviously unfair competition and there is a true danger that if one does it and gets away with it that all major players will follow its example. That would simply screw the companies of poorer countries which are unable to award large subsudies.

Someone may defend such subsidies as they indirectly "protect local jobs" but remember that we are speaking of 'public tax money' (which should be better spent in education, basic infrastructure, a fair system of justice, etc). There is also a high danger that politicians (who decide over government subsidies) will be simply bribed by the companies in exchange for such "a small favour among friends".

In pratical terms the USA could simply ignore the WTO decision, which in the worst case could only cancel the USA membership of the WTO (fat chance of that). Please notice that European and also US agriculture are subsidized by the respective governments and that the WTO is largely unable (and probably uninterrested) to do anything about it as the official excuse is "food security". Flamarande (talk) 03:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I certainly understand the reasoning behind it, but I was more asking whether being a member of the WTO gives the WTO the ability to effectively tell private companies what to do (i.e. give the loans back) instead of taking action against the government that acted unfairly. 68.35.40.154 (talk) 08:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

If the USA ignores the WTO I'm pretty sure other countries could ask for sanctions/retaliation or possibly trade compensation (although sanctions/retaliation are the norm AFAIK [14] [15]) [16]. These options may include sanctions on imports from the US but the biggest threat against the US tends to be ignoring their copyrights and patents [17] [18] although these may not work if the amount received is deemed too smal [19]. Nil Einne (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Schwartzenneger bodybuilding tips

could you summarize Schwartzenneger's tips on bodybuilding? 94.27.177.200 (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

You could find The New Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding : The Bible of Bodybuilding, Fully Updated and Revised which has Arnold Schwarzenegger as the main author. You can purchase it through Amazon.com (the link I included is from them) or any other bookseller online (don't take my link as an endorsement of Amazon in particular) or perhaps you can find it at a local library. --Jayron32 02:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Per [20]: "Arnold was from the old 'No Pain No Gain' school of bodybuilding. His routines consisted of high sets and reps, mostly not to failure." (Meaning lots of repetitions, but not so many that you can't do any more.) "He trained each muscle group three times each week (except calves, forearms & abs which he trained every day), using a six day split routine.... Arnold's routine changed constantly. At times he trained twice a day, while at other times once a day was enough.... Arnold tried everything, and picked what worked best for him at that particular time.... Remember this is a very advanced bodybuilding routine and should not be used by beginners or intermediates...." There's similar information at [21] which also includes diet tips.

Don't forget that he admitted to taking steroids. So, it's fairly important to stress that you almost certainly can't get to his level without advanced professional training and cheating. It's much better to try to set realistic workout goals for yourself, eat right and in limited quantities, and focus on whole-body exercises until a professional trainer or your doctor says you're capable of performing a bodybuilding regime anywhere near as strenuous as Arnold's. And even then, you're very unlikely to match the steroid-based bulk growth, and you should be glad about that. Dualus (talk) 03:48, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

One thing that made him so strong is that he didn't have any set routines. He had exercises he would do, but he always did them in random order. That way, he never plateaued the way most people do. Steroids help, but they can only help to a point; his randomness was a major factor in it as well. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I imagine his genes played a major part too. HiLo48 (talk) 04:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Did he have two human parents or one human one god like Hercules?

No one's answering, I guess nobody knows. The Wikipedia article says only: "His parents were the local police chief, Gustav Schwarzenegger (1907–1972), and Aurelia", which sounds like a Goddess to me. But it doesn't use the word "demigod" or "god" anywhere in the article, so this is just conjecture. Can somebody confirm? 94.27.180.112 (talk) 18:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, apparently he managed to build a body from scratch around ten years ago, with help from one other person... -- Arwel Parry (talk) 18:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Data about the inflation of the Portuguese escudo

Hy there, I'm looking for reliable sources of information about the inflation figures of the Portuguese escudo (which was withdrawn in 2002 and replaced by the Euro). I'm interrested in its yearly historical development (in which years was the inflation higher, in which was it lower). Much obliged. Flamarande (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Boeing

They are defense contractor. Then why they support the anti-war Democratic Party, not the pro-war Republican Party? --DHOD 1234 (talk) 03:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Democrats are afraid of The Chinese. Schyler (one language) 03:13, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

No, Democrats are not, nor have they really every been, an antiwar party. The current President, a member of the Democratic party, has supported expanding troop levels in Afghanistan and started an air war over Libya. It is a common characterization by some Rebublicans, when campaigning and trying to win elections, that they will characterize Democrats as "doves" and themselves as "hawks", but actual Democrat politicians are no more or less "pro" or "anti"-war than their Republican counterparts. --Jayron32 03:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed with Jayron. Boeing didn't and don't support the entire Democratic party. They supported the guy (in this case Obama) more likely to win the latest Presidential election. He might just remember this favour and give an indirect favour in return. I imagine that Boeing supports Republican or Democratic candidates in equal measure; it supports whoever is more likely to win the given election. Seriously why do you think that large companies give large amounts of money for the campaign of politicians running for a public office? Because they trust them and believe that these politicians are the best choice for the whole country? Or because "a friend in need is a friend indeed" and will probably repay the favour with interrest? And the best thing is that he won't even repay it with his own money but with tax money. It's one of the little flaws of democracy (actually this happens in almost all forms of government). Flamarande (talk) 03:28, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Nearly all the defense contractors donate heavily to both sides in every presidential and congressional race, and make it clear through their lobbyists that their future contributions will be in proportion to the candidates' support of their business prospects. Campaign contributions are merely a strategic business expense for most of the Fortune 5000 companies, and even more so in the Citizens United v FEC era that we in the US recently entered. You shouldn't assume that a corporate campaign donation of any amount means that the company's leaders are interested in the candidate's success, only that they are interested in their level of influence if the candidate succeeds. Dualus (talk) 03:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

---

Neither party can best be described as "anti" or "pro" war; that would be an oversimplification. The Center for Responsive Politics lists Boeing's political contributions here. Note that Senator Patty Murray of Washington (a Democrat) is the top recipient of Boeing contributions; this is because Boeing has much of its operations based in Washington and Murray is a champion for Boeing. Since Washington is a "blue state," with a mainly Democratic delegation to Congress, this accounts for some of the imbalance. You should also see Airliner Wars, about Boeing's competition with rival Airbus. Although Airbus is a French/European company, it has friends in the Republican Party who support its bid for government contracts over Boeing. See this piece in The Atlantic. See also this 2009 piece in Daily Finance on a $35b aerial refueling tanker contract:

Before getting into why the contact will likely end up being split, it's worth focusing on the regional politics involved. The Boeing work for the tanker would be done in Washington, Connecticut and Illinois. By contrast, the Airbus/Northrop Grumman tankers would be built in Alabama and South Carolina -- not to mention Europe. In short, the Democratic party wants Boeing to win, and the Republican party favors Airbus/Northrop.

I hope this helps. Neutrality^talk 05:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Note that the "party split" shows that they donate about equally to each party. They aren't donating based on "big scale" politics — they're donating based on influence. They had a big up-tick for Dems in 2008... because the Dems had a huge sweep then. Boeing bets on whomever they think the winners will be — and probably also donates to the losers, for good measure. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

updates on two international societies

I'm still hoping the Red Cross Society of Eritrea and the Tuvalu Red Cross Society will gain official recognition by, and admission to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. What's going on? Anyone know?24.90.204.234 (talk) 07:47, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I have a wikibook submission

Hello, Would you be interested to publish on wikipedia humanities a modern translation of the Quran that supports the Bible and acknowledges it together with the Torah. If not can u direct me to a publisher?

Please browse the book on the following link: https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B84c0FlSZXoANDNhNDI3MzMtMTJlOS00OGY0LThlYzctMGIzZWY1MWM3NTBk&sort=name&layout=list&num=50 41.153.241.65 (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see Wikibooks. However, I know nothing about their inclusion policy: please do not upload anything there unless you can confirm that this is the type of book that they want. Nyttend (talk) 12:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Er, no: Wikibooks are meant to hold "free content textbooks and annotated texts", while a translation of a text would probably have to go to Wikisource. They prefer "previously published, public domain translations" (s:Wikisource:What_Wikisource_includes#Translations, [22]), but might accept a new one as well. --Martynas Patasius (talk) 12:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

University in Brega

Which university has a campus in Brega? This is the location of some fightings. --Ksanyi (talk) 12:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

It is probably Bright Star just outside of Brega, here. -- kainaw™ 13:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

German volunteers in the Spanish Civil War

Having written the German involvement in the Spanish Civil War page, it occurred to me that there may be "unofficial" German volunteers, possibly on both sides. I have one figure of 5,000 German/Austrian volunteers in the International Brigades, but could do with further information on these people, which don't get much coverage. Were there lots? Were there organisations to send them? Which sides did they fight on? That sort of thing. Any help appreciated. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:11, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

citizenship of my hypothetical (but likely) child

I have dual nationality: United States and United Kingdom. I live in the UK. My partner is a German citizen and lives in the UK and Germany. We are moving to South Africa where we will be living for only a short time. Scenario: I am pregnant and our baby will probably be born in South Africa. Question: What citizenships would the child automatically have? How would it change if I were legally married to my partner? What citizenships would the child be eligible to apply for/have in the future, if not automatically given at birth? Can one have more than just two nationalities at the same time? Thanks! (P.S. this is not any sort of request for legal advice and I am not yet pregnant. I am just musing on the possible situation. Obviously, when I am actually expecting, I will get advice from government representatives who will not be surmising. But in the meantime I am very interested/curious now.) 94.197.112.113 (talk) 13:29, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

See South African nationality law, British nationality law, and German nationality law. According to those articles, your (hypothetical) child will definitely be a German citizen, will almost certainly _not_ be a South African citizen (if you're not going to be permanently resident there), and, assuming you've lived in the UK for three years, would be eligible for British citizenship (but you'd have to apply for that, it wouldn't be automatic). Tevildo (talk) 16:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

See also United States nationality law. The position under US law is very complicated, _does_ depend on whether or not you're married, and is sensitive to the amount of time you've lived in the USA as an adult. I wouldn't like to speculate on this particular element of the question. Tevildo (talk) 16:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

In theory your child will be a citizen of the USA, UK, and Germany (notice that you, your partner and your child hold European Union citizenship. It will not be a citizen of South Africa according to the South African nationality law which states that only "a child born in South Africa after 6 October 1995 as the child of South African citizens or permanent residents is a citizen of the Republic of South Africa". You and your partner aren't citizens or permanent residents of South Africa. You could go to a country which awards its citizenship to every person born upon its soil.

Notice that we can also lose our citizenship according to the laws of certain countries. Read German nationality law#Loss of German citizenship, British nationality law#Loss of British nationality and United States nationality law#Loss of citizenship. Flamarande (talk) 16:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

If you are not a "UK citizen by descent" (i.e. you are not a citizen through one of your parents being a UK citizen, rather than unconditionally by being born in the UK before 1983 or by being born there afterwards AND one of your parents also being a UK citizen), then your child WILL be a UK citizen by descent. However, if you are a UK citizen by descent then you cannot transmit UK citizenship to your own children unless they are actually born in the UK. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Appropriate gift

Hello all. Now that my music lessons will be ending soon I'd like to get my piano teacher a gift to express my appreciation for all he's done for me this past year; he's really a kind and patient person but also a brilliant teacher. Unfortunately I have no idea what to get him, since he is a bit old fashioned in that he doesn't talk about his personal life in our lessons so I don't know what he would like, and he strikes me as the type who, if receiving a gift, expects a "real" gift (ie, not a Hallmark card). For Christmas I gave him chocolates so I need something else. If it makes any difference, this is my first year with him, I do plan to take lessons with him again next year, these are private lessons that meet weekly, unaffiliated with my high school, and he is an older gentleman (I would guess late 50s/early 60s) without children. My question is essentially a question of etiquette: What are some appropriate but general gifts that I can give him? Thanks. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 17:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is the source of the problem from a man who is pushing 50. Until I had children, if I wanted something, I simply got it. So, it was not possible for someone to get me something I wanted because I already had it. Now, I have children. My resources are spent on getting them what they want. What I want is sleep - something that cannot be given as a gift. But, that is going off on a tangent. So, all you can do is show appreciation with something that he doesn't necessarily want but doesn't mind receiving. Do you have any other skills that could be of use? For example, you might make a great lasagna. You could make dinner for him one night. You might be great at photography. You can take some piano-themed photos and give him a small framed photo (with the offer to give him one much larger if he really wants it). You might be a great computer user. Hey may need someone to teach him to use Craigs List to advertise his services. -- kainaw™ 17:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

How about tickets to a really good concert of a kind that you may have discovered he really likes. That would show you're aware of his preferences and also he would be able to relax and enjoy some excelent music instead of just working at it.190.148.136.77 (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I just reread this and realized a concert might be out of your price range so perhaps an appropriate CD. 136 77.190.148.136.77 (talk) 19:01, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

How old are you? If you are over the age required to buy alcohol in your country, then a bottle of Scotch usually goes down well (if you aren't old enough to buy alcohol, then it might be a little inappropriate). --Tango (talk) 19:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)