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

May 28

Paul Nicklen Art

My son is doing a project for school and has a print out of Paul Nicklen's "A Brilliant Aurorae over Grey Mountains" painting. He has to have the name of the painting, artist name, and date of the painting. We obviously have the name of the painting and the artist. Can you tell me the date of the painting?

Thank you,

Sherman, TX —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.96.233.174 (talk) 01:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sherman, why not show your son how to search google for Paul Nicklen. The first hit is the photographer's website. Your son can send him an email to ask when he took the picture (it is a photograph, not a painting, as far as I can tell - is it one of these?). A few hits further down you can show your son Nicklen's official biography from National Geographic, which might help with the project too. WikiJedits (talk) 01:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

dominating force

who was the dominating force in WWII in terms of military might and effectiveness not necessarily in terms of number of men —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.97.66 (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Allies generally, and either the Soviet Union or the United States specifically, depending on your criteria. If you want a different scale, the tank and/or blitzkrieg tactics and the aircraft carrier would be good suggestions, much as trenches and the machine gun defined the Great War battlefield. — Lomn 04:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Atomic bomb. Edison (talk) 07:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The atomic bomb didn't fight the war; all it did was convince Japan to surrender at a time when they were at their weakest anyway. As has been said, radar won the war, the atomic bomb just ended it. The import of the atomic bomb even as a military weapon during WWII has been greatly exaggerated, to say nothing of the fact that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki the US supplies of them dwindled to almost nothing until the late 1940s. Carpet bombing had far more military consequences than the atomic bomb did. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Not for the most part of the war, though. SGGH ^speak! 09:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem with this question is that the Second World War had different stages. There just isn't a single answer for the whole of the War. Xn4 16:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

US Air Force Distinguished Service Medal

I've asked several people this, including Air Force public relations, and gotten no answer. What is the blue stone that is used at the center of the Distinguished Service Medal? Fonce Diablo (talk) 05:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The US Military site here discusses the "obverse design has a sunburst of thirteen gold rays separated by thirteen white enameled stars, with a semiprecious blue stone in the center." while this site says "The blue stone in the center represents the vault of the heavens" but I can't find the specific material. No books seem to name is as anything other than "blue stone" either. SGGH ^speak! 09:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What if you called air force pr back and asked them who is the manufacturer of the medal? Then call that company - they should know. WikiJedits (talk) 13:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

DHL company in Malaysia

How to explain the general environment of DHL company in Malaysia using the Pestel analysis and it`s competative environment using porter`s five forces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.188.235.131 (talk) 05:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen our pages PEST analysis and Porter 5 forces analysis? Look at the criteria and then find out how DHL matches those. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 09:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

My religion is between my god and me

I read the quote somewhere, but I can't remember who said it. At first I thought it was from Gandhi, but I can't find any site that attributed the quote to him. Can anyone help me identify who said it? Although now that I think about it, it could have been from an anonymous person. Anyway, your help in clarifying it would be appreciated. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.217.138 (talk) 08:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm X said "Island is my religion, but I believe my religion is my personal business. It governs my personal like and my personal morals. And my religious philosophy is personal between me and the God in whom I believe", that's the closest I can find. SGGH ^speak! 09:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

inherit the throne

Why does gender sometimes matter in inheriting the throne and sometimes it doesn't? Princess Anne goes lower than her younger brothers, but why then does Princess Beatrice go higher than Peter Philips even though he's a male? 67.68.32.13 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think if all else is equal then it goes males first then females, but if they are 'steps' ahead then they don't get jumped up the queue. I have no idea if Beatrice is a closer relative than Peter Phillips, but presumably she is and that is why she is ahead. Whereas Anne is no closer than her younger brothers so they will 'overtake' her by virtue of being male. There's probably a wiki article on it under something like succession or British Monarchy 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Line of succession to the British throne is probably the best article. Beatrice outranks Peter because sons outrank daughters, and children come before siblings. Andrew's children come immediately after Andrew, and thus before Anne and her children. Algebraist 11:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

This is Cognatic Primogeniture, because they can't be bothered to change it to a more modern and equal system. Although some countries have. And I think some are even worse, hardly ever letting women rule.HS7 (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Japan for example (Japanese succession controversy), although there have been talk of changing it because of the lack of a suitable male heir. The birth of one seems to have delayed/reduced calls for this but the current PM for example, still supports it. The Windsor case is complicated by the fact that the support of the Commonwealth realms will be ideal to avoid the situation where the various laws are out of sync with each other on succession and the fact that many of those most supportive of the idea probably want to do away with the monarch anyway. The fact that the current line means it's likely to make no difference is another factor. If William gets married and his first born is a daughter with at least one son after that, there may be a stronger impetus (but it'll likely have to happen when the male heirs are still fairly young otherwise there will be complaints it's unfair to those who were raised expecting to be the next in line after their father) Nil Einne (talk) 16:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It's also complicated by the facts that certain female members of the Royal Family reportedly desperately don't want to be higher up in the succession list, and that even if sex differences were wiped out the three closest heirs would remain the same. Therefore nobody feels an urgent need to change things. (Also, the change must be made by an act of Parliament, and I suspect the government of the day doesn't want the hassle.) --NellieBly (talk) 03:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

To avoid controversy, it may be best to make changes before the younger brother is born. Some people here in Sweden are still bothered about Prince Carl Philip getting bumped from being first in line to the throne at the age of seven or so months, when the reforms of the Act of Succession were adopted to equal primogeniture. /85.194.44.18 (talk) 16:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It's an odd hangover, particularly these days when discrimination by gender is generally outlawed in most other areas of life. They also discriminate on religious grounds - the monarch can technically be a member of any religion except Roman Catholicism. I believe Tony Blair talked about changing the law to make the succession arrangements more in line with modern thinking on inclusivity in employment, but it hasn't got past that stage. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, according to the Windsors' website, the religious requirements are more restrictive (must be a protestant and in communion with the CofE). Any such change would (I think) be hotly contested, and like Nil, I doubt any government will try to push it through until it actually matters. Algebraist 22:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how ordering by age is any fairer than ordering by sex and then age. It's not as though any of these people did anything to earn their place in the line of succession. The only benefit to changing the order that I can see would be a larger proportion of queens, which certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. I prefer queens anyway, kings are a lot less mobile and have to be carefully protected. But ultimately it seems like it would be much "fairer" to do away with the royal family and promote pawns instead—by general election presumably, or we could bring back the old system of quests perilous. Or get rid of the monarch entirely, but I'm not sure that's a good idea. There are advantages to having separate ceremonial and political heads of state. -- BenRG (talk) 23:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

@ Algebraist: Putting aside the facts that Charles was the first-born anyway, and that his first-born child is also a male, one could argue that it matters a great deal already. It matters because the succession rules incorporate examples of structural discrimination that are out of step with the way the rest of the Commonwealth is expected to operate. A lot of people still look to the Royal Family as role models. The Queen and her various governors-general have given royal assent to all the various bits of anti-discrimination legislation throughout the Commonwealth, and I'm sure all the assenters would have agreed these are good laws that make for a better and fairer world. The Queen has done a lot of things to modernise the monarchy and ensure she's seen as being in touch with community expectations, e.g. paying taxes she's not legally required to pay etc. Many people want to see the outright removal of the monarchy, but even they would welcome a change to the succession laws to bring them more into line with the access and equity framework that we mere mortals live by. Granted, any such change would not have any actual effect until such time as the death of a monarch whose first-born child happens to be a female. The earliest possible occasion would be the death of William V (currently Prince William), assuming he has a daughter first. That's probably at least 60 years down the track, and who knows if there'll even be monarchies by then (Nepal has just abolished its monarchy). I'm more interested in the implicit unfairness in the British model that has always applied and continues to this day. Symbolic changes are just as important as practicable changes, and constitutional monarchies are all about symbolism. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I find it highly unlikely a change like this will occur if the order has already been established for a long time and the current Prince is expecting and in training to be King. Unless of course the current prince desperately doesn't want to be King and the Princess who was first born desperately wants to be Queen. Hence unless this change happens with a few years of the birth of the Prince after the Princess, it simply ain't going to happen. Also, I suspect any change like this will most likely happen under the Conservative party in the UK since it simply isn't worth the hassle for Labour or the LibDems who on the whole have a fair number of people and supporters who want to just do away with the monarchy so fixing something which (in their view) is fundamentally broken in a way which doesn't make any real difference to them is likely to be seen as somewhat pointless. Nil Einne (talk) 10:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Romani/Gipsy brass band music

Hello. I've searched the articles on Romani music, but haven't been able to find what I am looking for. Quite specifically, I am looking for a piece of brass band music. It's very enthralling and cheery, but I don't know what is being sung. I recently saw a surrealistic Yugoslavian film (though recently made) about two Yugoslavs who fought the German occupation. Not sure about the title. Anyway, the brass band was prominent, because it'd follow them and perform this same piece over and over again. Performed instrumentally (as it was in that film), it had good potential for repeating over again. Trumpets and bass drums were important, but there were many other brass instruments. It would go something like DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada)-aaa-*wild and chaotic, writing doesn't really suffice*.

I know you've been able to answer vaguer questions about pieces of art, literature and music before, so I hope this will suffice. :) Scaller (talk) 13:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The movie is Underground (film), the soundtrack is "Kalasjnikov". Thank you! Scaller (talk) 13:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Are there social movements using wikis? And how?

I am trying to find information on whether there are any social movements using the wiki technology, and if so, how are they using it. If you can provide any examples (of social movement wikis, or works discussing that, or just anything you've heard) I would appreciate it.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Anytime a widespread group of people want to share information and collaborate, a wiki is a free and easy way to do so. They're easy enough to find. Google an issue and the word wiki. After you get past the wikipedia stuff, most major issues have at least one. ex: Autism Wiki or Global Warming Wiki. 160.10.98.34 (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Depends on what you mean by "social movement"? I'd say Wikipedia qualifies. --D. Monack | talk 19:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What is the name for the study of the history of printing / writing / the book?

I may want to study the above in graduate school. Assuming that I could get in to most programs, what would the best choice be?

In other words, would it be better to study history, English, or even anthropology? Where are the best programs located? Who are the leading scholars in this field?

Your help in answering my questions is greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.87.70.194 (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a very general question. You haven't mentioned for example, whether you're likely to be restriced to one country. It sounds to me that you're an American, but whatever the case, are you willing to consider universities in the US? Canada? the UK? Australia? What about e.g. Germany or France or Japan (which will almost definitely entail learning French or German if you don't know it already). Nil Einne (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Printing, of course, has a history which is very different from that of writing, and the history of writing divides into the history of the act of writing itself (palaeography, etc) and that of writing as a literary art. Books are part of the history of all of them. So your question really needs more focus, as suggested by Nil Einne. Xn4 16:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the above really falls into anthropology; I've seen people studying such things in both English programs as well as History programs, as well as History of Science programs (in the latter venue, look at the works by Jim Secord or Adrian Johns). There are a lot of links at the bottom of the History of the book page that might be useful. From what I understand of it, the specific venue you will want will depend on what time period and location you are interested in (19th century Britain? 15th century France? etc.) or whether you have thematic interests (the book as a way of transmitting scientific knowledge? the book as reflective of changing literary patterns of the middle class?), etc. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

To clarify: yes, I am an American. I have studied English at both a small liberal arts school in the U.S. as well as an Oxbridge college in the U.K. and would prefer to continue studying in a country where English is the native language. I am interested in the medium of the book itself, its history, and its place in anthropological and cultural studies. I suppose I was wondering if English is the best path to studying the medium of the book (in graduate school). Thank you for your responses thus far. 204.87.70.194 (talk) 18:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

You'll probably want to read up on some of the basic seminal texts in the field, just so you have a better idea of what it is you want to do and how it compares with what has already been done. After having done that it will be much easier to talk with potential professors about their programs, whether they would be apt for you. (And while I have no doubt that there would be anthropological insights to be gained, again, I have never seen anything that would make me think that this sort of study would be considered appropriate in an Anthropology department. They would wonder what you were doing had to do with their discipline. Just a tip. You might look into Science and Technology Studies, a discipline which includes anthropology and history and would probably be more accepting to that approach, if you really want to go the Anthropology route. In general though I think you're looking at English programs or History programs.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

To answer a part of the question, I don't know of a word for the study of the history etc. of books. There are plenty of nifty words in that general area, though. "Bibliogony" is the production of books. "Bibliology" is the scientific description of books. "Bibliopegy" is bookbinding. "Bibliopoesy" is the making of books. --Milkbreath (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

There is a program at the University of Toronto (in collaboration with various departments) called "Book History and Print Culture", which covers all of this. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

In academia in general it is called history of the book. If you told people you were interested in studying that they'd understand what you meant. If you said you were interested in bibilology they'd say Gesundheit. ;-) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

What is the Marxist Scientific Method?

Is there any work that outlines the Marxist scientific method? --Gary123 (talk) 15:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean by the Marxist scientific method? Do you mean the Marxist philosophy of science and nature? That is a subset of what is known as dialectical materialism (I don't think our page is very clear on the philosophy of nature aspects of it—it is really about hierarchical levels of knowledge that cannot affect one another, but that's a whole other story). Do you mean, the way in which Marxism calls itself a "science"? That is just hogwash with no methodology supporting it. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Probably not what you're looking for, but Ben Goldacre's Bad Science mentions Trofim Lysenko, a top Soviet biologist who: "thought natural selection was too individualistic, and spent his career growing plants really close together, in the hope they would develop collectivist tendencies." Dooky (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That's amusing, but is not actually what Lysenko believed. Our page on Lysenko is much more accurate. He was scientifically wrong, but not for reasons that are very entertaining. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Historical Religious Flag

I need more information concerning an old flag with a red cross on the right side and the words "By This Sign Conquer" next to the cross. I have a picture of the flag. Need instructions to download the picture. Please contact me (here). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.178.27 (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(I removed your contact info as per the instructions at the top of this page -SandyJax (talk) 18:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC))

The order of the Knights Templar uses a red cross and, on the seal, the Latin inscription "In hoc signo vinces". I could not find an image in WP, but there must be one in Google somewhere. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The actual Templars did not use that motto, so you've probably got a fake, or some modern recreation that claims to be Templars. "In hoc signo" was Constantine I's motto. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I must have mixed it up with that other saint, Simon Templar :) --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Meaning of the name Pen Argyl , and the people who founded the town .

The name Pen Argyl ( pronounced Pehn Argil , or Pehn Arjil ) derives from 2 words : Pen , meaning the mountain region ; Argyl , from the word " argylite " , a type of slate . Together , the two words mean " Mountain of Slate " . This name was giving to the town by the immigrants ( the ancestors or grandparents of the people of Pen Aygyl ) who arrived to the United States from the town of Delabole ; Cornwall , England . Many of the men arriving from Cownwall were slate quarry workers ; having worked in the Delabole Slate Quarry . They left their homeland because of lack of work in the tin mines . Many were forced to leave their homes and find work in other places in United Kingdom , Canada , United States , and Australia . With them they brought their history , language , culture , and recipes . Although they are English ; they prefer to be known as Cornish people . Their Food : The people of Pen Argyl are known for making two of their most popular Cornish dishes : Saffron Buns ( or Saffron Cake ), and their Cornish Pasties ( sometimes called English Pasties ) ; which is beef ( cubed or ground beef ) , onions , and diced - cubed potatoes ; stuffed in a half - folded pastry pie crust . They also like making Rhubarb Pie . Pen Argyl is the home of the famous " Mr. Pasties " pasty shop , where they make the pasties homemade ; home of " Weona Park " (pronounced : we - own - a - park )and its carousel . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.130.17.219 (talk) 23:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

This is the Wikipedia reference desk. Do you have a question? If not, you're probably lost. We have an article on Pen Argyl here. Algebraist 23:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I have copied the info onto the talk page there. 205... if you'd like to add this information to the article, find sources (references) in reliable books or magazines. Put that source in < source > into the text you are adding in the edit window. It will show up as a footnote. Good luck with your edit. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Pen Argyl is much better known these days for being the final resting place of Jayne Mansfield. Check out the photo of her tombstone in her article. --NellieBly (talk) 03:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

May 29

Name for belief about acquiring attributes

I'm trying to think of the general name for the belief that consuming something will bring the consumer the attributes of that thing. For instance, if you consume the sexual organs of a tiger, you will be virile, or that if you consume a turtle you will be slow. Ring any bells? -- Beland (talk) 00:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

James George Frazer in The Golden Bough calls it "sympathetic magic", or, more specifically, the branch of that magic he calls "homeopathic magic" or "imitative magic", the other being "contagious magic". (That book is on line at Gutenberg and is a must-read for anyone interested in stuff like this.) He proposes that one of the two principles on which magic is based is that like produces like. --Milkbreath (talk) 01:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

See also the article Chinese medicine[1] for brief intro and article Sympathetic magic. Great link by the way MB, Julia Rossi (talk) 01:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

And somewhat related is Lamarckism. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Not really... Lamarck's idea was that acquired characteristics were passed to the next generation: our article gives an example of a blacksmith passing his strong arms on to his children. A theory of evolution based on sympathetic magic would say that dragonflies evolved to become fast by their habit of eating quick moving insects. Matt Deres (talk) 16:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes evolution comes close, as it might say dragonflies became fast (evolved) in order to eat quick moving insects. Is it like that? Julia Rossi (talk) 01:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Something close, but you see the mechanism is backward. Under natural selection, the fastest dragonflies had the most offspring and passed that genetic trait on to their offspring. Under Lamarckism (debunked), the strain of flying fast built up the dragonfly's muscles and those large muscles were passed onto the offspring. Our hypothetical theory of evolution by sympathetic magic would say that the dragonflies that ate the fastest mosquitoes would acquire ability from them. In more general terms, natural selection is the weeding out of existing variables (a subtractive process), Lamarckism is the building up of acquired characteristics (an additive process), and our ToEbSM is, well, a transitive process (I'm making this up) in that the abilities of one animal are passed directly onto another from digesting it.

In a very limited sense, sympathetic magic is a more factual phenomenon than Lamarckian theories. Poison tree frogs, for example, do not create their toxins within themselves, but get them from the insects they eat. In a loose sense, the "magic" poison is passed onto the frog. Even there, though, we run into the problem of passing the trait onto the next generation. Oh well! Matt Deres (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Voodoo?

When a villain can only be killed if a certain object is destroyed, eg in Lord of the rings, Sauron dies if the One Ring is destroyed; the genie Jafar dies if his lamp is destroyed; and in Harry Potter, Voldemort dies if all his horcruxes, which contain pieces of his soul, are destroyed. Is there a word for this objecting being more than just standing for, (apart from effigy) the villain? Julia Rossi (talk) 01:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Would "soul vessel" or "icon" fit the bill?--71.236.23.111 (talk) 01:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

How about phylactery?--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That looks like a medicine bag to me. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 02:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

They all sound like it. I'll put those in a see also at the end of the article and maybe a section with links. Thanks for your help. Julia Rossi (talk) 04:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

You are no doubt aware that "phylactery" is a word in its own right having nothing to do with all this, borrowed without permission for the obscure fictional mumbo-jumbo. Frazer could come up with nothing better than "soul-box" (p. 680) to contain the "external soul". Incidentally. in poking around I discovered what I think I used to know, that the "Host" of the Eucharist is not the same word as the ordinary "host" but instead derives from the Latin for "sacrifice". I was hoping it would have to do with "hosting" the soul or something of Christ, but no. --Milkbreath (talk) 10:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Katschei is also famous for this. 134.96.105.72 (talk) 08:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

<nitpick alert> Sauron doesn't die. He is just rendered impotent (Viagra endorsement time?). </nitpick alert> Clarityfiend (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

One of the other examples has a similar inaccuracy. Spoiler here. --Anon, 00:06 UTC, May 30, 2008.

This is so helpful, I'm copying the whole thread to the talk page. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Tin Woodman

Why would the Tin Woodman in the Wizard of Oz be replaced by a snake in Hindu countries? Just curious, not wanting formal legal advice. :) Abeg92contribs 03:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a very interesting question. I've had a good trawl round via Google, but the only sites that assert this look like WP:Mirrors; I can't find anything that looks independent or gives any explanation of why this would be the case.

The information appears to have been added by User:Woggly in this diff [2] four years ago. Since they are still an active contributor, I've dropped a note on their talk page asking if they can help shed any more light on the matter. -- Karenjc 12:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This is cited to someone's website, but the website provides no additional reference beyond the assertion that it is so. I question whether this satisfys the verifiability requirement and have tagged the assertion in the article as needing a better reference. Edison (talk) 19:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Woggly has provided the following additional info:

Hi. I learned about the Tinman/snake substition in a presentation given by Dick Rutter in the year 2000, at the Wizard of Oz Centennial Convention that was held in Bloomington, Indiana, by the International Wizard of Oz Club. Rutter is an orthodonist and Oz enthusiast, who owns what very well may be the world's largest collection of international editions of the Wizard of Oz. He gave a slideshow presentation of books from his collection, including several books from Hindu countries, and reported the snake anecdote. I hope this information helps. --woggly (talk) 22:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Karenjc" --Karenjc 22:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Emailed Dr Rutter and requested help in tracking down the source. -- Karenjc 23:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

So... no response? Will this topic die? Should the snake stuff be removed from the article? I guess I'll remove it if this gets no replies to the contrary by tomorrow... Abeg92contribs 21:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Who is this writer?

I remember reading on the internet about some author who cranked out science fiction books (by dictation) at a rate of about one every week and a half. Supposedly they were full of filler, including a long tooth-brushing scene. Also, he was said to be the most prolific science fiction writer ever. I can't remember the name! Argh! 98.199.17.3 (talk) 03:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe that Isaac Asimov was the most prodigious, however I don't know that his works are "full of filler" nor am I aware that he dictated his work. Wikiant (talk) 12:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Philip K. Dick wrote a lot. However, he was rather crazy and was writing more to write than to create science fiction. In his worst states, I would not be surprised if he wrote an entire story about brushing teeth. In his better states, he created the foundation of many great stories. -- kainaw™ 13:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Not L. Ron Hubbard, by any chance? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 13:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds a bit dubious. A book every week and a half works out to just under 35 a year. Over say 20 years, that's nearly 700. Asimov (a freak, or an alien, or a whole gaggle of aliens) is considered by many to be the most prolific science-fiction author. By comparison, he wrote just over 500 books, not all science fiction, over a much longer period. Now it's possible for somebody to write drivel and call it science fiction, but would it be published? I think not. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have heard this before - the toothbrushing scene story is very familiar. I did wonder whether it might be John Creasey, who is known for his prolific output (well over 600 books) under a variety of names and who was capable of writing a short pulp novel (35,000 words) overnight. He's best known as a thriller writer, but he did write SF too. There's also Kenneth Bulmer. However, I have a niggling feeling it's another name, and one I ought to remember. Will keep looking. --Karenjc 17:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Asimov's rate picked up over his lifetime, and during his final decade, he was producing about one book every two weeks. --Carnildo (talk) 20:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a vague idea that the guy had three names (ie not John Creasey). 98.199.17.3 (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The toothbrushing thing reminded me of Kilgore Trout, which lead me to Philip José Farmer. Mr Farmer does not seem to have written 700 books, but he is a SF writer with three names whose list of works in his article is quite long. 161.222.160.8 (talk) 23:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

A. Bertram Chandler comes to mind, but his article shows "40 novels and 200 works of short fiction". --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Most of Asimov's work over most of his lifetime wasn't science fiction, and a lot of works that are counted in his total are ones he only edited as an anthologist. Another prolific author best known for SF is Robert Silverberg; our article says he wrote a million words a year at his peak, and I once saw him quoted -- I think in the 1980s -- as saying he'd written more books than Asimov. But I haven't heard the story being asked about, for him or anyone else. --Anonymous, 00:18 UTC, May 30.

It was Lionel Fanthorpe. --ColinFine (talk) 20:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

That's him! Thank you very much! 98.199.17.3 (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Hooray ColinFine! It was driving me mad too, once 98.199 had brought it up. If anyone's interested, the infamous toothbrushing scene was in Fanthorpe's novel Dark Continuum and is reproduced in full here [3]. -- Karenjc 14:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Relation

Is Colin Campbell Ross related to John Campbell Ross? Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 06:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I doesn't seem very likely. Ross is a common surname, and Campbell as a given name, although less common, is not uncommon. In the absence of a specific reason to think the two are related, the most likely guess is that they aren't. In the same way it is unlikely that Charles Campbell Ross and Duncan Campbell Ross are related. Ditto for Alan Strode Campbell Ross and Callum Campbell Ross.  --Lambiam 07:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Question!

Who were the most barbaric: Vikings, Goths, Mongols or Huns? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.93.179 (talk) 09:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That is a very subjective question, and not very useful as a question about history; to the monks of Lindisfarne, the Vikings were pretty barbaric, but the inhabitants of thirteenth century Baghdad would argue that the Mongols were the most barbarous. But what about all their good qualities, their civilization, their contributions to humanity? All of them founded extensive empires and had literature and art. Does that make them less barbaric? Adam Bishop (talk) 09:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

As usual the answer depends on who wrote the book you're reading. Romans are great because the beat "barbaric" tribes into shaping their empire. Moguls are "barbaric" because they beat "great" nations to shape their empire (?!)--71.236.23.111 (talk) 18:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that barbarians doesn't have a ethymology like Vandals or we could easily answer this question with a meaningless response. However an interesting thing I just learnt "The female first name "Barbara" originally meant "A Barbarian woman", and as such was likely to have had a pejorative meaning" Nil Einne (talk) 10:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It depends if you mean which ones were most ruthless and destructive in behaviour or the sense of barbarian as one who is outside the dominant culture (and seen in a lesser light). With the first, there's no distinction as Adam Bishop explained. Though the Romans had the word "barbare" for it/them, the second gets the rest. Julia Rossi (talk) 01:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Vikings were certainly not the barbaric peoples you think they are. Firstly, the term "vikings" is misleading because it means "raiders" and was assigned by Christan cultures looking at what (at the time) was a Pagan society (though Christianity did spread to places like Iceland in AD 999). The Vikings were in fact both raiders, traders and settlers. There are written sources from as late as the 1400s which write on the 793 raid on Lindesfarm or the raid on Portland, Dorset somewhere between 786-802. However in the latter, the inhabitants were expecting the Vikings to trade, nor raid, so that suggests they traded too. Furthermore, a camp excavated at Repton on the River Trent showed both weapons and scales and other trading equipment, and many Vikings were buried with scales as well as weapons, showing that they traded as well as raided. They were often merchants, trading ivory from Greenland and Iceland and they were farmers, they farmed crops and sheep and cattle. The entire of Iceland was made up of a commonwealth of small Viking farmships. They obviously settled as well, Viking settlements existed in Iceland, Greenland and Vinland (northern Americas). The idea of them being barbaric murdering raiders is a creation by Christian Europe, abhorring the idea of a few raiders sacking a Church in northern England, and (when they did adopt Christianity) taking the Church's tax money for themselves. This is a simplification of the reason, but undoubtedly the idea that Vikings were murderous barbarians isn't true. They even had far greater equality between the sexes than Christian Europe did at the time! SGGH ^speak! 14:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Simple Question .... Long answer

This is not supposed to offend anyone but I have a feelinbg it might. The other day I was sitting with my partner watching a program about Steven Hawking and his wonderful theories. Then, my partner said to me,' so if this is true, it blows Christianity away and the creation of the world in seven days...' I have a huge amount of respect for both religion and science but I couldn't help feeling my partner had won me over on this one. Any ideas? Kirk UK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.82.79.175 (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The short answer is that Christianity doesn't depend on the world being created in seven days. Most Christians take the passage describing that as being theological rather than scientific. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

7 days doesnt necessarily refer to 7 literal days. = ) --Cameron (T|C) 17:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that the Biblical description of the order of events, and not solely the timing between them, is spurious. Genesis claims that plants were created before the Sun that drives their photosynthesis, and that land organisms were produced before life in water. This description of events, and their attribution to God, would seem very reasonable to an ignorant person 2000 years ago but not by an author inspired by an omniscient God. The Bible also includes appaling examples of cruelty, collective punishment, and sadism, but again, these examples can easily be explained by the Bible's author's acceptance of comtemporary values. I think the Bible should, if rationality is not completely disregarded, be taken as simply the work of a mundane person 2000 years ago. --Bowlhover (talk) 04:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It only blows Christianity away if one assumes that the point of the Bible is to relay historical fact. I can similarly "blow away" the program you were watching by pointing out that Steven Hawking is three-dimensional and composed (principally) of carbon, while in the program you were watching he was a two-dimensional arrangement of photons. Of course, this misses the point that the program was meant to portray Steven Hawking's ideas, not to physically represent him. Wikiant (talk) 18:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hang on, seven days is seven days surely? Seven phases I can understand as being interpreted in many different ways but seven days equals seven blocks of twenty four hours. If not, then why say seven days? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.82.79.175 (talk) 18:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

During the program, would you have thought it odd if someone had pointed to the TV and said, "That's Steven Hawking"? It seems a straightforward statement -- surely, Steven Hawking is Steven Hawking. But it wasn't Steven Hawking; it was an image. In fact, the point of the program wasn't that the image was or was not Steven Hawking. The point was the information the program was trying to get across -- Hawking (or his image) was merely a vehicle for the information. Similarly, the specific words in the Bible are vehicles for transmitting an idea -- the idea is that (1) God is the source of all things; (2) God loves us. Wikiant (talk) 18:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

In other words, ceci n'est pas une semaine? Deor (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This is not what I'm asking, I'm familiar with the Rene Magritte ananagy of 'C’est Ne Pas Ne Pas Une Pipe', that's not what I'm referring to in the Hawking Statements. Moving away from Hawking statements, whether it be big bang theory, string theory or whatever, can the two exist simultaneously? Can a god creation of the universe exist alongside a scientific explanation of gravitational fields, probability fields and black holes. If we ignore the phrase 'on the first day, God said let there be light' in the bible, then does that mean that any phrases in the bible can be ignored if they 'don't fit'? Keeping to the original question, is there any research that explains how a religious and scientific explanation can co exist. Thanks - Kirk Uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.82.79.175 (talk) 19:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The issue is, what do you mean by "don't fit?" If you take the words in the Bible as statements of fact, then not only do they "not fit" with science, they don't even "fit" with themselves (do a google search on "contradictions in the bible" -- there's a lot of them). Now, if you take the words as conveying the idea that God created the universe, then there need not be a contradiction with science. Science explains *how* the universe came into being, but religion addresses *why* the universe came into being. Wikiant (talk) 20:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

You may find this article interesting. Particularly the second subheading 'The Marriage of Teachings—Does It Work?'. Best, --Cameron (T|C) 20:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[The website http://www.watchtower.org/ is obsolete, but Wayback Machine has archives of "Did God Use Evolution to Create Life?" indexed at https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.watchtower.org/e/200609/article_03.htm. Today the official website of Jehovah's Witnesses is http://www.jw.org, and that article is at http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102006323.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2014 (UTC)]

Don't get hung up on the "7 days" of Genesis 1. If you read Genesis 2, you will find the story of creation told in quite a different way (and order). From a Christian perspective, both are the Word of God, and thus speak of the Truth. Yet they appear to contradict each other. That doesn't fit with our modern preference for describing facts in a scientific, analytical way, so it seems nonsense. But, as Wikiant says, that is to take the passages in a way they were never intended. Think instead of traditional story telling as a way of conveying truths and ideas. There's a hundred versions of Robin Hood, yet we all understand the gist of it; we tell of the Tortoise and the Hare, when that never occurred ("How stupid, as if a hare and a tortoise could talk, and run a race"), yet we use it to demonstrate severals truths & concepts (that of not being too confident; that slow and steady often wins, etc). Even now we use fiction to portray truth. There never was a Private Ryan; do we then doubt D-Day happened? So, no, faith and science don't have to tie up exactly: they speak of different things. Can they be held together? There is much in the way of research, philosophy, discussion regarding that. Check out, for a start, Intelligent Design, Theistic evolution, Jewish views on evolution. There are plenty of links to follow from those. Also consider JRR Tolkein's On Fairy-Stories, where he addresses the idea that where fairy stories tell of truths, the Bible is the ultimate "fairy story" to portray the ultimate truth. Basically, science hasn't "blown away" religion. There are many intellectually satisfied people of faith (of all persuasions). Gwinva (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Addit: to clarify: I am NOT claiming that the Bible is merely story, and the various events described within it didn't happen. I was merely suggesting that each part of the Bible must be read as it was intended to be read; some is story, some is poetry, some contains historical records, some are personal letters, etc etc. Studies of any texts must start first with an analysis of style, and asking "why was this written". Gwinva (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I've known a few fundamentalist Christians who are so tied to the idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, that they believe the world was created, destroyed and then created again just to deal with the dual creation stories in Genesis. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 22:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it seems to me that a hard-core fundamentalist view of the Bible is not overly dissimilar from idolatry. Wikiant (talk) 22:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hawking and the Bible can both be right for one very simple reason: We really don't know what "seven days" means in the Bible. The only thing we can be reasonably sure of is that it wasn't the equivalent of one week in our time. Why? The sun wasn't even created until the "fourth day" of Genesis (Gen 1:16). If the sun wasn't created yet, and the sun is the most natural way we tell one day from another , how can we say that each of these days is twenty-four hours? We can't. Your friend's analysis was a bit simplistic. Hawking hasn't blown the Bible away, and the Bible hasn't blown Hawking away. Wrad (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Note as well Day describes the issues to some extent and bear in mind that the Bible was not originally written in English Nil Einne (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Gold State Coach

The state coach of the UK, has it been valued, it must be worth hundreds of thousands --Hadseys 19:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's part of the Royal Collection, and I don't think anyone's valued that specifically. I remember somewhere, someone saying that they had an insurer in at Buckingham Palace one day, and he was in just one room and gave up! But it's value would be hundreds of thousands if not millions; after all, it's a work of art, and it's royal provenance is pretty immense, having carried every sovereign since George III. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• And its coated in gold leaf all over and got lots of paintings by famous artists, wonder how much it'd fetch on ebay :P --Hadseys 19:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Lol, they probably won't know what it is and it'll go for £75 as a nice novelty item. ;) PeterSymonds (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• Bargain then :D

Well it's got my bid! And if things get desperate she can throw in six horses. I did always get fed up with taking the bus into town... PeterSymonds (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Once removed from its context, the state coach belongs in Las Vegas as much as anywhere. In Las Vegas the publicized amount it would be insured for would essentially be a publicity stunt. The problem: you're asking to evaluate something that embodies ineffable cultural values in terms of something without any intrinsic value. Two conventional systems that don't intersect: "invaluable", "priceless" give hints...--Wetman (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• Ye but if it was robbed how much would the queen be able to claim in insurance? --Hadseys 11:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Plus we value the invaluable all the time. QUALYs (Quality of Life Years?) for deciding what drugs to put on the nhs. Life insurance policies valuing the loss of income if a partner/person was to die. Auctions selling all manner of cultural artefacts. I expect that given that it is A) a work of art, B) Part of the British Royal Family and C) Famous that this thing would be worth well over £1m, probably 10x that (if not more) to a collector. Of course this is based on purely knowledge of auctions/antiques built up from years of watching The Antiques Roadshow as a child. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 11:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Pear and Fig dish

Is there a traditional Chinese or middle eastern Pear and fig dish? If so, what is it called? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have three large traditional Chinese recipe books. There are only two recipes that include figs. One is a fig/vinegar syrup intended for pork. The other is a fig-filling for sesame balls. Neither recipe includes pears. -- kainaw™ 21:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I've come across a pear-and-fig chutney, which I'm pretty sure comes originally from India, but don't ask me if it's from any particular part of the sub-continent. If you focus on chutneys, you may be able to get nearer to it. Xn4 23:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

What is the name of this chutney? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

One name for it is (ahem) 'Pear and Fig Chutney', as made, for instance, by Maison Therese Ltd. I can't say it's traditional, but for all I know it may be, somewhere. Xn4 11:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Where figs ripen dependably in the open (i.e., not cossetted against a warm, south-facing brick wall), pears don't get enough winter cold to set fruit dependably. That's the basic reason why there is not a "traditional" Chinese or Middle Eastern dish combining pears and figs: the ingredients come out of separate cultural contexts. --Wetman (talk) 23:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Secret codes in france WWII

I was watching the movie 'The Longest Day' over the weekend, and was left wondering how the secret code words played over the radio to the French Resistance were distributed to various cells? Every movie or book I've read with this concept has just taken it for granted that the right people will know what some random assortment of words will mean, but historically, how did they decide upon the meanings?142.33.70.60 (talk) 20:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Philippe de Vomécourt, at least, was given the code in London:

When would they come? In London I had been told to listen to the B.B.C. on the first and the fifteenth of each month. The message announcing the invasion would be broadcast after the 9 P.M. news—among the other curious messages that were put out night after night, like my own messages to tell my family I was well. April 15, May 1, May 15—each of them passed without the message I was waiting to hear.

Then the first of June.

"Les sanglots longs des violons de l'automne...." It was the first line of a poem by Verlaine. And it meant the invasion was soon to be launched. Only a few of us in the Resistance knew the significance of this message, and we could not tell our friends. We must now wait for the second half of the message, which would tell us that the invasion was to be launched within the next forty-eight hours. It was big news to carry about with me, and it was hard to hold it back from the others, but it could scarcely have added to the feverish excitement with which all were now possessed. Everyone could feel, despite all the disappointments of the past, that the invasion must come very soon. I looked at their faces, the faces of men whose friendship I held dear: men like Vincent and "Dédé," my adjutant, Captain Makowski, known as Maurice, and Colon, in charge of the Cher. I thought to myself, "You have not long to wait now."

And on the fifth of June, the imperturbable voice of the B.B.C. announcer, unaware of the momentous importance of the words he was speaking, said:

"Blessent mon coeur d'une langueur monotone...." It was the following line of the Verlaine poem, and it was the second part of the message. It signified that within two days Allied forces would be fighting once more on French soil.

Then followed a long string of "action messages," the coded messages by which each réseau received its orders to carry out the various prearranged operations against the railways, bridges, lines of communication, and so on. It was soon apparent that all notions of "graduated" action, on a selective basis, had been abandoned. About 300 "action" messages were broadcast that night, which meant, in effect, an order for a general uprising in every county in France. The messages went on and on, taking up far, far more time than usual. The Germans are said to have known the meaning of the two lines from Verlaine. Had they needed other proof that the invasion was imminent, those 300 "action" messages must have given it to them. That the Germans did not react more urgently, that the invasion, launched in bad weather, should have found them relatively so unprepared, with Rommel on leave with his family in Germany, was the purest fortune for the Allies. But, of course, there had been false alarms about the invasion for the past three years, when, just as now, the code words signaling imminent landings had been broadcast, and our hearts leaped in vain. Perhaps the Germans had also become skeptical by now of these messages.De Vomécourt, Philippe. (1961). An Army of Amateurs. pp. 229-30. OCLC 1634632

—eric 21:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I assume that only a few trusted people in the Resistance would know the codewords, and they would tell the others at the appropriate time. Given the huge effort that went into the deception operation I would be surprised if a few 'false' codewords hadn't been planted for the Germans to hear about in the hope that if they did find the real ones they would ignore them. The above passage would seem to bear that out. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Governments & bank accounts

A local government is similar to a business as they both take in revenue and pay expenses and employees. But a business stores its money in a bank account. How does a government treasury store its money? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.11.128 (talk) 23:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The U.S. Treasury is the U.S. Government's bank. Also, the two entities are dissimilar in that the firm's goal is to maximize profit while the (implicit) goal of governments tends to be to maximize revenue. Wikiant (talk) 23:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm talking more of a local government.71.218.11.128 (talk) 23:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure local goverments keep their money in bank accounts like everyone else. Algebraist 10:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It's really too simplistic to say "a business stores its money in a bank account". Most businesses have their capital tied up in property, equipment, trading stock, vehicles, infrastructure, etc., and beyond what's needed for cashflow purposes few have much cash in the bank, because businesses can generally find better uses for their money. If there's a company pension fund, it's likely to be invested in property, stocks and shares, bonds, etc. on the advice of fund managers, although there are times when a large part of a pension fund may be held in cash on deposit. In the UK, principal local authorities are (as you say) similar to businesses, and all of the above applies to them, except that they are more likely to have significant reserves, especially after selling major assets, and those are usually invested (on professional advice) to provide the best possible return without excessive risk. Like businesses, local authorities are likely to have borrowed money, especially for developing new housing or other major schemes. However, the lowest tier of local authorities in the UK (town, parish, or community councils) are more limited in their room for manoeuvre: there are restrictions on their powers to borrow money and to hold reserves. Xn4 10:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that was a bad comparison. But a city still has to pay its workers, like a business, so that paycheck has to come from somewhere. 71.218.1.96 (talk) 17:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

May 30

what are these buildings

what are these buildings located on treasure island in san Francisco [4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.97.66 (talk) 04:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

They are indeed "Sage Hall" and "Cosson Hall" but they were Bachelor Enlisted Quarters or BEQ. I lved there in the 1980's while attending Hull Maintenance Technician School. We were trained in firefighting, welding, sheel metal work, wodden construction techniques and overall Damage control experts for the Navy. The building was made with 6 wings around a central circular ramp. To get to the top floors you had to circle the ramp several times. The bottom floors were for male sailors stationed in Treasure Island. The upper floors were for students attending various schools on treasure island. It was the most perfect view of the San Francisco skyline.

When I Googled for "star shaped buildings" on Treasure Island, this said they are barracks, part of the former naval base. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

That's kinda weird. The armed forces aren't usually noted for odd architecture. Was the navy trying to subtly one-up The Pentagon? Clarityfiend (talk) 22:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

They're called "Sage Hall" and "Cosson Hall", and they were BOQ (bachelor officer quarters). --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Just speculation, but they might be multiple sleeping quarters wings with central offices and maybe dining rooms. Corvus cornix_talk 19:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It is a shame that the City of San Francisco has allowed this great base to fall into a total pile of crap. They were given the base the same time the city of San Diego took over NTC San Diego (Boot Camp). San Diego has made it a wonderful mixed use area full of shops, lower income housing, middle income units and even upscale areas.

San Diego has done it right. San Francisco... well let's all say how we really feel. A liberal left leaning State Government in a left leaning State has allowed Treasure Island to be taken over by the worst of the worst. I drove over to TI with my wife and actually feared for our lives. DON'T GO OVER THERE AT NIGHT.... EVER!

The River Nile

To what extent is the current management of the river Nile sustainable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.164.190 (talk) 08:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Please do your own homework.

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our aim here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. User:Krator (t c) 12:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

And here's the aforementioned help with pointing towards articles. You may want to look at Sustainability Nile Hydropolitics in the Nile Basin. Don't forget to look at linked pages (click on words in blue in the text) and "See also" pages mentioned. Water management is still under construction, but may also hold useful links. --76.111.32.200 (talk) 19:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Walibri's strange custom

I've read on the net that when men of the Walibri tribe of central Australia greet each other, they shake genitals instead of hands. The web pages saying this story are all unreliable, of course, (blogs or discussion forums) but I was wondering if there is some truth in the story? --211.243.246.207 (talk) 08:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure the tribe even exists (apologies to any member of the tribe if I'm wrong) but on a quick google search every reference to them talks about this genitals shaking custom. I can't find any reference to anything else about the tribe. Other aboriginal tribes seem well represented on the net so why not this one?Iiidonkeyiii (talk) 08:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Indigenous Australian group names doesn't list them.Iiidonkeyiii (talk) 08:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you mean the Warlpiri, whose language kept coming up in my linguistics classes... but I've never heard of this supposed custom. 134.96.105.72 (talk) 12:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Our leg is being pulled. Xn4 23:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Our middle leg, at that.

Is there a website with the names of clothes?

I never paid ANY attention to clothing, like, I wouldn't know what twill is or what pleated meant. Now I have a job that requires me to... any web sites that would show pictures of all the clothes and parts and what they are called? I barely know what a shirt is... THANKS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.88.122.226 (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested in Category:Textiles and Category:Clothing. 152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

And a google search for "fashion glossary" brings up some useful sites. WikiJedits (talk) 10:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

We have an article on nudism. I am certain that it covers relevant parts. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I thought nudism didn't cover relevant parts. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Have a look here [[5]] for clothing show and tell. --76.111.32.200 (talk) 19:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Europe and Cluster Bombs

See: Convention on Cluster Munitions.

File:Cononclubom.png

In the map to the right several countries are missing. That large nations such as the US and China didn't sign the convention is no surprise. However, Poland, Romania and Greece (?) didn't sign the convention either. Why would that be? This seems like a very good way to lose credibility within the EU. User:Krator (t c) 12:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It depends on who are the ruling parties of a country and its public interest/perception. This issue might seem like a no-brainer to sign-up to, but unless it scores you politically positive press/media coverage - or your party is generally anti-war/anti-weaponary there is little incentive to change. The nations you mention will probably receive very little detriment from not signing up. People tend to be too black & white in their consideration of the issue. Those who didn't sign the treaty are not necessarily disinterested/uncaring of the effects of cluster bombs, they may simply believe this convention is unmanageable, not worth signing up for, would cause additional issues. They may have their own internal defense-measures that prevent use of them, or they may not use them so see no value in signing up for something. The reasons can be numerous and many could be quite reasonable (similar is how people get excited by Kyoto by ignoring that just because you don't sign-up doesn't mean you don't take the issue seriously, you may just disagree with the method of control). 194.221.133.226 (talk) 13:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd also suspect that there's a strong correlation to how many countries found it politically easy to sign up and how many countries did not have any cluster munitions in their armaments in the first place. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

According to the article, technically no countries have signed - that doesn't happen until December. Rmhermen (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Having read this question, I started to search Polish websites for some info on cluster bombs and I found out that, sadly, cluster munition is produced in Poland and that Polish Armed Forces maintain and keep expanding their cluster munition stockpiles. Poland participated in the Oslo conference but refrained from signing the convention, saying it must first "analyze it thouroghly". This has been criticized by Polish NGOs such as Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights in Poland and Polish Red Cross. [6] — Kpalion^(talk) 08:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

That map cannot be correct since it includes Finland, another EU country outside the treaty. Finland did take part in the negotiations but did not succeed in keeping more advanced bombs outside the treaty, and thus won't ratify it in the foreseeable future. The Finnish goverment opposes a complete ban of cluster munitions because the current national defense plans involve replacing land mines with advanced cluster bombs, in order to be able to join the Ottawa Treaty banning land mines. For historical reasons there is broad support within Finnish society to maintaining non-negligible armed forces as a deterrent, however wrongheaded and outdated that kind of thinking may be. As long as a government is not willing to weaken national defenses, completely disposing of a form of weaponry cannot be done without alternative defense arrangements which require considerable time and money. The cynic in me suspects that a vast majority of the signatory countries did not rely on cluster bombs for their national defense in the first place, or had alternative arrangements already being phased in. 84.239.133.86 (talk) 08:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Australian Experience

The question about an Australian Aboriginal group earlier got me thinking. So here's my question: I'm a white European who has lived in Australia for 5 years, in that time I've met many different people from many different countries - Chinese, Spanish, Iranian's, Ugandans -you name them, I've met them socially. But in that whole time I've only ever met ONE Aboriginal Australian. I'm not really sure what my question is, but I think it's something like - Am I moving in the wrong circles? Have other migrant Australian's noticed this? –Iiidonkeyiii (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

You don't mentioned where precisely you live. The indigenous population in Australia nowadays is rather small about 2% of the population. Even for those, a fair percentage of them are isolated in certain areas I believe. So it's not surprising it's fairly uncommon to meet one. Indigenous Australians may interest you. Nil Einne (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Many people who live in the Australian metropolises will go through their entire lives without ever meeting an indigenous person that they're aware of. I say "that they're aware of" because indigenous people don't go around with an "Indigenous person" sign around their neck, and many self-identified indigenous people have mixed blood lines and don't have any of the stereotypical visible characteristics that some people assume they all have. You may in fact have met a number of indigenous people who didn't choose to reveal this information in a social setting. -- JackofOz (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I've lived in Australia for all of my 36 years, and I have met very few Aboriginal people, although I acknowledge what Jack says, that I may have met some who didn't mention it. Most of the Aboriginal people I have met were those I met up north, when I went to Onslow (north-west coast of Western Australia). When I was there, I actually met very few white people, because I was staying in an Aboriginal community there. There is an informal apartheid in Australia, which reaches near-formal status at various times. In some country pubs, so Aboriginal people have told me, there are still "whites-only" and "blacks-only" sections. You will eventually meet an Aboriginal person if you are open and tolerant, but to guage the degree of separation, watch when you see Aboriginal people in public: see who else they are with. You guessed it, they will be Aboriginal also.

Thanks for the question, because I like hearing sympathetic people who are concerned about these issues. You might care to read My Place by Sally Morgan, which was quite a famous book in its time, at least in WA. It's the autobiography of an Aboriginal woman who, for a long time, didn't know anything about her heritage, and went through rediscovering it, and dealing with the pain, and conquering any hatred and anger she might have felt. 203.221.127.63 (talk) 18:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The wrong circles. The circles you need to move in in Sydney would be openings of Aboriginal art gallery exhibitions (not the same as exhibitions of Aboriginal art) where the gallery is run by Aboriginal people; and other Aboriginal interest groups such as Aboriginal rights, housing, health, dance company, theatre etc. Everleigh Street in Redfern is an Aborigines only place, and as other concentrations of ethnic groups are found in certain districts (such as Leichhardt/Italians; Liverpool Street/Spanish etc) , Redfern is regarded as the Aboriginal one. Otherwise, country areas moreso, and I found that Western Australia gives more media coverage in general especially through their editions of national news media (The Australian, The Age etc). Julia Rossi (talk) 00:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

My Place by Sally Morgan got a new airing earlier this year: BBC Radio 4 serialised it, either as Book of the week or A Book at Bedtime, I don't recall which. They don't appear to keep an archive of what has been serialised though, so I can't produce references. --ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Christian beliefs about life after death

Hi do non Catholic Christians believe that a person is judged as soon as they die or is the fate of going to heaven or hell only determined on the day of judgement? If so is a person considered dead and unaware of anything until they are physically resurrected on the day of judgement? Any biblical quotes to do with this will be very helpful. Thanks Richie1001 (talk) 14:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

There are a lot of non-Catholic Christians. I doubt there is unity in their belief in this matter Nil Einne (talk) 15:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Even Catholic theologians aren't in agreement on this. Wikiant (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This was discussed with verses on Yahoo answers here: [7]. Rmhermen (talk) 17:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Child-in-Common

What does the phrase "have a child-in-common" mean? Does it only refer to biological children? Or does it include stepchildren?

Pskudnik30Pskudnik30 (talk) 14:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Pskudnik30, here's a couple of definitions: "Child-In-Common – A child-in-common is a minor or never married dependent 18-year-old living in a household with both of his/her natural and/or adoptive parents."[8] contrast with stepchild "minor or...18-year-old living in a household with the spouse of one of his/her parents. That spouse is not his/her other natural parent. A stepchild remains a stepchild even if his/her natural parent is not in the household, as long as the stepparent is still in the household." (same site) Hope this helps, Julia Rossi (talk) 01:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Julia, thank you! The information was very helpful.

You're welcome! Julia Rossi (talk) 00:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

early 20th-century Scandinavian criminal

I have tried in vain to find an article (that I read a year or so ago) about an unidentified Scandinavian criminal who targeted women sometime during the early 20th century. According to the article, he was never caught. I am fairly certain it was in the "Mysterious People" category. Does anyone know who I am talking about ? Thank you in advance. Philippe Laurichesse (talk) 22:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The Atlas Vampire maybe? (Only one victim, though.) DAVID ŠENEK 10:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

No, not the Atlas Vampire. As I said, there were several victims. My memory is not so good, but it's possible he only assaulted (and not killed) most, if not all, of his victims. Philippe Laurichesse (talk) 17:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

cremated remains found in a box

An article seems to have disappeared from Wikipedia (from the category, I believe, of "Mysterious People") concerning the cremated remains of a woman in a box which arrived at a police station in Australia. Her name and her dates of birth and death were written on the box. It was never discovered who had sent the box nor why it had been sent. Any help identifying the article or its source would be greatly appreciated. Philippe Laurichesse (talk) 22:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This sounds like nothing extraordinary or otherwise notable which was probably why the article was deleted if it is missing Nil Einne (talk) 06:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You might like to put your question on the Category:Mysterious people talk page where someone might be able to help you, Julia Rossi (talk) 07:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Google is your friend. This item appears in various places on the Internet: "Aug 14, 2007 POTTSTOWN, Pa. (AP) - Cremated human remains were found Tuesday inside a package placed in a mail collection box, police said. "In my 19 years of police work, never has something like this occurred," Pottstown police Capt. F. Richard Drumheller said. The letter carrier found the package wrapped haphazardly in a plastic bag, with no mailing address or return address, and notified police. A police dog did not detect any explosives, so officers opened it and found a box with a metal plate with the deceased person's name on it and the years "1957-2000." Police asked that the person's name not be released until relatives are found."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. In fact, Google -- being a corporation that controls its results, privileging those in English even when you type in words in other languages (for example, it refuses to give me non-English Wikipedia pages for certain subjects) -- is not my friend. (If I use it, it's because there's nothing better, as with a lot of commercial monopolies.) But, of course, I realize that your comment was not meant to be taken that way. Believe it or not, I actually did look, at one point, and, as I recall, did not find anything (or else I wouldn't have asked here), but it could very well be that I was slightly inebriated or not in my right mind at the time. Anyway, thanks again. Philippe Laurichesse (talk) 08:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Google has no monopoly, not by a long shot. That a product or service is "clearly the best" in its category, doesn't mean the company has a monopoly! People like you were calling it a monopoly even when Yahoo had a bigger search share, just because only Google search was even usable, everything else was total c***. Anyway did you try going to the Google domain in the country you'd like to search? e.g. for france, Google.fr? Then you can select searching only in that language, or even only sites from that country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.88.122.226 (talk) 11:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you an employee of Google, by any chance ? Yes, I know about Google.fr. ; I use it. I know about search preferences. Also, I, personally, don't recall ever calling Google a monopoly when "Yahoo had a bigger search share." I can't speak for the rest of the people on the planet, however. Feel free to generalize about them, just don't include me in your generalization. Philippe Laurichesse (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

But you called it one now, which is still incorrect. It's like saying Wikipedia has a monopoly on online encyclopedias. Perhaps the monopoly article will help you. Hint: a monopoly has to be able to control access to something in some way. Google doesn't and never has. Matt Deres (talk) 19:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Unrelated to Google ;), the article title (whatever it was) will show (when clicked on) that the article was deleted. It will show the date, the deleting admin and the reason. No articles go "missing" from the history unless they are oversighted, which effectively removes the history from everyone except fellow oversighters (there are no more than about 35), but this is only done if the page contained personal information (names, addresses, phone numbers etc), or by some other reason consistent with the oversight policy. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

How do I click on the article title when I can't find the article (whose exact title I no longer recall). Or do you mean something else ? Philippe Laurichesse (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Umm - Philippe did not call Google a monopoly. He did refer to 'commercial monopolies' in the same sentence, but he did not refer to Google as one. --ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

"If I use [Google], it's because there's nothing better" is a defensible statement. Tacking on "as with a lot of commercial monopolies" makes the reader think he was classing Google as one such monopoly. This is because even though "There's nothing better than ..." is not a phrase one normally associates with monopolies, it's not actually untrue (but it would be more pertinent to say "there's nothing else available"). So, either:

• he was really putting Google into the monopoly camp, in which case readers were right to question that; or
• he was comparing situations where there's a choice (e.g. Google) with situations where there's no choice (e.g. a monopoly). But if that was what he was about, his choice of words was very likely to cause readers to misinterpret his meaning, and question it. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't yahoo use the google search engine?
Sleigh (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

No, not since 2004. Algebraist 00:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

May 31

Hats

I didn't know who else to ask this question to, and so I thought I'd throw it out to the Wikipedia community: Do people wear REAL hats anymore? I never see anyone with a nice Akubra or Fedora, or any of the other types. Why and when did they go out of style, and does anyone wear them in the present day? I really miss the hats of old. They added a certain intangible sense of adventure and sophistication that is just not present in today's society. Unfortunately, I am too young to have experienced the hat wearing days. Would someone in a city look like a fool if he were to wear one of these types of hats, or is it still socially acceptable? When I am older, I would really like to wear some of these hats of old, but I'm just wondering if I would just be doing myself a disservice. I don't know what brought me to the topic, but I figured if anyone would know, it would be the Wikipedians!

Thanks! Mike MAP91 (talk) 02:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Off the top of my head :) - the Queen (of the UK) wears hats regularly, though perhaps she is of old. However, I believe hats similar to hers are often seen at UK weddings and funerals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.191.40 (talk) 02:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeehaw. Come to Texas for hats. For ladies' hats "African American" churches usually give good shows. As for the hats you quoted. Unless you can pull them off with a certain "look", wait. Fashion tends to recycle trends. I think I saw a popstar wear one recently (Timber???) Not everyone looks good in a hat. If you do and can give it a modern twist (leather jacket and double wrap scarf maybe?), give it a try. --76.111.32.200 (talk) 06:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It depends what you mean by 'real' hat too. These are resonably common in certain crowds and I personally consider them real hats (as does our article on hats) even if this article suggests there is a difference. Hats with a fuller brim are less common in general perhaps but are still quite common in certain places, e.g. among the Amish (and some Mormons/LDS followers too I think) and Cowboys+Cowgirls, where the functional usage is important (hot tropical ountries by people working under the sun, by more ordinary people when going out in the sun for extended periods especially tourists particularly Japanese ones), in certain occasions like the ones mentioned above and to some horse races ([9]) Nil Einne (talk) 06:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

In country Australia you can still walk up to a hat-wearer and ask, Is that an Akubra you're wearing? because they do, as well as the high top 10-gallon type. Musicians and Daniel Johns of Silverchair does, another singer, Guy Sebastian constantly wears a compact brim hat; girls wear a British urchin type hat with a soft full crown and peak in winter. It depends on their peer group. The late Heath Ledger wore a hat. Maybe it's an Australian thing, though Michael Stipe of R.E.M. wore a hat. Some people wear "statement" hats as a personal badge. Racing men and other horsey types routinely wear hats. The cap's been putting cap-hair on people for decades. My guess is when hair was big for men and women, hats declined through association with their parents' generation and associations with formality. Now formality is good. If you miss hats, why not start them off again. You'll be in step with Indiana Jones whose variable Fedora is making a return. Hats are still being produced for both sexes. Unbelievably I still see artists wearing the beret, though the Indian cotton brimless hat is popular too. As for me? I'm female and take my Panama hat (copy) to the beach. Goes well with sawnoff jeans... Julia Rossi (talk) 07:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

PS The celebs I mentioned are hugely listed at the article for their preferred hat, the Trilby a tighter looking variant of the fed. Julia Rossi (talk) 07:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Terry Pratchett is usually to be seen wearing a hat.I often wear a leather Australian cowboy hat.My best friend wears a white, floppy cricket hat in the sun.The baseball cap is ubiquitous though.86.53.80.11 (talk) 10:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

just a note, whoever started their reply with with "Off the top of my head" - GREAT!, made me laugh -- that's how to write, people. Don't be like The Economist and hurt yourself stetching for the pun. The current issue of The Economist (right-hand side on the page) has the cover pun RECOIL (typeset just like that). Lame. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.88.122.226 (talk) 11:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The first thing I thought of was the singer from Fall Out Boy, who is always wearing a baseball cap, but I suppose that doesn't count as a real hat. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• Some people do. Let's see, looking in my closet, I've got about dozen fedoras and panamas, not to mention several cowboy hats and of course various caps. It's kinda difficult these days, though; few establishments take hat wearers into consideration, so there's rarely any place to hang ones hat, and no hat check girl, so we end up with hats on the floor under the table and such. And flying with a good hat? You sure don't want to put it in the overhead, because someone will be guaranteed to crush it with their giant carry-on full of bricks, so you sit with it in your lap, or, again, on the floor. Sartorial elegance these days seems to ignore haberdashery. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

---

OK Everyone,

Thanks for all the info! I didn't expect it to be such a popular subject :). I was unaware of all the people who like to wear hats, especially the Australians. I am a big Terry Pratchett fan, and so it is nice to know that he wears a hat. I guess they are alive and well, just depends on your taste. I know Julia mentioned Indiana Jones...maybe the new movie will start a resurgence in hat-wearing. Who knows? I think my best bet will be to wear a hat when I travel, because when you're a tourist, I think people are more open to various styles. Hopefully I'll have the opportunity to visit Australia and bring home an Akubra as a wearable souvenir. The Panama hat is also an option. I guess JP wears hats as well, with the list of hats he gave. It's good to see that the style is being kept alive, although I don't see too many people in NYC or on Long Island wearing them. Would I have to wear certain types of clothing in order to look good in a hat, or is any type acceptable? I guess you'd need to coordinate the various items to look good. Someone said that fashion trends tend to recycle themselves, and so hopefully hats are on the upswing. Mike MAP91 (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• Screw the trends. If you like how you look in a hat, wear a hat. I got into it good hats in an odd way -- I was visiting my Mom for her 75th birthday party, and in the closet was a cheap white fedora. I tried it on for fun, looked at myself in the mirror, and said "Hey! That's your look!" A real good hat for traveling is a Borsalino crushable fedora; this one is my standard, and can take a lot of abuse. This page has a good assortment of Akubras, Borsalinos, and other travel hats. Panamas need to be handled properly, and tend to be sensitive to sweat -- my older ones are browner than they are white in places, and I keep one bright white Panama fedora for special occasions (and try not to perspire.) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

My Herbert Johnson Panama straw is forty years old and still a distinguished item. I wouldn't wear it in the rain or after September, though, and I live in New York. It's all in the context. --Wetman (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess the trends don't really matter if you like the way you look in certain hats. I'll be looking through the websites to see which ones fit me best. That is a very funny story JP...something to talk about around the dinner table for sure :). Sounds like a very cool hat Wetman. Now I just have to find the style of hat that fits me. I am thinking maybe Akubra or Fedora, or perhaps Panama. How would I go about figuring out my hat size?

Mike MAP91 (talk) 17:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You can size your head yourself: [10]. But I see you're near NYC; there are tons of hatters there; just Google search for "new york" hatter. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I must have a dozen hats here. A nice fedora for more formal wear, some similar for every day and camping use; straw hats for camping, boating and a ratty one for yardwork. The only baseball caps I have are Scout caps I don't wear much (the new one looks nice though) and a couple of patrol caps in the attic. And yes, a brilliant white Panama is a thing of beauty. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 18:12, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Just as a personal opinion, the world was a better place in many ways back when men wore hats. Perhaps they had cooler heads. I love old police procedural shows like Dragnet, where the police tell the suspect "Get your hat. We're going downtown" as if he could not enter an interrogation room sans chapeau. Detectives, reporters, and gangsters all seemed more in style wearing hats, and I'm not referring to cowboy hats or baseball caps. Edison (talk) 19:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. For a nice little history of the demise of the hat, I find Hatless Jack: The President, the Fedora, and the History of American Style (ISBN 0452285232) quite amusing. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Just a style note, creative types combine non-corresponding clothes such as a long black scarf or necktie knotted at the neck with a long sleeved t-shirt and jeans, with or without a dark blazer; if you want a modified history look, there's Timothy Hutton in A Nero Wolfe Mystery. I like your idea of constructing your hat look as a tourist first because it figures that being a tourist you're freer in lots of ways. Remember you can get crush-resistant Panamas... </:-) Julia Rossi (talk) 00:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the tips everyone! I do agree with Edison about the world being a better place when hats were around. I think everything was just more proper and formal. It did have a certain air of dignity and sophistication. That seems like a very interesting book JP. I'll look into purchasing it. Thanks for your support of my "tourist idea" Julia. Those are exactly the lines I was thinking on when I decided it would be a good idea. Maybe a nice crush-resistant Panama, a Hawaiian shirt, and a lemonade and I'll be all set to go :).

Mike MAP91 (talk) 01:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

1969 White Paper

Hello. Does the 1969 White Paper have a metaphoric meaning? I know that white papers denote reports that help politicians make decisions. I was wondering whether the word 'White' in the phrase '1969 White Paper' meant the assimilation of Canadian Aboriginals into the mainstream white society. Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 04:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

No, as you implied yourself, white paper is a generic term for this sort of document not matter what its subject; so the fact that this one was on a racial topic is just a coincidence. I've added a link in the article. --Anonymous, edited 05:45 UTC, May 31, 2008.

Why was the 1969 White Paper not prefixed with Royal Commission instead? --Mayfare (talk) 01:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Because it wasn't produced by a Royal Commission. This link from the Parliament of Canada web site provides a general definition of white papers in the Canadian system. In brief, they are "official documents presented by Ministers of the Crown which state and explain the government's policy on a certain issue." They are typically produced by the Department in question. A Royal Commission is quite a different beast; it is an independent body charged with making a wide-ranging enquiry into something and reporting to the government. Royal Commissions produce reports, not white papers. - Eron^Talk 02:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Does Japan deport illegal immigrants?

Hello I hope you can help me. My Filipino uncle is in Japan... illegally. He wants to have a work but he doesn't know if he will be deported when they know he's illegally. Does Japan deport illegal immigrants? Thanks and God Bless You Forever 190.49.95.22 (talk) 21:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

They do of course and from what I've heard they are quite zealous about it. Fribbler (talk) 22:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

DNC delegate hearing

I just watched the DNC Rules Committee hearing today, and I have a question about whether the right committee was conducting the hearing. Isn't it the job of the Credentials Committee, not the Rules Committee, to discuss issues with delegates?--Dem393 (talk) 23:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• Well, yes, but the Rules and Bylaws Committee is responsible for determining how many delegates each state gets in the first place. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
  • In that case, how can Clinton bring the matter up to the Credentials Committee if she is unsatisfied with today's results?--Dem393 (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
    • I've been trying to figure that out myself. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 00:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The Rules Committee is a committee of the Democratic National Committee. The Credentials Committee is an as-yet nonexistent committee of the Democratic National Convention. Corvus cornix_talk 01:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Really? They do already have committee chairs (since January). There are 186 members. Howard Dean chose 35 of them; the states choose the rest. So though they haven't met yet, they do seem to exist. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 05:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, they don't meet till the beginning of July. Corvus cornix_talk 19:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

June 1

stock

how old do you have to be to purchas buisness stocks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.124.175 (talk) 02:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can buy stocks. Just contact a broker and they should set up an account for you - although if you're under 18 (or 21 in some places) one of your parents would need to sign off. See this. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 10:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Basically, you need to be old enough to legally sign a contract. That age and ways around it (having a parent sign for you) depend on where you live. -- kainaw™ 19:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Veto power in the United Nations.

I have a question. I know that the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, France, the People's Republic of China and Germany have the veto power in the UN. But my doubt is: for example... If the Security Council imposes a sanction on China. Could China save itself using the veto power?. Thanks and if the answer is 'Yes'... the UN is the curse of our World! Maru-Spanish (talk) 04:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean the United Nations Security Council veto power? In that case Germany does not have a veto. Otherwise, yes, China can veto sanctions against itself, although I don't know if imposing sanctions is within the jurisdiction of the Security Council. The veto page has a bunch of examples of the US, USSR, and UK vetoing actions which were against their own interests, so such an event would hardly be unique. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The Security Council has the power to impose economic sanctions, like those on Iraq, or on Rhodesia earlier. There was absolutely no chance that the UN charter would have been adopted in 1945 without the veto, it was a major struggle at San Francisco to restrict it only to substantive, non-procedural matters. In the old Council of the League of Nations every member had a veto. Not vetoing threatening actions would be the surprising thing, the Korean war and the Soviet Union being the only such case. China has used the veto very little. And of course, the veto hardly made the UN the curse of our world, more the reverse.John Z (talk) 07:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

China has used the veto six times, less than any other member of the Security council. (According to that page, France has vetoed 18 resolutions, the UK 32, the US 82 and the USSR/Russia 123. Russian vetos were most frequent in the Cold War and US vetos in the 70s and 80s. Another chart on that site shows vetoes were most common overall in the Cold War, and although the data only goes to 1992, it looked like the trend was for vetoes to affect fewer and fewer of the total number of UN resolutions over time. WikiJedits (talk) 15:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

As I recall, some of the more surprising non-vetoes were a result of non-attendance. For example, the Korean War intervention vote wasn't vetoed by the Soviets because they were boycotting the council at that point. — Lomn 18:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sennosuke Yamaguchi's Fujiya Hotel Book 1939

I found this book a while ago and have not been able to find out any information on it. The title is in cursive Japanese kanji and is very difficult to make out, but the book was published in 1939 and autographed by the author, K.M. Yamaguchi, in 1947. From what we can figure out, K.M. Yamaguchi is a relative of Sennosuke Yamaguchi who founded the Hotel in 1878, but we have not been able to find out anything further. The book is a detailed history, in Japanese and English, of the Fujiya Hotel with pictures and hotel statistics. I was wanting to find out if there is any other information regarding this book, such as title, the author and Yamaguchi family. Basically, anything anyone can come up with will be helpful. Thank you very much,

Rachel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.61.84.54 (talk) 04:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

How about asking them? Oda Mari (talk) 15:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I did, but no one has gotten back to me as of yet. I was trying every venue open to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.164.50.119 (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

buddhism

please give some information on the impact of buddhism and jainism on literature ,art and architecture in India.124.7.76.158 (talk) 10:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)Sagnik Mukherjee,India

Here you go Sagnik: Indian literature, and more specifically Pali Canon, Charyapada, and Tamil literature; also follow the links in all those articles. Indian art and Indian rock-cut architecture. Indian architecture#Buddhist_and_Jain_architecture. WikiJedits (talk) 14:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

economics

what is ASSESSIBLE VALUE ?? how do we calculate INCIDENCE OF TAX ? Mmsr (talk) 11:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Have you read Tax incidence? From a quick google search, it looks like "assessable value" is an asset's value for tax purposes (see this). Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The incidence of tax (aka "tax burden") is determined by the elasticities of demand and supply. For example, the quantity demanded of luxury goods tends to be highly sensitive to changes in price. So, when the government imposes a tax on luxury goods, producers prefer to pay the tax via reduced profits rather than to pass the tax on to consumers via higher prices. Conversely, the quantity demanded of gasoline tends to be relatively insensitive to changes in price. So, when the government imposes a tax on gas, producers prefer to pass the tax on to consumers via higher prices rather than to pay the tax via reduced profits. The interesting conclusion is that the government has no control over who ultimately pays a tax. For example, in the US, the employer "pays" half of a worker's Social Security tax while the other half is withheld from the worker's paycheck. In fact, studies have shown that workers end up paying the entirety of the Social Security tax via reduced wages. Wikiant (talk) 12:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The term for In courtship, to open the legs and invite the male...

A long time ago I was reading something about how female lab rats would offer themselves to the male rats by opening their legs and showing their genetalia as if to invite the males. What is the term for this? I think it starts with 'L' and has a 'b' in it. Thanks Rfwoolf (talk) 16:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Minerva Minnie Mouse - not a rat but, at least, a rodent - having attended the introductory Lectures to Freudian Principles, given by the famed Professor Ludwig von Drake from Vienna called it "libido". O dear me, I just discover that I am less famous than a non-existing two dimensional psychoanalytical cartoon mouse oops, duck! Sniff, Boooh... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps Lordosis. Edison (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That's it! Thanks Edison. I've been trying to recall the word for a few months now - not ardently though, but when my mind wonders I keep on trying to recall it. Rfwoolf (talk) 03:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Better make that Lordosis behavior; those of us homo sapiens suffering from swayback have a posture problem not necessarily related to come-hither posturing! -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Refinement is appreciated. But back in the day I am sure behavioral scientists and textbooks just called it "lordosis" or the "lordosis reflex" [11] [12] [13] when a female rat prepared to be mounted by her suitor. And I have known swayback horses (and humans) who were not averse to courtship and all that it may entail. Edison (talk) 00:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Osaka/Kyoto in 1506?

I'm doing research for a novel that's set as per the title above, and so far it's been going well, although I seem to have chosen a rather 'dead' year, with veeery little info on the turn-of-the-century there. Out of the info I've managed to collect has arose a couple of questions: who would have in charge locally? Also from the Shugo page I don't know whether to use the term 'Shugo' or 'Daimyo'...I don't know, I think I've cobbled together a decent picture, but any certain info on what/who was/wasn't there at that time would be nice...?

--Lady BlahDeBlah (talk) 19:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Settsu Province and Izumi Province were governed by Hosokawa clan. kyoto was governed by Ashikaga clan. Read Ashikaga shogunate and Muromachi period and Daimyo#Shugo daimyo. Oda Mari (talk) 08:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Writing a song as a poem

All songs with lyrics can be considered poems. However, often in songs there are repeated refrains or choruses. If I am quoting a poem that is a song, could I leave out the repeated choruses, or leave out the choruses altogether? Can I state that song "Example X" is the poem "Example X without the choruses" ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.131.181.242 (talk) 21:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that it depends on what you're doing. It's usual when displaying lyrics to label the chorus as such the first time it comes and just put "chorus" every other time. If I wanted to render a song as straight-ahead poetry, I'd include the full text of every chorus every time. Good poetry bears repeating. --Milkbreath (talk) 22:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you writing it as lyrics, or making it into poetry? As lyrics, I'd go with the chorus written once then noted every other time. If a poem turned into a song with choruses, they would be for the purposes of song writing. If you want to find the core poem, I'd leave them out since it's not Greek theatre, or is it? Julia Rossi (talk) 00:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Does Bangladesh export medicine to USA ?

Bangladesh Pharmaceutical Industry is a very promising sector for the growth of the Country's economy. Bangladesh exports medicine to a number of countries mostly in Asia and recently to some countries of UK. If any information on the query mentioned above with authentic reference is available that would be greatly appreciated.

regards !

--Riz1 80 (talk) 22:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Beximco intended/intends/has. If that helps. Fribbler (talk) 23:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Mr Ketchum getting hot

After getting help with the name of a movie that I only remembered one scene from, I thought I might try with the author and name of a short story I read as a child. The story is about "Mr Ketchum" (I think) who gets caught while speeding through a godforsaken place somewhere in the usa. he is sent to prison to wait for his trial. There he is served enormous amounts of tasty food, while waiting for the judge (who is supposedly sick) to be able to sentence him. in town there are banners proclaiming "barbecue tonight!", but Ketchum does not realize what is going to happen to him until he is placed in another cell where the walls are burning hot! Does anyone recognize this? /Marxmax (talk) 23:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC) Yes, I do remember it but think it was either a TwilightZone episode or part of a "compendium " film.I've asked my friends and everyone recognises it so a search is going on as I type.hotclaws 14:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

June 2

contracts

how old do you have to be to sign a contract in california?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.124.175 (talk) 00:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If this random website is to be believed, the age at which one can enter into a contract without parental consent is 18 throughout the United States. Algebraist 00:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia agrees (for most states - there are some exceptions). See Age of majority#Countries and subdivisions and scroll down to the US (this is assuming that the age of majority is the same as the age at which one can sign a contract - the article mentions it but doesn't include a reference). Zain Ebrahim (talk) 01:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Emancipation of minors might also interest you. --Lisa4edit (talk) 18:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

evictions

Can the owners of our 6-unit apartments shut off our water while in the beginning of the eviction process?--Lisalisa1977 (talk) 00:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)lisalisa1977

Where?Edison (talk) 01:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Assuming the United States, rental codes vary from state to state. Usually there is a "Renter's Rights" group that you can check with on such things. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Most U.S. jurisdictions require that landlords meet the housing code for occupied residential properties, and the housing code generally specifies clean, running water. So, in most jurisdictions, the landlord would be violating the housing code by shutting off the water before an eviction is ordered by a court and carried out by constables. As the previous poster suggested, you should contact a tenants' advocacy group in your jurisdiction, who can advise you on your options. Marco polo (talk) 01:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Remember wikipedia can't be a trusted source of legal advice, you might want a solicitor. SGGH ^speak! 14:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Who invented the presumption of innocence?

The article on presumption of innocence does not talk about the origins of the concept. What king, judge, legislature, constitutional convention, or other authority was the first one to declare that anyone has a right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty? Or if that's not known, what is the earliest known legal system to have operated on that basis?

--Anonymous, edited 08:11 UTC, June 2, 2008.

Jeralyn Merritt tries to trace The History of the Presumption of Innocence here. ---Sluzzelin talk 09:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Enlightenment Painting

I'm looking for an Enlightenment painting that has a young noble boy dressed aristocratically, learning farming techniques from a peasant. --Gary123 (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Surnames

What are the common surnames in Iran among the Shi'a Muslims, What are the common names in Bangladesh among the Muslim population, what are the common names in Pakistan and What are the common names in Afghanistan? Is there any website about these thing I ask about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.129.52 (talk) 15:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic immunity

How many countries have ratify it and signed it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.129.52 (talk) 15:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I found a list (linking to Google cache to avoid password requirement). Algebraist 16:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Jefferson corpus

How would one go about obtaining a corpus containing all the recorded words of Thomas Jefferson as text file suitable for Markov analysis (thus, his words only without introductions other and crap that litters books of his writings)? I would have liked to think someone'd have already created such a file, but a cursory search was not availing. Sometimes I despair of the internet. 153.1.47.242 (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The nineteen volumes of The Writings of Thomas Jefferson are available in electronic format: OCLC 43904757. Internet Archive seems to list them all available in plain text [14], tho you would need to strip out those parts you did not want.—eric 17:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

basis for naming of historical ethnic groups

When historians refer to ethnic groups from ancient times, such as the Assyrians and the Akkadians, what is the basis for this classification? What do you need to call yourself an Akkadian, for example? Does it depend on language, culture, or both? Thanks in advance, 203.221.126.29 (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Iskhvakus / Ikshvaku - same or different?

Hi,

While reading the article on Skanda I came across these lines : The deity was venerated also by the "Iskhvakus", an Andhra dynasty

The article on Rama speaks of "Ikshvaku" dynasty. Rama was the prince of the Suryavamsha (Sun Dynasty) House of Ikshvaku

Iskhvakus / Ikshvaku - Are these two words with different spelling actually referring to the same clan or dynasty?

Writesprincesswiki (talk) 19:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Graven Image

In the 10 Commandments, does the term graven image really include photographs? If so, how come so many Christians take photos? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 20:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Only if you were to worship the phtograph as an idol. :-) Fribbler (talk) 20:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Exodus 20:4? Some understand "graven image" to mean a carved idol or representation of a god used as an object of worship particularly in the context of the world the Hebrews moved through and its influences. Peoples around them used objects: trees, stones, sculptures and images which weren't only worshipped as representations (afaik) but as the god itself. It was important for them to distinguish themselves against this background as a select group dedicated to a rather abstract power. Others take it to mean any twoD or 3D representation. The key seems to be "idol" as something that might replace or distract from the Hebrew god. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I've wondered the same about Muslims not being suppossed to create pictures, yet they all seem to watch tv and have illustrated newspapers and magazines etc, even the most devout/fanatical. 80.0.108.118 (talk) 00:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

(econ) I forgot your Christian snappers: it looks like the more abstract statement in Ex 20:3 applies, "Do not have any other gods before me", so rationally imo, a Christian as such (who is not defecting to the Antichristian Church of Photographic Worship) can snap away. Julia Rossi (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Naked Nazi

I saw a life-size statue out back of Buda Castle that I could swear I've seen depictions of, but I can't put my finger on it. It was a blackened bronze, I guess, of a naked man bareback on a smallish horse. The horse was in a crouch, as if about to spring. The man had on nothing but a helmet very much like the one worn by the Germans in WWII. He was blowing a post horn, one of the bugle-shaped kind, not a round one. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I only thought of naked riders on already rearing horses. Is it one snapshot before this? I found it and links to other pictures at de:Budapester Reiter, which has no article on en.wikipedia. Leonardo did sketch a lot of rearing horses, with and without nude riders wearing helmets. Perhaps it is a modern interpretation (Wehrmacht helmet)? ---Sluzzelin talk 10:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The horse's posture was something like that (I described that badly), as was the rider's. The overall impression was not so bulgingly mythological, though, more realistic-heroic, if you know what I mean, but not quite state-approved, either. It looks like one was after the other, but which, who can say? --Milkbreath (talk) 11:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Catcher in the Rye

Where is Holden Caulfield meant to be writing the book from ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.206.57 (talk) 20:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Moved from language desk -Elmer Clark (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It's never made clear. I've heard people suggest that he's writing it from a mental hospital, but I don't feel that there's a whole lot to support that. -Elmer Clark (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Supply and Demand

My name is Bob,

I read the supply and demand page, but I'm still wondering, how would a business owner, for example, calculate how much to charge for say, a dozen bananas?

If you would like to contact me

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.113.19.14 (talk) 21:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, Bob, I removed your email as per the Desk guidelines. See above. 200.49.224.88 (talk) 22:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to calculate anything - whether as seller nor as buyer. Just push the price until nobody buy it or try to bargain until nobody sells to you. 217.168.1.158 (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you producer, distributor or retailer? You will find retail pricing in the the last one and check out Production, costs, and pricing, cheers Julia Rossi (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There ought to be a diagram somewhere that has price along the x axis, and profit along the Y axis. Since lower prices mean (in theory, and with some exceptions) more sales but less profit per item sold, and higher prices less sales but greater profit per item, then there is an optimum price that gives the most profit overall. Profit = (number of items sold (price - unit cost)) - overheads.

In practical terms, you'd probably look at the price other grocers were selling bananas at and either sell at the same price, or perhaps slightly less in an attempt to get more sales. Or a higher price for a better quality product. 80.0.108.118 (talk) 00:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

June 3

Median population line(s) for Britain

Where would the west-east line lie that has 50% of the population to the north of it, and 50% to the south? And similarly for westerners and easterners. 80.0.108.118 (talk) 00:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

According to this source it says Appleby Parva in Leicestershire is the center of population for Britain. In other words, 50% live north, 50% live south, 50% live east and 50% live west. AlexiusHoratius (talk) 01:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The centre of population isn't necessarily the same thing as saying 50% of people live either direction north/south and east/west (as far as I can determine). It takes distance into account, so it is actually the geographical point nearest to all the inhabitants of Britain, on average. Or in other words, if everyone in Britain weighed the same, then the point of balance would be around Appleby Parva. But because Britain is relatively small and densely populated, I think one could probably approximate it pretty well. Rockpocket 01:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Pledge of Allegiance

Do American children have to swear the Pledge of Allegiance every day in school, or is it only done very rarely? Isnt it inconsistent with the freedom that Americans go on about a lot? 80.0.108.118 (talk) 00:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

When I was in elementary school we did it every day. As for freedom, well, it's been a controversy for awhile (see Pledge of Allegiance criticism), especially the question of the non-religious having to swear that the USA is "one nation, before God", and whether they can opt out of the Pledge without it being socially ostracizing or facing formal punishment. I'm fairly sure they're not allowed to do formal punishment anymore for people who want to quietly opt out. In my day, at some point I stopped saying much of it that I didn't agree with, as I got older (I have never been religious, though it wasn't clear to me that this was exceptional until I got to a certain age). I doubt anybody noticed; when you do something like that every day it becomes rote, you stop paying attention. It was years before I even thought about what the words actually meant (the idea of an indivisible republic is a little abstract for a 6 year old).

As for whether it is inconsistent with freedom—Americans talk about freedom a lot but what they generally mean by that is not very well articulated and thought out. Much of our visions of what it means to be "free" come from WWII-era/Cold War era propaganda about Nazis and Soviets and gosh-isn't-it-great-we-don't-have-the-terrors-here. But of course the US has had many, many periods in which people who said things that weren't considered kosher (of all political points of view; right and left alike) were immediately forced out of public office, out of jobs, out of civic society. No, they weren't killed, except in rare cases, but that's just it—for most Americans, the question of what freedom is, is anything less than murder by the state. Which, when you think about it, is something of a rather low bar to set. Anyway. I digress. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Our school says it everyday. Just remember we aren't actually forced to say it; its not like we would get into any trouble if we didn't and if the teacher were to yell at a student for not saying it the teacher could get into trouble with the parent. I live in a rural area so everybody in my school says it without compaint; it is patriotism. If the student just were to skip saying God there would be no problems. All the problems are just sparked by some atheist that just can't let things be. - MOFILA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.61.7 (talk) 01:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Or, conversely, all the problems were sparked by some zealous anti-Communists who thought that having school kids drone on "under God" would somehow make the country better. The Pledge lacked "under God" for most of its existence; the phrase was only added in 1954, at the height of McCarthyism. It's not exactly a neutral sentiment. Personally I think the entire pledge is dubious—it is Orwellian to say the least. Blind patriotism is not something to be celebrated, in my opinion—if patriotism it be, make it committed, honest, heartfelt, not rote, routine, and uncritical. That's bureaucracy, not patriotism. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

One of the jobs of the school under public education is to create good citizens. You can't expect little kids to be able to deal with the ins and outs of politics. Abe Lincoln was honest, and so was George Washington. Don't point out that in saying that you imply that all the others were maybe not so much. Let the little kids feel good about their country and about their piddling participation in its political life. The pledge was just something to be recited, like the intros to the Superman TV show and the Lone Ranger, and we got the words wrong, anyhow. It marked the opening of the school day, like a flag-raising ceremony. That's what it was, a ceremony, and not a contract between the state and its children. Sure, it seems like forced indoctrination, but a child can't be held to a promise he doesn't understand, and nobody expects him to follow through. I think that in my case the whole business served to alert me to the dangers of propaganda. As for freedom, the freedom to talk about the pledge of allegiance any way I want is enough for me. --Milkbreath (talk) 13:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

No patriot would just let things be when he saw the government undermining his country's highest principles. --Sean 14:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

By the time I was in high school, too many years ago, I think the pledge was read over the intercom about once a week or so. Nobody cared if you recited along or not. In fact, at that age, most kids (including myself) were too "cool" to be caught saying the pledge. The few kids who proudly pledged out loud were in fact the maverick minority. The silent ones were going along with the crowd, as high school kids are wont to do. —Kevin Myers 14:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Comparative cost of American NHS and space exploration

How much would the cost of providing an American health service like that of the NHS in the UK cost, compared to the cost of space race / space explortation. Would it be more, or less? Half as much? Twice as much? 80.2.202.232 (talk) 00:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There are a wide variety of possible space exploration and universal health care programs, but for comparison the Space Shuttle program will end up costing $173 billion (2004 dollars) to fly until 2010, over the lifetime of the program, while providing full coverage for America's uninsured would cost an estimated $34–$69 billion (2001 dollars) per year. Maybe your sister Nell can help with the math.—eric 01:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Some extremely quick and rough estimates:

The article on National Health Service (England) notes that the Department of Health has a budget of about £100 billion, "most" of which is spent on NHS. So let's assume about £85 billion (about $165 billion). This only covers health care for England, which has a population of about 50 million, about one sixth of that of the US. Multiply by six, and wha-la! a budget of just under $1 trillion. By comparison, NASA has an annual budget of about 17.3 billion, about 1/60th of that. But again, these are extremely rough estimates. --Ybbor^Talk 01:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

(ec twice!!) According to the NHS article, the 2008-9 budget is £91.7 billion and "serves" a population of 50.8 million people (£1805/per person or approx $3540). Scaling up to the USA's population of 304 million would suggest a total budget of a little over $1 trillion. That is a very simplistic calculation, but it is more than 60 times NASA's $17.3 billion budget for 2008. Astronaut (talk) 01:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a note on the apparent conflict of numbers, I imagine much of the conflict between myself/Astronaut and Eric, is that when looking at the budget for NHS, we're taking into account the total cost of health care, while he's taking into account the additional cost from what we already spend. In terms of the space budget, we're each looking at a fiscal year, while he's looking at the life of a single (very expensive) program. --Ybbor^Talk 01:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps the OP was thinking that if money hadn't been "wasted" on space exploration, then the US could have afforded to set up an American NHS. In fact I think space exploration is pretty good value, and scrapping that avenue of research and exploration would not yield the benefits that it's critics would imagine, whilst (funnily enough) four years of war in Iraq have cost the US economy around $3 trillion.

I also think both mine and Ybbor's estimates are probably on the low side because American health care is generally recognised to be the most expensive in the world.

Astronaut (talk) 01:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I was thinking of that. I was also thinking that the US might save a bit from economies of scale, but I think those benefits start maxing out once you've corsssed well into the tens of millions. In fact since the population density of England (976/sq mile) is far higher than that of the US (80/sq mile), the cost even for identical care would likely be far hihger (since you'd need more local offices to reach the same number of people) --Ybbor^Talk 02:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Right Ybbor, the shuttle cost i gave was for development, hardware, and thirty years of missions, while the cost of insuring the uninsured is in America is nowhere near what the cost of a program like NHS would be.—eric 02:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The question of best utilization of government spending is a difficult one. Should we scrap funding of national-parks and state-provided libraries etc in favour of more on healthcare and social-welfare? The US spends a huge amount per-person on healthcare, and the UK public system is far from a shining example of how to provide publically provided healthcare. You have to look further a-field for a more intelligent hybrid of private and public provision. I can't remember the country but it is Sri Lanka or somewhere - one of the smaller nations in the far-east that has the system that many consider to be the best. The space-program seems to be the first thing people want to drop, because they can't tie the spending back to something that benefits the citizens that pay for it. That's a pity because the space-program is hugely important and one of the greatest things that the US does for mankind the world over. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

"the UK public system is far from a shining example of how to provide publically provided healthcare." Could you be more specific about this and give the evidence your beliefs are based on please? While the public health care in France is said to be better when international surveys are done, it is also more expensive. 80.2.204.80 (talk) 14:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Who owns the copyright to the Gospel song "I'm Going Up Yonder" from 1976?

I am looking to verify the who the copyright owner is to a gospel song from 1975 or 1976 titled "I'm Going Up Yonder". It is not in the Copyright Office online records (nothing before 1978 is listed), and I have done much random internet research. Please help!

Thank you, FierySarai —Preceding unsigned comment added by FierySarai (talk • contribs) 02:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Becoming a full-time writer

Hello, fellow Wikipedians.

I am heavily considering becoming a full-time writer, either in Journalism or Fiction. I'm not a Stepen King-style hopeful. I just want to pay the rent, lights, and heat doing what I love. Pompous incarnate, but, I'm pretty good at it.

However, I have found the writing employment arena a particularly ultra-competituve, cut-throat business.

I am very close to completing a BS (both meanings applied) degree in Spanish, with a 3.97 GPA. However, the scholarship paying my college expenses ends next semester.

So, here is where I am at:

1) Should I finish the BS degree and continue, or

2) should I just go down to the mass-employment office (Manpower, or etc.) and get a job that will only be 4-6 hours a day (ex. paralegal's assistant) and start writing wholeshale during my free time?

3) Is there a well-known publication which accepts 2 - 10 pages of writing at a time from unknown authors. I'm a yog's law-er; I won't pay. Currently, simple exposure would be enough.

Also,

Submitting a query letter today resembles spitting into the ocean. I have contemplated the idea of simply printing a page saying (90-font, bold, center page): "IT'S GOOD. READ IT." Maybe a little balsy, but I think maybe that will maybe save my packages from rotting in a slush pile with a form letter six - eight weeks later. Most agents and publishing agencies (at least, the ones I have contacted) don't even open the package unless they recognize the sender's name.

Don't tell me about Writer's Market 2008...almost useless in my experience, all the small-time presses actually cost the author money, and all the big-time presses only take submissions from agents, which, as I said, only open packages from previous clients.

I, also, since I am working part-time, attending school, and studying often, I am hard-pressed to find time to write. I really am (no offense to anyone here) expending writing time NOW by writing the previous reference desk query. However, I think the answers could be useful, so it's not wasted time.

Any other advice/insight regarding related topics is also appreciated.

Thanks, --193.147.81.126 (talk) 12:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

(Michael Alan Anthony, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee) [Feel free to remove if violates WP policy]

In my opinion, the whole world is a slushpile to be lost in, whether you're a writer or not, so go for it. Have you looked into ways to write for internet sites? Wrad (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

If journalism is an idea, you might consider interning/working for a periodical. You're going to be doing a lot OTHER THAN writing in the early days of such a career but you'll see how it works from the inside, and be making connections that will be invaluable when you need to know "who do I need to get to read this to get it published?" You're probably going to have to start from the bottom, I'm afraid, but if you're any good and have any drive you'll probably separate yourself from the pack pretty quickly (in my experience). --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Speaking as a writer, the phrase "don't give up your daytime job" springs to mind. There are a couple of things to consider, which aren't apparent from your question. Do you have any family you're responsible for? How old are you? It's one thing to take a leap of faith like this when you're, say, 25, and another when you're older and have two kids to look after, for example. And yeah, it can be hard to make a living as a freelancer, which is what you can count on being. The good news is that when it comes to periodical publications, editors are always looking for good contributors. And by "good" I don't mean "can write well" and "knows his subject matter and does his research" (although these are definitely factors as well), but people who can write to spec, keep the length of the piece within the agreed-on range and, most importantly, stick to their deadlines. That's a key thing. I'd say that generally speaking, an average writer who always does his work on time is going to have a better career than a good writer who's late and unreliable. When it comes to magazines -- let alone newspapers -- the deadline is everything, and the contributor who understands and respects that will be much loved by his editor.

On a practical level, you might still want to get that BS out of the way, if you're almost done. I have no idea how much that'll set you back, but a degree is a degree. If you're a writer, nobody is going to care much about whether you have a degree or not, unless you're writing for a publication that has very, very high degree of specialization -- and even then it's not that likely. But there's nothing wrong with covering your ass, just in case your writing career doesn't work out, either because you're unlucky, or perhaps because you find that it's just not something you enjoy after all, or something else. If that happens, at least you'll have the degree to fall back on.

If you want to write books, man, that's gonna be hard going. Getting published is much harder than it is in the periodicals, and even if you do get published, you should really bear in mind that chances are it's not going to support you -- I mean, you could luck out and churn out a best seller from the gate and be pretty much set for life, with a constant demand for your words from that point on, but, honestly, you you can't count on it. You might as well be buying lottery tickets.

Of course, these things aren't mutually exclusive. You can write articles on some days and work on a novel on others -- use the income from boring articles to pay for your way and spend your passion on the novel. Or get a part-time job, and spend three days of the week on that, and the rest on your writing. Another key thing is to sell yourself to every place you can think of, and keep it up. Send in ideas for articles you could write. Ask for writing assignments. Sooner or later, someone's going to bite. That's another thing about freelancing: it's possible to get to a point where they call you, but it's going to take a while. A lot of your time and energy (emotional and otherwise) is going to be spent on just hustling, and getting rejected can be harsh. Suck it up. Learn that they aren't rejecting you, they're rejecting your work. It's a bit of a paradox: you need to stomp on your ego and refrain from throwing hissy fits when that rejection comes (and it's harder than it sounds, when you've poured a lot of yourself into something) and simultaneously feed it by knowing that your words are worth the trouble.

Hope this is useful. Good luck. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 15:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Re your "Also". I'd recommend you go read all Miss Snark's archives, followed by the Writer Beware pages. It will make a huge difference to your success and will in no way be wasted time. Miss Snark will tell you (with enjoyable wit) that 90-point font shortcuts almost guarantee you a rejection, while training yourself to write well almost guarantees your query letter will snag attention. Writer Beware will explain why (a) submiting to publishers who charge for the submission, and (b) writing for free does not only you but all other writers a disservice. Best luck, WikiJedits (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Outlaws of Wild West

Hi to all you guys 'n girls out there. My question is: I've searched all of the pages about famous outlaw's of the wild-west era for one thing:

Once I read (i think it was even in wikipedia!) about an Outlaw who was riding around with another one, when they got spotted by some Gunmen who noticed their ID and hanged them upside down from a tree. The Guys then shot one of the outlaws, killing him, the other one was missed - the Gunmen even hit the rope and the Outlaw dropped to the ground, where he eventually grabbed a gun (or got the chance to grab HIS gun/guns) and shot the few Gunmen (I guess they were vigilantes).

But I can't find the exact article in Wiki, so could someone who REALLY is a crack in these fascinating thing about american history, help me?

Thx alot!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.218.12 (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sounds more like a Hollywood plot than a real gunfight. I watched a documentary recently that claimed that, in fact, most gunmen were killed by being shot in the back rather than in gun duels. Rather unromantic. Rmhermen (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

MythBusters (season 4)#Gunslinger Myths disproved the idea that you can sever a rope with a single bullet (unless you're the Man with No Name of course). Clarityfiend (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The Sharon Stone character in "The Quick and the Dead" has a flashback scene that involves taking a shot at a rope in a similar situation... (more detail would be a *spoiler*), FWIW. -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Confederate political parties

Were there any formally-organized political parties in the Confederate States of America? Did Southern Democrats continue to refer to themselves as Democrats, or were there no formal parties? Corvus cornix_talk 18:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)