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

September 29

Voting intention polls

Look at Opinion polling in the next United Kingdom general election there is variation of several percentage points for different polls taken on the same day. What is the margin of error of these polls? If the difference isn't within that margin, what causes it? --Tango (talk) 01:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

In Statistics we learn that the Margin for Error is part of a Confidence Interval, and in this case the Confidence Interval is for the Proportion of Voters out of the whole number sampled, compared to a control source, say, the actual vote at the last election, which itself would be as true a poll of any nation as ever one could get. The complicated thing here, is that there are a number of political parties, and each proportion for each one has to be compared with how the party did at the previous election. One concern is how representative the poll is of the British population as a whole, but another thing I thought of, is the fact that each poll is done at random, within the guidelines of making it representative. My thought would be to poll the same people every time, and see how their opinions changed over five or so years. These people, preferably great in number, say, for a country the size of the United Kingdom, even as many as 100, 000, like what the US might refer to as a type of " Neilsen Voter " would be replaced gradually as some of them pass away or move on, just as occurs in the country as a whole. After all, the General Election will still be having most of those who voted last time in there, so the overall population only changes gradually over time. Certainly most of the electorate that brought Clement Attlee in at War's end were not there to return Mrs. Thatcher to power after the Falklands. So the margin is due to the uncertainty that those one has polled really do reflect the actual national opinion as it is, even if representative in many ways, since people are individuals, and even variables within an election. An analogy might be understood. Think of those polled as a sample of the whole population. Imagine then a factory making three inch nails by machine. Even then there will be variation in the lengths of these nails to say ± ⅛ ", or so. If the population of the nails is large enough, they become normally distributed, taking on the shape of a bell like curve, with the greater frequency of average ( mean ) values near the middle, and the outliers - either uncharacteristically large or uncharacteristically small, towards the ends. If we take a sample of nails, and a large enough one, then the distribution of this sample may mimic that of the population, with the same or a similar mean value and such. But how can we be sure ? We can't - that is why the statistician analyising the poll calcuates a margin of error or uncertainty, such that, to a given percentage of certainty, we can be confident that the proportion of those voting for the parties in real life are those shown in the poll. In calculating averages, this is to do with standard error, which is the value of one of the measures of spread for the data, divided by the square root of the number of respondents - the sample size. For proportions, and exspecially multiple ones, it will be more complicated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopherlilly (talk • contribs) 05:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC) The Russian Christopherlilly (talk) 05:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you are incorrect. The results of the previous election and the size of the population shouldn't have any significant impact on the margin of error. See Sample size. I just don't know how to work out what the margin of error actually is for this kind of poll (if it was just a yes/no poll I could do it, but it isn't). --Tango (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

No, matey, I am always right ! Just kidding. I get what you mean. If your sample is greater than thirty, then, yes, it should have a Normal distribution similar to the overall population. My concern is, why leave it to chance ? There of course has to be a balance between getting as accrate an answer as possible and not spending too much money and time on conducting too large a survey. I am sure those who take a poll on the eve of the election then go and compare their results to the actual vote to see either how wrong or right they were, or how fickle the electorate really is. In New Zealand we used to call them Heylen Polls, but now each of the two major networks, Government owned ( but not controlled ) TVNZ and the private TV3 network, will each do their own. Former PM Jim Bolger didn't trust polls - of course, as I said, the best poll is the election itself. They should be as often and as democratic as possible, so that only then does the Government have a mandate to do what they want for the next few years, without consulting us. I cannot think of how to do this either. But certainly it does have to do with confidence intervals and the Z values relevant to tables for the Normal Distribution. Of course, this distribution concerns Party alleigeance and is qualitative, as much as anything else. Keep thinking. The Russian.Christopherlilly (talk) 04:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Whilst I know nothing about the specifics of these polls, my guess is that they all have a sampling bias and thus should not be taken at face-value. Given they seem to come from different newspapers, this appears rational to assume.--Leon (talk) 13:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

They are commissioned by newspapers, but they aren't done by them, they are done by independent polling organisations. I would hope the bias is reduced as far as is possible. (The newspapers then choose the results from the poll that most support the point they want to make, of course, but I look at the polls themselves, not the newspaper articles based on them.) --Tango (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't mean to be cynical(!) but why do you believe that the bias is minimized in as much as it is possible, given who commissions them?!--Leon (talk) 16:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Because ICM, YouGov, Ipsos MORI etc are reputable organisations, who pride themselves on providing accurate, rather than partisan data. Whilst there is some dispute (e.g. YouGov having nicknames such as 'WhateverYousay,Gov', and a reputation for polling to the right), for the most part they wouldn't be believed if they let the leanings of whomever hired them influence their data. As part of this, all UK pollsters release their full data set, questions asked and crosstabs, to allow anyone else to analyse their information and determine its neutrality - short of lying about the raw data, which would be considered heinous, it's quite difficult for that bias to be present without being obvious. --Saalstin (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

(ec) Because most of the polling agencies are members of the British Polling Council, which has rules intended to increase the confidence people can have in the results. While they are commissioned by newspapers that often have biases, the agencies doing the polls are independent and, I would hope, have some professional pride. --Tango (talk) 17:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I could probably find a reference, but there are known variances between the methodology used by ICM, Mori etc, in converting "raw" poll results into the published figures. Given a sample of ~ 1000 people who have answered the survey, they will have to adjust the proportions of respondents (age, sex etc) to match the proportions in the population. Some "pollsters" will adjust for each respondent's answer to "How certain are you to vote in the next election?" so as to reduce the weight of those who may not vote. Some will ask "How did you vote in the last general election?" and weight the sample to match the historically true results. Or they may adjust the answers given by the sample voters by a formula designed to correct for the supposed tendency of right wing voters to lie more than left wing ones.

So as you can see there are enough factors to explain the differences between polls. If you study the table, you may detect the consistent variation between the respective series of polls. Sussexonian (talk) 22:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Anyone rem Australian radio show the Argonauts Club?

I joined the Argonauts Club (an Australian radio show that ended in the early 1970s) when I was about 13. I was Democritus 48, and looked forward to the show, 5:30 p.m. each week day. I rowed Jason’s trireme with enthusiasm but not enough enthusiasm to get to Golden Bar or Serpent’s Tooth. What I remember most (now) is the quality and depth of the show’s segments on music and the arts, far in advance of what anyone expects a child to absorb these days. And of course those sing-a-longs and the Muddle Headed Wombat and Jimmy’s antics, and the stable loveable Mac, surely the most comforting father figure one could imagine. Until Dad bought a TV.

I recently added some comments to the very brief article in Wikipedia on the Argonauts Club, and I am going to make it a little project to get a decent article going there. I would be so happy to hear from anyone who was a member, or just a listener. I do remember Mac and Jimmy well, and you can read some of my initial notes, rather unreliable memories, on that Talk Page to the Wikipedia article I mentioned. I will circulate your contributions to me to other people who write, so we can all hear what others recall, and what pieces of this radio history we can put together. There will never be anything like it again. We listened to Phidias, while today’s children watch Big Brother, and now much worse on the Internet.

My email (deleted for privacy)

Let’s share some memories! Myles325

Yes, I realize that privacy is not what you are looking for but neither, I suspect, do you want spam. If you sign your post (with 4 tildes, or click on the signature block on the edit screen), people can contact you at your talk page. (I have signed for you this time.) Enable your email function on your talk page, and anyone interested can contact you that way, too. To the extent that you are gathering sourced information for the WP article, this is an unusual but likely acceptable way to go about getting others interested. To the extent that you are setting up a fan club or social club, it is not. // BL \\ (talk) 04:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I wrote the above thinking Myles325 was a new user. I should have checked the linked page first. Miles has been on Wikipedia since early 2007, so, if anything in what I have written sounds inapporpriate because of your long service, Miles, I apologize. // BL \\ (talk) 04:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, Bille. (That's getting you back for calling me Miles, (;|) ). I am trying to gather PUBLISHED information on this club, which was, for its time, a very popular and remarkably intelligent children's program. I think that Australian history and culture is poorly represented in WP, but that is nobody's fault except our own. Myles325a (talk) 02:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Myles, I certainly remember the program. I was never an Argonaut, though; I was just content to listen in, which I did on countless occasions. My memories of it these days are rather unreliable, so I don't think I'd have much if anything to contribute. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Educational Pioneer

Back in about 1980, in our Intermediate ( 11 - 12 year old ) class, our teacher suddenly one morning singled out certain students and gave them harder exercises and appeared to treat them unfairly. He later revealed this was an experiment based upon what a US schoolteacher had done years before. I later saw her on a news story also, and the idea was that she was trying to prove that if children are treated badly by a teacher based on say race, then of course they will not perform as well, and their race has no bearing on performance. ( This assumes all children have the same schools regardless of race, and that the only difference is a teacher's prejudices - of course, black children for example will do worse also when their schools are not up to the standard they should be. Racists try to show how non whites are inherently inferior, forgetting that if people aren't given equal chances, then naturally there will be differences ) My question is, what was this woman's name. where and when exactly was she, what inspired her to do what she did, and where is she now ? The Russian.Christopherlilly (talk) 05:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe she lived in the midwest, and was active about the 1960s —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopherlilly (talk • contribs) 05:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You're talking about Jane Elliott. See the article, and her web site at www.janeelliott.com, for further information. --Anonymous, 10:02 UTC, September 29, 2009.

See also The Third Wave. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 18:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Now it is all very clear. Our teacher those two years was a very insightful, intelligent man, who could see how pecking order occurs naturally in schools. Those he singled out were the better, more confident students who would not be as adversely affected by it. I kind of agree with what she did. My only concern is using children as an experiment, especially without their parents' permission. However, how else would she have gotten anyone's attention. Those opposed to her could complain, but perhaps they needed to get off their backsides and make sure all children received equal treatment in school. After all, Jane Elliott only carried out a test. Blacks and Hispanics among others were treated far worse for real in schools. I even recall a Jane Curtin ( isn't she lovely ) movie made in the nineties and set in 1975 about primarily Irish parents not wanting Black kids bussed into their schools. How quickly they forgot the words " Irishmen need not apply " which probably affected my Irish ancestors when some moved to England themselves. I also recall the Wave ( 1981 ). Shame we haven't had it on NZ TV since. Even here, Maoris and Pacific Islanders fall behind in education, in a society where Whites make the vast majority. But one Maori friend of mine has said that such inherent unfairness should not be used as an excuse to fail. What could I say ? I can't be bothered learning because I must be thick seeing I'm part Irish ? When in fact the Irish are among the best educated in Europe. In any case, help should be given to those who need it , and a level playing field during the test match that is our education. The Russian.Christopherlilly (talk) 04:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

UK/US drug bust in South America

[1] I have a few questions after reading this news article.

1. What is the UK navy and US coastguard doing in South America in the first place?
2. Why do they have authority to seize the cocaine, arrest the suspects and destroy the ship in a place that is not their territory?

thanks F (talk) 12:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The BBC article gives some more information.

1) "HMS Iron Duke's primary task, while on a six-month deployment, is to reassure and assist the people of the UK Overseas Territories during the hurricane season.

The warship, which was launched in 1991 and cost £140m to build, is also on stand-by to take part in anti-narcotics operations. "

2)They were in international waters. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 12:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up on (2): You may find our article on the UN Convention on the High Seas useful, as it sets out the rights of warships to pursue and combat piracy. I would guess that either another treaty has extended the same sort of rights to combating the drug trade or that this case was classified as piracy due to false registration or the like. — Lomn 13:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

For a similarly historic case of the U.S. doing something similar, but in the sovereign territory of another country, see Manuel Noriega. Basically, the U.S. Military went in and arrested the president of Panama on drug conspiracy charges. Going into a sovereign country, arresting their Head of State for breaking laws in your country, is the definition of chutzpah on an international scale. --Jayron32 04:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

"We are the cops of the world." →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 05:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Louis, Rhineland-Palatinate

Tamara Bach was born in 1976 in Limburg an der Lahn and grew up in Louis, Rhineland-Palatinate.

This is what the new article on Tamara Bach says, but I am unable to find Louis as a village or town in Germany. Can anyone help figure this out? --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The article in the German Wikipedia says that she was raised in Ludwigshöhe. Although, as the article on the town explains, its name does mean "Louis's Heights", I don't think we want to (partially) translate it in our article about Ms Bach. The appearance of "Louis" in the article is probably a result of someone's use of a computerized translation program. Deor (talk) 16:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I am the someone, using the Google translation program. I will make it Ludwigshöhe. Thanks for the help, there is a lot to learn when contributing to Wikipedia. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Naval presence on lakes

Do any countries maintain a naval presence on large lakes, such as the Great Lakes, Lake Victoria, Lake Titicaca, or perhaps the Caspian Sea? Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 14:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

See Bolivian Navy Googlemeister (talk) 14:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Also Swiss Navy--Saalstin (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

"Swiss Navy" is a brand of sex lubricant. :) Mac Davis (talk) 00:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

And Caspian Flotilla. Recury (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Any on the Great Lakes? Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 14:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The US Navy does seem to have some presence there, like the Naval Station Great Lakes. I'm sure Canada does too. Still looking for more info though. Recury (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Has there been anything resembling military hostility between the U.S. and Canada since the War of 1812? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 14:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

• Not seriously, no. There was a boundary dispute in 1859 nicknamed the Pig War, but cooler heads prevailed before any humans were hurt in that one. And anyway, "Canada" as we now understand the term was not involved either in that dispute or the War of 1812, as it did not exist until the confederation of Canada in 1867; the areas were British colonies before. (Even after confederation, Canada was not really independent until after World War I; see dominion, Chanak crisis, and Statute of Westminster.) --Anonymous, 20:55 UTC, September 29, 2009.

Looking through the Canadian Navy articles, I don't see a mention of anything on the Great Lakes. Now's our chance! Recury (talk) 14:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe that the Webster–Ashburton Treaty (or some other treaty) barred any sort of naval build-up on the Great Lakes by the United States or Canada. —Ed (talk • contribs) 14:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You're right, Ed, that the W-A Treaty is a part of the openness and demilitarization of that border, but the earlier treaty that first established the non-military character of the Great Lakes was the Rush–Bagot Treaty. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 21:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The only Canadian Forces naval facilities that actually operate warships appear to be on the coasts: Canadian Forces base#Navy. (The Canadian Coast Guard and other law enforcement agencies are generally responsible for search and rescue, customs, and other Great Lakes tasks.) In addition, the Naval Reserve operates a number of stone frigates at inland locations: List of Canadian Forces Naval Reserve divisions. At least one of these stations – HMCS York – is located on Lake Ontario. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

HMCS Prevost is on a large-ish river...Adam Bishop (talk) 04:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget the mighty Ohio Naval Militia, which consists of a few unarmed boats and about 30 volunteer sailors between the ages of 17 and 67. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 16:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

See http://www.uscg.mil/d9/. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

This dockyard has a couple of warships in case of American invasion. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Aye matey, we Bee ready if Tecumseth that. Arrrr! Have I missed International Talk Like a Pirate Day? Clarityfiend (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

During WWII, the US Navy needed a lot of flight decks for pilot training. So they converted two coal-burning paddlewheel passenger vessels into rudimentary aircraft carriers, Wolverine and Sable, and deployed them on the Great Lakes. These vessels carried no armament and no facilities for aircraft beyond their flight decks. The invasion of Canada was not on the program. PhGustaf (talk) 00:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Given the peaceful relations between Canada and the United states, having a naval/military presence on any of the Great Lakes is totally unnecessary. Instead, there is a "policing" presence that meets the needs of each country. If it ever became necessary for there to be a naval/military presence on the Great Lakes, I wonder how each country would get their respective naval forces on the Great Lakes - there are too many shared points (including the St.Lawrence River). However, it would be very possible (if not probable) that an American aircraft carrier parked near the mouth of the St. Lawrence (or even further away) would suffice to keep us Canucks on our own side of the lakes . . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.66.136.118 (talk) 00:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

In Clive Cussler's Night Probe!, I believe that Canada sends a destroyer and the United States sends a guided missile cruiser up the St. Lawrence... —Ed (talk • contribs) 00:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

The US Navy does built warships on the Great Lakes, Marinette Marine in Marinette, Wisconsin is on the Menominee River which empties into Lake Michigan. The most recent warships built there include the new Littoral combat ships USS Freedom (LCS-1) and USS Fort Worth (LCS-3). -MBK₀₀₄ 00:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

OK. BUT, are they used on the Great lakes for naval/military purposes or are they built (as described above) and then enter into naval/military service once on the oceans? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.66.136.118 (talk) 13:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Viscount Exmouth served on Lake Champlain during the American Revolutionary War. This is the main character Sir Edward Pellew from the Hornblower television series.
Sleigh (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

meal frequency

Why is it typical for Western societies to have 3 meals a day as opposed to 1? Are there any cultures that typically only have 1 meal a day (assuming they have sufficient food)? Googlemeister (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

OR alert Have you ever tried it? It sucks. You eat a huge meal early in the day, then you get lethargic and tired and feel generally deplorable. Those are eventually accompanied by continued hunger late in the afternoon or evening. See Thanksgiving for what is probably the closest we get. Seriously though, it's not healthy. Your body has to divert resources and blood (oxygen) to deal with the massive influx of food, most of which will get stored as excess reserves. Then, later, your body has to break all that down to get the energy it craves. It's much healthier to eat small amounts frequently. Plus, you get less headaches from dehydration and hypoglycemia. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 20:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You would only get headaches from dehydration if you were not drinking enough liquids. That would not really be related to how many meals one eats each day. Googlemeister (talk) 20:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I often eat one meal per day. On 60 Minutes last night, General Stanley A. McChrystal revealed that he ate one meal per day. Mac Davis (talk) 23:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It's just a matter of training your brain and stomach to expect one feed per day. After a while, it becomes normal. As a benefit, you regain the time expended on preparing and consuming those other two meals. I doubt any healthy people other than athletes in training need eat more than once per day. Weepy.Moyer (talk) 01:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I know of no source that would recommend only one meal per day for anyone. For children, teens, nursing or pregnant women, the elderly (all of whom may well fall in the "healthy" category), as well as the ill, such "advice" as Weepy is giving is likely to be dangerous. For the rest of us, it is nutritionally unsound. That we can do it is not the point; nor is the example of a few who do eat only one meal per day. There are also people who manage, even appear to thrive, on 3 hours' sleep per day, but that would not be a sensible goal for most of the rest of us. // BL \\ (talk) 02:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

A number of small meals per day seems to be what's recommended, not stuffing yourself like a turkey for one meal. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

By Jewish tradition, on a weekday one eats two meals, one during the day and one at night. In addition, some eat a snack (for example, bread or cake) known in Hebrew as "pat shacharit" after the morning service. It should be pointed out that there is no prohibition against eating a lesser or greater number of meals on a weekday. However on the Sabbath, one is obligated to eat three meals.Simonschaim (talk) 05:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

During Ramadan, people fast during the day. Even then, people eat two meals, one at each end of the day. I'm told (OR) by friends who've fasted for Ramadan that you stuff your face before dawn just to get through the day, and still get hungry and lethargic. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 05:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

So all known cultures eat 2 or more times a day? Googlemeister (talk) 14:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Assuming food is available, yes. This doesn't count nations suffering from famine, of course. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it has a lot to do with what naturally feels best to people, not just culture. People tend to get hungry more frequently than once a day, so they eat more than once a day. Some of that may be due to habit, but there's probably a pretty large physiological component. Hunger isn't learned. Rckrone (talk) 22:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

The ancient Greeks ate two meals a day: a light lunch (ariston) and a dinner (deipnon). I can confirm the claim above that eating fewer than three meals a day will make you sluggish. It will also contribute to weight gain, as it decreases your metabolism. Athletes often eat five meals a day. They don't have to be large meals. They can be five snacks a day if you want to keep your weight down.--Drknkn (talk) 02:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, what about for religious purposes? Perhaps some of the ascetic or monastic groups? Googlemeister (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

September 30

Famous Composers

Hi, I want your opinion on the most famous or publicly recognizable composition by each of the following composers:

• Claude Debussy - Claire de lune from Suite Bergamasque
• Ralph Vaughan Williams -
• Richard Wagner - Ride of the Valkyries
• Johann Sebastian Bach - Toccata and Fugue in D Minor
• Ludwig van Beethoven - Für Elise, Symphony No. 5 (Beethoven)
• Frédéric François Chopin - "Funeral March
• Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart -Serenade No. 13 (Mozart) aka Eine Kleine Nachtmusik
• Franz Peter Schubert - [Ellens dritter Gesang|[Ave Maria]]
• Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky - 1812 Overture, Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy

Thank you! The point of this is a presentation where I want to have a very short selection or two from each composer that (hopefully) anyone could go "Aha!" and recognize their music. Mac Davis (talk) 00:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Serenade No. 13 (Mozart) aka Eine Kleine Nachtmusik from Mozart. Dismas|^(talk) 00:22, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

When you say "recognizable", do you mean the piece most people will know they have heard and can hum along or the piece about which they are most likely to say, "That's Ralph Vaughan Williams's XXXXX"? // BL \\ (talk) 00:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

What they have heard and can hum along to, regardless of which they know what it is called or who wrote it. Mac Davis (talk) 00:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Wagner's is surely the Ride of the Valkyries. Algebraist 01:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Vaughan Williams would be either his setting of O Little Town of Bethlehem or something from the English Folk Songs Suite. // BL \\ (talk) 02:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I would think Beethoven's Fifth is his most famous work. Eine Kleine Nachtmusik would probably be Mozart's. Wagner's, Ride of the Valkyries ("Ho Jo To Ho!!!"). Tchaikovsky's, I would say the entire Nutcracker Suite, except on July 4th when it's got to be the 1812 Overture. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Isn't the choral part of the ninth better known than the fifth? Perhaps there're geographical differences on that one. Algebraist 12:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

For Schubert, there are several possibilities, but my guess would be the Ave Maria. After all, it was in Fantasia, and it gets a lot of airplay around Christmas for some reason. Deor (talk) 04:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, good choice. Also in that film were Bach's Toccata and Fugue, and Tchaikovsky's Nutracker Suite - and Beethoven's Sixth, but the Fifth is probably the best known, or at least the most cliched. If this were the 90s, the answer to the Schubert question might have been, "The theme from the TV sitcom Wings". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 04:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, BB. I was going to add "… and it's a favorite of bad sopranos in churches everywhere", but that seemed rather snarky. Deor (talk) 04:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

To do "Ave Maria" right requires a good solo voice or choir. Context is not a requirement though. For example, Barbra Streisand did "Ave Maria" on a Christmas album. She did it straight and apparently resisted all temptation to retitle it "Oy Vey, Maria!" →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 04:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

And now I've got a vaguely related Tom Lehrer classic ringing in my head. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 04:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Would that be the one ending "Jingle Bells kaching, Jingle Bells kaching..."? On second thought, that would be Stan Freberg. Nice to know that Tom and Stan are still with us.

I can't listen to The 1812 Overture without hearing an old parody done by, I think, Spike Jones: "There was an emperor, Napoleon, who never heard a nickelodeon..."

This would be high on the list of recognizable Bach bits. PhGustaf (talk) 05:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Jesu, yes, definitely a very recognizable Bach, especially at Christmastime. Regarding the other, you're thinking of Stan's "Green Chri$tma$". I was thinking of this, by Tom Lehrer, the very end of the song: "Ave Maria / Gee it's good to see ya / Gettin' ecstatic 'n / Sorta dramatic 'n / Doin' the Vatican Rag!" →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 05:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Where's JackofOz when we need him? -Richardrj ^{talk email} 07:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Working, unlike you bunch of novomundane and antipodean layabouts.  :) For Chopin, the Funeral March is very well known, of course; but I'd also be tempted to mention the Military Polonaise or the one in A flat (Heroic). Or the Minute Waltz. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

For Vaughan Williams I'd suggest his Fantasia on Greensleeves (hmm, no article!). For Schubert there's also the well-known melody from his Unfinished Symphony, and his Marche Militaire in D major. By the way, it's quite possible that Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor wasn't actually written by Bach, wasn't written for organ, and wasn't originally in D minor - see the 'Attribution' section of the article. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. reading the talk page for the Toccata & Fugue reminded me of Bach's so-called "Air on the G String", familiar to British TV viewers of a certain age as "the music from the Hamlet advert". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 10:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

"Air on the G String" ... wasn't that about Gypsy Rose Lee? :) ... The "Greensleeves" variation is definitely a good one, though I don't know how well known it is. But it's on my iPod under Christmas songs, right after "Green Chri$tma$". :) →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, he took an extremely famous folk tune and wrote a fantasia on it. Anyone hearing the main theme would recognise it as "Greensleeves", but not necessarily as anything by RVW. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

True, it's a bit of a cheat to use arrangements, but the sound of the Fantasia is very distinctive even without the main melody. More to the point, I can't think of anything by RWW that would satisfy the OP's criteria. Rather bizarrely, I think knowing the composers well actually makes it hard to answer the question. For example I would instantly recognise any part of the Brandenburg Concertos; likewise for Schubert and The Trout (song or quintet), but I suspect those are much less familiar to the general public. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Afterthought: maybe Linden Lea or the hymn tune Sine Nomine (sung to "For all the saints") would qualify for RVW. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Wagner's greatest hit is probably the Bridal Chorus, known as "Here Comes the Bride", from Lohengrin. It's a good thing he wrote it; otherwise we might be using the more bombastic wedding march from Götterdämmerung. It's possibly worth noting that neither of these weddings turned out well, exactly. PhGustaf (talk) 16:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I would much rather hear "Ride of the Valkyries" as the conquering bride marches down the aisle wearing a winged helmet and carrying a spear. What a "themed" wedding that would be, eh? Just so long as they don't have to play the "Siegfried Funeral March" by the time it's over. That could be a bad sign: from a Viking wedding to a Viking funeral in the space of a few hours. Shouldn't have left that potato salad in the solarium. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The funeral march was the theme for the movie Excalibur, for example, but it might be better known for its melody than by its name. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure Claire de Lune is a nice piece, but I can hear Victor Borge now, calling it "Clear de Saloon". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Borge was one of the funniest people ever, or at least one of the funniest people to be recorded. He told the same jokes over and over for sixty years or so, and managed to make them funny each time. Another common bridal march is the Trumpet Voluntary, though it's not exactly clear who wrote it. PhGustaf (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

BB, you hear almost correctly. Borge did have a routine where he said the new name of Clair de lune is "Clear the room". -- JackofOz (talk) 21:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I would have suggested that Vaughan Williams' best publicly known work would be The Lark Ascending. I can only guess that I'm wrong, as others far more knowledgeable than myself don't appear to have mentioned it yet! Maedin\^talk 19:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

That occurred to me, too. Actually, RVW is much better known to "music lovers" than to the general public. The person in the street has probably heard of all the other names and could name something each of them wrote, but I'd guess most would have no clue who this "Mr Williams" was. Ask them to name some classical composers, and most would mention Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Tchaikovsky, possibly Grieg and Brahms, and almost certainly a generic "Strauss", referring to someone who wrote Viennese waltzes, marches and polkas. They probably think the same Strauss wrote the fanfare used in 2001: A Space Odyssey, but that was an unrelated Strauss. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

How well known is RVW outside the UK? Britain's commercial classical radio station, Classic FM, famously tried to restrict the amount of his works being played, much to the ire of the listeners and he regularly tops their annual popularity poll. However I remember a well known composer (can't remember who!) being interviewed, who had performed an RVW piece with an Austrian orchestra. They thought it was very good and wondered if he had written anything else! Alansplodge.

Has anyone mentioned Mozart's Ronda alla turca? That would be as well known as Eine kleine Nachtmusik. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Also his Musical Joke, which in the UK is (or was) familiar as the theme music for the 'Horse of the Year Show". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Value of diamonds

Just reading about the latest diamond discovery [2], I wondered what the relationship between size and value is for a high-end diamond? Is it strictly linear as the carats go up, or more exponential? Vranak (talk) 03:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The process that forms a diamond happens only in very rare circumstances, and typically the natural materials required are found only in small amounts. That means that larger diamonds are uncovered less often than smaller ones. Thus, large diamonds are rare and have a greater value per carat. For that reason, the price of a diamond rises exponentionaly to its size.[3]

Here's a paper that should reveal the answer. It would cost me 34 dollars to read it, though.[4] Mac Davis (talk) 03:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's a copy. Tell me when you've successfully downloaded the file so I can remove it from public view.--droptone (talk) 04:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Vranak (talk) 14:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

:( After reading through the paper I don't think that is what you want.Mac Davis (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted the answer, linear or exponential. Vranak (talk) 17:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

All else being equal a larger diamond is exponentially more valuable then a smaller diamond. Of course, this is for cut, gem diamonds. There are other factors then size to consider. For example not all diamonds are the same color, and some colors are more desirable and thus priced accordingly. Therefore, if you have a below average, brown diamond that is 2x larger then a perfect blue diamond, the blue diamond will very likely be the more valuable. Googlemeister (talk) 18:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I would just like to point out that "exponential" has a specific meaning and is not the only type of faster-than-linear increase. For example, if the price per carat varied as the square of the total weight, that would be one example of a relationship that was neither linear nor exponential, but in between. I have not read the cited paper and can't comment on the actual rate of increase, I'm just saying to be careful of your terminology. --Anonymous, 18:30 UTC, September 30, 2009.

Yeah I know. Arithmetic might be more accurate but perhaps doesn't have as much currency among laymen. Vranak (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Number of classroom hours per year by students in various countries

I've tried Googling various combinations of "classroom hours," students, "per country," "per nation," and all sorts of variations, and have yet to find a table that discusses it; closest I found were lists (I think UNESCO) that had number of years of school required per country, and then number of weeks through the year. Can anyone help, please? What I'm trying to find it a list, per country, of how many hours children spend in the classroom (per week could hve worked too, I suppose). Thanks in advance.4.68.248.130 (talk) 12:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Try OECD for member countries. They have good statistics. One problem I can foresee is that the number of weekly hours may vary according to the children's ages. Itsmejudith (talk) 12:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, it does look promising.4.68.248.130 (talk) 13:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

According to Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers: The Story of Success, "The school year in the United States is, on average, 180 days long. The South Korean school year is 220 days long. The Japanese school year is 243 days long." (pg. 260) Mac Davis (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't give hours within the day, though, which is more of a logical measure, since 5 hours at 200 days would be less than 6 at 180.4.68.248.130 (talk) 14:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

DNA Testing of "Hitler's" Blood on Sofa & Remaining Relatives

Has the blood on the sofa taken from Hitler's bunker (mentioned in this BBC article been subjected to any DNA tests to prove that it is in fact his? I understand that DNA testing was not around in 1945, but I am sure it would not be hard to track down relatives of his (in fact, I am surprised that this has not been done before - or has it?). It is known he had a half-brother (apparently married to an Irish lady and living in Liverpool, UK, before WW1) and a half-sister (who stayed in Austria). As they and Hitler would have shared one parent, surely there would be a DNA match, even between the half-sister's and brother's grandchildren's DNA and the blood on the sofa, were it to be indeed that of Hitler. In the article mentioned above, it is mentioned that the skull fragment in the same collection at the museum in Moscow has been DNA tested (revealing it to not be Hitler's), so has the sofa been tested? --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 13:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

There are indeed male-line relatives who could provide the DNA living in America (see William Patrick Hitler), suitable for y-chromosomal testing, but they do not want to do so. - Nunh-huh 13:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

And as an interesting side note, our article says that William Hitler had a job analyzing blood samples. Dismas|^(talk) 16:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

There was a wartime newspaper headline about William Hitler which was calculated to get attention: "Hitler joins U.S. Navy; sworn in by Goering." For some reason, he later changed his last name. Edison (talk) 19:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

That's in our article; the other guy's name was Hess, apparently. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe he ran into a Hess but was sworn in by a Goering per the headline. Edison (talk) 05:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It's also quite interesting that his choice of middle name for his son was 'Adolf', considering he hated his uncle (as implied in that article). Even though this was probably after his change of surname, it's still interesting that he should choose his uncle's name (I know Adolf is/was a common-ish name in Germanic countries, unlike in English where it generally tends to bring to mind one specific historical character, but even so...). --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 10:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Help with an author?

Resolved

I'm trying to recall the name of an author, I believe of Indian ethnicity - he wrote a book on airports, possibly a travel book, to be more general. Very 21st Century, postmodern, and there was a pervasive feel of being untethered, of not having a geographic home to speak of. Waxed lyrical about airport lounges or something of the sort. I think the book I read had a front cover with streaks of yellow in it.

Thanks. AlmostCrimes (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Was it fiction or nonfiction? If it was non-fiction, then it might have been Mehran Karimi Nasseri. Intelligentsium 22:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Pico Iyer, perhaps? Rhinoracer (talk) 09:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Perfect. Thank you. AlmostCrimes (talk) 15:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Law that prevents Military personnel from acting as domestic police officers

This has been bugging me for a while. Is there a law that says the president cannot deploy troops on domestic soil? If so, what is this law?

Thanks! sohmc (talk) 17:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

See Posse Comitatus Act. PhGustaf (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I knew it existed! sohmc (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

He can deploy troops, as Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne Division in 1957 to help nine black students get past rioting segregationists and enter the Little Rock High School in compliance the the 1955 Supreme Court desegregation order. But the troops did not act as police: they did not arrest the rioting segregationists and take them to jail, or before a judge for arraignment. The federal troops were at the school from September through November 1957, when they were replaced by U.S Marshalls. Marshalls were used several times in the civil rights struggles, but there was not a huge force of marshalls standing by in barracks for deployment, as there were troops, so marshalls had to be pulled from courthouse guard duty or investigations, or from federal prison guards. Edison (talk) 19:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Law enforcement is by Federal marshals, one "l".--DThomsen8 (talk) 19:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not that into silent letters, double or single "l's" or such oddities of English orthography. Edison (talk) 05:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

African Flag Portraying Decapitation

Resolved

I once saw a Wikipedia article about a flag that I can't seem to find again. The flag was either red or orange, and on the flag were two standing people, both solid black, and one was decapitating the other with a sword. The flag was from central or eastern Africa, either of a tribe or country, and it was from the 18th or 19th century. The article's name was in the form of "Flag of ...". I tried Gallery of flags by design, Flags with humans, and Flags of Africa but it wasn't there. Does anyone know which flag it was? --Codell^Talk 17:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found it: Benin Empire.--Codell^Talk 18:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Benin Empire

How bizarre. And it looks suspiciously like this James Thurber cartoon: [5] →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I would dearly love to know the story behind that choice of design. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Just the flag for mysophobes: "I don't do handshakes." Clarityfiend (talk) 21:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Not to quibble with a cool flag, but are we really sure that's accurate? I wasn't really able to find ample non-Wiki references to that. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

According to http://www.greatbenin.org/ (scroll down) it is the "national military flag" (emphasis mine), so it might not be the actual national flag. I don't know how reliable that site it (it's seriously broken, which isn't a good sign). --Tango (talk) 01:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to see that strung up with all the other flags in those street parties we used to have years ago (the Silver Jubilee, the Royal Wedding, etc.) or as one of the flags in the UN! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 10:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Letter Z and Native Americans

I need a word that begins with the letter Z and relates to Puget Sound Native Americans. This is for a school project. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.157.78.146 (talk) 19:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

A word in English, or in one of the Salishan languages, or some other language of the area? Adam Bishop (talk) 20:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please note that we will not do your homework for you. Intelligentsium 22:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

At least the OP's being honest here, and it's not a massively hard and convoluted exercise like an essay question or something. Having said that, I did some googling and found nothing at all helpful. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 10:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Ukranian composer

I am looking for some pre 1900's music with a composer from Ukraine. Any suggestions? Googlemeister (talk) 19:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Does List of Ukrainian composers help? -- JackofOz (talk) 20:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Tactical bombing during world war ii

How effective was bombing tanks during world war ii? What size bomb would it normally take to knock out a tank? Were most tanks destroyed from the air destroyed by level bombers such as the A20 havoc or diving ones such as Hurricane Mk 2c? 22:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.179.95 (talk)

Ground-attack aircraft touches on this in the History section but the attack methods are only briefly mentioned. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

If you look around in various tank articles, you'll see that most German tanks were knocked out by ground-attack aircraft; further, the main weapons used for this were 20mm and 30mm cannon. Tanks have thin top and bottom armor because it's hard for another tank or an anti-tank gun to hit those spots, but this also leaves them very vulnerable to aircraft attack. --Carnildo (talk) 22:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hans-Ulrich Rudel claimed to have destroyed 519 tanks, mostly(?) with his Ju 87G Stuka's two 37 mm cannons. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, I haven't heard of any western allied aircraft with armour piercing cannons. I know the Russians and Germans had them, but what allied planes had them? How much armour would AP rounds from a 20mm hispano cannon penetrate? And again, what size bomb would nromaly be needed to take out a tank?--92.251.138.156 (talk) 15:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You don't need an armor-piercing cannon: the Panzer IV, Germany's workhorse tank, only had 10mm of top armor, which won't reliably stop a .50 BMG round, much less an explosive shell.

Bomb size is very strongly dependant on where you hit: a one-pound bomb on the top of the tank is enough, a ten-pound bomb in contact with the side armor might cause enough spalling to knock out the tank, while a 500-pound bomb 20 feet away might kill the tank crew through concussion while leaving the tank itself fully functional. --Carnildo (talk) 01:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The "Rocket Projectile" RP-3 was the main British air to ground anti-armour weapon. Alansplodge, 1 October 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alansplodge (talk • contribs) 23:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Was divebombng, as by Stukas, highly effective against tanks in early WW2, before forces realized that the divebombers were easy to shoot down? Edison (talk) 04:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Eh, it appears to be something of a mixed bag. Stukas were basically the only divebombers operating against tanks on a regular basis in early WW2. Our article notes that they were highly effective against ships during the period, but as they were generally carrying a single bomb, bombing wouldn't seem the most efficient use of an anti-tank sortie. Specifically, we note that on the Russian front, tanks were only accounting for 5-10% of Stuka vehicle kills in the early part of the campaign. In the Stalingrad section, we note that T-34s were generally impervious to Stuka attack barring a direct hit, while pre-war models remained vulnerable. Finally, we note that the Stuka's adoption of the above 37mm cannon in 1943 is what boosted its value as an anti-tank platform. Prior to this armament change, it mounted only 8mm machine guns. — Lomn 15:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Following up, the above article on Hans-Ulrich Rudel appears to back this up. He claimed ~100 tank kills during the Kursk campaign with the new cannon-equipped G-model Stuka. In March 1944 (~6 months after Kursk), he claimed 200 total tank kills. He began combat operations in Stukas in 1941, but it seems clear to me that tanks weren't relevant targets until the cannon-equipped Stuka appeared. — Lomn 15:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Would 50 caliber machine guns in a strafing run destroy a WW2 tank? Were tank cannons effective against aircraft, or was the coaxial machinegun on some tanks, or only the machinegun on top by the hatch, which would require the man operating it to be fully exposed to the strafing? Edison (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

A tank would be unlikely be truly destroyed by .50 caliber strafing. The rounds have a reasonable chance at penetrating the top armor if the bullet hits perpendicular to the armor, but the further from that you get, the more armor you need to penetrate. The more armor you need to get through, the more energy the bullet loses. Any of the guns on the tank could kill an aircraft if it scored a hit. The bad news for the tank is that the aircraft is a fairly small, fast target, and the main tank gun would not be able to change direction to match it. Googlemeister (talk) 18:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Apparently not. This site looks to be an excellent resource. It documents the arms race between Soviet and German attack aircraft (going up to 75mm cannon) and discusses the western Allies' rocket-based approach. British studies noted that of over 200 Panther tank kills from Normandy to the Ardennes, only 14 could be definitely attributed to aircraft, and 11 of those were due to air-to-ground rockets. As for tanks defending against aircraft, the main cannon would be a non-starter. They simply wouldn't elevate high enough (18° on a Panther) to threaten most aircraft, the sights weren't built for such targets, there weren't proximity fuses as on anti-aircraft platforms, the rate of fire was lousy... sure, you could get a one in a million shot, but that'd be about it. The machine guns (especially the top-mounted one, which avoids the elevation limit of the coaxial MG) would have been reasonably effective. — Lomn 19:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I imagine it would be nigh on impossible to hit an aircraft that was doing anything but diving straight at you with the main gun. If they are flying straight at you in order to strafe well a much easier dshot if the gun goes high enough.

October 1

Dominica

Resolved

Why do Dominica and the Dominican Republic have similar names? Jc iindyysgvxc (talk) 00:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

According to our articles, Dominican Republic is named after Saint Dominic, whereas Dominica "comes from the Italian word for Sunday (domenica), which was the day on which it was spotted by Christopher Columbus." --Saalstin (talk) 01:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict)They are both derived from Domini (lord, "god" in this context). The difference is that Dominica comes through Italian domenica— Sunday (which in Christian countries is the "Lord's day"), and the Dominican Republic is named for Santo Domingo (which is also the name of their capital city), or Saint Dominic, in the English speaking world. Intelligentsium 01:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

First-rate on a lake

Resolved

Reading a section farther up the page on naval forces in lakes, I seem to recall that once upon a time, the Royal Navy had a first-rate ship of the line which was built, launched, and operated entirely on a freshwater lake. What was it's name, and which lake was it that it sailed around on? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 06:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

The HMS Ontario was the largest sail warship on the U.S./Canadian Great Lakes but apparantly was only a "sixth-rate" ship. Rmhermen (talk) 14:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

A few larger by tonnage but smaller by cannon count vessels participated in the Battle of Lake Erie 30-some years later. Rmhermen (talk) 14:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

In 1813 the US started two 87-gun ships of the line, New Orleans and Chippewa on Lake Ontario[6].

They never floated; construction was terminated at the end of the war. PhGustaf (talk) 14:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hah. HMS St. Lawrence was a 112-gun ship of the line that served on Lake Ontario during the War of 1812. She was bigger than the average first-rater. And she "served" only in the sense of just sitting there and scaring her opponents into port. If the war had gone on longer and the US liners had gone to sea (well, lake) we might have had some good battle stories to tell. PhGustaf (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

HMS St. Lawrence. That was it, thanks :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Marrying Adopted brother/sister or cousin

Say that you were adopted into a family and you fell in love with your /bro/sis/1st cousin and you decided that you guys wanted to get married. Is that legal? --Reticuli88 (talk) 14:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

In what jurisdiction? Algebraist 14:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Anywhere in the US --Reticuli88 (talk) 14:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Every state has its own marriage laws, so there could be 50 different answers. Consider that Woody Allen married his former wife's adopted daughter, that might give a clue - at least for the state of New York. Start with the article on Marriage and see where it takes you. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 15:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

They were never married, and Woody wasn't her adoptive father, so it wasn't quite as sketchy as it seems... Adam Bishop (talk) 17:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

In any event, the statement "anywhere in the US" only helps a little, because each state has its own laws. There is very little at the federal level that regulates marriages. I wouldn't be surprised if marrying adoptive siblings was illegal, even though genetically it's not incest. But each state's laws must be studied. If there's not a jumping-off point for that in Marriage or Marriage laws or something, he might have to go to Google, as we cannot really offer legal advice here. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

From the Code of Virginia:

§ 20-38.1. Certain marriages prohibited.

(a) The following marriages are prohibited:

(1) A marriage entered into prior to the dissolution of an earlier marriage of one of the parties;

(2) A marriage between an ancestor and descendant, or between a brother and a sister, whether the relationship is by the half or the whole blood or by adoption;

(3) A marriage between an uncle and a niece or between an aunt and a nephew, whether the relationship is by the half or the whole blood.

(b) [Repealed.]

(1975, c. 644; 1978, c. 647.)

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+20-38.1

---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

As a small choirboy in 1960s Britain, I used to entertain myself by reading the "Table of Kindred and Affinity" in the back of the Book of Common Prayer. I used to try to imagine who would want to marry his own grandmother! You can see the list here... http://www.genetic-genealogy.co.uk/Toc115570145.html Alansplodge 1 October 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alansplodge (talk • contribs) 23:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

As far as Jewish law is concerned, adoption does not change the status of a child. The person adopting the child is just an agent of the biological parents. The biological parents always remain the only parents. It would thus follow that there is no prohibition in marrying one's adopted brother/sister or cousin. Simonschaim (talk) 00:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It is unlikely to the point of impossibility that children brought up together from birth to six years will fall in love or lust with each other. See Imprinting (psychology). BrainyBabe (talk) 07:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That's not even close to true. See Incest#Between childhood siblings. It certainly happens. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I do not deny the existence of child-child (or more accurately, minor-minor) sexual activity within the family, but I understand sexual abuse to be primarily about power, not love or lust. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Generally, in the US, or other areas influenced by English common law, it is illegal to marry any "blood relative," i.e. someone with whom you have a genetic relationship. These laws were conceived long before knowledge of DNA, but ideas of "blood" and ancestry were considered important. This would rule out a marriage between any 2 persons who share even one parent. Similarly it would prohibit the marriage between a person and someone sharing at least one parent as their own parents, i.e. a biological aunt/uncle. Historically, English law made adopted children full members of their adopted families, with no special legal distinctions between adopted and biological siblings. This has historically meant that by default one could not marry one's adopted brother/sister, though at many points in time, local governments have made provisions where this could happen, based on the recognition that the two persons were not "blood-relatives" even if they were from the same household. Marriages between first cousins were never prohibited, and in elite social circles at certain times the "perfect match" was your father's brother's son/daughter as this would keep the family's inherited wealth concentrated in the same line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.122.183 (talk) 14:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Western influence in Africa

On this topic, I've found it relatively easy to find points suggesting that western influences were positive. On the negative side, however, points are harder to make. In my mind, one can say that the problems that resulted in war, urest and conflict after independence were (or partly) caused by the colonial government. Are there any solid examples of this?

Secondly, are there any good examples in history (and I'm sure there are) of where "the West" intervened and made things worse, particularly those that were attempting to solve an "African problem" and failed (I should point out that I'd also like any other external influence to Africa, eg. Soviet/Chinese)? I've got the arms trade into Africa (the Soviet type) to start off with. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 18:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean other than Slavery and when the CIA invented AIDS? ;)

In all seriousness, do you mean after independence? I think there quite a few examples of Europeans not acting in the best interest of the locals during colonial times (and even later), the Belgian Congo and apartheid probably being the most famous. There's also the whole blood diamond market fueled by Western consumers. TastyCakes (talk) 18:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

This article argues for colonial roots to the Rwandan genocide. Recury (talk) 18:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Ya that's a good example. Also, while the UN may not have worsened the genocide, its ineffectiveness over the course of it was just heartbreaking. See Shake Hands with the Devil. TastyCakes (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks both. The less obvious the point the better really: most places went downhill after independence (considerable caveats) and that the West harmed Africa during the invasion. Oh, and intervening badly is stronger than not intervening (BTW, this is for a [pointless] speech, I just need some background).- Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 18:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Also are you judging by western standards of what is good? Is health care good a good idea when it causes overpopulation? Is yet more people doing the same as everybody else a good thing? Dmcq (talk) 23:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Zimbabwe is an excellent case of how a colonial power (the British) created a country which became very powerful (named Rhodesia at the time) then went off the rails after the British left. Sure, during its height in power the native populations were second-rate citizens with next-to-no rights, but the economic infrastructure and military were envied by lots of other African nations - even South Africa came to consider Zimbabwe a viable threat to its own power and status after independence. Then the country just fell apart into the worst imaginable economic and political equivalent of absolute chaos in a country which still 'elects' the same government that brought the situation about in the first place. And the western powers don't do anything about it - all the British can do is ban them from playing international cricket. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 10:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all. Speech went well. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 15:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

"That is so gay"

When pre-teenagers nowadays so "that is so gay", they're obviously using it as a pejorative and an insult. But they're obviously not saying it specifically pertains to men being sexually attracted to other men, or to a lesser extent, women being sexually attracted to other women. I don't think they're even aware of the concept of homosexuality - they're just using the word "gay" because they've heard it's a good expression of what they're trying to convey. So what do they mean? "Stupid", "uninteresting", "outdated", or something similar? JIP | Talk 19:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

"Dull, untrendy, adult-oriented, unsexy, picayune, intellectual..." Conversely, could anyone say specifically what British gays really meant by Naff? --Wetman (talk) 19:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

If you truly want to know what it means when (American) teenager say something is "so gay," unless they specifically mean male homoeroticism, it just means "bad." Mac Davis (talk) 20:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

More like "lame". Clarityfiend (talk) 21:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It really is to be taken as almost, but not quite, entirely unlike cool. —Akrabbim^talk 21:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll go with contemptible. Vranak (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I second lame, but one quibble with the OP: there's nothing "nowadays" about this. This has been used in exactly this form and for this meaning since at least the late 80s.Fuhghettaboutit (talk) --22:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Lame, weak, "unmanly", the way teens used to say something was "queer". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Gay is also being used in this sense to mean intellectual. If something is being characterized as being gay it is being denounced for being overly preoccupied with cerebral qualities that the speaker finds objectionable. This is original research. This is the sense in which I sometimes hear it used. Bus stop (talk) 23:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see somebody already pointed out the "intellectual" angle on this. Bus stop (talk) 23:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Being "too" intellectual can also be considered "unmanly". That's not exactly a new problem, of course. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Beginning in the 1970s, people started denigrating other people as "homos," whether they were gay or not. It started on campuses, according to Cassell's Dictionary of Slang.--Drknkn (talk) 23:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

And in the 1980s, they began to use the word gay to denote someone who is "stupid, ugly, eccentric" according to the source above.--Drknkn (talk) 00:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, again "unmanly" or "abnormal" or "queer" or whatever term, not specifically denoting homosexual as such, just "not a real man". Just as with "fag". As the ever-politically-incorrect George Carlin once said, in his neighborhood, "a fag was someone who wouldn't go downtown and help beat up queers." →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

See Think Before You Speak. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 02:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It might refer to "Someone whose abilities exceed mine in some meritorious accomplishment." Edison (talk) 04:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

‘Lame’ or ‘rubbish’, according to the BBC programme complaints committee, when defending Chris Moyles' use of the word. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

According to this Salon article from 2000, "That is so gay!" means "lame, wrongheaded, queer in the original sense." The current popularity of the phrase among today's yutes is due, without question, to its frequent use on South Park. The show's usage of the phrase is anti-homophobic, in the show's typically backhanded way. In the show, the phrase usually doesn't reference homosexuality, and so they effectively remove the homophobia from the old playground insult. The Think Before You Speak campaign resists this trend by insisting that the homophobia be read back into the phrase. Good or bad? You decide. —Kevin Myers 17:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

if it sucks, its gay plain and simple --Talk Shugoːː 15:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

The name 'European Union'

Hello, When the European Community was renamed the European Union what other names, if any, were suggested? Thanks in advance, 79.78.66.1 (talk) 22:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It hasn't been renamed, as such. There are lots of overlapping European bodies which are collectively known as the EU, the EC is still one of those. The Lisbon Treaty will tidy all that up and make the EU the only body, if it is ever ratified. --Tango (talk) 01:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

And as our article will tell you, the European Union got its name upon the signing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, or if you prefer, when the Treaty came into force in 1993. I don't know if there was any debate on the choice of name.--Rallette (talk) 10:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

When did it cease to be the "Common Market?" That is the term I am more familiar with. Edison (talk) 04:49, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2

Health Care Prices

Does the precentage of an average individual british person taxes that goes to the NHS equal to amount of money spent by an average insured american on their own private health care plans? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.146.124.35 (talk) 02:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The US spends by far the most money per person on health care of any country [7]. This data shows the average cost per American so insured American's pay an even higher share than reflected by the graph. Something to keep in mind is that some US health care is paid for by tax money as well (Medicare and Medicaid) and the cost of employer based health plans effectively comes out of wages, so the full costs aren't always obvious. Rckrone (talk) 06:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The last point is especially important: the average insured American is not actually paying their own premiums directly. If you pay them out of pocket, they are for most prohibitively expensive (thousands of dollars per year for even really poor plans). My wife has to pay for private healthcare at the moment (she is in between jobs), and it's some $2000 a year or so for "hazard insurance" that just caps anything she would owe at $5000. So if she gets hit by a car, or catches some virulent disease, she pays the first $5000 in services out of pocket, and then the insurance pays for the rest—that's the whole health plan, no regular doctor's visits, no prescriptions, nothing. All of this for someone who is in between benefits-giving jobs, and has a correspondingly low income! You can, perhaps, understand why the "private option" is not so appealing to us at the moment! --Mr.98 (talk) 15:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The NHS employs about 1.3 million employees out of a UK employed population of 29 million. So approximately 4.5% of the entire employed population is dedicated to health care. What is the cost of that? When about 1 worker out 20 workers is working in health care I suspect the actual cost is not inexpensive. What is the cost of wages plus material annually for the NHS? SunSw0rd (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC).

A women-only Swedish city

I read a Chinese news report on a city in Northern Sweden that, according to the report, is the only women-only city in the world since 1820. However, the news only quoted the name in Chinese as 沙科保(pinyin:Shakebao), without its native name. Is there such a city in Sweden, and if so, what is its name in Swedish?--Poeticlion (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

According to the news report, the city:

• forbids men to enter
• has 25 thousand women as residents
• was established in 1820 by the widow of a rich man
• is situated near a woodland in Northern Sweden, therefore the women there live on forestry

--Poeticlion (talk) 08:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm Swedish, have never heard of this, and I find it highly unlikely (impossible!) that any city in Sweden would forbid people of a certain gender to enter it. Perhaps some community of 25 inhabitants could have such a rule, but certainly not a city of 25 000 inhabitants. Was the city supposed to exist to this day?/Marxmax (talk) 09:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

After a little Google translate, I must say that this is either the product of the journalist's or the chinese girl's vivid imagination. "Chako Paul City provides a woman having sex out of the city to come back you must first bathe, wash away the taste of a special body, and then a calm mood, taste and excitement to avoid the emotional impact of other women." Hilarious!/Marxmax (talk) 09:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! Google gives tens of thousands of mentions of the "city" but they are probably derived from the very same source, since most of the Chinese media are used to doing mindless copying and pasting. The character 市 usually refers to a city or en kommun but another news article says 沙科保 is actually a castle. This article, from the government news agency Xinhua, shows a picture of the castle. (Pictures and texts are often duplicated in the same manner by Chinese media.) Now I tend to believe it is a hilarious and false urban legend, but I cannot be certain of this. --Poeticlion (talk) 10:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Assuming this place really is a municipality/kommun, it would, with a population of 25.000, be on the list of the 100 (out of 280) most populous municipalities of Sweden, so this is definately an urban legend. /Marxmax (talk) 11:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sweden is a small country. A town with 25 000 inhabitants is considered a medium-sized town, which means that pretty much everyone in the country would know at least something about it, even had it been a perfectly ordinary town. I assure you that this is an urban legend, and that such a town would be unthinkable, since you can't deny half the population access to somewhere big enough to house thousands of persons. /Julle (talk) 11:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

What solid evidence and counterargument!! Thank you!! It's not famous despite its alleged "relatively high population", and men should have allemansrätten to enter the place unobstructed by policewomen, so it has to be an urban legend. Now I have to think about another question: how to stop it from widespreading and persuade other people (esp. my girlfriend) to believe it's untrue. First to get the article off from Chinese wikipedia??...--Poeticlion (talk) 12:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't the characters in Gregory's Girl have a similar idea (preponderence of women, not women-only) about somewhere in South America? Vaguely recall it may have been Caracas... --Dweller (talk) 10:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

That reminds me of a 1980s sci-fi film from Poland where two guys 'wake up' in the future and the entire world is populated by women (it's actually more complicated than that and has a very interesting ending). Can't for the life of me remember the name. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 10:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sexmission? --NorwegianBlue ^talk 11:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

That is exactly the one! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 12:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps not very coincidentally, we have such a place in the classical Chinese novel Journey to the West. The women in the "Girls' Kingdom" gave birth to babies after drinking their river water, so they did not need men. --Poeticlion (talk) 12:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

What happened to the male babies? --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 23:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Such an interesting story! Perhaps it is inspired by the fact that gender equality is so important in Sweden. But remember (And why not tell this to your girl friend, haha!), that gender equality work both ways: just as it would be unequal to prevent women to enter a particular city, it would be to prevent men from doing so. Equality means just that: equality. And, by the way: the more equal a society is, the less reason it would be for women to hide from men in a special city. --Aciram (talk) 12:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

From a Chinese point of view, they are not a stranger to having cities full of similar type people, so the Sweden story would be totally believable to them. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 13:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

As a Swede myself, I agree with Marxmax: there is no such town in Sweden. Interesting story, though, of the same kind as the belief that men has never walked on the Moon or that Santa Claus really exists, flying in a sled behind reindeer. Typically, if you want to believe in it, you can, because it is hard to prove that something does not exist. It should be noted that, despite the Swedish freedom to roam ("allemansrätten", as referred to above), you can exclude people from visiting your real estate - but only if it is gated real estate in direct access to a house where you live or a factory where safety requires it. Gated communities does not exist in Sweden, it has never been tested if it would be legal, but it would certainly be unimaginable in the Swedish political context - sort of beyond politically incorrect. Dagrqv (talk) 14:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Sweden does have a gated community - Victoria Park in Malmö [8], but it is quite controversial. /Marxmax (talk) 16:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget also, those who think the world is flat. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 14:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

There is of course a long tradition of female-only places in literature and mythology, starting with the Amazons and continuing into some examples of feminist utopias. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Whilst it already well established that this is a hoax, i have to add that the castle on the photo in the Xinhua article cannot possibly have been taken in Sweden. Even more unlikely that such a castle could have been found in northern Sweden, to my knowledge there are no major medieval buildings in the northernmost parts of the country. --Soman (talk) 08:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, the city name "Shakebao" sounds vaguely like Skellefteå. Thuresson (talk) 08:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Another Swedish town?

Is there actually a Swedish town called Rawlson on a river called the Rillerah?[9] →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

No —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.186.107 (talk) 06:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

List of rivers of Sweden has nothing that looks anything like "Rillerah". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

And List of cities in Sweden likewise has nothing that looks like "Rawlson". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

If I try to say Rawlson and Rillerah in swedish the closest I get is Råsun (Rawlson) and Rilleån, but neither exist in Sweden. Råsunda is a soccerstadium in the surburbs of Stockholm and Rickleå is a creek and a small village in nothern parts of Sweden. Who ever wrote the lyrics to the song might be an ancestor of Swedish chef. // Castrup (talk) 11:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

IOC and Barack

Is Barack going to the IOC and personally petitioning them to select his native country's city for the 2016 Olympics unprecedented by a head of state (or government)? Only interested in Olympics prior to 2016, not inclusive. Googlemeister (talk) 14:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

No. "Heads of state have been instrumental in recent votes, creating somewhat of a new precedent. Tony Blair helped London win the 2012 Olympics by traveling to Singapore to meet with IOC members ahead of that vote, and Russia's Vladimir Putin went to Guatemala to lobby in support of Sochi's bid for the 2014 Winter Games." source. --LarryMac | Talk 14:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

In any case, he did not succeed. Blame it on Rio. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

See Old School King Oenomaus might have been the first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.124.125.107 (talk) 23:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

British Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal visit was considered to be one of the elements that decided London's selection for the 2012 Olympics over (inter alia) U.S. and French competitors who did not send national leaders to the IOC meeting. British national euphoria over winning this contest lasted less than 24 hours before the 7 July 2005 London bombings. In my opinion, Obama and Lula da Silva, the President of Brazil, were both correct in their decisions to present their countries' cases to the IOC meeting in Copenhagen. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Check out this link [10] and it's totally clear why Rio won out over Chicago. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Although the OP specifically excluded the 2016 bid, it's worth remembering that every country bidding had leaders there. Japanese PM Yukio Hatoyama, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (as already mentioned) and both King Juan Carlos and Spanish PM José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero [11] [12] attended and had apparently announced their intentions to attend before Obama had. The Japanese tried to get a royal representative as well [13] [14] but appear to have failed. If Obama hadn't attended then the Chicago bid would have been the odd one out in lacking their countries head of government. And let's not also forget the Chicago bid effectively lost to Tokyo and Madrid not just Rio. So it's not that clear if Rio had not been there that Chicago would have won. Nil Einne (talk) 23:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Foreign currency reserve requirements

Foreign currency (e.g. Eurodollar) deposits sometimes pay higher interests because the banks don't have the same reserve requirements as in the home country. But why don't central banks lose control over the money supply if there are not the same reserve requirements in every country? MMMMM742 (talk) 14:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your query but here are a few points:

• The Fed bases its decisions on the M2 definition of money supply which excludes eurodollar deposits (but this says it does include overnight eurodollar deposits). Monitoring M3 would have its benefits but, according to money supply, it's not worth the effort of compiling the data. So the Fed has control over M2 despite what goes on in other countries.
• Now think about what would happen to US money supply if an EU central bank altered the reserve requirement on eurodollar deposits in the EU. Nothing, right? Limiting central banks to alter reserve requirements within their own jurisdictions only, prevents them from affecting money supplies in other countries.
• Also central banks seldom use reserve requirements to change the money supply anyway. They mostly use interest rates and trading bonds.

Does this help? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 19:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm not actually asking about monitoring, but about controlling, but thinking again what I mean is probably no longer an issue since September or October 2008 when the Fed was allowed to pay interests on the reserves. By doing that they can probably pull any amount of money out of the system.

What I meant is:

• The foreign banks lend almost all the US dollar money that is deposited, and that money is then again deposited outside the U.S. (indirectly of course, someone spends it, someone else deposits it). The money supply created by such transactions grows to at most 1/(reserve fraction). The smaller the reserve fraction the larger M3 becomes.
• If - theoretically - the Fed thinks M3 is becoming too large, so it has to raise interest rates, then it actually does this by selling U.S. Treasury securities.
• What if the foreign deposits have grown so large that the Fed runs out of Treasury securities and the interest rate still doesn't rise to the desired level, and M3 still grows rapidly?

MMMMM742 (talk) 20:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

There isn't really anything a government can do about what people do with its currency overseas. They don't really need to, though - it is in a bank's interest to keep reserves in the currency the deposits are denominated in, otherwise they could get into serious trouble when people come to withdraw it. It also smooths out exchange rate risks. I believe the UK doesn't have any reserve requirements, it is just left to the banks to choose a reserve that works for them (although the Financial Services Authority (FSA) will step in if the bank is taking excessive risks - at least, that's the theory...), and the Bank of England still manages to maintain control of the money supply through interest rate changes and, recently, "quantitative easing". It also helps that the amount of a currency being used in other countries is usually a small fraction of the amount used at home. --Tango (talk) 23:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Criminal organisations in Russia

Quick query: were there any named criminal organisations operating primarily in the Russian Empire? Alternatively, were there any particularly infamous (non-political) criminals active in Russia between, say, 1850 and 1917? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Napoleon's Grande Army? There were certainly many groups of anarchists committing criminal acts, such as the Circle of Tchaikovsky. Their crimes were mostly printing seditious and inflammatory anti-government pamphlets, and trying to foment revolution. As far as named criminals go, how about Rasputin? Googlemeister (talk) 20:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

See: KAOS it is by far the most notable. 173.124.125.107 (talk) 23:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

KAOS did not operate during the Russian Empire, obviously. How about Sonya Golden Hand? Adam Bishop (talk) 03:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

APA Publication Manual errors

See below. I thought one of your editors might want to verify and modify the APA style entry accordingly.

Mark

Mark A. Allan Head of Library Reference Services/Porter Henderson Library Angelo State University

Any opinions expressed are my own and do not reflect any official stance held by my employer.

I love the smell of book dust in the morning. It smells like...... knowledge.

From: Educ. & Behavior Science ALA Discussion List Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 2:30 PM Subject: APA Publication Manual 6th edition - errors

Hi all,

We have received word from our campus APA expert that the 6th edition contains many errors. Some (but not all) of the errors were corrected in a second printing. She is in constant contact with the folks at APA regarding the errors, so her information is from the source. With her permission, I am re-posting her email to me here:

           So far, I know that the sample paper has errors in the running head and the figures.  I haven’t searched for the
rest of the errors – I’m waiting for the list of errata to be published in the next couple of weeks.

The problem is that they rely heavily on the sample document to convey many of their formatting instructions, and so lots of people are now doing it wrong. I agree that they should really do a product recall.

Look at the sample one-experiment paper (figure 2.1). If it has the words “Running head:” in the header at the top of every page, then you have the wrong version. This is the correct version:

http://www.apastyle.org/manual/related/sample-experiment-paper-1.pdf

I suspect that many of us purchased copies from the first printing, which means that our copies have errors. Our campus bookstores may also be selling copies with errors.

I would like to respectfully suggest that APA do a product recall and replace the erroneous copies with free – and correct – copies!

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news….

Welcome to Wikipedia. Anyone may edit the articles, please see WP:WELCOME Dmcq (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Urdu as Muslim World's Second language?

Which organization officially said that Urdu should be the second most spoken language of the Muslim World after Arabic? Someone told that as a Muslim, you should speak Urdu after you learned Arabic. I am a Bengali and our ethnic group is the second largest Muslim group in the Muslim World after the Arabs-I believe this fact is true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.119.102 (talk) 20:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Its too late, unless you had this translated, your speaking English before Urdu. I don't think that there is a work around at this point. Is Arabic your first launguage? If so you may not be fully Bengaleze. French is a beautiful launguage, possibly you could travel to Paris and study up. Good luck! 174.152.228.209 (talk) 22:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

...I think you've missed the point of what the poster was asking, by a long shot. He/she is asking whether Bengali is the second most spoken language in the Muslim world after Arabic, rather than Urdu. I don't know if that's true—our articles on Bengali and Urdu seem to imply that Urdu is much more widely spoken than Bengali, though what percentage of that is Muslim, I don't know. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

...Looking Back the OP started with the question of "Which organization officially said", Since he asked this on the Humanites Desk instead of the Launguage Desk, I thought it best to recomend that he try to learn French. It's possible that the information on being Bengali and other factors, were only inserted as distractions to throw us off from selecting the correct answer. 173.103.254.88 (talk) 00:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Per the number of Bengali speakers versus the number of Urdu speakers, see List of languages by number of native speakers, which does give Bengali the edge. Note also however that according to our article Islam by country, there are more Muslims in Indonesia than in any other country, so perhaps Indonesian would be even more useful for communicating with fellow believers.

To 74.14.119.102, sorry, I have not found the answer to your first question, about an organization suggesting Muslims should learn Urdu after learning Arabic. I hope another editor will be able to help you, or you might try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Understanding Indonesian should probably also allow you to communicate to a reasonable extent in Malay so you can probably add ~18? million Muslims from Malaysia, Brunei and perhaps Singapore. Not much but if the numbers are close enough it may push it over the edge. It's possible it will also enable you to communicate with some Pattani Malay Muslims in Thailand but I'm less certain of that. However bear in mind number of native speakers is not necessarily the greatest measure since there's no reason why being able to communicate with people in a second language won't be quite useful. Also bear in mind the Indonesia having the most Muslims is no guarantee there are more Muslim Indonesian (language) speakers then Bengali or Urdu because there would be some in Bangladesh, some in India and some in Pakistan (and also some in other countries like Afghanistan and of course even a few in countries with high immigrant populations like the UK and US). Considering these, it's even possible that English may be the best language given it's wide popularity as a second language. Nil Einne (talk) 04:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not language expert myself, but you might get more expert responses by posting your question at WP:Reference desk/Language —— Shakescene (talk) 04:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

October 3

Art and money

1) Works by Van Gogh for example have risen in price. But are there many instances of works of art that have significantly declined in price - where their valuation in the past was greater than it is now? 2) How do economists explain the art market? Particularly for modern art, where you could sometimes buy identical items for a tiny fraction of the price (Damien Hurst's Pharmacy for example, that urinal thing)? 78.151.117.222 (talk) 01:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There is an artist (I have absolutely no clue who it was) who was well regarded. He painted very realistic paintings. They were worth a reasonable amount of money. Then, long after he died, it was discovered that he couldn't draw very well. He used an overhead projector to project photos on his canvas. He traced them and then painted them. When this was discovered, the value of his works fell. They are still considered very nice works of art, but not completely original. Perhaps someone reading this will know exactly who it was and be able to point out the old and current value of his paintings. The only one I remember in the documentary that I saw was one of a boy sitting on a dock. -- kainaw™ 02:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Was it an overhead projector, or was it a camera obscura? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 06:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Johannes Vermeer was suspected of using a camera obscura in his work, but as far as I know his works are considered priceless. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 06:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I see the similarity, but the documentary I saw showed the overhead projector and the transparencies he used in his painting room. They were able to reassemble his most popular works by using the transparencies. -- kainaw™ 13:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

In I900, you could have bought all of Van Gogh's paintings for the price of just one by Alma-Tadema. In 1960, you could buy all of Alma-Tadema's paintings for the price of just one by Van Gogh. The market of reputation and of money in art has its dizzying ups and downs.Rhinoracer (talk) 12:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

And there are many examples of unrecognised masterpieces being found in someone's dusty attic and being sold for a paltry sum, but when the real artist is identified, the current owner discovers they're an instant millionaire, assuming they choose to now re-sell the painting for its actual market price. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Murder in a gay couple.

Hi; in my country, Argentina, murdering a relative carries a mandatory life sentence. Example: Carlos Carrascosa was convicted last June of murdering his wife María Marta García Belsunce in Pilar, Buenos Aires Province and was sentenced to a mandatory prisión perpetua (life imprisonment). My question is, if in a gay couple, one of them kill the another one, would the crime carry a mandatory life sentence if gay partnership is not recognized?. Hope you understand me. Thank you ! --FromSouthAmerica (talk) 02:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Does marital status really affect the sentence? It doesn't matter if Carrascosa murdered his wife, it only matters that he murdered someone. Same for a gay couple. (Unless the law is different in Argentina, which is possible.) Adam Bishop (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

According to the OP and Life imprisonment, murdering a relative indeed makes a difference. How 'relative' is defined however I haven't been able to find Nil Einne (talk) 11:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there a word for Oriental/Asian/Mongoloid that is politically correct, accurate, and non-offensive?

Is there a word for Oriental/Asian/Mongoloid that is politically correct, accurate, and non-offensive?

• Oriental -- is a word that sounds pleasant and complimentary, but some whiny politically correct nuts turned it into being politcally incorrect
• Asian -- the worst politically correct term out there because of its inaccuracy. Most of Asia is caucasian, middle eastern, and indo-arayan. And the Oriental/Mongoloid race category is mostly not on the continent of Asia, but on islands near Asia.
• Mongoloid -- scientific, possibly poltically correct, but the term is very offensive

And telling which country a people came from or their sub race like Han or Maio is usually too difficult. So... is there a word for Oriental/Asian/Mongoloid that is politically correct, accurate, and non-offensive? Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 05:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• Race is pretty much a bullshit idea, in the sense that there is usually very little scientific backing or great consistancy in classifying people. Terms like Han or Maio don't refer to subraces, they refer to people groups, and are self-identifying tags used by the groups themselves. If you want to refer to someone, use terms they would use to describe themselves to others. That is universally the most accurate and non-offensive way to talk about someone. --Jayron32 05:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

"Asian" has become the euphemism for "Oriental", meaning Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and most anyone else east or northeast of the Himalayas and residing along the western Pacific rim. "Oriental" means "Eastern", and it's more precise than "Asian" for sure, but that's the nature of political correctness. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 06:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

"Asian" has that connotation (of Northeast Asian and/or Southeast Asian, although oddly enough not always of Filipino) in the U.S. today, but in other places, such as Britain and Africa, it's far more likely to imply South Asian (from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and surrounding countries). But as more South Asians migrate to the U.S. (and have children), and more East Asians migrate to Europe and Africa (and have children), those assumptions may well change. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That's interesting, and by your implication it has to do with the type of immigrants seen in a given area. To be more blunt, "Asian" as a euphemism for "Oriental", in the U.S.A., refers to those of the "Mongoloid" race grouping, i.e. those with what some call "almond eyes". Filipinos don't really have that characteristic, nor do Indians, Pakistanis, etc. Hence, in America, "Asian" is a rather specific (and misleading) racial euphemism. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 07:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

In British English, the term "Asian" (i.e. British Asian) excludes all but those from the former British India. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As noted by Shakescene also, the British usage seems to be opposite from the American usage. So there may be no correct answer to OP unless he specifies where he's from. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd use East Asian. Accurate, and no-one's taken offence to it, although of course no term is without problems. That is, if you meant China(s)/Koreas/Japan sort-of-thing, rather than all of Asia. In Britain, Asian did mean British Indian, now it's changing to mean both them and the above group. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 09:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with "East Asian," "South Asian," "Southeast Asian," "Central Asian," etc. Specific regional descriptions are unambiguous without bringing up any racial implications that tend to cause problems (rightly or wrongly). Rckrone (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you can say they're entirely unambiguous. For example are Afghanis, South Asians or Central Asians? Vietnam is in South East Asia geographically and politically but often considered culturally East Asian. I suspect many people would identify Baichung Bhutia as East Asian if they look at him but as an Indian he's surely South Asian right? I'm part Chinese Malaysian and part Pākehā; so consider myself both East Asian and South East Asian. And in that vein, how do we deal with Singapore? It has a significant what many would call East Asian cultural influence given the Chinese dominance but also some South East Asian and of course South Asian cultural influence but is well and truly part of South East Asia and doesn't even neighbour part of East Asia. Any attempt to categorise humans is always going to have problems particular at the borderlines. P.S. As should be obvious, I do consider the terms the best solution but I think people should appreciate that they're far from unambigious. P.P.S. I should point out as hinted at by Jayron32, Mongloid often isn't considered particularly scientific nowadays Nil Einne (talk) 09:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

In the Mongoloid article I noticed they say "an historical" in the first sentence. Is this correct grammar? I've seen it used a lot but I don't think it is. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 08:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

If the OP is happy to use African to describe everyone from Afrikaans to Zulus, then South Asian and East Asian would be much more precise descriptions of the people living between the Western Pacific and the Arabian Peninsula. But, it might be more useful to try and understand the differences between Japanese and Burmans. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Left-wing unionism

Are/Were there any left-wing or socialist Unionist organisations or groups in Ireland and Northern Ireland? --05:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You're referring, I presume, to Unionism in the sense of wishing to preserve or strengthen Northern Ireland's political bond with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and opposing independence or absorption into the Irish Republic, rather than in the sense of trade unionism or labour unionism. I think that there was a strong working-class flavour to the Popular Unionist Party, which adopted a social programme broader than simple Ulster Unionism. (Many of the militias that supported other small Unionist parties, such as the Ulster Democratic Party, also had working-class roots, but I don't think that their political agendas were particularly left-wing.) The Northern Ireland Labour Party tries to avoid the question of political union with either the UK or the Republic (unlike the explicitly-nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party), and I think includes many members who are both Ulster Unionists and trade-unionists.

If you're asking more about left-wing unionism in the spirit of James Connolly, there are still several left-wing groups that are either nationalist or internationalist, such as the Workers' Party of Ireland, the Socialist Workers Party and the Communist Party of Ireland.

But I've never set foot in Ireland, so these are strictly third- and fourth-hand observations and speculations; there must be others here who know far more and far better than I. —— Shakescene (talk) 07:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There used to be a bit of a joke about even the poorest unionist considering themselves middle class to distinguish themselves from the nationalists. Probably breaking up a bit now. Dmcq (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There was a controversy a few year back, when one of the Irish trotskyist parties (SWP?) began re-evaluating the PUP, saying that PUP was more working-class-oriented than other parties in NI politics, etc.. This caused quite a stir as the Irish left is historically pro-republican in one sense or another. --Soman (talk) 16:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The PUP is the obvious example. The Northern Ireland Labour Party dissolved more than twenty years ago; it long attempted to be neutral but ultimately adopted unionist positions. Other historic examples include the vaguely leftish Ulster Progressive Unionist Association, the Commonwealth Labour Party (a split from the NILP). The UK Unionist Party initially supported the British Labour Party, but soon became highly critical of it. There have been individuals in both the Ulster Unionist Party and Democratic Unionist Party who have been described as left-wing, but I'd argue that they weren't very left-wing, and seldom had any influence. The most left-wing unionist group would be the small British and Irish Communist Organisation, although their position shifted somewhat over the years. Warofdreams talk 00:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Brit honors

It seems to this American that there are a lot of Brits who are honored by the royals (CBE, OBE, etc). So, from a layman on the street perspective, are these titles given much attention? Do they make the nightly news over there? Are only the more prestigous ones paid any sort of attention? Dismas|^(talk) 09:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Our article on orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom ought to give you some idea. And by the way, it's British, not Brit. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Discussion about whether "Brit" is an appropriate substitute for "Briton" / "British"

British is an adjective, Brit is a noun. "British" would seem more grammatically correct here. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC) Also, see this entry. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC) I would think it's easier to take insults when you're a top dog, running an empire. :) →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC) I always thought "Brit" was short for "Britisher", but the article says that's obsolete. But speaking of taking insults, what do the British call us Yanks? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC) It's not really about an "insult", as such, just an unnecessary lack of respect. One of the comments on the blog Separated by a Common Language pretty much sums it up: Whoever coined Brit clearly had some idea of how they should have been referring to me - it is clearly a shortened or diminutive form of Britain, British, Briton - and the speaker couldn’t be bothered to say the whole word/phrase. That ‘can’t be bothered’ translates as a lack of respect. That lack of respect irritates me. :~) On a personal level, I never meant any great insult by calling Americans, Yanks - but I stopped doing it when I realised that many Americans did find it irritating. And that irritates me slightly as well. I was prepared to change my word usage to avoid irritating/annoying Americans - why aren’t they prepared to moderate their word usage to stop irritating me? I understand that it is a minor thing and that I shouldn’t be so sensitive ……. However, I was taught that to insult someone accidentally was just plain bad manners. Good communication is all about choosing words that your listener will interpret in the same way as you intend them. When speaking, it is my job to understand how my words will be understood and to choose them carefully. Therefore, if I insult someone accidentally, I have failed to communicate well. Insulting people on purpose is a whole different ball game. :~) Reuben Said “As a Yank living in the UK, I find it shocking that people find 'Brit' anything other than neutral.” - Well I find it absolutely shocking that anyone who reads blogs like these doesn’t realise that there are huge differences in the way that language is perceived by different people. I just hope that Reuben was trying to be ironic – no matter how badly he pulled it off. [15] Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC) "Yank" is neither an insult nor disrespectful. It's just a nickname. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC) Ironically, "Reuben" is a semi-polite way of saying "Rube" or "Hick" or "Country Bumpkin" or "Hayseed" or "Jay" (old-fashioned term). Or is that the point? →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 10:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC) It's just a reference to one of the earlier comments on the blog that I was quoting from. Meanwhile, our article on Yankee says Outside the United States, Yank or Yankee is a slang term, sometimes but not always derogatory, for any U.S. citizen, and indicates that many Southerners would certainly not regard it as a neutral term. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC) The blog wouldn't come up, so I don't know their context of "Reuben". There's no question people outside the USA use "Yankee" as an insult, and always have. We just don't care. We've embraced the term and worn it like a badge of honor. Most of the time, anyway. The Yankee article has an amusing summary of how the term is used with successive groups to describe someone else. The New York Yankees got their name because it's a synonym of "American". Songs like "Yankee Doodle" and "The Yankee Doodle Boy" are considered patriotic. Although there is the old southern joke, about the guy who said he was 21 years old before he realized that "damn" and "yankee" were separate words. :) →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 11:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC) The "context" of Reuben is that it is the name of a commenter on the blog. [16] That is all. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC) It still won't come up. I just wondered if they were trying to imply that only a "Rube" would call a British person a "Brit". →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 11:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

If you're all done talking about slang terms for populations... this mongrel half-kraut yank's question is still unanswered. Dismas|^(talk) 12:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There are generally two batches of honours awarded each year, in the Queen's birthday honours list and the New Year honours list, which are reported about in the news, yes. But it's pretty rare to see things like OBE appended to people's names in general practice, particularly given than many of those who receive the honours are unknown civil servants. People like Jimmy Saville might insist on it, though... Malcolm XIV (talk) 12:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

My sense is that people are much more attached to/conscious of knighthoods than to/of the other honours. Even peerages have become somewhat debased of recent years. The ordinary person would be generally aware that the former Mr Smith is now Sir Murgatroyd Smith; but they wouldn't know, or really care, that Mr Jones is a CBE, OM, LVO or CH. -- JackofOz (talk) 14:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As an example of what Jack said, observe that Sir Alan is a redirect for Alan Sugar. Malcolm XIV (talk) 14:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As another example closer to home, I've lost count of the number of WP articles I've edited that said the subject "was awarded the Order of the British Empire/Order of Australia" or whatever. Such awards - or appointments, to give the correct term - are to a particular level of the relevant order, such as Member, Officer, Commander, Companion, etc. Nobody is ever awarded "the Order of the British Empire" as such. But common parlance would have it otherwise, because the vast majority of people are indifferent to/ignorant of the forms and customs they use, because they don't have a particular interest in these things, mainly because they know there's precious little chance of them ever getting one. -- JackofOz (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The lower level honours (like MBEs) are handed out in quite large numbers, only those going to famous people get any real mention in the press. Local newspapers might mention local people being honoured, though. Someone being honoured for something particularly interesting might get mentioned in an "And finally..." type story. OBEs and CBEs are rather more prestigious, but still only really get press attention when going to famous people. Knighthoods are given routinely to people with certain jobs - High Court judges, senior civil servants, etc., nobody pays any attention to those. Knighthoods for less routine reasons get more attention, but I think usually you have to be either very rich or very famous to get one anyway. Peerages are mostly handed out for political reasons, so nobody pays much attention to them (one exception is peerages handed out as part of the "Government of all the Talent" (GOAT) where experts in their field, sometimes famous ones, are given peerages so they can take government positions, as recently happened with the now Lord Alan). --Tango (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

More discussion about whether "Brit" is an appropriate substitute for "Briton" / "British"

Speaking as a French-American who lived for years in London and has worked with Britons for three decades, I must say that I have never met one who objected to the word `Brit`, and, indeed, many use it themselves. You Limeys, Taffies and Jocks are way too sensitive. Rhinoracer (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC) Just because some people don't mind it, doesn't mean nobody does. And just because nobody voiced an objection, it doesn't mean it didn't grate with them. It's not about anyone being oversensitive, it's about respect: not playing the Ugly American. Malcolm XIV (talk) 12:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC) Instead of just claiming that the word brit is a no-no, would you please then suggest a replacement. Saying British persons, UK citizens, or whatever doesn't seem to cut it. It is quite interesting that the convenient names in English used for other peoples e.g. Swedes, Danes, Dutch are widely accepted and used but that extra PC-talk is necessary for yourselves. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC) It's really not "PC talk" to ask people not to use unwanted diminutives. If you kept called me "Malc" in a faux-chummy way, I would be quite within my rights to ask you to stop without it being anything to do with political correctness. Your use of Swedes, Danes and Dutch conveniently overlooks other proximate nations that have an equivalent "problem" with terminology. Are you saying it's too much bother to say "French people" or "Irish citizens", for example? Or is there a "convenient" name for them that I haven't yet heard? In the case of this question, I was assuming in good faith that the OP didn't realise that his choice of words might irritate some people. Some people, not all people. I don't really think it would have been all that "inconvenient" to say British honors or a lot of British people. Malcolm XIV (talk) 13:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC) Ok, I guess I shouldn't have mentioned PC, since it apparently gave you the opportunity to answer but avoid the actual question. I'll re-state it: In a sentence such as "It seems to this American that there are a lot of X who are honored by the royals...", where X refers to persons from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, what is the appropriate X? You have made it clear that you consider brits unacceptable. What do you want us to use to avoid the "unnecessary lack of respect"? /Coffeeshivers (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC) If you re-read what I said, I gave alternatives in my final sentence. Malcolm XIV (talk) 16:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

MBE sounds something like being made a Kentucky colonel by the Governor of that state, like Col. Sanders of chicken fame, Pope John Paul II, or Winston Churchill, who were all thereby entitled to be called the equivalent of "Colonel Winston Churchill" or "Honorable Pope John Paul II" or whatever. Edison (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

In recent years these honours have to my mind been given to unsuitable people with immoral pasts, so they are just baubles that the royals give away to buy popularity rather than being a mark of true worth. 89.242.93.56 (talk) 13:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Queen only makes the decisions for giving honours to other royals. The Prime Minister decides who else should get honours (on the advice of various committees and things). --Tango (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The thought of Winston Churchill or Pope John Paul II being made Kentucky Colonels is an amusing mental picture. Back to the "Brits" thing for a second, a Britisher on another ref desk page called himself a "Brit". Is it the case that it's OK for them to call themselves that, but not for others to? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots

Except, Tango, that there are certain honours within the monarch's personal gift, such as the Royal Victorian Order, the Order of the Garter and the Order of the Thistle. She and she alone decides who gets these, and when, and why; the only limitation is that there can be at most 24 Knights of the Garter alive at any one time, and only 16 Knights of the Thistle. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Royals of Multiple birth

Has there been any royal person in history that were twins, triplets, quadruplets, or quintuplet? --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 10:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Princess Sara and Princess Aisha of Jordan are twins. There's also Romulus and Remus, though they are of somewhat dubious historicity. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I remember that William IV of England had a pair of twin sons by his consort Adelaide, but they were stillborn. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

And Prince Frederick Charles of Hesse sired two sets of twins: Philipp, Landgrave of Hesse and Prince Wolfgang of Hesse, and their younger siblings Prince Christoph of Hesse and Richard Wilhelm Leopold. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

For living twin royals, there's Prince Nicolas and Prince Aymeric of Belgium. Looking through Leese's Blood Royal: issue of the kings and queens of medieval England, William de Bohun, 1st Earl of Northampton had a twin brother named Edward. Humphrey Stafford had two twin sons, William and George. Philip II of France had a pair of stillborn twin sons. Burke's Royal Family posits the theory that Empress Matilda was a twin of William III. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, another pair of living royal twins: Prince Philip and Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Waleran de Beaumont, 1st Earl of Worcester and Robert de Beaumont, 2nd Earl of Leicester. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Triplets: (1) Lamidi Olayiwola Adeyemi III, the current Traditional Monarch in the Nigerian region of Oba, is the father of triplets, two girls (Adeola and Adebunmi) and a boy (Adeniran). Source: [17]

(2) Per the Romulus and Remus note above, the first three kings of the Fifth dynasty of Egypt were supposed to have been triplets].

(For the odds re quadruplets and quintuplets, see Hellin's Law and multiply by the odds of being a royal family...) Best, WikiJedits (talk) 21:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Not only that, but I believe the multiple birth rate (particularly above twins) has increased dramatically in the West (and hence, somewhat in the World average) since IVF and similar treatments. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 08:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

(If we're finished with reality,) see The Man in the Iron Mask by Alexandre Dumas, père. B00P (talk) 05:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The Importance of Punctuation

I'm looking for a story I once read in a book about the importance of punctuation. There is a criminal under trial for murder and some authoritative voice (queen?) sends a written message to declare the verdict. The original message is "Impossible, to be condemned," which would have resulted in capital punishment for the criminal. But somewhere along the line, perhaps in the transcription, the comma was dropped, corrupting the message to "Impossible to be condemned," which resulted in the criminal's life being spared. Or the story could have been the other way around, with the criminal accidentally being hung. Is this a true story, and if so, where can I find more details? dlempa (talk) 13:54, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know that particular story, but it brings to mind the famously ambiguous "Let Him Have It". (Punctuation isn't an issue there, so I'm afraid I haven't answered your question.)--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I've heard that story in relation to Catherine the Great of Russia. But I've always had my suspicions about its apocryphality (?), since this just wouldn't work in Russian. But then, she was Prussian, and maybe she said it in German. I googled it but came up with nothing. -- JackofOz (talk) 14:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) A similar example is well known in the Nordic languages. A recent Norwegian book about punctuation uses it as the title: "Heng ham ikke vent til jeg kommer", word-by-word translation: "Hang him not wait till I come", which, depending on punctuation translates to: "Hang him, don't wait till I arrive", or "Don't hang him, wait till I arrive". I'm not aware of the example being based on an actual historic event (and I doubt that it is, because if it were, I think the story would have been even better known). --NorwegianBlue ^talk 14:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Re Jack's post and my post: How would the wording that I quoted work in Russian or German? --NorwegianBlue ^talk 15:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I know no German to speak of, and my knowledge of Russian diminishes by the second. Maybe someone else can chip in. -- JackofOz (talk) 15:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

And I know no Russian to speak of, and my knowledge of German diminishes by the second. However, with the help of Google + Google Translate: It almost works in German. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 15:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, we do have a Language Desk full of many people who are good at translating all sorts of languages... --98.217.71.237 (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

See this, it may be of help. 68.244.39.0 (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That's the one. It reminds me, in reverse, of Roger Casement, who was said to have been "hanged by a comma". -- JackofOz (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Here's another link pointing towards Catherine the great as the origin of the story. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 15:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

see also Eats, shoots and leaves/--Wetman (talk) 16:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Which title is Bowdlerized from the original "Eats roots shoots and leaves]] (put the commas where you will). "Roots" has a fairly obvious rude meaning in Strine. PhGustaf (talk) 17:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The "root" cause of this ambiguity is that the comma is not just used for separation, it's used in place of "and". That's why proper punctuation is "A, B and C" rather than "A, B, and C", because the latter actually means "A and B and and C". →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well there it depends what you're saying - A, B, and C can be perfectly valid, as you note, commas are used both for separation and as an 'and' substitute - "A, B, and C" has two commas, which mean two different things - the first is "and", the second is separating. To use some math symbols, "A, B, and C" means A+B+C, but "A, B and C" means A+(B+C). Without the second comma, the B and C run into each other, with it they are kept apart. Which of those you want to use.... depends on which you want to say --Saalstin (talk) 18:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree, the semantics are exactly the same. The difference is simply between British English (no commas before 'and') and American English (with commas before 'and'). --Tango (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• This is not an American/British difference. In both countries some use the serial comma and some, sadly, do not. Hence the two alternative names for it, "Oxford comma" and "Harvard comma". --Anonymous, 05:48 UTC, October 4, 2009.

The semantics can be extraordinarily different :) --Saalstin (talk) 19:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As with Mark Twain (as per Hal Holbrook) depicting a child saying "Good-bye, God, I'm going to Missouri", and then reporting that she actually said, "Good, by God, I'm going to Missouri." :) →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

It's not just commas. There's this one, embedded in this page,[18] which is also somewhere in The Joys of Yiddish. Stalin receives a telegram from Trotsky which reads, "You were right I was wrong I should apologize" which makes Stalin happy until a Yiddish-speaking colleague says that it really reads, "You were right? I was wrong? I should apologize? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There was an example of this came up once in a US criminal proceedings. The prosecutors said a woman had called in and confessed, "I killed my baby." What had really happened, it turned out, was that she had, while sleeping, accidentally killed the child (rolled over on it in some bizarre fashion), and was trying to explain that in a state of panic. So the confession wasn't a confession at all, because of its ambiguity, and she was acquitted, in the end. "I (purposefully) killed my baby" and "I (accidentally) killed my baby" are two different phrases, but the dropping of the qualifiers makes a very ambiguous statement... --Mr.98 (talk) 21:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Ha, an example from ancient Rome. A prominent Roman senator, in a time of troubles, sent to the prophetess, the Sybyl of Cumae, to know whether he should stay at home or flee into exile lest he be arrested.

The Sybyl's answer: DOMINESTES. (At that time, written Latin did not separate letters.) The senator read it as DOMINE STES, i.e. "Lord, stay". He therefore stayed...and was arrested. It turns out the true reading should have been DOMI NE STES --"Do not stay at home".

Ah, those prophetesses...what a witty batch o' lassies!

And somewhere lurks in my memory the comma that cost the US government billions of dollars...a tax suppressed for the importation of 'fruit nuts' ended up being suppressed for 'fruit,nuts'...yeesh, that is incompetence raised to the level of transcendent genius! Rhinoracer (talk) 20:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

And here's one about the importance of capitalisation - see qqzm's post. (It's rather too close to the "bone" for me, unfortunately.)

Returning to the original question: I really ought to go back to Russian school or stop making pronouncements about what is possible or not in Russian. I had only ever heard this execution/pardon story from English-language sources, but I now learn it is taught in Russian schools, and the expression "kaznit' nel'zya pomilovat'" (казнить нелзя помиловать) is so well known to Russians that at least one movie has been made with that as its title. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There is an example from Japanese (very well known). It pertains to a sign outside an inn or something which said 'ここではきものをぬいでください', which, depending on whether the comma (here omitted - which is not only possible but in fact usual in older Japanese) comes before or after the 'は' can either mean 'Please take off your shoes here' or 'Please take off your clothes here'. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 00:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

A true story of the importance of punctuation was a Canadian lawsuit involving Bell Aliant and Rogers Communications. The two companies had signed a contract that should have said it would

continue in force for a period of five (5) years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five (5) year terms unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.

but the actual text was:

continue in force for a period of five (5) years from the date it is made, and thereafter for successive five (5) year terms, unless and until terminated by one year prior notice in writing by either party.

which meant that 1-year-notice clause took precedence over the 5-year-term specification, making the latter effectively meaningless. When Bell Aliant took advantage of this error to cancel in the middle of a 5-year term, Rogers objected. The initial court ruling was in favor of Bell Aliant, but this was later reversed on the basis that the French version of the contract clearly said what the other one was apparently intended to say. --Anonymous, 06:00 UTC, October 4, 2009.

A very good example is from Marlowe's Edward II:

. Mor._ The king must die, or Mortimer goes down;
  The commons now begin to pity him:
  Yet he that is the cause of Edward's death,
  Is sure to pay for it when his son's of age;
  And therefore will I do it cunningly.
  This letter, written by a friend of ours,
  Contains his death, yet bids then save his life;
                                                               [_Reads._
  _Edwardum occidere nolite timere, bonum est,
  Fear not to kill the king, 'tis good he die:_
  But read it thus, and that's another sense;
  _Edwardum occidere nolite, timere bonum est,
  Kill not the king, 'tis good to fear the worst._
  Unpointed as it is, thus shall it go.

--rossb (talk) 11:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, in the tale "The Adventure of the Proper Comma" in The Memoirs of Solar Pons (1951), "the Sherlock Holmes of Praed Street" decides to investigate due to correct punctuation. A female patient at a mental asylum scratched the message "Help, please" on a stone and tossed it through the fence. Pons was intrigued that she took the trouble to include the comma. B00P (talk) 06:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there any technique to defend yourself from a shark attack?

From the attack of a Great Shark. --190.50.97.170 (talk) 18:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You might check our article on dolphin, which - if I'm recalling correctly - can defend by pounding a shark in a certain spot witht heir snout. Where that is, i don't know, but I suspect it's similar to kicking a male human...well, you get the picture.4.68.248.130 (talk) 18:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Aim for the gills, if memory serves. --Tango (talk) 18:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You should get in a defensive position and fight back. Punch sensitive areas, namely the eyes, gills, and nose, and it should go away. Still, it's better to just not get in that situation - don't go swimming at twilight, don't wear shiny things, don't carry bloody fish carcasses... ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

If you are referring to what Quint should have done in the 1975 feature film , I think Chief Brody gave him the best advise when he told him: "Your going to need a bigger boat." 72.58.55.48 (talk) 18:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Following up on that, I suppose blowing up a compressed-air tank could always work as well. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 19:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Not a chance. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 23:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait, you're telling me that wasn't real!? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Dunno. Did you need to be told? Your answer to that will answer your own question :) --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 02:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not so sure I would count on blowing up a scuba tank. In any case, predators in general are more inclined to back off if you put up a fight and show no fear. According to this extract from The Worst Case Scenario [19] you should use anything you have and repeatedly whack it in the eyes and gills (not the snout, unless that's all you can reach) and there's a reasonable chance it will back off. If it still eats you up, take solace in the fact that you're helping to improve the survival of a threatened species. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Scream and thrash up the water.They are alarmed by this...except, unfortunately, the Great White. This is because the Great White Shark is a dedicated predator, and its dedicated prey is roughly man-sized mammals, such as seals, walruses, or homo sapiens (i.e. you and me); thus, a display of thrashing and hollering that might deter a tiger shark or a hammerhead would only signal to a Great White "Mmm, lunch is a bit upset today." Rhinoracer (talk) 20:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

All suggestions here are going along the lines of the best defense is a great offense. This question is easily answered by providing simple defensive measures such as shark tanks, shark suits, and simply staying out of the water. -- kainaw™ 21:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You don't need courage to fight against a shark. Do it like a human being do it. Who needs courage when you can have a weapon? MBelgrano (talk) 21:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

A full-sized great white is far too large to even think about dissuading without a speargun. They will destroy you if they are so inclined. The only reasonable prevention is not to swim in their habitat. Vranak (talk) 23:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article Shark repellent. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Worst Case Scenario theory would still apply: If attacked by a Great White, try to repeatedly poke it in the eyes and the gills, with speargun, fist, or whatever. There is no guarantee you'll survive, but it will improve your odds, because if you do nothing, you're dead. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Indeed - I think the question is clearly based on the premise that you are already being attacked, in which case you might as well try. Preventing a shark attack is a completely different, although probably more useful, question. --Tango (talk) 04:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

For the best advice, see here. B00P (talk) 06:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Our article on shark attacks suggests poking the beast in the eyes or gills, but that assumes you have adequate time (sharks attack fast) and very long arms. More useful (albeit highly contentious) are chemical repellants and the shark billy (a bullet or shotgun shell inside a stick with a trigger that fires on contact). Forget the speargun -- small bore, hard to aim and very likely to really, really annoy the shark. Best advice is to know something about the ocean around you. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Looking for newspaper articles

I'm looking for four newspaper stories to help with a Wikipedia article I'm currently working on. Can anyone help? The newspaper articles are:

• Germany clears its minefields - Philadelphia Inquirer - September 22, 1991
• Land mines litter East West German border - National Public Radio - Oct 3, 1991
• Germans work to rid ex-border of land mines - Dallas Morning News - May 6, 1992
• Former German border almost free of mines - Austin American-Statesman - November 11, 1995

If anyone has access to a newspaper database, could you please see if those articles are there and let me know? -- ChrisO (talk) 23:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

A little-known and very useful Wikipedia page is the resource request. There you can place requests such as yours and someone might come along and help you. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 07:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Heck, I wish I'd known about that years ago. Thanks, Richardrj. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Religion of Lithuania before the Teutonic Knights

What was the religion of Lithuania and the surrounding area before the Teutonic Knights arrived? Our article doesn't say anything about it. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 23:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Christianization of Lithuania has some information - mostly a Baltic paganism (see also Lithuanian mythology and Romuva), but there were some Orthodox and Catholic converts. Warofdreams talk 23:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Livonian Crusade is also of relevance. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! The Romuva article was very interesting and the others provided a lot of background info for me. Thanks a lot! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

October 4

Funding political parties

Which political party in the United States get most fund - Democrats or Republicans? Which type of industry give the parties maximum fund? How much fund third parties get? --AquaticMonkey (talk) 02:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

www.opensecrets.org is a nonpartisan website dedicated to tracking this. Rckrone (talk) 03:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Aid and relief

Please note: I'm not using this website as a crystal ball. But I'm interested in finding out if there may or may not be televised benefit concerts to aid the victims of the 2009 Samoa earthquake? Will there also be any charity singles for the same thing, as well? I'm also interested if the USNS Comfort and/or the USNS Mercy might serve in the relief efforts. If more information is available, please let me know. Thank you so very much.69.203.157.50 (talk) 02:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

While we understand that you are not expecting us to predict the future, it would make more sense to wait a bit longer and post your question some time a bit more into the future, after all, the earthquake in Samoa has only just happened and they are still looking for people trapped in the ruins, not thinking about relief concerts. If you want to know about whether a particular ship is planning to serve there, you may find it helpful to contact the ship in question. On the website of the USNS Comfort there is a FAQ button (which as you know means 'Frequently Asked Questions') so I would assume there was a place to ask questions, even though I couldn't find one on that page. Good luck! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 09:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Correction:- There is. There is an email address in the first paragraph. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 09:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I trust the OP's interest in the earthquake tragedy is a wish to help. They may call the nearest Samoan embassy[20] and ask how best to contribute. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Or simply donate to one of the many charities out there helping. --Tango (talk) 04:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

A though experiment of sorts...

If Jesus lived in Nazi Germany (ignore the fact that he was a Jew here) and was hiding a Jew, what would he have said if some member of the SS were to go and ask whether he was hiding a Jew (also ignore any historical mistakes I'm making here)? After all, the answer "no" would save a few lives, but "yes" would mean the entire household and the Jew getting sent off to concentration camps... 202.45.54.47 (talk) 06:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand the enquirer's purpose, but this falls into speculation and opinion (What would Jesus do?, What if God was one of us?) that isn't easily supported by sources and references. Perhaps, Beliefnet [21] would be a good non-denominational forum for posing such a question. ¶ Factually, of course, the early Christians were faced with precisely this sort of problem in a very real (non-experimental) way during many persecutions, and I think responded in several different ways. Jesus rebuked a companion for cutting off the ear of one of those who had come to arrest Jesus (Matthew 26:51-52). —— Shakescene (talk) 08:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, Kant discussed a very similar ethical problem in On a Supposed Right to Tell Lies from Benevolent Motives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 11:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Jesus would probably not have directly answered the question, if his interaction with Pontius Pilate is any guide. —Kevin Myers 15:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's possible to meaningfully consider the question while "ignoring the fact that Jesus himself was a Jew:" his entire worldview and beliefs were firmly based in mainstream Pharisaic Judaism (notwithstanding subsequent Pauline biblical efforts to obscure this by substituting "Pharisees" or the ambiguous "Jews" where actual "Saducees" were being mentioned). The Pharisaic school of Judaic thought condoned the technical breaking of religious laws if a greater good resulted, such as saving health or life. Breaking a religious injunction against lying in order to save someone (whether or not a fellow Jew) from unjustified persecution and murder by such an obviously malign secular authority would in Pharisaic thinking have been completely justifiable and expected behaviour; not doing so would have been highly questionable if not reprehensible. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You need to either decide this for yourself or ask a religious leader of your choice. This isn't the kind of question a ref desk can answer, since it isn't based on facts, it is based on faith. --Tango (talk) 20:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

87.81.230.195 has the right answer, and it's a no-brainer. It's the Jewish principle of the "greater sin" vs. the "greater virtue". Lying may be a sin, but allowing a righteous person to be killed would be a greater sin. Also keep in mind that Jesus observably practiced this principle Himself, by healing the sick and the lame on the Sabbath. But as Myers suggests, this does not rule out the possibility that Jesus would have come up with something clever to say that would send the Nazis away confused, as He was pretty good at that sort of thing. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

"Move along. These aren't the Jews you're looking for." Adam Bishop (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The OP's question is counterfactual, it displays Godwin's Law at work and it can be rated with How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? as an exercise for theologians with too much spare time. Tango's answer should be sufficient. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Could he have magically turned their blood into wine, since he did equivalent magic tricks a couple of times? (John 2:1-11 water to wine; Mark 14, 22-26 turned wine into blood.) This would seem like a highly lethal and effective way to deal with pesky SS who come to your door, if you are the Messiah. Edison (talk) 23:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it more likely that He would have persuaded them of the error of their ways and to renounce their Nazism. However, it seems like the point of OP's original question was been lost. It was simply the question of whether Jesus (or anyone else, for that matter) would lie to protect people, and whether there's a moral dilemma. Of course He would. Anyone with a conscience would. And as 87.81.230.195 pointed out, there is in fact no moral dilemma in lying to protect innocent people's lives. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't recall Jesus having particularly impressive powers of persuasion - the Bible describes plenty of people disagreeing with him and not being convinced otherwise. Short of a miracle, I see no reason to assume he could persuade the Nazi to change his ways. Whether there is a moral dilemma or not depends on your morals, which is why the OP needs to answer this question for themselves. (Christians do not universally agree on moral issues.) --Tango (talk) 04:07, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Jesus' power of persuasion was sufficient to get him a billion or two followers today, though Paul certainly helped. The Jewish tradition, if I have it right, is that it's OK to break God's Law, pace rape, murder, and broadly construed idolatry, if you really have to. God wants his followers to have rich full happy lives, and if it's a pork chop that's the only food around and you're starving it's OK to eat the pork chop. If you have to lie to live, or to save another's life, it can be OK to lie. PhGustaf (talk) 04:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I should have noted that a lie repudiating a faith in God, or suggesting a faith in a false god, is right out. PhGustaf (talk) 04:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I would argue that Paul (and his peers) did far more than Jesus did (assuming he even existed in a way reasonably similar to that described in the Bible). The number of followers when Jesus died was pretty low, as I understand it - the boom didn't happen until after that. --Tango (talk) 05:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Well yes. Much of what's currently called Christianity is really Paulism, and Paul had many failings, especially those including his bizarre notions about women. I was just speculating about how Jesus (and I agree it's less than 50-50 that he existed at all) might have acted as an observant Jew. PhGustaf (talk) 05:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Blood into wine: Wait until the SS becomes suspicious about the missing officers, or until it becomes impossible to hide the dead bodies... Vltava 68 11:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Needed for urgent problem facing before debate!!!!!

Friends brothers:

I have a question on how to oppose that democracy wasn't a faliure in developing countries? If anybody could tell me theese sametime some advantages also?? Thanks alot!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamrvd (talk • contribs) 11:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify the multiple negations inherent in your wording, do you mean that you will be arguing that democracy was/is a failure in developing countries? 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Compare developing countries with oil reserves and developing countries without oil to see what difference the presence of Big International Oil makes. What difference does a thriving tourist industry have on democratic institutions? --Wetman (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Ref. Desk won't debate for you. Pick a developing country that has a history of, say, colonialism followed by democracy. Identify things that have happened during that transition and use them as examples that support your case. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

That's if you can find a developing country that is a democracy. B00P (talk) 06:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Your debate seems to be about the influence of oil, or tourism, on development. Neither requires democratic institutions, but here are a few examples that might be worth researching: Oil: USA and Canada (developing at the time of discoveries); tourism: Singapore (not quite democratic, but a nice destination) or Burma (losing vast tourism revenues by being such . . . must be NPOV . . . jerks). DOR (HK) (talk) 09:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

testifying in death penalty cases

In the US, has anyone refused to testify against a defendant on the basis that their evidence may lead the defendant to be convicted and face the death penalty? If so, what happens. If the evidence was crucial, would the judge make allowances for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.105.221 (talk) 21:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

It is within the power of a judge to impose sanctions on a witness who refuses to answer for Contempt of court particularly when the witness has taken the legal oath swearing to "Tell the whole truth". As an exception in USA the constitution upholds the right of a witness to plead the 5th Amendment instead of possibly incriminating themself but that must be stated as reason by the witness. Other reasonings such as disliking the legal system or the way a case might go are not exempted. BTW The use of the death penalty in USA can be used in countries that have abolished the penalty in an appeal against a deportation. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hence the country that won't extradite the murderer, gets to keep the murderer on their own soul. I don't see how someone could plead the Fifth when they are merely a witness. Better he should have said up front, "I saw nothing." It would still be morally dubious, but it would save time and resources. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The UK usually gets a commitment from the US that they won't seek the death penalty during extradition proceedings. Such commitments aren't binding, though, at least not on state courts, which has caused problems in the past, as I recall. Committing perjury or obstructing a police investigation are also illegal (at least, they are in the UK), so lying about not having seen anything would also not be allowed. --Tango (talk) 05:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You can imagine cases where the witness only witnessed a crime because he or she was committing one as well, or the testimony would contradict something he or she said earlier, thereby committing perjury. In all likelihood, the witness would provide such testimony and would not be prosecuted (or would be to a lesser degree) for their crime(s). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Our article on the fifth amendment includes sentences like this: "The amendment has also been used, notably, by defendants and witnesses in criminal cases involving the Mafia." That implies you can plead the fifth when you are a witness in somebody else's trial. --Tango (talk) 05:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but only if you are actually using the Fifth to avoid self-incrimination, like if a witness's truthful answer would be "Yes, I saw Bugsy take all the money from the vault, because I was standing there pointing my gun at the guard." If you're using the Fifth to avoid getting rubbed out by the mob later, you'll get thrown in jail for contempt of court. (You get to decide which is worse.) Tempshill (talk) 06:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

John de Bohun, 5th Earl of Hereford

In the article on John de Bohun, 5th Earl of Hereford it says John did not play much of a public role. Apparently he had some sort of incapacity. What was that "incapacity"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.83.105.28 (talk) 22:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The quoted source also only says vaguely that it was an "incapacity". This is complete speculation, but since he was 16 at the time of the Battle of Boroughbridge, and his father was killed there, maybe he was also there and was injured in some way? Adam Bishop (talk) 02:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

It sounds to me like it was probably some kind of embarrassing incapacity, which is why references to it are vague (it would have been hidden by the family). Learning difficulties, mental illness, epilepsy, some congenital disfigurement, perhaps even just a stammer - these are all things that aristocratic families would try to keep hidden so as not to make their bloodline look weak. The fact that he (twice) married (albeit without issue, at least not surviving issue - the article doesn't specify) seems to contradict that slightly, though. --Tango (talk) 04:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

October 5

Divorce in Interracial Marriage

What are the divorce rates for asian-white couples, black-white couples, and asian-black couples in the U.S. and Canada? 174.114.236.41 (talk) 03:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)