Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
 
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}}
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}}
[[Category:Wikipedia help forums]]
[[Category:Pages automatically checked for incorrect links]]
[[Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers]]
[[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 26 =
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 February 16}}


== What would the president Trump brokered peace treaty in Ukraine look like? ==
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 February 17}}


I know this is probably speculation, but going by what I've read in a few articles - how would the new president sort this out?
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2009 February 18}}


- the war stops
</noinclude>


- Russia withdraws all troops from the invaded regions of Ukraine
= February 19 =


- Ukraine withdraws all troops from the same regions
== "Reciprocal" marriages ==


- these regions become a DMZ, under control of neither party for the next 25 years, patrolled by the United Nations (or perhaps the USA/Britain and China/North Korea jointly)
Hi! If Family A's brother (John A) and sister (Jane A) are married to Family B's sister (Jane B) and brother (John B) respectively (John A-Jane B & John B-Jane A), what is this type of marriage called? Are there any social taboos or biological/social advantages concerning this type of marriage? Thanks! --[[User:Shibo77|Shibo77]] ([[User talk:Shibo77|talk]]) 02:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


- Russia promises to leave Ukraine alone for 25 years
:I don't know if the marriages have a name, but the offspring of them would be [[double first cousin]]s. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 03:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


- Ukraine promises not to join NATO or the EU for 25 years
:I don't know of any social taboos to these sorts of marriages. I have them on both sides of my family. My mom has two brothers that married a mother and a daughter. On my dad's side, two of my grandmother's aunts married two of my grandfather's uncles, making THREE close marriages of this sort. In smaller communities, with relatively small numbers of distinct families, it would not be unusual for several close members of the same families to intermingle in that way. As long as there is no close [[consanguinity]] usually there isn't any taboos. [http://www.twinstuff.com/twinswithtwins.htm This article] describes identical twin brother marrying identical twin sisters, which they call "Quarternary marriages", so that may be the term you are looking for. It claims there are only about 250 recorded cases of this happening world wide. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 05:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


- A peace treaty will be signed
::What would be the probability that their respective children (double cousins to each other), would be identical, or at least be so similar in appearance as to be virtually identical? (Male-male and female-female only, of course). -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 05:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


- The can will be kicked down the road for 25 years, at which point more discussions or wars will commence
:::Double cousins of identical twin pairings have the same consanguinity as true siblings do, so they would probably look like siblings, if not perfect twins. See [[Double first cousin]] for a discussion of this. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 06:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


So maybe the Americans will say "this is the best deal you're going to get, in the future we're going to be spending our money on our own people and no-one else - if you don't take it, we'll let the Russians roll right over you and good luck to you".
::::Good. Thanks, Jayron32. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 13:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


Is this basically what is being said now? I think this is what Vance envisioned. [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 03:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
: There was a time when such marriage might have been forbidden. Before [[Henry VIII]] married his brother's widow, he got a Papal waiver. (Consider the phrase ''sister '''in law''''' literally.) Incest was defined rather differently before [[Gregor Mendel]]! —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 02:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:{{small|The downside is that the residents of the buffer zone will be compelled to eat their pets. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 03:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}}
::{{small|Or each other's pets. [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 21:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)}}


:You seem to be overlooking one of the major obstacles to peace -- unless it suffers a stinging military defeat, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine which it's formally annexed -- Crimea and [[Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts|Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia]]... -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 03:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::Different situation entirely. There would have been no problem if Henry VIII had married Arthur's wife's ''sister''. The problem in that case was that Henry wanted to marry his dead brother's wife, not his dead brother's wife's sister... --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 02:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::You're right, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine, but it is likely that Ukraine does not expect Russia to do so too. Restoring to pre-war territories and the independent of [[Crimea|Crimean]], [[Donetsk Oblast|Donetsk]], [[Kherson Oblast|Kherson]], [[Luhansk Oblast|Luhansk]], and [[Zaporizhzhia Oblast|Zaporizhzhia]] are the best Ukraine can hope for. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 10:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Which is actually mandatory in some cultures. --[[User:Jpgordon|jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710;]]</small></sup> 20:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:Never heard of any such plan. 25 years? This is completely made up. Can't say I'm surprised since this is the same guy who asked the previous "question". My understanding is that Wikipedia and the Reference Desk are not a forum for debate. This is not Facebook. But this guy seems to think otherwise. Anyway, there's no way that the territories Russia has annexed will ever go back to the Ukraine. The only question which remains is what guarantees can be given to Ukraine that Russia will never try something like this ever again and eat it up piecemeal. The best answer (from Ukraine's point of view) would have been that it join NATO but of course Russia won't have it. If not that, then what? This's exactly where the "art of the deal" comes in. Speculating in advance on Wikipedia is pointless. Better to do that on Facebook. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 03:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::You're right, by policy Wikipedia is not a forum and [[WP:SOAP|not a soapbox]]. But attend also to the policy [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks]]. Oh, and the guideline [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] is another good one. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 10:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Further, it's a bit pointless to tell an OP that WP is not a forum or a soapbox, but then immediately engage in debate with them about the matter they raise. -- [[User:JackofOz|<span style="font-family: Papyrus;">Jack of Oz</span>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<span style="font-size:85%; font-family: Verdana;"><sup>[pleasantries]</sup></span>]] 18:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:A politician's butt dominates his brain. What he is going to do is more important than what he had said. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:Expect that a concept of a peace plan will be ready soon after day one. Until then we can only speculate whose concept. Will it be Musk's, Trump's, Vance's, Rubio's, Hegseth's, Kellogg's? The latter's plan is believed to involve Ukraine ceding the Donbas and Luhansk regions, as well as Crimea, to Russia,<sup>[https://www.reuters.com/world/trumps-plan-ukraine-comes-into-focus-territorial-concessions-nato-off-table-2024-12-04/]</sup> after which the negotiators can proclaim: "[[Mission Accomplished speech|Mission accomplished]]. [[Peace for our time]]." &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)


:* There may also be peace plans required for a possible US incursion in Canada and Greenland / Denmark. All three are members of the NATO, so this may be tricky. --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 18:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::: I wouldn't say second vs third degree of kinship is ''entirely'' different. —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 12:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


Isn't this one of those "crystal ball" things we are supposed to avoid here? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 21:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
An interesting variation of this used to happen relatively (no pun intended) often, back when siblings were often spread out over many years and widows and widowers were plentiful. Two brothers (say 20 years apart in age) might marry a widowed mother and her daughter, or some variation like that. Widower [[Samuel Adams]], for example, was remarried to Elizabeth Wells, and his daughter married Elizabeth's brother. Not unusual, but it does bring6 to mind the old novelty song, ''[[I'm My Own Grandpa]]''. —[[User:Kevin Myers|Kevin]] [[User talk:Kevin Myers|Myers]] 14:41, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


:{{agree}} [[User:Slowking Man|Slowking Man]] ([[User talk:Slowking Man|talk]]) 00:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
I know of one biological advantage first hand. A child I know was diagnosed with [[Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome]], was classified as a SCID-kid, and was basically kept in isolation most of his life (i.e. as a "bubble boy"). He had three double-first cousins, of which two were perfect bone marrow matches. He got a transfer and is now a (mostly) healthy boy. If not for those double-cousins, the chances of finding a suitable (let alone perfect) match would have drastically decreased and he would almost certainly be dead. [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 16:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
::If the OP provided an actual source for this claim, then it could be discussed more concretely. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 00:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::It is not a claim, but a question, "What is being said now about the prospects and form of a Trump-brokered peace treaty?" Should the OP provide a source for this question? If the question is hard to answer, it is not by lack of sources (I gave one above), but because all kinds of folks are saying all kinds of things about it. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 19:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:Whatever the plan may be, Putin reportedly doesn't like it.<sup>[https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-december-26-2024]</sup> &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)


== ID card replacement ==
You may be interested in the article on [[Prohibited degree of kinship]]. I'd summarize it here to answer your question but I'm afraid my mind's still spinning from reading about "wife's son's daughter" and so forth. ---- [[User:smurdah|<span style="color:black">smurdah</span>]]<sup class="Template-Fact"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[<i>[[User Talk:smurdah|citation ]][[Special:Contributions/Smurdah|needed]]</i>]</span></sup> 18:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


In California you can get a drivers' license (DL) from the DMV, which both serves as an ID card and attests that you are authorized to drive a car. Alternatively, from the same DMV, you can get a state ID card, which is the same as a DL except it doesn't let you drive. The card looks similar and the process for getting it (wait in line, fill in forms, get picture taken) is similar, though of course there is no driving test.
:Siblings marrying siblings is a rather common practice in Western societies (as any amateur genealogist could tell you), but I'm afraid I don't know of a particular term for it. One reason for the practice (at least in the past) is that the first pair to wed have already overcome the sometimes-strict religious rules against consanguinity of married couples, so the second pair who have the same ancestry need not worry about that impediment. However, just a few days ago I heard a report on BBC radio of a couple in just this situation who have long been prohibited from marrying in the Greek Orthodox church because it is considered "incest". Here [http://www.euranet.eu/eng/Today/News/English-News/A-Greek-family-tragedy] is a link to a news report of the case. [[User:Thylacoleo|Thylacoleo]] ([[User talk:Thylacoleo|talk]]) 21:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


If you need a replacement drivers' license, you can request it online or through one of the DMV's self-service kiosks installed in various locations. That's reasonably convenient.
::Large social advantages as everyone knows each other better. I know a case of this ages ago, the two couples had adjacent houses but generally only used one kitchen and only had shared meals. Inheritance of money and land is better too. [[User:Polypipe Wrangler|Polypipe Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Polypipe Wrangler|talk]]) 00:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


If you need a replacement ID card, you have to request it in person at a DMV office, involving travel, waiting in line, dealing with crowds, etc. DMV appointment shortens the wait but doesn't get rid of it. Plus the earliest available appointments are several weeks out.
== Is it true that the Mongols never lost a battle to a European force? ==


My mom is elderly, doesn't drive, doesn't handle travel or waiting in line well, and needs a replacement ID card. I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process. Not looking for legal advice etc. but am just wondering if I'm overlooking something sane, rather than reflexive [[system justification]]. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|talk]]) 19:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
^Topic says it all. [[Special:Contributions/76.6.56.157|76.6.56.157]] ([[User talk:76.6.56.157|talk]]) 03:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


:European (Brit) here, so responding with logic rather than knowledge, but . . . . If a replacement ID could be requested remotely and sent, it would probably be easier for some nefarious person to do so and obtain a fake ID; at least if attendance is required, the officials can tell that the 25-y-o illegal immigrant (say) they're seeing in front of them doesn't match the photo they already have of the elderly lady whose 'replacement' ID is being requested.
:Our article [[Mongol invasion of Europe]] notes that some did. Under "Later campaigns" it notes that the Poles defeated the Mongols at Krakow in 1287; but that it was something of a [[Pyrrhic victory]] for the Poles. It also notes unsuccessful raids against the Lithuanians in 1275 and 1277, and that a force of Mongols was defeated by [[Ladislaus IV of Hungary]] in the mid-1280's near modern Budapest. Then there is, of course, the [[Great stand on the Ugra river]], where [[Ivan III of Russia|Ivan the Great]] defeated the [[Golden Horde]] and ended Mongol suzerainity over Russia. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 04:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:Drivers' licences have the additional safeguard that drivers are occasionally (often?) stopped by traffic police and asked to produce them, at which point discrepancies may be evident. {The poster formerly known as 87.812.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 00:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, I guess there is some sense to that, though I haven't been stopped by police in quite a few years. I reached the DMV by phone and they say they won't issue an actual duplicate ID card: rather, they want to take a new picture of my mom and use that on the new card. Of course that's fine given that we have to go there anyway, but it's another way the DL procedure is different. [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D|talk]]) 00:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::What purpose does the ID card serve? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 04:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::::See [[Identity documents in the United States]]. These cards can be used for such purposes as boarding a plane, purchasing alcohol or cigarettes where proof of age is required, cashing a check, etc. Most folks use their driver's license for these purposes, but for the minority that does not drive, some form of official id is required from time to time, hence the delivery of such cards by states. --[[User:Xuxl|Xuxl]] ([[User talk:Xuxl|talk]]) 13:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::I'm just wondering under what circumstances a shut-in would ever use it. The OP could maybe explain. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::OP did not describe a "shut-in". And anyway, have you ever heard the well-known phrase-or-saying "none of your fucking business"? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 21:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Are you the OP? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 22:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::Not OP and not a shut-in, but ID is necessary for registration for some online services (including ID requirements for access to some state and federal websites that administer things like taxes and certain benefits). I've had to provide photos/scans of photo ID digitally for a couple other purposes, too, though I can't remember off the top of my head what those were. I think one might have been to verify an I-9 form for employment. And the ID number from my driver's license for others. At least a couple instances have been with private entities rather than governments. The security implications always make me wary. -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 23:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Virtually all of the private information of US citizens has been repeatedly compromised in the last decade. Not a single company or government entity has faced consequences, and no US legislation is in the works to protect our private information in the future. For only one small example, the personal info of 73 million AT&T account holders was released on the dark web this year.[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68701958] In the US, if you're a private company, you can do just about anything and get away with it. If you're a private citizen, there's an entirely separate set of laws for you. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
:Unless someone affiliated with the CA DMV drops by here, I'm afraid none of us are going to be able to tell you why something is the way it is with them. Essentially it's requesting people to guess or predict at why X ''might'' be the case. Have you tried [https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/contacting-dmv/ contacting them] and asking them for an answer? You and/or her could also [https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ contact] her CA state elected representatives and let them know your feelings on the matter. Sometimes representatives' offices will assist a constitutent with issues they're having involving government services ("constitutent services"). --[[User:Slowking Man|Slowking Man]] ([[User talk:Slowking Man|talk]]) 01:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
:If your mom is old and her medical condition affects her ability to perform daily activities (she couldn't handle the travel or waiting in line well), she can ask her medical doctor to complete a DS 3234 (Medical Certification) form to verify her status. Then you can help her to fill out a DS 3235 application form on the DMV website and submit the required documents accordingly. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)


::{{tq|I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process.}}
:If not, you'd need to explain what caused the Mongols to leave Europe. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 15:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:The [[Real ID Act]] contributed to the discrepancy in the replacment process, as did several notable fake ID rings on both coasts.[https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-lockyer-announces-arrest-mastermind-national-fake-id-operation][https://www.nj.com/news/2011/12/six_motor_vehicle_commission_c.html] In other words, "this is why we can't have nice things". [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{small|We can't have nice things because those in power regulate the allocation of goods. To distinguish between the deserving and undeserving they need people to have IDs. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}}


= December 27 =
::It was the death of the Khan that made them leave, as they all had to go back to Mongolia and elect a new one. This happened three times, apparently. On the thrid occasion, the Mongols didn't bother returning to Europe, presumably because of a new policy by the new Khan. It had nothing to do with whether we beat them, or not.--[[User:Givnan|KageTora]] ([[User talk:Givnan|talk]]) 11:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


== Building containing candle cabinets ==
:::So an empire collapsed due to a lack of [[absentee ballot]]s ? [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 14:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Excellent analogy! Clan heads were required to elect the new Khan in person, and by the third time around the emphasis was on richer China rather than poorer Europe. [[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 07:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


Is there a term (in pretty much any language) for a separate building next to a church, containing candle cabinets where people place votive candles? I've seen this mostly in Romania (and in at least one church in Catalonia), but suspect it is more widespread. (I've also seen just candle cabinets with no separate building, but I'm guessing that there is no term for that.) - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 01:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
== mount everest ==


:[[Shrine]] ''might'' cover it, but I suspect there's a more specific term in at least one language. {The poster fornerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 21:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
how is this site used by the chinese population? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jkuba4|Jkuba4]] ([[User talk:Jkuba4|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkuba4|contribs]]) 10:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::Somebody contributed a couple of photos of these kind of cabinets to commons. [[:File:Orthodoxe_Nonne_putzt_Kerzen%C3%B6fchen.JPG]] and [[:File:Beh%C3%A4lter_f%C3%BCr_Opferkerzen_an_einer_orthodoxen_Kirche_in_Rum%C3%A4nien.JPG]]. Both are in Romania, and outdoor. I suppose the purpose of the cabinet is to protect the candles from the weather? I see pictures of indoor ''racks'' for candles. One example is [[:File:Religión en Isla Margarita, Valle del Espíritu Santo.jpg]] which is an upcoming Commons picture of the day. This small dark metal shed full of dripping wax is apparently located in or near to the rather pretty and well-lit [[Basilica of Our Lady of El Valle]], but I saw nothing to tell me the spatial relationship. Some discussion, again about Romanian Eastern Orthodox traditions, [https://www.flickr.com/photos/time-to-look/27689850307 in this Flickr photo's text], which calls them ... candle cabinets. (They protect the candles from wind and rain, and protect the church from the candles.) [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 11:11, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Card Zero}} the things you are posting are, precisely, candle cabinets. What I'm talking about are structures like a proper building, but with just a portal, no doors as such. Here's a rare non-Romanian example I photographed in 2001: [[:File:Montserrat - prayer candles.jpg]]. Remarkably, I don't see any Romanian examples that really show the structure, they are all too close-in detailed. I'll try to see if I can find an example I may have shot but not yet uploaded. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] &#124; [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


= December 28 =
::As a start, there was of course the [[2008 Summer Olympics summit of Mt. Everest]].[[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 10:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


== Truncated Indian map in Wikipedia ==
== Frozen assets ==


Why is the map of India always appears truncated in all of Wikipedia pages, when there is no official annexing of Indian territories in Kashmir, by Pakistan and China nor its confirmation from Indian govt ? With Pakistan and China just claiming the territory, why the world map shows it as annexed by them, separating from India ? [[User:TravelLover05|TravelLover05]] ([[User talk:TravelLover05|talk]]) 15:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm trying to find Wikipedia's information on the idea of 'frozen assets' in banking/economics. I've searched for 'frozen assets', 'assets frozen', 'asset freezing', 'freezing assets', 'frozen', 'freeze' and checked the page [[Asset]] but with no result. Where can I find this information? Normally I have no trouble finding stuff on Wikipedia, so this suggests some redirects or additions to the disambig page might be needed. [[Special:Contributions/131.111.245.195|131.111.245.195]] ([[User talk:131.111.245.195|talk]]) 10:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


:The map at [[India]] shows Kashmir in light green, meaning "claimed but not controlled". It's not truncated, it's ''differently included.'' [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 17:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::Wikipedia has a page on [[Asset forfeiture]], although this is not quite the same.[[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 10:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:Please see no 6 in [[Talk:India/FAQ]] [[User:ColinFine|ColinFine]] ([[User talk:ColinFine|talk]]) 20:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)


= December 29 =
:::Try "Frozen Accounts". The first ghit was [http://www.nls.org/consumer/frozen-accounts.htm]. [[User:Bielle|// BL \\]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 19:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


== Set animal's name = sha? ==
==Castle inheritance==
hello there my name is elisha neville and my fathers name is richard neville we have heard for a few years that a castle has been handed down to him in male generations and after reading about the neville history is quite convincing i was wandering if you had any more information on the history you can contact me on #### thankyou very much for your time <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/166.179.153.84|166.179.153.84]] ([[User talk:166.179.153.84|talk]]) 11:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


"In ancient Egyptian art, the Set animal, or sha,[citation needed]" - this seems like a major citation needed. Any help?
::<small>I have removed your email address. [[User:Ranemanoj|manya]] ([[User talk:Ranemanoj|talk]]) 11:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)</small>
[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 00:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:Which article does that appear in? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 01:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::It must be [[Set animal#:~:text=The sha is usually depicted,erect, are usually depicted as|this]] article. [[User:Omidinist|Omidinist]] ([[User talk:Omidinist|talk]]) 04:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:::That term was in the original version of the article, written 15 years ago by an editor named "P Aculeius" who is still active. Maybe the OP could ask that user about it? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 05:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:*{{tq|Each time, the word ''šꜣ'' is written over the Seth-animal.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=0po3AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA21&dq=%22Each+time+,+the+word+š3+is+written+over+the+Seth-animal.%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|Sometimes the animal is designated as sha (''šꜣ'') , but we are not certain at all whether this designation was its name.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=yNn7EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA68&dq=%22Sometimes+the+animal+is+designated+as+sha+(š)+,+but+we+are+not+certain+at+all+whether+this+designation+was+its+name.%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|When referring to the ancient Egyptian terminology, the so-called sha-animal, as depicted and mentioned in the Middle Kingdom tombs of Beni Hasan, together with other fantastic creatures of the desert and including the griffin, closely resembles the Seth animal.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=PRjOEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA483&dq=%22When+referring+to+the+ancient+Egyptian+ter-minology,+the+so-called+sha-animal,+as+depicted+and+mentioned+in+the+Middle+Kingdom+tombs+of+Beni+Hasan,+together+with+other+fantastic+creatures+of+the+des-ert+and+including+the+griffin,+closely+resembles+the+Seth+animal.%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|''šꜣ'' ‘Seth-animal’}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=EwE2DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA81&dq=%22š+'Seth-animal'%22&hl=en]</sup>
:*{{tq|He claims that the domestic pig is called “sha,” the name of the Set-animal.}}<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=kc0UAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA141&dq=%22He+claims+that+the+domestic+pig+is+called+sha,+the+name+of+the+Set-animal.%22%22&hl=en]</sup>
:Wiktionary gives ''[[wikt:šꜣ#Noun 2|šꜣ]]'' as meaning "<u>wild</u> pig", not mentioning use in connection with depictions of the Seth-animal. The hieroglyphs shown for ''šꜣ'' do not resemble those in the article [[Set animal]], which instead are listed as ideograms in (or for) ''[[wikt:stẖ#Egyptian|stẖ]]'', the proper noun ''Seth''. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 08:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you! The reason I brought it up was because the hieroglyph for the set animal didn't have the sound value to match in jsesh.
::[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 22:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Hiero|The word ''sha'' (accompanying<br>depictions of the Set animal)|<hiero>SA-A-E12.E12</hiero>|align=right|era=egypt}}
:::IMO they should be removed, or, if this can be sourced, be replaced by one or more of the following two: &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 09:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
{{clear}}
{{multiple image
| width = 125
| image1 = Sha (animal).jpg
| alt1 =
| image2 = Set animal.svg
| alt2 =
| footer = Budge's original drawing and second version of PharaohCrab's drawing; the original looked very different, and this one is clearly based on Budge's as traced by me in 2009, but without attribution.
}}
:The article—originally "Sha (animal)" was one of the first I wrote, or attempted to write, and was based on and built on the identification by [[E. A. Wallis Budge]], in [https://books.google.com/books?id=b9ZDAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Budge,+Gods+of+the+Egyptians&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjxwteh7dmKAxUf48kDHeLjINYQ6AF6BAgGEAI#v=onepage&q=Sha&f=false ''The Gods of the Egyptians''], which uses the hieroglyph <hiero>M8</hiero> for the word "sha", and includes the illustration that I traced from a scan and uploaded to Commons (and which was included in the article from the time of its creation in 2009 until December 21, 2024 when [[User:PharaohCrab]] replaced it with his original version of the one shown above; see its history for what it looked like until yesterday). I have had very little to do with the article since [[User:Sonjaaa]] made substantial changes and moved it to "Seth animal" in 2010; although it's stayed on my watchlist, I long since stopped trying to interfere with it, as it seemed to me that other editors were determined to change it to the way they thought it should be, and I wasn't sophisticated enough to intervene or advocate effectively for my opinions. In fact the only edit by me I can see after that was fixing a typo.


:As for the word ''sha'', that is what Budge called it, based on the hieroglyph associated with it; I was writing about this specific creature, which according to Budge and some of the other sources quoted above has some degree of independence from Set, as it sometimes appears without him and is used as the determinative of one or two other deities, whose totemic animal it might also have been. One of the other scholars quoted above questions whether the word ''sha'' is the name of the animal, but still associates the word with the animal: Herman Te Velde's article, "Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs Symbols and Gods", quoted above, uses slightly modified versions of Budge's illustrations; his book ''Seth, God of Confusion'' is also quoted above, both with the transliteration ''šꜣ'', which in "Egyptian Hieroglyphs" he also renders ''sha''. [[Percy Newberry]] is the source cited by the [[Henry Francis Herbert Thompson|Henry Thompson]] quotation above, claiming that ''sha'' referred to a domestic pig as well as the Set animal, and a different god distinct from Set, though sharing the same attributes (claims of which Thompson seems skeptical). Herman Te Velde also cites Newberry, though he offers a different explanation for the meaning of "sha" as "destiny". ''All Things Ancient Egypt'', also quoted above, calls the animal "the so-called ''sha''-animal", while ''Classification from Antiquity to Modern Times'' just uses ''šꜣ'' and "Seth-animal".
:I don't know anything about your specific case, but be wary of anyone trying to tell you that you've come into an unexpected inheritance - that's unfortunately a very common [[internet scam]]. It generally goes like "you've inherited xxx, but you need to pay lawyers/taxes/bribes to get at it"; in these cases there's no inheritance, and your payment (and identity info) just lines the scammer's pocket). [[Special:Contributions/87.112.89.175|87.112.89.175]] ([[User talk:87.112.89.175|talk]]) 12:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
::I would be careful, but the Neville family do have castle-owning relations. How did you come into the knowledge? I'd first check this 'castle' exists; preferably by finding it. Then ask the current owners about it - even if it is a scam, I'm sure they'll want to know that their property is involved. If you've (or your father) inherited it, you must be a blood relative of the previous occupant, so they'll know if your inheritance is a possibility. I'd suggest also, though, if it's been on the back boiler (letter a couple of months ago), then it's almost certainly not real - no-one would leave such a building like that for any period of time. - [[User:Jarry1250|Jarry1250]] <sup>([[User_talk:Jarry1250|t]], [[Special:Contributions/Jarry1250|c]])</sup> 12:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


:I'm not certain what the question here is; that the hieroglyph transliterated ''sha'' is somehow associated with the creature seems to have a clear scholarly consensus; most of the scholars use it as the name of the creature; Herman Te Velde is the only one who suggests that it ''might'' not be its name, though he doesn't conclude whether it is or isn't; and one general source says in passing "so-called ''sha''-animal", which accepts that this is what it's typically referred to in scholarship, without endorsing it. Although Newberry made the connection with pigs, none of the sources seems to write the name with pig hieroglyphs as depicted above. Could you be clearer about what it is that's being discussed here? [[User:P Aculeius|P Aculeius]] ([[User talk:P Aculeius|talk]]) 16:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::The name of the castle would make this more intreresting for us others.--[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] ([[User talk:Wetman|talk]]) 13:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


:[[File:Budgesh.png|thumb|things that start with sh]]
:How did you hear about it? If it was any way other than the previous owner's solicitor contacting you, it's probably nonsense. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 14:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:I asked because I couldn't find it in Gardiner (jsesh, no match when searching by sound value) or Budge (dictionary vol II.)
:[[User:Temerarius|Temerarius]] ([[User talk:Temerarius|talk]]) 05:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


= December 30 =
::::I think you're probably talking about [[Warwick Castle]]. I would have thought the present owners might have something to say about an "inheritance"! Oh and if your Dad thinks he's descended from [[Richard Neville]], then he probably is: many people with English ancestry can trace their descent back to the Nevilles, myself included. --[[User:TammyMoet|TammyMoet]] ([[User talk:TammyMoet|talk]]) 15:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


== I do not say the Frenchman will not come. I only say he will not come by sea. ==
== Teenage behaviour ==


1. What is the ultimate source of this famous 1803 quote by John Jervis (1735 – 1823), 1st Earl of St Vincent, First Lord of the Admiralty at the time. I googled Books and no source is ever given except possibly another collection of quotations. The closest I got was: "At a parley in London while First Lord of the Admiralty 1803". That's just not good enough. Surely there must be someone who put this anecdote in writing for the first time.
What can I do to convince my 14-year old neice that I have no interest in the actual content of her text messages, MSN messenger conversations, emails, blogs and documents on the family computer or her cell phone? As I'm the family expert on all things "technical", she quite often asks me for help with the computer or cell phone, but if something is left on the screen a strange paranoia suddenly takes hold - turning the screen away, furious clicking to exit programs, covering the screen with her hands, and so on. Is that normal behaviour for a 14-year old girl or should her parents be worried? [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 17:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


2. Wouldn't you say this use of the simple present in English is not longer current in contemporary English, and that the modern equivalent would use present continuous forms "I'm not saying... I'm only saying..." (unless Lord Jervis meant to say he was in the habit of saying this; incidentally I do realize this should go to the Language Desk but I hope it's ok just this once)
:Sounds entirely normal to me! [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 17:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


[[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 11:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:Yep, perfectly normal. It might help if you make a point of looking away while she hides things or, if you have hold of the mouse, minimise the windows yourself straight away. Of course, it is possible that she's hiding something specific that her parents do need to be worried about, unlikely, but possible. A certain amount of monitoring of children's internet usage is recommended. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 17:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:Assuming he's talking about England, does he propose building a bridge over the Channel? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 12:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::How about a [[Channel_Tunnel#Earlier_proposals|tunnel]]? --[[User:Wrongfilter|Wrongfilter]] ([[User talk:Wrongfilter|talk]]) 12:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::It's a joke. He's saying that the French won't invade under any circumstances (see [[English understatement]]). [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 20:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The First Lord of the Admiralty wouldn't be the one stopping them if the French came by tunnel (proposed in 1802) or air (the French did have hot air balloons). Any decent military officer would understand that an invasion by tunnel or balloon would have no chance of success, but this fear caused some English opposition against the Channel Tunnel for the next 150 years. Just hinting at the possibility of invasion by tunnel amongst military officers would be considered a joke.
:::Unless he was insulting the British Army (no, now I'm joking). [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


:The quoted wording varies somewhat. Our article [[John Jervis, 1st Earl of St Vincent]] has it as "I do not say, my Lords, that the French will not come. I say only they will not come by sea" in an 1801 letter to the Board of Admiralty, cited to {{cite book | last = Andidora | first = Ronald | title = Iron Admirals: Naval Leadership in the Twentieth Century | publisher = Greenwood Publishing Group | year = 2000 | isbn = 978-0-313-31266-3 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=0P-A8rIfO34C&pg=PA3 | page = 3}}. Our article [[British anti-invasion preparations of 1803–05]] has Jervis telling the House of Lords "I do not say the French cannot come, I only say they cannot come by sea", and then immediately, and without citation, saying it was more probably [[George Elphinstone, 1st Viscount Keith|Keith]]. I can't say I've ever seen it attributed to Keith anywhere else. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
I'd say you're stuck between upholding a PC version of doctor/patient priviledge and you role as uncle/aunt. If she has a problem you need to fix - let her show you/take control first and then when she is comfortable she can hand it over to you to work on. Apart from that the above make sure you look away (and not just your eyes - make it obvious you're not trying to look) and that'll help. As DuncanHill said it's entirely normal behaviour - desire for privacy and fear of embarrassment are probably two of the biggest defining factors of what it is to be a teenager. [[Special:Contributions/194.221.133.226|194.221.133.226]] ([[User talk:194.221.133.226|talk]]) 11:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:Hmm, Andidora does '''not''' in fact say it was in a letter to the Board of Admiralty, nor does he explicitly say 1801. And his source, ''The Age of Nelson'' by G J Marcus has it as Jervis telling the House of Lords sometime during the scare of '03-'05. Marcus doesn't give a source. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::[[Robert Southey]] was [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LcGoSGtr84IC&pg=PA12#v=onepage&q&f=false attributing it to Lord St Vincent] as early as 1806, and while I don't want to put too much weight on his phrase "used to say" it does at any rate raise the possibility that St Vincent said (or wrote) it more than once. Perhaps Marcus and our St Vincent article are both right. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 16:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Interesting. Thanks. Some modern accounts (not Southey apparently) claim Lord St Vincent was speaking in the House of Lords. If that was the case, wouldn't it be found in the parliamentary record? How far back does the parliamentary record go for the House of Commons and/or the House of Lords. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 17:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:As for (2), the tense is still alive and kicking, if I do say so myself. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 23:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::You don't say? [An idiom actually meaning "You say ''that'', do you?", although I dare say most of you know that.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::This is not what I am asking. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 05:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Then I will answer you more directly. You are wrong: while the usage you quote is ''less common'' than it once was, it ''is'' still current, according to my experience as a native BrE speaker for over 65 years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 13:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::I kid you not. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 23:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


== What percentage of Ancient Greek literature was preserved? ==
:Ah that's a relief. Even though she makes all the right comments when internet safety is discussed, as a responsible adult I was getting worried. [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 12:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


Has anyone seen an estimate of what percentage of Ancient Greek literature (broadly understood: literature proper, poetry, mathematics, philosophy, history, science, etc.) was preserved. It doesn't matter how you define "Ancient Greek literature", or if you mean the works available in 100 BC or 1 AD or 100 AD or 200 AD... Works were lost even in antiquity. I'm just trying to get a rough idea and was wondering if anyone ever tried to work out an estimate. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 17:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::If you ''really'' want to embarrass her, tell her you've been discussing her behaviour with millions of strangers on the internet. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 12:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


:I don't have an answer handy for you at the moment, but I can tell you that people ''have'' tried to work out an estimate for this, at least from the perspective of "how many manuscripts containing such literature managed to survive past the early Middle Ages". We've worked this one out, with many caveats, by comparing library catalogues from very early monasteries to known survivals and estimating the loss rate. -- [[User:Asilvering|asilvering]] ([[User talk:Asilvering|talk]]) 20:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:::(ec) No need to do that. She doesn't want me to see anything of what she's writing, but is quite happy to put at least some of it in a blog for her friends (and millions of others around the world) to read. Crazy eh? :-) [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 13:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:One estimate is (less than) [https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/11/16/the-invisible-library] one percent. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)


:We have a [[Lost literary work]] article with a large "Antiquity" section. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 21:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
:I can't agree with the advice you're getting. The kid has enough friends; she needs somebody who loves her looking to protect her. Would you be OK with her sloping off to the local streetcorner to hang out and chat with a mix of criminals of all ages and persuasions? Be afraid, be very afraid of the internet. Watch her like a hawk, and it doesn't matter whether she thanks you later; you're not doing it for any reward other than knowing you've done what you could to help her reach adulthood intact. Although her behavior might be nothing more than teen weirdness, what you've described sure looks exactly like guilty conscience and furtiveness. Am I the only adult who remembers being that age? You try to get away with things, and kids today have more avenues. The kid can have privacy when she earns it by openness and when her brain is full-grown and when she gets married or has her own place. Put a keylogger on her computer (but never, ever read her diary). Protect her. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 13:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::These are works known to have existed, because they were mentioned and sometimes even quoted in works that have survived. These known lost works are probably only a small fraction of all that have been lost. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 23:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
::She's your ''niece''. You have a responsible-adult role, but you do not have parental role; you may not invade her privacy. If you are going to spy on her, be sure to lie to her; she's going to resent the hell out of you when she finds out, so you may as well delay it as long as possible. --[[User:Jpgordon|jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710;]]</small></sup> 17:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:Few things which might be helpful:
:#{{xt|So profuse was Galen's output that the surviving texts represent nearly half of all the extant literature from ancient Greece.}}<ref>[[Galen|Galen's article]]</ref>
:#Although not just Greek, but only 1% of ancient literature survives.<ref>https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2009/10/26/reference-for-the-claim-that-only-1-of-ancient-literature-survives/</ref> --{{User:ExclusiveEditor/Signature}} 11:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


:The following quantities are known: <math>S,</math> the number of preserved works, <math>L,</math> the (unknown) number of lost works, and <math>M_L,</math> the number of lost works of which we know, through mentions in preserved works. In a (very) naive model, let <math>\mu</math> stand for the probability that a given work (lost or preserved) is mentioned in some other preserved work (so <math>M_L=\mu L</math>). The expected number of mentions of preserved works in other preserved works is then <math>M_S=\mu(S-1).</math> If we have the numerical value of the latter quantity (which is theoretically obtainable by scanning all preserved works), we can obtain an estimate for <math>\mu</math> and compute <math>L\approx\frac{M_L}{M_S}(S-1).</math>
:As you say that you are the computer expert of the family and that you have no desire to spy on her, maybe you could tell her about public-key encryption? --[[User:Aseld|<span style="color:#CC0000">'''Aseld'''</span>]] [[User talk:Aseld|<span style="color:black"><sup>'''talk'''</sup></span>]] 01:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:&nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


* Even without seeing any professional estimate of the kind I'm asking about here, my ballpark figure was that it had to be less than 1 percent, simply from noting how little of even the most celebrated and important authors has been preserved (e.g. about 5 percent for Sophocles) and how there are hundreds of authors and hundreds of works for which we only have the titles and maybe a few quotes, not to mention all those works of which we have not an inkling, the number of which it is, for this very reason, extremely hard to estimate.
= February 20 =


* But as a corollary to my first question I have another three:
== Please Help! ==


* 1. Has any modern historian tackled this paradox, namely the enormous influence that the culture of the Ancient World has had on the West while at the same time how little we actually know about that culture, and as a consequence the problem that we seem to believe that we know much more than we actually do? in other words that our image of it that has had this influence on Western culture might be to some extent a modern creation and might be very different of what it actually was?
Hello, I recently joined Wikipedia in order to ask this question. I tried to find it, but could not, and I need it to finish a report...


* 2. I understand that in this regard there can be the opposite opinion (or we can call it a hypothesis, or an article of faith) which is the one that is commonly held (at least implicitly): that despite all that was lost the main features of our knowledge of the culture of the Ancient World are secure and that no lost work is likely to have modified the fundamentals? Like I said this seems to be the position that is commonly implicitly held, but I'm interested to hear if any historian has discussed this question and defended this position explicitly in a principled way?
Why did Eric Arthur Blair used "George Orwell" as his pen name?


* 3. Finally to what extent is the position mentioned in point 2 simply a result of ignorance (people not being aware of how much was lost)? How widespread is (in the West) the knowledge of how much was lost? How has that awareness developed in the West, both at the level of the experts and that of the culture in general, since say the 15th century? Have you encountered any discussions of these points?
Pease help me! [[User:Knitemare217|Knitemare217]] ([[User talk:Knitemare217|talk]]) 00:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:Our article [[George Orwell]] contains the lines
<blockquote>He returned to teaching at Hayes and prepared for the publication of his work now known as Down and Out in Paris and London which he wished to publish under an assumed name. In a letter to Moore (dated 15 November 1932) he left the choice of pseudonym to him and to Victor Gollancz. Four days later, he wrote to Moore, suggesting these pseudonyms: P. S. Burton (a tramping name), Kenneth Miles, George Orwell, and H. Lewis Allways. He finally adopted the nom de plume George Orwell because, as he told Eleanor Jacques, "It is a good round English name."</blockquote>
:[[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 00:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


[[Special:Contributions/178.51.7.23|178.51.7.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.7.23|talk]]) 08:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::I was under the impression that "George" was for the [[St George|patron saint of England]] and thus quintessentially English, and "Orwell" was for the [[River Orwell]] in [[Suffolk]], which was a place he held in some affection. I've done some googling and discovered several sites that agree with this (eg: [http://www.bryk.pl/teksty/liceum/j%C4%99zyki/angielski/22976-george_orwell_on_his_life_and_his_work.html] [http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/gorwell.htm] [http://doc.studenti.it/appunti/lingue/george-orwell.html]), but none of them provide an authoritative reference for this assertion, so it should be used with care if at all. <strong>[[User:Karenjc|<font color="red">Ka</font>]][[User_talk:Karenjc|renjc]]</strong> 15:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


:The issues touched upon are major topics in [[historiography]] as well as the [[philosophy of history]], not only for the Ancient (Classical) World but for all historical study. Traditionally, [[historian]]s have concentrated on the culture of the high and mighty. The imprint on the historical record by ''[[hoi polloi]]'' is much more difficult to detect, except in the rare instances where they rose up, so what we think of as "the" culture of any society is that of a happy few. Note also that "the culture of the Ancient World" covers a period of more than ten centuries, in which kingdoms and empires rose and fell, states and colonies were founded and conquered, in an endless successions of wars and intrigues. On almost any philosophical issue imaginable, including [[natural philosophy]], ancient philosophers have held contrary views. It is not clear how to define "the" culture of the Ancient World, and neither is it clear how to define the degree to which this culture has influenced modern Western society. It may be argued that the influence of say Plato or Sophocles has largely remained confined to an upper crust. I think historians studying this are well aware of the limitations of their source material, including the fact that history is written by the victors. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== Chinese Catholics ==


:178.51.7.23 -- Think of it this way: What did it mean to "publish" something in the ancient world? You had at least one written manuscript of your work -- rarely more than a handful of such manuscripts. You could show what you had written to your friends, have it delivered to influential people, bequeath it to your heirs, or donate it to an archive or research collection (almost none of which were meaningfully public libraries in the modern sense of that phrase). However you chose to do it, once you were gone, the perpetuation of your work depended on other people having enough interest in it to do the laborious work of copying the manuscript, or being willing to pay to have a copy made. Works of literature which did not interest other people enough to copy manuscripts of it were almost always eventually lost, which ensured that a lot of tedious and worthless stuff was filtered out. Of course, pagan literary connoisseurs, Christian monks, Syriac and Arabic translators seeking Greek knowledge, and Renaissance Humanists all had different ideas of what was worth preserving, but between them, they ensured that a lot of interesting or engaging or informative works ended up surviving from ancient times. I'm sure that a number of worthy books still slipped through the gaps, but some losses were very natural and to be expected; for example, some linguists really wish that Claudius's book on the Etruscan language had survived, but it's not surprising that it didn't, since it would not have generally interested ancient, medieval, or renaissance literate people in the same way it would interest modern scholars struggling with Etruscan inscriptions.
#What do Chinese Catholics do as regards to having children?
:By the way, college bookstores on or near campuses of universities which had a Classics program sometimes used to have a small section devoted to the small green-backed (Greek) and red-backed (Latin) volumes of the [[Loeb Classical Library]], and you could get an idea of what survived from ancient times (and isn't very obscure or fragmentary) by perusing the shelves... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
#Is the One Child Policy enforced on foreigners living in China?
::Indeed - at the other end of the scale, the ''[[Description of Greece]]'' by Pausanias seems to have survived into the Middle Ages in a single MS (now of course lost), and there are no ancient references to either it or him known. Since the Renaissance it has been continuously in print. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
#How does the Catholic Church in China address the first problem?
{{reflist-talk}}
[[User:Vltava 68|<font color="000080">Vltava</font>]] [[User talk:Vltava 68|<font color="green">68</font>]] 00:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:The one child policy (further relaxed in the last couple of years) has never applied to non-Chinese citizens, even alien-residents. The Chinese government has no control with that respect on non-citizens. [[User:Steewi|Steewi]] ([[User talk:Steewi|talk]]) 02:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:There are many exceptions to the one child policy. It does not apply to ethnic minorities, for example. Some of these minorities, such as the Hui or the Jews, are generally at least partly defined by religion - though I don't think Catholicism is counted as an ethnic minority. A Chinese citizen of foreign extraction would, in the usual case, be an ethnic minority and thus not be subject to the policy. Chinese citizens who have previously lived abroad are permitted two children. --[[User:PalaceGuard008|PalaceGuard008]] ([[User_Talk:PalaceGuard008|Talk]]) 02:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


= December 31 =
::Interesting. How would this affect an ethnic-Han Chinese married to a foreigner?--[[User:Givnan|KageTora]] ([[User talk:Givnan|talk]]) 10:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


== Was the fictional character "The Jackal" (as played by Edward Fox and Bruce Willis) based on Carlos The Jackal? ==
:The status of [[Roman Catholicism]] in China is complicated (see [[Christianity in China]] for an overview); Catholicism has been in China a long time due to [[Jesuit]] and other missionaries, but the [[People's Republic of China|PRC]] government regulates religion, banning sects it doesn't like and tightly controlling the rest. Hence Catholicism in China is officially controlled by the [[Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association]], rather than being under Papal authority. The article on the [[Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association]] says the CPCA approves of abortion and artificial contraception in contrast to [[Vatican]] teaching. The Vatican seems unwilling to break ties with Chinese Catholics even if they obey the CPCA, but the Vatican doesn't accept the Chinese government's authority over Catholicism either. --[[User:Maltelauridsbrigge|Maltelauridsbrigge]] ([[User talk:Maltelauridsbrigge|talk]]) 12:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


Talking about the fictional assassin from the books and films. I once read somewhere that the real Carlos The Jackal didn't like being compared to the fictional character, because he said he was a professional Marxist revolutionary, not merely a hitman for hire to the highest bidder (not in the article about him at the moment, so maybe not true). [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== Terrorist Attack on Big Ben ==


:No, the character wasn't based on Carlos. The films are based on the 1971 historical fiction novel ''[[The Day of the Jackal]]'' by Frederick Forsyth, which begins with a fairly accurate account of the actual 1962 assassination attempt on Charles de Gaulle by the French Air Force lieutenant colonel [[Jean Bastien-Thiry]], which failed. Subsequently in the fictional plot the terrorists hire an unnamed English professional hitman whom they give the codename 'The Jackal'.
Hi friends I read on [[20minutos]] (Spanish newspaper) that terrorists whoa attacked London in 2005 also wanted to attack the [[Big Ben]] and the [[Buckingham Palace]]. My question is... if they achieved it, would any person die in the Big Ben?, Are people working there?. I read the article of the Big Ben but there's no mention about attempted terrorist attack in July 2005. Thanks and forgive spelling mistakes. Greetings all! --[[Special:Contributions/190.49.118.197|190.49.118.197]] ([[User talk:190.49.118.197|talk]]) 01:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:[[Carlos the Jackal]] was a Venezuelan terrorist named Ilich Ramírez Sánchez operating in the 1970s and '80s. He was given the cover name 'Carlos' when in 1971 he joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. When authorities found some of his weapons stashed in a friend's house, a copy of Forsyth's novel was noticed on his friend's bookshelf, and a ''Guardian'' journalist then invented the nickname, as journalists are wont to do. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 03:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::There's also the fictionalised Ilich Ramírez Sánchez / Carlos the Jackal from the [[Jason Bourne]] novels. [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


== References ==
[[Big Ben]] is in the clock-tower at the [[Houses of Parliament]], so it would be an enormous terrorist attack and whilst it might be that it was low in terms of number of people it would be huge in significance - it would be an attack on an icon. Add in that depending on the 'time of day' there would be potentially thousands of tourists that could be injured/killed by falling debris etc. Of course to understand the terrorist policies you have to consider that they focus heavily on symbolism and the knock-on effects that an attack would have. You don't have to kill thousands to get the attention and spread fear to millions of people. [[Special:Contributions/194.221.133.226|194.221.133.226]] ([[User talk:194.221.133.226|talk]]) 09:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


I am on to creating an article on {{ill|Lu Chun|zh|陸淳}} soon. If anyone has got references about him other than those on google, it would be great if you could share them here. Thanks, {{User:ExclusiveEditor/Signature}} 11:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:Of course, depending on the nature of the attack, you might wipe out several hundred MPs - that would be a pretty successful terrorist attack. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 10:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::There would also be the knock-on effect of BBC Radio 4 losing the bongs before the news. [[User:AllanHainey|AllanHainey]] ([[User talk:AllanHainey|talk]]) 13:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::<sup>Of course, Radio 4 have used other bells before as stand-ins during building work, maintenence etc. - [[User:Jarry1250|Jarry1250]] <sup>([[User_talk:Jarry1250|t]], [[Special:Contributions/Jarry1250|c]])</sup> 15:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)</sup>
:::IT would also be very difficult to rebuild Big Ben to how it was, and the effect of an attack on the original buildings of the Houses of Parliament would also be irreparable.[[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 14:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Depending on the scope of the attack and resulting damage, [[Pittsburgh Steelers|These Guys]] would have to find another [[Ben Roethlisberger|Quarterback]] :) Cheers, [[User:10draftsdeep|10draftsdeep]] ([[User talk:10draftsdeep|talk]]) 19:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, that dude's tough. He played the Super Bowl with a broken rib. However, I don't even think he could take on a 747... --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 21:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


:Did you try the [[National Central Library]] of Taiwan? The library has a lot of collection about history of Tang dynasty. If you want to write a research paper for publication purpose, you need to know what have been written by others. Then the [https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/ National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertation in Taiwan] under the central library can be a good starting point. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== China ==


== Battle of the Granicus ==
Would it be fair to say that the reason China has been united throughout most of it's existence is because the ethnic and geographic layout of East Asia? [[Special:Contributions/72.200.101.17|72.200.101.17]] ([[User talk:72.200.101.17|talk]]) 02:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
: On the ethnic perspective, it depends on the time at which you take the snapshot of said layout. Historically, what is today "China" was inhabited by a whole range of diverse groups, most of which eventually became assimilated into the Han. Even today, there is great internal division amongst them. What has held the nation together is probably not so much their "ethnic" makeup as a cultural unity which has developed over the centuries and even today is incomplete. I would say the written Chinese language is one of the most important unifying factors. --[[User:PalaceGuard008|PalaceGuard008]] ([[User_Talk:PalaceGuard008|Talk]]) 02:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::I would also say that the original premise is somewhat faulted. The idea that China has been united throughout its existance is a faulty premise. Consider that Modern China includes territories which historically are not populated by the Chinese (Han) peoples, including [[Tibet]], [[Manchuria]], [[Uigur]] lands, etc. etc. Also consider that for large amounts of Chinese history there have been competing Han Chinese states, including such time periods as the [[Warring states period]], the [[Three Kingdoms]] period, the [[Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Period]], the [[Sixteen Kingdoms]] period, the [[Southern and Northern Dynasties]] period, the [[Xinhai Revolution]], the [[Chinese Civil War]] period, all represented times when there was no single monolithic Han Chinese state. Just watch the animated gif titled [[:File:Territories of Dynasties in China.gif]] and you'll get an idea about the ebb and flow of Chinese history... --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 02:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:::On the other hand, if you define a core central China excluding peripheral territories, then you get a zone roughly equivalent in area to Europe excluding Russia and northern Scandinavia, or roughly equivalent in area to the Indian subcontinent -- yet over the past 2,200 years, this core China has been politically unified considerably more often than than either Europe or the Indian subcontinent, and in some respects is more culturally unified, too (in terms of having only one major written language, etc.). [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 12:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


This month [https://archaeologymag.com/2024/12/location-of-alexander-the-greats-battlefield/ some news broke] about identification of the Battle of the Granicus site, stating in particular: "Professor Reyhan Korpe, a historian from Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University (ÇOMÜ) and Scientific Advisor to the “Alexander the Great Cultural Route” project, led the team that uncovered the battlefield". However, per [[Battle of the Granicus#Location]] it seems that the exact site has been known since at least [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-hellenic-studies/article/abs/battle-of-the-granicus-river/1C19CEF8F59308BED47331BE7063BB2C Hammond's 1980 article]. Am I reading the news correctly that what Korpe's team actually did was mapping Alexander’s journey to the Granicus rather than identifying the battle site per se? Per news, "Starting from Özbek village, Alexander’s army moved through Umurbey and Lapseki before descending into the Biga Plain". [[User:Brandmeister|Brandmeister]]<sup>[[User talk:Brandmeister|talk]]</sup> 23:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== Cavemen in literature ==


:If Körpe and his team wrote a paper about their discovery, I haven't found it, so I can only go by news articles reporting on their findings. Apparently, Körpe gave a presentation at the Çanakkale Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism for an audience of local mayors and district governors,<sup>[https://www.dailysabah.com/turkiye/site-for-alexander-the-greats-battle-of-granicus-identified-in-northwest-turkiye/news]</sup> and I think the news reports reflect what he said there. Obviously, the presentation was in Turkish. Turkish news sources, based on an item provided by [[Demirören News Agency|DHA]], quote him as saying, "{{tq|Bölgede yaptığımız araştırmalarda antik kaynakları da çok dikkatli okuyarak, yorumlayarak savaşın <u>aşağı yukarı</u> tam olarak nerede olduğunu, hangi köyler arasında olduğunu, ovanın tam olarak neresinde olduğunu bulduk.}}" [My underlining] Google Translate turns this into, "During our research in the region, by reading and interpreting ancient sources very carefully, we found out <u>more or less</u> exactly where the war took place, which villages it took place between, and where exactly on the plain it took place." I cannot reconcile "more or less" with "exactly".
When did the present stereotype of a [[caveman]] first appear? (By that I mean a group of people living in caves, wearing furs, carrying clubs and saying "Ug". Not meaning 'modern people' who choose to live as hermits in a cave.) In particular, would folk emigrating in the 1840s on the [[Oregon trail]] be familiar with the stereotype? -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 08:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:The news reports do not reveal the location identified by Körpe, who is certainly aware of Hammond's theory, since he cited the latter's 1980 article in earlier publications. One possibility is that the claim will turn out to have been able to confirm Hammond's theory definitively. Another possibility is that the location they identified is not "more or less exactly" the same as that of Hammond's theory. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 02:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:No, I don't think they'd be aware of the sdtereotype because it doesn't fit at all well with Biblical beliefs - as practised by almost everyone on the trail, and probably to the characters to which you refer. - [[User:Jarry1250|Jarry1250]] <sup>([[User_talk:Jarry1250|t]], [[Special:Contributions/Jarry1250|c]])</sup> 11:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


= January 1 =
:Neanderthal remains were the first real discovery of fossils significantly different from modern humans, but significantly more connected to modern humans than to apes; however, this wasn't really understood until 1856-1857 (and even then, some claimed that the Neanderthal skeleton was that of a "deformed Cossack" soldier from the preceding century!). Remains of fully modern humans from before the origins of agriculture (ca. 10,000 B.C.) weren't discovered until 1868 ([[Cro-Magnon]]). -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 12:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


== Has there ever been an incident of a serial killer murdering another serial killer? ==
So do we have any idea when / where the stereotype evolved? -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 13:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


Question as topic. Has this ever happened outside of the movies? [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 05:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:Conan Doyle's [[The Lost World (Arthur Conan Doyle)|The Lost World]] was published in 1912 with ape-men fighting humans; [[Edgar Rice Burroughs]] copied this idea for [[The Land That Time Forgot]] in 1915. I can't find any references before about 1912.


:This is an interesting question. Just because you can't find any incident, doesn't mean this kind of case never happened (type II error). [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:IMDb seems to point to a genre of caveman movies in the 1910s, listing [[D. W. Griffith]]'s [[Man's Genesis]] (1912)[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0002342/] and [[Charles Chaplin]]'s [[His Prehistoric Past]] (1914)[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0004102/]as well as [[Brute Force (1914 film)|Brute Force]] (1914)[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0002719/], [[The Cave Man]] (1912)[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0197348/], and later [[Cave Man]] (1934)[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0150077/]. From the descriptions, Griffiths's characters can't talk (handy for a silent film), and use sticks and stones for weapons, while the hero of Cave Man acts like [[Tarzan]], another source for primitive life, and fights dinosaurs. Stills from Man's Genesis[http://kissofthebeast.com/film_program/20_november/mans_genesis] and His Prehistoric Past[http://chaplin.bfi.org.uk/resources/bfi/filmog/film_thumb.php?fid=59421&resource=Stills] show the wearing of furs and grass, although Chaplin still has his bowler hat.


:Apparently yes: [[Dean Corll]] was killed by one of his his accomplices, [[Elmer Wayne Henley]]. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 12:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:[[Caveman]], [[:Category:Fictional prehistoric characters]] and [[:Category:Prehistoric people in popular culture]] may have some more information. There seems to have been a genre revival in the early 1960s: [[The Flintstones]] began in 1960, two years after [[B.C. (comic strip)]]. [[One Million Years B.C.]] was made in 1966. --[[User:Maltelauridsbrigge|Maltelauridsbrigge]] ([[User talk:Maltelauridsbrigge|talk]]) 13:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::I was wondering if caveman stereotypes might be influenced by [[circus]] [[strongman]] imagery, particularly as regards the brute strength and one-shouldered fur costume; but I can't find anything earlier than the early 20th century, e.g. Abe Boshes in an undated image[http://www.oldtimestrongman.com/blog/labels/Abe%20Boshes.html], so the circus performers may have been influenced by caveman movies. The Circus Historical Society[http://www.circushistory.org/] would be the place for research. --[[User:Maltelauridsbrigge|Maltelauridsbrigge]] ([[User talk:Maltelauridsbrigge|talk]]) 13:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


::Of course it would be more notable if the two were not connected to each other. --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 08:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::There have been heraldic "wildmen" or "[[woodwose]]s" in European iconography for a long time, often shown as bearded and carrying huge clubs, but they're not uniformly depicted as brutishly subhuman (in fact, often they're shown as fine physical specimens influenced by classical depictions of Hercules), and they have no real association with caves, that I'm aware of... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 14:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


:If you're including underworld figures, this happens not infrequently. As an Aussie, a case that springs to mind was [[Andrew Veniamin]] murdering [[Victor Pierce]]. Both underworld serial murderers. I'm sure there are many similar cases in organised crime. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 08:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:If I recall, the idea of "cavemen" specifically dates from the mid-19th century, coinciding with the widely-reported [[Neanderthals#Discovery|discovery of Neanderthal remains]] in Europe. Europeans of that period were fascinated with the idea that even "civilized" people like themselves had a pre-civilized, "barbaric" stage of life where they were essentially brutes. Tracing the evolution (har har) of this particular trope would be quite interesting, as it is one of those things that everybody "knows" today but nobody really knows why they know it, but it was well-established by the time people like Darwin and Galton were writing on the evolution of men. Darwin in particular draws on this idea in ''Descent of Man'' as a way to counter the accusations that Europeans and "savages" from other parts of the world were not the same species (he shows that civilization is just a layer over the basic barbaric frame). I don't think Americans in the 1840s would have been aware of the idea, though. I imagine it made its way into cheap Victorian literature a lot earlier than the "classics" described above. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.14.211|98.217.14.211]] ([[User talk:98.217.14.211|talk]]) 15:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::Aren't hired killers distinct from the usual concept of a serial killer? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 09:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::I've edited some of the fruitful thoughts above into Wikipedia's weak article [[Caveman]]. Anyone interested might want to improve it further. It needs your help--[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] ([[User talk:Wetman|talk]]) 17:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::: Thanks wetman. -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 21:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


It might not be a stereotype - see [[Cerne Abbas giant]] [[Special:Contributions/89.241.159.20|89.241.159.20]] ([[User talk:89.241.159.20|talk]]) 13:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:Outside the movies? Sure, on [[Dexter (TV series)|TV]]. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 21:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:The Dexter character from the multiple Dexter series is based on [[Pedro Rodrigues Filho]], who killed criminals, including murderers. It is necessary to decide how many merders each of those murders did in order to decide if you would want to classify them as serial killers or just general murderers. [[Special:Contributions/68.187.174.155|68.187.174.155]] ([[User talk:68.187.174.155|talk]]) 19:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:Stereotypes can be based on real difference, rather than just imagined ones. Just because ''some'' images show this type of 'caveman' does not mean it isn't a stereotype, because there are bound to be cavemen that don't ift into that group. - [[User:Jarry1250|Jarry1250]] <sup>([[User_talk:Jarry1250|t]], [[Special:Contributions/Jarry1250|c]])</sup> 13:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
::It sounds like the ''[[Death Wish (1974 film)]]'' film series might have also drawn inspiration from Filho. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 03:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:How is a piece of seventeenth century graffiti relevant here? [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 10:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


== Another serial killer question ==
== Succession ==


about 20 years ago, I saw a documentary where it was said that the majority of serial killers kill for sexual gratification, or for some sort of revenge against their upbringing, or because in their head that God (or someone else) told them to kill. But the FBI agent on the documentary said something about how their worst nightmare was an extremely intelligent, methodical killer who was doing what he did to make some sort of grand statement about society/political statement. That this sort of killer was one step ahead of law enforcement and knew all of their methods. Like a Hannibal Lecter type individual. He said that he could count on the fingers of one hand the sort of person who he was talking about, but that these killers were the most difficult of all to catch and by far the most dangerous. Can you tell me any examples of these killers? [[Special:Contributions/146.90.140.99|146.90.140.99]] ([[User talk:146.90.140.99|talk]]) 05:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Duchess of Saxony, yes or no? This should be a title for the pre-Windsors, right? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.231.164.27|68.231.164.27]] ([[User talk:68.231.164.27|talk]]) 06:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:[[Ted Kaczynski]] ("the Unabomber") comes to mind. --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 07:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:Yes, Victoria was a Duchess in Saxony. All British royals descended from Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, including Elizabeth II but excluding her descendants, would've also been Dukes and Duchesses in Saxony if George V hadn't renounced all German titles for himself and his descandants. If The Duke of Edinburgh hadn't renounced his princely titles, Elizabeth II and her male-line descendants would've also been Princes of Greece and Denmark. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 08:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
::I second this. Ted the Unabomber only got finally caught by chance, only after his brother happened to recognise him. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 08:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:More than a few killed for money; [[Michael Swango]] apparently just for joy. The case of [[Leopold and Loeb]] comes to mind, who hoped to demonstrate superior intellect; if they had not bungled their first killing despite spending seven months planning everything, more would surely have followed. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:[[Joseph Paul Franklin]]. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 13:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== Missing fire of London ==
So why doesn't Wikipedia mention this in their styles, only casually glance over the issue in relation to WWI? Surely, some standardization is in order. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.231.164.27|68.231.164.27]] ([[User talk:68.231.164.27|talk]]) 09:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Victoria never used the titles of Duchess in Saxony and Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, because she acquired them when she was already Queen of the United Kingdom. She used her highest, monarchical title instead of courtesy titles acquired by marriage. Her children rarely (if ever) used the titles of Duke in Saxony and Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha because their British royal titles ranked higher than their German ducal titles. We can mention that they held those titles, but they surely didn't use them. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 18:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


[[British Movietone News]] covered the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOIsenLDU9o burning down of the Crystal Palace] in this somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but apparently factual, film. At 00:15 it refers to 'the biggest London blaze since 1892'. What happened in 1892 that could be considered comparable to the Palace's demise, or at least sufficiently well-known to be referred to without further explanation?
I'm just wanting to see all titles, not just regnant, but even the honorary. HM the Queen today has all of these articles about her wonderful titles and positions, but you'd think we'd see this title included for the Albertine period of the BRF, what with the inclusion of all the French titles for the government back in the day, as they are listed on Wikipedia. I myself know much less about the German titles and situation, the whole present establishment descended from Sophia of Hanover. It would help me and others less familiar with this brand of the modern Monarchy. I know the title is in her article but the circumstances of the German dynasties with respect to their Continental holdings, are all rather hazy. I know much more about the French dynasties and their Continental connections with England, but maybe it's just not that interesting in this case. I don't know why Victoria inherited when there was a legitimate male heir to the throne. This is bewildering. The same thing happened to the Windsors, with Elizabeth instead of some male Windsor. It's like Parliament is increasing the Royal turnover rate for dynasties, so none of them are dyed in the wool elements of the establishment. Consequently, it is rather tiring to cultivate sympathy for nobodies on the throne, although I'm a hopeful monarchist.
:There are some articles which list all titles of a deceased British royal - [[List of titles and honours of Mary of Teck]] for example. Why did Victoria succeed? Victoria succeeded because her father was the eldest of the younger brothers of William IV and William IV had no children at all. Since Victoria's father was dead and she was his only child, she was the representative of him and his line. Ernest Augustus of Hanover was younger than Victoria's father and so Victoria was "older" than him in the eyes of cognatic primogeniture. Since the throne of Hanover was restricted to men only (just like the French throne), Ernest Augustus succeeded there as William IV's closest male relative. In the United Kingdom, however, women can succeed if they have no brothers - this has been a rule since the 12th century. Victoria and Elizabeth had no brothers and therefore they were both rightful heirs to the throne. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 22:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
:: Female succession was ''accepted'' from the 12th century, but it was not the ''rule'' – in the sense that Victoria definitely preceded her uncles and male cousins without controversy – until much later. —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 02:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


I can see nothing in [[History of London]], [[List of town and city fires]], [[List of fires]] or [[1892]]. The [https://londonfirejournal.blogspot.com/2007/05/welcome.html London Fire Journal] records "May 8, 1892 - Scott's Oyster Bar, Coventry Street. 4 dead.", but also lists later fires with larger death tolls. Does anyone have access to the Journal of the [[Royal Statistical Society]]'s article [https://academic.oup.com/jrsssa/article-abstract/56/1/124/7090013 ''Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892'']? <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 13:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
The male line was still in existence and still is today. It's quite strange to hear tabloid reports of the present heir to Hanover in Germany, instead of acknowledge that a male heir is desired to prolong a dynastic hold on the throne. It's not like the Tudors here, in this situation. What becomes of all the male Hanoverians and Saxons? This is just Parliament's stranglehold on the Monarchy and they've been doing it since they booted Jamie from the Throne, so there is no intention of a change any time soon? Is there an actual stipulation or clause written somewhere, that forces each dynasty to do this, a contract of Constitutional Monarchy? The Throne is divorced from reproductive pass/fail, but is wholly arbitrary? It couldn't go either way, could it? I want to know if this is as official as the ban on Roman Catholicism.
:Yes, but cognatic primogeniture doesn't care about the strict male line. Agnatic primogeniture does. The UK follows and has always followed (just like it's predecessors followed) cognatic primogeniture: if a person has no sons, then that person is to be succeeded by the eldest daughter. The parliament has not plotted against the monarchy or whatever you're trying to say and I hope you won't edit the article to reflect your opinion. Let's continue this discussion here please. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 23:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


:I see the [[Great Fire of 1892]] destroyed half the capital of Newfoundland and Labrador. But comparing that to [[The_Crystal_Palace#Destruction_by_fire|the Crystal Palace fire]], which destroyed only the Crystal Palace, is an odd choice. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 14:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
All right then, you want to say Parliament had nothing to do with forcing Henry Tudor onto the nation by marrying Elizabeth of York, even though there were viable claimants in both Houses of Lancaster and York that were of the Plantagenet dynasty? You're saying Parliament didn't interfere and demolish the Plantagenets by skillful use of the Tudors? I'm not necessarily addressing the Commons on this issue of royal right, but the Lords want concessions out of the Crown and will only get it for so long as they dictate the succession. What I'm getting at, is that England very clearly was an agnatic primogeniture succession country until the "solution" to the Wars of the Roses. I could not imagine any dynasty handing over their power so easily, unless the parliamentary establishment put handicaps on the succession. There is no law of the land that could prevent agnatic succession in the UK before the Williamites redefined the Monarchy and the natural desire of a Royal Family is to prolong their own kind for as long as God allows.
::It would also be odd to call it a "London blaze". &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)


:::The closest I found was the [[1861 Tooley Street fire]]. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:Oh, I hate conspiracy theories so much. England has not practiced agnatic primogeniture since the Norman conquest. You forgot that Matilda was designated heir of Henry I and that both Stephen and Henry II based their rights on their mother's succession rights. The parliament doesn't dictate succession, nor does the Cortes in Spain (and Spain practices and has always practised cognatic primogeniture). The throne is not held by a dynasty, it's held by the rightful heir. Henry VII was not forced to marry Elizabeth of York. He was monarch by the right of conquest and his marriage to Elizabeth simply strenghten his children's succession rights. The parliament has nothing to do with succession to the Crown or a peerage title. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 10:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Also a large fire at Wood Street in the City in 1882 (perhaps later mistaken for 1892?). [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/13518096] [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I too wonder whether the Movietone newsreader was the victim of a typo. In December ''1897'' [[Cripplegate]] suffered "the greatest fire...that has occurred in the City since the Great Fire of 1666". [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gJ7uvG29enQC&pg=PA91&dq=%221897+-+an+inquiry+respecting+the+greatest+fire+(+that+in+Cripplegate+)+that+has+occurred+in+the+City%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiOwqqy-daKAxUHXEEAHeoYKXAQ6AF6BAgGEAI#v=onepage&q=%221897%20-%20an%20inquiry%20respecting%20the%20greatest%20fire%20(%20that%20in%20Cripplegate%20)%20that%20has%20occurred%20in%20the%20City%22&f=false]. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 11:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC) That's also mentioned, I now see, in Verbarson's London Fire Journal link. --[[User:Antiquary|Antiquary]] ([[User talk:Antiquary|talk]]) 12:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


:{{re|Verbarson}} ''Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892'' is available on JSTOR as part of the Wikipedia Library. It doesn't give details of any individual fires. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 16:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
::Really not sure what you mean by that last sentence -- Parliaments in the British Isles were involved a number of times in resolving disputed claims about noble heirships, and what are the [[Act of Settlement 1701]] and the [[Royal_Marriages_Act_1772]] if not parliamentary acts? [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 22:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::{{Re|DuncanHill}}, so it is. The DOI link in that article is broken; I should have been more persistent with the JSTOR search. Thank you. <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 17:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:Unexpectedly, from the ''Portland Guardian'' (that's [[Portland, Victoria]]): [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/65441175 GREAT FIRE IN LIONDON. A great fire is raging in the heart of the London ducks.] Dated 26 November 1892. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 07:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::Oh, the poor ducks. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 12:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::<small>The whole OCR transcript of that blurred newspaper column is hilarious. "The fames have obtained a firm bold", indeed! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 12:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)</small>
::Setting aside the unsung history of the passionate ducks of London, what I see in that clipping is:
::* 1892 - Australia is still a colony (18+ years to go)
::* which is linked to the UK by (i) long-distance shipping, and (ii) [[Submarine communications cable#Cable to India, Singapore, East Asia and Australia|telegraph cables]]
::* because of (i), the London docks are economically important
::* because of (ii), they get daily updates from London
::Therefore, the state of the London docks (and the possible fate of the Australian ships there) is of greater importance to Australian merchants than it is to most Londoners. So headlines in Portland may not reflect the lesser priority of that news in the UK? <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 17:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Yes, I was highly impressed by the rapidity of the Victorian Victorian telegraph system there. But my money's on Antiquary's theory, above - I think the newsreel announcer's script had 1892 as a typo for 1897. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 18:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Which I have finally found (in WP) at [[Timeline of London (19th century)#1890 to 1899]] (using the same cite as Antiquary). It does look persuasively big ("The Greatest Fire of Modern Times" - [[The Star (1888–1960)|''Star'']]), though there were no fatalities. Despite that, an inquest was held. It sounds much more likely than the docks fire to have been memorable in 1936. <span class="nowrap">[[User:Verbarson|--&nbsp;Verbarson&nbsp;]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Verbarson|talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Verbarson|edits]]</sub></span> 19:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


:::I mean that Parliament doesn't change the succession law to suit a particular dynasty. Anyway, what's disputable about Victoria's accession? What's disputable about Elizabeth II's accession? [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 23:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


= January 4 =
::::The fact that you would have [[Jacobite succession|Francis II]] instead of Elizabeth II if the Act of Settlement 1701 hadn't been passed by parliament, as well as the fact that if the [[Royal_Marriages_Act_1772]] hadn't been passed, then a lot of the illegitimate children of Victoria's father's elder brothers might have been legitimate children of Victoria's father's elder brothers ... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 23:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


== Could the Sack of [[Jericho]] be almost ==
::::The IP was asking why Victoria ascended when there were males from the House of Hanover and why Elizabeth II ascended when there were males from the House of Windsor. Jacobites were not mentioned. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 00:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


:: Female succession in Spain goes back quite a long way, but since the Bourbon succession it has been excluded at least sometimes. —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 02:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
historical in the sense that the story of what happened, happened to a different city but was transferred to Jericho?[[User:Richard L. Peterson|Rich]] ([[User talk:Richard L. Peterson|talk]]) 05:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:It might be. But then again, it might not be. Following whatever links there are to the subject within the article might be a good start for finding out about whatever theories there might be. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 07:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:To believe that the events in the story are historical, whether for Jericho or another city, amounts to believing in a miracle. Barring miracles, no amount of horn-blowing and shouting can bring defensive walls down.
:Jericho was destroyed in the 16th century BCE. The first version of the [[Book of Joshua]] was written in the late 7th century BCE, so there are 9 centuries between the destruction and the recording of the story. An orally transmitted account, passed on through some thirty generations, might have undergone considerable changes, turning a conquest with conventional war practices, possibly with sound effects meant to install fear in the besieged, into a miraculous event. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:50, 4 January 2025 (UTC)


:[Edit Conflicts] The sack was described in the [[Book of Joshua]], which however was likely compiled around 640–540 BCE, some six or seven centuries after the supposed Hebrew conquest of Canaan. Some scholars now discount the whole Exodus and Conquest narrative as political lobbying written by [[Babylonian captivity|Jewish exiles in Babylonia]] (which the Persians later took over) hoping to be given control over the former territory of Israel as well as being restored to their native Judah.
::: Every Bourbon King of Spain had a male heir, except for Ferdinand VII, who was succeeded by his eldest daughter Isabella II - therefore, agnatic primogeniture was not ''applied'' in Spain since the Bourbon succession. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 19:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:The narrative logically explains why a people once 'Egyptian slaves' (like all subjects of the Pharoah) were later free in Canaan, but by then it was likely forgotten that Egypt once controlled almost the entirety of Canaan, from which it withdrew in the [[Late Bronze Age collapse|Late Bronze Age Collapse]]. The Hebrew peoples of the (always separate) states of Israel and Judah emerged from Canaanite culture ''in situ'', though minor folk movements (for example, of the [[Tribe of Levi]], who often had Egyptian names) may have had a role. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 10:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I heard the sack of Jericho in book of Joshua was an explanatory myth, not some kind of Exile claim to ownership, which is more logical anyway. If there were a more recent city that was sacked, it would be less than the estimate of 30 geneations of remembrance. I did forget to stress that when I asked if the story could be almost historical that I wasn't suggesting that Jericho's walls were supernaturally destroyed by trumpets. After all, the actual method of conquest in the story could be the connivance of the traitor Rahab.[[User:Richard L. Peterson|Rich]] ([[User talk:Richard L. Peterson|talk]]) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Oh, certainly the myth likely existed before it was consolidated with others into the written documents, just as stories about the mythical [[Danel]] may have been adapted into the fictional [[Daniel (biblical figure)|Daniel]] of the supposedly contemporary [[Book of Daniel]] describing his exploits in the 6th century BCE court of [[Nebuchadnezzar II]], although scholars generally agree that this was actually written in the period 167–163 BCE. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 07:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


::The Israelites partly emerged ''in situ'' (though there was also a definite nomad/pastoralist component), especially along the West Bank hill-chain (running in an approximate north-south direction) where the [[Four-room house]] took hold among the rural inhabitants there. They were not originally city-dwellers, and their culture could not have been consolidated until the power of the Canaanite cities in that area had declined, and it's not too hard to believe that they sometimes moved against what cities remained, so that part of the conquest narrative is not necessarily a pure myth. Jericho was in the valley (not along the hill-chain), so was not part of the core settled rural agricultural four-room house area, but was inhabited more by pastoralists/animal-herders who became affiliated... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 21:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
So, you are telling me that dynasties willingly abdicate their power to other people? That's not the English history I know. Monarchs wouldn't even give in to their own blood, much less one not in their family! Whig history tends to besmirch those who refuse to give up their power to new people they could control, but it is telling that Parliament owes the Magna Carta to the French and yet, Parliamentarians like to rewrite our history to make it seem like the Dutch are the fountainhead of freedom, since William of Orange and the Bill of Rights. Did you notice how both the Catholic and Protestant English hated the Stuarts? The Catholics tried to blow up the King and replace him with his daughter, Princess Elizabeth, who would be married to somebody they liked better, while the Protestants themselves used the very same daughter to promote Sophia of Hanover. The via media Anglicans were willing to use a Caroline descendent like Mary or Anne, so long as they were married to a husband they approved of. They did their damnedest to get rid of a native dynasty with a foreign ideology, only to import a foreign dynasty with a native ideology. Above all, they would not abide by a Royal Family of legitimists who would have a canonized ancestor like Charles the First. This is Parliament's intervention in the Monarchy. You are obviously reading some other country's tradition.


==Accessibility, for URLs in text document==
Just so you know, the reason why Matilda was heiress, was because there was no legitimate male of the Norman dyansty, so they'd obviously have a husband from another dynasty come in, but the Londoners wanted Stephen because Normandy didn't like Anjou, so they were trying to keep Geoffrey Plantagenet out of the picture. You are misreading the situation. It is obvious that one would have to rely on a maternal right of succession, if there were no paternal one to speak of! Henry Tudor was a conniving Parliamentary aristocrat who took over the Throne and ran it like a public office. He had the full backing of other Parliamentarians who were tired of fighting French wars for a dynasty which facetiously used a maternal succession right as justification for a century of war, when it was really just retaliation for not having autonomy over French territories, the Crown wanted to be held in right of the King of England, rather than in homage of the French Crown. This very same Angevin dynasty of Plantagenets fought amongst themselves for power and their conflicts were defined by the relation of their fathers to Edward III, although the ultra-Parliamentarian Yorkists also invoked the maternal succession from the Mortimers to Lionel of Antwerp. The Lancastrians were moderate Parliamentarians, only enough to depose Richard II's absolutism and regain the power John of Gaunt held. In a sense, the Yorkist succession was of the same type, that of regency and ultimately of usurpation.
We've been asked to increase the accessibility of all documents we produce, esp. syllabi. I use WordPerfect, where I don't seem to be able to have a URL with a descriptive text in the way Word allows. 508 is the operative term. I'm trying this out: "Princeton University has some handy tips on what is called “active reading, on this webpage: https://mcgraw.princeton.edu/active-reading-strategies." In other words, descriptive text followed by a bare URL. Is that good for screen readers? {{U|Graham87}}, how does this look/sound to you? Thanks for your help, [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 18:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{replyto|Drmies}} I wouldn't make a general rule about that as it's context-dependent ... depending on how many URL's are in a document, reading them might get annoying. In general I'd prefer to read a link with descriptive text rather than a raw URL, because the latter aren't always very human-readable ... but I don't think this is really an accessibility issue; just do what would make sense for a sighted reader here. [[User:Graham87|Graham87]] ([[User talk:Graham87|talk]]) 00:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::[[User:Graham87|Graham87]], thanks. There's only one or two in a ten-page document. According to our bosses, this is an accessibility issue--but it seems to me as if someone sounded an alarm and now everyone who doesn't actually know much about the issue is telling us to comply with a set of directives which they haven't given us. Instead, we are directed to some self-help course that involves only Word. It's fun. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:Stop using WordPerfect and start using Word. --[[User:Viennese Waltz|Viennese Waltz]] 07:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::I don't know why, but it seems many legal professionals prefer WordPerfect. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 10:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::[[User:Viennese Waltz|Viennese Waltz]], thanks so much for that helpful suggestion. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:You can create a hyperlink to a file using WordPerfect. First, you select text or a graphic you want to create a hyperlink. Then you click “Tools”, select “Hyperlink” and then type a path or document you want to link to. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 10:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::[[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]], that sounds like it might work: thank you. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{small|Do web browsers display WordPerfect documents? I don't think I have a WordPerfect viewing app installed on my platform (macOS). Does anyone have a [[URL]] of a WordPerfect document handy? &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}}
::[[User:Lambiam]], WP translates easily to PDF and to Word. I use PDFs in my [[Learning management system|LMS]]. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::You can see why WordPerfect is popular in legal circles at [[WordPerfect#Key characteristics]] (fourth bullet point) and [[WordPerfect#Faithful customers]]. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B|2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B]] ([[User talk:2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B|talk]]) 16:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I don't have the feeling this answers my question. Would I have to find and install an app that translates .wpd documents to .pdf or .doc documents? Would I then be able to tell my browser to use this app? The question is informative, not meant to bash a product that I have zero familiarity with. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 17:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::I've opened early WordPerfect (WP 5.1) documents using both Word and Firefox without any need for a third party translator. The only trick was changing the file extension to .WPD so that my computer could create the file association more easily. In the old days, file extensions were not so rigorously restrictive and many files ended up with extensions like .01 or .v4 or whatever. [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 17:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I cannot check if it would work for me, for lack of access to any WordPerfect document of any age. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 21:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::[https://search.justice.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=justice-archive&query=wordperfect Here's a bunch of them, in the DOJ archives.] [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 00:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Thanks, finally an answer. When I click on a {{mono|.wpd}} link, the file is downloaded. I can then open and view it with [[LibreOffice]]. (I can also open it with [[Apache OpenOffice|OpenOffice]], but then I get to see garbage like ╖#<m\r╛∞¼_4YÖ¤ⁿVíüd╤Y.) &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::Yes, web browsers do display WordPerfect documents. If you google “wpd online viewer”, you will find a lot of them. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 23:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:::When I google [https://www.google.com/search?q=%E2%80%9Cwpd+online+viewer%E2%80%9D&udm=14 [{{mono|“wpd online viewer”}}&#x5d;], I get two hits, one to this page and one to [https://fileproinfo.com/tools/viewer/wpd a site] where you can <u>upload</u> a WPD document in order to be able to view it online. What happens when you view an html page with something like {{mono|<nowiki><a href="file:///my-document.wpd">Looky here!</a></nowiki>}} embedded? &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Yes, you're right. Only Docx2doc (https://www.docx2doc.com/convert) and [[Jumpshare]] provide online viewers now. However, there are still other offline alternative, such as Cisdem (https://www.cisdem.com/document-reader-mac.html) and [[Apache OpenOffice|Apache]]. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Some other text editors, such as [[TextMaker]], can open and view WPD files. However, after editing, the WPD files can only be saved as other formats, such as docx or doc. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 09:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


One more thing that just came up--we got rapped on the fingers though the mandatory "training" didn't touch on it. We've been told that hyphens are bad. The internet tells me that screenreaders have trouble with hyphenated words, but does this apply also to date ranges? {{U|Graham87}}, does yours get this right, "Spring Break: 17-21 March"? For now I'm going with "Spring Break, 17 to 21 March", but it just doesn't look good to my traditional eyes. And on top of that I have to use sans serif fonts... [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 17:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
@Surtsicna: ''The parliament has nothing to do with succession to the Crown or a peerage title'' - that's not strictly true, as the case of George VI succeeding Edward&nbsp;VIII shows. Had the UK parliament not decided that Edward had abdicated (they get to decide, or at the very least confirm/agree/approve, because British monarchs cannot unilaterally abdicate), then Edward would have remained king until his death in 1972, and only then been succeeded by Elizabeth II. And, of course, parliament could theoretically change the succession laws tomorrow (subject to the Commonwealth Realms' concurrence). Parliament and parliament alone has that right. No monarch does. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 22:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
*To give another example, I have to redo this: "Final grades are computed along the following scale: A: 90-100; B+: 87-89; B: 80-86; C+: 77-79; C: 70-76; D+: 67-69; D: 60-66; F: Below 60." [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 17:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:And, besides succession to the throne (which follows law set by parliament), Parliament is the ''only'' means by which succession to a peerage title can be changed. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 22:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
**{{replyto|Drmies}} Under its default setting my screen reader does read out the hyphens, but I have my punctuation set lower than normal because I don't like hearing too much information so it doesn't for me. The other major Windows screen reader, [[NonVisual Desktop Access|NVDA]], also reads them out by default. [[User:Graham87|Graham87]] ([[User talk:Graham87|talk]]) 01:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
***Thanks [[User:Graham87|Graham87]]--I appreciate your expertise. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 01:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
***:As recently discussed on the Help or Teahouse desk, a date or other range should ''technically'' use an unspaced [[En Dash]], not a hyphen (according to most manuals of style, including our own), but I doubt that screen readers would notice the difference. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.6.84.253|94.6.84.253]] ([[User talk:94.6.84.253|talk]]) 08:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 5 =
::You're right, I wasn't clear enough. Yet I don't understand what the IP wants to know. Succession is cognatic rather than agnatic. Fullstope. The parliament doesn't change the succession law every once in a while to suit someone. Do you think that the Parliament conspired to change the dynasty when it gets too powerful or whatever the IP tries to say? [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 22:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


== How to search for awkwardly named topics ==
I'm stating that the succession must be cognatic only by duress from Parliament, to eliminate the concentration and entrenchment of Royal power in one family. The Monarchy has traditionally tried to run its affairs in the French manner, which means Salic Law. Of course, Edward III purposefully made this an issue for his own succession in France, but that was because he wanted to even the odds. The same tactic was chosen by Richard, Duke of York in his deposition of Henry VI's rights in favor of his own by invoking both male and female lines to his own benefit. The natural form of an hereditary monarchy, is to deplete all legitimate males when all efforts have been made to secure a male inheritance, then move onto a female of the most recent generation. Electoral monarchies rely on aristocratic intervention and caveats on who can succeed, whether the Throne will go to a male or female, or this or that new dynasty, from inside the country or a foreign choice. Surtsicna, you must have little understanding that England was once an hereditary kingdom, but became an electoral oligarchy over time, so even as the Monarchy was invested with central powers, Parliament had the trade-off of counsel and direction behind the establishment, for the choice of the Stuarts and subsequent rejection of them is a prime example of this. On the royal.gov website, the transition from Olde England to Great Britain is done with James, so they admit it just as well. The Monarchy had already been debased to being possessed by "New Men" in the form of the Tudors, who rose as "favourites" of the "corrupt" Lancastrians. The Tudors went from simpletons to royal majesty in less than a century and their record as leaders betrays these humble origins.


On and off I've been looking for good sources for the concepts of [[general union]] and [[trade union federation]] so as to improve the articles, but every time I try I only get one or two somewhat helpful results. Many of the results are not of material about the concepts of general union or trade union federations, but often about a ''specific'' instance of them, and as a result hard to gleen a lot from about the broader concept. Typcially this is because of issues such as many general unions being named as such (for example [[Transport & General Workers' Union]]). I'm aware of the search trick that'd be something like {{tq|"general union" -Transport & General Workers' Union}} but I've found it largely cumbersome and ineffective, often seeming to filter out any potential material all together
Anyways, I was hoping for more coverage of the Germanised establishment which prevailed since the Stuart twilight. I know but a little, that it mostly consisted of mercantile class connections and a few foreign dignitaries held in high regard. The process began under the Stuarts, with the Palatines and then the Dutch and onward. Mary of Teck was Swabian and her retainers came to Britain, but I confess to know rather little about these people in the "New Monarchy", even whilst learning much more than I used to about the old French establishment. I guess it's because the French have been absorbed into the English, but the new German establishmentarians are still too close to the Monarchy for their sort to mix and mingle with the English commons. The original point of discussion, was to find more exposure on the relationship of the UK to post-French Continental holdings of the Monarchy (her being Duchess of Saxony is one example of this). I think we all take it for granted about the knowledge we have on the Angevin Empire, but as to the Principality of Orange, for instance, I know next to nothing in its relationship to the UK in the time of William III, but I suspect Louis XIV tried to annex that territory for France. As I said before, this is all vague for me and I bet for most people who aren't related somehow to the present establishment of Great Britain, because they identify by default with England alone. One would probably have to be part of the new in-crowd to relate with the concept of Great Britain and its remade Continental relationship. We might all connect with Britannia, but that was so long ago. So by now, you see that German electoral monarchism is the norm for Great Britain, but the old hereditary establishment died with England.


Thought I'd ask because I'd like to improve those articles, and this is an issue I'm sure would come up again for me otherwise on other articles [[User:Bejakyo|Bejakyo]] ([[User talk:Bejakyo|talk]]) 13:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh right...the first instance of Parliamentarians unrelated to the Monarchy dictating the succession in their favour, rather than engineering it in the case of the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, was when the Duke of Northumberland made the dying Edward VI pass over his own two sisters in favour of Lady Jane, so that Guilford Dudley would eventually be made king. While Edward's father Henry VIII stipulated (with a notorious male preference) that the the Throne would first go to Edward, then Mary and Elizabeth, followed by a descendant of Henry's own younger sister Mary, he explicitly forbid the Scottish succession of his older sister Margaret. Parliament overrode this restriction and invited James VI of Scots anyways, but eventually regretted it and that is why the Civil War happened. Parliament has been Kingmaking in some form or another, ever since the Wars of the Roses, but it's only been a legitimate power of theirs upon the election of James Stuart, because they did not have a Royal Writ and didn't need one. Now, Parliament does it all the time, even where Royal Consorts are concerned. Their first interference in choice of consort, was removing Anne Woodville's family, followed by engineering any number of Henry VIII's marriages, then protesting Philip II of Spain and eventually Henrietta Maria of France was objected to and part of the reason for war with their king. Then, as mentioned, Parliament made William of Orange and George of Denmark their favoured husbands of the hated "legitimist" dynasty of the Stuarts, but you can already see that, despite the seniority of Margaret Tudor, the Stuarts were only as legitimate as the Tudors were at Bosworth. Parliament objected to Maria Fitzherbert and Wallis Simpson. [[Special:Contributions/68.231.164.27|68.231.164.27]] ([[User talk:68.231.164.27|talk]]) 16:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


:Do any of the articles listed at [[Unionism]] help? [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:I can't comment on Mrs Fitzherbert, but I doubt the bit about Wallis Simpson is true. It wasn't the parliament that objected to her, it was the government, and the PM, Stanley Baldwin, in particular. Baldwin told Edward that his choice of wife would never be accepted by the British people. That was what put the kibosh on him marrying her if he wanted to remain king. Afaik, parliament per se never expressed an opinion on the matter, one way or another. That would have been a waste of parliament's time in any case, because they don't get to approve or disapprove a monarch's choice of consort, well, not these days anyway; so objecting to it, or, for that matter, agreeing with it, would have had no effect. But they were happy to rush through the legislation altering the succession laws, allowing him to abdicate rather than continue to reign without "the woman he loved". -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 19:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:If you search for [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22a+trade+union+federation%22+-%22is+a+trade+union+federation%22&hl=en {{mono|["a trade union federation" -"is a trade union federation"&#x5d;}}], most hits will not be about a specific instance. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 6 =
The PM and all related bureaucracy are Parliament.


== What does the [[Thawabit]] consist of? ==
:No, they're not. The ''individual members'' of the government, including the PM, must be members of the Parliament, but the government and the Parliament are different entities. The Parliament makes its decisions, the government makes its. Normally, the government has some control over the parliament by sheer weight of numbers, but it is not necessarily the case. As for the bureaucracy, that term usually refers to the government and all its employees, civil servants, etc. Civil servants are members of neither the government nor parliament, but are simply private citizens paid to do a job. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 18:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


I asked about this at the article talk page and WikiProject Palestine, no response. Maybe it's not a question Wikipedia can answer, but I'm curious and it would improve the article. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 09:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
I think we are in agreement on this, but in the perception of the same thing. So, a better and more simple way of putting it: Government is half Parliament (central authority of hereditary and elected officials), half Civil Service (devolved authority of appointed officials). Inasmuch as the succession goes, only the Parliamentary half would be involved to any degree. The Commons should have no part in this, but they have insisted upon it, through their voice in the PM. Only the Lords, if anyone other than the Royal Family, should be a party to Royal Marriages, Alliances and Successions. It really is a no-no for most government officials, should be even off-limits for Lords with Life Peerages to broach in discussion. Therefore, it should be restricted to the BRF, but perhaps members of the Privy Council, or closely related Dukes and maybe Marquesses. [[Special:Contributions/68.231.164.27|68.231.164.27]] ([[User talk:68.231.164.27|talk]]) 21:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
*It's acronym (or an abbreviation) for the four principles enumerated in the article. Like how the [[United States Bill of Rights|Bill of Rights]] ''is'' the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 13:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
*:''Thawabit'' is short for ''alThawabit alWataniat alFilastinia'', the "Palestinian National Constants". ''Thawabit'' is the plural of ''[[wikt:ثابت#Noun|thabit]]'', "something permanent or invariable; constant". &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
*:What I'm saying is that I'm not sure the article is correct. The sourcing is thin, reference are paywalled, offline, or dead, and Google isn't helpful. Other scholarly and activist sources give different versions of the Thawabet, e.g.[https://books.google.com/books?id=ysdyCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA137&dq=thawabit+palestine&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSwMDm4NaKAxViElkFHUtYNM0Q6AF6BAgKEAI#v=onepage&q=thawabit%20palestine&f=false This one] adds the release of Palestinian prisoners, [https://www.instagram.com/eu_jps/p/C_D3DSZIL_n/?img_index=8 this one] adds that Palestine is indivisible. The article says that these principles were formulated by the PLO in 1977 but doesn't link to a primary source (like the Bill of Rights). I don't know if you're a subject matter expert here, I'm not--actually trying to figure this out. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 13:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
*::I was able to access the paywalled articles through the Wikipedia library, which adds a little more clarity. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


:According to [https://books.google.com/books?id=ysdyCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA138&dq=%22+the+objection+to+recognize+the+State+of+Israel+as+the+nation-state+of+the+Jewish+people%22&hl=en this source], a fifth principle was added in 2012: "the objection to recognize the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people". However, I cannot find this in the [https://web.archive.org/web/20131019163530/http://palestineun.org/category/mission-documents/statements/page/2/ cited source] &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
== Pamphleting cars ==
:::I checked the Arabic Wikipedia article before I responded above, and they list the same four principles. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 13:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::That appears to be a translation of the English article, so this doesn't mean much to me. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 13:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::I've poked around a little, and there doesn't appear to have been any change. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 13:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::The list in the book I linked to above is not the same as that in our article. The book does not include a "right to resistance", but demands the release by Israel of all Palestinian prisoners. It would be good to have a sourced, authoritative version, in particular the actual 1977 formulation by the PLO. Of course, nothing is so changeable as political principles, so one should expect non-trivial amendments made in the course of time. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::That book is incorrect. <span style="font-family: Cambria;"> [[User:Abductive|<span style="color: teal;">'''Abductive'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abductive|reasoning]])</span> 21:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::How do you know? &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
::::The text does not explicitly say, "among others", but the use of {{lang|ar|بها بما في ذلك}} suggests that this list of four principles is not exhaustive. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 7 =
Does anyone know of any locale that penalizes the placement of pamphlets on vehicles' windshields? Is there any reason passers-by may ''not'' remove such pamphlets? Thanks in advance. [[User:Imagine Reason|Imagine Reason]] ([[User talk:Imagine Reason|talk]]) 21:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:''Targeted littering''. Remove at will and recycle.--[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] ([[User talk:Wetman|talk]]) 13:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
::Removing the pamphlets from windshields and dropping them on the ground would probably not be an acceptable alternative, however. But you could remove the pamphlets and toss them into the nearest trash can. [[User:Who then was a gentleman?|Who then was a gentleman?]] ([[User talk:Who then was a gentleman?|talk]]) 18:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Commedian [[Mitch Hedberg]] said it best when he noted "Whenever someone on the street hands you a pamphlet, it's like he's saying to you 'Here, you throw this away'..." --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 23:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


== Is there such a thing as a joke type index? ==
== "Seven of the top 20 millionaires in the Sunday Times Rich List owe their fortunes to online gambling" ==


Or so says Roy Hattersley, a British politician, in The Guardian newspaper. Yet a quick look at said list http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/specials/rich_list/rich_list_search/ shows that nobody in the top twenty five has any mention of gambling. How can the big difference between what a reputable politician says (and whose party I incidently support) and the reality be explained? [[Special:Contributions/78.146.66.185|78.146.66.185]] ([[User talk:78.146.66.185|talk]]) 21:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Has anyone produced an index of joke types and schemata (schemes?) along the lines of the [[Aarne–Thompson–Uther Index]] for folk tales? More generally what kind of studies of the structure of jokes and humor are available? Has anyone come up with an A.I. that can generate new jokes? [[Special:Contributions/178.51.8.23|178.51.8.23]] ([[User talk:178.51.8.23|talk]]) 18:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:For starters, there's [[Index of joke types]]. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
: Did Hattersley say which of the top 20 he was referring too? [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 23:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:AI generated jokes have been around for years. Just Google for it. They range from weird to meh. [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:[[Gershon Legman]] made an attempt of sorts in his two joke collections, but it was kind of a half-assed approach: there are a bunch of indices printed on pages, but no key tying them together per se. His interest was in the core of the subject of the joke, so he might have said, for example, that ''these'' jokes were all based on unresolved Oedipal drives while ''those'' jokes were based on hatred of the mother (he was a capital "F" Freudian). The link Bugs shared is more about the formats of the jokes themselves, though some are also differentiated by their subject (albeit in a more superficial way than Legman attempted). [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 21:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


:[[Arthur Koestler]] has attempted to develop a theory of humour (as well as art and discovery), first in ''Insight and Outlook'' (1949) and slightly elaborated further in ''[[The Act of Creation]]'' (1964). He did, however, not develop a typology of jokes. IMO [[Victor Raskin]]'s [[Theories of humor#Script-based semantic theory of humor|script-based semantic theory of humor]] presented in ''Semantic Mechanisms of Humor'' (1985) is essentially the same as Koestler's, but Raskin does not reference Koestler in the book. For an extensive overview of theories of humour see [https://www.oalib.com/research/2052736 Contemporary Linguistic Theories of Humour]. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
The above quote was all the detail he went into. He did not mention any names. [[Special:Contributions/89.241.159.20|89.241.159.20]] ([[User talk:89.241.159.20|talk]]) 12:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


= January 8 =
:The phrase "top 20 millionaires" is rather odd too... the top 20 are all billionaires (strictly speaking, a billionaire is a millionaire, but you would normally use the more precise term). It sounds like he didn't have the faintest idea what he was talking about. When and where did he say that, by the way? If it was at a time when he wouldn't have been expecting to discuss the topic, he may just have said what he thought was true and hadn't fact checked it. Rather irresponsible, but perhaps not malicious. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 17:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


== ''The Nest'' magazine, UK, 1920s ==
::@ [[User:Tango|Tango]]: the "when and where" are both in the column linked. [[User:Bielle|// BL \\]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 17:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:::What column linked? The only link I see is to the rich list... --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 23:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


I have a copy of {{cite book | title = The Grocer's Window Book | year = 1922 | location = London | publisher = The Nest Magazine }}, "arranged by The Editor of ''The Nest''". The address of ''The Nest'' Magazine is given as 15 Arthur Street, London, EC4. It contains suggestions for arranging window displays in an attractive manner to attract customers into independent grocer's shops. I would be interested to know more about ''The Nest''. I suspect it may have something to do with Nestles Milk, as 1) the back cover is a full-page advertisement for Nestles and Ideal Milk, and there are several other adverts for Nestles products in the book, and 2) one of the suggested window displays involves spelling out "IDEAL" with tins of Ideal Milk. Thank you, [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 02:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Sorry, Tango. I was so certain that the link had been there (though you are quite right that it '''is''' not) that I searched the history looking for the elf who had made the switch. Forgive my aging brain cells. I must have done a search and found it that way. Here is the link [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/16/hattersley-casinos-gambling], with my sincere apologies. [[User:Bielle|// BL \\]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 23:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


:{{Tq|Nest, 1922. M.—1st. 6d. Nestle and Anglo-Swiss Condensed Milk Co., 15 Arthur Street, E.c.4}}[https://archive.org/details/willings-press-guide-and-advertisers-directory-and-handbook-49/page/130/mode/1up?q=nest+%2215+Arthur+Street%22] according to ''Willing's press guide and advertisers directory and handbook.'' I also found it in ''The Newspaper press directory and advertisers' guide,'' which merely confirms the address and the price of sixpence. Both of these were for the year 1922, which suggests to me that the magazine might not have survived into 1923. M signifies monthly, and 1st probably means published on the 1st of the month. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 19:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:People lower down the list like Anurag Dikshit (94th=), Russell De Leon and Ruth Parasol (97th), Vikrant Bhargava (289th), have made their fortune from online gambling, but Dikshit at 94th is the highest.[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/specials/rich_list/rich_list_search/?l=17&list_name=Rich+List+2008&advsearch=1&t=1&n=&k=internet+gambling&x=0&y=0&a=&r=&g=&i=&new=#searchtop] Branson, who runs virgingaming.com (and bit for Britain's National Lottery), is the only one in the top 20 I can find with gambling interests, though many own large property portfolios which may include casinos; Philip Green is a keen gambler[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1487501/Philip-Green%27s-big-wins-play-havoc-with-casino-group%27s-profit.html] and Sean Quinn plays poker with a £5 maximum[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/specials/rich_list/article3795629.ece]. Hattersley's elderly, eccentric, and often a little bit confused. To be charitable, online gaming has suffered over the past year or 2, with US authorities clamping down, so if Hattersley had looked at a list of say new billionaires in 2006 you might have seen more internet gambling millionaires.


== Historical U.S. population data by age (year 1968) ==
== Saw question on conjoined twins and had a thought ==


In the year 1968, what percentage of the United States population was under 25 years old? I am wondering about this because I am watching the movie [[Wild in the Streets]], and want to know if a percentage claimed in the film was pulled out of a hat or was based in fact. [[Special:Contributions/2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F|2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F]] ([[User talk:2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F|talk]]) 04:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
If there was a pair of conjoined twins, and one of them committed a serious crime (say physically punching someone), is it legally possible that their twin would have to go to jail simply because they are inextricably connected to their twin? I mean one could make an argument that they were there and thus an accomplice, but its possible they were physically unable to prevent the crime despite trying.
:What percentage did they give? ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 05:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::52% (it's on the movie poster). [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;">&nbsp;Card&nbsp;Zero&nbsp;</span>]]&nbsp;[[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 16:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:Tabel No. 6 in the [http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/1971-02.pdf 1971 US Census Report] (p. 8) gives, for 1960, {{val|80093}} Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of {{val|180007}} Kpeople, corresponding to 44.5%, and, for 1970, {{val|94095}} Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of {{val|204265}} Kpeople, corresponding to 46.1%. Interpolation results in an estimate of 45.8% for 1968. &nbsp;--[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 12:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


== Countries with greatest land mass ==
Please note that I am not asking for legal advice, this is a purely hypothetical legal paradox. [[Special:Contributions/65.167.146.130|65.167.146.130]] ([[User talk:65.167.146.130|talk]]) 22:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


Can someone please fill in these blanks? Thank you.
:See [[Chained for Life]]. If a movie director can't decide, I wonder what chance the rest of us have.[[User:Bielle|// BL \\]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 00:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


1. Currently, the USA ranks as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass.
::Not to be crass or insensitive, but if they're conjoined isn't the question immaterial? I would conjecture that, like the film hints, this is uncharted legal ground and would amount to a precedent-setting decision or two. [[User:Wolfgangus|Wolfgangus]] ([[User talk:Wolfgangus|talk]]) 04:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


2. If the USA were to "annex" or "acquire" both Canada and Greenland, the USA would rank as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass.
:::This has been discussed at the refdesk before. See [[Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2007_August_21#Conjoined_twins]]. (There are links in that discussion to 3 earlier related discussions, too.) <strong>[[User:Karenjc|<font color="red">Ka</font>]][[User_talk:Karenjc|renjc]]</strong> 15:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 05:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
== Identify the crown ==
:See [[List of countries and dependencies by area]], which gives a nuanced answer to your first question, and the answer to your second question is obvious from the data in the article.-[[User:Gadfium|Gadfium]] ([[User talk:Gadfium|talk]]) 05:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


= January 9 =
Could somebody identify [http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.royal.gov.uk/files/images/monarchy_pop_crown2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f233/british-crown-jewels-16453.html&usg=__xRwC5MVuF1i9gcv1uqSzSJboXqU=&h=390&w=349&sz=39&hl=de&start=11&um=1&tbnid=leTuS7z6LEnqHM:&tbnh=123&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcrown%2Bof%2Bwales%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dde%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7SUNA_en this] crown? I found it during a google search and didn't recognise it. It's the one in the top left corner (it's no use clicking for the larger image as it comes up as an error). It is presumably British due to the fact that it links to the website of the British monarch's site. The monarchy have relaunced their website and this image is not to be found amoung the crown jewel gallery... Thanks so much for any help! ;) --[[Special:Contributions/217.227.116.32|217.227.116.32]] ([[User talk:217.227.116.32|talk]]) 23:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
:I did a similar google search for 'crown of wales' and i believe this is the crown of King George I of England, dated 1715. A google image search for 'crown of king george I' brings up this picture. [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 23:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
::I second that opinion; this seems to be the [[State Crown of George I]]. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 23:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

= February 21 =

== When did [[Kitty Lange Kielland]] die? ==

And before you say January 8, 1914 ''just as the article says'' bear with me a moment. The Swedish and Norwegian Wikipedias list it as October 1st, 1914. Yes, I wrote the English article, but I no longer have access to the book I used and I know suspect I read 1/8/2008 in the American way (Month/Day/Year) and not the way it was meant (Day/Month/Year). I've checked around the internet, but can't find anything conclusive. Anybody have anything? Thanks! --[[User:Falcorian|Falcorian]]&nbsp;<sup><small>[[User_talk:Falcorian|(talk)]]</small></sup> 01:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:October 1, 1914. Citation: Marit Lange and Thea Miller. "Kielland, Kitty." In Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online, http://www.oxfordartonline.com (accessed February 21, 2009). --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 14:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::Thank you! --[[User:Falcorian|Falcorian]]&nbsp;<sup><small>[[User_talk:Falcorian|(talk)]]</small></sup> 04:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

== Questions related to the development of civilization ==

What was the problematic nature of the term "civilization"? How have a variety of social biases influenced our understanding of western civilization over time?

What were the culture and abilities of our hunter-gatherer ancestors?

How did the Neolithic Revolution establish the necessary preconditions for the development of civilizations?

Which historians defended this statement: "Egypt was in many waysa typical Neolithic civilization; its geography made it distinct"? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:76.64.128.220 |76.64.128.220 ]] ([[User talk:76.64.128.220 |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/76.64.128.220 |contribs]]) 22:22, 20 February 2009</span><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

:Out out courtesy, and assuming good faith, I have combined your related questions into one topic for ease of responding. I have to say that these read exactly like homework questions. While I am sure many people here would be willing to help you with things, we don't really just answer your homework questions for you like that. Have you researched the appropriate Wikipedia pages, like [[Hunter-gatherer]], [[Neolithic Age]], [[Neolithic Revolution]], etc.? - [[User:EronMain|Eron]]<sup>[[User Talk:EronMain|Talk]]</sup> 02:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

It is not homework questions and other websites will do. Thanks. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:76.64.128.220|76.64.128.220]] ([[User talk:76.64.128.220|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/76.64.128.220|contribs]]) 22:34, 20 February 2009</span><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

== Pre-Socratics ==

With the Pre-Socratics, western thought emerges from mythology into an attempt at accounts of reality that can be evaluated according to a new standard: rationality. What were the difference between these Pre-Socratic philosophers when it came to the way tradition is replaced by reason as the measure of the Greeks understanding of reality? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.64.128.220|76.64.128.220]] ([[User talk:76.64.128.220|talk]]) 02:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:From one point of view, the pre-Socratics were the first ones we know about who were dimly groping towards science by trying to explain complex phenomena as arising from basic principles or laws of nature. Unfortunately, from the relatively little we know about many of them, their debates were often about such things as whether fire or water was the first and most fundamental element... The article [[pre-Socratic philosophy]] is mainly a list of names. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 03:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

=== Plato's allegory of the cave ===

What was the Plato's allegory of the cave? What was the theory of Forms or Ideas it is based on? How does that theory relate to a theory of knowledge on one hand and what kind of educational practice does it produce? Any other websites about htis will do.<span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:76.64.128.220|76.64.128.220]] ([[User talk:76.64.128.220|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/76.64.128.220|contribs]]) 22:33, 20 February 2009</span><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

:I recommend you start your homework by reading [[Allegory of the cave]]. - [[User:EronMain|Eron]]<sup>[[User Talk:EronMain|Talk]]</sup> 02:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::I recommend that you watch the movie "The Matrix". [[Special:Contributions/118.71.169.174|118.71.169.174]] ([[User talk:118.71.169.174|talk]]) 13:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:::I recommend that you don't. 136 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Read Plato; it'll be faster, it's more understandable, and makes better sense. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 02:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:::: Whatever you do, don't watch the sequels. [[Special:Contributions/72.10.110.109|72.10.110.109]] ([[User talk:72.10.110.109|talk]]) 17:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== First Legal Tender Approved by US Congress ==

In the March 2009 issue of Popular Mechanics, pp 53, there's an ad for "Silver Dollars of the American Revolution" - ie Spanish Silver Dollars, that claims "Congress Chose This Silver Dollar as Our First Legal Tender" and goes on to say that the Contintental Congress approved it as such. [http://www.philadelphiafed.org/education/teachers/resources/money-in-colonial-times/#06 This article]claims that coin served as the unofficial national currency of the colonies for much of the 17th and 18th centuries, while none of the seemingly pertinent wiki entries, such as the [[Coinage Act of 1792]] or [[Dollar coin (United States)|This one on the dollar coin]] or any entries on the Constitutional Congress make any mention of the Spanish Silver Dollar as the first approved by Congress.

So does anyone know of a reliable source to back up this claim, made by a site called GovMint.com? Thanks [[User:Wolfgangus|Wolfgangus]] ([[User talk:Wolfgangus|talk]]) 03:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:Both of our articles on [[Dollar coin (United States)]] and on [[Spanish Dollar]] mention that the Spanish Dollar (aka Piece of Eight or Real de a Ocho) was legal tender until 1857. I have not yet found that 1857 act which ended its use... --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 03:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
::The act was 11 Stat. 163 ([http://books.google.com/books?id=P0stAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA44&lpg=PA44 text here]). --[[User:Cam|Cam]] ([[User talk:Cam|talk]]) 05:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

OK but neither verifies the ad's claim, that the Spanish silver dollar was the ''first'' legal tender for the newly created country; unless this is very loosely interpreted, i.e. it was accepted as legal tender among the colonies and became an ad hoc legal tender following the First or Second Continental Congress. Is this sound? [[User:Wolfgangus|Wolfgangus]] ([[User talk:Wolfgangus|talk]]) 04:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:Coins from many foreign countries were accepted as legal tender in the American colonies, but the Spanish dollar was the most common. The first legal tender issued by the Continental Congress was paper money (or bills of credit) known as [[Continental (currency)]], which was based on the Spanish system and theoretically backed by Spanish dollars. This is perhaps what the ad is referring to. Finding more info on Continental currency will probably help you find the answer. —[[User:Kevin Myers|Kevin]] [[User talk:Kevin Myers|Myers]] 04:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I can work from this. I appreciate the help from both of you. [[User:Wolfgangus|Wolfgangus]] ([[User talk:Wolfgangus|talk]]) 04:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

British pound sterling was still used in post-revolution America to pay for things, for one. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 05:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

=== American Pound Sterling ===

Why didn't the Founding Fathers choose an American version of the British currency? ''-- 16:34, 21 February 2009 68.231.164.27''

:There were persistent problems with a scarcity of precious-metal circulating in the British north American colonies, and coins of a number of different countries were in ''de facto'' use (as mentioned in a previous comment). So it was very easy for the U.S. to start from scratch in creating a new currency, if desired, and several figures (such as Benjamin Franklin) wanted to do this for various reasons, including decimalization... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 16:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::Makes sense. Why didn't they go the whole hog and have a metric system for weights and measures as well? -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 19:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:::By the time the metric system was well-established and gaining momentum in use in France, political relations between the U.S. and France were intermittently very tense and strained (see [[XYZ Affair]], [[Quasi-War]], etc.), and grand reform schemes originating in France were rather politically controversial and suspect within the U.S. Currency decimalization was presented as a homegrown reform (not dependent on foreign influence). However, the U.S. actually did adopt the metric system in 1866 (non-exclusively), in matters concerning the federal government (see [[Metrication in the United States]]). [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 21:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::: I was just today reading a book about [[Zebulon Pike]] and his explorations of [[Colorado]]. In several of his journal entries, he makes extensive notes on the weather and uses [[Centigrade]] temperature. However, he also uses standard length measurements (feet, miles, etc.) I expect that for some time, both metric and non-metric systems were in use throughout the U.S. For probably random and arbitrary reasons, the non-metric system "stuck". --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 19:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::::That gets me thinking about metrication in the US. In the 1960s, [[Benson & Hedges]], a British cigarette maker, marketed a 100mm cigarette in the US, prompting rival [[Liggett Group|Liggett & Myers]] to produce a cigarette "a silly millimeter longer", the [[Chesterfield (cigarette)|Chesterfield 101]]. Who says cigarettes are nothing but harmful? The "100" in cigarette names is 100mm, but I'm not sure how many Americans know that these days. Americans know two liters when they see them, though, thanks to [[PepsiCo|Pepsi]] in 1970. Soldiers brought the "[[klick]]" back from Vietnam in the 1960s, but it never caught on, and Americans still can't picture a kilometer very well, I think. The Olympics has forced the meter upon the US, and Americans know it's about a yard but don't use it in everyday talk. The hippies got pot in "keys", but they sold it by the ounce. All in all, America's resistance to metrication displays remarkable stubbornness when you consider the inroads it's made and the pressure from without. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 22:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::I'd agree with that, Jayron. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 23:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Ancient Irish state of Ulaid ==
[[Image:IrelandUlster.png|thumb|right|150px|Ulster in light]]
[[File:Www.wesleyjohnston.com-users-ireland-maps-historical-map1014.gif|150px|thumb|left|Ancient Ireland with Ulidia in blue]]
Hi, [[Ulaid]] is a precursor to the [[Irish]] province of [[Ulster]]. It is somehow entangled with [[Ulidia]] which is a small north east portion roughly covering counties [[County Down|Down]] and [[County Antrim|Antrim]]. Is it fair to say that Ulaid is roughly the same in boundaries as Ulster? What is the relationship between Ulaid and Ulidia? Anyone suggest a book or website that details these two? ~ [[User:RTG|<font color="Brown" size="2" face="Impact">R</font>]].[[User_Talk:RTG|<font color="brown" size="2" face="impact">T</font>]].[[Special:Contributions/RTG|<font color="brown" size="2" face="impact">G</font>]] 11:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:This source [http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~irlkik/ihm/ulster.htm] seems to state that the terms [[Uladh]], Ulidia and [[Ulaid]] were used interchangeably in ancient texts. --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 12:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

----
<small> Comments between horizontal rules moved here from Obama puppy section </small>

:Thanks for just putting those maps there without a warning - I have a phobia of maps, especially ones showing islands or water. Very considerate.--[[User:Wovit! Wovit!|Wovit! Wovit!]] ([[User talk:Wovit! Wovit!|talk]]) 15:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::Well, I have a phobia of sarcasm. Thanks for using it without warning. Very considerate. What's that? You had no way of knowing and it's not something anyone could reasonably expect? Well, you're still a bad person for doing it, I'm sure. -- [[User:Captain Disdain|Captain Disdain]] ([[User talk:Captain Disdain|talk]]) 08:20, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
----
<br clear=all>

== Did Barack Obama's daughters ever get their puppy? ==

If so, where is the Wikipedia article for it? US Presidential pets are apparently notable enough for their own articles.--[[User:Wovit! Wovit!|Wovit! Wovit!]] ([[User talk:Wovit! Wovit!|talk]]) 15:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
::::This op-ed suggests they are waiting for warmer weather before getting one [http://www.times-herald.com/opinion/op-ed/Dog-days-665691]. [[User:Exxolon|Exxolon]] ([[User talk:Exxolon|talk]]) 15:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

== has any work in philosophy ever caused historical change? ==

Hi, are there any good examples of any book or system of thought in philosophy having a definite causal effect on history? People often talk as if philosophy has been influential, and the preponderance of philosophical works on "great books" courses suggests an assumption of its wider importance, but I'm looking for a fairly concrete example. Thanks, [[User:It&#39;s Been Emotional|It&#39;s been emotional]] ([[User talk:It&#39;s Been Emotional|talk]]) 17:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:The [[Communist Manifesto]] seems to be an fairly concrete example. The text established a new method of political thinking a new ideology, which was to have an effect on the later history of so many countries.[[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 17:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
::The [[Analects]] of Confucius exerted (and continue to exert) a massive influence on the course of Asian history. [[Adam Smith]] continues to influence economic policy. The works of [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], in particular ''[[Social Contract (Rousseau)|The Social Contract]]'', were a major cause of the French Revolution, and his novel ''[[Emile: or, On Education|Emile]]'' had a major effect on pedagogy in France and elsewhere. [[Jeremy Bentham]] influenced the development of the modern penal system and the welfare state, among other things. The work of [[Georges Sorel]] may be partly blamed for the rise of fascism and Nazism, as it fueled anti-parliamentary extremism in the years before the Second World War. [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 19:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

: All of the fine examples listed above could be categorised as writing on economics, or politics, or sociology, and so forth. Similarly philosophical writings about the shape of the earth or the order of the heavens get called astronomy, writings about how many prime numbers there are get called maths, and writings about the death penalty and who should get a kidney transplant get called ethics. So the cynic might argue that "philosophy" is the name we give for thinking and writing about stuff for which we haven't (get) found a worthwhile application, and if some prior thought was found to actually have use, we'd promote it to being a proper science. So by that definition the answer to you question is a resounding "no!", for if something had ever caused historical change, we wouldn't call it philosophy. Of course I'm being rather contrary here, but when you find someone claiming "there is no use for philosophy", you'll find they're using a tautological definition of philosophy which defines it as only including useless things. [[User:Mimetic Polyalloy|Mimetic Polyalloy]] ([[User talk:Mimetic Polyalloy|talk]]) 23:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::You can make a clearer case if you're allowed one step of removal. Without Hegel, you don't get Marx, for example. Often the greatest influence of pure philosophy is on someone who does not plan to be a pure philosopher themselves. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.14.211|98.217.14.211]] ([[User talk:98.217.14.211|talk]]) 19:58, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:::You might find [[Philosophy#Applied philosophy|applied philosophy]] interesting for its impact. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 11:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for those answers. I don't quite agree with Mimetic's point which attempts to answer the issue by redrawing the boundaries of language. Clever, but I would accept that philosophy is a definite area that remains after it's been put to good use. Marx is, to me, an example that requires some care. He is probably best considered part-philosopher, part other stuff (including activist). I believe it's fair to say his impact has come mostly from his work on political (and perhaps economic) theory, but that philosophical aspects of his work have been influential. Rousseau and Bentham I would consider mainly philosophers, and I believe these are good examples, that I will give some thought to. Thanks :) [[User:It&#39;s Been Emotional|It&#39;s been emotional]] ([[User talk:It&#39;s Been Emotional|talk]]) 12:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I think there'll be a difficulty in separating philosophy from activism. Pacifism is, in part, a philosophy, but is its practical application still philosophic? If so, folks like [[Bertrand Russell]] (to choose a man who was very definitely a philosopher) would seem to qualify as having changed the course of history. A less stringent definition of philosophy nets you folks like [[Mahatma Gandhi]], who had an even greater effect on history. [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 15:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Vietnam war interview ==

Hi, I am looking for a video clip from the Vietnam war in which an American officer is being interviewed outdoors. He insists the North Vietnamese are nowhere nearby but immediately afterward there is gunfire and a wounded soldier is carried through the frame. Not sure if it was Tet, Hue or Saigon. Haven't had any luck with my searches on youtube. Thanks!--[[Special:Contributions/75.157.250.4|75.157.250.4]] ([[User talk:75.157.250.4|talk]]) 18:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:A descendant of [[John_Sedgwick#Death|John Sedgwick]], one assumes. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 15:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

== Name of science fiction story ==

Hi, I am trying to find a series of science fiction books on Wikipedia, but I can't remember the name!! The name of the series is simply a year in the 17th century (I thought it was called "1639", but I checked that year and can't find it there). All I need is the correct date and I should be able to find it.

The story is of a circle of land in modern-day US that was switched with an identical circle of land in 17th century Germany, and goes on to tell the story of the American people that were then trapped in the past... a pretty awesome story, no? [[User: Jonathan W|Jonathan]] <sup>[[User talk:Jonathan W|talk]]</sup> 19:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:I believe you are referring to [[1633 (novel)]]- there were also books entitled 1634 and 1635. Regards, [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 20:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:The first book in the series was [[1632 (novel)]]. It's available from the publishers as a free e-book, see the link in our article if you're interested. The series is [[1632 series|Assiti Shards series]], and that's part of a larger body of work called the [[Assiti Shards series]] -<font face="cursive" color="#808080">[[User talk:gadfium|gadfium]]</font> 21:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

That's it! Thanks [[User: Jonathan W|Jonathan]] <sup>[[User talk:Jonathan W|talk]]</sup> 05:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Louis Font, Donald Duncan, and Howard Levy ==

Why don't we have articles about [[Talk:Ehren Watada#Other US military against the war (prior history)|these people]]? [[User:GetLinkPrimitiveParams|GetLinkPrimitiveParams]] ([[User talk:GetLinkPrimitiveParams|talk]]) 20:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:Probably because nobody's got around to it yet. You could start them off yourself if you wanted to. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 21:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
:Because their notability is rather suspect. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 00:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

== inflation ==

why should inflation happen if the government printed just enough money to pay its foreign debt or to purchase from a foreign company or country?

:Because that money just comes from nowhere. By printing more money, all you're doing is making the existing money worth less.[[Special:Contributions/67.169.118.40|67.169.118.40]] ([[User talk:67.169.118.40|talk]]) 21:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

::Additionally, the concept of money as equivalent to physical currency is old and antiquated and not at all applicable in the modern world. Modern monetary theory rests on the total supply of money, which has little do with how many bills are printed and coins are pressed in a given nation. It used to, maybe 100 years ago, but since most "money" exists solely as entries in computer spreadsheats. Inflation is controlled mostly by the amount of money that banks will lend out relative to how much money they keep on hand to cover those loans. As banks make greater ratio of loans to capital on hand, inflation tends to increase, since more money is on the market. However, when banks stop loaning cash, people stop spending, and money is taken off the market as it sits around in bank accounts. Since the supply of money is now decreasing, inflation slows down, and you can actually get price deflation, since money is now scarce so its value rises relative to the products it can purchase. Governments can control this sort of money supply by lowering base interest rates; for example, a [[central bank]] can lower the rate IT uses when it loans money to commercial banks, thereby theoretically encouraging those banks to lower their interest rates, and encouraging them to loan out more money. This is sort of the modern equivalent of "printing money"; but it isn't the same thing as firing up the printing presses and producing more bills, since bills themselves represent a small portion of the total money on the market. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 23:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

:::A "dollar" is just a representation of 1/13-trillionth of the US economy. If you print more money, you're not increasing the size of the economy, so now that dollar represents less of the economy than it used to. -- [[User:Mwalcoff|Mwalcoff]] ([[User talk:Mwalcoff|talk]]) 00:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::::Don't forget that money isn't simply going into a safe or something, either. It's being given to businesses and governments, who will then spend that money, thus putting it back into the economy. And the more money is circulating, the higher inflation is. So while printing more money seems like a good solution, it only causes problems in the end. --[[User:Alinnisawest|Alinnisawest]],<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Alinnisawest|<font color="black">'''Dalek Empress'''</font>]]</sup> ([[User talk:Alinnisawest|<font color="#cf0021">'''extermination requests here]]'''</font>) 02:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:::::According to the U.S. Government themselves: [http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/fedpoint/fed01.html] there is $829 billion dollars of U.S. currency in circulation. That represents about 0.829 trillion dollars out of a 13 trillion dollar economy, or roughly 6 percent of the total "money" in the economy. Printing more dollar bills will have little to no effect on the overall supply of "money" in the economy. The "money supply" is no longer controled by printed bills; its controlled by the central banks, in the U.S. the [[Federal Reserve Bank]] which controls the interest rates with which it will loan money to banks, and to an extent by the Fed's ability to buy up U.S. government debt (Treasury Bills and Treasury Bonds), further driving down the supply of "money". If the [[Bureau of Printing and Engraving]] knocked out a few million more Benjamin Franklin notes this year, it would have little effect on the total supply of money, and thus would not do much for inflation. Again, inflation in the modern world is controled by the supply of money (well, as it was in ALL times) however, in the modern world, money is not currency. Money is mostly ledger entries in computers. Increasing the numbers in those ledger entries is much more effected by the [[Monetary policy]] of central banks. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 04:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::::::Printing money and adding money out of thin air to computer ledger books is the same thing essentially. Both increase the money supply and both can cause inflation if done irresponsibly. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 04:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Yes; but sometimes causing inflation can be a rational, intentional policy, sometimes the most responsible course. See Krugman's reissued book on the return of depression economics; there's a real chance it could be the wisest thing in the near future in the USA.[[User:John Z|John Z]] ([[User talk:John Z|talk]]) 14:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Yes, but the question is whether the actual printing of money is likely to have a major effect. Given that printed currency represents 6 percent of the money in the U.S. (and this is a high estimate, since most of the currency printed in the U.S. is used outside of the U.S. and likely not part of the U.S. economy), increasing this number to like 7% will have a slightly inflationary effect. Just not a significant one. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 14:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Indeed. See [[quantitative easing]] (which is nothing more than a euphemism for "printing money"). --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 14:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

= February 22 =

== British Royal Crest as displayed on the locomotive Duchess of Sutherland when the royal family is aboard... ==

Can you give me some information about the crest on the locomotive in your picture, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LMS_Princess_Coronation_6233_%27Duchess_of_Sutherland%27_at_Crewe_Works.jpg ? More specifically, what does the '''''R''''' stand for in the crest? I thought it might mean '''''Regina''''', but a British woman told me that it means '''''Royal'''''. Can you help out?
*EIIR stands for ''Elizabeth II Regina''. Regards, [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 00:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:See [[Royal Cypher]] -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

== New York/Law & Order blue paper ==

In Law and Order, whenever a motion or suit is served on someone it is encased in blue paper. What is this called, and why is it used? [[User:EdwinHJ|EdwinHJ]] | [[User talk:EdwinHJ|Talk]] 00:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:See [http://books.google.com/books?id=PC1RHfMTtsEC&pg=PA66&dq=%22blue+paper%22+legal+motion&lr=&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES]. Some jurisdictions specify blue bindings for court documents. Other sources say blue covers were used for legal documents as far back as the 1700's. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 03:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::In England & Wales we use a lot of pink ribbon (for legal documents, that is). --[[User:Jcrook1987|Joe]]<sup>[[User talk:Jcrook1987|Talk]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Jcrook1987|Work]]</sub> 03:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Hindus in Rome ==

Is there any historical record of Hindus traveling to the Roman Empire? What about Buddhists? [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 00:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:The main exposure of westerners to eastern religions in classical antiquity was in Bactria (a Greek-ruled kingdom on the northwest edge of the Indian subcontinent), where there were apparent Greek converts to Buddhism like [[Milinda]] and Greek converts to Hinduism like [[Heliodorus pillar|Heliodorus]], while the ruler [[Kanishka]] wrote ΒΟΔΔΟ (i.e. the name of Buddha transcribed as "Boddo" in Greek letters) on some of his coins... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::Yes, the existence of the Greek Bactrian kingdom was what aroused my curiosity in that direction. But I am specifically interested in Rome. Did Hindus ever set foot in the Roman Empire? Also, was any classical Roman writer aware, however dimly, of Hinduism or of the Hindu pantheon? [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 02:58, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:::Probably some did arrive from time to time, but not in such a way as to create significant historical traces, as far as I'm aware. The Greeks were certainly aware of Hindus, but mainly as "naked philosophers" and ascetic forest hermits... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 07:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::::See [[Gymnosophists]]... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 07:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::::Surely [[Alexander the Great]] had frequent contact with Hindus. That doesn't address the Rome connection, though, obviously. [[User:Who then was a gentleman?|Who then was a gentleman?]] ([[User talk:Who then was a gentleman?|talk]]) 21:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:[[Strabo]] XV i 4 [http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/15A1*.html#ref2] mentions one such embassy from Pandion and there are various other brief mentions scattered throughout ancient literature many of them drawn together in this article [[Roman trade with India]]. here are some other books on the subject [http://lonestar.texas.net/~robison/India.html] [http://books.google.com/books?id=ahMXbSFxGhUC] I expect the religious ideas of India were investigated by Romans at the time but Romans tended to assimilate and say "that Rama, he is just Jupiter under another name" not sure the details of their belief were ever really recorded by the Romans ''<small><font color="#000000">[[User:MeltBanana|meltBanana]]</font></small>'' 22:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::Thanks MeltBanana, that's the sort of thing what I was after. [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 11:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Bi bigamist ==

A hypothetical situation: A man marries a woman in Texas. On vacation in Boston, he marries a man. It stands to reason that the commonwealth of Massachusetts would consider him a bigamist. But would the state of Texas? [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 01:05, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:I remember reading a standard law textbook case from many years ago where a scoundrel, who was married, married an innocent young girl to have his way with her, then claimed the marriage was null and void because he was already married. The courts, although bigamy was illegal, ruled that he was married to both women, since otherwise he would benefit from his misconduct, so he had to support both women. Might a court in a conservative state do similar logical legerdemain? [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 01:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::But Texas would be in a very tight spot. If it charged the man with bigamy, would it not essentially be recognizing same-sex marriage? [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 02:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:::My reaction was that if any state had jurisdiction to prosecute the man for bigamy, it'd be Massachusetts. But on checking on online copy of the Texas penal code, section 25.01, I find it's illegal in Texas if a married person "purports to marry or does marry a person other than his spouse in this state, or any other state or foreign country, under circumstances that would, but for the actor's prior marriage, constitute a marriage". So indeed it seems the only issue is whether they have to recognize the same-sex marriage as a marriage. (I note incidentally that the law only says it applies to US states and foreign countries -- apparently if his bigamous marriage took place in Washington, DC, he would be safe from prosecution in Texas!) --Anonymous, 07:22 UTC, February 22, 2009.

::::That's interesting. [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 20:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::::I think you will find that other laws state that DC is included when the word 'state' is used in most circumstances. [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 14:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::That's interesting. I've seen some people claim DC is not entitled to voting congressional representatives (without an amendment) because the consitution says only states are. If the law giving DC representatives goes through and someone challenges it for the 'not a state' reason and the Supreme Court rules that DC isn't a state what would that mean for every other law and aspect of the constition that refers to states only? [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 14:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

:All those defense-of-marriage laws and amendments have been to fend off the [[full faith and credit]] clause of the U.S. Constitution. It would really ultimately depend on how the U.S. Supreme Court interprets that provision of the constitution... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::Frankly, I'm surprised someone hasn't tried it, or something similar, just to force the court's hand. [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 02:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:::They're probably afraid that the Bush court would decide against it. [[User:Who then was a gentleman?|Who then was a gentleman?]] ([[User talk:Who then was a gentleman?|talk]]) 21:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Breaking laws just to see what will happen isn't generally a wise move... --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 21:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::::It doesn't sound like breaking the law to see what would happen, but breaking the law to force the next move. Both [[Thomas Aquinas]] and [[Martin Luther King Jr]] would disagree with you, in any case. [[User:Llamabr|Llamabr]] ([[User talk:Llamabr|talk]]) 01:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::But chances are Texas would just let Massachusetts deal with it, and you wouldn't achieve anything. Civil disobedience needs to be better planned if it is going to have the desired effect. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 13:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::What are we even talking about here anyway? If you just want to challenge the DOMA and similar laws, there's no need to break any laws or do the bigamy idea. Just get married in a state where you can and then try to have your marriage recognised in a state where the law says it shouldn't be recognised and take it all the way to the US Supreme Court. According to comments at [http://www.daylightatheism.org/2009/02/full-faith-and-credit.html] (not a RS obviously) the reason why we haven't seen any challenges is indeed because people are afraid of setting a bad precedent because of the current composition of the court. It even suggests some ACLU chapters are advising against it for that reason. 13:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Bahrain- Music and Clothes ==

I am studying Bahrain in my social studies class and cant find a lot of information on what their native clothing and native music is. If you know of any books or websites that has any good information on these items please let me know!
:For music, the article [[Music of Bahrain]] may be of use to you. Regards, [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 02:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::And for the clothing including traditional dress, see [[Culture of Bahrain]]. You might also find images from Google or Flickr useful. [[User:Astronaut|Astronaut]] ([[User talk:Astronaut|talk]]) 15:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Alternatives to drone attacks ==

The US has allegedly used drones to target militants in Pakistan. Are there any realistic alternatives to this option? [[User:ExitRight|ExitRight]] ([[User talk:ExitRight|talk]]) 02:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:I am likely missing the point: what is the problem with using drones ''qua'' drones? I am not partisan in this, but the word "alleged" suggests a problem. [[User:Bielle|// BL \\]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 02:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:: It's just that most media say alleged. [[User:ExitRight|ExitRight]] ([[User talk:ExitRight|talk]]) 04:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::: Well they could use manned aircraft/vehicles or (unmanned) missiles as alternatives, but drones seems like a way of maintaining control without endangering US personnel. -- [[User:SGBailey|SGBailey]] ([[User talk:SGBailey|talk]]) 09:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::::I believe the reason drones are preferred in this case is due to their long [[loiter time]]s. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 16:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:::The reason the media say ''alleged'' is that the US is not officially admitting it, because they don't want to be too open about illegal violation of another country's sovereign territory. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 10:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::::Also, this allows for [[plausible deniability]] in case Pakistan wants to claim they were the ones who launched an attack. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 13:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

:Answering the question... Yes. There are many alternatives. The problem is your use of ''realistic''. That is a matter of opinion, based on how crazy the answerer may be. We could send guys walking through the mountains to get picked off by snipers and mines. We could pay someone else to go in and kill militants, but the money will likely just go straight to the militants anyway. We could carpet bomb the whole area, but that isn't effective. We could toss all past agreements out the window and napalm all the cave entrances. We could wire bombs to monkeys and send them in searching for food. We could start sending in thousands of Barney DVDs and just hope that everyone becomes friends. Of course, I've crossed my line of ''realistic'' already. -- [[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|&trade;]] 03:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

How hard would it be for a country to shoot down drones launched over its territory? Cuba could shoot down U2 spy planes in the early 1960's, so it would seem Pakistan could shoot down drones in 2009 if they wished to. [http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/11/ap_pakistanuav_112108/] described a Pakistani exercise in shooting down drones. If U.S. drones are circling over Pakistan for prolonged times then launching missiles toward dwellings or vehicles, it would seem to be because Pakistan doesn't mind it. Yugoslavia seemed to have no trouble shooting down drones in the [http://www.geocities.com/fscswheelsvstracks/sodastrawuavs.htm 1990s]. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 03:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:"Doesn't mind" is a bit strong. They simply judge the bad things that would happen as a result (sanctions and perhaps a US ground invasion) to be worse than the bad things that happen currently. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 05:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:William Saletan of Slate talks about the drone vs. terrorist war on a regular basis. His most recent column was about the identification of a US drone base inside Pakistan.[http://www.slate.com/id/2211683/] --[[User:JGGardiner|JGGardiner]] ([[User talk:JGGardiner|talk]]) 09:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Indian Buddhists ==

Which ethnic groups of India have Buddhist followers?
:Many are [[Dalit]]s (see [[Dalit Buddhist Movement]]), but that is a social rather than an ethnic distinction. For more, see [[History of Buddhism in India]]. [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 03:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::Probably you're thinking of India as the modern country called India. [[British India]] until 1937 included [[Burma]], and in those days most Indian Buddhists were [[Bamar|Burmans]]. Another ethnic group closely associated with Buddhism is the [[Sinhalese people]] of [[Sri Lanka]], some of whom live in present-day India. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] ([[User talk:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">talk</span>]]) 02:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Hindu, Christian and Buddhist President and Prime Minister of Bangladesh ==

When will be the time that Bangladesh will have its first Hindu president of Bangladesh, first Christian president, first Buddhist president, first Hindu Prime Minister, first Christian Prime Minister and first Buddhist Prime Minister? or Is it against the constitution? ''-- 03:36, 22 February 2009 74.14.117.39''
:First of all, the Reference desk [[Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_crystal_ball|cannot predict the future]], so we can't tell you when such a thing will happen. The [[Constitution of Bangladesh]] prescribes equality before the law, but it is also expressly non-[[secular]], placing "Absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah". It could be argued that this excludes the possibility of a non-Muslim president or prime minister. In any case, practically speaking, it is very unlikely that a non-Muslim would achieve such a high political office in a country where [[Demographics of Bangladesh|90% of the people practice Islam]]. [[User:Lantzy|<font style="color:black">'''L'''<small>ANTZY</small></font>]][[user talk:Lantzy|<sup>T<small><font style="color:black">ALK</font></small></sup>]] 03:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
:Is there time for all that? Aren't the rising sea levels supposed to swallow up the country sooner or later? =) --[[User:JGGardiner|JGGardiner]] ([[User talk:JGGardiner|talk]]) 09:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== IDENTITY OF SANJOY, A CHARACTER OF THE MAHABHARATA ==

I want to know as detail as possible about Sanjoy, the remarkable character of the Mahabharata, who described the War of Kurukshetra to the blind king, Dhritarastra.

:Well, we have [[Sanjaya]], as a start. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 14:09, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
::We have an article on the character, at [[Sanjaya]] and we also have an article on [[Mahābhārata]] and on the [[Bhagavad Gita]], which describes the war, and on the [[Kurukshetra War]] itself.
:I hope this helps! --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 14:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

The reference received, is no doubt helpful but still I cannot have a detail about Sanjaya, the epic Hero. If possible, I like to know (i)the name of father and mother of Sanjaya; (ii) How Sanjaya came to be the Charioteer and Companion of Dhritarastra; (iii) why Sanjaya had been chosen to have extra-ordinary vision?

:I have not read the Mahabharata in detail, and its been maybe 15 years since I read the Bhagavad Gita. You best source would be in the Mahabharata itself. There may be versions with a decent index or [[concordance (publishing)|concordance]] which may help you find that information. The best source is always the text itself. If its not in the Mahabharata, than any information about the character is probably outside of accepted Hindu [[canon]] so your guess is as good as anybodys. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 03:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Today I found out that "Gobogon" was the father of Sanjaya, the epic character.

: (i) The spelling I know best is [[Gavalgana]] (Sanjaya is usually called "son of Gavalgana" (the patronymic is Gavalgani), in the Mahabharata). Here is one source: [http://books.google.com/books?id=FdIkaccgneAC&pg=PA1154&dq=sanjaya Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Purāṇas By Parmeshwaranand]. It says says Sanjaya's parents were Sūtā and Gavalgana (Sūtā may refer to his [[Sūta|particular caste]]). It also includes other details of his life such as how he died.
: (iii) The [[Bhishma Parva]] describes this incident: Sanjaya received the blessing of the vision from Vyasa because Dhritarashtra had refused it, not wanting to see his sons die. See [http://books.google.com/books?id=UCm2f_jP-1MC&pg=PA5&dq=sanjaya+dhritarashtra&as_brr=1 this book].
: I could not find any information on (ii). Best, [[User:WikiJedits|WikiJedits]] ([[User talk:WikiJedits|talk]]) 16:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Looking for a chart of Canadian stock (index) performance before and during the Great Depression ==

The TSX started in 1934 when the TSE merged with the "Standard Stock and Mining Exchange." I'm looking for a chart of any Canadian indexes during this time (1920s-1940s). I don't know if the S&P TSX goes back this far. [[User:NByz|NByz]] ([[User talk:NByz|talk]]) 19:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

: You should be able to find back-calculated data for periods preceding the institution of the index itself. Don't know about any specific data source though. --[[User:PalaceGuard008|PalaceGuard008]] ([[User_Talk:PalaceGuard008|Talk]]) 22:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::The most commonly quoted Canadian indexes are the Standard & Poors TSX Composite and 60. S&P only began coverage of the composite index in 1977, and I can't find a start date for the 60. What common indexes were used on the TSX/TSE before that? [[User:NByz|NByz]] ([[User talk:NByz|talk]]) 22:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

::It might be useful to look at newspapers of that period, at least to see if there were any stock market indexes in that period and, if so, what they were called. For the [[Toronto Star]] and the [[Globe and Mail]], all issues from the founding of the two papers until a few years ago have been put online through [[ProQuest]]. They are not available freely on the Internet, but are available freely at public library computers in Toronto and presumably some other cities.
::For the Star, they are also available online on a pay basis at pagesofthepast.ca (currently you can search the year 1945 as a free sample); I don't know if the Globe has a similar arrangement for direct Internet access. Note that searching on these online papers is somewhat unreliable, as the OCR is far from perfect -- if you search on "green" you might get hits that turn out to be on "greed" or "preen", which also means that some hits that you should get on "green" may be missed in the same way. And you don't get any context for the hit, just the page number; to see the context you have to load the entire page (in PDF) and view it (the actual hits are highlighted in color), which isn't always convenient. But this may be useful. If you are actually in Toronto, an alternative way to view these old papers (and the Toronto Telegram too) is to go to the central reference library, where they are available on reels of microfilm. --Anonymous, 00:57 UTC, February 23, 2009.

:::Before the Great Depression, Montreal was the financial center of Canada, and the [[Montreal Stock Exchange]] was more important than the exchanges in Toronto. The situation began to change in Toronto's favor during the 1930s. So you would also do well to check library microfilm copies of the [[Montreal Star]], Canada's leading newspaper during the first half of the 20th century. It would also have information on the Toronto exchanges. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 02:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:::An easier path than scouring reels of microfilm might be to track down ''The Depression in Canada: Responses to Economic Crisis'' (1988), available, for example, through [http://www.amazon.com/Depression-Canada-Responses-Economic-Canadian/dp/0773047611/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235356349&sr=1-6 Amazon], or, less expensively, from academic and public libraries around the world, especially in Canada. I am not familiar with this source, but it is likely to have stock data, or at least reference to sources that have such data. [[User:Marco polo|Marco polo]] ([[User talk:Marco polo|talk]]) 02:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

= February 23 =

== United States and the Impending Canary Island Disaster ==

Has any United States politician addressed the problem presented by the impending disaster of a Canary Island Tsunami? [[Special:Contributions/66.229.148.27|66.229.148.27]] ([[User talk:66.229.148.27|talk]]) 00:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:I have looked into this, and for several years there have been reports that the severity of the problem is overstated. See this BBC news article from 2004. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3963563.stm] Regards, [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 00:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to seem rash or any of that. I thank you for the information, it was definitely a reliever. I just want to know if this has been addressed on a political forum. Such as the floor of congress, etc etc. [[Special:Contributions/66.229.148.27|66.229.148.27]] ([[User talk:66.229.148.27|talk]]) 00:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22canary+islands%22+site%3Acongress.gov&btnG=Search Yes. It has.] (Google is your friend). -- [[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|&trade;]] 02:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Cross-state sexual issues ==

I have a question about cases of US law. Is it illegal to cross state lines to engage in sexual conduct with a minor? Such as, in my state, the age of consent is 16, but in the other state, it is 18. If I were to bring that person back to my state, where it is legal, would the act of transporting cross-state be a federal crime?

Also, what does the law say about transmission of sexually explicit content over the internet from a minor, if that said person is agreed to the transmission, and I am over age? [[User:RefDeskPrivateAcct|RefDeskPrivateAcct]] ([[User talk:RefDeskPrivateAcct|talk]]) 04:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:The Reference Desk does not give legal advice. Consult an attorney for the application of the [[Mann Act]] to your situation. [[User:B00P|B00P]] ([[User talk:B00P|talk]]) 06:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a [[Roger B. Taney]] issue to me! [[Special:Contributions/68.231.164.27|68.231.164.27]] ([[User talk:68.231.164.27|talk]]) 06:27, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:What does that mean? [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 14:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

18 U.S.C. 2423 (2006) says:
:(a) Transportation With Intent To Engage in Criminal Sexual Activity.— A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, with intent that the individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.
:(b) Travel With Intent To Engage in Illicit Sexual Conduct.— A person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States, or a United States citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States who travels in foreign commerce, for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.[http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2423.html]
--[[User:Maltelauridsbrigge|Maltelauridsbrigge]] ([[User talk:Maltelauridsbrigge|talk]]) 18:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I see nothing Taneyish in sexual consent laws. Roger Taney was chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court during the Civil War years. Dred Scott, upholding slavery, was his opinion. He helped create the inevitably of the Civil War. If someone is not capable of giving consent, they cannot give meaningful consent. Children may be sexual but the law recognizes that they do not have an equal bargaining position with an adult. Statutory rape laws also exist. My personal story is that a child cannot stand up to an adult as an equal and is, therefore, easily exploited and abused.[[User:75Janice|75Janice]] ([[User talk:75Janice|talk]]) 02:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
75Janice

== Doing what's best for the economy ==

Here in the States, people will soon start receiveing their income tax return checks and that has me wondering something. What would be best for the economy; A) people spending that money as soon as they can so that it can move throughout the financial system or B) putting it into the bank, by way of a savings account or certificate of deposit, so that the banks have more money to lend out? I'd like it if you could pick from those two options but I'm open to reading better things to do with the money. Apologies if I've simplified the whole banking system way too much for my little brain. Thanks, <span style="font-family:monospace;">[[User:Dismas|Dismas]]</span>|[[User talk:Dismas|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 09:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:I think you might find [http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/02/18/how-8-a-week-can-best-boost-the-economy/ this post] useful. Or perhaps not. Its not especially serious, but at least it's asking the question to economists. [[User:Geuiwogbil|Geuiwogbil]] ([[User talk:Geuiwogbil|Talk]]) 10:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Spending it. The reason they're doling it out in small amounts rather than making one lump sum payment is because they think people are more likely to spend a little cash, while they are likely to save a lump sum. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 12:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Spending it is best for the economy, now, because banks, once they get hold of money from any source, tend to want to "hold onto it until the economy improves". This hording of money, of course, is precisely what keeps the economy from improving. However, once the economy does improve, both people and banks should increase their savings rates to prepare for the next economic downturn, as a lack of cash reserves was one cause of our current problems. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] ([[User talk:StuRat|talk]]) 12:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Spending would be better for the economy (but is it better for you?). Banks have become quite risk averse and so extend credit cautiously. [[Special:Contributions/Zain Ebrahim111|Zain Ebrahim]] ([[User talk:Zain Ebrahim111|talk]]) 13:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Chances are, spending it is best, but if there is a chance you will soon be in financial difficulties it would be better save it. Going bankrupt is going to harm the economy more than deferring spending a little. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 13:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

::[[Paradox of thrift]] may be of interest.

:::I have a hankering for the attitude of [[Enoch Powell]], who used to say that it's generally a mistake for people to act in what they conceive, often wrongly, as the national interest. According to this old-fashioned view, people should act responsibly in their own interest, and if they do that then the nation acts collectively in its own interest. No doubt this has some flaws, but then all economic ideas have flaws. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] ([[User talk:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">talk</span>]]) 02:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

:Although increasing short-run [[Aggregate Demand]] (consumption) is the point of a fiscal stimulus, if it hadn't been for the low marginal propensity to save (amount of money that goes into savings for each dollar of additional income) in the United States, it may not have had so many problems. A low [[Savings rate]] leads to a [[trade deficit]], increased private and public [[financial leverage]] and, often, less domestic ownership of assets (land and capital). These things allow foreign countries to capture surpluses that otherwise would be going to the United States. And they make financial panics more extreme. Some economists believe that countries go through cycles during which they start off in the world as a "net borrower" with low income and slowly achieve a high savings rate, during which time they accumulate capital, which increases their per capita income, which combines with a high savings rate to make them become a "net lender" in the world. The higher income slowly increases consumption (at the expense of savings), which eventually makes them a net borrower again. During this time, they maintain a high propensity to consume and a low propensity to save which slowly the erodes rate of capital accumulation and income growth. They "live beyond their means" for a while. Examining the increasing and consistent trade deficits and stubborn addiction to leverage (credit) in the US suggests that this is the stage in which they currently find themselves.[[User:NByz|NByz]] ([[User talk:NByz|talk]]) 03:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Children and Women of India ==

I would like to research women and children surviving on garbage dumps in the country of India.
Thanks, Pam Moes

:You might start by googling (without the quotation marks) "garbage dump living India". It brings up a lot of results. If you want a background as to the causes, you could look at [[Poverty in India]] and its references. [[User:Bielle|// BL \\]] ([[User talk:Bielle|talk]]) 18:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

::Other helpful searches could use the terms "rubbish dump", "rubbish tip", "dumping ground" and "rag pickers". [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_qdr=all&q=india+rubbish+dump+site%3Anews.bbc.co.uk&btnG=Search&meta= For example]. You might also look at [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/from-bags-to-riches-the-recycling-project-which-starts-in-indias-rubbish-tips-522321.html this article in The Independent] about a charity helping rag pickers in Delhi. Best, [[User:WikiJedits|WikiJedits]] ([[User talk:WikiJedits|talk]]) 19:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

== Oppression due to gender/skin colour ==

[to settle a discussion please] On the whole, who were more oppressed? - women under the Taliban in Afghanistan (1996-2001) or pre-Civil Rights blacks in the southern USA (1900-1950s)? Thanks for info. --[[User:AlexSuricata|AlexSuricata]] ([[User talk:AlexSuricata|talk]]) 19:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:At least African slaves could show their faces in public. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 19:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:What's the object of this discussion? Does someone win something? Because women under the Taliban and black Americans before the Civil Rights Movement didn't win anything. Getting acid thrown in your face or getting burned and lynched by the whole town: which would you choose? --[[User:Moni3|Moni3]] ([[User talk:Moni3|talk]]) 19:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::I'd go with being lynched. [[User:Recury|Recury]] ([[User talk:Recury|talk]]) 19:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:::What about [[stoning]], still a punishment for adultery, and indirectly a punishment for being raped? --—<i><b>—&nbsp;[[User:Gadget850|<font color = "gray">Gadget850&nbsp;(Ed)</font>]]<font color = "darkblue">&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Gadget850|''talk'']]</sup></font></b> - </i> 21:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Oppression is a subjective thing, a direct comparison like that is impossible. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 19:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:::Can we be given some background on the question? Why would those two classes of people be compared? Is there a reason why those two categories of people need to be compared on the basis of "oppression?" I am just wondering about the origin from which springs such a question. The questioner indicates that it is to "settle a discussion." Can we be afforded a glimpse of the nature of that "discussion?" [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 19:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Bus Stop. The discussion concerns denial of human rights in historically modern situations (20th Century+) to different groups + to try to understand how the oppression of these groups within the power structure could be maintained (eg: denial of education/career/freedom of movement etc.). The question would be which of the groups mentioned above was denied more basic legal and human rights. Hope that's clear, thank you for info. --[[User:AlexSuricata|AlexSuricata]] ([[User talk:AlexSuricata|talk]]) 20:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Thank you -- but why those two particular groups? That is what I am mainly wondering about. I'm sorry I didn't make my question more clear. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 20:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

If the question is badly phrased, then please remove it. I/we were informed that this is a good place on internet to receive information from people with good knowledge about historical contexts and the discussion, that we had, concerned denial of '''specific''' human and legal rights by one group over another (I thought this is called oppression politics, sorry if wrong). --[[User:AlexSuricata|AlexSuricata]] ([[User talk:AlexSuricata|talk]]) 20:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::Do you have trouble focussing on a question? Do you have difficulty conversing? You have been asked twice, by me, why these two particular groups are being compared on the basis of their relative "oppression." For the third time, I am asking you why those two particular groups are under comparison. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 21:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:I doubt if there are any objective sources that compare relative oppression of these two groups. But I could be wrong. [[User:A Quest For Knowledge|A Quest For Knowledge]] ([[User talk:A Quest For Knowledge|talk]]) 21:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::I doubt it too. But it is possible. Anything is possible. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 21:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Because they are, among other groups, being discussed here by us in a private conversation, as is our right of freedom of expression here in our country. I find you to be extremely rude ("''Do you have trouble focussing on a question? Do you have difficulty conversing''?") and would ask you to please desist from further communication here, thank you in advance.--[[User:AlexSuricata|AlexSuricata]] ([[User talk:AlexSuricata|talk]]) 21:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:Yes, that is fine. You are well within your "rights" in not conversing with me. Sometimes I pose "difficult" questions. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 21:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Although Bus Stop's demeanor was not as cordial as we like to see here on the reference desks, yours, AlexSuricata, was not without its problems. On the face of it, your question is the sort designed to incite rancorous debate, and debate, rancorous or not, is not what this desk is for. We volunteers are here to help you use the encyclopedia to find specific information; this is not a discussion forum. Your question presupposes an equivalence between the conduct of the United States and the conduct of the Taliban, making it quite a lot like the sort of non-question that trolls ask to make trouble, and it is unanswerable in any concrete way, as Tango pointed out, again troll-like. Of course, both oppressions happened, and therein lies a reason to assume good faith. We here at Wikipedia are supposed to assume good faith, and I think you'll admit that Bus Stop sort of did by asking you for clarification, which was not forthcoming from you. We still don't know why those two groups. What about the Russian serfs? What about Athenian non-citizens in the Golden Age? What about the Slavs, the Kurds, the Armenians, the Ainu, the Untouchables, the Irish? Why the two you name? I'm sure that many of the volunteers here saw the same problem with your "question", and either chose to ignore it, as is our "right", or answered levelly. So now it's me asking, why those two groups? --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 22:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::The question also presupposes an equivalence between men and women. One of the classes of people being discussed consists of women only. The other class of people comprises both sexes. I apologize for what may have been incivility on my part. I found it particularly curious that a group comprising one gender was being compared to a group comprised of both genders. I ask questions that I think will lead to fruitful discussions. I only grew frustrated, when my inquiries were thwarted. But I apologize to AlexSuricata. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 22:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:::A better comparison might be between women under the Taliban and women in Western European medieval culture (or even women in more progressive Islamic states such as Egypt, Lebanon, or Tunisia). [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 22:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
::::You are assuming you know why those two particular groups were chosen for this comparison. It appears that we will not be told what the interest in those two groups may be. Without understanding why those groups were chosen, finding references that could possibly compare them is extremely difficult. I am left thinking that it is an argument between a white woman and a black man about who's had it worse, even though neither one has ever been oppressed by a slave master or the Taliban. -- [[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|&trade;]] 22:27, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::It is difficult to quantify abstract qualities. There is no single "unit of oppression," and likewise, no direct way to compare them. How can one objectivly decide which acts of violence and oppression against either group are more severe? While the Reference Desk does very well with questions that have a definite answer ("Who is the current pope?" or "When was the War of 1812?"), we do not do so well with questions that have no definitive answer ("What is the meaning of life?") A discussion forum may be a better place to ask this question. [[User:Livewireo|Livewireo]] ([[User talk:Livewireo|talk]]) 22:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
:Well, then, on a general level, what is the difference between the way modern, 20th century governments oppress and create a framework supporting oppression and the way governments of the past have done so? I don't personally think that much changed at all. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 22:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:While I agree with and appreciate the comments above, here's a suggested approach to finding a common denominator for the comparison. If "oppression" is measured by the presence or absence of human rights (or civil rights), you would investigate the nature of those rights in each context: i.e. women vs. men in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, and blacks vs. whites in '30s–'50s Southern USA. A fair comparison will require digging under the surface: do the Taliban oppress their male political opponents in any way? what aspects characterized rural vs. urban Southern settings? And then (or first) examine your own definitions of context-dependent human/civil rights to ensure that other factors aren't involved: to take an example external to the chosen cases, is it oppression or liberation to deny a devout schoolgirl her choice to wear the headcovering required for modesty in the religion she professes? (Caveat: this may be mediated by a school acting ''in loco parentis'' for minors...but applying the values of the school board, not the girl's own parents!) A thoughful consideration and study of these issues, supported by what you can read online and in the broadcast and print media, should give you plenty of material and lead to some meaningful insights if not actual conclusions. Go for it! ''-- [[User:Deborahjay|Deborahjay]] ([[User talk:Deborahjay|talk]]) 22:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)''


Answer from OP to user Milkbreath: Because they are two groups we saw about recently in some movies ("Mississippi Burning" and "Osama") and read in books ("The Color Purple" & "The Kite Runner") and read about on the internet and these 2 timeframes and the groups (and how the power structure could be maintained - eg: denial of access to education/career, 2nd class citizens in legal systems, own bank accounts and driving licences, citzenship. etcv.) interest us and we were talking and comparing. Is that so bad? We are in Europe and know little first-hand about these groups. If the question is offensive, please remove - We were curious as to information about, for exaample, specific legal discrimination and which group had it harder to achieve "pursuit of happiness" for different reasons, and hoped someone could here comparitively point out basic but specific legal/human rights areas. But, if you deem this "troll-like" or offensive, then of course please remove, thank you. --[[User:AlexSuricata|AlexSuricata]] ([[User talk:AlexSuricata|talk]]) 23:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

:Thanks, Al (may I call you Al?). I didn't say it was bad, I said it ''looked'' bad. I didn't say you were trolling, I said that you should appreciate that a certain degree of suspicion on the part of a certain volunteer was understandable given the circumstances. We don't remove offensive questions unless their intent is solely to offend, and I am not offended by the question. Anyway, your question asks which was "more oppressed". Who can say? I guess we can measure oppression by numbers of victims killed per capita, but I doubt the Taliban recorded it every time a wife or daughter was beaten to death. I think we cannot know. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 23:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

<br><br>Returning to the question itself, I would say it was women under the Taliban. I see two key points.
#Lynching was never official government policy in the United States; executions in Afghanistan were officially sanctioned. Throughout the period you are discussing, oppression of blacks in the South was widely publicized and condemned by other segments of the American population, and by many people in the South itself. When President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he noted that his father had opposed the resurgent Klan in Texas right after World War I. In Afghanistan, where the government ''was'' the oppressor, protest against such oppression was itself a crime. When it comes to lesser forms of oppression than death, such as the inability to vote, this was, in the United States, a violation of the US Constitution obtained by dubious means, such as poll taxes, but in Taliban Afghanistan, as flowing directly from their law.
#The was very little preventing blacks from leaving the South. Hundreds of thousands migrated north, to places like Chicago and Detroit, or west. On the other hand, it was all but impossible for a woman to leave Afghanistan.
While it hardly matters to the victims who is killing them, for the society as a whole, it ''does'' matter if the offense is being perpetrated by some small, repulsive segment of the population or is the explicit policy of the nation. And it certainly matters whether one can escape a bad situation, or is, in effect, a prisoner.
Lack of human rights is always a tragedy, but looking at the issue in the United States and Afghanistan discloses two very different trajectories. In the US the movement whas been from slavery, through oppression, towards equality. (It hasn't been fully achieved yet, but you might want to take a good look at the current President.) The Taliban ''removed'' whatever legal equality women had before they came to power.
[[User:B00P|B00P]] ([[User talk:B00P|talk]]) 00:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
**It is quite incorrect to claim that there were no barriers to blacks leaving the south. Freed slaves travelling north right after the civil war were sometimes murdered for their impudence in not becoming sharecroppers. There was a longstanding fear of the loss of cheap labor, and rail travel was difficult for many years after emancipation. In the 1927 Mississippi River flood, sharecroppers/laborers were prevented from leaving the flooded Mississippi delta in Tennessee, and were kept in abusive and inhumane conditions on the levees, while whites were transported to safety elsewhere. The NY Times [http://www.democracynow.org/2005/9/2/historian_government_relief_efforts_to_1927 said] "“Blacks were rounded up into work camps and held by armed guards. They were prevented from leaving as the waters rose. A steamer, the Capitol, played "Bye Bye Blackbird” as it sailed away."[[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 02:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

= February 24 =

== Recovery from Narcisstic Nurturing (or lack of) ==

I do not have a "sense of myself". When I'm alone, I am not able to decide to do/or not do- anything. After changing out of my work clothes, I may simply sit on a chair for hours, until someone comes home, or phones. "No sense of myself" is the best term I can think of to describe this. I'm 53, and recently come to realize my mother was an extreme narcississt. How do I outgrow or overcome this lack. Is it something I devlop - or create? Is there a universally recognized form of therapy or treatment for this condition?[[User:NotaFiffle|NotaFiffle]] ([[User talk:NotaFiffle|talk]]) 03:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:Perhaps you should see a neurologist. You're not going to get sound medical advice here. This is just a [[Bullshit|bull]] session. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 04:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:Possibly see a therapist, but in any case see someone. As usual your doctor is a good person to start with. [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 14:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Maslow's hierarchy of needs ==

Why is sex in the physiological portion of Maslow's hierarchy? It's not necessary for life. Well, not for an individual to remain living. It's not directly necessary to be able to fulfill the safety needs. And it's redundant given the love/belonging needs. <span style="font-family:monospace;">[[User:Dismas|Dismas]]</span>|[[User talk:Dismas|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 04:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:Sex is a physiological event, and under Maslow's theory of human actualization, ALL physiological processes of the body are at the bottom of the pyramid. Sex, that is the physiological event of sexual release (i.e. orgasm), is distinct from the emotional processes such as love or belonging higher on the pyramid. Sexual release occurs even in the absense of love ([[masturbation]], sexual dreams, [[nocturnal emissions]], etc.) and in order to complete the lowest level of the pyramid, an individual must have an outlet of sexual release. It's important to note that the lowest level of the pyramid is not merely about "you will die if you don't get these things", its that you cannot fully reallize your potential as a human (i.e. be fully actualized) unless these needs are met.
:Maslow draws a distinction between several human experiences which we conflate with sex.
:#''Orgasm'' is on the lowest level.
:#Being in a sexual relationship with another would be on the second level (this makes sense, since you cannot have a full sexual relationship if you are incapable of orgasm).
:#Being in an ''intimate'' sexual relationship, where sex is intertwined with love (i.e. marriage or its equivalent) is on the third level (being in a working marriage requires a healthy sexual relationship, so this rests on the second level being complete first)
:#Feeling good about your marriage and being content in your family life would be on the fourth level.(Having esteem in your marriage requires a healthy sex life with your partner)
:#Feeling the need to place the needs of your marriage ahead of your personal needs; having a morally committed relationship to your partner, etc. etc. would be the fifth level.(Having a moral committment to monogamy in your relationship requires that you have esteem in it).
:Hope this spells it out a bit better for you. Its not the entire of sex ''and all that comes with it'' that Maslow places on the lowest level, its the mere physiological process of orgasm that belongs there. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 06:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Allegory of the cave ==

In Plato's [[allegory of the cave]], how do I determine whether I'm one of the prisoners in the cave or whether I'm one of the shadows being cast on the wall? [[User:NeonMerlin|<span style="background:#000;color:red;border:#0f0 solid;border-width:1px 0">Neon</span>]][[User talk:NeonMerlin|<span style="background:#0f0;color:#000;border:red solid;border-width:1px 0">Merlin</span>]] 05:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:Did you take the [[red pill]] or the blue pill? '''''[[User:Bibliomaniac15|<font color="black">bibliomaniac</font>]][[User talk:Bibliomaniac15|<font color="red">1</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Bibliomaniac15|<font color="blue">5</font>]]''''' 05:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
::To explain a bit more about Biblio's oblique reference, the 1999 film [[The Matrix]] is essentially a sci-fi version of the ''allegory of the cave''. The whole point of the allegory is that, unless you are specifically shown the real world (i.e. offered the red pill) you can never know whether or not the world you experience is "real". You can only assume what you experience is the totality of experience until someone leads you out of the cave/offers you the red pill. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 05:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:Uh, shadows aren't sentient, so you must be a prisoner. On a separate note, [[William Poundstone]]'s interesting book ''Labyrinths of Reason'' posits the ultimate allegory of the cave -- a single [[bit]] of information -- in which a single red LED taps out a depiction of reality in [[Morse Code]]. The subject would have just as rich an experience of the world as Plato's prisoners or we in our own cave. --[[User:TotoBaggins|Sean]] 13:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
::Sean's point being summed up as ''[[I think therefore I am]]''. [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 14:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== homosexual ==

Who were some people in the 19th century who opposed homosexual activity? This is homework but I just need a starting point. Thanks. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/194.80.240.66|194.80.240.66]] ([[User talk:194.80.240.66|talk]]) 09:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Articles that might be helpful: [[Paragraph 175]], [[Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885]], [[Cleveland Street scandal]]. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/194.171.56.13|194.171.56.13]] ([[User talk:194.171.56.13|talk]]) 11:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Oh sorry I forgot to specify this mainly for England during the 19th century, although other world sources are welcome for background context. Thanks. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/194.80.240.66|194.80.240.66]] ([[User talk:194.80.240.66|talk]]) 12:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:The vast majority of respected public figures who were willing to make any kind of public statement on the matter viewed it negatively. It would have been quite scandalous to do otherwise, except in rather subtly coded language when discussing ancient Greek society, anthropological comparisons of customs, etc. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 12:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

:One starting point: read about [[Oscar Wilde]]'s trial and follow the links to the person whose accusations precipitated the charges. [[User:WikiJedits|WikiJedits]] ([[User talk:WikiJedits|talk]]) 17:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

::[[Henry Labouchère]] is one individual who would interest you. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 17:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Quotation wrongly attributed to Paul Valéry ==

The quotation

"Mettons en commun ce que nous avons de meilleur et enrichissons-nous de nos différences mutuelles [French] =
Let us each put in common the best that we have and enrich ourselves with our mutual differences."

has been attributed to the French writer and poet Paul Valéry by a number of quotation guides, without a precise reference. According to specialists on Valéry, the phrase is nowhere to be found in his works. A search through electronic editions of his works did not uncover it either.

Who did originate this oft-quoted phrase?
[[User:Vossius|Vossius]] ([[User talk:Vossius|talk]]) 13:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
<small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Vossius|Vossius]] ([[User talk:Vossius|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vossius|contribs]]) 13:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I poked around the Internet and my bookshelves, and nada, not that my bookshelves are worth much. (Isn't that more like "Let us bring together the best..."?) I wouldn't be satisfied that it wasn't his unless I'd actually read every word he ever wrote, and even then it might have been oral. The absence of a work cited is suspicious, though. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 16:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Leviathan ==

Why did Hobbes call his book/commonwealth Leviathan? It seems that the [[Leviathan|huge monster of the bible]] was regarded as a demon and probably wasn't the nicest name for anything, let alone a sprawling totalitarian state. So why the demonic name? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/86.8.176.85|86.8.176.85]] ([[User talk:86.8.176.85|talk]]) 16:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== World Leader's role in 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War ==

What was the role of the world leaders including United Kingdom, U.S.A. and Saudi Arabia? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Bangladesh's Foreign Policy ==

What is Bangladesh's foreign policy toward to Muslim nations and Commonwealth nations? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Christianity ==

I notice that Islam is the religion that has an international organization in the name of Islam (Organization of the Islamic Conference). Why Christianity doesn't have an international organization, even though it is world's largest religion before Islam? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:It did for a long time, until the 16th century, the [[Roman Catholic Church]] claimed to represent all of Christendom (at least the Western parts) and it certainly did before the [[East-West Schism]] in the 11th century. Since the [[Protestant Reformation]], western Christendom has become increasingly fragmented. There have, throughout history, been various [[Ecumenical council]]s which attempt to bring various elements of Christendom together for mutual understanding. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 16:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
::See also [[Ecumenism]] and [[World Council of Churches]] and several other organizations noted in the Ecumenism article. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 17:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
:Mostly because of the priciple of secular government in the "Christian" world. Christianity concerns itself with saving souls, not making nations. It's Jesus vs. Caesar. And for the many religions, denominations, and sects within Christianity to unite, they would need something to unite against, and they would need their "member states" to be self-described "Christian nations", a hard sell in the developed world. Also, a Christian world organization on a par with the Islamic one would not be able to get away with making pronouncments like that the Jews "invented socialism, communism, human rights and democracy, so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong". Even PC has a silver lining. The Pope caught a ton of crap for suggesting that the Moslems might be a bit too shirty for everybody's good; imagine if the Christian world spoke such things with one voice. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 16:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Indian and Pakistani Nationalism ==

Why do I have feeling that Indian Nationalism is like Hindu Nationalism with its policy that make every Hindu, regardless of its ethnic background, speak Hindi and same thing with Pakistani Nationalism: it is like Muslim Nationalism with its policy that make every Muslim, regardless of its ethnic background, speak Urdu? If I am wrong, please correct me with some articles on Indian Nationalism and Pakistani Nationalism either from Wikipedia and/or from other websites. I am Bangladeshi, by the way, I am an Anti-Pakistani and an Anti-Indian as well because of them, Bangladesh is having a cold civil war between two political parties(Awami League and BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami and its supporters. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Ami Banglai Gan Gai ==

Who originally sang the song "Ami Banglai Gan Gai"? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I ''believe'' it was mahmuduzzaman babu. [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 17:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Bengali songs ==

Where can I find Bengali songs sang by Ghulam Ali, Mehdi Hassan, Mohammed Rafi, Jagjit Singh, Pankaj Udhas and Anup Jalota? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:[[Ghulam Ali]], [[Mehdi Hassan]], [[Mohammed Rafi]], [[Jagjit Singh]], [[Pankaj Udhas]] and [[Anup Jalota]]. These wikipedia artist pages may be of use to you. [[User:MarquisCostello|MarquisCostello]] ([[User talk:MarquisCostello|talk]]) 17:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Bangladeshi films ==

Is there website where I can find Bangladeshi films and their sypnosis? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Nationalism ==

I know that Lebanese Nationalism is also called Maronite Nationalism. So, is this mean that Iraqi nationalism is also called Chaldean nationalism and Egyptian nationalism is also called Coptic nationalism? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 16:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Not necessarily. One situation does not necessarily extend to others. The relationship between Maronite Christians and Lebanese society is quite different than that between, say, the Coptics and Egyptian society. To some extent, each situation is a ''[[sui generis]]'' situation, and must only be understood on its own terms, and not in relation to other superficially similar situations. --[[User:Jayron32|Jayron32]].[[User talk:Jayron32|<small>talk</small>]].[[Special:Contributions/Jayron32|<small>contribs</small>]] 16:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Heartland of Lebanon ==

Mount Lebanon Governorate is considered as "Heartland of Lebanese Christians" and Chouf District is the heartland of Lebanese Druze community. So, what about Sunni and Shi'a Muslims? Which governorate or district is the heartland of Lebanese Sunni Muslim community and which governorate or district is the heartland of Shi'a Muslim community? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/142.204.75.105|142.204.75.105]] ([[User talk:142.204.75.105|talk]]) 17:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== The punishment of nuns who broken their celibacy ==
This is a historical question. I wonder: If a nun in the, for example, 16th century had sexual intercourse with a man, then which punishment would she have? And which would a monk have, who had sex with a woman? --[[Special:Contributions/85.226.42.129|85.226.42.129]] ([[User talk:85.226.42.129|talk]]) 17:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:37, 9 January 2025

Welcome to the humanities section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Select a section:
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

  • Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
  • Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
  • Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
  • Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
    • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.



How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
See also:

December 26

[edit]

What would the president Trump brokered peace treaty in Ukraine look like?

[edit]

I know this is probably speculation, but going by what I've read in a few articles - how would the new president sort this out?

- the war stops

- Russia withdraws all troops from the invaded regions of Ukraine

- Ukraine withdraws all troops from the same regions

- these regions become a DMZ, under control of neither party for the next 25 years, patrolled by the United Nations (or perhaps the USA/Britain and China/North Korea jointly)

- Russia promises to leave Ukraine alone for 25 years

- Ukraine promises not to join NATO or the EU for 25 years

- A peace treaty will be signed

- The can will be kicked down the road for 25 years, at which point more discussions or wars will commence

So maybe the Americans will say "this is the best deal you're going to get, in the future we're going to be spending our money on our own people and no-one else - if you don't take it, we'll let the Russians roll right over you and good luck to you".

Is this basically what is being said now? I think this is what Vance envisioned. 146.90.140.99 (talk) 03:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The downside is that the residents of the buffer zone will be compelled to eat their pets. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots03:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or each other's pets. —Tamfang (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be overlooking one of the major obstacles to peace -- unless it suffers a stinging military defeat, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine which it's formally annexed -- Crimea and Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia... -- AnonMoos (talk) 03:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, Russia won't withdraw from territories belonging to 1990s Ukraine, but it is likely that Ukraine does not expect Russia to do so too. Restoring to pre-war territories and the independent of Crimean, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia are the best Ukraine can hope for. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never heard of any such plan. 25 years? This is completely made up. Can't say I'm surprised since this is the same guy who asked the previous "question". My understanding is that Wikipedia and the Reference Desk are not a forum for debate. This is not Facebook. But this guy seems to think otherwise. Anyway, there's no way that the territories Russia has annexed will ever go back to the Ukraine. The only question which remains is what guarantees can be given to Ukraine that Russia will never try something like this ever again and eat it up piecemeal. The best answer (from Ukraine's point of view) would have been that it join NATO but of course Russia won't have it. If not that, then what? This's exactly where the "art of the deal" comes in. Speculating in advance on Wikipedia is pointless. Better to do that on Facebook. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, by policy Wikipedia is not a forum and not a soapbox. But attend also to the policy Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Oh, and the guideline assume good faith is another good one.  Card Zero  (talk) 10:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Further, it's a bit pointless to tell an OP that WP is not a forum or a soapbox, but then immediately engage in debate with them about the matter they raise. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 18:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A politician's butt dominates his brain. What he is going to do is more important than what he had said. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Expect that a concept of a peace plan will be ready soon after day one. Until then we can only speculate whose concept. Will it be Musk's, Trump's, Vance's, Rubio's, Hegseth's, Kellogg's? The latter's plan is believed to involve Ukraine ceding the Donbas and Luhansk regions, as well as Crimea, to Russia,[1] after which the negotiators can proclaim: "Mission accomplished. Peace for our time."  --Lambiam 10:17, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this one of those "crystal ball" things we are supposed to avoid here? - Jmabel | Talk 21:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Slowking Man (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the OP provided an actual source for this claim, then it could be discussed more concretely. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots00:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a claim, but a question, "What is being said now about the prospects and form of a Trump-brokered peace treaty?" Should the OP provide a source for this question? If the question is hard to answer, it is not by lack of sources (I gave one above), but because all kinds of folks are saying all kinds of things about it.  --Lambiam 19:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the plan may be, Putin reportedly doesn't like it.[2]  --Lambiam 22:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ID card replacement

[edit]

In California you can get a drivers' license (DL) from the DMV, which both serves as an ID card and attests that you are authorized to drive a car. Alternatively, from the same DMV, you can get a state ID card, which is the same as a DL except it doesn't let you drive. The card looks similar and the process for getting it (wait in line, fill in forms, get picture taken) is similar, though of course there is no driving test.

If you need a replacement drivers' license, you can request it online or through one of the DMV's self-service kiosks installed in various locations. That's reasonably convenient.

If you need a replacement ID card, you have to request it in person at a DMV office, involving travel, waiting in line, dealing with crowds, etc. DMV appointment shortens the wait but doesn't get rid of it. Plus the earliest available appointments are several weeks out.

My mom is elderly, doesn't drive, doesn't handle travel or waiting in line well, and needs a replacement ID card. I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process. Not looking for legal advice etc. but am just wondering if I'm overlooking something sane, rather than reflexive system justification. Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

European (Brit) here, so responding with logic rather than knowledge, but . . . . If a replacement ID could be requested remotely and sent, it would probably be easier for some nefarious person to do so and obtain a fake ID; at least if attendance is required, the officials can tell that the 25-y-o illegal immigrant (say) they're seeing in front of them doesn't match the photo they already have of the elderly lady whose 'replacement' ID is being requested.
Drivers' licences have the additional safeguard that drivers are occasionally (often?) stopped by traffic police and asked to produce them, at which point discrepancies may be evident. {The poster formerly known as 87.812.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 00:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I guess there is some sense to that, though I haven't been stopped by police in quite a few years. I reached the DMV by phone and they say they won't issue an actual duplicate ID card: rather, they want to take a new picture of my mom and use that on the new card. Of course that's fine given that we have to go there anyway, but it's another way the DL procedure is different. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:DA2D (talk) 00:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What purpose does the ID card serve? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots04:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Identity documents in the United States. These cards can be used for such purposes as boarding a plane, purchasing alcohol or cigarettes where proof of age is required, cashing a check, etc. Most folks use their driver's license for these purposes, but for the minority that does not drive, some form of official id is required from time to time, hence the delivery of such cards by states. --Xuxl (talk) 13:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just wondering under what circumstances a shut-in would ever use it. The OP could maybe explain. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots21:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OP did not describe a "shut-in". And anyway, have you ever heard the well-known phrase-or-saying "none of your fucking business"? DuncanHill (talk) 21:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you the OP? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots22:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not OP and not a shut-in, but ID is necessary for registration for some online services (including ID requirements for access to some state and federal websites that administer things like taxes and certain benefits). I've had to provide photos/scans of photo ID digitally for a couple other purposes, too, though I can't remember off the top of my head what those were. I think one might have been to verify an I-9 form for employment. And the ID number from my driver's license for others. At least a couple instances have been with private entities rather than governments. The security implications always make me wary. -- Avocado (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Virtually all of the private information of US citizens has been repeatedly compromised in the last decade. Not a single company or government entity has faced consequences, and no US legislation is in the works to protect our private information in the future. For only one small example, the personal info of 73 million AT&T account holders was released on the dark web this year.[3] In the US, if you're a private company, you can do just about anything and get away with it. If you're a private citizen, there's an entirely separate set of laws for you. Viriditas (talk) 21:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless someone affiliated with the CA DMV drops by here, I'm afraid none of us are going to be able to tell you why something is the way it is with them. Essentially it's requesting people to guess or predict at why X might be the case. Have you tried contacting them and asking them for an answer? You and/or her could also contact her CA state elected representatives and let them know your feelings on the matter. Sometimes representatives' offices will assist a constitutent with issues they're having involving government services ("constitutent services"). --Slowking Man (talk) 01:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If your mom is old and her medical condition affects her ability to perform daily activities (she couldn't handle the travel or waiting in line well), she can ask her medical doctor to complete a DS 3234 (Medical Certification) form to verify her status. Then you can help her to fill out a DS 3235 application form on the DMV website and submit the required documents accordingly. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering why this discrepancy exists in the replacement process.
The Real ID Act contributed to the discrepancy in the replacment process, as did several notable fake ID rings on both coasts.[4][5] In other words, "this is why we can't have nice things". Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can't have nice things because those in power regulate the allocation of goods. To distinguish between the deserving and undeserving they need people to have IDs.  --Lambiam 10:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

[edit]

Building containing candle cabinets

[edit]

Is there a term (in pretty much any language) for a separate building next to a church, containing candle cabinets where people place votive candles? I've seen this mostly in Romania (and in at least one church in Catalonia), but suspect it is more widespread. (I've also seen just candle cabinets with no separate building, but I'm guessing that there is no term for that.) - Jmabel | Talk 01:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shrine might cover it, but I suspect there's a more specific term in at least one language. {The poster fornerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 21:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody contributed a couple of photos of these kind of cabinets to commons. File:Orthodoxe_Nonne_putzt_Kerzenöfchen.JPG and File:Behälter_für_Opferkerzen_an_einer_orthodoxen_Kirche_in_Rumänien.JPG. Both are in Romania, and outdoor. I suppose the purpose of the cabinet is to protect the candles from the weather? I see pictures of indoor racks for candles. One example is File:Religión en Isla Margarita, Valle del Espíritu Santo.jpg which is an upcoming Commons picture of the day. This small dark metal shed full of dripping wax is apparently located in or near to the rather pretty and well-lit Basilica of Our Lady of El Valle, but I saw nothing to tell me the spatial relationship. Some discussion, again about Romanian Eastern Orthodox traditions, in this Flickr photo's text, which calls them ... candle cabinets. (They protect the candles from wind and rain, and protect the church from the candles.)  Card Zero  (talk) 11:11, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Card Zero: the things you are posting are, precisely, candle cabinets. What I'm talking about are structures like a proper building, but with just a portal, no doors as such. Here's a rare non-Romanian example I photographed in 2001: File:Montserrat - prayer candles.jpg. Remarkably, I don't see any Romanian examples that really show the structure, they are all too close-in detailed. I'll try to see if I can find an example I may have shot but not yet uploaded. - Jmabel | Talk 04:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 28

[edit]

Truncated Indian map in Wikipedia

[edit]

Why is the map of India always appears truncated in all of Wikipedia pages, when there is no official annexing of Indian territories in Kashmir, by Pakistan and China nor its confirmation from Indian govt ? With Pakistan and China just claiming the territory, why the world map shows it as annexed by them, separating from India ? TravelLover05 (talk) 15:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The map at India shows Kashmir in light green, meaning "claimed but not controlled". It's not truncated, it's differently included.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see no 6 in Talk:India/FAQ ColinFine (talk) 20:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 29

[edit]

Set animal's name = sha?

[edit]

"In ancient Egyptian art, the Set animal, or sha,[citation needed]" - this seems like a major citation needed. Any help? Temerarius (talk) 00:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which article does that appear in? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots01:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It must be this article. Omidinist (talk) 04:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That term was in the original version of the article, written 15 years ago by an editor named "P Aculeius" who is still active. Maybe the OP could ask that user about it? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots05:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Each time, the word šꜣ is written over the Seth-animal.[6]
  • Sometimes the animal is designated as sha (šꜣ) , but we are not certain at all whether this designation was its name.[7]
  • When referring to the ancient Egyptian terminology, the so-called sha-animal, as depicted and mentioned in the Middle Kingdom tombs of Beni Hasan, together with other fantastic creatures of the desert and including the griffin, closely resembles the Seth animal.[8]
  • šꜣ ‘Seth-animal’[9]
  • He claims that the domestic pig is called “sha,” the name of the Set-animal.[10]
Wiktionary gives šꜣ as meaning "wild pig", not mentioning use in connection with depictions of the Seth-animal. The hieroglyphs shown for šꜣ do not resemble those in the article Set animal, which instead are listed as ideograms in (or for) stẖ, the proper noun Seth.  --Lambiam 08:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! The reason I brought it up was because the hieroglyph for the set animal didn't have the sound value to match in jsesh.
Temerarius (talk) 22:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SAAE12
 
E12
The word sha (accompanying
depictions of the Set animal)
in hieroglyphs
IMO they should be removed, or, if this can be sourced, be replaced by one or more of the following two:  --Lambiam 09:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Budge's original drawing and second version of PharaohCrab's drawing; the original looked very different, and this one is clearly based on Budge's as traced by me in 2009, but without attribution.
The article—originally "Sha (animal)" was one of the first I wrote, or attempted to write, and was based on and built on the identification by E. A. Wallis Budge, in The Gods of the Egyptians, which uses the hieroglyph
M8
for the word "sha", and includes the illustration that I traced from a scan and uploaded to Commons (and which was included in the article from the time of its creation in 2009 until December 21, 2024 when User:PharaohCrab replaced it with his original version of the one shown above; see its history for what it looked like until yesterday). I have had very little to do with the article since User:Sonjaaa made substantial changes and moved it to "Seth animal" in 2010; although it's stayed on my watchlist, I long since stopped trying to interfere with it, as it seemed to me that other editors were determined to change it to the way they thought it should be, and I wasn't sophisticated enough to intervene or advocate effectively for my opinions. In fact the only edit by me I can see after that was fixing a typo.
As for the word sha, that is what Budge called it, based on the hieroglyph associated with it; I was writing about this specific creature, which according to Budge and some of the other sources quoted above has some degree of independence from Set, as it sometimes appears without him and is used as the determinative of one or two other deities, whose totemic animal it might also have been. One of the other scholars quoted above questions whether the word sha is the name of the animal, but still associates the word with the animal: Herman Te Velde's article, "Egyptian Hieroglyphs as Signs Symbols and Gods", quoted above, uses slightly modified versions of Budge's illustrations; his book Seth, God of Confusion is also quoted above, both with the transliteration šꜣ, which in "Egyptian Hieroglyphs" he also renders sha. Percy Newberry is the source cited by the Henry Thompson quotation above, claiming that sha referred to a domestic pig as well as the Set animal, and a different god distinct from Set, though sharing the same attributes (claims of which Thompson seems skeptical). Herman Te Velde also cites Newberry, though he offers a different explanation for the meaning of "sha" as "destiny". All Things Ancient Egypt, also quoted above, calls the animal "the so-called sha-animal", while Classification from Antiquity to Modern Times just uses šꜣ and "Seth-animal".
I'm not certain what the question here is; that the hieroglyph transliterated sha is somehow associated with the creature seems to have a clear scholarly consensus; most of the scholars use it as the name of the creature; Herman Te Velde is the only one who suggests that it might not be its name, though he doesn't conclude whether it is or isn't; and one general source says in passing "so-called sha-animal", which accepts that this is what it's typically referred to in scholarship, without endorsing it. Although Newberry made the connection with pigs, none of the sources seems to write the name with pig hieroglyphs as depicted above. Could you be clearer about what it is that's being discussed here? P Aculeius (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
things that start with sh
I asked because I couldn't find it in Gardiner (jsesh, no match when searching by sound value) or Budge (dictionary vol II.)
Temerarius (talk) 05:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 30

[edit]

I do not say the Frenchman will not come. I only say he will not come by sea.

[edit]

1. What is the ultimate source of this famous 1803 quote by John Jervis (1735 – 1823), 1st Earl of St Vincent, First Lord of the Admiralty at the time. I googled Books and no source is ever given except possibly another collection of quotations. The closest I got was: "At a parley in London while First Lord of the Admiralty 1803". That's just not good enough. Surely there must be someone who put this anecdote in writing for the first time.

2. Wouldn't you say this use of the simple present in English is not longer current in contemporary English, and that the modern equivalent would use present continuous forms "I'm not saying... I'm only saying..." (unless Lord Jervis meant to say he was in the habit of saying this; incidentally I do realize this should go to the Language Desk but I hope it's ok just this once)

178.51.7.23 (talk) 11:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming he's talking about England, does he propose building a bridge over the Channel? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots12:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about a tunnel? --Wrongfilter (talk) 12:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a joke. He's saying that the French won't invade under any circumstances (see English understatement). Alansplodge (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The First Lord of the Admiralty wouldn't be the one stopping them if the French came by tunnel (proposed in 1802) or air (the French did have hot air balloons). Any decent military officer would understand that an invasion by tunnel or balloon would have no chance of success, but this fear caused some English opposition against the Channel Tunnel for the next 150 years. Just hinting at the possibility of invasion by tunnel amongst military officers would be considered a joke.
Unless he was insulting the British Army (no, now I'm joking). PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The quoted wording varies somewhat. Our article John Jervis, 1st Earl of St Vincent has it as "I do not say, my Lords, that the French will not come. I say only they will not come by sea" in an 1801 letter to the Board of Admiralty, cited to Andidora, Ronald (2000). Iron Admirals: Naval Leadership in the Twentieth Century. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-313-31266-3.. Our article British anti-invasion preparations of 1803–05 has Jervis telling the House of Lords "I do not say the French cannot come, I only say they cannot come by sea", and then immediately, and without citation, saying it was more probably Keith. I can't say I've ever seen it attributed to Keith anywhere else. DuncanHill (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, Andidora does not in fact say it was in a letter to the Board of Admiralty, nor does he explicitly say 1801. And his source, The Age of Nelson by G J Marcus has it as Jervis telling the House of Lords sometime during the scare of '03-'05. Marcus doesn't give a source. DuncanHill (talk) 13:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Southey was attributing it to Lord St Vincent as early as 1806, and while I don't want to put too much weight on his phrase "used to say" it does at any rate raise the possibility that St Vincent said (or wrote) it more than once. Perhaps Marcus and our St Vincent article are both right. --Antiquary (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Thanks. Some modern accounts (not Southey apparently) claim Lord St Vincent was speaking in the House of Lords. If that was the case, wouldn't it be found in the parliamentary record? How far back does the parliamentary record go for the House of Commons and/or the House of Lords. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for (2), the tense is still alive and kicking, if I do say so myself. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't say? [An idiom actually meaning "You say that, do you?", although I dare say most of you know that.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not what I am asking. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 05:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then I will answer you more directly. You are wrong: while the usage you quote is less common than it once was, it is still current, according to my experience as a native BrE speaker for over 65 years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I kid you not.  --Lambiam 23:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What percentage of Ancient Greek literature was preserved?

[edit]

Has anyone seen an estimate of what percentage of Ancient Greek literature (broadly understood: literature proper, poetry, mathematics, philosophy, history, science, etc.) was preserved. It doesn't matter how you define "Ancient Greek literature", or if you mean the works available in 100 BC or 1 AD or 100 AD or 200 AD... Works were lost even in antiquity. I'm just trying to get a rough idea and was wondering if anyone ever tried to work out an estimate. 178.51.7.23 (talk) 17:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an answer handy for you at the moment, but I can tell you that people have tried to work out an estimate for this, at least from the perspective of "how many manuscripts containing such literature managed to survive past the early Middle Ages". We've worked this one out, with many caveats, by comparing library catalogues from very early monasteries to known survivals and estimating the loss rate. -- asilvering (talk) 20:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One estimate is (less than) [11] one percent. --Askedonty (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have a Lost literary work article with a large "Antiquity" section. AnonMoos (talk) 21:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are works known to have existed, because they were mentioned and sometimes even quoted in works that have survived. These known lost works are probably only a small fraction of all that have been lost.  --Lambiam 23:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Few things which might be helpful:
  1. So profuse was Galen's output that the surviving texts represent nearly half of all the extant literature from ancient Greece.[1]
  2. Although not just Greek, but only 1% of ancient literature survives.[2] --ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 11:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following quantities are known: the number of preserved works, the (unknown) number of lost works, and the number of lost works of which we know, through mentions in preserved works. In a (very) naive model, let stand for the probability that a given work (lost or preserved) is mentioned in some other preserved work (so ). The expected number of mentions of preserved works in other preserved works is then If we have the numerical value of the latter quantity (which is theoretically obtainable by scanning all preserved works), we can obtain an estimate for and compute
 --Lambiam 13:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even without seeing any professional estimate of the kind I'm asking about here, my ballpark figure was that it had to be less than 1 percent, simply from noting how little of even the most celebrated and important authors has been preserved (e.g. about 5 percent for Sophocles) and how there are hundreds of authors and hundreds of works for which we only have the titles and maybe a few quotes, not to mention all those works of which we have not an inkling, the number of which it is, for this very reason, extremely hard to estimate.
  • But as a corollary to my first question I have another three:
  • 1. Has any modern historian tackled this paradox, namely the enormous influence that the culture of the Ancient World has had on the West while at the same time how little we actually know about that culture, and as a consequence the problem that we seem to believe that we know much more than we actually do? in other words that our image of it that has had this influence on Western culture might be to some extent a modern creation and might be very different of what it actually was?
  • 2. I understand that in this regard there can be the opposite opinion (or we can call it a hypothesis, or an article of faith) which is the one that is commonly held (at least implicitly): that despite all that was lost the main features of our knowledge of the culture of the Ancient World are secure and that no lost work is likely to have modified the fundamentals? Like I said this seems to be the position that is commonly implicitly held, but I'm interested to hear if any historian has discussed this question and defended this position explicitly in a principled way?
  • 3. Finally to what extent is the position mentioned in point 2 simply a result of ignorance (people not being aware of how much was lost)? How widespread is (in the West) the knowledge of how much was lost? How has that awareness developed in the West, both at the level of the experts and that of the culture in general, since say the 15th century? Have you encountered any discussions of these points?

178.51.7.23 (talk) 08:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issues touched upon are major topics in historiography as well as the philosophy of history, not only for the Ancient (Classical) World but for all historical study. Traditionally, historians have concentrated on the culture of the high and mighty. The imprint on the historical record by hoi polloi is much more difficult to detect, except in the rare instances where they rose up, so what we think of as "the" culture of any society is that of a happy few. Note also that "the culture of the Ancient World" covers a period of more than ten centuries, in which kingdoms and empires rose and fell, states and colonies were founded and conquered, in an endless successions of wars and intrigues. On almost any philosophical issue imaginable, including natural philosophy, ancient philosophers have held contrary views. It is not clear how to define "the" culture of the Ancient World, and neither is it clear how to define the degree to which this culture has influenced modern Western society. It may be argued that the influence of say Plato or Sophocles has largely remained confined to an upper crust. I think historians studying this are well aware of the limitations of their source material, including the fact that history is written by the victors.  --Lambiam 13:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
178.51.7.23 -- Think of it this way: What did it mean to "publish" something in the ancient world? You had at least one written manuscript of your work -- rarely more than a handful of such manuscripts. You could show what you had written to your friends, have it delivered to influential people, bequeath it to your heirs, or donate it to an archive or research collection (almost none of which were meaningfully public libraries in the modern sense of that phrase). However you chose to do it, once you were gone, the perpetuation of your work depended on other people having enough interest in it to do the laborious work of copying the manuscript, or being willing to pay to have a copy made. Works of literature which did not interest other people enough to copy manuscripts of it were almost always eventually lost, which ensured that a lot of tedious and worthless stuff was filtered out. Of course, pagan literary connoisseurs, Christian monks, Syriac and Arabic translators seeking Greek knowledge, and Renaissance Humanists all had different ideas of what was worth preserving, but between them, they ensured that a lot of interesting or engaging or informative works ended up surviving from ancient times. I'm sure that a number of worthy books still slipped through the gaps, but some losses were very natural and to be expected; for example, some linguists really wish that Claudius's book on the Etruscan language had survived, but it's not surprising that it didn't, since it would not have generally interested ancient, medieval, or renaissance literate people in the same way it would interest modern scholars struggling with Etruscan inscriptions.
By the way, college bookstores on or near campuses of universities which had a Classics program sometimes used to have a small section devoted to the small green-backed (Greek) and red-backed (Latin) volumes of the Loeb Classical Library, and you could get an idea of what survived from ancient times (and isn't very obscure or fragmentary) by perusing the shelves... AnonMoos (talk) 01:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed - at the other end of the scale, the Description of Greece by Pausanias seems to have survived into the Middle Ages in a single MS (now of course lost), and there are no ancient references to either it or him known. Since the Renaissance it has been continuously in print. Johnbod (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

December 31

[edit]

Was the fictional character "The Jackal" (as played by Edward Fox and Bruce Willis) based on Carlos The Jackal?

[edit]

Talking about the fictional assassin from the books and films. I once read somewhere that the real Carlos The Jackal didn't like being compared to the fictional character, because he said he was a professional Marxist revolutionary, not merely a hitman for hire to the highest bidder (not in the article about him at the moment, so maybe not true). 146.90.140.99 (talk) 02:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, the character wasn't based on Carlos. The films are based on the 1971 historical fiction novel The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth, which begins with a fairly accurate account of the actual 1962 assassination attempt on Charles de Gaulle by the French Air Force lieutenant colonel Jean Bastien-Thiry, which failed. Subsequently in the fictional plot the terrorists hire an unnamed English professional hitman whom they give the codename 'The Jackal'.
Carlos the Jackal was a Venezuelan terrorist named Ilich Ramírez Sánchez operating in the 1970s and '80s. He was given the cover name 'Carlos' when in 1971 he joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. When authorities found some of his weapons stashed in a friend's house, a copy of Forsyth's novel was noticed on his friend's bookshelf, and a Guardian journalist then invented the nickname, as journalists are wont to do. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 03:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the fictionalised Ilich Ramírez Sánchez / Carlos the Jackal from the Jason Bourne novels. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I am on to creating an article on Lu Chun [zh] soon. If anyone has got references about him other than those on google, it would be great if you could share them here. Thanks, ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 11:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try the National Central Library of Taiwan? The library has a lot of collection about history of Tang dynasty. If you want to write a research paper for publication purpose, you need to know what have been written by others. Then the National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertation in Taiwan under the central library can be a good starting point. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Granicus

[edit]

This month some news broke about identification of the Battle of the Granicus site, stating in particular: "Professor Reyhan Korpe, a historian from Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University (ÇOMÜ) and Scientific Advisor to the “Alexander the Great Cultural Route” project, led the team that uncovered the battlefield". However, per Battle of the Granicus#Location it seems that the exact site has been known since at least Hammond's 1980 article. Am I reading the news correctly that what Korpe's team actually did was mapping Alexander’s journey to the Granicus rather than identifying the battle site per se? Per news, "Starting from Özbek village, Alexander’s army moved through Umurbey and Lapseki before descending into the Biga Plain". Brandmeistertalk 23:38, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If Körpe and his team wrote a paper about their discovery, I haven't found it, so I can only go by news articles reporting on their findings. Apparently, Körpe gave a presentation at the Çanakkale Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism for an audience of local mayors and district governors,[12] and I think the news reports reflect what he said there. Obviously, the presentation was in Turkish. Turkish news sources, based on an item provided by DHA, quote him as saying, "Bölgede yaptığımız araştırmalarda antik kaynakları da çok dikkatli okuyarak, yorumlayarak savaşın aşağı yukarı tam olarak nerede olduğunu, hangi köyler arasında olduğunu, ovanın tam olarak neresinde olduğunu bulduk." [My underlining] Google Translate turns this into, "During our research in the region, by reading and interpreting ancient sources very carefully, we found out more or less exactly where the war took place, which villages it took place between, and where exactly on the plain it took place." I cannot reconcile "more or less" with "exactly".
The news reports do not reveal the location identified by Körpe, who is certainly aware of Hammond's theory, since he cited the latter's 1980 article in earlier publications. One possibility is that the claim will turn out to have been able to confirm Hammond's theory definitively. Another possibility is that the location they identified is not "more or less exactly" the same as that of Hammond's theory.  --Lambiam 02:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 1

[edit]

Has there ever been an incident of a serial killer murdering another serial killer?

[edit]

Question as topic. Has this ever happened outside of the movies? 146.90.140.99 (talk) 05:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting question. Just because you can't find any incident, doesn't mean this kind of case never happened (type II error). Stanleykswong (talk) 09:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently yes: Dean Corll was killed by one of his his accomplices, Elmer Wayne Henley. --Antiquary (talk) 12:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it would be more notable if the two were not connected to each other. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 08:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you're including underworld figures, this happens not infrequently. As an Aussie, a case that springs to mind was Andrew Veniamin murdering Victor Pierce. Both underworld serial murderers. I'm sure there are many similar cases in organised crime. Eliyohub (talk) 08:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't hired killers distinct from the usual concept of a serial killer? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots09:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Outside the movies? Sure, on TV. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Dexter character from the multiple Dexter series is based on Pedro Rodrigues Filho, who killed criminals, including murderers. It is necessary to decide how many merders each of those murders did in order to decide if you would want to classify them as serial killers or just general murderers. 68.187.174.155 (talk) 19:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like the Death Wish (1974 film) film series might have also drawn inspiration from Filho. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots03:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another serial killer question

[edit]

about 20 years ago, I saw a documentary where it was said that the majority of serial killers kill for sexual gratification, or for some sort of revenge against their upbringing, or because in their head that God (or someone else) told them to kill. But the FBI agent on the documentary said something about how their worst nightmare was an extremely intelligent, methodical killer who was doing what he did to make some sort of grand statement about society/political statement. That this sort of killer was one step ahead of law enforcement and knew all of their methods. Like a Hannibal Lecter type individual. He said that he could count on the fingers of one hand the sort of person who he was talking about, but that these killers were the most difficult of all to catch and by far the most dangerous. Can you tell me any examples of these killers? 146.90.140.99 (talk) 05:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ted Kaczynski ("the Unabomber") comes to mind. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 07:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I second this. Ted the Unabomber only got finally caught by chance, only after his brother happened to recognise him. Eliyohub (talk) 08:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
More than a few killed for money; Michael Swango apparently just for joy. The case of Leopold and Loeb comes to mind, who hoped to demonstrate superior intellect; if they had not bungled their first killing despite spending seven months planning everything, more would surely have followed.  --Lambiam 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph Paul Franklin. Prezbo (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Missing fire of London

[edit]

British Movietone News covered the burning down of the Crystal Palace in this somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but apparently factual, film. At 00:15 it refers to 'the biggest London blaze since 1892'. What happened in 1892 that could be considered comparable to the Palace's demise, or at least sufficiently well-known to be referred to without further explanation?

I can see nothing in History of London, List of town and city fires, List of fires or 1892. The London Fire Journal records "May 8, 1892 - Scott's Oyster Bar, Coventry Street. 4 dead.", but also lists later fires with larger death tolls. Does anyone have access to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society's article Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892? -- Verbarson  talkedits 13:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see the Great Fire of 1892 destroyed half the capital of Newfoundland and Labrador. But comparing that to the Crystal Palace fire, which destroyed only the Crystal Palace, is an odd choice.  Card Zero  (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It would also be odd to call it a "London blaze".  --Lambiam 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The closest I found was the 1861 Tooley Street fire. Alansplodge (talk) 16:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also a large fire at Wood Street in the City in 1882 (perhaps later mistaken for 1892?). [13] Alansplodge (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I too wonder whether the Movietone newsreader was the victim of a typo. In December 1897 Cripplegate suffered "the greatest fire...that has occurred in the City since the Great Fire of 1666". [14]. --Antiquary (talk) 11:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC) That's also mentioned, I now see, in Verbarson's London Fire Journal link. --Antiquary (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Verbarson: Fires in London and the Metropolitan Fire Brigade in 1892 is available on JSTOR as part of the Wikipedia Library. It doesn't give details of any individual fires. DuncanHill (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DuncanHill:, so it is. The DOI link in that article is broken; I should have been more persistent with the JSTOR search. Thank you. -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unexpectedly, from the Portland Guardian (that's Portland, Victoria): GREAT FIRE IN LIONDON. A great fire is raging in the heart of the London ducks. Dated 26 November 1892.  Card Zero  (talk) 07:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, the poor ducks.  --Lambiam 12:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The whole OCR transcript of that blurred newspaper column is hilarious. "The fames have obtained a firm bold", indeed! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 12:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Setting aside the unsung history of the passionate ducks of London, what I see in that clipping is:
  • 1892 - Australia is still a colony (18+ years to go)
  • which is linked to the UK by (i) long-distance shipping, and (ii) telegraph cables
  • because of (i), the London docks are economically important
  • because of (ii), they get daily updates from London
Therefore, the state of the London docks (and the possible fate of the Australian ships there) is of greater importance to Australian merchants than it is to most Londoners. So headlines in Portland may not reflect the lesser priority of that news in the UK? -- Verbarson  talkedits 17:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was highly impressed by the rapidity of the Victorian Victorian telegraph system there. But my money's on Antiquary's theory, above - I think the newsreel announcer's script had 1892 as a typo for 1897.  Card Zero  (talk) 18:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which I have finally found (in WP) at Timeline of London (19th century)#1890 to 1899 (using the same cite as Antiquary). It does look persuasively big ("The Greatest Fire of Modern Times" - Star), though there were no fatalities. Despite that, an inquest was held. It sounds much more likely than the docks fire to have been memorable in 1936. -- Verbarson  talkedits 19:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


January 4

[edit]

Could the Sack of Jericho be almost

[edit]

historical in the sense that the story of what happened, happened to a different city but was transferred to Jericho?Rich (talk) 05:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It might be. But then again, it might not be. Following whatever links there are to the subject within the article might be a good start for finding out about whatever theories there might be. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots07:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To believe that the events in the story are historical, whether for Jericho or another city, amounts to believing in a miracle. Barring miracles, no amount of horn-blowing and shouting can bring defensive walls down.
Jericho was destroyed in the 16th century BCE. The first version of the Book of Joshua was written in the late 7th century BCE, so there are 9 centuries between the destruction and the recording of the story. An orally transmitted account, passed on through some thirty generations, might have undergone considerable changes, turning a conquest with conventional war practices, possibly with sound effects meant to install fear in the besieged, into a miraculous event.  --Lambiam 10:50, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[Edit Conflicts] The sack was described in the Book of Joshua, which however was likely compiled around 640–540 BCE, some six or seven centuries after the supposed Hebrew conquest of Canaan. Some scholars now discount the whole Exodus and Conquest narrative as political lobbying written by Jewish exiles in Babylonia (which the Persians later took over) hoping to be given control over the former territory of Israel as well as being restored to their native Judah.
The narrative logically explains why a people once 'Egyptian slaves' (like all subjects of the Pharoah) were later free in Canaan, but by then it was likely forgotten that Egypt once controlled almost the entirety of Canaan, from which it withdrew in the Late Bronze Age Collapse. The Hebrew peoples of the (always separate) states of Israel and Judah emerged from Canaanite culture in situ, though minor folk movements (for example, of the Tribe of Levi, who often had Egyptian names) may have had a role. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 10:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I heard the sack of Jericho in book of Joshua was an explanatory myth, not some kind of Exile claim to ownership, which is more logical anyway. If there were a more recent city that was sacked, it would be less than the estimate of 30 geneations of remembrance. I did forget to stress that when I asked if the story could be almost historical that I wasn't suggesting that Jericho's walls were supernaturally destroyed by trumpets. After all, the actual method of conquest in the story could be the connivance of the traitor Rahab.Rich (talk) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, certainly the myth likely existed before it was consolidated with others into the written documents, just as stories about the mythical Danel may have been adapted into the fictional Daniel of the supposedly contemporary Book of Daniel describing his exploits in the 6th century BCE court of Nebuchadnezzar II, although scholars generally agree that this was actually written in the period 167–163 BCE. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.84.253 (talk) 07:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Israelites partly emerged in situ (though there was also a definite nomad/pastoralist component), especially along the West Bank hill-chain (running in an approximate north-south direction) where the Four-room house took hold among the rural inhabitants there. They were not originally city-dwellers, and their culture could not have been consolidated until the power of the Canaanite cities in that area had declined, and it's not too hard to believe that they sometimes moved against what cities remained, so that part of the conquest narrative is not necessarily a pure myth. Jericho was in the valley (not along the hill-chain), so was not part of the core settled rural agricultural four-room house area, but was inhabited more by pastoralists/animal-herders who became affiliated... AnonMoos (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility, for URLs in text document

[edit]

We've been asked to increase the accessibility of all documents we produce, esp. syllabi. I use WordPerfect, where I don't seem to be able to have a URL with a descriptive text in the way Word allows. 508 is the operative term. I'm trying this out: "Princeton University has some handy tips on what is called “active reading, on this webpage: https://mcgraw.princeton.edu/active-reading-strategies." In other words, descriptive text followed by a bare URL. Is that good for screen readers? Graham87, how does this look/sound to you? Thanks for your help, Drmies (talk) 18:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I wouldn't make a general rule about that as it's context-dependent ... depending on how many URL's are in a document, reading them might get annoying. In general I'd prefer to read a link with descriptive text rather than a raw URL, because the latter aren't always very human-readable ... but I don't think this is really an accessibility issue; just do what would make sense for a sighted reader here. Graham87 (talk) 00:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Graham87, thanks. There's only one or two in a ten-page document. According to our bosses, this is an accessibility issue--but it seems to me as if someone sounded an alarm and now everyone who doesn't actually know much about the issue is telling us to comply with a set of directives which they haven't given us. Instead, we are directed to some self-help course that involves only Word. It's fun. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stop using WordPerfect and start using Word. --Viennese Waltz 07:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why, but it seems many legal professionals prefer WordPerfect. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Viennese Waltz, thanks so much for that helpful suggestion. Drmies (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can create a hyperlink to a file using WordPerfect. First, you select text or a graphic you want to create a hyperlink. Then you click “Tools”, select “Hyperlink” and then type a path or document you want to link to. Stanleykswong (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stanleykswong, that sounds like it might work: thank you. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do web browsers display WordPerfect documents? I don't think I have a WordPerfect viewing app installed on my platform (macOS). Does anyone have a URL of a WordPerfect document handy?  --Lambiam 14:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Lambiam, WP translates easily to PDF and to Word. I use PDFs in my LMS. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can see why WordPerfect is popular in legal circles at WordPerfect#Key characteristics (fourth bullet point) and WordPerfect#Faithful customers. 2A00:23A8:1:D801:8C31:BAC2:88CF:A92B (talk) 16:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have the feeling this answers my question. Would I have to find and install an app that translates .wpd documents to .pdf or .doc documents? Would I then be able to tell my browser to use this app? The question is informative, not meant to bash a product that I have zero familiarity with.  --Lambiam 17:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've opened early WordPerfect (WP 5.1) documents using both Word and Firefox without any need for a third party translator. The only trick was changing the file extension to .WPD so that my computer could create the file association more easily. In the old days, file extensions were not so rigorously restrictive and many files ended up with extensions like .01 or .v4 or whatever. Matt Deres (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot check if it would work for me, for lack of access to any WordPerfect document of any age.  --Lambiam 21:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a bunch of them, in the DOJ archives.  Card Zero  (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, finally an answer. When I click on a .wpd link, the file is downloaded. I can then open and view it with LibreOffice. (I can also open it with OpenOffice, but then I get to see garbage like ╖#<m\r╛∞¼_4YÖ¤ⁿVíüd╤?Y.)  --Lambiam 14:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, web browsers do display WordPerfect documents. If you google “wpd online viewer”, you will find a lot of them. Stanleykswong (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I google [“wpd online viewer”], I get two hits, one to this page and one to a site where you can upload a WPD document in order to be able to view it online. What happens when you view an html page with something like <a href="file:///my-document.wpd">Looky here!</a> embedded?  --Lambiam 13:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right. Only Docx2doc (https://www.docx2doc.com/convert) and Jumpshare provide online viewers now. However, there are still other offline alternative, such as Cisdem (https://www.cisdem.com/document-reader-mac.html) and Apache. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some other text editors, such as TextMaker, can open and view WPD files. However, after editing, the WPD files can only be saved as other formats, such as docx or doc. Stanleykswong (talk) 09:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that just came up--we got rapped on the fingers though the mandatory "training" didn't touch on it. We've been told that hyphens are bad. The internet tells me that screenreaders have trouble with hyphenated words, but does this apply also to date ranges? Graham87, does yours get this right, "Spring Break: 17-21 March"? For now I'm going with "Spring Break, 17 to 21 March", but it just doesn't look good to my traditional eyes. And on top of that I have to use sans serif fonts... Drmies (talk) 17:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • To give another example, I have to redo this: "Final grades are computed along the following scale: A: 90-100; B+: 87-89; B: 80-86; C+: 77-79; C: 70-76; D+: 67-69; D: 60-66; F: Below 60." Drmies (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 5

[edit]

How to search for awkwardly named topics

[edit]

On and off I've been looking for good sources for the concepts of general union and trade union federation so as to improve the articles, but every time I try I only get one or two somewhat helpful results. Many of the results are not of material about the concepts of general union or trade union federations, but often about a specific instance of them, and as a result hard to gleen a lot from about the broader concept. Typcially this is because of issues such as many general unions being named as such (for example Transport & General Workers' Union). I'm aware of the search trick that'd be something like "general union" -Transport & General Workers' Union but I've found it largely cumbersome and ineffective, often seeming to filter out any potential material all together

Thought I'd ask because I'd like to improve those articles, and this is an issue I'm sure would come up again for me otherwise on other articles Bejakyo (talk) 13:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do any of the articles listed at Unionism help? Blueboar (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you search for ["a trade union federation" -"is a trade union federation"], most hits will not be about a specific instance.  --Lambiam 14:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 6

[edit]

What does the Thawabit consist of?

[edit]

I asked about this at the article talk page and WikiProject Palestine, no response. Maybe it's not a question Wikipedia can answer, but I'm curious and it would improve the article. Prezbo (talk) 09:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's acronym (or an abbreviation) for the four principles enumerated in the article. Like how the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. Abductive (reasoning) 13:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thawabit is short for alThawabit alWataniat alFilastinia, the "Palestinian National Constants". Thawabit is the plural of thabit, "something permanent or invariable; constant".  --Lambiam 13:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What I'm saying is that I'm not sure the article is correct. The sourcing is thin, reference are paywalled, offline, or dead, and Google isn't helpful. Other scholarly and activist sources give different versions of the Thawabet, e.g.This one adds the release of Palestinian prisoners, this one adds that Palestine is indivisible. The article says that these principles were formulated by the PLO in 1977 but doesn't link to a primary source (like the Bill of Rights). I don't know if you're a subject matter expert here, I'm not--actually trying to figure this out. Prezbo (talk) 13:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I was able to access the paywalled articles through the Wikipedia library, which adds a little more clarity. Prezbo (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source, a fifth principle was added in 2012: "the objection to recognize the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people". However, I cannot find this in the cited source  --Lambiam 13:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the Arabic Wikipedia article before I responded above, and they list the same four principles. Abductive (reasoning) 13:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That appears to be a translation of the English article, so this doesn't mean much to me. Prezbo (talk) 13:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've poked around a little, and there doesn't appear to have been any change. Abductive (reasoning) 13:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The list in the book I linked to above is not the same as that in our article. The book does not include a "right to resistance", but demands the release by Israel of all Palestinian prisoners. It would be good to have a sourced, authoritative version, in particular the actual 1977 formulation by the PLO. Of course, nothing is so changeable as political principles, so one should expect non-trivial amendments made in the course of time.  --Lambiam 14:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That book is incorrect. Abductive (reasoning) 21:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How do you know?  --Lambiam 00:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The text does not explicitly say, "among others", but the use of بها بما في ذلك suggests that this list of four principles is not exhaustive.  --Lambiam 00:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 7

[edit]

Is there such a thing as a joke type index?

[edit]

Has anyone produced an index of joke types and schemata (schemes?) along the lines of the Aarne–Thompson–Uther Index for folk tales? More generally what kind of studies of the structure of jokes and humor are available? Has anyone come up with an A.I. that can generate new jokes? 178.51.8.23 (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, there's Index of joke types. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots21:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AI generated jokes have been around for years. Just Google for it. They range from weird to meh. Shantavira|feed me 10:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gershon Legman made an attempt of sorts in his two joke collections, but it was kind of a half-assed approach: there are a bunch of indices printed on pages, but no key tying them together per se. His interest was in the core of the subject of the joke, so he might have said, for example, that these jokes were all based on unresolved Oedipal drives while those jokes were based on hatred of the mother (he was a capital "F" Freudian). The link Bugs shared is more about the formats of the jokes themselves, though some are also differentiated by their subject (albeit in a more superficial way than Legman attempted). Matt Deres (talk) 21:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Arthur Koestler has attempted to develop a theory of humour (as well as art and discovery), first in Insight and Outlook (1949) and slightly elaborated further in The Act of Creation (1964). He did, however, not develop a typology of jokes. IMO Victor Raskin's script-based semantic theory of humor presented in Semantic Mechanisms of Humor (1985) is essentially the same as Koestler's, but Raskin does not reference Koestler in the book. For an extensive overview of theories of humour see Contemporary Linguistic Theories of Humour.  --Lambiam 00:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 8

[edit]

The Nest magazine, UK, 1920s

[edit]

I have a copy of The Grocer's Window Book. London: The Nest Magazine. 1922., "arranged by The Editor of The Nest". The address of The Nest Magazine is given as 15 Arthur Street, London, EC4. It contains suggestions for arranging window displays in an attractive manner to attract customers into independent grocer's shops. I would be interested to know more about The Nest. I suspect it may have something to do with Nestles Milk, as 1) the back cover is a full-page advertisement for Nestles and Ideal Milk, and there are several other adverts for Nestles products in the book, and 2) one of the suggested window displays involves spelling out "IDEAL" with tins of Ideal Milk. Thank you, DuncanHill (talk) 02:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nest, 1922. M.—1st. 6d. Nestle and Anglo-Swiss Condensed Milk Co., 15 Arthur Street, E.c.4[15] according to Willing's press guide and advertisers directory and handbook. I also found it in The Newspaper press directory and advertisers' guide, which merely confirms the address and the price of sixpence. Both of these were for the year 1922, which suggests to me that the magazine might not have survived into 1923. M signifies monthly, and 1st probably means published on the 1st of the month.  Card Zero  (talk) 19:37, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Historical U.S. population data by age (year 1968)

[edit]

In the year 1968, what percentage of the United States population was under 25 years old? I am wondering about this because I am watching the movie Wild in the Streets, and want to know if a percentage claimed in the film was pulled out of a hat or was based in fact. 2601:18A:C500:E830:CE4:140C:29E5:594F (talk) 04:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What percentage did they give? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots05:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
52% (it's on the movie poster).  Card Zero  (talk) 16:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tabel No. 6 in the 1971 US Census Report (p. 8) gives, for 1960, 80093 Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of 180007 Kpeople, corresponding to 44.5%, and, for 1970, 94095 Kpeople age 0–24 on a total population of 204265 Kpeople, corresponding to 46.1%. Interpolation results in an estimate of 45.8% for 1968.  --Lambiam 12:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Countries with greatest land mass

[edit]

Can someone please fill in these blanks? Thank you.

1. Currently, the USA ranks as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass.

2. If the USA were to "annex" or "acquire" both Canada and Greenland, the USA would rank as number _____ among countries with the greatest land mass.

Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 05:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See List of countries and dependencies by area, which gives a nuanced answer to your first question, and the answer to your second question is obvious from the data in the article.-Gadfium (talk) 05:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 9

[edit]