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

August 29

Was Perseus on the Argo?

User:Drawingpad has edited the Argonauts article to indicate that Perseus was on the Argo, with no source given. Is this true, and can someone give a source? It seems implausible, because his great-grandson Heracles was also on the ship for a short while. – b_jonas 08:57, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

No, Perseus is a character in Argonautica but was not himself an Argonaut. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Stairway to heaven?

In our flats a lift tower has been built out in front of the staircase, which connects the balconies of the different floors. Between the stairs and the lift on each floor there is a landing with a wide ledge on each side. At lunchtime yesterday as I passed one landing on the way out I saw the ledge on the side adjacent to a Chinese family's flat piled high with the most wonderful meal - all different kinds of sweetmeat and fruit and bordered with candle holders. It reminded me of what I saw, on a smaller scale, when I went into a temple in Kuala Lumpur 44 years ago. When I returned later in the afternoon it had vanished.

My question is - is this something to do with a Chinese religious festival? Yesterday was a full moon and I heard that the eighth (August) moon is an important (dragon boat?) festival. If the Chinese New Year was about three weeks into January (as it sometimes is) this would tally, but if it was about three weeks into February (as it also sometimes is) then it wouldn't. Is this traditional and what might have happened to the meal? I could of course simply knock on the Chinese family's door and ask but I don't really know them and I don't want to be thought nosy. 80.43.176.34 (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

By the time you returned, maybe they had finished defrosting their refrigerator. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

But why the candles and all the bother of taking the food outside when they could just leave it on the work surface? There was nobody around so if this was just routine housekeeping there was the added disincentive that any passing resident could tuck in or divert some of it to their own use. 80.43.176.34 (talk) 12:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Traditional Chinese holidays says Aug 28 this year is the date for the Ghost Festival.184.147.128.46 (talk) 15:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

In my thoughts I have seen rings of smoke through the trees, and the voices of those who stand looking. If there's a bustle in your hedgerow, don't be alarmed now. A new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter. Dear lady, did you hear the wind blow? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:34, August 31, 2015 (UTC)

And that strange bit of poetry would likely make sense only to people who would leave food outside in the hallway. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:25, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

There's a truth to your call, but I want to make sure, because sometimes words have two meanings. Like, sometimes plants aren't in hedgerows and pages aren't in books. In other other words, Led Zeppelin appeals to those people, not me. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:12, September 4, 2015 (UTC)

It wouldn't be the hallway. In this country flats are arranged with an external balcony so that residents can enter their homes directly from the street - the only hallways are in their own homes. This allows the postman to deliver to houses individually, just as on a normal street. He posts the mail directly into each house through a letter box carved into the front door like a catflap. The tenants were doing what the article says - leaving food on an outside table for the spirits of their ancestors to eat, this being the time of year when they visit their relations who are living. 78.145.16.226 (talk) 13:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Non whites in the UK (1960s/70s)

How visible were black and Asian people in Britain's streets in the 1960s and 70s? I am referring to average towns not including London or Birmingham. Thank you. --Edmund-islington (talk) 20:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Just personal anecdote here, but while I was at school in a provincial county town in the late 60s to mid 70s, we didn't have a single black person in the entire school. The only people of non-British origin were a second-generation Ukrainian and an Iranian. Rojomoke (talk) 21:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Another personal anecdote: my primary school class in 1966 in Leytonstone, East London was all white British. In our last year at primary school, 1970, of 32 children there was one girl from a West Indian family and one girl from India, although some of the other classes were a little more mixed. At my comprehensive school, by the mid-1970s, we were about two thirds white British with a lot more Indian and Pakistani children, many of whom seen to have come from Kenya. The total population of that borough, Waltham Forest, is now 62% "from minority ethnic background". [1] Alansplodge (talk) 23:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Another personal anecdote, growing up in rural North Wales, I was about 10 years old when I first saw black people in the flesh, a group of kids at the Marine Lake amusement park in Rhyl, who if I recall from their accents were probably from Birmingham; I remember being amazed (probably just as much at Brummies as their being black). When I started secondary school in 1969, out of over 600 kids in school there were two - an Indian kid whose dad was a doctor in a local hospital (I remember our teacher taking a survey of what language we spoke at home, getting the usual answers of "English", and "Welsh", and being totally flummoxed by "Merathi" and having to find out how to spell it!), and an Italian kid with distinctly olive-coloured skin who was a bit unusual. Later on we had a couple of Chinese kids whose parents ran the take-away. The biggest ethnic minority in our area at the time was Polish, as one of the biggest post-war resettlement camps had been around 20 miles away. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 08:41, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

It even varied between villages in conurbations. Aged 9, I moved from a school in one part of the borough which was about 40% non-white, to a school the other side of the borough which was totally white. It's much the same now to be honest, but such neighbourhoods are fewer and farther between. --TammyMoet (talk) 08:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

We could do with a bit less anecdotal evidence here, and more direction towards reliable sources. Unfortunately, the raw information from the 1971 census is not at all easy to track down online - but that is where surely we should be looking. (But, it should be noted that in 1971 questions were only asked about birthplace and parents' birthplace, not specifically about perceived ethnicity.) You may be able to find the original documents in your local public library, of course. And, an "average town" is difficult to identify - the original enquirer needs to specify more precisely whether we are talking about a medium-sized city, a medium-sized rural market town, or somewhere in between. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Most of the Asian (Indian-subcontinent) and Afro-Caribbean immigration to the UK was immediately post-WWII (Modern_immigration_to_the_United_Kingdom#Post-war_immigration_.(1945–1983) ); I'm not sure what time-period most of the Oriental (Far-East) immigration to the UK occurred. Given that, most of the Asian and Afro-Caribbean immigrants would be either first or second generation immigrants, you could dig through the census for several representative towns, finding those who were born aboard, and check the ages of their children (if that was asked in the census). LongHairedFop (talk) 11:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The phrase "immediately post-WWII" may need qualification, our MV Empire Windrush article says it is "best remembered today for bringing one of the first large groups of post-war West Indian immigrants to the United Kingdom... in 1948" so the peak period of Caribbean immigration would have to be later than that. Alansplodge (talk) 17:08, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Population Trends - Stability and change in ethnic groups in England and Wales (Pdf 166Kb) may help. It is a report on a group of people who were picked randomly from the census and then followed from 1974 to 2004. Therefore, the people were a sample of the entirety of England and Wales. Although ethnicity wasn't asked about on earlier census, it was after 1991, so they were able to find out retroactively the ethnicities of their sample in 1974.

Numbers aren't my forte so I welcome correction, but if you look at the chart on page 39, it seems to say that they were following 417,514 people in total. Using their best retroactive guess, in 1974 392,582 or 94% were white. 3392+1225+1235 or 1.4% were from the Caribbean or Africa. 8576+4310+1652+1341 or 3.8% were from India/Pakistan/Bangladesh. 1118+2053 or less than 1% were from China or ticked “other”.

I didn’t read on to see if these data were broken down by location, so do that, Edmund, but if they aren’t you’ll still need the anecdotal information given above. 184.147.128.46 (talk) 12:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The anecdotal information is still needed because the OP asked about "visibility" which you don't get from boring old statistics. A census can tell you where someone was born, but it won't necessarily tell you who was white (for example, Colin Cowdrey or Cliff Richard) or who was black or Asian: nor will it tell you what their habits were, whether they socialised openly and were visible on the streets. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

True, but it's more likely to give more helpful information than the reminiscences of random people on the internet. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

August 30

Psychological/rhetorical device

I'll try my best to explain this. On TV I heard a very egotistical/self-centred presenter say, "I would never use a child as a weapon. I don't care what anyone says." It is a rational and common sense position to hold to never use a child as a weapon in, say, a divorce. The second sentence he uses frames that logical and "correct" opinion as less than commonly held in order to portray himself in an even greater positive light. Is there a technical name for that particular "technique"? If I haven't explained myself well, I apologise. 213.106.130.210 (talk) 11:56, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't know what it's called, but it's terribly irritating and very common. I see it on Facebook all the time in various iterations. "I know it's out of favour these days, but I was taught to value honesty and integrity - share if you agree!" Ugh. Some of grandiosity plays into it; there's a definite egotism involved. I would love to have a specific word for this phenomenon. 99.235.223.170 (talk) 20:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Blade hurlers [2]? --Askedonty (talk) 21:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Holier than thou? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:41, August 31, 2015 (UTC)

I think "I don't care what anyone says" is a non sequitur. Bus stop (talk) 03:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

The assumptive Assumption. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 04:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

It comes across as defensive assertion, which is an implicitly self-contradictory position to take. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

There is a subtle common pundit notion in InedibleHulk's proposition with what I was thinking about. That's why in agreement with Jack's analysis I'd simply name them selfists. Paradoxically because they're not entirely sincere, pretending to be the main offender they're in fact exposing themselves as the (potentially you) (see my previous link) knive thrower's assistant. This because what they are expecting is the answer to: "how the hell I am going to get rid of this pervasive morally correctness, without anybody's notice". If they do not get that they have a nice picture of themselves. Then what they're doing is selfing, or better, pure holier-than selfing. --Askedonty (talk) 06:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron. His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth. In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him. The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved. His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone. When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves.

If you want a nice picture of yourself, you may be selfie sticking. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:39, August 31, 2015 (UTC)

They say one of the safest partner for this kind of trade may be the rattlesnake. --Askedonty (talk) 07:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron's rod swallowed up their rods. Sucks to be the everyman sometimes. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:53, August 31, 2015 (UTC)

At least be grateful you're not nobody.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

• ""I would never use a child as a weapon. I don't care what anyone says." is attacking a straw man since the second sentence is implying that the majority disagree with the speaker, which is implausible to say the least. Abecedare (talk) 16:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • • • It's not exactly disagreeing with the speaker, i.e. not disagreeing with not using a child as a weapon; it's actually a claim that many people believe that particular speaker WOULD use a child as a weapon. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much everyone! It was all very helpful. :) 213.106.130.210 (talk) 08:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Axiom Void burn (talk) 23:55, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Subdivisions of BiH

• What are regions of Republika Srpska? For instance, File:BH_cantons_&_regions.png and File:Bosnia_and_Herzegovina_division_2005.png both tacitly reference them, and Category:Regions of Republika Srpska exists, but Municipalities of Republika Srpska (the ostensible main article of the former category) makes no reference to them, and Political divisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina#Overview says "The Federation is further divided into cantons, which are then subdivided into municipalities. Republika Srpska is divided directly into municipalities.".

• What is the status of Sarajevo and Istočno Sarajevo exactly? Both seem to exist above the municipality and below the Canton and RS respectively. Are they both sui generis on a level of government with no equivalent elsewhere?

• Is the entirety of Brčko District one municipality?

--Quentin Smith 12:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Geschiedenis van ???scafanders???

"hoe komt het dat ik geen informatie kan vinden over het geschiedenis van scafanders?" wrote Cosyn,david (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) in an article I've just deleted. I suppose most of us here can get the gist of the Dutch. But what the Bachman–Turner Overdrive does "scafanders" mean? A place in the Netherlands? "Other sheep"? Something completely different? --Shirt58 (talk) 12:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The English word is scaphander, "scafander" is a Dutch spelling (though I had to google it). It is derived from French scaphandre, and denotes a type of diving suit. - Lindert (talk) 12:56, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Most often the iconic standard diving dress. I can understand Cosyn,david (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s frustration. At least at the present time (see present time), "Geschiedenis van scafanders" is still the third in position in the "scafanders" related Google search. --Askedonty (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The Dutch Wikipedia has an article on it however, but not with the same name: Duikpak. --Askedonty (talk) 19:04, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

"most of us here can get the gist of the Dutch" I couldn't, and I speak German Asmrulz (talk) 10:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

The article de:Skaphander has everything on the history that could be found online. Accordingly, the first record of the Dutch word Scaphander is the book De Scaphander: Of de Konst om in de diepste Wateren dryvende te gaan en allerhande werk te verrigten. Amsterdam 1777. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 11:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Are the JMSDF ship naming conventions codified somewhere?

The JMSDF avoids using Imperial Japanese Navy ship names due to their historical associations[3]. Is this just an unspoken rule or is it actually codified somewhere? Is it a law passed by the Japanese Diet or an internal self-defense force regulation? My other car is a cadr (talk) 13:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

They've recently overturned that convention by naming their new "helicopter carrier" the Kaga after a carrier that participated in the Pearl Harbor attack and was eventually sunk in the Battle of Midway. See Japan launches second Izumo-class helicopter carrier. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Frontline management

Why are frontline management staff in customer service, retail, leisure, tourism, security etc often not very well paid, compared to office staff, despite the fact they work longer hours and have a lot of responsibility. 82.132.225.221 (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Depends how strong the union is. The non - office staff on London Underground earn a huge amount, possibly because they can hold the public to ransom by bringing London to a grinding halt. They're not very popular at the moment because they're holding a series of strikes to derail the night tube due on 12 September. 89.240.30.79 (talk) 14:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

What is the racial composition of each major political party in the USA?

What is the racial composition of each major political party in the USA? Can someone fill in the following blanks, with any reliable sources?

1. In the Democratic Party, _____% are White and _____% are Black and _____% are Hispanic.
2. In the Republican Party, _____% are White and _____% are Black and _____% are Hispanic.
3. Of all White voters, _____% are Democrats and _____% are Republican.
4. Of all Black voters, _____% are Democrats and _____% are Republican.
5. Of all Hispanic voters, _____% are Democrats and _____% are Republican.

Again, this refers to the United States. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The problem with your question is that many U.S. states do not have formal registration of voters by party affiliation. Texas is the most populous such state. Another problem is that a very large bloc of voters self-identify as independent, though many sympathize with a major party. And in California, the most populous state, while voters can declare a party affiliation, primary elections (except for the presidency) are "top two open primaries" with voters free to select from candidates from any party. There is no comprehensive national list of official "Democrats" and "Republicans", so public opinion polling is the only way to approximate an answer. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, yes, all of those are limitations of interpreting whatever statistics or data we have. But, nonetheless, there are still some statistics and data out there. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Quibble here: California has a partisan primary vote for prez/veep and one other thing. A shiny no-prize to the first person who remembers it! No cheating by looking it up, please. --Trovatore (talk) 19:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Here are 2012 Gallup Poll results that are on point. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Here are 2014 poll results from the Pew Research Center, also looking at factors like gender, education and religion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Excellent articles, both of them! Thank you. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:58, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Just a side note, "Hispanic" is treated somewhat differently by the US census - Hispanic#Definitions_in_the_United_States. So e.g. Desi Arnaz was a famous "white" Hispanic American [4] [5]. This is why on many official forms you'll see boxes named "White (non-Hispanic)" SemanticMantis (talk) 21:41, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Reptilians come in both colors and all three demographics (Asian reptilians are typically more God than state, so rarely bother with camouflage). Of course, it's hard to count "them", and estimates are all over the board. "Some say" they're imaginary. Worth a small amount of consideration, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:32, August 31, 2015 (UTC)

Hard to count reptilians, I mean, not Asian Americans in government and politics. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:35, August 31, 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Five-headed horse figure

Recently I saw a five-headed horse figure at an antique shop. It was maybe 18" from head to tail, maybe 12" tall, mostly black, made of metal. The owner didn't know anything about it other than that it came from Tibet, is "fairly old", and may have been "used to ward off evil spirits". As he was clearly unsure, take the background information with a grain of salt. What I do know is I can't find anything else like it, which is surprising. The only prominent, culturally significant five-headed horse I've found is a carving found at the Terrace of the Elephants in Cambodia. Other than that, nothing. I also haven't found any such figure (it's not cartoonish, not fantastical -- just looks like a black horse...except with five heads, fanned across a maybe 100 degree arc). I'm trying to find something similar or at least more information about what its story could be. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Uchchaihshravas is a seven-headed horse from Hindu mythology. My impression is that once you get above three heads on a mythological beast, their exact number can vary a bit :) SemanticMantis (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

And, as linked in the article, you can see a nice image on Dark Horse Records where the heads form an arc. Nanonic (talk) 21:58, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

According to this site, Surya's horse is sometimes depicted with multiple heads, and I recall that Surya does appear in Tibetan Buddhism.

According to this source, Hayagriva is often represented as or by horses, particularly the Wind Horse. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@SemanticMantis, Nanonic, and Ian.thomson: These are some great leads. Thanks very much. Other suggestions are still welcome, of course, but this provides some good ideas to go on. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

August 31

Democracy in the USA.

What are some reasons people might think that the USA is not a true democracy? --Spondingar (talk) 06:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

All systems of democratic government are something of a compromise, some more than others. Have a look at our Democracy article. You might also look at Lobbying and Lobbying in the United States which is perhaps the main issue highlighted by critics of the US system. Alansplodge (talk) 08:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

It is a common misconception that democracy means "people vote" and nothing else. As is noted in the Democracy article, a democracy is one where people, regardless of their status, have access to the structures of power in their society. By that measure, the U.S. (as do all societies, to varying degrees, so don't mistake my meaning here) has many shortcomings when considering it's status versus the democratic ideal. As noted by the reference in the lobbying articles, it is often noted that in America, there is a "pay to play" access to political power, and that political policy is shaped not by the will of the people, but by the large corporations and very wealthy (see Political activities of the Koch brothers) who fund the election campaigns of the politicians. Also, the U.S. doesn't do very well with regards to social mobility (see Gini coefficient, for one example) or other measures that indicate one's ability to move oneself from one social strata to another. --Jayron32 10:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Money and power differences is one thing everyone here seems to have mentioned, but another issue for any country with some largely FPTP system with two dominant parties is that in a fair part of the country, your vote means basically nothing for a number of positions. Even without gerrymandering, natural geographical differences in the popularity of certain candidates and issues can mean even say, a 20% swing won't affect the outcome. While there may be reasons for the electoral college, it combined with the tendency of states to use the winner-takes-all distribution means even the vote for president among the two candidates can often be irrelevant. I believe these factors combined with others are one reason why some of the lower positions in US elections (and Americans seem to vote for a lot of things) are basically uncontested. Nil Einne (talk) 13:04, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Forgot to mention the US has also have major issues with voter disfranchisement and suppression, up until fairly recently. While the grandfather clauses which made the Poll tax (United States) and Literacy tests so clearly biased against certain racial groups were partially eliminated with the Guinn v. United States decision in 1915 and I think completely eliminated with Lane v. Wilson, in effect because of social economic differences the laws still predominantly affected certain racial groups, particularly when combined with intimidation and discriminatory enforcement. It was only the various laws brought on by the American Civil Rights Movement culminating in the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which seemed to finally really start to eliminate this.

Yet even now, there's concern voter ID laws and intentional disenfranchment of sometimes all felony convicts (including in some cases after the sentence has been served) are having a similar effects. (While other countries have national ID cards, the US seems to be one of the few without such a card, but where some places require some card for voting.) Not helped again by possibly biased or just plain weird implementation of such laws, as the Florida election recount showed for felon disenfranchment. (I think the Florida case also made people wonder about the fairness of the election commission or bodies in charge of elections in parts of the US.) The extremely high conviction and incarceration rate in the US probably doesn't help perceptions either. Stuff like voter caging surely doesn't help either.

Nil Einne (talk) 21:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Somewhere along this line of reasoning Arrow's impossibility theorem and ranked voting should be mentioned. Even Condorcet et al. during the French revolution knew that first past the post voting systems had serious problems. Aside from very small pockets, to my knowledge most places in the USA do not allow ranked voting, and that feeds in to the two-party duopoly that you hint at. SemanticMantis (talk) 23:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Two reasons for that notion that I recall hearing in Sweden are: 1. Low vote participation in the US presidential election. See Voter_turnout 2. Money seems to matter a lot more in the US in who gets elected to office. Star Lord - 星王 (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Citizens United v. FEC gets a lot of attention from the pundits, press, and some politicians. SemanticMantis (talk) 13:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Citizens United gets a lot of press because it is a recent court decision, but it is a symptom rather than a cause of the influence of money in politics. The U.S. has a lot of prior traditions (i.e. corporate personhood for just one example) which have been part of the political history of the U.S. It's not like the U.S. had been an egalitarian, democratic utopia and then Citizens United ruined it all... --Jayron32 14:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Hunt that citizen down, tar-and-feather him, then subject him to the ultimate ignominy - de-unite him! -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:16, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Sure, that's all fair. According to our article CU explicitly enshrined in the law of the land that corporation=legal person and money=speech, and there's a reason it's a divisive case. And there's a reason why Super PAC spending has skyrocketed since that ruling. Saying much more could veer into WP:NPOV and WP:SOAP, so I'll stop there. SemanticMantis (talk) 23:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

There's a usage somewhat unrelated to the above, popular among the American right wing, where it is asserted that the U.S. is "a republic, not a democracy". This is pretty much the etymological fallacy, defining "democracy" to only mean direct democracy, ignoring how the word is actually used in political science. This appears to go back to The Federalist Papers, where the authors portrayed "democracy" as mob rule, and contrasted it with the new republican government that the Constitution would create. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Which is why some right-wingers try to call the other party the "Democrat" party, on the grounds that they are not really "democratic". (As if the right wing IS.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

For comparison with other countries, the Democracy Index is an indication of how democratic a country is. When I looked a few years ago, I was able to find explanations for why each country got its rating (e.g. reasons for the U.S. being 8.11 instead of a perfect 10), probably somewhere on the Economist Intelligence Unit's website.--Wikimedes (talk) 02:52, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

How was the white French battle flag differentiated from the white surrender flag?

The French battle flag was white when no royalties was present during the Ancien Régime for a period of time. ByDuring that time, using a white flag to signal temporary truce or surrender was already in common usage. How did the commanders in that era differentiate between these two cases?

Addendum: I'm more curious about the land battle case, since the naval case is trivial. My other car is a cadr (talk) 08:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Trivial?!? How very dare you! :-) Alansplodge (talk) 11:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

It seems to have been mainly used at sea, where you surrender by taking down your ensign, see striking the colours, rather than by raising a white flag. Alansplodge (talk) 09:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

The section I linked to has two pictures of it being used on land:

• 
  The surrender of Lord Cornwallis to French (left) and American (right) colonial forces after the battle of Yorktown (1781).
• 
  Royalist army used the white Bourbon ensign, during the French Revolutionary Wars (here, the battle of Quiberon, 1795).
• 
  Drapeau Colonel de 1er compagnie d' un régiment française d'infanterie royale.

My other car is a cadr (talk) 09:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Alansplodge is correct about the white flag only used at sea as a battle flag during Ancien Régime. On land it was different. French infantry regiments were using many different battle flags of various colours, with a white scarf on top of the flag pole. A white flag has been used as a French flag too, but this was a commercial flag at harbours and at overseas commercial places. Your pictures are more recent, they don't belong to the Ancien Régime era. Akseli9 (talk) 10:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. I've updated my OP. 1781 does belong in the Ancien Régime era though, I'm afraid. My other car is a cadr (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

After some research it seems that I was not entirely correct. "French infantry regiments at the time [the American War of Independence] carried one colonel's flag - all white, and 14 "drapeaux d'ordonnance". I think all 14 were identical within the regiment, and most regiments featured the white cross." French Flags of the U.S. Revolutionary War and " In the French infantry regiments a single colour, that of the colonel, was entirely white." Uniforms of the American Revolution in Color. However, it seems that this was not plain white: "Each regiment had a single drapeau blanc, that was 'the colonel's flag'. It was usually all white, with a large white cross stitched in outline upon it. There were usually three large, gold fleur-de-lis in the upper left canton, and in some cases there may have been added small heraldic devices. Specially raised, or foreign units, tended to have more elaborate 'colonel's colors' with the arms of their commander. The white 'drapeau blanc' represented the king's royal authority vested in the commander of the regiment." Les Régiments Français: Regiments of l'Armée de Terre Royale in the American War for Independence. So the answer seems to be that a) the French white flag when used as a regimental colour in battle was used in conjunction with other colours generally bearing a white cross and b) the drapeau blanc was all white but with embellishments. Alansplodge (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I found an image of a French infantry regiment's colonel's flag which I have added to your gallery above. There are many more elaborate examples at Category:Colors of the Royal French Infantry (Colonels). I think you're right that it would be difficult to distinguish them from a plain white flag, so I had a quick Google search for any examples where a white regimental colour might have been mistaken for a flag of surrender or truce, but without success. Perhaps the answer lies in the formality of the 18th century battlefield, which tended to be conducted in rigid formations. If you saw a white flag being carried in the centre of an advancing French line, then it would be rather obvious, I suspect, that the battle was still very much in progress. But I'm guessing now; perhaps somebody will correct me if they know better. Alansplodge (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Civil disobedience

Someone told me "civil disobedience" was protected by the German constitution. I found some small support for the idea in the German article on on the subject (where it says that civil disobedience is not an offense or crime in itself), but not as much as I would like. Does anyone know of any support for such a notion? Star Lord - 星王 (talk) 11:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Follow-up question: Is there a helpdesk on the German wikipedia side? Star Lord - 星王 (talk) 11:27, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but Civil disobedience or de:Ziviler Ungehorsam treat the concept in much detail and the German article refers to article #20, section 4, of the German constitution "All Germans shall have the right to resist any person seeking to abolish this constitutional order, if no other remedy is available" granting the Widerstandsrecht (right to resist), which is not the same as civil disobedience and also not the same as the right of revolution. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 11:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Pp.paul. !

Resolved

Star Lord - 星王 (talk) 11:52, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

As for your follow-up question, the reference desk in the German Wikipedia can be found here. --Viennese Waltz 07:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Cheese production in Togo

Can you tell me about cheese production in Togo? --Stafallordeireshire (talk) 15:00, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Cheese production is limited in Togo because the entire country lies within the range of the tsetse fly, which transmits disease to all milk-producing livestock, making it difficult to raise such livestock. The cheese that is produced there is mainly wagasi. Marco polo (talk) 18:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. --Stafallordeireshire (talk) 18:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

This site contains information on cheese production in Africa, and this is an article (from 1996, unfortunately) about cheese production in Benin. Tevildo (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Ask Dr. Blofeld nicely and I'm sure he'll start an article about it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I think Stafall is pulling our legs in picking an obscure topic, I'm not sure they even produce cheese in Togo, though it shares many traits with Benin so it's possible that wagasi (which I started) is also produced there. I'm sure we could manage an article on Cheese production in Africa.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:24, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

The UN FAO statistics [6] show that Togo had a milk production of 12756 tonnes in 2011 and a cheese production of 262 tonnes (which would use about 1/5 of all milk produced). They had production of 0.04 kg/capita/year, compared to, for example, the U.S. which produced 15.4 kg/capita or France which produced 24.13 kg/capita. Rmhermen (talk) 21:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

does zhong kui carry a book? maybe the book of life and death?

any pictures of him holding the book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.60.126.54 (talk) 16:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article about Zhong Kui. You can also use "Google Images" to search for images of him. --Jayron32 16:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Handing someone an item in Japan

According to Etiquette in Japan, it's considered bad manners to hand someone his business card using just one hand. Equally, it is consider offensive to give a cashier the cash for an item, when there is a tray to put the money.

Is this all that there is about handing an item with one hand? Can't this rule be generalized to handing all objects? So, if at the airport, someone has to produce his ID, would he use one or two hands? And what if someone asks for a pen?--Jubilujj 2015 (talk) 18:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm not Japanese or particularly polite, so can't be too sure, but I see differences. The first two things have to do with building and maintaining a business relationship, the latter two don't. More important to consider the feelings of people who can decide whether to buy your stuff or a competitor's. Customer satisfaction plays no part in whether an authority figure cards you, unless you get into bribery levels of satisfaction, which are frowned upon by polite society. Likewise, a person without a pen is going to need to borrow a pen, regardless. The customer is always right but beggars can't be choosers. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:49, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

Committing a crime on an international border..?

What if I was to commit a crime on an international border, such as public indecency? Let's say I committed public indecency on a tripoint border, with one leg in Afghanistan, one leg in Pakistan and my arms in China,. Which country would arrest me? --Spoœekspaar (talk) 18:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, your bottom would be pointed towards Pakistan and Afghanistan, while you are bended towards China. I am pretty sure the Chinese would recognize your bow as a sign of appreciation and let you go with it.

The question is still who would get you, Pakistan or Afghanistan? If the Afghans take you, they could use you as Bacha bazi, if you are of proper age.

I suppose the two countries would have to debate who is to get you, but as things are in international politics, you'll probably would end up in Pakistan, which is the strongest country.

Do not take this as legal advice. Consult with a lawyer before exposing yourself in public. --YX-1000A (talk) 20:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

It would depend on where you went afterward. Nobody would try to extradite you for such a minor crime. That'll be $1000, plus $25 for disbursements.Clarityfiend (talk) 23:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Aren't border guards typically armed? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:52, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Considering the tripoint amongst those countries is in the middle of, and high up in, the mountains, I doubt that there are very many border guards anywhere near there. Dismas|^(talk) 01:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

If so, then the OP is unlikely to be arrested - unless he foolishly posts a picture of it, as with a recent case in one of the middle east countries. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

That case was in Malaysia, not in the Middle East. [7] --Xuxl (talk) 09:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Technically, the border is a line with no width. So it is impossible for a human being to be precisely on the border. The exhibitionist is therefore committing his crime in both (or all three) countries simultaneously and subject to prosecution in all of them, if it is their wish to proceed with meting out punishment. --Xuxl (talk) 09:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

If there are no guards, who would arrest him? And if there are guards, and they're armed, they might just decide to use that poor sap for target practice. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

The unfortunate lady was on a mountain but in the middle of the country. Here, if a border guard approached the thing to do would be to retreat into one of the two countries he was not a border guard of. This is a well - known ploy. The City of London has its own police force (their officers have a ridge on their helmets so they're easily distinguishable). If you descend into Liverpool Street Station you're confronted with a different police force but that's a different story. I read that the working girls in Middlesex Street (which is where the Petticoat Lane market is held, across from the station), when approached by City of London police officers would retreat to the far pavement (the city boundary runs down the middle of the road) where they were safe, as this was "the Essex side of the road". Now Essex is a big county, but it doesn't extend further than the River Lee, which is some miles away. Middlesex Street would have been the boundary of the Metropolitan Borough of Stepney, situated in - you guessed it - Middlesex, appropriately enough. 89.240.30.153 (talk) 09:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

If there's a border guard for each of the three countries, each of the armed, either they hit the target from three directions, or they decide amongst themselves which country to turn him over to. In the case described immediately above, in the US (at least) when someone is observed committing a crime, the police might alert the police of the neighboring jurisdiction. In both hypotheses, the criminal is basically screwed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It depends on the crime. The jurisdiction of the English courts does not extend into Scotland, and vice versa. So if someone gets a parking ticket just south of the border but they live in, say, Gretna Green, which is in Scotland, the English council is pretty much screwed as far as getting its money is concerned. 89.240.30.153 (talk) 10:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It's not as simple as that; apparently, parking fines for private property in England are enforceable because of the Freedom of Protections Act 2012 which is specific to England and Wales; it is unenforceable in Scotland as there is no equivalent legislation there. [8] According to our Law enforcement in the United Kingdom article, "Territorial police constables have certain powers of arrest in countries other than the one they were attested in." BTW, whatever the situation was a century ago, the City of London Police now regularly attend calls in the neighbouring Metropolitan Police divisions and vice versa, so I wouldn't bet on using Middlesex Street as an escape route. Alansplodge (talk) 12:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I thought you might have guessed from my use of the word "council" that I had in mind something like a motorist stopping on the main A whatever that runs north from Carlisle through Gretna Green to (presumably) Dumfries and beyond (although no doubt the name of the road changes at the border). 89.240.30.153 (talk) 13:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

There is no A-road crossing the border at that point. Historically, it was the A74, but that road was converted to a motorway during the late 20th century, with the motorway being designated the M6 on the England side and the A74(M) on the Scotland side. The original A74 roadway now crosses the border as the B7076. Marco polo (talk) 16:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Regrettably, police and local authority parking tickets are issued under the Road Traffic Act 1991 which applies to the whole Kingdom. [9] Alansplodge (talk) 16:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Does England have a process for impounding vehicles of scofflaws? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes the police can do it. The courts can also confiscate property from people who have been convicted of a crime, if the property is a "benefit ... obtained from crime" - e.g. a fancy car bought from the proceeds of drug-dealing. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

And returning to statutory parking tickets (technically "Penalty Charge Notices"), failure to pay is eventually referred to a Certificated Enforcement Agent or "bailiff", who can seize property (which could be a car) equal in value to the amount owed, plus the bailiff's own fee. [10] Alansplodge (talk) 16:46, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

There's a new law which is going to be brought in saying that if people have unexplained wealth the onus is on them to prove they acquired it legitimately. This is copied from legislation in Ireland and some other countries. Does this mean that if enquiries go unanswered the "proceeds of crime" procedure can be set in motion? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would have thought that there is no mechanism for distraining on property in Scotland on foot of a PCN issued by an English council. Some people go on holiday to places like Italy and months later get a bill in the post for a traffic violation. Am I right that they don't have to pay unless they return to the country? As for bailiffs, I think it hilarious that County Court litigants who want redress against somebody have to apply for a "Warrant of Execution". I know they used to hang people for stealing a sheep but this seems to be over the top. 89.240.30.153 (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

See: Judgment of Solomon as a precedent. If the various nations can't agree on who has jurisdiction... cut the offender up and send each nation a piece so they all can have jurisdiction. Blueboar (talk) 18:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Or just use them for target practice. Each side can say he was trying to exit or enter the country illegally. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

That might be a bit tricky. Due to the pervert effects of ballistics and other effects of simple geometry the several parties of guards would be putting the lifes of their other colleagues at risk. --Askedonty (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

They would certainly have to take the topography into account. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Also Judges XIX v. 29. Concubines have a rough time of it. A video posted on the website of China's State Archives Administration details how during the Japanese invasion of the Shandong peninsula in the Sino - Japanese war an enemy sergeant killed and cut up his sex slave when food was scarce then used her flesh as a meal for his squadron, telling them it was regular meat from their battalion headquarters. 92.25.66.96 (talk) 10:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm no lawyer, but I believe that, at least when countries are on speaking terms, the treaties and agreements governing border control generally allow each country's law enforcement to operate on both sides of the border within a reasonable distance. I'm pretty sure you aren't the first person to come up with the idea of trying to get away with something just over the border, but in view of the bordering country's law enforcement. Partly of course this is just practical necessity; border guards can't feasibly do their jobs if they constantly have to be sure that they don't step foot over the official border line. And it's obviously silly to have a situation where you're being pursued, cross a border, and then law enforcement can only stop and stare dumbfounded. Now, if you're in Country A, break a law, and you're detained by an officer of Country B, I think they just hand you over to Country A's law enforcement and they decide what to do with you. Similarly, if you break a law in Country A in view of an officer of Country B, and then try to cross the border, they'll probably detain you and hand you back over to Country A. The general principle is that a country can deport you or refuse entry at its discretion. Of course, it's up to the country in which the law was broken to prosecute you, but the other country's border guard can certainly act as a witness. For some examples of this in practice, you might look at enclaves and exclaves. For example, I believe Italian law enforcement are allowed by treaty to operate inside both San Marino and Vatican City. Although not involving international borders, the situation in the U.S. with local and state law enforcement is also illustrative. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 21:51, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Well you don't necessarily need agreements, if you're a powerful country and the country you're enterring in to isn't powerful (or doesn't care enough) to make a real fuss. Hence why several countries including the US may kill people in some other country without the agreement/permission of that countries government, as mentioned in Hot pursuit. Nil Einne (talk) 13:32, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Children dancing around a crocodile

In David Reynolds' 1945 & the Wheelchair President there is a film clip of a city burning, with a statue of children dancing around a crocodile in the foreground. Where is/was this? DuncanHill (talk) 23:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

If this is the picture you saw then it is a scene from Stalingrad (Volgograd) taken during WWII. I found a batch of pics on the web but left this link as it has some explanation about the statue as well. MarnetteD|Talk 23:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

That's it! Thank you - and the article you linked helped me find Barmaley Fountain and Emmanuil Evzerikhin. DuncanHill (talk) 23:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome DuncanHill. The first time I can remember seeing the film clip of this scene was in an episode of The World at War. That was many moons ago now :-) I am glad that you found the other articles as well. It is nice when the interwebs can be used for learning. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 23:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

September 1

instigation of French revolution

Who instigated the french revolution? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iphonelover22 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

See Causes of the French Revolution. The causes were complex, and trying to pin down a single group of 'instigators' results in a gross oversimplification. Our article summarises major factors thus :

Cultural: The Enlightenment philosophy desacralized the authority of the King and the Church, and promoted a new society based on "reason" instead of traditions.

Social: The emergence of an influential bourgeoisie which was formally part of the Third Estate (commoners) but had evolved into a caste with its own agenda and aspired to political equality with aristocracy.

Financial: France's debt, aggravated by French involvement in the American Revolution, led Louis XVI to implement new taxations and to reduce privileges.

Political: Louis XVI faced virulent opposition from provincial parliaments which were the spearheads of the privileged classes' resistance to royal reforms.

Economic: The deregulation of the grain market, advocated by liberal economists, resulted in an increase in bread prices. In period of bad harvests, it would lead to food scarcity which would prompt the masses to revolt.

AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Surely the root cause of the French Revolution was the same as for most revolutions - a reaction against autocratic government, encapsulated in this instance by Marie Antoinette's comment on receiving the report that people were rioting because there was no bread: "Let them eat cake". 80.42.79.200 (talk) 11:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Of course, we have an article called "Let them eat cake", which say that the quote was first published in 1755 when Marie Antoinette was only 9 years-old and was first directly attributed to her in 1843, nearly half a century after her death. Andy has succinctly hit the various nails on the head above. An additional factor was all the French soldiers returning from the American War of Independence, describing how the locals were able to overthrow the king's army and establish a republic; the oppression of having to pay an extra thrupence for a packet of tea must have seemed a very minor imposition to the French, who paid as much tax as the nobility thought they could get away with on such staples as bread and salt. Alansplodge (talk) 12:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Navigation tower in harbor

Tried asking this a week ago at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Transport/Maritime transport task force#Navigation tower in harbor, but so far no responses there so I'm asking here. Is there a correct name for a marker tower in a harbor that serves a similar purpose to a buoy, as shown in the picture at right? - Jmabel | Talk 02:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

"Harbor marker tower", perhaps? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:22, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

Range marker? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:25, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

I see that there is Navigation Structures at Frankfort Harbor and Navigation Structures at Pentwater Harbor so it may be that Navigation structure, a redirect to beacon, is the term. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 07:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

The general term for a non-floating thing serving the same function as a buoy is a "beacon". Iapetus (talk) 09:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

What's the general term for the light on top of them? InedibleHulk (talk) 09:55, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

We have an article on this topic: Beacon. 92.25.66.96 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

For those not familiar with the term, a "zebra crossing" is the equivalent of a "crosswalk" in Australia, which is modelled on the American pedestrian crossing even to the extent of the "WALK" "DONT WALK" signs. Some of these Australian crosswalks are lethal at night - they are simply a band of black and white stripes across the road with no lights to warn drivers. Apart from the black and white stripes (hence "zebra crossing") there is a pole at either end with a flashing yellow globe on top, called a "Belisha beacon" from the Minister of Transport who introduced them after the war, Mr Hore - Belisha. The beacon is the light on top of the support, not the structure that it is fixed to. 92.25.66.96 (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

See Leslie Hore-Belisha, 1st Baron Hore-Belisha. Alansplodge (talk) 16:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Inexplicably, the initial proposal to call them "Hore beacons" did not find favour. {The poster formally known as 87.81.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 13:13, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Roxanne don't have to put out the red light! Besides, whores on rocky outposts are called sirens. Did you know the awooga horn that cartoons make when they see a fetching cartoon lass or that movie ships make before they sink is called a klaxon, not a siren? Or, that on cloudy nights (or silent nights when all is bright) a foghorn's sound essentially moves faster than light? InedibleHulk (talk) 14:02, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

I pretty firmly believe "beacon" is just the light on top (for obvious reasons) or, alternatively, something that sends a radio signal, and that a buoy can also have a beacon, so "beacon" is a bit of a non sequitur. FWIW, on Commons we have a general Commons:Category:Navigational aids (maritime navigation) (which is where I have this right now). It has a subcategory Commons:Category:Navigation buoys, but no category for things like this that are fixed rather than floating. This is presumably a range light or some other sort of channel marker, but that still doesn't deal with the fixed tower vs. buoy thing. - Jmabel | Talk 00:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

"Beacon tower" has some Google results, including one at our own Gribben Head article: "The 84 feet (26 m) high square beacon tower was erected by Trinity House in 1832 to distinguish the Gribben from Dodman Point and St Anthony’s Head, and thus make navigation into Fowey and the harbours of St Austell Bay safer. It was never lighted, but is painted in broad red and white bands as a daymark." So it seems that you can have a beacon without a light. Also, the Ordnance Survey map symbol for such a structure is simply labelled "beacon", although this may be purely British usage. Alansplodge (talk) 10:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

If the Ordnance Survey marked a shoreline structure without a light as a beacon that would surely be a serious matter - navigators would be looking for a light and accidents could result. "Beacon tower" does not demand the existence of a light, especially where the reference makes it clear that there is no light. I don't see how you can have a beacon without a light or radio transmitter, although the term for the latter would normally be "radio beacon". 80.42.79.200 (talk) 12:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

The unlit tower linked above is indeed marked by the OS with a "beacon" symbol: type "Menabilly" into the search field this map - there is an option to view as an OS map on the tool bar at the top left. Note that OS maps are not intended for maritime navigation - you need an Admiralty chart for that. Alansplodge (talk) 12:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

If a mariner is using an OS map rather than a nautical chart, then and accidents he has as a result are his own fault. To answer InedibleHulk's question, the term for the light on top of a buoy or beacon is a "light". The term for a non-light marker on a buoy or beacon is a "topmark". The general term for buoys and beacons is "sea mark" or "navigation mark". See sections P and Q of [the international list of nautical charting symbols ] for details. Iapetus (talk) 15:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

And finally, see our Day beacon article: "A day beacon is an unlighted nautical sea mark. Typically, day beacons mark channels whose key points are marked by lighted buoys. Day beacons may also mark smaller navigable routes in their entirety. They are the most common aid to nautical navigation in shallow water as they are relatively inexpensive to install and maintain." Alansplodge (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Sort of unlighted, anyway. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:34, September 4, 2015 (UTC)

One crime, two sentences for runaway sailor?

One day, a certain H.H. O'Bryan decided his master's ship seemed unseaworthy and decided to stay on land. He made a good call, because that ship foundered on the voyage. But a contract's a contract, so three weeks before things played out as he thought they might, he was sentenced to hard labour. Not 21 days of it, but 14 days and 7 days.

What's up with that? Could a sailor be charged with two counts of not proceeding to one ship? Were these consecutive or concurrect sentences? Was one a mistake quickly realized as too harsh/lenient, but kept recorded for formality's sake? Did H.H. O'Bryan have a brother named H.H. O'Bryan who concurred that the boat shan't float? Simple clerical error? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:19, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

Wrong link. Perhaps you meant this one. No comment otherwise. --65.94.50.17 (talk) 04:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that's the one! Stumbled into this whole mess trying to find out if a "mutiness" was a female mutineer, accidentally left a virtual paper trail. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:35, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

September 2

Communion and Political Opinion in the Catholic Church

From time to time I have heard of people being denied communion by the Catholic church simply because they held political opinions (or supported political candidates) that the Catholic church didn't like. Is this standard practice within the Catholic church? Are there any written rules within the Catholic church that specifically permit this? 98.116.86.229 (talk) 03:34, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Canon 915 is the place to start. Grants permission to deny permission. There's a very long answer, too, of course. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:49, September 2, 2015 (UTC)

It depends on what is meant by "political opinion". For example, birth control and abortion are two topics which are political questions in certain countries, but which are also covered by Catholic Dogma: One cannot be considered to be in compliance if one willfully lives in a state of sin, including supporting political policies that the Catholic church considers to be sins. So, it depends on the particular "political" issue. Can you be denied communion for supporting legal abortion? Yes, but only because the Catholic church considers abortion not a purely political issue. I know of no Catholic church where a priest would deny communion for other political issues, such as whether or not you support a particular school funding referendum or whether or not you vote for a specific candidate for office. But yes, there are matters which the Catholic church expects you to believe before you can take communion. That's what religions do. --Jayron32 15:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I think you don't mean that last sentence. Lots of religions do nothing like communion whatsoever. Lots of Christian sects will give communion to anyone who wants it. For instance the United Methodists "... have no tradition of refusing any who present themselves desiring to receive" - [11]. So rejecting people from taking communion based on their belief or actions is not a general feature of religion. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

There are religions in the world that have NO beliefs they expect you to agree with? Belief in a doctrine is generally part of the whole religion thing, and to be a part of that religion, they generally wish you to also believe it as well. --Jayron32 19:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

That's not what I said. As I say below, I was perhaps being over literal in my reading, sorry about that. When I first read the last two sentences you wrote above, it seemed like you were saying that demanding adherence to a specific belief in order to receive communion is a general feature of religion, and that's just not true. An atheist can take communion at a Methodist church, and not a catholic church. An atheist can be a part of Unitarian_Universalism along with a Satanist, a Pagan, a Christian, etc. You can't really expect members of a UU church to share that many beliefs, but that's sort of their whole thing, they're really into inclusion. I suppose many people would not consider UU to be a "real" religion, but I don't want to play no true scotsman right now :) SemanticMantis (talk) 20:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

But many or most religions do have something along the lines of excommunication, which is in a lot of ways ultimately the same thing. And, yes, some of those other groups have expelled or excommunicated individuals in whatever ways they use to do so for what some outsiders might call "political" reasons. This will probably be most frequently true to older groups which others have schismed away from. Groups of individuals who have been, in a way, excommunicated from other groups are probably less likely to do any excommunicating themselves.

Also, particularly within the Catholic Church, the taking of communion during mass is indicative of the individual being in agreement and compliant with the central teachings of that church. And that church has taken a stand that what others might call purely political matters, including birth control, abortion, capital punishment in some cases, and other topics are inconsistent with the teachings of that church, and that promoting these activities, which in this instance are generally counted as mortal sins by that church body, and even remotely supporting such actions is something that church, and its recognized and adherent members, cannot support. John Carter (talk) 19:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Sure, many religions kick people out. I think OP has good answers and refs at this point, and perhaps I was being a little too picky in my literal reading of Jayron's last sentence. In-group favoritism and Out-group homogeneity are probably also relevant to general religious inclusion/exclusion practices. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

There have been high profile cases of refusal of communion, such as the Rainbow Sash Movement people. They would turn up at a church wearing their sashes that proclaimed their homosexuality, daring the priest to deny them en masse. Well, he took the dare, and they promptly complained of discrimination. I wonder why. Not. Now, if they'd all just turned up without their sashes, as many other homosexuals do all the time, they wouldn't have been denied anything. Priest can't be expected to be able to identify the murderers, rapists, sodomites, politicians, lawyers, used car salesmen, Wikipedia editors, or what have you in their congregations just by looking. But if one carries a big sign identifying one's lubricious doings, the priest can hardly be expected to ignore it, because that would be tantamount to condoning the uncondoneable. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

That's all true, but there is an expectation of earnestness in these exchanges. The Catholic church expects a "free conscience" in people who take communion; that is they expect that people who take communion to be in full compliance with Catholic doctrine and beliefs. People can, and do, take communion despite this, but Priests who are in knowledge of someone who they know to be out of compliance of Catholic doctrine are allowed (even expected) to deny access to communion, just as earnest Catholics who know themselves to be outside of church doctrine, either through their actions or beliefs, to voluntarily refrain from communion. Of course people can lie, mask, or deny their beliefs or actions in order to take communion, and they'll still get a wafer and a sip; it doesn't mean that the church teaches they should do that. Earnestness is expected on both sides of the rail, and if either the priest or the communicant knows that they are not "right" with the church, for whatever reason, it is not unreasonable that they refrain from communion. One cannot stop liars, but one can at least have the expectation of earnestness for believers. --Jayron32 01:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Are not the Catholics and the Orthodox free to communicate in each other's churches now that the eleventh - century excommunications have been revoked? The Orthodox are not bound by many of these political dogmas. As for getting a wafer and a sip in a Catholic church, in which country does this happen? Leaders pay lip service to the idea of giving Communion in both kinds but I am not aware that any priests have actually implemented it. 80.42.79.200 (talk) 11:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Note also as I remarked before, even if the priest is fairly sure you shouldn't be receiving communion, it doesn't mean they will deny communion. There is recognition that sometimes a public denial may cause unnecessary scandal. I suspect an example would be if a person had told the priest that their spouse left them and is banging their same sex secretary day and night. If it's a small congregation, perhaps the priest will recognise the spouse. But even if they genuinely believe that the person was telling the truth and that the spouse is obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin, they probably still won't deny communion initially, instead privately approaching the spouse and reminding them of the churches teachings. If the spouse continues to try and receive communion, perhaps only then will they deny it. See [12] for example. <pAs for the Rainbow Sash Movement, I believe this is distinct from the other denials. While those who are in same sex relationships may be be "obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin", I don't believe the church is necessarily willing to say the same for those who simply disagree with the churches teachings and who are supporting their children/parents/siblings/random straight people/whatever. Despite what our article suggests, from my previous research e.g. [13], I believe the sash is also worn by such people. The reason for the denial is instead because the chuch feels it's not "to use the reception of Communion as an act of protest" [14], rather than because the sash is a sign the person is "obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin". (Well okay, it's possible that using the receiption of Communion as an act of protest could be "obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin", but I don't think that's the statement, and I think it's hard to argue wearing it once is "obstinately persevering" too.)

In fact, even in the case of abortion or euthanasia, as per our article Canon 915 and other sources, my understanding it isn't simply those who disagree with the teachings. Rather, it's those who are considered to be part of it, doctors who carry out such procedures obviously, but also politicians who are considered to be "formal cooperation" in the practices via their support of laws which allow it. (Although the later is particularly controversial.) Perhaps a prominent blogger, or even a wikipedia editor who strives to remove excessive Catholic content from articles on the topics could be considered to be cooperating in the practices, but I'm not sure if some random person has a discussion on the topic with their priest and rigirously disagrees with the church's views, even if they go as far as to say if someone were to ask them they would say so, would be denied communion by even most hardline priests.

Nil Einne (talk) 15:10, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Degrees from developing contries not recognized?

A Nigerian immigrant I know told me he has a 4-year degree in Mechanical Engineering from a Nigerian university, but it is worthless and not recognized here in Ireland. Why is this? Are the univerities in Nigeria really that bad, or is this due corruption/ignorance on the part of Irish authorities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.81.124.1 (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

It will depend on the employer or academic institution in Ireland, as well as the specific institution in Nigeria. See Higher_education_accreditation and List_of_recognized_higher_education_accreditation_organizations. It may be that the specific engineering degree simply did not come from a properly accredited institution, and the fact that it's in Nigeria is secondary. On the other hand, it could be some form of casual racism/xenophobia at work. Without knowing any specifics, it's impossible to say for sure.

Here are some lists of accredited universities in Nigeria [15] [16]. I don't think those lists are highly reliable (WP:RS), but you should be able to look at each of these (or any other specific) universities and learn what their accreditation status is, and what body granted it. Hope that helps, SemanticMantis (talk) 14:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Has your friend looked at taking any of the engineering examinations? Regulation and licensure in engineering covers the various requirements around the world, but in many places, one must take and pass certain examinations to be a licensed engineer. It may be allowed for him to take and pass the exam, even if his degree is not properly accredited. In the U.S., engineers have to pass two exams: the Fundamentals of Engineering Examination which is taken prior to any engineering employment, followed by their Principles and Practice of Engineering Examination after some number of years working on the job, to become fully licensed. Further exams are available to get additional endorsements in various specialties, for example the Structural Engineering exam for civil engineers. Has your friend looked into such requirements in Ireland? If he passes the requisite exams, it may not matter as much where his degrees come from. --Jayron32 15:17, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

It might make sense to check the website of Quality and Qualifications Ireland. For whatever reason, their database does not indicate recognition of engineering degrees from Nigeria, although it does list other Nigerian qualifications. It might be that a determination was made that engineering education in Nigeria is not up the same standard as comparable education in Ireland. However, that website has a number of pages advising on how to gain recognition for foreign qualifications. Marco polo (talk) 20:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

My brother went to medical school in some developing country called the "United States", yet he can't practice in Canada without going through some sort of gyrations. (Now I admit Canadians have become more highly evolved in order to play hockey better, but still ...) Clarityfiend (talk) 21:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Australia does not allow people trained at overseas institutions to simply start practising upon arrival by brandishing a degree certificate. I know this is particularly true of medical degrees, but I think it extends to all fields. They have to at the very least sit examinations to prove their skills and knowledge and experience match those of locally trained persons. Often they have to do more training. Similar protocols apply in other countries. Our article Validation of foreign studies and degrees is pathetically woeful. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

That's strange. I see Australian firms recruiting directly out of Irish colleges.--88.81.124.1 (talk) 22:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

So what? Just because they are recruiting students from Ireland doesn't mean said recruits are exempt from Australia's qualifications.--Jayron32 23:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Doctors who wish to work in Australia and are registered in New Zealand, the UK, Ireland, the United States and Canada, because of the quality of their qualifications and training are fast-tracked through the system. Eligible source countries can opt out — Singapore and South Africa have done so to minimise workforce loss. Once the source country's registration documents have been processed and visas obtained then that's more or less it. The Australian Health Practioner Regulation Agency issues limited registration for supervised practice to the foreign doctor. No competency examinations are deemed necessary. --Bill Reid | (talk) 10:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

September 3

Negotiating Kentucky's admission to the Union

Kentucky was a part of Virginia until it became a separate state on June 1st, 1792. Although Kentucky was not admitted to the Union until well over a year after the admission of Vermont, nonetheless the act of Congress admitting Kentucky to the Union was passed two weeks before the act admitting Vermont. It was passed on February 4th, 1791. I recall reading (pardon the expression) "somewhere" that the reason the law passed in February 1791 specified that the new state was not to be admitted until June 1792 is that politicians in Kentucky wanted time to negotiate various details of their state constitution and laws. So my question is: Which details? And are there citable sources? Michael Hardy (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

The constitution was finalized in December of 1791, and approved by congress in February of 1792, before final admission to the Union in June of the same year. It's given on the last page of this book chapter, which also goes into great detail about the debates surrounding Kentucky's separation from Virginia and quest for statehood. James Madison also wrote about this quest [17], but before statehood was achieved, so he does not address its conclusion. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Minority governments in Canada must include the plurality party?

From Minority governments in Canada:

   "In Canada's parliamentary system of responsible government, minority governments occur when no party has a majority of seats in the legislature, and the party with a plurality forms government."

Is this actually true? If I'm reading the sentence correctly, it implies that any government must include the party with the plurality.

If it's true, what happens when there are multiple plurality parties?

For a simplification, imagine four wolves and six sheep. The four wolves form the Wolf Party, while three sheep form Sheep Party A and the other three form Sheep Party B. Since the Wolf Party has plurality, it can force, by the force of law, one of the Sheep Parties into forming a minor government with them, even though it's against the Sheep Party's interest to do so. It just doesn't make any sense. 222.248.3.31 (talk) 08:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Canada does not normally have coalition governments. In your example, the wolf party would form the government on its own, without the help of any sheep party. If the sheep parties cooperate to block the government's bills, the government's bills don't get passed. If they block important bills like the budget (a scenario known as loss of supply), or if they pass a motion of no confidence, the government collapses and a re-election occurs. --Bowlhover (talk) 08:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Seems like I got coalition government and minority government confused. 222.248.3.31 (talk) 08:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Also note in your example there is only one plurality - the wolves. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Bear in mind a agreements can be in forms besides coalitions. Although this doesn't seem to happen in Canada either, it's possible for a minority government to have confidence and supply agreements with other parties ensuring that the government survives provided the agreement survives and the respective parties have enough seats. The other part/ies agree to protect the government and its budgets, but not necessarily any particular bill the government wants to push through. (I.E. The government needs to win the support of the other parties, be it the ones they have an agreement with or the opposition to get their policy through.) This protection could be in the form of supporting the government in confidence and supply issues, or simply abstaining in such issues, depending on the precise allocation of seats. (Of course, even without an agreement, a party may announce they will support or more likely abstain on such issues if some party, probably the one with a plurality forms the government.) Nil Einne (talk) 16:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

The article is just wrong. I've fixed it to say "Typically, but not necessarily". In Ontario following the 1985 election, the Progressive Conservatives were reduced to a minority, but had a plurality. When they called for a vote of confidence after their throne speech, they lost. The New Democratic Party had agreed to support the Liberals without creating a formal coalition. With the consent of the lieutenant governor, the Liberals under David Peterson formed a government and held power for 2 years before a new election was called—in which they gained a majority and the NDP as well as the PCs lost seats. --65.94.50.17 (talk) 23:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Yugoslavia.

Why did no world leaders attend the coronation of Jean-Bédel Bokassa of the Central African Empire? They were invited to an elaborate ceremony of a new and upcoming country. --Spoœekspaar (talk) 19:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

From Jean-Bédel_Bokassa#Proclamation_of_the_Empire

“ Despite generous invitations, no foreign leaders attended the event. By this time, many people inside and outside the CAE thought Bokassa was insane. The Western press, mostly in France, the UK, and USA, considered him a laughingstock, and often compared his eccentric behavior and egotistical extravagance with that of another well-known eccentric African dictator, Idi Amin of Uganda. ”

(emphasis mine) I'll admit a few flags could be thrown in there, but it seems pretty clear to me that no world leaders wanted to be associated with him. I found a few California newspaper articles mentioning him, but they seem to all be printed after his coronation [18]. You can look through Wikipedia:List_of_online_newspaper_archives if you want to see what other countries may have been saying at the time. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Fascinating that no one wanted to be associated with him, though. Even the most hermetic kingdoms usually have a few friends, if only for economic reasons. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:55, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

"Yugoslavia?" Is it non-sequitur week? Asmrulz (talk) 13:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I wondered the same thing Asmrulz. The only thing I could think of was that Yugoslavia did send an official delegation to the event, but there is nothing about that in the article. MarnetteD|Talk 13:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The Foreign Office did not send Idi Amin an invitation to the Commonwealth Conference. When he said he was coming anyway, they told him he wouldn't be allowed into the building where it was being held, considering that the Queen would be opening it. Come to that, he probably wouldn't have been allowed into the country.

I heard of a man who lived at Zurich Airport for two years. I believe he originally came from Ethiopia - I don't know if someone eventually relented and gave him a passport. 78.145.16.226 (talk) 13:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Odysseus and Achilles' armor

In the Odyssey, Homer tells a bit about Odysseus's victory over Ajax in the competition for Achilles' armor. However, in the period of his 10 year journey home, no mention, as far as I recall, is made of him ever possessing the armor, wearing it, or what became of it. If he did have the armor at the beginning of his journey home, he must have some point, probably early on, lost it. (This must be true, for he certainly wouldn't have had it after his raft sinks and he swims to shore and then encounters Nausicaa, when he must use a tree branch for modesty. My question is, are there ancient Greek writers who used this unexplained part of Homer's story as a springboard for creating a new adventure, in which Odysseus perhaps fights a battle while wearing the armor and then later perhaps it falls off the ship or just is stolen, for example? Thanks, Rich2601:681:4902:31B8:95CC:E49C:E8F:3502 (talk) 04:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Read about Achilles' heel. --Aspro (talk) 12:25, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

No, Achilles' heel is (as that article says) a later addition and not something present in Homer. Read Achilles#Fate_of_Achilles.27_armor instead, where you'll see that Odysseus gave it to Neoptolemus, Achilles' son. --Aquillion (talk) 12:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The love that dare not speak its name

I know that the above is an old euphemism for homosexuality that comes from the poem "Two Loves" by Lord Alfred Douglas, published in 1894 (WP has articles on just about everything)... several years ago, I came across a somewhat snarky comment about Gay rights activism that went something along the lines of "'The love that dare not speak its name' now won't shut up!"... I am trying to discover who originally made that snarky comment. Blueboar (talk) 13:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)