Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Reference desk

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.146.28.229 (talk) at 06:18, 2 May 2014 (→‎Popular critics of Internet communities?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
skip to bottom
Select a section:
Shortcut
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:


April 26

Correlation between leadership in the workplace and social skills

Are there workplace leaders who are not very skilled in their social lives or do good leaders and successful business people generally have good social skills also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.220.128.88 (talk) 01:21, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd expect that some people are good leaders when assigned to the role, but don't spontaneously become good leaders if not assigned the role. So, in a social situation they wouldn't tend to be "the life of the party", but could still do a good job managing others. StuRat (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We need some definitions here. By "workplace leader" do you mean someone appointed to lead, somoene self-appointed to lead (through being the company owner), or someone who truly leads? In my expereince they are often quite different things. HiLo48 (talk) 06:30, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A good leader in any field is going to have some degree of aloofness. Whether that qualifies as a good social skill is a matter of opinion. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:34, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Really, any answer to this question is going to be a matter of opinion.--Maleko Mela (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Casey Stengel said the secret to being a manager was to keep the guys who were neutral about him away from the guys who hated him. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For reference: the top three hits on this google scholar search for /workplace leadership social skills/ all look promising [1]. You can ask here or at WP:REX if you want the full texts and can't get access through your library or other means. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See here: "Professor Hare pointed out that psychopaths thrive in the fields of big-business and politics and can create mayhem therein. Intelligent psychopaths can be very charming and charismatic and find their way into various positions of leadership because of such outward characteristics that are combined with single-minded and determined ruthlessness. Unfortunately, such charisma and decisiveness has beguiling broad appeal to non-psychopaths who do not have the either the time or inclination to undertake or audit various leadership responsibilities themselves. Psychopaths seek to be in positions of power, crave malign thrills and enjoy manipulating others and derive a sense of superiority from such pursuits." Count Iblis (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that anyone who wants to be a leader is a psychopath? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:28, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and all striped animals are zebras MChesterMC (talk) 08:45, 28 April 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Bismillah - Bohemian Rhapsody

Does anyone know if there have been protests (whether pro- or anti-Islam) against the song "Bohemian Rhapsody" by Queen on the grounds of its use of the term "Bismillah"? --69.204.228.240 (talk) 13:03, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When Queen's Greatest Hits was released in Iran, it included a booklet explaining the lyrics, and said that the "Bismillah" in Bo Rhap was the murderer calling out to God for forgiveness before his execution. Here's an Irianian choir performing it. --Nicknack009 (talk) 14:34, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As if nothing really mattered. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:41, April 26, 2014 (UTC)
Anyway, Arabic-speaking Christians also say "Bismillah" (though not usually as part of the same longer phrases commonly used by Muslims). AnonMoos (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe see Basmala#Alternative Christian meaning. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:11, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

Saga of sci-fi novels (of the same author) about a cosmic war between centuries-old creatures (probably thousands of pages)

Dear Oracle,

some years ago a read a Wikipedia page speaking about a saga of sci-fi novels (of the same author), specifying that it was one of the longest as per number of pages for the same fictitious universe written by the same author of all times, where a sort of Divine Father had put some sort of Generals all around the universe in order to continue it, but then for divergences of opinions they had started to be in conflict and this was going to degenerate in a cosmic war. The original thing seemed to be that the main characters were not humanoid beings, but the galaxies themselves, or constellations, or vortexes. Or maybe each of them was in charge of a galaxy, I don't remember well enough. The main content seemed to be a cosmic war between the lords of different galaxies. Would you recognize the name of the sage from the poor description of my messed-up memories about it???? Thank you in every case!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.141.197.200 (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with the plot you desribe, or this work, but Henry_Darger wrote a huge fantasy manuscript, one of the largest I've heard of:
-just a guess, might help. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe one (or more) Cthulhu Mythos deities will ring a bell. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:21, April 26, 2014 (UTC)

April 27

Would this count as a primary or secondary source? (anthropology master's thesis)

When reading an anthropology master's thesis, I found it described how each of the chapters was written:

"Chapter 4 describes by means of demographic, economic, and social perspectives, the trend of the community after World War II. Chapter 5 focuses on the social interaction of the community members and on the underlying values and structures. These two chapters are based mainly on the data collected by participant observation techniques, on structured and unstructured interviews, and are supplemented by recent Japanese publications on Mexico, community newspapers, pamphlets, and newsletters." - I know the author has cited the school's enrollment figures and an "(Idaka 1977:38)."

Based on this text (I know it is footnoted) would you say it is a primary source or a secondary source? (If anyone wants to see the documents, including the pages of Chapter 5 I am talking about, I can e-mail you them)

  • The University of Alabama libraries section on sourcing for anthropology states here: "Primary sources are original works created by a person who witnessed or participated in an event. Examples include diaries, memoirs, letters, newspaper and magazine articles, photographs, and manuscripts. Government materials are sometimes considered primary sources, too." and "Secondary sources discuss information originally presented elsewhere. They include scholarly journal articles, books, conference proceedings, dissertations, and class lectures."
  • Nova Southeastern University states here: "Primary sources refer to information collected firsthand from such sources as historical documents, literary texts, artistic works, experiments, surveys, and interviews. Thus, articles where the author is describing their own experiments would be considered a primary source." while "Secondary sources refer to another person's second-hand account of something such as in a literature review. Thus, an experiment that is described by someone other than the researcher(s) would be considered a secondary source. Accounts found in newspapers, radio, and television about research findings would be considered secondary sources."

WhisperToMe (talk) 10:51, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If chapter 4 describes the "trend of the community", it would have to be secondary I would think. Describing a trend is a synthetic creation, not a presentation of oral histories, etc. Same for chapter 5, not least because it says these two chapters are based on participant observation and interviews (rather than primarily consisting of them). Further, the chapter is supplemented by other publications, as listed. I think it can only be secondary. IBE (talk) 11:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When I read chapter 5 it was a narrative form with an occasional quote from an individual instead of a list of recordings of the participants being presented verbatim. The author of the thesis wrote the chapter using various sources. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I find IBE's description totally incompatible from how sources are treated in the natural sciences. Perhaps the definitions vary by academic culture.
In my world, if the author conducted the research, then it is a primary source. Even if the author used previously published data, presumably a master's thesis has a requirement that it contain original research or synthesis, similar to what we don't allow here, WP:OR. Generally speaking, theses and dissertations are almost always considered primary sources. People write them to prove to their academy that they can perform useful original research. If a work uses historical documents to present new research, then it is a primary source. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note that different academic departments define the terms "Primary" and "Secondary" differently. Also note that sources don't always fit neatly into these narrow definitions... Very often, sources are actually a mix of both primary and secondary material. Where the author is discussing specific data, that data itself is best treated as primary material... when the author shifts to comparing and analyzing the data, that comparison and analysis is secondary material. Blueboar (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Would anyone be interested in me e-mailing a link to the relevant pages? Seeing the pages themselves may help with the determination of what is primary and what is secondary. (They are the pages that talk about the Liceo Mexicano Japones)
An author of a book citing the thesis, Masterson, stated in p. 214-215 that in the pages she draws conclusions about the Liceo Mexicano Japones based on her field research: "Fieldwork by Chizuko Watanabe concludes that Japanese parents sent their children to the school to "maintain their ethnic identity and pride, implant a spiritual heritage that they claim is the basis for success, and to establish close ties with Nikkei-jin children who live in distant areas." -- He is referring to this:
  • p. 151: "The school's educational goal, as stated in its brochure, is to bring up capable individuals to be equipped with a sense of internationalism who will contribute to their nation and to world peace by promoting intercultural understanding and the exchanging of education and cultural activities between Mexico and Japan (Nihon Mekishiko Gakuin no Gaiyo 1981:1). Whatever the long-term objectives may be, in actuality it functions according to design. The Nikkei parents send their children here to maintain their ethnic identity and pride, to implant a spiritual heritage that they claim is the basis for success, and to establish close ties with other Nikkei children who live in distant areas." (the text of the copy of Watanabe's thesis seems to slightly differ from the quote Masterson used)
It may help to clarify the matter if I present the preface's description of how each chapter is sourced: es:Wikipedia_discusión:Consultas_de_borrado/Liceo_Mexicano_Japonés#Table of contents and sourcing
WhisperToMe (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
SemanticMantis, you are in maths, which is characteristically different anyway. When I did maths, the terms "primary" and "secondary" source were not used. Original research means doing some original equations, or an original synthesis/ application of some existing equations. That does not use any primary "data", because, strictly speaking, in maths there is no primary data, just abstract equations. I did honours in maths, and can't imagine why anyone would need to classify my thesis as primary or secondary. I can accept that context is important, especially when one is using a particular source in a particular way, such as on Wikipedia, but normally this can only be secondary. IBE (talk) 02:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I just checked out the article Primary source. You should have a look at it, especially the bit that says primary sources are created "during the time period being studied". This might make the thesis a primary source, since it depends on participant observation. I was thinking by analogy from history, where the researcher (typically) cannot have been present at the events, so primary sources are not things the researcher has written. IBE (talk) 02:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's true I have a background in math, but I was speaking in terms of the "hard" sciences (and yes, math is quite different, it's not even a science ;). It seems that's not really the appropriate perspective here, after reading the updates below. I also don't think that primary source is most appropriate, as that seems to have a very historical/sociological/journalistic perspective. For the OP's purposes of a WP project, WP:PRIMARY seems to be the guide to follow. First, I note there is no ban on primary sources, just that secondary is often preferred for purposed of notability. Also, my brief look at the thesis seems to indicate that it does have plenty of synthesis and discussion of materials that have been presented in other, prior works, so those bits are clearly "secondary" in the eyes of WP. My current understanding is that the thesis is probably not the best source for establishing notability, unless WTM wants to cite a specific part that says something like "[topic] has been discussed by many authors in recent decades, e.g. Jones (1980), Xu (1992), and Carlo (2005)." But this seems to be more a question of WP policy and guidelines than general reference, so I'll bow out now. SemanticMantis (talk) 04:08, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The thesis talks about the history of the school and events that happened before the thesis was researched and written.
  • p. ix states: "This study is a result of my twenty-two week stay in Mexico. An eleven-week field program in the northeastern region sponsored by the California State University, Los Angeles, allowed the establishment of initial contacts with four Japanese families during the period from March to June, 1978. Two two-week trips to the same area followed in March and September, 1979. An additional two-week survey trip to Mexico City allowed the collection of most of the written Japanese sources during September, 1980. Finally I spent five weeks in Mexico City in October and November, 1981, which afforded me the opportunity to stay with three different Japanese families, to conduct intensive interviews, and to attend community events."
The thesis discusses the general antagonism prior to the construction of the school and threats of violence against a 1967 meeting, which is sourced to an "Idaka 1977:38".
WhisperToMe (talk) 03:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In light of above, there isn't any single "correct" and universally agreed upon answer to this question. OP, it also might help us give you better answers if you can answer this question: "who cares if this thesis is classified as a 'primary source' or a 'secondary source'? I don't mean to be rude, the best answer for the occasion will be context specific. E.g. is someone telling you "only primary sources count", and if so, who? Is this for a WP or school project, or professional research purposes, or something else? Do you have a desire that it be classified as one or the other? Either position is probably defensible, so might be able to just defend your claim. SemanticMantis (talk) 00:19, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on the AFD in the Spanish Wikipedia (es:Wikipedia_discusión:Consultas_de_borrado/Liceo_Mexicano_Japonés) and another editor is saying that this source shouldn't count towards notability of the subject because it is a "primary" source while I was arguing it was a "secondary" source because it uses anthropology field research and other sources. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:47, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right, if you're citing a specific section that reports on trends in a wider community of research, then that section at least would seem to qualify as a secondary source per WP:PRIMARY. SemanticMantis (talk) 04:08, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian version of national crime victimization survey?

In the US, the Bureau of Justice Statistics administers a national survey known as the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is used to determine the prevalence of different categories of crimes. Does Canada administer a similar survey? 65.92.5.76 (talk) 14:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not completely sure, but I think that Canada's General Social Survey on Victimization is a bit similar, link here. Hope this helps, cheers ~Helicopter Llama~ 15:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Helped a lot, thanks. 65.92.5.76 (talk) 16:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Political direction of national socialism

Isn't national socialism also just another leftist political ideology? If you take many facets into account, then aren't the similarities between the programs and shows of the Nazi party and those of the communist party of the Soviet Union rather very similar, thus Nazis can be more labelled as "leftists"? I mean state control, eugenics, role of party are quite similar in both. Both say everything must be equal. Both rather were hostile to religion. 112.198.79.49 (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably a troll question, but dumb ol' me has been wondering the same thing and I'm actually interested in seeing what reliable sources have to say. Let's pretend I asked it. Evan (talk|contribs) 17:55, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think of political ideology as a circle, rather than a line. Thus democracy is on one side of the circle, while fascism and "communism" (of the brand practiced by Stalin and Mao) are next to each other. A key difference would be that while the "communists" spoke publicly about the goal of everybody being economically equal (although they often did the opposite in private), the Nazi's didn't set that as a goal. StuRat (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that's accurate. Early Nazi propaganda utilized both the swastika and the hammer and sickle (a friend of mine owns a 1930s-era Nazi lapel pin that has both). Isn't that at least an implicit agreement with Marx's idea of class struggle? Evan (talk|contribs) 17:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Might have been a ploy to attract followers of Marx, even if they didn't believe in him themselves. They did a lot of such things, like generally treating Kaiser Wilhelm II well, even though they opposed restoration of the monarchy, to avoid offending monarchists. StuRat (talk) 18:22, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Note that during the Night of the Long Knives, the Strasserist (left-wing) faction of the Nazi Party was wiped out. Until then, they were tolerated, as Hitler wasn't powerful enough to oppose all his enemies at once prior to that. Similarly, he tolerated the homosexual leader of the SA, until that night. Both communists and homosexuals were later targets for extermination. StuRat (talk) 18:47, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that mainstream Nazi ideology (as opposed to Strasserism, which is a more complex issue) was left-wing is unsupported by most relevant academic commentary: it seems to be an argument largely confined to sections of the right, often seemingly more interested in point-scoring than accurate historical analysis. It should be noted that the Nazis came to power as a result of support from conservative elements amongst the German political establishment, who saw them as a bastion against the left. Like many other populist movements, the Nazis used rhetoric that drew from leftist tropes on occasion, but little of their practice once gaining power was even remotely 'leftist' in intent, and it shouldn't be forgotten that their first targets when gaining power were Communists, Socialists, Trade Unionists and the like - their systematic onslaught on the Jews came later. Much of the recent attempts to characterise them as 'left-wing' draws on political concepts (particularly from right-wing libertarianism) that are entirely anachronistic, and of little relevance to actual ideological differences between left and right at the time. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This notion of "left" and "right" that you're using may have some value in terms of describing the groups of people to whom various approaches were attractive, but it's useless as a description of the underlying philosophies. The central question of normative political theory is, always has been, and always will be, what is the relationship of the individual to the collective, and to what extent is the collective justified in forcing the individual to conform to its goals? To that question, the Nazis and the Soviets gave virtually the identical answer. Whether that makes them both left, both right, or simply demonstrates that "left" and "right" are not very interesting concepts, I really don't care. --Trovatore (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Um, no. Not even close. The 'collective' for Nazis meant a very different thing than it did for Soviets - and you are presupposing that 'Soviets' were the sole representatives of the left. They weren't. Simplistic analogies tell us next to nothing about the position on Nazism within the political spectrum of the era. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The political spectrum of the era" is not important. Who runs the collective is not as important as the relationship of the individual to it. These, of course, are value judgments rather than descriptive statements. But they're ones I happen to be right about. --Trovatore (talk) 06:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you take many facets into account, then aren't the similarities between the programs and shows of the Nazi party and those of the communist party of the Soviet Union rather very similar, thus Nazis can be more labelled as "leftists"?
Only if you think the Soviets can be labelled "right-wingers"--after all, it follows from your own argument!
I mean state control, eugenics, role of party are quite similar in both.
There was no eugenics in the Soviet Union. In fact, all research relating to genetics was brutally suppressed, with scientists sent to the gulag. See lysenkoism.
Both say everything must be equal.
Since when did the Nazis say anybody was equal to them?
Both rather were hostile to religion.
Yes, and both were friendly to the idea that the sky is blue. Sharing one belief does not make Hitler a leftist or Stalin a rightist. --Bowlhover (talk) 06:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, why were communists and socialists persecuted alongside Gypsies, Jews, and homosexuals? Or perhaps, why was the invasion of the USSR justified as a defence against the spread of Bolshevism? If they really were socialist, is there an explanation for countless posters?
Perhaps they were fighting over which version of socialism was the best one, you could say. It is true that the left is notorious for political infighting, so from here we must look at the real phenomena of fascism and socialism.
All of the movements that called themselves "fascist" rose in their strongest forms as reactions to left-wing proletarian movements. Fascism in power exhibits several characteristics: its extreme anti-labour practices; second of all is its ideological emphasis on national unity, class collaboration, etc., as a reaction to the class struggle emphasized by the proletariat; scapegoating as a means of unifying "the nation"; broad state autonomy and authoritarianism as a mechanism of forcibly suppressing class struggle.
Socialism has a longer history. At its most basic form, socialism is democratic control of the means of production by the working class. That's about the only thing all forms of socialism have in common, though. However, this is enough for us to answer our question, "is Naziism a leftist ideology"?
Hitler once declared in 1933 that "The government will not protect the economic interests of the German people by the circuitous method of an economic bureaucracy to be organised by the state, but by the utmost furtherance of private initiative and by the recognition of the rights of property". By declaring that the purpose of the state is to protect private property, Hitler abandons the most basic tenet of socialism.
As further reading, Fascism: What it is and how to fight it and What is national socialism, both by Trotsky. →Σσς. (Sigma) 09:26, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you want a proper answer to your question, you will, unfortunately, have to work it out for yourself because the answer is subjective, not objective. An excellent book is Michael Burleigh's The Third Reich: A New History. However, serendipitously, I read the following blog-post today, which also addresses your question: http://annaraccoon.com/2014/04/27/blair-russia-and-islam/ 86.144.112.196 (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Communism was a progressivist modernist ideology, Nazism a backward-looking pastoral-romanticist ideology rooted in Germans' resentment over losing WW1 and the chaos of the Weimar period. I can sorta see how a case can be made for Nazism being leftist (citizen vs state and all), yet this is a misuse of the term leftist. Also note that this fixation on the individual-vs-state dimension of any given political ideology is an American thing. Asmrulz (talk) 18:27, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so Hayek, for example, was American, huh? No, it's not "an American thing". It's the right thing. --Trovatore (talk) 19:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Left-wing means popular, right-wing means elitist. I don't know how right-wing came to mean lean government, economic liberties and whatnot. Soviet totalitarianism was a right-wing aberration within Communism. And yes, trying to lump Communism together with Nazism based on superficial similarities (or, rather, one single similarity - the exaggerated role of the state) is an American thing. This whole stuff is not as simple as the Nolan chart Asmrulz (talk) 19:33, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly as complicated as you want it to be, but no, it's not an American thing. That's flat wrong. --Trovatore (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The left/right scale is arbitrary, and what is seen as typically 'left' or 'right' has been given very different definitions in different countries and epochs. There are no 'true' or 'absolute' definitions of 'left' and 'right', so in the end these excerises are completly useless. What can be said is that 1) Nazists themselves always stayed aloof from being categorized in left-right dichotomy, claiming to represent broader national interests, transcending class conflicts and 2) as Nazism emerged as a fringe group in the 1920s (self-identified) right-wing nationalist milieu, it is typically labelled as 'far-right' in contemporary politics. --Soman (talk) 19:19, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The "direction" of both Nazism and Communism was totalitarianism. Assigning "left" or "right" to either extreme is an exercise in futility. Consider that the old guard in the USSR was described as "conservative". That's right wing, in normal usage. Not a trait you would necessarily equate to communism, but it can make sense in a given context. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

United Kingdom a federalistic state?

Isn't the United Kingdom a quasi federal state like, let me say Malaysia? The 4 parts of the UK are already called countries, not just regions. Scots and Northern Irelad have own parliaments which corresponds to state parliaments in the US. 112.198.79.49 (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, but the question is already quite vague. 'Quasi federal' can mean almost everything in-between a very centralist state (like France) and a federation. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (but not England) have different degrees of autonomy, but constitutionally speaking it is not a federal state. --Soman (talk) 18:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, the UK is a unitary state which has devolved some government administration to local areas. That doesn't make it a federation. --Jayron32 19:39, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Westminster Parliament is still sovereign, and can pass any laws it wishes, up to and including abolishing the other legislatures. Rojomoke (talk) 20:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 1972-1998, but yes. The UK could abolish the Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland legislatures whether they liked it or not. A federal government and its states just have to live with each other.--81.145.165.2 (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In theory perhaps, but I don't think they would be able to do so in reality, as the disenfranchised nationalities would just declare independence and set up their own parliaments. In the good old days of Empire they could prevent this by force of arms, but that approach doesn't work in the modern world, unless you're Putin. StuRat (talk) 20:34, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not condoning any of his excesses, but why single out only the most recent barbarian? He comes from a long line of such people, and war is the rule rather than the exception, historically speaking, unfortunately. (Apropos of nothing, I see that that great humanitarian Robert Mugabe added his saintly lustre to the double papal canonisation in Rome last night.) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 21:31, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Westminister Parliament did do what Rojomoke said from 1972-2007 in Northern Ireland - Direct rule. Continuing apropos nothing, but it is unclear to me why Putin or Mugabe should (frequently) be singled out over far more barbaric barbarians like any recent US president.John Z (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can a true barbarian be as exquisitely hypocritical as our revered Presidents? —Tamfang (talk) 06:01, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which recent US president has used force of arms against a declaration of independence from the US? Putin was presumably singled out here for the Second Chechen War, or possibly for regions of countries declaring independence from the Soviet Union. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 1972-1998, but yes. The UK could abolish the Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland legislatures whether they liked it or not. A federal government and its states just have to live with each other.--81.145.165.2 (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the US Congress could not abolish the states legally under any circumstances, as it does not have that power under the Constitution. It could introduce a constitutional amendment abolishing them by a 2/3 majority, but it would still have to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. That is, 3/4 of the states would have to vote themselves out of existence. Marco polo (talk) 19:24, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this map accurate?

I want to learn more about the ethnic groups (such as Hausa, Afar, Zulu etc.) and their distribution across Africa. Unfortunately, the article on this topic does not have the complete list of all the thousand of ethnic groups living there and the map only shows the large language groups. So, I looked up the Internet and found this: http://www.globalhumandynamics.com/africahr.jpg

This map by George Peter Murdock divides Africa into territorial boundaries of different tribes (ethnic groups). Do you think this map is factually accurate? I ask this because this map also divides Arab population of North Africa into different peoples such as Tripolitanians or Tunisians instead of keeping them together as a single ethnic group. Also, the ethnic division in Madagascar seems to differ from the image on Demographics of Madagascar. If it is accurate, could it be used on Wikipedia? 75.80.145.53 (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am by no means an expert in the subject, particularly with the ethnic group issue you brought up, but I do know now that this map was published in 1959, so it might not represent the current territorial divisions. It is important to note that the regions listed there may have shifted due to various conflicts, etc., notably the Rwandan Genocide in 1994 which is what first came to mind for me. ~Helicopter Llama~ 20:25, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The map cannot be truly representative, as it fails to indicate areas where ethnicities are intermingled - and in any case, 'ethnicity' is a fluid concept, frequently redefined depending on context etc. As for the 'Arab population', many North African people aren't considered ethnically Arab, though they may speak Arabic. And of course, North Africa is just as ethnically diverse as elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

75.80.145.53 -- I have the book from which this map was taken (Africa: Its Peoples and their Culture History'), and I can tell you that many of the maps in that book are quasi-normalized to ca. 1500 AD (notice "Guanche" in the Canary Islands at top left), and that considering all Arabs from Morocco to Oman as a single undifferentiated grouping is based on a kind of homogenizing macro-nationalism which he wasn't concerned with. (If they spoke their mother-tongue vernaculars, without attempting to assimilate them to quasi-artificial "standard" Arabic, a Moroccan and an Omani could not effectively communicate with each other...) Consult Map 11 on page 112 for "Areas of Berber Speech". I don't think that Map 17 was originally intended to be an up-to-date map of non-overlapping ethnolinguistic distributions as of 1959, and even if it were, it would not of course be accurate to 2014. It's also probably copyrighted... AnonMoos (talk) 10:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with AnonMoos's point that such maps are normally meant to give relative positions, not fully accurate ranges showing overlap, and often pick some date in the past prior to European colonization. A really accurate map would have to be on the village level, and would be quite impossible to reconstruct. Note the presence of the Zulu on the eastern south coast. They were not present as a separate entity 500 years ago. They were originally an undifferentiated part of the Nguni people who originated in approximately the Ndebele area marked somewhat further to the north on the detailed map.
This situation can be compared to linguistic maps of "pre-columbian" North America that show a large swath of speakers of Siouxan languages up and down the great plains. These groups are known to have expanded into Algonquian speaking areas post-Columbian contact by horseback conquest. (Another flaw of this map is that it shows Na-Dene and Algonquian speaking areas as monolithic, as opposed to the very high diversity of California. This is simply an artifact of the state of classification, as there are dozens of non-mutually intelligible Algonquian and Na-Dene languages, yet specialists prefer to treat small groups in California discretely, even though they are often known to be classifiable in wider groupings like Hokan and Penutian.) There will be a blank area in maps of the Ohio Valley sometimes called the empty quarter. The land wasn't empty before columbus, but the civilization(s) there collapsed, almost certainly due to European diseases, so fully that their languages are not attested.
There's simply no way to get a high-resolution synchronic snapshot in such maps. They should be taken to show the most recently known general range of indigenous people beffore recent European influence. μηδείς (talk) 18:59, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

music similar to Miserere mei, Deus

If I was interested in finding music similar to Miserere mei, Deus how should I go about finding it? Thanks. --78.148.106.196 (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can explore composers who were writing polyphonic choral music in the same era. Being British, I'd start with Thomas Tallis, whose Spem in Alium is simply stunning if you haven't heard it before, also his chum William Byrd. On the European front, Italian Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina is perhaps the top man, also Dutchman Orlande de Lassus and the Spanish Tomás Luis de Victoria. Moving on a few years, Giovanni Battista Pergolesi and Antonio Vivaldi wrote some fantastic choral stuff in the later Baroque style. I can listen to Vivaldi's Gloria RV 589 over and over. I'm into William Croft at the moment, but that may be an acquired taste. May I suggest that you go to a well known video sharing site, type in the name of a composer and see what grabs you. Sometimes you need to listen to pieces a few times before it grows on you. However, Allegri's Miserere is a towering achievement and it may take you a while to find something which compares. Alansplodge (talk) 10:35, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 28

Request to add photo of eminent Economist

Hello,

I was wondering if it would be possible to include a photo of Paul Ormerod on his homepage - I tried to read through the steps but found it difficult to follow,

there's a good one here:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XeUuBx5mKuU/UcG829tln3I/AAAAAAAAAn8/CgsT3eDe9QY/s1600/ormerod.jpg

He has written three very highly acclaimed economics books so far, and I think it would be right to put a face to his page.

Thanks,

Liam.

159.134.232.43 (talk) 01:57, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a reference desk question. Please use the Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions for assistance in uploading images.--Maleko Mela (talk) 02:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Eminent" might be a bit much. How about "better known than average"? RomanSpa (talk) 05:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. If he's notable enough for an article, he's notable enough for a mugshot. —Tamfang (talk) 05:57, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You'd probably get better help at either the WP:Teahouse or the WP:Help Desk, for these sorts of questions about Wikipedia.
To put a picture in an article, it must first be uploaded to Wikimedia. To do that, you need to be logged in to an account. Anyone can create an account for free, without even the email verification that many websites use.
Be aware that there can be WP:Copyright issues when it comes to pictures, which is why articles on people don't always have the greatest possible picture: we can only use free (as in copyright, not cost) images, which often means someone has to go to an event, take a photo of the person, and upload it to Wikimedia, selecting the option to release the image under an appropriate licence. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 06:02, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Air Force

According to our Russian Air Force article, it is commanded by a lieutenant general. Why so low a rank? For instance the much smaller RAF is commanded by an air chief marshal (=full (four star) general). SpinningSpark 12:52, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't that low a rank. Lieutenant general is a three-star level rank, so he would be only one rank below an Air chief marshal. This is to be expected as the Russian Armed Forces have a unified structure under the command of a four-star general. (The same structure, for instance, exists in Canada where the Canadian Forces are commanded by a four-star General and the Royal Canadian Air Force is under the command of a Lieutenant General.)
(It does get a bit confusing that a Major out ranks a Lieutenant, but a Lieutenant General outranks a Major general.) - EronTalk 16:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The present incumbent is one Viktor Bondarev, who is indeed a Lieutenant General (equivalent to NATO rank code OF-7 or RAF Air Vice-Marshal. However, his predecessor was Alexander Zelin who was a Colonel-General (NATO OF-8 or RAF Air Marshal), so it looks as though it isn't set in stone. Zelin was sacked but nobody knows why - how very Russian. Alansplodge (talk) 17:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Post-World War I Plebiscite (Referendum) Requests Which Were Rejected

I know that shortly after World War I several plebiscites (referendums) took place in order to help determine the borders of various countries. I also know that requests for plebiscites in Alsace-Lorraine and in South Schlewsig got rejected. My question here is this: Were there any other cases shortly after World War I where there were requests for plebiscites which got rejected? Futurist110 (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Civil War

Is this is the first war in human history for which so many first-hand video footage from the warfront are available in the internet for public viewing? Is there any previous war which saw such wide number of videos? --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Taliban in Afghanistan/Pakistan just love to post pics they take of their bombs going off and killing people. StuRat (talk) 22:02, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Another question, can members of US military make videos using smartphone cameras while in the battlefiled? Is it legal? --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 22:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Basdeo Panday

Hi I am from Trinidad in the West Indies. Recently I read the profile on Basdeo Panday and saw his birth place being that of Trinidadian. To my knowledge he was born in Guyana. Could you please verify this and contact me or make relevant changes if necessary.190.213.37.76 (talk) 21:57, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for raising this, though a better place to do so would be on the talk page Talk:Basdeo Panday. His birthplace, like most of the information in the article Basdeo Panday, was unreferenced (which means it is a very poor article, and I have added an appropriate tag) so could have been removed; however, I have found this, saying that he was born in Princes Town, which seems to be in Trinidad, and have therefore added the town and the reference to the article. If you have a reliable source that says he was born in Guyana, you should bring this up on the talk page; but if it is your own knowledge unsupported by published sources, I think the Parliament of T&T wins! --ColinFine (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is blue hair a "thing" in England for older women?

File:Enid Blyton.jpg

I saw today's featured article and noticed the picture in it and it seems to me I've seen other older English women with blue hair watching some shows and movies but I couldn't swear how many times or pinpoint where. I was just wondering if it's a thing in England and if so its origins?--108.46.109.33 (talk) 22:07, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blue rinse is the stuff. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:09, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just England. Google a song called "Blue Hair Driving In My Lane". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget Marge Simpson. StuRat (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The origin is surely that people with greying (or fully greyen) hair sometimes feel the need to not look like they're grey (and by extension, old). So, they add a colour to enhance the impression of relative youth. The bags and lines and cracks in their faces do tend to give the game away, though. Marge is a much later comer. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's very easy for grey hair to develop a yellow tinge and this doesn't flatter older skin, so the blue rinse is used to reduce or remove the yellow tones. You're welcome. --TammyMoet (talk) 10:31, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Purely anecdotal evidence, but I don't recall seeing any elderly ladies with a "blue rinse" in London since the 1980s, but then again, I haven't been looking too hard. Alansplodge (talk) 14:48, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The blue rinse lives on in New England (USA), though it may literally be dying out. I don't often see it on women under 80. Marco polo (talk) 15:17, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In case it isn't clear to some: the goal of using blue rinse by many people is NOT to turn their hair visibly blue. The objective is usually to change a yellow-gray to a silver-gray. The picture posted above is someone who did it "wrong", at least probably in the eyes of her peers. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I am certain that some elderly women in the United States want their hair to appear pale blue. Typically, they apply the rinse to hair that is mostly white, rather than gray. Marco polo (talk) 19:35, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Corporal Punishment

Recently there was a video on facebook where a mother beats her 12 year old daughter for posting unfit pictures. This happened in Trinidad in the West Indies. The mother's name is Helen Bartlett. Could you please verify this information?190.213.37.76 (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Verify that such a video exists, or that it's not fake ? StuRat (talk) 22:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason, I am not surprised that the OP's IP geolocates to Trinidad. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neither appear to be actresses. So whether the strop stung or not: it is pretty good acting. The follow up however, suggests this was not done for the benefit of the camera. So I'd say, what you see is what she got.--Aspro (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 29

Mailer/Behan punch-up

I've just been reading a 1999 review of the book "To Convey Intelligence: The Spectator 1928-1998" by Simon Courtland. The reviewer writes at one point:

This event seems to be so "famous" that I cannot find a single online reference to it. Mailer was somewhat prone to such behaviour (his fisticuffs with Gore Vidal get/s a few hits), and Behan was also an uncouth type given to brawling; but there's nothing about a fight between these two, either in the context of a Spectator party or anywhere else.

Was the reviewer mistaken? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 01:37, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of it either, and like you can find no references for it. By the by, it does seem that neither Mailer nor Behan were much cop as pugilists. STORMIN' NORMAN. DuncanHill (talk) 11:25, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Duncan. That does mention that they had a fight, but it sounds more like a pre-arranged match. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 12:39, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I should read more carefully!DuncanHill (talk) 12:40, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've concluded that the reviewer was mistaken, there being no evidence of this allegedly "famous" punch-up. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 09:52, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Anglo-Saxon exiles after 1066

Has there been any study or history book relating to the groups of Anglo-Saxons (mainly the former nobility and their widows and children) who escaped England after the Norman Conquest and resettled as expatriates in other parts of Europe?--170.140.105.10 (talk) 01:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article about Edgar the Ætheling notes that some of the exiles ended up in Scotland, and used it as a base of operations for attempts to oust the Normans. His sister, Saint Margaret of Scotland, would become Queen of Scotland and grandmother to both William Adelin and Empress Matilda. --Jayron32 02:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sons of Tostig Godwinson ended up in Norway, it seems. --Jayron32 02:29, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gytha of Wessex (Daughter of Harold Godwinson) ended up in Denmark on the way to marrying into the royal family of Kievan Rus'. That article also mentions two of her brothers ending up in Denmark as well, but doesn't mention which ones. --Jayron32 02:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gytha married Vladimir II Monomakh of Kievan Rus'. I've read elsewhere that this could be connected with the establishment of Nova Anglia mentioned below. There's a little more information here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:00, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gospatric, Earl of Northumbria also ended up in Scotland with the other exiles there, before finding his way to Flanders. --Jayron32 02:44, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It would be more interesting to learn about their entourages, the groups of fellow exiles and the communities they formed in these foreign lands. --170.140.105.10 (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some of them apparently ended up in the Varangian Guard in the Byzantine Empire. I'm certain there have been studies on exiles in general - the Anglo-Saxons are a well-covered subject, although it's not my field in particular so I'm not sure where to look...but for the ones who went to Byzantium, you could try "The English and Byzantium" by Jonathan Shepard (Traditio 29, 1973) and The Varangians of Byzantium by Sigfus Blondal. (There must be more recent works that I'm not aware of, though!) Adam Bishop (talk) 07:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See also New England (medieval). The state of Nova Anglia was supposedly founded on the Black Sea coast by these refugees in the Varangian Guard. SpinningSpark 08:35, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Our article Harold Godwinson, says that his sons sought refuge in Ireland and from there mounted an counter invasion, landing in Devon. I'm struggling to find much more about that, but give me time. Alansplodge (talk) 12:35, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not a study, but for a fictional account I strongly recommend The Last English King by Julian Rathbone. DuncanHill (talk) 14:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Bedford Leno

Without wishing to be disrespectful, there are some howlers here which permeate several different pages. I have corrected one reference to the Reform League, Hyde Park Riot and intend to do the same for the incorrect reference to Edmund Beales and to the Reform League but the root of the problem appears to be the page on Leno. Leno could not have joined the First International in 1848 as it was not established until the 1860s. I know that, but have insufficient knowledge of Leno's life (sources are scarce) to know what alternative organisation the author was thinking of. I would like to collaborate with other scholars to tidy this up because frankly it is a mess. Is there any mechanism in Wiki through which I can request collaboration in this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.1.31 (talk) 06:45, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but the best place to discuss these issues is Talk:John Bedford Leno. --Viennese Waltz 09:29, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right, but when you've done that, leave a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom which should get the ball rolling. Good luck. Alansplodge (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article was (largely) written by an editor who has not made any contributions at all since 2008.. and I doubt if that article is watched by many pairs of eyes. My advice to 121.44.1.31 would simply be to edit it yourself to remove any obvious errors. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:10, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As for "some howlers", I'm sure there are many others under active discussion, many others yet to be discovered, and many new ones getting inserted every day of the week. We have over 4.5 million articles, and that's just in the English language version; we have versions in something like 200 other languages to boot. It's all done by unpaid volunteer editors, who are not required to demonstrate any academic credentials whatsoever. They range from university professors to people who are barely literate. It really is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit". That is its sorrow and also its joy. You'll find plenty of examples of both. Happy reading and, if you're interested, happy editing. We need people like you: an eye for detail, can string a sentence together, shows respect, sees the bigger picture. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 20:33, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


April 30

short story identification

Not science fiction but I think it was written by an SF writer, maybe R. A. Lafferty.

Narrator is the credit manager of a department store, in the era before Equifax. His job is to evaluate credit applications from customers and approve or disapprove credit. Some stores had strict rules for credit approval, others were more subjective; this particular one was an "ironclad system house", i.e. very strict. A customer comes in and cheerfully admits not meeting any of the credit requirements (income, residence stability etc) but seems so charming and trustworthy that the narrator breaks the rules and approves credit anyway. Customer buys a lot of stuff and can't pay. Store can't get the cops involved, since the guy never committed fraud (truthfully admitted not having money) and didn't steal anything, so he was just a deadbeat, not a crook. Credit manager confesses the error to the big boss, expecting to get fired. Boss is understanding, says the same customer did the same thing at a lot of other stores, all of them strict like the narrator's--the loose ones were left alone, and the boss himself may have personally done an approval, so the credit manager is forgiven. I'm not sure if there is a moral or conclusion after that.

Thanks, 70.36.142.114 (talk) 00:21, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diplomatic immunity and firefighters

How does diplomatic immunity apply to quasi-governmental entities such as firefighters? For example, imagine that a fire is raging in Dupont Circle, and the Washington firefighters are having to use extreme measures to stop it. Are they allowed to enter a diplomatic compound without the ambassador's permission in order to fight the fire? Are they required to gain permission before doing anything to a fire in the compound? On the opposite side, are they permitted to do anything that they're permitted to do at private properties? I'm assuming that there are tons of local regulations on their actions; I don't care about those, since I'm only interested in international law. I'm basically asking about what (if any) components of diplomatic immunity are waived by international law for public safety agencies (excepting law enforcement, of course) in emergency situations. Nyttend (talk) 01:04, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that you're thinking of extraterritoriality, not diplomatic immunity. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 01:48, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they would need the ambassador's permission, or permission of whoever was in charge, to enter the embassy. I suspect that, lacking permission, they would limit their actions to spraying water from the outside the embassy compound, to prevent the fire from spreading beyond the embassy. StuRat (talk) 02:03, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations covers this. Article 31 states that consular premises shall be inviolable and permission is needed for authorities of the host state to enter them, but notes that ""The consent of the head of the consular post may, however, be assumed in case of fire or other disaster requiring prompt protective action." - EronTalk 02:46, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a link to an actual case, at the Cuban Consulate in Montreal in 1988: Consulate staff did not allow city firefighters to enter the premises and three employees died who might have been saved had the firefighters been allowed to intervene. [2] --Xuxl (talk) 08:43, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Combat footage

Is it legal for members of the US military to capture live footage from the warfront and then publicly distribute it? --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 10:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as Bradley Manning was convicted of Espionage Act violations for passing such footage to Wikileaks, I doubt it. --Viennese Waltz 11:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Recently I watched a documentary titled Apocalypse: The Second World War. The entire films consits of footage caputred by armed forces members of the major power of the Second World War. How could they capture it if it was illegal, especially the footage of the Nazi military. --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 11:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's a difference between, for example, an army film unit recording footage for official distribution, and individual soldiers using their smartphones or whatever. And likewise, there's a difference between what the military releases promptly, what it keeps for its own purposes and releases later under timed disclosure rules, and what it doesn't want released at all. WW2-era soldiers were not generally toting their personal cine cameras at the front line. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:59, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right, what Chelsea did was illegal because the footage was classified and no one approved the release. I don't think it is relevant to the question, which I read as asking about "unofficial" footage being captured by soldiers with theit own devices. There are almost certainly rules that must be followed before releasing that sort of footage (if they're even allowed to take it in the first place), so we should try to find references for those rules. Katie R (talk) 13:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I was assuming that all footage was classified, whether taken by a soldier with his own device or by some kind of official cameraman (if such a thing even exists anymore). There's no reason to draw a distinction on the secrecy level of a piece of footage based on who shot it. --Viennese Waltz 14:07, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily who shot it, but what it depicts. In WWII, news media were allowed to report on events which would already be known to the enemy. You may recall that Geraldo Rivera caught some heat in the early weeks of Gulf War II, as he was imbedded with the troops, and on at least one occasion he talked a bit too much about where they were and what was going on. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:35, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is it legal/illegal? That asks for a legal opinion... you would have to ask a lawyer. (Note that Wikipedia is not supposed to give legal advice or opinions... we can look things up in law books and quote the text of a law, but we can not interpret the law). The applicable text for the US Military would be the Uniform Code of Military Justice... other nations will, of course, have different laws. Blueboar (talk) 14:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This writeup from 2006 indicates that the DOD has been pretty liberal with allowing soldiers to capture and post pictures and videos. But they do draw the line at certain things, including the type of stuff that got Geraldo in trouble. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:45, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two official film departments were the US Army Pictorial Service (a division of the Signal Corps), and the First Motion Picture Unit. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:07, April 30, 2014 (UTC)

More recent (2008) info can be gleaned from this New York Times piece. More about censoring the embedded press, but the same sorts of things should logically apply to social media soldiers. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:22, May 1, 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, I think most soldiers can easily capture a footage like, say, launching of an anti-tank missile in the direction of a T-90, or launching of a stinger etc. I don't see how these footage could reveal classified information.
Not sure if the launching pad counts as the "warfront". It's the killing part they generally censor, tactical info notwithstanding. Big guns and fast planes are good recruitment tools, so long as people see fire, not blood. Glory, not guts. Whenever you see a story involving pictures of US war killing, it becomes a scandal story instead. These are the types of military videos the Department of Defense prefers. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:41, May 1, 2014 (UTC)
Yes. Matthew Brady's exhibit of photographs of the dead of Antietam caused a major stir, because it's about the reality of war, which can undermine support for it, especially of bodies of allies as opposed to enemies. That same mentality continues today. No small amount of controversy even over coffins draped in US flags, while the controversy over graphic photos of Saddam Hussein's dead sons was much less. (In fact, according to the articles, the US itself released those photos.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:40, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As Mel Brooks said, "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die." The Hussein kids weren't intended as sideslapping hilarity, but certainly to put a smile on some faces. Of course, it only really works when the dead have been sufficiently built up as heels. If there's uncertainty (as is usually the case with "suspected militants"), uninvolved viewers will generally default to empathy.
Control Room gives a decent look at the issue (and others) in war news around invasion time, particularly at Al Jazeera. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:56, May 1, 2014 (UTC)
No. BB's surprising theory that a notorious bushranger from Van Diemen's Land reincarnated 35 years after he died and snapped pics at Bull Run and Antietam has an initial sensationalism that pales on confrontation with the correct link to the American civil war photographer Mathew Brady. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 14:18, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh! Yes, it was Mathew Brady whose photo exhibit in New York caused a bit of a row due to its potential for undermining the warhawk propaganda machine. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:48, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notable members of the British Home Guard in World War II

I was thinking of starting a new section in our Home Guard (United Kingdom) article, about notable people who served in the Home Guard. I already have George Orwell, George Formby and Patrick Moore, as well as a few retired generals like Douglas Brownrigg who was the military advisor for the 1943 film The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp. Do any others spring to mind? Alansplodge (talk) 18:37, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Perry of course. DuncanHill (talk) 18:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A few more listed here, including, rather pleasingly, Arnold Ridley and John Laurie. DuncanHill (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I'd forgotten about Jimmy Perry. In trying to find some references, I came across Undiscovered Scotland: John Laurie wich says; " John Laurie served in the Home Guard, the only future Dad's Army cast member to do so". More work needed. Alansplodge (talk) 10:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 1

Shanty town and slum

What is the difference between Shanty town and slum? --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 09:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should be reasonably clear from the articles, but the key factor is this: a shanty town is necessarily composed of ad-hoc buildings made of junk and readily-available materials. A slum might be a shanty town, but many notorious slums have been, and still are, comprised of purpose-built houses in traditional building materials such as wood, plaster, brick and concrete. I'd go so far as to say that all shanty towns are slums, but not all slums are shanty towns. Rookery (slum) is about a historic form of slum in which the main buildings were mainly purpose-built houses, but where a lack of repair and maintenance, combined with ad-hoc extensions, had started to transform them into something more like a modern shanty town. (My ancestors lived in something like this, round the back of St Martin's church in central London.) AlexTiefling (talk) 10:33, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 10:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you're interested in such things, you might like Kowloon_Walled_City, a fascinating example of a fort that turned into a slum, and then perhaps a shanty town. SemanticMantis (talk) 13:34, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Murder on the Orient Express" question

I just read this book, and there's something that confuses me: in his summation (part 3, ch. 9), Poirot says that as soon as MacQueen was told about the letter fragment (part 2, ch. 2), MacQueen immediately told the others, and they all agreed to deny any connection with the Armstrong family. But in Princess Dragomiroff's subsequent interview (part 2, ch. 6), she freely admits that she was a friend of Linda Arden and godmother of Sonia Armstrong. So does Poirot misspeak here? --Lazar Taxon (talk) 11:00, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No... the Princess may well have agreed to deny any connection with the Armstrongs... but under Poirot's questioning she slips up, and mentions her relationship when she probably should not have. Poirot is good at getting suspects to do things like that. Blueboar (talk) 13:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to know who are the popular critics of Internet communities and a brief summary and references about their opinions in regards to "disembodied gatherings and worship online that create a false form of community". (Exploring Religious Community Online: We are One in the Network, written by Heidi Campbell 2005) I presume it's a common observation. Hence the lack of citation in the book. Still, I'm interested in the claim and what the popular critics have to say about "disembodied gatherings and worship online". I never even knew that you could worship online. 140.254.227.117 (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the mechanics of running "worship online," my first guess is a videophone-type thing or a broadcast setup, as if everyone logs on to a webcast that shows a preacher and/or song leader at various points. Also consider websites like www.sermonaudio.com [I can't give the full link, since it's on the spam blacklist], a site that offers downloadable sermon recordings. It definitely wouldn't work with any of the Christian sacraments, since they all involve one-on-one interaction. 2001:18E8:2:28CA:F000:0:0:2B89 (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But songs and sermons only play a part in many traditional Christian liturgies. There are the recitations of the various creeds and prayers, and many Christian liturgies are done uniformly and synchronously. 140.254.227.117 (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ship of Fools (website) has experimented with worship, though obviously not with sacraments, through at least two different social platforms over the years. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:03, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The website mentions "complete atheists". I wonder if they are Christian atheists or some sort of post-Enlightenment atheist or the Dawkins atheist or a confirmed atheist who personally does not believe in deities but still respect deceased spirits of family ancestors due to family heritage and tradition. 140.254.227.117 (talk) 15:31, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I used to be a regular. We had all of the above, as I recall, as well as a few adherents of non-Christian religions. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I went to the website and noticed they have purgatory. The only Christian denomination that accepts the doctrine of purgatory is Roman Catholicism and maybe Roman Catholic dissidents (i.e. "traditionalist Catholics" or "Old Catholics") who are not Protestants, Orthodox Christians, or non-Trinitarian Christians. 140.254.227.117 (talk) 16:04, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Without wishing to prolong this tangent too far: those names were not chosen to reflect the theology of the site, or even of the site's organisers - they were just amusing titles for the forums in question. There is no practical connection between the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory and the SoF forum for the discussion of serious topics. You have no need to explain to me which denomination believe in the doctrine of Purgatory. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry.140.254.227.117 (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Among Buddhists the e-sangha concept, meaning an on-line community paralleling traditional sangha monastic communities is relatively uncontroversial. In contrast, the Catholic Holy See has taught for centuries (see Aquinas) that sacramental confession requires three "acts" on the part of the penitent: contrition of the soul, disclosure of the sins (the 'confession'), and doing penance, i.e. amends for the sins, but seems nonplussed in bewilderment about the ecologically progressive fulfilment of these functions via Skype with an on-line Priest. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

'Nonplussed' would imply they say nothing on the matter: in fact, the Catholic Church says a fair amount about Confession over telephone or through other distance media. You also need to bear in mind the concerns about privacy when it comes to the Sacrament of Reconciliation: where exciting new sign-language translators have been installed in Confessionals, it has been strongly emphasised that they have no means of connecting to any networks or other computers, let alone the internet. That they consider it invalid does not mean they say nothing about it. And I fail to see how running a computer at each end, two routers, and all the servers involved, is more eco-friendly than walking into a Confessional. 86.146.28.229 (talk) 06:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Egyptian development pace

Why the development pace of Egytian civilization throughout thousands of years was generally slow (as evidenced by slow and sometimes minor changes in dress, technology and science) when compared to, say, AD 100-300, AD 300-900 or AD 1000-1300 timeframes in European realms and countries? --93.174.25.12 (talk) 15:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know for sure that it was that slow, or is it just that we have more detailed information for the more recent past? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:57, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder how it is possible to measure quantitatively the pace of a civilization. Science as we know it is a modern invention. In ancient times, people did think differently than people today. 140.254.227.117 (talk) 16:09, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
People usually don't realize how much Egypt did change over 3,000 years. New Kingdom Egypt, from roughly 1500 to 1000 BC, had chariots, bronze weapons, and a multicultural empire, which would have been hard for Egyptians in the Old Kingdom, roughly 2700 to 2100 BC, to imagine. Egyptians in Ptolemaic and Roman times prayed to their age-old gods and wrote stories about legendary pharaohs like Ramesses II while they were holding Greek-style athletic games and collecting manuscripts of Homer. Part of the reason for the illusion of changelessness is that the Egyptians themselves constantly reworked their traditions so it would seem that they were doing things as they'd always been done. (Barry Kemp's book Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation gives a lot of examples of that habit.) An inscription from the Roman-era Temple of Dendera that claims its floorplan was laid out in the reign of Khufu, 2,500 years earlier. A temple did exist at that site in the Old Kingdom, if not quite as far back as Khufu's reign, but the specific claim is flatly false. Most Old Kingdom temples were nothing like the size of the Roman temple at Dendera, and their ground plans were very different. A lot of architectural and decorative motifs (columns shaped like plants, hypostyle halls, cavetto cornices) would have been shared, but the ones at Dendera were almost always more elaborate than their New Kingdom counterparts, let alone those from the Old.
It's true that life in ancient Egypt did not change as much as life has changed in the past 2,000 years, but I think that's a product of the increasing pace of change in civilization in general. More sophisticated technology, more cultural exchange, and more people create a snowballing effect. Egypt started at the beginning of recorded history, so it's naturally going to appear more slow-moving than anything in our recent experience. The other factor is Egypt's relative isolation, which allowed it to maintain more of its original traditions than Mesopotamia, where a new people invaded or supplanted the locals every few centuries (Akkadians, Gutians, Amorites, Hittites, Kassites, Medes…). Egypt didn't have frequent invasions like that until after 1000 BC. A. Parrot (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Software playlists

I was wondering f there are any other software playlists beyond Real player? the amound of times that thing has frozen up and deleted my lists, I cant deal with it anymore? But im looking for a similar free software to play it. the VLC media player doesn't offer thisl.Lihaas (talk) 21:01, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

QuickTime. 140.254.226.235 (talk) 21:09, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Male Mormon missionaries vs. female Mormon missionaries

Is there a statistically significant discrepancy between the number of male Mormon missionaries and female Mormon missionaries? 140.254.226.235 (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Historically there were fewer women Mormon missionaries because the LDS set the minimum age for men missionaries at 19 years old, while setting a minimum age for women missionaries at 21. This rule changed last year, with the minimum age for women missionaries dropping to 19. Since that change, there's been a sharp increase in the number of women missionaries. A third of new missionaries are now women. There are figures in this news article. [3] OttawaAC (talk) 22:27, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&oldid=606732521"