Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities: Difference between revisions
→Yearbooks: Reply |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}} |
|||
[[Category:Pages automatically checked for incorrect links]] |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers]] |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedia help forums]] |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedia reference desk|Humanities]] |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedia help pages with dated sections]] |
|||
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]</noinclude> |
|||
= December 5 = |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 March 4}} |
|||
== BAA == |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 March 5}} |
|||
BAA ambiguous meaning in context of aviation in UK, could you please check the discussion [[:n:Talk:Airport_security_tightened_worldwide|here]] 🙏 [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 07:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 March 6}} |
|||
:@[[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] This is the humanities reference desk. Do you have a question on humanities? [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= March 7 = |
|||
::Yes [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 10:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]], next time, I would suggest copying the question you want answered from Wikinews, rather than expecting people here to work out what you want to know. |
|||
:::As Wikinews has sources, I suggest checking them, e.g. [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/jan/03/brown-airport-security-full-body-scanners The Guardian] says {{tq|BAA, which runs six UK airports}}, so in 2010 BAA [plc] was a company that ran six UK airports. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 21:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Did you try [[BAA (disambiguation)]]? [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 20:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== UK politics/senate == |
|||
== Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Iran == |
|||
Hi, is this factually accurate [[:n:Talk:Former_Scottish_Conservatives_leader_Annabel_Goldie_to_stand_down_as_MSP|link]] Thanks. [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 07:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
In the article Unitary state, it listed that Afghanistan, Iran and Sri Lanka. I understand that Bangladesh appoints people as Divisional Commissioner and District Commissioner. What about Afghanistan's President? What are the names for the leaders of provinces and districts of Afghanistan? What about Sri Lanka's President? What are the names for leaders of provinces and districts of Sri Lanka? |
|||
What are the names for the leaders of provinces and district of Iran? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Don Mustafa|Don Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Don Mustafa|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Don Mustafa|contribs]]) 00:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:See above. [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm not sure what you are asking about [[Hamid Karzai|Afghanistan's president]]. Here is a [[List of Afghanistan Governors|list of Afghanistan's governors]]. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 02:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 10:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Scipion-Virginie Hébert (1793-1830) == |
|||
== why was correction to caption rejected? == |
|||
{{hat|Block evasion}} |
|||
The only daughter of Jacques-René Hébert was a repubblican, bonapartist, or royalist? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/82.56.174.231|82.56.174.231]] ([[User talk:82.56.174.231#top|talk]]) 11:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:[https://www.croirepublications.com/blog/un-jour-dans-l-histoire/13-juillet-1830-la-fille-d-hebert-et-la-premiere-bible-de-mariage This brief biography in French] says that she was adopted as a one-year-old by an old associate of her father called Jacques Marquet who educated her with the aim of her becoming a schoolmistress. She maried a Protestant pastor called Léon Née (1784-1856) and both became leading figures in the ''pré-Réveil'' (we have an article on the ''[[Réveil]]'' which was an 1814 Protestant revival in France and Switzerland). They had five children, three of whom died early. She was later the vice-president of a society that gave Bibles to newly married couples. No mention of politics, but it seems that her interests were on a higher plane. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 18:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
in the history of world war 2 article "FOCKE-WULF Fw190" i attempted to correct the caption of a photograph of a Fw 190A4 painted as a captured usaaf aircraft. the original caption incorrectly identified the location as a base in europe and the aircraft as a possible example evaluated by the test group. the correct caption should read that the aircraft was located in tunisia,north africa in 1942-3 the mto. this aircraft was operated by the 85th fighter squadron/79th fighter group of 12th air force. my father was an officer/pilot with the twelfh and flew this aircraft. the light blue area on the fuselage near the cockpit/canopy is the patch of the 85th fighter squadron. this unit was known as the "flying skulls". see-http://members.aol.com/brimiljeep/WebPages/SquadronPatchAAFPage.html on that page you will see the insignia of the 85th fighter squadron. my father had a photograph of him flying this focke-wulf fw 190. the photo was taken from another aircraft flying in formation. in the photo the side of the fuselage is clearly visible with the squadron insignia---my father is also clearly recognizable. my correction was an effort nto correct an error and contribute to your data base. the flying photo also appeared in a monthly issue of "wings" a sentry magazine that was highlighting the focke-wulf fw 190 german fighter aircraft. the picture was included as an example of some that were captured when the germans quit north africa in 1943. hope this helps. <small>contact details removed</small>. my father was an air force officer for 32 years. the first plane he ever flew was a Boeing P-12 in 1937. he retired in 1970 as a full colonel. his last position was as chief of staff of 8th air force at westover afb ,mass.[[User:Hal whiteman|Hal whiteman]] ([[User talk:Hal whiteman|talk]]) 05:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::can you if there are sources about her political ideas? [[Special:Contributions/193.207.166.191|193.207.166.191]] ([[User talk:193.207.166.191|talk]]) 18:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::There are none. You can build hypotheses based on the facts that '''''a''''') her father, Jacques-René Hébert was a promoter of the [[Cult of Reason]], yet considering [[Jesus Christ]] a [[Sans-culotte]] ([[Jacques Hébert#Dechristianization]], [https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/O89BAAAAcAAJ?hl=fr&gbpv=1&pg=PA449 ''une religion sans base, fille d'aucune foi, ne procédant d'aucune révélation''] ) '''''b''''') it is known that when she was two years old around her beside Jacques Marquet: ''"The child is surrounded by his uncle, Jacques Goupil, an invalid officer, Pierre Theuvenot, a ironmonger of the rue du Temple (section of Reunion), by Jean-Baptiste Gaignot, employed in the national domains, of the Guillaume Tell section, of Pierre-François Coignard, employee of the National Treasury, living in rue Denis, of his neighbour Joseph Barat, of Pierre François Joseph Guérin, printer in the rue du Temple, all sans-culottes friends of the family – the Revolution visibly offered many places in the New administrations, social advancement"'', '''''c''''') she became an assistant teacher. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 01:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Note that the Sans-culottes were not keen on any branch of Christianity, see [[Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution]], so it seems unlikely that she would have followed her parents' political path. [[Protestantism in France|Protestants in France]] were a small minority that had been persecuted under successive monarchs before the Revolution. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 10:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:If you have an issue with the editing of an article, you should take it up on that article's [[talk:Focke-Wulf Fw 190|talk page]]. [[User:FiggyBee|FiggyBee]] ([[User talk:FiggyBee|talk]]) 06:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree with FiggyBee. The editors who undid your change had no idea where you got your information. In particular, if you can provide info about the specific issue of ''Wings'', that would almost certainly address their concern. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 07:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The author of [http://le-blog-de-jean-yves-carluer.fr/2015/08/28/fonder-une-societe-biblique-auxiliaire-3/ this related blog] is the opinion that Jacques Marquet himself might have been, at least, leaning toward protestantism. And the circumstances that are related are certainly convincing. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 14:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Judicial Terror and the Third Reich == |
|||
{{hab}} |
|||
= December 6 = |
|||
The Socialist underground press called what the Nazis did to the Jews after 1935 'Judical Terror.' I would like to know how this worked in practice in the period before the outbreak of the war? It's not so much grand set piece pogroms I am asking about-and here the obvious example is the Night of Broken Glass. Rather I am thinking of the day to day process of persecuation, the way the police and the other agencies of the state acted to enforce discrimination. I would also like to know what impact Nazi policy here had on the public at large? Thank you for your time. [[User:Vic Viking|Vic Viking]] ([[User talk:Vic Viking|talk]]) 08:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Provenance of some sculptures == |
|||
:[[Roland Freisler]], [[Judges' Trial]] -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 18:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
There are a bunch of reliefs worked into the wall of the garden (rear) side of the former Casa Storck, now Frederic Storck and Cecilia Cuțescu-Storck Museum, in Bucharest. I can't tell whether they are older pieces collected by Frederic Storck (he certainly collected a number of such pieces; some are in the museum) or his own work, or a mix of the two. Clearly for some of these, if they are his own work they would have been imitative of older styles, but he was enough of a chameleon at times that I would not rule that out. (I had originally presumed they were all his, but I'm having second thoughts.) Wondering if anyone might know something more solid than I do; there is nothing in particular about this I've been easily able to find, except that they seem to date back at least very close to the origin of the building (1910s). |
|||
Amongst other things, Vic, the [[Kripo]]-the main branch of the Criminal Police- was given specific instructions in June 1937 to arrest all those guilty of breaking the [[Nuremberg Laws]], and send them to concentration camps. In June 1938 the definition of [[Nazi concentration camp badges|asocials]] was extended to all Jews who had served minor prison sentences in the past. This meant in practice that they could be rounded up and sent to concentration camps, as over 1500 were, even those in full-time employment, and only released on promise of emigration. This was to be the first such mass round-up in the history of the regime. Other official actions along these lines made it all but impossible for Jewish people to earn a living. The whole point of this organised 'police terror' was to force as many Jews as possible to leave Germany. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
<gallery> |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 01.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 02.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 03.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 03.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 05.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 06.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 07.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 08.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 09.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - relief on exterior of Casa Storck - 10.jpg |
|||
File:Frederic Storck - miscellaneous reliefs on exterior of Casa Storck - 01.jpg|Several more here |
|||
</gallery> [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Given my uncertainty, I've put these in a new [[:commons:Category:Unidentified works in the Frederic and Cecilia Cuțescu Storck Museum]] that does not imply authorship by Frederic Storck. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Ben Mathews and the Bakewell tart: source for this? == |
|||
: No one with an idea on any of these? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 19:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Georges Jacques Danton == |
|||
In your description for the bakewell tart, you give reference to a book by Ben Mathews (1839). I am struggling to find the title to the book, could you reveal the title so i can source it. |
|||
{{hat|Block evasion.}} |
|||
Are there any sites with the full biographies of their two sons Antoine (1790-1858) and François Georges (1792-1848)? |
|||
:An article in French can be found [https://www.jstor.org/stable/41920566 here]. You'll need to access it through a library. Their basic biographical details are also available on various genealogy sites, but I expect you're looking for more than just that. [[User:Xuxl|Xuxl]] ([[User talk:Xuxl|talk]]) 16:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/84.71.149.244|84.71.149.244]] ([[User talk:84.71.149.244|talk]]) 10:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Can you search for others? Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/87.5.237.18|87.5.237.18]] ([[User talk:87.5.237.18|talk]]) 16:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I have searched high and low at Wikipedia and the web for the Ben Mathews mentioned at our article [[Bakewell tart]], anonymous questioner. And I have searched using all combinations of ''Ben''-or-''Benjamin'' and ''Mathews''-or-''Matthews''. I used whole phrases at Google, enclosed in quotes like this: "Ben Mathews". No luck. The text of our article appears to be borrowed, and has been borrowed in turn at many other places, it seems: but no more information comes to light. |
|||
{{hab}} |
|||
:Anyone have an idea? |
|||
:–<font color="blue"><sub><big><big>'''[[User_talk:Noetica |⊥]]'''</big></big></sub><sup>¡ɐɔıʇǝo</sup>N<small>oetica!</small></font><sup>[[User_talk:Noetica |T]]</sup>– 07:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= December 7 = |
|||
::Considering the other "[[Special:Contributions/86.136.239.180|contributions]]" of the anonymous editor who inserted this, it looks like [[WP:vandalism|vandalism]]. I've removed it, as well as other [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bakewell_tart&diff=91497471&oldid=86468423 old vandalism]. --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 23:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Why did [[Pippi Longstocking]] end up never getting married in her adulthood? == |
|||
== Nineteenth Century Battle, won against the odds? == |
|||
AKA her actress, [[Inger Nilsson]]. A lot of suitors would admire famous actresses and trample on each other to have a chance to court them, so a lot of actors and actresses end up getting married, but how come Pippi's actress never got married nor had kids after growing into an adult? --[[Special:Contributions/2600:100A:B032:25F0:1D7A:CC5D:1FC2:21E2|2600:100A:B032:25F0:1D7A:CC5D:1FC2:21E2]] ([[User talk:2600:100A:B032:25F0:1D7A:CC5D:1FC2:21E2|talk]]) 06:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I am looking for a good example of a nineteenth century battle where a weaker army won in the face of greater odds. I would particularly like to know by what means the victorous general was able to prevail over his opponent, what tactics he used in bringing victory? Was there the element of luck that Napoleon thought essential for a good commander, or was there something less nebulous at work? I suppose what I really want to know is waht are the qualities that make an outstanding commander in the field? [[Special:Contributions/81.151.6.121|81.151.6.121]] ([[User talk:81.151.6.121|talk]]) 11:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Do you know for certain that she wasn't/isn't married and/or has children? If so, from what source? |
|||
:Look at the [[Battle of Chancellorsville]] from the [[American Civil War]]. [[Robert E. Lee|Lee]] was outnumbered two to one. What we call luck is always in play on both sides and can therefore be discounted. Lee won by daring, good reconnaissance, deception, and energy. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 11:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Some actors do not choose to make their private life public, so perhaps she was/is and does, and if not, many people (including my elderly single self) are simply not interested in getting married and/or having children. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.211.243|94.1.211.243]] ([[User talk:94.1.211.243|talk]]) 11:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:She's still among the living, so maybe you could find a way to contact her, and ask her that nosy question. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 12:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::In the [[Battle of Brice's Crossroads]] in the [[American Civil War]], Confederate General Nathan Forrest with about 3200 men defeated Union General Samuel Sturgis who had about 8500 men. Forrest in several other Civil War actions defeated larger Union forces. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 14:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:If she really could "lift her horse one-handed", I suspect even male fellow equestrians would be very wary suitors. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 12:35, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
||
: As an adult, she has chosen to keep her private life private.<sup>[https://www.whosdatedwho.com/dating/inger-nilsson]</sup> So be it. --[[Special:Contributions/136.56.165.118|136.56.165.118]] ([[User talk:136.56.165.118|talk]]) 19:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Like Milkbreath, I, too, would select Chancellorsville, Lee's great masterpiece, the one engagement that simply leaps to mind here. He was daring because he had to be daring, dividing his weaker army not once but twice, almost certainly the road to suicide for any other commander. But there is something else worth raising here, something in Lee's make-up that Milkbreath has not mentioned; namely the almost intuitive ability he had to read the mind of his opponent. Nowhere was this better demonstrated than at Chancellorsville, where [[Joseph Hooker]],-like a rabbit caught in the headlights-, might be said to have lost the battle before Lee won it. Lee was also fortunate, it also has to be said, in the invaluable support he had from his [[Thomas J Jackson|Right Arm]]! [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I suspect that famous actresses actually try to avoid suitors that admire famous actresses. They don't want to marry someone who is in love with a fake public persona created by the PR department of a studio. Not only actors and actresses, but also a lot of bakers, chemists, dentists, engineers and so on do end up getting married. Being famous does not help. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I imagine she particularly would not welcome suitors who admired her as a preteen. [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 20:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 8 = |
|||
[[Battle of Isandlwana]] The Zulu nation had 10 times more men but they were armed with spears and cow hides. They annihilated a formation of thousands of armed men. Lotsofissues 11:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Lotsofissues|Lotsofissues]] ([[User talk:Lotsofissues|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lotsofissues|contribs]]) </small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Petosiris of Arabia == |
|||
:Lotsofissues, have you actually ''read'' the article you linked? At Isandlwana exactly ''one'' thousand British soldiers faced 25,000 Zulus. Yes, the British were armed with [[Martini-Henry]] rifles, but the defensive perimeter was too large and the guns prone to jamming, allowing the Zulus to penetrate the line with ease. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
So African auxiliaries don't exist? Why do you only count 1400 British soldiers? |
|||
Their perimeter was overextended because of poor leadership. Does that detract from Zulu victory? Do Mead's mistakes undermine the claim that Chancellorsville was Lee's masterpiece? |
|||
In this clash of breech loading rifles against spears, you still claim the disadvantage of being outnumbered? LOLERCOASTER |
|||
The British had the invincible factor. And they lost. Lotsofissues 09:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
The rendering of [[Tayma stones|פטסרי]] as Petosiris seems to take inspiration from the [[commons:Category:Tomb_of_Petosiris|far-flung]]. Is this the same name? If ''osiris'' is Osiris, what's the ''pt'' pt? |
|||
:There were a lot of incompetent generals in Europe during the 19th century but I can't name them offhand.<br>[[User:Sleigh|Sleigh]] ([[User talk:Sleigh|talk]]) 22:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 22:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The [https://collections.louvre.fr/en/ark:/53355/cl010120341 source to which this is cited] has throughout ''Peṭos<u>'''r'''</u>iris''. However, the transcription of [[Françoise Briquel-Chatonnet|Briquel-Chatonnet]] has ''pṭsry''. Roche states the name means {{nowrap|''« qu’Osiris a donné »''}}.<sup>[https://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?id=3288857&url=article]</sup> --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 18:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks for that, Lotsofissues. Please do not misunderstand me: I am not in any sense discounting the significance of the Zulu victory. My remark was addressed to your contention that 'they annihilated a formation of thousands of men', which is bound to give an ''entirely misleading impression''. Yes, there were local raised troops, but the [[Natal Native Contingent]] was not only badly armed but of a highly uneven quality. The British command had a poor opinion of their fighting ability, keeping them in reserve at the outset of the battle, a position from where most would seem to have deserted, hence their relatively low casualty rates. Indeed, it is uncertain to me just how many of the NNC were actually engaged. The Wikipedia article says that over 477 'others' were killed; but it also says that British casualties amounted to 852 officers and men out of a force of 1400. Of this only 55 officers and men are said to have escaped, which leaves some 500 men unaccounted for. |
|||
::I may be mistaken, but wouldn't « qu’Osiris a donné » require פת? |
|||
::[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 03:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 9 = |
|||
I'm not quite sure what you mean by the 'invincibility factor', which in the circumstances would seem to be a quite nonsensical expression. Indeed, as I have already said, the Martini-Henry rifle, which should in theory have given the British superiority over the larger Zulu army was prone to jamming, and is now considered to be one of the factors in their defeat. The simple fact remains that the British were overwhelmed by considerably superior numbers. So, if you read 81.151's question again you should be able to conclude that Isandlwana is quite out of place here. |
|||
==Tribes and inceldom== |
|||
Incidentally, as I have already said, the Union commander at Chancellorsville was Joseph Hooker, not [[George Mead]]. Mead's [[V Corps (ACW)|V Corps]] was kept in reserve throughout the battle, one of the factors in Hooker's defeat. If you read once again what I wrote above you will see that I make it quite plain that Hooker's mistakes were an important part of the Confederate victory; that he 'might be said to have lost the battle before Lee won it.' [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 00:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
One common saying in [[incel]] subcultures is that women are "programmed" to only have relationships with the 20% top men. This appears to be consistent (o at least not contradicted by) this phrase in the [[polygamy]] article: "More recent genetic data has clarified that, in most regions throughout history, a smaller proportion of men contributed to human genetic history compared to women." |
|||
Then again, while I've heard of modern tribes with weird marriage practices (for example the [[Wodaabe]] or the [[Trobriand people]]) I've never heard of tribes where 70% of men die virgins. Is there any tribe/society where something like that happens? (I realize that modern tribes are by definition different to Paleolithic tribes)[[Special:Contributions/90.77.114.87|90.77.114.87]] ([[User talk:90.77.114.87|talk]]) 13:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:From what I've read in the past, it seems that hunter-gatherer cultures over the last 50,000 years ago probably tended to be mildly polygynous -- that is, certain men, due to their personalities and demonstrated skills, managed to attract more than one woman at a time into a relationship with them. (Usually a small number -- some men having large numbers of wives is associated more with agricultural civilizations, and women there could often have less freedom of choice than women in hunter-gatherer groups.) Everybody of both sexes is likely to be most attracted to high-status individuals, but under hunter-gatherer conditions, women also need help with child-rearing, which factors into their mating strategies. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 14:19, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
81 asked for an example of a victorious "weaker army" up against great odds. It amazes me that you think 10x, 25x, 100x, or whatever greater manpower nullifies great odds. Again--like a broken record--in this battle pitting spear against rifle, numbers are insignificant to figuring the balance sheet of advantage. Why? Because the gun is invincible! A defensive position bristling with the firepower of many volleys per minute is invincible against men running up. It's nonsensical given the circumstances that anybody got within the length of half a football field. Yet, the Zulus won, beating the most unfavorable odds. Lotsofissues 04:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::P.S. Under the classic anthropological band-tribe-chiefdom-state classification system (on Wikipedia, covered in the vaguely named [[Sociopolitical typology]] article), most historical hunter-gatherer cultures were "bands", while the Wodaabe and Trobriand people sound more like "tribes". [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 14:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In a battle of a large army armed with [[assegai]]s vs a small army armed with unreliable firearms, I'd go for the former. Especially as the former were a very well disciplined force, nullifying that usual advantage that European powers had over native opposition. Chuck in the extraordinary Zulu bravery and military prowess, it's correct to say that while it was a tremendous victory for the Zulu, it doesn't fit the criteria the questioner asked for. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 15:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:: Worth remembering, though: who has "sanctioned" relationships is not necessarily equivalent to who actually has sex. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 19:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Another Dickens question: his political views? == |
|||
:::It has been said (in mammals at least) that each 5% difference in mass for males means that their [[harem (zoology)]] has one more female. The [[sexual dimorphism#Humans]] article says that human males are 15% heavier that the females (previously I had heard 20%), suggesting that the harem-holder has three mates (or 4, if the 20% is correct). But this does not mean that 75% of human males never had sex. Firstly, holding a harem is a dangerous, short term job if other animals are any guide, with the harem master regularly killed or overthrown. Secondly, in current polygynous human cultures and in polygynous animals, there is a huge amount of cheating. Evidence from animals shows that when females cheat, they are statistically more likely to produce offspring from that mating than from a mating with their main male. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 11:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::It's doubtful that there were commonly "harems" at any stage of human evolution which is very relevant to modern human behavior. Gorillas have moderate harems of often around 3 or 4 females (as opposed to elephant seals, which commonly have a harem size in the thirties). [[Paranthropus|Robust Australopithecines]] may have been similar, but modern humans are not descended from them. What we know about attested hunter-gatherer societies strongly suggests that during the last 50,000 years or so (since [[Behavioral modernity]]) the majority of men who had wives had one wife, but some exceptional men were able to attract 2 or 3 women at a time into relationships. Men having large numbers of wives (real harems) wasn't too feasible until the rise of social stratification which occurred with the development of agriculture. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 16:50, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks to those who responded to my question on Dickens and Utilitarianism. I would now like to know more about the author's political views. For example, was he in favour of Chartism? Was he a Conservative, a Liberal or a Radical? Would he have been in favour of votes for women? I short, what is the best way of summarising his views on the great political questions of the day? [[User:Mrs 'Arris|Mrs 'Arris]] ([[User talk:Mrs 'Arris|talk]]) 12:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Dickens agreed with Carlyle, right? So that would make him more of a conservative. He thought America was a big mess. My guess is that he would have been against votes for women, though I'm not sure he said anything about it directly. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 16:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::How do we know that? Because the same evidence is that prior to 50,000 years ago, humans ''did'' have harems. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 20:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I thought he was more of a working class socialist than a conservative - at least modern day conservatism. Most of his books appear to feature people in positions of power (or wealth) who are cruel/unkind/uncaring, and people in positions of poverty who are honest/caring/worthy of help and often I get the impression from his works that he favoured helping the poor and had a general contempt for the rich. Could be wrong mind you, i've not read a lot of his work and i've never 'studied' it. [[User:Ny156uk|ny156uk]] ([[User talk:Ny156uk|talk]]) 17:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Where can we find this evidence? --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 08:31, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00239-003-2458-x A Recent Shift from Polygyny to Monogamy in Humans Is Suggested by the Analysis of Worldwide Y-Chromosome Diversity]. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 14:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Scattering in US elections == |
|||
::Well, you're absolutely right that he cared about the poor, the conservative thing about him is the way he says that should be done. He agrees with Carlyle. Carlyle was considered a conservative because he favored the monarchy and he favored the class structure as it was, he just argued that rich people should be nicer to poor people. Dickens' ''A Christmas Carol'' portrays the transformation of a crusty rich old man into a man who helps poor people. the rich man, however, is the one with the power. In any case, Dickens was not as liberal as [[John Stuart Mill]] and the like. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 18:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
What does scattering mean in the context of US elections? Examples: [[1944 United_States presidential election in California#Results]] [[1886 United States House of Representatives elections#Mississippi]]. Searching mostly produces [[Electron scattering]], which is not the same thing at all! Is there (or should there be) an article or section that could be linked? [[User:Cavrdg|Cavrdg]] ([[User talk:Cavrdg|talk]]) 14:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Dickens hated poor-houses and exploitative factory-owners, but he also hated workers' strikes, and had little sympathy with radical politics or most attempts at broad sweeping social reforms (look at his take on prison reform near the end of ''David Copperfield''...). [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 21:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:If you click on the source for Frederick G. Berry in the 1886 election, then on Scattering on the following page, it says it's for those with "No Party Affiliation". [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 14:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Presumably from the phrase "a scattering of votes" (i.e. for other candidates than those listed)... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 15:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Dickens was a middle-class, middle-brow, [[Radicalism (historical)|radical progressive]]-understood in the nineteenth century sense of the term- and something, on occasions, of an old-fashioned Tory paternalist, though I am quite aware that he would have hated to be described in such a fashion! He hated backward-looking aristocratic reaction, the abuse of power by traditional elites; but he feared the consequences of revolution even more, the essential message of ''[[A Tale of Two Cities]]''. No, he was not in favour of [[Chartism]], as we can guess from hostile sentiments he expressed in his correspondence (Letters, III, 282). He celebrated the fall of the French [[July Monarchy]] in 1848, while worrying about the spread of 'public bedevilments to England. |
|||
::I suspect that the intended word is "smattering". [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 09:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 11 = |
|||
His fear of the urban under-class was fully expressed in ''[[The Old Curiosity Shop]]'', which takes Little Nell and her Grandfather into England's dangerous industrial heartlands. He hated, above all, forms of demagoguery, which, in his view, exploits the oppressed for selfish political ends. He is generous in his perceptions of the labouring-poor, those, that is, who are ''deserving'' of such generosity; people like Betty Higden in [[Our Mutual Friend]]. It is best, one supposes, that people like this do not think for themselves over-much, otherwise they end up like the muddle-headed Stephen Blackpool in ''[[Hard Times]]''! |
|||
== Shopping carts == |
|||
But, as far as I am concerned, the best possible summary of Dickens, the great moral campaigner, is that given by [[George Orwell]] towards the end of his masterly essay on the subject: |
|||
Where were the first shopping carts introduced? |
|||
''When one reads any strongly individual piece of writing, one has the impression of seeing a face somewhere behind the page. It is not necessarily the actual face of the writer. I feel this very strongly with Swift, with Defoe, with Fielding, Stendhal, Thackeray, Flaubert, though in several cases I do not know what these people looked like and do not want to know. What one sees is the face that the writer ought to have. Well, in the case of Dickens I see a face that is not quite the face of Dickens's photographs, though it resembles it. It is the face of a man of about forty, with a small beard and a high colour. He is laughing, with a touch of anger in his laughter, but no triumph, no malignity. It is the face of a man who is always fighting against something, but who fights in the open and is not frightened, the face of a man who is generously angry — in other words, of a nineteenth-century liberal, a free intelligence, a type hated with equal hatred by all the smelly little orthodoxies which are now contending for our souls.'' [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*[[shopping cart]] and [[Sylvan Goldman]] say the Humpty Dumpty chain |
|||
*[[Piggly Wiggly]] says the Piggly Wiggly chain and quotes the Harvard Business Review |
|||
Both articles agree it was in 1937 in Oklaholma. I believe that Humpty Dumpty is more likely, but some high quality sources would be useful. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 11:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:It seems to be a matter of some dispute, but [https://sova.si.edu/record/nmah.ac.0739 ''Guide to the Telescoping Shopping Cart Collection, 1946-1983, 2000''] by the Smithsonian Institution has the complex details of the dispute between Sylvan Goldman [of Humpty Dumpty] and [[Orla Watson]]. No mention of Piggly Wiggly, but our article on Watson notes that in 1946, he donated the first models of his cart to 10 grocery stores in Kansas City. |
|||
:Dickens' modern-day biographer [[Peter Ackroyd]] quotes approvingly [[Walter Bagehot]]'s description of Dickens as a "sentimental radical" and states (with supporting references to ''Nicholas Nickleby'' and ''Barnaby Rudge'') "Dickens can pity individuals and individual suffering [...] but he changes his attitude when such individuals are grouped together in a crowd, or 'mob'." With reference to Dickens' attitude to Chartism, he adds that in the late 1830s when the Chartists were active "there is no indication that [...] Dickens played anything but the part of a concerned spectator who did not feel himself to be actively engaged in any of the popular credos of the moment". Around this time Dickens described [[Robert Peel]]'s Tories as "people whom, politically, I despise and abhor" whilst when a journalist he worked for the liberal/radical [[Morning Chronicle]] though as discussed [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Dickens_and_Utilitarianism|above]] did not see eye-to-eye with the Utilitarianism espoused by many of the radicals of his time. [[User:Valiantis|Valiantis]] ([[User talk:Valiantis|talk]]) 04:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WBH3rhiWsm4C&pg=PA205 ''The Illustrated History of American Military Commissaries'' (p. 205)] has both Watson and Goldman introducing their carts in 1947 (this may refer to carts that telescope into each other for storage, a feature apparently lacking in Goldman's first model). |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JCUwEQAAQBAJ&pg=PT17 ''Scalable Innovation: A Guide for Inventors, Entrepreneurs, and IP Professionals''] says that Goldman's first cart was introduced to Humpty Dumty in 1937. |
|||
:Make of that what you will. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 13:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Absolutely. I remember that the power lift arrangement mentioned in the Smithsonian's link was still an object of analysis for would-be inventors in the mid-sixties, and possibly later, even though the soon to be ubiquituous checkout counter conveyor belt was very much ready making it unnecessary. Couldn't help curiously but think about those when learning about [[Bredt's rule]] at school later, see my user page, but it's true "Bredt" sounded rather like "Bread" in my imagination. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 15:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:On Newspapers.com (pay site), I'm seeing shopping carts referenced in Portland, Oregon in 1935 or earlier, and occasionally illustrated, at a store called the Public Market; and as far as the term itself is concerned, it goes back to at least the 1850s. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 15:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::But perhaps referring to a cart brought by the shopper to carry goods home with, rather than one provided by the storekeeper for use in-store? [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{ping|Alansplodge|Askedonty|Baseball Bugs}} thank you for your help, it seems that the Harvard Business Review is mistaken and the Piggly Wiggly chain did not introduce the first shopping baskets, which answers my question. The shopping cart article references a [https://www.csi.minesparis.psl.eu/working-papers/WP/WP_CSI_006.pdf paper by Catherine Grandclément], which shows that several companies were selling early shopping carts in 1937, so crediting Sylvan Goldman alone is not the whole story. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 17:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::There were occasions when he became more conservative, such as after [[Cawnpore]], IIRC. [[User:AllenHansen|AllenHansen]] ([[User talk:AllenHansen|talk]]) 07:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Lilacs/flowers re: Allies in Europe WWII == |
|||
== The Glorious Revolution == |
|||
At 53:20 in [[Dunkirk (1958 film)]], British soldiers talk about [paraphrasing] 'flowers on the way into Belgium, raspberries on the way out', and specifically reference lilacs. I imagine this was very clear to 1958 audiences, but what is the significance of lilacs? Is it/was it a symbol of Belgium? [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee|talk]]) 21:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Just wondering if anyone could help me: Was the Glorious Revolution of 1688 popular in Scotland and Ireland? I am aware that James II's policies of Catholic toleartion would obviously have been popular in Ireland, therefore winning him some support there and that there were some Catholics who would have been remained loyal to James in Scotland, but were those Scots who were members of the Kirk hostile to William and Mary or welcoming? |
|||
:I think it's just that the BEF [[Operation David|entered Belgium]] in the Spring, which is lilac time. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Finally, how much of an affect did the Enlgish deciding who should rule Scotland and Ireland have an affect on both Anglo-Scottish relationships and Anglo-Irish relationships? Sorry if the question seems complex, its just I am unsure of just how important the Glorious Revolution was! Any help would be much appreiciated. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/172.189.163.242|172.189.163.242]] ([[User talk:172.189.163.242|talk]]) 17:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:There are contemporary reports of the streets being strewn with lilac blossom. See [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/75930659/7411364 here] "Today the troops crossed the frontier along roads strewn with flowers. Belgian girls, wildly enthusiastic, plucked lilac from the wayside and scattered it along the road to be torn and twisted by the mighty wheels of the mechanised forces." [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Ah! That would explain it, thanks! [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee|talk]]) 16:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 12 = |
|||
:We have a lovely article on the [[Glorious Revolution]] that will probably help answer your question quite well. A quick read suggests that there were some Catholic supporters in Ireland and Scotland, but James II's policies also spawned the [[Jacobite Risings]] in Scotland, and the [[Williamite War in Ireland]]. [[User:Tony Fox|Tony Fox]] <small>[[User_talk:Tony Fox|(arf!)]]</small> 18:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== The USA adding a new state == |
|||
:You may be interested in our article on [[Jacobitism]], which discusses opposition to the Glorious Revolution in Scotland and Ireland. [[User:ObiterDicta|'''ObiterDicta''']] <small>( [[User talk:ObiterDicta|pleadings]] • [[Special:Contributions/ObiterDicta|errata]] • [[Special:Emailuser/ObiterDicta|appeals]] )</small> 18:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
If my understanding is correct, the following numbers are valid at present: (a) number of Senators = 100; (b) number of Representatives = 435; (c) number of electors in the Electoral College = 538. If the USA were to add a new state, what would happen to these numbers? Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 06:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
172.189, on a point of fact, while the English most certainly decided who would rule in Ireland, this is not really the case in Scotland, which still, at that time, was a separate kingdom, with its own government and political institutions. While the government of [[James VII]] had not been as unpopular as it had been in England, it was not particularly popular either. The [[Scottish Privy Council]] was therefore content to go along with the Glorious Revolution, even though it had been made in the south. Who should occupy the vacant Scottish throne was not decided until the spring of 1689 by a Convention of Estates, on condition that the new monarchs accepted the [[Claim of Right Act 1689|Claim of Right]], the Scottish equivalent of the English [[Bill of Rights 1689|Bill of Rights]]. |
|||
:The number of senators would increase by 2, and the number of representatives would probably increase by at least 1. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 09:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thus, to answer the final question, the minimum number of Electors would be 3… more if the new state has more Representatives (based on population). [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 13:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In the short term, there would be extra people in congress. The [[86th United States Congress]] had 437 representatives, because Alaska and Hawaii were granted one upon entry regardless of the apportionment rules. Things were smoothed down to 435 at the next census, two congresses later. --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] ([[User talk:Golbez|talk]]) 14:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Let me re-phrase my question. (a) The number of Senators is always 2 per State, correct? (b) The number of Representatives is what? Is it "capped" at 435 ... or does it increase a little bit? (c) The number of Electors (per State) is simply a function of "a" + "b" (per State), correct? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 21:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
The rule of William and Mary was to be particularly welcome in the southern Lowlands, because it produced, in 1690, a Presbyterian settlement to the question of Church government, replacing the [[Episcopacy]] favoured since the [[English Restoration|Restoration]] in 1660. Jacobite support for James, such as it was, was at this time confined to the western Highlands, to those areas fearful of a restoration of the power of the Campbells. Although some Jacobites were Catholics, others were Episcopalian Protestants, including [[John Graham of Claverhouse]], the leader of the 1689 rising. |
|||
:As I understand it, it is indeed capped at 435, though Golbez brings up a point I hadn't taken into account -- apparently it can go up temporarily when states are added, until the next reapportionment. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{br}}I suggest that (b) would probably depend on whether the hypothetical new state was made up of territory previously part of one or more existing states, or territory not previously part of any existing state. And I suspect that the eventual result would not depend on any pre-calculable formula, but on cut-throat horsetrading between the two main parties and other interested bodies. {The poster formerly nown as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.211.243|94.1.211.243]] ([[User talk:94.1.211.243|talk]]) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Nope, it's capped at 435. See [[Reapportionment Act of 1929]]. (I had thought it was fixed in the Constitution itself, but apparently not.) --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Oh, one other refinement. The formula you've given for number of electors is correct, for states. But it leaves out the [[District of Columbia]], which gets as many electors as it would get if it were a state, but never <s>less</s> <u>more</u> than those apportioned to the smallest state. In practice that means DC gets three electors. That's why the total is 538 instead of 535. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) <small>Oops; I remembered the bit about the smallest state wrong. It's actually never ''more'' than the smallest state. Doesn't matter in practice; still works out to 3 electors for the foreseeable future, either way, because DC would get 3 electors if it were a state, and the least populous state gets 3. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 23:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC) </small> |
|||
= December 13 = |
|||
The situation in Ireland was altogether different, as the vast majority of the Catholic population supported James. Indeed, there was no Glorious Revolution in Ireland; it had to be carried there by conquest. The defeat of the Jacobites in 1691 left the way open for the [[Protestant Ascendancy]] and the subsequent discrimination against Catholics enshrined in the fearsome [[Penal Laws (Ireland)|Penal Laws]]. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 02:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== economics: coffee prices question == |
||
in news report "On Tuesday, the price for Arabica beans, which account for most global production, topped $3.44 a pound (0.45kg), having jumped more than 80% this year. " [https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c36pgrrjllyo] how do they measure it? some other report mention it is a commodity price set for trading like gold silver etc. what is the original data source for this report? i checked a few other news stories and did not find any clarification about this point, they just know something that i don't. thank you in advance for your help. [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 01:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
As a sole proprietor, what is the most money you can make before you are required to claim it on your taxes? [[User:Here7ic|Here7ic]] ([[User talk:Here7ic|talk]]) 18:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]], they seem to be talking about the "Coffee C" contract in the [[List of traded commodities]]. The price seems to have peaked and then fallen a day later |
|||
:What country? --[[User:NellieBly|NellieBly]] ([[User talk:NellieBly|talk]]) 18:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:*explanation [https://www.ice.com/products/15/Coffee-C-Futures here] |
|||
:*I googled "coffee c futures price chart" and the first link was uk.investing.com which I can't link here |
|||
:*if you have detailed questions about [[futures contract]]s they will probably go over my head. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 01:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::thanks. i see the chart which you cannot link here. why did it peak and then drop shortly after? [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 04:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Financial markets tend to have periods of increase followed by periods of decrease (bull and bear markets), see [[market trend]] for background. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 04:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== source for an order of precedence for abbotts == |
|||
::USA. [[User:Here7ic|Here7ic]] ([[User talk:Here7ic|talk]]) 18:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Hi friends. The article for [[Ramsey Abbey]] in the UK refers to an "order of precedence for abbots in Parliament". (Sourced to an encyclopedia, which uses the wording "The abbot had a seat in Parliament and ranked next after Glastonbury and St. Alban's"). Did a ranking/order of precedence exist and if yes where can it be found? Presumably this would predate the dissolution of monasteries in england. Thanks.[[Special:Contributions/70.67.193.176|70.67.193.176]] ([[User talk:70.67.193.176|talk]]) 06:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The Reference Desk does not give legal advice. [[User:ObiterDicta|'''ObiterDicta''']] <small>( [[User talk:ObiterDicta|pleadings]] • [[Special:Contributions/ObiterDicta|errata]] • [[Special:Emailuser/ObiterDicta|appeals]] )</small> 18:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The abbots called to parliament were called "Mitred Abbots" although not all were entitled to wear a mitre. Our [[Mitre]] article has much the same information as you quote, and I suspect the same citations. The only other reference I could find, also from an encyclopedia; |
|||
::::Its not legal advice. It would be legal advice if I was asking for a course of action. I'm asking for a stated fact. [[User:Here7ic|Here7ic]] ([[User talk:Here7ic|talk]]) 19:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:{{xt|Of the abbots, the abbot of Glastonbury had the precedence till A.D. 1154, when [[Pope Adrian IV]], an Englishman, from the affection he entertained for the place of his education, assigned this precedence to the abbot of St. Alban's. In consequence, Glastonbury ranked next after him, and Reading had the third place.}} |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GZnQtCA-a2kC&pg=PA2 ''A Church Dictionary: A Practical Manual of Reference for Clergymen and Students'' (p. 2)] |
|||
:[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Sources differ on the order. There is a list published in 1842 of 26 abbots as "generally ... reckoned" in order here |
|||
:My understanding is that, while there is a threshold below which you aren't taxed, you are required to claim all forms of income. The point at which enforcement kicks in is poorly defined -- for instance, an audit is unlikely to crack down on a typical teenager's babysitting income. — [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 19:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MBZjBKtuIQkC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA182 ''The Church History of Britain Volume 2'' (p.182)] [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 22:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Are the proposed Trump tariffs a regressive tax in disguise? == |
|||
::How about an income within a thousand dollars? [[User:Here7ic|Here7ic]] ([[User talk:Here7ic|talk]]) 19:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I'm wondering if there has been analysis of this. The US government gets the tariff money(?) and biggest chunk will be on manufactured goods from China. Those in turn are primarily consumer goods, which means that the tariff is something like a sales tax, a type of tax well known to be regressive. Obviously there are leaks in the description above, so one would have to crunch a bunch of numbers to find out for sure. But that's what economists do, right? Has anyone weighed in on this issue? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|talk]]) 08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The [[IRS]] has one hell of a [http://www.irs.gov/ web site]. The publication I found [http://www.irs.gov/publications/p334/ch01.html#d0e732 here] (after a search of about two minutes, hint, hint) says that you have to file if you get $400 or more. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 19:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There have been many public comments about how this is a tax on American consumers. It's only "in disguise" to those who don't understand how tariffs work. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 11:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks, I'll see what I can find. Do you remember if the revenue collected is supposed to be enough for the government to care about? I.e. enough to supposedly offset the inevitable tax cuts for people like Elon Musk? [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|talk]]) 22:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Import duties are extremely recessive in that (a) they are charged at the same rate for any given level of income; and (b) those with less income tend to purchase far more imported goods than those with more income (define “more” and “less” any way you wish). Fiscally, they border on insignificant, running an average of 1.4% of federal revenue since 1962 (or, 0.2% of GDP), compared to 47.1% (8.0%) for individual income tax and 9.9% (1.7%) for corporate tax receipts.[[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 22:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Curious about your point (b); why would this be? It seems to me that as my income has risen I have probably bought more stuff from abroad, at least directly. It could well be that I've bought less indirectly, but I'm not sure why that would be. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 00:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::More like, those with less income spend a larger fraction of their income on imported goods, instead of services. [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Trovatore, most daily use items are imported: toothbrushes, combs, kitchenware, shopping bags. Most durable goods are imported: phones, TVs, cars, furniture, sporting goods, clothes. These items are more likely to be imported because it is MUCH cheaper / more profitable to make them abroad. Wander through Target, Sam's Club, or Wal-Mart and you'll be hard pressed to find "Made in America" goods. But, in a hand-crafted shop, where prices have to reflect the cost of living HERE, rather than in Bangladesh, prices soar. [[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 19:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Um, sure, but surely it's a fairly rare person of any income level who spends a significant portion of his/her income on artisanal goods. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 06:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::PiusImpavidus, Every income strata (in America) spends far more on services than on goods. Services tend to be more of a repeated purchase: laundry (vs. washing machine), Uber (vs. car), rent (vs. purchase), internet (vs. books), etc. [[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 19:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Ron A. Dunn: Australian arachnologist == |
|||
== Wizard Weir == |
|||
For {{q|Q109827858}} I have given names of "Ron. A.", an address in 1958 of 60 Mimosa Road, Carnegie, {{nowrap|Victoria, Australia S.E. 9}} (he was also in Carnegie in 1948) and an ''uncited'' death date of 25 June 1972. |
|||
On a recent visit to Edinburgh I was told a story about the Wizard Weir. This was apparently a real person who lived I think in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries. I have been looking here for more info but can find nothing. Is it just a tall tale? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.151.242.83|86.151.242.83]] ([[User talk:86.151.242.83|talk]]) 19:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
He was an Australian arachnologist with the honorifics AAA AAIS. |
|||
:That'll most probably be Major [[Thomas Weir]], also known as "the wizard of West Bow". Google has a few snippets about him including [http://www.wyrdology.com/edinburgh/major-weir.html], [http://www.scotclans.com/scottish_myths/supernatural_scotland/major_weir.html], [http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/scotgaz/people/famousfirst1283.html] and also it has been put forward that he was the inspiration for the story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/6748363.stm] [[User:Nanonic|Nanonic]] ([[User talk:Nanonic|talk]]) 19:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Can anyone find the full given names, and a source or the death date, please? What did the honorifics stand for? Do we know how he earned his living? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
There is an interesting essay on the subject of Thomas Weir by the Scottish historian David Stevenson, entitled ''Major Weir: a Justified Sinner?'' (Scottish Studies, 16, 1972). The author links the case to the Presbyterian obsession with [[Predestination]]. Weir made a voluntary confession to his crimes and refused all attempts to persuade him to seek the pardon of God. Even on the gallows, when he was bid to say 'Lord be merciful to me', he responded as before: "Let me alone-I will not-I have lived like a beast and I will die like a beast." The theme of strict predestination, and the possible adverse moral implications of such theology, was later taken up by [[James Hogg]] in his novel ''[[The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner]]'' [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 01:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[User:Pigsonthewing|Pigsonthewing]] Have you tried ancestry.com? For a start |
|||
== What the...? Joseph Goebbels' flamboyant "camp" uniform == |
|||
:A scan of the 1954 Carnegie electoral roll has |
|||
:*Dunn, Ronald Albert, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, accountant |
|||
:*Dunn, Gladys Harriet I, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, home duties |
|||
:I can't check newspapers.com, but The Age apparently had a report about Ronald Albert Dunn on 27 Jun 1972 [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 14:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you. I don't have access to the former, but that's great. AAA seems to be (member of the) Association of Accountants of Australia: [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/206190746]. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 16:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I accessed Ancestry.com via the Wikipedia Library, so you should have access. Newspapers.com is also available via the library if you register, which I haven't. An editor with a Newspapers.com account would be able to make a clipping which anyone could access online. |
|||
:::I agree AAA is probably the Australian Society of Accountants, a predecessor of [[CPA Australia]]. They merged in 1953 ([https://trove.nla.gov.au/people/458467 source]) so the information would have been outdated in 1958. AAIS could be Associate [of the] Amalgamated Institute of Secretaries (source [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vxQ6AQAAIAAJ Who's Who in Australia, Volume 16, 1959] Abbreviations page 9). [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 16:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Last time I tried, Ancestry wasn't working for WP-Lib users. Thank you again. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 20:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::There is a phabricator problem about loading a second page of results. My workaround is to try to add more information to the search to get more relevant results on the first page of results. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 21:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Or perhaps someone at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request]] could help? [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 12:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::They already have at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request#The Age (Melbourne) 27 June 1972]]. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 12:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Given his specialty, I suggest the honorific stands for "Aaaaaaaaagh It's (a) Spider!" [[User:Chuntuk|Chuntuk]] ([[User talk:Chuntuk|talk]]) 12:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 15 = |
|||
Goebells created a flamboyant blue suit as a uniform for himself, unlike that of any of the other Nazi's. Today, this would be seen a being rather ''camp'' Further more, Hiter apparently enjoyed being deficated on. I do not mean to imply that homosexuals enjoy defication, please dont take this the wrong way, but in the light of these to aspects of thier personalities relate to the Nazi persecution of homosexual persons. Thanks people. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/193.115.175.247|193.115.175.247]] ([[User talk:193.115.175.247|talk]]) 17:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Schisms and Byzantine Roman self-perception == |
|||
:I saw the above question on the miscellaneous desk and thought that people here would be better informed to give a good answer. Is any of this true, or is it just a load of cobblers? [[User:Do you believe it?|Do you believe it?]] ([[User talk:Do you believe it?|talk]]) 19:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Did the [[Rome-Constantinople schism|three schisms between Rome and Constantinople]] tarnish Rome's reputation to the degree that it affected the Byzantine self-perception as the "Roman Empire" and as "Romans"? Including Constantinople's vision of succession to the Roman Empire and its notion of [[Second Rome]]. [[User:Brandmeister|Brandmeister]]<sup>[[User talk:Brandmeister|talk]]</sup> 15:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::There is obviously some confusion between [[Joseph Goebbels]] and [[Herman Göring]] here. It was the latter, not the former, who was known for his 'camp' uniforms, once wearing a coat that [[Count Ciano]], the Italian Foreign Minister, described as the sort of thing that a 'high grade prostitute wears to the opera'. Hitler's alleged [[coprophilia]] was a piece of war-time black propaganda, that made its way into the academic mainstream via the absurd conduit of 'psychohistory, represented most particularly by Robert Waite's ''Hitler: the Psychopathic God'', a work best ignored. The Nazi presecution of homosexuals had absolutely nothing to do with the individual eccentricities, or otherwise, of their leadership; and one of the most noted homosexuals in the leading ranks of the Party was [[Ernst Roehm|as butch as they come]]. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 01:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Various maneuverings in the middle ages (including the infamous Fourth Crusade) certainly gave many Byzantines a negative view of western Catholics, so that toward the end some frankly preferred conquest by Muslims to a Christian alliance which would involve Byzantine religious and political subordination to the European West (see discussion at [[Loukas Notaras]]). But the Byzantines generally considered themselves to be the real Romans, and called themselves "Romaioi" much more often than they called themselves Greek (of course, "Byzantine" is a later retroactive term). [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 17:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::It began here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#Goebells] [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 07:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I think these religious schisms had nothing to do with the secular political situation. In 330, before Christianity became an established religion that could experience schisms, [[Constantine the Great]] moved the capital of the unitary Roman Empire from Rome to the city of [[Byzantium]] and dubbed it the [[New Rome]] – later renamed to Constantinople. During the later periods in which the [[Western Roman Empire|Western]] and [[Eastern Roman Empire]] were administered separately, this was not considered a political split but an expedient way of administering a large polity, of which Constantinople remained the capital. So when the Western wing of the Roman Empire fell to the [[Ostrogoths]] and even the later [[Exarchate of Ravenna]] disappeared, the Roman Empire, now only administered by the Constantinopolitan court, continued in an unbroken succession from the [[Roman Kingdom]] and subsequent [[Roman Republic|Republic]]. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Hitler might have enjoyed [[deification]]. --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 00:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::In Ottoman Turkish, the term {{large|[[wikt:روم#Ottoman Turkish|روم]]}} (''Rum''), ultimately derived from Latin ''Roma'', was used to designate the Byzantine Empire, or, as a geographic term, its former lands. Fun fact: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, [[Mehmet the Conqueror]] and his successors claimed the title of [[Caesar of Rome]], with the Ottoman Empire being the successor of the [[Byzantine Empire]]. IMO this claim has merit; Mehmet II was the first ruler of yet another dynasty, but rather than replacing the existing Byzantine administrative apparatus, he simply continued its use for the empire he had become the ruler of. If you recognize the claim, the [[Republic of Turkey]] is today's successor of the Roman Kingdom. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 12:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The Ottomans basically continued the Byzantine tax-collection system, for a while. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 23:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Foreign Presidents/Heads of State CURRENTLY Buried in the USA == |
|||
:::::Has he not already been deified?! Yes, I was sorely tempted to have fun with that, Lambian, but was mindful of the injunction about not making light of a questioner's poor grammar and spelling! [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 00:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
How many foreign presidents are CURRENTLY buried in the USA? (I am aware of previous burials that have since been repatriated) |
|||
== All Bones? The Road of Bones, Siberia == |
|||
For example, In Woodlawn Cemetery in Miami, FL, there are two Cuban presidents and a Nicaraguan president. |
|||
Are there any other foreign presidents, heads of state, that are buried in the USA? [[User:Exeter6|Exeter6]] ([[User talk:Exeter6|talk]]) 17:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I was watching a dvd of Eawan McGregor and Charley Boorman on their motorbike trip around the world. On the road of bones just before Magadan in Siberia there was some discussion of those who died in its construction, the 'intelligent' the 'educated' and so on. Is this true? It made Stalin sound a bit like Pol Pot, but surely there had to be something more to his style of government considering the technical advances of the USSR during his period of rule? Was the purge simply about destruction and nothing else? Did Stalin do nothing to attract people to his side? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Dun Sin Ane|Dun Sin Ane]] ([[User talk:Dun Sin Ane|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dun Sin Ane|contribs]]) 20:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:As far as I know, all 4 of the presidents of the [[Republic of Texas]] are buried in Texas, which is currently in the US. [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 18:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:You can read all about it at [[Great Purge]], which quotes a figure of 1000 executions per day by the [[NKVD]] in '37 and '38. So far as the army goes, our article says: "The purge of the army removed three of five marshals (then equivalent to six-star generals), 13 of 15 army commanders (then equivalent to four- and five-star generals), eight of nine admirals (the purge fell heavily on the Navy, who were suspected of exploiting their opportunities for foreign contacts), 50 of 57 army corps commanders, 154 out of 186 division commanders, 16 of 16 army commissars, and 25 of 28 army corps commissars. In total, 30,000 members of the armed forces were executed." Definitely not a sustainable mode of operation. — [[User:Laurascudder|Laura Scudder]] [[User talk:Laurascudder|☎]] 22:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::[[Andrés Domingo y Morales del Castillo]] was President of Cuba in 1954-55 and died in Miami. Not sure where he's buried though. |
|||
:As to what the purges were about, it was to remove people from the party ranks who were not fully in line with party ideologies (i.e., had just joined because the party was in power). The educated suffered disproportionately because anyone from the upper classes of society was automatically under suspicion. There had been purges before the Great Purge, but they just involved removing party membership, rather than executions or labor camps (see [[Purge of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union]]). — [[User:Laurascudder|Laura Scudder]] [[User talk:Laurascudder|☎]] 22:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Also [[Anselmo Alliegro y Milá]] (President of Cuba for a few hours on January 1, 1959) similarly went to Florida and died there. |
|||
::And [[Arnulfo Arias]], ousted as President of Panama in the [[1968 Panamanian coup d'état]], died in Florida (a pattern emerging here...) |
|||
::[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 19:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:For ease of reference, the Woodlawn Cemetery in question is [[Caballero Rivero Woodlawn Park North Cemetery and Mausoleum]], housing: |
|||
:# [[Gerardo Machado]], president of Cuba from 1925 to 1933 |
|||
:# [[Carlos Prío Socarrás]], president of Cuba from 1948 to 1952 |
|||
:# [[Anastasio Somoza Debayle]], president of Nicaragua from 1967 to 1972, and from 1974 to 1979 (not to be confused with his father [[Anastasio Somoza García]] and brother [[Luis Somoza Debayle]], both former presidents of Nicaragua, buried together in Nicaragua) |
|||
:[[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 20:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Searching Findagrave could be fruitful. Machado's entry:[https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/6881438/gerardo-machado_y_morales] ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Polish prime minister and famous musician Ignacy Paderewski had his grave in the United States until 1992. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 07:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
There is a very real misperception of the purpose and function of the Great Purge in the Stalinist scheme of things. You are right to raise doubts, Dun; for along with the stick there was also a carrot, and the Soviet Union did not in any sense resemble the Cambodia of Pol Pot, where destruction ruled for the sake of destruction. I would suggest that you or, indeed, any anyone else interested in the issues raised here read [[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]'s ''[[Cancer Ward]]''. I would draw your attention in particular to the figure of Pavel Nikolayevich Rusanov, the technocrat who did very well out of the old order, and is worried by the changes introduced after Stalin's death, which represent a threat to his status and position. He serves very well as an archetype for those who emerged, phoenix-like, out of the ashes of the purges, a new class of specialists with limited political vision, not unduly concerned that their place in society was achieved at the expense of others. |
|||
::I guess not current, though... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:You can find some with the following Wikidata query: [https://query.wikidata.org/#SELECT%20%3Fperson%20%3Flabel%0AWHERE%0A%7B%0A%20%20%3Fperson%20wdt%3AP39%20%3Foffice%20.%20%23%20held%20office%0A%20%20%3Foffice%20wdt%3AP279%2a%20wd%3AQ48352%20.%20%23%20office%20is%20head%20of%20state%0A%20%20%3Fperson%20wdt%3AP119%20%3Flocation%20.%20%23%20burial%20location%0A%20%20%3Flocation%20wdt%3AP17%20wd%3AQ30%20.%20%23%20burial%20location%20in%20the%20USA%0A%20%20FILTER%28%3Foffice%20%21%3D%20wd%3AQ11696%29%20.%20%23%20Office%20is%20not%20POTUS%0A%20%20%3Fperson%20rdfs%3Alabel%20%3Flabel%20.%0A%20%20FILTER%28LANG%28%3Flabel%29%20%3D%20%22en%22%29%20.%0A%7D%0AGROUP%20BY%20%3Fperson%20%3Flabel%0ALIMIT%20100]. Some notable examples are [[Liliʻuokalani]], [[Pierre Nord Alexis]], [[Dương Văn Minh]], [[Lon Nol]], [[Bruno Carranza]], [[Victoriano Huerta]], and [[Mykola Livytskyi]]. Note that [[Alexander Kerensky]] died in the US but was buried in the UK. Unfortunately, the query also returns others who were presidents, governors, etc. of other than sovereign states. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 19:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Addressing the specific issues you raise it is well to remember that these specialists- technocrats and bureaucrats of all sorts-had been emerging steadily during the course of the 1930s. Such people, Pavel Rusanov and his kin, were the real basis of Stalin's power, not the [[NKVD]] and the apparatus of terror. They were almost always Party members, replacing the old non-political specialists, whom Stalin distrusted so much, the people who had raised all sorts of practical objections to the over-optimistic targets of the [[First Five Year Plan]]. The new wave included many who were to reach the most senior ranks in the party; men like [[Leonid Brezhnev]], [[Andrei Gromyko]] and [[Alexey Kosygin]]. I suspect that it was these sorts of individuals that [[Trotsky]] had in mind when he wrote ''[[The Revolution Betrayed]]'' in 1936: the new 'pyramid of bureaucrats' upon which Stalin's power depended |
|||
:I suppose we should also consider [[Jefferson Davis]] as a debatable case. And [[Peter II of Yugoslavia]] was initially buried in the USA but later reburied in Serbia. He seems to have been the only European monarch who was at one point buried in the USA. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 00:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Manuel Quezon]] was initially buried at Arlington. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 00:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Stalin needed to ensure that the new ''apparatchiks'' were kept on side. Their loyalty had to be assured, in other words, by more than propaganda and sloganeering. This was done by increasing consumer spending during the Second Five Year Plan of 1933 to 1937, information which does not appear in the Wikipedia article on the subject. It was during this period that rationing was lifted and all sorts of consumer goods appeared for the new Soviet middle-class, including cameras, gramophones and radios. There was also a rise in the production of all sorts of luxury goods for the new political elite, anything from chocolates to champagne. |
|||
:And of course I should rather think that most monarchs of Hawaii are buried in the USA. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 00:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If burial was the custom there. (I'd guess it was, but I certainly don't know.) --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[Royal Mausoleum (Mauna ʻAla)]] answers that question with a definitive "yes, it was". [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 22:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Antanas Smetona]] was initially buried in Cleveland, but then reburied elsewhere in Ohio. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 06:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::To be specific, All Souls Cemetery in [[Chardon, Ohio|Chardon]] according to Smetona's article. [[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 06:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:There are a number of Egyptian mummies in US museums ([[List of museums with Egyptian mummies in their collections]]), but I can't find any that are currently known to be the mummy of a pharaoh. The mummy of [[Ramesses I]] was formerly in the US, but was returned to Egypt in 2003. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 22:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
This was a time of general retreat from what might be called 'Bolshevik asceticism', with a new emphasis on the compatibility of Consumerism and Communism. Just as the inconvenient old-guard was being swept aside in the purges, propaganda began to place its greatest emphasis on the ''material'' rewards of labour. This, of course, meant a retreat from the illusions of Marxist equality. For the new [[Stakhanovite|labour aristocracy]] was rewarded well beyond its needs. |
|||
= December 17 = |
|||
So, yes, not all took the road of bones. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 01:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Most powerful woman in the Soviet Union == |
|||
== Geographic extent of an English parish c. 1800 == |
|||
Is there any one woman who could make a claim to having been the most powerful woman in the history of the Soviet Union? Looking back at claims of famous Soviet citizens, no woman stands out in the political or military realms. <font face="Arial">[[User:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:green">Corvus cornix</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:Dark Green">talk</span>]]''</sub></font> 23:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
What would have been the typical extent (in square miles or square kilometers) of an English parish, circa 1800 or so? Let's say the median rather than the mean. With more interest in rural than urban parishes. -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 00:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Ekaterina Furtseva]] was no slouch in the Khruschev era. --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 23:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There were tensions involved in a unit based on the placement of churches being tasked to administer the poor law; that was why "civil parishes" were split off a little bit later... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::To be honest, Corvus, you would be really hard pressed to find many powerful women in the higher reaches of the [[CPSU]], for the simple reason that-for all its revolutionary pretensions-it was a remarkably sexist organisation. The only figure of any significance that I can think of among the [[Old Bolsheviks]] is [[Alexandra Kollontai]], and she was hardly in the first rank. It may be an indication of just how seriously Stalin perceived women in politics that she is the only one of the old guard, not within his circle, to have survived the Great Purge. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 00:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[User:Avocado|Avocado]] As a start the mean area of a parish in England and Wales in around 1832 seems to have been around 5.6 square miles. |
|||
::Awesome, thanks for both answers. <font face="Arial">[[User:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:green">Corvus cornix</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:Dark Green">talk</span>]]''</sub></font> 00:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Source [https://books.google.com/books?id=pJZGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA494 The Edinburgh Encyclopædia Volume 8]. It also has figures by county if you are interested. |
|||
:*p.494 38,498,572 acres, i.e. 60,154 square miles |
|||
:*p.497 10,674 parishes and parochial chapelries |
|||
:*Average 3,607 acres, i.e. 5.64 square miles [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 02:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you -- that's a starting point, at least! -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 13:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::But regionally variable: |
|||
:::Considering the extremely radical gender equality policies of the Bolsheviks, I don't really think it's accurate to describe them as "remarkably sexist". Keep in mind that this was the same regime that legalized abortions in the 1920s, and even if that was reversed during Stalin, there were still opportunities for women in the Soviet Unions that weren't available in the West until well after WW II. |
|||
:::{{xt|By the early nineteenth century the north-west of England, including the expanding cities of Manchester and Liverpool, had just over 150 parishes, each of them covering an average of almost 12,000 acres, whereas the more rural east of the country had more than 1,600 parishes, each with an average size of approximately 2,000 acres.}} |
|||
:::[[User:Peter Isotalo|Peter]] <sup>[[User talk:Peter Isotalo|Isotalo]]</sup> 07:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=grdvBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT34 ''OCR A Level History: Britain 1603-1760''] |
|||
:::[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{xt|On the contrary , in England , which contains 38,500,000 statute acres, the parishes or [[Benefice|living]]s comprehend about 3,850 acres the average; and if similar allowance be made for those livings in cities and towns , perhaps about 4,000.}} |
|||
::::Peter, please forgive me for saying so, but you seem, ever so slightly, to be missing the point here. My remarks were directed at the power structure of the CPSU, to the almost complete absence of women in the higher ranks of the Party and the State, from the earliest days onwards. It is quite possible to be both progressive in theory and sexist in practice when it comes to the exercise of power. A gender equality policy at a lower level in no way militates against this argument. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 01:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fCtdAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA165 ''An Essay on the Revenues of the Church of England'' (1816) p. 165] |
|||
::::The point about urban parishes distorting the overall average is supported by [[St Ethelburga's Bishopsgate]] for instance, that had a parish of only 3 acres (or two football pitches of 110 yards by 70 yards placed side by side). [https://www.londonparishclerks.com/Parishes-Churches/Individual-Parish-Info/St-Ethelburga-Bishopsgate] [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Oh, that's great info -- ty! I can't seem to get a look at the content of the book. Does it say anything else about other regions? -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 23:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The OCR book doesn't mention other regions. I have found where the figure of 10,674 came from: [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fCtdAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA112 page 112 of the 1816 essay] has a note that {{tq|Preliminary Observations ( p . 13. and 15. ) to the Popu-lation Returns in 1811 ; where the Parishes and Parochial Chapelries are stated at 10,674 .}} The text of page 112 says that {{tq|churches are contained in be-tween 10 , and 11,000 parishes † ; and probably after a due allowance for consolidations , & c . they constitute the Churches of about 10,000 Parochial Benefices}}, so the calculation on p.165 of the 1816 essay is based on around 10,000 parishes in England (and Wales) in 1800 (38,500,000 divided by 3,850). [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 01:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::: The primary source is [https://books.google.com/books?id=6wUSAAAAYAAJ ''Abstract of the Answers and Returns Made Pursuant to an Act Passed in the Fifty-first Year of His Majesty King George III, Intituled, "An Act for Taking an Account of the Population of Great Britain, and of the Increase Or Diminution Thereof" : Preliminary Observations, Enumeration Abstract, Parish Register Abstract, 1811''] and the table of parishes by county is on page xxix. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 01:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Thank you! -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 17:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== When was the first bat mitzvah? == |
||
[[Bar and bat mitzvah]] has a short history section, all of which is about bar mitzvah. When was the first bat mitzvah? What is its history? <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 01:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Today I heard a [[Smokie Norful]] song with a title like "For All the Lord Has Done" or "For What the Lord Did". It seems to have the word "ding-a-ling" in it, and contains a reference to birds singing. What song is this? I can't find it anywhere online, even though I looked up all of Norful's albums on Amazon and googled for |
|||
:To be clear, I am more asking when the bat mitzvah ritual became part of common Jewish practice. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 01:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
"smokie norful" bird singing |
|||
:Parts from Google's translation of [[:he:בת מצווה]]: |
|||
::As early as the early 19th century, in the early days of Reform Judaism, confirmation ceremonies for boys and girls began to be held in which their knowledge of the religion was tested, similar to that practiced among Christians. It spread to the more liberal circles of German Jewry, and by the middle of the century had also begun to be widespread among the Orthodox bourgeoisie. Rabbi Jacob Etlinger of Altona was forced by the community's regulations to participate in such an event in 1867, and published the sermon he had prepared for the purpose later. He emphasized that he was obligated to do so by law, and that Judaism did not recognize that the principles of the religion should be adopted in such a public declaration, since it is binding from birth. However, as part of his attempt to stop the Reform, he supported a kind of parallel procedure that was intended to take place exclusively outside the synagogue. |
|||
::The idea of confirmation was not always met with resistance, especially with regard to girls: the chief rabbi of the Central Consistory of French Jews, Shlomo Zalman Ullmann, permitted it for both sexes in 1843. In 1844, confirmation for young Jews was held for the first time in Verona, Italy. In the 1880s, Rabbi Zvi Hermann Adler agreed to the widespread introduction of the ceremony, after it had become increasingly common in synagogues, but refused to call it 'confirmation'. In 1901, Rabbi Eliyahu Bechor, cantor in Alexandria, permitted it for both boys and girls, inspired by what was happening in Italy. Other rabbis initially ordered a more conservative event. |
|||
::At the beginning of the twentieth century, the attitude towards the bat mitzvah party was reserved, because it was sometimes an attempt to imitate symbols drawn from the confirmation ceremony, and indeed there were rabbis, such as Rabbi Aharon Volkin, who forbade the custom on the grounds of gentile laws, or who treated it with suspicion, such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, who in a 1950s recantation forbade holding an event in the synagogue because it was "a matter of authority and a mere vanity...there is no point and no basis for considering it a matter of a mitzvah and a mitzvah meal". The Haredi community also expressed strong opposition to the celebration of the bat mitzvah due to its origins in Reform circles. In 1977, Rabbi Yehuda David Bleich referred to it as one of the "current problems in halakhah", noting that only a minority among the Orthodox celebrate it and that it had spread to them from among the Conservatives. |
|||
::On the other hand, as early as the beginning of the twentieth century, rabbis began to encourage holding a Bat Mitzvah party for a daughter, similar to a party that is customary for a son, with the aim of strengthening observance of the mitzvot among Jewish women. |
|||
: --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 11:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you! Surprising how recent it is. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 21:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 18 = |
|||
as well as "smokie norful" birds sing and other variations. [[User:Wiwaxia|Wiwaxia]] ([[User talk:Wiwaxia|talk]]) 23:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Major feminist achievements prior to 18th century == |
|||
= March 8 = |
|||
What would be the most important feminist victories prior to the 18th and 19th centuries? I'm looking for specific laws or major changes (anywhere in the world), not just minor improvements in women's pursuit of equality. Something on the same scale and importantance as the women's suffrage. [[User:DuxCoverture|DuxCoverture]] ([[User talk:DuxCoverture|talk]]) 11:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Different Types of Karma in Buddhism == |
|||
:I'm not aware of any occuring without being foreseable a set of conditions such as the perspective of a minimal equal representation both in the judiciary and law enforcement. Those seem to be dependent on technological progress, maybe particularly law enforcement although the judiciary sometimes heavily relies on recording capabilities. Unfortunately [[Ancient Egypt#Social status|Ancient Egypt]] is not very explicitly illustrating the genesis of its sociological dynamics. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 16:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Before universal male suffrage became the norm in the 19th century, also male [[commoner]]s did not pull significant political weight, at least in Western society, so any feminist "victories" before then can only have been minor improvements in women's rights in general. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Changes regarding divorce, property rights of women, protections against sexual assault or men's mistreatment of women could have have been significant, right? (Though I don't know what those changes were) [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02|2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02]] ([[User talk:2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02|talk]]) 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Intolerance by D. W. Griffith == |
|||
I know that according to Buddhism, there are four types of karma (kamma is the pali term) one of which is karma that leads toward nirvana (nibbana is the pali term). But how does one produce the karma that leads toward nirvana? Is merit the same thing? What about stupa veneration or Buddha statues? It would be much apreciated if answers could be from a Theravada perspectives. And if it is at all possible, could someone lead me to some related Suttas? [[User:RBTruthSeeker|RBTruthSeeker]] ([[User talk:RBTruthSeeker|talk]]) 01:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Why did [[D. W. Griffith]] make the film [[Intolerance (film)|Intolerance]] after making the very popular and racist film [[The Birth of a Nation]]? What did he want to convey? [[Special:Contributions/174.160.82.127|174.160.82.127]] ([[User talk:174.160.82.127|talk]]) 18:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I searched for info on "four types of karma" in Buddhism and found there to be many different ways of describing karma, some of which use four types, but I couldn't figure out which system involves "karma that leads toward nirvana". Most seem to focus on the stopping of karma as leading toward nirvana. Could you be more specific about where your four karma system comes from? Some pages that may or may not be relevant: [[Jhana in Theravada]], [[Dhyāna]], [[Arūpajhāna]], and [[Four stages of enlightenment]]. Also, [http://books.google.com/books?id=ntwpx1oVvSEC this book] describes four types of karma on pages 19-20, and 8, but none seem to be specifically leading to nirvana. [[User:Pfly|Pfly]] ([[User talk:Pfly|talk]]) 06:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The lead of our article states that, in numerous interviews, Griffith made clear that the film was a rebuttal to his critics and he felt that they were, in fact, the intolerant ones. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::First of all, merit is not quite the same thing. See [[merit (Buddhism)]]. I'm surprised Plfy didn't mention our article on [[Karma in Buddhism]], although no fourfold analysis is mentioned there either. Some branches of Buddhism delight in breaking down various concepts into constituent types (mostly as an aide-memoire) and karma is no exception. Among the fourfold divisions (I've taken these from Nyanatiloka's ''Buddhist Dictionary'') are an analysis with regard to function: regenerative karma (''janaka-kamma''), supportive karma (''upatthambhaka-kamma''), counteractive karma (''upapitaka-kamma''), and destructive karma (''upaghataka-kamma''). Then there is a breakdown with regard to their result: weighty karma (''garuka-kamma''), habitual karma (''acinnaka-kamma''), death-proximate karma (''maranasanna-kamma''), and stored-up karma (''katatta-kamma''). Most of this sort of stuff is found in the commentaries rather than the suttas themselves, especially the [[Visuddhimagga]]. The only reference to nirvana I can think of in this context is that wholesome karma (''kusala-kamma'') leads to nirvana and unwholesome karma (''akusala-kamma'') does not. Both these types of karma are broken down into lists of ten (the ten precepts), which are mentioned many times in the suttas, especially in the ''Sevitabbasevitabba Sutta'' (Majjhima-Nikaya 114). For more information you might be interested in Nagapriya's ''Exploring Karma and Rebirth'' (ISBN 1-899579-61-3).--[[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Term for awkward near-similarity == |
|||
== Colonies: why did Europeans discover and colonise? == |
|||
Is there a term for the feeling produced when two things are nearly but not quite identical, and you wish they were either fully identical or clearly distinct? I think this would be reminiscent of [[Narcissism of small differences|the narcissism of small differences]], but applied to things like design or aesthetics – or like a broader application of the [[uncanny valley]] (which is specific to imitation of humans). --[[Special:Contributions/71.126.56.235|71.126.56.235]] ([[User talk:71.126.56.235|talk]]) 20:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<s>Deleted repeated of question already above.[[User:Bielle|៛ Bielle]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 01:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)</s> |
|||
:The uncanniness of the [[uncanny valley]] would be a specific subclass of this. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Re-inserted question moved here from Ref Desk. Misc.. I deleted it in error, being confused by the title. |
|||
== Yearbooks == |
|||
Why did european countries colonize and discover america, asia and africa? What gave them the advantage of developing sea faring ships and the desire where as africa for instance did nothing of the sort. Why was one more dominant than the other. 193.115.175.247 (talk) 17:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)Zionist |
|||
:There are probably as many answers as there are historians. You might find it useful to move this question to the Humanities desk. --68.144.73.245 (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Your best bet is probably to start at our Colonialism article, which discusses the concept of creating colonies and branches off into the history of colonialism as well as many other areas. It looks like a pretty solid starting point. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::For one explanation as to Europe's lead in such matters, read the book [[Guns, Germs and Steel]]. Corvus cornixtalk 19:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::And you might check out Age of Discovery to think about the specific context of Europe's deciding to go explore and take over the world at that moment. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 23:43, 7 March 2008 |
|||
Why [[yearbook]]s are often named '''after''' years that they concern? For example, a yearbook that concerns year 2024 and tells statistics about that year might be named '''2025''' Yearbook, with 2024 Yearbook instead concerning 2023? Which is the reason for that? --[[User:40bus|40bus]] ([[User talk:40bus|talk]]) 21:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
193.115, it's a fairly safe assumption Europe was aware of the existence of Africa and Asia, when [[Al-Andalus|Africans]] and [[Mongol Empire|Asians]] were in the imperial business, not the Europeans! Otherwise, as others have suggested, you should look at the [[Age of Discovery]], [[Spanish colonization of the Americas]] along with the [[History of colonialism]] and other related articles for a full answer to your question. In terms of technological advancement, military organisation, ship-building and trade Europe was beginning to develop a commanding lead over other parts of the Atlantic sea-world world by the early sixteenth century. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 04:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:It is good for marketing, a 2025 yearbook sounds more up to date than a 2024 one. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 21:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
||
:One argument may be that it is the year of publication, being the 2025 edition of whatever. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In the example of a high school yearbook, 2025 would be the year in which the 2024-2025 school year ended and the students graduated. Hence, "the Class of 2025" though the senior year started in 2024. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 23:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== European intervention: why so little, in American Civil War? == |
|||
:The purpose of a yearbook is to highlight the past year activities, for example a 2025 yearbook is to highlight the activities of 2024. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 06:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 19 = |
|||
Why wasn't there a greater European prescence in the American Civil War, given the stakes? [[User:GeeJo|GeeJo]] <sup>[[User talk:GeeJo|(t)]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/GeeJo|(c)]]</sub> <small>• 02:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:GeeJo, insofar as I understand the terms of your question, there was certainly sympathy for the [[Confederate]] cause among ruling circles in both Britain and France at the outset of the [[American Civil War]]. In October 1862, [[William Ewart Gladstone]], then Chancellor of the Exchequer, went so far as to say that "...there is no doubt that Jefferson Davis and the other leaders of the South have made an army; they are making...a navy; and they have made what is more than either, they have made a nation." It was at this time that there was a strong possibility of Britain and France joining in an offer of mediation, as you will see if you look at [[Great Britain in the American Civil War]]. However, after the Union victory at the [[Battle of Antietam]] and the subsequent [[Emancipation Proclamation]], the possibility of intervention all but vanished. Besides, France was too heavily involved in trying to prop up [[Maximilian I of Mexico|Maximilian Habsburg]] in Mexico to risk alienating Washington any further. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 04:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There's an article on that subject in the little essay-collection book "Why the North Won the Civil War" (which can often be found cheap in used bookstores in the U.S.). The briefest answer is that there was little likelihood of a strong direct European intervention without some consensus among the major European powers, which never materialized. Russia was always against it, France was usually for it, and Britain wavered according to military fluctuations and various diplomatic incidents, but never publicly committed itself to taking action as a matter of formal policy. It was probably a good thing for the Union that the first transatlantic telegraph cable had failed before the war, so that North American news was delayed several weeks before arriving in Europe. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 08:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Who is "Lady Ann Byron"? == |
|||
I've been reading some of my grandfathers genealogical research and there is one section that refers to: |
|||
"Ann (Maunder) GREGORY (1828-1903), believed to be Lady Ann Byron" |
|||
I assumed that Lady Ann Byron was famous in some way, so I did a google search, and Wikipedia check, and have come up completely empty! My grandfather died a few years ago. Can anyone shed any light on it? -- [[User:Chuq|Chuq]] <span style="font-size:90%;">[[User talk:Chuq|(talk)]]</span> 03:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There have been some people who might correspond to that name, but not to those dates. For example, Anne Isabella "Annabella" Milbanke was the wife of the poet (George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron, best known as "Lord Byron"). But her dates are 1792-1860. Anna Ismay Ethel Fitzroy (1884-1966) was the wife of Frederick Ernest Charles Byron, 10th Lord Byron. There was an Anne Molyneux whose husband was John Byron, but he died in 1625. So it's hard to say who, precisely, it was who "believed Ann Maunder Gregory to be Lady Ann Byron", or why. I'm assuming there is some romantic story of faking a death or substituting a birth to go with the supposition; you may want to have a look at [[Lady Anne Blunt]], granddaughter of the poet, whose life might have inspired such a story. Perhaps you can provide more information to go on, or someone else can suggest a likelier possibility. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 04:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I've found the sames names that you found, but as you said, the dates don't line up. The details I have are "Oliver Gregory (1825 - 24 Jan 1902) married Ann Maunder (1828 - 9 Feb 1903)." and the line above "believed to be Lady Ann Byron". They had 16 children between 1847 and 1871. I have found another source online which shows her name as Anne (but no mention of the Lady Byron). -- [[User:Chuq|Chuq]] <span style="font-size:90%;">[[User talk:Chuq|(talk)]]</span> 11:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I don't think I can be of any real help to you, but you should also tell us what country or location they were in. Your best approach is probably just to try and track down Oliver Gregory and Ann/Anne Maunder, and see if the notation about Byron makes any sense, rather than to try and track down Lady Ann Byron. You could also drop a note to the e-mail of the webmaster of the site you found them on. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 00:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Tabligh Jamaat == |
|||
I know that Tabligh Jamaat was formed in Indian Sub-continent and it is practiced by people of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh but nowadays I see people from Somalia and some Arab countries follow this. Why? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Don Mustafa|Don Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Don Mustafa|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Don Mustafa|contribs]]) 04:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:If you have a look at the article [[Tablighi Jamaat]] you'll find it's a [[Muslim]] [[missionary]] movement aiming to bring spiritual revival to the world's muslims. First founded in India it spread throughout other muslim countries in the second half of last century and has political and celebrity links though it is not considered a political movement in itself. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 06:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Mixed black/white Arab == |
|||
You know how a kid whose parent is white and the other is black is called a Mulatto, which is a Spanish term because of the Spaniards. What about the Arabic term for a kid whose parent is a white and the other is black? and I am asking this because Arab nations of Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and if possible Qatar, Bahrain, Oman and Yemen, have not only the white population, but also have the black population. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Don Mustafa|Don Mustafa]] ([[User talk:Don Mustafa|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Don Mustafa|contribs]]) 04:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I don't know the Arab term for that, but there's the "[[Mixed race]]" article with lots of links here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_race#Types_of_mixed-race_people] you might like to scan for yourself. This link [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_interpretations_of_race#Race_in_Brazil] to this section of an article called [[Social interpretations of race]] that tells you about mulatto. There's another article [[Moors]] that gives some Arab-African history before the words "muslim" and "Islam" came along. Hope this helps, [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 06:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::The idea of dividing people up into distinct [[race|races]] based on skin color is really unique to European and European-derived cultures. This idea had its origins in the [[Atlantic slave trade]]. In the Arab countries, slaves could come in any number of different colors and from many different ethnic backgrounds, including European. In these countries, religion and ethnicity are the key features of identity, and skin color is fairly trivial. Since the idea of race is alien to many non-European cultures, a term comparable to "mulatto" is unlikely to exist, since its basic meaning is a person whose parents are of different races. To the extent that these cultures would see any point in labeling such a person (and they might not), they might describe the person's skin color as tan or light brown, or they might say that one parent had darker skin than the other, though again, lacking the concept of race, people in these cultures might see no reason to compare the skin colors of a person's parents. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 22:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Funny fact: in Turkey, black people are colloquially called "Arabs". --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 00:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::There are a lot of Bedouins who descend from Sudanese slaves, but they aren't classified separately and they have the exact same position and rights as anyone else. [[User:AllenHansen|AllenHansen]] ([[User talk:AllenHansen|talk]]) 07:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Structure of Roman Army == |
|||
Looking at [[Roman army]], I see: 8 soldiers = 1 contubernium, 10 contubernium (contubernia/contuberniae?) = 1 century; X centuries = 1 maniple; Either 10 or 6 contubernium = 1 cohort; 10 cohorts (1*10 + 9*6 centuries) = 1 legion. So How big is a maniple and what place does it have in the structure since it appears bypassed between centuries and cohorts. -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 06:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Where have all the legionnaires gone just when you need them? Never mind, try this article: [[Maniple (military unit)]] and get back to us if there's more to it. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 09:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The maniple continued to exist after the Marian reforms. It was a pair of (on paper) 80 or 100 man centuries. There is some reason to suppose that these pairings were permanent. In the first cohort of a legion at least, each maniple had its own commander, an officer called an ''ordinarius'', of whom there were five, one for each pair of centuries. How long this state of affairs continued is unknown to me. |
|||
:[[Vegetius]] has ''ordinarii'' in his description of a legion, coming immediately after the commander in his list, but from Caesar to Vegetius is four centuries and words do change in meaning. You should bear in mind that paper figures for the strength of military forces are rarely a reliable guide to their actual strength. For the Roman army, where soldiers were always detached to guard governors and tax collectors and imperial this-and-that and to serve as messengers and who knows what else, it is very unlikely that units were ever anywhere close to their paper strength when they marched out of the gate on campaign. The word legion covers Roman formations over 1000 years I suppose. What little evidence there is for the strength of legions - Egyptian papyri of around 300AD which give monetary values for the payrolls of ''Legio II Traiana'' and ''Legio III Diocletiana'' - suggest legions of around 1000 men, but this probably not something that should be applied to significantly earlier dates. |
|||
:Southern & Dixon's ''The Late Roman Army'' doesn't really go into much depth on internal organisation, although that's largely because not much is known. Webster's ''The Roman Imperial Army'' does, or so I recall. [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]] [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] 02:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Of Human Bondage == |
|||
I've not long finished Of Human Bondage, Somerset Maugham's masterpiece. What I would like to know is how likely it is that a person of talent and education could fall in love with a social and intellectual inferior, a love that comes close to destroying him, the central theme of the novel? Has this happened in real life? What I mean is has any leading English writer even been in the same position as the fictitious Philip Carey? [[User:Balzac's Ghost|Balzac's Ghost]] ([[User talk:Balzac's Ghost|talk]]) 08:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Welcome to the refdesk Balzac's Ghost – [[William Somerset Maugham|Maugham]]'s own life must have some of this content since the book was based on his personal experiences, for example Philip's club foot is analolgous to Maugham's stutter. Being passed around the family, being shunned, studying medicine, being happiest in Europe were all very real material of his own life. I can't think of another writer off the top of my head, but if you're interested in the interpersonal dynamics of the novel, you could look at [[martyr complex]], [[codependence]], issues of control in unequal relationships and some aspects of the master-slave dialectic in [[Karl Marx|Marxist]] terms, maybe? [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 09:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::How likely is it that someone of education and talent falls in love with a social inferior? Happens every day. (It used to happen much more, when men had a quasi-monopoly on the professions. Doctors fell for nurses, if not waitresses. Now doctors marry doctors.) Some people are nearly destroyed by by the love affair, some live happily ever after. How likely is it that someone fall in love with their intellectual inferior? See [[lust]]. [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 10:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Hey, Bbabe, and all the while I thought it was [[Machiavellianism|manipulation]]. Silly me. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 11:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:A literary example I can think of is [[William Henry Davies]]. From reading his later autobiography, which was kept unplublished before his wife died, he (as far as I recall from reading it) was over fifty and disabled when he married a young woman in her twenties who he had picked up in the street - so I suppose she was a prostitute. A non-literary example is the brief marriage of the elderly billionaire and the former stripper - I forget the names. I've noticed in American films how common it is to have a wrinkly old man with a beautiful young wife - but perhaps that happens for real in US culture? [[Special:Contributions/80.0.101.168|80.0.101.168]] ([[User talk:80.0.101.168|talk]]) 14:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Sure - [[Anna Nicole Smith]]. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 14:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't think the extreme age difference is all that common but the more minor age difference—guy in his 50s, woman in her 30s—is quite common, and the trope of that is being played to extremes in the films to connote all sorts of moral or humorous issues. Note though that the reversal of genders in such a situation is almost unheard of (though it does exist). --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.18.109|98.217.18.109]] ([[User talk:98.217.18.109|talk]]) 19:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
What man cares about the brains of a woman?[[User:Mr.K.|Mr.K.]] [[User_talk:Mr.K.|(talk)]] 14:36, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:What woman cares about the brains of a man? [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 17:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Depends if they taste of chocolate or not. [[User:Nanonic|Nanonic]] ([[User talk:Nanonic|talk]]) 17:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I do! [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 02:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I suppose the relationship between [[James Joyce]] and [[Nora Barnacle]] is worth mentioning here. That, at least, was positive for both, unlike the story of poor [[George Gissing]], a talented, though now sadly neglected English writer, whose novel ''The Odd Women'' was considered by George Orwell to be one of the best in the English language. Poor Gissing had not one but two disastrous relationships! |
|||
In some ways his story resembles that of Maugham's Philip Cary, though his experience was far, far worse. When he was still a student he had the misfortune to fall in love with Nell Harrison, a woman he met in a Manchester brothel. In pursuit of his infatuation, he stole books and money from his fellow students to feed Nell's taste for booze as well as for her treatment for syphilis. He was finally caught and sentenced to a month's imprisonment with hard labour. This was the same kind of treadmill treatment that [[Oscar Wilde]] received at Reading Jail, which meant climbing the equivalent of 10,000 feet a day! |
|||
After his release, and a temporary exile in the United States, he returned to England and married Nell, syphilitic as she was. Of course it could not last. But even after they separated Gissing continued to send her money, supporting no less than fifteen members of her family at one point from his tiny income. Yet having rid himself of Nell he immediately picked up one Edith Underwood. No syphilis this time; Edith was just mad! Violent and unstable, she made life hell for George, as he did for her. After they separated she spent the last fifteen years of her life in a mental asylum. |
|||
With a life like this you may not be surprised to learn that much of Gissing's ''oeuvre'' is of a gloomy nature. He blamed himself for his own unhappiness, tracing it to "my own strongly excitable temperament, operated upon by the hideous experience of low life." Yet he produced some superb novels. To Orwell's recommendation I would add ''Born in Exile'', ''The Nether World'' and, above all, ''[[New Grub Street]]'', with an autobiographical theme to match that ''[[Of Human Bondage]]''. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 02:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Thanks to all who responded here, but a particular thanks to Clio the Muse for that fascinating insight to the misfortunes of George Gissing. Twice! There surely have been some masochism here. I have now added New Grub Street to my reading list. Thanks agsin for taking such time and care over this. [[User:Balzac's Ghost|Balzac's Ghost]] ([[User talk:Balzac's Ghost|talk]]) 10:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I too enjoyed ''New Grub Street'' and ''The Odd Women'' and would recommend them to people who are comfortable with [[Victorian literature]]. However, in response to the original question, I would highlight that although NGS is largely autobiographical, the central character, Edward Reardon, marries a woman of ''higher'' status, and the marriage breaks down because he cannot attain the literary and financial success that she thought he would. As an aside, the two writers at the centre of the novel have been re-invented as a [[BBC Radio 4]] comedy, ''[[Ed Reardon's Week]]''. [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 12:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Versailles and the end of democracy == |
|||
President Wilson said that America entered the first world war to make the world safe for democracy but the end of empires in Europe did no such thing. Why did the end of the old Europe cause a rush to dictatorshiop? Was it because the Versailles treaty was grossly unjust? Was there any real solution to Europe's nationality problems? Thank you for your answers. [[User:Tommy Stout|Tommy Stout]] ([[User talk:Tommy Stout|talk]]) 12:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:As far as i remember from history class, many felt ''Versailles'' was too harsh, specifically reparations and the "war guilt" clause, where Germany had to accept full responsibility for causing the war. The German people also felt betrayed by their own government because they felt the [[Armistice with Germany (Compiègne)|armistice]] had been signed prematurely. Take a look at wikipedia's [[Treaty of Versailles]] article, specifically the [[Treaty of Versailles#Reaction to the treaty|reactions to the treaty]] section. [[User talk:Think outside the box|<i>Think outside the box</i>]] 15:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
It seems only right that, having just written about George Gissing's fictions, I should mention that he also wrote about politics and contemporary affairs. Writing before the First World War, he placed no hope in the fashionable notions of democracy, which he saw as "full of menace to all the finer hopes of civilization." What is worse when combined with militarism and nationalism "there has but to arise some Lord of Slaughter and the nations will be tearing at each other's throats." |
|||
Tommy, the problem with the Versailles settlement -and by this I mean the whole of the post-war settlement- is not so much that it was unfair, but that it created an unstable peace; a peace based on the satisfaction of some national aspirations and the frustration of others. It also, it has to be said, created tensions within the various successor nations that were simply not compatible with democracy. In place of the nationality problems in the old [[Austro-Hungarian Empire]] came the nationality problems in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Yugoslavia and Romania, in some ways even more severe that what went before. Most serious of all, it was a peace predicated on the continuing weakness of Germany and Russia, and that could not last forever. |
|||
To this mixture of instability there was the added problem of Soviet Russia, where the democratic revolution of February 1917 was effectively destroyed by the Bolshevik ''counter-revolution'' in October. And I make no apology here for using the term counter-revolution in this particular context. After the forced dismissal of the [[Russian Constituent Assembly|Constituent Assembly]] in January 1918, the only fully democratic body in Russian history to that date, Lenin said that this "means a complete and frank liquidation of the idea of democracy by the idea of dictatorship. It will serve as a good lesson.” It certainly did, in Italy in 1922 and Germany in 1933. |
|||
Was there a solution to the nationality problem? Yes, I suppose there was, as the [[Population exchange between Greece and Turkey]] demonstrated. But can you imagine that happening across Europe, in nation after nation, across multiple frontiers? Can you imagine the upheaval and misery caused? Now go fast forward to 1945. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 02:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Clio's response, is, as usual, dead-on. I think the original questioner might have mixed up two things: The nationality issue and the fragility of democracy in interwar Europe. Czechoslovakia, which had nationality issues as big as any country post-Versailles, was a true democracy all the way up to the cusp of World War II. On the other hand, Hungary never developed a stable democracy, even though it didn't really have any nationality issues inside its borders. (There were, and still are, issues about Hungarians in other countries.) -- [[User:Mwalcoff|Mwalcoff]] ([[User talk:Mwalcoff|talk]]) 05:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Does this kind of collar have a name? == |
|||
[http://i13.ebayimg.com/06/i/000/c1/a7/fca7_1.JPG] --[[Special:Contributions/82.169.41.246|82.169.41.246]] ([[User talk:82.169.41.246|talk]]) 18:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There is nothing special about the collar. It is a standard button collar. What makes it look strange is that it is about two inches too small for the guy, so he has the top button unbuttoned. You can see from the creases radiating from the top buttoned button that it is pulled rather tight. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|™]] 19:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:In [[American English]]: buttoned-down collar. Don't know whether this is also the [[British English]] term. ''-- [[User:Deborahjay|Deborahjay]] ([[User talk:Deborahjay|talk]]) 21:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)'' |
|||
::Just looks b....y untidy to me what ever it's called!--[[User:Johnluckie|Artjo]] ([[User talk:Johnluckie|talk]]) 09:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Kainaw is right: the shirt is too small. But I'm not convinced it's a standard button-down collar, but rather a clerical tab collar like [http://cgi.ebay.com/Clergy-Shirt-Tab-Collar-Men-Dress-Shirt-BLUE-SZ-17-35_W0QQitemZ380002635034QQihZ025QQcategoryZ57991QQcmdZViewItem#ebayphotohosting this] (sorry for the ebay link, best image I could find in a quick search). In which case, the tie is wrong as well. [[User:Gwinva|Gwinva]] ([[User talk:Gwinva|talk]]) 20:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC) Actually, after another look at the first photo, I'm not sure; it's pulled so strangely it might be a standard collar. [[User:Gwinva|Gwinva]] ([[User talk:Gwinva|talk]]) 20:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::To me, the shirt seems just a tight fit on purpose. It seems to be a creative solution to a conservative standard with a definite sense of style about it, a "look". Probably a very recent development. Then again seeing it's from eBay, it could be just someone selling something they have obviously grown out of. I'm with kainaw on this one. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 21:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The teenage psycho-killer in the recent novel ''[[We Need to Talk about Kevin]]'' had a fetish for wearing tight clothes of this sort. His mother, the character writing the letters, explained this by saying he didn't want to grow up, a sort of [[Peter Pan]] complex. [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 03:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Canceling an adoption == |
|||
According to a report in the "Jerusalem Post" in July 1995, the mother of a boy born in England in the late 1950s was an English Catholic and the father a Kuwaiti Moslem, but they were not married. The mother gave the boy over to a Jewish couple for adoption, he was given the name Ian Rosenthal, and he was later converted to Judaism. At a later date he changed his name to Jonathan Bradley and went to the High Court in Britain to have his adoption overturned, but his application was not accepted. According to this newspaper article he intended to bring the case to the House of Lords and, if that failed, to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Does any user know if this case came to these Courts, or that there were any other developments in this matter? Thank you.[[User:Simonschaim|Simonschaim]] ([[User talk:Simonschaim|talk]]) 18:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:In July 1995, this case had already gone to the [[Court of Appeal of England and Wales|Court of Appeal]], where it's called 'B (A Minor)' [1995] EWCA Civ 48. It was heard by [[Thomas Bingham, Baron Bingham of Cornhill|Sir Thomas Bingham]] (then [[Master of the Rolls]], later [[Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales|Lord Chief Justice]]) and by [[Lord Justice of Appeal|Lords Justices]] Simon Brown and Swinton Thomas. Bradley was represented by the late Allan Levy [[Queen's Counsel|QC]] and lost again. In a Judgement dated 17 March 1995, all three LJJ dismissed his appeal, while expressing deep sympathy with him, and they also refused him leave to appeal to the [[Judicial functions of the House of Lords|House of Lords]]. So it seems the ''Jerusalem Post'' somehow had the story wrong, if its report dated two months later suggests that appeals were still pending. For more detail of the case, see the bailii site [http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1995/48.html here]. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 19:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Thank you. [[User:Simonschaim|Simonschaim]] ([[User talk:Simonschaim|talk]]) 13:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Change of names of religions - Mohammedan to Muslim== |
|||
In a few older books I've read, 19th C & earlier, I see Hindu spelt as Hindoo and Muslims referred to as Mohammedans/Islam as Mohammedanism, etc. I'm just wondering when we changed to the current forms & why? I don't think it could be the influence of adherents of those religions as they've got their own spellings/names in their own languages. Anyone know? [[User:AllanHainey|AllanHainey]] ([[User talk:AllanHainey|talk]]) 18:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Out of curiosity, I charted the data for occurrences of the words "Hindoo" and "Hindu" in the New York Times. "Hindoo" was preferred to "Hindu" from 1851 through the early 1880s. From around 1880 to 1984 they were both used in roughly equal frequencies though "Hindu" really started to be used more. From 1900-1910 the spelling of "Hindoo" dropped off considerably, though was still ocassionally used up through the early 1930s, though nowhere nearly as often as the spelling "Hindu", which really sky-rockets. By the 1950s the word "Hindoo" is only used in weird throw-back ways, or for the names of things like racehorses. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.18.109|98.217.18.109]] ([[User talk:98.217.18.109|talk]]) 19:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Hit "edit" for this question to see my data (below) if you want to graph it yourself. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.18.109|98.217.18.109]] ([[User talk:98.217.18.109|talk]]) 19:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- DATA : please don't modify. sorry it is so long. |
|||
hindoo hindu |
|||
1851 2 0 |
|||
1852 5 0 |
|||
1853 7 5 |
|||
1854 7 1 |
|||
1855 25 2 |
|||
1856 18 0 |
|||
1857 25 0 |
|||
1858 6 2 |
|||
1859 0 1 |
|||
1860 14 3 |
|||
1861 2 0 |
|||
1862 3 1 |
|||
1863 5 0 |
|||
1864 3 1 |
|||
1865 5 0 |
|||
1866 5 2 |
|||
1867 4 2 |
|||
1868 7 3 |
|||
1869 4 3 |
|||
1870 11 3 |
|||
1871 14 3 |
|||
1872 14 2 |
|||
1873 16 6 |
|||
1874 13 2 |
|||
1875 10 5 |
|||
1876 25 7 |
|||
1877 16 4 |
|||
1878 40 4 |
|||
1879 25 17 |
|||
1880 32 43 |
|||
1881 53 43 |
|||
1882 18 51 |
|||
1883 4 36 |
|||
1884 6 35 |
|||
1885 7 27 |
|||
1886 14 33 |
|||
1887 43 29 |
|||
1888 39 34 |
|||
1889 46 25 |
|||
1890 13 38 |
|||
1891 8 42 |
|||
1892 29 38 |
|||
1893 38 53 |
|||
1894 48 55 |
|||
1895 9 56 |
|||
1896 11 33 |
|||
1897 21 34 |
|||
1898 19 39 |
|||
1899 24 42 |
|||
1900 24 46 |
|||
1901 24 45 |
|||
1902 22 39 |
|||
1903 22 49 |
|||
1904 10 31 |
|||
1905 22 39 |
|||
1906 12 39 |
|||
1907 3 43 |
|||
1908 1 55 |
|||
1909 8 44 |
|||
1910 13 58 |
|||
1911 12 54 |
|||
1912 8 42 |
|||
1913 5 41 |
|||
1914 9 52 |
|||
1915 3 32 |
|||
1916 3 47 |
|||
1917 6 43 |
|||
1918 6 38 |
|||
1919 5 39 |
|||
1920 10 42 |
|||
1921 16 59 |
|||
1922 14 82 |
|||
1923 17 84 |
|||
1924 11 92 |
|||
1925 8 98 |
|||
1926 5 138 |
|||
1927 6 99 |
|||
1928 7 176 |
|||
1929 9 124 |
|||
1930 5 274 |
|||
1931 6 260 |
|||
1932 7 195 |
|||
1933 2 115 |
|||
1934 3 78 |
|||
1935 4 100 |
|||
1936 2 68 |
|||
1937 5 123 |
|||
1938 4 93 |
|||
1939 7 106 |
|||
1940 3 77 |
|||
1941 1 66 |
|||
1942 0 194 |
|||
1943 0 100 |
|||
1944 2 56 |
|||
1945 1 79 |
|||
1946 1 308 |
|||
1947 1 413 |
|||
1948 0 270 |
|||
1949 1 105 |
|||
1950 2 213 |
|||
1951 1 141 |
|||
1952 0 130 |
|||
1953 0 128 |
|||
1954 0 126 |
|||
1955 0 125 |
|||
1956 0 136 |
|||
1957 1 135 |
|||
1958 1 92 |
|||
1959 0 110 |
|||
1960 1 126 |
|||
1961 0 125 |
|||
1962 1 136 |
|||
1963 0 101 |
|||
1964 1 188 |
|||
1965 1 120 |
|||
1966 20 138 |
|||
1967 2 177 |
|||
1968 2 91 |
|||
1969 1 93 |
|||
1970 1 96 |
|||
1971 0 144 |
|||
1972 2 101 |
|||
1973 0 152 |
|||
1974 0 132 |
|||
1975 2 124 |
|||
1976 0 79 |
|||
1977 1 120 |
|||
1978 0 85 |
|||
1979 0 115 |
|||
1980 0 108 |
|||
1981 1 81 |
|||
1982 1 93 |
|||
1983 0 116 |
|||
1984 2 232 |
|||
1985 0 145 |
|||
1986 2 166 |
|||
1987 1 165 |
|||
1988 0 149 |
|||
1989 2 162 |
|||
1990 3 233 |
|||
1991 0 148 |
|||
1992 0 132 |
|||
1993 0 192 |
|||
1994 0 115 |
|||
1995 0 141 |
|||
1996 0 202 |
|||
1997 0 174 |
|||
1998 0 290 |
|||
1999 1 280 |
|||
2000 0 218 |
|||
2001 0 284 |
|||
2002 0 347 |
|||
2003 0 228 |
|||
2004 0 213 |
|||
2005 0 198 |
|||
2006 0 243 |
|||
2007 2 236 |
|||
--> |
|||
::"Hindu/Hindoo" is simply a case of [[transliteration]]. The change of spelling does not indicate a change of name. "Mohammedanism" is rather a more interesting case. That word fell out of favour -- I don't know when or how -- for the very good reason that it grossly misrepresents the religion. [[Mohammed]] was of course the prophet who brought the message to the people, and various spellings/transliterations of his name have been used in English over the centuries. But the religion does not worship him, and it is offensive to its followers to suggest that they do. The word "Islam" is a reasonable written approximation of the [[Arabic]] word, rendered into the English writing system. The [[etymology]] of "[[Islam]]" means "to submit", and those who do are now known as "Muslims", but again other spellings have been used -- still, sometimes, "Moslems", and more anciently "Mosselman" and its variants. [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 20:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I always thought that was odd, that Muslims should find "Mohammedan" offensive: Baptists don't worship John the Baptist, Calvinists don't worship Calvin, and Lutherans don't worship Martin Luther, so how does the term "Mohammedan" imply that Muslims worship Mohammed? In all these cases, the religion is simply named after its founder. If Christians don't understand that the position of Mohammed in Islam isn't equivalent to the position of Jesus in Christianity, that has nothing to do with the name that is used. [[User:Kwamikagami|— kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 21:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Offence about religious matters is quite subjective, and mercurial, and is more often than not learned, not innate. A Muslim who had never been told that "Mohammedism" is considered offensive to Muslims, would be unlikely to be personally offended by it. Same goes for swear words; if someone called you a "c**t", and you'd never heard that word before, you might think they were complimenting you, and thank them. Once, it was perfectly acceptable and not considered demeaning in any way to refer to an African-American as a "negro". Now, that's not so - not because the word is inherently offensive, because no words fall into that category, but because of the negative connotations that came to be placed on it. The thing with "Mohammedanism" is that the word was invented by non-Muslims, so even though there may have been no intent to offend, and even though it seems quite reasonable and useful to outsiders when they juxtapose it with words like Buddhism, Christianity, Calvinism etc, Muslims are within their rights in asking that it not be used, just as African-Americans are within their rights to do the same with "negro" and other words now considered pejorative in meaning, if not necessarily in intent. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 00:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::There's actually an Arabic adjective محمدي ''muħammadī'', but it means "pertaining to Muhammad", and is not a synonym for Muslim. However, in the past the abstract noun form المحمدية ''al-muħammadiyya'' was occasionally used to refer to the entire Islamic community, and the related word أحمدي ''aħmadī'' (derived from the same [[triliteral|root]]) could be used to mean "Islamic" (and still is in certain specific phrases)... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 10:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::In their rights, of course. I wasn't saying they weren't, just thought it was an odd thing to get offended about. "Negro" is different - that was contaminated by racism. I've never heard of anyone using "Mohammedan" as a slur, though I suppose it may have happened. (I mean, I've heard "they" used as a slur, but hey, that's America.) [[User:Kwamikagami|— kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 06:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== MP3 law question == |
|||
If I buy a CD, and lose it or it gets corrupted, is it legal for me to download the mp3's off a file sharing service in the United States? I certainly believe it's ethical. Similarly, if I pay the standard fee for a music file, and it comes in a given format, is it legal to convert it to another format? My example, for the second sentence, was that I bought several files from Yahoo music for 79 cents each, and they came in protected wma, but I hated protected media, so I circumvented it by burning it to a CD then ripping it to mp3. [[User:The Evil Spartan|The Evil Spartan]] ([[User talk:The Evil Spartan|talk]]) 18:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Legal issues for replacing a CD: according to the RIAA, it is never legal. The courts haven't tested it out, though — it might be [[fair use]], though I doubt it. Ethical issues: If you lose or break a CD you are not entitled to a new copy for free any more than you are to a new computer if you lose or break it. If it is a manufacturer's error, then that might be different, but just because you bought something once doesn't mean you're entitled to get another one for free. The only reason you see a difference is because you are assuming there is no lost property in creating a digital version (versus the materials needed for a computer), but that's because you're not putting any value on the intellectual property in this context. I don't think it really has much ethical footing. |
|||
:Legal issues for converting between files: it probably has to do with whether or not the [[EULA]] is enforceable. Read our EULA article and you'll see that sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't. Ethical issues for converting: depends on whether you value the rights of the producer or the rights of the consumer more. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.18.109|98.217.18.109]] ([[User talk:98.217.18.109|talk]]) 19:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Khmer rouge == |
|||
was precedent in khmer rouge empyting Phmom Penn? why and had happened before? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.148.38.138|86.148.38.138]] ([[User talk:86.148.38.138|talk]]) 18:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Yes, there was. In 1971 [[Pol Pot]] expressed concerns at meeting of [[Angkar]]'s Central Committee that the towns in the 'liberated zones’ were reverting to their bad old ways. Two years later he wrote that the only way to deal with the problem was to send townspeople to work in the fields. Otherwise, "if the result of so many sacrifices was that capitalists remain in control, what was the point of the revolution?" [[Kratié]] was evacuated in 1973. Not long after 15,000 people were effectively kidnapped from [[Kampong Cham (city)|Kampong Cham]], and driven to the 'liberated zones'. [[Oudong]] was similarly evacuated in March 1974, a year before the much larger operation in Phnom Penn. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Daeg Faerch]] == |
|||
There's been long-term edit warring over when this child actor was born, and no references for how his name is pronounced. Neither is particularly important, but I thought someone here might know. Thanks, [[User:Kwamikagami|— kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 20:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I believe Færch is a [[Denmark|Danish]] name. The problem with Danish is that (as with English) its spelling seems to lag behind its pronunciation, so we need a Dane to tell us more. Dæg is the [[Old English]] for 'day', and I believe it means something like 'dark' in the Irish language. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 18:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Saladin's wife == |
|||
The [[Saladin]] article mentions that in the year Saladin marched to [[Damascus]] to claim the throne from [[Nur ad-Din]] (Nureddin), he married Nureddin's widow as a sign of respect. Who was she? It says on Nureddin's page that he married the daughter of [[Imad ad-Din Unur]], but it doesn't list Unur's issue. Who was Saladin's wife? I am writing a book in which Saladin is one of the characters, and I would like to know for that reason.--[[User:Scott Greenstone|Scott Greenstone]] ([[User talk:Scott Greenstone|talk]]) 22:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I believe his wife was called Ismat al-Din. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Yup, that's her name - `Ismat ad-Din Khatun, or at least that was her title, since it means "Lady Purity-of-the-Faith". Her father's name was [[Mu'in ad-Din Unur]] (not Imad), and she married Nur ad-Din when the two allied in 1147. Saladin married her in 1176, and she died in 1186; even though it was a politically convenient marriage and she may have been somewhat older than Saladin, they were apparently close, as Saladin continued to write letters to her everyday, and when she died in January 1186, his retinue was afraid to tell him until March. She wasn't his only wife though; as Lyons and Jackson's biography of Saladin says, "apart from references to Nur al-Din's widow `Ismat al-Din Khatun...there are almost no details to be found about his wives or the slave girls who bore him children..." (pg. 135). [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 06:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::(Only somewhat [[tongue in cheek]]): "He wrote to her everyday." Did she ever write back? Did he notice when the letters stopped coming? Or did his courtiers make up some excuses, like the server's down, the [[Pony Express]] was hijacked, the courier was eaten by wolves, etc? Why did it take him months to notice, and what did he do to the well-meaning liars who had tried to keep the truth from him?[[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 11:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::"Hey, he found out she died!" "RUN!" [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 13:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'll have to hunt around some more - the only books at hand are Lyons and Jackson, and the recent translation of Baha ad-Din, who doesn't mention this. I'll try to get to the usual sources for Saladin's life (L&J refer to Imad ad-Din al-Isfahani for example). I was looking at ibn al-Qalanisi for more about `Ismat and Nur ad-Din, but the index is pretty useless so I'll have to dig further. Perhaps an article or two will result! [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 01:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Voila - the beginnings of an article, [[Ismat ad-Din Khatun]] (al-Din works just as well, I tend to prefer the assimilated form though). I found the reference to her in Ibn al-Qalanisi, and I will have to look for Imad ad-Din al-Isfahani and Ibn al-Athir, but otherwise the references given by Lyons and Jackson are probably not going to be accessible by me. I will look at other biographies of Saladin to see what they say as well. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 09:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= March 9 = |
|||
== Architecture and Music == |
|||
This is something I've wondered for a long time. My whole life I've loved music, and yet I fail to see any connection with architecture. Many times I've read on how a well designed building can be translated into song. This whole concept seems rediculous. I mean, has anyone walked past a skyscraper, snapped thier fingers, and thought "great tune, man" ? Could someone please explain this to me? --[[User:Sam Science|Sam Science]] ([[User talk:Sam Science|talk]]) 00:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I cant find anything on Sophic or Mantic... |
|||
Be nice if someone put something in |
|||
Thx <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/157.201.186.150|157.201.186.150]] ([[User talk:157.201.186.150|talk]]) 01:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I think it was [[Goethe]] who first described architecture as “frozen music”. [[Michael Flanders]] in turn suggested that his friend [[Donald Swann]]’s music was “defrosted architecture”. :) -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 01:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Well, there's the old quote that "writing about music is like dancing about architecture"... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 02:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::You need to consider how a composer works. Speaking as a composer myself I doubt that music can actually convey extra musical ideas directly. Music does however convey the emotions and possibly the ideas of a composer very well, far better than text sometimes. Many composers cite architecture as being an inspiration to their music. [[John Adams (composer)|John Adams]] has said this for instance. Maybe it a feeling of grandeur from a gothic cathedral, maybe it’s a sense of sleek modernism in a skyscraper, or maybe it’s even a sense of history that a composer is inspired by. Finally, consider how architecture has directly influenced music compositions. In particular many [[Renaissance]] composers wrote music specifically designed to be performed in churches and cathedrals. They took into account the very long reverberation time and also the location of the one or more choirs when they wrote, thereby customizing the music for the building in which it would be heard. --[[User:S.dedalus|S.dedalus]] ([[User talk:S.dedalus|talk]]) 02:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Not just emotions and ideas, but formal elements too can be translated directly from architecture to music, and back again. Both disciplines talk about static and dynamic structure, fundament, the use of space, background, omission, detail, ornament, and so forth. [[Iannis Xenakis]], who was both an architect and a composer, published some thoughts on these translations, though they're quite academic and perhaps not directly related to your question. But yes, there are people who "see" a song in all sorts of things, including architecture, from skyscrapers to beach huts, from crowded airports to hospital waiting rooms. If [[synesthesia]] can make music elicit visual imagery, why shouldn't it be possible the other way around as well? And occasionally we do snap our fingers and think: "great tune, man!" ---[[User:Sluzzelin|Sluzzelin]] [[User talk:Sluzzelin|<small>talk</small>]] 11:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm reminded of two things [[John Ruskin]] said - "A building must do two things: it must shelter us and it must speak to us of the things we find important and need to be reminded of." And "Don't just look at buildings, watch them." That second remark plainly means that while a building is static, its appearance alone isn't the only thing about it that matters: it's also important how people move around it and experience it. Perhaps a building can have many of the qualities and effects of music, although of course the comparison is a metaphysical one. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 18:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Music and emotion == |
|||
I am a person of modest education and background who has sometimes been chagrined when persons whose opinions I respect describe popular music as being extremely simple/repetitive/unimaginative as compared to works by [[Mozart]] and company. I can see their point in terms of the virtuosity of the composition and performance, but the stuff just leaves me cold. I grew up listening to an [[NPR]] station with no shortage of classical music, but '''none''' of it can make me actually feel emotion like, say, [[Too Drunk to Fuck]] or recent [[Spencer Krug]] output or a lot of other pop music. My question: is popular music more popular than more technically masterful music for the same reason that [[Anne Rice]] outsells [[Nabokov]], or are these different situations? Thanks. |
|||
:Anyone who claims classical music is not repetitive has not actually listened to (or especially studied) classical music. I can't help but be reminded of an interview with Jimmy Page where he discusses trading riffs with David Bowie. He said that Bowie told him it must have been like that back in the classical time. Perhaps someone told Beethoven, "Hey man, I got a cool riff for you. It goes da-da-da-dum. I bet you can build a song around that." Then, I can't help but think of many Beatles songs that are far more technically masterful than Mozart. Even Metallica's Master of Puppets is more technically masterful than most classical music. So, your question is based on a fallacy. Classical music is not more technically masterful than popular music. Popular music is more popular because it is popular music. It is wasn't popular, it wouldn't be called popular music. It would be called alternative or underground or college music (or country -- oops, I shouldn't have said that!) -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|™]] 03:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Kainaw, I disagree and I hardly think [[David Bowie]] is a good reference for classical music. lol. Although some classical music is repetitive in a sense ([[theme (music)|themes]] are repeated and elaborated on), it is not repetitive in the circular way that popular music is. I’m not sure how Bowie came to that conclusion, but having analyzed numerous works of Mozart, Bach, etc. and a few pieces songs by the Beatles I can’t see any contest. In terms of harmony, rhythm, melodic development, and use of tambour even [[Edvard Grieg]] is superior. |
|||
::To answer the original question – I’m sorry to say this is one question to which you will not find an answer without some degree of musical training. A standard pop song has a repetitive [[chord]] progression such as I, IV, V, I (chords move in [[Chord progression|sequesnce]] and are labeled with [[Roman numerals]] depending on what note of the scale they start on). Compare this to even the most basic composition by Mozart which relies on a complex pattern of relationships [[Secondary dominant |between]] and [[Diatonic function |within]] [[Key (music)|keys]]. Classical music is also generally far more complex and intricate than popular music because of its musical forms such as [[Sonata form]] or [[Rondo]]. Classical music is often far more expressive and uplifting than popular music. I cannot imagine comparing [[Too Drunk to Fuck]] with the searing emotional rollercoaster ride that is Bach’s [[St Matthew Passion (Bach)|St Matthew Passion]]. How can even the any pop love song compare to the beautiful [[Winterreise]]? How can even the complexity of on of [[Frank Zappa |Frank Zappa’s]] most experimental songs compare to the intellectual genius of [[Arnold Schoenberg]]? |
|||
::Pop music is easy to absorb and requires zero thought to understand. It appeals to us on essentially a carnal level. “Classical” music requires the listener to participate. Classical music must be understood not just heard, but if you can do that the payoff is a hundred times more wonderful. If you really want to understand this question you could start by looking through [[Portal:Classical music]] and reading some of the articles featured there. Hope this helps. --[[User:S.dedalus|S.dedalus]] ([[User talk:S.dedalus|talk]]) 04:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Music evolves... I think it's simply a case of changing styles. You can't compare classical music which was composed 400 years ago to MTV's top 10 in 2008. To say either is more or less emotive is really for the listener to decide. I see both points and can totally understand each. To answer your question directly, I believe today's "general public" have come to accept things which they can enjoy instantly, and which don't require effort to do so. Like your comment about famous authors, most people would rather read a novella which takes them through a story directly, rather than read an epic classic which might require effort to actually understand and enjoy. It's basically [[instant gratificaton]]. The same applies to music. What defines technicality differs from person to person, of course, but as a fan of both the most extreme forms of metal, and the wizardry of Bach, I can state without reservation that old classical music has realms to which even the most complex modern metal compositions still aspire. I think it's blatantly untrue to say that bands such as the Beatles and Metallica produce more complex music than classical greats. Time will tell, of course, but I have my doubts that any of the music we call "popular" these days will still be listened to 1,000 years from now, whilst the great classical composers will surely live on. A personal opinion, of course. --- [[User:Soulhunter123|Soulhunter123]] ([[User talk:Soulhunter123|talk]]) 04:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I'm not quite sure what "technically masterful music" means, whether it has to do with composition or performance. But either way I am skeptical about the link between music that is technically good and music that moves you emotionally. I might even suggest that technique has almost nothing to do with emotion. [[User:Pfly|Pfly]] ([[User talk:Pfly|talk]]) 06:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I think by technically masterful the OP means [[art music]]. Perhaps there is a link because a very skilled composer can purposefully create specific emotional responses in an audience whereas an amateur or unskilled composer may be able to do the same, but he or she may rely more on luck and inspiration than skill. --[[User:S.dedalus|S.dedalus]] ([[User talk:S.dedalus|talk]]) 06:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Popular music is 'popular' because it appeals to a broad spectrum of listeners. That makes no difference on whether it is 'technically' good or 'art or 'skilled' - it can range from being some of the best music ever made to being some of the worst music ever made (though all that would be opinion). The reason it sells well is many reasons: Easily accessible, large audience of listeners/people who've heard it to market to, general human desire to be part of the 'norm' or 'mainstream' (not everybody falls into this always, but by and large) and many other reasons. Only pretentious tossers (apologies for the use of language) believe that mainstream must equate to lower quality than niche markets - it is not the case. You may prefer more niche music more (I certainly tend to) but those niche markets churn out just as much crap music as the 'pop' world does. [[User:Ny156uk|ny156uk]] ([[User talk:Ny156uk|talk]]) 14:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::A few thoughts, in random order. It's completely fallacious to relegate classical music to that written "400 years ago". I suppose there was a bit of intentional hyperbole involved in that claim, but it just perpetuates the notion that all the classical composers died out at some stage in the past, and "popular" composers are all we have left today. That is 1000% wrong. There is wonderful "classical" music being written as I speak, and there always will be. True, great music from the past is still played, listened to and enjoyed today, precisely because a significant number of people love it and want to keep on spreading the word about it. Same holds true for great literature, sculpture, architecture and painting from the past. If it's timeless, it's timeless. On the other hand, the proportion of works of art from any era that are truly timeless, compared to the totality of all works of art from that era, is small. In amongst the great works are multitudes of lesser works all the way down to utter crap, and no composer wrote only timeless pieces. One measure of the greatness of a composer is the proportion of their entire output that remains loved and played - Bach, Beethoven and Mozart wrote literally hundreds of pieces in this category, which would probably account for 30% of everything they wrote. That might sound like a low figure, but they wrote a hell of a lot, and there isn't enough time in anyone's life to get to know their entire output. Lennon and Macartney would probably score a lot higher than 30% - and they were just as much geniuses as Mozart and co were. Popular music consists, in the main, of 3-minute songs. But when it comes to classical music we're comparing apples and oranges. Mozart's works, for example, ranged from simple 2-minute songs or piano pieces, up to 4-act operas that take 3 hours to perform, and also 4-movement symphonies and concertos, chamber music of extraordinary range and variety, masses and other choral works, etc. I might love particular parts of a certain opera, but quite dislike other parts; others would have a different set of responses. Or I might love opera but despise string quartets, or vice-versa. It's tempting to lump all "classical music" into one basket, but that's as wrong-headed as lumping reggae, jazz, soul, pop, new wave, funk, dance music, and all the other "popular" genres into one basket as if they were all the same. I've played and heard Beethoven's ''Moonlight Sonata'' probably close to 1000 times; but if, in some weird Kafka-esque nightmare, I were given the choice of hearing it played 1000 times over and over, or the Beatles' "Yesterday" played 1000 times, I'd choose the latter. One's emotional reaction to music varies greatly - I might listen to a piece on one occasion and get teary; but on another occasion I'll just enjoy it, but with no emotional reaction at all. Oliver Sacks' ''[[Musicophilia]]'' has a lot to say about emotional responses to music, as do a lot of other books on the subject. There's no explanation, afaik, as to why one person is strongly attracted to "classical" music while others are magnetised by "popular" music. I will never be able to explain why Brahms's ''Alto Rhapsody'' moves me and ''Smells Like Teen Spirit'' horrifies me. We like what we like, and we can never make anyone like what they don't. Exposure is important, and parents have a duty to expose their kids to a wide range of genres of music and other forms of art, but at the end of the day, what the kids like and enjoy is what their own brains decide for them, not what their parents decide for them. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 00:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Ragging (in India, especially) == |
|||
What are the main causes of ragging in India. Can we call a person who conducts ragging as mentally sick? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kishormahabal|Kishormahabal]] ([[User talk:Kishormahabal|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kishormahabal|contribs]]) 03:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
: [[Ragging]]. --[[User:PalaceGuard008|PalaceGuard008]] ([[User_Talk:PalaceGuard008|Talk]]) 03:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Identifying classical piano piece. Please have a listen! == |
|||
Last month, I posted here to see if anyone could identify a piece of classical piano from a YouTube clip. Nobody knew it, so I'm back again and hopefully some piano fan will be able to tell us this time what it is. It sounds to me like a Michael Nyman ("The Piano") piece, but the clip is only very short, so I cannot tell. Any help is appreciated. '''View the clip here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqMMJV-ZgPQ''' --- [[User:Soulhunter123|Soulhunter123]] ([[User talk:Soulhunter123|talk]]) 04:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It may be helpful if people looked at your original posting and the responses then, Soulhunter: [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008_January_1#Trying_to_identify_classical_piano_piece_-_music_fans.2C_please_help.21_.5BSolved.5D|so here it is]]. For some reason it is marked as "solved"; but I don't think it really was, as you indicate. |
|||
:Why not email the producers of ''Frasier''? |
|||
:–<font color="blue"><sub><big><big>'''[[User_talk:Noetica |⊥]]'''</big></big></sub><sup>¡ɐɔıʇǝo</sup>N<small>oetica!</small></font><sup>[[User_talk:Noetica |T]]</sup>– 04:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:...or was that a different one? If so, please give a link to correct earlier posting, so people don't have to follow up the same false leads as they did last time. |
|||
:–<font color="blue"><sub><big><big>'''[[User_talk:Noetica |⊥]]'''</big></big></sub><sup>¡ɐɔıʇǝo</sup>N<small>oetica!</small></font><sup>[[User_talk:Noetica |T]]</sup>– 04:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::My apologies; I think I posted my last request without logging in (i.e. anonymously) so I can't actually find it now. The one you specified above is, indeed, different and was solved. To provide a quick summary, [[Philip Glass]] was suggested as the composer, but it was decided that the piece was unlikely to be his. [[Michael Nyman]] remains the top runner, but nobody could identify which piece the clip was from. I will keep looking for the old discussion. --- [[User:Soulhunter123|Soulhunter123]] ([[User talk:Soulhunter123|talk]]) 04:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The old discussion is [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008_February_22#Identifying_piece_of_classical_music_.28Michael_Nyman.2C_perhaps.3F.29|here]]. --- [[User:Soulhunter123|Soulhunter123]] ([[User talk:Soulhunter123|talk]]) 04:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Nutty Nazis?== |
|||
Why was Hitler's government so marked by people in power with huge mental health issues? Was it due to hand-picking, the leadership role model, a job-specific selection process, or just sheer political manoevering by aggressive, ambitious types with supermen complexes gathered from Nietszche as in jobs for the boys? I take it they were a product of the times, philosophies, national confidence factors etc, but why this particular imbalance when there were a few regular, idealistic, "principled" types like say, Rommel? [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 08:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I'd say you're on the right track, though perhaps ''[[Übermensch|supermen complexes]]'' would be over-egging it for most party members. On the whole, there aren't many modest and entirely rational people who go into politics, at the best of times. For Germany, the years following the [[First World War]] were the worst of times, and when the [[Nazi party]] got into government its rise was still linked with the [[Sturmabteilung|SA]] as well as the [[Schutzstaffel|SS]]. The Nazi Party always presented a theatrical or even melodramatic face to the world. On the inside, I find it hard to see a man like [[Erwin Rommel|Rommel]] getting far, even if he'd wanted to be part of the show, which is also hard to imagine. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 17:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Hi, Julia. I'm not at all sure that the Nazi leadership was in fact marked by 'mental health issues', as you have put it. Indeed, I personally would reject such a label as positively dangerous, in the sense that it would seem to offer a convenient and entirely unsatisfactory explanation for the criminal excesses of the Nazi regime. After all, mad people do mad things; don't they? Yes, it is true that Hitler might be said to have some personality disorders, but so, too, did Stalin. Most of the senior Nazi leadership-and I do not include [[Julius Streicher]] here-were surprisingly normal, with little in the way of a 'superman complex'. Some had above average intellects; people like [[Herman Göring]], [[Josef Goebbels]], [[Albert Speer]] and the 'fellow traveller' [[Hjalmar Schacht]]. Others like [[Heinrich Himmler]], [[Wilhelm Frick]] and [[Walther Funk]] were colourless mediocrities, who, but for Hitler, would almost certainly have passed through life unnoticed by History. Others, most notably [[Rudolf Hess]], were just bizarre eccentrics. |
|||
Xn4 is right in drawing attention to the historical circumstances that brought these men together, and allowed them to advance the programme they had. If they were mad then so, too, was Germany. Yes, they were all ambitious, all anxious to make an impact on the world and address what they saw as injustices inflicted on Germany. They all had principles of a kind, not principles you or I may like, but principles nonetheless. Perhaps the only one with a true 'superman complex' was Goebbels, a restlessly ambitious figure with a razor-like intellect and virtually no moral sense at all. But Goebbels was an oddity in a party that stressed an Aryan ideal. Below average height with a club-foot and a large head, he over-compensated for his perceived weaknesses by developing his skills as a publicist, a speaker and an organiser. In these particular areas he had a talent second to none. He was probably one of the few who ever read Nietzsche. |
|||
I suppose in the end you have to consider that the Nazi state was torn up by the roots, so to speak, which has allowed the kind of pathology that you have advanced. Yes, it was mad. Yes, they were mad. But just imagine if this had happened with any other state; just think what the records might reveal. What, for example, lies behind [[Donald Rumsfeld]], a man less fitted for senior office I find hard to imagine. Look also at the Soviet leadership under Stalin, little better than a collection of thugs and drunks with a [[Lavrenti Beria|sexual pervert]] thrown in for good measure. And they all emerged from an ideology that placed its greatest stress on the liberation of the human race! Politics at the best of times is an odd business, attracting odd people. We know all too well what it attracts at the worst of times. [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 01:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:To begin with, these men were both angry and capable, but not mad (in your words, "people with huge mental health issues"). Mad people need tremendous luck to organize their own success, and the leading Nazis had to make their own luck and did succeed to a large degree, both in their own careers and in taking over their country. After the [[Great War]], Germany had been treated meanly and foolishly in defeat, and in the midst of economic collapse and mass unemployment the Nazis set about harnessing the anger of the German nation to bring themselves to power. That course took them into extreme paths, and when they got into power (especially later, under war-time conditions) it corrupted them further. When Hess flew to the UK in 1941, he was closely examined and found to be suffering from mental illness and depression, but was not not found to be mad. In all the circumstances, that's hardly surprising. Hitler, surely, was mad by the end, and the killing of the Goebbels children surely shows madness, but people do crack up under such pressures. I agree with Clio that we see forms of mental illness at the top in all directions. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 05:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::That clarifies things for me, that syndromes of incapacitating mental health problems weren't the thing, but tendencies to be crazy were in the party and were aggravated under pressure. Re "principled", it was the turn of phrase meaning having some sense of responsibility to others and doing the best job they could contrasting with the cruelty and excesses of people in power - rightly the Nazis had their own principles as in a chain of reasoning, so I didn't mean to be so woolly there. It's been very helpful to have the overview, connections with will and power and politics and the background of Germany between the wars as a recipe for ensuing developments. I take it the fascism wasn't against a background of suzerainty that was Stalin's- though this isn't to make excuses for anyone abusing power in the way that these are examples (or models) of, but I couldn't see how the mad ones accumulated the way they did, so it's been helpful to think about that. I guess too that having an extremist in leadership attaches and protects others with the same um... aptitudes as himself and keeping them around him. It's disturbing to see "forms of mental illness at the top in all directions". In the end, power is about oppression to stay in place and other syndromes such as paranoia emerge in that context. It's a rich field to think about lots of things - including what a prevailing power understands by what it means to be human - and not. Thanks for your thoughtful information, both of you. Politics, anyone? [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 06:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Not mad, but severely lacking in moral judgement. [[User:AllenHansen|AllenHansen]] ([[User talk:AllenHansen|talk]]) 07:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Rumsfeld is a [[Princeton]] graduate. There is no point comparing him to the Nazis and I dont know how Clio the Muse got this information that he is the man "less fitted for office that she could imagine". Perhaps she thinks [[Churchill]] is much more of an intellectual as him. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/80.58.205.37|80.58.205.37]] ([[User talk:80.58.205.37|talk]]) 12:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
==The word “Beastorn"== |
|||
A recent question about Byzantium/Byzantine reminds me that in July <s>last year</s> of 2006, on a thread about words to do with Byzantium – see [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk_archive/Language/July_2006#Byzantium verses Byzantine and el verses El|here]] - I asked a side question about the origin of the word “Beastorn”, or even whether it’s a real word. It appeared in ''"[[Barry Jones (Australian politician)|Barry Jones]] Dictionary of World Biography"'' (Information Australia, 2nd ed., 1996), in the article on [[Charlemagne]], and the full quote is as follows: |
|||
* By 800, Charlemagne was the supreme power in western Europe, and he and his counsellors, such as the English Alcuin, wishing to emphasise an imaginary continuity between Charles his empire [sic] and that of Rome, argued that the imperial throne was vacant owing to the crimes of the '''Beastorn (Byzantine)''' empress Irene. (my emphasis) |
|||
I took the advice last year that it was probably a misprint for “Eastern”, but that's never quite sat right in my brain. The book, as I said last year, has an extremely surprising number of factual and spelling errors for a person of Jones's undoubted erudition, so it could well be just another one. However, the spelling errors (apart from transliterations of Russian names, about which he’s very inconsistent) tend to be more related to type-setting rather than those perpetrated by Jones himself, e.g. in many places where the letter l (el) belongs, the numeral 1 (one) appears. And on the back cover, there’s a blurb for the reader, signed by Barry Jones, and with his name printed under his signature. It’s spelled “Barry 0. Jones” - that’s Barry '''zero''' Jones, not Barry '''O''' (for Owen) Jones. I know this because in the body of the blurb he refers to Edna O’Brien and O.J. Simpson, both spelled correctly with an O and not a 0. There’s no way he would misspell his own name so egregiously. There was a later edition of the Dictionary in 1998, but I don't have it so I can't compare. |
|||
I remain inclined to the view that it's not a typo, and that Jones uses the word Beastorn quite deliberately, if for no other reason than that he explains, by the use of a word in brackets, what he’s referring to. If it were a typo for "Eastern", no explanation would be required, and the word "Byzantine" would not require any brackets. The first time I ever read this passage, the word sprang out at me and I '''knew''' absolutely that I’d seen it somewhere before, but I still can’t remember where or when. On Google there are precisely 3 hits for “Beastorn” – my original question from last year; a weird Spanish “grammer” [sic] site which has quoted my question without authority (what cheek!); and a rather amazing porn site named “Beastporn” (I had to open it in the interests of literary and historical research, you understand). But that's all. I seem to be in very dubious company lately. I did check with Michael Quinion last year, but he drew a complete blank. So, it seems to be just about unknown, except to Barry Jones and me (well, at least my taste in friends is improving). |
|||
OK, after that long-winded intro, I’m now casting around for anyone who can help me with the etymology of this word and its relationship to things Byzantine. Clio – if anyone knows about stuff like this, you would. Any ideas? Noetica - you’ve turned up here since those heady days – does the OED have ''anything'' to say about this melancholy and haunting word? Or anyone else? I'm depending on you. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 09:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think it's particularly unlikely that "Eastern" might be qualified by "Byzantine" in that context. I remember this discussion from before; the typo explanation still seems most reasonable. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 09:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::so what is this 'beastporn' site like? are we talking animals here or what?...:)[[User:Perry-mankster|Perry-mankster]] ([[User talk:Perry-mankster|talk]]) 14:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Not animals in the sense of non-human. More like super-human, if you get my drift. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 23:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Jack, is that really a published dictionary definition? It's positively breathless! It also makes [[Alcuin]] sound like some kind of collective or tribe! What on earth are the alleged crimes of the [[Irene (empress)|Empress Irene]]? In actual fact [[Pope Leo III]] and Charlemagne considered the imperial throne to be vacant for entirely sexist reasons. Irene was, well, a woman! Perhaps that was her chief crime?! I have no idea where 'Beastorn'-a truly ugly word-comes from. I imagine-and please forgive me for saying so-that it is a product of Mr. Jones intellectual confusion. I must have a look at this dictionary. If this is typical it must be full of laughs! |
|||
Incidentally, I did not see this first time around because the Language Desk is not among my happy hunting grounds. In reading it over I was surprised to note that the first respondent had never heard of Byzantium. I seem always to have known of its existence, dragged into consciousness from some past life perhaps! [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 01:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The real reason you didn't see it is that it was posted in July 2006, Clio, before your arrival in these hallowed environs, not last year as I incorrectly stated. The quote above is not a definition, just the full sentence in which the word appears; it's part of a considerably longer article on Charlemagne. I quoted it to provide the context in which the word Beastorn appears; I thought that might help respondents to understand what was going on. Unfortunately, the Dictionary doesn't have an article on the empress Irene, so I have no idea to which "crimes" Jones was referring. In his autobiography ''A Thinking Reed'' (2006), he goes into great detail about the genesis of this Dictionary (he started work on it in the mid 1950s!), and explains the troubles he had with publishers in earlier versions. These included various editions being published under his name, but without his knowledge, and with massive unauthorised changes and deletions made by the publishers. Apparently he wrote a stinging denunciation of the troubled history of the work in ''Private Eye''. I can't agree about the ugliness of Beastorn - it's certainly not a beautiful word, but it does evoke another place and another time - it has a really haunting quality for me, hence my lingering obsession with it. But that's just me. Thanks anyway, Clio. So, where does this leave me? Noetica, you may be my last hope. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 06:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Although [[Constantine_VI]] does not sound an ideal son, having him kidnapped and blinded might be considered an ummotherly act, or even a crime. [[User:SaundersW|SaundersW]] ([[User talk:SaundersW|talk]]) 15:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Wild Geese: "Flight of the wild geese" == |
|||
Where did the name "[[Flight of the Wild Geese]]" come from? --[[Special:Contributions/12.169.167.154|12.169.167.154]] ([[User talk:12.169.167.154|talk]]) 10:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I found nothing definite, but would have guessed that like the feathered geese, they [[Bird migration|migrated]] southward in large numbers, hoping to return one day, when the climate is warmer again. |
|||
:I did find this quote by [[Seán Ó Faoláin]]: |
|||
::"The Wild Geese come in their thousands with the October moon. They blacken the sky and they cry the coming of Autumn. Where there are low marshlands, or sloblands, they settle down, and then the cabins are cooking them with much butter or grease in the bastables all the Winter. About the estuary of the [[River Shannon|Shannon]], and all up the river into [[Limerick]], they must have whizzed and moaned, that Winter of 1691, when [[Godert de Ginkell, 1st Earl of Athlone|Ginkel]] offered the terms that ended the [[Williamite War in Ireland|Jacobite War]], and started bitter quarrels among the tired and tattered Irish. The flying Irish, down the Shannon or down the Lee with [[Patrick Sarsfield|Sarsfield]], looked up at the skies, and took the name, The Wild Geese. It was the end of a period. It was all but the end of a race." [http://www.doyle.com.au/wild_geese.htm] |
|||
:---[[User:Sluzzelin|Sluzzelin]] [[User talk:Sluzzelin|<small>talk</small>]] 10:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I found this "French ships, which came to the west coast of Ireland smuggling brandy and wine, would leave with recruits for the Irish Brigade. To hide their movements from the English, the men would be listed on the ship's manifest as 'Wild Geese,' thus the origin of the name" here[http://wildgeeserugby.com/history.htm]. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 10:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Singing: what is this "quivering" of the voice? == |
|||
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orA-x_1igSU&feature=related In this rendition of 'ne me quiite pas'], the singer's voice possesses a quality; a sort of quiver that occurs at certain points throughout - is there a name for this kind of "quivering" of the voice? --[[User:Seans Potato Business|Seans]] '''[[User talk:Seans Potato Business|Potato Business]]''' 14:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Tremolo]]. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 15:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::It sounds to me rather as though the tremolo is produced in rather than being an intrinsic quality of her voice, though. [[User:SaundersW|SaundersW]] ([[User talk:SaundersW|talk]]) 16:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, when used by skilled singers, tremolo is a musical technique rather than an accidental occurrence. It can be used to great effect when applied artistically. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 00:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::[[Vibrato]]. [[User:Malcolm XIV|Malcolm XIV]] ([[User talk:Malcolm XIV|talk]]) 14:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Vibrato is a fluctuation in pitch rather than the fluctuation in intensity of tremolo. By the way, I meant only that this particular tremolo sounded artificial, not that it is artificial in general. [[User:SaundersW|SaundersW]] ([[User talk:SaundersW|talk]]) 15:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Britain, UK, British Isles, etc. == |
|||
I have been aware on past visits to Wikipedia of the battles that flare up from time to time over the use of the term 'British Isles' as applied to the whole archipelago, including the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Thinking about the politics here I was wondering how the label 'Britain' evolved in relation to Britain itself, that part of the archipelago excluding Ireland. The Roman provance of Britannia did not include-or describe-the whole island; so how did the concept evolve after the departure of the Romans? Does any of this make sense? probably not. But I'm sure some of you guys will give me a good answer. I'm relying on you![[User:King Knut|King Knut]] ([[User talk:King Knut|talk]]) 14:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Have you looked at the very detailed [[British Isles (terminology)#Historical aspects]]? [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 14:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you for that. Yes, I have read all of that page. What I am asking about though is the evolution of a POLITICAL as opposed to a geographic concept. I am sorry I did not make this clearer. [[User:King Knut|King Knut]] ([[User talk:King Knut|talk]]) 17:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I believe the page the previous respondent referred to covers the political as well as the geographical use of the name in some detail. Additional information not in that article might include that the term [[Bretwalda]] - usually understood to mean "Lord of Britain" - was used in the Anglo-Saxon period to refer to an Anglo-Saxon ruler who had dominance over the other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. How, why, and to what extent the term was used is a matter of some debate - as the article I've linked to sets out. The term [[King of the Britons]] was sometimes used to refer specifically to Welsh princes prior to Wales' incorporation into the Kingdom of England. |
|||
:::Put simply, the island continued to be called Britain after the Romans left, and when a state emerged that occupied the whole of the island, the geographic name was adopted for that state. 02:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Britain was always both a political and a geographic concept. However, things start to get complicated after the Romans left in the fifth century. [[Bede]], for instance, obviously thinks of the Britons as a very specific group of people, under attack from both the Irish and the Picts. As he has it "...we call them races from over the waters, not because they dwelt outside Britain but because they were separated from the Britons by two wide and long arms of the sea, one of which enters the land from the east, the other from the west, thought they do not meet." The 'arms of the sea' here refer to the Firths of Clyde and Forth. |
|||
Going forward to the ninth century ''[[Historia Brittonum]]'' again we see two Britains. There is the island inhabited by the Scots, Picts, Saxons and Britons. But the author-traditionally named as [[Nennius]]-goes on to describe the thirty-three cities of Britain, none further north than [[Dumbarton]]-the fort of the Britons-on the Clyde estuary, suggesting a non-British kingdom beyond to the north. This distinction is maintained by the ''[[Anglo-Saxon Chronicle]]'', which divides the island between the Picts to the north and the Britons to the south. |
|||
By the tenth century we find [[Edward the Elder]] being described as "King of the English, raised by the right hand of the Almighty to the throne of the kingdom of all Britain." But the first who might truly be entitled to that title was [[Athelstan]], his son. |
|||
There was still at this time confusion, though over the precise terminology, as 'King of Britain' could effectively still mean dominion only over the old Roman province. The one way of getting round this might have been the style 'King of all Britain', which appears with increasing frequency in the Chronicles, or 'King of Albion’, a tenth-century neologism [[Eadwig]], for example, is described as 'king not only of the Anglo-Saxons but also truly of the whole island of Albion.' |
|||
In reading early Medieval sources it is as also as well to remember that Britain could still mean 'the land of the Britions', as opposed to England. In [[Asser]]'s ''Life of King Alfred'' it is used specifically in reference to Wales, with [[Offa's Dyke]] "the great rampart made from sea to sea between Britain and Mercia.” In is only from the twelfth century that the Britons of the west were described as being from 'Wealas', the Old English for foreigner or Celt, though the Welsh still thought of themselves as British. By the following century the Normans, abandoning the old Anglo-Saxon preoccupation with the whole island, thought of Britain as the old name for their own kingdom of England. |
|||
In his ''[[History of the Kings of Britain]]'' [[Geoffrey of Monmouth]] managed to create an elaborate and bogus genealogy, giving comfort to both the Welsh and the English in their claims to authentic Britishness! The competition between the two over historical roots found some resolution in Elizabethan times, when [[Edmund Spencer]]] celebrated in the ''[[Faerie Queene]]'' a Britain made up exclusively of England and Wales. It took a [[James I of England|northern interloper]] to bring a new and not entirely welcome expansion of this idea! [[User:Clio the Muse|Clio the Muse]] ([[User talk:Clio the Muse|talk]]) 03:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== A Dutch patriotic song == |
|||
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v8YMbB6f7k |
|||
What is the song in the movie "''[[A Bridge too Far]]''". It is also in the movie "''[[Soldaat van Oranje]]''". -- [[User:Toytoy|Toytoy]] ([[User talk:Toytoy|talk]]) 17:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It's "Oranje boven, oranje boven, leve de koningin." The best way to translate it would be something like "Up Orange, Up Orange, long live the Queen!" It's hard to translate the word "boven" correctly. Literally it means up or above, but in this context it means something along the lines of "hail ...". This song is sung to this day. [[Special:Contributions/Aecis|<font color="blue">A</font>]][[User:Aecis|<font color="green">ecis</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Aecis|Brievenbus]]</sup> 18:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::How are you going to sing this when you will be ruled by a [[Willem-Alexander, Prince of Orange|king]]? Will it scan? --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 23:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'll be very honest with you: I have no idea, since we haven't had a king since November 1890. [[Special:Contributions/Aecis|<font color="blue">A</font>]][[User:Aecis|<font color="green">ecis</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Aecis|Brievenbus]]</sup> 23:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== The estate of [[Anna Nicole Smith]] == |
|||
Who will get her money eventually, in American law, as the son she left her money to in her will is deceased? [[Special:Contributions/80.0.106.88|80.0.106.88]] ([[User talk:80.0.106.88|talk]]) 18:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I have no idea but a scan through articles such as [[probate]], [[inheritance]] and [[Uniform Probate Code]] might help you find out more. 18:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/entertainment/2004261094_eye05.html Anna Nicole Smith's daughter will inherit late mother's estate]. <font face="Arial">[[User:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:green">Corvus cornix</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:Dark Green">talk</span>]]''</sub></font> 20:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Does the daughter receive estate as a beneficiary in a testamentary clause or through intestate succession? |
|||
[[User:75Janice|75Janice]] ([[User talk:75Janice|talk]]) 22:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)75Janice[[User:75Janice|75Janice]] ([[User talk:75Janice|talk]]) 22:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Given that the article linked by <s>Corcus</s>Corvus cornix says, "A Los Angeles judge on Tuesday made 18-month-old Dannielynn Hope the sole heir and set up a trust in the girl's name", I suspect the latter. [[User:Bielle|៛ Bielle]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 00:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Close to the latter. Anna Nicole Smith didn't quite die intestate, but her will named no beneficiaries that were alive at the time of her death (she had left everything to her son Daniel, and had not revised her will following Daniel's death and Dannielynn's birth). The size of Anna Nicole's estate is not particularly large unless she wins her suit regarding the provisions of J. Howard Marshall's will, and we are faced with the prospect of a protracted legal battle between representatives of two dead people, which will be economically beneficial primarily for the lawyers involved. Ideally, a settlement would be reached between Marshall's other heirs and Dannielynn's representatives (which should be possible now that Anna Nicole is dead, and the ill-feelings between the heirs should be of lesser importance), but that would require that Dannielynn's representatives place her interests above their own. We shall see what transpires, as Howard Stern is involved. One is reminded of [[Jarndyce and Jarndyce]]. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 00:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Question regarding loan talks (germany post war) == |
|||
Some background: |
|||
The best research on the Morgenthau plan I've found so-far is this paper: |
|||
Frederick H. Gareau [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-4078%28196106%2914%3A2%3C517%3AMPFIDI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X&size=LARGE "''Morgenthau's Plan for Industrial Disarmament in Germany''"] The Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 2 (Jun., 1961), pp. 517–534 |
|||
Here Gareau explains how the plan was longterm policy, it won the day at the Potsdam conference thanks to the political bent of the U.S. delegation, and then gradually was watered out, although its effects on Germany lasted well into the 50's. |
|||
There were two main turning points, one was the September 1946 speech which most reputable historians have rightly labeled as the primary turning point, see also [[John Gimbel]] [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0032-3195%28197206%2987%3A2%3C242%3AOTIOTP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-9 "''On the Implementation of the Potsdam Agreement: An Essay on U.S. Postwar German Policy"''] Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 87, No. 2. (Jun., 1972), pp. 242-269. |
|||
The second '''main''' turning point was Hoovers March 1947 report where he candidly stated "There is the illusion that the New Germany left after the annexations can be reduced to a 'pastoral state'. It can not be done unless we exterminate or move 25,000,000 people out of it.", as for example [http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2008/webarticles/080103_marshallplan.html used here]. This report in a convoluted way led to the U.S. occupation directive being rescinded. |
|||
I found [http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/releases/2006/march/policy_germany.htm this paper], released in 2006 on the UK government secret discussions from 21 October 1946, where they pretty much prove that the historians who saw the Byrnes speech as one of the pivotal point were right. I.e. |
|||
"b) U.S. policy was pastoralising (Morgenthan) until Stuttgart speech. They supported R. & Fr. case - to point of reducing steel prodn to 5.8 m. tons. And during Loan talks, cdn´t oppose them too strongly." |
|||
"...They forced us to 5.8 m. - but all experience has shown we were right on APW Cttee in our figure of 11 m. " |
|||
"Before this was completed I had seen Byrnes (before Stuttgart speech) & asked wtr. this meant he wd. overthrow Morgenthau policy. He said yes - with Truman´s authy." |
|||
What buggs me is that I would like to know more about the "And during Loan talks, cdn´t oppose them too strongly." Which loans was it that the U.S. so strongly opposed? Any ideas on this? i presume they were some sort of reconstruction loans for Germany that the Morgenthauers in the U.S. administration wanted no part of? Regards--[[User:Stor stark7|Stor stark7]] <sup>[[User_talk:Stor stark7|Talk]]</sup> 22:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:EB ([[Ernest Bevin]]) is talking about the [[Anglo-American loan]] - the UK economy had a very large dollar deficit, not all of it home-grown, and a desperate need of dollar-denominated credits - which had been agreed in December 1945. It wasn't the US that "cdn´t oppose", it was EB who couldn't oppose US plans to deindustrialise Germany until ''after'' the loan was agreed. [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]] [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] 00:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Okey, thanks a lot for clearing that up for me. Although I have to say that from EB's [http://www.ena.lu?lang=2&doc=16822 1949 letter to Schuman] he does not seem very opposed to de-industrialisation per see.--[[User:Stor stark7|Stor stark7]] <sup>[[User_talk:Stor stark7|Talk]]</sup> 01:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::"I must tell you frankly that the continuation of dismantling is causing great disquiet among the Labour Party here and is becoming more and more unpopular in Parliament." [I am opposed] "In my view we cannot afford to wait until our whole dismantling policy falls about our ears ... ." [So we should stop now] |
|||
:::The Americans got the scenery, the Russians got the agriculture and the British got the (heavy) industry. The day-to-day priority of the British administration was to keep steel and coal and finished goods flowing out of the British zone and food flowing in. But dismantling didn't help with that. |
|||
:::"[A]s long as [the dismantling issue] remained unsettled it was the British who had to bear the brunt of German resentment and American criticism." [Bullock, ''Ernest Bevin: A Biography'', p. 671] Had conditions been different, food could have been imported from the Sterling bloc, but in 1945-1947 feeding Germans meant spending dollars and we've already seen that dollars were one thing the British did not have. The short version is that Alled post-war policy in Germany was made everywhere but London. "England is so weak she must follow our leadership. She will do anything that we insist upon ..." said [[W. Averell Harriman]]. And he was right. [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]] [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] 02:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Discographies: Alberto Ginastera's "Danzas Argentinas" == |
|||
Hi, I'm trying to compile a discography of Alberto Ginastera's "Danzas Argentinas" but have not had any luck. I've tried online databases, but they have results that are outdated, and therefore inaccurate. I was wondering if you could help point me in the right direction, or know of any sites that would help (that I haven't been able to find yet). Thanks! <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/216.165.95.5|216.165.95.5]] ([[User talk:216.165.95.5|talk]]) 23:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Hm... Surely you have already checked [[Danzas_Argentinas|this article]]. I guess [http://www.classiccat.net/ginastera_a/2.htm this link] and [http://www.di-arezzo.es/detail_notice.php?no_article=DURAN02953 this other one] are not of much help. Maybe you want to try posting your query on the [[WP:RD/E|Entertainment Desk]], where such kinds of search usually receive helpful treatment. [[User:Pallida_Mors_76|<span style="background:#000;border:#c3c0bf;color: #fff;border:1px solid #999">Pallida </span>]][[User talk:Pallida_Mors_76|<span style="background:#fff;border:#c3c0bf;color:#000;border:1px solid #999"> Mors</span>]] 02:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= March 10 = |
|||
== Artificial Competition == |
|||
Is there an example (from past or present...NO FUTURE PLEASE) of a Parent Company manufacturing two different but similar products for the purpose of creating the illusion of competition? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.128.192.184|24.128.192.184]] ([[User talk:24.128.192.184|talk]]) 00:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:[[Procter & Gamble]] produce detergents and haircare products under many different brands. Another classic example is the car industry, where multiple marques are owned by one parent company and vehicles are [[badge engineered]]; for example, in the US market GM produces the all-but-indistinguishable [[Chevrolet Trailblazer]], [[Oldsmobile Bravada]], [[GMC Envoy]], [[Isuzu Ascender]], [[Buick Rainier]] and [[Saab 9-7X]]. Whether the goal is to "create the illusion of competition" is debatable; more often, it's because one company has bought out another, and fears losing market share if they retire one of the brands. [[User:FiggyBee|FiggyBee]] ([[User talk:FiggyBee|talk]]) 01:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::When I worked for Sony, the professional equipment was sold at a high price with a Sony brand on it. The same internal equipment was placed in a drabber looking case and branded either National or Panasonic and sold at a lower price. As such, I performed the same repairs/maintenance on Sony and Panasonic equiment - often switching parts between the two brands. I can only assume the reasoning is that some people will buy Sony because of brand loyalty, but others will pay 1/3 the price to Panasonic because they think it is a great deal over the Sony model. Wish they'd do that with the PS3. I'd be more than happy to buy a Panasonic FunStation3. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|™]] 16:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== People Who Were Important in Establishing Bilingual Education Programs in the United States == |
|||
I need to know about three or four people who were important in establishing bilingual education programs in the United States. |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/99.135.154.196|99.135.154.196]] ([[User talk:99.135.154.196|talk]]) 04:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I suggest you look on the website of, or contact directly, the professional organisation known as [[TESOL Inc.]]. [[User:BrainyBabe|BrainyBabe]] ([[User talk:BrainyBabe|talk]]) 15:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Battle of Chancellorsville == |
|||
I read about the battle of Chancellorsville as a result of an interesting discussion here about nineteenth century battles. General Hooker lost this battle but what I would like to know is could he have won the campaign if he had pressed the attack as General Mead wanted? I know this may call for a lot of speculation, but I still think it worthwhile. Also I am amazed in considering these civil war battles more generally just how fantastically high the casualty rates were. Figures like this today would cause national outrage. Was there a reason for such high battle casualties, apart from clumsiness by the opposing commanders? [[Special:Contributions/217.43.8.37|217.43.8.37]] ([[User talk:217.43.8.37|talk]]) 08:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Casualties of that time were particularly high for a number of reasons. I would note particularly the primitive [[battlefield medicine]] of the time, as [http://www.civilwarhome.com/civilwarmedicine.htm medical-related casualties were fearful]. Additionally, the war coincided with major advances in infantry weapons -- the [http://www.civilwarhome.com/civilwarweapons.htm rifled musket] and, to a lesser extent, the [[Sharps rifle|breech-loader]]. It took quite some time for tactics to catch up to the realities of the battlefield, much as with [[World War I]] and the [[machine gun]]. — [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 15:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== 2008 US presidential Campiagn == |
|||
Sirs, I am compiling a dossier on the present American presidential campaign, press cuttings, magazine articles and the like. At the moment I am looking for amusing comments on any of the main candidates that have appeared in the form of letters to the press. Any help here would be greatly appreciated. [[User:Ward Jason|Ward Jason]] ([[User talk:Ward Jason|talk]]) 09:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== The Confederate Emancipation Proclaimation == |
|||
In late 1864, Davis authorized an envoy, [[Duncan Kenner]] to go to France and GB and offer emancipation for intervention, sacrificing slavery for independence. The war was fought to preserve slavery. So why would the Confederates strike such a dumb bargain? |
|||
Lotsofissues 11:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't know the period, but surely the fact that the confederates were obviously losing the war is relevant? [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 15:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The war was not about slavery, it was, from the Confederate point of view, about [[states' rights]]. <font face="Arial">[[User:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:green">Corvus cornix</span>]]<sub>''[[User talk:Corvus cornix|<span style="color:Dark Green">talk</span>]]''</sub></font> 16:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Corvus is right. Even the Union fought more for preservation of the Union than for slavery. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 16:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The slavery issue with the Civil War is a product of revisionist history. In my history book when I was in grade school, it stated clearly that Lincoln demanded that all slaves be freed and the South revolted and immediately went to war with the North. There is no truth in that at all, but it is what was taught to every student who used the same text book. The goal is to rewrite history by repeatedly telling each generation the same thing until anyone who states what actually happened is deemed an idiot. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|™]] 16:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Well the article [[Origins of the American Civil War]] shows that the reasons were much more complex than that. However, I think that the issue of slavery became the apple of discord/bone of contention before the civil war. Someone of the north would attack slavery passionately and someone of the south would defend his right to enslave blacks with tooth and claws. After the war there was trend to focus upon pre-war slavery by part of Northern historians and academics and upon states rights by part of their Southern counterparts. I particularly like this statement inside the article [[Lost Cause]]: "Stampp also mentioned Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens' A Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States as an example of a Southern leader who said that slavery was the "cornerstone of the Confederacy" '''when the war began''' and then said that the war was not about slavery but states' rights '''after Southern defeat'''. [[User:Flamarande|Flamarande]] ([[User talk:Flamarande|talk]]) 17:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Naming babies after dead siblings == |
|||
It seems to have been usual in nineteenth-century England, at least, for a family to keep giving each newborn a certain name until one lived. For instance, if a Molly Smith died at age three, the next girl born to her parents would often be named Molly. Is there a name for this practice, and is it codified or sanctioned anywhere, such as in the Bible or in tradition or in imitation of blueblood practice? In other words, is there some reason for it beyond the obvious reasons that come to mind? --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 11:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There was a practice of letting land with the lease to run for the length of the lifetimes of persons named in the lease (which seems to be related to [http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Pur+autre+vie pur autre vie]). I have found [http://www.originsnetwork.com/help/helpio-griffiths.htm this] in relation to the practice in Ireland. ''Lease: |
|||
The frequent term of a lease was 21 or 31 years, known as a 'lease of years'. Alternatively land was leased for the life time of named individuals otherwise known as a 'lease of lives', eg. typically there were three named lives, including the tenant, his son and another named individual. The lease and rent agreement remained in force until the death of all three named persons. Some of the more prosperous tenants secured the right to get renewable leases for ever, or leases for several hundred years, which were essentially freehold in all but name. However over 80% of all tenancies in the mid nineteenth century were annually set, with no security and no formal lease. '' |
|||
:The naming of several children with the same name was sometimes related to this type of lease, since only the name of the son, and the fact of his relationship was given, not the date of birth. I read this in the notes on a novel, and sadly can't remember which, so sorry, no ref. [[User:SaundersW|SaundersW]] ([[User talk:SaundersW|talk]]) 12:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::In the case of [[Salvador Dali]], his parents told him he was the reincarnation of his dead brother Salvador, who died 9 months before he was born. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 12:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Lorna Doone == |
|||
I'm reading Lorna Doone and there are some things I just can't get. Who are the men of Gotham (page 116)? What was the dispute between court and city mentioned on page 186 and what is the great conspiracy mentioned on page 187? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Myra McCartney|Myra McCartney]] ([[User talk:Myra McCartney|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Myra McCartney|contribs]]) 13:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Don't have the book handy at the moment, but assume that he's referring to the legendary [[Fools of Gotham]] and the royal-parliamentarian tensions that led to the [[English Civil War]]... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 14:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::It's on wikisource. The dispute is in 1683, so it's not civil war-related. The conspiracy is the [[Rye House Plot]]. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 14:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::[http://www.bbc.co.uk/legacies/myths_legends/england/nottingham/article_1.shtml Here] is a BBC account of the [[Wise men of Gotham]] and their adventures with King John. The great dispute is explained in that paragraph: the court (of the king) wishes to appoint the chief officers of the Corporation of London, and the citizens maintain that they have the right to appoint the officers themselves. From the names Lord William Russell and Algernon Sidney, the great conspiracy would be the [[Rye House Plot]]. [[User:SaundersW|SaundersW]] ([[User talk:SaundersW|talk]]) 15:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Accounting practises for branch accounting == |
|||
I am working for an organisation which has field offices around South India. All the expenses for the field offices are being sent by Head Office. what sort of accounts the branches should maintain ? Is there any book in India which can be referred for this purpose ? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/121.247.81.248|121.247.81.248]] ([[User talk:121.247.81.248|talk]]) 13:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Discrete and Insular Minority == |
|||
I have been trying to understand the legal meaning of this phrase for a paper I am writing. The phrase si first seen in Carolen Products v United States, Footnote Four in 1937. I understand what discrete means, as well as what insular means, but there is a great difference between the legal meaning of a word and the practical representation of the same word. If anyone could point me to any legal references, it would be greatly appreciated. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.24.210.17|66.24.210.17]] ([[User talk:66.24.210.17|talk]]) 14:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Digital copy of House Bill 775? == |
|||
Does anybody have a digital copy of House Bill 775 filed by Tim Couch (R-Ken) or where I could find one? I did some perusing of Kentucky's Legislature website to no avail. It's the bill proposing to make illegal anonymous posting on the internet, and I have a strong desire to read it. There's a fair amount of buzz on sites like Digg if you don't know what I'm talking about. [[User:Here7ic|Here7ic]] ([[User talk:Here7ic|talk]]) 16:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Machiavelli-the devil? == |
|||
The church put Machiavelli's The Prince on its index of banned books, and it is sometimes said that Old Nick, another name for the devil, comes from his name. Is there a specifically anti-christian message in the Prince? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/217.42.105.7|217.42.105.7]] ([[User talk:217.42.105.7|talk]]) 17:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:It's definately an un-christian message contained there. Not much of 'the meek will inherit the earth' 'or blessed are the alms givers' type thought in there - maybe that's the reason? |
|||
:If you search for the "prince machiavelli banned" it will turn up numerous essays explaining why the church found it unnaceptable[[Special:Contributions/87.102.94.48|87.102.94.48]] ([[User talk:87.102.94.48|talk]]) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|comment]] was added at 17:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I wonder if it was considered a satire at the time, such seeming cynicism? Does satire have a tendency towards papal bans?[[Special:Contributions/87.102.94.48|87.102.94.48]] ([[User talk:87.102.94.48|talk]]) 17:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 06:21, 19 December 2024
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
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.
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.
December 5
[edit]BAA
[edit]BAA ambiguous meaning in context of aviation in UK, could you please check the discussion here 🙏 Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 07:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Gryllida This is the humanities reference desk. Do you have a question on humanities? Shantavira|feed me 10:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 10:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Gryllida, next time, I would suggest copying the question you want answered from Wikinews, rather than expecting people here to work out what you want to know.
- As Wikinews has sources, I suggest checking them, e.g. The Guardian says
BAA, which runs six UK airports
, so in 2010 BAA [plc] was a company that ran six UK airports. TSventon (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 10:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Did you try BAA (disambiguation)? —Tamfang (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
UK politics/senate
[edit]Hi, is this factually accurate link Thanks. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 07:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- See above. Shantavira|feed me 10:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Scipion-Virginie Hébert (1793-1830)
[edit]Block evasion |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
The only daughter of Jacques-René Hébert was a repubblican, bonapartist, or royalist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.56.174.231 (talk) 11:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
|
December 6
[edit]Provenance of some sculptures
[edit]There are a bunch of reliefs worked into the wall of the garden (rear) side of the former Casa Storck, now Frederic Storck and Cecilia Cuțescu-Storck Museum, in Bucharest. I can't tell whether they are older pieces collected by Frederic Storck (he certainly collected a number of such pieces; some are in the museum) or his own work, or a mix of the two. Clearly for some of these, if they are his own work they would have been imitative of older styles, but he was enough of a chameleon at times that I would not rule that out. (I had originally presumed they were all his, but I'm having second thoughts.) Wondering if anyone might know something more solid than I do; there is nothing in particular about this I've been easily able to find, except that they seem to date back at least very close to the origin of the building (1910s).
-
Several more here
Jmabel | Talk 04:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Given my uncertainty, I've put these in a new commons:Category:Unidentified works in the Frederic and Cecilia Cuțescu Storck Museum that does not imply authorship by Frederic Storck. - Jmabel | Talk 04:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- No one with an idea on any of these? - Jmabel | Talk 19:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Georges Jacques Danton
[edit]Block evasion. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Are there any sites with the full biographies of their two sons Antoine (1790-1858) and François Georges (1792-1848)?
|
December 7
[edit]Why did Pippi Longstocking end up never getting married in her adulthood?
[edit]AKA her actress, Inger Nilsson. A lot of suitors would admire famous actresses and trample on each other to have a chance to court them, so a lot of actors and actresses end up getting married, but how come Pippi's actress never got married nor had kids after growing into an adult? --2600:100A:B032:25F0:1D7A:CC5D:1FC2:21E2 (talk) 06:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Do you know for certain that she wasn't/isn't married and/or has children? If so, from what source?
- Some actors do not choose to make their private life public, so perhaps she was/is and does, and if not, many people (including my elderly single self) are simply not interested in getting married and/or having children. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.211.243 (talk) 11:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- She's still among the living, so maybe you could find a way to contact her, and ask her that nosy question. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- If she really could "lift her horse one-handed", I suspect even male fellow equestrians would be very wary suitors. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:35, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- As an adult, she has chosen to keep her private life private.[1] So be it. --136.56.165.118 (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I suspect that famous actresses actually try to avoid suitors that admire famous actresses. They don't want to marry someone who is in love with a fake public persona created by the PR department of a studio. Not only actors and actresses, but also a lot of bakers, chemists, dentists, engineers and so on do end up getting married. Being famous does not help. --Lambiam 13:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I imagine she particularly would not welcome suitors who admired her as a preteen. —Tamfang (talk) 20:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
December 8
[edit]Petosiris of Arabia
[edit]The rendering of פטסרי as Petosiris seems to take inspiration from the far-flung. Is this the same name? If osiris is Osiris, what's the pt pt? Temerarius (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- The source to which this is cited has throughout Peṭosriris. However, the transcription of Briquel-Chatonnet has pṭsry. Roche states the name means « qu’Osiris a donné ».[2] --Lambiam 18:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I may be mistaken, but wouldn't « qu’Osiris a donné » require פת?
- Temerarius (talk) 03:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
December 9
[edit]Tribes and inceldom
[edit]One common saying in incel subcultures is that women are "programmed" to only have relationships with the 20% top men. This appears to be consistent (o at least not contradicted by) this phrase in the polygamy article: "More recent genetic data has clarified that, in most regions throughout history, a smaller proportion of men contributed to human genetic history compared to women."
Then again, while I've heard of modern tribes with weird marriage practices (for example the Wodaabe or the Trobriand people) I've never heard of tribes where 70% of men die virgins. Is there any tribe/society where something like that happens? (I realize that modern tribes are by definition different to Paleolithic tribes)90.77.114.87 (talk) 13:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- From what I've read in the past, it seems that hunter-gatherer cultures over the last 50,000 years ago probably tended to be mildly polygynous -- that is, certain men, due to their personalities and demonstrated skills, managed to attract more than one woman at a time into a relationship with them. (Usually a small number -- some men having large numbers of wives is associated more with agricultural civilizations, and women there could often have less freedom of choice than women in hunter-gatherer groups.) Everybody of both sexes is likely to be most attracted to high-status individuals, but under hunter-gatherer conditions, women also need help with child-rearing, which factors into their mating strategies. AnonMoos (talk) 14:19, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- P.S. Under the classic anthropological band-tribe-chiefdom-state classification system (on Wikipedia, covered in the vaguely named Sociopolitical typology article), most historical hunter-gatherer cultures were "bands", while the Wodaabe and Trobriand people sound more like "tribes". AnonMoos (talk) 14:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Worth remembering, though: who has "sanctioned" relationships is not necessarily equivalent to who actually has sex. - Jmabel | Talk 19:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- It has been said (in mammals at least) that each 5% difference in mass for males means that their harem (zoology) has one more female. The sexual dimorphism#Humans article says that human males are 15% heavier that the females (previously I had heard 20%), suggesting that the harem-holder has three mates (or 4, if the 20% is correct). But this does not mean that 75% of human males never had sex. Firstly, holding a harem is a dangerous, short term job if other animals are any guide, with the harem master regularly killed or overthrown. Secondly, in current polygynous human cultures and in polygynous animals, there is a huge amount of cheating. Evidence from animals shows that when females cheat, they are statistically more likely to produce offspring from that mating than from a mating with their main male. Abductive (reasoning) 11:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Worth remembering, though: who has "sanctioned" relationships is not necessarily equivalent to who actually has sex. - Jmabel | Talk 19:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's doubtful that there were commonly "harems" at any stage of human evolution which is very relevant to modern human behavior. Gorillas have moderate harems of often around 3 or 4 females (as opposed to elephant seals, which commonly have a harem size in the thirties). Robust Australopithecines may have been similar, but modern humans are not descended from them. What we know about attested hunter-gatherer societies strongly suggests that during the last 50,000 years or so (since Behavioral modernity) the majority of men who had wives had one wife, but some exceptional men were able to attract 2 or 3 women at a time into relationships. Men having large numbers of wives (real harems) wasn't too feasible until the rise of social stratification which occurred with the development of agriculture. AnonMoos (talk) 16:50, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- How do we know that? Because the same evidence is that prior to 50,000 years ago, humans did have harems. Abductive (reasoning) 20:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Scattering in US elections
[edit]What does scattering mean in the context of US elections? Examples: 1944 United_States presidential election in California#Results 1886 United States House of Representatives elections#Mississippi. Searching mostly produces Electron scattering, which is not the same thing at all! Is there (or should there be) an article or section that could be linked? Cavrdg (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you click on the source for Frederick G. Berry in the 1886 election, then on Scattering on the following page, it says it's for those with "No Party Affiliation". Clarityfiend (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Presumably from the phrase "a scattering of votes" (i.e. for other candidates than those listed)... AnonMoos (talk) 15:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I suspect that the intended word is "smattering". Cullen328 (talk) 09:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
December 11
[edit]Shopping carts
[edit]Where were the first shopping carts introduced?
- shopping cart and Sylvan Goldman say the Humpty Dumpty chain
- Piggly Wiggly says the Piggly Wiggly chain and quotes the Harvard Business Review
Both articles agree it was in 1937 in Oklaholma. I believe that Humpty Dumpty is more likely, but some high quality sources would be useful. TSventon (talk) 11:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to be a matter of some dispute, but Guide to the Telescoping Shopping Cart Collection, 1946-1983, 2000 by the Smithsonian Institution has the complex details of the dispute between Sylvan Goldman [of Humpty Dumpty] and Orla Watson. No mention of Piggly Wiggly, but our article on Watson notes that in 1946, he donated the first models of his cart to 10 grocery stores in Kansas City.
- The Illustrated History of American Military Commissaries (p. 205) has both Watson and Goldman introducing their carts in 1947 (this may refer to carts that telescope into each other for storage, a feature apparently lacking in Goldman's first model).
- Scalable Innovation: A Guide for Inventors, Entrepreneurs, and IP Professionals says that Goldman's first cart was introduced to Humpty Dumty in 1937.
- Make of that what you will. Alansplodge (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely. I remember that the power lift arrangement mentioned in the Smithsonian's link was still an object of analysis for would-be inventors in the mid-sixties, and possibly later, even though the soon to be ubiquituous checkout counter conveyor belt was very much ready making it unnecessary. Couldn't help curiously but think about those when learning about Bredt's rule at school later, see my user page, but it's true "Bredt" sounded rather like "Bread" in my imagination. --Askedonty (talk) 15:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- On Newspapers.com (pay site), I'm seeing shopping carts referenced in Portland, Oregon in 1935 or earlier, and occasionally illustrated, at a store called the Public Market; and as far as the term itself is concerned, it goes back to at least the 1850s. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- But perhaps referring to a cart brought by the shopper to carry goods home with, rather than one provided by the storekeeper for use in-store? Alansplodge (talk) 16:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
@Alansplodge, Askedonty, and Baseball Bugs: thank you for your help, it seems that the Harvard Business Review is mistaken and the Piggly Wiggly chain did not introduce the first shopping baskets, which answers my question. The shopping cart article references a paper by Catherine Grandclément, which shows that several companies were selling early shopping carts in 1937, so crediting Sylvan Goldman alone is not the whole story. TSventon (talk) 17:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Lilacs/flowers re: Allies in Europe WWII
[edit]At 53:20 in Dunkirk (1958 film), British soldiers talk about [paraphrasing] 'flowers on the way into Belgium, raspberries on the way out', and specifically reference lilacs. I imagine this was very clear to 1958 audiences, but what is the significance of lilacs? Is it/was it a symbol of Belgium? Valereee (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think it's just that the BEF entered Belgium in the Spring, which is lilac time. DuncanHill (talk) 22:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are contemporary reports of the streets being strewn with lilac blossom. See here "Today the troops crossed the frontier along roads strewn with flowers. Belgian girls, wildly enthusiastic, plucked lilac from the wayside and scattered it along the road to be torn and twisted by the mighty wheels of the mechanised forces." DuncanHill (talk) 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ah! That would explain it, thanks! Valereee (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
December 12
[edit]The USA adding a new state
[edit]If my understanding is correct, the following numbers are valid at present: (a) number of Senators = 100; (b) number of Representatives = 435; (c) number of electors in the Electoral College = 538. If the USA were to add a new state, what would happen to these numbers? Thank you. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 06:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- The number of senators would increase by 2, and the number of representatives would probably increase by at least 1. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 09:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thus, to answer the final question, the minimum number of Electors would be 3… more if the new state has more Representatives (based on population). Blueboar (talk) 13:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the short term, there would be extra people in congress. The 86th United States Congress had 437 representatives, because Alaska and Hawaii were granted one upon entry regardless of the apportionment rules. Things were smoothed down to 435 at the next census, two congresses later. --Golbez (talk) 14:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Let me re-phrase my question. (a) The number of Senators is always 2 per State, correct? (b) The number of Representatives is what? Is it "capped" at 435 ... or does it increase a little bit? (c) The number of Electors (per State) is simply a function of "a" + "b" (per State), correct? Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- As I understand it, it is indeed capped at 435, though Golbez brings up a point I hadn't taken into account -- apparently it can go up temporarily when states are added, until the next reapportionment. --Trovatore (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
I suggest that (b) would probably depend on whether the hypothetical new state was made up of territory previously part of one or more existing states, or territory not previously part of any existing state. And I suspect that the eventual result would not depend on any pre-calculable formula, but on cut-throat horsetrading between the two main parties and other interested bodies. {The poster formerly nown as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.211.243 (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)- Nope, it's capped at 435. See Reapportionment Act of 1929. (I had thought it was fixed in the Constitution itself, but apparently not.) --Trovatore (talk) 21:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, one other refinement. The formula you've given for number of electors is correct, for states. But it leaves out the District of Columbia, which gets as many electors as it would get if it were a state, but never
lessmore than those apportioned to the smallest state. In practice that means DC gets three electors. That's why the total is 538 instead of 535. --Trovatore (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) Oops; I remembered the bit about the smallest state wrong. It's actually never more than the smallest state. Doesn't matter in practice; still works out to 3 electors for the foreseeable future, either way, because DC would get 3 electors if it were a state, and the least populous state gets 3. --Trovatore (talk) 23:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
December 13
[edit]economics: coffee prices question
[edit]in news report "On Tuesday, the price for Arabica beans, which account for most global production, topped $3.44 a pound (0.45kg), having jumped more than 80% this year. " [3] how do they measure it? some other report mention it is a commodity price set for trading like gold silver etc. what is the original data source for this report? i checked a few other news stories and did not find any clarification about this point, they just know something that i don't. thank you in advance for your help. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 01:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Gryllida, they seem to be talking about the "Coffee C" contract in the List of traded commodities. The price seems to have peaked and then fallen a day later
- explanation here
- I googled "coffee c futures price chart" and the first link was uk.investing.com which I can't link here
- if you have detailed questions about futures contracts they will probably go over my head. TSventon (talk) 01:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- thanks. i see the chart which you cannot link here. why did it peak and then drop shortly after? Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 04:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Financial markets tend to have periods of increase followed by periods of decrease (bull and bear markets), see market trend for background. TSventon (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
source for an order of precedence for abbotts
[edit]Hi friends. The article for Ramsey Abbey in the UK refers to an "order of precedence for abbots in Parliament". (Sourced to an encyclopedia, which uses the wording "The abbot had a seat in Parliament and ranked next after Glastonbury and St. Alban's"). Did a ranking/order of precedence exist and if yes where can it be found? Presumably this would predate the dissolution of monasteries in england. Thanks.70.67.193.176 (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- The abbots called to parliament were called "Mitred Abbots" although not all were entitled to wear a mitre. Our Mitre article has much the same information as you quote, and I suspect the same citations. The only other reference I could find, also from an encyclopedia;
- Of the abbots, the abbot of Glastonbury had the precedence till A.D. 1154, when Pope Adrian IV, an Englishman, from the affection he entertained for the place of his education, assigned this precedence to the abbot of St. Alban's. In consequence, Glastonbury ranked next after him, and Reading had the third place.
- A Church Dictionary: A Practical Manual of Reference for Clergymen and Students (p. 2)
- Alansplodge (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sources differ on the order. There is a list published in 1842 of 26 abbots as "generally ... reckoned" in order here
- The Church History of Britain Volume 2 (p.182) TSventon (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Are the proposed Trump tariffs a regressive tax in disguise?
[edit]I'm wondering if there has been analysis of this. The US government gets the tariff money(?) and biggest chunk will be on manufactured goods from China. Those in turn are primarily consumer goods, which means that the tariff is something like a sales tax, a type of tax well known to be regressive. Obviously there are leaks in the description above, so one would have to crunch a bunch of numbers to find out for sure. But that's what economists do, right? Has anyone weighed in on this issue? Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E (talk) 08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- There have been many public comments about how this is a tax on American consumers. It's only "in disguise" to those who don't understand how tariffs work. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll see what I can find. Do you remember if the revenue collected is supposed to be enough for the government to care about? I.e. enough to supposedly offset the inevitable tax cuts for people like Elon Musk? 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Import duties are extremely recessive in that (a) they are charged at the same rate for any given level of income; and (b) those with less income tend to purchase far more imported goods than those with more income (define “more” and “less” any way you wish). Fiscally, they border on insignificant, running an average of 1.4% of federal revenue since 1962 (or, 0.2% of GDP), compared to 47.1% (8.0%) for individual income tax and 9.9% (1.7%) for corporate tax receipts.DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Curious about your point (b); why would this be? It seems to me that as my income has risen I have probably bought more stuff from abroad, at least directly. It could well be that I've bought less indirectly, but I'm not sure why that would be. --Trovatore (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- More like, those with less income spend a larger fraction of their income on imported goods, instead of services. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Trovatore, most daily use items are imported: toothbrushes, combs, kitchenware, shopping bags. Most durable goods are imported: phones, TVs, cars, furniture, sporting goods, clothes. These items are more likely to be imported because it is MUCH cheaper / more profitable to make them abroad. Wander through Target, Sam's Club, or Wal-Mart and you'll be hard pressed to find "Made in America" goods. But, in a hand-crafted shop, where prices have to reflect the cost of living HERE, rather than in Bangladesh, prices soar. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Um, sure, but surely it's a fairly rare person of any income level who spends a significant portion of his/her income on artisanal goods. --Trovatore (talk) 06:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- PiusImpavidus, Every income strata (in America) spends far more on services than on goods. Services tend to be more of a repeated purchase: laundry (vs. washing machine), Uber (vs. car), rent (vs. purchase), internet (vs. books), etc. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Ron A. Dunn: Australian arachnologist
[edit]For Ronald Albert Dunn (Q109827858) I have given names of "Ron. A.", an address in 1958 of 60 Mimosa Road, Carnegie, Victoria, Australia S.E. 9 (he was also in Carnegie in 1948) and an uncited death date of 25 June 1972.
He was an Australian arachnologist with the honorifics AAA AAIS.
Can anyone find the full given names, and a source or the death date, please? What did the honorifics stand for? Do we know how he earned his living? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pigsonthewing Have you tried ancestry.com? For a start
- A scan of the 1954 Carnegie electoral roll has
- Dunn, Ronald Albert, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, accountant
- Dunn, Gladys Harriet I, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, home duties
- I can't check newspapers.com, but The Age apparently had a report about Ronald Albert Dunn on 27 Jun 1972 TSventon (talk) 14:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I don't have access to the former, but that's great. AAA seems to be (member of the) Association of Accountants of Australia: [4]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- I accessed Ancestry.com via the Wikipedia Library, so you should have access. Newspapers.com is also available via the library if you register, which I haven't. An editor with a Newspapers.com account would be able to make a clipping which anyone could access online.
- I agree AAA is probably the Australian Society of Accountants, a predecessor of CPA Australia. They merged in 1953 (source) so the information would have been outdated in 1958. AAIS could be Associate [of the] Amalgamated Institute of Secretaries (source Who's Who in Australia, Volume 16, 1959 Abbreviations page 9). TSventon (talk) 16:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Last time I tried, Ancestry wasn't working for WP-Lib users. Thank you again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a phabricator problem about loading a second page of results. My workaround is to try to add more information to the search to get more relevant results on the first page of results. TSventon (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Or perhaps someone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request could help? Alansplodge (talk) 12:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a phabricator problem about loading a second page of results. My workaround is to try to add more information to the search to get more relevant results on the first page of results. TSventon (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Last time I tried, Ancestry wasn't working for WP-Lib users. Thank you again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I don't have access to the former, but that's great. AAA seems to be (member of the) Association of Accountants of Australia: [4]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Given his specialty, I suggest the honorific stands for "Aaaaaaaaagh It's (a) Spider!" Chuntuk (talk) 12:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
December 15
[edit]Schisms and Byzantine Roman self-perception
[edit]Did the three schisms between Rome and Constantinople tarnish Rome's reputation to the degree that it affected the Byzantine self-perception as the "Roman Empire" and as "Romans"? Including Constantinople's vision of succession to the Roman Empire and its notion of Second Rome. Brandmeistertalk 15:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Various maneuverings in the middle ages (including the infamous Fourth Crusade) certainly gave many Byzantines a negative view of western Catholics, so that toward the end some frankly preferred conquest by Muslims to a Christian alliance which would involve Byzantine religious and political subordination to the European West (see discussion at Loukas Notaras). But the Byzantines generally considered themselves to be the real Romans, and called themselves "Romaioi" much more often than they called themselves Greek (of course, "Byzantine" is a later retroactive term). AnonMoos (talk) 17:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think these religious schisms had nothing to do with the secular political situation. In 330, before Christianity became an established religion that could experience schisms, Constantine the Great moved the capital of the unitary Roman Empire from Rome to the city of Byzantium and dubbed it the New Rome – later renamed to Constantinople. During the later periods in which the Western and Eastern Roman Empire were administered separately, this was not considered a political split but an expedient way of administering a large polity, of which Constantinople remained the capital. So when the Western wing of the Roman Empire fell to the Ostrogoths and even the later Exarchate of Ravenna disappeared, the Roman Empire, now only administered by the Constantinopolitan court, continued in an unbroken succession from the Roman Kingdom and subsequent Republic. --Lambiam 10:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Ottoman Turkish, the term روم (Rum), ultimately derived from Latin Roma, was used to designate the Byzantine Empire, or, as a geographic term, its former lands. Fun fact: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, Mehmet the Conqueror and his successors claimed the title of Caesar of Rome, with the Ottoman Empire being the successor of the Byzantine Empire. IMO this claim has merit; Mehmet II was the first ruler of yet another dynasty, but rather than replacing the existing Byzantine administrative apparatus, he simply continued its use for the empire he had become the ruler of. If you recognize the claim, the Republic of Turkey is today's successor of the Roman Kingdom. --Lambiam 12:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Ottomans basically continued the Byzantine tax-collection system, for a while. AnonMoos (talk) 23:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Ottoman Turkish, the term روم (Rum), ultimately derived from Latin Roma, was used to designate the Byzantine Empire, or, as a geographic term, its former lands. Fun fact: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, Mehmet the Conqueror and his successors claimed the title of Caesar of Rome, with the Ottoman Empire being the successor of the Byzantine Empire. IMO this claim has merit; Mehmet II was the first ruler of yet another dynasty, but rather than replacing the existing Byzantine administrative apparatus, he simply continued its use for the empire he had become the ruler of. If you recognize the claim, the Republic of Turkey is today's successor of the Roman Kingdom. --Lambiam 12:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Foreign Presidents/Heads of State CURRENTLY Buried in the USA
[edit]How many foreign presidents are CURRENTLY buried in the USA? (I am aware of previous burials that have since been repatriated) For example, In Woodlawn Cemetery in Miami, FL, there are two Cuban presidents and a Nicaraguan president.
Are there any other foreign presidents, heads of state, that are buried in the USA? Exeter6 (talk) 17:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- As far as I know, all 4 of the presidents of the Republic of Texas are buried in Texas, which is currently in the US. Blueboar (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Andrés Domingo y Morales del Castillo was President of Cuba in 1954-55 and died in Miami. Not sure where he's buried though.
- Also Anselmo Alliegro y Milá (President of Cuba for a few hours on January 1, 1959) similarly went to Florida and died there.
- And Arnulfo Arias, ousted as President of Panama in the 1968 Panamanian coup d'état, died in Florida (a pattern emerging here...)
- Alansplodge (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- For ease of reference, the Woodlawn Cemetery in question is Caballero Rivero Woodlawn Park North Cemetery and Mausoleum, housing:
- Gerardo Machado, president of Cuba from 1925 to 1933
- Carlos Prío Socarrás, president of Cuba from 1948 to 1952
- Anastasio Somoza Debayle, president of Nicaragua from 1967 to 1972, and from 1974 to 1979 (not to be confused with his father Anastasio Somoza García and brother Luis Somoza Debayle, both former presidents of Nicaragua, buried together in Nicaragua)
- GalacticShoe (talk) 20:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Searching Findagrave could be fruitful. Machado's entry:[5] ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Polish prime minister and famous musician Ignacy Paderewski had his grave in the United States until 1992. AnonMoos (talk) 07:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- I guess not current, though... AnonMoos (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- You can find some with the following Wikidata query: [6]. Some notable examples are Liliʻuokalani, Pierre Nord Alexis, Dương Văn Minh, Lon Nol, Bruno Carranza, Victoriano Huerta, and Mykola Livytskyi. Note that Alexander Kerensky died in the US but was buried in the UK. Unfortunately, the query also returns others who were presidents, governors, etc. of other than sovereign states. --Amble (talk) 19:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- I suppose we should also consider Jefferson Davis as a debatable case. And Peter II of Yugoslavia was initially buried in the USA but later reburied in Serbia. He seems to have been the only European monarch who was at one point buried in the USA. --Amble (talk) 00:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Manuel Quezon was initially buried at Arlington. DuncanHill (talk) 00:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- And of course I should rather think that most monarchs of Hawaii are buried in the USA. DuncanHill (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- If burial was the custom there. (I'd guess it was, but I certainly don't know.) --142.112.149.206 (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Royal Mausoleum (Mauna ʻAla) answers that question with a definitive "yes, it was". Cullen328 (talk) 22:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- If burial was the custom there. (I'd guess it was, but I certainly don't know.) --142.112.149.206 (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Antanas Smetona was initially buried in Cleveland, but then reburied elsewhere in Ohio. --Amble (talk) 06:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- To be specific, All Souls Cemetery in Chardon according to Smetona's article. GalacticShoe (talk) 06:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are a number of Egyptian mummies in US museums (List of museums with Egyptian mummies in their collections), but I can't find any that are currently known to be the mummy of a pharaoh. The mummy of Ramesses I was formerly in the US, but was returned to Egypt in 2003. --Amble (talk) 22:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
December 17
[edit]Geographic extent of an English parish c. 1800
[edit]What would have been the typical extent (in square miles or square kilometers) of an English parish, circa 1800 or so? Let's say the median rather than the mean. With more interest in rural than urban parishes. -- Avocado (talk) 00:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There were tensions involved in a unit based on the placement of churches being tasked to administer the poor law; that was why "civil parishes" were split off a little bit later... AnonMoos (talk) 01:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Avocado As a start the mean area of a parish in England and Wales in around 1832 seems to have been around 5.6 square miles.
- Source The Edinburgh Encyclopædia Volume 8. It also has figures by county if you are interested.
- p.494 38,498,572 acres, i.e. 60,154 square miles
- p.497 10,674 parishes and parochial chapelries
- Average 3,607 acres, i.e. 5.64 square miles TSventon (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you -- that's a starting point, at least! -- Avocado (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- But regionally variable:
- By the early nineteenth century the north-west of England, including the expanding cities of Manchester and Liverpool, had just over 150 parishes, each of them covering an average of almost 12,000 acres, whereas the more rural east of the country had more than 1,600 parishes, each with an average size of approximately 2,000 acres.
- OCR A Level History: Britain 1603-1760
- Alansplodge (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- On the contrary , in England , which contains 38,500,000 statute acres, the parishes or livings comprehend about 3,850 acres the average; and if similar allowance be made for those livings in cities and towns , perhaps about 4,000.
- An Essay on the Revenues of the Church of England (1816) p. 165
- The point about urban parishes distorting the overall average is supported by St Ethelburga's Bishopsgate for instance, that had a parish of only 3 acres (or two football pitches of 110 yards by 70 yards placed side by side). [7] Alansplodge (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, that's great info -- ty! I can't seem to get a look at the content of the book. Does it say anything else about other regions? -- Avocado (talk) 23:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- The OCR book doesn't mention other regions. I have found where the figure of 10,674 came from: page 112 of the 1816 essay has a note that
Preliminary Observations ( p . 13. and 15. ) to the Popu-lation Returns in 1811 ; where the Parishes and Parochial Chapelries are stated at 10,674 .
The text of page 112 says thatchurches are contained in be-tween 10 , and 11,000 parishes † ; and probably after a due allowance for consolidations , & c . they constitute the Churches of about 10,000 Parochial Benefices
, so the calculation on p.165 of the 1816 essay is based on around 10,000 parishes in England (and Wales) in 1800 (38,500,000 divided by 3,850). TSventon (talk) 01:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) - The primary source is Abstract of the Answers and Returns Made Pursuant to an Act Passed in the Fifty-first Year of His Majesty King George III, Intituled, "An Act for Taking an Account of the Population of Great Britain, and of the Increase Or Diminution Thereof" : Preliminary Observations, Enumeration Abstract, Parish Register Abstract, 1811 and the table of parishes by county is on page xxix. TSventon (talk) 01:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! -- Avocado (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The OCR book doesn't mention other regions. I have found where the figure of 10,674 came from: page 112 of the 1816 essay has a note that
When was the first bat mitzvah?
[edit]Bar and bat mitzvah has a short history section, all of which is about bar mitzvah. When was the first bat mitzvah? What is its history? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 01:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- To be clear, I am more asking when the bat mitzvah ritual became part of common Jewish practice. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 01:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Parts from Google's translation of he:בת מצווה:
- As early as the early 19th century, in the early days of Reform Judaism, confirmation ceremonies for boys and girls began to be held in which their knowledge of the religion was tested, similar to that practiced among Christians. It spread to the more liberal circles of German Jewry, and by the middle of the century had also begun to be widespread among the Orthodox bourgeoisie. Rabbi Jacob Etlinger of Altona was forced by the community's regulations to participate in such an event in 1867, and published the sermon he had prepared for the purpose later. He emphasized that he was obligated to do so by law, and that Judaism did not recognize that the principles of the religion should be adopted in such a public declaration, since it is binding from birth. However, as part of his attempt to stop the Reform, he supported a kind of parallel procedure that was intended to take place exclusively outside the synagogue.
- The idea of confirmation was not always met with resistance, especially with regard to girls: the chief rabbi of the Central Consistory of French Jews, Shlomo Zalman Ullmann, permitted it for both sexes in 1843. In 1844, confirmation for young Jews was held for the first time in Verona, Italy. In the 1880s, Rabbi Zvi Hermann Adler agreed to the widespread introduction of the ceremony, after it had become increasingly common in synagogues, but refused to call it 'confirmation'. In 1901, Rabbi Eliyahu Bechor, cantor in Alexandria, permitted it for both boys and girls, inspired by what was happening in Italy. Other rabbis initially ordered a more conservative event.
- At the beginning of the twentieth century, the attitude towards the bat mitzvah party was reserved, because it was sometimes an attempt to imitate symbols drawn from the confirmation ceremony, and indeed there were rabbis, such as Rabbi Aharon Volkin, who forbade the custom on the grounds of gentile laws, or who treated it with suspicion, such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, who in a 1950s recantation forbade holding an event in the synagogue because it was "a matter of authority and a mere vanity...there is no point and no basis for considering it a matter of a mitzvah and a mitzvah meal". The Haredi community also expressed strong opposition to the celebration of the bat mitzvah due to its origins in Reform circles. In 1977, Rabbi Yehuda David Bleich referred to it as one of the "current problems in halakhah", noting that only a minority among the Orthodox celebrate it and that it had spread to them from among the Conservatives.
- On the other hand, as early as the beginning of the twentieth century, rabbis began to encourage holding a Bat Mitzvah party for a daughter, similar to a party that is customary for a son, with the aim of strengthening observance of the mitzvot among Jewish women.
- --Lambiam 11:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! Surprising how recent it is. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 21:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
December 18
[edit]Major feminist achievements prior to 18th century
[edit]What would be the most important feminist victories prior to the 18th and 19th centuries? I'm looking for specific laws or major changes (anywhere in the world), not just minor improvements in women's pursuit of equality. Something on the same scale and importantance as the women's suffrage. DuxCoverture (talk) 11:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of any occuring without being foreseable a set of conditions such as the perspective of a minimal equal representation both in the judiciary and law enforcement. Those seem to be dependent on technological progress, maybe particularly law enforcement although the judiciary sometimes heavily relies on recording capabilities. Unfortunately Ancient Egypt is not very explicitly illustrating the genesis of its sociological dynamics. --Askedonty (talk) 16:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Before universal male suffrage became the norm in the 19th century, also male commoners did not pull significant political weight, at least in Western society, so any feminist "victories" before then can only have been minor improvements in women's rights in general. --Lambiam 22:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Changes regarding divorce, property rights of women, protections against sexual assault or men's mistreatment of women could have have been significant, right? (Though I don't know what those changes were) 2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02 (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Intolerance by D. W. Griffith
[edit]Why did D. W. Griffith make the film Intolerance after making the very popular and racist film The Birth of a Nation? What did he want to convey? 174.160.82.127 (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The lead of our article states that, in numerous interviews, Griffith made clear that the film was a rebuttal to his critics and he felt that they were, in fact, the intolerant ones. --Lambiam 22:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Term for awkward near-similarity
[edit]Is there a term for the feeling produced when two things are nearly but not quite identical, and you wish they were either fully identical or clearly distinct? I think this would be reminiscent of the narcissism of small differences, but applied to things like design or aesthetics – or like a broader application of the uncanny valley (which is specific to imitation of humans). --71.126.56.235 (talk) 20:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The uncanniness of the uncanny valley would be a specific subclass of this. --Lambiam 22:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Yearbooks
[edit]Why yearbooks are often named after years that they concern? For example, a yearbook that concerns year 2024 and tells statistics about that year might be named 2025 Yearbook, with 2024 Yearbook instead concerning 2023? Which is the reason for that? --40bus (talk) 21:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- It is good for marketing, a 2025 yearbook sounds more up to date than a 2024 one. TSventon (talk) 21:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- One argument may be that it is the year of publication, being the 2025 edition of whatever. --Lambiam 22:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the example of a high school yearbook, 2025 would be the year in which the 2024-2025 school year ended and the students graduated. Hence, "the Class of 2025" though the senior year started in 2024. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The purpose of a yearbook is to highlight the past year activities, for example a 2025 yearbook is to highlight the activities of 2024. Stanleykswong (talk) 06:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)