Humanities desk
< January 16	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 18 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 17[edit]

Why is Lampedusa the goal of many migrants coming from Africa but not Pantelleria?[edit]

During the European migrant crisis but also before, people trying to migrate to Europe have been using ships from Lybia to reach Italian or Maltese islands, especially Lampedusa which is some 80 km from the African coast of ~~Algeria~~ Tunisia. Pantelleria, another Italian island, is just under 60 km away from ~~Algeria~~ Tunisia. So why do migrants risk trips from Lybia to Lampedusa instead of from ~~Algeria~~ Tunisia to Pantelleria? Is ~~Algeria~~ Tunisia that effective in preventing migrants from coming into the country? Our article on the migrant crisis does not mention either ~~Algeria~~ Tunisia or Pantelleria which I find odd (and potentially needs expansion). Regards So Why 10:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you might find this article and report by a UN-affiliated NGO useful: [1]. It says Tunisia is a destination for migrants rather than a waypoint and has some discussion of visa requirements and penalties that play into this. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The answer seems to be because Lampedusa has the infrastructure to deal with the immigrants, and Pantelleria does not. Lampedusa is home to the Lampedusa immigrant reception center, which is designed to house and process migrants who are coming to Europe. Pantelleria has no such facilities, as far as I can tell. --Jayron 32 17:22, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That might be a point but wouldn't most refugees care more about arriving somewhere in Europe save rather than where there might be facilities? After all, they can expect to be transported to the facilities once on Italian soil. Regards So Why 17:58, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that the Lampedusa facilities are a consequence of the immigration, not a cause. --Error (talk) 19:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From my ignorance, some parts of the Libyan coast are unwatched or controlled by accomplices of the smugglers. On the other side, the Tunisian Coast Guard operates normally. --Error (talk) 19:25, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find detailed information about the seizing of the Zeiss optical works to Russia as war reparations?[edit]

It's briefly gone over in the articles on Carl Zeiss AG ("As part of the World War II reparations, the Soviet army took most of the existing Zeiss factories and tooling back to the Soviet Union as the Kiev camera works.") as well as Kiev (brand) ("After the war had ended, the Soviet Union demanded new sets of Contax tools from the original toolmaker in Dresden...") as well as referenced in this overview of Kiev rangefinder cameras and this page about Contax history but I'd like some better sources on this particular facet of postwar reparations. Does anyone know of better sources I could read over, or at least where to start looking? Thanks, Horst.Burkhardt (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See John H. Noble for part of it... AnonMoos (talk) 13:29, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this account in International Law Reports is the most detailed I’ve found. Some other sources with brief mentions, in case that helps: The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography (one paragraph), An Economic History of the U.S.S.R. (on the context of the reparations in general), The East German Economy, 1945-2010 (mention of Zeiss continuing in Dresden). 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You best search under "VEB Carl Zeiss Jena" for the time after the war until Germany was reunited. The russians obviously started rethinking their Restitution plans when they noticed how successful the other allies put the german population in their sectors back to work. --Kharon (talk) 00:56, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

William Royle of Rusholme[edit]

I would be interested to learn more about William Royle of Rusholme, who was "a shippers merchant, the chairman of the Executive Committee of the Manchester Liberal Federation and ... wrote a history of Rusholme which was published in 1905. His Liberal connexions are what most interest me. DuncanHill (talk) 17:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there’s a biography of him, not viewable online: [2]. But some fairly recent publications have cited it, so it must be accessible somewhere… I see a copy on Amazon, or maybe you could get it via a uni library with interlibrary loan or even WP:RX. Other sources:

Political Change and the Labour Party 1900-1918 (Royle chose Manchester’s Liberal candidates in the 1890s)
Churchill Warrior (Royle’s opinions on German foreign policy in 1911)
The Progressive Alliance and the Rise of Labour, 1903-1922 (Royle’s opinions on the 1918 general election)

70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 20:50, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DuncanHill, the book is not widely held. There are two WorldCat records (1 and 2), seemingly for the same title; Columbia University is the only one west of the Atlantic, while east of the Atlantic you can get it at Trinity College Dublin, the National Library of Scotland, the Bodleian, the British Library in London, or the British Library in Wetherby, West Yorkshire. I think you're going to have to buy it if you want a copy, unless you can visit one of those libraries. Nyttend (talk) 23:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nyttend, the cis-Atlantic libraries are our copyright libraries. ×I might get a British Library reader's card at some point (I have a couple of lines of research for which it would be useful), but in the meantime I'll keep a look out for a cheap copy on the Web. DuncanHill (talk) 15:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]