Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:21, 11 August 2014

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/H

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.

August 5

Disability Studies textbooks

I'm looking to acquire a few undergraduate level books about Disability Studies. My Bachelors is in Communication Science, so I don't have a basic grounding specifically in the subject. I intend taking a post-graduate course in Disability Studies within the next year or two. I'd really prefer not to be the class ignoramus when I start. Are there any "must read" books I should study to get up to speed on the basics before starting the course? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Category:Disability literature.—Wavelength (talk) 19:49, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another idea would be to familiarize yourself with whatever laws are in place regarding disability in your jurisdiction. E.g. in the USA this would be the Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but unfortunately the category doesn't contain anything suitable - it's mostly a list of books (fiction and non-fiction) about individuals that have a disability. I've already collected various legislation and policy documents from government websites so that angle is basically covered. The Bibliography in the Disability studies article is a bit too much - perhaps 4 or 5 of the "best" of those would be reasonable, but there's no indication which of them are more comprehensive and comprehensible for a beginner. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which country will you be studying in? As an ex-sociology/community studies lecturer, my take on it would be to read Tom Shakespeare's books and maybe also Laura Hershey. I'd become familiar with the various models of disability: the Social model, or the bio-psycho-social model (which seems to inform most of Government policy in the UK at the moment)(what no article?). I'd also become familiar with theories of social capital, particularly from John Field, who has written a book on this subject which is very useful. But this all applies to UK courses. If you are in the UK, and are on Facebook or Twitter, there are a number of disabled activists/theorists I could recommend. --TammyMoet (talk) 08:32, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a redirect. Apologies if this spoils anyone's fun. Tevildo (talk) 12:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in South Africa, but UK or other sources are welcome. The only book I have at the moment is American, but with a global scope - James Charlton's Nothing About Us Without Us ISBN-9780520224810 - I often found the Neo-Marxist POV difficult to parse. I've come across some of Hershey's work online. Thanks TammyMoet, you've given me good leads to follow up. A few Facebook links would be most welcome too. Disability studies as an academic discipline is still in its infancy in this country (we've been somewhat preoccupied with bigger fish to fry). The University of Cape Town is the only institution offering actual courses - but only at the post-graduate level. (I found Biopsychosocial model). Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Amazon.com: disabilities - Medical Books: Books.—Wavelength (talk) 15:50, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and Wow! is Amazon deliberately trying to be offensive by classifying these books under "Medical"?!?! The problem I have with looking through such lists/catalogues is that I don't know enough about the subject to tell the "essential reading" titles from the junk. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't e.g. Autism, Paraplegia things that cause disabilities and are also medical conditions? Our article on disease says that sometimes broad use of that term includes disabilities. I don't think it's that weird that a book about e.g. Vision_impairment would be classified as both a medical book and a disability book...

Anyway, as for separating the wheat from the chaff, why not solicit some of your future instructors? Even if you don't know exactly who will be teaching which course, I'm sure anyone in the department can either help you make a reading list or will direct you to someone who can. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disability studies has very little to do with medicine per se, it is primarily concerned with philosophical, ethical, political, economic and sociological issues, which may include topics such as matters pertaining to the provision of health services to people with disabilities, such as why the only dentist in town has her surgery on the second floor of a building without an elevator, thus forcing wheelchair users to incur the additional expense of travelling to the next town for their regular dental checkup; or whether it is a nett gain to society to abort 80% of fetuses that are diagnosed with Down syndrome before 20 weeks gestation. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saints and particular virtues

Is there a list of Seven virtues that includes saints associated with said virtues, or a list matching up Catholic Saints with corresponding virtues? If the answer is "All saints display every virtue to some degree," yeah, sure, whatever, but certainly particular saints' stories call out particular virtues, and I'm wondering if there are any works that list such correspondences. Heck, I'd even take a list of saints who appear in Dante's Paradiso according to which sphere they're in (although I'm pretty sure he just shuffled them into the eighth sphere and higher to focus more on social commentary rather than hagiography). Ian.thomson (talk) 20:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few namesake saints, such as Faith, Hope and Charity, but I've never heard that saints are assigned to virtues in that way. You might have better luck with angelology, or Tolkien's Valar. AnonMoos (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but already got lists of angels (heck, I overhauled the Shemhamphorasch article not too long ago. Got a list of saints and orishas that correspond, but was hoping someone had tried to tie saints and virtues (even something that fails WP:RS, since I doubt I'd end up using the material here). I suppose I'll have to settle for synthesizing (not for this site, obviously) the demonologies of Peter Binsfeld and Sebastien Michaelis, and matchng the saints to different virtues through the corresponding vices and demons -- if no one knows of anything that might be useful. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:55, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The seven deadly virtues, those ghastly little traps

Oh no, my liege, they were not meant for me

Those seven deadly virtues were made for other chaps

Who love a life of failure and ennui

Take courage now there's a sport

An invitation to the state of Rigor Mort

And purity a noble yen

And very restful every now and then

I find humility means to be hurt

It's not the earth the meek inherit, it's the dirt

Honesty is fatal, it should be taboo

Diligence a fate I would hate

If charity means giving, I give it to you

And fidelity is only for your mate, ha

You'll never find a virtue unstatusing my quo

Or making my beelze bubble burst

Let others take the high road, I will take the low

I cannot wait to rush in where angels fear to go

With all those seven deadly virtues

Free and happy little me has not been cursed

DuncanHill (talk) 05:05, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of curses, virtues, FH&C, threes and thirteens, fatal honesty and a lack of humility, here's a spirited theological discussion on how to do unto others I'm quite proud of, preserved for eternity. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:43, August 6, 2014 (UTC)

"Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same." GBS. DuncanHill (talk) 05:46, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Nobody's making anybody click anything. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:54, August 6, 2014 (UTC)

And I'll only explain how the virtues connect to the saints through the Care Bear Cousins on a "need to know" basis. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:38, August 6, 2014 (UTC)

More to the point, but not exactly, here is St. Leo the Great's take on charity. I don't have a source saying he's typically associated with that one above the others, but it seems that way to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:43, August 6, 2014 (UTC)

Yongli Emperor

How large was the retinue which accompanied Yongli Emperor into exile in Burma in 1658?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to find out for you since yesterday, but I just can't do it. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:55, August 7, 2014 (UTC)

Languages of the UN

The official languages of the United Nations are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish. What languages do nations where none of those languages is an educational language speak?

For example, I'm curious about the following nations: continental Europe, the Lusophone, Japan, etc. I am less curious about places like Philippines (which have a strong English tradition).

FYI, Notes on my most recent viewing:

Ukraine spoke English (Not Russian!).
Luxembourg spoke something non-English, presumably French.
Chad spoke something non-English, presumably French.
Nigeria spoke English.
South Korea spoke English (IIRC)
An Eastern European nation (I cannot remember which; possibly Latvia or Lithuania) spoke something non-English, presumably Russian.

Magog the Ogre (t • c) 22:58, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just on the Ukrainian issue, there is no preference given as to which language a nation's representatives use in UN business, and Ukraine as a very good political reason to distance itself from Russia in every possible way, despite any linguistic or cultural connection. Nigeria, of course, speaks English as a former British possession. Chad, likewise, was a former French posession. Luxembourg has three official languages, French being one of them. As China is a longtime supporter of North Korea, it is unsurprising that South Korea would distance themselves from China and choose English as it's language of choice (especially since Anglophone countries like the U.S. have long been staunch supporters of the South's cause). --Jayron32 01:45, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Luxembourg spoke something non-English" reminds me of "Three Men on the Bummel" by Jerome K. Jerome. Our three friends (to say nothing of the dog) are cycling through Alsace-Lorraine, and observe that 1/3 of the population are offended if you speak to them in French, 1/3 are offended if you speak to them in German, and 1/3 are offended if you speak to them. DuncanHill (talk) 02:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron32 -- English is pretty much the general international language in South Korea. Chinese and Japanese are important for aspects of South Korea's foreign relations, trade relations, and history, but ambitious diplomats seeking postings outside East Asia might not consider learning them to be worth the effort. Ban Ki-moon apparently speaks English and some French... AnonMoos (talk) 03:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With Japan, they sometimes use English and sometimes Japanese. Bear in mind, there is a huge team of interpreters behind the scenes, interpreting all the different languages. If you notice, everyone in the meeting hall has a headset on. They are not all listening to Gangnam Style. There is a central office, where all the translators are. If a non-'standard' language is used, this will be presumably translated into English by the Japanese/English translator, and the other translators will translate the English translation. This may sound like there would be a delay, but this is not the case. All of the interpreters are simultaneous interpreters, so there would be no unusual delay whatsoever. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 04:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If someone says "President Kennedy demands that you remove the ICBMs" and the correct Languagese is "dartoose abombo the demand-aqo you that remove-apa Kennedyo Presidento" wouldn't the best they could do sound like "ICBM demands you that removes Kennedy President" does to us? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 00:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am similarly befuddled by the question, but see word order. It might have something to do with what you're asking about... maybe... I think... Okay, I'm really not sure. Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And that reminds me of the time when the French delegate felt it appropriate to refer to the proverbial sagacity of the people of Normandy. "La sagesse Normande" became "Norman Wisdom". DuncanHill (talk) 04:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 6

How long should I wait to answer a potential landlord' email reply?

On Craigslist I asked how much are the utilities/yr last night (9:40). They answered 8 minutes after the office probably opened. I wanna ask if they have an upper. I asked if they still had one bedrooms the last of the month and apparently they are out. Maybe I should add that I don't like to hear footsteps so they don't think my ability to pay their 2 bdrms hinges on how much the heat is. (I wouldn't take a lower, though I do like taking the the lower's waste heat). I want to see the other 3 reply with the address and heat cost and visit first but I'd pay whatever's the best that day. I could always bear my relatives a while longer, though, I'm not desperate to accept. They're not luxury, I'd say they're utilitarian or utilitarian plus but the paint is new, or not old. If something I didn't add is important then I can provide that. Also, how long is too long without an explanation, in case the Internet goes out? (My brain doesn't have my email password anymore, only the desktop) 68.173.121.143 (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I conjecture that somewhere there is a reader that has a clue what that question is about. That reader is not me. --ColinFine (talk) 21:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you are far enough along in the process to get their phone number and call them or get their address and actually show up. In my experience, you notice things when you visit you would never think to ask, like "Are you next to a smelly landfill ?". StuRat (talk) 21:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons why India is in such bad shape?

Look at this post which cogently summarizes problems in India. Why is this? What genes or possible causes can make such a situation possible?74.14.75.23 (talk) 23:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has nothing to do with genes. People born in India have no biological predisposition towards negative traits than any other person in the world. See Corruption in India, however, for what is often cited as a major barrier to economic prosperity in what is the second most populous nation on earth. See also This article in the Economist and this article in Forbes and this one from Harvard University all of which basically agree that political corruption is the major roadblock that keeps India from becoming a major world economic power. --Jayron32 00:02, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But how would "political corruption" explain away this?74.14.75.23 (talk) 04:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think public sanitation was like in London 400 or 500 years ago? Are you familiar with Bubonic plague which killed 25 million people in Europe when populations were much lower? India has problems as does every country on Earth. India is rapidly modernizing but has a long way to go. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:48, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Effective governance is necessary to establish public sanitation, efficient legal systems, and to educate the public in the needs thereof. Corruption in the form of cronyism, rampant bribery, etc. gets in the way of effective governance. More to the point, who's going to build the sanitation system? Ultimately, it takes the government to do so, and if they don't work well, nothing will. --Jayron32 11:28, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

one reason is India plays democracy when what she needs is a benevolent dictatorship to drag the people out of pre-modernity, filth, familism, superstition, bad treatment of women etc. Asmrulz (talk) 15:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you can go to India and appoint yourself its "benevolent dictator". We will see how that goes. If you don't want to do that, work on removing that log from your eye. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:10, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Simple. Someone was cursed, centuries ago, and didn't tell anyone. Same as everywhere. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:58, August 7, 2014 (UTC)

wat Asmrulz (talk) 15:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We can't know. If we can't know, we can't say it didn't happen. Don't worry about it, I typed it small because it barely matters. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:27, August 8, 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of filth and politics and awareness of money, here's the Total Sanitation Campaign. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:02, August 7, 2014 (UTC)

And here's a look at other disease campaigns of the 1950s. The 1955 malaria one is sort of interesting. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:09, August 7, 2014 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the OP here is the same guy arguing that "successful" nations have superior genetics. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I get the feeling he's also the guy linking to the article that links to the article the guy in the article wrote, but that's just a guess. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:35, August 7, 2014 (UTC)

Or wait, no. That's a fact. The thing I meant to say is what I'm guessing. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:39, August 7, 2014 (UTC)

Duh, yup. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the "genes factor" one should refer to The Bell Curve and the controversial IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Since intelligence is linked to genes, and unless a complete cultural determinist stance is taken, there is inevitably some variation in the average intelligences between different pools. However, intelligence quotients have been proven to rise in like manner with better education as well. So it is not all about genes either. And what's controversial is to what extent the average intelligence quotient would affect social issues. --Pudeo ' 02:06, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think low IQ is probably the largest factor for the situation in India. The post in the OP shows how bad the situation is, and IQ is the most probable reason.74.14.75.23 (talk) 02:54, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Haven't you been promoting that link enough already? If you don't have any genuine questions or issues, let's move on. --Pudeo ' 03:10, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question. Is this blatant enough and is the Ref Desk "article enough" to delink it per WP:ARTSPAM? Might be best before archiving (we're not an SEO technique), but to leave it here during the answer period, to give responders the "this" in "Why is this?" It's helpful in answering, but the answers won't be useful to future readers, since "this" was so vague. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:25, August 8, 2014 (UTC)

The ANI discussion about a "Spambot" is interesting. The threat of blacklisting it might trigger the IP to remove it himself here first. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:35, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This continual IQ argument is bogus. Richard Nixon had a very high IQ. His was also the most corrupt administration in US history, as far as we know. And I would hardly call it "successful", either. I think it was Teddy Roosevelt (among others) who said that persistence is much more likely to lead to success than is anything to do with IQ. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

India was a British colony for hundreds of years. Masses of its wealth was removed to the UK during that time. I don't know details but I would suspect that even now many of the country's wealth producing corporations would have significant chunks of foreign ownership. Not much left to trickle down to the poverty stricken locals. HiLo48 (talk) 06:58, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your second point, many would argue that the opposite is true. Indian restrictions on foreign company ownership are unusually strict in many sectors, and those parts of the economy are less developed as a result. 123.121.197.23 (talk) 20:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that India is such an unmitigated disaster. It certainly has many problems, and often "punches below its weight" in international terms, but it's far from being a failed state, and it compares favorably in many respects to most of its prominent neighbors (i.e. Pakistan, Ceylon, Bangladesh, and Burma). It was certainly late in adopting policies favorable to significant economic growth, and has a legacy of rural poverty and caste oppression which is not easy to overcome, but it also lacks some of the advantages of natural resources and cultural unity which China possesses, and has a political system that (though somewhat flawed) is much more democratic than China's... AnonMoos (talk) 13:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In short, the OP's biased premise is in error. And if Indian IQ is so low, why is it that so much high-tech work has been offshored to India? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 7

FIFA's profits

Resolved

Who gets them? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's registered as a not-for-profit organisation in Switzerland[1]. The party line is that what doesn't cover tournament and administration costs is redistributed to the various member associations[2]. Hack (talk) 05:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thank you kindly. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:44, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bartenders not drinking alcohol

In the Lucky Luke album Le Pied-tendre, the main villain, Jack Ready, fakes his own death in order to frame Waldo Badminton and Lucky Luke as having killed him. When Waldo and Luke enter a bar and Waldo asks for a bottle of whisky, the bartender says "No one drinks from that bottle! It is Jack Ready's bottle!" Later, Lucky Luke finds out that the bottle is still becoming emptier. When confronted, the bartender claims he drinks from it himself. Luke replies "Like most bartenders, you never drink alcohol. That bottle of milk over there proves it." I have never heard of such a custom among bartenders. Does it happen in real life? On the contrary, I should think many bartenders drink alcohol themselves while off duty. Heck, I have even seen a bartender drink alcohol on duty in Munich. And how does a bottle of milk prove not drinking alcohol? What's stopping someone from drinking both milk and alcohol? JIP | Talk 18:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a regional thing, or rather a regional influence on preference. A tee-totaler bartender can strike me as competent as a vegan barbeque pit master (how do you know if it's good?), but I could understand a bartender not drinking much because it either cuts into their or their employer's profits, because they end up expecting better than they serve, or because they're constantly faced with some sorts of people they don't want to be like. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See this US website, Bob Johnson's School of Bar Management, which has a page entitled "Drinking on the job — Don’t do it!". It used to be common in the UK for bar staff to be allowed to drink but it's generally forbidden now, especially by large chains like J D Wetherspoon. Alansplodge (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alan, it's not just forbidden. It's illegal. It's illegal to eat or drink in an area used for food preparation, which includes the bar where drinks are served. I was a bartender for 9 years on and off. We had to hide our drinks. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 16:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's at least vaguely possible that regulations regarding this vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 20:29, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Ontario, you need "Smart Serve" certification to bartend or waitress. If either drinks on the job (even a sip), they can lose their card. Only if they get caught, of course. I knew a girl who was. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:06, August 9, 2014 (UTC)

I can understand that, but I understood from the Lucky Luke album that the bartender never drinks alcohol, not even off duty. So I was wondering if such a thing really is common. JIP | Talk 08:58, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've known a couple of alcoholic bartenders who never touch the stuff. The one I talked to about said something like it felt good to reassure himself each day he can go without drinking. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 20:29, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps truer to say "alcoholic bartenders who never touch the stuff anymore". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:24, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Never trust a thin chef" DuncanHill (talk) 01:47, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One problem with a bartender drinking on the job is that there is a strong temptation to give yourself a drink or two "on the house" (ie to not pay for it). That adds up, and eats into the bar's profit margin... which can be considered a form of theft (see just about any episode of Bar Rescue) Blueboar (talk) 02:04, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from hurting the bottom line and inhibiting drink mixing skills, that could also violate Section 20 of Ontario's Liquor Licence Act ("...the licence holder shall not offer for sale a serving of liquor for less than a total purchase price of two dollars..."). Whether letting staff pour themselves a free drink constitutes "offering a sale" is probably arguable. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:54, August 10, 2014 (UTC)

Colorado/Virginia same-sex marriage

Hi, are there any reliable sources that say that Colorado and Virginia legalized same-sex marriage..? Prcc★27 (talk) 20:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Same-sex marriage in Colorado and Same-sex marriage in Virginia. In both cases, the law of the State (explicitly) bans same-sex marriage, and both laws have been ruled unconstitutional by the appropriate federal court. So, the _States_ haven't legalized same-sex marriage, the _USA_ has obliged them to make it legal. Tevildo (talk) 21:24, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Striking down a constitutional ban does not imply legality of same-sex marriages, does it? It would still take a law from the state legislature to legalize it, just as in those states that never had a SSM ban in their constitutions. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 11:37, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on what a given judge has ruled. In some cases, they have struck down such a law but put the issuing of marriage licenses on hold. In other cases, they have ordered the issuance of marriage licenses. Either way, it's on the strength of the US Supreme Court's rejection of the Defense of Marriage Act, and the snowball seems to be getting bigger and faster. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. If you read the links above, the true 'legality' of same-sex marriage in CO seems still unspecified. From a de facto perspective, licenses were indeed provided for a bit, but only in a few counties, and it seems as though they've now stopped until the lawyers and legislators figure out what to do. (post EC, I think what Bugs says might be possible, but not what has happened in CO, according to the link above.)SemanticMantis (talk) 17:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To pile on what the above have said, there's a difference between "legal" "Illegal" and "legally ambiguous". In cases like this, where a court has declared a law like this unconstitutional, it generally doesn't cause "illegal" to become "legal" or visa-versa. Instead it causes the entire situation to become "legally ambiguous". Part of the issue with the constitutionality of these laws is that the U.S. Constitution requires that every state grants full faith and credit to contracts enacted in other states. While these courts haven't, in every case, decided that a state MUST grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, what they have often struck down is laws in which the state refuses to recognize the validity of marriage licenses issued from other states. This violates the equal protection clause as well, which is why courts are shooting them down left and right. It doesn't make same-sex marriages legal in such states in the sense that it forces states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but these court rulings do require that states recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states as valid, and thus afford the same benefits and rights to same-sex married couples as to opposite-sex married couples. Now, in some of these cases, courts have taken an even more strict ruling, stating that states cannot even refuse to grant marriage licenses, under the notion that marriage is a basic human right and that states cannot refuse to deny same-sex couples for that reason. Thus, it is currently a bit of an ambiguous situation; some rulings seem to imply that a rewrite of the laws in question could still allow states to discriminate against same-sex couples in some way; other rulings seem to say that is entirely verboten. Given the large number of these rulings, some of which are not always consistent with the others, this is sure to go to the Supreme Court in the not too distant future to iron it all out. --Jayron32 17:52, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which is one reason the Republicans are so desperate to get back the Republican monolith they enjoyed during the GW Bush administration - so that they can have a puppet Supreme Court. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly enough, however, many of the judges which have been striking down these marriage ban laws have been Republican nominees. So, even in that case, it may not be likely... --Jayron32 20:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to them for following precedent. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:20, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 8

Elizabeth Sinclair

Can anybody help me find some genealogical information on the three sons of Elizabeth Sinclair? I am having troubke since Elizabeth Sinclair is a pretty common name.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like none of them had children. George died at sea with his father in 1846; James was "an invalid" and apparently died unmarried and childless; Francis Sinclair (1833–1916) married twice but seems to have had no children. More on Francis Sinclair Jr. here.--Cam (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When was James born and when did he die? And when was George born?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And here's the family tree, although it omits the sons, only listing the daughters: Niihau#Sinclair-Robinson_family_tree. Presumably they are omitted due to their lack of issue. StuRat (talk) 03:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's on her article too. That's why I asked about the sons.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found dates for George (1820–1846) and James (1825–1873) on ancestry.com, perhaps not a reliable source in the Wikipedian sense.--Cam (talk) 12:42, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow River

Was the Yellow River really a tributary of the Yangtze River in the 13th and 14th century? [3]

According to Yellow_River#Medieval_times, for a while it drained into a lake, which drained into the Yangtze. But the claim is flagged ^{[citation needed]}. Seems plausible enough to me, especially considering our article references several other documented changes in course. It seems to have been a rather dynamic river. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:02, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 9

Sikh boy's head bump

Now and then I see boys, who I think are of Sikh families, wearing a light head-covering tied so as to bunch some of the hair, in a way that reminds me of the bump sometimes portrayed on the Buddha's head. What's that about? —Tamfang (talk) 07:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be called a Patka. (Looks like a scoop of ice cream on the second kid.) Clarityfiend (talk) 07:44, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

English writer, "shown in his dotage for a fee"

Reading The Happy Return by C. S. Forester, one of the references escaped me. Hornblower is invited by a Spaniard to view a shackled and raving madman. Hornblower, a sensitive soul, is repulsed, but reflects that "One of the greatest writers of the English language, and a dignitary of the Church to boot, had once been shown in his dotage for a fee". Who was this unhappy man? DuncanHill (talk) 08:02, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite know why, as he was hardly a "dignitary of the Church", but I could not help but think of John Bunyan. I can't confirm he was the writer in question, though. Btw, you're not the first person to have asked this question: this guy's apparently been waiting 7 years for an answer. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:28, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I don't think Bunyan had much of a dotage - but I dare say he was exhibited while in prison. Certainly not a dignitary of the church though (still less of the Church with a capital C), and not the sort of thing either Hornblower or Forester would have erred about. Jonathan Swift (suggested in the thread you linked to) had already struck me as possible - he definitely had a dotage, and was a dignitary of the Church. I've got A. L. Rowse's Swift: A Major Prophet, but no mention as far as I can see of him being exhibited. I feel if he had then Rowse, more than anyone, would have used it to make a point about just how appalling people are! DuncanHill (talk) 08:39, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming "dotage" here is being used in meaning #1. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:45, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's how I read it - and given the raving prisoner who inspires the thought I'm sure of it. DuncanHill (talk) 08:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gibbon is Hornblower's favourite author, but he does talk approvingly of Swift (as well as Johnson, Pope, and Gray) in the next chapter. DuncanHill (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Springfield, it's spelled d'oh-tage. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Smart, possibly? He was incarcerated in St Luke's Hospital for Lunatics, and wrote on religious matters, but he wasn't an ordained minister. Swift is probably the best candidate, in default of a definitive answer. Tevildo (talk) 08:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah poor Kit Smart - I'm glad he had his cat to keep him company, the cherubs of the tribe of Tiger are a great comfort. He may have been ordained - wasn't he something in one of the Universities (I think you had to take orders to hold University posts then)? But no, I don't think he quite fits the bill. Swift does seem most likely for the time being. DuncanHill (talk) 09:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If Swift only became "insane" in old age, I suspect he may have had Alzheimers, or some other form of senior dementia. StuRat (talk) 11:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting question - there's a good examination of it in Brain: A Journal of Neurology, Vol 129, Issue 11, Pp. 3127-3137, accessible here. DuncanHill (talk) 21:41, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What does Rowse write about the Reverend Francis Wilson? He's been accused of all sorts of things, from stealing Swift’s books, defrauding him of money and using “Deanery funds to make a personal display of charity” to threatening and assaulting Swift, and forcing him to drink alcohol. See Jonathan Swift: A Hypocrite Reversed by David Nokes. Maybe there was another rumor at one time about Wilson having showcased Swift for money. ---Sluzzelin talk 12:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the index for Wilson. Rowse doesn't go into much detail about the final illness though, it's more of a biography of his works. DuncanHill (talk) 21:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating question.

Hinges on exhibition of "dotage" - easily best search term.

"One of the greatest writers of the English language, and"
"a dignitary of the Church to boot,"
"had once been shown in his dotage for a fee."

Nothing at all on Hornblower (or Forester) and dotage in JSTOR or Questia. Nothing relevant in Google Scholar on same searches. Nothing on dotage in Hornblower Companion, online archives of C.S. Forester Society, Sternlicht's study, C.S. Forester and the Hornblower Saga, or (online) biography by his son, John Forester.

A response to this identical question, posed in the Shakespeare newsgroup on July 11, 1997, notes that "The story is told that his [Jonathan Swift's] servants would take fees to show him to curious onlookers." humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare English author displayed when senile?

If that story is printed in a biography of Jonathan Swift - or another source - that C. S. Forester was likely to have read, or known second-hand, prior to writing The Happy Return (published 1937), then I think we we have it nailed. Next step is a look at pre-1937 biographies of Swift.

I've sent a couple of email inquiries to acknowledged C. S. Forester experts, one of whom already responded as working on it. If permitted by my source, I will report back here. If identification of allusion documented, will revise article. Paulscrawl (talk) 22:56, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paulscrawl, wow thank you! DuncanHill (talk) 22:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. What I missed above is obvious fact that reading of Forester-1937 is one thing; reading of Hornblower-1808 another. Where did young Hornblower read or hear of this story, prior to 1808? Gibbon is looking more likely a source for anecdote of servants having Swift "shown in dotage for a fee." Paulscrawl (talk) 00:08, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, Samuel Johnson more likely source. Paulscrawl (talk) 00:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Presidential pardons in the USA

The recent anniversaries of Watergate, Nixon's resignation, and Ford's pardon of Nixon brought to mind the following question. Can a US President pardon himself? Is that a settled question of law? Or, as yet, an unanswered legal question? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a settled question; the issue has never arisen. However, it wouldn't stop the president from being impeached. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What do you mean by your last sentence? Are you saying that even if a President pardoned himself, an impeachment can still move forward? If so, why do you make that claim? Is that itself a settled question of law, one that has arisen before? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of an impeachment trial, the President can be removed from office. I don't see any reasonable interpretation of the Constitution that would allow the President to pardon himself of that penalty. Criminal penalties might be a bit more iffy. StuRat (talk) 18:43, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jpgordon is referring to Article Two of the Constitution, Section 2, Clause 1, particularly the last part: "he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment". If you google things like President + pardon + himself + constitution you will find this being discussed all over the place, usually pointing out that the Constitution doesn't say he can't (except in cases of impeachment). But as jpgordon wrote, it's not settled and there are other opinions, for example "Pardon Me?: The Constitutional Case Against Presidential Self-Pardons" by Brian C. Kalt. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:56, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Dominis Holt

I need some help tracing some information about a person by the name of John Dominis Holt. He was either a major or colonel during the Kingdom of Hawaii. He is mentioned here and some of his photographs are listed here at commons:Category:John Dominis Holt. I've pinpoint down to either a nephew or a uncle. The first is this findagrave person John Dominis Holt, II (1861–1916), whose genealogy is listed here. Another candidate is his uncle John Domnis Holt, I (1839–1922) who married Hannah Auld listed here as a brother of Owen Jones Holt, John Domnis Holt, II's father. But there no way to know since none of these sources I can find mention anything about either being a colonel or major, any reference to the colonel or major don't specify who is who. To add to the confusion of the research is there is a descendant who had the same name who lived in the 20th century and was an author. What would help is finding a source describing the colonel/major or an obituary of either of the two John Dominis Holt, which might give a brief bio which can help identify who is who. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 20:07, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's one more book that mentions a Major J.D. Holt: [4]. I'm getting a "reached your viewing limit" error but perhaps someone else will be able to view it - those limits seem erratic sometimes. The google search result looked like he was being listed in a photo caption: "Q.Q. King Kalakaua and military 'Staff. Left to right.re.ar.:-CoIl Col. Curtis Iaukea, Major Edward Purvis, Col. George H. Macfarlane, Captain A. B. Hayley, Major J. D. Holt, Major Antone Rosa. Front Row: Col. Charles H. Judd, Kalakaua and Gov.".

As for newspapers,

Major J.D. Holt is mentioned here in a list of guests at a ball at Iolani Palace. Report is dated Nov. 20, 1888.
Major John Dominis Holt is mentioned in this from Sept 23, 1890 as part of the King's attendants at a formal audience.
Colonel John Dominis Holt is mentioned here (from Aug 29, 1892), similarly as one of a group attending the Queen at a formal occasion.

That's all I've got, no obits or bios, I'm sorry. 184.147.144.166 (talk) 22:40, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Books about Togo and Benin

Hello everyone, I am having trouble trying to find books about the contemporary history of Togo and/or Benin. I am aware that there are a few books about this subject but they are usually in French, a language I do not speak. Can any of you Wikipedians help me out? Thank you! --Skiffle Vond (talk) 20:17, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 02:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless. --Skiffle Vond (talk) 15:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also had no luck looking for books on Amazon. But here is a university course on the contemporary history of West Africa in general, and it has a reading list of three texts in English that might at least be a start. (Plus you could check the other readings listed under each week, or email the prof.) 184.147.144.166 (talk) 17:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 10

Illustration/printing technique

I've recently added an article on the illustrator Margery Gill. There's a technique she frequently used on her covers where a pen and ink drawing is overlaid by two or three colours, the overlap between those colours creating further colours. A few examples are here, here and here. I've done a bit of digging and it seems this was a form of lithographic printing where the artist manually separates the colours and draws the overlays in ink on sheets of transparent plastic called "Plastocowell", which are then used as transparencies to burn the image onto lithographic plates. It was popular for the covers of children's books in the 1940s-60s before full colour photographic printing became more affordable. Gill continued using it into the 70s and seems to have been a particularly prominent user of it, and I'd like to add something to the article to that effect, but I can't - it'd be original research as none of the references I've found to the "Plastocowell" lithographic technique mention her specifically. Can anybody direct me to a reference that might be useful? Thanks. --Nicknack009 (talk) 08:04, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza "no-go" zone

I am perplexed and appalled by what I'm reading about the "no-go zone" in the Gaza Strip. That article mentions nothing about it, while 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict mentions, sourced to a very brief comment in the New York Times,^[5] that 44% of the entire area is such a zone. Apparently before it was 300 meters,^[6] enforced by live fire (though I suspect that sometimes, though not always, when people say they were shot at they might have been warning shots). In any case, it was a definite displacement of the population. But I don't have a good image of whether the residents of half of Gaza have in fact been banished from their lands, nor how viciously the Israelis treat those who fail to flee. Sources like [7][8] paint a bleak picture though - that even before the present "war", there were troops shooting civilians up to 1.5 kilometers into Gaza.

How can anyone, even the Israelis, claim that intentionally shooting non-violent civilians simply because they failed to clear out of a "buffer zone" is anything other than a flagrant act of terror, morally ethically and legally no better than flying an airplane into the World Trade Center? Wnt (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't you been here long enough to know better than to phrase your question like that (or ask it at all, here, for that matter)? ---Sluzzelin talk 14:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should have had a question mark at the end of the first paragraph, true. So to be clear, I'm asking:

Is the current "no-go" zone really depopulated of civilians now?

Will the Israelis fire on civilians in the entire 44% of the country simply for being there?

How do Israelis try to explain that shooting civilians for non-military activity is not terrorism, let alone consistent with the Geneva Convention? Wnt (talk) 15:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See complex question. You've presupposed conditions that aren't established as valid in your question, and you've also added emotional weight to your questions, leading the answerer to only one possible "right" answer, which you've already decided on. "Isn't it true that if someone does XXXX, why are they not evil?" is the sort of question that isn't really a question; you already know that someone is doing XXXX, and anyone who disagrees with you must be agreeing with evil. This isn't a question for information, it's WP:SOAPBOXing in the form of questions rather than statements. --Jayron32 17:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To the contrary, I was providing the background of what I read, and I would genuinely welcome to hear what the opposing argument is. I literally don't know what the opposing argument can be on this issue. Wnt (talk) 17:25, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The facts that have become clear from the latest broadcasts are:

Hamas still has thousands of rockets even after a month of pounding them by the Israelites.
They have built multiple tunnels to penetrate Israel and Egypt using most likely that no-go zone.
Gaza residents have what looks like a luxurious life style: great houses that look good, electricity, food, etc. and unlikely even one of them works, I mean they certainly work on building the tunnels and bringing the rockets. It is all at the expense of American taxpayers. Who supports the UN? Us of course.

The OP presupposed (wrongly) that everyone who shows up in that zone is a civilian. I guess it is far from the truth given the latest developments. We can see it all on TV, just turn it on. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 18:00, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how the no-go zone ties in with the tunnels. The maps I've seen show it covering the north and east borders of Gaza, but not the south (map) -- which is rather odd indeed, since that's where the tunnels and the nominal focus of the military operation is. I should ask if that is really not a no-go zone! Can you give a reference about tunnels going east/northward into Israel?

I also am surprised by your description of a luxurious lifestyle. I'm reading from the article " Per capita income (PPP) was estimated at US$3,100 in 2009, a position of 164th in the world. Seventy percent of the population is below the poverty line according to a 2009 estimate." Our article doesn't have hard figures for unemployment, nor recent figures, but I don't remember it being over 50%, which means that most people there find it worth working for $3000 a year - this seems to contradict your impression. What am I missing?

I do not deny that military [ish] personnel would show up at the border and cause trouble, but civilians have obvious reasons to be there. I find myself comparing free-fire zone, but even in Vietnam the practice had some clear limitations not described in this coverage. Wnt (talk) 18:50, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re the US taxpayers footing the bill for the UN: see United States and the United Nations#The U.S. arrears issue:

The UN has always had problems with members refusing to pay the assessment levied upon them under the United Nations Charter. But the most significant refusal in recent times has been that of the U.S. Since 1985 the U.S. Congress has refused to authorize payment of the U.S. dues, in order to force UN compliance with U.S. wishes …… U.S. arrears to the UN currently total over $1.3 billion. Of this, $612 million is payable under Helms-Biden. The remaining $700 million result from various legislative and policy withholdings; at present, there are no plans to pay these amounts. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"but not the south (map) -- which is rather odd indeed, since that's where the tunnels and the nominal focus of the military operation is. I should ask if that is really not a no-go zone! Can you give a reference about tunnels going east/northward into Israel?" Egypt is to the south of Gaza. Hamas has their tunnels there as well. They have been used for smuggling rockets brought from Libya and Sudan during the time of Morsi's government. You are rather confused. Hamas does not attack Egypt. They attack Israel. The direction of their rocket attacks is North and East. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 19:46, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point to some sources on the Palestinian funding by the U.S. via the UN? I looked it up and found that there is apparently a ban on U.S. funding of UN agencies that admit Palestine. However, the U.S. does provide funding to the Palestinian Authority with the quite surprising requested figure of $440 million. [9] With the State of Palestine claiming 4.5 million inhabitants, that is nearly $100 per person, a lot more than I thought but not enough to affect the $3100 figure much. But since the PA has been hostile to Hamas, and the U.S. regards Hamas as a terrorist organization and ???maybe doesn't fund it on that basis, I'm not sure that money would reach Gaza. Do these facts - $100, direct rather than via the UN - seem about right to you, or am I missing something?

Oh, and I understand the rockets are being shot east, but does the extra few km (previously meters) really have anything to do with that? Why does the Israeli army need a "buffer zone" east and north if its army can operate without one while seeking out and destroying tunnels in the south? Wnt (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wnt, when reading the Israeli rhetoric on Palestine you need to realize many of Israel's actions and statements are for media purposes. Stating that civilians killed by Israel were in a no-go zone is just one more excuse Israel will use to excuse itself of its crimes against humanity. The usual excuse put forward by Israel for why it shoots children in the no-go zone is that the children may be collecting rubble that may be used to create bomb shelters like Israelis have. You may be interested in Iman Darweesh Al Hams, a 13-year old girl shot on her way to school (a school were many teachers and students have been shot by IDF on their way to, or even at, school), for going in a "no-go zone". The IDF shot her twice in the legs at a few hundred meters, when she dropped her bag and tried to run away, the IDF chased her down, went up to her laying on the ground, shot her twice point blank in the face, walked away from her body and fired a dozen shots into her corpse. She posed no threat, the militant who shot her said he would have done the same if the girl was 3-years old, the killer was never punished, the killer was promoted to major. Wnt, do terrorist ever call themselves such? 99.224.193.148 (talk) 20:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As per a commentary I saw recently... Every time a Palestinian dies, it's a victory for Hamas. It's in Hamas' own interest for Palestinians to continue to be killed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A small tactical victory against Israel, but not a goal for Palestine. The sort of thing that falls into their lap. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:06, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Hotel with a view of The Liffey in Dublin?

A friend without internet access asked me to ask at the RefDesk if there's (or there was in 2002) any hotel in dublin that has full view to the Liffey River (Not The Clarence Hotel). Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From a map from a google search, it looks like the Morrison Hotel would have a view. The website says they just did a major renovation, so that makes me fairly confident the hotel was there in 2002 with the same name. It is very near the Clarence but on the other (north) side of the river. The Arlington Hotel O'Connell Bridge is a little further east on the north side of the river and also has views, but I can't tell how long it has been there.Dreamahighway (talk) 01:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are there two Lefts?

Hello, it just seems to me there's a huge difference between what I think of as Leftist and what is called Leftist generally.

The way I see it is - the one Left is pro-worker's rights, equity feminist, pro-nation state (internationalist, but the basic unit is still the nation state), anti-Nato, positivist (there's an objective knowable reality out there), pro-nuclear family ("democracy begins at home") etc.

The other is more or less indifferent to workers, gender feminist, globalist (anti-nation state, are ok with states ceding authority to supranational bodies and outsourcing public works to private firms), culture relativist (medical science is a western artifact and as such not more legitimate than say shamanism (Dawkins has a bit on that in his book)), subjectivist (if I say I'm a cat, then I am and who the hell are you to tell me otherwise), anti-nuclear family etc.

Their assesment of historical events and figures is different, too, for example how they view Pinochet (evil incarnate/indifferent), Soviet Russia and Lenin (modernizer/mass killer), modern Russia (proto-Capitalist banana republic/Communist hell), etc.

Is it just me who sees it or is the other Left not the real Left or was there perhaps a schism and if so, when and has someone perhaps written about it that I could read? Asmrulz (talk) 17:02, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See centre-left and far-left. The former you talk about generally fall into the centre-left camp, while the latter is usually described as far-left. In general, leftist politics leans towards improving social equality, while rightist politics tends to favor preserving the existing social order and hierarchy. Within each of those camps are shades of difference, and there's a continuum of "lets make small changes and not upset the apple-cart too much" to "tear it all down and bring about the perfect society by any means necessary", which describes the general trend between centrism and radicalism. Furthermore, the SPECIFIC issues which are adopted as key issues by leftists or rightists in any one country will differ based on the existing culture of that country. Some things which are major political fighting points in country X may not even exist in country Y; some issues that are leftist in one country are rightist in another, and so on. There is no universal political model that fits every society in the world. --Jayron32 17:15, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

er... by this classification the Democratic Party, as well as the various Social Democrat (e.g.) and Green parties of Europe (who are everything I say in the 2nd paragraph, and who also (forgot to mention) affirm their respect for private property at every opportunity given) are far-Left whereas the CPSU and the various small parties labelled far-Left (1st paragpraph and anti-private property) are/were centre .... Asmrulz (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how abolition of private property can be anything but an extremist position. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:16, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But they are sane on other social issues (my 1st paragpraph and the centre-left article.)Asmrulz (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's why it is a political spectrum or continuum. There are VERY broad strokes to be painted (BROADLY) leftist or rightist, however every country has its own political situation, and when you get too granular, there aren't two "camps" to fit in, there are a minimum of n+1 camps to fit in, where "n" is the total number of political parties in the world right now. Parties are classified as centre-left or far-left based on the preponderance of their political positions, not on any one or small subset of them. There are parties which are generally centrist which hold one or two extremist positions, there are parties which are generally extremist which hold one or two centrist positions; it doesn't make them not one or the other on the balance. No party is purely one thing or another, and party positions change over time as well. It matters when one looks at a party, as well. Furthermore, I don't know how you can classify the U.S. Democratic party as "far left", it doesn't seek to dismantle society, it doesn't seek income redistribution by using the force of violence, it doesn't advocate violent overthrow of the current order, it has never even advocated against social hierarchy as a concept. There are literally zero political positions which match ANYTHING mentioned at the far-left article that apply to the U.S. Democratic party, or really any of the others you mention (the SPD, the Greens, etc.) If you're trying to claim that parties like the SPD and the U.S. Democratic party ought to be labeled "far left", I'm not sure what to do about that, as you are so out of touch with reality as to defy the ability to learn... --Jayron32 18:39, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's so much about centre-left and far left. Since the fall of communism most of the left has moved away from socialism - the idea of restructuring the economy to deliver equality - and fallen back on identity politics. Unfortunately identity politics has a tendency to become an "I'm more oppressed than you" contest, and devolve into a sectarian mess with activists denouncing each other on the internet for being insufficiently anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobic, or just being a straight cis white male, instead of trying to solve any problems in the real world. The left in America is lucky that the right is also a shambles. Not so much elsewhere. --Nicknack009 (talk) 19:06, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't classify them as far-Left. ~~I thought you did.~~ You identified the stuff from my 2nd paragraph as far-Left ("The former you talk about generally fall into the centre-left camp, while the latter is usually described as far-left."). Those are the positions which incidentally the mainstream democratic parties share (gender as opposed to equity? check. culture-relativist? check. etc) I personally think these parties are not Left at all, or, if they are, they are everything that's wrong with it Asmrulz (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, what Nicknack009 said. I couldn't have put it better myself Asmrulz (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Left-wing politics for our "overview" article. I would characterize your first description as Socialism and your second as Cultural liberalism, but, as mentioned above, political views aren't easy to compartmentalize at this level. Tevildo (talk) 18:43, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the groups you talk about seem to be left from my perspective, as both accept, tolerate, or cultivate capitalist social relations. From my definitional perspective, which comes out of Marxist and anarchist class struggle traditions, the minimal criteria for left-wing politics is to hold a position for the abolition of capitalism and its replacement with a classless society, either immediately, gradually or eventually, and to act politically upon this position. I think you're more interested in the difference between labourism progressivism and post 1970 social democracy and contemporary social liberalism and identity politics. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:45, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fate of the German royal family

After the First World War the German monarchy was abolished and the country became a republic. What became of the Kaiser and his family? Is there anyone alive today who would be Kaiser had Germany still been a monarchy? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:00, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Check Wilhelm II, German Emperor#Abdication and flight and all his children's' articles. Nearly all of them have articles. And Georg Friedrich, Prince of Prussia --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assassins' executioners

Is there any record of who the executioners were of Charles J. Guiteau and Leon Czolgosz—i.e. the people who 'flipped the switch', so-to-speak? matt (talk) 21:41, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to this contemporary account, Guiteau was executed by a "Mr Strong", on whom we don't seem to have an article. I'll see what I can find out about Czologosz. Tevildo (talk) 22:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another Wiki has an article on another(?) somewhat anonymous Mr. Strong (SPOILER) who didn't mind a little blood on his hands. Having the ruling class' blessing was just a bonus. In a previous position, he'd killed a man just as a means to sentencing another to die for regicide. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:22, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

According to this site (which cites a contemporary newspaper article), Czologosz was executed by "Electrician Davis" under the instructions of "Warden Mead" (presumably J. Warren Mead - see Auburn Correctional Facility#Wardens). Tevildo (talk) 22:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of epidemics

List of epidemics seems a bit lopsided toward the West. Aren't there any serious epidemics which affected Eastern Asia before the 17th century?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a horribly incomplete list and likely always will be; it doesn't even include epidemics we have articles for, such as Plague of Emmaus and Plague of Cyprian. Yes, there were many epidemics in Asia and pretty much almost anywhere people have ever lived (though the pre-contact New World seems not to have had many, or at least we have no record of it). Unfortunately, WP still suffers from biases in favour of recentism and English sources. Off the top of my head, there was a plague in Yuan dynasty China, but our article on the period doesn't mention it and we have no standalone article. Second plague pandemic only alludes to it. Google yuan dynasty plague for more. Matt Deres (talk) 23:11, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Before we get too down on ourselves about how lopsided our coverage is... take a look at the other language versions of WP. We actually do comparatively well. That isn't to say we couldn't do better. Don't just complain... try to fix the problem. Blueboar (talk) 01:10, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 389: / Line 389: @@
 A friend without internet access asked me to ask at the RefDesk if there's (or there was in 2002) any hotel in dublin that has full view to the Liffey River (Not The Clarence Hotel).  Thanks. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 16:51, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
+From a map from a google search, it looks like the Morrison Hotel would have a view. The website says they just did a major renovation, so that makes me fairly confident the hotel was there in 2002 with the same name. It is very near the Clarence but on the other (north) side of the river. The Arlington Hotel O'Connell Bridge is a little further east on the north side of the river and also has views, but I can't tell how long it has been there.[[User:Dreamahighway|Dreamahighway]] ([[User talk:Dreamahighway|talk]]) 01:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 == Are there two Lefts? ==

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities: Difference between revisions